Those of us with functioning brains have known for some time that Islam is a religion comprised largely of radicals and terrorists, and while “moderates” do make up the majority of Muslims, the number of extremist Muslims is far greater than leftists lead people to believe, and there is a blurry line at best between “moderates” and “extremists”. Leftists, however, are still hanging onto the theory that there is a negligible amount of “extremist” Muslims while the overwhelming majority of Muslims are “peaceful”, and that few (if any) moderates are at risk of becoming extremists. The left’s conjecture came crumbling down in October 2016 when a self-described “moderate” Muslim student attacked innocent bystanders at Ohio State University, injuring a dozen people.
[T]here is a blurry line at best between “moderates” and “extremists”
First, the statistics. Here are the percentages of Muslims, in surveyed countries, that believe suicide bombings against civilians can be justified if they are in defense of Islam: 59% of Palestinian Muslims, 55% of Lebanese Muslims, 59% of Egyptian Muslims, 29% of Turkish Muslims, 43% of Jordanian Muslims, 61% of Bangladeshi Muslims, 32% of Malaysian Muslims, 21% of Indonesian Muslims, 46% of Tanzanian Muslims, 25% of Nigerian Muslims, 31% of Senegalese Muslims, and 46% of Israeli Muslims. It gets worse.
Islam is about as peaceful as Adolf Hitler.
Horrifyingly, large percentages of residents in Muslim-majority countries support Hamas and view the terrorist group in a favorable light (note non-Muslims are included in this question). 8% of Turks (the country is almost entirely Muslim), just under 44% of Lebanese Muslims (the only country surveyed where Muslims were counted separately)*, 39% of Jordanians (the country is 93% Muslim), 38% of Egyptians (the country is 90% Muslim), 35% of Palestinians (Palestinians are 97% Muslim), 37% of Tunisians (the country is 99% Muslim), 29% of Bangladeshis (the country is more than 90% Muslim), 21% of Indonesians (the country is 87% Muslim), 28% of Indonesians (the country is 63% Muslim), and 24% of Israeli Arabs (almost all of which are Muslim) view Hamas favorably. Here are just some of Hamas’ war crimes, which include thousands rockets at schools, densely populated cities, hospitals, and anywhere they have a chance at killing an innocent Israeli, dragging dissidents through the streets on the back of motorcycles, using human shields consistently, such as launching their rockets from atop schools and hospitals, and violating ceasefire after ceasefire, to name just a few.
[T]he Koran declares… “[Allah] has made [men] superior to [women]
The Koran, or the Islamic holy text, teaches to murder all non-believers until only those who believe in Allah remain on dozens and dozens and dozens of occasions. Furthermore, the Koran leaves no room for ambiguity on the topic of gender equality, even declaring in one verse (of many, many sexist verses) that “[Allah] has made [men] superior to [women]… and as to those women from whom you fear disobedience… beat them.” Even just as a precaution if you have suspicions of disobedience, the Koran teaches you should beat women.
Here are the long lists of the human rights violations of all the countries that run under complete Sharia law: Egypt, Sudan, Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Yemen. Just look at Sharia law, the Islamic law code, in practice, and it is quite clear that Islam is about as peaceful as Adolf Hitler.
[T]ry to be gay in one of these countries; sentences… range from decades of imprisonment to death by stoning.
Just to throw out a few more statistics, here are the traits Muslims in the Middle East associate with Westerners; 68% call us “selfish”, 64% consider us “greedy”, 61% “immoral”, and 57% “arrogant”. Just 29% see us as “generous” and 33% “honest”. If you find these stats shocking, hold onto your seat. 66%, or almost two out of every three Muslims, deem Westerners “violent”, and 57% view Westerners as “fanatical”. Remember all those facts about Muslim approval of violence and the violent teachings of the Koran? Yet two-thirds of Muslims regard us as violent, and the majority look on us as fanatics. Just 44% of Muslims consider the West to be “respectful of women”. Is this some kind of joke? Muslims could not be less respectful to women if they tried (as demonstrated by their human rights crimes), yet they label the West, where women are equal in every way to men, as disrespectful of women. But perhaps the most ridiculous stat of them all is the following; only 31% of Muslims see Westerners as “tolerant”. It is quite strange that Muslims label the West intolerant considering that all the factual evidence points towards Muslims being possibly the least tolerant group of people the world has ever seen, all the teachings of the Koran that preach to be intolerant and either kill or convert everyone, and the facts that a large percentage of Muslims support the murder of innocents for the sake of Islam and that Muslims literally kill people in the name of destroying Western society. And try to be gay in one of these countries; sentences in the aforementioned countries for being gay range from decades of imprisonment to death by stoning.
Perhaps you would argue that in predominantly Muslim countries, Muslims become radically bloodthirsty, but in “Western” countries they are absorbed into society and become normal people. First off, a religion of peace should not inevitably turn vicious in isolation, but the more important point is that reality would disagree that this is the case.
In Great Britain, 78% of Muslims want those who publish cartoons of Mohammed to be persecuted, 68% of Muslims wish for those who insult Islam to be persecuted, and 62% of Muslims are opposed to people being allowed to express criticism of Islam. 22% disagreed that religious leaders who back terrorism should be removed, 19% said they respect Osama Bin Laden, and 17% said they respect Saddam Hussein. Meanwhile, 24% thought that suicide bombings in defense of Islam can be justified.
[A] religion of peace should not inevitably turn vicious in isolation
In France, 35% of Muslims believe suicide bombings in defense of Islam can be justified. In Spain, that number is 25%, while in Germany it’s 13%. As far as acceptance of the orchestrators of the September 11th attacks goes, just 48% of French Muslims, 35% of German Muslims, 33% of Spanish Muslims, and a mere 17% of British Muslims are willing to admit that Islamic extremists carried out the attacks.
But what about the United States? Our “moderate” Muslim population is mostly averse to suicide bombings, with just 13% concluding that suicide bombings in defense of Islam can be justified. Just 40% of American Muslims concede that Islamic extremists carried out 9/11.
Islam has been the catalyst for a smidge under 20,000 dead innocents since the September 11th attacks
Why let in any Muslims at all when large percentages of them are averse to everything the West has to offer and a huge chunk of them promote terrorism against the West and its allies? Again, this is not to say that there aren’t any “good” Muslims who can fit in nicely in the West, only that the risk of letting in one Muslim who wants to destroy the West (and very well may act on it) is not worth the “reward” of two moderate Muslims integrating into society.
ISIS, the Islamic terror group, has slaughtered thousands and oppressively subjugated millions through the medium of Islam. The countries that run under Sharia law are basically hell on earth. Overall, Islam has been the catalyst for a smidge under 20,000 dead innocents since the September 11th attacks (which, as the Muslim populace is unwilling to admit, was indeed carried out by Muslim extremists). Does it sound like a “religion of peace” anymore?
In spite of all the facts, statistics, and evidence that shows that Islam is anything but a religion of peace, the left still tries to pretend this is the case. Former President Barack Obama claimed that “99.9%” of Muslims reject Islamic terrorism. It makes one wonder what world Obama thinks he’s living in, because in this one, the least you will ever see in a given country is 10% of the Muslim population supporting suicide bombings, while it is not uncommon to see that number in the 30s, 40s, and even 50s. Former presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton tweeted “Muslims are peaceful and tolerant people and have nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism.” Once again, this is demonstrably false, as not only are Muslims and violence happily bound together by the Koran, but huge percentages of Muslims, as we just went over, lobby for terrorism, and tens of thousands of people have been killed in the name of Islam in just over 15 years. The detestable Washington Post called Islam a “religion of love”, while two-thirds of Democrats believe Islam and Christianity to be equally militant (where then are all the Christians who side with violence for religion’s sake, and where are the dozens of thousands of dead bodies from Christian terrorist attacks?).
Think about it this way; when it comes to gun control, the left essentially makes the argument that even though only one-in-a-million citizens will ever misuse their gun, this is enough to necessitate extremely strict gun control (or, as leftists dream, a total gun ban). Why, then, is it immoral to bar Muslims from our country, when it is not one-in-a-million Muslims that are a threat to society, but one out of every two or three Muslims? When such a large percentage of Muslims are one step away from committing terrorist attacks against innocent Westerners, as those who approve of bloodshed in defense of Islam are just a recruitment or insult-to-Islam away from committing an act of terror, why should we let any Muslims in? When Muslims view Westerners as evil and immoral, when they bring with them a backward culture, and when they cheer the murder of innocent Americans, why welcome them into society? This is not bigotry, only national defense.
Barack Obama claimed that “99.9%” of Muslims reject Islamic terrorism.
Islam is no religion of peace, it is not true that “99.9%” of Muslims are moderated, and Islam is not just as dangerous as any other religion. When tens of thousands of innocents have been killed by a religion in the last 15 years, when the holy book teaches brutality towards and the destruction of non-believers, and when every country run under the legal code is an absolute hellhole, the religion is no longer a religion of peace, and America as the leader of the free world is certainly at war with such tyranny disguised as a religion.
This is not bigotry, only national defense.
The only things separating “extremists” from a large percentage of what the left calls “moderates” is that the former has been pushed just a little bit and has acted on its abhorrence of non-believers and Westerners. The latter, in contrast, has not yet decided that it must undertake drastic measures to defend Islam, though it certainly backs those who take such measures. To tell apart a “moderate” that supports terrorism from a “moderate” who does not is borderline impossible; when confronted and there is any incentive to lie (e.g. on immigration papers) both will attest to not being keen on violence in defense of Islam. This means there is truly no way, within reason, of knowing if a self-described “moderate” is secretly seeking to act on their hate for the West, thereby making all Muslims national security threats.
To tell apart a “moderate” that supports terrorism from a “moderate” who does not is borderline impossible
Never had this been more evident than in the case of Abdul Razak Ali Artan, a Muslim student at Ohio State University. In August of 2016, Artan was interviewed by the school newspaper. Here is what he had to say:
“I just transferred from Columbus State. We had prayer rooms, like actual rooms where we could go pray because we Muslims have to pray five times a day. There’s Fajr, which is early in the morning, at dawn. Then Zuhr during the daytime, then Asr in the evening, like right about now. And then Maghrib, which is like right at sunset and then Isha at night. I wanted to pray Asr. I mean, I’m new here. This is my first day. This place is huge, and I don’t even know where to pray. I wanted to pray in the open, but I was scared with everything going on in the media. I’m a Muslim, it’s not what the media portrays me to be. If people look at me, a Muslim praying, I don’t know what they’re going to think, what’s going to happen. But, I don’t blame them. It’s the media that put that picture in their heads so they’re just going to have it and it, it’s going to make them feel uncomfortable. I was kind of scared right now. But I just did it. I relied on God. I went over to the corner and just prayed.”
Sounds like your classic “moderate” Muslim. Nothing to see here; just an innocent Muslim trying to pray in the open, but fearful of what people will think when they see a Muslim praying considering how the evil “media” has depicted Muslims as hateful and radical (I would argue that the opposite is true; the media is happy to paint a picture of a world where Muslims are “99.9%” peaceful and then show it to viewers as if it is reality, while the truth is that Muslims are quite militant). But everything was not as it seemed.
In November of the same year, Artan drove a car through the Ohio State campus and then got out and began stabbing people. A total of 13 were injured, most of them moderately injured (let’s just hope their injuries weren’t as “moderate” as Artan), though thankfully no one died. Artan was the only one killed in the ordeal, a bullet put in his body by a heroic police officer after Artan refused orders to stand down. Artan, who had previously declared himself to be an innocent peace-loving Muslim and who had ranted about the falsely belligerent portrayal of Muslims by the media, had proven our point; it is impossible to distinguish between the most peaceful of Muslims and the most aggressive of Muslims. At least until the latter gets pushed over the edge (Artan reached his “boiling point” when he didn’t like how the United States was handling a Muslim humans rights crisis in Myanmar) and runs around stabbing people.
A total of 13 were injured, most of them moderately injured (let’s just hope their injuries weren’t as “moderate” as Artan)
Because of the inconvenience of the truth, the left is forced to lie, spin stories, ignore statistics (the left has already mastered all these), and sometimes straight-up pray for a favorable outcome when it comes to Muslims.
After the Ohio State attack, in which the police officer happened to be white and the terrorist happened to be black, some on the left tried to make the shooting a racial issue. This shtick is commonplace, and essentially follows every single police shooting of a black man (no matter how justified). But the left trying to make this about race was uniquely egregious because it wasn’t just a typical case of a police officer acting in self-defense as a black suspect was about to attack him, but a heroic officer saving countless lives by taking action and gunning down a deranged, knife-wielding man intent on murder.
[I]t is impossible to distinguish between the most peaceful of Muslims and the most aggressive of Muslims… until the latter… runs around stabbing people.
Immediately following the attack, Tariq Nasheed, a Black Lives Matter activist, tweeted “This Ohio State shooting with hero cop Alan Horujko and the Somali “terrorist” is extremely interesting.” What was interesting about what happened, why the race of either party even mattered, or why the word “terrorist” was in quotation marks was never explained, proving that this was just a lousy attempt to spin the story as to better fit the wanted narrative. What’s more expedient; a Muslim being shot down by a heroic cop after injuring a total of 13 in an act of terror, or a white police officer shooting a black man in cold blood? As a side point, if Black Lives Matter won’t denounce Tariq or any of this, we have nothing else to believe but that Black Lives Matter has no issue with it.
In December of 2015, 14 were killed and 22 were injured in a radical Islamic terrorist attack in San Bernardino, California. It was a nationwide tragedy. However, there were some among us who were privately upset not over the fact that 14 Americans were killed, but over the inconvenient religion of the shooter. Shameful.
When John Podesta, Chairman of Hillary Clinton’s failed presidential campaign, was emailed news of the terrible tragedy in an email chain (the link sent was from the news station MSNBC with Chris Hayes reporting on the incident), his response was not remorseful in the slightest. He did not talk about the 14 Americans who were killed or his sadness over the killing. He did not offer any hint of sorrow. His only words were the following disgraceful ones: “Better if a guy named Sayeed Farouk [one of the shooters] was reporting that a guy named Christopher Hayes was the shooter.” John Podesta, and we would have to assume the entire Clinton campaign as no one had any gripes about the comments, was not upset that 14 Americans had perished, but that the religion of the perpetrator didn’t fit his narrative.
Leftists do not care about the truth, they care about convenience. The truth is that Islam is a militant, barbaric, backward religion, but it would be convenient if it were peaceful, civilized, and progressive, so the left runs with the second version. This requires much mental gymnastics, lying, covering up, twisting, and distracting. But don’t worry; these things, leftists have mastered.
*This site was used to calculate percentages of Muslims who support Hamas, along with the Pew poll cited.