The following video is a joint Baron-Vlad Tepes production. It uses maps of the Sydney metropolitan area to compare and contrast the level of gun violence with the percentage of Muslims in the population.
Take note that the dark green area on one map means the number of shootings, and the dark green on the other map of the same area means the percentage of Muslims in the population. Draw your own conclusions:
If the issue were anything but Islam — if we were looking at the percentages of Trobriand Islanders, or bald-headed men, or Presbyterians — the obvious correlation would be widely published and universally acknowledged.
Furthermore, if those dark green splotches represented the number of white men the neighborhoods of Sydney, the story would generate above-the-fold headlines in every newspaper and the would be the top item on ABC for weeks.
As it is, we can expect these statistics to be quietly forgotten.
And don’t be surprised if the Australian government stops including religious affiliation in its published census data.
Sources:
- Shootings map from The Sydney Morning Herald, January 2014
- Demographic map from Wikipedia, 2011 census data (People who are affiliated with Islam as a fraction of total persons, in Inner Sydney, Australia, according to the 2011 census results.)
Thanks to Andrew Bolt at the Herald Sun.
Graphics used in the video:
Hat tip: TN.
This is an interesting and useful video,BUT the synthesized voice-over is offputting.
Apparently Tony Abbott has pursued the right policy with regard to stop the boats *). So what does it take to also make him comprehend that the next logical step must be to gradually deport the unwelcome fifth column? It is beyond me how politicians can be that thick.
*)
In case you haven’t seen it, I suggest this recent ABC documentary on how the government repels the boats:
http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2014/s3965617.htm
There are only three prominent members of the current federal government who have expressed an apprehension for our current importing of the Islamic third world. The Prime Minister is not one of them.
However, the immigration minister, Scott Morrison, is, although in the past when in opposition his views on Islam were shouted down by the party hierarchy, including Mr Abbott.
Around the middle of last year I sent a letter via email to then opposition leader Tony Abbott. I requested his views on Multiculturalism. He assured me he was 100% all for the policy as it made this country a better place, and according to him diversity made Australia stronger!
In that regard we may safely assume that Abbott is a Globalist.
We have a major problem with our immigration program, in that we allow Muslim immigration lawyers access to those Islamic countries that we should be avoiding. Islamic immigration has become a well oiled machine over the past 15 years and it is going to take a politician of extraordinary frankness and patriotism to call out and then rectify what needs to be fixed. Will Scott Morrison do something about Islamic immigration? I have my fingers crossed.
Thanks for the explanation, I begin to see. Not that it would make things much better, but from a european ‘total surrender’ viewpoint, it is definitely impressing to see what you government at least is doing to halt the sea-borne invasion: It *can* be done, with a little extra effort, and not even shots fired. So all hope is not lost for you yet (almost in contrast to Europe) – may be the next government will be headed by a politician ready to walk the extra inch, that is the one inch too far for Abbott…
Michael, I believe one of the major problems in getting politicians to recognize the fears of the people who have genuine concerns about the followers of Islam and what they bring with them, is not so much a cowardly attitude in accepting those fears as something real and not imaginary, but is likely based on the advice given out to those who make the political decisions and the political agenda they may pursue.
Who are the advisers and what is their agenda when Prime Ministers and Presidents seek advice on Islam?
I can also picture a court of law at some distant place in the future, when those who have led us to this point in time are on trial for their very lives for the treachery that they permitted through aiding and abetting our would be conquerors. The matter will be raised about who advised what, where, how and to whom in political circles as a matter of course, and I imagine that just like the Nuremberg Trial where ‘just following orders’ was routinely dismissed as a defence, receiving advise and the, ‘just giving the advise’ will also be routinely dismissed as a defence. Why? Because it is incumbent on all who we elect to political office and their advisors, that when decisions are made on policy at government level that can have a direct effect on the population, than ALL consequences of those decisions must be debated as to the worth of the final decision.
At this point in time, the worth of Islam has never been debated via public inquires by any Western government. Instead, government chose to force Islam onto us without any mandate or constitutional authority to do so. They knew then that we would not take kindly to having Islam in our midst so introduced special laws to protect the Muslim and Islam from a resultant backlash while dampening through lawfare any sparks of dissent that would result from such an imposition. And this was done because they relied on the word of academics and advisors, who no doubt, had their own political agenda in mind when giving out that advice.
I imagine there will at some time in future be a need for much strong rope for those found guilty of their part in what we now have to face and defeat.
Hm. You may be right, my friend. Unless democracy and state of law can be developped further to avoid occurrences like the ones we’re presently going through (something which I at a younger age had thought was self-evident…), this ultimate corrective seems to be needed, from time to time, to put things back in place.
Non-statistical remarks…
* What motivated that strange electronic voice?
The phonemes sound okay (with an American
accent, not Australian), but the pacing of text-to-
speech synthesis has not been perfected;
it sounds too staccato, with stop-and-go
changes of speed.
* What is that urban overview at the very last
second, after the credits?
* The similarity is seen more clearly by
comparing two static color-coded maps
rather than overlaying them in a video.
Statistical remarks…
Yikes, this will make a good case study in
“how to not do statistics”.
* The shooting-count is not a very fine-grained
number, with only 15 gradations (0~14 shootings),
and most of the districts have 0 shootings.
* The population of each district is not taken
into account, to get per-capita information
rather than absolute numbers of shootings.
* There are standard ways to correlate one
factor with another, such as by computing
a correlation coefficient. That has not been
done here.
* With 100 types of data to compare
(e.g. baby-formula sales versus high-school
dropout rate), there are 100*99 = 9,900
pairwise comparisons that can be made,
some of which will show surprising but
spurious correlations.
* “You be the judge” (of what, exactly?)
is a copout. State a hypothesis, and test it!
* Here’s a hypothesis that is amenable to
testing:
http://www.faithinallah.org/are-muslims-only-kind-to-other-muslims-and-harsh-with-unbelievers/
Quran 48:29, which says that Muslims
are merciful among themselves and
harsh against kafirs.
In statistical terms, this suggests the testable
hypothesis: The victim of a shooting by a
Muslim is more likely to be a kafir than
another Muslim.
* This map comparison is interesting and
colorful, but it hardly goes beyond suggesting
a hypothesis to test (nor does it purport to
be anything other than suggestive).
— Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY)
What do climate change sceptics rightfully say to warmists: “Correlation is not causation” And this has a scientific base. Now I have no sympathy what so ever for political Islam. If we could get rid of it we could get closer to world peace and would improve the quality of life of hundreds of millions of people, women in particular. But in the war against Islam we can not make the same mistakes as the leftist apologists. Besides this, have you overlaid the two maps? (just scroll the time bar up and down in the clip) It does not even match well. I am sorry, I might get the wrath of some readers but this one does not convince me.
Its interesting that the “incidence of shootings” map first appeared in the Sydney Morning Herald. Any resident of Sydney would have looked at it and immediately noticed the direct correlation between Middle Eastern Muslims and gun violence. The Sydney Morning Herald on the other hand seems largely devoted to the proposition that we should not be noticing these uncomfortable facts. They must not have thought it through. I also think that if you super imposed another map of welfare housing and welfare spending it wouldn’t be much different.
Names like “Sydney Morning Herald” have become a liability that increases obfuscation. Like other grand, old newspapers in the rest of the Anglophony and the rest of the West, is is a mindless drone programmed by some space lizards — not that I am a David Ickes fan — to spout Progressive nonsense heralding the new morning where reality has ceased to exist and been supplanted by its farcical simulacrum held in the frozen minds of all such “Heralds'” editors, reporters and opinionators.
Police in New South Wales were forced to stop using ‘Lebanese’ as a person of interest (POI) descriptive back in 1998 when the growing influence of those who run the Lakemba Mosque found their perpetually aggrieved voices.
The descriptive for the Lebanese Muslim POI is now a universal ‘Middle Eastern Appearance’, a descriptive that so called Newspapers like the Sydney Morning Herald studiously avoid inserting into their sanitized, deodorized and propagandized version of the news stories of the day.
Let this one cry be raised by all the soldiers of God,,It is the will of God ! (Pope urban,1095)…..2/3 of Spain,& at one time,southern France,until Charles Martel(The Hammer)Defeated a large Muslim army,under Abd ar-Rahman at the battle of poitiers in 732 AD.It was to be another seven centuries until all Arabs wher expelled from Spain,in 1492.In those days of antiquity,we fought pitch battles,some time we won,& some time we lost.Classic example Malta 1565,Lapento 1577,both victories.It wasn’t until 1918,that Muslim dominance came to an end.This time its different,the resurgence of Islamic expansion,has more sinister overtones& our weak & usless elected reps(Gutless Pollies) are more than happy to see that this takes place.All the great struggles of Antiquity were all for NOTHING !