“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.”

Moreover,

“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.

The Muslim population of America is expanding at warp speed

American Thinker, by Carol Brown, Jan. 21, 2015:

Even when Muslims are a minority population they can and do transform whole cultures and societies. And not for the better.

Why? Because their holy book is a totalitarian ideology founded on submission and world domination. And toward that end, Islam is on the march. Meanwhile, the West remains mired in cowardice and complicity. Nowhere can this be seen more clearly than in Europe, which is on the fast track to join the Caliphate.

Not to be outdone by Europe’s madness, the United States is traveling down the same bloody path, importing large numbers of Muslims from Islamic countries thanks to the Islamophile sitting in the Oval Office and a nation full of dhimmis.

muslims in americaEstimates on the number of Muslims living in the US vary, ranging from 3 million to 7 million. Whatever the precise number, it’s already outdated as it rises with each passing nanosecond.

Since 9/11, there has been a dramatic uptick in immigration from Islamic countries with a 66% increase in the past decade. And things are just warming up. Islam is now the fastest growing religion in America.

Muslim popStrange, is it not? War has been waged against America in the name of Islam and we’ve opened our doors ever-wider to those who adhere to the very ideology that mandates our destruction.

Pew Research projects that by 2030, the Muslim population in the United States will more than double. In large part this will be attributable to immigration; to a lesser degree due to the size of Muslim families.

9781612154985In his book Slavery, Terrorism, and Islam, Peter Hammond wrote a detailed analysis on the proportion of Muslims to the overall population and increased violence and adherence to Sharia law. Hammond’s research reads like a roadmap to ruin; a horrifying picture of the future of civilization. To summarize an oft-quoted section:

When the Muslim population remains at or under 2%, their presence tends to fly low under the radar. In the 2% – 5% range, Muslims begin to seek converts, targeting those they see as disaffected, such as criminals. When the population reaches 5% they exert influence disproportionate to their numbers, becoming more aggressive and pushing for Sharia law. When the population hits the 10% mark Muslims become increasingly lawless and violent. Once the population reaches 20%, there is an increase in rioting, murder, jihad militias, and destruction of non-Muslim places of worship. At 40%, there are “widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks, and ongoing militia warfare.” Once beyond 50%, infidels and apostates are persecuted, genocide occurs, and Sharia law is implemented. After 80%, intimidation is a daily part of life along with violent jihad and some state-run genocide as the nation purges all infidels. Once the nation has rid itself of all non-Muslims, the presumption is that ‘Dar-es-Salaam’ has been attained – the Islamic House of Peace.

(Peace, of course, is never attained. Schisms among sects, starting with the rift between Shia and Sunni, erupt. The ideal of absolute power with divine authority always leads to internal conflict.)

That the United States is ramping up Muslim immigration is sheer insanity. A crucial step to putting the brakes on this frenzied march to our demise is to close the door to Muslims – whether those from Islamic countries or anywhere else.

Unfortunately, we’re doing the exact opposite.

In the last three years alone, 300,000 Muslims immigrated to the United States. And that’s just the beginning. The Refugee Resettlement Program is paving the way for a mass of Muslims to flock to our shores. With the United Nations in charge of determining who qualifies for refugee status and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (formerly the Organization of the Islamic Conference) as the power broker at the UN, you can count on a flood of Muslim refugees to be arriving at a town near you – if not your own town – soon.

And as one might expect, Obama is on board with any and all avenues to bring Muslims to the United States. I guess it’s part of his dream; our nightmare.

Who can forget the lie he told back in 2009 when he said the United States was one of the largest Muslim countries in the world. Taqiyya? Stupidity? Slip of the tongue? Wishful thinking? Whatever the reason, it appears he is doing everything in his power to make that lie a reality.

 

Part of the process of flooding this country with Muslims from Islamic countries involves transplanting entire communities from places like Somalia. And just as we see in Europe, the new arrivals don’t assimilate and they live off the public dole.

20100715_SomaliMigrantsFor example, Family Security Matters reports that Somali immigrants have overwhelmed many small towns in America, creating their own enclaves. In some cases they’ve become the majority population – a population distinguished by being the least educated and most unemployed in the country, with evidence to show some have little motivation to become gainfully employed. When they first arrive, they are urged to go to towns where welfare is easy to access – places like Lewiston, Maine, a city of about 30,000 people.

At least before the invasion began.

The town provided welfare and public housing to Somali Muslims, many of whom were mothers with lots of children. And the Somalis came at a rate of about 100 per day.

The Somali population of Lewiston now exceeds 40,000.

In addition to Muslims from Somalia, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia, a new wave has started arriving from Syria. The State Department expects “admissions from Syria to surge in 2015 and beyond.” It is expected that 9,000 or more Syrian refugees will arrive this year with a plan to bring at least 75,000 over the next five years.

syrian-refugees-protest (2)And as refugees flow in, our tax dollars flow out as the American tax payer funds the Muslim invasion, because when refugees arrive they are linked with a broad array of publically-funded services (food stamps, subsidized housing, subsidized medical care, tutors, interpreters, and so on). In addition, charities (many of which are Christian or Jewish) that assist refugees receive federal grant money to provide additional support.

And where do these new immigrants from Islamic countries settle once they arrive? Well, just about everywhere and anywhere. The five states with the largest number of refugees are Texas, California, New York, Michigan, and Florida. But the situation is very dynamic and as numbers are updated, demographic shifts occur.

These were the top 5 states in FY2014. Right now Arizona is edging out Florida and Michigan has moved to number 3.

These were the top 5 states in FY2014. Right now Arizona is edging out Florida and Michigan has moved to number 3.

There are also regions of the country that participate in what is called the Preferred Communities Program. The program considers small towns and rural areas to be most suited to refugees and immigrants because small communities are best able to offer the kinds of services this new class of imports need. Or so they claim. And so we’ve got Somali refugees flocking to Cheyenne, Wyoming, in order to get easy-to-come-by Section 8 housing vouchers they take to other states. Those states either pick up the tab, or bill Cheyenne. And Cheyenne is running out of money. Duh.

So much for the taqiyya on the Preferred Communities Program website waxing poetic about the contributions these immigrants make to our society: “Refugees help communities learn and appreciate the many ways newcomers’ talents contribute to a richer, stronger society.”

Riiiiiiiiiiiiight.

Maybe that was the case in another time in America. But not now in the age of multi-culturalism. Not with Muslim refugees with no skills, enormous needs, and a sense of entitlement. Oh, and for some, the desire to kill us.

DSC_8770-TrojanHorse-PSSo why are all of these Muslim refugees coming here anyway? Why aren’t they being taken in by Muslim majority countries? It would certainly make sense. After all, they’re much closer geographically, language barriers would be reduced, and local values and traditions are closer.

That Muslim majority countries have not opened their doors to these refugees is, I am confident, quite by design. This is about conquest. Otherwise known as Hijra, the Islamic doctrine of immigration. Hijra works in concert with violent jihad to overwhelm a society until Islam becomes the single dominant force.

And while Muslim refugees swarm into the United States as part of this conquest, Obama has twisted the knife even further by (1) easing requirements for potential immigrants who have links to “soft” terror, and (2) closing the door to persecuted Christians in the Middle East who have precious few options of where to flee. (Obama is also making it exceedingly difficult for French Jews to immigrate to the United States.) Per Investor’s Business Daily:

In another end-run around Congress, President Obama has unilaterally eased immigration requirements for foreigners linked to terrorism. (snip)

…By exempting five kinds of limited material support for terrorism, Obama instantly purges more than 4,000 suspects from the U.S. terror watch list and opens our borders up to both them and their families. (snip)

At the same time Obama opens the floodgates to them, he’s closing our borders to Christians fleeing persecution by Muslims in Egypt, Iraq and other Mideast countries.

Leave it to Obama to make a good situation bad. And then make a bad situation worse. He isn’t satisfied until he’s upped the ante so far imminent danger is at hand.

So we’re importing Muslims from Muslim majority countries who are traumatized, who don’t speak English, who have few skills, who follow the teachings of the Koran, many of whom want to spread Sharia law, some of whom actively support terror, and/or others of whom are or will become terrorists, while we’ve abandoned Christians trapped in the Middle East as they are slaughtered en masse.

To be blunt: We are importing Islamic terror. Not because every Muslim is a terrorist. But because enough of them are. And plenty more who don’t commit acts of terror support it – quietly at home or loudly in the street.

Below is a snapshot of where American Muslims stand on a variety of issues based on polls conducted over the past few years (see here, here, and here):

·      13% agree that some frequency of violence to defend Islam against civilians is justified.

·      19% are either favorable toward Al Qaeda or aren’t sure.

·      40% support Sharia law and believe they should not be judged by U.S. law and the Constitution.

·      46% believe Americans who mock or criticize Islam should face criminal charges, with 12.5% in support of the death penalty for blasphemers, another 4.3% somewhat agreeing on the death sentence for those who insult Islam, and 9% unsure if the death penalty should apply.

In addition, to name a few additional points of concern among many (see here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here):

·      Mosques are proliferating across the landscape at breakneck speed, 80% of them preach jihad (through sermons and/or materials), and more than 95% of American Muslims attend such mosques.

·      Many American Muslims send their children to Islamic schools where they are indoctrinated in hate.

·      Many American Muslims have embraced Jew-hatred, as is written in the Koran.

·      There are compounds across America where Muslims receive jihad training.

·      Our prisons are breeding grounds for jihadists.

·      The Muslim Brotherhood has infiltrated every arm of our government as well as other major institutions.

So all-in-all, there are a lot of Muslims in America who are on board with Islamic law/jihad. It doesn’t matter if all of them are. Enough of them are.

What are we doing?!

We’re carefully planning our suicide, that’s what.

As Michael Walsh wrote at PJ Media: “There is no assimilating invaders who wish to replace your society with theirs, whether they call themselves ‘immigrants,’ ‘refugees’ or ‘asylum-seekers’…When it comes to the soul of a country, there really can be only one.”

What Muslims Believe

43% of Muslims Support Death Penalty for Those Who Leave Islam (h/t @DanielPipes)

Muslims1Let us call someone a “radical Muslim” if they believe that the death penalty should be given to people who leave Islam.  Can we all agree that by the standards of general civilized behavior executing someone for leaving a religion is a radical position and that anyone who holds it is, therefore, a radical?

By that standard, what percentage of the world’s Muslim population is “radical?”  While an exact figure is impossible, the available data strongly suggests that it is around 43%.  That is to say, of the worlds 1.6 Billion Muslims, roughly 698 Million believe that those who leave Islam should be put to death.

In other words, if the number of Muslims in the world who believe in killing those who practice religious freedom were a country, it would have twice the population of America.

The figure of 43% comes from page 219 of the Pew Research Center’s report on the world’s Muslim population which can be found here;

http://www.pewforum.org/files/2013/04/worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-full-report.pdf

The report does not list the corresponding population of each country polled, but I created a spreadsheet (found below) and did a simple wiki search of the various countries population (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_by_country).  Now obvious this is not exact, given that there are strong regionalism differences in the support of the death penalty for apostasy among Muslims, but still the basic fact is quite clear;  the percentage of Muslims who support the death penalty for those who leave Islam is high roughly the same level of support as Americans who support Obamacare today.

Personally I regard anyone who is so against religious freedom that they support the execution of those who leave their religion to be ideological enemies of my country’s ideals.  It might be argued that those who support the death penalty for apostasy in Islam are the minority.  This is true.  But there is a world of difference between being a minority of say, 4.3% and being a minroity of 43%.  A political or social body can pretty much ignore a minority of 4.3% without much difficulty.  But no social group can ever fully ignore a minority of 43%.

If 43% of a group believe in something, they will find some way to influence the remaining 57%.  They might not get what they want, but they will be heard and they will have an impact.  The most famous instance of this is probably in March of 1933 when one Adolph Hitler was elected with only 43% of the vote.

***

40-45% of all Muslims are fundamentalists (Western Europe) (h/t Vlad Tepes)

Published on Jan 6, 2015 by Invandring Sverige

Muslim fundamentalism is not a marginal phenomenon in Western Europe. This conclusion is drawn in a study published by Ruud Koopmans from the WZB Berlin Social Science Center.

Large Percentage of 1.2 Billion Muslims Are Radicalized

Published on Jan 12, 2015 by act4america

http://www.actforamerica.org
In this clip from a panel discussion of Fox, Brigitte Gabriel, President of ACT For America explains studies that show what percentage of the world’s 1.2 billion Muslims are radicalized.

SHAPIRO: Politifact Thinks There’s No Such Thing As a Radical Muslim

Truth Revolt, by Ben Shapiro:

Politifact has long been an outlet for the left. Masquerading as a news-only, “just the facts, ma’am” truthtelling outlet, Politifact has burnished its reputation for veracity by labeling President Obama’s “if you like your plan, you can keep your plan” lie half-true – only to reverse course and label the very same statement its lie of the year just a year later.

Now, Politifact has seen fit to attempt to debunk my video attempting to estimate the number of radical Muslims on the planet.

This was, admittedly, a tall order for the mental midgets at Politifact. That’s because I drew all my numbers directly from well-established polling companies like Pew, and clearly defined my terms: radical Muslims, I said, believed in one of the following: (1) honor killings; (2) conspiracy theories surrounding 9/11; (3) the implementation of shariah law; (4) support for terrorist groups or attacks. I then calculated the highest polling percentages from the world’s most populous Muslim countries that fell within these four categories. The goal: to set an outer limit at the number of radical Muslims on earth. My conclusion: at least 800 million Muslims fell within these categories.

So, what was Politifact’s response? They didn’t like my criteria. Instead, they claimed, my claim was false. They did not claim that I misquoted the polls, or that I skewed the numbers. They simply stated that supporting honor killings, conspiracy theories surrounding 9/11, implementation of shariah law, and support for terrorism didn’t make you radical.

Which begs the question: what in the hell actually makes you a Muslim radical according to Politifact?

Let’s analyze their asinine analysis.

First, they argued, believing in implementation of shariah law did not make one a radical Muslim:

It is a moral code that covers marriage, crime and business. Different branches of Islam use different versions of the law. Some elements are widely accepted, such as the immorality of fraud. But for countries and sects that follow the harshest versions in which thieves have their hands cut off and unfaithful women are stoned to death, the opposition from the West, and parts of the Muslim world as well, is strong and visceral.

Somehow it seems less than honest to suggest that those who back implementation of shariah law in Pakistan want to restrict that implementation to usury laws.

And yet that’s precisely what Politifact does:

Pew reported that 84 percent of Pakistani Muslims wanted Sharia law, but of those, nearly two-thirds said it should only apply to Muslims. Run those numbers through and you get about 54 million Muslims who think all Pakistanis should be subject to Sharia law. That’s about 60 percent fewer than Shapiro said.

Well, no. If Christians wanted governments to apply Biblical punishments for adultery, but only for Christians, they’d still be radical Christians. It matters little to the young Muslim woman stoned for adultery whether shariah law is only applied to Muslims or not. The person doing the stoning is radical.

But here’s where Politifact gets truly hilarious: they can’t even stick with their own statistics:

We are not saying that Pakistan has 54 million radical Muslims. Our point is that more detailed polling data changes the results a great deal. Shapiro chose one yardstick. Other analysts could with at least as much justification choose another.

That doesn’t make my yardstick wrong, of course. It just means Politifact doesn’t like my yardstick. So they try their own. And, sadly, they come up with a calculation of 181 million Muslims in 15 countries who are radical. Which is lower than my estimate, but reasonable.

But that’s politically incorrect. So Politifact simply says that no standard can be used for determining radicalism in the Muslim world: “To be clear, we’re not saying there are 181 million radical Muslims.”

They’re not saying there are 54 million radical Muslims in Pakistan or 181 million radical Muslims in the most populous Muslim countries. So, what are they saying?

They’re saying that all definitions of Muslim radicalism are off the table, so we can never tell if there are any Muslim radicals at all. As they concede, “We should note that we found no solid estimate of the number of radical Muslims worldwide.”

To prove that point, Politifact quotes James Zogby of the Arab American Institute to support the notion that even honor killings do not make one a radical Muslim: “Zogby said that as cruel as honor killings are, they are not tied to beliefs that underlie beheadings and suicide bombings.” In other words, as long as you’re not a head-chopper, you’re not a radical Muslim. And even then, we’d have to examine your true Islamic motives.

That’s certainly convenient for Zogby, given his reported defense of groups including Hamas and Islamic Jihad, as well as certain individual terrorists. Zogby even said that Palestinian organizations that refused to sign a pledge not to use American aid for terrorism were not supporting terrorism. So there’s that.

Finally, Politifact concludes that my claim that a majority of Muslims are radical is false: ““Shapiro’s definition of radical is so thin as to be practically meaningless and so too are the numbers he brings to bear.”

Which is beyond ridiculous, given that they established no definition for radicalism, disowned their own numbers in order to avoid coming to uncomfortable conclusions, and even admitted that my yardstick was justifiable, as were others.

Politifact, it turns out, is actually just PolitiOpinion.

We rate Politifact’s brand “false.”

THE MYTH OF THE TINY RADICAL MUSLIM MINORITY

isis-flag-AFP (1)Breitbart, by BEN SHAPIRO:

Over the weekend, former President Jimmy Carter attended the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) conference in Detroit. There, he assured Muslims that the “principles of Allah” were designed to “bring peace and justice to all.” ISNA’s ties to terror-supporters are quite deep.

But Carter isn’t alone. For years, American leaders have lectured Muslims on the nature of Islam, in the fruitless hope that pooh-poohing Islamic extremism as a fringe element will somehow convince Muslims all over the world that America is more of a friend to them than Islamic radicals are. This week, Barack Obama said, “ISIL speaks for no religion” — which comes a shock to those who live in the world of reality, given that ISIL certainly speaks for a certain segment of a religion. Eric Holder has said that radical Islam is not consistent with the teachings of Islam. For years, George W. Bush assured Americans that Islamic extremists represented but a tiny minority of Muslims. Hillary Clinton wrote in her new memoir Hard Choices that “Not all Islamists are alike…it is in America’s interest to encourage all religiously based political parties and leaders to embrace inclusive democracy and reject violence.”

This may be true. Or it may not be true. What is certainly true is that American politicians, mostly Christian or atheist, know less about the nature of Islam and Islamic radicalism than members of ISIS. To suggest that a cursory examination of platitudes about the Koran provides enough knowledge to spout paternalistic expertise about the religion is insulting to Muslims of all stripes.

Here’s what we do know: the polls show that Islamic extremism is on the rise. That’s not because it’s a fringe element. It’s because the West has swallowed multiculturalism wholesale, to the point where it’s politically unpalatable to condemn Islamic extremism for the mass rape of children.

So, here is the evidence that the enemy we face is not a “tiny minority” of Muslims, let alone a rootless philosophy unconnected to Islam entirely. It’s not just the thousands of westerners now attempting to join ISIS. It’s millions of Muslims who support their general goals, even if they don’t support the group itself.

France. A new, widely-covered poll shows that a full 16% of French people have positive attitudes toward ISIS. That includes 27% of French between the ages of 18-24. Anne-Elizabeth Moutet of Newsweek wrote, “This is the ideology of young French Muslims from immigrant backgrounds…these are the same people who torch synagogues.”

Britain. In 2006, a poll for the Sunday Telegraph found that 40% of British Muslims wanted shariah law in the United Kingdom, and that 20% backed the 7/7 bombers. Another poll from that year showed that 45% of British Muslims said that 9/11 was an American/Israeli conspiracy; that poll showed that one-quarter of British Muslims believed that the 7/7 bombings were justified.

Palestinian Areas. A poll in 2011 showed that 32% of Palestinians supported the brutal murder of five Israeli family members, including a three-month-old baby. In 2009, a poll showed that 78% of Palestinians had positive or mixed feelings about Osama Bin Laden. A 2013 poll showed 40% of Palestinians supporting suicide bombings and attacks against civilians. 89% favored sharia law. Currently, 89% of Palestinians support terror attacks on Israel.

Pakistan. After the killing of Osama Bin Laden, the Gilani Foundation did a poll of Pakistanis and found that 51% of them grieved for the terrorist mastermind, with 44% of them stating that he was a martyr. In 2009, 26% of Pakistanis approved of attacks on US troops in Iraq. That number was 29% for troops in Afghanistan. Overall, 76% of Pakistanis wanted strict shariah law in every Islamic country.

Morocco. A 2009 poll showed that 68% of Moroccans approved of terrorist attacks on US troops in Iraq; 61% backed attacks on American troops in Afghanistan as of 2006. 76% said they wanted strict sharia law in every Islamic country.

Jordan. 72% of Jordanians backed terror attacks against US troops in Iraq as of 2009. In 2010, the terrorist group Hezbollah had a 55% approval rating; Hamas had a 60% approval rating.

Indonesia: In 2009, a poll demonstrated that 26% of Indonesians approved of attacks on US troops in Iraq; 22% backed attacks on American troops in Afghanistan. 65% said they agreed with Al Qaeda on pushing US troops out of the Middle East. 49% said they supported strict sharia law in every Islamic country. 70% of Indonesians blamed 9/11 on the United States, Israel, someone else, or didn’t know. Just 30% said Al Qaeda was responsible.

Egypt. As of 2009, 87% of Egyptians said they agreed with the goals of Al Qaeda in forcing the US to withdraw forces from the Middle East. 65% said they wanted strict sharia law in every Islamic country. As of that same date, 69% of Egyptians said they had either positive or mixed feelings about Osama Bin Laden. In 2010, 95% of Egyptians said it was good that Islam is playing a major role in politics.

United States. A 2013 poll from Pew showed that 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 21 percent of Muslims are concerned about extremism among Muslim Americans. 19 percent of American Muslims as of 2011 said they were either favorable toward Al Qaeda or didn’t know.

In short, tens of millions of Muslims all over the world sympathize with the goals or tactics of terrorist groups – or both. That support is stronger outside the West, but it is present even in the West. Islamist extremism is not a passing or fading phenomenon – it is shockingly consistent over time. And the West’s attempts to brush off the ideology of fanaticism has been an overwhelming failure.

Ben Shapiro is Senior Editor-At-Large of Breitbart News and author of the new book,The People vs. Barack Obama: The Criminal Case Against The Obama Administration (Threshold Editions, June 10, 2014). He is also Editor-in-Chief of TruthRevolt.org.Follow Ben Shapiro on Twitter @benshapiro.

 

Islamic State: Young British Muslims debate Caliphate

BBC, Aug. 14, 2014: (h/t Cultural Jihad)

When the extremist group widely known as Isis (now renamed Islamic State) declared a Caliphate taking in parts of Syria and Iraq, they reignited a debate over the issue.

The Ottoman Empire was the last widely recognised Caliphate and most of those in the West have only the faintest, if any, idea of what the word means.

But for some Muslims it is what they are waiting for, whether they back Islamic State or not – a state to restore a sense of dignity that many feel has been lost.

BBC Asian Network reporter Catrin Nye gathered young British Muslims from different sects of Islam to hear about their views on the concept of a Caliphate and what it means to them.

Queen Mary Univ: Radicals More Likely to be Well-Off, Educated

ChoudaryBY RYAN MAURO:

A new study by Queen Mary University of London concludes that there is not a strong link between terrorism and poverty, lack of education or mental instability. In fact, terrorists are more likely to be highly educated and financially secure. The survey adds to the mountain of proof that violent radicals, especially Islamist ones, are motivated by an ideology that is not born out of inequality.

The study strikes at the heart of the debate about Islamist terrorism.

One camp sees the root cause as a mixture of inequality, desperation and anger over Western foreign policy. This camp usually legitimizes some of the Islamist causes while condemning their methods. Both Presidents Obama and Bush were influenced by this camp.

While President Bush said that Islamic extremists were opposed to Western freedoms, he also said in 2002, “We fight poverty because hope is an answer to terror.” In 2005, Bush said that alleviating poverty will “strike a blow against the terrorists who feed on anger and resentment.” Like his successor, he did not usually use terms like “Islamist” to identify the ideology.

Similarly, President Obama said in this year’s State of the Union address that U.S. military deployments “may ultimately feed extremism.” In 2008, he said as a candidate that the U.S. needs to convince Hamas and Hezbollah that violence “weakens their legitimate claims.” In January, Secretary of State John Kerry said“this issue of poverty, which in many cases is the root cause of terrorism…”

A great example of this mindset affecting policy is the Obama Administration’s long-delayed decision to label Boko Haram, a Nigerian affiliate of Al-Qaeda, as a Foreign Terrorist Organization. Heincorrectly stated the group is an example of what happens when “countries are not delivering for their people and where there sources of conflict and underlining frustrations that have not been adequately dealt with.”

The Queen Mary University study boosts the standing of the second camp. This one blames the Islamist ideology, arguing that its outlook on the world cultivates those political grievances. After all, the natural response to U.S. troops in Afghanistan (where they protect Muslims) is not to institute Sharia governance, engage in violent jihad and perpetrate human rights abuses. Those are symptoms of Islamism, not anything the West did.

Read more at Clarion Project

How women should dress according to different Muslim countries… with the vast majority saying they should NOT cover their face

  • Survey was carried out in Tunisia, Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Turkey which all have a majority Muslim population
  • The majority prefer women to cover their hair rather than their whole face
  • But a substantial proportion in Lebanon and Turkey felt it’s appropriate for women not to cover their head at all in public

By SUZANNAH HILLS:

The way Muslim women should dress in public has been a strongly debated topic in recent months.

But a new study has now revealed what the citizens of different Muslim countries believe is appropriate female dress – and how widely views differ between them.

The survey was conducted across seven countries – Tunisia, Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Turkey – which all have a majority Muslim population.

And the research from the University of Michigan’s Institute for Social Research found that most residents in these countries prefer women to cover their hair with a traditional hijab, al-Amira or head scarf rather than cover their entire face with a full burqa or niqab.

Survey: Chart shows how people from seven different countries with a majority-Muslim population believe women should dress

Survey: Chart shows how people from seven different countries with a majority-Muslim population believe women should dress

Researchers asked respondents to pick their favoured style of female Muslim dress from a chart, assembled by the Pew Research Center, showing a range of clothing from the full burka (see image one on the chart above) and niqab (see image two) to types of hijabs (image four and five) to no head covering at all (image six).

The majority of those questioned – 57 per cent in Tunisia, 52 per cent in Egypt, 46 per cent in Turkey and 44 per cent in Iraq – believed the white hiqab or basic al-Amira (shown in image four) is the most appropriate dress for a Muslim woman.

But the more conservative black hijab or chador (shown in image three) was the second favourite choice of citizens in Iraq and Egypt.

And a 63 per cent-majority of those polled in Saudi Arabia chose the second most conservative form of dress, a niqab, which is depicted in image two.

Read more at Daily Mail

Video: Christopher Holton on Civilization Jihad, the Global Islamic Insurgency and Shariah Compliant Finance

moa1Terror Trends Bulletin, Oct. 17, 2012, by Christopher Holton:

This information makes up the introductory portion of the briefing that I have been delivering around the country for the past 3 years. It is important given the mounting evidence of Muslim Brotherhood infiltration in the West, and the US in particular.

On 22 May 2007, the Pew Research Center, certainly not a “conservative” organization, published a report on a survey that they conducted of Muslims in America. The name of that report was “Muslims in America: Middle Class and Mostly Mainstream.”

Pew rolled it out as a celebration of Muslims in America. The media jumped on the bandwagon and the report was received with delight.

But there are aspects of the report which deserve more scrutiny and which Pew and the media essentially ignored in their spin during the release.

First a few background highlights:

• Pew reported that there were 2.35 million Muslims in America, including 1.4 million over the age of 18 (the target group of the survey).

This is important because the Muslim Brotherhood organizations, such as CAIR and ISNA, frequently claim that there are 5-6 million Muslims in America. President Obama parroted the bogus 5-6 million figure from the Muslim Brotherhood in his 2009 Cairo speech.

• 30% of the 1.4 million (420,000) were said to be between 18 and 29.

This is important because this is the demographic most likely to be involved in jihadist activity.

Most importantly, there were two particularly relevant questions that were buried deep in the Pew survey that Pew chose not to address or highlight in its release and rollout of the report:

Relevant Question Number 1: Can Suicide Bombing of Civilian Targets to Defend Islam be Justified?

A: Often/Sometimes: 8%

A: Rarely: 5%

A: Don’t Know/Refuse to Answer: 9%

A: Never: 78%

 In other words, AT LEAST 13% of American Muslims believed that suicide bombings of civilian targets was justified at least in some circumstances.

 182,000 Muslims in America over the age of 18 believed that Islamikaze bombings of civilian targets was justified at least in some circumstances.

Here is another important point: This same question was asked of Muslims under the age of 30 (the age group most associated with jihadist activity):

A: Often/Sometimes: 15%

A: Rarely: 11%

A: Don’t know/refuse to answer: 5%?

A: Never: 69%

 26% or 109,200 Muslims in America between 18 and 29 believed that Islamikaze bombings of civilian targets was justified at least in some circumstances.

Relevant Question Number 2: What is your view of Al Qaeda?

A: Favorable: 5%

A: Somewhat Unfavorable: 10%

A: Don’t Know/Refuse to Answer: 27%

A: Very Unfavorable: 58%

Same questions to Muslims under 30:

A: Favorable: 7%

A: Somewhat Unfavorable: 16%

A: Don’t Know/Refuse to Answer: 19%

A: Very Unfavorable: 58%

 70,000 Muslims in America admitted to having a favorable view of Al Qaeda.

 29,400 Muslims in America between the ages of 18 and 29 admitted to having a favorable view of Al Qaeda.

It is particularly noteworthy that younger Muslims in America appear to be more predisposed to violent Jihad than older Muslims based upon the answers to these two questions.

Note that this survey was conducted of Muslims in America, not Muslims in Benghazi, Ramadi, Fallujah, Gaza, Cairo, Sana’a, Tehran, Kandahar, or Islamabad. The tens of thousands of Muslims that harbor these views all live in America. These numbers are staggering and frightening.

Civilizational Jihad and Global Islamic Insurgency with Christopher Holton, Published on Dec 26, 2013 by Children of Jewish Holocaust Survivors:

 

“… new reality makes identifying and understanding the Islamic doctrinal basis of our Jihadist enemies all the more important, yet with each passing attack, we seem to be getting further and further away from doing so.”

Christopher Holton of the Center for Security Policy discussed what America faces in addition to the threat of violent jihad another, an even more toxic danger — a stealthy and pre-violent form of warfare aimed at destroying our constitutional form of democratic government and free society. The Muslim Brotherhood is the prime mover behind this seditious campaign, which it calls “civilization jihad.”

Civilizational Jihad is succeeding through government, finance, military institutions…and though our schools.

Christopher Holton is Vice-President of Outreach at the Center for Security Policy. He directs the Center’s Divest Terror Initiative and Shariah Risk Due Diligence Program. He has been involved in legislation in twenty states to divest taxpayer supported pension systems from foreign companies that do business with the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Islamic Republic of Sudan, and the Syrian Arab Republic. Since 2008, Chris has been the editor-in-chief of the Shariah Finance Watch Blog. In 2005, he was a co-author of War Footing, published by the US Naval Institute Press. Holton’s work has also been published by National Review, Human Events, The American Thinker, Family Security Matters, Big Peace, World Tribune, World Net Daily, NewsMax, and thehayride.com. Before joining the Center, Chris was President of Blanchard and Company, a two hundred million dollar per year investment firm, and editor-in-chief of the Blanchard Economic Research Unit. Christopher blogs at TerrorTrendsBulletin.com.

 

And this is an excellent presentation on Shariah Compliant Finance with a long Q&A beginning about 50 min. in:

 

Here is a transcript of a similar presentation given in 2012.

 

New Poll of Muslim Countries Finds Large Support for Terrorists

Hamas5BY RYAN MAURO:

A new Pew poll of 11 Muslim countries shows that Islamist terrorist groups still command double-digit support, with Hamas being looked upon favorably by about one-third of respondents. About one-fourth do not have an opinion of the terrorists, leaving them up for grabs in the ideological war.

The poll found that overall Muslim support for acts of violence against civilians in the name of Islam has dropped over the last decade, while concern about Islamic extremism has risen. About 67% are concerned about extremism in their faith and 27% are unconcerned.

The 11 countries surveyed are: Egypt, Indonesia, Jordan, Lebanon, Malaysia, Nigeria, Pakistan, Palestinian Territories, Senegal, Tunisia and Turkey.

The country with the worst trend is Turkey. It is the only country where support for suicide bombings has increased.

About 13% supported the tactic in 2012 and 16% support it today, but this small increase doesn’t tell the whole story. In 2011, Turkish support for suicide bombing was at 7%. This means that support for suicide bombing more than doubled in the past two years.

Hamas is the most popular of the terrorist groups. Almost one-third (32%) of Muslims surveyed have a positive opinion of it and 45% have an unfavorable view.

The countries most supportive of Hamas are Egypt and the Palestinian Territories (48% support) and Lebanon and Tunisia (46%). The countries most hostile are Turkey (5%), Senegal (11%) and Pakistan (12%).

Hezbollah is the runner-up in terms of popularity. Overall, 26% of the Muslim world supports Hezbollah. About 42% have an unfavorable opinion. This is still an impressing showing because Hezbollah is a Shiite terrorist group. Even though 90% of the Muslim world is Sunni and Hezbollah kills Sunnis, it still has a large pool of support.

The countries most supportive of Hezbollah are Lebanon (46%), the Palestinian Territories (43%) and Malaysia and Tunisia (35%). The countries most hostile to Hezbollah are Turkey (7%), Senegal (10%) and Pakistan (15%).

Read more at Clarion Project