It is very difficult to estimate the precise number of Muslims currently living in the United States. Muslims tend to put the number somewhat higher than non-Muslim scholars and demographers; the estimated figures range widely - from around two million in one study to as many as seven million. There are several reasons for the varying estimates. First, because the U.S. Constitution mandates a separation of church and state that is reflected in American law, U.S. Census Bureau survey forms do not ask recipients about their religion. Neither does the U.S. Immigration Service collect information on the religion of immigrants.
This could be a problem as recent events from Britain demonstrate, specifically UK citizens from Pakistan. The NYT reports:
U.S. Seeks Closing of Visa Loophole for Britons
By JANE PERLEZ
Published: May 2, 2007
LONDON, May 1 — Omar Khyam, the ringleader of the thwarted London bomb plot who was sentenced to life imprisonment on Monday, showed the potential for disaffected young men to be lured as terrorists, a threat that British officials said they would have to contend with for a generation.
But the 25-year-old Mr. Khyam, a Briton of Pakistani descent, also personifies a larger and more immediate concern: as a British citizen, he could have entered the United States without a visa, like many of an estimated 800,000 other Britons of Pakistani origin.
American officials, citing the number of terror plots in Britain involving Britons with ties to Pakistan, expressed concern over the visa loophole. In recent months, the homeland security secretary, Michael Chertoff, has opened talks with the government here on how to curb the access of British citizens of Pakistani origin to the United States.
American officials, citing the number of terror plots in Britain involving Britons with ties to Pakistan, expressed concern over the visa loophole. In recent months, the homeland security secretary, Michael Chertoff, has opened talks with the government here on how to curb the access of British citizens of Pakistani origin to the United States.
At the moment, the British are resistant, fearing that restrictions on the group of Britons would incur a backlash from a population that has always sided with the Labor Party. The Americans say they are hesitant to push too hard and embarrass their staunch ally in the Iraq war, Prime Minister Tony Blair, as he prepares to step down from office.
Among the options that have been put on the table, according to British officials, was the most onerous option to Britain, that of canceling the entire visa waiver program that allows all Britons entry to the United States without a visa. Another option, politically fraught as it is, would be to single out Britons of Pakistani origin, requiring them to make visa applications for the United States.
Rather than impose any visa restrictions, the British government has told Washington it would prefer if the Americans simply deported Britons who failed screening once they arrived at an airport in the United States, British officials said. The British also screen at their end, and share intelligence with the Americans.
But Washington feels strongly, Mr. Chertoff has said, that it has the right to build controls against terrorists from Britain who do not have a prior criminal record — precisely the kind of man Mr. Khyam was until he was arrested in early 2004 and put on trial for plotting to blow up targets like a major London nightclub and a popular suburban shopping mall.
For its part, the British government looks with dismay at the frequency with which Britons travel to their ancestral land of Pakistan — an estimated 400,000 trips a year — where a small minority, like Mr. Khyam, link up with extremist groups and acquire training in weapons and explosives.
Foreign office officials have said they have discussed measures with the Pakistani Embassy in London, which grants Pakistani passports to Britons of Pakistani descent, to consider tightening the rules for Pakistani travel documents.
In Washington, an expert on terrorism and Pakistan, Bruce Riedel, who served on the National Security Council under President Clinton and in the early Bush administration, and who recently retired after 30 years in the Central Intelligence Agency, said that Mr. Khyam was perfect material for Al Qaeda.
“He is the classic U.K.-Pakistani connection that Al Qaeda has focused on since 9/11,” said Mr. Riedel, who is now a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution in Washington. “His U.K. passport gives him international mobility. His training at a camp run for Kashmiris by Pakistan’s Inter- (rest of article)
Footnote: The most recent wave of Muslim immigration to the US has come after 1965, the year President Lyndon Johnson sponsored an immigration bill that repealed the longstanding system of quotas by national origin. Under the new system, preferences went to relatives of U.S. residents and those with special occupational skills needed in the United States. The new law was a signal act in American history, making it possible for the first time since the early part of the 20th century for someone to enter the country regardless of his or her national origin. After 1965, immigration from Western Europe began to decline significantly, with a corresponding growth in the numbers of persons arriving from the Middle East and Asia. In this era more than half of the immigrants to America from these regions have been Muslim.
Allen's accurate portrayal of conversations at the Bar:
ReplyDelete...a sick dude.
---
allen said...
doug,
Over many, many, many hours, on another blog, have I discussed with you and others the issues you raise and the innumerable faults of the Bush administration. It was often entertaining and occasionally enlightening. However, when you and your friends questioned the integrity of the United States Marine Corps and the Navy of the United States, essentially claiming that men and women known to me would send the Haditha Marines to the gallows and/or prison for the sake of political expediency; agreed amongst yourselves that American troops were “mercenaries”; and remained impervious to any countervailing reason; you lost me.
To the extent that your neuroses will help me make the case for pursuing a militant course against Islam, I will engage you. This is not one of those moments. The questions you hurl about with hysterical abandon are unworthy of the consideration of honorable men because you pose them dishonorably. And yes, Doug, that comes from me sitting astride my high horse, which if only 2mm high would still tower above you and your ilk.
Semper Fidelis! Death before Dishonor! Bite Me!
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSuch a pleasant Chap!
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI do not recall American troops being called mercenaries. I did a post on contractors and referred to the correct use of the word mercenaries, which is the proper term used to describe the Swiss Guards at the Vatican.
ReplyDeleteSwiss Guards are Swiss mercenary soldiers who have served as bodyguards, ceremonial guards and palace guards at foreign European courts from the late 15th century until the present day (in the form of the Papal Swiss Guard). They have generally had a high reputation for discipline and loyalty to their employers. Some of these units have also served as fighting troops in the field. There were also regular Swiss mercenary regiments serving as line troops in various armies, notably those of France, Spain and Naples until the 19th century who were not household or guard units.
Examine this definition:A mercenary, is a person who takes part in an armed conflict and "is motivated to take part in the hostilities essentially by the desire for private gain and, in fact, is promised, by or on behalf of a Party to the conflict, material compensation substantially in excess of that promised or paid to combatants of similar ranks and functions in the armed forces of that Party".[1][2] When the term "mercenary" is used to refer to a soldier of a national, regular army, it is usually considered to have pejorative connotations.
That clearly applies to private contractors. Allen was very vocal in many discussions about inapropriate behavior of US military officers in several instances.
Discussions here that have been helpful in forming opinions that may vary from the doctrinaire. They are not always neat and tidy. This is not the blog for demi-god worship or cult of the host. It is what it is.
Hard truths often trump thin skins.
-Meum cerebrum nocet
Air Force Might Cut Pay for Surge
ReplyDeleteMilitary.com | By Christian Lowe | April 25, 2007
The Air Force’s top officer said Wednesday that if nearly $1 billion in personnel funds taken from the service to pay for combat in Iraq and Afghanistan isn’t restored by the end of the summer, Airmen and civilian employees might not get their pay.
Due to a congressional delay in approving a wartime supplemental funding bill this year, the Pentagon pulled about $880 million from the Air Force’s personnel accounts to make up for a shortfall it warned lawmakers would come in mid-April.
My response to Allen @ Belmont
ReplyDeleteDeuce,
ReplyDeleteMy position was the Marines were being mistreated in a politically motivated witch hunt.
Allen took offense, and accused me of dishonoring the Marines!
Check out a few of my links there, and it becomes apparent that the Marines were mistreated in a politically motivated witch hunt, with Murtha, NCIS, and Commandant Hagee at the center of the mess.
Good old John Murtha!
Doug, I follow the tilting that goes on here. You and DR were the first two I engaged with at the BC. I have not read anything that you have written that I felt was offensive to the truth or honor of the men in the ranks. The military is not immune from politics and public opinion. Far from it, political correctness is a curse on the efficiency of the Navy and Army in particular.
ReplyDeleteI have been called a flack for DR. That amuses me because I have always done things my own way. That has not always been the smart way either! DR often takes a position that is meant to provoke a discussion. This is the blogosphere and at least on this site, open and free thinking and discussion is exactly that, open and free.
I guess we will not hear Allen's side since he has exiled himself from the EB.
ReplyDeleteYeah, DR loves to cite those Alexa Stats!
ReplyDeletePoor Richard, indeed!
Stay tuned at the Belmont link above, Allen is spinning out.
ReplyDeleteMy last post there, so far:
ReplyDelete---
LtCol Chessani
Chessani is described by fellow officers as a focused, hands-on commander, a strict follower of the Law of War, and sympathetic to the plight of innocent Iraqi civilians.
He is a committed Christian with a wife and five children.
He has honorably served his nation for over nineteen years with tours of duty that included Panama, the first Persian Gulf War, and three combat tours in Iraq.
---
But HE was accused of a coverup!
...and Bargewell has determined there was NO Coverup.
Allen says the Thomas More Center is spinning agitprop for him!
ReplyDeleteI don't think he needs it!
I suggest a debate. I will put up a post. You and Allen select a time.
ReplyDeleteI'll do it right now!
ReplyDeleteallen took offenst to the reality of enlistment and retention bonuses paid to Sailors, Airman, Soldiers and Marines.
ReplyDeleteCaptains could soon get $20K retention bonus
By Jim Tice - Staff writer
Posted : Monday Apr 23, 2007 16:51:41 EDT
The Army has been given the green light to offer retention bonuses of $20,000 to selected captains in return for a three-year service commitment.
The special incentive is believed to be the first of its kind ever offered commissioned officers.
Implementing guidance such as eligibility rules and application procedures had not been finalized by press time.
However, sources indicated earlier that senior leaders want to launch the program May 1.
When approved, implementation details will be announced by the officer directorate of Human Resources Command in a worldwide message.
Called a Critical Skills Retention Bonus, the incentive is similar to the bonuses available to senior NCOs and warrant officers in high-priority specialties and career fields. Those bonuses range from $40,000 to $150,000, depending on MOS and length of service extension.
Now to admit that Soldiers, Sailors, Airman and Marines might be motivated by cash incentives offended the sensabilities our socialist friend.
He is so easily offended.
Find Allen. The post is up.
ReplyDeleteLuckily, *I* have never been motivated by cash incentives.
ReplyDeleteWhat could anyone, inside, or outside the Military,
be THINKING when they supplicate themselves so?
Guy is not praying, just trying to find the right lug wrench to change a tire.
ReplyDelete