KAMALA HARRIS once declared that “radical Islamic terrorism no longer exists” and said she would like the term to be “abolished”

In a recently released video (below) of Kamala Harris speaking at the Islamic Center of Southern California, the vice president declared that, “We must have the courage to object when they use that term, ‘radical Islamic terrorism.'”

I’m sure ISIS (ISLAMIC STATE), TALIBAN, HEZBOLLAH, HAMAS, AL-SHABAAB, HOUTHIS, ISLAMIC JIHAD will be very happy to hear this.

🚨REVEALED: FAR-LEFT KAMALA’S SYMPATHY FOR TERRORISTS🚨

Speaking to the Islamic Center of Southern California, Kamala Harris says the term “radical Islamic terrorism” should be abolished.

Harris is affiliated with NIAC, a pro-Khamenei lobby group for the Islamic Republic. pic.twitter.com/pnIcI2pMKl

— Shelley G (@ShelleyGldschmt) July 26, 2024

Raymond Ibrahim Back in 2001, following 9/11, when Americans by and large first took notice of Islam, a debate quickly developed: Were Muslim terror groups acting in keeping with or against Islamic teachings? Did Islam promote terrorism or was it the “religion of peace”?

Out of this debate, the phrase “radical Islam” emerged triumphant, and was initially seen as something of a compromise. It came to mean that, while Islam itself is innocent, Islamic teachings could nonetheless be manipulated or “twisted” in a fashion that supports the beliefs and goals of terror groups like al-Qaeda.

This, of course, merely opened the door to more relativism and paved the way for the mainstream and widely accepted idea that “Islam is peace,” to quote former President George W. Bush. The only problem was that there were “bad guys” out there who cleverly manipulated Islamic teachings and scriptures to say and support what they believed and did.

Now, more than two decades later, here is Kamala Harris saying that even that politically correct and highly sanitized formulation is no longer acceptable. Not only are we expected to reject the idea that Islam itself sponsors violence and intolerance — which was the net result of acquiescing to the phrase “radical Islam” — but now we cannot even accept that there are any “radical” versions of Islam out there.

If there is no such thing as “radical Muslims,” then whenever Muslims lash out, and regardless of what they say (cries of “Allahu akbar” and the like), they are really motivated by factors that have nothing whatsoever to do with Islam, or even their own reading of it (grievances, economics, climate change, Israel, etc.).

Meanwhile, back in the real world, Islam itself — not radical Islam — is hostile to everything Western civilization represents. The Koran and Muhammad repeatedly praise terrorism. Jihad, defined as warfare against non-Muslims for no other reason than that they are non-Muslim, is a standard aspect of the faith.

Had people rejected politically correct terms such as “radical Islam” as deceptive whitewashers of its dangers, the matter would have ended in the early 2000s, and so many negative developments — such as the flooding of the West in general and Europe in particular with Muslim “refugees” who behave more like terrorists — would not have occurred.