Photo Credit: Winds of Jihad

Whenever I write an article about Muslims, there inevitably appears a comment from a reader throwing in the non sequitur "There are 1.5 billion Muslims in the world, if they were all evil, bloodthirsty terrorists, there would be no one left on earth."

That statement is absolutely true. However, no group has to be 100% composed of members who are evil and bloodthirsty for that group to be dangerous. For example, the Nazi party at its greatest level never had more than 8.5 million members, most of whom were members strictly for careerist reasons and the actual active membership was less than a million.

That is, one could easily have said about Germany in 1939 when the vast majority of Germans, more than 98%, were not active members in the Nazi party: "There are more than 79 million Germans, if they were all evil, bloodthirsty Nazis, there would be no one left on earth." Considering that WWII saw the deaths of more than 60 million people caused by fewer than one million active Nazis, a quick extrapolation (79 times 60 million) shows that if all Germans were active members of the Nazi party then 4.7 billion (or twice the world population in 1939) would have died. Yes, I know that is absurd, but so is the excuse that we should not fear Islam because the majority are not Jihadists.

So yes, if all 79 million Germans were evil, bloodthirsty Nazis, there would be no one left on earth. But saying that, how does that ameliorate the real evil that was done by a tiny extremist fringe group?

Was the United States right to declare war on all of Germany, not just on the few Nazis running things? Should FDR have declared, "We are not at war with the German people, the overwhelming majority of Germans are peace-loving - are interested in the same things that you and I are interested in.... We want to be clear about who the enemy is: a handful, a tiny minority of people engaging in horrific acts." ¹

Would that have ended the whole WWII thing with negotiations and treaties instead of bullets and bombs?

It is true that 99.9% of Muslims are not terrorists, but that is strictly an accident of geography. If 1.5 billion Muslims lived in the US and Europe, then America and Europe in short order would be 100% Muslim just as in Somalia, Oman, Mauritania, Western Sahara, Saudi Arabia, Libya, and the Maldives. Or 99% Muslim as in Afghanistan, Yemen, Algeria, Iran, the Gaza Strip, and Turkey. Or 95% to 98% Muslim as in Senegal, Jordan, United Arab Emirates, Comoros & Mayotte, Iraq, Pakistan, Tunisia, and Morocco.

In every place Muslims insinuate themselves, eventually that area, that region, that country becomes majority Muslim.

Muslims came to Africa in 639 AD (actually it was an Arab army) and now Islam is the largest religion in Africa [Wiki].

Muslims came to Asia in the 7th century during the life of their prophet Muhammad and now 62% of the world's Muslims live in Asia, with Indonesia, Pakistan, India and Bangladesh having the four largest Muslim populations in the world. Although Arab traders initially came with their religion along with their goods, the majority of Asian lands were converted by massive conquests by successive Muslim empires where the inhabitants were given the choice of converting to Islam, becoming slaves or being killed ².

At every point in time from the days of the prophet to the present, one could always say with absolute truth and unassailable certainty, that the majority of Muslims then living were not evil, blood-thirsty terrorists. However, as true as that is, it was no consolation to the hundreds of millions of native Hindus, Bantus, Christians, Zoroastrians, Berbers, Bahá'ís, Tatars, Pagans, Egyptians, Buddhists, Sikhs, atheists, Iberians, Jews and others who did not wish to convert or become slaves and were consequently killed.

There is no religious or political group of people in the world now or in the past where 100% of its members were evil and blood-thirsty. But so what? It is a meaningless and empty phrase. It does not excuse the atrocities committed in their name.

DO Christians and Jews commit crimes? Clearly, yes, yes, yes. But no Jew or Christian today blows himself up invoking the name of his God nor does he identify himself as a Christian or Jewish terrorist. Muslim terrorists, on the other hand, proudly and joyfully identify themselves as Muslim terrorists.

Irish terrorists although Christian identified their struggle in territorial, not religious terms.
Zionist terrorists although Jewish identified their struggle in territorial, not religious terms.
Tamil Tiger terrorists although predominately Hindu identified their struggle in territorial, not religious terms.

Only one terror group justifies their atrocities by quoting their Holy Book. 99% of Muslims may not be terrorists but that is because 94% of them do not yet live in America and Europe. Give them time.