....apparently this was a hard working man, (apparently much working much harder than some AMerican young men). And to his credit, HE ran business and had purchased a house and supported a large family...BUt the article brings out an important issue:

"Roughly 3,5000 Malians enter the United States each year on temporary visas. But precious few attain achieve citizenship:"

....The article makes no mention of his visa status or citizenship status....Had he overextended his visa? Did he ever apply for citizenship?....

THe US Immigrations does a poor job of following up on the location of individuals who come into the country and disappear after the visa expires...

....This lax enforcement of the immigration laws allows for potential violent Muslims to be roaming around unchecked.....potential time bombs in your neighborhood..

another reason you should Ban Muslim Immigration now....

Posted by: exsgtbrown at March 13, 2007 7:14 AM

In a long piece the other day, designed to tug at the heartstrings of readers (this reader was stonily unaffected), The Duranty Times described a family whose polyphiloprogenitive head was in Mali, while his two (count them -- two!) wives were taking care of nine or so children, presumably all on the dole. We learned that Mr. Magassa -- or was it Mr. Soumare, or was it both -- were illegal immigrants, that Mr. Magassa -- or was it Mr. Soumare -- and both of his brothers had declared bankruptcy (the sure grasp of some immigrants of aspects of American law -- that is, when it comes to every sort of taxpayer-funded benefit, and to the workings of the bankruptcy laws, fascinates. We learn that Mr. Magassa -- or was it Mr. Soumare -- practiced polygamy, which is illegal in the United States.

In short, we learn that these immigrants had violated the immigation laws, had violated the family laws of the state and the Federal government, had violated the original intent of the bankrupty laws (to protect those who take financial risks), and yet, with all this law-breaking, The Duranty Times, and then Mayor Bloomberg, declaring that these peope "are part of America" and even quoting the Qur'an, put the final nail in the coffin of whatever sanity had survived the Duranty Times's coverage.

Posted by: Hugh at March 13, 2007 8:08 AM

"....apparently this was a hard working man, (apparently much working much harder than some AMerican young men). And to his credit, HE ran business and had purchased a house and supported a large family...BUt the article brings out an important issue"

[...]

Posted by: exsgtbrown at March 13, 2007 07:14 AM

exsgtbrown:

I'm not sure how much credit we should give to Moussa Magassa's "entrepeneurship". Depending on what he charged for services like assisting with legal filings and shipping items back to Mali, it may be more a matter of exploiting his own community.

Posted by: waterdragon52 at March 13, 2007 8:23 AM

A Darwinian Analysis of Islam and Jihad
---------------------------------------

Synopsis:

According to Darwinian evolution man is one of the great apes. The overriding motivator of great ape social structure is the access to females. In gorilla troops access to females is controlled by one dominant silverback, but because of equal male/female births when a male reaches sexual maturity he must resort to one of the following options to propogate his genes: shmooze the silverback and hope to get the females he doesn't take, challenge the silverback (seriously risky, especially for a jeuvenile), cuckoldry (risky for the male, the female and any offspring), or found a new troop (by taking females in raids on other troops). However, because of the concentration of many females under the control of one dominant male, there are always a large number of juvenile males looking for mating oportunities.

Polygamy is the congate to this in the social structure of the human great ape. Islam is not the only religion to have permitted polygamy, but it is perhaps the most successful in channelling the 'lost juveniles' into looking outwards at other faiths as a source for females. Thus the punishment for touching a female 'belonging' to a Muslim silverback without his permission is death, but all non-Muslim women are seen as potential mates - even if they are married to a non-Muslim. This is re-enforced by a non-Muslim male being liable for death for touching a female 'belonging' to a Muslim. In this analysis Jihad is revealed to be about sex and the control of access to females. The destruction of the institution of polygamy and the implementation of equality for women are key to the neutralisation of Jihad.

Any brave social anthropologists out there want to pick up this idea and do a proper in-depth Darwinian analysis polygamy and Jihad?

Posted by: Tziona at March 13, 2007 9:10 AM

Polygamy should be punished

Utah State was required to write anti-polygamy clause in its constitution (for dealing with Mormons) in 1896 before it was accepted as a State and other States also were required to make the same stand, therefore America should come down hard on this practice.

Posted by: UK Infidel Lover at March 13, 2007 9:42 AM

Answer: Enforce all anti-polygamy laws on the USA side to all who seek to come into this country.

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at March 13, 2007 9:44 AM

Hugh, I read that sunday NYT article and was shocked at how the fact that he had 2 wives was not bigger news. That stood out to me! Why isn't more being said about that?

Posted by: nyone at March 13, 2007 9:45 AM

particularly for older men who can afford it.

Do you think he could really afford it? Maybe if the newspaper would INVESTIGATE they might find that the city or state was really paying the bills for these families.

Will they investigate? Unlikely.

And could he really afford it? Didn't the house catch fire because they couldn't afford the heating bill?

You can marry more than one wife if you can treat them both equally. It doesn't say equally good. They were both treated equally bad it seems.

There are reasons polygamy was outlawed in this country. ENFORCE THE LAW.

Polygamy causes poverty.

Posted by: Borg at March 13, 2007 9:52 AM

Hugh- You are so right as usual. Do you think the state or the City of NY might check into fraud? If these men had two wives but one or both were collecting benefits he should be forced to reimburse them.

It seems a normal practice is to have the second wife live completely on benefits. Her benefits check will make the mortgage payment on his house. A tidy arrangement. And, like you say, all the immigrants seem to know how to work the system. They have an underground drum beat sending the message along to all new arrivals.

It's no wonder the average working family needs both incomes to survive. A whole community has filed bankruptcy. To them it is free money. Infidel money.

Posted by: Borg at March 13, 2007 10:13 AM

I am no expert on polygamy laws, but surely they can only be enforced when the man is actually legally married to more than one woman ?

In islam, they marry multiple wives under sharia law, so legally he only has one wife and the rest are mistresses or concubines. Nothing unlawful there. Immoral, maybe, but not illegal.

I have no sympathy whatsoever for this man or his family. Isn't it cute how the newspaper calls them "newcomers". And how they refer to both of his women as "wives". Kind of a slap in the face to all of us legal wives, isn't it ?

Posted by: ImNoDhimmi at March 13, 2007 10:19 AM

I wonder how many Muslim polygamists and their enormous progeny will be eligible for amnesty or guest worker status under the immigration "reform" legislation that Bush and the Democrats are pushing.

Posted by: RBLA at March 13, 2007 10:33 AM

“It’s our religion that allows men to have four wives. But two wives in the same house, it’s not so common — usually they have one wife abroad and one here.” - Ms. Dia

Thanks Tziona. The Darwin theory is useful in this context. Spreading the females and their offspring around in different locations, assures that if one group is discovered and obliterated by predators, well at least the other group is safe.

Ms. Dia also said: ". . . men traditionally bring the first wife first, but of late many prefer to bring the youngest."

The younger are fertile longer and survival of more offspring from one female, here in the hospitable, exploitable environment of America, is almost assured.

"The destruction of the institution of polygamy and the implementation of equality for women are key to the neutralisation of Jihad." - Tziona

Long term perhaps, in the meantime, Infidels, in order to assure their own survival, need to stop importing these Islamic parasites, stop conferring any status of respect, and stop all forms of aid worldwide NOW.

Posted by: Malinois at March 13, 2007 10:43 AM

If the polygamists in Arizona and Utah can be hauled into court on charges, why not Mr. Maggassa? Yes, he lost a lot of children...his fault..he had a huge amount of people crammed into a 100 year old row house and didn't have batteries in the smoke alarms. Shouldn't he be charged with criminal neglect? If that situation happened to one of those polygamists in Arizona, there would be outrage, charges filed and no sympathy shown by officials. He probably committed major welfare fraud too. The state of New York, or NYC, has most likely has paid thousands of dollars in expenses for his many children that he should have paid for as the parent. The rule of law is breaking down everywhere. I see it in my community. I must have two inspections on my new deck and all proper documentation for my dog. Two blocks from me, ten people, not family, are living in a three bedroom house, with another four or five living in the garage, sleeping on hammocks. What I am know waiting for is CAIR to step in and find some grievance for Mr. Maggassa, the Muslim polygamist, so that he can sue the city or the state for millions of dollars.

Posted by: maryrose at March 13, 2007 10:49 AM

"particularly for older men who can afford it..."

Apparently, this polygamist (this wonderful, "entrepreneur" who could afford to keep two wives), wasn't wealthy enough to afford to buy batteries for the smoke detectors -- two of which were found to be without batteries.

Posted by: J.S. at March 13, 2007 10:51 AM

I think I know the African run hair parlor on 125th st. I used to pass it on the way from the subway to the Hudson River Line train. There were always a half dozen noisy and lively W. African women in front and it looked like a marketplace in Africa. I'm sure its them - gorgeously dressed in exotic colored wraps and turbans, loud, raucous, laughing, singing, if there weren't any customers, braiding each other's hair into elaborate coifs. I could picture those lively gals telling their men to take their sharia and shove it.

All you multiculti morons - don't help silence the women of Africa into purdah wrapped ghosts. Its happening as I speak. Islam is a killjoy. Literally. It kills joy.

Posted by: poetcomic1 at March 13, 2007 12:02 PM

We realize this is a tragedy but we can't allow immigrants to be practicing polygamy here. We need to demand that our elected officials start cracking down on polygamy. Polygamy is very bad for our society.

Posted by: DavidE at March 13, 2007 12:19 PM

"Polygamy is common in Mali and throughout West Africa. But it is illegal in the United States, and it can bar immigrants from gaining permanent legal residency or citizenship".

Something tells me that hardly an immigrant is refused entry because of being a polygamist. After all, who are we to judge if this is a good or bad practice? How dare we expect foreigners to live up to long established norms in the US-heaven forbid!

Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at March 13, 2007 1:29 PM

I'm glad this outrage has come out.

It's one more piece of edicence to me why D'Souza has been so allusive, so indirect, so nebulous about what a "traditional muslim" is like. He knew that, had he been clear about it, he would have had to describe a fimily like these folks in the Bronx, as very traditional, and the truth about their values would have smelled to high heaven, and even Britney Spears would come across as--well, not preferable, but passable.

So what's to admire about the traditional Muslim family values? Polygamy? Endless silent suffering and depression on the part of the women? Promiscuity--two wives living with their large broods virtually next to each other, with children most likely competing for the attention of the father (because that's the way nature works)? Large families living on the dole, at the taxpayers' expense? How many decent Americans do you know who are willing--and happy--to live off somebody else's hard work?
I take it D'Souza is against abotion, and so am I, but simply breeding has no intrinsic value, except in catastrophic circumstances. Civilization means all the other things built around breeding, which means raising and educating the brood.
I saw a picture of some of the children (boys only) in that "extended family." They looked deeply alienated and somewhat autistic. Not your regular happy Bronx kid. And please don't tell me they were discriminated against. Their own progenitors destined them to a hell of a life--literally.

The iconic "traditional Muslim," Mr D'Souza? Here you have him, in his entire splendor.

Posted by: ovidius_naso at March 13, 2007 1:32 PM

"The iconic 'traditional Muslim,' Mr D'Souza? Here you have him, in his entire splendor."
-- from a posting above

Indeed. Very traditional.

Posted by: Hugh at March 13, 2007 1:48 PM

Polygamy is inhumane and insidious. The UK is complicit in the hideous practice of polygamy by turning a blind eye to the non-citizens’ practice of it. We should hope other Western countries don’t follow suit in the UK’s negligence, but use it as one indicator to detect those who should be deported.

Posted by: ofcourse at March 13, 2007 2:17 PM

Polygamy is not uncommon in the bronx. Here are two examples:

Case one, Mohammed has his three wives, Amina, Ayesha, and Fatima living in his townhouse. The women are kept in hijab and forbidden to talk to any men outside the family.

Case two, Marcus has three women in his stable, Latonya, Quandesha, and Lisa. He turns them out on the street corner to "service" male customers to finance their crack habits while he keeps the profits.

The two cases may seem to be polar opposites but they are really very similar. In both cases an abusive male has absolute control over the lives of three women and the women have no right to complain if they don't want to be beaten or otherwise abused. Both cases are equally immoral and destructive to the lives of all involved.

Posted by: Provoslavni at March 13, 2007 3:18 PM

Polygamy exists (openly) in Canada...There's a community in British Columbia (Bountiful, B.C.) which has a polygamous Mormon sect. The police do not dare arrest the perpetrators. Reason? Authorities are afraid that given our Supreme Court (the one which demanded that homosexuals be given the "right" to marriage), that if the polygamous men are arrested, then they will launch a Supreme Court challenge, and the next thing you know, polygamy will become a marriage option. One can only imagine what would happen to Canada's welfare system...or, for that matter, immigration...(possibly making matters even worse than they currently are)...

Posted by: J.S. at March 13, 2007 3:42 PM

“If you leave your country, you have to come with the good things, not bring the bad things with you.”

that may be The Quote of the Week !

Posted by: M Al-Content at March 13, 2007 4:41 PM

Hmmm... shouldn't the authorities worry about a nonworking smoke detector. Why are so many children and people living in cramped conditions???

Posted by: callmeinfidel at March 13, 2007 6:57 PM

Now hold on there…. Some of you are relapsing into moral relativism. First, you equate immigrant polygamists with pimps and then with Mormons. No! No! No! This is wrong on so many levels.

We can solve the problem of polygamist immigrants easily: deport them. As for Mormon polygamists and pimps, these are social issues (which should be worked on but) that our futures are hardly threatened by. Furthermore, the non-citizens are already lobbying for polygamy without the Mormon’s help. I needn’t say any more.

Posted by: ofcourse at March 13, 2007 7:25 PM

DebV,

Exactly. Both pimps and Muslims treat their women with the same level of respect, or lack thereof. At the root, there is little difference in status between women in a pimp's stable and women in a rich Saudi's harem. Both are there only to serve the man's perverted desires.

Posted by: Provoslavni at March 13, 2007 7:32 PM

The US has a strange immigration system. If a skilled worker wants to migrate to the US, it's a huge ordeal and all they can get is a temporary visa. This leaves you in a stressful limbo, worrying about the visa being cancelled, and you never feel like you can truly belong or that you are accepted.

For some, this isn't a problem, since they feel separate from you anyway. They don't want to belong, they view you as "outsiders" as the article above states.

Clearly this is a dangerous situation. There are many examples in this forum, of Muslim "immigrants" in the US, illegally, either plotting your destruction or undermining your society like with this Malian bunch. Time to do away with this separate, temporary resident class of "migrant" you are infested with. They'll bring your great country down, from within.

Posted by: feralee at March 13, 2007 8:44 PM

And the other character in the story, Mamadou Soumare is apparently an illegal immigrant, who "everyone" is clammoring to automatically be granted US citizenship.

'Mamadou Soumare was to appear Wednesday at the U.S. Citizen and Immigration Services' Manhattan office to obtain an advance parole document, which will allow him to leave the country and return.

"We're happy we're able to do it," said an agency spokesman, Shawn Saucier.

Saucier would not say what Soumare's current immigration status is, citing federal privacy laws. The native of Mali had applied for asylum in 1992, but the case was never adjudicated, said U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer.'

http://wcbstv.com/topstories/local_story_072152847.html

The video clips on the news showing hundreds of Muslim prostrating themselves on the street during the funerals were....not wonderful.

And yes, my first reaction was, shouldn't they be responsible for any violations that might have contributed to this? If there'd been a landlord, the media would be calling for their head! Of course, no comments on that issue in ANY of the news stories I saw.

Bah! I'm with Hugh; my heart was not tugged.

Posted by: Vee at March 13, 2007 10:04 PM

The politicians were out in force weren't they?
/blech!

Posted by: Carolyn2 at March 13, 2007 11:11 PM

Tziona - I'm no social anthropologist but I believe that polygamy may go hand in hand with warrior cultures in which many men die in battle and so polygamy can be justified as a way of taking care of the numerous widows. As Islam is a warrior culture (and grew out of the warrior culture of 7th century Arabia) it shouldn't be surprising that polygamy is central to its social structure. If this is indeed the case, then when we see polygamy we should at the same time see a people who have a warrior mentality. Importing polygamy, in other words, is part and parcel of importing the warrior/jihad mentality to our shores.

Posted by: Caroline at March 13, 2007 11:13 PM

And it requires an expansion mentality. After all, not all the men are going to be killed off and where do the extra men get a wife? They must bring one in from some other area. That requires conquest of other lands, which goes hand in with the war. Not just local wars, but large distance. And slave raiding expeditions when there is no war.

Posted by: Borg at March 14, 2007 6:49 PM

This warrior mentality may actually works against muslims and by a monogamist society at that! China, because of its stupid one child policy, now faces a population surplus of 50 to 100 million males. I had one Chinese friend tell men that they may seriously consider invading a neighboring country that is a "trouble maker" to kill their men and take the women.

I asked him what are trouble making countries that neighbor China? He answered North Korea, Pakistan and Afghanistan. Since they would exclude exterminating North Korean men out of deference to South Korea, that leaves Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Posted by: Provoslavni at March 16, 2007 12:20 PM