[AliVeritas]

ping

[yldstrk]

Assimilation is the key.

[Smokin' Joe]

Because in the US when some local decides to go jihadi, the press squelches it.

[BeckB]

A smaller percentage of our overall popultation is Islamic. Hope it stays that way.

[Northern Alliance]

Why Britain and not the U.S.?

Ask me a hard one. That's because these people already consider the UK as theirs so they are infuriated that they don't have Sharia law and have to tolerate living with non-believers.

[donna]

Becasue no one in America has told the “no” yet.

[elhombrelibre]

I believe Britain has been more indulgent of these cranks. For example, there was the hook-handed mad Mullah who was on the dole while preaching sedition and mass murder in the name of Allah. Then, you have the example of Spain where it was seen that a successful attack could lead to the policies al Qaeda wants. I don’t believe that’d work in the UK, but al Qaeda does. Ultimately, it’s a case of no good deed going unpunished. Britain has been receptive and generous with many people from her former colonies. They work hard to be PC. Their intellectuals hold their history up for scorn. In gratitude, some of these immigrants despise England and intend to harm its people.

[gcruse]

“making it hard for terrorists from outside to get into the country.’

No, I don’t think that’s why. What a maroon.

[expatguy]

"The Islamic population in the United States is better assimilated into the general population, whereas here, in Germany, in France, they're very much on the outside looking in," he said. "When people get disaffected, sadly, there's not much loyalty to country in that sort of situation."

This is FALSE information - Completely Untrue

Allow me to explain - the United States is not seen what is in the pipeline yet - in another 4-5 years we will start to see the fruits of our appeasement.

First is the numbers - percentage of the population - later you are going to be able to apply a percentage in the future of radicalization and of those who don't assimilate.

Second is the stage or level of their cultural assimilation in the United States - here is a graphic that I use:

And then next we have the stages of assimilation - This is Very Important

There are some items concerning this graphic that need to be understood - It is important to understand that the stage or level of an immigrant's "potential assimilation" is dependent on numerous variables. I will list a few:

The countries overall immigration policy - "melting" pot vs. "salad bowl" - needless to say, the "salad bowl" approach has a major affect on the assimilation of the individual and may delay their potential integration by several years or not at all if the immigrant is encouraged to remain in ethnic enclaves - it also has a high risk of alienating immigrants ie."radicalization"

Ethnic and Racial enclaves - where they are settled - if the immigrant is "settled in mass" with many of his own people nearby - then this also delays integration - the immigrant will choose the path of least resistance - he will continue to speak his own language rather that learn and speak English etc.

Another factor to consider is how the host country responds to the demands of the immigrants. Does our own actions and policies encourage coping strategies or reactive responses?

Building foot basins in airports and universities - and kowtowing to their demands in the name of tolerance does NOT encourage coping strategies - as you can see it encourages alienation, isolation and eventually radicalization

Further you might notice that there is no time frame listed - the potential assimilation can take as little as 6 or 7 years or may never happen - and the USA needs to understand that and be prepared for the consequences to come.

My own assimilation overseas took over 10 years and at times it was absolute hell - but Im not living in a place where the government or people fell over backwards trying to make my stay enjoyable - I was forced to adopt coping strategies - and that is what made the situation easier for me.

We have 7,000 Iraqis now on their way to the United States - many of these Iraqis will be settled in Michigan which has a high percentage of Muslims - needless to say, we are in many ways encouraging them to not assimilate and integrate - we give a mixed message - one that leads the immigrant to criticize, rationalize and eventually withdraw.

I have several posts on my blog that cover this subject - in the section "Submission and Subjugation".

My latest is here - One Last Drink of Hemlock

Another good one is here - America - Eyes Wide Shut On Muslim Integration

[guitfiddlist]

I am just guessing, but I suspect it has a lot to do with the accommodations our two different nations have made to their most prominent immigrant groups.

Our two governments have made implicit decisions to cater and kowtow to two different groups. In our case - to illegal Mexicans, in their case - legal muslims. Why? Perhaps because neither of our countries are repopulating to the satisfaction of these imperious bastards. They don’t deign to explain their defacto decisions to us Plebes.

Muslims in England are actively trying to muscle arm the UK into accepting their Sharia law. They wouldn’t have a prayer of having their way here, since that spot has already been taken by Mexicans mass-infiltrating the US, aided and abetted by traitorously self-serving ‘Rat politicos and a would-be Royal and his RINO running dogs.

At least we can point and laugh at the UK, “Ha ha - our illegals are marginally less hostile to our culture than your legals are to yours.”

Future historians will have a hard time explaining this Twilight Zone era, since they always assume rationality and sanity in the motives and decisions of nation-states.

[Capt. Tom]

And, of course, the attacks last weekend, in which police found and deactivated two car bombs before two men in a flaming Jeep Cherokee loaded with gas and gasoline canisters smashed into the airport check-in area in Glasgow, Scotland.

The police were clueless in both attacks. The car bombs outside the nightclub were not discovered by the police, and the Jeep Cherokee crashed into the airport without any restraint from the police. - tom

[WilliamofCarmichael]

Why?

Any attack would weaken the chance for a Democrat to be elected president.

Radical Muslims know that attacks while there is a Democrat president would be met by the president filing a police report with the local police department.

There would never be a "Shock and awe" military counter attack in response. It would simply be, "Aw, shucks."

[wildbill]

Why Britain and not here?

Because they are afraid of the reaction of the U.S. if another major attack occurs.

They have admitted they didn’t anticipate our reaction in going into Afghanistan and Iraq.

Everyone in the world knows we are agressive and crazy cowboys where there are more guns than people.

We have proved we are dangerously unpredictable when aroused.

[Spirochete]

Why Britain and not the U.S.?

Because Britain is clueless. They continue to import plane-loads of islamic baboons. The doctor implicated in the recent attacks was a recent (2004) immigrant.

[Let's Roll]

Muzzies are a larger percentage of the population in the UK?

[G Larry]

Because the terrorists don’t want to disrupt all of the support they’re getting from the liberals in Congress and the press in this country.

Also, a significant percentage of U.S. citizens are better prepared to respond to potential threats.

[Star Traveler]

It’s just a matter of time for the U.S. ... the terrorists will start their thing here, too.

[R.W.Ratikal]

Why Britain and not the U.S? Because England is saturated with third world immigrants and has been for a long time.

The U.S. is not yet so infiltrated by Muslims that similar attacks can begin. There is an addition reason. Millions and millions of Americans are armed. The brave and courageous Hooded Muslims will find that attacking school buses and Macdonald's will not be as easy as it is in countries like Britain where gun ownership by private citizens is not permitted.

For example, I go fully armed and I am trained to use my guns . And, I profile.

[darth]

I think the islamonazis recognize the difference in national character. Bombing in the UK is followed by the PM banning the use of “muslim” to describe the bombers. Bombing in the USA is followed by the conquest of two countries that offended us and the serious consideration of nuke first strikes. Oh yeah, we also re-elected a Texan by a whopping margin!! It reminds me of the moment before the London Blitz when Churchill would stand outside shouting at the German bombers flying overhead, “Bomb London”! He knew that as long as the Germans stuck to military targets, the citizenry would not unite behind the war effort.

[TN4Liberty]

“We haven’t played cowboys and muslims yet.”

[ClearBlueSky]

Millions of armed citizens.
The size of the country.
Millions of armed citizens.
Vigilante justice.