CDZ What do American Muslims want?

[Mudda]

What concerns me is that virtually ALL of the NEW immigrants will be "that conservative" and carrying expectations of justice and authority that do not match their new homelands.

Why do you assume that?

Because they know no other cultural or societal reference than the theocratic hell holes they are fleeing from.
And availing themselves to a legal system that seems to VIOLATE their very beings is scary at the least and UNACCEPTABLE to them at the worst. Not to mention the constant barrage of OFFENSIVE material they see and hear from the moment they set FOOT in this country. ANY accommodation to the ways of the old country will be sought out and used.

Don't you think we're assuming a lot here? We seem to think they are all a mass of uneducated superstitious peasants incapable of moving beyond that. First off - there is a self-selection at work among those who CHOOSE to immigrate. It's no easy undertaking, it's expensive, risky, challanging. You're already looking at a group that shows itself to be flexible and forward thinking to some degree. In addition, the world is not so isolated anymore - media, social media, internet etc brings the world into every living room and puts people in contact with each other in ways never before imagined (not always good) - people are more likely to know what is going on around the world, other political systems, other social systems. I think that can have an effect.

Second, it's quite possible that the older generation will seek what is familiar to their old country. Are you going to flat out deny it? I had to write a research paper once, on immigration at the turn of the century. The largest group at the time was East European Jews, and yes, they lived in insular communities at first, they had their own Yiddish language newspapers, store signs, stores with old country merchandise and foods, and their rabbi's. I doubt they were much different than the Irish Catholics in that regard. But the thing is - they still assimilated. They still adapted to a very different culture - maybe not always the first generation, but the second. In the meantime do we have the right to deny them - or any immigrant group, access to community and religious services that they feel they need as long as the law isn't violated?

Please take your blinders off and/or get your head out of the sand. the 9/11 hijackers all VOLUNTARILY CHOSE TO IMMIGRATE to the US. They were SELF-SELECTED by OSAMA BIN LADEN.

were they all immigrants? they had green cards? (???) that's news to me!!!
However ---there is no denying that lots of our Islamic terrorists-----have been
either citizens or legal green card holding immigrants------the status is no
guarantee (some have been ocnverts)

C'mon, they were welcomed in and were well on their way to citizenship, if that's what they would have wanted. If Trump had been in charge, the door would already have been closed.

 

[irosie91]

Long ago when I was a kid-----in high school----ATTENDANCE at the FOOTBALL PEP RALLY----was actually compulsory. There was a bit of social pressure to
scream SHISH BOOM BAH --along with the rest of the hundreds of kids. I have---in the course of my long life, been to mosques---a few times. Muslims are kinda under social pressure to, at the very LEAST----nod in agreement during "death to...." rants---or "ENEMEEEEES OF ISLAAAAAM...." spew. I had never witnessed a murmur of dissent. (all in the USA ) PEP RALLIES do have an effect on one's
mind---especially the DEVELOPING BRAIN

 

[Coyote]

And in US..what is the fraction of Muslims are conservative enough to seek religious arbritration? When it comes to abuse should not ALL women matter?

What concerns me is that virtually ALL of the NEW immigrants will be "that conservative" and carrying expectations of justice and authority that do not match their new homelands.

Why do you assume that?

Because they know no other cultural or societal reference than the theocratic hell holes they are fleeing from.
And availing themselves to a legal system that seems to VIOLATE their very beings is scary at the least and UNACCEPTABLE to them at the worst. Not to mention the constant barrage of OFFENSIVE material they see and hear from the moment they set FOOT in this country. ANY accommodation to the ways of the old country will be sought out and used.

Don't you think we're assuming a lot here? We seem to think they are all a mass of uneducated superstitious peasants incapable of moving beyond that. First off - there is a self-selection at work among those who CHOOSE to immigrate. It's no easy undertaking, it's expensive, risky, challanging. You're already looking at a group that shows itself to be flexible and forward thinking to some degree. In addition, the world is not so isolated anymore - media, social media, internet etc brings the world into every living room and puts people in contact with each other in ways never before imagined (not always good) - people are more likely to know what is going on around the world, other political systems, other social systems. I think that can have an effect.

Second, it's quite possible that the older generation will seek what is familiar to their old country. Are you going to flat out deny it? I had to write a research paper once, on immigration at the turn of the century. The largest group at the time was East European Jews, and yes, they lived in insular communities at first, they had their own Yiddish language newspapers, store signs, stores with old country merchandise and foods, and their rabbi's. I doubt they were much different than the Irish Catholics in that regard. But the thing is - they still assimilated. They still adapted to a very different culture - maybe not always the first generation, but the second. In the meantime do we have the right to deny them - or any immigrant group, access to community and religious services that they feel they need as long as the law isn't violated?

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. the 9/11 hijackers all VOLUNTARILY CHOSE TO IMMIGRATE to the US. They were SELF-SELECTED by OSAMA BIN LADEN.

Actually, none of the hijackers were immigrants, one was here on a student visa, the rest on 6 month tourist visas or business visas.

 

[Coyote]

...

Why do you assume that?

Because they know no other cultural or societal reference than the theocratic hell holes they are fleeing from.
And availing themselves to a legal system that seems to VIOLATE their very beings is scary at the least and UNACCEPTABLE to them at the worst. Not to mention the constant barrage of OFFENSIVE material they see and hear from the moment they set FOOT in this country. ANY accommodation to the ways of the old country will be sought out and used.

Don't you think we're assuming a lot here? We seem to think they are all a mass of uneducated superstitious peasants incapable of moving beyond that. First off - there is a self-selection at work among those who CHOOSE to immigrate. It's no easy undertaking, it's expensive, risky, challanging. You're already looking at a group that shows itself to be flexible and forward thinking to some degree. In addition, the world is not so isolated anymore - media, social media, internet etc brings the world into every living room and puts people in contact with each other in ways never before imagined (not always good) - people are more likely to know what is going on around the world, other political systems, other social systems. I think that can have an effect.

Second, it's quite possible that the older generation will seek what is familiar to their old country. Are you going to flat out deny it? I had to write a research paper once, on immigration at the turn of the century. The largest group at the time was East European Jews, and yes, they lived in insular communities at first, they had their own Yiddish language newspapers, store signs, stores with old country merchandise and foods, and their rabbi's. I doubt they were much different than the Irish Catholics in that regard. But the thing is - they still assimilated. They still adapted to a very different culture - maybe not always the first generation, but the second. In the meantime do we have the right to deny them - or any immigrant group, access to community and religious services that they feel they need as long as the law isn't violated?

Please take your blinders off and/or get your head out of the sand. the 9/11 hijackers all VOLUNTARILY CHOSE TO IMMIGRATE to the US. They were SELF-SELECTED by OSAMA BIN LADEN.

were they all immigrants? they had green cards? (???) that's news to me!!!
However ---there is no denying that lots of our Islamic terrorists-----have been
either citizens or legal green card holding immigrants------the status is no
guarantee (some have been ocnverts)

C'mon, they were welcomed in and were well on their way to citizenship, if that's what they would have wanted. If Trump had been in charge, the door would already have been closed.

They were not "well on their way to citizenship" - they hadn't even applied for citizenship or showed any indication they wanted it. Try to check your facts first.

 

[irosie91]

...

Because they know no other cultural or societal reference than the theocratic hell holes they are fleeing from.
And availing themselves to a legal system that seems to VIOLATE their very beings is scary at the least and UNACCEPTABLE to them at the worst. Not to mention the constant barrage of OFFENSIVE material they see and hear from the moment they set FOOT in this country. ANY accommodation to the ways of the old country will be sought out and used.

Don't you think we're assuming a lot here? We seem to think they are all a mass of uneducated superstitious peasants incapable of moving beyond that. First off - there is a self-selection at work among those who CHOOSE to immigrate. It's no easy undertaking, it's expensive, risky, challanging. You're already looking at a group that shows itself to be flexible and forward thinking to some degree. In addition, the world is not so isolated anymore - media, social media, internet etc brings the world into every living room and puts people in contact with each other in ways never before imagined (not always good) - people are more likely to know what is going on around the world, other political systems, other social systems. I think that can have an effect.

Second, it's quite possible that the older generation will seek what is familiar to their old country. Are you going to flat out deny it? I had to write a research paper once, on immigration at the turn of the century. The largest group at the time was East European Jews, and yes, they lived in insular communities at first, they had their own Yiddish language newspapers, store signs, stores with old country merchandise and foods, and their rabbi's. I doubt they were much different than the Irish Catholics in that regard. But the thing is - they still assimilated. They still adapted to a very different culture - maybe not always the first generation, but the second. In the meantime do we have the right to deny them - or any immigrant group, access to community and religious services that they feel they need as long as the law isn't violated?

Please take your blinders off and/or get your head out of the sand. the 9/11 hijackers all VOLUNTARILY CHOSE TO IMMIGRATE to the US. They were SELF-SELECTED by OSAMA BIN LADEN.

were they all immigrants? they had green cards? (???) that's news to me!!!
However ---there is no denying that lots of our Islamic terrorists-----have been
either citizens or legal green card holding immigrants------the status is no
guarantee (some have been ocnverts)

C'mon, they were welcomed in and were well on their way to citizenship, if that's what they would have wanted. If Trump had been in charge, the door would already have been closed.

They were not "well on their way to citizenship" - they hadn't even applied for citizenship or showed any indication they wanted it. Try to check your facts first.

were they here on visas?

 

[Coyote]

...

Don't you think we're assuming a lot here? We seem to think they are all a mass of uneducated superstitious peasants incapable of moving beyond that. First off - there is a self-selection at work among those who CHOOSE to immigrate. It's no easy undertaking, it's expensive, risky, challanging. You're already looking at a group that shows itself to be flexible and forward thinking to some degree. In addition, the world is not so isolated anymore - media, social media, internet etc brings the world into every living room and puts people in contact with each other in ways never before imagined (not always good) - people are more likely to know what is going on around the world, other political systems, other social systems. I think that can have an effect.

Second, it's quite possible that the older generation will seek what is familiar to their old country. Are you going to flat out deny it? I had to write a research paper once, on immigration at the turn of the century. The largest group at the time was East European Jews, and yes, they lived in insular communities at first, they had their own Yiddish language newspapers, store signs, stores with old country merchandise and foods, and their rabbi's. I doubt they were much different than the Irish Catholics in that regard. But the thing is - they still assimilated. They still adapted to a very different culture - maybe not always the first generation, but the second. In the meantime do we have the right to deny them - or any immigrant group, access to community and religious services that they feel they need as long as the law isn't violated?

Please take your blinders off and/or get your head out of the sand. the 9/11 hijackers all VOLUNTARILY CHOSE TO IMMIGRATE to the US. They were SELF-SELECTED by OSAMA BIN LADEN.

were they all immigrants? they had green cards? (???) that's news to me!!!
However ---there is no denying that lots of our Islamic terrorists-----have been
either citizens or legal green card holding immigrants------the status is no
guarantee (some have been ocnverts)

C'mon, they were welcomed in and were well on their way to citizenship, if that's what they would have wanted. If Trump had been in charge, the door would already have been closed.

They were not "well on their way to citizenship" - they hadn't even applied for citizenship or showed any indication they wanted it. Try to check your facts first.

were they here on visas?

Business visas, tourist visas, one student visa.

 

[irosie91]

...

Please take your blinders off and/or get your head out of the sand. the 9/11 hijackers all VOLUNTARILY CHOSE TO IMMIGRATE to the US. They were SELF-SELECTED by OSAMA BIN LADEN.

were they all immigrants? they had green cards? (???) that's news to me!!!
However ---there is no denying that lots of our Islamic terrorists-----have been
either citizens or legal green card holding immigrants------the status is no
guarantee (some have been ocnverts)

C'mon, they were welcomed in and were well on their way to citizenship, if that's what they would have wanted. If Trump had been in charge, the door would already have been closed.

They were not "well on their way to citizenship" - they hadn't even applied for citizenship or showed any indication they wanted it. Try to check your facts first.

were they here on visas?

Business visas, tourist visas, one student visa.

OH GOOD----the ultimate and excellent screening-----now I feel better

 

[Arianrhod]

...

were they all immigrants? they had green cards? (???) that's news to me!!!
However ---there is no denying that lots of our Islamic terrorists-----have been
either citizens or legal green card holding immigrants------the status is no
guarantee (some have been ocnverts)

C'mon, they were welcomed in and were well on their way to citizenship, if that's what they would have wanted. If Trump had been in charge, the door would already have been closed.

They were not "well on their way to citizenship" - they hadn't even applied for citizenship or showed any indication they wanted it. Try to check your facts first.

were they here on visas?

Business visas, tourist visas, one student visa.

OH GOOD----the ultimate and excellent screening-----now I feel better

They weren't then. They've been revised since.

Of course "wants to take flying lessons but doesn't want to learn how to land" should have been a tipoff.

Not to mention the multiple warnings from multiple overseas intelligence agencies that got lost in internecine squabbles between the FBI, CIA, etc.

 

[flacaltenn]

Because they know no other cultural or societal reference than the theocratic hell holes they are fleeing from.

That makes perfect sense because, of course, those folks have no radio, television or Internet access, books and papers we read in the U.S are not ever translated into a language they understand, they've never known or met anyone who's emigrated from their home country to a place like Western Europe or the U.S. Moreover, those who do want to immigrate to the U.S. only have stated a preference for the U.S. as their destination because they blindfolded threw darts at a wall map, and the U.S. is what their dart hit. Lastly, of course, they lack the intellectual acumen to conceive that there may be a modality of social existence that differs from theirs. In other words, they are the modern day equivalent of the subjects in Plato's cave who saw only shadows on a wall from the day they were born until the day they decided they want to emigrate.

Give me a break!

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I'm being completely serious because this now is really no laughing matter or one that deserves insults in any way. I'm not trying to be rude, condescending, castigatory, excoriative, pejorative, or anything resembling those things. I'm absolutely and truly incredulous that anyone can conjure the nature of the premises, inferences and conclusions that you have throughout this discussion with me and Coyote.

They are dying sometimes 700 a day just trying to leave these hellholes. I don't think they are reading travel reviews on Expedia or Trip Advisor. OR being picky about where they end up. Assuming they make it past being a Mediterranean menu item for the sea life.

And THEIR sources of news if they DON'T speak English are EXTREMELY limited. I'm sure you've READ about the Marine Corps --- think there might still be immense ADJUSTMENTS in your routine and nature to be made when you're in it?? Then YOU are far better prepared for the life adjustment.

From reading your since deleted comments, I don't feel safe continuing this discussion in this thread. So I'm out... I can only stand so much micro-aggression before I return to my safe space. .

 

[flacaltenn]

I think something else needs to be examined here. There is this implied fear that we are going to be beset by a HORDE of Muslim Immigrants creating closed immigrant enclaves as if somehow, the assimlation has always occured will suddenly fail.

I think this horde is based on Obama's statement of upping the number of refugees we will take to 10,000. 10,000 is nothing. It's also from a group that is vetted for several years before ever setting foot on US soil.

In terms of numbers....look at things proportionately instead of emotionally.

10,000 - the definition of a "small town" is a population of under 20,000. So 10,000 refugees, who will be spread among communities throughout the US. Refugees are given a lot of assistance and support in the resettlement process.

Here is a list of countries from where we have gotten refugees over the past couple of of years:

For 2015 - the entire intake of refugees combined represents something like 0.02% of the US population.

That is not a horde.

If it's 0.02% ( i dont see where ya got that) -- than that about 88,000.. It's not insignificant for just one year. Continue that rate for 6 or 8 years and you have maybe a "mini-horde" ...

 

[flacaltenn]

What concerns me is that virtually ALL of the NEW immigrants will be "that conservative" and carrying expectations of justice and authority that do not match their new homelands.

Why do you assume that?

Because they know no other cultural or societal reference than the theocratic hell holes they are fleeing from.
And availing themselves to a legal system that seems to VIOLATE their very beings is scary at the least and UNACCEPTABLE to them at the worst. Not to mention the constant barrage of OFFENSIVE material they see and hear from the moment they set FOOT in this country. ANY accommodation to the ways of the old country will be sought out and used.

Don't you think we're assuming a lot here? We seem to think they are all a mass of uneducated superstitious peasants incapable of moving beyond that. First off - there is a self-selection at work among those who CHOOSE to immigrate. It's no easy undertaking, it's expensive, risky, challanging. You're already looking at a group that shows itself to be flexible and forward thinking to some degree. In addition, the world is not so isolated anymore - media, social media, internet etc brings the world into every living room and puts people in contact with each other in ways never before imagined (not always good) - people are more likely to know what is going on around the world, other political systems, other social systems. I think that can have an effect.

Second, it's quite possible that the older generation will seek what is familiar to their old country. Are you going to flat out deny it? I had to write a research paper once, on immigration at the turn of the century. The largest group at the time was East European Jews, and yes, they lived in insular communities at first, they had their own Yiddish language newspapers, store signs, stores with old country merchandise and foods, and their rabbi's. I doubt they were much different than the Irish Catholics in that regard. But the thing is - they still assimilated. They still adapted to a very different culture - maybe not always the first generation, but the second. In the meantime do we have the right to deny them - or any immigrant group, access to community and religious services that they feel they need as long as the law isn't violated?

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. the 9/11 hijackers all VOLUNTARILY CHOSE TO IMMIGRATE to the US. They were SELF-SELECTED by OSAMA BIN LADEN.

Actually, none of the hijackers were immigrants, one was here on a student visa, the rest on 6 month tourist visas or business visas.

Like any government convenience or statistic --- these student, tourist, visas are SAFER than the TPS visas that are granted to a LOT of those 88,000 YEARLY immigrants we are discussing. Student, tourist Visas are easily revokable and constantly reviewable. The "temp. protect. Status" VISAs that are issued to those LARGE Iraq, Somali, etc fractions are an accommodation that makes it EXTREMELY difficult to revoke.

 

[320 Years of History]

From reading your since deleted comments, I don't feel safe continuing this discussion in this thread. So I'm out...I can only stand so much micro-aggression before I return to my safe space.

Red:
Yes...about that...I was very careful to diplomatically word those paragraphs so they concerned the ideas you have been expressing and not you. I did that expressly so they could not be shown to be illustrative of personal affrontery while clearly expressing the nature and extent to which the thematic and literal ontology of your lines of argument genuinely mortify me.

That it is now manifest that sternly unequivocal upbraids of thoughts presented by a moderator, namely you, is subject to summary deletion, though leaving me dyspeptic, assures too that I shall henceforth not willfully address your remarks. On that you can rely and therein find succor.

 

[Coyote]

I think something else needs to be examined here. There is this implied fear that we are going to be beset by a HORDE of Muslim Immigrants creating closed immigrant enclaves as if somehow, the assimlation has always occured will suddenly fail.

I think this horde is based on Obama's statement of upping the number of refugees we will take to 10,000. 10,000 is nothing. It's also from a group that is vetted for several years before ever setting foot on US soil.

In terms of numbers....look at things proportionately instead of emotionally.

10,000 - the definition of a "small town" is a population of under 20,000. So 10,000 refugees, who will be spread among communities throughout the US. Refugees are given a lot of assistance and support in the resettlement process.

Here is a list of countries from where we have gotten refugees over the past couple of of years:

For 2015 - the entire intake of refugees combined represents something like 0.02% of the US population.

That is not a horde.

If it's 0.02% ( i dont see where ya got that) -- than that about 88,000.. It's not insignificant for just one year. Continue that rate for 6 or 8 years and you have maybe a "mini-horde" ...

I took the total number of ALL refugees for 2015, 69,933...and figured the percentage of the US population approx 320 million....

 

[Coyote]

Why do you assume that?

Because they know no other cultural or societal reference than the theocratic hell holes they are fleeing from.
And availing themselves to a legal system that seems to VIOLATE their very beings is scary at the least and UNACCEPTABLE to them at the worst. Not to mention the constant barrage of OFFENSIVE material they see and hear from the moment they set FOOT in this country. ANY accommodation to the ways of the old country will be sought out and used.

Don't you think we're assuming a lot here? We seem to think they are all a mass of uneducated superstitious peasants incapable of moving beyond that. First off - there is a self-selection at work among those who CHOOSE to immigrate. It's no easy undertaking, it's expensive, risky, challanging. You're already looking at a group that shows itself to be flexible and forward thinking to some degree. In addition, the world is not so isolated anymore - media, social media, internet etc brings the world into every living room and puts people in contact with each other in ways never before imagined (not always good) - people are more likely to know what is going on around the world, other political systems, other social systems. I think that can have an effect.

Second, it's quite possible that the older generation will seek what is familiar to their old country. Are you going to flat out deny it? I had to write a research paper once, on immigration at the turn of the century. The largest group at the time was East European Jews, and yes, they lived in insular communities at first, they had their own Yiddish language newspapers, store signs, stores with old country merchandise and foods, and their rabbi's. I doubt they were much different than the Irish Catholics in that regard. But the thing is - they still assimilated. They still adapted to a very different culture - maybe not always the first generation, but the second. In the meantime do we have the right to deny them - or any immigrant group, access to community and religious services that they feel they need as long as the law isn't violated?

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. the 9/11 hijackers all VOLUNTARILY CHOSE TO IMMIGRATE to the US. They were SELF-SELECTED by OSAMA BIN LADEN.

Actually, none of the hijackers were immigrants, one was here on a student visa, the rest on 6 month tourist visas or business visas.

Like any government convenience or statistic --- these student, tourist, visas are SAFER than the TPS visas that are granted to a LOT of those 88,000 YEARLY immigrants we are discussing. Student, tourist Visas are easily revokable and constantly reviewable. The "temp. protect. Status" VISAs that are issued to those LARGE Iraq, Somali, etc fractions are an accommodation that makes it EXTREMELY difficult to revoke.

Actually I thought that those particular VISA's were a week link in security (as opposed to refugee screening) - and they are also no infrequently overstayed. I'm not familiar with "status visas". The number I was talking about though was refugees, not immigrants since it was refugees that Obama was talking about increasing.

 

[Coyote]

From reading your since deleted comments, I don't feel safe continuing this discussion in this thread. So I'm out...I can only stand so much micro-aggression before I return to my safe space.

Red:
Yes...about that...I was very careful to diplomatically word those paragraphs so they concerned the ideas you have been expressing and not you. I did that expressly so they could not be shown to be illustrative of personal affrontery while clearly expressing the nature and extent to which the thematic and literal ontology of your lines of argument genuinely mortify me.

That it is now manifest that sternly unequivocal upbraids of thoughts presented by a moderator, namely you, is subject to summary deletion, though leaving me dyspeptic, assures too that I shall henceforth not willfully address your remarks. On that you can rely and therein find succor.

I was the moderator that edited that post 320, basically - in the CDZ, one of the rules is no putting down other posters - I read those remarks as doing so......but you're post is priceless

 

[320 Years of History]

From reading your since deleted comments, I don't feel safe continuing this discussion in this thread. So I'm out...I can only stand so much micro-aggression before I return to my safe space.

Red:
Yes...about that...I was very careful to diplomatically word those paragraphs so they concerned the ideas you have been expressing and not you. I did that expressly so they could not be shown to be illustrative of personal affrontery while clearly expressing the nature and extent to which the thematic and literal ontology of your lines of argument genuinely mortify me.

That it is now manifest that sternly unequivocal upbraids of thoughts presented by a moderator, namely you, is subject to summary deletion, though leaving me dyspeptic, assures too that I shall henceforth not willfully address your remarks. On that you can rely and therein find succor.

I was the moderator that edited that post 320, basically - in the CDZ, one of the rules is no putting down other posters - I read those remarks as doing so......but you're post is priceless

Blue:
Thank you for letting me know, Coyote.

flacaltenn, please accept my sincere apology for having incorrectly adjudged you to have been the moderator who abridged my earlier post. I was clearly mistaken and unjustifiably rash in doing so. I'm sorry.

Green:
TY.

Purple:
I nonetheless maintain that my remarks were excoriations of thoughts, not of the person who shared the thoughts. I see the two as being distinct and dissimilar. Clearly we disagree in that regard. That is what it is.

Again, TY for the "green" comment, and most especially for correcting my mistaken assumption regarding flacaltenn. There's no question that was an appropriate thing to do, notwithstanding our dissensus re: deriding individuals vs. doing so re: thoughts folks express.

 

[alpine]

Egyptian and Turkish presidential elections results.

I think we will see similar results for Pakistani elections, once American Pakistani able to vote.
Last time they tried, their system didnt work, as far as I know.

I'm a bit confused - how does that translate into support from American Muslims?

American muslims cast their votes at their consulates in the US.
They are counted and reported separate in the general election results, like a state result.
So we can see exactly how many American muslims casting their votes for the islamists.

US has a much lower % compared to EU countries, but still at around 20%.

Are they dual citizens? Expats?

Not sure if this is meaningful because the 20% would apply only to Turkish citizens in America right? And what percentage of the American Muslim community is of Turkish descent and a Turkish citizen? I think this is very misleading.

Big majority would be dual citizens.

Similar results for Egyptians and Turkish, Pakistani on the way, I think 2018 we shall see those results.

I think Egypt and Turkey are 2 very representative examples. Turkey has 95% literacy rate, and have been the most secular oriented among all middle east countries, so the % you find there, should represent the lower bar. Egypt has 75% literacy rate, had long lasting secular dictatorship. Just like how it was in others.

Population wise, these are again comparable to any other middle east/north african muslim countries. The % of muslims originated from Turkey or Egypt you will find in the US, will be pretty much same for any other mid east/north african country. I should make Pakistan an exception, because of her big population compared to others.

But as I said, I dont expect Pakistan to stay as an exception in their upcoming elections, when we will be able to see the breakdown.

And honestly, 20% islamist rate is a pretty low rate among muslims. Because when you look at those countries, islamists crush the seculars by huge margins, meaning a crushing majority are in fact supporting islamists.

Much less of that huge % made their way to US, but many more made their way to the EU, which also makes sense if you think about it...

The problem I'm seeing with this is I think you are stretching your thesis very very thin. You are taking a subpopulation - basically, dual citizens or expats residing in the US, and of that very small contingent - 20% voted for Islamist parties in Turkey. You're taking a tiny number that might not even be relevant because they might not even be American citizens and using that to indicate a similar trend among American Muslims? The politics of other countries are bound by those countries culture, political structure, freedoms and local issues. This is statistically nuts imo. The Pew Poll of American Muslims doesn't indicate anything like that among American Muslims in general among the American Muslim population.

They either are American citizens, or green card holders, which are essentially the same thing.
It is very very, but very very tough to stay in this country otherwise, so the number is negligible...


This election has a sample size of 100.000 with a 30% response rate, meaning a sample of 30.000


And this is the research I think you are refering to;

The Pew Research Center conducted more than 55,000 interviews to obtain a national sample of 1,050 Muslims living in the United States.
Muslim Americans: Middle Class and Mostly Mainstream



And their numbers are pretty close to my numbers;

And by nearly two-to-one (63%-32%) Muslim Americans do not see a conflict between being a devout Muslim and living in a modern society.

30% of American muslims see a conflict between being a devout muslim, and living in a modern society... I think this is a pretty open and clear remark here...

My number was 20% for Turkish, and added that this would be the bottom bar because Turkey had stronger secular roots..
Seems like other nationalities pushed this number up, to 30%, as predicted...

But still, 60-30, this is pretty good majority...
Good for secular American muslims...

 

[Mudda]

Because they know no other cultural or societal reference than the theocratic hell holes they are fleeing from.
And availing themselves to a legal system that seems to VIOLATE their very beings is scary at the least and UNACCEPTABLE to them at the worst. Not to mention the constant barrage of OFFENSIVE material they see and hear from the moment they set FOOT in this country. ANY accommodation to the ways of the old country will be sought out and used.

Don't you think we're assuming a lot here? We seem to think they are all a mass of uneducated superstitious peasants incapable of moving beyond that. First off - there is a self-selection at work among those who CHOOSE to immigrate. It's no easy undertaking, it's expensive, risky, challanging. You're already looking at a group that shows itself to be flexible and forward thinking to some degree. In addition, the world is not so isolated anymore - media, social media, internet etc brings the world into every living room and puts people in contact with each other in ways never before imagined (not always good) - people are more likely to know what is going on around the world, other political systems, other social systems. I think that can have an effect.

Second, it's quite possible that the older generation will seek what is familiar to their old country. Are you going to flat out deny it? I had to write a research paper once, on immigration at the turn of the century. The largest group at the time was East European Jews, and yes, they lived in insular communities at first, they had their own Yiddish language newspapers, store signs, stores with old country merchandise and foods, and their rabbi's. I doubt they were much different than the Irish Catholics in that regard. But the thing is - they still assimilated. They still adapted to a very different culture - maybe not always the first generation, but the second. In the meantime do we have the right to deny them - or any immigrant group, access to community and religious services that they feel they need as long as the law isn't violated?

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. the 9/11 hijackers all VOLUNTARILY CHOSE TO IMMIGRATE to the US. They were SELF-SELECTED by OSAMA BIN LADEN.

Actually, none of the hijackers were immigrants, one was here on a student visa, the rest on 6 month tourist visas or business visas.

Like any government convenience or statistic --- these student, tourist, visas are SAFER than the TPS visas that are granted to a LOT of those 88,000 YEARLY immigrants we are discussing. Student, tourist Visas are easily revokable and constantly reviewable. The "temp. protect. Status" VISAs that are issued to those LARGE Iraq, Somali, etc fractions are an accommodation that makes it EXTREMELY difficult to revoke.

Actually I thought that those particular VISA's were a week link in security (as opposed to refugee screening) - and they are also no infrequently overstayed. I'm not familiar with "status visas". The number I was talking about though was refugees, not immigrants since it was refugees that Obama was talking about increasing.

I must have missed all of the US and other Western Muslim marches against Al-Qaeda after 9/11. So as to what do Muslims want? In this case, not to be seen as against the 9/11 attacks.

 

[Indofred]

What do American Muslims want?

I'm pretty sure the majority just want to live in peace, work and look after their families.

 

[Syriusly]

[Q
ONE religion is under scrutiny because we are currently accelerating the immigration of folks who come from a culture of intolerance, religious domination of govt authority, and reliance on that authority to replace secular law. .

Are we?

I have heard discussions of increasing the number of refugees from the Middle East- but refugees are rather a drop in the bucket in our overall immigration numbers.

So where is this 'accelerating the immigration'?

Total American Muslim population share projected to grow

That is what you call 'accelerated immigration'? LOL. No wonder you are so confused.

You confuse 'immigration' with population growth.

Population growth is immigration plus the birth rate of residents and citizens. That is not proof of 'accelerated immigration'.

Secondly- you are terrified that by 2050- Muslims might represent 2.1% of the entire population of the United States? Really?