. . . at which all cultures eventually become Muslim
With just a tiny percentage of New Zealand's population being Muslim we have already had the spectacle of speakers considered "blasphemous" being denied use of Council buildings on "security grounds". You can read the petition here in which the Muslim sponsor indicates that blasphemy is the major reason Lauren Southern should be banned from New Zealand.
Take a moment to consider the appalling French, Swedish, German, Belgian, Dutch and British experiences of Islamic Sharia Courts, no-go zones, rape culture and so on. I keep asking this, but again: Why shouldn't this also be our experience if we keep mimicking the attitudes of the indigenous peoples of those countries? There's absolutely no reason that our future will be any different.
We should not forget Ayaan Hirsi Ali in this discussion either - both she & Lauren Southern have had to cancel over "security concerns." Neither person has ever advocated violence towards those who oppose them, while they themselves are faced with violence for their ideas. At the moment this violence primarily stems from what could reasonably be termed the overly paternalistic and patronising Far Left (what else would you call a group prepared to use violence to protect Muslims - a group they obviously think incapable of withstanding normal criticism?).
All this is extremely odd.
Have a look at this video on how Victorian Police are charging Lauren Southern and Stefan Molyneux A$68,000 for doing their job during their recent speaking engagement. As the presenter notes, why is it only Conservative events that get attacked (and also billed)?
This is all way out of kilter.
A note for the excitable:
Right about now some of you are thinking that this is shaping up to be a xenophobic screed attacking a culture the writer doesn't understand. As David Lange said in that famous debate "I can smell the uranium on your breath" friend.
Take another breath. Then take the time to watch the video and read some more posts here. We're all on the same side. I want Muslims to be able to practise their religion here - but not the political aspects and not to the detriment of everyone else practising their belief system.
Today I was asked to remove my crash helmet in Pak n Save; I wondered if the employee would ask a Muslim lady with a Niqab on to do the same thing. Well, that is an interesting question isn't it? Overseas experience indicates that another standard would be applied - all in the spirit of tolerance, diversity and multiculturalism of course. One law for everybody? What starts with us being sensitive ends with us receiving no sensitivity whatsoever. Banning speakers for blasphemy? In New Zealand in 2018? Really?
And judging from the response of our thought leaders everyone is totally OK with this.
Below is a 6 minute discussion on the growth of Islam in the West and the crushing of Christians in what we might term, the old Islamic home countries. Should we be concerned if the percentage of Muslims - lovely, friendly, reasonable people that they are - gets to this percentage here? Only if we bother reading history, theology and a whole pile of contemporary news, surveys & studies.
Otherwise, nah. Only racists would think as much.
Nikoletta Incze on Lone Wolves: “The Behavior is Already Encoded in the Ideology”
Nikoletta Incze is a researcher for the Hungarian office of the Center for the Study of Political Islam. In the following appearance on Hungarian TV, Ms. Incze discusses the history of Islam, and especially the significance of Islamic law — which is the political side of Islam, comprising well over half of the text of the Islamic scriptures.
Many thanks to CrossWare for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:
0:00 Year by year more and more people celebrate Ramadan here in Europe,
0:04 when the Mohammedans remember that Allah proclaimed
0:08 his will via the prophet Mohammed. 44 million Mohammedans live
0:12 in Europe and freely practice their religion. The question
0:16 is whether Christians can do the same in the Middle East?
0:20 Nikoletta Incze, from the Center for the Study of Political Islam.
0:24 Good morning. — I was thinking, 19 million Muslims… In Birmingham, we could see
0:28 There were [only] 140 thousand in the park,
0:32 and I was thinking, which Islamic country has that many Christians in it,
0:36 and whether they could do the same? —That is an interesting question. If we look at
0:40 the history of Islam, and look at the last 1,400 years,
0:44 because we’re talking about this religion from the 7th century, where
0:48 the prophet Mohammed was the central figure and Allah
0:52 gave proclamations to him through the Quran in the 7th century,
0:56 that was the basis of what we call Islam today.
1:00 By the way — right up until today they still refer the very same books
1:04 when one examines the everyday workings of Islam.
1:08 We can see, if we examine those areas where Islam became dominant, like Egypt,
1:12 Turkey or Syria, those countries were Christian before they were Islamic.
1:16 Not many people know: Pakistan was Hindu;
1:20 Afghanistan was Buddhist and Zoroastrian.
1:24 I usually refer to a Harvard study. I would like to say
1:28 a couple of additional words about it, because a lot of misunderstanding comes from it.
1:32 [Peter D.] Beaulieu was the person who used a mathematical formula
1:36 for this historical pattern, and examined
1:40 how these societies become saturated
1:44 by Muslims and the ideology of Islam,
1:48 and he came to the conclusion that these processes
1:52 usually take hundreds of years — some countries takes even 300-400 years --
1:56 but there is a specific point [of no return], which is usually around 16%.
2:00 If that large a proportion of the society becomes Muslim, the process becomes irreversible.
2:04 Then the rest of the change usually occurs over a period of 100-150 years, on average,
2:08 in these countries. So if we look at this principle --
2:12 we also studied this question, and see that
2:16 in history, the process of the spread of Islam
2:20 normally met with resistance, because in this ideology
2:24 conquest and dominance are encoded at an elementary level,
2:28 which is all about the supremacy of Islam. Now in Europe,
2:32 today, this process is happening very differently, because there is
2:36 NO RESISTANCE. In the name of tolerance and acceptance
2:40 Islam is treated as equal with other religions, and it is not recognized
2:44 that there are political aspects to Islam. —But how far can the equal treatment go?
2:48 Where is the limit? If I am a German citizen,
2:52 and steal an apple from the store, or God forbid something more valuable,
2:56 I could be punished severely. But when they use
3:00 Sharia law — which the authorities do not even know about, or if they know,
3:04 they do not care, because they do not know how to handle it --
3:08 what kind of equality could we talk about, or is it even possible to talk about such things?
3:12 It’s very interesting to look at what happens on the other side. For example,
3:16 in the 7th-9th centuries a pact emerged, which we call the Pact of Umar,
3:20 which was about the relationship between Christians and Muslims.
3:24 Christians, Jews and other religions, or as they are called, Dhimmis, the second-class citizens,
3:28 as they called them in Islamic societies.
3:32 These rules regulated their lives in the Islam society. And we can see
3:36 that what emerged as basic principles in the Pact became
3:40 the legal elements of Sharia law in later centuries.
3:44 We can see various parts of it: for example,
3:48 crosses cannot be left on the churches; they must be taken down.
3:52 It was forbidden to have an Easter procession,
3:56 or any other mass event. Church bells must be quiet or inaudible.
4:00 The lowest mosque in the city had
4:04 to be taller than the tallest church.
4:08 We can see that different clothing was required for
4:12 dhimmis. For example, the color yellow was first associated with the Jews;
4:16 they had to wear a belt to differentiate them from the Muslims.
4:20 Every regulation and law that was created under the Pact of Umar was
4:24 based on the fundamental principle, which was contained in
4:28 the Quran and Mohammed’s Sura and the Hadith,
4:32 that a Muslim is never the equal of an unbeliever.
4:36 And if we examine the process of Islamization, we must
4:40 understand that we should not imagine an organizational structure
4:44 like that found in Christianity with the Church, even inside the Islamic State,
4:48 which is not a good example of this [organizational structure], because the “lone wolf” perps
4:52 show clearly — despite the fact that ISIS accepts that the terrorist was “their soldier” --
4:56 that they never even had any contact with the Islamic State. Now the question emerges:
5:00 Why is it that isolated individuals are doing the same thing --
5:04 stating that they follow an Islamic call — without any organizing force
5:08 connecting them with an institutional structure? The answer is
5:12 that the behavior is already encoded in the ideology.
5:16 That system, that idea fuels the process
5:20 we call Islamization. That is what we see from everyday Muslims also;
5:24 they almost instinctively demand different clothing standards
5:28 — the burkini is one example of that issue, or the burka --
5:32 and many other things, which they insist are a religious
5:36 experience, but behind them there has always been a political issue,
5:40 leading to Islamization. — Thank you very much.
5:44 You’re welcome.