in the West Are Serious About Islamic Terror: Many Refuse to Recognize the
By Dennis Prager
July 19, 2016
It appears that no matter how many men, women, and children
Islamists slaughter or maim, few in the West take Islamic terror seriously. This
may sound odd given how much talk there is about terror, but a compelling case
can be made for this assertion.
One: The Western elites. The elites of the Western world
are far more preoccupied with and afraid of global warming than
Islamic terror. They regard those who believe that Islamic terror is the
greatest threat to civilization as not merely wrong, but as bigots. They have
labeled such people Islamophobes; but, of course, there is no such thing as a
carbon-phobe or a fossil-fuel-phobe.
Two: Universities. The universities of the Western world
not only do not identify Muslim terrorists or Muslim terror organizations as
Muslim, they teach students the falsehood that there is no moral difference
between Islam and Christianity or Judaism. This has helped leave the West
incapable of dealing with the root cause of Islamic terror — some of the
teachings and practices of Islam.
Of course, there are vast numbers of peaceful Muslims; and
the great majority of American-born Muslims are just like their Protestant,
Catholic, and Jewish neighbors. But to deny that there is something Muslim about
the theology of the Muslims who commit atrocities against “infidels” is to
deny one of the most important truths about Islamic terror. And it therefore
prevents the only solution to Muslim violence — a reformation of Islam,
starting with overthrowing its ideal of a sharia-based society, and then moving
to Muslim views of women, of non-Muslims, and of Muslims who convert from Islam.
Three. Apple and other Silicon Valley giants. The business
giants of Silicon Valley are united in weakening Western civilization’s
ability to fight Islamic terror. The heads of Apple, for example, are on the
verge of making it impossible for anyone, even Apple itself, to ever be able to
open an iPhone. The tech company refused to unlock the iPhone used by Syed
Farook, the husband of the married team of San Bernardino terrorists, to see if
he had accomplices — even though Farook was not the phone’s owner; and his
employer, San Bernardino County, owned the phone and wanted it unlocked.
In other words, Apple’s position is that even if, by
unlocking the terrorist’s iPhone, it could prevent another massacre of
Americans, it would not do so. Apple’s position was supported by virtually
every major Silicon Valley company.
In the Wall Street Journal, former New York mayor Michael
Bloomberg, no conservative, recently wrote this about the tech companies and
In the future, phones will be designed to prevent even
Apple from opening them, just as the makers of some messaging services have
already done. Such a move would be an unprecedented rejection of public
authority and a potentially catastrophic blow to public safety. The prospect of
criminals and terrorists communicating with phones beyond the reach of
government search warrants should send a shiver down the spine of every citizen.
Google, Facebook, Snapchat, and WhatsApp are all working to
increase encryption in ways that will make it impossible for the courts and
law-enforcement officials to obtain their users’ data.
Four: Barack Obama. The American government, under its
president, Barack Obama, does not call Islamist violence “Islamist
violence,” but rather “violent extremism.” This began in 2009 when the
administration declared the massacre of 13 Army soldiers by “Allahu Akbar”–shouting
Nidal Hassan at Fort Hood “workplace violence.” It continues. You’d think,
after two massacres in Paris, another in Brussels, and another in Nice in just
the last 18 months, that the administration would change its terminology to
comport with the facts. But it hasn’t. Islamist violence is, to the American
government, still “violent extremism.”
Five: Hillary Clinton. The Democratic nominee for president
of the United States has called for the United States to accept 65,000 Muslims
from the Arab Middle East. That’s six times more than President Obama has
called for. She says they will be vetted; a laughable notion. How do you
“vet” 65,000 Syrians and Iraqis? Do we ask them, “Do you want to kill
Americans?” “Do you favor killing Muslims who leave Islam?” “Will you
kill your daughter if she dates a man you don’t approve of?” “Do you want
Six: The European Union. Unlike Hillary Clinton, who called
for only 65,000 Middle East Muslims, Angela Merkel, the chancellor of Germany,
announced last year that Germany will accept more than 800,000 more Muslims into
her country — and, by extension, to virtually all of the European Union
There are already about 20 million Muslims in the EU, a
significant percentage of whom do not assimilate, and who reject Western liberal
values. Among the latter, there is a smaller but significant number who are what
we call “radicalized.”
Despite this, the leader of the most powerful country in
Europe calls for nearly a million more Muslims from the most radicalized Muslim
region in the world — the Arab Middle East.
It is inconceivable that this situation will long endure.
Most people in the West do not share its elites’ broken moral compass.