Mike Scruggs
A 2015 poll by the Center for Security Policy (CSP) indicated that 33 percent of American-Muslims believe Sharia (Islamic Law) should be supreme over the U.S. Constitution. Another 24 percent either didn’t know or wouldn’t say. But 43 percent of Muslim-Americans polled apparently believe that the U.S. Constitutions should have precedence over Sharia. Another way of asking the question indicated that 51 percent of American-Muslims polled believed they should have the choice of choosing U.S. law or Sharia. The same 43 percent disagreed, saying that U.S. law should prevail.
But are Muslims likely to tell the truth to pollsters about how they feel about Sharia versus U.S. Law? The Koranic-based near-identical doctrines of Taqiyya (Shia Muslim) and Muda’rat (Sunni Muslim) should give well-warranted pause to accepting the accuracy of Western polls or State Department questionnaires and interviews regarding Muslim sympathies for Jihad, violence against non-Muslims, terrorism, and commitment to Islamic Law versus Western systems of law.
These doctrines justify deception when advancing or defending Islam. In other words, Muslims are likely to deny any sympathy with terrorism, Jihad, commitment to Sharia, and their motivation for immigration, when challenged by non-Muslims. These doctrines closely resemble Communist and Nazi doctrines that truth and right are whatever it takes to accomplish their objectives. Despite the widespread pipe-dream that the vast majority of Muslims are moderates, according to the 2015 CSP poll above, an absolute maximum of 43 percent of American-Muslims could be classified as moderate. The actual number of moderates may be much lower.
“Moderate” Muslims appear to be more common in the United States than predominantly Muslim countries. A World Public Opinion poll from February 2009 indicated that 61 percent of Egyptians approved of attacks on Americans, and 34 percent disagreed. The same poll indicated that 83 percent of Palestinian Muslims approve of terrorist groups like Hamas. Palestinian Muslims appear to be at the top of the violently anti-Western category.
It is easy to see the potential problem to Israel. Asked the same questions, 62 percent of Jordanian Muslims approved of terrorist groups, and only 21 percent were opposed. Turkey’s traditional secularized Islam was evident in the poll with only 42 percent approving of Muslim terrorist groups and 45 percent disapproving. But how moderate is that, when probably more than half may favor terrorist groups? At 2006 People’s Press poll indicated that 31 percent of Turks approved of suicide attacks against Americans in Iraq.
Pew Research polls in 2007 and 2011 indicated that about 8 percent of American-Muslims agreed that suicide bombings are justified, but a similar poll in 2013 indicated that those who believed suicide attacks were at least partially justified ran to 19 percent. Among younger American-Muslims, it ran to 26 percent in the 2011 poll. Forty-two percent of young Muslims in France believe suicide bombings are justified. In Europe as well as in America, young Muslims are more likely to believe violence against non-Muslins is justified. Pew also found that American-Muslins who identified strongly with their religion were three times as likely as others to believe suicide bombings are justified. A June 2015 poll revealed 38 percent of American-Muslims agreed that the Islamic State (ISIS) is doctrinally correct in their Islamic theology, and 43 percent disagreed.
A 2010 Pew Research poll indicated that 84 percent of Egyptian Muslims, 86 percent of Jordanian Muslims, and 76 percent of Pakistani Muslims support the death penalty for Muslims who leave Islam. This is part of Sharia, which is based on the Koran and teachings of Muhammad. A Motivaction survey in 2014 indicated that 80 percent of young Dutich-Muslims saw nothing wrong with Jihad against unbelievers. A majority voiced some support for ISIS.
A Terrorism Research Institute study in 2011 indicated that 84.5 percent of imams teaching at
American mosques recommended violence-positive texts. There are approximately 2,200 mosques in the U.S. The traditions of the Koran and Sharia also discourage assimilation and condemn democracy as depending on the wisdom of men rather than Allah.
Rape Epidemic in Swedish Absurdistan
Another area of cultural shock in Western countries with significant Muslim immigration is the crime rate, and especially disproportional sexual crimes against the host country’s women. In Sweden, which does not usually report the nationality of rapists, a just released study by Swedish Police revealed that Muslim men, who constitute only 2 percent of the population are responsible for 77.6 percent of rapes, giving once peaceful Sweden the highest rape rate in Europe and the second highest in the world, next to South Africa. This shocking explosion of sexual crime by Muslim men in Sweden and elsewhere is probably related to the Muslim doctrines of Hijra (immigration) and Jihad (Holy War).
The young immigrants evidently view their presence in Sweden as Civilization Jihad, entitling them to the sexual spoils of war. For a good example of rape as a Jihad entitlement, see the October 9 Daniel Greenfield article in FrontPageMag.com on the Islamic State. Sharia law also makes male conviction for rape extremely unlikely, because four male witnesses are required for conviction, and the raped females are considered suspect in their sexual behavior. Gang rapes once unknown in Sweden have become common. In 1975, 421 rapes were reported in Sweden. There were 6,620 in 2014.
Sweden has become a politically correct nightmare, where authorities are reluctant to risk offending multicultural sensitivities.
According to Paul Joseph Watson, writing in the February 19 edition of Infowars.com, Swedish Courts often seem remarkably sympathetic to rapists and harsh to victims.
Blowing the whistle on the Muslim rape epidemic in Sweden can be costly. Michael Hess, a leader of the conservative Sweden Democrat Party, was convicted of a “hate-speech” crime of “denigrating an ethic group” in bringing the rape crisis to public attention. In 2014, Swedish Police released a list of 55 “No-go” zones, where Muslim gangs have taken control, and even police and ambulance crews are at risk to enter. Conditions are only slightly less severe in the U.K., Norway, and Denmark, and becoming worse in all of Europe.
So what are the risk levels of taking in 100,000 predominantly younger male Syrian Sunni Muslim refugees per year into the United Nations and U.S. State Department Refugee Resettlement Program? First of all, no more than half have proved to be Syrian. How many are we willing to take in six South Carolina counties specified in Governor Nikki Haley’s 2016 Refugee Resettlement Plan? How many of these refugees that the FBI has testified to Congress that they cannot vet will North Carolina take?
How many thousands of lives, are we willing to risk so liberal politicians of both political parties and misguided low-information clergy can feel good about themselves? Who will be accountable for bringing the inevitable increase in violent sexual crimes against women and children? If you are in denial, check NCFire.com, Infowars.com, FrontPageMag.com, and JihadWatch.org.
There is a minority of “safely moderate” secularized or cultural Muslims in the world, but the unacceptably high probability of bringing death, disease, destruction, and crime to our own people to make a home for fairy-tale moderate Muslims shouts loudly against the risk. Making immigration a sacred cow is proving to be an extraordinarily dangerous and foolish policy. We are in such danger that we should call a moratorium on all Muslim immigration. In fact, our immigration policies have become so corrupt and dangerous that we should have a three-year moratorium on all immigration that does not involve substantial immediate family hardship.
