"It must understand that they are entering a host country, and they need to make an effort to adjust to local norms." - that's the crux of it really. There's no polite way to say it but they don't think of accommodation the way you do. You giving in or compromising on anything is viewed as you obviously seeing the light. Hence you shouldn't expect them to be gracious in accommodating one of your requests. I was a student in the UK who then worked there. Back in 2011, i saw how London was turning out and decided to leave. I hope it doesn't come to it for Europe and the UK but I'm increasingly convinced that you're going to have to remember that line by Quintus - people should know when they're conquered
Visited London with the kids over the holidays after a long time away and the change was sufficiently noticeable that my 12 year old commented. Especially compared to Paris (laicite apparently had some impact).
The last time I was in Paris, a North African dude was robbing a parking meter with a screw driver. It kind of put me off for the trip. But 25 years after 9/11 and we're still debating this.
The West, and modern prosperity and human progress, were built on liberal beliefs and institutions. These are already being assaulted from within. To allow millions of immigrants who never developed these beliefs and who hold ideas directly contrary is borderline suicidal.
The problem is that a liberal society has an innate reluctance to screen incumbents. The idea seems fundamentally intolerant.
Places like the UK are going to have to figure out how to address this. Failure risks complete civilizational collapse. I wish them the best of luck.
Fantastic article on a very complex topic. But it appears that in Europe for sure the reverse assimilation of Muslims is getting worse. Which tracks with your work on Israel & my lived experience in the US. Simply put, religion is bad and fundamentalism is terrible. And we have Israeli settlers, the IRCG and Pete Hegseth calling the tune--all fundamentalists who aspire to 11th century ideals not 21st century ones
Your figures represent a frightening validation of the general feeling in the West of the real and present danger of increasingly radicalised and intolerant young Muslims.
The sheer hypocrisy and misogyny embedded in Sharia further argues that freedom of religion needs to be replaced by a sterner freedom FROM.
And of course should apply to all crazed voodoo.
That, in many cases and countries, it really is the majority of young Muslims who are embracing an aberrant position is more worrying than the " oh, it's only a minority" stance.
And it takes only one throat cutter or a handful in a few airlines to panic entire nations.
I'm a French Muslim, and this is actually a great article! I can see what I observe in real life reflected in these polls. And yeah, we have so much work to do!
I'd say that when you are an immigrant (or a child of immigrants), integration can be difficult depending on the country. I'd say it's "normal" since people are physically and culturally different. But it can reinforce social withdrawal, a rejection of belonging to this society, and a return to something that "understands" you: religion.
Another challenge for Muslims is the lack of centralised organisation. Since Islam doesn't have an official clergy, people coming from different countries need more time to adapt and create a "new" religious identity that respects the new setting.
Also, I'm not sure, but I think we would find similar numbers across Jewish populations on many of these subjects.
On jews, I agree. Maybe more in NY than France? In any case the difference is that radical Jews want to do their stuff alone, whereas radical Muslims want to change other people’s behaviors.
If I had to elaborate, especially on the current and future state of immigration:
1. The most important thing I see in France is a lack of social mix (and it gets worse). Stop putting all immigrants in housing projects in the suburbs; incentivize and help them move in countryside and city centers. Create better cities now that we do not need to accommodate millions of people a year.
2. Help Muslim structures themselves. I also know that countries of origin are trying to influence all the current organisations and associations (for example, in France, Algeria and Morocco are seeking to influence them), pretty sure we need help from governments here.
3. Help immigrants find communities that are not necessarily based on their country of origin so that they stop feeling like people who will never become a part of their new countries.
4. Make them feel good and integrated. Make it easy to build new mosque. Feel that they are integrated in the societies: make them visible in the medias (in good ways), in companies administration, governments, etc
5. Help stop wars (or stop creating them) and destruction in poor countries
Of course, as Muslims, we have many things to do that mostly involve creating structures with clear visions and interpretations of islam in the West.
I kind of agree with the difference between radical jews and muslim you make, but I would add that imo it comes more from the fact that jews are part of these countries for a long time, more than religious or cultural reasons.
On Jews, there’s the fundamental difference that Judaism does not promote proselytism: You’re the chosen people, and that’s it. You’re not supposed to tell others they are too. Christianity and Islam are different in that regard.
On the measures, these sound reasonable. But they seem all to come from the state. What can or should Muslims do more of? Differently?
Ah, all faithful Muslims that were sincere about their faith were cool to me. They may believe that I deserve to burn in hell as a non-muslim, but do that from a perspective of mercy, sometimes trying to convince, peacefully.
The problems I had were with the hypocrites. Those who get fat during fasting, or pray and preach with anger in their heart. Those are the ones who can't tolerate that others may be doing the things they would actually like to do. The ones who come at you for being different.
As in most religions I suppose. And as always, the more societal pressure to pretend, the more there are hypocrites, of course.
Interesting article. I’m concerned by the fact that the us data is almost a decade old. A lot happened in the meantime both politically and even demographically. Moreover data from Europe shows how things can change over time. You seem to be optimistic, eg suspect today American Muslims are even more accepting of homosexuality than in 2017. I am not so sure. We really need current studies to get a better picture and see if America’s positive exceptionalism in this regard still holds.
I think generational changes are less significant than those caused by the Gaza War. I know many, many Muslims. Almost none had antisemitic views prior to 2023, now almost all do. On October 7 they held a level of disapproval and disappointment with Hamas. My coworker told me his mosque gave a sermon that week about restraint against oppressors. Now many of the Muslims I know support Hamas. Those who were somewhat proud to be American now hold fervent anti-West views, etc.
If you can support an organization like Hamas, your values to start with are in question. I am very skeptical of this explanation. Data from before 2023 shows widespread antisemitism in Muslim communities. What I think actually happened on Oct. 7th is that Israel's terrible moment of weakness made antisemites feel empowered. They rose their heads and discovered minimal to no pushback from decent society, and now antisemitism which was taboo has become normalized in the west for the first time since WWII.
No, most Muslims, at least in the US, didn’t care one way or another about Jews before Oct 7. Most were really unaware about Palestine and Israel.
It’s not really surprising that people from the third world are susceptible to third world ideologies. Antisemitism is not some nebulous omnipresent thing, but something that waxes and wanes with time.
Interesting analysis. I think the UK piece is incomplete. Most British Muslims are also part of a wider group of immigrants from that part of Asia and later from East Africa. So both comparison to Hindu and Sikh attitudes and attitudes of British Muslims to their fellows from South Asia are important to understand the whole picture.
Both - some shared cultural heritage but also some shared religious animosity. And now in 2nd/ 3rd generations of UK so has a flavour of surviving through racist times in their early years in this country.
Very resonant article for me, as an Uzbek in NYC who is genuinely fearful of my community’s increasing radicalism. You would think as time goes on and they continue enjoying American freedoms and laws (especially provisions like welfare), they would become less radical…
I'm surprised to see how *few* Muslims believe the Quran is the literal word of God and the absolute truth. It's written in the first person from God's perspective! It's one of the points that orthodox Muslims, Sunni and Shia from all over the world, supposedly agree on! Seems practice is quite different from theory.
Also, "I think following the Quran is more important than the laws of my country" is hard to disagree with when it's the word of God vs, you know, some flawed human-made laws. Nonetheless, afaik most Islamic scholars say you should follow the laws of the country you're in (or avoid moving to countries where sharia isn't practiced in the first place).
Very nice Job. Seems to me nativists are right to be preoccupied. Countries should really reduce migration to a minimum and be very selective. And this is before ai makes most human labor irrelevant.
Posting isolated Qur’anic quotes like “fight the disbelievers” or “don’t take Jews and Christians as allies” without explaining the historical context, Arabic wording, or scholarly interpretation is misleading. Many of these verses were revealed during specific wars, political conflicts, or legal situations in 7th century Arabia, and words like awliya are far more nuanced than a simple English translation suggests. Some verses are definitely difficult and debated even among Muslims, but removing all context and presenting them as blanket commands for all Muslims today seriously devalues your credibility and turns a complex topic into propaganda instead of honest discussion.
Thomas, if you are going to present verses like this to a broad audience, I think you also have a responsibility to clarify how those verses are understood by mainstream scholars and the overwhelming majority of Muslims today, rather than only presenting the most extreme literalist interpretations.
A reader unfamiliar with Islam could easily walk away believing those interpretations are universally accepted, when they are not. If the goal is honest discussion rather than reinforcing fear or suspicion, then representing both the existence of extremist interpretations and the mainstream understanding is important.
Otherwise it stops being education and starts becoming selective framing.
You are saying that these verses exist, and that some people exploit literalist interpretations of them to radicalize Muslims into violence. That is true.
What I am saying is that those interpretations are heavily used by Islamophobes, by stripping the Arabic nuance, historical context, and centuries of scholarship, and do not represent how the overwhelming majority of Muslims understand their faith. That can also be true at the same time.
Reading the Quran in Arabic versus isolated English translations can dramatically change meaning, tone, and interpretation, especially with words like awliya, jihad, or verses revealed during specific wartime and political situations. Treating selective English excerpts as the definitive representation of Islam ignores that complexity entirely.
You are also missing a major part of history: many extremist movements in the Muslim world were not born naturally from theology alone. Governments, political actors, and foreign powers have historically funded and promoted rigid or militant interpretations of Islam to rally troops, consolidate power, or fight proxy wars. Religion, like nationalism or ideology, can absolutely be weaponized to control populations. That is not unique to Islam.
And yes, there is a small fraction of Muslims who are radicals. That is true. But the same is true in virtually every religion and ideology on earth. Christianity has had violent extremists, white supremacist movements like the KKK, militias, and terrorism justified through religion as well. Most reasonable people would recognize it is unfair to hold every Christian responsible for that.
So by your logic, what have you personally done to stop radical Christianity or groups like the KKK? I doubt you think every ordinary Christian has a duty to publicly answer for extremists acting in Christianity’s name. The same standard should apply to Muslims.
I also reject the idea that every ordinary Muslim has some obligation to become a public spokesperson tasked with “fighting Islam” to satisfy Western political expectations. I condemn violence and extremism broadly, whether it comes from radical Muslims, extremist Christians, white supremacists, militant nationalists, or anyone else.
Thanks Bilal. I think your comment and this interaction is so important. If we can see eye to eye on this, we might be able to help others do the same.
Let's take as valid the assumption that 20% of Muslims in the West are Islamists. If we agree on that approximation, then I think we agree on most everything. Yes, the vast majority don't agree with this reading, but 20% do, and that's an awful lot.
Your follow-up question is the key. You ask what I've done to push back on extremists in my culture, and I've done A LOT.
In my culture, I consider extremists those who want to impose their views on others. So I've pushed back on those who want to ban abortions in all cases. I've pushed back on those who want to limit free speech, in China, in the US, in Europe. I've called out and investigated peers for sexual harassment. I've pushed back against the Jewish defense of settlements in the West Bank. I've pushed back on cancel culture, on specific examples I've seen from very closely. I've done it in private and in public, with friends, family, coworkers, bosses, at dinners...
Because this is how culture is formed. It's through the big and small everyday acts. If people don't speak up when they see something wrong, they normalize it.
So yes, you should be public about the excesses of Islamists, the same way you're being public right now about what you're seeing here as a potential misinterpretation as Islamophobia. If every moderate Muslim was as vocal criticizing Islamists as it is protecting Islam, the rejection of Islamism within Islam would be so clear that I think that would solve more than half the battle.
They're not removed from context. The context is: Many people take the Quran literally, and this is bad because the Quran says some bad things when taken literally. Here are examples."
What you say is "Yeah but that can be interpreted in a better light." I agree. That's why there are moderate Muslims.
My concern for your type of comment is that I think it's counterproductive. I think a much more productive type of comment would be: "It's true that some radicals interpret it literally. These people are bad for Islam and for the world, and we should fight them. Because I don't believe Islam should be interpreted literally. Here are examples, following your quotes:..."
If you wrote that, I'd think "Great, Bilal is a moderate that truly wants to fight the radical wing of Islam and integrate its more tolerant part with the West."
But the staunch defense of Islam, despite its obvious ideological drawback (as illustrated here) is very much the problem that allows its more radical sides to fester.
Honestly, losing the 20% of Muslims that don’t believe in murderous insanity on behalf of their sandfaggot god is worth it to get rid of the 80% who do
So, I think the thing that surprises me most is that on all of those charts showing a significant proportion of British Muslims with extremely conservative beliefs, there's also a surprisingly (and concerningly) sizeable chunk of non-Muslims who agree with them!
Not sure which questions, but there are radicals everywhere. The only question is how many, how crazy, and how much are they willing to act on their craziness.
"It must understand that they are entering a host country, and they need to make an effort to adjust to local norms." - that's the crux of it really. There's no polite way to say it but they don't think of accommodation the way you do. You giving in or compromising on anything is viewed as you obviously seeing the light. Hence you shouldn't expect them to be gracious in accommodating one of your requests. I was a student in the UK who then worked there. Back in 2011, i saw how London was turning out and decided to leave. I hope it doesn't come to it for Europe and the UK but I'm increasingly convinced that you're going to have to remember that line by Quintus - people should know when they're conquered
That’s why the limits are important.
Do what you want if it relates to yourself. When it relates to others and their freedoms and customs, you have to adapt.
Visited London with the kids over the holidays after a long time away and the change was sufficiently noticeable that my 12 year old commented. Especially compared to Paris (laicite apparently had some impact).
The last time I was in Paris, a North African dude was robbing a parking meter with a screw driver. It kind of put me off for the trip. But 25 years after 9/11 and we're still debating this.
The West, and modern prosperity and human progress, were built on liberal beliefs and institutions. These are already being assaulted from within. To allow millions of immigrants who never developed these beliefs and who hold ideas directly contrary is borderline suicidal.
The problem is that a liberal society has an innate reluctance to screen incumbents. The idea seems fundamentally intolerant.
Places like the UK are going to have to figure out how to address this. Failure risks complete civilizational collapse. I wish them the best of luck.
Fantastic article on a very complex topic. But it appears that in Europe for sure the reverse assimilation of Muslims is getting worse. Which tracks with your work on Israel & my lived experience in the US. Simply put, religion is bad and fundamentalism is terrible. And we have Israeli settlers, the IRCG and Pete Hegseth calling the tune--all fundamentalists who aspire to 11th century ideals not 21st century ones
Your figures represent a frightening validation of the general feeling in the West of the real and present danger of increasingly radicalised and intolerant young Muslims.
The sheer hypocrisy and misogyny embedded in Sharia further argues that freedom of religion needs to be replaced by a sterner freedom FROM.
And of course should apply to all crazed voodoo.
That, in many cases and countries, it really is the majority of young Muslims who are embracing an aberrant position is more worrying than the " oh, it's only a minority" stance.
And it takes only one throat cutter or a handful in a few airlines to panic entire nations.
Or one defense secretary thinking he's on an 11th century crusade....
Tough topic but good for you for trying to look into it! Moderation in all things - I say myself !
I'm a French Muslim, and this is actually a great article! I can see what I observe in real life reflected in these polls. And yeah, we have so much work to do!
I'd say that when you are an immigrant (or a child of immigrants), integration can be difficult depending on the country. I'd say it's "normal" since people are physically and culturally different. But it can reinforce social withdrawal, a rejection of belonging to this society, and a return to something that "understands" you: religion.
Another challenge for Muslims is the lack of centralised organisation. Since Islam doesn't have an official clergy, people coming from different countries need more time to adapt and create a "new" religious identity that respects the new setting.
Also, I'm not sure, but I think we would find similar numbers across Jewish populations on many of these subjects.
Thanks for sharing, I appreciate.
I’d love to hear more about your experience.
On jews, I agree. Maybe more in NY than France? In any case the difference is that radical Jews want to do their stuff alone, whereas radical Muslims want to change other people’s behaviors.
Hi Tomas! Yes, please ask any questions :)
If I had to elaborate, especially on the current and future state of immigration:
1. The most important thing I see in France is a lack of social mix (and it gets worse). Stop putting all immigrants in housing projects in the suburbs; incentivize and help them move in countryside and city centers. Create better cities now that we do not need to accommodate millions of people a year.
2. Help Muslim structures themselves. I also know that countries of origin are trying to influence all the current organisations and associations (for example, in France, Algeria and Morocco are seeking to influence them), pretty sure we need help from governments here.
3. Help immigrants find communities that are not necessarily based on their country of origin so that they stop feeling like people who will never become a part of their new countries.
4. Make them feel good and integrated. Make it easy to build new mosque. Feel that they are integrated in the societies: make them visible in the medias (in good ways), in companies administration, governments, etc
5. Help stop wars (or stop creating them) and destruction in poor countries
Of course, as Muslims, we have many things to do that mostly involve creating structures with clear visions and interpretations of islam in the West.
I kind of agree with the difference between radical jews and muslim you make, but I would add that imo it comes more from the fact that jews are part of these countries for a long time, more than religious or cultural reasons.
Thanks!
On Jews, there’s the fundamental difference that Judaism does not promote proselytism: You’re the chosen people, and that’s it. You’re not supposed to tell others they are too. Christianity and Islam are different in that regard.
On the measures, these sound reasonable. But they seem all to come from the state. What can or should Muslims do more of? Differently?
Some rough ideas:
- scaling training of local imams. tbf, I don't know the current state of this
- get involved in politics. actually all parts of the state: administration, army, police, education, etc. I guess this process is in progress.
- highlight the richness of having 2 cultures: to be proud of them, promote the good aspects of western culture, and the result of the mix
- create a coherent and enviable vision/story for muslim in West, most of us have trouble projecting ourselves into future
- stop referring to egyptian, and saudi imams.
As you can see, these have less impactful than the state-ones
Ah, all faithful Muslims that were sincere about their faith were cool to me. They may believe that I deserve to burn in hell as a non-muslim, but do that from a perspective of mercy, sometimes trying to convince, peacefully.
The problems I had were with the hypocrites. Those who get fat during fasting, or pray and preach with anger in their heart. Those are the ones who can't tolerate that others may be doing the things they would actually like to do. The ones who come at you for being different.
As in most religions I suppose. And as always, the more societal pressure to pretend, the more there are hypocrites, of course.
Good effort on pulling together data on a difficult topic.
Interesting article. I’m concerned by the fact that the us data is almost a decade old. A lot happened in the meantime both politically and even demographically. Moreover data from Europe shows how things can change over time. You seem to be optimistic, eg suspect today American Muslims are even more accepting of homosexuality than in 2017. I am not so sure. We really need current studies to get a better picture and see if America’s positive exceptionalism in this regard still holds.
I think generational changes are less significant than those caused by the Gaza War. I know many, many Muslims. Almost none had antisemitic views prior to 2023, now almost all do. On October 7 they held a level of disapproval and disappointment with Hamas. My coworker told me his mosque gave a sermon that week about restraint against oppressors. Now many of the Muslims I know support Hamas. Those who were somewhat proud to be American now hold fervent anti-West views, etc.
Good points
If you can support an organization like Hamas, your values to start with are in question. I am very skeptical of this explanation. Data from before 2023 shows widespread antisemitism in Muslim communities. What I think actually happened on Oct. 7th is that Israel's terrible moment of weakness made antisemites feel empowered. They rose their heads and discovered minimal to no pushback from decent society, and now antisemitism which was taboo has become normalized in the west for the first time since WWII.
No, most Muslims, at least in the US, didn’t care one way or another about Jews before Oct 7. Most were really unaware about Palestine and Israel.
It’s not really surprising that people from the third world are susceptible to third world ideologies. Antisemitism is not some nebulous omnipresent thing, but something that waxes and wanes with time.
Good points. Thanks for sharing
Interesting analysis. I think the UK piece is incomplete. Most British Muslims are also part of a wider group of immigrants from that part of Asia and later from East Africa. So both comparison to Hindu and Sikh attitudes and attitudes of British Muslims to their fellows from South Asia are important to understand the whole picture.
The source data doesn’t give that afaik. A good point for future research
Agreed - don’t know where the data might be found but the dynamic is very evident to anyone living here
So you think it’s, in this case, more cultural than religious, right?
Both - some shared cultural heritage but also some shared religious animosity. And now in 2nd/ 3rd generations of UK so has a flavour of surviving through racist times in their early years in this country.
Very resonant article for me, as an Uzbek in NYC who is genuinely fearful of my community’s increasing radicalism. You would think as time goes on and they continue enjoying American freedoms and laws (especially provisions like welfare), they would become less radical…
What is your experience?
I didn’t know there was an Uzbek community in America
I'm surprised to see how *few* Muslims believe the Quran is the literal word of God and the absolute truth. It's written in the first person from God's perspective! It's one of the points that orthodox Muslims, Sunni and Shia from all over the world, supposedly agree on! Seems practice is quite different from theory.
Also, "I think following the Quran is more important than the laws of my country" is hard to disagree with when it's the word of God vs, you know, some flawed human-made laws. Nonetheless, afaik most Islamic scholars say you should follow the laws of the country you're in (or avoid moving to countries where sharia isn't practiced in the first place).
Very nice Job. Seems to me nativists are right to be preoccupied. Countries should really reduce migration to a minimum and be very selective. And this is before ai makes most human labor irrelevant.
Posting isolated Qur’anic quotes like “fight the disbelievers” or “don’t take Jews and Christians as allies” without explaining the historical context, Arabic wording, or scholarly interpretation is misleading. Many of these verses were revealed during specific wars, political conflicts, or legal situations in 7th century Arabia, and words like awliya are far more nuanced than a simple English translation suggests. Some verses are definitely difficult and debated even among Muslims, but removing all context and presenting them as blanket commands for all Muslims today seriously devalues your credibility and turns a complex topic into propaganda instead of honest discussion.
Thomas, if you are going to present verses like this to a broad audience, I think you also have a responsibility to clarify how those verses are understood by mainstream scholars and the overwhelming majority of Muslims today, rather than only presenting the most extreme literalist interpretations.
A reader unfamiliar with Islam could easily walk away believing those interpretations are universally accepted, when they are not. If the goal is honest discussion rather than reinforcing fear or suspicion, then representing both the existence of extremist interpretations and the mainstream understanding is important.
Otherwise it stops being education and starts becoming selective framing.
You are saying that these verses exist, and that some people exploit literalist interpretations of them to radicalize Muslims into violence. That is true.
What I am saying is that those interpretations are heavily used by Islamophobes, by stripping the Arabic nuance, historical context, and centuries of scholarship, and do not represent how the overwhelming majority of Muslims understand their faith. That can also be true at the same time.
Reading the Quran in Arabic versus isolated English translations can dramatically change meaning, tone, and interpretation, especially with words like awliya, jihad, or verses revealed during specific wartime and political situations. Treating selective English excerpts as the definitive representation of Islam ignores that complexity entirely.
You are also missing a major part of history: many extremist movements in the Muslim world were not born naturally from theology alone. Governments, political actors, and foreign powers have historically funded and promoted rigid or militant interpretations of Islam to rally troops, consolidate power, or fight proxy wars. Religion, like nationalism or ideology, can absolutely be weaponized to control populations. That is not unique to Islam.
And yes, there is a small fraction of Muslims who are radicals. That is true. But the same is true in virtually every religion and ideology on earth. Christianity has had violent extremists, white supremacist movements like the KKK, militias, and terrorism justified through religion as well. Most reasonable people would recognize it is unfair to hold every Christian responsible for that.
So by your logic, what have you personally done to stop radical Christianity or groups like the KKK? I doubt you think every ordinary Christian has a duty to publicly answer for extremists acting in Christianity’s name. The same standard should apply to Muslims.
I also reject the idea that every ordinary Muslim has some obligation to become a public spokesperson tasked with “fighting Islam” to satisfy Western political expectations. I condemn violence and extremism broadly, whether it comes from radical Muslims, extremist Christians, white supremacists, militant nationalists, or anyone else.
Thanks Bilal. I think your comment and this interaction is so important. If we can see eye to eye on this, we might be able to help others do the same.
Let's take as valid the assumption that 20% of Muslims in the West are Islamists. If we agree on that approximation, then I think we agree on most everything. Yes, the vast majority don't agree with this reading, but 20% do, and that's an awful lot.
Your follow-up question is the key. You ask what I've done to push back on extremists in my culture, and I've done A LOT.
In my culture, I consider extremists those who want to impose their views on others. So I've pushed back on those who want to ban abortions in all cases. I've pushed back on those who want to limit free speech, in China, in the US, in Europe. I've called out and investigated peers for sexual harassment. I've pushed back against the Jewish defense of settlements in the West Bank. I've pushed back on cancel culture, on specific examples I've seen from very closely. I've done it in private and in public, with friends, family, coworkers, bosses, at dinners...
Because this is how culture is formed. It's through the big and small everyday acts. If people don't speak up when they see something wrong, they normalize it.
So yes, you should be public about the excesses of Islamists, the same way you're being public right now about what you're seeing here as a potential misinterpretation as Islamophobia. If every moderate Muslim was as vocal criticizing Islamists as it is protecting Islam, the rejection of Islamism within Islam would be so clear that I think that would solve more than half the battle.
They're not removed from context. The context is: Many people take the Quran literally, and this is bad because the Quran says some bad things when taken literally. Here are examples."
What you say is "Yeah but that can be interpreted in a better light." I agree. That's why there are moderate Muslims.
My concern for your type of comment is that I think it's counterproductive. I think a much more productive type of comment would be: "It's true that some radicals interpret it literally. These people are bad for Islam and for the world, and we should fight them. Because I don't believe Islam should be interpreted literally. Here are examples, following your quotes:..."
If you wrote that, I'd think "Great, Bilal is a moderate that truly wants to fight the radical wing of Islam and integrate its more tolerant part with the West."
But the staunch defense of Islam, despite its obvious ideological drawback (as illustrated here) is very much the problem that allows its more radical sides to fester.
Honestly, losing the 20% of Muslims that don’t believe in murderous insanity on behalf of their sandfaggot god is worth it to get rid of the 80% who do
You can get rid of the radicals without getting rid of the moderates
There aren’t any moderates
20-50% depending on how you calculate and where
So, I think the thing that surprises me most is that on all of those charts showing a significant proportion of British Muslims with extremely conservative beliefs, there's also a surprisingly (and concerningly) sizeable chunk of non-Muslims who agree with them!
Any idea who these people are?
Not sure which questions, but there are radicals everywhere. The only question is how many, how crazy, and how much are they willing to act on their craziness.