• Why Jihad Watch?
  • About Robert Spencer and Staff Writers
  • FAQ
  • Books
  • Muhammad
  • Islam 101
  • Privacy

Jihad Watch

Exposing the role that Islamic jihad theology and ideology play in the modern global conflicts

Reza Aslan: “If you’re a violent, war-mongering person, you can find justification in any scripture”

Sep 9, 2014 10:07 pm By Robert Spencer

It’s remarkable that Don Lemon is pursuing this question, which is generally taboo in the mainstream media. He discussed it a few days ago; this is a follow-up. But notice that just as CNN featured two Jew-haters, Reza Aslan and Peter Beinart, to debate about Israel and Hamas, so also here both Aslan and Muslim Brotherhood-linked Congressman Keith Ellison are both on the same side of the question.

CNN, of course, would rather be thrown into a pit of ravenous wolves than bring on anyone who would dare argue that there is something uniquely violent about Islamic teachings as compared to those of other religions. The intent of this segment seems to be to demolish Bill Maher’s suggestion that all religions are not the same in their capacity to incite their adherents to violence, as Reza Aslan argues exactly that: “If you’re a violent, war-mongering person, you can find justification in any scripture. If you’re a peaceful, pluralistic person, you can find justification for your views in the exact same scriptures.”

Aslan is a Board member of a lobbying group for the bloody Iranian mullahs, and so it is understandable that he would want to wave away the violence committed in accord with directives of the Qur’an and Sunnah, and he is also not very bright, but this is a silly statement even for him. He is essentially saying that words have no meaning, that the various scriptures of various religions have no essential content or character, that the religions themselves are meaningless and interchangeable, and that people are never inspired to change their behavior by the teachings of a religion, which anyway don’t exist since religions are wholly and solely what people decide they will be. Can a religion’s teachings transform a believer into a violent, war-mongering person, or a peaceful, pluralistic person? For Aslan, the answer is no: religions are just putty, to be formed by those who believe in them into any shape they like. So tomorrow Muslims could begin to declare that there are five gods, despite the Qur’an’s fierce monotheism, and Christians could begin murdering people while screaming, “Jesus is Lord!”

If you believe that, you probably also believe Reza Aslan is a deep thinker.

Also, there have been 23,795 jihad terror attacks justified by Islamic texts and teachings since 9/11. They were perpetrated by an awful lot of violent, war-mongering people who found justification for their actions in the Qur’an and Sunnah. How many Christians have committed acts of terror since 9/11, and justified them by reference to their scripture? None. Zero.

People like Aslan generally have to go back before 9/11 and invoke the Lord’s Resistance Army in Uganda, Tim McVeigh, and abortion clinic murders to try to establish that Christianity is as capable of inciting violence as Islam. The scale, however, is still way off (as it is when one considers Hindus and Buddhists who have justified violence by reference to their religions), and what’s more, no Christian sect teaches that one should blow up government buildings or murder abortionists, etc., while all the mainstream sects of Islam and schools of Islamic jurisprudence teach that the Muslim community must wage war against and subjugate unbelievers.

Aslan then introduces a complete red herring: “The problem, however, is when we take the actions of an infinitesimal group and make it, somehow, predictive of the actions of everyone else – 1.6 billion Muslims, in this case. That’s when the argument becomes completely strained and unbelievable.” In the first place, this group is not infinitesimal. The Islamic State governs much of Iraq and Syria. Then there is al-Qaeda, Boko Haram, Hamas, Hizballah, and so many others. But in any case, no one is arguing that the actions of Islamic jihadusts are predictive of the actions of any other Muslims. That is not at issue in the question of whether Islam teaches violence. If it does, that still doesn’t mean that every Muslim is going to be violent. But by raising and dismissing this straw man, Aslan has implied that to say Islam is violent is to say that every last Muslim is violent — an absurdity designed to divert people away from an honest assessment of the texts and teachings of Islam.

Ellison then further muddies the waters by pointing out that atheists like Stalin have committed a lot of violence as well. This is based on a false premise — no one is saying that only Muslims commit violence. The question is whether Islam incites some of its adherents to commit acts of violence. The answer is obviously yes, but here Aslan and Ellison did their best to obfuscate that fact.

“CNN’s Lemon Uses Bill Maher Tweet To Revisit ‘Islam is A Violent Religion’ Debate,” by Matthew Balan, Newsbusters, September 9, 2014:

Don Lemon returned to the question of whether Islam is an inherently violent religion on Monday’s CNN Tonight, as he interviewed Democratic Rep. Keith Ellison and author Reza Aslan. Lemon turned to his two Muslim guests for their take on a recent Tweet by atheist HBO host Bill Maher: “ISIS, one of thousands of Islamic militant groups beheads another. But by all means let’s keep pretending all religions are alike.”

Aslan contended that “Islam isn’t a violent religion or a peaceful religion. It’s just a religion, and like all religions, it is absolutely dependent on the interpretation of whomever follows it.” This answer actually surprised the anchor, who cited an oft-used talking point by apologists for Islam. The University of California-Riverside professor continued with a relativistic argument about religion in general:…

DON LEMON: But I think it’s interesting that you say it’s not a peaceful religion, because most Muslims will say that Islam is a peaceful religion.

REZA ASLAN, PROFESSOR, UC RIVERSIDE: ASLAN: I completely understand why most people of faith – regardless of the faith – think that the radicals and extremists within their faith are not really Jews; are not really Christians; are not really Muslims. But the fact of the matter is – is a Muslim is whoever says he’s a Muslim. A Jew is whoever says he’s a Jew.

The problem, however, is when we take the actions of an infinitesimal group and make it, somehow, predictive of the actions of everyone else – 1.6 billion Muslims, in this case. That’s when the argument becomes completely strained and unbelievable.

But the fact of the matter is, if you’re a violent, war-mongering person, you can find justification in any scripture. If you’re a peaceful, pluralistic person, you can find justification for your views in the exact same scriptures.

Representative Ellison then replied to Maher’s Tweet by bringing in the history of non-religious ideologies – specifically, atheism/communism:

LEMON: Congressman, what do you – what do you make of what Bill Maher Tweeted?

REP. KEITH ELLISON, (D), MINNESOTA: Well, you know, I think that it’s not just religion. It goes beyond that. I mean, look, Stalin was atheist, and he found a way to kill people to advance his ideology – Pol Pot, the same way. The fact is, whenever you have an ideology – whether it’s secular or religious – and you’re willing to kill and murder other people to impose it on them, you’re dangerous, and you’re a problem.

And so, I think that – you know – you know, I think Bill Maher, certainly, is an entertaining guy, and I think he brings a lot to the public debate. But there’s no doubt that he – you know, that he has a certain perspective on religion. I just think that it’s broader than religion. I think it has to do with ideology, and those who are willing to kill to impose it on other people.

Lemon, along with his guests, spent the remainder of the segment on the responsibility of “moderate Muslims” to help combat ISIS and radical Islam in general:

LEMON: Is the burden on other Muslim nations, you think, and moderate Muslims to reject ISIS, and to join the fight against ISIS? Is that what’s happening?

ASLAN: Well, first of all, the voice of rejection from organizations and individuals across the Muslim world is absolutely deafening. If anybody thinks that Muslims are not denouncing ISIS, do a Google search and that shall answer your question.

The larger point, however, is nation-states. Muslim-majority nation-states – like Turkey, like Qatar, like Kuwait, who – and Saudi Arabia – who, for reasons of their own national security interests, have not done enough to combat extremist groups, like ISIS, because they feel, in one way or another, that these groups promote their interests in some way. That’s got to change. That’s not a religious thing. It’s just what nation-states do.

LEMON: Yes, but how do you do that? How do you do that? That’s-

ASLAN: Well, to remind them that these groups are as dangerous to them as to anyone else-

LEMON: Congressman?

ASLAN: Yes, Congressman.

ELLISON: I was going to say, let’s not forget that this ISIS, sort of, emerges out of Syria – which is a failed state – and there is this – this proxy war going on between different sects of Islam there, and that – we’ve got to address the problem in Syria sooner or later. We’ve got to come, as an international community, to try to bring a cessation of violence there, because that’s one of the problems with these failed states. Whether it’s Syria, Somalia, or anywhere, it allows real bad things to germinate. And that political crisis has got to be solved in order to squeeze on ISIS as well.

I think some of those states thought their interests might be vindicated by supporting certain elements. Now, it’s clear that that is a Frankenstein monster.

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • More
  • Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)

Follow me on Facebook

Filed Under: Jihad doctrine, journalistic bias, Useful idiots, War is deceit Tagged With: featured


Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Comments

  1. Max Publius says

    Sep 9, 2014 at 10:20 pm

    If ratings mean anything, it’s beyond me why CNN would put these two Islamogandists together, as it leads to a boring, predictable “discussion” that I would not “stay tuned” one minute for.

    On the other hand, I would rush home to see a debate between Asslan and Robert Spencer on CNN (or should I say a skewing of Asslan).

    • John C. Barile says

      Sep 9, 2014 at 10:57 pm

      O, were it so–inshallah!

      • jihad3tracker says

        Sep 10, 2014 at 8:12 pm

        Hello J.C.B. —

        Let me jump in here, to point out that Keith Ellison (who reads every JW post) is such a dim bulb that he does not realize joining foulmouthed clown Reza Aslan shows us clearly :

        KEITH ELLISON IS NOT A PATRIOTIC AMERICAN. HIS LOYALTY IS TO MUHAMMAD.

        HE WOULD FOLLOW THE QURAN’S COMMANDS AGAINST INFIDELS.

        WHAT SHOULD WE CALL THAT ? SEDITION / TREASON ? PERHAPS ELLISON HIMSELF CAN POST AN HONEST ANSWER HERE.

        I have long ago run out of patience with him and his fellow slime — their time has evaporated thanks to ISIS’s refusal to play stealth jihad.

        • John C. Barile says

          Sep 10, 2014 at 8:45 pm

          I have no patience for any of them, either. Now, excuse me while I mentally detach myself from this dreary planet, while Choom Boy–er, ah–the President takes to the air waves for the next 15 interminable minutes.

        • Will says

          Sep 10, 2014 at 11:43 pm

          re: Ellison.

          IMO He should be shot for the traitor that he is: I do hope he reads this.

        • Jack Gordon says

          Sep 11, 2014 at 6:55 am

          Right. If whores suddenly become a majority in his district, he’ll be soon hanging out on the local street corners in tight jeans and tee-shirt.

    • Don McKellar says

      Sep 10, 2014 at 1:15 am

      The very second Asslan learned that Spencer would be on with him he would run. He would never, ever show up for something like that and would find any cowardly way he could to duck out — even if he had to walk out on air if Spencer were introduced without any warning. Asslan is one gutless, pathetic piece of human garbage.

      • mortimer says

        Sep 10, 2014 at 11:33 am

        DID REZA ASLAN SUGGEST AYATOLLAH KHOMEINI WAS A ‘WARMONGERING PERSON’?

        “If you’re a violent, war-mongering person, you can find justification in any scripture” – Reza Aslan

        Quotes from Khomeini (founder of modern Iran):

        …those who STUDY ISLAMIC HOLY WAR will understand why Islam wants to conquer the whole world. -Ayatollah Khomeini

        …The PUREST JOY in Islam is to kill and be killed for Allah – Ayatollah Khomeini

        …Those who know nothing of Islam pretend that Islam counsels against war. Those (who say this) are witless. – Ayatollah Khomeini

        Reza Aslan is saying that Ayatollah Khomeini 1) was a warmongering person 2) found justification in Islamic scripture for war.

        Reza Aslan is trying to have it both ways. Warmongering is ‘good’ if done by Ayatollah Khomeini but ‘bad’ if you are ISIS.

  2. Max Publius says

    Sep 9, 2014 at 11:06 pm

    Meant skewering actually. Asslan already does a good job of skewing reality.

  3. Rita says

    Sep 9, 2014 at 11:51 pm

    That professional liar, Reza Aslan does what he always does: he lies either way:

    He is either not the “expert on Islam” as he sells himself, and so he lies,
    or
    he IS an “expert on Islam” and then he lies too, because then he of all people should know that Islam is NOT “just a religion”, as he asserts.

  4. Myxlplik says

    Sep 10, 2014 at 12:04 am

    Infinitesimal?

    The current stats are, between 15-25% of all Muslims favor a brand of Islam similar to that which is observed by ISIS. That leaves upwards of 400,000,000 Muslims which are described as “infinitesimal” who share this interpretation.

    Too bad Don doesn’t know the numbers :).

  5. dumbledoresarmy says

    Sep 10, 2014 at 12:05 am

    Mark Durie offers a good discussion here, re. religion and the behaviour of adherents.

    He’s responding to two dhimmi islamopologists.

    http://blog.markdurie.com/2014/09/complexity-truth-and-islamic-state.html

    CNN should be interviewing people like Rev Dr Mark Durie and Prof Hans Jansen: who have a thorough, scholarly knowledge of Islamic texts and history, and of Christian texts and history.

  6. No Fear says

    Sep 10, 2014 at 12:06 am

    Yeah, there are so many misunderstanders of Buddhism out there at this very moment beheading people. And Jains…..and Mormons…..and Jehovah’s Witnesses…….etc

  7. No Fear says

    Sep 10, 2014 at 12:39 am

    From news.com.au:

    A (ISIS) militant named al-Khanssa provides advice on Tumblr to potential recruits — her suggestions include bringing a hairdryer and warm clothes — but adds: “The main role of the muhajirah [female migrant] here is to support her husband and his jihad and [God willing] to increase this ummah [Islamic community].”

    Can Reza use the Quran , the Hadith or Sirat to point out the error in her words?

    {……….sound of crickets chirping}

    • Jay Boo says

      Sep 10, 2014 at 9:14 am

      Actually he probably could.

      The Koran’s convenient duality (Peaceful versus Violent verses) allows him to do either (confirm or obfuscate).

      Reza Aslan, rewriting history, one lie at a time

      • Jay Boo says

        Sep 10, 2014 at 9:17 am

        Reza though would not actually be pointing out any real ‘error’
        Reza the Islam magician.

  8. voegelinian says

    Sep 10, 2014 at 1:02 am

    “…no one is arguing that the actions of Islamic jihadists are predictive of the actions of any other Muslims. That is not at issue in the question of whether Islam teaches violence. If it does, that still doesn’t mean that every Muslim is going to be violent. But by raising and dismissing this straw man, Aslan has implied that to say Islam is violent is to say that every last Muslim is violent — an absurdity designed to divert people away from an honest assessment of the texts and teachings of Islam.”

    While Spencer is correct, I think this is not the best way of framing this particular aspect of the overall problem. Not only is Aslan’s straw man/red herring designed to divert people away from an honest assessment of the texts and teachings of Islam — it is also designed to divert people away from an intelligent informed alarm at a systemic problem of various forms of extremism and violence — criminal, vigilante, terrorist, paramilitary and military — in the Muslim world (and increasingly among Muslims in the West); not only systemic, but metastasizing as we speak. The fallacy here is to distort the problem of systemic extremism into a straw man of “you are saying that all Muslims are violent”. And the problem of avoiding a confrontation of this fallacy head-on, by only focusing attention on “the texts and teachings of Islam”, is that one tends to reinforce the common (if often only semi-conscious) impression that to express alarm at an open-ended systemic, metastasizing problem of Muslims (whose minuscule proportion is supposed to be set in stone) is to commit oneself to an inexorable slippery-slope that logically leads toward genociding all Muslims.

    • Beagle says

      Sep 10, 2014 at 1:20 am

      I’d be happy if we could decide to not allow Muslims to immigrate at the fastest rate of any group of people, quit establishing Islam as our de facto state religion, and kill jihadis in droves. You’re so far out in front of where we are, I am not sure what logical slippery slope you’re sliding down.

      Stop them from overwhelming, subjugating, and murdering us. That should solve many of the theoretical future sliding issues.

      • Beagle says

        Sep 10, 2014 at 1:21 am

        By “fastest rate” I mean legal immigration and ‘refugee’ immigration, not including illegal immigration which is largely Hispanic and non-Muslim.

        • voegelinian says

          Sep 10, 2014 at 1:48 am

          Problem is, there are already millions inside the West now. Stopping immigration now is like closing the barn door — after the wolves have already gotten in. And it’s reasonable to assume that the PC MC-besotted West will not be ready to stop immigration of Muslims in general for a couple of decades — and by that time, the barn will have a few million more wolves inside it.

        • Brian Hoff says

          Sep 10, 2014 at 12:55 pm

          There are Hispanic muslim in South America and Center America than quite afew Hispanic in america are convert to Islam.

        • Myxlplik says

          Sep 10, 2014 at 7:22 pm

          Voegelian,

          Total deportation of Muslims from the west is ethnic cleansing, even a partial purposeful removal of their population is defined as ethnic cleansing, and you could argue that it’s already starting.

          Some Northern European countries are deporting Immigrant prisoners, but this is a thinly veiled, targeted, palatable form of ethnic cleansing, because due to the love Muslims have for filling European prisons, it is obliquely selective on purpose.

          http://muslimstatistics.wordpress.com/2014/01/29/norway-deports-record-number-of-muslims-to-reduce-crime-31-increase/

          Let’s be clear though, all of the trends we see, is towards halting all immigration in European nations. In poll after poll, westerners do not want Islamization, so this is really targeted at Muslims, because it is absolutely insane to import an ideology which openly calls for the destruction of its host.

          One of the definitions of ethic cleansing is the purposeful removal of a religious minority, it doesn’t have to be violent. I think the reworking of immigration laws with the intent to stop Muslims from coming in, and policies which obliquely target them for removal are a form of soft cleansing.

      • Myxlplik says

        Sep 10, 2014 at 2:41 am

        I disagree, I think Voegelian is behind the curve of history. If demographics change as stated then there are 3 historical precedents.

        1- we’ll be subjugated
        2- we’ll be ethnically cleansed
        3- Muslims will be ethically cleansed

        Voegelian’s just the only one with the balls to say it.

        • voegelinian says

          Sep 10, 2014 at 4:31 am

          Well, I only advocate total deportation from the West; I’m not sure if that qualifies as “ethnic cleansing”. The problem with that term is that the PC MC mainstream conflates it with genocide or with violence short of genocide; and the term was born in the deformed welter of anti-Serbian propaganda during the 1990s (e.g., conceiving of alleged activities of the Serbs in using violence and intimidation in a belligerent and semi-organized manner in order to force an ethnic population to leave). It doesn’t have to be this way. The “Islamic Relocation Initiative” can be conducted in a restrained and civilized manner where the message would be something along the lines of, “We won’t hurt or kill you as long as you leave, and we will even provide you the planes, trains and automobiles to do so, as long as you cooperate — and even if you resist, we will try our utmost to avoid using any unnecessary force; though we will not put our lives at risk if terror attacks are probable.”

        • Myxlplik says

          Sep 10, 2014 at 7:51 am

          Voegelian,

          There is no reason to believe one or more of the 3 above historical precedents won’t happen because of the people depicted in this video refuse to change. They are deceiving, but in the end, one of the 3 precedents are their agenda.

          Personally, I think we are slowly being subjugated. There are few who speak the truth, most get ridiculed or forced into exile like “teacup” Mohammed Molly Norris.

        • voegelinian says

          Sep 10, 2014 at 12:58 pm

          “Personally, I think we are slowly being subjugated. ”

          The West is being slowly subjugated; however this process is only succeeding thus far for two crucial reasons usually overlooked by those in the Counter-Jihad who worry about it (or the few Christians and/or Conspiracy Theorists among them who almost seem to eagerly anticipate it eschatologically):

          1) it’s proceeding under a camouflage of stealth moderation enabled by the West’s PC MC anxious need to respect diversity and avoid racism

          2) it’s proceeding in the form of a pseudo-Sharia Lite which, perforce, cannot express itself in its true frankly red-blooded form.

          The reason for #2 (and for the stealth camouflage of it all) is because Subjugation is, in this context — logically (if one thinks it through) — the full interpenetration and complete fusion of the Oil and Water of Islam and West. What so many in the Counter-Jihad seem strangely to fail to appreciate, however, is just how profoundly and massively and richly different this Oil and Water are, and how mutually repellent they are in their respective essences. Thus, this Subjugation is a process, not a static done deal; and this process is incremental, not swift; and this incremental process is proceeding from the superficial and mild form slowly (and under camouflage) toward its goal of full engagement and fusion (i.e., victory). However, two factors about the difference of the Oil of Islam and the Water of the West indicate that it cannot succeed:

          1) their profound mutual disparity

          2) the astronomic superiority of the West in comparison with Islam — on every level of comparison one can imagine (political, economic, technological, scientific, intellectual, artistic, sociological, cultural, philosophical, theological, spiritual ).

          For those in the Counter-Jihad who continue to fret about an Islamic conquest, something’s gotta give in their imagination: they have to minimize #2 and magnify #1 in ways that are unwarranted and approach irrationality (and sometimes seem to bespeak a curious detachment or alienation from their own civilization).

          In my view, the problem is not that the Mohammedans will succeed in their desideratum, but rather that they will be able to wreak untold mayhem, misery and mass-murder merely in trying — but failing — to suceed. For the West will finally rouse and rally to save itself when the rubber meets the road as the Oil and Water began to combine in a flammable way such that Denial will no longer be possible. The only question is: will the West do so before — or after a few million of its men, women and children are mass-murdered and horribly wounded (along with considerable chunks and gouges of infrastructure destruction) by Muslims.

        • occupant 9 says

          Sep 11, 2014 at 5:35 pm

          I’m reminded of the “joke” about the three Muslims in a rowboat that were stopped by the Coast Guard. They were laughed at when they claimed the three of them were invading … until they said they were the last three, the rest were already in.

          Somebody, somewhere, with the crazy power to make it happen, wanted blood in the streets of their own hometown. Otherwise we’d never have such a self-created threat to our own free nation’s existence.

    • Myxlplik says

      Sep 10, 2014 at 1:43 am

      Beagle,

      I don’t think Voegelian is ahead of the curve, he’s a student if history, so the curve is behind him.

      We’ll be subjugated or there will be ethnic cleansing, at least, if immigration policy isn’t changed.

  9. voegelinian says

    Sep 10, 2014 at 1:30 am

    Spencer wrote an interesting description of Reza Aslan’s implied point of view:

    “[Reza Aslan] is essentially saying that words have no meaning, that the various scriptures of various religions have no essential content or character, that the religions themselves are meaningless and interchangeable, and that people are never inspired to change their behavior by the teachings of a religion, which anyway don’t exist since religions are wholly and solely what people decide they will be. Can a religion’s teachings transform a believer into a violent, war-mongering person, or a peaceful, pluralistic person? For Aslan, the answer is no: religions are just putty, to be formed by those who believe in them into any shape they like.”

    What’s interesting here is that in the modern West, for many people (perhaps the majority, including Christians and Jews), in a way religion has become a kind of mix-and-match cafeteria whose criteria seem up for grabs and almost hopelessly relativistic and subjective. Aslan here is cleverly alluding to that without explicitly adverting to it, thus cannily assuming it as an axiomatic truism for the benefit of his PC MC-besotted audience. While such an amorphously mushy state of affairs may pertain to “religion” in the perspective of the modern Western secular worldview (to which, to repeat, many Jews and Christians to one degree or another subscribe), it’s a ridiculous stretch to apply it so glibly to Islam, as Aslan does. To the extent that Islam does manifest ostensible diversity, it has (with a handful of exceptions too few to make a difference) virtually nothing to do with the process by which the West has devolved into its secularist deconstruction of Christendom over the past three centuries or so.

    • Max Publius says

      Sep 10, 2014 at 6:25 am

      Good points. Reading his bio, I think Aslan might have more of an ethnic, religious, racial grudge against the West. He was raised Christian but reverted to Islam as it is a more conducive vehicle to wage a hate campaign through. It makes him feel like a big man and a victim at the same time.

  10. Jovial Joe says

    Sep 10, 2014 at 2:16 am

    Regarding the ‘infinitesimally small’ versus the ‘1.6 billion Muslims’: the counter-charge must then be – well why can’t Islam get its own house in order then? So many millions of peaceful Muslims promoting a peaceful text should be able to reign in these ‘TMOEs’ with ease; so why hasn’t it happened? Indeed, why is the TMOE demographic growing all the time? Doubtless the reply will come: ‘Western foreign policy, poverty, marginalisation’ etc.; even though none of the other impoverished and marginalised peoples in the world resort to such practices as beheading and sex-slavery. A pathetic evasion of the truth and demeaning to anyone with an ounce of intelligence. It’s just a shame that even that much is missing from our so-called ‘intelligentsia’.

    • occupant 9 says

      Sep 11, 2014 at 5:37 pm

      They are the negligentsia.

  11. nacazo says

    Sep 10, 2014 at 2:27 am

    almost there reza, now if you eliminate the phrase ” islam is a religion of peace” you would be getting closer to the light.

  12. Sumit Basu says

    Sep 10, 2014 at 2:47 am

    “But the fact of the matter is, if you’re a violent, war-mongering person, you can find justification in any scripture. ”
    There are 2.1 billions Christians, 1.6 billion Muslims and 1 billion Hindus in the world. Then why do we see majority of Muslims committing violence giving religious justification, whereas we hardly hear about a violent Christian or a violent Hindu citing religious scriptures as justification for their acts.?

    • john spielman says

      Sep 10, 2014 at 7:25 am

      that is because the New testament of the Bible DOES NOT allow any violence by the followers of Jesus. (Luke chapter 19 refers to the end of this age when Jesus returns and destroys all evil and evil doer. This will be carried by Him alone with His holy angels-Revelation 19-21)

      • AnneM says

        Sep 10, 2014 at 8:24 am

        Hi, been checking up on those chapters in Revelation and in Chapter 19: 11-16, it does mentions armies in Heaven, which means not just the angels, but also male saints who are joined in the fight with those male saints on earth as well. Thank-you for your response.

      • deja vu says

        Sep 10, 2014 at 8:08 pm

        True, john spielman, and it should be added that the battles in the Old Testament are descriptive, NOT prescriptive, as Muslim apologists such as Reza Aslan like to claim.

        They also err in claiming that ‘calling yourself’ a Christian makes you one – hence their idea that all Westerners are automatically Christians. Unacquainted with the notion of free will and choice, it is an understandable mistake that should be rejected whenever it crops up.

  13. R Cole says

    Sep 10, 2014 at 3:02 am

    Surprised Congressman Ellison did not breakdown and start crying all over the place for his ‘brothers’ – in this religion he joined [in part for political reasons].

    :: ::

    Reza Aslan got his PC a bit muddled and Lemon caught him in it and immediately responded with – “…it’s interesting that you say it’s not a peaceful religion, because most Muslims will say that Islam is a peaceful religion.”

    It is very probable that most Muslims in the west had never heard Islam was a peaceful religion – until George Bush said it – and the opportunity not to see their religious name sullied – was had.

    Clearly ~ some did not get the memo!

    :: ::

    As for the 5 Gods – perhaps in Islam it might help – if one is too harsh – Muslims could turn to another. And then we would not be having these conversations – unless of course all the Gods agreed with the One!

  14. Champ says

    Sep 10, 2014 at 3:07 am

    Reza Aslan: “If you’re a violent, war-mongering person, you can find justification in any scripture”

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Is this man completley incapable of telling the truth?!! …jeez there is something seriously *wrong* with him — blah!

  15. duh_swami says

    Sep 10, 2014 at 3:16 am

    Only Islamic scripture has the power to influence men to murder, because ‘God’ orders it ‘directly’, and if you want to get into paradise you must obey, or at least support.
    It’s true that not all humans have the desire, nor the ability, to physically fight, which is why Allah in all his wisdom and glory invented other forms of jihad that are not violent, but have the same goals.

    • wildjew says

      Sep 10, 2014 at 10:10 am

      You are right. However, just as Germans embraced Nazism, Muslim embrace Islam.

    • wildjew says

      Sep 10, 2014 at 10:16 am

      Daniel Greenfield wrote this morning:

      “Allah knows you have to kill. Even if you think you shouldn’t.

      “The worst of them are acting on impulse. The best of them are acting on faith….

      “Faith is irrational. Believers believe without understanding and act without thinking. The holy men of our religions acted on faith. So do the holy men of Islam. It’s what they have faith in that is the problem….”

      I wrote: Faith is irrational probably (no doubt) for many. But it should not be that way. One should not believe what one does not understand. One should not practice what one does not understand. One should not practice what does make sense or is not reasonable.

      Like the prophets said: “Come now, and let us reason together,” Says the LORD, “Though your sins are as scarlet, They will be as white as snow; Though they are red like crimson, They will be like wool.”

      • voegelinian says

        Sep 10, 2014 at 1:03 pm

        If I understand Greenfield here, I think he’s flat wrong. The problem with Muslims following Islam is not that they have faith, but that they fiercely and ferociously cultivate a fanatically gnostic certitude — the psychic and spiritual antithesis of faith. Islam is anti-faith through and through (though to appreciate this, the Westerner has to understand his own civilization’s articulation of the distinction between faith and gnosticism; and, alas, many Westerners seem to be rather illiterate in this regard).

  16. IQ al Rassooli says

    Sep 10, 2014 at 3:38 am

    Dear ALL

    $100,000 says that no human being – including deceivers such Aslan & Ellison – can find verses in the Hebrew Bible or the New Testament inciting their followers to Subjugate, Humiliate,Discriminate and or Exterminate ‘others’ while no human being can find a SINGLE operative verse in Muhammad’s Quran that shows any Compassion & Mercy to Kuffar/Infidels/Kafiroon/Unbelievers.

    The god of Islam Allah on the other hand incites and sanctifies in hundreds of verses in Muhammad’s Quran the Subjugation, Humiliation, Forced Conversion or Extermination of ALL none Muslims

    Allah FORBIDS Muslims from ever being LOYAL to any constitutions and or people who are NOT Sharia compliant. Full Stop!

    All apologists for Muhammad’s CULT belief system called Islam cannot ever disprove my statements and hence by omission they agree with them

    IQ al Rassooli
    Kafir & Proud!

    • duh_swami says

      Sep 10, 2014 at 4:26 am

      I watched the video of your interview, posted on Islam-watch…Thumbs up IQ…

    • Guy Macher says

      Sep 10, 2014 at 9:15 am

      Easy money!!! Easy, if I can lie about it like devout Muslims do.

  17. duh_swami says

    Sep 10, 2014 at 4:23 am

    I wish I could be there, figuratively, not actually, when Aslan and Ellison finally meet Allah, and explain to him their , moderation. If they can convince Allah that they are merely fooling kuffar with taqiyya, they might get in the door, but if Allah is in one of his regular rotten moods, watch out. Allah actually has shovel ready jobs in the furnace room.

  18. Kasey says

    Sep 10, 2014 at 4:57 am

    When the five pillars of Islam are: “conquest, taqiyya, dhimminitude , deportation and annihilation”, what can one expect other than that is being served up today in so many nations and states where Islam is dominant?

  19. tpellow says

    Sep 10, 2014 at 6:41 am

    “Reza Aslan: ‘If you’re a violent, war-mongering person, you can find justification in any scripture'” –

    Aslan should have added the vital part:-

    ‘it is true that for most of the past 1,400 years or so, many Islamic jihadists across the world have been, and still are, particularly violent, and use the tenets of Islam as the justification for that extreme violence.’

    But, of course, Aslan censored that out.

  20. Jack Gordon says

    Sep 10, 2014 at 7:49 am

    Has anyone else noticed that lately Minnesota seems to have become a Mecca (couldn’t resist it) for Koran-thumping jihadist lunatics ? Some go in for jihadi politics like the opportunist Ellison here while others slap on a mask or niqab and head off to slaughter innocent victims in Syria or Iraq. Perhaps it’s time to test the water in the Twin Cities.

  21. mortimer says

    Sep 10, 2014 at 7:57 am

    Danish University Researcher Tina Magaard claimed Islam is the most warlike religion. After three years analyzing the original texts of ten different religions, Magaard concluded that the Islamic texts stand out by encouraging terror and violence to a larger degree than other religions do. She stated that ‘Islamic texts encourage terror and fighting to a far larger degree than the original texts of other religions. The texts in Islam distinguish themselves from the texts of other religions by encouraging violence and aggression against people with other religious beliefs to a larger degree.’

    Yeah, right…’religion of peace’…not according to Islam’s sacred texts. Islam is a warrior cult.

  22. mortimer says

    Sep 10, 2014 at 8:03 am

    Ellison claimed ISIS is a ‘Frankenstein monster’.

    No, ISLAM is a Frankenstein’s monster.

    • Huck Folder says

      Sep 11, 2014 at 3:07 am

      Or islam is Dr. Frankenstein, and isis is his/its creation.

      Hmmm.

      allah is Dr. Frankenstein, and islam is his monster?

      mo is Dr. Frankenstein, and allah is his monster?

      I’m getting confused, any suggestions anyone?

  23. Jaladhi says

    Sep 10, 2014 at 8:37 am

    This is not an intelligent discussion – it is just gobbledygook with a aim to exonerate Islam from any responsibility of terrorism throughout the world!!

  24. Jay Boo says

    Sep 10, 2014 at 8:42 am

    There is are a few different versions of the Bible.
    The NIV is easier to read than KJV for Example.

    There appear to be a few different versions of the Koran (WITHIN the Koran)
    The Mecca version and the Medina version.
    The (abrogated) Mecca version is easier to stomach than Medina version.

    Why don’t Muslims separate the two Koran versions?

    • Brian Hoff says

      Sep 10, 2014 at 1:12 pm

      There is no abrogated versions of the Koran the Mecca part are perfect valid today. You are just than hate monger Islamoprobic.

      • Jack Gordon says

        Sep 10, 2014 at 1:19 pm

        Brian: Refrain from drinking to excess before you post the next time.

        • John C. Barile says

          Sep 10, 2014 at 8:54 pm

          The man is hopelessly dyslexic.

        • Huck Folder says

          Sep 11, 2014 at 3:11 am

          John: Deslyxics of the world untie!

          BH (BHO perhaps?) is too pathetic to address.

      • occupant 9 says

        Sep 11, 2014 at 5:51 pm

        Of course they are valid. The peaceful verses are used for deception all the time, which is a valid use for them within Islam’s worship of death for all of us.

        And we thought they didn’t care.

  25. Jay Boo says

    Sep 10, 2014 at 9:36 am

    So very good to see that Keith Ellison chimed in to add ‘credibility’ to Aslan.

    Congressman Keith Ellison sworn-in placed his hand on an English translation of the Qur’an once owned by Thomas Jefferson as if to Imply Jefferson supported Islam.
    http://religionandpolitics.org/2014/04/09/thomas-jeffersons-quran/

    http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2158

  26. wildjew says

    Sep 10, 2014 at 10:07 am

    I am in a bit of a rush so I’ve not read all the comments yet. Maybe someone caught this?

    Aslan said: “The problem however is when we take the actions of an infinitesimal group and make it somehow predictive of the actions of everyone else, 1.6 billion Muslims in this case that’s when the argument becomes strained and unbelievable….”

    This is NOR the argument or the important or fundamental point. The question in my mind is this. What percentage of the (approximately) 1.6 (?) billion Muslims globally see the actions of this “infinitesimal” group as representative of authentic Islam? My guess is Mr. Aslan will not honestly grapple with that question.

    • wildjew says

      Sep 10, 2014 at 10:35 am

      Sorry: “This is NOT the argument….”

  27. wildjew says

    Sep 10, 2014 at 10:20 am

    “If you’re a violent, war-mongering person, you can find justification in (Islamic) scripture” because Allah is a non-forgiving, non-merciful, non-long suffering, war-like god toward non-believers, ‘hypocrites’, heretics, etc.

    • Huck Folder says

      Sep 11, 2014 at 3:15 am

      You forgot the most important: The Greatest DECEIVER.
      She becomes her own water-carrier for all the destructive attributes.

  28. Jon says

    Sep 10, 2014 at 11:01 am

    I don’t think there are any easy answers. Deportation from the West, even if it could ever happen as a result of some grand awakening that goes against the spirit of intolerant tolerance, would eventually result in wars against nations, for Muslim nations would then be spurred to show their aggression against Christian countries. They would, in other words, show their cards, for there would be no reason to pussyfoot around anymore and foster a peaceful image. I am afraid battle will come, at home and abroad, because it is written in the Scriptures, and that the only response for Christians now is to be lambs with the hearts of lions, rather than lions. We should defend ourselves, but we should not be aggressive (however justified it might seem) because the war will not be won that way, and in any case has already been won on our behalf at Calvary. We must defend ourselves, and defend Israel, but mass deportation, or attacking Muslim countries, will only increase their blood lust. In any case, the wolves will come to us looking for blood.

  29. mortimer says

    Sep 10, 2014 at 11:17 am

    Message to Reza Aslan from the founder of modern Shi’ite Iran: You are ‘WITLESS’.

    Khomeini rebuked the Islam-is-a-religion-of-peace crowd:

    “Those who know nothing of Islam pretend that Islam counsels against war. Those [who say this] are WITLESS. ISLAM SAYS: KILL ALL THE UNBELIEVERS just as they would kill you all! Does this mean that Muslims should sit back until they are devoured by [the unbelievers]? Islam says: Kill them, put them to the sword and scatter [their armies]….Islam says: Whatever good there is exists thanks to the sword and in the shadow of the sword! People cannot be made obedient except with the sword! The sword is the key to Paradise, which can be opened only for the Holy Warriors! There are hundreds of other ayahs and hadiths urging Muslims to value war and to fight. Does all this mean that Islam is a religion that prevents men from waging war? I spit upon those foolish souls who make such a claim.”

    -Ayatollah Khomeini

    Maybe Aslan knows the above, believes it and he is lying?

    LYING…

  30. clyde says

    Sep 10, 2014 at 11:32 am

    Peter Beinart is Jewish. How can he be a Jew Hater?
    ANSWER: Goes on all the time. He is a self hating Jew.

  31. Myxlplik says

    Sep 10, 2014 at 1:22 pm

    ISIS and Boko Haram are literally rounding up women and children, selling them as sex slaves, while using Mohammed’s example as justification and this has nothing to do with Islam, just how some radicals interpret Mohammed and his followers selling women and children as sex slaves, is the problem.

    Incredible, absolutely incredible that they can say this without getting called on it on air.

  32. abad says

    Sep 10, 2014 at 6:31 pm

    Reza Aslan: “If you’re a violent, war-mongering person, you can find justification in any scripture”

    No. You won’t find it in the Gospels (the core of Christian teaching), you won’t find it in the Old Testament (despite the fact there are a number of death penalties within I am hard pressed to find a religious Jew actually practice any of them), you won’t find it in the Avesta, you won’t find it in the Buddhist scriptures, you won’t find it in the Kitab Al Jilwah nor Mishefa Reş (Yezidi scriptures)….Aslan is a Moron

  33. mortimer says

    Sep 10, 2014 at 8:31 pm

    Reza contradicts Ayatollah Khomeini who recognized the inherent violence of Islam. Islam is intrinsically violent, in the same way as American football is intrinsically violent. Football cannot be played without violence. The nature of the sport encourages toleration for and even promotion of violence. Players attempt to injure each other to take them out of the game. Many young men are seriously injured while playing football. So too, Islam’s goal is to take out all opposition to Islam by all means, especially through violence and the threat of violence, through terror.

    Mohammed said: “I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah’s Apostle, and offer the prayers perfectly and give the obligatory charity, so if they perform that, then they save their lives and property from me except for Islamic laws and then their reckoning (accounts) will be done by Allah.” (Sahih Bukhari 1.24)

    The foregoing should make it clear to Don Lemon that there is no way around “fighting” in Islam. Either you do all the above “perfectly” or Islam is obligated to “fight” you, rob you, slay you and take your wife and children as slaves. These 7th century commandments have not been abrogated.

  34. Darius Jeddburgh says

    Sep 11, 2014 at 8:37 pm

    and if your a reality denying apologist for the “religion”of hate, you’ll ignore anything.

  35. Anon says

    Sep 15, 2014 at 12:47 am

    This guy is trying to imply that a “viewpoint” defines the “scripture” when history has proven the opposite to be true, that scripture defines the viewpoint. There is nothing in the Quran, or supporting texts, that indicates an Islamic reformation has occurred, or the that violent verses have been made obsolete.

    I wonder just how small the problem is. Even the nothing-wrong-with-islam Pew Research Center indicates that the “Death Penalty for leaving Islam” support is around 60-70 percent average for large Muslim-majority countries, and that Sharia Law should apply to ALL citizens (approx. 50% average). So 1.6 billion times say 0.60 = 960 million people strongly feel this way (globally).

    http://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the-worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-beliefs-about-sharia/

FacebookYoutubeTwitterLog in

Subscribe to the Jihad Watch Daily Digest

You will receive a daily mailing containing links to the stories posted at Jihad Watch in the last 24 hours.
Enter your email address to subscribe.

Please wait...

Thank you for signing up!
If you are forwarding to a friend, please remove the unsubscribe buttons first, as they my accidentally click it.

Subscribe to all Jihad Watch posts

You will receive immediate notification.
Enter your email address to subscribe.
Note: This may be up to 15 emails a day.

Donate to JihadWatch
FrontPage Mag

Search Site

Translate

The Team

Robert Spencer in FrontPageMag
Robert Spencer in PJ Media

Articles at Jihad Watch by
Robert Spencer
Hugh Fitzgerald
Christine Douglass-Williams
Andrew Harrod
Jamie Glazov
Daniel Greenfield

Contact Us

Terror Attacks Since 9/11

Archives

  • 2020
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2019
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2018
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2017
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2016
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2015
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2014
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2013
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2012
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2011
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2010
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2009
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2008
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2007
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2006
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2005
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2004
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2003
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • March

All Categories

You Might Like

Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Recent Comments

  • Walter Sieruk on Iranian top dogs approve bill to end UN nuclear inspections, increase enrichment
  • Dude on Muslim cleric: ‘We welcomed the takeover of ISIS because they wanted to implement the Sharia’
  • Infidel on Uighur leader: ‘We’re actually quite worried’ about what Biden might let China get away with
  • Infidel on Uighur leader: ‘We’re actually quite worried’ about what Biden might let China get away with
  • Mojdeh on Audio: Robert Spencer on Muslim Brotherhood influence in a Biden/Harris administration

Popular Categories

dhimmitude Sharia Jihad in the U.S ISIS / Islamic State / ISIL Iran Free Speech

Robert Spencer FaceBook Page

Robert Spencer Twitter

Robert Spencer twitter

Robert Spencer YouTube Channel

Books by Robert Spencer

Jihad Watch® is a registered trademark of Robert Spencer in the United States and/or other countries - Site Developed and Managed by Free Speech Defense

Content copyright Jihad Watch, Jihad Watch claims no credit for any images posted on this site unless otherwise noted. Images on this blog are copyright to their respective owners. If there is an image appearing on this blog that belongs to you and you do not wish for it appear on this site, please E-mail with a link to said image and it will be promptly removed.

Our mailing address is: David Horowitz Freedom Center, P.O. Box 55089, Sherman Oaks, CA 91499-1964

loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.