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

Reza Aslan: America ‘Desperately’ Needs to See Afghan Refugees In Sitcoms

By

 

My latest in PJ Media:

Failed CNN host and cannibal Reza Aslan is one of the many media talking heads who would have us believe that the primary result of the 9/11 jihad attacks has been that Muslims have faced large-scale discrimination and harassment in the United States. This isn’t really true: FBI hate crime statistics show that anti-Semitic hate crimes are far more common than attacks on Muslims, which actually dropped 42% in the last year. No hate crime is justified, but the idea that Muslims are living in fear of MAGA-hat-wearing redneck vigilantes in America is paranoid Leftist fantasy. Aslan, however, has a fantasy solution to his fantasy problem: put Afghan refugees in sitcoms.

In a Los Angeles Times column published Monday, Aslan wrote: “I’ve spent my entire career trying to help non-Muslims in the West understand Islam as a religion, a culture and an ideology. For years I was the friendly face of Islam on cable TV, the guy making jokes on Jon Stewart and getting into arguments on Fox News, trying to reframe Americans’ perceptions about my faith and culture. My first book, ‘No God But God: The Origins, Evolution, and Future of Islam,’ became an international bestseller. I really thought I was making a difference.”

Reza Aslan, a notoriously hateful and unhinged far-Left ideologue, was never the friendly face of anything. As arrogant as he is hate-filled, Aslan cannot understand why Americans after 9/11 remained wary regarding jihad attacks and chose to believe their lying eyes rather than his assurances that Islam was peaceful: “But at some point, I realized I wasn’t. Five years after 9/11, in 2006, negative perceptions of Islam were far higher than they were in the immediate aftermath of the attacks. Ten more years later, in 2016, the U.S. set a record for anti-Muslim hate crimes.”

In fact, he admits that none of the efforts to hoodwink Americans in the face of 40,000 jihad attacks worldwide since 9/11 had any significant effect: “Now, 20 years after 9/11, it is difficult not to conclude that all the college courses and cable news discussions, the bestselling books and viral videos — none of it made much of a difference in how Americans viewed Islam.”

Aslan ultimately concluded that “no amount of lectures or essays or bloviation on cable news will make someone stop fearing another person.” Indeed. When there are five jihad attacks a day every day for twenty years, all committed by people who believe that a book telling them to “kill them wherever you find them” (Qur’an 2:191, 4:89, cf. 9:5) was written by the one and only god, people might get suspicious of those who hold the same belief system. There is no justification for any actions against innocent people, but Aslan’s bafflement over why so many Americans viewed negatively is silly: Americans would have no problem at all with Islam or Muslims were it not for jihad violence.

There is more. Read the rest here.

Comments

  1. “Americans ‘desperately’ needs to see Afghan refugees in sitcoms.”

    Here’s my version of a most ignorant and warped statement by Aslan: “Afghan refugees and Muslims in general ‘desperately’ need to see America as a land of freedom, equality under the law, the most productive society in history, a society which allows questioning of everything without fear of retribution (minus modern-day Leftists who are, virtually daily, eradicating freedom just as Islam has been doing for some 1400 years), which has the capacity to apologize for past wrongdoings—contra the Islamic world immensely so—and which is NOT xenophobic but definitely antagonistic to ideologies that are mortal enemies of liberty, including Nazism, Marxism—and, yes, Islam.

    Yep, this is a sitcom I would definitely like to see. Aslan of course will miss all this. He misses a lot, the only question being whether it is due to mere ignorance or active complicity with malevolence. For the record, I favor the latter option.

    • Yes, hear, hear! Aslan is asking us to criticize Islam and poke fun at it, but I ask him to go first. I know he will not poke fun at Islam. He knows that fatwas will pursue him to his last days as they pursue Sir Salman Rushdie who was sentenced by the Ayatollah Khomeini.

      Just try it, Aslan. You first.

      Aslan has no moral compass, if he is unable to see what is wrong with Islam … the sadism, bronze-age backwardness and brutality. Furthermore, Alsan is unable to perceive REAL ISLAM when he sees it in clerical Iran, in Taliban Afghanistan, in fundamentalist, corrupt Pakistan and in rigid, dysfunctional Saudi Arabia. Moreover, none of those societies has accepted the Enlightenment. The Enlightenment granted us the permission to poke fun at sacred cows. Islamic societies are all pre-Enlightenment and so no one may poke fun at Islam … no one.

      Surely, Aslan knows all this, but he is pretending he doesn’t know the meaning of the word ‘FATWA’. I am sure a mullah will oblige Aslan if he writes a sit-com mocking Islam.

    • The idea that people would look at Muslims if their were no jihad terrorist attacks is false.

      Why 2016? Because more Muslims came here and in Europe, Australia, Japan, Philippines, etc. They are Muslims demanding pork in schools, in my state schools who cancelled our tradition Halloween costumes parade to be “inclusive,” some towns turning into little Arabia or Somalia.

      In Europe it’s even more pronounced yet all over. Towns in Sweden becoming rife with violence, child marriage in western countries, there are 11 high risk mosques in my little state teaching Islam expansionism, hatred of infidels, sharia, and the like.

      Non-assimilation. Clerics in the US spouting anti-Semiticism and anti-homosexuality, killing cows inhumanely, some expressing wanting Islamic national holidays-federal holidays like Christmas, wanting sharia law in Texas, a mosque near the World Trade Center site and so on even no bacon in prisons.

      Complaining and demanding. Afghans and Gazans have a lot of kids. 5-6 kids is normal. People resent housing found for refugees while not American homeless. I remember in Canada some Afghan women were wearing burkas which looks creepy as well as niqabs.

      What people see that has nothing to do with terrorism is what drives dislike of Muslims in countries. Muslims who assimilate, don’t demand sharia courts or laws, participate in our cultural traditions and such, are seen more favorably. Censorship is another problem. Local violence you see a lot in England that isn’t terrorism but rape, knives, harassment of ex-Muslims and over-building mosques. Lying about the Qur’an doesn’t help either. In Canada a PM who coddles Islam.

      Need I go on? I hear these complaints from all over the world.

      A lot of people don’t even know the extent of terrorism around the world; most Americans are clueless about foreign countries. They don’t know the pockets of strict sharia and people being lashed for walking too close to their boyfriend. They may fake it out of political correctness, but they see it around them, at least when it’s obvious. Leftists are cowards. When women wearing shorts while bicycling in France were attacked for that reason, it screws up their heads.

  2. sound great how about a show called Killing Fields, woman’s rights by Islam, How to marry a child by Islam, Sharia Laws by Islam, Bathroom edict by Afghans, How about a fashion show about woman dress by Islam will the shows show how the real world is of Islam
    I think NOT

  3. Did he ever explain to people on cable tv or in his books that the Suras of the Koran are not arranged chronologically and that once they are arranged and read in order of “revelation” to Muhammad the book starts to make more sense? Did he ever explain how abrogation works and that any verses in the Koran that appear to conflict with each other are made clear by looking at which verse came from Allah the last? Did he ever try to explain that Sura 9 was “revealed” second to last of all the Surahs and that it abrogates anything earlier that tells Muslims to be peaceful and tolerant of other religions? Did he explain that Muslims are supposed to fight all “Infidels” until everyone who refuses to become a Muslim is either dead or humbly submitting to the Muslims and paying them the tribute of the Jizya? If he ever did any of this, it’s news to me.

  4. Reza Aslan: America ‘Desperately’ Needs to See Afghan Refugees In Sitcoms
    …………..

    As I’ve said before, if you had a sitcom like “All in the Family” about Muslims–which is what Aslan suggested–with jokes about wife beating and hating Infidels and suicide bombings and forced veiling and “Honor Killing”, Muslims like Aslan himself would be up in arms–and many Muslims would be issuing death threats.

    I’ve noticed that most Muslim “humor” basically revolves around poking fun at the Kuffar for being afraid of being murdered in Jihad terror attacks, like Dean Obeidallah’s “The Muslims are Coming!”. *Really* ugly stuff, and not at all funny.

    • “…and not at all funny.”

      Agreed, gravenimage. Even worse than Jimmy Kimmel whom I look upon as the anti-Johnny Carson.

      • Agreed–Jimmy Kimmel is just not all that hilarious from what I have seen–but this is mostly just a matter of taste.

        But much Muslim “humor” is actually viciously offensive–an altogether different category. Dean Obeidallah has described his comedy as “activism”–and it is that. The kind where if you are offended the reply is “can’t you take a joke”? To see this coming from people who adhere to a creed that murders comedians and cartoonists is especially grotesque.

        This is representative of this kind of thing:

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L4h79ExDpg8&ab_channel=BBC

        But I could have picked out scores of other examples. He sneers at this neighbor for being upset about ISIS. Just grotesque.

        • Gravenimage, I couldn’t agree with you more just grotesque. And to think non-muslims go to his shows.

        • John, it’s wokeness run amok. This “comedy” is aimed at these dhimmi fools.

      • I’ve often heard it said that, “A good comedian can read the phone book, and make it hilarious.”

        When I think of a muslim funny guy, reading a phone book on TV, I envision some people, shortly after, checking in to a hotel under an assumed name.

      • Mortimer, I don’t think this show much pokes fun at Muslims.

        Here are some of the comments on link you provided:

        Little chuckles ?
        kathrynjustice0527 September 2018
        I thought it was funny. Little jokes about the misconceptions and prejudices westerners have about the eastern religions and the Arab nationals.
        …

        A hoot
        roedyg16 January 2007
        My partner and I laughed out loud many times during the one episode we have seen so far. The humour is based on townspeoples’ exaggerated fear of the innocent actions of a group of bungling Muslims trying to set up a mosque in the basement of an Anglican church.
        …

        A commendable attempt
        mrfaisalc11 January 2007
        ….But at the end of the day, I would take this willingly over anything else the media has to say about Muslims nowadays. I hope the show is a success so that it can get to the point where it can the explore real issue: that we Muslims are just like every other person on this earth – human beings.
        …

        Hilarious open-minded view on Islam versus rural North America
        AirBourne_Bds9 January 2007
        This debut rated high on my skepticism scale – even though I thoroughly enjoyed it and its originality, I still have reservations as to how many “raghead” gags you can cram in 30 minutes for a sustained period? The pilot from CBC.ca is very different from the typical sitcom – the new Imam (priest/rabbi) is chiding his mother for his daring to turn his back on “success” and using what are ordinarily everyday phrases lands himself in Customs as a threat!…

        An Anglican priest rents his community hall to serve as a mosque for the Muslim section of society over in suburban Canada much to the shock of the immediate “regular” white community who proceed to react in a manner not unlike American ultra-conservative Rush Limbaugh radio-host!
        …

        Give it a chance – I did
        flatfootcdb10 January 2007
        Not being a great fan of the CBC network I have to say they might get my attention with this show. This show pokes fun with mild satire at the average persons concept of folks from the Middle East. This will be a hit if the writers can break the stereo typing that seems to come from the medias attempt to blanket just the negative elements of everyday life…

        That was the whole point of this sitcom–to poke fun at the Infidels for thinking that Muslims could possibly be a threat.

        A different poster notes how hyped this show was. Just more whitewash of Islam.

        The creators make their goals pretty clear here:

        https://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0117/p07s02-woam.html

    • gravenimage,

      Just for the record, the original 1970s “All in the Family” could never be broadcast today (on a major network) in America’s current PC World.

      It would get “canceled” after the first episode.

      But you knew that already.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EClbf-ZyByA

      • This is true, James–even though the show was actually very leftist. The viewer is supposed to see Archie Bunker as a troglodyte. Still, the show did poke fun at most of the characters–I doubt that would happen today.

  5. Excuse me if I’m wrong, but didn’t the taliban just murder a comedian is Afghanistan?

  7. I have an idea for a Sitcom. Remember the TV serial on FX ‘The Shield’ which ran in the early 2000s that involved cops that bent the law and were heavy handed on criminals? Do something like that, but in this serial, make the villains some variety of muslims every week – a Paki ‘grooming gangster’ one week, an Afghan homophobe another, a Chechen gunman a third, and so on. The cops in the serial can be – unlike Vic Mackey – deniers who refuse to look at them b’cos they are muslims and going after them will be islamophobic. Do this so that it covers a variety of countries – Turks, Pakis, Palis, Iranians, Afghans, Bangladeshis, Kyrgyz, Chechens, Indian Muslims, Somalians, Libyans, Yemenis, Saudis, Egyptians, Malians, Moroccans, Azeris, Rohingyas, Sri Lankan muslims and Albanians. That’s about 20 different countries, and show them all as the criminals, and show the police and city authorities do nothing about it while normal people suffer

    Yeah, I know it’s the nightly news, but here, just introduce diversity by varying the nationalities of the muslims in every episode

    • That would be a clear case of art imitating life. You forgot the Indonesians – being “inclusive”, as well as “diverse”, is very important.

      Diversifying the crimes would be a good idea. I’m sure the infidel West would be greatly enriched by viewing a comedy about Islamic bestiality, Islamic tempporary marriage, Islamic paedophilia, or Islamic honour killing.

  8. Talking of desperation, here is some foolery from the Vatican: https://www.ncregister.com/news/holy-see-reportedly-pressing-for-talks-with-taliban-to-avert-humanitarian-catastrophe

    “In a letter to the Italian daily Il Tempo published on Aug. 22, Bisignani alleged that, under the impetus of Pope Francis, the Vatican Secretariat of State and the Congregation for the Oriental Churches are working on a three-way dialogue with the Taliban mediated by Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.”

    What could possibly go wrong ?

    “In an Aug. 19 statement, Aid to the Church in Need President Thomas Heine-Geldern said it was unclear under the 2020 peace agreement how Afghans who do not espouse the Taliban’s practice of sharia (Islamic law) will be treated. He also pointed out the pros and cons of international approval and recognition of the Islamist regime.”

    It’s become clear enough for anyone not wilfully and hloody-mindedly self-blinded to see. Newsflash: Taliban Afghanistan has not been, and will not be, a religiously liberal state, allowing the kuffar to worship in ways hateful to Mohammed.

  9. this is all bullshit we are playing with poop

    America doesnt Desperately’ Needs to See Afghan Refugees In Sitcoms
    America need to wake up and smell the coffe

    Islam is a dangerous criminaly violent totalitarian ideology that has no place in the free world because its goals are to destroy the hosting culture by killing most of the non muslims males and enslave all non muslms and making the non muslim woman sex slaves.
    a Sovereign state that has sane socienty shuld not allow any muslims to imigrate in and should ban islam starting by destroying all mosques and burning the qurans.
    all the countries that allow muslim population in will eventually be destroied by islam
    the muslims are systematicaly destroying the non muslims by the following mode of operation
    when their persentage of the population is quite low
    1 they are having 4 wifes and they dont work so they live of the wellfare of the state
    2 they are moving into non muslims neighborhoods and then making the life of the non muslims to unpleasant by building mosques and doing the noise pollution of the muezzin 5 times a day (this is actually a Psychological war). and what happen then is the prices of realestate are dramatically dropping because non muslims wat to sell and flee so its making it easier for more muslims to move in
    3 once their persentage in the neighborhood is increasing their self confidence is growing and they bluntly harrasing the non muslims and trying to take non muslim woman and do all kind of crimes intentionally against non muslims starting by car theaft, home burglary, business robbary, rape, arson etc
    all this is creating the no go zone where the autorities lose their grip
    so its a beggining of state withing state
    to make a long story short the process is called Lebanonization
    the muslims are gathering weapons and preparring to big war and in the meantime they conduct terror attacks on the non muslims by improvised explosive devices and shooting and stabing
    soon as the persentage of the muslims is large enough they will start a military jihad and take over the country
    another thing that i didnt reffer to is that during the first stages of their taking over process they are very politically active and they are insidiously implementing sharia laws into the state laws by taking advantage of the gullible and stupid humane generous non muslims politacians.(excellent example is justin trudeau in Canada)

    this process is now in progress in most of the western countries
    its more advenced in europe in countries like UK and france Sweden ans so on but it will defintly reach the full destruction of the hosting culture.
    unfortunely USA Australia and Israel are all on the same sliperry slope

  10. How about a musical titled, Springtime for Mohammed, based somewhat loosely on the largely failed Arab Spring movement?

  11. Aslan is a Muslim intellectual, and once you understand their code,it becomes clear.He and the others are in favor of multiculturalism ,and against “imposition of Western values”.

    When Aslan and the other Muslim intellectuals say “Western values are not universal”,it is code for “human rights are not universal”.

    Muslims are theists,so you can believe in God…… and be against human rights.

    To answer gravenimage, here is the definition of it all. The concept of human rights says all men are equal, which comes from English philosopher John Locke.

    Locke and his Theory of Natural Rights: he stated “All men by nature are equal” and they are born with 3 inalienable rights,that of Liberty,Life and Property.

    Muslim intellectuals correctly say that is false,we are not all born equal,some are more intelligent,some wealthier, some more beautiful.

    But Locke stated that it means something else. He said all are born in the Image of God. That makes us different from animals. “By nature” he meant “born in the image of God”.

    Because of that all are equal:the ugliest and most stupid is the equal of the best-looking and most intelligent, the one born sickly and handicapped and poor is the equal of the one born healthiest and wealthiest.

    Because all are automatically born in the Image of God,then all automatically are born with the right to life,liberty and property. Which elaborated more give us this in the 1789 French Declaration of the Rights of Man:

    “The National Assembly recognizes and declares,

    in the presence of the Supreme Being (God ), and with the hope of his blessing and favour, the following sacred
    rights of men and of citizens:
    I. Men are born, and always continue to be ,

    free and equal in respect of their rights.”

    And then continues with the right to freedom of speech,of the press,etc

    Some of the French intellectuals were only deists,but said there was a religion called Natural Religion, which said all that Locke stated,except for the part of being born in the Image of God.

    The key,code word is RIGHT. The idea that all,literally all,are born with certain rights is a concept that only appears in the West. It is ,a s the Muslim intellectual declare,a “Western value”.

    In other cultures they did have freedom of speech,freedom of religion,but it was to get along,it was useful,utilitarian,and it could disappear. But in none ,not one,did they claim all were automatically born with certain rights,that should not be taken away. It was because their gods had not created men in the image of God,their religions didn’t have that dogma.

    That is why Muslim intellectual Subboor Ahmad,who has studied philosophy,as has atheist Cosmic Skeptic, said human rights is a leftover from Christianity ,and based of the idea that men are born in the image of God ( the second said by him in a comment outside the debate).

    I think gravenimage and others would find the following debate a heads-up:

    “DEBATE: Can Atheism Justify Human Rights? | Cosmic Skeptic vs Subboor Ahmad”

    https://youtu.be/fPkUE-6svVU

    “

    • Doomer, your believing that you have to explain the history of the idea of human rights to me is mistaken.

      For anyone baffled by this from Doomer, in a previous post on another thread he essentially said that no Atheist can believe in human rights, because the idea has no basis without the concept of God. I noted that there are actually many very moral Atheists–including those here. Ayn Rand, for instance, bases the idea of human rights on reason.

      As for this debate, Subboor Ahmad is an apologist for terrorism and the other horrors of Islam–that he is saying that a large number of westerners have no right to speak about human rights is just really about slamming the concept of human rights in general, since this is *not* an Islamic concept. He is just castigating Infidels here, not as you appear to believe making a case for the existance of God (as oppsed to the vicious character of “Allah”.

      Alex O’Connor (CosmicSkeptic) also argues from reason–and he actually appears to be a person concerned about human rights–unlike Subboor Ahmed. The idea that Atheists can have no interest in human rights is in fact clearly given the lie here–obviously O’Connor *is* concerned about this.

      You cited Atheist Richard Dawkins saying that opposing rape is arbitrary–although he has actually condemned rape himself. Few Atheists condone rape, in fact. But Islam actually *sacralizes* rape–the “Prophet” Muhammed himself was a rapist, and Jihadists regularly rape Infidels and believe they have the right to use them as sex slaves.

      I note that you don’t consider O’Connor’s argument convincing, and that is fine–but I also note that you seem to have no such problem with the appalling Subboor Ahmed.

      You may agree with this Jihadist that Atheists have no right to support human rights. But to say that Atheists who support human rights have no right to do so is rejecting ethical allies against the horrors of Islam–I’m not actually sure why you would want to do that.

  12. They kill 3000. American citizens and think we will forget that muslims/islam did this. They yell kill America and christians and I should not pay attention to their threats? Wrong, I don’t trust them and I think it ‘s justified.

Discover more from

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading

Skip to content