Muslims around the world—especially in Europe where their numbers have burgeoned in recent times—are wreaking havoc.
The newest atrocity—assuming another one hasn’t already occurred since this writing—is the barbaric slaughter of an 84-year-old Christian priest in France. Yesterday (7/26) morning, “Allahu Akbar” shouting Muslims stormed his church in Rouen during morning Mass, slit the throat of the octogenarian priest (named Jacques Hamel), and “critically injured” a nun, before being killed by police—the same police who knew that that church was being targeted and had been monitoring one of the murderers for at least one-and-a-half years.
Days earlier in France and Germany, Muslims, mostly migrants, committed terrorist acts in Nice (84 dead), Munich (9 dead), attacked people in train stations (one dead, several injured), killed a pregnant Polish woman, and attacked a mother and her three adolescent daughters (puncturing the lungs of an 8-year-old).
Those who seek to reverse this situation must begin by embracing one simple fact: Islam is not terrorizing the West because it can but because it is being allowed to.
To be sure, that was not always the case: for over a millennium, Muslims repeatedly invaded and conquered portions of Europe—terrorizing, massacring, raping and enslaving in the name of Allah—and were only repulsed by great force of arms.
Indeed, invading and destroying churches, slaughtering priests, even raping nuns is as old as Islam’s first entry into Christian territory in the seventh century, and has played out countless times since. (Watch this brief video for an idea of how many jihadi campaigns were undertaken against Europe.)
Today, Muslim terrorists, rapists, criminals are not entering the West against its will but because of it.
Consider it by analogy. What if zoologists began to maintain that it’s false to say that lions naturally prey on zebras? So zoo directors—most of whom come from the ranks of the zoologists—start introducing lions into zebra enclosures. The inevitable happens: although well fed, lions continue doing what they’ve always done—chase and kill zebras. Yet, because it is a slanderous stereotype to say that lions by nature prey on zebras, the zoologists continue insisting on placing the two together.
Surely only a great fool would blame the slaughter of zebras on lions—who, after all, are merely being lions—while ignoring those who place lions with zebras in the first place?
This is the situation we are in. The powers-that-be maintain that it’s false to say that Muslims prey on non-Muslims, that is, “infidels.” So the policymakers—most of whom come from the ranks of the powers-that-be—introduced Muslims into Europe. The inevitable happened: although given equal rights, Muslims continued doing what they’ve always done—persecute and kill infidels. Yet, because it is a “slanderous stereotype” to say that Muslims by nature prey on infidels, the powers-that-be continue insisting on placing the two together—in the name of “diversity.”
Nor does it matter that not all Muslims harbor animus for “infidels” or are prone to acts of violence. If only 1% of a beverage is poisoned and you ingest it, will it matter that 99% of it was clean? No, you will still suffer, possibly die. The only sure way to preserve your health is not to put it into your body in the first place.
Whether they are intentional liars with a nefarious agenda, or whether they are incompetent, indoctrinated fools, no longer matters. Western policymakers who insist that Islam is peaceful (despite all evidence otherwise) and that the West is “obligated” to receive Muslim migrants, are 100% responsible for the daily victims of jihad, most recently an octogenarian priest.
The war begins with them. Kick them and their suicidal policies out, and watch Islamic terror on Western soil fizzle away.
 When Patriarch Ignatius of the Syriac Orthodox Church recently requested that Sweden's government relocate Christians out of asylum seekers' housing, because Muslim majority residents are persecuting them there, Anders Danielsson, Director General of the Swedish Migration Board, replied that separate housing for Christians and other vulnerable groups “would go against principles and values that are central to Swedish society and our democracy.” In other words, better that Christians suffer than admit that our “principles and values” fail with Islam.