Rebutting Radical Islam: Congressman Peter King’s Congressional Hearings of March 10, 2011

by Sundar J.M. Brown


Sundar J.M. Brown, Editor



Amidst alarmist cries of, “Islamophobia!” “McCarthyism!” and, “Bigotry!”, apologists for Radicalized Islam them have been protesting Congressman Peter King’s March 10 hearing on Muslim Radicalization in America and what the Islamic community is doing to work against it.  The apologist platform has alleged that the Congressional inquiries are based on false premises.  The comprehensive data speaks to the contrary.  We offer three concise rebuttals to the most insisted-upon obfuscations.


CLAIM 1: Islamic extremism does not warrant special attention; if Islamic extremism should be investigated then all extremism should be investigated.

REBUTTAL 1: Islamist groups, the ACLU, congressmen, and pundits have cited the Triangle Center on Terrorism and Homeland Security’s recent analysis of 2010 data. It finds, “more than 20 terrorist plots by non-Muslims in the United States in 2010”, compared to 20 Muslim-American terror suspects

A more careful look at the numbers in full context serves to bolster King’s assertion that radical Islam requires special scrutiny. Muslims comprise approximately one percent of the United States’ population, though, even that number has come under scrutiny

Accepting the census data produced by the Muslim community (7 million Muslims in the U.S.), and examining the Triangle Center’s 2010 report’s roughly equal numbers of Muslims and non-Muslims engaging in terrorism (20+ by non-Muslims / 20 Muslim-American terror suspects) reveals this: the problem of extremism is 100 times more prevalent among U.S. Muslims.  Hence, terrorism can be curtailed most efficiently by focusing on Islamic radicalization, just as King posits.


CLAIM 2: Radicalized ideologies are scarce in the overall Muslim population of the United States.

REBUTTAL 2: A 2007 Pew poll is often cited as proof that American Muslims exhibit little radicalism.  The poll’s complete results, however, are far from reassuring: 

  • 5% of U.S. Muslims (350,000 people) indicated a favorable view of al-Qaeda;
  • 27% of U.S. Muslims (1,890,000 people) did not know or refused to answer
  • 8% of U.S. Muslims (560,000 people) stated that suicide bombings can be justified at least “sometimes.”
  • 1% of U.S. Muslims (7,000) said that such jihadist attacks are “often” justified

Even the one percent figure amounts to seven thousand people with openly Radicalized Islamic ideologies- this must be viewed as a serious consideration by Homeland Security.  King is right for investigating where these radicals inherit and form and plan to act on these ideas.


CLAIM 3: The Muslim community at large is of regular assistance in thwarting terrorist plots and works to eradicate radical ideologies within their communities.

REBUTTAL 3: A study by MPAC states that Muslims have helped disrupt 1/3rd of the post-9/11 terror plots within their respective communities.  This statistic is being used to counter King’s assertion that Muslims give insufficient aid to law enforcement.

Yes, Muslims have played a role in derailing some plots.  But this has happened despite the efforts of prominent Muslim groups to act to the contrary.  Consider CAIR, arguably the most prominent Muslim representation organization.  In recent years, CAIR threatened to suspend contact with the FBI over informants, was protested by Minneapolis Muslims who accused it of hampering investigations of jihad recruitment, claimed entrapment of terror suspects, and was shamed when its San Francisco branch displayed a “Don’t Talk to the FBI” poster in its open office space. The real question is how much more assistance Muslims would provide if not for the obstructionism of CAIR and others.

There are some who, while opposed to jihad, who have still taken pessimistic views, acting as detractors to King’s substantiations.  Even before the hearings began, however, his proposal for them bore fruit.  The massive resistance to a public and fair probing of Muslim extremism has exposed Islamist organizations’ true mindset along with their “pathetic record on combating Islamic radicalism.”  As reformist Muslim Asra Nomani notes, “Our worst enemies in America … are Muslim interest groups and leaders, who do more to deny the problem than defeat it.” 

Congressman Peter King deserves the gratitude of the American people for courageously and tirelessly working to put the destructive agenda of the Radicalized Islamists and their apologists on full display.


Please contact the office of Congressman Peter King to voice your support:


Telephone:      (202) 225-7896


Congressman Peter King



About Sundar JM Brown

A University of Pennsylvania-trained South Asianist, Seminary-educated Theologian, and Intelligence Community Professional, Sundar J.M. Brown specializes in analysis of Theoterrorism, Counterterrorism and HUMINT Operations. His regional focuses include terror groups/acts in India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Afghanistan, the Philippines, the Middle East and Africa. His primary expertise is Theoterrorism, the intersection of Terrorism and Theology. His present research focuses on apocalyptic themes in terrorist ideologies and on the theological components informing the radicalization and deradicalization of Violent Religious Extremists and Militants. He is the Founder and Director of the IntelliGen Conference on Religion & Violence. *Sundar's Twiter: @SundarJMBrown *Sundar's YouTube Channel: *Sundar's Blog:
This entry was posted in Analysis, Terrorism Studies. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s