[detbuch]

It seems to me that if you kill the big bad wolf that wants to eat you, you don't have to be afraid of it anymore. But if you let it roam around outside of your gate, you will be in constant fear . . . that is such a harsh word to the ears of the compassionate--how about mildly disturbed? . . . that you will be in constant mild disturbance that it will sneak in and make you greatly disturbed, to say the least. Oh, that's right, you can wait for the inevitable and kill it when it does finally sneak in. Or better yet, out of compassion and understanding, you can keep throwing some meat over the fence to keep it satisfied. You'd better not run out of meat. And don't let your children run outside of your fence. But that's Ok, because, after all, it will eventually like you and be your friend if you keep feeding it meat.

But it might cause you to feel a little uncomfortable when you get reports about this brand of wolf seeming to not be so reciprocally kind when it is, or becomes, the dominant power. Maybe not all brands of wolves are the same? Maybe some can be domesticated and turned into nice puppies who appreciate your largesse and maybe only occasionally poop in places that you don't like, but mostly will be obedient dogs, who do your bidding, and even help protect your home, even fight other big bad wolves outside the gate.

And maybe some, because of the nature of their brand, cannot be domesticated.

And you keep getting reports of this brand of wolves mostly preferring to breed strictly among their own and never really, in their deepest identity, desiring to be somebody's pet dog. That they have a certain, indomitable sense of pride which they deem makes them superior. That in their minds they are actually, especially when they are banded together as they prefer to do, a superior breed. And you observe that they tend to multiply rapidly, and seem always to produce wild ones who cause deadly trouble to hosts, or total domination of others when they gain control.

It might give you pause to think about if they can be domesticated, and about how to discern which ones are prone not to be domesticated, about which ones would actually bite the hand that feeds them. You might want to actually figure out, in spite of the difficulty of adding them to your already divided turbulent household, if they are a good addition, and how to go about doing that and which ones are the most promising to let in.

Or you can just role out your red carpet and compassionately let in the ones who were wounded by their own kind. And because of that, believe that they are different wolves and will actually choose (sort of like transgenders) to become (identify as) sheep rather than merely wearing sheep's clothing .

Of course, there are many in your house who see these wolves as allies to gain power over their rival siblings and want enough of them in to solidify that power.

Sorry if that sounds harsh to the snowflakes. But reality is not always kind.

Do I think that Muslims are, by nature, wolves--big bad ones? Of course not. Not by nature. By nature they are different only by genetic tribal differences. And those natural differences are probably not an impediment to peacefully admix in society with others.

It is not in their human nature that Muslims have difficulty cooperating with non-Muslims within a society whose greater purpose is the protection of individual differences, it is in their Islamic dogma where the difficulty occurs. That can only be denied in theory, not in fact.

In theory, Islam can be transformed to fit the modern world. In fact, that has not yet happened. Perhaps Western countries, especially in North America, can help to bring about that transformation by intermingling large numbers of selected Muslims into their societies. As of now, that would be a social experiment. And the outcome is not certain. We like to believe that our Western ways are so superior that those who are freely allowed to live them will prefer them to the cultures from which they came. They will prefer it so much that they will give up their deepest spiritual beliefs, or at least tweak them to fit the greater society. Many Muslims profess the desire to do just that. The problem is that the sources of Islam, Mecca and Tehran, must decree any transformation for the religion to be changed. And to do that in a way that is compatible with Western society, the Islamic rulers in Saudi Arabia and Iran, must dissolve the theocratic power they have over their people and Muslims in the rest of the world. And the difficulty in rewriting the story of Muhammad so that the change is not so noticeable and is believable and without causing turmoil throughout the Islamic world is unimaginable. But, theoretically possible.

When, and if, that fundamental transformation happens, Muslims would not pose the existential threat that so many fear. Unfortunately, there are other problems and dangers in expanding "diversity." I'm, personally, all aboard with cultural variety. I particularly love the wide choice of cheap restaurants that immigrants provide. I love the variety of faces. The different genetic pool, if it actually mixes rather than balkanizes, is healthy.

What I don't love is the importation of mind-sets which see government as a ruling class rather than a serving one. I don't like the importation of group think over individualism. I hate the importation of people to be used as dependents who will sustain Party power.

Other than all that, hey, c'mon in. Contribute to our wealth and productivity rather than leaching off of it. Assimilate. Become AMERICANS first. Love this country and its founding structure. And preserve that structure despite the attempts to use you all as useful idiots to maintain the power of those who wish to make you, and the rest of us, perpetual dependents.

And don't get upset when we want to check you out more thoroughly rather than giving you an EZ pass through gate.