[QUOTE]New Zealand politicians have rounded on a colleague who has suggested that young men who are Muslim or "look like Muslims" be banned from "Western" airlines.
In a column for Investigate magazine, New Zealand First MP Richard Prosser said he accepted that the majority of Muslims were not terrorists but added it was "equally undeniable'' that "most terrorists are".
"If you are a young male, aged between say about 19 and about 35, and you're a Muslim, or you look like a Muslim, or you come from a Muslim country, then you are not welcome to travel on any of the West's airlines," he wrote.
"If the greatest identifiable threat to modern aviation security is posed by young Muslim males, then surely the answer is to prohibit young Muslim males from flying on our aeroplanes."
He also claimed New Zealand's rights were being denigrated by "misogynist troglodytes from Wogistan".
Since the article was published, New Zealand First leader Winston Peters has distanced himself from Mr Prosser's views but confirmed he had spoken with him about the irresponsibility of such a one-sided view.
"I've told him you cannot go and generalise in the erroneous way he did," Mr Peters said.
"He wrongfully impugned millions of law-abiding, peaceful Muslims.
"Mr Prosser agrees that the article did not have balance and does not represent the views of New Zealand First."
Mr Peters added that Mr Prosser had written the article as a journalist and were from an extreme point of view "which we don't share as a party".
Embarrassing
Ethnic affairs minister Judith Collins described Mr Prosser's comments as extremely disappointing and feared they could embarrass the country internationally.
"New Zealand values diversity and prides itself on being an inclusive society," she said.
"Muslims in New Zealand are also a diverse community – it is simply appalling to profile people based on their religion, skin colour, country of origin or a perceived stereo-typed look as Mr Prosser has done.
"Mr Prosser's anti-Muslim rant has let New Zealand down and as a member of parliament he should know better.
"The Office of Ethnic Affairs works closely with the Muslim community in New Zealand - a community that denounces terrorism and has vowed to work with authorities to counter any terrorism threat."
[url]http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-02-12/nz-mp-wants-muslims-banned-frrom-airlines/4514422[/url]
[/QUOTE]
Noice.
What a clever man.
[quote]In a column for Investigate magazine, New Zealand First MP Richard Prosser said he accepted that the majority of Muslims were not terrorists but added it was "equally undeniable'' that "most terrorists are".[/quote]
I hate the fallacy that "not all Muslims are terrorists but most terrorists are Muslim," that racists perpetuate. Terrorism is generally defined as a violent act to cause fear and gain some religious or political goal. The problem is that while so many countries have a varying, or nonexistent, definition of what constitutes terrorism, which results in terrorist-style attacks not being labeled appropriately, whenever the person being violent is even remotely "Muslim looking" they are immediately classed as a terrorist.
[QUOTE]"New Zealand First MP Richard Prosser said he accepted that the majority of Muslims were not terrorists but added it was "equally undeniable'' that "most terrorists are".[/QUOTE]
I suggest that he reads the definition of terrorist before he oversimplifies & generalizes, then uses these as a strawman argument for political leverage..
Suddenly New Zealand is target of airlines bombings, led by white muslim extremists.
How about instead you just put them all on the same plane, and everyone else on different ones?
Oh wait, that's bad too
If he were the president of the US:
"We should start nuking/going to war with Arabic/Muslim countries, since they contain Arabic and Muslim people, it is obvious that we must eradicate them!"
[QUOTE=Omali;39560503]I hate the fallacy that "not all Muslims are terrorists but most terrorists are Muslim," that racists perpetuate. Terrorism is generally defined as a violent act to cause fear and gain some religious or political goal. The problem is that while so many countries have a varying, or nonexistent, definition of what constitutes terrorism, which results in terrorist-style attacks not being labeled appropriately, whenever the person being violent is even remotely "Muslim looking" they are immediately classed as a terrorist.[/QUOTE]
But race =/= religion. I also think that "not all Muslims are terrorists, but most terrorists are Muslim." (which is true) and I'm not racist.
When was the last hijacking? Oh wait [I]NEARLY TWELVE YEARS AGO[/I] it's dumb politicians saying stuff like this that cause attacks in the first place.
[quote]He also claimed New Zealand's rights were being denigrated by "misogynist troglodytes from Wogistan".[/quote]
as a wogistanian im thoroughly offended
[QUOTE=north korea;39560517]most terrorists are Muslim." (which is true)[/QUOTE]
compare muslim terrorism to kurdish or tamil separatism then see if you can seriously make that statement.
terrorism is terrorism because its done with a purpose, give me one good reason why any muslim terrorist would commit a terrorist act against New Zealand, because so far most victims of muslim terrorism have been muslims
[url]http://www.disinfo.com/2012/03/has-the-tsa-ever-foiled-a-terrorist-plot/[/url]
a smart "terrorist" sure as fuck would avoid TSA like aids, and would sure as shit look as white as possible. So this is just another "Paranoid schizophrenic" tactic to make the country "safer"
[QUOTE=thisispain;39560600]compare muslim terrorism to kurdish or tamil separatism then see if you can seriously make that statement.
terrorism is terrorism because its done with a purpose, give me one good reason why any muslim terrorist would commit a terrorist act against New Zealand, because so far most victims of muslim terrorism have been muslims[/QUOTE]
Most Muslim terrorist acts happen in the Middle East but what you're saying still doesn't change the fact that most terrorists are Muslim and most of the terrorist attacks are Islamic terrorist attacks.
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_battles_and_other_violent_events_by_death_toll#Terrorist_attacks[/url]
why should we listen to anything north korea tells us?
[QUOTE=north korea;39560641]most terrorists are Muslim and most of the terrorist attacks are Islamic terrorist attacks.
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_battles_and_other_violent_events_by_death_toll#Terrorist_attacks[/url][/QUOTE]
you don't know what you are talking about, even if you could put a number on most terrorists (id love to see your data for this), most terrorist attacks are completely outside of the realm of islamic terrorism and are conducted for anti-national or separatist reasons
name a separatist muslim group in NZ, until you can you dont bloody have a point
[QUOTE=thisispain;39560679]you don't know what you are talking about, even if you could put a number on most terrorists (id love to see your data for this), most terrorist attacks are completely outside of the realm of islamic terrorism and are conducted for anti-national or separatist reasons
name a separatist muslim group in NZ, until you can you dont bloody have a point[/QUOTE]
I'm implying that most terrorist acts come from Muslims whether they're committed in Muslim countries or not, but you're on a different topic.
[QUOTE=thisispain;39560679]you don't know what you are talking about, even if you could put a number on most terrorists (id love to see your data for this), most terrorist attacks are completely outside of the realm of islamic terrorism and are conducted for anti-national or separatist reasons
name a separatist muslim group in NZ, until you can you dont bloody have a point[/QUOTE]
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Islamic_terrorist_attacks[/url]
Cracking out wikipedia
[QUOTE=north korea;39560706]I'm implying that most terrorist acts come from Muslims, but you're on a different topic.[/QUOTE]
im not on a different topic and what you are implying (imo stating without any evidence to support your view) is completely wrong
to suggest its "undeniable" that most terrorist are muslims suggests 2 things: 1. complete ignorance of the current state of terrorism in the world, 2. a completely anti-muslim agenda steeped in post 9/11 hysteria
this politician doesnt know what he's talking about and it doesn't even matter, he's just tapping into populist muslim hysteria like everyone else, regardless of the logistical or even philosophical consequences
he must think the people he's communicating to are absolutely stupid to not see through that
[editline]12th February 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Zi;39560717][url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Islamic_terrorist_attacks[/url]
Cracking out wikipedia[/QUOTE]
crack a current events aggregate not centered around only one part of the world
please dont condescend me by suggesting i have anything to gain from reading a page you probably didnt even read
[QUOTE=thisispain;39560732]im not on a different topic and what you are implying (imo stating without any evidence to support your view) is completely wrong
to suggest its "undeniable" that most terrorist are muslims suggests 2 things: 1. complete ignorance of the current state of terrorism in the world, 2. a completely anti-muslim agenda steeped in post 9/11 hysteria
this politician doesnt know what he's talking about and it doesn't even matter, he's just tapping into populist muslim hysteria like everyone else, regardless of the logistical or even philosophical consequences
he must think the people he's communicating to are absolutely stupid to not see through that[/QUOTE]
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_battles_and_other_violent_events_by_death_toll#Terrorist_attacks[/url]
And it's not centered around Middle East only, you can clearly see other terrorist acts in other countries committed by other organisations. But you can also see that 80% of them are committed by Muslims.
[QUOTE=north korea;39560748][url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_battles_and_other_violent_events_by_death_toll#Terrorist_attacks[/url][/QUOTE]
read one wikipedia article and already you're on your way on becoming an expert on contemporary terrorism
[editline]12th February 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=north korea;39560748]But you can also see that 80% of them are committed by Muslims.[/QUOTE]
pulling a random percentage out of your arse is fine and dandy but not convincing in the slightest
[QUOTE=thisispain;39560767]read one wikipedia article and already you're on your way on becoming an expert on contemporary terrorism[/QUOTE]
It shows that most terrorist acts are committed by Muslims and it's the simple truth.
[QUOTE=north korea;39560748][url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_battles_and_other_violent_events_by_death_toll#Terrorist_attacks[/url]
And it's not centered around Middle East only, you can clearly see other terrorist acts in other countries committed by other organisations. But you can also see that 80% of them are committed by Muslims.[/QUOTE]
Yes because wikipedia has a comprehensive list of all terrorist attacks. These are just the successful attacks. Keep in mind many would be thwarted by anti-terrorism agencies.
[QUOTE=north korea;39560775]It shows that most terrorist acts are committed by Muslims and it's the simple truth.[/QUOTE]
no it doesnt show that, it shows a complex history of terrorism committed by mostly separatist and nationalistic groups
islamic terrorism is a fairly new phenomenon in the history of terrorism, the US even today still suffers from a nasty streak of homegrown right-wing terrorism, while the UK's history with separatism is known to any person who lives on the irish islands
[editline]12th February 2013[/editline]
even then none of this proves anything relating to New Zealand even in the slightest and you're only convincing me that what you are talking about all comes from a deep and vile hysteria towards a religious group who has not committed a crime en masse and therefor shouldnt be subject to punishment en masse
pretty easy stuff id think but please continue with posting the wikipedia article again
[QUOTE=thisispain;39560788]no it doesnt show that, it shows a complex history of terrorism committed by mostly separatist and nationalistic groups
islamic terrorism is a fairly new phenomenon in the history of terrorism, the US even today still suffers from a nasty streak of homegrown right-wing terrorism, while the UK's history with separatism is known to any person who lives on the irish islands
[editline]12th February 2013[/editline]
even then none of this proves anything relating to New Zealand even in the slightest and you're only convincing me that what you are talking about all comes from a deep and vile hysteria towards a religious group who has not committed a crime en masse and therefor shouldnt be subject to punishment en masse
pretty easy stuff id think but please continue with posting the wikipedia article again[/QUOTE]
Maybe this will be clear enough for you; [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Islamic_terrorist_attacks[/url]
Non-Islamic terrorist acts don't happen as often.
[QUOTE=north korea;39560862]Maybe this will be clear enough for you; [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Islamic_terrorist_attacks[/url]
Non-Islamic terrorist acts don't happen as often.[/QUOTE]
And yet, the Nazi who started world War 2 are never considered terrorist in their era?
By the way, to North Korea, (serious question) the OP. Did you lost any of your closest loved ones, friends or family member or relatives to a terrorist attack before. As in closest known person who you loved and cared died in an act of terrorism from the hands of a terrorist?
For a person to hate Muslims, we need to have a reason why. If you hate a Muslims just because others are hating too with no valid reason, then your hate is misplaced.
Don't go hating someone or something just because you don't understand them.
[QUOTE=BCell;39560952]And yet, the Nazi who started world War 2 are never considered terrorist in their era?[/QUOTE]
You just went full south.
The NZ politician is an obvious bigot who may also hate asians and africans as well.
[editline]12th February 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=north korea;39560958]You just went full south.[/QUOTE]
Of course you are joking.
[url]http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/01/not-all-terrorists-are-muslims/[/url]
[t]http://www.loonwatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/piechart2-1024x1024.jpg[/t]
i mean if you're looking at direct terrorism alone, the international jewish conspiracy is more dangerous than radical islam lmao
[url]http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/01/terrorism-in-europe/[/url]
[quote]The results are stark, and prove decisively that not all terrorists are Muslims. In fact, a whopping 99.6% of terrorist attacks in Europe were by non-Muslim groups; a good 84.8% of attacks were from separatist groups completely unrelated to Islam. Leftist groups accounted for over sixteen times as much terrorism as radical Islamic groups. Only a measly 0.4% of terrorist attacks from 2006 to 2008 could be attributed to extremist Muslims.[/quote]
lel
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;39561053][url]http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/01/not-all-terrorists-are-muslims/[/url]
[t]http://www.loonwatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/piechart2-1024x1024.jpg[/t]
i mean if you're looking at direct terrorism alone, the international jewish conspiracy is more dangerous than radical islam lmao
[url]http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/01/terrorism-in-europe/[/url]
lel[/QUOTE]
The information seems biased and unstable. Also, it's aimed at Europe. Funny how it doesn't mention the constant terror attacks in the Middle East.
But hey, I can post biased articles too; [url]http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/index.html#attacks[/url]
Most terrorists are humans, let's ban humans from the everything.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
