French Muslims: ‘Jews’ Are Behind Paris Attacks’


PJ Media, by Michael Van Der Galien, Nov. 21, 2015:

After the terrorist attacks in Paris, Canadian journalist and entrepreneur Ezra Levent hopped on a plane to France. His mission? To interview French Muslims about the attacks. He wanted to know their views: who committed these horrific attacks, does it have anything to do with islam, and does this mean France is at war? If so, a war against whom?

Now, Levant published a 20-minute video with highlights of these interviews. Although the conversations are in French, his organization Rebel Media put English subtitles below them. The results are both troubling and, in some way at least, reassuring.

Let me start with the reassuring part. Most French Muslims Levant talked to condemned the attacks. They made clear they don’t want to have anything to do with ISIS and don’t share the organization’s views and goals.


So far, so good.

However, many of them also said some things that are extremely troubling. For example, almost every single one of them said ISIS can’t possibly have anything to do with Islam. Muslims can’t kill innocent people, they say, so ISIS-terrorists aren’t Islamic.


Although that may make them feel better about their faith, the problem with that attitude is that it denies reality. If Radical Islam is to be defeated, non-extremist Muslims have to be honest with themselves about the problems within their faith. Sadly, many of them clearly aren’t prepared to do so.


What’s more, while condemning the attacks and claiming the terrorists can’t possibly be Islamic, many of the interviewees put the blame on… Jews.


And it’s not just Jews who are responsible for ISIS, say these ‘moderate’ French Muslims. No, when push comes to shove, it’s actually an American organization:


In other words, ISIS isn’t Islamic at all! Nope, as far as these enlightened adherents of the Islamic faith are concerned, the group is nothing more or less than a cabal of “really sick” Jews and their capitalist American friends:


As Levant points out in his video, the most troubling part of this is that the interviewee who made this statements doesn’t look like a radical Muslim at all. He’s not wearing traditional Arabic clothes, nor does he have a long beard. “He looks like a hipster”: an average guy and active participant in French society.

Yet his views are anti-American, anti-Semitic and, dare I say it, downright fundamentalist.

It would be one thing if the man who said this was the exception, but Levant’s video proves that not to be the case. Many other French Muslims – men who appear to be completely normal – share his ideas.


All in all, Levant says about half of the French Muslims he spoke to told him that ISIS was created by “the Jews” and America.


Their reasoning is simple: Muslims don’t kill other people, and especially not fellow Muslims. ISIS kills innocent people – and especially Muslims (in their eyes) – and so the group can’t possibly be Islamic. It’s as simple as 1+1=2.

On the other hand, these people are convinced that Jews do kill innocent people – and Muslims most of all.


To summarize: ISIS “is an organization that follows the United States and the Jews.”


So, at best French Muslims are in denial about ISIS’ Islamic views, and at worst, they blame “the really sick Jews and Americans” for the rise of the organization and its attacks in Paris last week.

If it proves one thing it is that France has a massive Islamic problem on its hands.

Watch the video:


Ezra Levant of talks to Marc Lebuis, who directs Point de Bascule Canada. This website investigates Muslim organizations and individuals and their terror.

Lebuis helps Ezra and his viewers understand the interviews Ezra conducted in Paris during his post-terror attack trip to France:

51% of U.S. Muslims Want Sharia. What could possibly go wrong?

quran (3)

Frontpage, by Robert Spencer, Oct. 16, 2015:

Lost in the controversy over Ben Carson’s remarks on Sharia and a Muslim President was the fact that a recent poll bears out his concerns.

Investigative journalist Paul Sperry reported during the Carson brouhaha that “Muslims living in the U.S….just this June told Polling Co. they preferred having ‘the choice of being governed according to Shariah,’ or Islamic law.” He also noted “the 60% of Muslim-Americans under 30 who told Pew Research they’re more loyal to Islam than America.”

Many key Muslim leaders in the U.S. have said the same thing. “Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on earth.” So said the cofounder and longtime Board chairman of the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), Omar Ahmad, back in 1998. He has since denied saying this, but the original reporter stands by her story.

Ahmed’s longtime colleague, Hamas-linked CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper, said in 1993: “I wouldn’t want to create the impression that I wouldn’t like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future.”

Another prominent Muslim leader in the U.S., Siraj Wahhaj, said back in 2002: “If only Muslims were clever politically, they could take over the United States and replace its constitutional government with a caliphate.”

Younger Muslims have expressed the same sentiments. “We reject the U.N., reject America, reject all law and order. Don’t lobby Congress or protest because we don’t recognize Congress. The only relationship you should have with America is to topple it. . . . Eventually there will be a Muslim in the White House dictating the laws of Shariah.” That was Muhammad Faheed, a young Muslim leader at a Muslim Students Association meeting at Queensborough Community College in 2003.

Some may object that none of these quotes are newer than twelve years old. One wonders, then, what transformation in Islam in the United States has taken place over the last twelve years to make it likely that these men have changed their views.

Others may suggest that these men don’t speak for the vast majority of Muslims. If that is so, however, then where is the Muslim group that equals the power and influence of Hamas-linked CAIR while eschewing jihad violence, Islamic supremacism, and any desire to impose Sharia in the United States now or in the future? Where is the Muslim student group that rivals the Muslim Students Association in the number of campuses on which it has chapters (the MSA has hundreds, all over the country) while rejecting all attachment to the aspects of Sharia that are incompatible with U.S. law, such as its denial of the freedom of speech and of the equality of rights of women and non-Muslims?

And there are others as well. Sperry quotes Muzammil Siddiqi, the chairman of the Fiqh Council of North America and the North American Islamic Trust: “As Muslims, we should participate in the system to safeguard our interests and try to bring gradual change, (but) we must not forget that Allah’s rules have to be established in all lands, and all our efforts should lead to that direction.”

Sperry also quotes the Imam Zaid Shakir, co-founder of Zaytuna College in Berkeley, California, has said: “If we put a nationwide infrastructure in place and marshaled our resources, we’d take over this country in a very short time….What a great victory it will be for Islam to have this country in the fold and ranks of the Muslims.”

Really, what did you expect? Islam has been supremacist, authoritarian, and expansionist since its inception. U.S. Muslims are not from some sect that rejects all that. Yet a considerable portion of U.S. domestic and foreign policy is based on the assumption that Islam in the U.S. will be different: that Muslims here believe differently from those elsewhere, and do not accept the doctrines of violence against and subjugation of unbelievers that have characterized Islam throughout its history.

But on what is that assumption based? Nothing but wishful thinking. And future generations of non-Muslims will pay the price.




Breitbart, by Oliver Lane, Oct. 15, 2015:

Research in the European microcosm nation of Denmark has found three-quarters of Muslims in the country register on an important measure for radicalisation – more now than a decade ago.

Whereas 10 years ago Muslims in Denmark could have been considered to be comparatively moderate, today a poll by newspaper Jyllands-Posten finds attitudes have hardened – and the younger the Muslim, the more likely they are to hold hard-line views.

In a series of polls released by the paper over the course of this week, it has been revealed that Muslims are now more likely to take the word of the Quran literally, and that the teaching of the Islamic holy book should be implemented directly. In 2006 the number of people who agreed with the statement “the Quran’s instructions should be followed completely” was 62 per cent – today it has grown to 77 per cent; a strong majority.

While many have argued that the more violent verses of the Quran, which includes commandments to slay the enemies of the religion, have been taken out of context and are not to be interpreted literally, the view of three quarters of Muslims living in Denmark seems to contradict this view.

As well as taking the faith more literally, Muslims in Denmark also practice it with greater devotion, with more than half now praying at least five times a day, and a similar proportion rejecting the notions of any form of modernisation or reformation.

Jyllands-Posten reports this attitude towards a possible Islamic reformation came as a great disappointment to the small, elite group of Muslims that exist within the fashionable and powerful neighbourhoods of Copenhagen, such as Conservative member of parliament Naser Khader, who campaigns for such a reformation.

The paper reports the comments of one left-wing campaigner of Syrian Muslim heritage, who said in response to the poll’s findings that the fact Danish Muslims weren’t on board with their modernising mission was because the message had been mis-worded, and a rebranding of the concept of reformation would bring them up to date and in line with her metropolitan ideals. Contradicting this conceit, the paper also printed the remarks of Imam Fatih Alev of the Danish Islamic Centre, who said: “You can not change what is in the Quran and what the prophet has told us we need to do. Then you are not a Muslim any-more”.

On integration, attitudes towards the children of Muslim families marrying non-Muslims in Denmark varied. While a minority supported the idea of a daughter marrying someone outside the faith, a remarkable 74 per cent said they would be happy for a son to marry a non-Muslim.

This may be less surprising considering the literal interpretation of the Quran now enjoyed by the majority of Muslims in Denmark allows for polygamy, and for some wives to be treated less kindly than others.

Sociologist Brian Arly Jacobsen of the University of Copenhagen expressed surprise at the finding.

He told the paper: “It seems that Danish Muslims have become more religious in all dimensions, both in terms of faith and practice. Generally, we would expect that the opposite would happen, and that they would eventually come to resemble the rest of the Danes, who are not particularly religious activity”.

He said the opening of 30 new mosques in the past decade was likely the main cause of the radicalisation, a key warning to other European nations presently planning to allow the construction of mosques to serve their own booming Muslim populations. Perhaps most telling of all are the comments of Free Press Society chairman Katrine Winkel Holm, who said of the findings that they were a sign of Islamist forces within Denmark “unfolding at full speed”.

That Danish Muslims are now more hardline today than they were ten years ago should concern freedom of the press campaigners in the nation. It was back in 2005, a mere decade ago that cartoonists working with the Jyllands-Posten were threatened with execution, and massive protests spread from the nation worldwide after the paper published depictions of Mohammed.

The news reflects a trend also observed in Britain. In 2007 it was revealed that a staggering 36 per cent of young Muslims believe the act of leaving Islam deserves death.

Brigitte Gabriel VVS15 Talks Pew Poll on Sharia Law


Published on Oct 1, 2015 by Brigitte Gabriel

ACT for America president and founder Brigitte Gabriel talks about “moderate Muslims” in the top 5 Islamic countries and how they voted on Sharia Law. Gabriel message: Heed a warning from a victim of Islamic extremism.

Join ACT’s Refugee Resettlement Working Group



Meanwhile, An Islamic Fifth Column Builds Inside America by Paul Sperry

In berating GOP presidential hopeful Ben Carson for suggesting a loyalty test for Muslims seeking high office, CNN host Jake Tapper maintained that he doesn’t know a single observant Muslim-American who wants to Islamize America.

“I just don’t know any Muslim-Americans — and I know plenty — who feel that way, even if they are observant Muslims,” he scowled.

Tapper doesn’t get out much. If he did, chances are he’d run into some of the 51% of Muslims living in the U.S. who just this June told Polling Co. they preferred having “the choice of being governed according to Shariah,” or Islamic law. Or the 60% of Muslim-Americans under 30 who told Pew Research they’re more loyal to Islam than America.

Maybe they’re all heretics, so let’s see what the enlightened Muslims think.

If Tapper did a little independent research he’d quickly find that America’s most respected Islamic leaders and scholars also want theocracy, not democracy, and even advocate trading the Constitution for the Quran.

These aren’t fringe players. These are the top officials representing the Muslim establishment in America today.

Hopefully none of them ever runs for president, because here’s what he’d have to say about the U.S. system of government:

Muzammil Siddiqi, chairman of both the Fiqh Council of North America, which dispenses Islamic rulings, and the North American Islamic Trust, which owns most of the mosques in the U.S.: “As Muslims, we should participate in the system to safeguard our interests and try to bring gradual change, (but) we must not forget that Allah’s rules have to be established in all lands, and all our efforts should lead to that direction.”

Omar Ahmad, co-founder of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the top Muslim lobby group in Washington: “Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Quran should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth.”

CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper: “I wouldn’t want to create the impression that I wouldn’t like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future.”

Imam Siraj Wahhaj, director of the Muslim Alliance in North America: “In time, this so-called democracy will crumble, and there will be nothing. And the only thing that will remain will be Islam.”

Imam Zaid Shakir, co-founder of Zaytuna College in Berkeley, Calif.: “If we put a nationwide infrastructure in place and marshaled our resources, we’d take over this country in a very short time. . . . What a great victory it will be for Islam to have this country in the fold and ranks of the Muslims.”

Worrisome Number of American Muslims Polled Believe Sharia and Violence Are Acceptable


Political Islam, Jul 8 2015, by Bill Warner:

We are constantly told that only a tiny minority of Muslims hold extremist views and that Muslims make wonderful citizens. But a recent survey refutes all of this optimistic propaganda.
The survey tell us that significant numbers of Muslims in America do not want to be ruled by our Constitution but want Sharia law. Nearly a third of the Muslims said that violence to enforce Sharia blasphemy laws are acceptable. Nearly 10% of American Muslims say that Islamic State is real Islam.
Why do we want to admit more Muslims who oppose our laws and customs? How can Muslims be true citizens of America?

ISIS Has Up To 42 Million Supporters in the Arab World

Islamic State supporters

Islamic State supporters

Clarion Project, by Ryan Mauro, June 28, 2015:

An analysis of four polls surveying Arab public opinion towards the Islamic State (ISIS/ISIL) reveals that the group has a bare minimum of 8.5 million strong supporters and that’s a conservative estimate. If you include those who feel somewhat positively towards the Islamic State, the number rises to at least 42 million.

The estimate is based on a March 2015 poll by the Iraq-based Independent Institute for Administration and Civil Society Studies;  a November 2014 poll by Zogby Research Services; another  November 2014 poll by the Doha-based Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies and an October 2014 poll by the Fikra Forum commissioned by the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

The following is a breakdown of the support for the Islamic State in 11 Arab countries:


The November 2014 poll by the Doha-based Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies found that 2% of Iraqis view the Islamic State positively and another 4% view it positively to some extent. The March 2015 poll found that 5% do not consider the Islamic State to be a terrorist group.

With a population of 32,586,000 according to the CIA World Factbook, that means the Islamic State has between 651,720 and 1,955,160 supporters in Iraq.


Seventeen percent of Syrians said that they completely support the Islamic State’s goals and activities in the March 2015 poll. That statistic grows to 27% when you account for Syrians who do not consider the Islamic State to be a terrorist group.

The November 2014 poll interviewed 900 Syrian refugees in Lebanon, Jordan and Turkey and found that 4% are positive towards the Islamic State and another 9% are somewhat positive. This should raise serious concerns for countries that are accepting refugees from the civil war.

With a population of 17,952,000, that means the Islamic State has between 3,051,840 and 4,847,040 supporters in Syria.

Palestinian Territories

About 4% of Palestinians view the Islamic State positively but a shocking 20% feel the Islamic State is positive to some extent. This is the highest level of positivity towards the Islamic State in the November 2014 poll (which does not include Syria).

The CIA World Factbook says there are 1,816,000 Palestinians in Gaza and 2,731,000 in the West Bank, for a total of 4,547,000. This equates to a range of between 181,800 and 1,091,280 Palestinian supporters of the Islamic State.


The November 2014 poll found that Tunisia has the highest percentage of people who are view the Islamic State positively (7%). Another 6% view it somewhat positively. The finding is substantiated by assessments determining that Tunisia is the biggest source of foreign fighters for the Islamic State.

The country’s population of 10,937,000 would include 765,590 people who are unequivocally supportive of the Islamic State; a number that grows to 1,421,810 if you include those who are somewhat positive.


The Fikra Forum poll from October 2014 found that 3% of Egyptians view the Islamic State very positively (1%) or fairly positively (2%). The March 2015 poll has 4% of Egyptians viewing the Islamic State positively and another 6% viewing it somewhat positively.

Egypt has an estimated population of 86,895,000. The number of those who view the Islamic State positively ranges from 86,895 to 347,580 depending on which poll has the more accurate number. If you include all of those with some positivity towards ISIS, the range is 260,685 to 8,689,500.

Saudi Arabia

The Fikra Forum concluded that 2% of Saudis are very positive towards the Islamic State and 3% are fairly positive. The March 2015 poll has it at 5% positive and 5% somewhat positive.

Saudi Arabia has an estimated population of 27,346,000. The lowest statistic would mean that there are between 546,920 and 1,367,300 Saudis who are fully positive towards ISIS. If you include those who are somewhat positive, it is between 820,380 and 2,734,600 Saudis who are inclined towards the Islamic State.

United Arab Emirates

The Zogby poll from November 2014 found that 13% of the UAE’s population most favors the Islamic State in the Syrian civil war. The country has a population of 5,629,000, translating to 731,770 Islamic State supporters.


Approximately 7% of Yemenis say they do not consider the Islamic State to be a terrorist group. The CIA World Factbook estimates Yemen’s population to be 26,053,000. This equates to 1,823,710 people.


Only 3% of Jordanians view the Islamic State positively and another 6% view it somewhat positively. About 5% say they do not consider the Islamic State to be a terrorist group.

With a population of 7,930,000, this translates to 237,900 supporters on the low end and 713,700 on the high end.


An estimated 7% of Libyans do not consider the Islamic State to be a terrorist group. The estimated population is 6,244,000, placing the number of Islamic State supporters at 437,080.


The Fikra Forum poll found that support for the Islamic State is nearly non-existent in Lebanon with only 1% of the country’s Sunnisseeing the Islamic State as fairly positive. The Doha-based Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies had a similar conclusion.

The CIA World Factbook says that only 54% of the Lebanese population is Muslim. Of that Muslim population, only 27% is Sunni. The result indicates the presence of 8,578 Sunnis in Lebanon who view the Islamic State fairly positively.

In Sum

If we use the most optimistic of the polls for each of the 11 Arab states, we come to an estimate of 8,523,803 supporters of the Islamic State and an average of 5.8% support in the Arab world. If we extend that average to the other 11 Arab countries with a total population of 370 million, you get a result of 21,460,000 strong supporters of the Islamic State in the Arab world overall.

This is in line with the November 2014 poll by the Doha-based Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies. It concluded that 85% of Arabs view the Islamic State negatively and 4% view it positively. The difference of 1.8% can be attributable to the margin of error in the polls and/or slight changes in opinion.

If we include the most pessimistic polls and include those who view the Islamic State somewhat positively, the result is 24,454,228 Arabs who view the Islamic State at least somewhat positively. If the average of 11.5% is consistent across the entire Arab world, then up to 42,550,000 Arabs view the Islamic State at least somewhat positively.

This second number is also in line with the November 2014 survey’s conclusion that an additional 7% are somewhat supportive of the Islamic State for a total statistic of 11%.

With a minimum of 8.5 million strong supporters and 24.5 million who view the group at least somewhat positively, the Islamic State has plenty of room for growth in the Arab world.

Ryan Mauro is’s national security analyst, a fellow with Clarion Project and an adjunct professor of homeland security. Mauro is frequently interviewed on top-tier television and radio. Read more, contact or arrange a speaking engagement.

Poll of U.S. Muslims Reveals Ominous Levels Of Support For Islamic Supremacists’ Doctrine of Shariah, Jihad

u1_Muslim-image-intense US FLAGCenter for Security Policy, June 23, 2015:

According to a new nationwide online survey (Below) of 600 Muslims living in the United States, significant minorities embrace supremacist notions that could pose a threat to America’s security and its constitutional form of government.

The numbers of potential jihadists among the majority of Muslims who appear not to be sympathetic to such notions raise a number of public policy choices that warrant careful consideration and urgent debate, including: the necessity for enhanced surveillance of Muslim communities; refugee resettlement, asylum and other immigration programs that are swelling their numbers and density; and the viability of so-called “countering violent extremism” initiatives that are supposed to stymie radicalization within those communities.

Overall, the survey, which was conducted by The Polling Company for the Center for Security Policy (CSP), suggests that a substantial number of Muslims living in the United States see the country very differently than does the population overall.  The sentiments of the latter were sampled in late May in another CSP-commissioned Polling Company nationwide survey.

According to the just-released survey of Muslims, a majority (51%) agreed that “Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to shariah.”  When that question was put to the broader U.S. population, the overwhelming majority held that shariah should not displace the U.S. Constitution (86% to 2%).

More than half (51%) of U.S. Muslims polled also believe either that they should have the choice of American or shariah courts, or that they should have their own tribunals to apply shariah. Only 39% of those polled said that Muslims in the U.S. should be subject to American courts.

These notions were powerfully rejected by the broader population according to the Center’s earlier national survey.  It found by a margin of 92%-2% that Muslims should be subject to the same courts as other citizens, rather than have their own courts and tribunals here in the U.S.

Even more troubling, is the fact that nearly a quarter of the Muslims polled believed that, “It is legitimate to use violence to punish those who give offense to Islam by, for example, portraying the prophet Mohammed.”

By contrast, the broader survey found that a 63% majority of those sampled said that “the freedom to engage in expression that offends Muslims or anybody else is guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and cannot be restricted.”

Nearly one-fifth of Muslim respondents said that the use of violence in the United States is justified in order to make shariah the law of the land in this country.

Center for Security Policy President, Frank J. Gaffney, Jr., observed:

The findings of the Center for Security Policy’s survey of Muslims in America suggests that we have a serious problem.  The Pew Research Center estimates that the number of Muslims in the United States was 2.75 million in 2011, and growing at a rate of 80-90 thousand a year.  If those estimates are accurate, the United States would have approximately 3 million Muslims today.  That would translate into roughly 300,000 Muslims living in the United States who believe that shariah is “The Muslim God Allah’s law that Muslims must follow and impose worldwide by Jihad.”
It is incumbent on the many American Muslims who want neither to live under the brutal repression of shariah nor to impose it on anybody else to work with the rest of us who revere and uphold the supremacy of the U.S. Constitution in protecting our nation against the Islamic supremacists and their jihad.

Chris Cuomo’s Sharia Folly

PJ Media by Andrew Bostom, June 5, 2015:

In the wake of CNN’s Wednesday revelation that journalist/activist Pamela Geller was targeted for beheading by slain Boston area jihadist Usaama Rahim, CNN’s Chris Cuomo interviewed Ms. Geller Thursday. Most attention to the interview has been focused on Geller’s understandable reaction to Cuomo’s suggestion that non-profane, free-speech cartoons of Muhammad — for example, ex-Muslim artist Bosch Fawstin’s thoughtful drawing below, which was awarded first prize at the recent Garland, TX exhibit – were somehow too provocative.

Fawstin_Mohammad-Contest-Drawing-1-small-1024x814 (1)

Said Geller to Cuomo:

Drawing a cartoon … warrants chopping my head off? That’s too far? I just don’t understand this. They’re going to come for you, too, Chris. They’re coming for everybody and the media should be standing with me.

But the most illuminating — and in Cuomo’s case, pathognomonic — segment of the interview (starts at 6:57 of the below clip) was when Geller asked Cuomo:

Where are the mainstream Muslims teaching in the mosques against the [Islamic] blasphemy laws, against Islamic law, the Sharia, the jihadist doctrine?

Geller’s query elicited this breathtakingly ignorant though commonly reiterated media falsehood, here asserted by Cuomo with supreme confidence:

Sharia is not mainstream Muslim thought.

Mr. Cuomo and other media figures across the political spectrum would do well — before issuing such embarrassing, factually challenged pontifications — to study the serious work of Joseph Schacht (d. 1969), who was the most authoritative modern Western Islamic legal scholar.

The sharia, or “clear path to be followed,” as Schacht demonstrated, is the “canon law of Islam,” which “denotes all the individual prescriptions composing it.”

Schacht traced the use of the term “sharia” to Koranic verses such as 45:18, 42:13, 42:21, and 5:48, noting an “old definition” of the sharia by the seminal Koranic commentator and early Muslim historian Tabari (d. 923) as comprising the law of inheritance, various commandments and prohibitions, and the so-called hadd punishments.

These latter draconian punishments, defined by the Muslim prophet Muhammad either in the Koran or in the hadith (the canonical collections of Muhammad’s deeds and pronouncements), included:

(Lethal) stoning for adultery; death for apostasy; death for highway robbery when accompanied by murder of the robbery victim; for simple highway robbery, the loss of hands and feet; for simple theft, cutting off of the right hand; for “fornication,” a hundred lashes; for drinking wine, eighty lashes.

As Schacht further noted, sharia ultimately evolved to become “understood [as] the totality of Allah’s commandments relating to the activities of man.”

The holistic sharia, he continues, is nothing less than Islam’s quintessence:

The Sharia is the most characteristic phenomenon of Islamic thought and forms the nucleus of Islam itself.

Schacht also delineated additional characteristics of the sharia which have created historically insurmountable obstacles to its reform:

Allah’s law is not to be penetrated by the intelligence . . . i.e., man has to accept it without criticism, with its apparent inconsistencies and its incomprehen­sible decrees, as wisdom into which it is impossible to enquire [inquire].

One must not look in it for causes in our sense, nor for principles; it is based on the will of Allah which is bound by no principles, therefore evasions are consid­ered as a permissible means put at one’s disposal by Allah himself.

Muslim law . . . has always been considered by its followers as some­thing elevated, high above human wisdom, and as a matter of fact human logic or system has little share in it. For this very reason, the Sharia is not “law” in the modern sense of the word, any more than it is on account of its subject matter.

It comprises without restriction, as an infallible doctrine of duties the whole of the religious, political, social, domestic and private life of those who profess Islam, and the activities of the tolerated members of other faiths so far as they may not be detrimental to Islam.

Most importantly, Schacht elucidated how sharia — via the uniquely Islamic institution of jihad war – regulated the relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims. These regulations make explicit the sacralized vulnerability of unvanquished non-Muslims to jihad depredations, and the permanent, deliberately humiliating legal inferiority for those who survive their jihad conquest, and incorporation into an Islamic polity governed by sharia.

Consistent with the doctrine of jihad, in accord with the Sunna (the traditions of Muhammad and the early Muslim community), by using foul language against the Muslim prophet Muhammad, Allah, or Islam, the non-Muslim transgressors put themselves on a war footing against Muslims, and their lives became licit (such as the poet Kaab b. al-Ashraf, who composed poems denigrating Muhammad, and was assassinated). (See herehere, and here.)

This “offense” was then constructed and legitimated by Muslim jurists when Islam was politically, militarily, and economically dominant, so that it was expected that the non-Muslims under Islamic rule would not denigrate the religion of Islam, nor cast aspersions on its major figures or institutions. (See herehere, and here.) The jurists saw any such denigration as an unacceptable hostile act, punishable by death, automatically, as per three of the main Sunni schools of Islamic Law (Maliki, Shafii, Hanbali), and the major Shiite schools.

According to the fourth major school of Sunni Islamic law, the Hanafi, the punishment of a non-Muslim guilty of blasphemy is left to the discretion of a Muslim judge. The death penalty was in fact most often applied by the Hanafis. (See here and here.)

Read more

SURVEY OF SURVEYS – What the world thinks of Islam

(Report and research by Islam Surveyed)

1.0 About this Survey of Surveys

Surveys and polls concerning Islam and Muslims regularly hit the headlines.  Often alarming, sometimes reassuring, and difficult to put into context, they can confuse more than illuminate. And, there is always the question of survey and poll quality.

This is a survey of surveys and polls from reliable sources published over the last five years or so, compiled with the objective of providing a clear picture and a convenient reference.

2.0 Summary

British Muslims

A large minority of British Muslims subscribe to values that clash with those held by the majority of British people. The proportion ranges from around 15% to 30% depending on the topic.

27% had some sympathy with the killers of the Charlie Hebdo staff.   11% believe those who publish images of Mohammed deserve to be attacked. 20% have some sympathy with young Muslims who leave the UK to join fighters in Syria.

29% would prefer to live in Britain under Sharia law rather than British law. 17% believe it is appropriate that Muslims who convert to other religions are cut off by their family and even worse, 31% agree Muslim conversion to another religion is forbidden and punishable by death.

Muslims themselves see the divide.  16-20% say there is a clash between Islam and

British values

Much of the time this might not be apparent as large numbers maintain dual identities.  Just as many (77%) say they identify strongly or extremely strongly with Britain, as say they identify strongly or extremely strongly (75%) with their religion.

For ethnic minorities in general in Britain, research shows that 44% say they identify as strongly with their ethnic group as they identify with Britain. 22% hold entirely to their original culture. 21% have lost their original culture but have taken nothing of British culture. Only 13% are assimilated.

Dual identity is not necessarily a bad thing but when starkly conflicting values are involved it is a cause for concern.

British People

The majority British view of Islam and Muslims is strongly negative.

Over half (55%) believe there is a fundamental clash between Islam and British values and six in 10 (61%) have a negative or wholly negative view of Islam.

A large majority (81%) would support a ban on wearing of a full face veil or niqab in public places, such as schools, courts or hospitals. 71% believe the media should publish material even if it offends the religious views of some people.

The World’s Muslims

On average, seven in 10 (70%) Muslims in the greater part of the Muslim world favour making Sharia the Law of the Land.

Of these, 58% favour whippings or cutting off the hands of thieves and robbers, 60%favour stoning as a punishment for adultery, and 53% favour the death penalty for apostasy.  And, on average 43% of Muslims favour gender segregation in the workplace.

It is as high as 85% in Pakistan.

Large minorities (10-30%) believe suicide bombing against civilian targets can be often or sometimes justified in order to defend Islam from its enemies.

It is difficult to find words that might qualify these horrendous results of surveys by the Pew Research Center, a highly reputable research organisation.

Knowledge and education topics also provide results alarming to modern people.

Nearly half (44%) of Muslims believe in creationism; humans and other living thingshave always existed in their present form. A staggering two in three (64%) deny that

Muslims in Europe and Western Countries

In Germany more than one in five (22%) Muslims are against integration and reject German values. Over half of French Muslims say they will marry only another Muslim.

Nearly half (47%) of Canadian Muslims believe they should be free to choose to be ruled by Sharia courts in the case of divorce and other family matters.

Three quarters of Australian Muslims think counter-terrorism policing and laws unfairly target their community. Many of them explain terrorism as the result of “the history of occupation and invasion throughout the Middle East”.

Western Views

On average in Europe’s largest countries over half (54%) of Europeans believe Islam is incompatible with the Western world. Seven in 10 (69%) would approve a ban on veils that cover the whole face.

More than half (57%) of Germans believe Islam poses a threat to Germany.  52% believe it does not belong in German society. They see Islam as an “archaic religion, incapable of fitting into modern life”.

Three quarters (74%) of the French think Islam is intolerant and that it is incompatible with the values of French society.

Half of Danish citizens favour a cap on the number of Muslims permitted to live in Denmark.

Read more


If you would like a copy of the full report (as a pdf) emailed to you simply or visit this website

The main sections of the report provide considerably more information on eachsurvey and poll covered, including:

• A tabular summary of all significant results as well as those mentioned above;

• Further summary analysis and comment;

• Survey details such as sample size and interview method;

• Links to publishers’ and research agency original reports and results;

• Summaries of and links to media coverage, press comment and articles.

Give Somalis in Minnesota What They Want – The Exit Door

UTT, by John Guandolo, June 3, 2015:

Film-maker Ami Horowitz produced a 4-minute film that is gold, and gives us all a clear understanding of what we are up against in the Muslim community.

Horowitz walks around Minneapolis, Minnesota and asks simple questions of Muslims about America, Sharia, and Somalia.  The Muslims speak their minds freely.

They say that those who insult the Prophet Mohammed should be killed.

They say clearly that Sharia should be the law of the land, and they would rather live in Somalia than the United States.

Fine by us. The exit door is open.  Please leave.

Please take your entire families, your four wives, your culture of death, your hatred for all that is good, and your desire to conquer, and leave.

Take your Sharia, your hatred for homosexuals, your desire to kill Jews, and your love of death and leave.

Take your whining and your laziness and your desire to get from and not give to our society and go.

Take all of the Muslim Brotherhood leaders with you too.  Please take all the leaders of ISNA, ICNA, MAS, MSA, CAIR, NAIT, IIIT, MPAC, USMCO, AFP, and the other thousand organizations to Somalia with you.

While you’re at it, please take all of your allies with you.  Take the entire staff of MSNBC, Code Pink, the National Council of Churches, the USCCB, the entire State Department, John Boehner, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and Mitch McConnell with you.  America will be better off without them.

We do not want you here destroying our nation and our way of life any longer.

Please, Muslims of Minneapolis, go back to Somalia as you desire.


Jonh Guandolo has just launched a beautiful new website with tons of resources! Go and check it out —> 

Video: Robert Spencer vs. Imam on Hannity on Sharia and U.S. mosques

spencer vs imamJihad Watch, by Robert Spencer, June 3, 2015:

Last night I appeared on Fox’s Sean Hannity Show discussing the prevalence of a preference for Sharia over U.S. law among Muslims in the United States, and what mosques are doing (and not doing) about it. Appearing along with me was the Imam Mohammad Ali Elahi of the Islamic House of Wisdom in Dearborn Heights, Michigan. We were discussing the video by Ami Horowitz in which Muslims freely avow their preference for Sharia; Hannity’s overview of that video and interview with Horowitz begin this clip and give the context for my discussion with the imam, which begins at 3:56.

“Tiny Minority” of Terror-Supporting Muslims?

Koran-bookFrontpage, May 1, 2015 by David Meir-Levi:

On April 27, former President George W. Bush delivered an uncharacteristically harsh public criticism of President Obama’s foreign policy, accusing him of naiveté regarding Iran, losing the war against Islamic terrorism, contributing to the chaos in Iraq, and in general, lacking a clear strategy for the Middle East and placing the U.S. in “retreat” around the world.

He forgot to mention one very important, revealing and recurring aspect of Obama’s failures as the Commander-in-Chief of our armed forces and as the leader of the free world: he plays front-man for ISIS, al-Qaeda, and a dozen other Islamic terrorist organizations.

Back on February 17, The Los Angeles Times published an op-ed by President Obama, in which the president said:

“Efforts to counter violent extremism will only succeed if citizens can address legitimate grievances through the democratic process and express themselves through strong civil societies. Those efforts must be matched by economic, educational and entrepreneurial development so people have hope for a life of dignity.”

During that same week Obama hosted at the White House a Summit on Countering Violent Extremism to highlight domestic and international efforts to prevent terrorism. His message at that summit was essentially the same as his op-ed: violent extremists have legitimate grievances and their violence can best be prevented by promoting democratic economic, educational and entrepreneurial development so that terrorists and wannabe terrorists can have hope, dignity and jobs. His words came with an important caveat, a warning about whom and what not to blame:

“Al-Qaida and ISIL and groups like it (sic!) are desperate for legitimacy. They try to portray themselves as religious leaders .… We must never accept the premise that they put forward, because it is a lie.”


“The terrorists do not speak for over a billion Muslims who reject their hateful ideology… No religion is responsible for terrorism. People are responsible for violence and terrorism.” 

This mendacious message was taken to its transparently ridiculous extreme by State Department Deputy Spokesperson Marie Harf when interviewed by Chris Matthews on MSNBC and later by CNN’s Wolf Blitzer. Expanding upon the President’s message, she asserted that the root cause of ISIS’s terrorism is unemployment and poverty.

“We cannot win the War on Terror, nor can we win the war on ISIS, by killing them. We need to find them jobs. We need to get to the root cause of terrorism; and that is poverty and lack of opportunity in the terrorist community.”

So here’s the administration’s logic: al-Qaeda, ISIS, Hezbollah and Hamas and the dozens of other Muslim, hate-mongering, supremacist, jihadist, annihilationist terrorist armies busily at work slaughtering civilians, burning people alive, and beheading people, have legitimate grievances but still could be weaned away from their terrorist proclivities if only they had hope, dignity, and jobs.

Such tripe is truly worthy of unrestrained obloquy. There is a robust body of literature utilizing empirical analysis that incontrovertibly contradicts our president’s assertions. A recent Rand study has shown that terrorists are not particularly impoverished or uneducated. In fact, many terrorist leaders come from relatively privileged backgrounds. There is simply no link between poverty and terrorism.

The present writer has argued elsewhere in this journal that President Obama’s “don’t blame Islam” and “all they need is hope and jobs” doctrine is not the result of ignorance or misunderstanding, nor is it a desperate concern for the delicate sensibilities of Muslim minorities in our country, nor is it “naiveté” (pace George W. Bush), nor even an example of sheer stupidity. Rather, it is an intentional doctrine of pure treason against the USA and against the western world. It is an attempt to hamper America’s defensive actions against its Muslim terrorist attackers by redirecting or preventing our natural and legitimate responses to terrorist attacks. To paraphrase George Orwell: “If you hamper the war effort of one side you automatically help that of the other.”

By obfuscating the reality of the terrorists’ motivations and intentions, and minimizing the threat that they pose to the USA and to western civilization, Obama is helping the terrorists and hampering his own country. Helping the enemy in wartime is treason.

There is, however, one grain of truth in his benighted pronouncements about dignity, hope, and jobs: Isis et al do not speak for all Muslims. It is reasonable to assume that not every one of the 1.6 billion Muslims in the world today is actively or passively participatory or supportive of the Muslim jihadist terror organizations.

But for just how many Muslims does ISIS speak? To understand the enormity of Obama’s treason, we must first know the answer to this question.

Some indication of the size of the global Muslim population supportive of Muslim jihadist terrorism can be gleaned from a series of polls aptly summarized by Brietbart’s Ben Shapiro and Wikipedia. Polls of Muslims in France, Britain, the Palestinian territories, Pakistan, Morocco, Jordan, Iraq, Indonesia, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the USA show a low of 10% and a high of 70% of respondents supporting terrorism, suicide bombings, ISIS, el-Qaeda, the Taliban, Hamas and Hezbollah.

Results from the USA are perhaps the most hair-raising. In a Pew 2013 poll 13% of American Muslims said that violence against civilians is often, sometimes or rarely justified to defend Islam. A 2011 poll from Pew showed that 19 percent of American Muslims were either favorable toward Al Qaeda or didn’t know. Estimates place the Muslim population of the USA at about 6.7 million people. 13% of 6,700,000 is 871,000 people. 13% is a minority, but 871,000 is a frighteningly big number of people who think that targeting civilians is just fine, at least some times. That 1,273,000 (19% of 6.7 million) American Muslims admire Al Qaeda is even more terrifying.

And let’s keep in mind that Hamas is wildly popular in Israel’s West Bank, Hezbollah is growing in popularity and in political strength in Lebanon as a seemingly endless stream of volunteers flock to their ranks, ISIS enjoys a steady flow of new recruits lusting to do their share of the beheadings and mass murders, and Boko Haram is growing in strength as Nigerian Muslims enlist to kidnap more teen-aged Christian girls and behead more African Christians unwilling to convert. Moreover, in Iraq, Turkey, and Iran, Islamist leaders who solidly and vociferously support terrorism against the west have been elected to office with overwhelming majorities. Clearly a large majority of those Muslim voters want a pro-terrorism leader in office.

There is some good news in these polls: in some countries support for Muslim terrorism is on the decline. But jubilation must be tempered with the recognition that this decline may be the result of the (probably accurate) belief that some Islamic terror organizations represent an existential threat to those Muslim countries in which the polls show a decline. And even more worrisome, even after that decline there is still double-digit support for el-Qaeda and the Taliban.

In short, a double-digit percentage of Muslims all over the world sympathize with terrorist groups.

Even if we take the lowest estimate, Dr. Pipes’ 10%, we must note that 10% of one billion six-hundred million Muslims world-wide is one hundred and sixty million (160,000,000) people; and some research supports numbers above 15%. So when we reduce the total by the approximately 50 % who are women, and again by the c. 25% who are too young or too old to be considered potential recruits for the terrorist minions, we are left with about 40,000,000 potentially active Muslim supporters of terrorism. Even if only 4% of those supporters become active terrorists, we are facing a terrorist army of 16,000,000 people.

So, indeed our president is correct that Isis does not speak for all Muslims. But the 10-15% of those for whom they most probably do speak confront us with an enormous terrorist army. The “tiny minority” of Muslims who want to see us either dead or dhimmi or Muslim is not so tiny. Unless our leadership gets us onto a war footing now, we may be looking at the end of western civilization.

42% of Canadian Muslims Admit Islam and West ‘Irreconcilable’

Female-Madrassa_Reuters-640x480Breitbart, by Jordan Schachtel, April 14, 2014:

Two recently-released polls found that 42 percent of Canadian Muslims agree that Islam is “irreconcilable” with Western society.

The surveys also found that over 60 percent of Jewish and Christian Canadians believe that Islam is incompatible with the West. Among secular Canadians, 46 percent shared the “irreconcilable” viewpoint, the Vancouver Sun reported.

The polls asked 2,000 individuals and its surveying took place in 2013 and 2014.

Jack Jedwab, who’s Association for Canadian Studies commissioned the poll, said of its results: “It’s quite disconcerting that our poll results consistently show about 60 percent of Canadians see the West and Islamic society as ‘irreconcilable.’ It puts you up against a dead end.”

“It’s a huge blow to interfaith dialogue,” he added.

Jedwab discussed the “Clash of Civilizations” that occurs when people from Islamic cultures have to blend into Western society, citing Koranic mandates that require women to cover themselves. “Some people say the niqab reflects the oppression of women. Others say it’s just a piece of clothing. My view is it does represent the oppression of women,” he said.

Ezra Levant of Rebel Media said that the poll was important because it discussed a “sensitive subject” matter that is largely avoided by “politically correct journalists.”

The polls were conducted before a series of Islamic terror attacks against Canadian officials in late October. The first attack was carried out by an Islamic State supporter, who proceeded to run over two police officers with his vehicle before police shot the jihadi dead. The second attack targeted Canada’s Parliament Hill in Ottawa. The jihadi gunman, Michael Zehaf-Bibeau, killed a Canadian soldier before being shot dead by the House of Commons Sergeant-at-Arms.

Radicalization of Europe’s Muslims Hits a Crisis Point

by Abigail R. Esman
Special to IPT News
March 23, 2015

1107 (1)With every new atrocity, Western leaders and political commentators collectively assure themselves and the public that the Islamic State’s power will suffer, that its PR machine is failing, and that the flow of Western Muslims to the Caliphate will stop.

It doesn’t.

European Muslim radicals have shown no hint that they are reconsidering their hero worship of IS (or ISIS), not even in the aftermath of the widely-condemned killing of Jordanian pilot Moath al-Kasasbeh, who was caged and burned alive in February. While Muslim moderates around the world decried the killing, teens from England, Germany, Holland, Belgium, France and even the United States continue to cross into Syrian territory, eager to join the jihad.

This news shouldn’t be all that surprising. In 2013, Ruud Koopmans published the results of a pan-European study, based on interviews with 9,000 European Muslims, which  showed large numbers of European Muslims believe in many of the ideas championed by the Islamic State: a return to the roots of Islam, the conviction that religious (Koranic) law stands above all secular laws; a hatred of Jews and homosexuals; and a view of the West as the enemy of Islam.

Among the findings, “[a]lmost 60 percent of the Muslim respondents reject homosexuals as friends; 45 percent think that Jews cannot be trusted; and an equally large group believes that the West is out to destroy Islam.”

More recently, in the aftermath of the Charlie Hebdo massacre, the BBC surveyed 1,000 British Muslims, and found that 24 percent consider “violence against those who publish images of the Prophet” is justified. Asked whether “Muslim clerics preaching that violence against the West can be justified are out of touch with mainstream Muslim opinion,” 45 percent disagreed.

Put another way, nearly half of British Muslims stand comfortably by those clerics who justify violence against the West.

Equally disturbing was the finding that 11 percent of British Muslims questioned said they “feel sympathetic towards people who want to fight against western interests.”  With a Muslim population of more than 2.7 million in 2011 (the most recent date for which such figures are available; by now the number would be higher), that makes for approximately 297,000 people. While likely not even a majority of those 297,000 are seeking to make hijrah – join the Islamic State and its jihad – these numbers represent an international terror threat of astronomical proportions.

And that’s just in the U.K.

Sadly, one can no longer pass these views off as those of a “small minority” of Europe’s Muslims. Across Western Europe, Koopmans’ study determined, “Two thirds of the Muslims interviewed say that religious rules are more important to them than the laws of the country in which they live. Three quarters of the respondents hold the opinion that there is only one legitimate interpretation of the Koran.”

While these figures reflect the responses to interviews conducted in 2008, little would suggest a massive re-evaluation of their views and religious beliefs on the part of significant numbers of Western Muslims, as the BBC survey makes clear.

Moreover, 56 percent of Belgian and 64 percent of Austrian Muslims responding to Koopmans’ survey in 2008 agreed that “Jews cannot be trusted,” and indications are strong that Muslim attitudes towards Jews have only worsened. Indeed, with the targeted killings of Jews in Brussels, Paris, and Copenhagen over the past year, Muslim hate towards Jews in Europe has now reached a crisis.

Clearly, we are watching trends that stretch across all of Europe. The issue here is one of trends, and these trends, which involve hundreds of thousands of radical, fundamentalist Muslims, paint a deeply disturbing picture.

Just how disturbing can be seen in a report from the International Center for the Study of Radicalization and Political Violence, which suggests that those who “sympathize with” IS and al-Qaida can be some of the terrorist groups’ most potent weapons. Such sympathizers – private individuals in the West – “possess significant influence over how the conflict is perceived by those who are actively involved in it.” In addition, new spiritual leaders have emerged who, while not actively “facilitating the flow of foreign fighters to Syria or coordinating with jihadists,” play the role of cheerleaders. “Their statements and interactions can be seen as providing encouragement, justification, and religious legitimacy for fighting,” the report’s authors say.

Koopmans clearly agrees. Though he did not respond to an interview request from IPT, he cautioned last month in Belgian newspaper de Morgen that because of such influences, “in addressing radicalization, leaders have to look beyond the small group that just uses violence. The roots of this problem sit in the Muslim community itself.”

This radicalization challenge poses more than a danger for us. It also creates a tragedy for that same Muslim community Koopmans pinpoints as its cause: for the young girls who, running off to Syria with dreams of marrying heroes find themselves wed, instead, to strangers, forced into sex at 14 and 15 years old; for boys like the 18-year-old Australian Jake Bilardi, aka “Jihad Jake,” who blew himself up earlier this month in Baghdad; for the girls and women growing up in fundamentalist communities hidden in European cities, with their medieval, often barbaric views on women.

Yet astoundingly, none of this seems to be enough to bring the moderate Muslims in the same communities to their feet, to defend equality and freedom, to demand a world of possibility and reason. That fight still remains our own.

Abigail R. Esman, the author, most recently, of Radical State: How Jihad Is Winning Over Democracy in the West (Praeger, 2010), is a freelance writer based in New York and the Netherlands.

Obama’s Biggest Lie and What It Means

obama_pino-300x180PJ Media, By Roger L Simon On February 8, 2015:

Unlike Nixon and Clinton, who lied in self-defense, Obama lies proactively, which is decidedly more dangerous.  He will say practically anything to achieve his goals without regard to the truth.  The repeated assertion about keeping your doctor and your health insurance under the Affordable Care Act is just one famous example.  But only a few days ago on Fareed Zakaria’s show the president made a statement that dwarfed his claims about Obamacare.  When asked if we were in a war with radical Islam, the president replied:

….I reject a notion that somehow that creates a religious war because the overwhelming majority of Muslims reject that interpretation of Islam. They don’t even recognize it as being Islam, and I think that for us to be successful in fighting this scourge, it’s very important for us to align ourselves with the 99.9 percent of Muslims who are looking for the same thing we’re looking for — order, peace, prosperity.

99.9 percent?!  I will bypass for the moment Obama’s rather self-serving definition of Islam and focus on that outrageous  number, which is absurd on the face of it and not remotely supported by any of the numerous polls on the subject.  Although the data is somewhat fluid, we can assume that out of 1.7 billion Muslims world wide, at least 200 million are sympathetic to the goals and means of the Islamists, many of them, undoubtedly many millions, willing to put their scimitars where their mouths are. By way of comparison, of the approximately 66 million Germans at the beginning of World War II, some 850,000 were card-carrying NazisDaniel Pipes points out the Islamist numbers are diminishing, but the raw totals are still huge and nowhere remotely in the vicinity of Obama’s risible point 01 percent.  No matter how you count it, we’ve got a problem that is not going away anytime soon, possibly not before everyone reading this article has passed from the scene, I’m sorry to say.

So why did Obama lie and what does that mean?  To begin with, he is a moral narcissist.  That means because he knows he’s right and knows what we should do, he’s free to say anything he wishes that he believes will achieve those goals, especially if he thinks he can get away with it.  And Fareed Zakaria would be the last person to question him. (The CNN commentator has problems of his own.)  If all this reminds you of the ends justify the means, it’s not accidental.  Marx was a moral narcissist too — one of the greatest.

Now let’s get back to Obama and Islam.  Is he a Muslim?  Not really. He’s not religious, but he does have an Islamic childhood with which he identifies, undoubtedly on a more profound level than he does with Christianity, which he joined for expedient reasons.  Therefore, he can’t acknowledge to himself and others that Islam is severely sick and in need of serious reformation.  No talk from Obama ever about all the extreme misogyny and homophobia that pervades Islam, nor of Shariah law.  Nothing like this ever passes his lips — at least I’ve never heard it.  To do so would be to say there is something wrong with him.  So he says that 99.9% of Muslims reject the Islamists, which is literally impossible because if it were so, the Islamists wouldn’t be wreaking havoc everywhere from Sydney to Sanaa.

Complicating this psychological disturbance on the part of our president is his overweening desire to make a deal with Iran, almost at all costs.  Bizarre as it sounds, a deal with Iran would prove to Obama that Islam — at least in its Iranian shiite form — is capable of modernity. To the rest of us, it means they’re capable of nuclear war. (I guess that’s sort of modernity.) In any case, Obama’s greatest lie is designed to include Iran and its leaders in the good 99.9%. I can’t imagine a scarier thought.