Malik ’18: The dangerous stupidity of Islamophobia

Opinions Columnist
Monday, November 23, 2015

I still have strong feelings about the atrocities that took place in Paris on Nov. 13. To say that I feel deep sadness for the innocent people who have suffered, that I am disgusted and angry because people who claim to share my religion have committed such heinous acts of violence, that I am scared for what will happen to Syrian refugees seeking shelter from war and that I am worried about the backlash Muslims around the world will face because of this mass killing would be a series of understatements.

What I hear on the news about how people are responding to the tragedy does not help me find peace. As an American Muslim, I am infuriated by the fact that, at a time when numerous U.S. political leaders could show compassion and understanding by expressing support for refugees and solidarity with Muslims in general, they are instead exploiting the terror caused by ISIS for their own political gains. For example, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, has asserted that while the United States should welcome Christian Syrian refugees, Muslim Syrian refugees should seek safety in Muslim countries, implying that they would pose a threat to the United States. Donald Trump, meanwhile, refused to rule out having Muslims carry special identification to signify their religion, nor is he opposed to increasing surveillance of mosques or searching Muslims without using warrants.

Such expressions are not exactly new. I am used to my religion being used as a punching bag for politicians. I remember the absurd controversy during the 2010 midterm elections around a mosque being built near Ground Zero in New York. People just wanted to have a house of worship and a community center near their homes. But this innocent desire was presented as suspicious and vile through false, prejudiced logic that equates particular acts by terrorists claiming to be Muslims with the views and actions of all Muslims. Through this way of thinking, politicians are seeking to fabricate an omnipresent yet insidious enemy: the anti-Western Muslim. This enemy is supposed to present a constant threat to this country.

Associating the actions of the Islamic State and other terrorist groups that claim to follow Islam with the entire religion of Islam in order to create the notion of a powerful anti-Western threat is asinine. Doing so ignores the fact that over 100 Muslim scholars worked on and supported an open letter last year, meant for the leader of ISIS, that relied upon the Quran to oppose ISIS’s ideological claims. The idiocy that allows one to assert that Islam in general is villainous ignores the fact that the majority of people killed by ISIS and other terrorist groups that claim to follow Islam are Muslims who refuse to obey the terrorists. Claiming that all Muslims pose a threat to the West ignores the fact that terrorists have killed scores in Baghdad, Beirut and Mali — three non-Western places. But these truths do not serve politicians’ needs. Fear does.

By presenting Islam itself as a threat to the West, politicians make the terrorists seem more numerous than they are and falsely exaggerate the threat they pose. The politicians therefore put on the masks of strong leaders by promising to take great measures to defeat the enemy.

But these politicians, like Trump and Cruz, are not strong leaders. Rather, they are complicit in the terrorists’ efforts. In an interview with the Huffington Post, journalist Glenn Greenwald explained that one of ISIS’s goals is to get Western countries “to turn against their Muslim populations,” for ISIS wants Muslims in Western countries to feel that they are unsafe and that they could never assimilate. Greenwald said the more we in the West call for and carry out anti-Muslim measures, such as increasing surveillance in or shutting down mosques, “the more we’re playing perfectly into ISIS’s hands.” Thus, the rhetoric of certain politicians is not merely incorrect but also dangerous.

The Huffington Post has a running list of Islamophobic incidents that have occurred in the United States and Canada since the atrocity in Paris. I fear that the blatant Islamophobia conveyed by these so-called leaders will make the environments in Western countries even worse for Muslims. I find it disgusting that political leaders in the United States are riding on this wave of fear that the terrorists intended to create — a wave that will cause real dangers for many innocent people.

I am deeply saddened not only by what has occurred in Paris but also by the atrocities that have taken place around the world and that have been carried out by people who are enemies of humanity in general. My thoughts and prayers are for those who have died and for those who have suffered. But I fear the suffering is not over. I dread the Islamophobic backlash that will cause innocent people who are in no way associated with or supportive of terrorist groups to get hurt. As long as these terrorist groups are active, further atrocities could occur, and in the aftermath this pattern of hatred and hostility will only add to the pain.

In this time of pain and fear, we have to respond in nondestructive ways. We should grieve, mourn, do what we can to help those who have suffered and unite through expressions of solidarity against those who have caused the tragedies, those who are opposed to all decent human beings from all backgrounds and religious faiths around the world. Taking advantage of these terrible circumstances in order to further self-interested goals is inexcusable.

Ameer Malik ’18 can be reached at


  1. The Islam of the middle east is the Christianity of 500 years ago. In Leviticus is says to kill homosexuals. The Hadith say to kill apostates, and the Koran says to kill and maim further. The difference is that Christianity has withered at the hands of secular humanism. Abolitionist Christians were on the losing side of a theological debate, as was Galileo. It was in spite of these massive anti-science, bigoted ideologies that the west has risen, not because of them. Christianity has centuries of built up “reinterpretation” to be able to explain why plainly stated commandments to stone adulterers are no longer valid, despite prior centuries of violent assurance of the opposite. We’re still struggling to keep creationism out of schools, but at least the violence is gone. Except only in the US! Radical Christians almost got the death penalty for homosexuals in Uganda.

    The Islam of the middle east is completely at odds with everything we know about equality and liberty. Every feminist, every LGBTQ activist, every peace-loving humanist should stand firmly against Islam. Why is it taboo to criticize religion? It’s an ideology, a belief that you hold, something you choose to follow. You can’t get “offended” and expect to be taken seriously. You criticize Ted Cruz. Imagine if he got offended by your comments, and your peers scorned you for such a crime? The cries of “Islamophobia” ring quite hollow.

    You are right to quickly condemn the foolish words of politicians. But we cannot let the west’s own zealots, the fundamentalist Christians and far-right conservatives, be the only people to talk honestly about Islam. You don’t get to apply a double standard. The fact that the major blocker of religious criticism is fear of *offending* shows that the religion is deeply, deeply flawed. Too weak to stand on its own morals and logic, it resorts to shaming (taking offense) in civilized countries, and violence elsewhere. We have seen this *exact* pattern play out in history time and again, and we are fools to allow barbarity for the sake of political correctness.

    • Humanist,

      I agree with most of what you write other than your comparing Christianity to Islam.

      Islam’s prophet was a sadistic megalomaniac. Jesus was the opposite and the examples they set are important to their respective adherents.

      Islam’s core tenets include the supremacism of Muslims over all others, the subjugation of non-Muslims, the right of Muslims to steal from non-Muslims, etc. Again this could not be much further from Christianity.

      Where you are correct is that many Christians have perverted their religion such that they behave no differently than Muslims who are following their religion pointblank.

      • Jesus’s message, the message of Christianity, is that you must believe or face an eternity in hell. It is not your actions that determine your fate, but whether you were a Christian. If you truly believe these claims, then the Inquisition was in fact an act of mercy. Better to suffer a small while now than forever in the afterlife. In fact, any terrible atrocity committed can be justified this way, and it was.

        It’s simply not true to say that Christianity was “perverted” for thousands of years before some Quakers thought slavery was a bad idea. Or more recently when some have though homosexuality was acceptable. Or perhaps the day of non-corruption is yet to come for the Catholic Church, when they admit AIDS is worse than condoms.

        Islam may yet be worse than Christianity, that’s easy enough to argue. But to say that Christianity doesn’t have a history of brutal barbarity and violence that was not expressly justified by the churches and the Bible, much like Islamic violence and oppression is justified by the Koran, Hadith, and imams, is to flatly contradict the facts of history and necessarily requires a reinterpretation of the texts.

        • You make a compelling case. I believe (although I could be convinced otherwise) that Christ and the Golden Rule set examples and guidance that if a Christian were to model his life on these then the slavery and atrocities would have been seen as sins.
          That said, I hear you. Even today many Christian’s interpretations of Christianity sure leaves one wondering. Nevertheless I stand by my belief that there is a world of difference between Christianity and Islam, and that it is hard to interpret Islam as anything but a supremacist and cruel religion whereas it’s a perversion to study Christ’s life and the Golden Rule and at the same time practice slavery, the Inquisition and all the other horrific Christian acts done in Christ’s name.

        • You do not make a compelling case. Islam is fundamentally unlike the other Abrahamic faiths for many reasons, chief among them a literalist interpretation. The Bible is not the divine word; it is an interpretation of the divine word, subject to the evolving judgement of different church hierarchies such as the papacy and priesthood. This fact is key to the evolution of Christianity, because worship can be restructured by church authorities to be compatible with modern ideals. Not only can Christians ignore draconian admonishments to stone adulterers, but they can do so with theological legitimacy. The Quran, however, is the divine word, a literal interpretation of the will of God. There is no Islamic hierarchy to moderate scripture and adjust it to fit the times. Imams today teach the exact same things as they did one thousand years ago.

          Islam is a repressive political ideology because it was founded upon conquering zeal and delivered at the point of a sword. Throughout the 7th and 8th century, Arab armies erupted out of Arabia and conquered the Middle East and North Africa. In so doing, they took control over a very large population of disparate peoples, with varying cultures and beliefs. In order to establish authority, Islam was used to create a unified population. This is why there are so many provisions in the Quran demanding modesty and intense devotion, and why non-Muslims are treated so poorly according to Islamic law. Jesus was marginalized in his lifetime, and Christians suffered terribly for centuries after his death. This is why the new testament, when read objectively, has a theme of charity and poverty rather than expansion and subjugation. Even the old testament is far more palatable than Islamic texts; around 20% of the Quran is devoted to the violent repression of non-Muslims.

          You also seem to want to assert that the crimes of Islam and those of Christianity have some sort of parity; that Christians committed the same crimes, just earlier in history. This is intellectually dishonest and apologetic towards Islam. First, the vogue Christian abuses to point out are the Crusades. Holy War is an entirely borrowed concept from Islam, however. Jihad was the first ever form of unified religious conquest, and the 7th and 8th centuries saw many vibrant Levantine cultures destroyed by invading Muslims. In fact, the Crusades were an attempt to retake Jerusalem after the city’s Muslim authorities had begun persecuting Christians in accordance with Islamic law. And, Christian conquest has always left societies and cultures intact. The same cannot be said for Islamic conquest, which has tragically and permanently altered the once demographically diverse Middle East. It is now inhabited by primarily by Muslim Arabs, who were once confined only to the South of the Arab Peninsula. Aramaics, Chaldeans, Syriacs and many others were completely annihilated by Muslims and have disappeared from history.

          I will give you a more tangible example. Take, for instance, Islamic and Christian iterations of slavery. Islamic slavery was savage and brutal, as black Africans were always castrated and often killed once their usefulness has expired. That is why, while we see a robust population of African Americans here in the United States, no such parallel surviving black population exists anywhere in the Muslim world. Consider as well the fact that the calls to end slavery originated in the Christian West, among abolitionist Christians. They opposed slavery because it did not square with their distinctly Christian moral barometer.

          I think all religion is negative. Christianity has had its fair share of dark times and abuse. But Islam is far and away the most destructive and retrograde force in history.

          • Slavery is not permitted in Islam. Treating your slaves harshly is a sin. Also, the Quran does not ask to treat non-Muslims harshly. You only think that either because you’ve read a translation of the Quran (most translations in non-muslim countries are completely wrong), or because you have gotten the information from an anti-Islamic website. The Quran and ahadis both do not allow Muslims to treat non-muslims with unkindness. However, there are several ahadis and verses in the Quran which tell Muslims what will happen to non-muslims on the Day of Resurrection and in the grave. This part has nothing to do with Muslims as they can’t do anything about it, and they should not be blamed for what the Quran says about non-muslims and the Hereafter. (I’m a Christian from America living in Pakistan.)

          • Slavery is not permitted, but insofar as you have slaves, you must not treat them harshly? I’m sure you see the paradox in your opening claim. How can the religion ban slavery, and simultaneously have rules regulating slavery?

            And that is probably your most coherent argument.

            It’s clear to me that you’ve never read any Islamic scripture.

            Here’s a volume of excerpts from the Qur’an alone that disprove your plainly incorrect claims:

            Allah himself fights against the unbelievers (9:30), so why should Muslims not fight in his cause rather than in the cause of evil (4:76)? )? About 19% of the Qur’an is devoted to the violent conquest and subjugation of non-Muslims across all known translations:
            “Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies of Allah and your enemies and others besides, whom ye may not know” (8:60)
            “Strive hard (Jihad) against the Unbelievers and the Hypocrites, and be firm against them. Their abode is Hell,- an evil refuge indeed.” (66:9, See also 9:73)
            Muslims are to expect a reward in this life as well as the next (4:134), so it makes sense that unbelievers should be punished in this life as well:
            “…He whom Allah sendeth astray, for him there is no guide. For them is a penalty in the life of this world, but harder, truly, is the penalty of the Hereafter…” (13:33-34)
            There are at least two places in the Quran where the violent death of non-Muslims is referred to as Allah’s reward for unbelief (2:191, 9:26), as in “such is the reward for unbelievers.” Verse 3:56, bluntly states that “those who reject faith” will be “punished with terrible agony in this world” (a vow that Muhammad and his companions personally took it upon themselves to fulfill).

            The Quran tells Muslims thate Quran tells Muslims that Allah uses them to violently punish others:
            “Fight them, them by your hands and bring them to disgrace…” (9:14)
            Verse 4:102 says Allah has prepared a humiliating torment for the disbelievers. Narrations from Muhammad’s life show little distinction between punishment from Allah violence from at the hands of faithful Muslims.

            Allah could slay unbelievers himself, but he makes it a test for Muslims to prove their faith:
            “If it had been Allah’s Will, He Himself could certainly have punished them (without you). But (He lets you fight), in order to test you, by means of others. But those who are killed in the Way of Allah, He will never let their deeds be lost” (47:4)
            One of the most violent chapters in the Quran charters Muhammad and his followers with making Islam “superior over all religions” (9:33).

            As noted, verse 8:55 compares unbelievers to animals. In keeping with this theme, the passage goes on to encourage Muslims to gain “mastery” over them and severely punish those who disobey, so as to intimidate the rest:
            “So if you gain the mastery over them in war, punish them severely in order to disperse those who are behind them, so that they may learn a lesson” (8:57).
            In the end, All beings on heaven and earth will be forced to bow down to Allah, either willingly or by force:
            “And unto Allah falleth prostrate whosoever is in the heavens and the earth, willingly or unwillingly” (13:15)
            Muslims are told that Allah “loves those who fight in his way” to make Islam “victorious over all other religions, even though the disbelievers resist” (61:4-11). Those who do resist Islam will be humiliated:
            “Those who resist Allah and His Messenger will be among those most humiliated.” (58:20 – The context for this verse is the eviction of the Jewish tribes of Medina and the confiscation of their wealth, land, and children by Muhammad).
            Non-Muslims are to be fought until religion is only for Allah:
            “And fight them until there is no more fitna (unbelief, worshipping others beside Allah), and religion is all for Allah… (8:39 – Some translate the word “fitna” as “persecution”, but in this context it means resistance to Islam – defined in the prior verse as an unwillingness to believe (see verse 38). This passage was “revealed” following a battle that Muhammad deliberately provoked. Verse 2:193 essentially says the same thing and was also “revealed” at a time when the Muslims were not under physical attack).
            Those with “diseased hearts” – which include Christians and Jews according to 5:52 – are to be “seized wherever found and slain with a (fierce) slaughter” (33:60-62) al) along with “hypocrites” (Muslims who are judged not to be true believers by their associations with unbelievers or their unwillingness to engage in Jihad).

            Non-Muslims are to be encroached on, pressured and punished by the Muslims:
            “See that we gradually reduce the land (in their control) from its outlying borders” (13:41 – See also 21:44)

            “We shall punish them gradually from directions they perceive not.” (68:44)

            “And He made you heirs to their land and their dwellings and their property, and (to) a land which you have not yet trodden, and Allah has power over all things.” (33:27, See also Bukhari 53:392)
            Allah will grant Muslims authority and power over all other people:
            “Allah has promised, to those among you who believe and work righteous deeds, that He will, of a surety, grant them in the land, inheritance (of power), as He granted it to those before them; that He will establish in authority their religion…” (24:55)
            (Muhammad’s companions continued to self-fulfill this prophecy with an aggressive and senseless military expansion that left a trail of bodies from Spain to India).

            Allah provides instructions to Muslims for dealing with unbelievers who are unwilling to accept Islamic rule:
            “Remember thy Lord inspired the angels (with the message): “I am with you: give firmness to the Believers: I will instill terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them.” This because they contended against Allah and His Messenger: If any contend against Allah and His Messenger, Allah is strict in punishment.” (8:12-13)
            Defeating non-Muslims should be easy for true believers because they are superior in intelligence and understanding:
            “O Prophet! Exhort the believers to fight. If there be of you twenty steadfast they shall overcome two hundred, and if there be of you a hundred (steadfast) they shall overcome a thousand of those who disbelieve, because they (the disbelievers) are a folk without intelligence” (8:65)
            Other verses of violence may be found here.

            Remember that the Quran says that not all men are equal according to Islam. This even applies to Muslims with regard to their aggressiveness toward unbelievers. Those who kill or are killed on behalf of Islam are more pleasing to Allah:
            “Not equal are those of the believers who sit at home… and those who strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with their wealth and lives” (4:95)


            The pattern of violence and aggressive disregard for human suffering that is persistent in Muslim history and contemporary attitude toward non-believers reflects the message of the Quran, which is one of personal superiority and arrogance.

            In today’s world, Muslim dominance is characterized by the oppression and discrimination of non-Muslims, while Muslim minorities within larger societies are distinguished by varying degrees of petulant demand, discord and armed rebellion. Few Muslims are uncomfortable with this blatant double standard, in which Islam either plays the victim or unapologetically victimizes others, depending on its position of power – and the reason is obvious.

            Islam is a supremacist ideology in which the role of non-believers is subordinate to the position of Muslims. Those who resist Islamic rule are to be fought until they are either killed or fully humiliated and forced to acknowledge their inferior status by converting to Islam or by paying a poll-tax and otherwise accepting the subjugation of their own religion.

            There is simply no other religion on earth that draws such sharp distinction between its own members and others, or devotes as much of its holiest text toward condemning and dehumanizing those who merely choose not to follow its dogma.

            So much about Islamic terrorism and the general indifference of the broader Muslim community toward the violence makes sense only against this dual nature of Islam – as does the strange willingness of Muhammad’s followers to tolerate their own subjugation under Ottoman or Arab tyrants, such as Saddam Hussein, while being violently opposed to a Jewish neighbor state.

            The apologists are correct in saying that Islam teaches love and kindness, but they fail to add that this applies only to the treatment of those within the Muslim community. Loyalty to one’s own identity group is valued above all else and empathy for those outside the faith is optional at best – and even explicitly discouraged in places.

            If this is a “misunderstanding” of Islam by modern-day “radicals,” then it is an error that the founder of Islam made as well. In Muhammad’s time, non-Muslims were put to death merely for speaking out against the new religion and its self-proclaimed prophet. Likewise, the Jews of Qurayza were summarily rounded-up and executed on Muhammad’s order, even though they had not even fought in battle.

          • geoffrobinson says:

            “Slavery is not permitted in Islam.”

            Yes it is. Muhammad had slaves. Muhammad’s example is to be followed.

            You’re making this too easy to refute.

        • Islam does not allow fighting unless provoked. Terrorists are not Muslims. If they were, they would not have attacked the Army Public School in Peshawar, Pakistan. They killed more than 200 children there, and later threatened to carry out their next attack on a school in Lahore (I’m a Christian living there). If terrorists ARE muslims, then why are they attacking people in Pakistan, who happen to be muslims as well?

          When I moved from America to Pakistan to study, I was extremely Islamophobic. I would stay away from everyone in fear. Then, a group of girls came to me and invited me to study with them. When I told them I was Christian, they didn’t seem to care. They would like comparing Islam with Christanity and they would always start with a ‘Forgive me if I’m wrong, but…’ So, if they are ready to accept us, why can’t we be ready to accept them? They admit it if they’re wrong about our religion, yet we don’t. We insist that we’re right even though all the information we have of Islam is usually from anti-Islamic websites.

          • geoffrobinson says:

            “Islam does not allow fighting unless provoked.”

            Some of them have a hair-trigger definition of “provoked”.

    • ShadrachSmith says:

      Today’s humanists see humans as a cancer on the planet. They are almost as bad as the moslems and politically side with the moslems against christians.

      The point is that moslems’ god told them the murder of kafir to advance the faith or faithful pleases their god, and some moslems believe that, and those moslems form Jihad against the world specializing in murder, rape, torture, and enslavement of entire populations somewhere on earth every day of the 21st century so far…and that’s OK with the rest of the moslems.

      So I don’t like moslems, much.

  2. “…and that I am worried about the backlash Muslims around the world will face because of this mass killing would be a series of understatements.”


    That’s funny because I am a lot more worried about Islam’s next victims. Be it those murdered in a hotel in Mali, Jewish women stabbed to death in Jerusalem, the people of Brussels who are hiding indoors, the people attending the German soccer match where an ambulance filled with explosives was discovered.


    Until your people can stop their endless killing, their death threats and their declared hatred of America I care not at all for them. My concern is with their victims and their loved ones.


    Furthermore I am sick and tired of Muslims like you who are more worried about the backlash, the anger aimed at you people for behaving as inhumane barbarians while quoting chapter and verse from the Qur’an to justify the barbarism.


    I am all for welcoming Syrian refugees — the Christian ones. I am all for welcoming Hindu refugees — those fleeing Muslim persecution in Pakistan and Bangladesh. But I will stand with any politician who fights against Muslim immigration. Particularly since in a significant percentage of the Muslim terrorists in the west are second generation Muslims — Muslims who are not poor, who are educated, and who end up killing in the name of Allah.

  3. “…I am infuriated by the fact that, at a time when numerous U.S. political leaders could show compassion and understanding by expressing support for refugees and solidarity with Muslims in general, they are instead exploiting the terror caused by ISIS for their own political gains.”
    Compassion for a people who participated in the Paris bloodshed? You’re kidding, right?

    Three of the Muslim terrorists in Paris were Syrian refugees and you’re upset that some of us in the west would rather welcome people into our country – people who have shown a love for our country – than a people who want to destroy us from within?
    I have come to believe Islam is such a controlling ideology that it destroys Muslims ability to look at their religion or their people objectively.

    Islam means submission; submission of the individual to collective group-think. Muslim concepts like apostasy, I am convinced, along with the demand that Muslims submit – that they give up intellectual freedoms – makes Muslims like you Ameer incapable of seeing Islam objectively.

    Your religion, Ameer, has caused more pain and suffering than anything else imaginable. And I do not mean just in the last decade, I mean historically.

    Historians say, for instance, that Muslim jihadists are responsible for 70 million Hindu deaths in southern Asia. Muslim jihadists killed or forcibly converted every single Buddhist in Afghanistan. The killing left in Islam’s wake is unimaginable yet one never hears of an American Muslim acknowledging this reality. Objectivity is not your strong suit.

    • thara ravishanker says:

      So do Christians yet I don’t see you complaining about it.

      • Hey, Christians have done equally horrific things as Islam but there is a difference. When Christians kill they are sinning. When Muslims kill they are promised virgins in Paradise.
        The difference between Islam and Christianity are like night and day, but we’re all people susceptible to all the same wanton acts as the next guy.
        But, again, when a religious ideology promotes violence as does Islam it is statistically more likely to find violence associated with it. An ideology that teaches hate versus when that tries to teach love and compassion for all will far more likely reap what it sows.

        • When Muslims kill they are sinning as well. Terrorists are brainwashed to think the complete opposite. Don’t forget that Pakistan is a Muslim country which is constantly being attacked by terrorists. Also, many Islamic buildings in Saudi Arabia are being destroyed by terrorists. Do you still think they’re true Muslims? A few of my Muslims friends told me that when you kill a person, their sins are transferred to you. Islam is a peaceful religion and I admit I did not think so when I used to live in America. Also, Hindus WERE killed in South Asia, but do you even know why? Do you know how the Muslims’ Prophet used to treat non-muslims? We argue with Muslims saying we know more about Islam than them. I find this completely stupid. All the information we will ever find will either be derived from an anti Islamic website or be written by someone Islamophobic. Also, according to an FBI Report, only 6% of terrorists are Muslims.

  4. “Taking advantage of these terrible circumstances in order to further self-interested goals is inexcusable.”
    Coming from you, Ameer, this is almost funny.

  5. ShadrachSmith says:

    This is a really simple situation. Jihad is the greatest source of man’s inhumanity to man in the 21st century. Jihad is the ugly child of Islam, and where Islam goes there is Jihad. Since Jihad is evil, I will not welcome Jihad into my home, because every organism has the natural right to self-defense.

    The Democrats are willing to embrace that evil in the hopes that all 3rd world immigrants will vote Democrat and the murders are just a bump in the road to that higher goal of Democrat victory.

    Really simple stuff.

    • According to an FBI report, only 6% of the people carrying out this so-called ‘Jihad’ are Muslim. Get your facts straight.

  6. I agree completely. People can discuss their ideas about Islam elsewhere; if they believe it’s tenets are objectionable, they may respectfully introduce their own point of view. However, their is nothing in the world that can justify violence against normal people trying to live their lives. Hatred only breeds more hatred, and this can never help the world. ISIL is a group of savages who have taken to most fundamental and mindless stance possible and ignored the important of mercy and love in the process. They do not represent true Islam.

    Thank you for speaking on this issue. I believe that it is important and I deeply appreciate your perspective.

    • Clearly you’ve never read the Koran. Both the Koran and the Hadith repeated, explicit commands to kill apostates, scourge disobedient wives, and terrorize infidels. Mohammed spread Islam by the sword and kept child wives. Osama bin Laden, ISIL, and other extremists offer a version of Islam firmly rooted in its texts. For comparison, the WBC find clear condemnation (to death, actually) of homosexuals in the Bible, and abolitionists in the 19th and early centuries had to reckon with a Bible that clearly enjoined them to keep slaves.

      The idea that we can fence off one particular ideology from criticism – “Islamophobia” – is far more dangerous, in an actual real sense, than hurt feelings.

      • The translations and copies of the Quran sold in the US are fake. A lot of ahadis on the internet are also fake. Apostates are supposed to be given 3 choices: accept islam, payement of tax or war. Most apostates chose war.

  7. Man with Axe says:

    Your concern over a backlash, while not totally irrational, seems misplaced. The real danger is the one posed by Muslims. I’m reminded of the old joke about two liberals who are walking down a road when they come upon a man viciously beaten and left for dead in a ditch. “We must find the people who did this,” one of them says. “They need help.”

    You use the phrase “people who claim to share my religion.” Don’t they actually share it? Or are you a victim of the “no true Scotsman” fallacy? How do we know Obama is a Christian and not a Muslim? Because he says so. How do we know the ISIS murderers are Muslim? Because they say so. What other evidence could there be? The horrors they commit do not preclude their belief in Islam.

    No one claims that all Muslims pose a terror threat to the West. That is a straw man. The strongest reasonable anti-Muslim claim is that most of the terror threats posed to the West are posed by Muslims. I don’t see how that claim can be refuted. I don’t see how it can be ignored.

  8. Get over your tears for Islam, Malik. The killing was inspired by Islam, committed by Islamists fanatics, and it represents the vast, vast majority of terrorism and violence perpetrated around the world today. Outside of Brown, the real world knows we’re in for a battle to the death to preserve our Constitutional freedoms *and* our freedom of religion all in one. And the enemy are the fanatical Islamists. It is asinine to assert that just because these fanatics also kill Muslims that they will go away if we just downplay them.

    What fuels the recruiting of more and more fanatical Islamists isn’t what we in the West are doing, or what Trump or Cruz are saying. What dumb assertions. In fact, it’s one thing — success. When they kill, when they intimidate, when they silence, they get momentum. This is what gets them recruits, and funding. This is what creates the impression of inevitability on their side that brings in all the growing support.

    The lectures on how to be sensitive to the nuances of Muslims, to find solidarity and sympathy with our enemies, is reaching the end, don’t you think? We really have only one choice — end the successes of these extreme jihadist Islamists. It’s not rocket science, though I hope we use both in the process.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *