We all recognize that most Muslims pose no threat to us. And yet we have no reliable way of distinguishing the Muslims we need to worry about from the ones we don’t.
As Bill O’Reilly pointed out this week, France is now reaping the bitter fruit of virtually unrestrained Islamic immigration. This week, at the offices of the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, three Muslims took it upon themselves to massacre 10 journalists and two (unarmed) policemen in the name of Allah.
The response of our political leaders to the Paris attack has been typically feckless and hypocritical. President Obama has leapt to the defense of the cartoonists at Charlie Hebdo who ridiculed Mohammed, while just two-and-a-half years ago locking up a filmmaker whose movie simply told the truth about the founder of Islam.
Were Obama to be consistent with his 2012 self, he would have insisted that any surviving journalists at Charlie Hebdo be immediately imprisoned for a year in the cell next to Nakoula Nakoula for offending the Islamic world.
Howard Dean said the other day that the terrorists weren’t even Muslims. And yet they shouted “Allahu Akbar” in between squeezing off rounds from their AK-47s, in obedience to their god, their prophet and their holy book. The Qur’an commands them, "Slay the idolaters wherever you find them. Arrest them, besiege them, and lie in ambush everywhere for them” (Sura 9:5).
In other words, the Muslim attackers in Paris were not hijacking Islam, they were implementing it.
Cartoonists know they can lampoon Christianity with utter impunity, and they do so quite freely. But in 2012 the president’s spokesman, Jay Carney, criticized Charlie Hebdo even then for showing bad “judgment” by publishing cartoons which ridiculed Muhammad. Well, why would that be bad judgment? Because Carney knew that many Muslims will not hesitate to use the Kalashnikov veto.
This reveals that, whether they will admit it or not, the Obama administration and other leftists know full well that Islam is not a religion of peace but of war, violence and death.
Artists can photograph Christ immersed in a jar of urine or paint the mother of Jesus covered in elephant dung and have no fear that Christians wearing ski masks will bust into their galleries shouting “Praise Jesus” and hose the place down with assault rifles. Why? Because they know that Christianity is a religion of peace while Islam is not.
The Seattle cartoonist who inspired “Everybody Draw Muhammad Day” back in 2011 has been in hiding for the last four years, living under an assumed name, whereabouts unknown, because her life is still in danger for drawing a cartoon poking fun at the prophet.
A Christian who shoots up a newspaper office is a bad Christian. A Muslim who does the same is simply being a good Muslim. “Slay the idolaters wherever you find them.”
So here is the question: will our political leaders simply wring their hands and denounce Islamic terrorism, or will they do something meaningful to protect us?
One place to begin is by ramping up surveillance of mosques and Muslim communities, as the NYPD did for a full decade following 9/11. Most mosques in the U.S. are run by the Muslim Brotherhood, and are breeding grounds for jihad. As Rep. Peter King pointed out, the only way to stop these jihadist attacks is with “prior intelligence,” which can only be gleaned through surveillance and informants.
And It is likely time to reconsider Islamic immigration into the United States, as Robert Spencer, Frank Gaffney and Andy McCarthy have suggested in one form or another. No one has a constitutional right to immigrate to the U.S., and Congress, in the interest of national security, has authority to set whatever parameters it wishes around the practice of immigration.
We all recognize that most Muslims pose no threat to us. And yet we have no reliable way of distinguishing the Muslims we need to worry about from the ones we don’t. Until we do, perhaps it’s best to be cautious with them all. Reconsidering Islamic immigration is not Islamophobia, it is Islamo-realism.