Because CAIR tells them so.
According to CAIR’s website,
There is no scientific count of Muslims in the U.S. Six to seven million is the most commonly cited figure.
“Most commonly cited”? Cited by whom? Why, by CAIR, of course. CAIR routinely pushes the six million-plus figure, but other sources place the number much lower. Take, for example, the U.S. Census Bureau. According to the latest information I could find on the Bureau’s website*, survey data would indicate that 0.5% of the population in 2001, or 1.5 million people, consists of self-described Muslims.
That number sounds a bit low, even to me. Are some American Muslims wary of oppression, and thus unwilling to acknowledge their religion in a telephone survey?
- - - - - - - - - -
One reported figure is for four million Muslims in the U.S.A. as of 2004, so I’ll consider that a generous estimate, and use it in the calculations given below.
Now: where do the Muslim population figures for Western European countries come from? In many — if not all — of them, it is illegal for the government to gather such statistics, in the interests of Political Correctness. We often hear that France is 10% Muslim, but the French have no way of knowing that for sure, because their census officials simply cannot ask citizens to list their religion.
So let’s assume that European countries get their figures from Muslim groups more or less like CAIR. Let’s also assume that these groups exaggerate to the same extent that CAIR does. The website Islamic Population has useful statistics, as drawn from the Ummah’s point of view. I have used them below to supply the higher of the numbers for European Muslim population.
Using a 4.14M to 6.5M ratio, we can downsize the countries’ Muslim populations to 63.7% of the figures given in my Ummah database. The results, including those for the United States, are given below.
|Country||%||# Muslims||Real %?||Real #?|
As you can see, the total difference is significant — almost eight million fewer Muslims in Western Europe and the United States, based on the lower figure.
All of the given statistics are guesses, however. Nobody really knows the number of Muslims in any of these countries.
Why would CAIR want to inflate the statistics for their religion to this extent? Besides simple pride in their faith, that is?
I suspect one reason may be found in another Census Bureau statistic: the number of self-identified Jews in the United States. According to the same survey data, 1.3% of Americans, or almost four million people, identify themselves as Jewish.
My guess is that CAIR desperately wants to set the number of Muslims comfortably higher than the number of Jews, and will do anything it can to pad the rolls and get the figures it wants.
But this is sheer speculation. There are other obvious advantages to the higher numbers: more clout with members of Congress, a higher media profile, and the sheer propaganda value of being “the fastest-growing religion”.
And there may be yet another reason for the exaggeration: a large portion of American Muslims are African-Americans belonging to the Nation of Islam. NOI is an organization which predates the rise of the current Wahhabist subversion, is financially independent from it, and does not answer to it. It would make sense for CAIR to inflate its Wahhabi numbers so that they surpass those of NOI.
The situation with CAIR vs. NOI is reminiscent of the Communist Party vs. (say) the Agrarian Populist Party in the old days. The two groups may have shared a number of goals, and have been able to work together on many issues, but the indigenous local group takes no orders from Moscow — or, in this case, Riyadh.
If the true size and makeup of American Islam were ever actually revealed, CAIR would deflate like a punctured balloon, and become just another minor advocacy group, instead of “the voice of seven million Americans” that it claims to be now.
Muslims may deliberately overstate their numbers to enhance their power, particularly in Europe, and thus be able to punch above their weight. But even if the lower figures are more accurate, Islam in the West is a formidable presence. The demographic disparity between it and the degenerate secular infidels guarantees that its proportion in the population will continue to increase.
But the traditional strategy for spreading Islam has not been to outbreed the infidels. The time-honored Muslim practice is to convert them, kill them, enslave them, or drive them out of their homes.
The steps are as follows:
|1.||The Call. An Islamic military leader is obliged by his scripture to invite his adversary to convert to the True Faith. If, after a suitable interval, the enemy fails to answer the Call, then we come to|
|2.||Jihad. Through force of arms, and by any method deemed expedient, the mujahid will wage war until the infidel submits or is killed. Submission may take the form of|
|3.||Dhimmitude. The surviving infidel must agree to submit to the power of the Islamic rulers, be subjected to humiliating strictures, pay a substantial poll tax called the jizyah, and never again try to proselytize for his own religion. Alternatively, there is|
|4.||Slavery. This has been widely practiced with respect to surviving infidel women and children.|
By the above methods Islam enjoyed an enormous expansion over its first few centuries. Syria, Egypt, Palestine, Asia Minor, Spain, and the Caucasus had all converted peacefully to Christianity, but they were brought to Islam by the sword. Up until the late 19th century, Spain was the only place where Islam had been rolled back from a signifant amount of territory gained by earlier conquest: in 1492 Los Reyes Católicos adopted an Islamic custom — namely, ruthless slaughter — and drove the Moors back across the Strait of Gibraltar and out of Iberia.
Historically, peaceful coexistence only provided the opportunity for Islamic expansion. In any given region the Islamic population would ratchet in one direction only, increasing by violence and coercion when it was possible, patiently biding its time when it was not.
Once the Islamic population of a country reaches a critical mass — somewhere between 10% and 40% — the process of absorption begins, with the infidel inhabitants being killed or driven out of their local areas until Muslims manage to attain political control and the country joins the Caliphate.
The various empires of the late second millennium — the British, the Ottomans, the Chinese, and so on — served to keep the Muslim dominions in stasis, with Islamic expansion held in check by the imperial center. Even though the Ottomans were Islamic, they had a vested interest in maintaining their Christian and Jewish subjects in good health, since these were the most productive of the Sultan’s subjects. As the providers of Janissaries for the Sultan’s army, and jizyah for his treasury, infidels were an absolute necessity for the smooth functioning of the Ottoman state.
The collapse of the Ottoman Empire changed all that. The stasis continued piecemeal under the various despots who succeeded the Sultan in the fragments of the empire, with Nasser, Saddam, the Shah, and Assad père maintaining their religious minorities in place for their own political reasons. But they were only postponing the inevitable — as soon as the restive Muslim populations were released from tyrannical control, Islamification resumed and accelerated. Saudi Arabia and Yemen soon cleansed themselves of Jews and Christians, and “Palestine” and Lebanon are midway through the same process. The Christian population of Iraq is facing the latest version of this ordeal. As Iraqis gain their liberty, one of their newfound freedoms seems to be the freedom to crucify and decapitate Christians.
India underwent a similar process after the British departed in 1947. Pakistan (and later Bangladesh) was established as an Islamic state, and there the infidel population rapidly dwindled. But, even in Hindu India, the inexorable momentum continued:
The bloodiest sections of the “bloody borders” are where the Islamic population hovers near the tipping point. Consider the countries listed in this table:
These are among the most violent places on earth, where constant civil strife between the Muslims and everyone else causes bloodshed, mayhem, poverty, and anarchy. Absent outside intervention, these places will become more and more Muslim until new Islamic polities are established, and then the “peace” of Shari’a will descend.
Consider Thailand, which is only 5% Muslim, but is experiencing some of the worst sectarian violence on the planet. Even though the Islamic presence is relatively small, it is concentrated in the southern region of Thailand, adjacent to Malaysia. Expect an eventual “peace deal” with the insurgents, granting them an autonomy which leads to an eventual merger with Malaysia, similar to what is happening now with Kosovo.
And what of the West? Whether France is currently 6%, or 10%, or 15% Muslim, the demographics of Europe point to an inevitable Islamic dominance. The European Union has no interest in reversing this process; in fact, it is actively colluding with Muslims in the slide towards Eurabia.
When this happens, it will be a notable event: the first time a non-Muslim culture has given in to Islam without a struggle. If the French continue to respond to the burning of vehicles by establishing more welfare programs, if the British allow female newscasters to read the television news while veiled, if the Swedes use the Center Against Racism to suppress all discussion of Muslim rapes and other crimes — then, for the first time in history, a culture will have submitted to the Prophet without a real fight.
The United States is at an earlier stage, but the same subversive effort is underway here. CAIR has established a beachhead, and its shock troops are slowly moving inland towards its strategic objectives.
It’s a good idea to watch this process closely. Let’s keep an eye on the numbers.
*These figures were calculated based on extrapolated survey data provided by the Census Bureau, as found in an Excel spreadsheet linked on Bureau’s site mentioned above. The spreadsheet itself can be found here.