Intro to ‘Speak Out: Inbred Muslims’ & Nicolai Sennels


Intro by John R. Houk

Intro © September 25, 2019

 

I cannot vouch for the authenticity 0f the post “Speak Out: Inbred Muslims” for I have a suspicion it was the result of the dreaded chain email. This title was posted in 2013 on a website called Southeast Missourian. The website does not have an About Page, but going over the rather extensive site index I can deduct the website some local media in Cape Girardeau County, Missouri.

The principle source appears to be Danish psychologist Nicolai Sennels. I could do a search engine examination to validate the Sennels sourcing and validate stats not attributed to Sennels, BUT I’ll let you the reader expend that time. Here is some info on Nicolai Sennels from the Counterjihad/expose Islam website World Truth Summit:

 

I came across Nicolai Sennels, a Danish psychologist, through an excellently researched article in JihadWatch. The topic: psychological differences between Muslim and non-Muslim criminals.

You may have heard of him from his involvement in the court case against Guantanamo prisoner Omar Khadr.

 

In Denmark, he’s a nationally known participant in tv, radio and newspapers in the debate on Muslim integration and criminals. He’s also appeared on Canadian Sun TV on the Michael Coren Show.

What’s his message?

 

Nicolai Sennels, a Danish psychologist, has done groundbreaking work, especially regarding anger and the sense of honor. Major areas of difference between Muslim and non-Muslim criminals: anger, aggression, irresponsibility and insecurity. The Muslim criminals scored much higher on each, than the non-Muslim criminals.

The biggest thing: Nicolai has dared to write and speak about his findings regarding the Muslim mentality and the psychological influence of Islam on Muslims.

The first outcome: he was asked to leave his job for speaking out about his findings.

The second: he wrote a book (not yet translated into English).

He notes that the general use of terms like “immigrant criminal behavior” distorts a disturbing reality. For instance, in Denmark, all non-Muslim immigrant populations have a lower crime rate than the non-Muslim Danish population. However, the Muslim population, immigrant and non-immigrant, accounts for about 70% of crime in Denmark,  … READ THE REST

 

And now, “Speak Out: Inbred Muslims”:

JRH 9/25/19

Your generosity is always appreciated: 

Please Support NCCR

Support this Blog HERE. Or support by getting in 

the Coffee from home business – OR just buy some healthy coffee.

***********************

Speak Out: Inbred Muslims

 

Posted by bothedog (as in Bo The Dog)

May 23, 2013 10:28 PM

Southeast Missourian

 

1400 Years of Inbreeding. Very Enlightening!

 

A huge Muslim problem: Inbreeding

 

Nicolai Sennels is a Danish psychologist who has done extensive research into a little-known problem in the Muslim world: the disastrous results of Muslim inbreeding brought about by the marriage of first-cousins.

 

This practice, which has been prohibited in the Judeo-Christian tradition since the days of Moses, was sanctioned by Muhammad and has been going on now for 50 generations (1,400 years) in the Muslim world.

 

This practice of inbreeding will never go away in the Muslim world, since Muhammad is the ultimate example and authority on all matters, including marriage.

 

The massive inbreeding in Muslim culture may well have done virtually irreversible damage to the Muslim gene pool, including extensive damage to its intelligence, sanity, and health.

 

According to Sennels, close to half of all Muslims in the world are inbred. In Pakistan , the numbers approach 70%. Even in England, more than half of Pakistani immigrants are married to their first cousins, and in Denmark the number of inbred Pakistani immigrants is around 40%.

 

The numbers are equally devastating in other important Muslim countries: 67% in Saudi Arabia , 64% in Jordan , and Kuwait , 63% in Sudan , 60% in Iraq , and 54% in the United Arab Emirates and Qatar .

 

According to the BBC, this Pakistani, Muslim-inspired inbreeding is thought to explain the probability that a British Pakistani family is more than 13 times as likely to have children with recessive genetic disorders. While Pakistanis are responsible for three percent of the births in the UK , they account for 33% of children with genetic birth defects.

 

The risk of what are called autosomal recessive disorders such as cystic fibrosis and spinal muscular atrophy is 18 times higher and the risk of death due to malformations is 10 times higher.

 

Other negative consequences of inbreeding include a 100 percent increase in the risk of stillbirths and a 50% increase in the possibility that a child will die during labor.

 

Lowered intellectual capacity is another devastating consequence of Muslim marriage patterns. According to Sennels, research shows that children of consanguineous marriages lose 10-16 points off their IQ and that social abilities develop much slower in inbred babies. The risk of having an IQ lower than 70, the official demarcation for being classified as “retarded,” increases by an astonishing 400 percent among children of cousin marriages. (Similar effects were seen in the Pharaonic dynasties in ancient Egypt and in the British royal family, where inbreeding was the norm for a significant period of time.)

 

In Denmark , non-Western immigrants are more than 300 percent more likely to fail the intelligence test required for entrance into the Danish army.

 

Sennels says that “the ability to enjoy and produce knowledge and abstract thinking is simply lower in the Islamic world.” He points out that the Arab world translates just 330 books every year, about 20% of what Greece alone does.

 

In the last 1,200 years of Islam, just 100,000 books have been translated into Arabic, about what Spain does in a single year. Seven out of 10 Turks have never even read a book.

 

Sennels points out the difficulties this creates for Muslims seeking to succeed in the West. “A lower IQ, together with a religion that denounces critical thinking, surely makes it harder for many Muslims to have success in our high-tech knowledge societies.”

 

Only nine Muslims have ever won the Nobel Prize, and five of those were for the “Peace Prize.” According to Nature magazine, Muslim countries produce just 10 percent of the world average when it comes to scientific research measured by articles per million in habitants.

 

In Denmark , Sennels’ native country, Muslim children are grossly overrepresented among children with special needs. One-third of the budget for Danish schools is consumed by special education, and anywhere from 51% to 70% of retarded children with physical handicaps in Copenhagen have an immigrant background. Learning ability is severely affected as well. Studies indicated that 64% of school children with Arabic parents are still illiterate after 10 years in the Danish school system. The immigrant drop-out rate in Danish high schools is twice that of the native-born.

 

Mental illness is also a product. The closer the blood relative, the higher the risk of schizophrenic illness. The increased risk of insanity may explain why more than 40% of patients in Denmark ‘s biggest ward for clinically insane criminals have an immigrant background.

 

The U.S. is not immune. According to Sennels, “One study based on 300,000 Americans shows that the majority of Muslims in the USA have a lower income, are less educated, and have worse jobs than the population as a whole.”

 

Sennels concludes:

 

There is no doubt that the widespread tradition of first cousin marriages among Muslims has harmed the gene pool among Muslims. Because Muslims’ religious beliefs prohibit marrying non-Muslims and thus prevents them from adding fresh genetic material to their population, the genetic damage done to their gene pool since their prophet allowed first cousin marriages 1,400 years ago are most likely massive. (This has produced) overwhelming direct and indirect human and societal consequences.

 

Bottom line: Islam is not simply a benign and morally equivalent alternative to the Judeo-Christian tradition. As Sennels points out, the first and biggest victims of Islam are Muslims. Simple Judeo-Christian compassion for Muslims and a common-sense desire to protect Western civilization from the ravages of Islam dictate a vigorous opposition to the spread of this dark and dangerous religion. These stark realities must be taken into account when we establish public polices dealing with immigration from Muslim countries and the building of mosques in the U.S.

__________________________________

Intro to ‘Speak Out: Inbred Muslims’ & Nicolai Sennels

Intro by John R. Houk

Intro © September 25, 2019

_____________________

Speak Out: Inbred Muslims

 

© SOUTHEAST MISSOURIAN

 

Spell Check editing performed by Blog Editor.

+++++++++++++++++++++

Blog Editor: Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me. Recently, the Facebook censorship tactic I’ve experienced is a couple of Group shares then jailed under the false accusation of posting too fast. So I ask those that read this, to combat censorship by sharing blog and Facebook posts with your friends or Groups you belong to.

Abortion: A Contribution to the High Crime Rate in the African American Community


Aborted - BHO View on Right to Life and Liberty

Here are some interesting thoughts about abortion sent by a person who wishes to remain anonymous at this time.

 

JRH 2/17/13

Please Support NCCR

***************************

Abortion: A Contribution to the High Crime Rate in the African American Community

 

By Anonymous

Sent: 2/16/2013 8:28 PM

 

One of the common misconceptions that are perpetuated in our society is that abortion reduces crime rates.  Therefore abortion is a necessary evil as it accomplishes a greater good for our society.  I take exception with the terms necessary evil or greater good, as it is contradictory in itself and has been used as a justification for some of the worst atrocities in human history.  I seek to outright contradict the notion that abortion reduces the crime rate.  In fact I propose that abortion actually increases crime rates.  Though all I will be able to give you is logic and data that has a correlation to the effect I strongly believe this is the case.

The data:

There have been studies that claim abortion reduces crime.  But what is shown here, anyone with a little bit of intelligence and curiosity can easily build themselves.  It is very simplistic and as we know from Occam’s Razor when all the wrong answers are removed the simplest solution is likely the correct one. All one has to do to produce the graph below is look up the national crime rates, number of abortions, and number of people in the nation for the years shown and they themselves can produce the same graph.  The blue line represents the number of crimes per person, while the red line represents the number of abortions per person multiplied by 7 and then with an offset of 10 years into the future.

 

mime-attachment.jpeg

 

national crime rates, number of abortions, and number of people graph

The abortions per person is multiplied by 7 only to give the curve a more distinct appearance so that it can be easy followed along with the crime statistics while the offset for 10 years is to compare the age at which children might have started committing crimes.  As can be seen the crime rate is proportional to the abortion rate suggesting a correlation between increase crimes with increased abortions and decreased crimes with decreased abortions.

 Why might it increase crime rather than reduce it?  Well this is a good question?  In the last 50 years our country has done everything it can to destroy the family structure from allowing no fault divorce to encouraging sexual promiscuity.  But what most may have not realized is that our country is also encouraging the worst possible mothers to be the parents of the next generation, and abortion is only half the equation to this encouragement.

One of the common themes that the left tries is to paint abortion in a positive light by saying that it is a necessary evil because it eliminates unwanted children who have no future and would only be a burden on society. Commonly pro-life advocates argue against this as a valid reason to end the life of what is sacred and valuable (every human life).  Even though it is true that this isn’t a valid reason pro-life advocates commonly fail to challenge the premise that abortion is ridding us of unwanted children whose future is unlikely to turn out well.  In reality when US policies allow mothers to choose abortion, it is those women who are actually contemplating their future.  In their fear of what it may become, they are ending these lives.  While the benefit of the welfare system is encouraging the women who are thinking of what they can get now to keep their children by increasing what they can get.   So instead these philosophies are encouraging those who would probably turn out to be bad mothers to keep their children and those who would probably turn out to be good mothers to kill them.  This is sad because we should be encouraging those who would be good mothers to keep them and those who would be bad mothers to put them up for adoption.

 Fatherlessness is noted as the prime reason for high crime rates in the African American community.  Most will not deny that, including me, as it is one the major differences in African American communities and communities of other ethnic backgrounds which do not have higher crime rates.  This huge shortage of positive male role models is causing destruction of the family structure and its benefits that allow the rearing children in the way they should go.  What I want to propose is that the combination of the higher abortion rate along with the promotion of welfare programs, which has become prominent amongst the African American community because they have a higher poverty rate, is contributing to the really high fatherlessness in their community.  For if it is more likely that bad mothers are the ones keeping their children they are also unlikely to choose good role models for mates either.

 

Sources:

 

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm

 

http://www.christianliferesources.com/article/u-s-abortion-statistics-by-year-1973-current-1042

_________________________

Edited by John R. Houk

Abortion and Crime Rate Part 1


Steve Sailer 2

 

3/17/11

 

Adam Houk who sent a statistical hypothesis debunking the myth that abortions lower crime rates sent a link that has a series of statistical analyses that demonstrates that the abortions lower crime rates economics statistician Steve Levitt’s stats were flawed. Levitt’s book entitled “Freakanomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything” proclaims that statistics show surprising results on many held beliefs. One portion examined abortion and crime. He believes his statistics that abortion lowers the crime rate. The rebuttals to Levitt’s claim about abortion and crime are by Steve Sailer. The webpage shows Sailer’ debunking of Levitt’s claim about abortion was written in 2005.

 

Adam is excited that a more in depth statistical challenge exists that debunks the myth that abortions lower the crime rate. Adam says in his email with the link:

 

Wow I looked further into this and found a person that actually went into more detailed research than I.  He came up with the same exact conclusion even as far as stating that it was good moms that were more likely to have abortions and not bad moms.

 

So my speculation is no longer speculation there was actually studies that proved it.

 

JRH 3/17/11 (Read the extended SlantRight 2.0 of this post)

Do Abortions Bring Down Crime Rates?


Unborn Baby 2

 

By Adam David Houk

Edited by: John R. Houk

© March 15, 2011

 

You know how pro-choice people are always saying that abortions are good for crime rates.  Well I looked up some things and made a chart that would throw that idea out of the water.  I have made a chart of crimes per Population as a percentage and the number of abortions per Population as a percentage.  I also included and offset of 10 years to allow for children to come to an age of crime-worthiness.  The results are profound. Look at the chart.

 

Year

Population

# Crimes

Percentage per Population

Abortions

Percentage per Population

PPP offset by 10 years

1960

179,323,175

3,384,200

1.89

     

1961

182,992,000

3,488,000

1.91

     

1962

185,771,000

3,752,200

2.02

     

1963

188,483,000

4,109,500

2.18

     

1964

191,141,000

4,564,600

2.39

     

1965

193,526,000

4,739,400

2.45

     

1966

195,576,000

5,223,500

2.67

     

1967

197,457,000

5,903,400

2.99

     

1968

199,399,000

6,720,200

3.37

     

1969

201,385,000

7,410,900

3.68

     

1970

203,235,298

8,098,000

3.98

     

1971

206,212,000

8,588,200

4.16

     

1972

208,230,000

8,248,800

3.96

     

1973

209,851,000

8,718,100

4.15

744,600

0.35

 

1974

211,392,000

10,253,400

4.85

898,600

0.43

 

1975

213,124,000

11,292,400

5.30

1,034,200

0.49

 

1976

214,659,000

11,349,700

5.29

1,179,300

0.55

 

1977

216,332,000

10,984,500

5.08

1,316,700

0.61

 

1978

218,059,000

11,209,000

5.14

1,409,600

0.65

 

1979

220,099,000

12,249,500

5.57

1,497,700

0.68

 

1980

225,349,264

13,408,300

5.95

1,553,900

0.69

 

1981

229,146,000

13,423,800

5.86

1,577,300

0.69

 

1982

231,534,000

12,974,400

5.60

1,573,900

0.68

 

1983

233,981,000

12,108,600

5.18

1,575,000

0.67

0.35

1984

236,158,000

11,881,800

5.03

1,577,200

0.67

0.43

1985

238,740,000

12,431,400

5.21

1,588,200

0.67

0.49

1986

240,132,887

13,211,869

5.50

1,574,000

0.66

0.55

1987

242,282,918

13,508,700

5.58

1,559,100

0.64

0.61

1988

245,807,000

13,923,100

5.66

1,590,800

0.65

0.65

1989

248,239,000

14,251,400

5.74

1,566,900

0.63

0.68

1990

248,709,873

14,475,600

5.82

1,608,600

0.65

0.69

1991

252,177,000

14,872,900

5.90

1,556,500

0.62

0.69

1992

255,082,000

14,438,200

5.66

1,528,900

0.60

0.68

1993

257,908,000

14,144,800

5.48

1,495,000

0.58

0.67

1994

260,341,000

13,989,500

5.37

1,423,000

0.55

0.67

1995

262,755,000

13,862,700

5.28

1,359,400

0.52

0.67

1996

265,228,572

13,493,863

5.09

1,360,160

0.51

0.66

1997

267,637,000

13,194,571

4.93

1,335,000

0.50

0.64

1998

270,296,000

12,475,634

4.62

1,319,000

0.49

0.65

1999

272,690,813

11,634,378

4.27

1,314,800

0.48

0.63

2000

281,421,906

11,608,072

4.12

1,312,990

0.47

0.65

2001

285,317,559

11,876,669

4.16

1,291,000

0.45

0.62

2002

287,973,924

11,878,954

4.13

1,269,000

0.44

0.60

2003

290,690,788

11,826,538

4.07

1,250,000

0.43

0.58

2004

293,656,842

11,679,474

3.98

1,222,100

0.42

0.55

2005

296,507,061

11,565,499

3.90

1,206,200

0.41

0.52

2006

299,398,484

11,401,511

3.81

   

0.51

2007

301,621,157

11,251,828

3.73

   

0.50

2008

304,374,846

11,160,543

3.67

   

0.49

2009

307,006,550

10,639,369

3.47

   

0.48

           

0.47

           

0.45

           

0.44

           

0.43

           

0.42

           

0.41

 

I took the population of the year and divided it by the parameter and multiplied it by 100.  This gave me a percentage of acts done per person per year (whether it is crime or abortions).

 

My first point to make is that there is no way anyone could use abortions as a means to lower crime as an excuse to legalize it.  This just is not true.  I made an offset of the abortions rate of 10 years because I believe that children are at an age where they are smart enough to get themselves into a lot of trouble, and is also an age in which parents may start to let children roam around more freely.  Looking at this 10 year offset I noticed that both abortions and crime rates steadily increase from (5.18, .35) percent to (5.90, .69) percent.  Where on this offset both start to decrease never again increase for more than 1 consecutive year.

 

This therefore makes more of a connection to abortions increasing the rate of crime than decreasing it.  This should be mind boggling.

 

The only possible reason that I can think of for the opposite connection of the suggested crime rates and abortions is that the suspected people having abortions aren’t the ones having them.  This is those that don’t really want the children.  While it is true that those that have abortions are mostly among the poorer communities we must remember that abortion clinics target those areas purposefully.

 

I would like to make a new suggestion.  Those having abortions are people that have an actual interest in their future, not really the ones that don’t really care about their children, and it is these people that if they had children that have a tendency to change their attitude of self interest in their future to interest in the children’s future and those things that affect their children’s future while those that really only care about now, probably don’t care enough about the future to even bother changing when they have children and have the children anyway.  Therefore those that might have influenced drops in crime rates are not longer being produced while those who add to crime rates aren’t changing their contribution.  As usual no one can make a blanket characterization for all and there will always be exceptions to the rule, but I would like to suggest that this is the majority of abortions.  While it is important to remember this is speculation, I think it is a good one.  I challenge others to come up with a different reason why abortion statistics might be connected with the increase rather than decrease of crime rates.

 

I will always take the stand that Life starts at conception, and I think it has been a callous disregard for life that we sided with the selfishness of convenience. Giving rights for the choice to destroy life while giving scientists the time to prove scientifically whether it is a life or not rather than side on the caution that it might be a life is very tragic.   For when we find out later that it is a life we will have already murdered tens of millions of unborn babies if not hundreds of millions.  That is genocide.