Mark T. al-Rahman
September 1st, 2011 at 8:53 am by David FarrarThe case of Mark Taylor, or Mark T. al-Rahman, is an interesting one.
You have to trust the PM and the SIS presumably, when they say Mr Taylor is no threat.
However the official explanation he gave of trying to attend a wedding, for his attempt to enter an al-Qaeda military camp in Pakistan has always been highly dubious.
But it is innocent until proven guilty and as Mr Taylor says, he has not been charged with any offence. But having said that, I’d be a bit nervous if he moved in next door to me!
Related posts:
- Campaign Launch for Mark Blumsky
- Sex conviction rate drops to 45%
- Mark Felt has died
- Ron Mark for Carterton
September 1st, 2011 at 8:57 am
If he moved next door to me, I’d be bashing his door down on a regular basis.
Claim of right, I’m saving lives!
Vote:September 1st, 2011 at 9:02 am
Here’s a thought experiment. Who, statistically, is the greater danger to you as a neighbour: a member of Al Qaeda, or a beneficiary?
AFAIK, nobody living next door to the Sept 11 terrorists was hurt. All those awful people were trying to do was keep a low profile until that day.
Same can’t be said for our friends on the benefit. Certainly not their kids.
I believe I had a P lab next door to me until 3 months ago. Not cool.
Vote:September 1st, 2011 at 9:32 am
maybe he could move in with those Mob women in Pomare. Housing NZ has declined to evict them after all!!
Vote:September 1st, 2011 at 9:33 am
Good point ben, but don’t just limit it to “beneficiary”, most of whom are probably quite safe. If you want to blanket blame a group you could say National supporters are a bigger risk than Act supporters.
Gang members, recidivist drunk drivers, pedophiles, kleptomaniacs etc all will have higher risk factors than members of Al Qaeda.
Vote:September 1st, 2011 at 9:35 am
Hey ben whats makes you think a member of AQ or JI isn’t on a benefit?
Vote:September 1st, 2011 at 9:57 am
Pete, no doubt you’re right. But ‘most’ is not ‘all’ and the question is who is safer. Being on a benefit is a very strong predictor of illegal activity.
Murray – yes you might be right, although I tend to think a terrorist cell’s main goal in life, other than destroying as many people as they can, is to stay as far away from the government as possible, so I doubt they would be on a benefit, and I doubt very much they would be do anything to attract attention like cooking drugs or car conversion or stealing from the neighbours.
Vote:September 1st, 2011 at 10:01 am
Although, having thought about it, given a choice would I really rather have a beneficiary or a terrorist cell next to me? Actually, of course, the beneficiary. Who knows what kind of explosive or device or whatever ol’ Joe Bin Laden next door is cooking up. And who wants to live next to the kind of person with such a low opinion of us infidels.
Vote:September 1st, 2011 at 10:13 am
I think he would be okay living next door but I would be concerned if he was getting on the same 747 I was – especially if it was heading to LA or San Fran.
Vote:September 1st, 2011 at 10:14 am
I can just see this guy becoming New Zealand’s latest ‘Cause De Celebre’ with the left lining up to salivate over him-Dave Dobbyn will be writing a sickly, wailing song about the guy as we speak….
Vote:September 1st, 2011 at 10:35 am
Potential security threats are not really just a case of “innocent till proven guilty” because of the threat they pose. So, despite being “unconvicted” of anything, our SIS and seurity system (a 2nd form of justice) has worked well here, looking in to his activity, imposing restrictions, etc. Think this works.
Vote:September 1st, 2011 at 10:39 am
@Longknives
Vote:So I am guessing ‘DD’ and the ‘Formyula’ aren’t on your iPod playlist.
September 1st, 2011 at 11:23 am
@ben 9:57 am
That’s because the benefit isn’t enough for people who are on it long-term to survive, so many are forced to resort to criminal activity to get by.
Vote:September 1st, 2011 at 11:26 am
I am shocked!
Vote:Toad is trolling with possibly the biggest bullshit line yet seen
September 1st, 2011 at 11:26 am
Mark Taylor may or may not be a threat as your neighbour, but the heat he would bring to the neighbourhood would be a threat. You can almost guarantee that every spook in New Zealand is watching him, and that doesn’t include foreign agencies.
Vote:September 1st, 2011 at 11:29 am
Why would foreign or domestic ‘spooks’ be a threat to anyone other than the target?
Vote:September 1st, 2011 at 11:31 am
toad’s latest pearl: “… the benefit isn’t enough for people who are on it long-term to survive, so many are forced to resort to criminal activity to get by.”
In other words, the taxpayers could be expected to dig even deeper if the Gweens get anywhere near the Treasury benches at the end of November.
What a bunch of economic retards.
Vote:September 1st, 2011 at 11:36 am
So where does he live and where can we get a picture? Not that I’d want him harassed in any way.{smirk}
Vote:September 1st, 2011 at 12:09 pm
That comment Toad, is the biggest piece of unmitigated bullshit peddled since Chris Trotter spouted his infamous line about justification for lawbreaking.
Shame on you for trying to justify criminal behaviour on the grounds that it is somehow OK under an economic argument when the perpetrators lack a moral compass or common decency or a sense of place in the community is reprehensible and should be cause for you to take a long hard look at your own moral sense.
Disgusting
Vote:September 1st, 2011 at 12:16 pm
@redeye – could be this person….
http://www.google.co.nz/imgres?q=mark+taylor+new+zealand&hl=en&biw=1066&bih=570&gbv=2&tbm=isch&tbnid=FVWDyQjhcbruxM:&imgrefurl=http://www.newszoom.com/search/latest/mark-taylor/news/&docid=Zj7G5BEkax7b4M&w=180&h=120&ei=R85eTvLJEPLOiAKP3YSzBQ&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=235&vpy=354&dur=1928&hovh=96&hovw=144&tx=71&ty=106&page=1&tbnh=96&tbnw=144&start=0&ndsp=15&ved=1t:429,r:10,s:0
Vote:September 1st, 2011 at 12:20 pm
@redeye – or this one….
http://www.google.co.nz/imgres?q=trevor+mallard&hl=en&biw=1066&bih=570&gbv=2&tbm=isch&tbnid=PwB3z-2uV7Tz1M:&imgrefurl=http://www.guide2.co.nz/politics/news/mallard-puts-up-minimum-wage-bill/11/13777&docid=x16C6Ua_Bi8EJM&w=225&h=300&ei=vs9eTpDzJqLSiAKSku2zBQ&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=180&vpy=65&dur=993&hovh=240&hovw=180&tx=106&ty=133&page=1&tbnh=130&tbnw=102&start=0&ndsp=19&ved=1t:429,r:0,s:0
Vote:September 1st, 2011 at 12:22 pm
@david 12:09 pm
I’m not trying to justify it – just saying why it often happens. If people see the choice as between their kids going hungry and dealing a bit of dak or working under the table, many will take the latter option.
Vote:September 1st, 2011 at 12:36 pm
@toad
More BS
Is the issue that people don’t have enough food to eat on a benefit or are there other priorities than their own kids food.
Like money back to the islands, tithes they can’t afford, lotto tickets, booze, rent too high in certain areas.
You may scoff in your way but I know people that actually make these fucked up decisions. Thats why food stamps for beneficiaries are a bloody good idea.
Vote:September 1st, 2011 at 12:36 pm
cheers Elaycee. Neither live in my area thankfully.
Vote:September 1st, 2011 at 12:40 pm
You’d better believe NZ is now a high-priority target for Al-Qaeda.
He’s gonna hijack a plane and blow up the Prince of Wales’ archway in Rotorua. Oh yeah!
Vote:September 1st, 2011 at 12:40 pm
Ah there’s the greenie for you.
Selling “a bit of dak” ,nudge nudge wink wink no problem.
Working under the table…….what and not pay tax or contribute….interesting concept.
And with our welfare state backed up by all those NGOs there is no excuse for children to go hungry.
Worse come to worse,theres’ lots of work in Oz and dignity in bringing up your children and giving them the values that count.
Not bludgerism and criminality. But hey it’s just a bit of “dak.”
And this idea that Islamic terrorism ain’t a problem………there’s a shit load of them in Ozzie,even a refugee whose been convicted of wanting to kill his hosts. What’s wrong with deportation………sorry I forgot they’ve got human rights…..the rights their victims, the community and taxpayers don’t have.
http://www.smh.com.au/national/six-women-in-danger-dossier-20110830-1jk8n.html
Vote:September 1st, 2011 at 1:25 pm
toad said
“That’s because the benefit isn’t enough for people who are on it long-term to survive, so many are forced to resort to criminal activity to get by.”
—
Nobody is “forced” to resort to criminal activity.
We have free will. Do you understand what this means?
Vote:September 1st, 2011 at 1:47 pm
I would tend to think Bens comment that being a beneficiary is an indicator of criminal activity is a greater nonsense than the rubbish spoued by Toad
Vote:September 1st, 2011 at 2:36 pm
Toad – I have no idea why beneficiaries commit so much crime. But that’s what they do. Their exact motivation is of zero consequence when I clean up my house after another break in, and think about whether Al Qaeda would make better neighbours.
Toad people like money, whether it is to feed the kids or pay for extra Sky channels, let’s acknowledge a part of what drives illegal activity is the enormous effective marginal tax rates beneficiaries face from participating the legal economy (>90% over some ranges I believe). Recognising this is important, because it follows from this that more benefit income will probably not much affect incentives to participate in the illegal economy.
Vote:September 1st, 2011 at 2:43 pm
sthn.jeff – oh please. Christ, when’s the last time a child WASN”T killed by abuse by a family receiving a benefit? I could be wrong but I’d have thought the single statistic that most strongly predicts crime is receiving a benefit. That does NOT mean a benefit causes crime. The fact that beneficiaries are over-represented in crime stats is hardly controversial.
Vote:September 1st, 2011 at 4:19 pm
Actually, if you are considering percentages rather than overall numbers, my experience would agree mostly with Ben.
And someone being prosecuted for stealing necessities is extremely rare, at least in my experience. Perhaps Sth Auckland has a higher rate of food and vege shoplifters than where I live. However, I think the behaviour of the UK rooters is telling…
Vote:September 1st, 2011 at 4:20 pm
@ FE Smith now THAT’S a funny typo!!
Vote:September 1st, 2011 at 4:31 pm
Those sort of prosecutions happen occasionaly in Auckland FES.
Vote:They just don’t get reported whereas d listers who get caught riding Harleys while suspended do.
September 1st, 2011 at 4:31 pm
I’m not sure that receipt of a benefit is a very strong predictor of criminal behaviour at all. We have about 350,000 beneficiaries. There are something like 400,00 offences recorded each year. We have about 8,000 offenders in prison and about 40,000 on community sentences of one sort or another.
While it may be true that many offenders are beneficiaries, even if ALL offenders were beneficiaries it would not logically follow that ALL beneficiaries are likely to be offenders.
Vote:September 1st, 2011 at 4:49 pm
Hey,
Rosemary McLeod on RNZ just said that a report says this guy has had 4 wives,all of whom are now dead!
Vote:Wot’s that about ?
September 1st, 2011 at 4:51 pm
DPF:You have to trust the PM and the SIS presumably, when they say Mr Taylor is no threat
The SIS? Aren’t they the ones that failed to do simple background checks on a fraudster?
Vote:September 2nd, 2011 at 3:56 am
My response to:
RRM (3,669) Says:
September 1st, 2011 at 12:40 pm
You’d better believe NZ is now a high-priority target for Al-Qaeda.
He’s gonna hijack a plane and blow up the Prince of Wales’ archway in Rotorua. Oh yeah!
Mark Taylor or Mark T. Al-Rahman just wants to get back on with life and wants to move back to a Muslim Country, he doesn’t feel welcome or happy coming back to his home country and having people judge him without any Evidence and charges for terrorism place against him.
Just give the guy a fair go, he only wanted to find a Pashtun lady for marriage and he went to a area in Pakistan that was a restricted zone and he didn’t know that.
Check out the NZ Herald:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10748692
Vote:September 2nd, 2011 at 12:34 pm
Stabbing in Strathmore just reported.
Who wants to bet against it being a beneficiary who is found responsible? I’m offering even money.
Vote: