5% Muslim myth?

I often hear claims that when the proportion of a country’s population reaches 5% (sometimes 3%) then all heel will break loose, Sharia Law will take over, praying to Mecca will become compulsory and the secular sky and Christian heaven will fall in.

I haven’t seen any substantial support of this ‘theory’. Some just state it as if it were fact, while sometimes a country with Muslim problems is cited as an example.

Muslim immigration is very contentious, and fear of terrorism is real, albeit out of proportion to the relative real threat.

There are people and groups who obsess about spreading fear of all Muslims, predicting dire consequences for any country that let’s it’s Muslim population reach 5%.

The 2013 census in New Zealand counted 46,149 Muslims, just over 1% of the population. About 7,000 of them are Maori, Pacific Island or European. The others come from a diverse range of countries including Lebanon, Turkey, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh and Fiji, with growing numbers of students from Malaysia.

Australia has about twice the proportion of Muslims, 2.2%.

The closest country to New Zealand with a Muslim population over 5% is Fiji (6-7%). Like ours their legal system is based on the British system. No Sharia. No major Muslim issues.

Just north of Australia is Indonesia, the country with the most Muslims in the world, about 87% of their total 263 million population.

While religious freedom is stipulated in the Indonesian constitution, the government officially recognises only six religions: Islam, Protestantism, Roman Catholicism, Hinduism, Buddhism, and Confucianism.

A large proportion of Indonesians—such as the Javanese abangan, Balinese Hindus, and Dayak Christians—practice a less orthodox, syncretic form of their religion, which draws on local customs and beliefs.

There are also a number of indigenous religions. These seem to coexist with Muslims.

One part of Indonesia, Aceh, applies sharia law in criminal matters. In other parts of the country it just applies to civil law (marriage, inheritance, gifts) to varying degrees, parallel with their Roman Dutch based legal system.

Other countries with large Muslim populations have varying degrees of Sharia law and varied application. Sharia law applies in 12 of Nigeria’s 36 states. About 41% of the Nigerian population is Muslim.

In a number of countries with large Muslim populations sharia law plays no part in their judicial system


The only European country with a majority Muslim population is Bosnia and Herzegovina at 51% (Christian 46%). They have a civil (not sharia) law system.

Germany (1.9% Muslim) has Sharia as part of their private law but it is limited and only applies to people with nationalities from countries using Sharia.

The United Kingdom (about 4.3%) has a voluntary dispute resolution system, the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal. The tribunals have the power to rule in civil cases. They operate under Section 1 of the Arbitration Act which states that: “the parties should be free to agree how their disputes are resolved, subject only to such safeguards as are necessary in the public interest”. This operates within the English law framework and is not a separate legal system.

I am not aware of any pressure to have similar tribunals operating in New Zealand. Muslims can try to resolve civil matters through the Disputes Tribunal of New Zealand like everyone else.

An estimated 8-10%of the French population is Muslim, many of whom emigrated from French colonies in northern Africa. They have significant issues – but these may be more to do with the percentage of Muslims who live in deprivation and with high unemployment rates rather than their percentage of the population.

Each country deals with the ethnicities and religions of it’s inhabitants as they see fit.

New Zealand has long had cultural diversity, including religious diversity. We have a history of religious tolerance. Nearly half of New Zealanders identify with no religion, and many others barely practice their religion.

From Islam in New Zealand:

The first Muslims in New Zealand were an Indian family who settled in Cashmere, Christchurch, in the 1850s. The 1874 government census reported 15 Chinese gold diggers working in the Dunstan gold fields of Otago in the 1870s.

Small numbers of Muslim immigrants from South Asia and eastern Europe settled from the early 1900s until the 1960s. Large-scale Muslim immigration began in the 1970s with the arrival of Fiji Indians, followed in the 1990s by refugees from various war-torn countries.

The first Islamic centre was started in 1959 and there are now several mosques and two Islamic schools.

The majority of the Muslims are Sunni, with a large minority Shia and some Ahmadi Muslims, who run the largest mosque in the country.

Contemporary Islam:

The number of Muslims in New Zealand according to the 2013 census is 46,149, up 28% from 36,072 in the 2006 census.

That’s quite a surge but on quite small numbers. Immigration numbers from countries tend to vary a lot so it is difficult to predict trends.

The community is noted for its harmonious relations with the wider New Zealand community, with various interfaith efforts from all sides contributing to this situation. FIANZ established the Harmony Awards as part of Islam Awareness Week in 2008 to recognise the contributions of New Zealanders to improving understanding and relationships between Muslims and the wider community.

We currently don’t have any appreciable problem with Muslims in New Zealand. They tend to blend in like the many other religions, and they have diverse ethnicities like the rest of the population.

There is no way of predicting with any accuracy whether the proportion of Muslims will ever reach 3% or 5% in New Zealand, and I’m not aware of any credible evidence that those thresholds on their own would have any particular risk anywhere in the world, and especially not in New Zealand.

Note: this post is a genuine attempt to explore and understand Muslim demographics and their potential effect on New Zealand. Feel free to discuss anything related to the content.

But please do not launch into general sermons about ‘them versus us’ or general mass dissing. If you think that Muslims are an issue in New Zealand then the topic deserves decent debate, and not screes of hobby horse rehashing.


  1. Missy

     /  March 26, 2017

    “Just north of Australia is Indonesia, the country with the most Muslims in the world, about 87% of their total 263 million population. ..

    There are also a number of indigenous religions. These seem to coexist with Muslims.”

    Sorry to burst your bubble, but indigenous religions in Indonesia do not coexist with Muslims very well at all.

    According to Human Rights Watch Indonesia’s religious minorities are under threat. Acts of Religious Intolerance increased in 2016, and more than half of the incidences implicate Government entities.


    “One part of Indonesia, Aceh, applies sharia law in criminal matters.”

    In all matters I think, here is an example of Sharia Law in action, not sure it shows a minority religion coexisting with Muslims though.


  2. chrism56

     /  March 26, 2017

    Be wary of looking at percentages of a country as a whole. These can mask local issues There are major problems in some suburbs of Sydney and Melbourne with Muslim/ Middle Eastern gangs. These are regularly reported in SMH or the Age paper edition, just not on their websites. There are big radicalization problems among their prison population as segregated wings are set up. That is a fertile ground for Islamist jihadis That is background from where the London killer came from.

    • Yes, concentrations of ethnic populations can certainly create problems, but the overall numbers are often quoted as a risk threshold.

      I’m not aware of us having that in New Zealand.

    • Missy

       /  March 26, 2017

      Pretty similar to the UK, a lot of trouble in areas of high Muslim populations, and increasing levels of radicalisation in prisons.

      The overall population of Muslims in the UK is around 5%, the 2011 census put the Muslim population of Birmingham at 21.8%, Birmingham is the main breeding ground for Jihadis in the UK, along with prisons.

      Another issue with concentrated and segregated population of Muslims is highlighted by Rotherham. In 2015 it was reported that Rotherham’s Muslim population was 3.7%, but they also have the third least segregated Muslim population in the UK. I won’t go into details, the sexual grooming ring has been well reported, it is important to note that the victims (over 1000) were all young white girls. The men involved were all Pakistani Muslims. This, more than anything, shows the contempt that many Muslim men have for white women.

  3. Blazer

     /  March 26, 2017

    Be wary of resourceful forces that seek to stoke the fires of Islamophobia.Not hard to identify them…..1+1=2.

  4. Missy

     /  March 26, 2017

    The UK’s Muslim population in 2011 was 4.4% (though estimates put it at approximately 5% now). Many areas run Sharia Councils alongside the UK legal system. These Councils deal in civil matters, and their decisions are not recognised in UK Courts, but that doesn’t stop them from trying to impose their rulings on UK law.

    Last December a statement was published on Open Democracy signed by almost 300 women, mostly Muslim, arguing against running Sharia Courts, and Sharia Councils, parallel to the UK’s legal system.

    These women warn against any attempt to normalise profoundly regressive religious codes of conduct as the basis of social interaction with, and policy development aimed at, minority women, mostly from their own experiences.

    From the Guardian article: “The experiences of these women tell us that the entrenchment of sharia councils and parallel legal systems within minority communities creates a space for the perpetuation of patriarchal control and harm to women, children and others perceived to be apostates, atheists and nonconformists.”


    The number of these councils in the UK is unknown, they are highly secretive in their workings, but what we do know is that there have been Sharia Councils for at least 8 years as the first numbers of councils I can find dates from 2009 where the think tank CIVITAS estimated at least 85 Sharia Councils, however, it seems the only research was done in 2012 where Reading University could only identify 30.


    Last year, as Home Secretary, Theresa May ordered a review into Sharia Courts, and Sharia Law, in the UK. This is expected to report back this year.

    The UK has less than 5% Muslim population, there is already a parallel legal system, enclaves of Muslim areas where the population don’t integrate, can’t speak English and gangs try to enforce Muslim religious values on the local population. There is no indication of how many of that population are extremists, however, based on a survey last year here is what we do know:

    66% of Muslims would not contact police if they suspected someone close to them had become involved in extremist activity

    23% of Muslims believe Sharia Law should replace British Law in Muslim areas

    31% think that polygamy should be legalized

    52% think that homosexuality should be illegal (in contrast only 22% of the Non-Muslim population believe this)

    35% believe that Jewish people have too much influence in the UK (compared to 8% of the non-Muslim population)


    So, I wouldn’t say all hell will break loose, but as the population increases there will be demands, or at least parallel societies / enclaves forming where the basic values will contrast with those of western countries as a whole, they will run Sharia Councils – if NZ doesn’t already have some, they will come when the population increases.

    • Corky

       /  March 26, 2017

      A telling post..Missy.

      • Blazer

         /  March 26, 2017

        ‘, ICM used face-to-face, in-home research to question a representative sample of 1,081 Muslims across Britain.’….All citizens muslim or otherwise have to obey the law AS IT IS.

    • Nice put together rebuttal to PG, MIssy…..

      • I don’t see it as a rebuttal. I touched briefly on a number of countries, Missy added a lot more detail about one that she particularly knows about.

        One thing she highlights proves one of my main points – an arbitrary threshold of ‘beware 5%’ is meaningless. Every country is different.

        Rather than scaremonger about irrelevant percentages here in New Zealand we should do what we can to ensue that Muslims or any other immigrant groups have good reason to adopt the common Kiwi attitude of tolerance.

        And we should do what we can to avoid ghettoing and alienation that occurs in parts of some other countries.

        Employment, education and being decent to anyone regardless of their ethnicity or religion would help more than ostracising in advance.

        • Pete, I’m interested as to where you often see the arbitrary 5% tipping point cited.

          • Kitty Catkin

             /  March 26, 2017

            I have seen both 3 & 5 quoted, but I can’t remember where.

            It sounds to me like paranoia. 3% suddenly take over 97% ? More fools the 97% if that’s allowed to happen.

            It also sounds like the sort of thing that Hitler said about Jews.

            • Blazer

               /  March 26, 2017

              Kitty ..don’t go swimming without a…life saver…or at the very least ..a rubber..ring.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  March 26, 2017

              There’s no sense in that reply.

  5. Brown

     /  March 26, 2017

    I could go on about how problematic it is for Christians in ‘moderate’ Indonesia and increasingly Malaysia, irrespective of the effective removal of Christianity the Middle East and North Africa, despite the nice facade you have painted but you have a closed eye to the Muslim theology and political practices in the real world.

    Some Muslim countries will have laws and constitutions that say all sorts of nice things but the reality on the ground for non-Muslims is such that the laws may as well not exist. In respect of Sharia Law its a poor example for contractual disputes because its commonly used against women who do not enjoy the same rights as the men to start with.

    Already we have Muslim swimming nights at council pools in NZ. Presumably the Muslim men (which is boys 9 and above), who cannot be left swimming alone with their women, are still welcome to perve at the white chicks in the public pool. We should not be accommodating religious / cultural practices like this in NZ in public facilities. They either hire the pool or fit in.

    You, like most of us, see what we want to see and sometimes we are correct because the cards just fall that way but the expressed goals of Islam are incompatible with western democracy. Its presently ascendant because its reforming. We are presently seeing a reformed militant Islam because it has returned to its core values.

    • Kitty Catkin

       /  March 26, 2017

      Not Muslim nights-women only nights, and not at all pools.. One pool is women only for two hours a week. Surely you don’t grudge women two hours out of a week. The women only is just what it sounds like-only for women. Any women. Any race. The only qualification is that one is a woman, Why do you mind one night out of seven being women only ? I bet that they are week nights, when the pools aren’t busy anyway..

      You flatter ‘white chicks’ if you imagine that Muslim men are going to be at public pools in the hope of being able to perv at them. There may be some, as there are possibly men of all races who go there for that reason-but I suspect that the number of men of any persuasion who do this is tiny. The people I see going into the pool nearest to me are mainly families. Not much perv material there.

      • Corky

         /  March 26, 2017

        Instigated by Muslim Women.

      • Blazer

         /  March 26, 2017

        good to see your ANECDOTAL evidence that there are no perverts at your ..pools.HGope this guy ..does not turn ..up.

  6. NOEL

     /  March 26, 2017

    If Maori get rebuffed every time they claim the are above the legal process how is Shara Law going to be forced on us by five percent of Muslims?

    • Gezza

       /  March 26, 2017

      It’s not. But Missy identifies the potential problems in her post above once the Muslim poulation increases, based on experience in Britain.

      • Obviously an increased number of alienated, disaffected people, or people who have problems adjusting to different ways of life, will increase the potential for problems.

        But putting a national number on it seems meaningless too me.

        I think the proportion of an immigrant group who are unemployed immigrant will matter more than the proportion of the total population.

        • Putting a national number on “alienated, disaffected people, or people who have problems adjusting … [and] will increase the potential for problems” is kinda dangerous rather than “meaningless” IMHO PG … and laying the label Muslim religion on them even moreso …

          We should deal with the situations as we foresee them, sure, but also as they are and as they arise. There are plenty of non-Muslim “alienated, disaffected people” …

          I like Missy’s post and everything she says is worth considering …

          However, I’d like to say, not as rebuttal but hopefully for perspective –

          a) An example like Rotherham is only good for so much ‘mileage’. Sexual grooming and exploitation of underage females is by no means confined to Muslim men and a confined area of the U.K. Your typical ‘sex tourist’ is not a Muslim man …


          b) The natural tendency of people to live and mix with ‘like’ people and congregate in certain areas – to form enclaves – is hardly confined to Muslims either. Nor does it necessarily constitute “segregation”. It happens to various degrees and in various ways throughout NZ, perhaps especially in suburbs of Auckland. eg Remuera? Mt Roskill? Does it necessarily lead to trouble …?

          c) We’re kidding ourselves if we think there aren’t effectively “parallel legal systems” in New Zealand … The power of Church, Lodge, Association and Think Tank in this country is greatly under-estimated IMHO … These are, not unlike Islam, forces of tremendous and frightening conservatism …

          So yes, be wary of any extremism …

          • Missy

             /  March 26, 2017

            “a) An example like Rotherham is only good for so much ‘mileage’. Sexual grooming and exploitation of underage females is by no means confined to Muslim men and a confined area of the U.K. Your typical ‘sex tourist’ is not a Muslim man …


            Parti, yes trafficking and sex tourism are issues and not limited to Muslim men, however you do a disservice & mislead those reading your post by comparing sex tourism and trafficking with what happened in Rotherham. I would say that you either do not know the full story of what happened in Rotherham, or what happened there doesn’t fit with your world view so you are going into the default position of the left – mislead, say it isn’t only Muslims and show erroneous examples of how it isn’t only Muslims, and then say this isn’t what Muslim men do.

            Rotherham was a deliberate and systematic targeting of underage white girls by a gang of Muslim men. It was allowed to go on so long for a number of factors, but one that was reported time and time again is that the authorities did not want to target the Pakistani Community for fear of being labelled racist. This started in the 1990’s, race was a big issue, and many liberals and lefties were labelling the police and authorities institutionally racist everytime someone from an ethnic minority was investigated, so in my view the vocal liberal left do bear some small part of the responsibility for the Rotherham case. That is one of the dangers of those on the left throwing the word racist around so easily and without any thought or understanding.

            “b) The natural tendency of people to live and mix with ‘like’ people and congregate in certain areas – to form enclaves – is hardly confined to Muslims either. Nor does it necessarily constitute “segregation”. It happens to various degrees and in various ways throughout NZ, perhaps especially in suburbs of Auckland. eg Remuera? Mt Roskill? Does it necessarily lead to trouble …?”

            Tell me Parti, those ‘enclaves’ in Remora and Mt Roskill, are they truly enclaves in the sense that the Muslim one’s in London & Birmingham & other parts of the UK are. Yes, most people do congregate generally with ‘like’ people, however, in terms of those that immigrated to a country, most will generally learn the language, get involved in the community, mix and interact with the locals, adopt some of the local customs and values. But here is another example, Southeast London has a high Eastern European population, Polish and Ukrainian, and some Russians.

            Most integrate well with the rest of the population, but there are a few groups that don’t, they refuse to learn English, they don’t have jobs, and they don’t socialise outside their own kind, and yes it does lead to trouble. They sir around the square, they get drunk and engage in anti social behaviour, but on a more extreme level, they form their gangs (like back at home) and then there will be large gang fights between the different groups (e.g.: Polish v Russian), the difference between the Polish and the Muslims is that the Polish don’t have someone at church preaching how they need to kill everyone who is not like them.

            So, yes if a group of people form an enclave without also making steps to integrate into the local society it does lead to trouble.

            Also, I am interested in what these ‘enclaves’ in Mt Roskill and Remuera are, Russians? Polish? Muslims? Chinese? Polynesians? or just Rich White Folk?

            “c) We’re kidding ourselves if we think there aren’t effectively “parallel legal systems” in New Zealand … The power of Church, Lodge, Association and Think Tank in this country is greatly under-estimated IMHO … These are, not unlike Islam, forces of tremendous and frightening conservatism …”

            Tell me Parti, do any of these ‘parallel legal systems’ you think exist in NZ try to supersede NZ law? Your political agenda is showing if you think the Church, Think Tanks (really – Think Tanks a parallel legal system?), or the lodge are ‘not unlike Islam’. You have jumped the shark there Parti, and it is attitudes like yours that aid and abet the extremism in Islam. Those organisations you quoted work within NZ law and work to change the law from within, Islam and Sharia Councils work outside the law, and work to not change the UK law but to supersede it.

    • Brown

       /  March 26, 2017

      Maori are well along a path of getting their own laws. These things are not shouted out because it will frighten the horses. Islam will quietly do the same and the politicians will suck up to it in due course. Neither concession will be ethically correct but that’s politicians for you.

    • I don’t think the Māori v Muslim debate is relevant. Islamists globally believe that their Quran absolutely has precedence over any and all man made laws. Some activist Māori may object to British imposed man made Iaw, but they have no alternative laws to refer to. They use British law and interpret that Te Tiriti supports certain claims within our existing laws. No comparison.

  7. [Deleted. A lengthy diatribe going back in time to 622, which looks like a cut and paste, is not attempting to discuss the content of this post. PG]

    • [Deleted]

      Pete, this is precisely the sort of censorship that Islam and its acolytes are enforcing on the Western liberal tradition. It is dishonest in its purpose and impedes the role of the free press in a Western society.

      Please publish my post verbatim, not because of your personal views, but because it adds to this debate by giving the origin of the title for the enlightenment of others.

      [No. Try keeping your comments to the point and discuss the actual issues. If you have a heap of library material precis it and link to the source. PG]

  8. “I often hear claims that when the proportion of a country’s population reaches 5% (sometimes 3%) then all heel will break loose, Sharia Law will take over, praying to Mecca will become compulsory and the secular sky and Christian heaven will fall in.”

    Lets set up a straw man and then set it on fire. Nicely done Pete.

    I think Missy has a far better handle on it though…

    • No straw man. I’ve seen many comments and claims along those lines. Do you want me to find evidence of them?

      • “All hell well break loose”, “Heaven will fall in”

        You know full well you have cherry picked the most extreme stuff and thrown in some hyperbole to create a position to attack Pete.

        That is obvious from the way the statement I have quoted from your post is formulated.

        You can go find claims to back up your strawman- start at WOBH – but you have been beautifully rebutted by Missy already so that might be pointless for me to debate with you.

        Have a nice Sunday

        • Of course I cherry picked some of the more extreme examples. There wouldn’t have been much point in including non-examples.

          Missy has added some useful information about the UK which is good for discussion. Instead you have just chosen to diss the messenger without adding anything useful. What was your actual point? You disagree with something in particular?

          • Just winding you up Pete.

            You have had so many examples pointed out about what a growing Mulsim population means for a Western country and western values, how tolerance is turned against the West as a weapon by Islamists.

            How it has been happening for DECADES – since before 9/11 [go google the extermists preachers who have been preaching hate in London since the early 90’s, how they used the Human Rights legislation of the UK and EU against the UK to avoid deportation when their hate spreading became too much for the UK government].

            The examples of Sweden, France and the UK…how violence has flowed, how local customs are subverted, the harassment and worse of Western woman, the harassment of people in the UK doing normal things like buying a beer from the off licence and going pass a Muslim majority area on the way home because alcohol is “haram” in Islam…

            Its all real and it gets worse as the numbers of Muslims in a country grows..

            And you keep calling for more tolerance and more understanding – as if Islam will compromise and change….

            Frankly you espouse noble sentiments Pete – but deluded. And that delusion leads to call for more compromise and tolerance from Western democracies which is just a white flag in the eyes of Islamists…. and encourages more demands..

            Appeasement leads to much worse outcomes than a firm stand after initial negotiation.

            I’m all for getting out of the Middle East remove the excuse that is brandished – but it won’t stop what has started. Because what has now started is a return a continuation of a return to fundamental Islamic principles started in late 1700’s, which is what Salfism and Wahhabism are all about, and that will lead to ever expanding conflict with the West as the two cultures are not compatible WITHOUT a strong authority enforcing peace.

            If you don’t believe the above paragraph have a look at the way non-Muslims are treated in Egypt when the military are not in control – the Copts suffered when the Muslim Brotherhood briefly had control of Eygpt a few years ago.

            Look at the way things go in Iraq, Syria when the controlling Military/Secular government loses control

            Chamberlain demonstrated what appeasement leads to.

            • Alleging ‘appeasement’ is a bit low. I’m not trying to suggest any appeasement. You obviously don’t get my key point.

              I think that we will do more for our quality of life and reducing risks if we are better than the crappy countries and the intolerant people who suggest ‘solutions’ that are as bad as the actions of those they criticise.

              No one is trying to invade us. We have fairly choices – to keep complaining about other people and other countries which we can do absolutely nothing about, or we could instead put our efforts towards showing we can do things better here in New Zealand, and learn from and avoid problems that are occurring elsewhere.

            • Pete – you use some strong terms yourself and then complain when appeasement is used to classify your position? Come now, you have been blogging and commenting on the web for a long time – surely a mere word like appeasement doesn’t trigger you?

              I see your point entirely Pete. I just strongly believe you are misguided when it comes to Islam.
              Islam is about SURRENDER. There is NO other path but the Koran, Hadith and Sharia Law. And it brooks no compromise and no rival

              NZ hasn’t seen it in any significant way yet – though we have had some opening intra-Muslim skirmishing about the true path in Auckland already. Beatings and a threat to kill…

              And we have stupidly allowed the Saudis to sponsor Wahhabist Imams into NZ – for the price of gold in the form of trade agreements

              I have no axe to grind against individual Muslims. Worked with a few Pakistanis and a few Fijians who nominally follow the faith. All good as people – but none of them were devout or openly so.

              The Lindt cafe attack in Sydney, the Police station attacks of Australia are a mere 1000 odd miles away and serve as an example of what to expect. Radical Islam is a fish that swims freely in the Muslim population of a Western country and while not openly espoused by large numbers has the critical non vocal support it needs to slow thrive. Missy supplied you the numbers – but you choose to ignore them

              We reach 5% Muslim population and things will be no different here to the UK. And i don’t want that.

            • Appeasement has special connotations, and it is often linked to a certain British Prime Minister as I’m sure you know.

              Ok then, show how I have done any appeasement. And explain how it is different to those who keep appeasing Islamaphobics?

            • I don’t need to state differences Pete. People have a rationale fear of Islamists. That fear is based in numerous killings worldwide – not just on Western countries but also sectarian violence among Muslims, which has been going on since Ali was killed within living memory of the prophet himself dying.

              There is zero wrong with calling out the incompatibility of Islam and Western cultures. And zero wrong with saying – no sharia here, no special consideration for Muslim religious needs.

              You have constantly and consistently preached – we, meaning Westerners, need to show tolerance. And that is in the face of the facts. And that is a strategy of appeasement….

              You have tried the old “economic disadvantage” leading to “alienation” meme in this very thread, i.e. its us not them and we just need to adapt and show special consideration to stop the problems that have occurred in Sweden, France, Belgium, Germany and the UK . That is a strategy of appeasement Pete whether you like to admit it or not…

              And that strategy has been tried in those countries for decades and it hasn’t worked. Multiculturalism requires respect from all sides. it won’t work when one cultural is religo-fascist and wants total domination.

            • “There is zero wrong with calling out the incompatibility of Islam and Western cultures.”

              So why do Western countries keep intervening in and invading Muslim countries?

              “And that is a strategy of appeasement….”

              Bullshit. Accusing appeasement is a lazy non-argument.

              “You have tried the old “economic disadvantage” leading to “alienation””

              There are well known connections between them. People with good jobs and successful careers are far less likely to become terrorists, or gang members, or criminals.

            • First “Bullshit…. lazy non-argument” Oh dear you seem to have lost your equilibrium Pete. that sort of retort is something you always criticise…

              Don’t disagree re invading Muslim countries Pete – and you know that fairly well because I have said it repeatedly on this forum and others… Afghanistan was justified it was were Al Qaeda was headquartered. Iraq II was no correct strategy in my view and has caused many problems….

              As for alienation – its odd isn’t it how many western countries have large Indian Hindu, Thai, Taiwanese, Korea, etc immigrant populations and the alienation isn’t there like it is with Muslims, particularly those from places like Pakistan & Kashmir who have settle in the UK.

              Oddly many of those other populations don’t try and push their religion and customs on others, often intermarried with the local populations and things just move on…

              But with Muslims – their religion is their Law and the way they want the nation organised politically. And that desire intensifies as their numbers grow….

              Bending over backwards for Muslims to prevent alienation is appeasement, you don’t like the word – well tough.

            • Conspiratoor

               /  March 26, 2017

              You have consistently called for tolerance pg. A noble sentiment
              However one-sided tolerance is the definition of appeasement.

            • No it’s not.

              Here’s the relevant definition: “to yield or concede to the belligerent demands of (a nation, group, person, etc.) in a conciliatory effort, sometimes at the expense of justice or other principles.”

              My principles on this are strong, and I’m not yielding or conceding to you or anyone, the opposite in fact.

              Calling someone an appeaser in this context is like calling someone a Nazi. It’s a dirty diss.

              And it’s not one sided in New Zealand.

            • Conspiratoor

               /  March 26, 2017

              Godwin has made an appearance. Time to go

            • Meh…. I didn’t bring it up C. Appeasement is just a word

            • Just a word with fairly special meanings in certain contexts, and a word often used to try to trash a messenger rather than debate the message.

              No, you didn’t bring up the word, but you tried to make excuses for it’s use and minimise it.

            • Oh dear Pete – your now displaying Standard type logic trying to control words used and then lashing out when people don’t agree with your attempt at control. Appeasement is a fair word to describe the solution of pandering to sharia and those would push it in to normal society in the West.

            • Except that you’re insinuating things that are false. I haven’t proposed any solutions related to sharia. And I have made no attempt to push it in the West.

              So claiming appeasement is not only pissy it is straight out false.

              It seems like you’re trying to do the lashing out here.

            • Nice attempted reverse Pete.

              You have been promoting the “don’t alienate” line, you introduced the appeasement word. Not me.

              You have pushed the tolerance line, even when numerous examples from Missy are related to you. And she is not alone in being subjected to the sort of harassment she has described.

              Fundamentalist Islam, unreformed Islam, dogmatic Islam is incompatible with Western values and just sees our inclusion and tolerance as weakness to be exploited…

              Nice debating .. I can see were the “badger” nickname used by your opponents on the Net came from.

              I’ll have to read the whole flow of exchange when I get home to see where the holes are..

              And no lashing out by me.. I am as calm as a still mountain tarn on a windless day…

            • I didn’t introduce the appeasement word.

              You seem to have a real difficulty with facts posted about a contentious issue, and you also have a problem misrepresenting what I’ve done and said.

              And now you even try the badger thing, what next?

              If you disagree with what I or others say just disagree or put forward your own views. But you seem to have decided to attack me instead. That’s lame.

            • Your correct Pete I used the word appeasement first…. to describe a strategy of constant conciliation, to describe a position of saying ‘what the West is doing in its own countries that make Muslims feel alienated’ [note not quote marks but isolating a statement as a description of a position] as if its for the the West to change to allow a group who don’t accept our values to fit in.

              Sorry but those concepts of its us not them – we need to do more in our own countries to allow muslims to fit in is appeasement.

              On the Badger thing – just stating I understand why now, as your very persistent Pete…

              There was no attack on you Pete – zero.

              You have chosen to get wound up and then say I’m lashing out.

              All good…

            • Yes, I am persistent when I choose to be, that and not getting wound up seems to frustrate some people.

            • Blazer

               /  March 26, 2017

              Dave ,I say Dave…you have reverted to type,someone disagrees with you,presents a co herent argument and you are incensed they will not come around to your way of thinking.WO is your natural…home.

            • Blazer grow up. Robust exchange of views… nothing more….

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  March 26, 2017

              The Lindt Cafe was one person.

              There has been more than one mass killing in Australia, and a few serial killers. I can’t remember the name of the man who killed all the people at the resort ? park ?

              The few mass killings in NZ have had nothing to do with religion.

            • Ahhhh Kitty….. too little and waaay too later.

            • Corky

               /  March 26, 2017

              Pete reminds me of the Terminator..he will always be back to give us another serve.

  9. Corky

     /  March 26, 2017

    Still trying to find the site as promised, Pete. Here’s one from my records. A very well done survey.


    • Blazer

       /  March 26, 2017

      very impressed with that Corky.You must have extensive…records.Any on economics.

      • Corky

         /  March 26, 2017

        No, I do my own thinking on that using the KISS principle.

      • Blazer

         /  March 26, 2017

        so praise is worth 2 down ticks…whats negative critique…worth?

        • Corky

           /  March 26, 2017

          What the hell are you talking about?

          • Kitty Catkin

             /  March 26, 2017

            Don’t ask. He is not making sense tonight.

            • Corky

               /  March 26, 2017

              He’s taken some big hits today. And he’s been quite abusive while plagiarising poor old Glen Campbell whom is about to exit this mortal coil.

      • That’s a very general categorisation that does nothing to recognise very different conditions in different countries.

        No mention of New Zealand.

        And no comparison with conditions caused by non-Muslims – for example Yemen, Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq have significant complications caused by non-Muslim countries.

        • Corky

           /  March 26, 2017

          Nothing general about it. Read the survey. Look at the Muslim population percentage. Read what to expect with that percentage of Muslims. See if that summation is true or not.

          Example: New Zealand. While not mentioned, it would come under this heading:

          As long as the Muslim population remains around 1% of any given country they will be regarded as a peace-loving minority and not as a threat to anyone. In fact, they may be featured in articles and films, stereotyped for their colorful uniqueness:

          Stats from CIA. Please allow for intervening years and bulk immigration which has changed things a little.

          United States — Muslim 1.0%
          Australia — Muslim 1.5%
          Canada — Muslim 1.9%
          China — Muslim 1%-2%
          Italy — Muslim 1.5%
          Norway — Muslim 1.8%

          Is the summation correct? Yes, it covers your posts to a tee. The media also…who consider people like me bigoted nuts.

          • “Read what to expect with that percentage of Muslims. ”

            No. It’s a simplistic generalisation using very few factors and not taking into account any regional or country differences.

          • I could say that ‘when indigenous people get to 15% of the population they want the state to stand by a treaty and give compensation for illegally taken land and other breaches of contract’.

            But that wouldn’t mean much to most countries.

            • Been a while since I’ve read a comment that good PG …

              Great topic. What the comments are saying to me is: Myths inevitably have some grounding in reality … but how much?

              The question becomes: Who is perpetuating and/or enhancing and/or exaggerating the myths? And why?

              For instance: Immigration, including significant numbers of Muslims – being accessible cheap labour – is a cornerstone of the economy most people on YourNZ support – what I call the FIIRE economy.

              Immigration maintains unemployment levels – supposedly controlling inflation – depresses wages, masks systemic issues like inequality and iniquity (and worse), buttresses flawed assumptions (like globalisation) and plugs obvious leaks …

              Yet these same FIIRE economy supporters don’t want Muslim immigrants. Indeed, they rail against them …

              I can imagine this looking kinda *odd* to some people …

            • Corky

               /  March 26, 2017

              I’m sorry. Pete. I’ve done my best. We will have to disagree.

            • Corky

               /  March 26, 2017

              As a side topic. Just been listening to Matty Hooten and Mike Williams de cussing this little toe-rag who wont cut his hair as required by Auckland Grammar. Hooten,an old boy, stated in the 80’s you could wear your hair any way you liked. Grammar was only interested in results, both academic and sporting. So what changed? According to Hooton the high number of Asian pupils who’s parents are more conservative.

              Immigration…big problem.

            • Gezza

               /  March 26, 2017

              “Great topic. What the comments are saying to me is: Myths inevitably have some grounding in reality … but how much?”

              The biggest problem with religions, including the 3 Abrahamic ones, is that their fundamental premise – the idea that Yahweh /aka The Trinity/ aka Allah actually exist, did magic, & communicated with ancient illiterates telling them what they must do and not do – is grounded in unreality, so discussing their religion rationally with believers is not really possible.

  10. Blazer

     /  March 26, 2017

    ‘storming up the charts…..’At night when you turn off all the lights
    There’s no place that you can hide
    No no, the muslims gonna get’cha

    In bed, throw the covers on your head
    You pretend like you are dead
    But I know it, the muslims gonna get’cha

    Muslims gonna get’cha
    Muslims gonna get ‘cha

    The muslims gonna get’cha tonight
    No way, you can fight it every day
    But no matter what you say
    You know it the muslims gonna get’cha’

    • Corky

       /  March 26, 2017

      I was going to give you a record contract. But I think your prescience may be unintentional, while your sarcasm isn’t. So, I will keep this for prosperity. When we endure our first terrorist attack from a radicalised Pakistani student here on a visa, and kiwi blood is split, I will remind you of this…..and invite you to write your second hit.

      • Blazer

         /  March 26, 2017


        • Corky

           /  March 26, 2017

          No.. prosperity, mine at your expense. although in bad taste.

      • Blazer

         /  March 26, 2017

        this the B…side…

        ‘The end has come and found us here
        With bodies scattered all around us here
        The puzzle that we never found an answer for
        Still asks us, soldiers’, just what all the games were for
        And here we stand in a box of sand
        Where’s the playground Corky?
        You’re the one who’s supposed to know his way around
        Where’s the playground Corky
        I can’t stay around?
        I can’t stay around?’

        • Corky

           /  March 26, 2017

          And the following day
          After a spray.. bullets at a gay
          Car smash into Cafe May
          Oh, did the liberals bray
          Peace be with you brother M
          Our wicked civilisation is to blame.
          Atonement will be our game
          Infidels must pay
          And so it was on another day
          Brother M look down from his throne
          Your sentiments do you proud
          Brother L, but if you speak again
          The death knell will be your tell.

          Corky Enterprises
          A fairer deal for Infidels

          • Blazer

             /  March 26, 2017


            • Corky

               /  March 26, 2017

              Thank you…just because you haven’t the brains to copyright your material is no excuse to take it out on me…Infidel.

              But hold on..’Where’s the playground Corky?” ‘You’re the one who’s supposed to know his way around.” Lol, son that’s called plagiarism

              Exhibit A your honour, in the case of Blazer v Glen Campbell.

      • Corky

         /  March 26, 2017


        • Blazer

           /  March 26, 2017

          blood or….milk?

        • Blazer

           /  March 26, 2017

          of course its plagiarism,so is the A side (Gloria Estefan)….its all done in the best ..possible taste though…a la Al Yankovich.

          • Corky

             /  March 26, 2017

            Mine wasn’t.

            • Blazer

               /  March 26, 2017

              what a surprise ..not!

            • Corky

               /  March 26, 2017

              Lol..nasty reply not expected..not.!

            • Blazer

               /  March 26, 2017

              Corky..believe me no nastiness intended..your pol.itics are like Als ..whats good for me…but I think you have a conscience…which may sound patronising…because..it ..is.

  11. Alan Wilkinson

     /  March 26, 2017

    The Muslim religion is a myth like all others. Myths are tools that can be used for good or evil like all others. All we can do is ban their use for evil.

  12. Brown

     /  March 26, 2017

    “… Islamaphobics?”

    There we go Pete. Falling back to use of a word that is intended to insult those who maybe know a bit about Islam and would seek to properly debate the wisdom of allowing it to practice what it preaches.

  13. Blazer

     /  March 26, 2017

    ‘who maybe know a bit about Islam ‘….sponge heads that soak up all the contrived hysteria promoted by vested interests.

  14. Corky

     /  March 26, 2017

    Surely those screen shots of joyous Muslim commentators can’t be true… especially from Al Jazeera..hell, Gezza watches that channel.


    • Surely you think that everything Infowars publishes is true and balanced.

      • Corky

         /  March 26, 2017

        Well, they could have faked it, but they would be in a shitload of strife and legal problems should that be proved.

        What don’t you like about the clip?

      • MaureenW

         /  March 26, 2017

        Where do you get your news from that is true and balanced? I’d like a link – I’m not currently aware of any non-partisan news outlet.

        • People who are strongly partisan tend to see everything as partisan.

          I suggest looking for a range of sources and always have some scepticism.

          When someone promotes a highly partisan source as gospel be even more sceptical.

          And be aware that there’s a difference between mainstream sources who may lean a bit either way and sites like Infowars that are well known to promote conspiracy theories. Two of their current headlines:

          Emergency Alert: Elites trying ti kill Trump

          The truth about Trump’s failure to repeal Obamacare

          – hint, even more scepticism advised for sites claiming to know the ‘truth’.

          • MaureenW

             /  March 26, 2017

            I read a variety of news websites and find both sides of the partisan divide pedal conspiracy theories – look for Trump being blackmailed by russians, Trump and the golden showers, in fact the Russia/Trump myth(s) appear to have been perpetuated by the DNC and published by the “establishment” MSM. These are conspiracy theories also. Do you know of any news websites that don’t pedal conspiracy theories?

          • Corky

             /  March 26, 2017

            So would you concede over half the clip I posted was factual and based on repeated history and is not a conspiracy theory?

    • Blazer

       /  March 26, 2017

      psst have you seen the one about the Israelis jumping for joy, on 9/11!

    • Gezza

       /  March 26, 2017

      Er … Corky … ALL the Aljaz reporting & commentary has been pro-London, pro-Western, anti-Islamic extremism, & as factual as has been possible as more official information has come to light.

      All that showed was someone had posted clip an edited clip from one of their tv news bulletins showing the area on social media, having used one of the many app packages online or downloadable from the App Store to add bouncing smiley faces.

      Paul Joseph Watson is a major contributor to Infowars. I love him because he’s such a total twat.

      • Corky

         /  March 26, 2017

        That woke you up. I’m sure the reporting was. Aljaz is considered a fair news agency regarding East/ West perspectives. I was talking about the comments and likes( stuff the smiley faces, I dont like them) shown at same time. However, point taken. I was wrong to word it like that.

        Was there anything else in the clip you have a problem with? Why I loved this clip, wasn’t the anti West sentiments…. it was at 1.33. He mentions the Left, but I include the majority of Westerners no matter their political stripes.

        • Gezza

           /  March 26, 2017

          No I’m fine with the clip. PJW just irritates me.

  15. I recommend that if you want to read an unbiased and thoughtful thesis on what drives Daesh (ISIS) and the relationship with Saudi Arabia and Wahabbism, then read both parts of Alistair Cooke’s proposition published here:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alastair-crooke/isis-aim-saudi-arabia_b_5748744.html. Alistair amongst his many literary and theatrical accomplishment was a MI6 Agent of some credibility about Midle Eastern matters.
    The 2 parts, describe the effects that Wahabbi ideology has on ISIS and the fear that Saudi Arabia has that ISIS will destroy the modernisation of the Saudi economy and cause a destruction of moderate Islam and the imposition of pure Wahabbism on Saudi leading to the destruction of the Saudi Kingdom as we know it today. Alistair says the West will be unable to do anything about the situation. I concluded that his thesis was written before the flooding of Europe by Muslim refugees occurred but note that they could provide a source for ISIS reserves should the internal divisions in the Saud family cause a revolution in Saudi Arabia.

  16. Blazer

     /  March 26, 2017

    everyone knows if the Saudis did not have oil,no one would give them…the time ..of day.

  17. They also have been investing in property and joint ventures in any country that will allow them to invest. The value of their intended investment mentioned during the King’s recent visit was $US100 billion. I am trying to establish their investment totals, but do know they are revising their economic plans to minimise the falling returns from crude oil. The combat power of their armed forces are significant on a global stage and they are thought to have access to nuclear weapons by arrangement with Pakistan, speculative of course, but…?

    • Blazer

       /  March 26, 2017

      yes the deal is…sell oil in U.S dollars and invest in U.S and other western securities.

  18. Alan Wilkinson

     /  March 26, 2017

    Muslim immigration is very contentious, and fear of terrorism is real, albeit out of proportion to the relative real threat.

    The fear is realistic. That is why huge amounts of time and money are spent combating the threat. These efforts have reduced the likelihood of the threats being carried out but the threats themselves are still major and very real.

    There is a very real threat that when you import immigrants you import their old hatreds and the ideology that supports them. The more that they fail to integrate and live in enclaves, the greater this threat. The 5% claim seems to be merely a rule of thumb speculation that at that level integration can fail for too many. That doesn’t seem to be outrageous to me. The big question is what to do about it. The obvious options are to suppress immigration to below that level and/or to ensure good integration. Both invite the question: how?

    • Corky

       /  March 26, 2017

      Yeah..the trillion dollar question..how?

      • Blazer

         /  March 26, 2017

        you two have been told so many times now.

    • “There is a very real threat that when you import immigrants you import their old hatreds and the ideology that supports them. ”

      Yes, but that’s not new. It dates way back to concerns about Chinese, Irish etc.

      For a while we feared people of German and Japanese ethnicity – that seems to have passed over.
      There were grizzles about Dutch immigrants. Poms, especially union Poms. Pacific Islanders were very controversial in the 1970s and now they are an intregral part of Auckland in particular but elswhere the are seen as normal Kiwis.

      There were also concerns about Irish immigrants again during the Troubles. And later Chinese again.

      If we had no immigrants with religious beliefs some people would find something else to fear.

      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  March 26, 2017

        Grizzles are very different from fear of attack and the problems of integration are magnified by rigid and incompatible religiosity. Some people can fear anything. Most people only fear more realistic and severe threats.

        1. Keep them in the hell-holes they call home, and
        a) try to fix those, or
        b) leave them to kill each other.

        2. Allow them to bring their hell-holes here, and
        a) try to talk them out of their hatreds and delusions, or
        b) accept that this will become another hell-hole.

        • There’s nothing to justify a fear of attack in New Zealand. Of course it could happen, but the risks must be very low.

          Far more risk from earthquakes and volcanic eruptions, and normal day to day risks.

          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  March 26, 2017

            Yes. The number of Muslims here doubled between 2001 and 2013 censuses but was still then only 1.2%.

          • MaureenW

             /  March 27, 2017

            Is this your most uninformed comment? Clearly you haven’t travelled much.

      • Of course the generation of NZers who have nearly passed bemoaned “10 pound poms, and sleeves rolled up dutchies” etc. It was all in pretty good fun and has long since ceased. 1950s Kiwis were far more insular. It’s not exaggerating to say that the vast majority of now adult Nzerzs are among, if not the most, well-travelled people on this planet. Add education and unparalleled hospitality of kiwis to the mix and you have an accepting and tolerant climate in general.

        People like immigration, they desire it socially and fiscally. They see however that throughout the world there are only isolated examples where Muslim dominated countries minorities grant equal rights to non Muslims or apostates and that these groups are subject to isolation at best and active discrimination, marginalisation and much more at worst. I’m not going to prattle on about the regression of previously liberal countries like Iraq and now Turkey, but I think evidence supports the argument that regarding Quranic law as superior to secular law can never be compatible with Western society and neither can a host society anticipate migrants integrating and embracing secular, democratic liberalism when continued bride fetching and marginalisation of women’s rights are regarded as the normal.

  19. Blazer

     /  March 26, 2017

    ‘of previously liberal countries like Iraq and now Turkey, ‘…I wish you would educate me about these previous ‘liberal’ countries.Do tell.

  20. Good article..I didnt read the comments though im pretty sure its mostly nigative about muslims as usual..Im a muslim woman from Jordan and I lived in several arab countries and contrary to what alt right media is telling you we live with christians as large minoroties and we never had any problems ..nobody imposes anything on them..i studied in christian schools and have many friends and we never had any problem..what im trying to tell you is that in islam nobody can force anyone to do anything..so no matter how the number of muslims grow that will make no diffrence .The world focuses on few terrorist who dont represent more than 1 billion muslims but in the same time thousands of Rohinga muslims are burned and raped by buddhists and no body calls buddhists terrorest..Yesterday thousands of hidu attacked muslim houses in india and nobody called them terrorists.

    • Its a bit like rampaging kids in Kaikohe … Terrorism, in service of a political agenda …