Gad Saad on “Islamophobia”

He understands what many Westerners do not:

The suicide of the West is perhaps nowhere better evidenced than the way our elites, media, politicians and chattering classes bend over backwards to defend all things Islam, and blame all of our ills on anything but this political ideology.

Thus the West itself is seen as being guilty of any and all wrongdoing, or the Jews, or capitalism, or MAGA, or Christianity, and so on. Anyone who dares to point out the countless crimes of Islam are accused of Islamophobia, and that is supposed to be the end of the matter.

Talk about ‘suicidal empathy’ on steroids. And the author of the book with that title knows all about this. Indeed, in both of his best-selling volumes, Gad Saad speaks to the madness of the West in placating its Islamist enemies while denouncing itself, its history, its values, and its culture.

Both volumes look at how political Islam is targeting the West and getting away with murder – often quite literally. Let me offer a few quotes from each of these volumes on this important and alarming reality.

The Parasitic Mind (Regnery, 2020)

Saad informs us that “Islamophobia” is a nonsensical concept: “In a free society, people have every right to mock, condemn, criticize, despise, and fear any ideology.” (p. 50) Later in the book he speaks of victimhood status and the “merchants of faux-outrage”. He offers one pertinent example:

Anita Rawhani conducted an experiment at Queen’s University: she wore a hijab for eighteen days to examine people’s reaction to her. Undoubtedly, the working hypothesis was that bigotry and prejudice would be ubiquitous. She was taken aback by the fact that people were very kind and polite to her. In an extraordinary attempt to salvage the victimology narrative, she concluded that this manifest tolerance and kindness was a means by which people overcompensated for their concealed bigotry. If you are unkind to a Muslim woman, you are an Islamophobe. If you are kind to a Muslim woman, you are an Islamophobe. All roads lead to Islamophobia. Being kind and tolerant is a form of racism in the ecosystem of the university campus. (pp. 111-112)

He also speaks to how the FBI has a global list of wanted global terrorists:

Twenty-six out of the current twenty-eight members that compose this infamous group are connected to Islamic groups. Though Muslims make up roughly 25 percent of the world’s population, they comprise 92.9 percent of terrorists on the FBI list….

 

Given the demographic realities of terror attacks, it might perhaps be minimally surprising that no-fly lists contain a great number of Muslims, although the actual lists are unavailable for public viewing. But, of course, the general response is the screeching cry of Islamophobia because any other reaction would be bigoted. (pp. 160-161)

Suicidal Empathy (Broadside Books, 2026)

In his brand-new book, Saad speaks often about Islam and its undermining of the West – aided and abetted of course by clueless Westerners who defend all things Islamic while denouncing their own culture. Consider what he says in a section of Chapter 3 titled “Islamophilic Immigration – Be Kind to Child Rapists and Terrorists”:

Over the past several decades, Britain has witnessed the organized sexual exploitation of young white girls by “Asian” grooming gangs across countless cities on an industrial-scale level. There are innumerable bewildering stories of how police declined to intervene, and government officials refused to highlight the problem lest they might be accused of bigotry and, worse, Islamophobia. To the invertebrate castrati who compose our leaders, nothing could be worse than being accused of Islamophobia. The ability of Westerners to come up with euphemisms to hide the real commonality across these groups of perpetrators is downright Orwellian. In the context of the British grooming gangs, one should refer to them as “Asian” and not as British Pakistani Muslims. In France, the Muslims who engage in criminality across the suburbs are referred to as les jeunes (the youth). Well, the youth are not Vietnamese Buddhists; they are not Hasidic Jews; they are not Nigerian Christians. They constitute young Muslim criminals, but heaven forbid that one links this criminality to Islamic immigration. This would marginalize the Islamic community. In the calculus of progressive empathy, protecting white British girls from gang rapes is worth a lot less than protecting the perpetrators’ Islamic heritage. Sorry, girls, toughen up. Take one for the team or, perhaps more accurately, take it from the entire team. (pp. 49-50)

Saad continues:

Why did the British authorities fail to act on these monstrous crimes against children for so many decades? Well, to reiterate, they were being empathetic in ensuring that the Muslim communities of Britain would not be marginalized. Sure, protecting white children from endless sexual torture is important, but it is not nearly as important as ensuring community cohesion and refraining from stoking the fire of division and hate. This is what happens when your empathy moral compass is broken. Upon finding out about the Muslim grooming gang in another British city, Newcastle, the Muslim community was quick to point out that they feared a backlash of Islamophobia. Sure, it is bad when thousands of young girls are raped and sodomized, but Islamophobia cannot be allowed to spread. Incidentally, when these Muslim men engaged in the wide-scale organized rape of young white British children, it was because of a “wider failure of British society to integrate these men into their adoptive culture.” Speaking of the rape of children, a twenty-eight-year-old Bangladeshi asylum seeker impregnated a ten-year-old child in a small Italian village, at a migrant reception center, forcing the child to have an abortion (the mother of the child was also an asylum seeker). The local population, though, was very quick to point out that they had no problems with the migrants. It might perhaps seem misguided for the local population to rally around the asylum seekers and redouble their efforts to be maximally hospitable as a response to a child’s rape.

 

The West’s reflex is always to protect Islam irrespective of the unfolding realities…. (pp. 50-51)

He looks at numerous instances of all this madness, including the matter of very public prayers:

There are countless other examples of religious tolerance that are repeatedly granted to a singular religion (Islam) at the cost of other people’s freedoms. Take, for example, the growth of public prayers throughout the West. We never see Seventh-Day Adventists, Buddhists, Jains, or Hasidic Jews taking over public spaces for their prayers. And yet, throughout Europe and increasingly so in Canada and in the United States, sidewalks, parks, and actual streets are shut down by a massive influx of Muslims praying in those spaces. Whenever I have weighed in on the astounding violation of people’s rights to be free from another’s religious impositions, I am drowned by a cacophony of suicidally empathetic Westerners, utterly oblivious to the underlying dynamics at play. (p. 57)

I and others have sought to explain these dynamics. See this piece for example: https://billmuehlenberg.com/2025/11/14/on-muslim-prayer-broadcasts/

Saad makes the same point:

It is my contention that these mass public prayers are a signal of dominance. “We are here. We are growing in number, and you will eventually have to submit.” Again, these prayers start to occur and with increased frequency only when the number of Muslims in a society passes a tipping point. The Islamization of a society follows a well-established historical template and is largely dependent on the percentage of Muslims in the host society. When they are a very small minority, they are construed as an exotic and peaceful community that adds cultural richness to the host society. As their numbers grow, increasingly more forceful demands are made, increased violence and intolerance is exhibited toward non-Muslims, until one day “peace” is achieved in the host society via the erasure of all non-Muslims. (p. 57)

One final quote is worth sharing here:

The West’s Islamophilic suicidal empathy does not impose on Muslims any expectations of reciprocal acceptance. A comparison of the number of mosques in the West versus the number of non-Islamic houses of worship in Islamic countries yields a very clear pattern. Islamic public prayers are permitted in the West, but you would be hard pressed to witness non-Islamic public prayers in Islamic countries. The number of Muslims who have been allowed to emigrate to the West is astronomically high, and yet very few (if any) non-Muslims can obtain citizenship in Islamic countries. Islamic clerics are permitted to spew astoundingly hateful rhetoric from their religious pulpits while in the West. Try to criticize Islam in an Islamic country. Ironically, many such extremist Islamic clerics are banned from Islamic countries but are welcomed with open arms in the West! The tolerance is always one way. A heavily proselytizing and supremacist religion coupled with host nations that are suicidally empathetic in their welcoming nature can yield only one outcome. The death of the West at the Altar of Infinite Tolerance and Orgiastic Empathy. (p. 59)

If you do not yet have these two excellent volumes by Gad Saad, why not get copies now?

[1505 words]