Who are we really trying to exclude?

Submitted by James Luce (Spain), Jan 18, 2016 at 10:01

Dear Mr. Pipes,

Your proposal is excellent and workable...but how do we encourage the Federal Government to fund such a project?

Re the use of polygraph machines: Having spent four years as a USAF criminal investigator and twenty-five as a trial attorney it is clear to me that the use of polygraph machines would not be productive in the case of interrogating Muslims, especially Muslims who have had little contact with the high-tech world. In order for a polygraph to be effective the following must be true: 1) the deponent must believe that a polygraph machine can detect lies, 2) the deponent must believe that lying is immoral, and 3) the questions asked must be amenable to simple (hopefully Yes or No) answers. Given that the Quran makes lying to Infidels a virtue and given that many Muslims are not surrounded by high-tech the first two conditions will not be met. As for the third condition, the types of questions that must be asked to be effective are not susceptible to short answers. Indeed, complex answers should be encouraged.

It seems to me that there are three types of people who adhere to the Quran, not two. These are: 1) those who would apply Sharia law, engage in jihad, and hate the West 2) those who are ecumenical and like the West 3) those who are not jihadists but who live by Sharia and will work peacefully for its establishment in the West. To me the most dangerous type is number three. We can subdue terrorists, but not a voting block of Sharia bent voters. Thus, it is imperative that only type-two be allowed into the West.

Thank you for all your good work in educating the West about Islam.
James Luce

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".