Top 1200 Islamic Terrorism Quotes & Sayings

ISIS and radical Islamic terrorism will face no more determined foe than I will be.

Donald Trump, like most Americans, like most Republicans, believe in protecting America's core national interests. He believes as do I, as do most Americans, that we aren't yet doing enough to take the fight to the Islamic State.That the intervention in Libya was ill-considered and slapdash at the time. And we're living with the consequences of it now. That we have to get tougher when it comes to our intelligence and law enforcement practices to stop Islamic terrorism.

We are in a struggle against radical Islamic terrorism, al-Qaida and ISIS. The president, in his campaign for office, made it clear that he would make a priority of confronting radical Islamic terrorism abroad. But also adding new measures to ensure that individuals would not be coming into this country with the motivation to harm our people. And we really do believe that this temporary pause with regard to the countries other than Syria, temporary pause where we evaluate our screening process and ensure that people coming into the country don't represent a threat is appropriate.

It's important to remember that some of our best sources in the war against radical Islamic terrorism are Muslims, both in America and overseas.

We cannot simultaneously fight terrorism, we and our allies, while with the other hand we fund terrorism, arm terrorism and train terrorism.

We must not be afraid to define our enemy. It is Islamic extremist terrorism. I did not say all of Islam. I said Islamic extremist terrorism. Failing to identify them properly maligns decent Muslims around the world. It also sets up a fear of being politically incorrect that can have serious consequences. And it has.

The September 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon prompted a fundamental shift in the American government's approach to Islamic terrorism.

You know, Obama says we can't use the word "terrorism." We can't use the word "foreign." We can't use any of these provocative words that insult them. "Islamic terrorism" is a phrase not permitted to be used by the US government.

Our leaders today cannot be honest about Islam with us. They will not even use the term "Islamic terrorism," "radical Islam."

We need a clear plan to put radical Islamic terrorism out of vogue, and it should be eliminated at its roots. American SOF are part of the puzzle, but they do not, by themselves, complete the picture.

If U.S. occupation is a primary recruitment tool and what inspires Islamic terrorists, are many of our current efforts overseas actually fighting terrorism and diminishing the threat?

I have nothing but scorn for the notion of an Islamic bomb. There is no such thing as an Islamic bomb or a Christian bomb. Any such weapon is a means of terrorizing humanity, and we are against the manufacture and acquisition of nuclear weapons. This is in line with our definition of - and opposition to - terrorism.

Democrats, the mainstream media, Hollywood elites are so out of touch when it comes to keeping you, the American people, safe from radical Islamic terrorism, and they are willing to gamble with your life.

When you talk about Islamic terror. You go, oh, you're an Islamic - you're Islamophobic because you besmirching all Muslims. No. I'm talking about Islamic terror.

All we talk about is 'Islamic terrorism.' If the two words are associated for long enough it's obviously going to have an effect on how people think about Muslims.

We need to aggressively take on radical Islamic terrorism but not at the expense of our American values.

Islamic law is clearly against terrorism, against any kind of deliberate killing of civilians or similar 'collateral damage.'

If we want to destroy ISIS,if we expect to do this on our own, we will fail but if we do it in unison with people who are also are at risk and threatened by Islamic Radical terrorism, we'll be far more successful.

I feel like [terrorism] acts are un-Islamic. So to see that happen and somebody do that in the name of God, it just - and the religion that you practice, it just - it hurts your heart so deeply because it's such a misrepresentation of the faith.

Climate change isn't out biggest problem. It's Islamic terrorism.

I would say, we have had a lot of problems with radical Islamic terrorism, that's what I'd say.

The entire Washington political class and establishment cannot see Islamic terrorism when it happens. Well, they actually do see it. They just don't want to call it that, and they don't want anybody else calling it that.

If the cops come upon a mass murder attack that is clearly instigated by Islamic doctrine, they are not permitted to conclude that it is terrorism because they have been directed by their superiors in law enforcement to maintain that Islam is against terrorism.

Islam, the religion of peace and any terrorism that happens, is not really Islamic or Islamic inspired. This is called a willful blindness. It's also political correctness.

Enhancing long term national security requires that we have a clear-eyed view of radical Islamic terrorism without ascribing radical Islamic terrorist views to all Muslims.

We need a commander in chief that speaks the truth. We will not defeat radical Islamic terrorism so long as we have a president unwilling to utter the words 'radical Islamic terrorism'.

We have a president [Barack Obama] that won't use the term radical Islamic terrorism, won't use it.

We need to focus on building a military that is second-to-none ... so that we can destroy Islamic terrorism.

GTMO has been a goldmine of intelligence about radical Islamic terrorism.

When anyone studies a little or pays a little attention to the rules of Islamic government, Islamic politics, Islamic society and Islamic economy he will realize that Islam is a very political religion. Anyone who will say that religion is separate from politics is a fool; he does not know Islam or politics.

Islamic terrorism is the handiwork of people who've heeded, not hijacked, Islam. Or so says [Wafa] Sultan.

Anderson [Cooper], I guess the question I have is why can't CNN cover Obamacare, and ISIS, and radical Islamic terrorism?

When the Jews were being persecuted by the Nazis in 1944 we passed the War Refugee Act, which focused on rescuing Jews, a religious group. But if the religious group is the subject of the persecution based on their religion, it's perfectly OK for a First Amendment-bound society to emphasize their rescue, just as it is perfectly OK to emphasize the fact that many, if not all of the perpetrators of Islamic terrorism, come from countries with a history of supporting terrorism.

You guys should know we do [ cover Obamacare, and ISIS, and radical Islamic terrorism] because you watch CNN all day long.

Our government denies that terrorism is caused by Islamic doctrine. Now, that is true, and it is a declarative statement. It's not arguable.

Initially, terrorism was a certain mixture of politics, economics, and religion. Now, it seems that terrorism is more individual and done to avenge personal grudges. So there are two kinds of terrorism.

ISIS is not Islam. No, I'm not saying that. The government says that. The left, the media says it. ISIS is not Islam. You've heard Obama say that. ISIS is making a mockery of Islam. In fact, what you really need to understand about the way our government looks at Islam, they look at Islam as anti-terror as well. Islam is anti-terrorism. Therefore, no terrorism can actually be Islamic.

That, by the way, is perhaps the most ludicrous comment I've ever heard, that climate change is a bigger threat to our country than radical Islamic terrorism.

We need to bear in mind that we don't have religious tests in this country, and we also need to remember that some of our best allies in the war against Islamic terrorism are Muslims.

One of the things we've seen here is how easy it is for Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton to get distracted from dealing with radical Islamic terrorism. They won't even call it by its name.

We are fighting hard against radical Islamic terrorism, and we will prevail. We cannot accept those who reject our values and who use hatred to justify violence against the innocent.

One thing that I feel very, very strongly is that we talk about Islamic countries, Islamic people, Islamic leaders, as either moderates or extremists. It's almost like there are only two categories of Muslims. And actually, that doesn't show respect. It shows lack of understanding of the diversity of Muslim thought.

Who better to help formulate and to lead debate on fighting ISIS and Islamic extremists than an Arabic-speaking former CIA case officer who has been fighting the war on terrorism?

How does the phrase radical Islamic terrorism link all the believers of a faith to terrorism? If I said radical Christian terrorism, does that mean I as a Catholic are a terrorist?

Obviously radical Islamic terrorism is a big problem, but there are all sorts of kinds of horrific terrorism that take place.

President Obama and Hillary Clinton most definitely signaled to Islamic State leaders that they had no intention of seriously challenging them, or even of calling radical Islamic terrorism by its name.

If you want peace and well-being to be in place in the Middle East and you want terrorism to be uprooted, then there's no path other than the presence of the Islamic Republic of Iran, you saw that in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen that the power that was able to help the people of Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen in the face of terrorist groups was the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Russia has a common interest in confronting radical Islamic terrorism and especially ISIS. And if we have opportunities to work together I think President Trump is looking for an opportunity to begin that relationship anew.

Nor should we exclude the possibility that Islamic terrorism may begin to make common cause with Western political extremists of the far Left and far Right.

The Gulf War is responsible for the huge and horrifying rise in Islamic terrorism.

A war against terrorism is an impracticable conception if it means fighting terrorism with terrorism.

If you view terrorism in Syria from one perspective and terrorism outside Syria from another perspective, it can create problems. If you view terrorism in categories such as good terrorism and bad terrorism, that too can create its own challenges.I think we should not look at these questions individually.

There are two kinds of terrorism. Rational terrorism such as Palestinian terrorism and apocalyptic terrorism like Sept. 11. You have to distinguish between the two.

The law enforcement agents believe they cannot call terrorism "terrorism" unless and until they uncover evidence proving that the Muslim mass murderers have some tie to a designated non-Islamic terror group like ISIS or Al-Qaeda, and bingo, bingo. What do we get today? "There's an ISIS connection," and once again none of this has anything to do with Islam. That's how it works at the highest levels of our government.

We are going to stop radical Islamic terrorism in America. Hillary Clinton won't even mention the words, and neither will President Obama. So I just want to tell you, she wants open borders.

There is no such things as "Islamic terrorism," because terrorism differs from Islam. There's just terrorism, not Islamic terrorism. But the term "Islamic terrorism" has become widespread.

We can't be afraid to call the enemy what it is: Radical Islamic terrorism.

I will reinforce old alliances and form new ones, and unite the civilized world against radical Islamic terrorism, which we will eradicate completely from the face of the Earth.

Israel is the vanguard of the free world against the Islamic terrorism of ISIS, Hezbollah, Hamas, and Iran.

We believe America is practicing all kinds of terrorism against Libya. Even the accusation that we are involved in terrorism is in itself an act of terrorism.