Take one comedian, mix in a beauty queen, throw in some bigots and an exploding crow and you'll open an unorthodox window into the past year for Muslims in America.
It's been a tough year, so let's start with the crow.
One of the stupendously stupid protagonists of the British film Four Lions wires a crow to explode by remote control as part of the wannabe-jihadi schemes dreamed up by the film's eponymous four British Muslims. The smartest one of them uses The Lion King to explain to his young son the concept of holy war in the name of Islam, hence the "Lions" of the title.
I watched the film in New York City. And I knew the people laughing the loudest in the theater were Muslims: they got all the references to "Shaytan" (Satan), they got turns of phrases lifted verbatim from radical Islamic rhetoric masquerading as "authentic" Islam and they got the Arabic and Urdu curse words.
You almost expected a cameo from Anwar al-Awlaki, an American-Yemeni radical cleric dubbed a "Jihadi all-star" by a right-wing blog. Awlaki, who issued a call for the murder of American "devils," has been linked to last year's Ft. Hood shootings and the failed Christmas Day "underwear" bombing. Not many leaps of the imagination from exploding underwear to exploding crows.
Although it was set in the U.K., this NYC Muslim laughed so hard exactly because it was satire as revenge. What a relief to laugh at that madness at the end of a year when to look in the mirror as a Muslim in America was to have a scary radical -- stupid or not -- yell "boo" back at you. Who put him there? Watching the news often felt like an out of body experience in which we were all morphed into one ugly, scary reflection.
Or else Muslims were being asked to choose between two uglies: the radical super-imposed reflection or some politician claiming to take a swipe at those radicals but, in swinging so hard, he revealed his bigotry instead.
Take State Representative Rex Duncan's constitutional amendment to outlaw Islamic law from Oklahoma courtrooms which passed with 70 percent of the vote during the Republican mid-term landslide in November. No one had asked for Islamic law, but Duncan, a Republican, had called the constitutional amendment a part of "a war for the survival of America" and "a pre-emptive strike." Clearly, "pre-emptive strikes" have now moved from Bush war doctrine into legislation.
A federal judge temporarily blocked the state from putting it into effect, saying it didn't pass constitutional muster because it conveyed a message that the state favors one religion or particular belief over others.
None of the Muslims in the U.S. I know wants Islamic law. It has been interpreted differently and too often in a misogynistic way, but now, as the Council on American Islamic Relations (a civil liberties group which leans more conservative than many American Muslims) has gone to bat for Islamic law, we're squeezed into the false choice of conservatives versus bigots.
How about neither?
We are many in the U.S. who refuse that "choice." In 2005, I supported Canadian Muslim groups in their opposition to faith-based arbitration based on Islamic law in Ontario province. But that opposition clearly called for a ban on all faith-based arbitration. Ontario Premier Dalton MacGuinty wisely prohibited all religious-based tribunals to settle family disputes. Take a look at Jewish law and you'll find an uncanny pro-male bias in cases of family disputes.
Comedian Jon Stewart popped the bubble of bias wherever it popped up. More than anyone in 2010 -- Muslim or not -- he most eloquently and surgically unpacked the bigotry that fueled too many conversations about Muslims in the U.S., especially around the Park51 Islamic community center and mosque near Ground Zero.
It was difficult to find something to laugh at but the priceless heart of Stewart's comedy lies exactly where investigative journalism's fails to beat. For example, when he pointed out that a Saudi prince was a partner in News Corp, the parent company of Fox News, one of the loudest and most deceptive purveyors of the "Ground Zero Mosque" and the idea that foreign funding would help Muslims build a "victory mosque."
Park51 itself created an interesting dispute among Muslims in the U.S. Tariq Ramadan, author and professor of Islamic Studies who was once banned from entry into the U.S., suggested moving Park51 would be "symbolic and wise." Salman Rushdie, subject of a fatwa by Ayatollah Khomeini for his book, Satanic Verses, supported Park51's right to stay right where it was as part of First Amendment guarantees of freedom of religion and speech.
Shock! Muslim views are not a monolithic blob.
Enter Rima Fakih, the Lebanese-American who became the first Muslim Miss USA. As allergic as I am to beauty pageants, I have a huge girl crush on Rima: for her bikini that made even me struggle to concentrate, for thanking her mother for her support, for receiving glowing praise from an aunt in a headscarf in Lebanon who called Rima the "pride of southern Lebanon" and for wrong-footing many Muslims unsure whether to cheer or condemn a Muslim beauty queen.
But the Wrong Footing Prize -- or rather Shoot Yourself in the Foot Prize -- must surely go to Pastor Terry Jones who captivated too many with his threats to burn copies of the Quran on the anniversary of 9/11. Surely as much as I hate looking in the media mirror and seeing "all-star Jihadis" reflected back, no Christian American wanted a media-hungry book burner as a template.
As Duke University's first Muslim Chaplain Abullah T. Antepli so aptly put it when we recorded a Bloggingheads TV conversation, Jones was a reminder that "Muslims didn't own the crazies."
It's an important reminder for 2011: The "crazies" of all stripes are on one side, demanding from the rest of us a false choice, "us" or "them" over and over.
One of the most bitter sweet scenes in Four Lions involves a would-be "jihadi" dancing with a non-Muslim neighbor who has no idea she's standing in a safe-house being used to store explosives. The two of them, headphones on, yelling out the lyrics to "Dancing in the Moonlight" are happily oblivious to the world and the explosives until the Four Lions and their "us" and "them" rhetoric return.
Jon, keep popping those bubbles for us all in 2011.
Follow Mona Eltahawy on Twitter: www.twitter.com/monaeltahawy
John Feffer: The Lies of Islamophobia: The Three Unfinished Wars of the West Against the Rest
Judge Blocks Oklahoma's Ban on Using Shariah Law in Court ...
Voters say no to sharia in … Oklahoma? | Analysis & Opinion |
Islam in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Muslims in America: A Series by Andrea Elliott
Mona Eltahawy: Muslims in America, Circa 2010
Muslims in America increasingly alienated as hatred grows in Bible ...
Please keep telling everyone it is the Christians who are the dangerous ones and how Muslims are so accepting of others....
I could care less what your personal voodoo beliefs are. Just don;t go harassing others beliefs and god as being false and yours as the only truth. If you are bigoted towards others belief that you deserve to be mocked for your beliefs.
A given religion's right to be left alone by outsiders should be reciprocal and contingent upon its responsibility to leave outsiders alone.
America became great because we have celebrated our differences...they have become our entertainment, empowered our imaginations, and enriched our lives. As the French say: "Vive la Differance!"
U.S. has been been spared most of the calamities which befell Europe because of three main factors.
1. multi-cultural fantasies have been largely ignored by pragmatic Americans.
2. America is not a welfare state and immigrants are forced to work, and therefore forced to integrate more. Which leaves them less time for whining and Jihad.
3. In some American states Jihadist demonstrations such as common in London ( and New York) would've been stopped by the local boys without too much ceremony. Second Amendment Rules.
1. Mono-cultural states do not exist.
2. Sweden is a welfare state and we have had less home grown terrorist then the U.S.
3. That's because the KKK doesn't have any locals in Europe!
Islamic scholar Dr. Zakir Naik explains that Is. .lam is correct while all other religions are false
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=plyS8sIUjmQ&feature=player_embedded
In the past it has been well documented that the Metro White Intelligencia has criticized, looked down upon, scoffed, and made fun of Catholics and Christians as being un intelligent due to their religious beliefs being illogical and having magical thinking. Then why are they scared of Muslims and revere them placing them on a high mantle? Does this also imply when Mexican immigrants place their banner of the Virgin Mary when begging for amnesty dies that mean the Metro White Intelligencia criticize, look down upon, scoffed, and make fun of them being illogical and having magical thinking.
A very heartfelt Thank You to all the HuffPo users who defended American Muslims and our rights this year. Truly appreciate it!
If you reject Sharia Law (and many American Muslims like Rauf do not, although it is a bit difficult to know what Sharia is since no one has a good definition that I can find), and you have some calling for the implementation of Sharia in the US, and you disagree, why not speak up?
Why the reluctance?
Why the silence?
Are you afraid of CAIR?
Really?
Why not let your fellow Americans know where you stand? Join the debate, reject extremism, have candlelight vigils, marches, protests, demonstrations, burn effigies, write letters, etc; make it clear that bin Laden and Qaradawi do not speak for you.
You see, when there are crowds of hundreds of thousands of Muslims around the world marching and rioting on a regular basis screaming Death to America or something similar, when there are fatwahs calling for the death of all Americans over and over, and this goes on for 30+ years, it tends to make an impression on other Americans, don't you think?
So if you personally disagree, and your friends and fellow Muslims disagree, you have to be louder. More forceful. More organized.
Otherwise, I forsee terrible trouble ahead.
Or else Muslims were being asked to choose between two uglies: the radical super-imposed reflection or some politician claiming to take a swipe at those radicals but – in swinging so hard – he revealed his bigotry instead. "
It seems she thinks that Mu. lms are born to be victims. She almost pictures them as if they somehow need to be saved from their own nature. and I think they do.
basically this new 'temple' will be used to propagate the new religion of 'moderate is. .lam'.
http://www.newsweek.com/2010/08/06/the-real-ground-zero.html
The debate over whether an Islamic center should be built a few blocks from the World Trade Center has ignored a fundamental point. If there is going to be a reformist movement in Islam, it is going to emerge from places like the proposed institute. We should be encouraging groups like the one behind this project, not demonizing them. Were this mosque being built in a foreign city, chances are that the U.S. government would be funding it.
It's an important reminder for 2011: The "crazies" of all stripes are on one side, demanding from the rest of us a false choice, "us" or "them" over and over.
==========================
Muslims who want Sharia law are not crazy. Non-Muslims who do not want Sharia law in America are not crazy. They simply disagree about the definition of the good society.
The choice is real and necessary and getting more pressing as time goes on. One either believes that Sharia produces a better society or one does not. I do not, and you seem to agree.
That puts us on the same side of this issue. Who is on the other side? Islamists--proponents of Islamic government.
Who are the Islamists in America?
The Islamic Circle of North America (and many other Muslim Brotherhood organizations)
The Council on American Islamic Relations
The North American Islamic Trust
The Fiqh Council of North America
Awlaki, Ramadan, Qaradawi and Rauf are the leading proponents of Sharia law for the West.
Those are your enemies, not Rep. Duncan, Fox News, Terry Jones or "conservatives and bigots."
You ask "How about neither?" This is an ideological and physical civil war within Islam. Good luck trying to get Conscientious Objector status.
If you need to learn more about the issues surrounding Islamism and reform, go for it.
The Saudi Prince, The Mosque And Fox News
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129584557
Yet the parent company of Fox News shares a financial backer with the imam who is at the center of the firestorm. The second-largest holder of voting stock in News Corp. is Saudi Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal, a nephew of the Saudi king. And through his philanthropies, Waleed has given generously to initiatives pursued by the imam, Feisal Abdul Rauf.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/hindu-extremists-burn-down-village-churches-766873.html
I do agree that ordinances prohibiting all religious tribunals from civil law implementation are more appropriate. A ban on Saudi financing of US mosques would also be constructive.
But I would also restrict Iran's ability to do the same, even though they are not anywhere in the same league. And if any other Muslim entity arises to try to pick up the slack, they should suffer the same fate.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali: On Losing Faith In "religion"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0txwUT8Csh4&feature=fvw
Here is another feminist who was a previous Mu. sli. .m and currently an inf. ide .l
Ayaan Hirsi + Bill Maher: The truth about Is. l .am
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyYZulIxNCE&feature=related
Please.
You see, when this belief system is being forced on the West, the West needs to hear ALL sides of the issue, not just the good and the whitewashed.
And by the way, when there are violent Islamists speaking for you that you disagree with you, why do you not object and protest them?
If you don't we assume you side with them.