Toward Intelligent Progress, Part 6


Sep 22, 2016

Toward Intelligent Progress, Part 6

To Profile or Not

The problems of wisely dealing with immigration, illegal immigration and refugees are similar. Here are some that need to be considered.

  • The number of people we can assimilate
  • Are any of them a security threat? If so what kind of percentage are we talking about?
  • How carefully should they be screened before allowed to stay?
  • Will they assimilate with our way of life and support our constitutional government?
  • Do they have needed skills?

In the past the United States has been quite liberal in accepting refugees. We have been very accepting of refugees fleeing totalitarian systems such as the old Soviet Union, Cuba and others. One of the reasons for our acceptance is that many refugees in the past seemed happy to adopt our way of life and Democratic government, feeling it is much superior to the one they are fleeing.

Unfortunately, the refugee problem as well as immigration has become more complicated since 2001, after the 9/11 attack. Since all the 19 Hijackers were devout Muslims many people have become concerned about members of this religion entering this country. Then it hasn’t helped that most of the terror attacks worldwide and within the country since then have been perpetrated by members of the Islamic faith.

People have thus becomes divided into two camps as far as accepting Muslim immigrants and refugees.

(1) Those who think Muslim immigrants should be carefully screened to make sure they will support the American System and not pose a threat.

Quite a few throughout the world seem to be in this category as here are results from Pew research:

A median of 50% across four Western European countries, the U.S. and Russia called Muslims violent and a median of 58% called them “fanatical,”

(2) Those who think any type of profiling is Islamophobic – that it would be wrong to look any more closely at them than anyone else.

So, does the first group have a point or should Muslims be of no more concern to us than any other belief system?

Let us take a look Muslims in the United States. Here are some statistics on their thinking according to polls.

  • 51% agree that “Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to Shariah Law. 51% also agreed that they should have the choice of American or Shariah courts, or that they should have their own tribunals to apply Shariah. Only 39% of those polled said that Muslims in the U.S. should be subject to American courts.
  • Nearly a quarter of the Muslims in America polled believed that, “It is legitimate to use violence to punish those who give offense to Islam by, for example, portraying the prophet Mohammed.”
  • Nearly one-fifth of Muslim respondents said that the use of violence in the United States is justified in order to make Shariah the law of the land in this country.
  • Pew Research revealed that 26% of younger Muslims in America believe suicide bombings are justified.

Here are just a few elements of Shariah Law that so many support:

  • Criticizing or denying any part of the Quran is punishable by death.
  • Criticizing Muhammad or denying that he is a prophet is punishable by death.
  • Criticizing or denying Allah, the god of Islam is punishable by death.
  • A Muslim who becomes a non-Muslim is punishable by death.
  • A non-Muslim who leads a Muslim away from Islam is punishable by death.
  • A non-Muslim man who marries a Muslim woman is punishable by death.
  • A man can beat his wife for insubordination.
  • A woman who has been raped cannot testify in court against her rapist(s).
  • A woman’s testimony in court, allowed in property cases, carries ½ the weight of a man’s.
  • A female heir inherits half of what a male heir inherits.
  • A woman cannot drive a car, as it leads to fitnah (upheaval).
  • A woman cannot speak alone to a man who is not her husband or relative.
  • Most think it supports the death penalty for gays

A cause of concern are conclusions published by Dr. Peter Hammond in his book, Slavery, Terrorism and Islam: The Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat, published in 2005 where he examine what has happened throughout history when the number of Muslims in a country increases.

  • As long as the Muslims make up about 1%, they are generally considered a peace-loving minority who do not bother anyone.
  • At 2-3%, some start proselytizing to other minorities and disgruntled groups, especially in prison and among street gangs.
  • At 5%, Muslims have an unreasonably large influence relative to their share of the population. Many demand halal slaughtered meat, and have been pushing the food industry to produce and sell it. They have also started to work toward the government giving them autonomy under sharia law. Hammond writes that the goal of Islam is not to convert the whole world, but rather, to establish sharia law all over the world.
  • When Muslims reach 10%, historically, lawlessness increases. Some start to complain about their situation, start riots and car fires, and threaten people they feel insult Islam.
  • At 20%, violent riots erupt, jihadi militia groups are formed, people are murdered, and churches and synagogues are set ablaze.
  • When the Muslims reach 40% of the population, there are widespread massacres, constant terror attacks and militia warfare.
  • At 60%, there is the possibility of uninhibited persecution of non-Muslims, sporadic ethnic cleansing, possible genocide, implementation of sharia law and jizya (the tax for “protection” that unbelievers must pay).
  • When there are 80% Muslims in the country, they have taken control of the government apparatus and are, as in, for instance, Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq, committing violence in the name of Islam or political power.
  • When 100% are Muslims, the peace in the house of Islam is supposed to come — hence the claim that Islam is the “religion of peace.”

Indeed it does appear that there is a danger in letting wholesale numbers of Muslims into this country without some type of screening process. That said, then what should we do about the Syrian refugees in need of assistance? Should we just let them perish or is there a way to assist them? We’ll discuss this next.

Copyright by J J Dewey

Index for Recent Posts

Easy Access to All the Writings

Register at Freeread Here

Log on to Freeread Here

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Gather with JJ on Facebook HERE

1 thought on “Toward Intelligent Progress, Part 6

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *