However, one might wonder why some people think we should seek ever more diversity and further Balkanization of the nation both culturally and religiously. This is even more puzzling when the Muslim is trying to immigrate to the US, and to bring his faith with him, together with the Islamic penchant for dominance sooner or later, while at the same time we are fighting and killing their kin, and they us, in dusty places.

Perhaps JB, who has lived with them (most likely under special mandate from the ruling party to protect the foreigner, the unbeliever, that is helping to build their nation. I recall that the majority of labor in SA is done by foreigners.), can tell us how to identify the bad guys that want to immigrate or have immigrated, as opposed to the good guys he knows.

Then too, perhaps, JB, you can explain the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and why it is that three major wars have begun with invasion of Israel by Muslim nations, and not the reverse. And, why it is that suicide bombers have targeted Israeli civilians for over 50 years. Finally, if this carnage is characteristically embedded in the Muslim psyche, explain why we should invite such bloodthirsty people into the US.

Assimilation won't happen as long as governments continue to promote social policies that lead to separation, division, and the Balkanization of cultural groups within the greater culture.

Correct.

If that really is the crux of Henley's argument and excuse for his ad hominems, he's go it exactly wrong. Steyn argues that various Islamic institutions are stronger than the current institutions of Europe, and that assimilation isn't going to occur for those reasons.

Very true. Put another way, you would have to give immigrants something to assimilate to, and give them a reason for doing it. IN the name of 'diversity', we've failed in both areas.

This will be one of the most important events you have ever attended, thanks to the United American Committee: Exposing the Threat of Islamist Terrorism A National Symposium Series Saturday February 2, 2008 Ranch of the Lonesome Dove in Southlake,...

(You'll have to read the link... the ideas don't edit well, and so I won't post large parts of it here.)

The difference being, I'm still hopeful Islam will spawn a Luther. Steyn, perhaps correctly, implicitly wonders if many Islamic Luthers have not been beheaded, already.

Obviously, I don't think Steyn's comments racist, or even unwarranted.

That said, it stikes me that Hensley's error as you noted, doesn't defeat the arguments he makes of themselves... but they do tend to leave one wondering if he's lashing out without really having thought the matter through... or is perhaps writing toward a pre-determined mindset... Steyn is arguably conservative and therefore must be denounced as a racist, etc. We've seen this kind of thing too often to ignore the possibility.

That said, I'll read the remaining comments now, and pile into them one at a time once I get home.

Roy Beck of Numbers USA has posted a grid of the 2008 Presidential candidates based on Here is what you have to know about the GRID: My rating of a candidate's past performance in political office is at the bottom...

If you look at the actual figures the differences are a lot lower than you seem to think. The OECD collects figures and publishes them. The pdf summary of the 2007 immigration outlook gives more info. A few quotes:

Table II.1 shown below compares the incidence of the foreign and foreign-born populations for almost all OECD countries. As is evident, it is in the settlement countries (i.e. Australia, Canada and New Zealand), as well as in Luxembourg and Switzerland, that the percentage of the foreign-born is highest, close to or exceeding 20% in all of these. In addition, certain European countries (e.g. Austria, Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden) have a percentage of immigrants at least as high as that recorded in the United States (approximately 12%). Likewise the percentage of the foreign-born population exceeds 10% of the total population in Belgium, France, Greece and Ireland.

These figures are appreciably higher than those enerally presented for the immigrant population, measured on the basis of foreign nationality and which never exceed 10%, except for Luxembourg and Switzerland. It is clear that many European countries have managed to admit and absorb immigrants in considerable numbers over the past decades, significantly more than is evident from looking at statistics of the resident foreign population.

Caution, however, needs to be exercised in interpreting the data for some countries. In France, but also in Portugal, for example, the foreign-born population includes a significant proportion of persons born abroad as citizens and repatriated from former colonies. Thus, about 1.6 million people born with French nationality outside of France (mainly in Algeria) are counted in the population census of 1999. A similar situation occurs for other countries and in particular the United States, because of persons born overseas of American parents (for instance, children born to military personnel stationed abroad).

And in addition, a bit further in the report:

In addition, in a number of countries, foreign-born persons with a doctoral degree account for a high proportion of all persons holding such degrees in the host country.

In the United States, even if a significant part of the immigrants are not highly qualified, more than 440 000 foreign-born persons hold a PhD. This accounts for approximately 25% of the total stock of PhDs in the country. The proportion of foreign-born doctorates in Sweden is comparable and in Australia and Canada it stands even higher, at 45% and 54%, respectively.

The situation in Austria, Finland, France, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain or Turkey, differs significantly. In these countries, at least 50% of the foreign-born have less than upper-secondary education.

I can't talk for all of Europe, but in the Netherlands the percentage of muslims is higher than in the US (6% vs 1.4% according to nationmaster) and the "problem groups" are usually those who come from less-educated backgrounds. The group of immigrants that follow our "Dutch" patterns best (in number of kids, education, age of marriage, age of first kid) is Iranian, but those come mostly from well-educated backgrounds. A lot of the Moroccan muslims (to name a group with a bad rep) come from backgrounds where the parents come from very rural background with hardly any schooling. Other immigrant groups that come up high in the 'stats about problems' are more often from similar backgrounds than from similar religions.

The last immigrant group that didn't assimilate and fell back on terrorism to try to achieve political goals were the Moluccans and were very Christian.

Unfortunately preferring your gut-feeling above facts seems to become the National sport here too.

I've worked with Christians, Jews, Buddhists, and Hindus in Saudi Arabia. None of them bore extra tax burdens. None of them had to give up their firstborns to their Muslim overlords.

While we should never forget 9/11, it will serve our security purposes better to not assume that the average Mo Muslim is a fundamentalist. Even the fundamentalists aren't all terrorists. It takes a very special kind of Islamic fundamentalism--one not shared by 99% of Muslims--to look for a return of the Caliphate.

I am stumped - here is the question:
I purchased a Teddy Bear this morning for the princely sum of $10.
I named him Mohammed.
This afternoon I sold him on E-Bay for $30.

...

Hopefully this comment will burst the bubble of the folks who support Mike Huckabee. GOP presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee said Sunday he won’t run from his statement 15 years ago that AIDS patients should have been isolated. Huckabee acknowledged th...