ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Home Page

Immigration Daily


Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board



Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation


CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network




Connect to us

Make us Homepage



The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of
free information!
© 1995-
Immigration LLC.

View RSS Feed

Immigration Law Blogs on ILW.COM

Muslim UK Immigrant Killed by Fellow Muslim Over Easter Greetings. Roger Algase

Rate this Entry
The Washington Post reports on March 29 that a Glasgow, Scotland shopkeeper and Pakistani Immigrant, Asad Shah, was killed by another Muslim who allegedly drove 200 miles to murder him after Shah sent Easter Greetings to his Christian friends, neighbors and customers. According to the WP story, Shah was known and loved by everyone in his neighborhood as a man who respected and cared about everyone regardless of religion.

One of the vigils in his honor was attended by the Scottish first minister. Shah belonged to the community of Ahmadiyyah Muslims, who are known for their tolerance and acceptance toward other religions. The WP reports that the majority Sunni Muslims, to whom his alleged killer belongs, consider the Ahmadiyyah Muslims as heretical.

Certainly, no one in his right mind would want to let the alleged killer into the United States, and there will no doubt be questions about how he was allowed into the UK (if he was not born there). Obviously, tighter background checks to weed out potential killers and terrorists are needed.

But Donald Trump would also have banned Asad Shah, who gave his life for the ideal of religious tolerance, from entering the US, merely because he was also a Muslim, despite the fact that most victims of killings and atrocities by ISIS and other Muslim extremists have also been Muslims. Is this what America really stands for?

(I do not have a link to the WP story - please check out their March 29 home page.)
Roger Algase is a New York immigration lawyer and a graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School. For more than 35 years, he has been helping mainly skilled and professional immigrants from many different parts of the world obtain work visas and green cards.

Roger believes that tolerating or promoting prejudice against or denial of basic rights to any group of immigrants on racial or religious grounds puts the freedoms of all Americans, and the foundations of our democracy itself, in danger. His email address is

Roger Algase
Attorney at Law

Submit "Muslim UK Immigrant Killed by Fellow Muslim Over Easter Greetings. Roger Algase" to Facebook Submit "Muslim UK Immigrant Killed by Fellow Muslim Over Easter Greetings. Roger Algase" to Twitter Submit "Muslim UK Immigrant Killed by Fellow Muslim Over Easter Greetings. Roger Algase" to Google Submit "Muslim UK Immigrant Killed by Fellow Muslim Over Easter Greetings. Roger Algase" to StumbleUpon Submit "Muslim UK Immigrant Killed by Fellow Muslim Over Easter Greetings. Roger Algase" to Reddit Submit "Muslim UK Immigrant Killed by Fellow Muslim Over Easter Greetings. Roger Algase" to Digg Submit "Muslim UK Immigrant Killed by Fellow Muslim Over Easter Greetings. Roger Algase" to

Updated 03-30-2016 at 06:30 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs

Tags: None Add / Edit Tags


  1. MKolken's Avatar
    "The Department of Homeland Security under the Obama Administration is already racially profiling and discriminating against Muslim migrants, by holding detainees for indefinite and extended periods of time, setting unusually high bond amounts, and now preparing to deport Muslim detainees en masse to their potential deaths."

  2. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    It sounds as if Trump (and Cruz) are already in charge of US immigration policy, without either one having been elected president. Is Obama consulting with them when he draws up lists of people to deport? Seems like it.

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law
  3. Nolan Rappaport's Avatar
    Roger, when are you going to get your facts straight? Trump said we should ban Muslims temporarily until the government can find a way to identify the terrorists among them. That had nothing to do with religion. I don't know, but I suspect that he was referring to the statements the FBI director and the DHS Secretary had made about not being able to do background security clearances on Syrian refugees. Certainly their statements support his proposal to the extent that it applies to Syrian refugees anyway.

    Why can't you respond to what Trump says on the merits instead of distorting his comments and claiming that he hates this or that group? Is it because you can't think of an objective reason for rejecting his proposal to ban all Muslims?
  4. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    Sure, Nolan, somewhere in the sewer of hatred and racism that Donald Trump comes from, there is no doubt an "objective" reason for barring 1.6 billion Muslims around the world, purely on the basis of religion, without any evidence of actual terrorist sympathies or connections.

    In the 1920's, another rich and successful business tycoon, Henry Ford, whose anti-Semitic views influenced Hitler, also had "objective" reasons for wanting to cut off Jewish immigration to the US. These views actually became law, in the 1924 Immigration Act.

    By drastically reducing or eliminating quotas for Jewish immigrants (or for the countries that most of them came from), that law condemned millions of Jewish refugees who might otherwise have been able to find refuge in the America to death in Hitler's concentration camps and gas chambers.

    You tell me what Henry Ford's "objective" reasons were for excluding Jewish immigrants then, and I will tell you what Donald Trump's "objective" reasons are for excluding Muslim immigrants now.

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law
    Updated 03-30-2016 at 08:53 AM by ImmigrationLawBlogs
  5. Nolan Rappaport's Avatar
    Don't stop. Explain why Trump's proposal is unwarranted and offer a way to screen out the terrorists so Muslim immigrants will not be a threat. If trump wants to keep them out anyway, you will have a rational objective basis for saying he is anti Muslim.
  6. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    Since Nolan is eager for an "objective" justification for Trump's proposed Muslim immigration ban, I will provide one: All fascist and proto-fascist demagogues, who, like Trump, seek to gain power by violence, support for torture and by threatening, humiliating and intimidating their opponents, need scapegoats in order to gain support by stirring up hate against an unpopular group or groups of people.

    For Hitler, it was the Jews and the Gypsies, both of whom he tried to exterminate. Trump is not another Hitler and does not support genocide. But he is an authoritarian who has shown little or no respect for democratic procedures during his violence prone campaign so far.

    Trump also needs scapegoats. There, in a nutshell, is the "objective" reason for his attacks against Muslim and Mexican immigrants. Yes, Donald Trump is just the right person to Make America Hate Again.

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law
    Updated 03-30-2016 at 09:16 AM by ImmigrationLawBlogs
  7. Unregistered222's Avatar
    Irrelevant personal comment has been deleted.

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law
    Updated 03-30-2016 at 08:10 AM by ImmigrationLawBlogs
  8. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    I will make one further comment with regard to Nolan's argument that Trump's proposed ban on Muslim immigration is only "temporary", until we (he) can "figure out what is going on". What does that mean? As an example, Nolan cites what he perceives as difficulties in doing background checks on Syrian refugees, who amount to an estimated 4 million people in total.

    But there are approximately 1.6 billion Muslims in the world, all of whom Trump wants to ban from entering the US, whether they have any connection with Syria or not. Using rough arithmetic, for every single Muslim who is a Syrian refugee, there are more than 250 Muslims in the world who have nothing to with Syrian refugees.

    Syrian refugees are not a very good excuse for proposing a world-wide ban on Muslim immigration to the US. Exploiting anti-Muslim hatred is a much more likely motive

    And Trump's proposed ban would be indefinite, until he has things "figured out". Has what figured out? Trump doesn't say.

    There have been tensions between the Muslim and Christian parts of the world for well over a thousand years. Is that what Trump wants to "figure out" before letting any more Muslims into the United States?

    Again, he doesn't say. Nolan should spare us the spin about the supposed time "limits" on Trump's proposal to ban all of the world's followers of a religion he doesn't like from coming to the US, unless Nolan has special insights into the inner workings of Trump's mind.

    In this case, "temporary" could just as easily mean "for the indefinite future" - years, decades, forever. There can be little doubt that this is what Trump's Islamophobic supporters think he means, and that is why his proposal is so popular with them.

    As a distinguished and highly expetienced lawyer and legal scholar, Nolan knows as well as anyone else, if not even better, that Trump has not placed either a time limit or any conditions on his proposed ban on Muslim immigration. It is time to stop making distorted excuses for Donald Trump's foray into the realm of immigration policy based on open religious bigotry.

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law
    Updated 03-31-2016 at 09:18 AM by ImmigrationLawBlogs
  9. MKolken's Avatar

    The Obama administration's policy of persecuting Muslims on account of their faith and national origin is widespread and has already been implemented with impunity.


    And see:
    Updated 03-30-2016 at 01:46 PM by MKolken
  10. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    Matt's reports are doubly chilling because the harassment on the rounds of religion is being directed against US citizens. A "benign" way of looking at this would be that we are moving back to the McCarthy era with Muslims as the targets instead of Communist sympathizers.

    A less "benign" interpretation is that America is capable of going fascist even without Donald Trump. But in the incidents that Matt mentions, at least the Muslim Americans involved were able to get back into their own country without physical harm.

    If Donald (or even Ted) becomes president, Muslim American citizens may find themselves being kept out by a Wall, summarily arrested and illegally deported if already in the US, or sent to Japanese-American "relocation" style concentration camps.

    And this won't necessarily stop at only Muslims. That could just be the beginning. Torture might very likely also become widely used in America, and against Americans of every background or persuasion, not only Muslims or foreign citizens.

    Don't take my word for it. Donald has already in effect promised us that this will happen.

    This is not a site for discussion of religious opinion, and purely on religious matters, my own beliefs and views are fundamentally different from and incompatible with those of Islam. The same could be said of most Americans, since Muslims are only a small minority in this country.

    But if those of us who do not happen to be Muslims fail to stand up for the basic rights of our fellow Americans or immigrants who are Muslims, our own freedoms will be the next to disappear.

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law
    Updated 03-31-2016 at 09:21 AM by ImmigrationLawBlogs
  11. Unregistered222's Avatar
    I will only permit rational comments which have at least some relation to the subject matter to remain posted here. This site welcomes legitimate disagreement about the topic, not purely personal insults. The Internet offers plenty of other opportunities for those - elsewhere.

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law
    Updated 03-31-2016 at 08:32 AM by ImmigrationLawBlogs
  12. MKolken's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by ImmigrationLawBlogs
    If Donald (or even Ted) becomes president, Muslim American citizens may find themselves being kept out by a Wall, summarily arrested and illegally deported if already in the US, or sent to Japanese-American "relocation" style concentration camps.

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law
    You mean like this? U.S. Citizen with Hispanic name taken into immigration custody.
    or this: Abuses against Transgender Women in Immigration Detention
    or this: I know an American 'Internment' Camp When I see One.

    Point being, if Liberals focused their energies on exposing the actions of the current occupant of the White House, rather than obsessing over what a Republican might hypothetically do maybe some problems could be solved. Instead, Obama gets a pass while more abuses of immigrants are perpetrated than at any time since another Democrat rolled his wheelchair over the Constitution committing human rights violations against Japanese Americans in the process.

    But something tells me that this really is less about addressing human rights violations, and more about ensuring that the next occupant of the White House also has a D after her name. You know, the one that wanted to deprive immigrants of due process of law, and deport refugee children to send a message.

    Roger, if a Republican actually wins this fall (doubtful), you can rest assured I will turn my sights on them. Until then, I'm too busy putting out fires started by the current administration to care what Donald Trump tweeted. It's called triage.

    And incidentally, vote Gary Johnson for President, and Make America Sane Again.
  13. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    I agree with Matt about the need for triage in dealing with the administration's persecution of Muslims and immigrants in general. As I understand the word "triage", it means focusing all our efforts on dealing with the most urgent cases that we have the power to do something about.

    Matt apparently believes that the most urgent order of business is to call out the current administration for its failures to follow the law and respect the basic rights of immigrants (and minority US citizens). This is certainly a worthy and important goal.

    But does it meet the triage test of being more critical and urgent than any other threat to our immigration system and immigrant rights that is facing America now?

    My answer is that it does not, not so long as there is any serious chance that Donald Trump could become president. No one can possibly say that this is beyond the bounds of reasonable possibility. Even if Trump fails to receive the Republican nomination, he still has a fair chance of winning as a third party candidate. No one can rule him out.

    I am not a political pundit, and I realize this is not a site for political prognostication. But almost everyone agrees that the pundits and politicians have underestimated Trump up to now, and that this mistake has helped him to get to the point where he is today.

    There is also a good argument that Hillary Clinton might not be nearly as strong a candidate as most people seem to think she is, even if she does not get indicted in the current FBI investigation of her emails (which no one commenting on this site seems to take seriously except Nolan Rappaport - and maybe we should all listen to Nolan a little more closely on this issue).

    And what chance would Bernie Sanders have of beating Trump, if Hillary doesn't get the nomination? It is not so easy to dismiss the possibility of a Trump presidency.

    And then what? If Trump becomes president, can anyone guarantee that he would not close America's borders entirely in his inaugural address? And thinking he would stop at that could be overly optimistic. It would not be surprising if he also revokes (retroactively) birthright US citizenship by fiat for the children of "illegals", or even children whose parents had visas which Donald once used to like so much but has now soured on - such as H-1B.

    Can anyone be sure that Trump would not also announce he is suspending the Constitution, including the Bill of Rights, in the same inaugural address?

    Of course, no one would be able to speak out against this or oppose it without being "roughed up" by US officials under Trump's control, very possibly in concentration camp style "relocation centers" where all Americans, not only Muslims, would learn - under torture, of course, how to Make America, Really, Truly, Great Again.

    If Matt wants to vote for Gary Johnson, fine - go ahead. It might be the last chance to do so, because if Donald wins this election, we might not have another one in 2020.

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law

    Updated 03-31-2016 at 07:31 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs
  14. MKolken's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by ImmigrationLawBlogs
    But does it meet the triage test of being more critical and urgent than any other threat to our immigration system and immigrant rights that is facing America now?
    President Obama's current policies are the most urgent threat to immigrants in the history of this country. And he has blood on his hands.
  15. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    I am not arguing with Matt about the seriousness or evil of Obama's anti-immigrant persecution. Nor am I trying to make excuses for Obama.

    My only point is that things can become much, much worse, not only for immigrants but for all Americans who support immigration, if Donald Trump becomes president. We have Donald's promise of that, in his own words and actions.

    To take an example from still-recent history, German nationalism and militarism were a big problem for the world before Hitler came on the scene. They were the cause of WW1.

    But Hitler expanded on this already existing ideology and took it to an entirely new, and even more destructive level. Again, i am not comparing Trump with Hitler. Trump does not advocate or support genocide or extermination of any given race or group of people.

    But Trump has given many indications of favoring dictatorship over democracy. He has also proposed radical changes in our immigration system, including barring members of one of the world's leading religions from America, purely on religious grounds and in direct opposition to the spirit of religious freedom embodied in the first amendment to the constitution and the principles on which our nation was founded.

    He has also promised to abolish most, if not all, of our skilled worker legal immigration system.

    Again without making excuses for Obama, his anti-immigrant actions are like a rowboat sinking, compared to Trump's taking power, which would be like the Titanic going down. We should not remain blind to this danger.

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law

    Updated 04-01-2016 at 01:59 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs
Put Free Immigration Law Headlines On Your Website

Immigration Daily: the news source for legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers Enter your email address here: