Fox‘s Megyn Kelly interviews Ayaan Hirsi Ali (4/10/14), who’s always available to demonize Muslims.
After an outcry from students, faculty and civil rights groups in early April, Brandeis University withdrew its invitation to honor notorious Islamophobe Ayaan Hirsi Ali at its 2014 commencement.
The right-wing echo chamber—which adores Hirsi Ali and parades her on Fox News whenever there’s a need to demonize Muslims—responded with predictable outrage (Media Matters, 4/11/14).
Far more disturbing was how the mainstream media whitewashed Hirsi Ali’s bigotry.
The New York Times (4/8/14) called her “a campaigner for women’s rights and a fierce critic of Islam.” The Los Angeles Times (4/11/14) described her as “a feminist and outspoken critic of Islam,” while to the Boston Globe (4/9/14), she was “a prominent advocate for women’s rights and an outspoken critic of Islam.”
But how does this square with reality?
Hirsi Ali has labeled Islam in its entirety “a destructive, nihilistic cult of death” (London Evening Standard, 2/7/07) that must be “defeated” by the West “militarily” (Reason, 11/07). She has urged the United States to amend its Constitution to strip American Muslims of their civil rights (Reason, 11/07)).
Calling for state violence against 1.6 billion Muslims is not “criticism.” It is borderline genocidal.
Had Hirsi Ali made similar statements about Judaism, she would have quickly—and rightfully—been identified as an antisemite and ostracized. So why the pass on Islam-bashing?
It’s also absurd to suggest that Hirsi Ali is an advocate for women’s rights, given that she pushes the narrative that misogyny and violence are inherent to Islam.
Yet somehow, the New York Times managed to offer a veiled justification for such views, declaring, “Even some of Ms. Hirsi Ali’s critics say they understand her hostility to Islam, given her experiences.”
The Times goes on to describe those experiences: “A native of Somalia, she has written and spoken extensively of her experience as a Muslim girl in East Africa, including undergoing genital cutting, a practice she has vigorously opposed, and her family’s attempts to force her to marry a man against her wishes.”
The Times failed to inform its readers that Hirsi Ali fabricated many of these experiences. It was revealed in 2006 (Observer, 5/20/06) that Hirsi Ali had lied on her asylum application and invented much of her past. Though born in Somalia, she did not, as she had claimed, escape persecution and a forced marriage there. Nor was she raised in a strict Muslim family.
Rather, she lived a very comfortable and free life in Kenya before immigrating to the Netherlands. There she was elected to Parliament and allied with the anti-immigrant far right and warned against the dangers of accepting immigrants from Muslim countries (Asian Tribune, 5/20/06), essentially kicking the ladder out from under her.
Forced to resign from parliament over her fabrications, Hirsi Ali accepted a position at the war-hungry American Enterprise Institute and became an overnight darling of neoconservatives—who in the latest controversy have been her loudest defenders. Iraq war cheerleaders Bill Kristol (Weekly Standard, 4/9/14) and John Podhoretz (Commentary, 4/9/14) blasted liberals for supposedly silencing a feminist icon, while Zev Chafets, a pro-Israel fanatic, went so far as to liken Brandeis’ treatment of Hirsi Ali to an “honor killing” (Fox News, 4/10/14).
Conversely, Hirsi Ali’s loudest critics have always been Muslim feminists. In the Netherlands, they told Reuters (4/25/07) they were relieved to have her gone:
Hirsi Ali is held responsible by many in the Muslim community for “Islamis-ing” the Netherlands’ migrants, polarizing communities and diverting attention from those trying to boost integration in what they see as a more constructive approach.
“Let her call one woman forward and show how she really helped her,” said Famile Arslan, a 35-year-old family lawyer.
Muslim feminists in the US are equally repelled by Hirsi Ali’s hatemongering. But their voices were largely absent from mainstream coverage of the Brandeis controversy, with Al Jazeera America (4/14/14) being one of the few outlets to quote several American Muslim women.
Progressive women’s rights activist Linda Sarsour explained to AJA, “The problem we have with Ayaan Hirsi Ali is not that we invalidate her own experience, but she equates violence against women to Islam.” Sarsour added that “her story does not represent Islam or all Muslim women” and Hirsi Ali “has few allies among Muslim women around the world.”
And who can blame them? A vocal proponent of bombing majority-Muslim countries, Hirsi Ali believes the US should have attacked both Iraq and Iran after the September 11 terrorist attacks (Guernica, 2/27/07). How does dropping bombs on Muslim women and vilifying their faith help advocate for their rights?
I did a small search, and now I see you are the worst type of liberal organization, the kind that excuse Islamification and Islam terrorism.
You keep asking rhetorical questions of Hirsi. It seems to me if you really wanted to know, and wanted to know the details of her quotes context, you should have shown them, and asked her.
Yes, why would the US want to bomb Iran, one of the largest state sponsors of terrorism in the world, and along with so called ally Saudi Arabia, a major exporter of extremist Islam. Iran, a country that has been the major cause of destabilizing the Middle East, and is directly responsible for equipping and training insurgents in Iraq.
I suppose actually asking Hirsi, that would have taken up too much electrons?
Your almost as bad as that spastic idiot Ben Affleck.
Get a grip people. The Islam that Saudi Arabia and Iran has been exporting around the world for decades would execute every single one of you. Perhaps that would be a good thing and wake up some turgid thinking fools, but it would probably be excessive.
Islam is anti woman. It’s very scripture is deeply anti woman. Around the world we can see this effect. But for you, those women who are forced into arranged marriages, who are forced to wear the veil, who are forced to have sex, who can’t access birth control or abortions, who’s very life is at stake should she be raped and there are not 2.5 as many women around to testify, well if they have been indoctrinated from birth and love their indoctrination, then Hirsi, according to you, should just shut her mouth and live with her female genital mutilation.
Her voice has no worth.
Fuck each and every single one of you assholes, you have no right to have an opinion.
It’s not as flowery as your writing, but it’s essentially the same thing.
You shouldn’t be allowed to have a voice because I don’t like your opinion. Liberalism has turned into fascism. It used to be liberals actually cared about women who are being subjugated. Not if they are Islamic. What about the orthodox Jews? Do women who are isolated their entire lives, traded like chattel and treated like second class citizens, do they get to ignore abuse because they have been trained since birth to believe they deserve it?
Or how about the Jews themselves, and the overwhelming hatred shown towards them because of the Koran?
I suppose it must be OK, because the poor Islamic people are brown and downtrodden.
This video is 3 minutes 22 seconds long. People like yourself should be forced to watch it. Instead, I’ll just suggest it. It’s made by Muslims in a Western European country to show us Westerners that they are in no way extreme. Just good Muslims.
what muslims know and europeans fail to understand
So a quick look at just a single Hirsi quote that you linked to showed your a liar.
“A vocal proponent of bombing majority-Muslim countries, Hirsi Ali believes the US should have attacked both Iraq and Iran after the September 11 terrorist attacks (Guernica, 2/27/07).”
Either you can’t read, or you so wanted it to be true, you made it true in your mind. If that is true, please find the quote, in context. She says they invaded the wrong country, and they did it for oil.
I’m disgusted by you.
Hirsi Ali was born a musilm and has first hand experience of the abuse women in Islam experience. She is not an Islamophobe. She was astonished when she came to Europe that the only people criticial of Islam was the radical right. You should read her autobiography before spreading Islamic propaganda. World wide news coverage has chronicled Islamic violence very well. Every day hundreds are killed by muslims in their violent jihad. Over 1 million European women and children have been raped by muslim men alone. In Africa and India the number is far far higher. I do not support fascism or the radical right at all but this is one issue they understand well.
you can have your opinion but not your facts. She is a conwoman, look for yourself http://zembla.vara.nl/dossier/uitzending/the-holy-ayaan
So she’s a “conwoman” is she? So, according to YOUR definition, then Nelson Mandela must also be a “conman” as he also = altered his name to escape persecution! You are an idiot.
Hahahaha! “FAIR” eh? FAIRNESS & ACCURACY IN REPORTING ?? That’s priceless! Pure Orwelian doublespeak at its finest. The notion that Hirsi Ali is “Islamophobic” is beyond absurd. For a start, there’s no such thing as “Islamophobia”…it’s a WEAZEL WORD designed to shut up legitimate criticism of the IDEAS of Islam, by tarring it with the brush of “racism”. I have some information you may not know…Islam is NOT A RACE. It’s a set of IDEAS! You CANNOT be racist towards an IDEA! So GROW UP! Try to think like an adult.