America, like Europe, is dishonest about Islamic extremism

24 April 2013

9:18 AM

24 April 2013

9:18 AM

I have been in the US over recent weeks, during the period of the Boston bombings and the hunt for the perpetrators. It may surprise some British readers to know that although American public debate is undoubtedly wider and more robust than in Britain, even America displays denial and deflection when it turns out that the culprits are radical Islamists.

I think of this as ‘Toulouse syndrome.’ Much of the reaction to Boston is very reminiscent of what we saw last year after the shooting of seven people in France. From the first attacks on French soldiers until after the third shootings at a Jewish school, both national and international news focussed on the possibility that the lone gunman had been a far-right extremist. This led to claims that various right wing politicians – including then President Sarkozy – bore at least some degree of responsibility for the attacks. Alleged trails of culpability were sniffed out and fingers pointed.


However, once the gunman turned out to be a radical Muslim called Mohammed Merah, the speculation ceased. Nothing much to see here. Please move along.

Reaction to the atrocity in Boston has had a similar flavour. Before the suspects were identified, some on the political left even said that they ‘hoped’ that the bomber would turn out to be a ‘white American’. Certainly if their dream had come true then current reporting of the case would be different. Remember the way in which the attempted murder of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was laid straight at the doors of Tea Party activists and Sarah Palin?

In America, as in Europe, civil society and the political class are well prepared for dealing with certain types of extremism. But they remain infinitely less able to deal with extremism when it comes from radical Islamists. When Representative Peter King set up his committee to look into domestic radicalisation a couple of years back he was excoriated by left-wing and Muslim groups in the US as well as many on the political right. They included the usual accusations of bigotry, ‘Islamophobia’ and provoking of a potential ‘backlash’ against Muslims.

Long before Boston, Rep. King should have been offered an apology by such critics. Instead America looks like it is going through that same process of evasion which is so familiar to Europe. Already Muslim leaders are warning of a potential ‘backlash’ and large parts of the media are doing what they can to pretend that the faith of the terrorists is the least important thing imaginable.

Subscribe to The Spectator today for a quality of argument not found in any other publication. Get more Spectator for less – just £12 for 12 issues.

Show comments
  • gerd

    Here you can read official statistics in german and english:

  • brian2907

    Do they use ‘Christianityophobia’ of ‘Judeophobia’ in Dar-el-Islam? If not, why not?

  • John Pitcher

    I cannot for the life of me see how the very serious problem of radicalisation in Islam and how you deal with it is helped by the never ending chipping of one side against the other as seen in this piece. Anyone who denies it happens is obviously a lunatic but to claim it is the only influence is as stupid.

    Islam is more capable of being perverted for the purposes of supporting violence than Christianity or Judaism because there is no single body within the religion that has the authority to define the proper reactions of all in the community.

    Therefore the interpretations of the terrorists after or before or without radicalisation are as worthy as those of anyone else.

    The reality is that not all terrorists are radicals; many take action for revenge; because their country has been invaded; on behalf of Palestinian Arabs; for political or economic reasons and of course for a mixture of all these.

    You do not have to be a fundamental believer in a radical form of Islam to want to kill someone if your family has been wiped out by a drone. I am not saying you should take revenge but that the drone was a mistake in the first place and the result is plain to see and to be expected in a violent world. The answer is of course to reduce the violence. To take measures to stop the conflicts and take away justifications on all sides.

    The perverse form of Islam used by radicals is not justification in the eyes of the massive majority of Muslims. I know this as I live in a Muslim community and have done so over a period of thirty years in many parts of the Islamic world.

    Islam has been connected to terrorism by the terrorists it is not the seed that has created them. The seed of creation comes form other places. The seed is fertilised by violence. Koranic verses are misinterpreted and simplified to justify violent jihad that has nothing to do with the evolved and still evolving religion that has become syncretic with many other religious practices around the world, and with different political and legal systems.

    To assume that radical Islam (a poorly defined term if it is ever properly defined) is coherent and strong enough to be the defining structure around which Muslims worldwide will assemble to act as one is simplistic and utterly ill-informed.

  • Hugh

    The injunction to murder thy neighbour which some Muslims claim to find in scripture is as little observed as the injunction to love him which actually is in the Gospels. Hence the peaceful and prosperous Muslim communities in the United States. Hence the Holocaust.

    • Mussi Buma

      Wrong. The Holocaust was a direct descendant of muslim jew-hatred. The very first pogrom against jews in Europe was by muslims in occupied Spain. By the time that european Christians began the Crusades (and subsequently attacked jews), muslims had conducted three pogroms against jews.

      Before those pogroms, there were 1.5 million jews in Europe between 800 and 1100. And no pogroms. Jew-hatred is another of the ways in which islam contaminated European christianity.

      There have been 20,000 islamically-inspired terrorist attacks since 2001. All of those attacks are following the behaviour of Mohammed (“I have been made victorious through terror”). Even the muslim concept of “charity” is totally alien to the christian concept of charity; the latter is universal, whilst the former CANNOT be used to help non-muslims. Despite the stupid christians renaming The Red Cross (to include The Red Crescent), if one examines the accounts of that (now) chris-lamic organisation, one will see that the entire 1.2 billion muslims in the world donate less to universal charity than the 5 million people who live in Singapore.

      Islam is the anti-thesis of christianity. Islam is a counter-reformation against christianity.

  • Donafugata

    The terrorists are only one side of the coin.
    There is such a thing as demographic jihad which is manifest in the massive number of Muslims who arrive in Europe as immigrants. Before anything else, they are muslims and their purpose is to take over by whatever means they can. Simply going after benefits is a Muslim’s way of helping to drain us dry.

    Why have they come here when the values, customs and practices of western society are such an anathma to Islam? They have so much to complain about so,even as law-abiding citizens, they are busily changing society to suit themselves.

    Even without another act of terror ever taking place, Europe is being gradually Islamified because the real Europeans are sitting back, doing nothing. Had the Muslims come as an army of invasion, it would have been better because our armed forces would have fought them off. It might take them longer, this way but eventually Europe will be a caliphate.

    • John Pitcher

      For what you describe to be afcat you would need first to say who is coordinating this effort against Europe and where are they operating from.

      If what you are saying is happening it is a by-product of immigration from Muslim areas; it is not a cannot be a planned effort as there is no one to do the planning.

  • Augustus

    “In America, as in Europe, civil society and the political class are well prepared for dealing with certain types of extremism. But they remain infinitely less able to deal with extremism when it comes from radical Islamists.”

    Oh why, oh why, couldn’t the bombing have been a secular protest, with no Islamic roots,
    against Russia’s occupation of Chechnya and in favour of Chechen independence? Because then the target would have been Moscow, not Boston. What happened in Boston last week was terrible and terrifying – precisely the outcome terrorists seek to achieve. They have told us, over and over, that they are waging what they call a jihad. Yet so many people, in government, the media, academia, refuse to believe this, or at least refuse to acknowledge it. How often do we hear, ‘There is no global war, there is no global jihadist movement’? And imagine if jihadists had nuclear weapons, instead of improvised explosive devices, or just razor blades with which to hijack airplanes. Seeing the threat through unclouded eyes would be the first step. Apprehending, not killing, terrorists whenever possible, and interrogating them
    effectively, rather than telling them that they had ‘the right to remain silent’, would be a useful second.

  • Austin Barry

    What’s Obama avoiding saying, by using the most contorted linguistics, about any Islamist terror?

    Scroll link below to short video interview of Charles Krauthammer.

  • global city

    Follow the post at the bottom of that ‘Atlantic’ article Douglas linked to see the twisted logic and self hate of the ‘liberal left’? Linda Reynolds is a classic example

    Here is another example

  • AlexanderGalt

    One of their sisters told journalists that she didn’t know “what got into them”.

    Obama clearly didn’t know either as he described the Boston murders as “this

    In a word, what got into them was Islam.

    In a lighter vein the Chechen community of Boston have at least cleared up the controversy between Pamela Gellar and CAIR over the true meaning of “jihad”.

    There’s a good take on that in: “My Jihad” at:!/2013/04/my-jihad.html

  • kyleyoder

    America is like Europe today. That was Obama and his supporters’ plan. So why shocked that Americans would sweep terrorism under the rug like europe too?

  • Julian West

    Entirely agree about Peter King. His disgusting hypocrisy about terrorism makes him entirely unsuited for his role. If the Boston bomb had been planted in Belfast by the IRA, he would have been applauding it.

  • The Sage

    To prove your point Douglas, eight days after the event, here was a headline from the BBC website:
    “Boston Marathon bombing: Mystery remains over motive”
    It seemed the BBC hadn’t the faintest idea why the bombings had taken place. Strange.

    • kyleyoder

      Typical british style catering to radical Islam while at the same time fostering its sneering anti-Americanism.

      • Austin Barry

        As long as we cater halal.

  • pearlsandoysters

    That’s a very serious & complex issue, so inevitably the discourse is craftily shaped and reinforced via mass media, tried and tested narratives show up again and again. If one digs deep then the familiar picture vanishes out of sight, yet the one that emerges is so outright unsettling that it’s rather difficult to stomach it.

    • James

      I’ve spoken to a number of M*****s who tell me that Jihad is interpreted in different ways: lone wolf types are apparently impatient and taking it into their own hands – Allah states jihadists have patients – apparently the day will come when all infidels will be slaughtered. You can see how the faith believers are building bases and communities all over the west and asia, but murdering the infidels is the word of Allah and a duty of those who believe, yet we encourage it?

      • JabbaTheCat

        Why have you self censored your post?

        • James

          Maggots brigade.

      • pearlsandoysters

        Actually, what I meant is that there’s a point of view in the academia, that the very concept of war against infidels laid dormant for some four hundred years and was re-activated as a political project. The real problem is that there’s no delineation between the political & religious in the world of the Middle East. That’s partly an explanation why Arab spring led to surge of religious party not secular.

  • ceruleanblue777

    “Cambridge Syndrome” for the United States.

  • Ali Babba

    The only good Muslim is a dead one.

  • Daniel Maris

    Douglas got that “Nothing much to see here. Please move along.” from Jihad Watch – that’s Robert Spencer’s catchphrase.

    • Abhay

      also used by Mark Steyn.

      • global city

        It has been a staple in ‘cynical cop’ movies since the 60s’ and probably before.

    • Mussi Buma

      Actually, you will find that the phrase “Move along, nothing to see here” was first used to extensive comedic effect by Officer Bar Brady of South Park. He was using the phrase to move people along from major catastrophes some 15 years ago.

      Future generations will look back and see that fin-de-siecle South Park was the only western cultural product worthy of the designation “satire”. Mark Steyn is a lovely combination of humour and erudition. I especially like the pedantry of his evisceration of some “Professor of Journalism” who had the temerity to accuse Steyn of inventing Ayatollah Khomeini’s “Little Green Book”.

      • Daniel Maris

        OK no copyright on a phrase…

  • Daniel Maris

    The problem really is that democracies find it difficult to cope with such a subtle ideological opponent flying under the flag of religion.

    We need firstly to focus not on Islam, but on Sharia. There is really no problem with a Muslim who doesn’t want to impose Sharia, either now or in the future. There is only a problem with Muslims who want Sharia to triumph (either through violence or by other means).

    The ECHR judgement that Sharia Law is not compatible with human rights should be written into UK Law and it should become illegal to conspire to introduce Sharia Law.

    There should be specific controls on religious courts. They should be required to publish their proceedings and judgements in English, and the names of the people appearing and presiding.

    Sharia propagation should be tackled. We need proper inspection of Sharia schools (there are thousands) where children receive instruction for usually about 10 hours a week. There should be a legal upper limit on that and the curricula would have to be published.

    No Sharia propagandists should be allowed in from abroad. No one who wishes to see Sharia implemented should be allowed to take up residence in the UK or become

    a UK citizen, by marriage or any other means.

    There are many other practical measures that could and should be implemented.

    • Van Grungy

      “There is really no problem with a Muslim who doesn’t want to impose Sharia, either now or in the future.”
      Yes, just let them build their population. In a couple generations that muslim’s 45 grandchildren will want to impose shariah.

      • Daniel Maris

        Well then there’s a problem…but I think it unlikely that most children will become less tolerant if their parents are more tolerant.

        I am a democrat not a totalitarian. I am looking at ways of dealing with this problem through democratic means.

        • Van Grungy

          It’s a function of islam that as the more muslims become concentrated in an area, the closer they conform to the textual directions of their quran and hadiths.

          Unfortunately there will be no means of dealing with the islam problem through democratic means. For example, the Tower Hamlets in London will forever be a muslim run area.
          Another example of the encroachment of muslims can be witnessed at a more primitive level in Myanmar as the Buddhists there deal with islamic encroachment. I believe that the violent actions by the Buddhists there are a preview of what will inevitably occur in the West.

        • Donafugata

          This may seem obvious but is often not the case.
          Young women, born in the Uk into Muslim families, revert to traditions. Whereas the first generation women were only too delighted to abandon the hijab on coming to Britain, their daughters who are born here, want to wear the veil and keep Islamic traditions.

          Same for boys, how often do we hear about a young terrorist’s arrest and an interview with the dad expressing surprise that his son was a radical?

  • Mainlander

    “Mosques are our barracks, domes our helmets, minarets our bayonets, believers our soldiers.” This is a line from a poem by Turkish writer, Ziya Gökalp.

    • anotherjoeblogs

      quoted later by recep tayyip erdogan ( cost him a prison sentence though )

  • Evil Zionist

    “The infidels should not think that they can get away from us. Prepare against them whatever arms and weaponry you can muster so that you may terrorize them. They are your enemy and Allah’s enemy.” Qu’ran 8:59/60

    • O Bicer

      This, people, is EXACTLY what the media does. They dont give you the whole picture. The FULL quote is: “And prepare against them whatever you are able of power and of steeds of war by which you may terrify the enemy of Allah and your enemy and others besides them whom you do not know [but] whom Allah knows. And whatever you spend in the cause of Allah will be fully repaid to you, and you will not be wronged.” “And if they incline to peace, then incline to it [also] and rely upon Allah . Indeed, it is He who is the Hearing, the Knowing.”

      • Mussi Buma

        “This, people, is EXACTLY what the media does.” You are just adding another level of deception here, under the guise of providing completeness.

        Mohammed’s concept of peace, was that infidels (e.g. pagans, buddhists, hindus) would be slaughtered/enslaved. Jews/Christians were to be turned into 2nd class citizens/serfs in their own lands. Islam knows no other concept of peace with non-muslims.

  • James

    China have laws on foreign religions and those Muslims unable to enforce Sharia law there are retaliating with terror, but feeling the force of law. We seem to have lost our minds in the west – whilst bending over backwards. I read Scotland Yards ‘terror monthly’ newsletter, which informs me that Professors, Doctors, Students and even Police Officers have been arrested for attempting Jihad. We have arrested over 1000 in the last year. I’ve concluded we do trade deals with islamic countries on the basis we accept the faith on our shores.

    • global city

      The focus of the Liberal Left are so focused in on their core philosophy, that White/Western culture is so wicked that everything has to brought back into that point. This is why you get such awful ‘contradictions’ and ‘Fisking’. Their guilt, and determination to do something about that guilt for the good of the world means that destruction or threat of any sort is reinterpreted as a means to their end.

      Everything is justified, rationalised or explained away to not deflect from their obsessive conviction that nothing can be worse than arrogant cultural and supremacist (exclusively white) utilising any cause to rebuild their oppressive edifice that the Liberal Left have worked so hard, for so long to demolish – hence all the lunatic twisting and ‘my enemy’s enemy is my ally’ approach to incidents like Boston.

      Margaret Thatcher completely missed the most dangerous ‘enemy within’ when she confined this condemnation to Stalinist revolutionary union bosses. The biggest enemies are in academia, NGO and 3rd sector organisations, who Baroness Warsi informed us yesterday ‘monitor’ right wing groups (by omission I amuse that they do not monitor left wing radicals and potential Jihadists)

      Multiculturalism and the (correct) desire to condemn racism has been used as cover for what is fundamentally a deeply racist war of elimination of ‘the racist group’, who they condemn simply because of the colour of their skin and the sins of their ancestors. being white is enough to have you condemned as a bigot, child of imperialism and inherently racist.

      • James

        Liberals, or progressive types are a hindrance to progress and prosperity. I’m amazed at the hypocrisy and amnesia that these people display. It seems the freedoms and democracy gifted to them has gone to their heads and they have taken it to a level beyond reason and accountability.

        • global city

          Yes. The irony is that as soon as the project to eliminate western culture is complete, ‘liberal thinking’ will disappear along with it.

          • James

            Ironic that liberals allege to be concerned about human rights and feminism, but turn a blind eye to murder, torture and oppression against women in Islamic countries whilst defending the Allah project.

            • Donafugata

              Those who are now facilitating Islam because they believe in equality will get a horrible shock when they discover there is no room for plurality and liberal values under sharia law.

              • James

                Lefties align themselves to Sharia law representatives because they want to upset western values, culture and society.; Sharia law representatives align themselves to lefties to upset western values, culture and society. Two wrongs don’t make a right, no pun intended.

              • Mussi Buma

                The founder of the SWP acknowledged as far back as 1946 that islam was fascistic. The modern day SWP are so desperate for power, they would assist Hitler if they thought it would get them into power.

          • pearlsandoysters

            I wonder how you’ve come to this particular conclusion?

            • global city

              Just think of all the major issues you hold dear to your liberal heart… then compare it, say, to the charter of Hamas? Liberals and atheists are only marginally behind Jews on the mad mullahs hit lists of hate… sucker!

              • pearlsandoysters

                That’s blindingly obvious. You mean that all the liberals will be held to account for their values that are not in accord with Muslim sensibilities? That’s what you mean? Once the European culture as we know it today is over… then what?

        • pearlsandoysters

          There’s a perfectly valid, academic point of view that nation-states are rather an aberration than the norm (William H. MacNeil). At the same time, the citizens of liberal democracies tend to take stable political community for granted. This very complacency may come dear in future.

  • formonitoring

    No honest person can support Rep. Peter King in anything he does, and Douglas Murray is going to embarrass himself. King’s support for the IRA over many years was vital in the process of normalising terror as an acceptable political strategy in the world, and romanticising the IRA in American eyes. King collected money for, and directed NORAID which almost certainly went to Semtex and weapons which killed British and Irish citizens. He defended his relationship with the IRA, saying that they had never killed an American, so weren’t his country’s enemies. And his principal contact in the IRA was Michael McKevitt, head of the Real IRA, jailed for the Omagh bombing. His calls go unheeded because no one wants to be associated with this disgusting, hypocritical human being – and one sign that Congress was more serious about a rational examination of the spread of violent Islamist sympathies would be the removal of this man from his post. Until that happens, it’s absurd for Brit neocons who slavered over Thatcher to have anytime for a man who was a vocal supporter of Bobby Sands

  • Abhay

    Welcome back, Douglas. Good article but I was expecting a more hard-hitting post from you.

    ”American public debate is undoubtedly wider and more robust..”. Really? Not on this theocratic-inspired atrocity. It was as insipid, predictable and politically correct as in any other liberal haven, in large parts.

    ”This led to claims that various right wing politicians – including then President Sarkozy..”. Again – really? When did Sarkozy become right. In him lay the worst of both worlds. He wore a label saying ‘right’ on his forehead, but ran just another PC-liberal govt. that got booted out and now he is acting as a private equity manager to Qataris who are emerging as a bunch of significant global Sharia enthusiasts.

    Becoming ‘right’ has become easy – get yourself a few totem poles of the right, shout them aloud a few times, suspend your thinking, prefix ‘centre’ before ‘right’ – you are done.

  • Alfred

    According to Pew, 69 percent of U.S. Muslims claim that religion is an important part of their lives; 47 percent report attending worship services on a weekly basis. These numbers closely parallel the numbers for U.S. Christians. It is also true, however, that one-fifth of U.S. Muslims seldom or never attend worship services, a sure sign of secularization.

    Another sign is that a large majority of U.S. Muslims appear to be comfortable with religious pluralism. Pew found that 56 percent of U.S. Muslims believe that many different religions can lead to eternal life while 35 percent believe that only Islam will get you there. Similarly, 57 percent of U.S. Muslims believe that there are many valid ways to interpret Islamic teachings, as opposed to 37 percent who maintain that only one interpretation is valid. Suffice it to say, the notion that many different religions are of equal value is not likely to be embraced by the religiously orthodox. Indeed, one possibility is that this more relaxed approach to the demands of religion represents a way station on the road to abandoning religion entirely.

    Only one dishonest is Murray

    • Daniel Maris

      The issue is quite simple: how many Muslims want to see Sharia implemented.

      Pew surveys normally put this at around 40-50% in the West I believe. However, this may be something of an underestimate, given reluctance of Muslims to identify themselves as potentially subversive and because it seems unlikely that very conservative Muslims – women especially – would ever engage with a survey.

      If you have a population of say 5 million Muslims, this means 2-2.5million want to see your open democracy replaced by a discriminatory system of law which will turn non-Muslims and women into second class citizens.

      If you are relaxed about that, that’s your privilege matey-boy.

      • Mussi Buma

        Not just that, but under sharia law, slavery is legal. This is the principal reason why the musilm world rejected the UN Declaration of Human Rights (as the UNDHR abolishes slavery). See Sultan Tabandeh’s “A Muslim Commentary on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights”.

        Since slavery is a fundamental part of islam, the muslim world has refused to even discuss the millions of white european and black africans sold off as slaves by muslims. And the leftist Ansar in the west show they have no genuine objection to slavery, only caring about slavery when it is an opportunity to attack white (post-)christians.

    • Fergus Pickering

      Yeah, but how many actually want to kill us? And how many are lying when they are asked?

  • Alfred

    Yawn! I was wondering how long it would take the Islamist ‘expert’ mr Murray to come out of his hole….for a more nuanced piece and the reasons why these thugs carried out this vile terrorist act please read this piece in WaPo…

    Also love murray’s logic of m enemies’ enemy is my friend, or does he forgt Peter king’s support for the IRA….

    Well – what is politically correct here is the exclusive focus of “Islamist terrorism” and forgetting about radical right radicalization and terrorism.
    It was politically correct security and law enforcement practice that allowed for Anders Breivik to get away with his terrorism.

    The political correctness is found in the notion: “not an Muslim, not a terrorist, has nothing to do with Islam, is not terrorism.”

    • Mark Turner

      So although 20,000 jihad attacks recorded since 9/11 and many more that have been thwarted by the police have a common denominnator Islam, you say this is just a coincidence? Who are you trying to kid?

      • Daniel Maris


    • Mussi Buma

      ” the exclusive focus of “Islamist terrorism” and forgetting about radical right radicalization and terrorism.”

      Breivik is a black swan, one of only a handful of “right wing” terrorists to appear since 2001 from a white European population of 300 million. The 250 British muslims convicted of terrorism since 2001 are the white swans. They have appeared out of a population that is less than 2 million.

      Since you brought up Breivik. I will see you, and raise you Sheikh Al-Haddad, PhD. The learned Sheikh points out that the vast majority of European terrorism is from the Left, not muslims. He also points out that muslims are never going to integrate. Elsewhere he points out that sharia law must be above all parliamentary legislature.

      Any investgation of the TE-SAT reports show that for every “right wing” terrorist in Europe, there are at least 9 “left wing” terrorists.

  • darwins beard

    great piece and its getting worse

    This by Sayeeda Warsi

    “the Government is now taking Islamophobia seriously” so crime committed by thugs now means you will not be able to criticise Islam as an Ideology and heaven forbid you should link Islam and violence even if those committing it do.

    • Shazza

      Islamophobia is a construct that was designed by the Muslim Brotherhood in the early 90’s to prevent any criticism of their murderous idealogy. A phobia is an irrational fear of something and there is everything to fear from islam.

      • chan chan

        By the International Institute of Islamic Thought (a Muslim Brotherhood front-group) in VA, USA.

        Somewhat ironically taking a leaf out of the book of homosexual activists, and their word, ‘homophobia’.

      • Icebow

        As someone said, ‘It isn’t Islamophobia if they really are trying to kill you’.
        Actually, the irrationality associated with ‘-phobia’ has no etymological justification, but rather reflects its appropriation by psychiatry. As you say, there is everything to fear from the cult in question.

  • Wilhelm

    The people are very aware of the muslim problem, it’s the media that’s behaving like an ostrich.

    Dr Bill Warner, ”Islam has been waging a 1400 war on Europe.”

    • Donafugata

      It hasn’t won in all that time.
      Perhaps that’s why Muslims have decided to invade by stealth, immigration, in other words.

      • Mussi Buma

        “It hasn’t won in all that time.”

        Wrong. It’s the longest surviving empire. Islam still occupies formerly christian lands like Algeria, Turkey, Bosnia. Islam still occupies formerly buddhist/hindu lands from Indonesia, to Malaysia, to Bangladesh & Afghanistan. Islam has only ever lost less than 1% of the land they conquered over 1000 years ago. That is the most successful global colonisation in the history of the world. And with all the renewed emphasis on the restoration of the Caliphate, islam of the late 21st century may be the stuff of your grandchildrens’ nightmares.

        Furthermore, islam has corrupted christian europe. The atlantic slave trade, the Crusades, the Inquisition, even the colonisation of the Americas are the result of the corrupting influence of islam. Buddhist scholars say that buddhism died 1000 years ago, when islam invaded India and decimated the monastries, destroying libraries and universities.

        Compared to Mohammed, Hitler and Stalin were but a blink of an eye. Tamerlaine was a far greater butcher than either Hitler or Stalin. Tamerlaine was following in the steps of Mohammed.

        • Pete McCullagh

          Very interesting points. However an empire is a political structure not religious. Land cannot be religious.

          • Mussi Buma

            Please leave your euro-centric assumptions at the door. Islam does not separate church & state. Islam is politics and war, dressed up as religion. Muslims will proudly tell you about Mohammed creating “The Constitution of Medina”. For 100s of years, muslims referred to one of their “holy books” (the Life of Mohammed) as “The Book of Wars”.

            • Pete McCullagh

              Islam does not separate church and state because it is a morally bankrupt bronze age ideas. Land is not religious. Empires are political. 5000 years ago those places were not muslim and in 5000 years they won’t be again. Religion is a personal thing.

              And thats not an ethnocentric things, that’s a knowledge of the english language thing.

  • Andy M

    Very accurate article. Although I would say that America is still far more open about discussing Islamic issues than Britain and other European nations.

    • Roy

      More open, they can be indeed. They can also find they are suddenly having trouble with the tax department, and having to put up with a searching investigation.

  • thanksdellingpole

    Charlene Downes.


    • Shazza

      And Kriss Donald and all the other victims that the cowardly MSM neglect to mention.

      • Wilhelm

        Kris Donald airbrushed out by the media, abducted by a gang of muslims for being white, tortured, set on fire and then murdered. And the BBC is still droning on about Saint Stephen Lawrence !!

      • Mussi Buma

        When a UK muslim academic on Twitter brought up the “horrific” violence muslims suffer at the hands of white Brits, he ran off and refused to discuss the murders by racist muslims of Kris Donald, Gavin Hopley, Ross Parker, etc.

        If there was just an EQUAL amount of violence from the indigenous British population towards muslims, over the last decade there would have been 40 instances of gangs of white men going out to find a muslim, and murdering him. Instead, there is not one instance. Meanwhile there are multiple instances of muslims doing that very thing. And the white victims of these muslims are deliberately ignored by the media, because they don’t fit the delusions of the elite.

  • Shazza

    Thank you Douglas for once again bravely trying to open people’s eyes.

  • ProffessorPlum

    ” killed in Louisiana yesterday. Americans are dying every day through gun violence and yet there seems to be a general amnesia to these events.

    The nationality of the deaths used to the be most important concern in the west; now it seems to be who does the killing is the most important consideration.

    • curious

      Say again? Who killed who? And what has gun violence to do with the Boston bomb attack?

      • ProffessorPlum

        “And what has gun violence to do with the Boston bomb attack?”

        Der, well I dunno guv. er let me fink er der er


        • curious

          Gee, you are a one thinker, proffessor. Any other deep thought at hand before you´ll die of senility and I of boredom?
          It might have escaped your occupied and educated mind but that 8-year old boy did not die because some vile redneck pulled the trigger but because two mad Caucasians to whom oh-so-violent America opened its doors and offered opportunities unimanigable in their home country had decided to please their god by blowing up some people. Death indeed.

          • ProffessorPlum

            “It might have escaped your occupied and educated mind but that 8-year old boy did not die because some vile redneck pulled the trigger but because two mad Caucasians …..”

            You prove the point I was trying to make perfectly.

            • curious

              Which was what? That it is OK to blame Americans for gun violence and not OK to mention nationality of perpetrators of a terrorist attack? So as you could pose as a nice and sensitive person that cares for all humanity and its suffering and death unlike the rest of us squares? That´s cheap.

              • ProffessorPlum

                “violence and not OK to mention nationality of perpetrators”

                Actually sweetheart the post I originally responded to mentioned only the religion of the alledged bombers. Your mention of their nationality came after my response.

                Nice try.

                • curious

                  (sigh) It was you who brought up nationality with your “Americans are dying every day through gun violence” only so as you could chastise others (and it seems that here you mean “the west”) that “now it seems to be who does the killing is the most important”.
                  Pardon me but I read it as that you are perfectly willing to lay the blame for violence on Americans and exculpate non-Americans. Now I´m neither an American or a man of the west (much closer to Chechens in this respect) but I still think that it is cheap moralistic posturing.

                • chan chan

                  Superbly condescending. Well done…

        • Adam

          Mr Plum, not very bright, are you? I think the title “Professor” (or is that “Proffessor”?) is aspirational rather than rooted in reality – much like your worldview.
          Your logic is akin to saying that the TV programme Cheers is connected to the Boston bomb attack because both take place in the same city.

          • ProffessorPlum

            “Your logic is akin to saying that the TV programme Cheers is connected to the Boston bomb attack because both take place in the same city.”

            Rember that you said that, not me.

            • Adam

              Yes “Proffessor”, I’ll “rember” it.

              Point lost on you – still, with your intellectual poverty, I can see why.

    • Donafugata

      So are you saying that it’s OK for Muslims to kill Americans because some other American might do it anyway?

  • Craig

    There is a certain amusement to be gained from watching media and academic figureheads dance around the sole common factor that unites Islamist terrorists, which is their faith. Even more amusing is their manufactured outrage on Islam’s behalf, in spite of the murderous hatred its founder had for ‘disbelievers’. Judged by modern standards, Mohammed was a brutal criminal who combined the personal traits of L. Ron. Hubbard, David Koresh and Kim Jong Il. It astounds me that any rational person could perceive any signs of benevolence within this 7th century personality cult.

    • Shazza

      Agreed Craig and I too enjoy the ‘certain amusement’. However, this is all going to lead to disaster – the death of Western civilisation unless something is done now to address this, the greatest threat ever to face us, islam. I fear for our children and our grandchildren.

    • chan chan

      When you transfer the mores and methods of murdering 7th century bandits to the 21st century, you get terrorists.

      • Evil Zionist

        Quran 8:12

        When your Lord revealed to the angels: I am with you, therefore make firm those who believe. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them.

    • Van Grungy

      Why David Koresh?
      Even the Wiki article can’t hide the fact the people were there willingly and nobody was forced to stay.

      If anything, Janet Reno is like mohammad

    • Simon Morgan

      The main reason Muslims are so outraged, at everything and everyone, is that their faith derives from Hebrew bible. That must really stick in the craw. No wonder they’re so teed off.

      • Dan Vandermeir

        Actually that’s incorrect. Mohammed invented his religion trying to incorporate both Christianity and Judaism into one, but didn’t really understand either.

  • Chet Carter

    Not disagreeing with your general thesis on radical Islam. But be fair, there was another reason that representative Peter King suffered criticism. His lassez faire attitude to the IRA terror campaign in the past did not put him in the best position to come forward and condemn other forms of terrorism.

  • Roy

    A very true article.

    If political correctness has a supreme example it is the pretense that Islamic extremists are just friendly type unshaven men, face covered women, looking for a better life. When the facts tell us, they would love to behead the lot of us.

    • anotherjoeblogs

      the extremists to do the hacking and the moderates to explain why we deserve it or why islamophobia is making us imagine things.

    • Icebow

      Agreed, but we must develop the habit of always using quotation marks around ‘political correctness’, as not doing so implies that the very idea of ‘political correctness’ is correct. It is ‘correct’ only for the cultural Marxists who have promulgated it.