Would Muslims be safer and happier in the USA if we limit their numbers to NMT 2% of our population?

[Montrovant]

Why don't you just go ahead and tell us what you think the proper distribution of people is, based on whatever criteria you consider important?

Why don't you read the thread?

I've read the thread. It's the reason for my question. Your OP promotes limiting immigration based on religious belief, even limiting the total % of the population which follows a particular religion. If you think you are qualified to determine the proper numbers of whatever groups of people who get to live here, go ahead and do it. I'm curious to see how you will apportion the country.

 

[Mojo2]

I have considered the two opposing arguments.

Religious totalitarianism on one side.

Freedom on the other side.

Uhhh...

Make mine freedom!

This fails as a false dilemma fallacy.

At least you're consistent at being a failure.

Hey, what are you Muslim posters so riled up about?

You are already here in the USA.

Why is it so important to you that we NOT limit immigration numbers from Muslim nations?

 

[hotpotato]

I think most Muslims feel safer in the west than they would back in traditional muslim countries at this time. Tarring them all with the same brush is the problem. The majority are peaceful, law abiding individuals who just want to get on with life. Ok some extremists want more! Westbro Baptist for example...oops not who I meant

 

[Mojo2]

Why don't you just go ahead and tell us what you think the proper distribution of people is, based on whatever criteria you consider important?

Why don't you read the thread?

I've read the thread. It's the reason for my question. Your OP promotes limiting immigration based on religious belief, even limiting the total % of the population which follows a particular religion. If you think you are qualified to determine the proper numbers of whatever groups of people who get to live here, go ahead and do it. I'm curious to see how you will apportion the country.

NMT 2% Muslims in our population.

Otherwise we start to see Stage Two and Stage Three and Stage Four and Stage Five problems develop.

I don't want that.

Most Americans don't.

So let's prevent the predictable and inevitable problems which always occur when Muslim populations grow to the sizes described in "The Five Stages of Islam."

 

[Mojo2]

I think most Muslims feel safer in the west than they would back in traditional muslim countries at this time. Tarring them all with the same brush is the problem. The majority are peaceful, law abiding individuals who just want to get on with life. Ok some extremists want more! Westbro Baptist for example...oops not who I meant

Yes, we need to distribute a memo to everyone. We are now no longer interested in moderate Muslims.

They are irrelevant.



Yes, most Muslims feel safer in the West.

But they would not feel safe in the West if there were snipers looking to shoot them from afar at random just because they were Muslims.

And why and how would this happen?

If the right series of many smaller violent acts or a few large terrorist events took place killing a large number of innocent American non-Muslims, moderate Muslims would have to hide.

Their every day safety would be compromised if they did not go into complete seclusion.

That is not what we want to happen.

So lets limit Muslim populations to less than 2%.

 

[Pogo]

I have considered the two opposing arguments.

Religious totalitarianism on one side.

Freedom on the other side.

Uhhh...

Make mine freedom!

This fails as a false dilemma fallacy.

At least you're consistent at being a failure.

Hey, what are you Muslim posters so riled up about?

You are already here in the USA.

Why is it so important to you that we NOT limit immigration numbers from Muslim nations?

Why is it so important to YOU that we not follow our own Constitution?

 

[Derideo_Te]

Would Muslims be safer and happier in the USA if we limit their numbers to NMT 2% of our population?

The Five Stages of Islam
By Richard Butrick

Forget the Five Pillars of Islam. It is the Five Stages of Islam that threaten the fundamental freedoms
of Western Democracy. Freedoms which include freedom of thought, expression, and association
and the crucial derived right of freedom of the press. We should never forget that "Islam" means
submission -- the opposite of self-determination and Enlightenment values.

Six years ago Dr. Peter Hammond published a remarkable book which included a statistical study of
the correlation between Muslim to non-Muslim population ratios and the transition from conciliatory
Islam to fascist Islam.

The stages are the same in 2011 but the demographics have changed to show an alarming progression. Many European nations and the U.S. are on the cusp of moving to a higher bracket.

The demographics change but the story is the same.

First comes the taqiyya and the kitman; then comes the Sword of Islam.

Imam Rauf, the Ground Zero Mosque promoter, is the current master of taqiyya. He has gulled everyone from Bloomberg to Maureen Dowd of the NYT -- who fanaticizes over male Muslims. Expect doppelgangers of Khomeini for stage 5 and Islamic PEACE at last.

Stage 1. Establish a Beachhead

Population density à 2% (US, Australia, Canada).

Muslims are conciliatory, deferential but request harmless special treatment (foot bath facilities, removal/elimination of that which is offensive to delicate Muslim sensibilities - like walking dogs near Mosques).

Stage 2. Establish Outposts

Population density 2% - 5% (UK, Germany, Denmark).

At 2% to 5%, they begin to proselytize other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups, often with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs. A recent example is that of Sheikh Abdullah el-Faisal who is back in Jamaica after being kicked out of the UK. Sound harmless? Read on:

The dispatch, dated February 2010, warns that that Jamaica could be fertile ground for
jihadists because of its underground drug economy, marginalized youth, insufficient
security and gang networks in U.S. and British prisons.

Stage 3. Establish Sectional Control of Major Cities.

Population density 5% - 10% (France, Sweden, Netherlands).

First comes the demand for halal food in supermarkets, and the blocking of streets for prayers; then comes the demand for self rule (within their ghettos) under Sharia. When Muslims approach 10% of the population the demands turn to lawlessness. In Paris, we are already seeing car-burnings. Any
criticism of Islam results ...

Continued at link.

Articles The Five Stages of Islam

I have little problem with the numbers of Muslims in America, currently.

This number, however, will change with an increase in the numbers of Muslims allowed in through immigration.

So, why not set a limit to prevent Muslim populations in America from reaching the Stage Two level?

They would be happier and be treated better.

​

Exactly what part of that is over your head, Adolf?

The Bill of Rights was not written to apply to Muslims.

It was written only for the Christians who were fleeing persecution from the British Throne.

That has to be one of the single most ignorant statements ever posted in USMB.

To believe that there were no Muslims in America when it was founded is ridiculous. There is documented evidence of Muslims fighting on the American side in the Revolutionary war.

Records from the American Revolutionary War indicate that at least a few Muslims fought on the American side. Among the recorded names of American soldiers are "Peter Salem","Yusuf ben Ali" and "Bampett Muhamed".[27]

The first country to recognize the United States as an independent nation was the Sultanate of Morocco under its ruler Mohammed ben Abdallah, in the year 1777.[28] He maintained several correspondences with President George Washington.

Islam in the United States - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

1530 African slaves arrive in America. During the slave trade, more than 10 million Africans were uprooted from their homes and brought to American shores. Many of these slaves were from the Fulas, Fula Jallon, Fula Toro, and Massiona as well as other areas of West Africa. These areas were governed from their capital, "Timbuctu." These slaves were sent to Mexico, Cuba, and South America. More than 30 percent of these 10 million slaves were Muslim. They became the backbone of the American economy. 1732 Ayyub ibn Sulaiman Jallon, a Muslim slave in Maryland, is set free by James Oglethorpe, founder of Georgia, and provided transportation to England. He arrived home (Boonda, Galumbo) from England in 1735. 1790 Moors from Spain are reported living in South Carolina and Florida

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

American Muslim History

 

[Mojo2]

Would Muslims be safer and happier in the USA if we limit their numbers to NMT 2% of our population?

[QUOTE
American Muslim History

I don't really care about Islamic history or their participation in our founding or not.

I am concerned with preventing some 300,000,000 Muslims around the world religious ambitions from being realized.

 

[Pogo]

I don't really care about Islamic history or their participation in our founding or not.

I am concerned with preventing some Muslim's future religious ambitions from being realized.

Actually you're obsessed with painting political activity with a "religion" brush. Because politics is complex, while bigotry is simple.

Far easier to bellow "they all look alike to me" and penalize a blanket than take the time to dissect histories and internal dynamics and context.

Ironically by belaboring this association fallacy you're not just impeding rational analysis but dragging out a cockamamie idea that can not and never will fly because of the presence of the First Amendment. And thank God, nongod, Allah, Yhwh, Zeus, Zoroaster, Isis and the whole frickin' gang we still have it.

 

[Mojo2]

I don't really care about Islamic history or their participation in our founding or not.

I am concerned with preventing some Muslim's future religious ambitions from being realized.

Actually you're obsessed with painting political activity with a "religion" brush. Because politics is complex, while bigotry is simple.

Far easier to bellow "they all look alike to me" and penalize a blanket than take the time to dissect histories and internal dynamics and context.

Ironically by belaboring this association fallacy you're not just impeding rational analysis but dragging out a cockamamie idea that can not and never will fly because of the presence of the First Amendment. And thank God, nongod, Allah, Yhwh, Zeus, Zoroaster, Isis and the whole frickin' gang we still have it.

If I were you, NoGo, I'd focus my attentions on coming up with a reliable way of detecting extremist Muslims.

Otherwise, limiting Muslim populations in the USA to NMT 2% by setting quotas on immigration, might be a way to keep everyone but the Jihadi satisfied.

 

[Mojo2]

I have considered the two opposing arguments.

Religious totalitarianism on one side.

Freedom on the other side.

Uhhh...

Make mine freedom!

This fails as a false dilemma fallacy.

At least you're consistent at being a failure.

Hey, what are you Muslim posters so riled up about?

You are already here in the USA.

Why is it so important to you that we NOT limit immigration numbers from Muslim nations?

Why is it so important to YOU that we not follow our own Constitution?

Sell it elsewhere, Fredo.

 

[Pogo]

I have considered the two opposing arguments.

Religious totalitarianism on one side.

Freedom on the other side.

Uhhh...

Make mine freedom!

This fails as a false dilemma fallacy.

At least you're consistent at being a failure.

Hey, what are you Muslim posters so riled up about?

You are already here in the USA.

Why is it so important to you that we NOT limit immigration numbers from Muslim nations?

Why is it so important to YOU that we not follow our own Constitution?

Sell it elsewhere, Fredo.

Wassamatta? Can't answer?

 

[Mojo2]

I have considered the two opposing arguments.

Religious totalitarianism on one side.

Freedom on the other side.

Uhhh...

Make mine freedom!

This fails as a false dilemma fallacy.

At least you're consistent at being a failure.

Hey, what are you Muslim posters so riled up about?

You are already here in the USA.

Why is it so important to you that we NOT limit immigration numbers from Muslim nations?

Why is it so important to YOU that we not follow our own Constitution?

Sell it elsewhere, Fredo.

Wassamatta? Can't answer?

Limiting immigration quotas has no effect on the Constitution.

And the Constitution has no effect on limiting immigration quotas.

 

[Pogo]

I don't really care about Islamic history or their participation in our founding or not.

I am concerned with preventing some Muslim's future religious ambitions from being realized.

Actually you're obsessed with painting political activity with a "religion" brush. Because politics is complex, while bigotry is simple.

Far easier to bellow "they all look alike to me" and penalize a blanket than take the time to dissect histories and internal dynamics and context.

Ironically by belaboring this association fallacy you're not just impeding rational analysis but dragging out a cockamamie idea that can not and never will fly because of the presence of the First Amendment. And thank God, nongod, Allah, Yhwh, Zeus, Zoroaster, Isis and the whole frickin' gang we still have it.

If I were you, NoGo, I'd focus my attentions on coming up with a reliable way of detecting extremist Muslims.

Otherwise, limiting Muslim populations in the USA to NMT 2% by setting quotas on immigration, might be a way to keep everyone but the Jihadi satisfied.

Now how's come you're all up in arms about "extremist Muslims" yet silent on extremist Catholics, extremist Jews, extremist Presbyterians, extremist atheists, extremist Baptists and so on?

Are we having trouble figuring out what they all have in common?

Why is that, Tojo?

 

[Pogo]

I have considered the two opposing arguments.

Religious totalitarianism on one side.

Freedom on the other side.

Uhhh...

Make mine freedom!

This fails as a false dilemma fallacy.

At least you're consistent at being a failure.

Hey, what are you Muslim posters so riled up about?

You are already here in the USA.

Why is it so important to you that we NOT limit immigration numbers from Muslim nations?

Why is it so important to YOU that we not follow our own Constitution?

Sell it elsewhere, Fredo.

Wassamatta? Can't answer?

Limiting immigration quotas has no effect on the Constitution.

What if you reverse the two? Then what?

 

[Mojo2]

I don't really care about Islamic history or their participation in our founding or not.

I am concerned with preventing some Muslim's future religious ambitions from being realized.

Actually you're obsessed with painting political activity with a "religion" brush. Because politics is complex, while bigotry is simple.

Far easier to bellow "they all look alike to me" and penalize a blanket than take the time to dissect histories and internal dynamics and context.

Ironically by belaboring this association fallacy you're not just impeding rational analysis but dragging out a cockamamie idea that can not and never will fly because of the presence of the First Amendment. And thank God, nongod, Allah, Yhwh, Zeus, Zoroaster, Isis and the whole frickin' gang we still have it.

If I were you, NoGo, I'd focus my attentions on coming up with a reliable way of detecting extremist Muslims.

Otherwise, limiting Muslim populations in the USA to NMT 2% by setting quotas on immigration, might be a way to keep everyone but the Jihadi satisfied.

Now how's come you're all up in arms about "extremist Muslims" yet silent on extremist Catholics, extremist Jews, extremist Presbyterians, extremist atheists, extremist Baptists and so on?

Are we having trouble figuring out what they all have in common?

Why is that, Tojo?

Convert to Islam.

Surrender to Islam and pay a Jizya tax.

Die.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The Bill of Rights was not written to apply to Muslims.

It was written only for the Christians who were fleeing persecution from the British Throne.

This is unsurprisingly ignorant.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Convert to Islam.

Surrender to Islam and pay a Jizya tax.

Die.


This fails as a hasty generalization fallacy.


The actions of the few are not representative of the whole.

 

[Pogo]

Convert to Islam.

Surrender to Islam and pay a Jizya tax.

Die.


This fails as a hasty generalization fallacy.


The actions of the few are not representative of the whole.

True but his answer will be the same as it has been thus far, to wit:



He's a coward.

 

[Mojo2]

Convert to Islam.

Surrender to Islam and pay a Jizya tax.

Die.


This fails as a hasty generalization fallacy.


The actions of the few are not representative of the whole.

No matter what we do there will always be an unacceptable islamic extremist element in any large population of Muslims.

And because we can't more precisely identify and excise those who would be problems we know that overall total Muslim populations have reliably resulted in measurable behaviors based on the % of their saturation in our country.

Therefore, in order to keep Muslims in line we need only prevent their population from growing higher than the stages already researched and delineated by Dr. hammond in the article, Five Stages of Islam.