The Solid Surfer.com

Western Writers and Muslim Demographic Exaggeration

Before reading this post:

If you haven't done so already, please visit the previous post to see how you can help save the life of Bangladeshi journalist Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury, who has been arrested for speaking out against fundamentalist Islam and supporting Israel, America, and other religious faiths. It's a real must, and takes only a moment.

And now, onto the main content:

In the recent past, many Muslim communities in non-Muslim countries have exaggerated their demographic numbers, often wildly, for political gain. Among other places, they have done so in America, in France, and in Israel. Certain Western writers, meanwhile, particularly Mark Steyn, have taken these numbers at face value, and have scared the daylights out of Westerners by projecting a population-based Islamic takeover of the world. In reality, however, statistics that Steyn excludes from his analysis largely debunk his thesis (as I have demonstrated here and here), and the Muslim threat to the West, while clearly real, is far from the certainty he claims.

Lest such journalistic predictions remain a Western phenomenon, however, a researcher in Estonia named Paul Goble now claims a similar situation for Russia. According to Goble, current Russian population trends indicate that by mid-century, over half of that country's citizenry will be Muslim. Worrisome? Of course. But true? Almost certainly not.

Goble bases his projection on three apparent indicators - low Russian fertility, high Muslim fertility, and Muslim immigration from other Soviet republics. Taken at face value, the combination of these indeed points to a Muslim population takeover.

Thing is, however, only one of these indicators is actually correct. Russians indeed have few children (about 1.3 per woman), but the Muslim numbers are enormously exaggerated.

Goble claims that the primary Muslim groups in Russia, the Chechens and Ingush, average ten children per woman, while the Tatars (at least those living in Moscow) average six. He also states, meanwhile, that several hundred thousand Muslim immigrants arrive each year from Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, and Kazakhstan.

Now I don't know where Goble found this ten-children number, but rest assured, it is most certainly false. It is difficult to find exact fertility numbers for ethnic/religious populations within Russia, but the state of Chechnya itself claims a crude birthrate of 24.9 per 1000 women, which translates to a fertility rate of about three children per woman. This number may or may not be accurate for all Muslims in Russia, but for comparison, we must note that not a single nation on Earth averages close to the ten-children mark. (The highest-fertility groups worldwide -- certain African tribes, desert Bedouins, and Hasidic Jews -- max out at about seven.) The world fertility average is 2.5, and the Muslim nations bordering the parts of Russia where the Chechens, Ingush, and Tatars reside range from 1.8 (Iran) to 1.92 (Turkey) to 2.46 (Azerbaijan). Most likely, the overall Russian Muslim rate lies somewhere within this span, and whatever it is, it's not remotely close to ten (or even six).

Of course, a fertility rate between 2 and 3 is much higher than the ethnic Russians' 1.3, but there are also about 130 million ethnic Russians and perhaps only 15 million ethnic Muslims. At current rates, it will take Muslims almost two centuries to catch up. Furthermore, if rates (and/or the political situation) change, something that's virtually guaranteed to occur to some degree, they will likely favor the Russians, as their birthrates probably can't sink much lower and have actually slightly risen over the past few years.

At the same time, meanwhile, Goble's other Muslim source, immigration numbers, is also likely misrepresented. Many migrants have indeed moved to Russia from surrounding nations, but their religion has not formally been tracked, and chances are, a large portion are actually returning ethnic Russians.

For all his assumptions, Goble does attempt to support his claim with some genuine hard evidence, such as increased mosque construction and Islamic religious practice over the last twenty years. But these too can be explained. In Soviet times (i.e. before 1989), religion was almost entirely suppressed. Today it is not. The mosque construction and religious practice, hence, reflects not necessarily an absolute population rise, but a return to observance by a portion of the already existing population. Very similarly, many more churches and Christian worshippers (and synagogues and Jewish worshippers) exist compared to 1989, even though the absolute numbers of ethnic Russian Christians and Jews have not increased.

Whatever his motivations, Paul Goble follows Mark Steyn in using exaggerated Muslim numbers to predict the downfall of other nations. This threat, however, does not stand to genuine statistical scrutiny. The fundamentalist Muslim threat to the free world, once again, is very real. But non-Muslim nations should be much more optimistic about their relative demographic situations than much of the media has led us to believe.

Help Save Bangladeshi Journalist Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury - Friend of Israel and America

Tons to catch up on...where can we even start? There has been plenty of important news from the past week, but first and foremost, we can help save a life.

Anyone here heard of a Bangladeshi journalist named Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury? Mr. Choudhury has been arrested by the Bangladeshi government on charges of sedition, treason, and blasphemy, having committed the "crime" of speaking out against fundamentalist Islam and advocating peaceful relations with Jews and Christians. His trial is set for January 2007 under an Islamist judge who intends to apply capital punishment.

As outrageous as this is, however, American pressure can almost certainly convince the Bangladeshi government to dismiss the charges. Such a threat has previously convinced Bangladesh on other matters, and their economy is largely dependent on American garment purchases. To help Mr. Choudhury, read this article and visit this website.

It will take only a minute or two of your time, and you can help save a person's life. As the linked article says, "Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury has stood up for us at considerable peril; now it is up to us to stand up for him." Let's do it.

-TheSolidSurfer.com

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Update - a reader writes:

"I would like people to know that a bipartisan resolution has been introduced in the House of Representatives in support of Mr. Choudhury. It calls upon the government of Bangladesh to drop all charges against him, return his confiscated property and prosecute the individuals who attacked him. Please ask your readers to call their representatives in Congress and ask them to support House Resolution #1080. This is an urgent matter, since Congress will adjourn in another week or two at the most, and it is important that the resolution pass with a huge majority before that. The European Parliament passed a resolution in support of Mr. Choudhury last week. It's our turn."

Well, there you have it - let's call our Congressional representatives. If you don't have their contact information, you can also reach them via email through the American Jewish Committee's website (and don't worry - it's pre-formatted so you don't have to compose anything original if you don't want). Here is the direct link.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Further Update: David Harris, executive director of the American Jewish Committee, has penned an essential article on Mr. Choudhury's situation.

North Korean Nuclear Test and Defeating Iran

As the world now knows, North Korea has openly conducted a nuclear test. Some experts have questioned its success, but whether fully accomplished or not, the Communist state's intention is clear - to brandish nuclear bombs as an offensive weapon.

Writers from around the web have commented on the launch, from those who worry greatly, to others who virtually discount it, to yet others who write about larger implications and its relevance to American politics. Collectively, it seems, almost every viewpoint can be found.

Without too much rehashing, then, I'd like to offer my own perspective. America, I believe, can live with a nuclear North Korea. It's far from ideal, but we can likely manage the situation with proper deterrents, similar to those used against the Soviet Union.

What the U.S. also *must* do, though, is learn from its North Korea mistakes, so to stop a much more dangerous repeat with Iran.

Throughout the 1990s, as North Korean dictator Kim Jong-Il announced his nuclear aspirations, President Clinton responded diplomatically, signing a non-nuclear pact with him that naively demonstrated America's trust in his promises of peaceful intentions. Of course, however, Kim lied through his teeth, commencing atomic development the moment the ink was dry. The end result, to say the least, has been that a vicious anti-American state has gained power, its democratic neighbors Japan and South Korea feel existentially threatened, the entire region risks an unstable nuclear arms race, and terrorists have gained a potential WMD supplier. To call these developments a gigantic risk to the free world is an understatement.

And if we think that's bad, we could be headed for deja vu all over again with Iran, unless America and the West approach the fanatical Mullahs much more strongly. We cannot risk such weapons in the hands of rulers who aim to be even more tyrannical than Kim.

The lesson, therefore, couldn't be more clear: Autocratic regimes cannot be trusted in negotiations, and any ruler who openly declares a desire to attack the United States holds a perfectly serious intent. Negotiating with Iran is an absolute capitulation to the Mullahs' goals. America's only choice is to push for regime change and/or attack the Islamic republic's nuclear facilities. These measures may seem harsh and risky, but they utterly pale compared to the world war that could occur otherwise.

President Clinton's foreign policy greatly failed with North Korea. President Bush has the chance to correct such mistakes. For the sake of the entire free world, he must immediately get moving.

UN and Media Silent on War: Ethiopia and Somalia

Two weeks ago, a sovereign country decided to fight back against Islamic terrorists firing weapons at it from a neighboring nation. The terrorists completely instigated the war, but the sovereign country rightfully feels that it must respond as a matter of self defense. The battle has been difficult, and innocent civilians have been killed on both sides, but the sovereign country cannot allow its people to be continually attacked by terrorists. And so the war rages on, with the sovereign country aiming to defeat the terrorists and protect its people.

Anyone know which country I'm talking about? Here's a hint - it's not Israel.

The answer, rather, is Ethiopia. That's right, another nation is involved in a highly similar war to the Israel-Hezbollah conflict. Jihadist terrorists who took over parts of Somalia have massed at the Ethiopian border and fired weapons into Ethiopian territory. In response, Ethiopia has sent its army into Somalia to crush the attackers.

Did you know all of this? I sure didn't until I read this article by WorldNetDaily's Joseph Farah discussing the conflict and its likeness to that in the Middle East.

But why hasn't the Ethiopia-Somalia conflict been publicized? The Israel-Hezbollah war has remained the centerpiece of every mainstream media outlet for weeks, but practically nothing has been written about the almost parallel clash in the Horn of Africa.

According to Farah, the media and "international community" just don't care about Ethiopia, because it isn't a conflict they can blame on Jews, Zionists, and America. Therefore, they simply ignore it altogether.

At first glance, this conclusion seems almost too far-fetched to be true, but you know what - I think Farah has hit the nail upon the head. The Ethiopian situation seems almost tailor-made for international sympathy (war in Africa, civilians under attack, humanitarian concerns), but the UN and the leftwing-led media have barely even mentioned the conflict let alone attempted to resolve it. Clearly, it appears that they genuinely don't care.

But regardless of world opinion, the conflict rages on, and we must fully support Ethiopia in its efforts. Israel, Ethiopia, the United States, and many other nations are all fighting the same war against Islamic jihadism, and the sooner we all unite, the more quickly victory will be achieved. It's time the mainstream media joins the team as well.

North Korea's Missile Test and Stopping Kim Jong-Il

Another day, another missile. That's apparently what Kim Jong-Il and the fanatics in North Korea want the rest of the world to fear, having just launched seven Taepodong 2 test missiles into the Sea of Japan.

As such, both East Asia and the United States are on high alert, with the U.N. Security Council (who somehow found time away from their disgustingly continuous Israel-bashing) condemning the launch and America scrambling to activate its missile-defense system.

Given North Korea's confirmed possession of nuclear weapons, this is a clearly a serious issue. But also given the nation's small size and limited non-nuclear offensive capabilities, we must ask ourselves - just what are their intentions? The Communist state's strength is miniscule compared to both the U.S. and its surrounding neighbors (China, Japan, South Korea, Russia), and even a dictator as unstable as Kim likely favors self-preservation enough to avoid tempting bigger powers with a nuclear exchange.

So why the missile launch? Could Kim merely be delusionally overconfident like Iran's President Ahmadinejad? Is he genuinely just bonkers as many have claimed? Perhaps he pines to recapture Communism's glory days of the Soviet Union years? Or does he have something truly sinister in mind, such as an EMP attack over the American heartland?

North Korea's government has hinted at very little, but I believe the answer is actually none of the above. Rather, Kim's regime feels pressured by the capitalistic successes surrounding it (particularly South Korea and Japan), and merely wishes to remain in power via nuclear deterrent. Hence, unlike with Iran (where any nuclear possesion is a grave danger that must not be allowed), the North Korean threat to America (and everyone else) can be minimized if properly managed. But poorly handled, it could become disastrous.

Now I know this conclusion may sound naively optimistic, and certainly it is not ideal. (An exponentially better situation would have been Bill Clinton stopping a pre-nuclear Kim when he had the chance.) But after examining the range of possibilities, I do feel it is likely. First, while Kim clearly rules the state fanatically, he is not insane and indeed appears to quite intelligent and rational. Wikipedia reports, for example, that Kim holds an economics degree, systematically consolidated his hold on power, and controls every major detail of North Korea's government operations. Furthermore, he probably doesn't overconfidently aim to defeat the U.S.; unlike Ahmadinejad, Kim is no Muslim utopian (nor, by most accounts, a religious person at all), and as such would not likely risk his life for a war or nuclear brinksmanship. Finally, as the ruler of a small nation surrounded by larger powers, Kim surely must realize that he has virtually no chance of replicating the Soviet Union's past success.

So what's left as an explanation? Protecting his hold on power. Kim is an international pariah, his state is dirt-poor, and his people despise him. What better way to stay on top than with nuclear weapons? North Korea's missile tests, then, are Kim's attempt to remind the world that he's still in charge.

Knowing this, I believe the conflict can be managed the same way the U.S. deterred the Soviets - via mutually assured destruction. America must give Kim an ultimatum that if he launches (or gives to terrorists) a single nuclear missile, we will bomb him back to the stone age. At the same time, just as with the Soviets, we must pressure Kim with economic incentives to free his people. These strategies together can help stabilize North Korea's offensive capabilities while gradually enticing it towards capitalism and democracy.

The bad news, of course, is that Kim has already developed nukes, which presents an instant inherent risk. For this reason, appealing to the U.N. Security Council is a terribly wrong response. China and Russia regularly support Kim specifically to oppose the U.S., and including them in discussions will only prolong the crisis and perhaps even embolden Kim to pull further stunts.

America has one clear way to solve this standoff: Force North Korea to play by our rules rather than playing by theirs. The sooner we do it, the safer we'll be and the sooner the North Korean people will finally receive their much needed freedom.

New Sports Hero: Footballer John Paintsil of Ghana

TheSolidSurfer.com would like to present our new sports hero: Ghanian soccer player John Paintsil. After scoring two goals in a key World Cup win over the Czech Republic, Pantsil, who plays professionally in Israel, waved an Israeli flag to the cheering crowd. (Photo credit: AP)

Naturally, Paintsil's gesture has thrilled many Israelis, many of whom warmly celebrated Ghana's victory. Just as unsuprisingly, though, a number of Arab countries have erupted in fury, and as usual, the conspiracy theory allegations are already on the table. (And yes, you read that correctly - Egyptian newspapers think Paintsil is a Mossad agent. What next - an editorial claiming he's the Mayor of Tel Aviv in disguise?)

So why did Paintsil do it? In his own words, because he is a religious man who holds a special place in his heart for Israel. Also, as a foreign resident, he greatly enjoys living there, and wanted to show some appreciation for his many Israeli fans.

Sadly, Ghana's Football Association then succumbed to political correctness and apologized to those "offended" by the flag-wave. But Paintsil said he didn't care about political implications; he only wanted to support Israel and its people. And plus, he continued, many Ghanians agreed with him: "Everyone was very proud of me for bringing a little happiness to Israel."

Count me in among that crowd. That's why Mr. Paintsil is TheSolidSurfer.com's first official Sports Hero of the Day.

Rabbi Shea Hecht on Iran and the Inept United Nations

I'd like to welcome a new guest contributor to TheSolidSurfer.com, Rabbi Shea Hecht. Rabbi Hecht, a New York community activist and the Chairman of the Board at the National Committee for the Furtherance of Jewish Education (click here for a full bio), writes regular columns at his own site (which I've also added to the "My Heroes" section in the left column), and occasionally we will feature them here as well.

Rabbi Hecht's latest piece covers Iran and the continuing ineptitude of the United Nations:

A UN Folly

I was recently reminded of the folly and the lack of common sense of the UN by my friend U.S. Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA), Chairman of the Senate Republican Conference.

Senator Santorum said: "I am extremely disappointed that member nations of the United Nations have elected the Islamic Republic of Iran to serve as the Vice-Chair of the U.N. Disarmament Commission. Electing Iran, a country that has demonstrated no sign of abandoning its pursuit of enriching uranium, is ludicrous. Iran is a threat to the United States and the rest of the world, and this vote by a group of U.N. member states is simply non-sensical."

Senator Santorum's comments refer to a recent UN development. Iran won a seat on the United Nations' Disarmament Commission which is charged with promoting the disarmament of nuclear weapons and reviewing treaties that deal with nuclear energy. Iran on the UN Disarmament Commission? How ludicrous!

Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad recently announced that he has successfully enriched uranium in order to produce nuclear fuel, in violation of a call by the UN Security Council to end the project. He has also publicly stated his repeated threat to wipe Israel off the map. This is who is sitting on the UN Disarmament Commission?

Over the years, many have spoken about the outright, inane absurdity of the UN and its appointments, but this is totally outrageous. Iran does not even hide their nuclear plans and plans of destruction! Will this help people see the blatant insanity of the UN? Maybe now US citizens will wake up from their complacency and pressure US to leave the UN. There is nothing in the global rule book that says the United States must be part of the United Nations.

The US actually tried recently to force some changes at the UN. For a while, there was hope that US Representative Henry Hyde's (R-IL) ultimatum calling on the United Nations to reform would be successful. Yet, even when the UN was given the choice to make some reforms or lose funding from the USA - its host nation and largest financial and physical benefactor - it allowed sadistic, autocratic regimes onto commissions designed to battle their negative and dangerous conduct.

Senator Norm Coleman (R-Minn.) has also spoken out against the appointment of Iran to the UN Disarmament Commission. He wants the Bush administration to withhold dues for the United Nations Disarmament Commission now that Iran was elected to a leadership position on that commission.

"The election of Iran as a vice-chair of the UN Disarmament Commission at the same time as Iran clandestinely pursues its own nuclear ambitions provides yet another example of the UN's inability to establish credible institutions to deal with global issues," Senator Coleman said in a statement Wednesday. "Having the Iranians serve on this commission is like asking the fox to guard the hens, and will only ensure its ineffectiveness. Iran says its program is peaceful, but the United States and dozens of other countries fear it wants the technology to make the core of nuclear warheads."

Some of our politicians in Washington are also to blame as they have watered down the reform legislation and the United Nations is once again back to its old games; it seems that the subject of UN reform is not only out of sight it's also out of mind. We need more leadership like that of Senators Santorum and Coleman.

Let us use our own common sense and heed the words of our Senators. The fox should not guard the hen house, the inmates shouldn't be holding the keys to the asylum, nor the bank robbers the key to the vault. The US has enough clout to force a change in the UN or leave the UN altogether. We, as citizens of this country, should demand that the USA bring the UN issue to the forefront and force some change.

Rabbi, thank you for the piece, and I look forward to featuring more of your work in the future. I fully agree that the UN desperately needs to be reformed, and now that John Bolton is America's representative, perhaps it finally has a chance. Of course, as evidenced by the subject matter of your essay, it has a long way to go. But as you also say, American pressure can accomplish much - we just need to keep it up.

China vs. India

Conventional wisdom states that China will become the next world superpower. The billion-strong nation has been rapidly modernizing, consolidating its manufacturing base, building a high-tech economy, and educating its youth. The result has been unprecedented productivity growth, with China recently becoming the world's fourth largest economy. Some Americans are genuinely concerned that soon it will overtake even the U.S., both economically and militarily. But by and large, most Americans view China as an opportunity on the rise, and many are scrambling to invest in its markets, learn its language and history, pursue its entrepreneurial opportunities, and immerse themselves in its culture.

Now at this moment, it probably seems I'm at the point in this essay where I'm about to state that I disagree with the above assessment.

But this time I don't. Everything I mentioned has either already occurred or stands a great likelihood of occurring.

But while I certainly can't deny China's upward trajectory, I believe that another nation will ultimately overtake it: India. Why? For the simple reason that China is a Communist dictatorship while India is a democracy.

Like China, India is home to a billion plus, has experienced rapid GDP growth, features a burgeoning high-tech sector, and is rapidly modernizing. But unlike its Far East neighbor, India lives with American-style capitalism, free elections, intellectual property rights, and an unrestricted press. In combination, these create opportunities that China cannot hope to match under its current governmental structure.

China certainly has opened its doors to greater capitalism in recent years (and, in fact, this has been a primary driver of its extraordinary growth). But it still suffers greatly from socialist misunderstandings of people's self-earning motivations, lax intellectual property rules that stifle entrepreneurship, economic centralization that adds inefficiencies to markets, and a government whose draconian one-child policy has played havoc on the nation's future social fabric and workforce.

India, on the other hand, faces none of these issues, and sits on a wide-open path to national prosperity. China may be a good place to invest, but as I see it, India is even better.

U.S., U.N., Africa, and Afghanistan

A significant piece of evidence in the money laundering case against House Majority Leader Tom DeLay was a supposed list of Republican candidates who received the dirty funds. But now prosecutors have admitted that the document does not exist. Looks like DeLay wasn't just assigning blame when he claimed to be an innocent victim of partisan politics.

The latest move by the U.N. is just disgusting. They invited Robert Mugabe, the dictator president of Zimbabwe who seized white-owned farms and caused drastic food shortages for millions of his people, to address a conference aimed at solving world hunger. What's next - Fidel Castro heading up a conference on democracy?

About a month ago, I briefly noted an article discussing the advantages of DDT in combatting malaria. And now another piece is greatly urging spraying the chemical in hard-hit Africa. Use the links at the bottom of the article to call on your senators and President Bush to support this.

Afghanistan warming up to Israel? President Karzai wants to formally recognize Israel if his Palestinian "brothers" also get a state. Coming from the leader of a Muslim country, this condition unfortunately does not surprise. But the Afghan leader should recognize who his true brothers really are; significant genetic and cultural evidence point to the Afghans as being one of the Ten Lost Jewish Tribes.

News Site of the Day: TheRant.us

The Good, The Bad & The Ugly

Hope Clint Eastwood likes this post. (And given that he's a Republican in leftwing-dominated Hollywood, I'll bet he probably would :-)

The Good:

Roberts confirmed as Chief Justice. Glad it finally occurred.

A victory for academic freedom on college campuses.

Residents starting to return to New Orleans.

Blog of the Day: Good News From Iraq (and Afghanistan). An absolute must read, on what the liberal media will never tell you.

The Bad:

Saudi prince Al-Waleed buys stake in Fox News. This could be very troubling indeed if Al-Waleed, the same prince whose $10 million check was rejected by Rudy Giuliani after 9/11, gains influence over the company's direction. His ownership share is relatively small, so chances are he won't, but this certainly should be monitored.

Liberal media pandering to radical Muslims. Now at first glance, you might wonder - what's wrong with this article? After all, it's only about a few Latina women who converted to Islam. But let's examine things more closely. First of all, this is not a noteworthy event that should ordinarily grace the front page of a national news site. Far more Hispanics, for example, have converted to Mormonism (and such converts outnumber Islamic converts by about 100 to 1), but you never hear their story. Secondly, the article portrays fundamentalist Islam in a sugar coated light at great odds with reality. The article, of course, does not identify the brand of Islam that these women practice, but given that they all wear full-body hijabs and attend a mosque that denies Israel's existence (click and scroll down for a telltale map on its website), they clearly are not moderates. This article exists only so the liberal media can try and convince themselves that radical Islam is normal and not the dangerous threat that it actually is.

And, unfortunately, the Ugly:

So a particular country has built a razor barb-wire fence to keep certain people out. Those on the "wrong" side of the fence, so to speak, have complained insistently that it infringes their rights. The nation that built the fence has deployed its army to assist with protection. Surely the U.N. must be furious, demanding that the fence be torn down!

But nope, not a peep from Kofi and company. What could possibly be wrong?

Oops, the country is not Israel. The U.N. is absolutely silent.

And hence yet another reason why the organization is not a trustworthy partner for America (as I discussed in the previous post). The U.N. in no place to oversee the Internet, and needs serious immediate reforms.