The article in the Atlantic last year, which argued that ISIS is not just Islamic but very Islamic, predictably created an uproar of indignation and accusations of fomenting Islamophobia from the usual suspects, from the NYT to the Huffington Post.  By contrast, very little has been heard from the same quarters about the treatment of Yazidis, Christians, and other religious minorities in Iraq – mustn’t criticize Muslims for fear of offending Muslim sensibilities or – that ultimate crime against humanity – fomenting Islamophobia.

But let me leave aside these obvious bases for criticizing Islamic practice and even leave aside terrorist acts – from 9/11 to the Boston Bomber to Charlie Hebdo and now Nice.  Instead, the case here will be argued just on the basis of the prevailing behavior and mindset of the young males of Europe’s new “immigrants.”

In one day alone, there were 1,200 sexual assaults on German women by approximately 2,000 Muslim “immigrants.”  Angela Merkel’s reaction?  To cut a deal with Facebook and Twitter so that next time Muslims commit thousands of sexual assaults, it will be much harder for the populace to get the news out through the digital curtain of dot-com censorship and propaganda.  And those fewer than 1% who do get “prosecuted”?  The poor dears have just been miseducated and need courses in deportment and a gentle nudging into accepting the astounding concept that infidel women have feelings, sensibilities, and rights.

Miseducated?

There is no shortage of apologists for Islam who will insist that the mass rape and sexual abuse of European women by Muslim men in Cologne and elsewhere does not fit Koranic doctrine, which basically permits rape only of captive women taken in battle (Ar-Rahim), but, as Raymond Ibrahim points out, other interrelated Islamic doctrines command Muslim men to hate all non-Muslims and to see women – especially infidel women – as little more than sex objects.  (In the words of a Muslim who recently murdered a Christian girl in Pakistan for refusing him sex, “Christian girls are only meant for one thing: the [sexual] pleasure of Muslim men.”)

But textual exegesis aside, as Jack Jenkins, senior religion reporter for ThinkProgress (gasp) maintained, it is a mistake (“fools errand”) to believe that a religion is defined solely by what is in its texts.  “Religion is a community. Religion, whether it’s Islam or Christianity, whether it’s Hinduism, is a group of people that interpret things, whether that’s text, whether that’s different sorts of rituals and then move on from them.”

And that is the point.

Europe’s new immigrants who are convinced that infidel women are legitimate prey are the product of Islamic communities and the Muslim clerics who guide them.  Islamic communities produce such creatures en masse, regardless of what Western apologists claim is the real Islam.  The scholars may argue ’til they are blue in the face, but the fact is, there is enough there in Islamic holy books for clerics to indoctrinate and send their zombie rapists abroad to “propagate” the infidel sluts.  They are not forthcoming under the aegis of any other religion.  They are bred nowhere but in cultures and culture cells claiming the authority of Islam.