Maarten's banner image



Comments and Views - Society

If you wish to add any comments, use my blog site: Maarten's Blog

Why the Peaceful Majority is Irrelevant

"Why the Peaceful Majority is Irrelevant" is an essay on Islamic fanaticism written in 2006 by Paul E. Marek, a second-generation Canadian, whose grandparents fled Czechoslovakia just prior to the Nazi takeover. Below is what he wrote:

I used to know a man whose family were German aristocracy prior to World War Two. They owned a number of large industries and estates. I asked him how many German people were true Nazis, and the answer he gave has stuck with me and guided my attitude toward fanaticism ever since.

“Very few people were true Nazis” he said, “but, many enjoyed the return of German pride, and many more were too busy to care. I was one of those who just thought the Nazis were a bunch of fools. So, the majority just sat back and let it all happen. Then, before we knew it, they owned us, and we had lost control, and the end of the world had come. My family lost everything. I ended up in a concentration camp and the Allies destroyed my factories.”

We are told again and again by “experts” and “talking heads” that Islam is the religion of peace, and that the vast majority of Muslims just want to live in peace. Although this unquantified assertion may be true, it is entirely irrelevant. It is meaningless fluff, meant to make us feel better, and meant to somehow diminish the specter of fanatics rampaging across the globe in the name of Islam. The fact is, that the fanatics rule Islam at this moment in history. It is the fanatics who march. It is the fanatics who wage any one of 50 shooting wars world wide. It is the fanatics who systematically slaughter Christian or tribal groups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entire continent in an Islamic wave. It is the fanatics who bomb, behead, murder, or honor kill. It is the fanatics who take over mosque after mosque. It is the fanatics who zealously spread the stoning and hanging of rape victims and homosexuals. The hard quantifiable fact is, that the “peaceful majority” is the “silent majority” and it is cowed and extraneous.

Communist Russia was comprised of Russians who just wanted to live in peace, yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of about 20 million people. The peaceful majority were irrelevant. China’s huge population was peaceful as well, but Chinese Communists managed to kill a staggering 70 million people. The Average Japanese individual prior to World War 2 was not a war mongering sadist. Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way across South East Asia in an orgy of Killing that included the systematic killing of 12 million Chinese civilians; most killed by sword, shovel, and bayonet. And, who can forget Rwanda, which collapsed into butchery. Could it not be said that the majority of Rwandans were “peace loving”.

History lessons are often incredibly simple and blunt, yet for all our powers of reason we often miss the most basic and uncomplicated of points. Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by the fanatics. Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence. Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemy if they don’t speak up, because like my friend from Germany, they will awake one day and find that the fanatics own them, and the end of their world will have begun. Peace-loving Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Rwandans, Bosnians, Afghans, Iraqis, Palestinians, Somalis, Nigerians, Algerians, and many others, have died because the peaceful majority did not speak up until it was too late. As for us who watch it all unfold, we must pay attention to the only group that counts; the fanatics who threaten our way of life.

The original posting of his essay can be read here.

More recently, Brigitte Gabriel made the following points on the subject during a panel discussion:


Robin Bain's Thumb

The recent screening of the TV documentary "3rd Degree" has again raised the issue of the Bain murders, who dunnit?, etc.

Robin Bain's thumbThe new "evidence" was from the police photograph of Robin Bain's hand showing 2 lines on the thumb, suggesting that these were marks made when loading bullets into a magazine. This made a compelling argument ... until one sees the collage of photos in the NZ Herald on 27 June 2013 showing several thumbs that had marks from loading magazines, and the photo of Robin's thumb. That photo clearly stood out as being different - the lines are not parallel!

And who put the magazine on its edge beside the hand before the police arrived?


Who Killed Robin Bain?

Robin BainThe last court case found David Bain not guilty of any of the murders - this then raised the issue: "Who killed Robin Bain?"

Many believe that Robin Bain committed suicide. Although there is a slight possiblilty he did, it is very unlikely - his suicide certainly is not a case of being "beyond reasonable doubt". There are many doubts about his death being suicide, many of them raised by Bryan Bruce in an earlier documentary.

There are some other doubts I'd like to raise:

A man planning to commit suicide knowing that his son is due back from his paper round very soon would write a suicide note on a piece of paper. He would not wait for an old computer to boot up, and then type a message on the screen ... unless he was trying to avoid using his own handwriting ...

An educated person (such as Robin) writing a suicide note, like the one left on the computer, would very probably write it in the present tense, such as "sorry, you are the only one who deserves to stay" - not in the past tense such as "sorry, you are the only one that deserved to stay". The message left on the computer has the appearance of being written after the event - something extremely difficult to do if one has just committed suicide ...

So ... who killed Robin Bain? Is there a murderer out there that needs to be found and brought to justice? Or did the "justice" system break down again?


Arrogance of ORFU

Arrogance - a prime example is the Otago Rugby Football Union (Dunedin, New Zealand).

In February 2012, the ORFU announced it was going into liquidation - it was in debt of $2.35 million! Ok, so they screwed up, and after all, times are tough. But then they had the audacity to say that they will 'start again'! In other words: 'Tough shit for all the creditors. We screwed up and spent the money. You don't get anything. We're going to press <Esc> and start this game again'. Just as simple as that! Blow an enormous amount of money, leaving businesses out of pocket by $ millions. Too bad, never mind.

It then turns out that a short time before announcing the liquidation (and to hell with the creditors), they had a lavious party, leaving an upaid bill of over $25000. This $25000 was part of the $480000 debt to the Dunedin City Council, funded by the ratepayers of Dunedin. They then went to the council with cap in hand, asking that Dunedin forgets about that $half-million!

In March, after considerable deliberation, the council decided it will waive the $half-million. Ok, so the ratepayers of Dunedin have to put hand in pocket to help bail out the ORFU.

Dave CullBut wait, there's more! A short time later, the Mayor of Dunedin, Dave Cull, was interviewed on National Radio about this saga. During the talk, he questioned the board's performance and made some comments that displeased the ORFU. A couple of guys of the ORFU weren't happy about these comments, and demanded that Mayor Dave Cull apologise! In April, they then had the audacity to threaten legal action if he did not apologise!! And in May, they went ahead with proceedings to personally sue the mayor for $500,000 each!!!

How's that for sheer arrogance? Who the hell are these cowboys!?!

I say to Dave Cull:
Stand your ground! Don't take any crap from these bullies!
Do not apologise to these 2 clowns until they apologise to every man, woman, and child in Dunedin for being such arrogant selfish prats!!!

* * *

The Sequel - September 2012

Alas, Mayor Dave Cull wrote to these arrogant prats and offered an apology for "any distress or harm caused".

So what happened here? One guy commented about the incompetance of a group, of which two bullies were involved with. So these playground bullies bailed up this guy and threatened repurcussions unless he withdrew his comments. Sadly, the system supported the arrogant bullies rather than the guy standing up to them.

There is endless talk about school bullies and how much society is working to deal with this situation. But the example played out between the ORFU and the Mayor shows that bullying is an integral part of our society, and worse still, the bullies are glorified.

Once again, we have to accept this crap from the immature bullies, and if we stand up against them, they pull resources until we withdraw. While this approach continues to be entrenched in our society, it is a hard road ahead for us all!



Retailers seem to be obsessed with ending prices in "99".

For example, when something is priced at $99.99, they really want to push the price as high as they can, but make it look like it's below $100. They are prepared to forego 1c to try and fool customers into thinking that they are paying less than $100. So what they are really saying is:

"Hopefully you are stupid enough not to notice that this is going to cost you $100".

That means retailers using this pricing scheme are either arrogant and treat customers as being stupid and gullible, or are ignorant that this pricing scheme is insulting to intelligent customers.

When are these retailers going to start to treat their customers with respect?

Perhaps we should start boycotting retailers that use this insulting form of marketing . . .