Our new president has issued an executive order to close the US to immigrants from Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia, and Yemen. His purpose is to protect us from Islamic terrorists who originate in those countries. This is a complete turnaround from Obama’s do-nothing policy. Obama would not even acknowledge the threat from Islamic terrorism. He forbade government employees and the military from using words and phrases such as “Islamic terrorism,” “jihad,” and “Allah.” As a direct result, we have been more vulnerable to attack. It has been suggested that the terror nightmare in Orlando could have been prevented if Obama had not censored the DHS from acknowledging the existence of a threat.
The argument against Trump’s executive order, according to Ryan Crocker, former US ambassador to Iraq and Afghanistan, is that it will “confirm to the world that we are anti-Muslim.” Madeline Albright, former secretary of state, seems to agree. She has expressed her solidarity with Muslims who, she believes, are being discriminated against because of their religion. Albright is ready to register as a Muslim if such registration becomes policy.
The fallacy of the dissenting arguments is that they have it completely backwards. Trump’s executive order does not demonstrate that the US is anti-Muslim or that we discriminate based on religion, but rather demonstrates that we recognize a simple fact: Islam is anti-US. Not only are the teachings of mainstream Islam at odds with American values, the doctrine of jihad demands that Muslims should attack and destroy Western society. It is not bigotry to criticize Islam on the grounds that it is a bigoted ideology. When you accuse someone of being bigoted, that does not make you a bigot. It makes you an accuser. The question is whether your accusation is justified.
So is it correct to accuse Islam of being a bigoted political ideology that seeks the destruction of our values and political institutions? Islam is a religion of intolerance, preaching openly from its holy book against the rights of women, homosexuals, Christians, Jews, and anyone who deviates from the true religion. “How hard is it to understand that radical Islamic jihadis have declared war on the West?” asks Raheel Raza, president of the Council for Muslims Facing Tomorrow and founding member of the Muslim Reform Movement. “In simple English,” she says, “this means: they will find you and kill you wherever and whenever they can.” Former Muslim Ayaan Hirsi Ali, in her book, Heretic, writes: “It is foolish to insist, as our leaders habitually do, that the violent acts of radical Islamists can be divorced from the religious ideals that inspire them. Let’s not be politically correct about it. Islam is a destructive, nihilistic cult of death.” In a similar vein, Dutch parliamentian Geert Wilders said, “We have to stop pretending that Islam is a religion. Islam is a totalitarian ideology that aims to conquer the West. A free society should not grant freedom to those who want to destroy it.”
Before criticizing Trump’s motives, it is instructive to examine the language he uses in his executive order:
In order to protect Americans, we must ensure that those admitted to this country do not bear hostile attitudes toward our country and its founding principles. We cannot, and should not, admit into our country those who do not support the U.S. Constitution, or those who would place violent religious edicts over American law. In addition, the United States should not admit those who engage in acts of bigotry and hatred (including “honor” killings, other forms of violence against women, or the persecution of those who practice other religions) or those who would oppress members of one race, one gender, or sexual orientation.
The president is doing his job by protecting us from those who would do us harm. Instead of being blindsided by the religious discrimination argument, we need to recognize the threat Islam poses to this country. Don’t believe it? Just look at what is taking place in Europe because of misguided leftist values that have opened the floodgates to Muslim terrorists. “The experience of Western European countries,” said Czech president Milos Zeman, “shows that the integration of the Muslim community is practically impossible.”
“Our society is now measurably less safe and less civilized and the rights of women are effectively negotiable,” said British political commentator Pat Condell about the result of Muslim immigration. We need to stop the Muslim invasion, he advised, “and if you think that sounds harsh the alternative is a million times worse.”
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read more.
Send this to friend