This is very difficult, if not impossible, because the behavior of their Prophet Mohammed was in contradiction with the notions of the Enlightenment. For Muslims, he is the perfect example for them for all time even though he lived in the 7th century. His behavior may have been normal for a 7th century ruler of semi-barbaric people but a person behaving like him today would be jailed for a long list of crimes - including murder and pedophilia. In fact, the murderer of Theo Van Gogh was only trying to imitate his Prophet's behavior by killing someone who insulted Islam.

Therefore, a case can be made that Islam as it is currently practiced in the majority of Muslim countries is incompatible with the values of western societies. For example, apostates in Muslim countries suffer varying degrees of persecution, including the death penalty. Thus it follows that Muslim migration to a non-Muslim country will put western societies under stress. Perhaps the Paris riots were the first shots of an European civil war that will make Yugoslavia look like a schoolyard brawl.

Why allow people in when they reject your values? Perhaps, it was thought that once over in the new country, they will embrace new values after one generation. But this has not happened with many and probably most Muslims. The Muslims who took part in the 7/7 attacks in the London subway were born in Britain . Although most Muslims disagree with their actions, the fact that the suicide bombers were British born shows that even after one or two generations, they have more in common with Muslims in the Mid East or Pakistan than with their countrymen. It should be noted that converts to Islam sometimes also start acting this way. J Walker Lindh, the American Taliban, is an example. Somehow, Islam has a way of instilling 7th century Arab warrior values into people.

However, putting such a case forward in the open would create problems. Firstly, European leaders will have to consider their Muslim voters. Secondly, it will worsen relations with Muslim countries whose help we need to fight the Jihadists. Telling Muslims that their faith is a retrograde force will not win friends and also drive moderates into the hands of the radicals.

But there is more than one way to skin a cat. Instead of making it so obvious, western governments can limit immigration to the top 50 countries of the Human Development Index. The public argument would be that a country must only admit people from progressive nations. In that way, we can be assured that they can adapt to a modern society. Culture, is the main determinent on whether a people succeed or not. To illustrate this point, let me again take a look at Britain .

In the The Income of Ethnic Minorities [1], a study conducted by Essex University , it can be seen that Chinese and Indians have done well in the UK but not the Pakistanis and Bangla Deshis. It reported that 60% of Pakistanis and Bangla Deshis are poor. Unlike poor Chinese and Indians who tend to be found in depressed areas, Pakistanis and Bangla Deshis are poor everywhere - even in rich neighborhoods. Indians, Pakistanis and Bangla Deshis are racially similar and so the problem is not racial discrimination. They all started migrating to the same country - Britain - from the 1950s onwards. So nobody had a head start. All three countries had the same colonial master which taught them English. Thus language is not the problem. The only major variable that is different is religion. The Indians are mostly Hindus while Pakistanis and Bangla Deshis are mostly Muslims. This is evidence that Islamic culture hinders progress as I argued in my earlier essays.

There is no good reason to welcome immigrants whose culture does not produce productive people. Immigrants should benefit the receiving country. Otherwise, the host will soon suffer economic decline. A case could be made that immigrants should come only from countries from the top 50 of the Human Development Index without mentioning Islam or Muslims. You will see that apart from a few small oil rich countries ( Saudi Arabia not among them), the other countries are non-Muslim. The top 50 comprises mainly western and east Asian countries. Because a few Muslim countries are in the list, politicians can argue that they are not targeting Muslims.

Though my quick study on Muslim immigration only focused on one western country - Britain - I think the experience of most western countries are about the same. Stopping Muslim immigration to rich countries may help Muslims in the long run. Immigration to rich countries is like a safety valve for dysfunctional societies allowing them to defer reforms. By letting the steam build up, the governments there might be forced to change. Or things could explode. One last point. If western governments cannot restrict Muslim immigration now, when they are a small percentage of the population, how can they when their numbers grow larger?

4)The Military Front

What to do with an Iran that is determined to have nuclear weapons? Remember that Iran is a fundamentalist Islamic nation. People who welcome martyrdom cannot be deterred by the assurance of Mutually Assured Destruction. If they get nukes, they could pass them to terrorists who would then smuggle them thought the porous Mexican-US border. They are also interested in missiles that can reach Europe .

Though Shiites, the Iranians share the same Islamo-fascists world view that Al-Qaeda and other terrorists have. In other words, the world is divided into two parts - darul Harb (land of war) and darul Islam ( land of Islam ). It is the duty of all good Muslims to ensure that the whole world obeys Allah's law. I will let Iran 's founder, Ayatollah Khoemini do the talking:

"Islam makes it incumbent on all adult males, provided they are not disabled and incapacitated, to prepare themselves for the conquest of (other) countries so that the writ of Islam is obeyed in every country in the world." [2]

The economy produces nothing worthwhile apart from oil (and maybe Persian carpets) which will run out in 20 years' time. The Iranians are Shiites. Though Shiites are about 15% of the global Muslim population, they are concentrated around the Persian Gulf . More than half of Iraqis are Shiites and the oil rich provinces in Saudi Arabia are in mainly Shiite regions. Perhaps, the Iranians harbor ambitions to redraw the map.

<< back     next >>