Despite my extensive studies of Islam’s history with the West, which is full of conflict, I do not hate Muslims, since that would be illogical and counterproductive. However, it’s Islamic leaders like Musa ibn Nusayr who started the aborted Islamic conquest in Europe, Osama bin Laden in the present day, and leaders in between like the villainous Almanzor (who sacked Santiago de Compostela and razed and plundered churches), the brutal Arouj Barbarossa (a vicious pirate, and his brother Haireddin wasn’t such a nice guy either— he massacred the entire town of Fondi because one woman escaped), the ruthless Mohammed II (the destroyer of Constantinople), the treacherous Lala Mustafa (who promised a Venetian general if he surrendered he and his men would be allowed to leave, but instead enslaved the soldiers, beheaded their officers, and had the general flayed alive), and so forth, who earn the rest of Islam a bad name. Those who come into the West and demand that the West change its ways to their ways are not aid in countering this impression.
You don’t want to eat pork? That’s fine. But don’t tell me I can’t have my Sunday bacon. You don’t think it’s alright to drink wine? Then don’t drink it, but don’t tell me I can’t. You don’t like Jewish people? That’s your business, but if you insult, attack, or hurt them, then it becomes everyone’s business. You don’t like church bells or religious music? That’s okay, but you don’t get to silence them while at the same time demanding the right to boom your call to prayer from loudspeakers five times a day.
You think child grooming is okay, or that it’s okay to force someone to marry against her will? You are in the wrong part of the world. You can disagree with us all you want, but you can’t demand we be silenced when it comes to your prophet. If I want to say Mohammed was a pedophile bandit (although that’s a gross simplification) I’ll say it. That’s how it goes here.
This isn’t Saudi Arabia, where you can ban churches. This isn’t Egypt, where you can treat the minority Christians like shit and no one can do a thing about it. This definitely isn’t Turkey, where you can just wipe out or expel all religious and ethnic minorities, erase any and all signs they were ever there, and get away with it.
If you have a problem with this, may I suggest a return to whatever primitive sandbox you came from? The sooner the better.
Ethics Alarms 
Steve, bravo! You said what so many are thinking, accurately and succinctly. I’m with you especially on the simple truth that anyone who goes to live in any country must at least to attempt to assimilate, or leave. Thank you for this blunt and honest post.
Just swap “Muslim” with “Communist,” or “Nazi,” and the supposed offensive nature of the comment vanishes, which is how you can see that the outrage mob is being dishonest, as usual.
Islam isn’t a race, like Black people. It’s an ideology, like Communism. Leftists want us to feel the same way about Islam as we do about people’s immutable characteristics, like racial heritage. That’s twisted and wrong, but it works for them, which is why they’ll keep doing it.
Amen!
Always an education when Steve holds a History lesson
Peter Boghossian and Raymond Ibrahim had a conversation recently about Muslim immigration. It’s mostly about how it’s affecting Western Europe. I thought it was interesting, but their cameraman objected. (The meltdown isn’t until near the end.)
Apparently there were two camermen. Based on my own viewing of the video, one cameraman had a hissy fit and never came back. The other cameraman stayed and argued (not very effectively) but demonstrated the courage and curiousity to engage with Boghossian and Ibrahim. It seems the cameraman came back for more the next day.
charles w abbott
rochester NY
No, it’s just the one cameraman. At first he said he left because he had to go to the bathroom. Later he said he left because he has a friend who is an immigrant and he was offended by Boghossian saying Europe needed to protect its borders and shoot people trying to enter illegally.
The cameraman was incapable of talking about immigration to Europe separately from immigration to the U.S. He was also incapable of offering any solution. Although he was capable of beginning a sentence with words other than, “I would say”, he mostly chose not to. Everything he said was predictable, except when he said, “my wife”. I was surprised at that. (He had reminded me a lot of the husband of a man I used to work for who had told me that socialism just means living in a society. I bet he would have the same pro-immigration arguments. Or, rather, lack of arguments. Feelings.)
I’m not convinced that you are correct. For example, I’m relying on the description included with the video (the long video that is 2 hours and six minutes long).
Video description states, and I quote:
“During my in-person interview with Raymond Ibrahim in LA, both of the cameramen freaked out and walked off the set. Two out of two!”
= – = – = – =
so, that’s my sense of what happened.
I think only one cameraman came back–that is the one that we heard engage Boghossian and Ibrahim toward the end of the second hour.
Parts of the video are hard to follow. And parts are painful!
= – = – =
More generally, I felt kind of sorry for the cameraman who debated Boghossian and Ibrahim–but not *that* sorry. He signed up for the humiliation. And he was unprepared while being smug and overconfident. He was embarrassingly unprepared to debate the two men (older, better informed, perhaps smarter, definitely more serious) who disagreed with him and asked him to support his statements with evidence, and to delve into “mundane specifics.”
= – = – = – =
That is a really useful term, “mundane specifics.” Thomas Sowell uses it. Sowell has contrasted “verbal virtuosity” with “mundane specifics.” There is a difference between “verbal virtuosity” about immigrant behavior in the West in general and discussion of “mundane specifics” about different immigrant behavioral trends in specific European countries, their apparent crime rates based on arrests and incarceration, or the fact that “Islam is the majority religion inside French prisons” as I read more than a decade ago. God bless Thomas Sowell.
= – = – =
As the kids say, the end of the video was “cringe.” The cameraman’s attempt to support his statements in the face of reasonable questions was “cringe.”
One sign of the cameraman’s low command of “mundane specifics” was his inability to discuss Western Europe with any confidence, reflexively changing his statements back to conditions in the USA.
In an ideal world, the video might have switched at some point to something like this. “Cameraman, here’s a challenge. Put down your phone. List the countries in Western Europe. As many as you can recall. Better, match the different immigrant streams to the specific countries (e.g., Algerians in France, Pakistanis in England, Turks in Germany, etc).”
I’ll give you $500 if you can name half the countries in the European Union. Right now, buster!
Thanks for reading!
charles w abbott
rochester NY
Right off the bat the cameraman shows that he’s just recyling talking points and fake data. That stat about crimes by illegals is false, and when anyone resorts to it means I don’t care to listen to them. The guy’s an idiot, essentially.
Even if the stats were true, it’s a red herring. EVERY crime committed by an “immigrant” is one that would not have occurred here at all if they had been back where they came from. The issue is that It’s additional and avoidable crime; the supposed rate is meaningless. A comparison of rates is only relevant if your aim is to replace one group with another.
Shorter Steve Witherspoon: Mind your own damn business or kindly GTFO — ten minutes ago.
Well done Steve.