Just curious, why do you say Moslems and not Muslims?

Dearborn...

Mark,

I agree with your post 100%. I've spent some time in London and am familiar with the phenomenon of second generation Muslims being far more devout, sometimes to the point of radicalism, than their parents.

I definitely see some similarities between that culture and our inner city "gangsta" or "thug" culture. You have a population of young men, which has traditionally been part of an permanent underclass, lured to a way of life which grants power and respect in exchange for fear and violence (or at least the perception of danger). I can see how that would be a seductive alternative to being overlooked and irrelevant.

In both cases, you'd need to find a way to reestablish the concepts of community, self-respect and humilty - concepts which seem to have escaped us of late.

Noonan: I agree in essence with your post but your comment:

"The responsibility for preventing this lies with America's Moslem community - the leaders of the community have to come down hard on the side of an American identity, and send packing those Moslems who preach radical hatred."

NOT GOING TO HAPPEN!!!

Unfortunately.

Hey, Cannuck, signs of understanding. But it may happen when they see that we (Americans) will not back down or give up our way of life the way others have.

I wonder why we worry about Muslims not assimilating when we have a few million illegal Hispanics, many of which also aren't assimilating. In fact, they seem to be pushing their Hispanic customs off on us here in Southwest Washington.

My wife, an American born of Hispanic descent, saw this growing up in Houston and as an adult saw it much worse near the border. Being only half Hispanic she felt as if she didn't fit in with either and never learned Spanish.

It angers her to be looked down upon by other Hispanics that get upset because she doesn't speak Spanish.

Our Melting Pot has been good, even if early on some were not included. They can be now, that was corrected. But, multi-culturlism from many angles will help destroy our unique American identity.

Muslims need to help defeat terrorists and Hispanics entering illegally, or even those born here or here legally, need to forget naking the west coast part of Mexico once again. We need to invite and include those who want to be Americans into our melting pot as well.

As a Liberal that lived thought 9/11 and is distrustful of American Muslims because they refuse to acknowledge their home country is America, I know that you all are missing the point. Theses guys need to show their support for America the country and NOT whisper a breath about Israel. Our security is dependant on our prestige (which President Bush has thrown in the toilet, because he is incompetent .)What a shame.

This issue has been around for as long as America has existed. I'm not minimizing it, but pointing out that here in the US we know how to balance assimilation verses cultural roots. The muslims may turn out to be a small problem but we'll get past it just as we did with so many other ethnic groups (perhaps with some strife, some legislation, or some good-old-fashioned social pressure of the nasty kind, which people in the US are perfectly capable of applying.

The bigger problem is the very large number of liberal haters who will try to feed and inflame the resentments of US Muslims. Of course the liberals will do this thinking that they have only the best of intentions...that is the nature of modern liberals...self-righteousness combined with self-destructive action.

This country is headed for an internal clash that we must win before we can prevail against the Muslims in the WWIII.

This is not a new problem in that immigration has always been changing our society and the "natives" have always resented it. We identify our country with specific values; however, the "melting pot" brings with it so many different values.

I too am quick to denounce any culture that tries to change the local culture rather than assimilate into the existing one. What's interesting is that our culture changes dramatically over time and now it's changing faster than ever with globalization. My view is that we should only allow immigrants that can fill labor roles that we don't have the capacity to fill.

If we become too fragmented by not assimilating, then we risk infighting, and this vehicle of wealth and freedom called America will stop working.

"Moslems in America are trying to bring a slice of middle eastern cutlural values in to the United States. We won't allow it - we can't allow it: our culture forbids it. Dressing modestly is one thing - but any attempt by Moslems to enforce a dress code from the middle east on women in the United States - even in a district majority Moslem - just won't fly."

The idea that "we won't allow it, we can't allow it, our culture forbids it" is all untrue Mark...I have no idea what you are talking about, your not making any sence, are there some rules for living in the United States?

I also don't understand where you get the idea that "Moslems [will] enforce a dress code from the middle east on women in the United States", are you talking about Moslem women, or all women in the United States? If your talking about Moslem women, there is nothing in that article that said women are enforced to a dress code, it is thier choosing.

Mark, your post was a step in the right direction. Good job. But, you know I'll disagree with some of your post so here goes....

"Islam in and of itself is not incompatible with America - my friend at work shows that..."."-MN

This is a false statement. The Qu'ran specifically states that Muslims should not take Christians as friends. Therefore, your Muslim friend is violating Islam by being friends with you who is a Christian. Proof-

Qur’an 5:51 “Believers, take not Jews and Christians for your friends. They are but friends and protectors to each other.”

(It's good that you two are friends, though. Friendship between Muslims and Christians/Jews should be encouraged!)

Islam itself is un-Constitutional in many ways.

1)Islam violates the First Amendment which guarantees freedom of religion. Islam prohibits freedom of religion: The penalty for a Muslim who gives up Islam is death.

2)Islam violates the First Amendment which guarantees freedom of speech. In Islam, criticism of Islam = blasphemy = death penalty.

3)Islam violates the US Constitution which establishes a democratic republican form of government for the United States of America. Islam dictates a totalitarian theocracy under Sharia Law guided first by the Qur’an and then by the Sunna. Islam is not only a religion, but a total way of life. All areas of life—religious, economic, social, and political are guided by first the Qur'an and then by the Sunna. In Islam, the religious leader is the political leader.

4)Islam violates the US Constitution's prohibition against "cruel and unusual punishment". Sharia Law has many cruel and unusual punishments, ie.-beheading, stoning, flogging, amputation of a hand for theft, crucifixtion, death for blasphemy.

- but most of Islamic culture simply cannot work here."-MN

Agreed wholeheartedly. Dearbornistan, Michigan is a case in point. Burkhas and Pro-Hizballah rallies are disappointing and dangerous developments.

Well...here's one that doesn't seem to be assimilating very well:

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/08/29/BAGAEKRCO55.DTL

Seems that 29-year-old Omeed Aziz Popal used his SUV to mow down over a dozen folks in San Fran., therby fullfilling his religion's mandate to kill the infidels.

From a poster on another blog.....

2 Million Dead, Millions more injured and displaced government officials believe that the small back pack nuclear weapon which vaporized 25 blocks of downtown Manhattan today was the direct result of a suicide Islamist terrorist attack. Government and Administration officials were quick to point out that we failed to imagine the threat that a terrorist group would really actually use a nuke against us. The President today has declared her intention to begin open negotiations for a peaceful settlement with all Islamic Terror Groups. In the speech before the UN where she agreed to an immediate phased turnover of the U.S. military to the leadership of the UN Secretary General in an attempt to avert another such attack Ms. Clinton stated that "We Americans will mourn our dead but will stand resolved that the damage inflicted by the failed policies of former President George W. Bush will not stand in the way of a peaceful solution to the recent problems in the Middle East." She further stated her intentions to send her husband to Iran to seek direct support from the Ayatollah and President Ahmadinajaed. The French President immediately applauded Ms. Bush's statement as one of historic significance and at the same time warned that any use of Nuclear Weapons on French soil would result in immediate nuclear retaliation in kind. The Russian and Chinese Ambassadors were quick to urge Ms. Clinton to use restraint and not immediately retaliate or blame any country that harbored terrorist groups but especially not Iran or the dictatorship in the New Islamic Republic of Iraq, which was established shortly after the U.S. withdraw earlier this year in a bloody coup that resulted in more then a million Iraqi deaths. Russian ministers further stated that they were now a direct allie of the Islamic Republic of Iraq and would not support any type of sanctions against any terror groups operating out of that country to which the UN immediately agreed.......

Several years ago when I was in the Marines I went to a very tough school at Coronado. This school had us running confidence courses, going on long hikes, and practicing taking rubber assault boats to and from the beach (tip, easier coming ashore than taking one out through the surf).

On of the other Marines was a black Muslim - and he was a good friend. But, there were a few times when we were shooting the breeze at night that he told me of these enormous conflicts he was having. He knew many white Marines. He knew that except for a very few idiots color was not an issue with us. It certainly wasn't with me. But he said his religion said that whites were the devil. He was supposed to hate, and battle us. But working and living with us day after day doing the very demanding and team building things we were doing was making him doubt this. I believe he did a lot of soul searching over it.

After a couple of months I headed back to North Carolina and he to Okinawa. Never saw him again and I don't know what he decided. I was completely floored by this at the time. I had no idea that this religion of white hatred even existed. Later, watching Nation of Islam in action - I think that this episode in my life gave me some insight into their world.

It is a dark place. They are taught to hate and revile the white man. If we are the devil incarnate, how could it be otherwise? In many ways - this using hatred as a central value is what Hitler did. There are many things about the Nazi's that he took from other groups and others have borrowed from him. I don't always mean to compare a group to the Nazi's in Toto when I make that comparison. But this hatred, and deionization, and call for violence is VERY similar. This is also just the experience I had – I have no idea what other Muslims believe.

.

Several years ago when I was in the Marines I went to a very tough school at Coronado. This school had us running confidence courses, going on long hikes, and practicing taking rubber assault boats to and from the beach (tip, easier coming ashore than taking one out through the surf).

On of the other Marines was a black Muslim - and he was a good friend. But, there were a few times when we were shooting the breeze at night that he told me of these enormous conflicts he was having. He knew many white Marines. He knew that except for a very few idiots color was not an issue with us. It certainly wasn't with me. But he said his religion said that whites were the devil. He was supposed to hate, and battle us. But working and living with us day after day doing the very demanding and team building things we were doing was making him doubt this. I believe he did a lot of soul searching over it.

After a couple of months I headed back to North Carolina and he to Okinawa. Never saw him again and I don't know what he decided. I was completely floored by this at the time. I had no idea that this religion of white hatred even existed. Later, watching Nation of Islam in action - I think that this episode in my life gave me some insight into their world.

It is a dark place. They are taught to hate and revile the white man. If we are the devil incarnate, how could it be otherwise? In many ways - this using hatred as a central value is what Hitler did. There are many things about the Nazi's that he took from other groups and others have borrowed from him. I don't always mean to compare a group to the Nazi's in Toto when I make that comparison. But this hatred, and deionization, and call for violence is VERY similar. This is also just the experience I had – I have no idea what other Muslims believe.

"A new generation of American Muslims -- living in the shadow of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks -- is becoming more religious. They are more likely to take comfort in their own communities, and less likely to embrace the nation's fabled melting pot of shared values and common culture.
...From schools to language to religion, American Muslims are becoming a people apart."

My, you people are young. This process has been going on since the 60s.
Our culture is becoming more and more fragmented and intolerant. Blacks attack any remark they can construe as racial. Hispanics have finally started to reply to their wetback image with a non-American culture of their own.
And now, as we look awry at any person with a middle Eastern name, a more radical group is being born. A group of young muslims who are becoming tired of people pointing at them and at their religion and calling them the terrorists who blew up the Towers. A group who have started flaunting their background, just as blacks started becoming more "African" after Martin Luther King died.

Mark, your friend is the rule, not the exception. Unfortunately, it only takes one hothead to start a movement. Or plant a bomb.

Freedom 1 - Our religion requires us to kill witches. Do you know any practitioners of Wicca? Do you feel like killing them?
Yes, there are a lot of literalists who will kill Christians on principle, just as there are some Christians who will kill gays, abortionists, and pagans, based on Biblical commands.
But not all Christians do so. And it would be wrong to identify Christianity as a religion of gay bashers and witch burners.

Oh, and Warriornation - the muslim who launched the suicide attack probably lives here already, and is a member of a domestic muslim terror group, not a foreign one. Nuking the entire middle east won't stop him.

Christian,

I don't change my mode of writing in order to bow to PC dictates - it has been "Moslem" my whole life, and so it shall always remain in my writing. "Muslim" is like "Mumbai" - an anoying and un-necessary change to settled practice.

Lew,

That is a large problem - but among the problems of assimilating Mexicans there isn't that bit about strapping a bomb on and blowing up innocent people.

extra,

What I worry about is that it will come down to a necessity for violence - I'd hate to see it happen, but we'll know over the next ten years of so whether or not America's Moslem community has a death wish. The plain fact of the matter is that if I were to move to a Moslem country, I'd conform to their cultural norms...and the Moslems in this country will simply have to conform to ours, or be eventually destroyed/exiled.

"Lew, That is a large problem - but among the problems of assimilating Mexicans there isn't that bit about strapping a bomb on and blowing up innocent people." Posted by: Mark Noonan

Agreed. Most illegal immigrants are Mexicans and most Mexicans are Catholic Christians. I thank God for that! As Catholics, there's nothing that fundamentally prohibits Mexicans/Hispanics from eventually assimilating into the American way of life. Language and other cultural differences can be overcome. With Muslims, Islam is fundamentally opposed to "infidels" ie.-Christians, Jews, atheists, Buddhists-and to Western culture. Unless the Qur'an gets re-written, it will always be that way.

Freedom, of all the posters here, you seem to be by far the most knowledgable about Islam. Do you think it's possible for there to be an Islamic Reformation, similar to the Protestant Reformation led by Martin Luther nearly 5 centuries ago? It seems to me that, for civilization as we know it to survive, something like that has to occur. Any thoughts?

Small Town,

The violence of the Old Testament was for a time, but not for all time. Jesus Christ said to "turn the other cheek" and to "love your enemy". God, Himself, will deal with "witches". A good Christian should pray for witches, not prey on witches.

Kahn,

The Nation of Islam is not real Islam. (This confused me too, until recently. If you already know that NOI is not real Islam, please disregard this post.) I did some research on the Nation of Islam. Here's some excerpts from a few websites which differentiate the Nation of Islam from real Islam-

(Wikipedia)-Nation of Islam: The main belief of The Nation of Islam is that God came to the earth in the form of a human named Wallace Fard Muhammad and that they should pray five times a day to the holy city of Mecca.

Louis Farrakhan, commenting on his teacher's description said the following: "The Honorable Elijah Muhammad told us of a giant Mother Plane that is made like the universe, spheres within spheres. White people call them unidentified flying objects (UFOs).
********

The 'Nation of Islam' is Not Islam: There is a great deal of confusion about the group known as the Nation of Islam, currently led by Louis Farrakhan. Although the group's name implies that it is part of the Islamic religion, its beliefs diverge so greatly from Islam that most Muslims consider it to be a different religion.
**********

The Nation of Islam Exposed: By. A. I. Palmer (Society for Adherence to the Sunnah)

Louis Gene Walcott Farrakhan is not a Muslim, nor is his doctrine Islam. Farrakhan is the leader of a black racist cult called "the Nation of Islam," (NOI) founded in Detroit, Michigan in the 1930's. While the group calls its followers Muslims, in reality, they have very little to do with the faith of Islam. Islam believes in the total transcendance of almighty God (called in Arabic, Allaah), the NOI teaches that black people are angelic gods. Islam maintains universal brotherhood, the NOI says that Islam is for blacks only. Islam teaches that prophethood ended with Muhammad ibn Abdullah, more than 1400 years ago. The NOI teaches that Farrakhan's teacher, Elijah Muhammad, is the last prophet. Islam teaches principles of spiritual and moral decorum such prayer, fasting, charity, pilgimage, etc., Elijah Muhammad cast these out or altered them beyond recognition. [..]

In brief, the doctrine states that the first humans, a race of black people, whom the NOI calls 'the Original Man,' created white people in a genetic experiment 6,000 years ago. Elijah claimed that they (the whites) would rule the world for 6,000 years and then be destroyed at the 'end of their time' by the blacks. He said that 'Judgement Day' means that at the 'end of time' the Gods (i.e., blacks) would destroy the entire white race (devils) and then establish a Paradise (nation) on this earth ruled forever by the blacks (i.e., Gods).

..

"Do you think it's possible for there to be an Islamic Reformation, similar to the Protestant Reformation led by Martin Luther nearly 5 centuries ago?" Posted by: Retired Spook

No. Pope Benedict XVI explains why quite well.

On his radio show (1/6/06), Hugh Hewitt interviewed Father Joseph Fessio, a student and friend of Pope Benedict XVI, concerning the pope’s views on the possibility of an Islamic Reformation. Here's a partial transcript (emphasis mine):

Benedict XVI on Islam and the West

HH: Father Fessio, before the break, you were telling us that after the presentation at Castel Gandolfo by two scholars of Islam this summer with Benedict in attendance, as well as his former students, for the first time in your memory, the Pope did not allow his students to first comment and reserve comment, but in fact, went first. Why, and what did he say?

JF: Well, the thesis that was proposed by this scholar was that Islam can enter into the modern world if the Koran is reinterpreted by taking the specific legislation, and going back to the principles, and then adapting it to our times, especially with the dignity that we ascribe to women, which has come through Christianity, of course. And immediately, the Holy Father, in his beautiful calm but clear way, said well, there's a fundamental problem with that, because he said in the Islamic tradition, God has given His word to Mohammed, but it's an eternal word. It's not Mohammed's word. It's there for eternity the way it is. There's no possibility of adapting it or interpreting it, whereas in Christianity, and Judaism, the dynamism's completely different, that God has worked through His creatures. And so, it is not just the word of God, it's the word of Isaiah, not just the word of God, but the word of Mark. He's used His human creatures, and inspired them to speak His word to the world, and therefore by establishing a Church in which he gives authority to His followers to carry on the tradition and interpret it, there's an inner logic to the Christian Bible, which permits it and requires it to be adapted and applied to new situations. I was...I mean, Hugh, I wish I could say it as clearly and as beautifully as he did, but that's why he's Pope and I'm not, okay? That's one of the reasons. One of others, but his seeing that distinction when the Koran, which is seen as something dropped out of Heaven, which cannot be adapted or applied, even, and the Bible, which is a word of God that comes through a human community, it was stunning. [..]

JF: Yeah, that Christianity can engage modernity just like it did...the Jews did Egypt, or Christians did to Greece, because we can take what's good there, and we can elevate it through the revelation of Christ in the Bible. But Islam is stuck. It's stuck with a text that cannot be adapted, or even be interpreted properly.

HH: And so the Pope is a pessimist about that changing, because it would require a radical reinterpretation of what the Koran is?

JF: Yeah, which is it's impossible, because it's against the very nature of the Koran, as it's understood by Muslims.

HH: And so, even the dialectic that was the Reformation is not possible within Islam?

JF: No.

..

"Do you think it's possible for there to be an Islamic Reformation, similar to the Protestant Reformation led by Martin Luther nearly 5 centuries ago?" Posted by: Retired Spook

No. Pope Benedict XVI explains why quite well.

On his radio show (1/6/06), Hugh Hewitt interviewed Father Joseph Fessio, a student and friend of Pope Benedict XVI, concerning the pope’s views on the possibility of an Islamic Reformation. Here's a partial transcript (emphasis mine):

Benedict XVI on Islam and the West

HH: Father Fessio, before the break, you were telling us that after the presentation at Castel Gandolfo by two scholars of Islam this summer with Benedict in attendance, as well as his former students, for the first time in your memory, the Pope did not allow his students to first comment and reserve comment, but in fact, went first. Why, and what did he say?

JF: Well, the thesis that was proposed by this scholar was that Islam can enter into the modern world if the Koran is reinterpreted by taking the specific legislation, and going back to the principles, and then adapting it to our times, especially with the dignity that we ascribe to women, which has come through Christianity, of course. And immediately, the Holy Father, in his beautiful calm but clear way, said well, there's a fundamental problem with that, because he said in the Islamic tradition, God has given His word to Mohammed, but it's an eternal word. It's not Mohammed's word. It's there for eternity the way it is. There's no possibility of adapting it or interpreting it, whereas in Christianity, and Judaism, the dynamism's completely different, that God has worked through His creatures. And so, it is not just the word of God, it's the word of Isaiah, not just the word of God, but the word of Mark. He's used His human creatures, and inspired them to speak His word to the world, and therefore by establishing a Church in which he gives authority to His followers to carry on the tradition and interpret it, there's an inner logic to the Christian Bible, which permits it and requires it to be adapted and applied to new situations. I was...I mean, Hugh, I wish I could say it as clearly and as beautifully as he did, but that's why he's Pope and I'm not, okay? That's one of the reasons. One of others, but his seeing that distinction when the Koran, which is seen as something dropped out of Heaven, which cannot be adapted or applied, even, and the Bible, which is a word of God that comes through a human community, it was stunning. [..]

JF: Yeah, that Christianity can engage modernity just like it did...the Jews did Egypt, or Christians did to Greece, because we can take what's good there, and we can elevate it through the revelation of Christ in the Bible. But Islam is stuck. It's stuck with a text that cannot be adapted, or even be interpreted properly.

HH: And so the Pope is a pessimist about that changing, because it would require a radical reinterpretation of what the Koran is?

JF: Yeah, which is it's impossible, because it's against the very nature of the Koran, as it's understood by Muslims.

HH: And so, even the dialectic that was the Reformation is not possible within Islam?

JF: No.

HH: And so, even the dialectic that was the Reformation is not possible within Islam?

JF: No.

Thanks for the clarification. That's disappointing.

RS,and Freedom1,
Not only disappointing, but disturbing as well.
The word "assimilate" seems improper in regards to the reality of what's happening.
The word "infiltrating" seems, IMHO, the more descriptive term. Thoughts?

Mary S,

Infiltrate sounds about right. This LGF search: Dearborn shows what's really going in the Muslim community in Dearborn, Michigan. Just glance at the list of articles.

To illustrate the point, look at these 3 pictures: Pix: Terror Supporters Turn Out in US

Hizballah Supporters Rally in Dearborn: "Americans" for Hezbollah: ...And from NPR, a profile of the Lebanese-American community in Dearborn Michigan includes this:

Daily protests occur in Dearborn. At one recent demonstration, organized by the Congress of Arab-Americans, about 1,000 people attended. College-age men asked, in call and response fashion, "Who is your army?" Protestors responded: "Hezbollah." "Who is your leader?" they were asked. "Nasrallah," the chanters responded. Many carried placards of the Hezbollah leader. A few days earlier at an even larger demonstration, more than 15,000 turned out, about half of Dearborn's Arab community.

Those who regularly attend the demonstrations tend to be the most strident.

"Oh, Jews, remember Khaibar," the marchers chant. "The army of the Prophet will return."

The line is a reference to Khaibar, a Jewish town north of Medina that, according to Islamic tradition, was overtaken by the Prophet Muhammad in the seventh century. Once defeated, the surviving Jews of Khaibar were forced into serfdom. Two decades later, they were expelled from the Arabian peninsula.
*****

There are about 6 million Muslims in the US, right now. As the American Muslim population increases, these problems are only going to get worse...and more dangerous.

..

Freedom, thanks for that HH quote. I heard that show, and was profoundly disturbed by it. I find Hugh to be one of the most educational, rational, and also entertaining shows on radio, and encourage all to listen to him if they can. (As far as I know, he is the only talk radio host who ever required all callers, one day, to "talk like pirates" and who has done a show on the best movies ever made about Ohio. But when the need is to talk about politics or political philosophy, he nails it, with the best guests on radio.)

I think one problem is the protection Islam has in this country, due to our freedom of religion history and law. But when you have a group that is simultaneously a religion and a political movement dedicated to the destruction of the country which is offering it its protection, it gets a little complicated.

As so many "moderate" Muslims claim that Islam is really a religion of peace, and as the radicals are declaring their dedication to violence, I suggest that we start to define radical, violent, 'anti-infidel' Islam as "secular Islam". Just as approximately 70% of the Jews in Israel are secular Jews, we can identify those who have cultural and ethnic roots in Islam as secular Muslims, those who have chosen a non-religious approach to Islam.

And then let the Muslims fight it out. Let them define their religion a little more clearly than they have, and let them draw the lines.

But if all references to violent Islam identified it as "secular" it would create a chasm, a division, between peaceful Islam and violent Islam. It might force Muslims to take sides, and in doing so force the dialogue and introspection and evaluation it will take for any kind of reformation to take place, if it is at all possible.

As the dialogue progressed, we could see where it was headed, and make plans accordingly.

And it would deprive terrorists of the protection they now have in this country as people merely practicing their religion. Any segment of Islam which preaches violence or destruction of anyone is automatically declared to be secular, and therefore outside the protection of religious freedom.

If we can define religion in some way, such as the peaceful pursuit of spiritual enlightenment and/or salvation, we can effectively eliminate those factions which use twisted dogma as the excuse for violence against others.

And if a Christian sect were to advocate violence, I would not object to including it in the new secular political movement category. Christianity has already undergone a lot of examination and internal discussion. Maybe it is time to force Islam to do the same. But we can't continue to contribute to, or even tolerate, the notion that the crazier you are, the holier you are---that the more you hate, the closer you are to God.

To respond to a parallel comment, there was a recent article about how companies are trying to retain hourly workers by offering increased benefits. The reporter interviewed a woman who has been working as an hourly worker for six years, talking about her increased wages but also about the other benefits, such as five weeks of paid vacatio/sick leave per year, etc.

But the interview had to be done through an interpreter, because this woman, who is presumably here legally, and who is making good money in a permanent job, has not bothered to learn English.

I think we have become so Politically Correct in our headlong embrace of anything that can be called "diversity", and so accepting of the self-hatred of so many Americans, that we simply are not comfortable sending the message that this is a good, worthwhile, country, and that those who live here should try to be a part of it.

Freedom1,
Very disturbing...I wish I knew what else to say. Your research on this subject is incredible! You know much more than I, so I can't imagine how disturbing it must be to you.
It is, though, probably best to "know one's enemy"
BTW, was able to communicate with Rev! Was discussing your extensive knowledge regarding Islam.
He asked that I give you his web address, he is interested in your thoughts.
I told him that you have done some incredible research. He can be reached at www.mpturner.net.
I hope this finds you!
Mary

Freedom,

And yet a good number of Moslems live a very American life in this country - that colleague of mine is at least a bit devout, as he doesn't eat pork and does keep the Ramadan fast...so, he's at least found a way to reconcile his faith with his Americanism (he became a citizen in 2004).

I have to agree that there isn't much wiggle room in the Koran for a protestant-style Reformation of Islam - but I am going to continue to bet on the universal human desire to not be bothered. It may be a forlorn hope, but I'm keeping to it as long as I can because the alternative is a horrific war to the death between Islam and the West. I'd avoid that, if I can.

Mary S.,
Got it, thanks.
:)