Islamophobia: Fact & Fiction

The blogosphere and cable channels are all atwitter over a discussion Bill Maher had with Sam Harris, Ben Affleck, and Michael Steele last week. The topic? Whether too many Americans are engaged in Islamophobia in their criticism of Islam. At one point, Affleck said, “We've killed more Muslims than they've killed us, by an awful lot.” At another, he called the criticism of Islam “ugly,” “gross,” and “racist.” He compared the criticism of Islam with someone calling a Jew “shifty.” Is he right?

He is not—and neither is the decade-plus shutting down of this important discussion. The shibboleths used to shut down these discussions, the very labels Affleck used, are what cow too many of us into silence and prolong and delay the serious conversation that is long overdue and long misunderstood.

Let us start with the notion that America has a problem with Islamophobia, and that we have killed more Muslims than have killed us. To be sure, we have killed more Muslims. But, then again, we also killed more Germans than killed us in World War II. Why did we kill Germans? The same reason we’ve killed Muslims: when America goes to war, a war that is declared on us and that we rarely have ever initiated against an enemy, we go to liberate, not colonize, torture, or maim. Indeed, as Wolf Blitzer of CNN pointed out about a decade ago, “[A]lmost every time U.S. military forces have been called into action to risk their lives and limbs, it’s been on behalf of Muslims….[T]o assist the Afghan mujahaddin . . . during the Soviet invasion in the 1980s, to liberate Kuwait following the Iraqi invasion of 1990, to help Somali Muslims suffering at the hands of a warlord in Mogadishu, to help Muslims first in Bosnia and then in Kosovo who faced a Serb onslaught, and more recently to liberate Afghanistan from its Taliban and al Qaeda rulers.” Since then, one can add the attempted liberation of Iraqis from the thumbscrew of Saddam Hussein, and now Africans facing an Ebola pandemic, and those targeted by ISIS in Syria and Iraq.

We do not kill Muslims because of our religious, nationalist, or patriotic motives, we do so to protect civilization and save innocent Muslims—and Christians and Jews and others. And we do so regrettably and with the most precision we can. Let us recall: We did not declare war on Islam; rather, a substantial part of Islam, call it Radical Islam if you like, declared war on us and civilization. And, as no less than President Barack Obama said recently: “Our Armed Forces are unparalleled and unique. And so when we’ve got a big problem somewhere around the world, it falls on our shoulders. And sometimes that’s tough. But that’s what sets us apart. That’s why we’re America. That’s what the stars and stripes are all about.” Who else is going to stop the scourge of civilization abuse Radical Islam has been waging? And how else, other than militarily, do we defeat those who slit throats, use civilian airliners as missiles, stone apostates to death, and have brought back killing fields?

As for Islamophobia and Islam, America has a record of exquisite decency and non-racism that belies everything Mr. Affleck implied. Just how racist are we as a nation? The FBI tracks crimes based on race, religion, and other characteristics, and the numbers it reports are rather striking, even laudatory. Throughout the long war we have been in, the American civilian reaction has been anything but “gross” or “racist.” In 2012 (the latest year statistics are available), there were 1,340 hate crimes based on religion. Too many to be sure. But how many were against Muslims? 11.6 percent. How many, by contrast, were there against Jews? 62.4 percent. These numbers have been fairly consistent since 9/11. In 2002, for example, one year after 9/11, just under 11 percent of the anti-religious bias incidents in America were anti-Muslim, in contrast to the 70 percent of anti-Jewish incidents constituting religious bias reported that year. Yet would anyone today say “America is anti-semitic” or has a Jewish problem? Of course not. Every hate crime is a wrong, but the idea that America has a problem with Muslims is discounted nearly ten-fold by the obviously false statement that America has a problem with Jews.

Which gets us to the absurd comparison Mr. Affleck made about “shifty Jew”s. Do thousands or hundreds of thousands of Jews commit acts of grotesque or any other kind of violence in the name of their God? Of course not. Do Muslims? Of course. And they cite religious tracts and tell us they are doing it in the name of Allah. Burying or ignoring this fact does exactly the wrong thing: it refuses to acknowledge the obvious and lets off the hook the moderate Muslims who have a duty to confront the violent aspects of and within their religion. Is Radical Islam a minority position within Islam? To be sure, but it’s a rather large minority, isn’t it? Estimates of the size of Radical Islam vary from seven to 20-plus percent of the world Muslim population, but even at the low end, that number may constitute over 100 million followers throughout the world. But let’s assume that number is too high by half for just a moment, and the number is 50 million? Say that’s wrong, again by half, 25 million? We can keep downplaying and cutting those numbers, but even if the number is one million, that is an awful lot of people—and we know what 19 can do with less than the annual salary of most college presidents.

Here’s the point: So long as this serious discussion keeps getting shut down, it will be ignored and the radicals as well as the moderates will get a pass in confronting what they must confront among their co-religionists. We would tolerate that pass of no other religion where millions in the name of their God committed truly gross and racist acts. Our local Muslim leader, Zuhdi Jasser, of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, has it right in confronting his religion and its false prophets head on. Perhaps he is also right that discussing “moderate Islam” is folly and we should talk more of a “reformed Islam.” But the point, the point of the sword, is in front of all of our eyes: Islam has a problem and it needs to be confronted—not those of us who point it out.

I know this is long, but there's a lot of "to-the-point" and "hard-hitting" truth here.

This is the Discussion on Islam vs. Radical Islam
Many Americans Have Been Waiting To Hear ( 4:51 )

Read this thread.

What You Can’t See on the UN’s Maps of Gaza

Benghazi: The Difference It Makes Is Accountability!

"Sharia" Is Not The "SAME FAITH", and "THE PEACEFUL MAJORITY WERE IRRELEVANT !"

Unusual Answer from Panelist Receives Standing Ovation at Benghazi Coalition Meeting

This is the Discussion on Islam vs. Radical Islam Many Americans Have Been Waiting To Hear

Heritage Foundation Panelist on Radical Islam

I'm a retired air traffic controller/supervisor and I have done official transcripts before.

Full Context: Benghazi Accountability Coalition Event ( 9:17 )

SABA AHMED: As-salamu alaykum. Peace to you all. My name is Saba Ahmed. I'm a Law Student at American University. I am here to ask you a simple question. I know that we portray Islam and all Muslims as bad, but there is 1.8 billion Muslims followers of Islam. We have 8 million plus Muslim Americans in this country, and I don't see them represented here. But my question ishow can we fight an ideological war with weapons? How can we ever end this war? The jihadist ideology that you talk about - it's an ideology. How can you ever win this thing if you don't address it ideologically? CHRIS PLANTE: Frank. FRANK GAFFNEY: Well, um, I'm glad to see you're representing Muslims in this company. Uh, I don't want to speak for anybody else, but I think I can say safely that there isn't anybody on this panel that thinks that all Muslims are the problem. I certainly don't. What we have been trying to help people to understand is the ideology, to use your tern, the doctrine, if you will, uh the program, agenda. I don't know what best way to describe what "Sharia" is. But that's the default line, I think, between Muslims who are … decidedly the problem,because they believe it is "Allah's will", God's will, to impose that will on everybody else, Muslim and non-Muslim, alike, on one hand. And on the other hand, you have lots of Muslims who don't follow that program.They don't even know what it's about, don't speak Arabic, aren't imbued with the traditions of the faith as out of Saudi Arabia, for example. And they are NOT necessarily the problem, at least not yet. But what makes these policy things so important it seems to me, and why it is imperative that we understand it ... It's not just that we don't know that we're fightingan "ideological war" against people who ARE ABSOLUTELY CONVINCED OF THE SUPREMACY OF THEIR IDEOLOGY but because as a practical matter, we're engaged in a situation that is becoming vastly worse in part because we keep embracing people who are imbued with that ideology. This is why I come back to this idea of legitimating and engaging and funding and arming the Muslim Brotherhood. These are exponents of "Sharia". It is part of their agenda, very explicitly, to impose it, as I say, on everyone else. So I thank you for the question and I think we absolutely do need to deal with it as an ideologically war, at least in part or at least understand the the ideology that is driving THE VIOLENT JIHAD ON THE ONE HAND, AND EVERY BIT AS IMPORTANTLY WHAT THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD CALLS THE "CIVILIZATION JIHAD" ON THE OTHER. Many in the government, if they're thinking about this at all, are focused on the sort of dangling, shiny object, dangerous as it is, of "VIOLENT JIHAD". But they're missing ENTIRELY, that other piece that I talked about in connection with Huma Abedin and others, which is … the SUBVERSION, the not-so-much non-violent form of Jihad, as the PRE-VIOLENT FORM OF JIHAD, with which they hope ultimately to take us down just as surely as the others who embrace VIOLENT JIHAD seem to. But at the end of the day, it is something that brings them together, whether it is ISSI, whether it is the Taliban, whether it's Al Qaida, whether it's the Muslim Brotherhood, whether it's dozens of others, IS "Sharia" . And we DO have to get THAT straight. BRIGITTE GABRIEL: Great ,,, Crowd: ( applause) [Video time ( 4:06 )] BRIGITTE GABRIEL: Great question. I am so glad you're here. And I am so glad you brought that up, because this …, because it gives us an opportunity to answer. What I find so amazing is, since the beginning of this panel, which we are here about Benghazi attack against our people; not one person mentioned Muslims, we are here against Islam, or we're launching war against Muslims. We are here TO DISCUSSHOW 4 AMERICANS DIED, and WHAT OUR GOVERNMENT IS DOING. We are NOT here to bash Muslims. YOU were the one who brought up the issue about 'most Muslims', NOT US. And since you brought it up, allow me to elaborate with my answer. There are 1.2 BILLION Muslims in the world today. OF COURSE NOT ALL of them are radicals. The majority of them are peaceful people. The radicals are estimated to be between 15 to 25% according to ALL intelligence services around the world. That leaves 75% of them, ma … a peaceful people. But when you look at 15 to 25% of the world's Muslim population,you're looking at 180 million to 300 million people DEDICATED TO THE DESTRUCTION OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION. That is as big of the United States. So why should we worry about the radical, 15 to 25%?BECAUSE IT IS THE RADICALS THAT KILL. BECAUSE IT IS THE RADICALS THAT BEHEAD AND MASSACRE. When you look throughout history, when you look at all the lessons of history,most Germans were peaceful. Yet the Nazis drove the agenda. And as a result, 60 million people died, almost ah, … 14 million in concentration camps. 6 million were Jews. The peaceful majority were IRRELEVANT. When you look at Russia, most Russians were peaceful as well. Yet the Russians were able to kill 20 million people. The peaceful majority were irrelevant. When you look at China for example, most Chinese were peaceful as well. Yet the Chinese were able to kill 70 million people. The peaceful majority were IRRELEVANT. When you look at Japan prior to World War II, most Japanese were peaceful as well. Yet, Japan was able to butcher its way across Southeast Asia, killing 12 million people, mostly killed with bayonets and shovels. The peaceful majority were IRRELEVANT. On September 11th in the United States, we had 2.3 MILLION Arab Muslims living in the United States. It took 19 hijackers,19 radicals,to bring America down to its knees, destroy the World Trade Center, attack the Pentagon, and … and kill almost 3000 Americans that day. THE PEACEFUL MAJORITY WERE IRRELEVANT ! SO FOR ALL OUR POWERS OF REASON, and US TALKING ABOUT moderate and peaceful Muslims, I'm glad you're here. But WHERE ARE THE OTHERS SPEAKING OUT? AND SINCE YOU ARE THE ONLY MUSLIM REPRESENTATIVE … Crowd: ( overwhelming applause) BRIGITTE GABRIE: ( speaking to the large crowd and waving her hands down to lower the noise) Save your applause until the end. Crowd: ( overwhelming applause) BRIGITTE GABRIEL: Thank you. Crowd: ( overwhelming applause) BRIGITTE GABRIEL: (Laughing) Thank you. AND SINCE YOU ARE THE ONLY MUSLIM REPRESENTATIVE IN HERE, YOU TOOK THE LIME LIGHT INSTEAD OF SPEAKING ABOUTWHY our government … And I assume You're an American? [Ahmed responded yes.] BRIGITTE GABRIEL: You're an American Citizen? [Ahmed responded yes.] BRIGITTE GABRIEL: So, as an American citizen, you sat in this room, and INSTEAD of standing up as saying a question, or asking something about our 4 Americans that died and what our government is doing to correct the problem, YOU STOOD THERE TO MAKE A POINT ABOUT PEACEFUL, MODERATE MUSLIMS. I wish you brought 10 with you TO QUESTION THEM ABOUT WHAT, HOW WE CAN HELP OUT GOVERNMENT RESPONSIBLE It is timewe take political correctness and THROW IT IN THE GARBAGE CAN WHERE IT BELONGS, and STOP CALLING IT "SAME FAITH" . [Video time ( 8:00 )] Crowd: ( Shouts of "Yeah" and overwhelming applause) CHRIS PLANTE: And they'll be refreshments afterwards. Crowd: ( Laughter and overwhelming applause) CHRIS PLANTE: (to Clare Lopez) Ah, did you want to respond to the ah … ? CLARE LOPEZ: (Shaking her head no) I don't want to. CHRIS PLANTE: You think, ah (laughing) you think that … another time . CLARE LOPEZ: (Shaking her head no) I can't follow that. CHRIS PLANTE: ( Laughing) ( Pointing to Saba Ahmed) You had a follow-up that you'd ah … I'd uh … Yeah, go ahead. Go ahead. [Video time ( 8:31 )] (Video of part of the large crowd and Saba Ahmed asking question) SABA AHMED: … A comment. Thank you for your responses. And I do really hope that other Muslims will start showing up at these conservative forums. But, you know, as a peaceful … ah, American Muslim I would like to think that I'm not that irrelevant. I would like, I'm just as much an American and Im very deeply saddened about the lives that were lost in Libya. And I hope that we will find justice for them and their families and … But I don't think that this war can ever be won BY JUST THE MILITARY. You have to address the war … You have to bring the Muslims to the table TO ADDRESS THIS. CHRIS PLANTE: I think that … I think everyone agrees that it can't be won JUST by the military, and I that everyone has said that. You, … Can you tell me WHO the head of the uh, Muslim Peace Movement IS? SABA AHMED: Huh, I guess that's me right now, sir. (she's smiling) Thank you. CHRIS PLANTE: Uh, yeah, well uh … (smiling) Thank you. (Crowd clapping)

In summary, SEND 'EM TO HELL !
Remember what Jesus said.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.