Chem Lab Capers in Saskatchewan

Another day, another incident of workplace violence. In this case, the workplace was a university chemistry lab, and the violence was fortuitously averted.

As part of their celebration of diversity, Western universities and technical schools welcome foreign students with open arms. The culture-enrichers are invited to attend our educational institutions, where they learn how to fly planes, build electronic devices, and concoct dangerous chemical compounds.

The University of Saskatchewan is just the latest such establishment to face the consequences of all this indiscriminate diversity. Vlad Tepes reports on an email sent out by university administrators to students and faculty concerning an unfortunate incident with a Mohammed Coefficient of 100%:

Wednesday’s precautionary sweep by hazmat officials, of an engineering chemistry lab, was prompted by a student who threatened the potential use of dangerous chemicals. This student was arrested after a search of his home revealed chemicals stolen from the university. He has been charged with theft and remains in police custody pending a court appearance today.

The student’s name is Mohamadmahdi Kowsari. A photograph is attached.

Out of concern for the safety of our community, the president has suspended this student and banned him from the University of Saskatchewan. Any sighting or knowledge of this student on campus property should be reported to Saskatoon Police Service or Protective Services immediately.

This incident is a reminder that our campus is home to many hazardous materials because of the nature of the work that we do. Day to day, these are handled under strict adherence to safety standards and procedures. We must continue this diligence in our handling of such materials and never hesitate to report concerns or unusual activity.

Visit Vlad’s place for the photo and more information.

If it weren’t for the name, recipients of this message might never have guessed that JIM was involved in the incident. It’s standard operating procedure not to release any information that might point to the role of Islamic ideology in an attempted terrorist attack. I’m surprised they even revealed the young man’s name.

If we lived in a sane world, such matters could be openly discussed. But we don’t live in a sane world.

It’s hard to calculate the disproportionate involvement of Islam in successful or attempted terrorist attacks, since the collecting of such statistics is deprecated (and often fudged). But let’s make a conservative estimate, and assume that 80% of planned or executed terrorist incidents are devised by Muslims. Then we’ll be generous, and assume that 4% of the North American population is Muslim. This means that Muslims are twenty times more likely to commit an act of terrorism than any other religious group.

It’s commonly asserted that “Islam has nothing to do with terrorism.” To disprove this fallacy, you don’t have to demonstrate that the terrorists are correct in their understanding of Islam. You don’t have to analyze their ideology or understand the way their minds work. All you have to do is look at the statistics.

The imbalance becomes even more lopsided if we use more realistic statistics — say, a 2% proportion of Muslims in the population, and a guess that 95% of terrorism is Islamic. Then Islamic ideology is fifty times more likely to be responsible for a given act of terror than anything else.

Assuming a finite supply of counterterrorism resources, a rational society would focus its intelligence efforts on those people most likely to commit acts of terrorism. 98% of investigatory costs could be saved if our officials concentrated their attention on people named Mohammed, Abdul, Ahmed, etc. What is their pattern of mosque attendance? What is preached in those mosques? What countries have they visited in the past five years? What kind of clothing do they wear?

I’m sure that our domestic intelligence agencies use such criteria in their investigations. But they are also required to surveil staunch Presbyterians named McClintock and observant Catholics named Kozlowski, otherwise their political masters will nip their careers in the bud.

We don’t live in a rational society, so further death, carnage, mayhem, and dismemberment will become all-too-familiar features of the years that lie ahead.

For a complete listing of previous enrichment news, see The Cultural Enrichment Archives.

15 thoughts on “Chem Lab Capers in Saskatchewan

  1. Your figures are wrong, and much too generous to the Muslims.

    In the first instance, using 80% of attacks and 4% of population, a Muslim is actually 96 times more likely to commit an act of terrorism. In the second case, using 95% of attacks and 2% of population, this rises to 931 times more likely.

    The conclusion remains the same though. Muslims are far more likely than anyone else to commit an act of terrorism, so wherever you have Muslims you will probably have terrorism and anti-terrorist resources should be focused almost exclusively on Muslims.

  2. I believe the correct calculation is as follows:

    terrorist acts per capita for muslims: 0.8T/0.04P, where T is the # of terrorist acts and P is the total population.
    terrorist acts per capita for Infidels: 0.2T/0.96P
    The relevant statistic is the ratio of terrorist acts per capita for muslims to terrorist acts per capita for Infidels, which simplifies to 4/(1/24), or 96.

    If we assume instead that 95% of terrorist acts are committed by muslims, and they comprise only 2% of the total population, then the ratio is 19/(1/49), or an astonishing — and I think more accurate — 931.

  3. I believe the correct calculation is as follows:

    terrorist acts per capita for muslims: 0.8T/0.04P, where T is the # of terrorist acts and P is the total population.
    terrorist acts per capita for Infidels: 0.2T/0.96P
    The relevant statistic is the ratio of terrorist acts per capita for muslims to terrorist acts per capita for Infidels, which simplifies to 4/(1/24), or 96.

    If we assume instead that 95% of terrorist acts are committed by muslims, and they comprise only 2% of the total population, then the ratio is 19/(1/49), or an astonishing — and I think more accurate — 931

  4. What’s strange is that in a “democracy” you don’t learn any lessons. We think that “democracy” is so good that we must never rethink our policies, we must never listen to our criticizers, we never make mistakes, if we do it is because of dictators, or KGB even if KGB is dead for 30 years. The problem is: who is responsible in a democracy? Once a vice starts you can’t stop it. And you can’t force virtues because you are deemed Christian far right. To fight all those things and to prove that “democracy” means tolerance of others, they tolerate the intolerance to prove that “democracy” is ideal. The measure of democracy in any western country is how much Muslims misbehave and you tolerate them and how much “democracies” fulfill their whims and caprices.

    • And can you imagine it has only just begun. Oh my…won’t it be grand when they populate the armed forces from top to bottom. Why it might even be like that very successful former multicultural entity “Yugoslavia where the muslims would go off on a regular basis in the barrack room and shoot their fellow Christian citizens. (From a 1980s WSJ article.) Actually it seems way beyond that now.

  5. Well, obviously I’m not a statistician! Thanks for correcting my figures. I’m glad I didn’t highball them.

    • Baron! You don’t have to be a statistician when SyB is around.

      From my studies in Lund, Sweden in the seventies, I remember that we calculated the significance of claims and placed them as either “1-, 2- or 3-stjärniga” (Stjärna = star). Which means that the chance that the claim is wrong is 1 out of 10, 100 or 1000.

      If SyB figures might only be “2-stjärniga” – yours are definitely “3-stjärniga”.

  6. Did anyone read Macleans a month back? they quoted a study saying (from memory here might be a bit out) 2/3 of Canadians dont trust islam, and bemoaned how sad it was! it was the best news I have read for a long time, we need to educate only 1/3 of Canada and the percentage was higher in Qubec!

  7. We have come to expect that when a crime is reported, no reference is to be made to certain demographic characteristics of the suspect, especially if those characteristics evoke some unfavorable reaction in the observer. Reports from the news media or the police conform to this dictum by refraining from making any reference to ethnicity, religion, and so on.

    This phenomenon has been with us for quite some time now. I am wondering where the idea arose and what is its justification. Could it be related to, and is a direct consequence of our blind march toward egalitarism where everyone is supposed to be equal? Equality has become synonymous with justice. The path we are on is evil and unnatural. There is no such thing as equality. No two persons are equal, unless they are identical twins. The equality ideology is going to be our ruin. The consequences will be horrible.

    The whole liberal progressive edifice is built on the premise that we are all equal. That edifice has now become established and is currently the establishment. It is the basis of much of our culture and politics. Yet, as it is a false proposition, it is the achilles heel of liberalism. I believe that in order for conservatives to change the path on which we are traveling, that foundational proposition must be attacked and totally discredited.

    One of the modern philosophical proponents of egalitarianism was John Rawls. In his book “Theory of Justice”, he invents the idea of “the veil of ignorance” which he believes necessary for there to be justice. This “veil of ignorance” is what is going on today with crime reporting. In order to treat someone without any prejudicial attitude, you place that person behind a veil. That way you are supposed to judge the person by only the facts surrounding the situation. If the person has some inherent quality that may evoke negative feelings in the one making a judgement about that person, then that quality should be concealed behind the “veil of ignorance.”

  8. These endless reports of Mo-inspired violence remind me of the conversation I have had many times with a friend of mine who smokes.
    In his mind, since smoking doesn’t give everyone lung cancer, it doesn’t give anyone lung cancer. Come to think of it, this story is about a type of cancer. I hope we can cut it out before it is too late.

  9. This incident is a reminder that our campus is home to many hazardous materials because of the nature of the work that we do. Day to day, these are handled under strict adherence to safety standards and procedures. We must continue this diligence in our handling of such materials and never hesitate to report concerns or unusual activity.

    The “hazardous materials” code red for enrichers of the Mahomet variety. : -)

  10. We should all be grateful to Pam M and Sy B, then consider the sheer ghastliness of their statistical analysis: Muslims are 96 ( a figure generated from an unrealistically low estimate, 80%, of the proportion of terror attacks committed by Muslims) to 931 times more likely than a non-Muslim to commit acts of terror in a country like the USA. Just imagine going to a casino or racetrack and being informed that this slot machine/horse is 100-1000 times more likely to produce a win for you. What rational person wouldn’t put their money behind it.

    What silly societies we live in where our airport security does not profile every single Muhammed and Aisha and wastes hundreds of millions every year questioning people on a random basis. All so as not to offend the sensibilities of Muslims.

  11. Not only that, but the idea of profiling a metastatically increasing demographic of Muslims inside the West is itself a soft idea, theoretically flailing about for some kind of way to wave newspapers at a growing fire.

    The only workable policy will be total deportation. It will occur, because the Muslim demographic and their mischief is not static, but metastatic. The only question is when the West will deport them; not if. And will that when be before, or after, millions of us are mass-murdered in various terror attacks in the coming decades using WMDs of various flavors (and after incalculable destruction to infrastructure, and economic dislocations)?

    Silly me, but I prefer that we do it before.

Comments are closed.