“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.

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.

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.

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

The Formidable Islamist Minority in America

flag as hijabBy Ryan Mauro

A summary of polls about the ideological makeup of the Muslim-American community shows that the majority is moderate, but there is a formidable minority influenced by Islamist doctrine. A significant number are refusing to give answers or are still figuring out where they stand on issues like terrorism and Sharia Law.

The number one question is how many Muslim-Americans support terrorism. A 2011 Pew poll found very little support for Al-Qaeda, with only 2% viewing the terrorist group very favorably, 3% somewhat favorably and 11% somewhat unfavorably. About 70% view Al-Qaeda very unfavorably, an increase of 12% since 2007.

There are 2.6 million Muslim-Americans, a number that is expected to rise to 6.2 million by 2030. This means there are 130,000 Muslim-Americans who will admit that they view Al-Qaeda favorably and that assumes there are no supporters among the 14% who did not answer the question. Plus, the survey did not poll support for Hamas, Hezbollah, the Muslim Brotherhood and other groups.

Only 1% of Muslim-Americans say violence against civilians to defend Islam is “often” justified. About 7% say it is sometimes justified and 5% say it is rarely justified. Approximately 81% say attacks on civilians are never justified. Of course, the definition of “civilian” varies. Hamas supporters, for example, argue that there is no such thing as an Israeli civilian. The survey did not poll support for attacks on soldiers.

The 2007 Pew poll found that about 49% feel mosques should stay out of politics and about the same amount feel the Koran should not be taken entirely literally. The survey concluded that Muslim immigrants are more moderate on this issue than those who were born here.

“Native-born Muslims express overwhelming support for the notion that mosques should express their views on social and political matters. By contrast, a large majority of foreign-born Muslims—many of whom are from countries where religion and politics are often closely intertwined—say that mosques should be kept out of political matters,” the report said.

Perhaps the most surprising findings were related to social issues. The Pew 2011 poll shows that 39% feel that homosexuality should be accepted by society, an increase of 12% from 2007. On the issue of multiple wives, a Wenzel Strategies poll released in October found 22% support allowing polygamy.

The findings related to Sharia Law and specific elements of Islamist doctrine were less comforting.

The Wenzel poll found that almost 40% strongly or somewhat agree that Sharia Law should be the supreme law of the country. A slight majority oppose that proposition, with 35% strongly disagreeing and 18% somewhat disagreeing. However, when presented with a more refined question about what to do if Sharia conflicts with the U.S. Constitution, 70% would follow the Constitution and only 9% would follow Sharia Law. About 21% were undecided.

There is high support for restricting freedom of speech in compliance with Sharia Law.

About 59% feel that criticism of Islam or its founder is not permitted under the First Amendment. Only 41% disagreed. Shockingly, 52% strongly or somewhat support criminal charges against those that criticize or parody Islam, while 33% oppose it. Nearly 15% strongly or somewhat support executing critics of their religion. About 70% strongly oppose it and around 11% only somewhat oppose it.

Only about 30% believe that Americans have the right to encourage Muslims to leave their faith. Around 45% disagree. Note that this question isn’t about whether people should proselytize to Muslims. It’s about whether doing so is a constitutional right.

The polls indicate that the Muslim-American community is more moderate than its counterparts overseas on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. A 2011 Gallup poll found that over 80% support a two-state solution. However, the 2011 Pew poll shows only 61% believe a two-state solution that respects the rights of Palestinians is possible. About 20% feel it is impossible, matching Gallup’s result.

The Wenzel poll directly asked Muslim-Americans whether Israel has a right to exist. About 46% strongly agreed that it does and 21% somewhat agree. Only 8% strongly disagree, essentially supporting the elimination of the state of Israel. Another 8% somewhat disagree that Israel has a right to exist and 16% were unsure.

Read more at Front Page