A huge study out of Germany, released in 2010 but now mostly forgotten, provided a serious point to ponder. After researching 45,000 youths, it found that with increasing religiosity Christian young people became less violent. But Muslim youths became, with increasing religiosity, more violent.
My, even a relativist could get the nagging and nauseating feeling that maybe, just perhaps, not all religions are the same, after all.
More and more Americans are realizing this, too. And despite the Islamic threat being like Harry Potter’s Lord Voldemort — you’re not supposed to name it — they’re increasingly issuing warnings about it. In response, figures such as Muslim Congressman André Carson (D-Ind.) have said that “Islamophobia” has no place in America. What’s more, claims Carson, insofar as domestic terrorism goes, it’s “white supremacist organizations” that we have to worry about. So what’s the truth?
Addressing this Tuesday, John R. Lott Jr. writes at RealClearPolitics:
March alone saw multiple terrorist attacks carried out by Muslims. In Austin, a terrorist wore a sweatshirt reading “Property of Allah” during an attack. In New York City, bomb throwers shouted “Allahu Akbar” while throwing a homemade shrapnel bomb. At Old Dominion University, a shooter also yelled “Allahu Akbar” and had previously been convicted of supporting ISIS. Another attacker, whose brother was a Hezbollah terrorist commander, targeted Temple Israel in Michigan, and yet another attack, involving three men of Iraqi origin, targeted the U.S. embassy in Norway. The Austin, Old Dominion, and New York City bombers and the Michigan synagogue attackers were also all foreign-born individuals who were naturalized U.S. citizens.
Terrorist attacks take many forms. For example, the January 2025 truck attack in New Orleans, with an ISIS flag on the truck, left 14 people dead and 47 injured.
Of course, some will dismiss the above as anecdotal and possibly cherry-picked. So what do the statistics show?
The Data
In presenting stats, Lott writes that he’s going to
focus the discussion on one type of attack that has been extensively studied: mass public shootings. Researchers define a mass public shooting as an attack in which a perpetrator kills four or more people at one time in a public place, excluding crimes such as gang fights or robberies.
And here’s a summary of Lott’s findings:
- From January 1998 to December 2025, the U.S. had 108 mass public shootings involving 111 shooters.
- Muslims committed eight of these shootings (7.2 percent), while averaging about 0.4 percent of the American population — making their share of attacks roughly 18 times their population size.
- By contrast, only seven attackers (6.5 percent) expressed white supremacist, neo-Nazi, or anti-immigrant views.
- Some “anti-immigrant” attackers (e.g., El Paso, Dayton, Buffalo) also cited environmentalist motivations, concerns about population growth harming sustainability, anti-capitalist views, support for worker ownership, and leftist/Democratic leanings — yet media often labels them broadly as right-wing extremists or white supremacists.
- The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) claims all extremist violence from 2022-2024 was committed by right-wing perpetrators, asserts Lott. Yet it excluded cases such as Audrey Hale (Nashville Covenant School, 2023; anti-“white privilege”), Robert Crimo (Highland Park, 2022; anti-Trump), and Connor Sturgeon (Louisville; pro-BLM, anti-police/Trump).
This is common, do note. For example, I reported in 2017 on a terrorism study that, as I wrote,
included in the right-wing-acts category a black nationalist; a rampaging, mentally ill young man distraught over romantic failures; and a Colin Kaepernick supporter who describes himself as a “hard socialist.”
More Numbers, Not Narratives
To further summarize, Lott also relates:
- Non-Middle Eastern whites comprise ~64 percent of the US population but ~55 percent of mass public shooters (slightly underrepresented).
- Individuals of Middle Eastern origin accounted for seven attacks (6.4 percent of attackers), about 16 times their population share — making them the most disproportionately represented ethnic/racial group.
- Blacks, Asians, and American Indians commit these attacks at slightly higher rates than their population shares. Hispanics’ rate was substantially lower (~nine percent below their share).
- Overall, the data show Muslims commit terrorism (including mass public shootings) at a greatly disproportionate rate in the U.S.
Related to this, I reported back in 2014 on the myth that “most mass shooters are white.” It was never true, just ever and always fashionable propaganda.
So the bottom line is clear. The evidence, states Lott, contradicts claims that whites or right-wing white supremacists pose the primary terrorist threat.
“I Will Cast Terror Into the Hearts of Those Who Disbelieve. Therefore Strike Off Their Heads and Strike Off Every Fingertip of Them” — Koran (8:15)
So harking back to the German study, and Lott’s findings, what accounts for the violence attending Islamic belief? First there are the numerous violent injunctions in the Islamic canon, such as the above. Yet unbeknownst to most, the Koran is only 16 percent of that canon. The rest comprises the Hadith and Sira — which contain far more violent injunctions still.
And what happens with increasing Muslim religiosity? Well, you go beyond the Koran and delve into the Hadith and Sira. These two works are influential for a more significant reason, too.
Virtues (and vices) are caught more than they’re taught; actions speak louder than words. Thus are Christians likely to ask “What would Jesus do?” Thus are they more likely to counsel “Reflect Christ” than “Reflect Matthew 22:37.”
Muslims have their role model, too: Muhammad. They call him “The Perfect Man,” and his words and deeds are recorded in the Hadith and Sira. But while Jesus is acknowledged as the Prince of Peace, even by many skeptical of Christianity, what was Muhammad?
He was a warlord, bandit, mass murderer, employer of torture, polygamist, and slave trader and master. In fairness, though, as with Attila the Hun, Genghis Khan, Tamerlane and many others, he was largely a man of his time and place. Yet this gets at the point.
Imagine someone told you Attila the Hun was the perfect man and his role model. Would you turn your back on that person?
The Bottom Line
Then there’s something never said. Whatever threat “white supremacist” terrorists pose, they’re generally of bloodlines long established in our country. Like it or not, they’re our homegrown problem. At issue in the discussion here, however, is this: Should we be inviting more problems into our country?
Or should we look critically at immigration policy, realizing that not all groups are assimilable? It is our nation, after all — no one has any inherent right to come here.
And what lies ahead if we don’t?
Representative Brandon Gill (R-Texas), another voice sounding the alarm, weighed in on this earlier this week. As The Christian Post reports:
“You’ve got parts of Paris or London that no longer look Parisian or English anymore,” he said. “You’ve got areas in both of those cities that are [sharia-law-influenced] no-go zones for native Parisians or native Londoners. That is a problem.”
It’ll be our problem, too — unless we grasp that demography is destiny and trade our immigrationism and internationalism for patriotism and realism.
