Islam ‘Radicalization’ Narrative Rejected in Blunt Fox News Interview with Gad Saad [WATCH]

A Fox News segment featuring evolutionary psychologist Gad Saad and host Jesse Watters sparked renewed debate over immigration, religious ideology, and the limits of vetting in Western societies, with Saad arguing that core Islamic tenets are fundamentally incompatible with Western liberties and Watters questioning whether authorities can effectively screen for radical beliefs.

During the exchange, Saad said he has spent decades warning about what he described as an irreconcilable conflict between Western values and Islamic doctrine, particularly when adherents fully embrace the religion’s teachings.

“It’s unbelievable. You know, as you know Jesse, I’ve been warning about this for several decades,” Saad said.

“Let’s draw an analogy. Suppose you get married, and there’s diversity of thought in terms about being monogamous. You want to have sex with as many women as possible, whereas your wife thinks that it’s a good idea to be only true to one person. That type of diversity within that union is probably not going to lead to good outcomes. Islam may contain many adherents that are perfectly lovely, but does Islam contain tenets that are perfectly incongruent with Western liberties? Nothing could be clearer, we don’t need this kind of diversity.”

Watters responded by focusing on the practical challenge faced by immigration and border authorities, noting that individuals with radical beliefs may not be identifiable during the screening process.

“It’s very hard to screen those types of Muslims out,” Watters said.

“I mean, you can’t just screen away people like that. I mean, they can radicalize. They can self radicalize. They can hide from Customs and Border Patrol agents their true intentions. I mean, what is the solution?”

This Could Be the Most Important Video Gun Owners Watch All Year

Saad rejected the framing of “radicalization” as something separate from the religion itself, arguing instead that behavior depends on how strictly an individual follows Islamic teachings.

“I don’t like the term. They can get radicalized. That’s It’s as though that’s outside the religion, right?” Saad said.

“There is no Islamism. There is no radical, violent extremist, extremist, militant ism right? You don’t just add a bunch of isms and a bunch of qualifiers so that you can hallucinate about it being different from Islam. Islam is a codified set of ideas. If I choose to ignore much of it, I will be peaceful. If I choose to take it seriously, I won’t be peaceful.”

Saad went on to argue that this reality makes effective vetting nearly impossible, even for individuals who appear fully integrated into Western societies.

“So it’s not radicalization, it’s simply whether I adhere to the tenets of the faith or I don’t,” he said.

“And so you to your point, you could never vet someone, because these are people who had been the father had been there since the 90s. The son was born there. So certainly, from any vetting perspective, you would think they’re well acclimatized to Western liberties. And it just takes one trigger and off we go.”

WATCH:

🚨 TRUTH NUKE: “Islam is a codified set of ideas. If I choose to ignore much of it, I am PEACEFUL. If I take it seriously, I WON’T BE PEACEFUL.”

“I don’t like the term ‘they can get radicalized.’”

“We don’t need this kind of diversity. It’s very hard to screen those types of… pic.twitter.com/Tk1M4N23yW

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) December 16, 2025