Can Muslims in the West Ever Really Be De-Radicalized?

Or, to put it another way, is there such as thing as an unbelieving Believer? One of the great fallacies of Western Europe’s multicultural fantasy is that the children of imported Musselmen will become less Muslim and that, eventually, their offspring will become more like their nominally Christian but in fact entirely secular hosts. Accordingly, the British and others now dealing with the consequences of their willfully ahistorical blindness regarding the true nature of Islam, have assumed that “radical” Muslims are the exception rather than the rule, and so have treated them as aberrational.

This, however, flies in the face of no less an expert on Islam than Turkey’s would-be caliph, Recep Erdogan, who famously denied that any such thing as “radical” Islam exists — because, to be a Believer, is to believe in the faith in its entirety. The idea of “cafeteria” Muslims, he has said, is totally wrong:

In a 2010 interview with the Italian daily Corriere della Sera, Obama referred to Turkey as a “great Muslim democracy.” Obama should have seen that a democracy is a democracy — without any religious prefix. He would see in later years the difference between a democracy and a Muslim democracy.

Seven years after Obama’s pathetic diagnosis about the kind of democracy Erdogan brought to an otherwise secular country, the Turkish president said that “There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. There is only one Islam.” Worse, he claimed that the term “moderate Islam” had been fabricated by the West in order to weaken Islam. From the Muslim democracy to the former U.S. president, with love…

Comes now a report in the Times of London that ought to give pause to anyone still deluded by the idea that a religion that defines itself in opposition to Judeo-Christianity is suddenly going to “moderate” once exposed to a spiritually bankrupt Western democracy.

Read the rest from Michael Walsh HERE.