Thursday, January 11, 2007


"Yes, I agree with you, there are many millions of decent law-abiding Muslims."

Sir Henry Morgan, no relation to the good Captain as far as I know, had an idea proposed to him by a friend:
There I was a few days after the second of my Terror Attacks posts was up, sitting at home minding my own – well, Islam’s own – business when he phoned me:
“I’ve had an idea”
“Whassat then?”
“Well you know that worldwide, Muslims go on a violence fest every Ramadan?”
“Yyyeeeeeess.” (and they do: Religion of Peace recorded 245 attacks last month, 45 in Thailand alone, and look at Paris, apparently every year now – Brussels too this year).
“So why not get a calendar converter for the Muslim calendar/our calendar, a list of their celebration dates throughout the Muslim year, and check against crime figures based on our year, then do a calendar conversion to see if there are any bumps in the crime stats coinciding with those celebrations? Any regularities may not show up on our calendar, but on theirs, who knows?”
So Sir Henry set about examining these dates and what happened on them - he's right, Ramadan is typically a time when violence increases. First he looked at London, comparing census data, the calendar, and crime statistics, all freely available online. He then took a map of London and looked at areas based on their population density of various groups. To make his job eaiser, he focused on a single crime category: sex crimes:
What I have is, if not actual proof, then a whole series of correlations. However, on the basis that if you can’t actually prove something fell out of the back end of a dog, but it looks like it did, smells like it did, feels like it did, and tastes like it did, then it might be best if you didn’t step in it, I’m going to publish what I found. You can make your own minds up. I’ve made mine up, and I wouldn’t want my daughter or nieces living near large numbers of Muslims. I think most reasonable, reasoning, people will agree after reading this.
He examined the muslim populations of areas and compared them to the sex crime offenses, and further looked at the population growth. What he found was disturbing:
You might expect offences to rise with a rise in population level? Well yes, you might at that. But in this case you’d be wrong. Havering has a higher population than Tower Hamlets: going from figures in the last census – admittedly five years ago, but it’s the latest available - and working to the nearest thousand, Tower Hamlets, with much more than double the sex offences, has only 196,000 people to Havering’s 225,000. What Tower Hamlets has more of is Muslims.

What about the borough with the next largest proportion of Muslims, Newham, with 24.3% Muslims? An even bigger gap! Very nearly two and a half times as many sex offences. Newham was recently declared the least desirable place in Britain to live. I wonder why?
Sir Henry proposes that a change occurs in a population, based on his study and statistical data. When an area reaches 10% Muslim population density, a jump occurs in the percentage of sex crimes in the area. The general population growth does not appear, in his study to generate a higher percentage of sex crimes, but an increase in Muslim population did, in London at least.

Then he thought that perhaps this is unfair, what about other religions, maybe it's just religious fervor that causes the increase in these sorts of crimes, the unbearable tension of showing sexual self-restraint.

So he examined Christians in the same way, with the same data, and the same procedure:
A sharply falling trendline. A strong negative correlation. Thehigher the %Christians in a borough, the fewer the sex offences. Unquestionable. Yes, I’d be quite happy for my daughter to live amongst these people. Nothing to see here, move along please.
What about other religions? Jews? Hindus? Druids? The problem is he couldn't find high enough numbers of these religious, high enough concentration in any area to come up with useful data. However, he was able to use "other religions" as a study, lumping them all into one group:
A moderately dropping trendline. A moderate negative correlation. So, the higher the percentage of other religions/borough, the fewer the sex offences. I’d be content for my daughter to live amongst these people too. It could be that had their numbers matched those of Christians then the trendline drop might have been steeper. Who knows? I’m content with what I found.
He suggests that this isn't proof of cause and effect, but that it is pretty significant in terms of correspondance and if the Metropolitan Police want to prove otherwise, perhaps they could release data on arrests and convictions based on religion.

Now I know that was a long introduction, but I wanted to cover what he said well. His actual post is significantly longer with significantly more data, step by step examination of his methodology, graphs, and so on. Commenters at the site read all this and responded:
I certainly do appreciate all the time and effort it took to pull this together. Well done.

If this post can be condensed for short attention spans of our newly elected govt . . .I would like to send this to them.
-by heroyalwhyness

Sir henry--Very interesting and important work.

Just a note about all those great spreadsheets and statistics databases on websites that are U.S. government produced. Having tried over the years, and the operative word is tried, to extract such information for use in research at my Federal government agency, I can tell you that many times it is either not possible or only possible by allocating several frustrating hours to this one task; not something I or our dedicated computer people could usually do since I worked in an extremely quick turn around environment in which I usually had only a few minutes to come up with a supposedly authoritative answer.

It seems that the U.S. government has never standardized its websites or any of this data presentation across the federal government. Complicating this is the fact that many of the most cutting edge websites, having been produced by technology infatuated types, have so many cutting edge bells and whistles that federal agencies with less than cutting edge computer capabilities, in our case complicated by extremely heavy security considerations, cannot download these statistics. You have no idea, or maybe you do, of how frustrating it is to have exactly the statistical material you need right there on the screen in front of you and not being able to import it for your research. Then, of course, you have to deal with trying to print the data out in some intelligible fashion, which can be a problem in its own right.

I'm glad you were able to get what you needed.
-by ursus

How do general crime figures in these same broughs come out on the Muslim calendar? Is there a peak in the month of Ramadan for instance?
-by PD111

Too bad the basic data are not more detailed. I suspect you cound have titled the essay 'Have you a daughter or a son?' It seems 'logical' that crimes of pradation against women would result from the sexist proscriptions of Islam, but I bet there is a different correlation too - crimes of sexual predation - male or female - with psychological malfunction around male sexuality.
-by Glenmore

There are a number of arguments that one might enlist to refute this analysis, but I think the trend is probably strong enough that it will survive those attacks. (There is, for instance, the ecological inference problem, that we don't know who is committing the offenses, or against whom.)

But putting those aside there's a fairly simple hypothesis here that isn't quite the one Sir Henry has proposed. Basically, that hypothesis would be that this is more an interaction between the ideology of multiculturalism and group entitlements on one hand, and an enabling culture on the other, than a pure consequence of either Islam or Islamic culture. In other words it's a very unfortunate side effect of bad westen philosophy made manifest in public policy.

When you undermine individual responsibility for acts of predation what you're doing is legitimating predation under "excusable circumstances". In other words, if you legitimate thuggery, you're likely to get thuggery. The whole notion of group or identity entitlements is bogus, and this sort of thing is the consequence.

To test this alternative theory one might look at Muslim enclaves within the US, where the ideology of multiculturalism and group identity is less established. I suspect that the trend line will not be as steep as in the UK, and the thresholds (though they may still exist) will occur at higher concentrations of muslims in the population. Instead of at 10% the change will occur at 20% or 25%.

Likewise, where multi-culti is more established (France and Belgium) the trends will be steeper and the shifts will occur at lower levels of muslims in the population.

Interesting and disturbing stuff. Thanks.

One other thought: significantly Muslim boroughs will probably correlate with a large number of young males, presumably the most likely to commit sex crimes.

It's good to see you Brits and some mainland Europeans are waking up to the threat of Islam. I think we Americans actually have it easy: Islam chose to fight us, and a fight they shall have; but in Europe, they have opted to subvert your long, beautiful culture and heritage. It's a lot harder to fight subversion than it is a willing combatant. That's when the vaunted PC Brigade steps in and accuses you of being a Culturalist, racist and bigot.

The causes of these crimes might need further examination, but I can relate from my own studies into religion and race here in the US that religion itself can play a huge part in one's success or failure: Hindu Indians do well enough, while Arab/Pashtun Muslims don't do as well.

I see clearly that multiculturalism is an enemy in itself. Again, here in the US where Muslims are more integrated and more assimilated, we do not see the problems that arise in Europe, especially in Paris and across all of France, where Muslims do not assimilate.

All in all, an excellent study. I will examine the data myself, and if they do come together as you have displayed, but I'll definately recommend this to all my like-minded (and non like-minded) friends. They will enjoy the read.

Many thinks from the Plains
-by Sons of Leonidas

this seems to be relevant;
A woman is raped every two hours and gang-raped every eight hours in Pakistan, according to the country's independent Human Rights Commission.
-by m al-content

Interesting however, there appears to be weaknesses. Havering, according to the census data is almost 95% white. Tower Hamlets, according to the census data you show is combo 87% white/brown [Muslim]. Newham is 63% white/brown. Newham has an other population of almost 40%. I can't see the actual numbers, however, my guess is they're black.

My sense is that by missing the ethnicity of various boroughs, it distorts your data. La Griffe du Lion is a good reference point. His findngs show that as the size of the black community grows in US cities, the threat to whites increases proportionately.

Moreover, is it sound to base value of immigrants on criminality? If 50 million law abiding Hindus or Chinese immigrated to the Uk does it really reduce the threat to well mostly the English because Wales and Scotland are still overwhelmingly white. Ethnic genetic interest is still threatened by immigration. Even mass eastern European immigration is genetically deleterious to the British. As Darwin said 150 years ago tribal or racial competition/conflict is decided by many things but most significantly fertility. If the British people continue allow mass immigration, especially from genetically distant sources, it will ultimately mean their extinction. We have seen the impact of an Anglo-Saxon apartheid on Britons, Dr. Mark Thomas' paper, the English, if this folly is not ended, could also suffer a similar fate.
-by Desmond Jones

Yes sir, you're right: there are weaknesses in this work, and more than that which you describe. But the consistency is remarkable, and I just had to go with it. Not just the consistency within the work here, but also with reports from all over the world.

I prefer to stick with the ideological issue, that being our immediate threat, rather than go into the issue of race, which is, I confess, something I do feel rather uncomfortable talking about. However, in light of what you said about the American study, then you might care to go through the crime data for Lambeth over the past six years, then check it against the demographic data ... Lambeth contains a large concentration of afro-carribeans, as any Londoner knows.

My immediate concern though, is Islam, because this is what's killing people, amongst the other things it does; and it is Islam that is an immediate threat to our British way of life. That way of life is far from perfect, but it's infinitely better than the Islamic alternative.

I feel that sooner or later all Islamic immigration will be brought to a dead stop - and the only way the PC brigade will be able to countenance doing that will be by making it non-discriminatory i.e. stop ALL immigration. It'll be just as well: we are a small island, and already extremely overcrowded. I believe our total population should be at a level (and our industrial capacity, but that's another issue) where we could, if necessary, again "stand alone", and still be able to feed all our people from our own land.

One way or another, it's all coming to a head.


(indeed, everyone) go take a look at this. He's talking about America, but it applies everywhere there is large-scale immigration:

YouTube video
-by Sir Henry Morgan
This study is not a definitive work on sexual crimes and religious persuasion - he even admitted that he deliberately tried to avoid socio-economic factors in his analysis to focus as exclusively as possible on religion. It is a small sample, although London is rather large. That said, the trend is unmistakable and disturbing, and given data from Norway and France, as well as other nations, not surprising at all.

The difference between Christian and Muslim populations in this study was significant but again is not terribly surprising. The attitude of Islam (as opposed to individual Muslims) toward women is fairly oppressive and demeaning, women are little more than property, objects men take and use, and so overwhelmingly seductive and sexually compelling that they have to be covered and hidden away. The attitude of Christianity (as opposed to individual Christians) is that Women are to be respected, protected, that rape or abuse is a crime, that women are to be listened to and learned from and that both men and women are to avoid sexual immorality rather than demand all temptation be hidden away.

Ultimately, there's nothing about Muslims that is especially heinous and evil, Christianity openly teaches that we all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, that we're all hellbound without the grace of God in Christ Jesus. But there is a stark difference in civilization and attitude between the Muslim world and the western world, and failure or refusal to recognize that in the name of tolerance and multiculturalism is deliberately foolish and self-destructive.
[technorati icon]

1 comment:

BostonMaggie said...

I found this very interesting. Thank you for posting it.