A pathetic surrender to Islamism

In the shadow of the Freedom Tower, where the memories of 9/11 still whisper warnings, New York City has ignited a fuse that could scorch the soul of America. By electing Zohran Mamdani—a self-proclaimed Democratic Socialist with deep Islamist sympathies—and allowing him to swear his mayoral oath on the Quran, New Yorkers aren’t just flirting with fire—they’re dousing the nation’s foundations in gasoline. This isn’t harmless diversity; it’s a reckless embrace of an ideology that views America as the Great Satan, Christianity as a corrupted faith, and Western liberty as an abomination to be conquered.

Elections have consequences, but Mamdani’s first act—nominating Ramzi Kassem as chief counsel—transforms those consequences into a chilling echo of the planes crashing into our skyline. If we don’t wake up, this “inch” of naive empathy will let Islamists seize a mile, unraveling the Judeo-Christian tapestry that built this republic.

Consider the fact that Ramzi Kassem, a professor at CUNY School of Law, has centered his career on defending America’s adversaries. Originally an immigrant from the Middle East, he has represented at least 15 Guantanamo detainees from countries like Yemen, Algeria, and Pakistan—men held for suspected terrorism ties—arguing they were denied fair trials despite serious red flags in their backgrounds. One of his clients was Ahmed Muhammad al-Darbi, an al-Qaeda operative who pled guilty in 2014 to plotting the 2002 bombing of a French oil tanker that killed a civilian. Kassem didn’t just represent him. He publicly celebrated al-Darbi’s release to Saudi custody, as if the grief of victims’ families didn’t matter. This goes beyond standard legal defense—it’s a form of advocacy that consistently puts the interests of America’s enemies ahead of its citizens’ safety.

Kassem’s record doesn’t end with al-Qaeda. Critics have called him an “anti-Israel lawyer,” and for good reason: He has coached and defended anti-Israel activists, including Mahmoud Khalil. In his own student writings, Kassem accused Israel of “ethnic cleansing” and “genocide,” portraying the Jewish state as an oppressor while downplaying Hamas’s rockets and calls for annihilation. Perhaps most telling is the reaction from CAIR-NY, the New York chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations. They praised Kassem’s appointment as victory for justice and Muslim civil rights, emphasizing his work defending “marginalized immigrants” caught up in counterterrorism measures. CAIR-NY also welcomed Mamdani’s revocation of Adams’ “Israel First” executive orders. When an organization repeatedly accused of Islamist sympathies and ties to groups like the Muslim Brotherhood celebrates someone as a hero, Americans should pay attention.

Now, pivot to the oath that sealed this bargain: Mamdani’s historic swearing-in on multiple Qurans, including a family heirloom and a historic copy from Harlem’s Schomburg Center.

Liberals and progressives may gush over this as a symbol of minorities’ empowerment and a celebration of inclusivity. However, the Quran is no neutral religious text. It explicitly labels Christians as misguided and Jews as those who earned Allah’s wrath, and it warns Muslims against befriending them, declaring Islam as the only true faith.

Celebrating the oath in this manner is political naivety and religious ignorance, blind to how close adherence to Quranic commands and Muhammad’s example fueled the 9/11 hijackers’ fanaticism.

In 2001, devout Muslims flew planes into buildings to wage jihad. Today, they exploit ballots to infiltrate and appoint sympathizers. It’s the classic Islamist strategy. Islamists—those who seek Islam’s supremacy as both worship and state, deeming all other faiths inferior—don’t aim to coexist. They aim to conquer.

This saga reflects a pattern of progressive empathy that extends olive branches to people whose ultimate commitments lie elsewhere—sometimes with goals to cripple their own foundations.

The Mamdani–Kassem duo exemplifies a strain of naïve progressive sympathy, packaged as inclusivity yet blind to genuine existential threats. For Islamists, jihad is a religious obligation—whether waged on literal battlefields or pursued through slow “cultural” erosion of non-Muslim societies deemed inferior to Islam’s asserted supremacy. Deception in service of this cause is even sanctioned under the concept of taqiyya, justifying dishonesty as obedience to Allah and advancement of Islamic goals.

Islamism itself is not merely a faith but a radical political ideology that draws directly from Islamic texts to impose hegemonic rule. It suppresses individual freedoms, severely restricts the rights of non-Muslims, and endorses violence against those branded “infidels.” This ideology poses a grave threat to humanity, yet many Americans remain unaware of its reach because it advances through naïve empathy.

The dangers are tangible. In New York, leaders are celebrated who advise protesters on circumventing national security measures, undermining the city’s counterterrorism infrastructure, and creating openings for radical influence. Voter apathy enables Islamists to rise, with young progressives prioritizing affordability over ideology—fueling a form of suicidal compassion that invites greater Islamist influence and increasingly hostile anti-Israel policies in America’s largest city.

Yet America stands at a precipice—not defeated, but defiant. We must not yield to an ideology that seeks to fracture our republic. The gates may be breached, but the ideological battle remains ours to win. The alarm is sounding—will we silence it, or rally to meet the challenge?