Obama Prayer Leader "Linked" to Hamas; So Is Jimmy Carter, I Presume

Fox News and other right-wingers are now playing gotcha with what they see as a vulnerability in an otherwise almost invulnerable celebration/inauguration - drawing a "connection" between someone on Obama's lineup of religious leaders, hence his "side", and .... lots of ooohs and ahhhs and looks of fear and loathing, please ... TERRORISM.

Ingrid Mattson, president of the Islamic Society of North America, is one of many religious leaders scheduled to speak at the prayer service at Washington's National Cathedral.

Mattson has been the guest of honor at State Department dinners and has met with senior Pentagon officials during the Bush administration. She also spoke at a prayer service at the Democratic National Convention in Denver. Mattson, who was elected president of the society in 2006, is a professor of Islamic studies at Hartford Seminary in Hartford, Conn.

But in 2007 and as recently as last July, federal prosecutors in Dallas filed court documents linking the Plainfield, Ind.-based Islamic society to the group Hamas, which the U.S. considers a terrorist organization.

Neither Mattson nor her organization have been charged. But prosecutors wrote in July that they had "a wide array of testimonial and documentary evidence expressly linking" the group to Hamas and other radical groups.

Note that it says "federal prosecutors" were the sources for this alleged affiliation. Then note that Hamas, named as a "terrorist organization" by the United States, also happens to have been the political party that was voted into power by the Palestinians in a "free and fair election" that was overseen by none other than former U.S. President Jimmy Carter. Yes, Jimmy Carter, the right-wing's favorite whipping boy, who also happened to have overseen a number of other foreign elections, to the approval of the United States, or at least, certainly not to his condemnation.

Yet clearly, by this, and by his inflammatory book entitled - wouldn't he be booted off dailykos for this? - "Peace, Not Apartheid" - Jimmy Carter is obviously linked to Hamas and linked to terrorism. How dare he make such inflammatory statements against Israel as accusing them of apartheid? How dare he criticize Israel? Israel is our friend, right or wrong. Wasn't the invasion of Lebanon "conducted" with impunity? Never mind that Lebanon is a sovereign nation. Flying in the face of national sovereignty is a Neocon Calling Card, or should I say right of passage. And Israel's government is the quintessential neocon's dream. Security always trumps compassion, or even cooperation. Compassion is always there basically, or so it appears, for PR.

In fact, Jimmy Carter's links to Hamas and terrorism are stronger than those of Ingrid Mattson, that - do we shudder at the word? - Muslim. She wears a terrorist hijab, in solidarity with terrorism and Islam, which are of course, one and the same. But she never wrote a book entitled Peace Not Apartheid. She did not oversee the election that put Hamas in power. And the allegations are against her organization, not her personally. Never mind that her organization is widely considered to be the most moderate mainstream organization for Muslims in America.

And Jimmy Carter's association with Hamas was not just the allegations of a prosecutor. And nobody even knows the "basis" on which those allegations were made. Jimmy Carter actually wants Palestinians' rights to be considered in negotiations regarding middle east peace in the region. Now that's a tie to terrorism, since Palestinians' rights are right there on Hamas' charter, along with the destruction of Israel. So by these "ties", Jimmy Carter is clearly asking for the destruction of Israel.

And of course, Obama, by having a Muslim give a prayer, is giving in to terrorism. And since any Muslim can probably be linked to terrorism with the flick of a switch, sort of at will, he should have known. But you know, maybe we can forgive him.

After all, Ingrid Mattson also has "ties" to anti-terror efforts.

Law enforcement agencies have used the organization's annual convention as part of its outreach to the Muslim community. The group has provided religious training to the FBI, according to court documents. Karen Hughes, a former Bush confidant and under secretary of state, called Mattson "a wonderful leader and role model for many, many people."

And to Jewish groups. And to the U.S. government.

Mark Pelavin, director of inter-religious affairs for the Union for Reform Judaism, another organization participating in the prayer service, called Mattson "a really important voice denouncing terrorism."

"Clearly, Dr. Mattson has been welcome throughout the government," he said. "I haven't found anyone anywhere who's found anything Dr. Mattson has said that's anything other than clearly denouncing terrorism in quite explicit Islamic terms."

Pelavin's group has a partnership with the Islamic Society to encourage members of mosques and synagogues to build ties nationwide.

Attorneys for Mattson's group wrote in court documents that it is not a subject or target of the Holy Land investigation. The group has worked with the Bush administration's Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, according to court documents.

Wait! Isn't that what neocons and other Islamophobes are always taunting Muslims to do? Denounce terrorism? Then when someone actually does, some prosecutor is dragged out to create a damning "link" to terrorism, thus undercutting the efforts of the terrorism-denouncer and harming their credibility. How can you expect Muslims to come out and denounce terrorism when that in itself could create a "keyword" that would be picked up by "echelon" or some other spying "entity" and would brand that already-under-suspicion Muslim as a "terrorist"? If someone like Ingrid Mattson, who has been praised for her efforts by people from all sides of the equation, can be "linked" to terrorism, what about the rest of us?

This heavy-handedness only makes the situation worse and keeps moderates in hiding while extremists have lots of fuel for the fire. Extremists have nothing to lose, basically. Moderates have everything to lose.

As to the prosecutor "source", that may be about to disappear:

According to e-mails filed in the court case, one of the prosecutors seemed willing to ask the judge to remove the group from the list.

If this is some sort of tactic to dampen down the Obama inauguration's high ground and excitement, it's also typical of the previous 8 years' path toward destruction that wants to use smear tactics and lies to prevent goodwill and cooperation.

The whole world needs more goodwill and cooperation, and Ingrid Mattson, a woman convert to Islam and Islamic scholar - talk about breaking down barriers! - is the kind of leader we need more of. Obama and his team should be proud, not wary, of their choice. It's not like he's the first one to recognize Mattson's importance and beneficial, outspoken stance.

Terrorism Against Muslims Hits Ohio in Ramadan

This disconcerting news about terrorism against Muslims is just in (quoted in full):

Baboucarr Njie was preparing for his prayer session Friday night, Sept. 26, when he heard children in the Islamic Society of Greater Dayton coughing. Soon, Njie himself was overcome with fits of coughing and, like the rest of those in the building, headed for the doors.

"I would stay outside for a minute, then go back in, there were a lot of kids," Njie said. "My throat is still itchy, I need to get some milk."

Njie was one of several affected when a suspected chemical irritant was sprayed into the mosque at 26 Josie St., bringing Dayton police, fire and hazardous material personnel to the building at 9:48 p.m.

Someone "sprayed an irritant into the mosque," Dayton fire District Chief Vince Wiley said, noting that fire investigators believe it was a hand-held spray can.

According to fire dispatch communications, a child reported seeing two men with a white can spraying something into a window. That child was brought to the supervising firefighter at the scene.

Wiley would not discuss that report, but said the investigation has been turned over to police. Police were not commenting.

The 300 or so inside were celebrating the last 10 days of Ramadan with dinner and a prayer session, but the prayer session was interrupted so those suffering from tearing, coughing and shortness of breath could receive treatment.

Wiley said an adult and juvenile were taken to area hospitals and others had their eyes or faces washed on the scene. He did not know how many people were treated at the scene.

Ismail Gula, ISGD secretary, said people were praying during the weekly service when some in the audience began to cough and experience breathing troubles, then left the building. Once outside, several of them called 911, Gula said.

Tarek Sabagh, a member of the ISGD board, wasn't present when the incident occurred.

He said his daughter called and told him to stay away because of the possibility of remaining fumes. Sabagh arrived shortly after and watched from the mosque's steps as members were allowed back inside about 11 p.m. to collect belongings.

"It's very disturbing," Sabagh said. "Something like this has never happened before."

Sabagh said members moved to a Beavercreek school to finish their prayer session as police continued to investigate.

"I don't know if people will have the feeling of trust to come back tomorrow or next week or next month," Sabagh said. "I don't know how people will feel."

Ramadan is the ninth month of the Muslim calendar. During the month, Muslims fast (do not eat) from sunrise to sunset. In the evening and in the morning before the sun comes up, they eat small meals. During this month, they take extra time for family, inner reflection, and spiritual growth.

This shows the anti-Muslim sentiment which is a direct result of the so-called Global War on Terror. You can't have a war based solely on ideology and win. It's always ultimately a lose-lose.

One loss is participation of Muslims in American politics and society, an important way of mitigating terrorism. In fact, it's the only real solution. Yet here's the reaction of one Muslim on dailykos after this incident:

Keep in mind, as many of you know, Muslims in america are well assimilated, mainstream moderate people, often times professionals who contribute greatly to the communities in which they live.

But because of Fox News, because of right wing organizations, like the Clarion FUND and their viscious attacks on islam, because of daniel pipes and ohers like him, Islam has been maligned to the extent thathate crime is an acceptable part of the rights tradition. They believe that Muslims are out to destroy America.

No matter the facts, no matter the reality, all that matters is the propaganda they listen to on Rush Limbaugh and Fox News, etc....

Cal Thomas editorials are in my local paper virtually every day. The man rants against muslims all the time. And there are many others like him. Michelle Malkin. This Kathleen Parker who has recenltly called for Palins resignation has viciously attacked muslims in the past.

So many of them. And so, the regular people believe this crap, and they believe it is their duty to defend america against this Mortal enemy.

And when attacks like this happen. Nothing much is done, BECAUSE, muslims are ignored by and large. Their situation their suffering EVEN their votes dont seem to matter much.

Fortunately, a large and sympathetic response from the site assures us that not everyone has that divisive, partisan, emotional, fear-mongering, and unthinking attitude. Now we need more conscientious men and women of conscience in the media reporting an incident like this, and more public outcry.

Blaming Muslims for Terrorism: Blood Sport for the Cheesecake Crowd

Columnist Walter Williams wrote a piece entitled "Peaceful Muslims," blaming the peaceful majority of Muslims for the actions of terrorists, in response to which I wrote the following, addressed to Mr. Williams:

This column reflects a very common theme coming from all sides, left and right, of the non-Muslim world. Such a piece is an easy one to write, to be sure, as it seems so obvious and there is such a broad consensus in the West on this point. (One point important to interject here is that the article referred to in this piece is this one found on the acrimoniously anti-Islam site where Mr. Islamofascism Week, David Horowitz, holds court, Frontpage. Their bias is that all things Islamic are bad, all things Western Christian are good. End of story.)

This point of view also strongly supports the idea of a Global War on Terror, another point regarding which there is broad consensus, almost to the point where it's become a given, like the assumptions that the universe started with nothing more than a Big Bang, or that socialism in itself is what caused the USSR to become repressive, or that the way to deal with Climate Change is to switch to biofuels and Primuses, join a commune and bring the entire world back not to 1968, but to 1768, when carbon emissions were presumably a tiny fraction of what they are today. It all sounds good on paper, but on the ground it ain't necessarily so.

First, we presume "Islam" and "Muslim" to be one vast, coherent force, one gigantic religious bloc, acting on some level in a manner expressive of what Islam is. "Muslims" are usually, as in your column, seen as and compared with citizens of a nation or, in their case, a huge empire, as if the dreaded/fantasized "caliphate" were a reality and this massive public voice is an expression of unconscionable apathy in the face of evil.

In reality on the ground, the one true thread in all this is the "unconscionable apathy in the face of evil" part. Or you can forget the divisive word "evil" and say "oppression." Even the Qur'an warns against following corrupt and oppressive leaders, emphasizing the responsibility of the "little people", those who use their oppression as an excuse for inaction, abandoning their responsibility to take action to change their situation. The Qur'an refers to them as "corrupt." So does this jive with your point?

Absolutely not. The oppression or "evil" here is oppression. It is the dictatorships that govern almost every Muslim population on the planet, such as Egypt, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Sudan, Libya, now Pakistan, and even Indonesia. Note I did not mention Iran. They do have parties and some degree of representative government and Ahmedinejad did not get there by a yes-no referendum, but by multi-party popular vote. Lebanon is another nation with representative government and multi-party elections that also has a sizeable and powerful Muslim population. Notably, we don't approve of either, despite their democratic bent, mainly due to their nasty predilection for pro-Palestinian views. Oooh, those nasty Palestinians! But I digress...

The point is that Muslims are citizens in repressive regimes. They are, for the most part, passive recipients of repression/oppression. They know it is wrong to take this lying down, and nobody likes it. But one look at Tibet and the former Soviet Union and you can see that a little people power can backlash into even more repression. It's like the torture at Gitmo: a "suspect" tries to tell the truth and it doesn't work, so he tells the lies his tormenters want to hear to stop the pain, but it seems they only want to take collective revenge on him.

To most Muslims living under dictatorships, they see the West feeding and caring for their oppressors, and making it impossible for them to get out of their hunger, poverty or misery. "Terrorists" are, to many of them, merely "freedom fighters" with an agenda they understand as taking extreme action under extreme circumstances - people, in some cases, with no truly functioning government, no economy, no infrastructure, no social support, no hope. Or people who feel that the West is catering to a wealthy elite at their expense, plundering the people's resources, using their lands as military bases for adventures that seem only to harm their world. The so-called "liberation" of Iraq was a sham, to them a blatant oil-grab upon which was clumsily tacked-on a promise of "democracy". Word on the street is that "democracy" means "kiss Uncle Sam's feet" and adopt so-called "Western" culture. It means submit to Western dominance. It means obliteration of their culture, their religion, even their pride. It means sinking deeper into poverty. Is that not what happened to Iraq? To Egypt? To other so-called "Western-friendly" nations?

This is not how we see it, of course - this view seems absurd, nonsensical to us. But to them it is obvious fact. In the face of this, the only ones apparently standing for their pride, their culture and religion, their self-determination against the monolithic Western powerbrokers, are the "terrorists". At least they are, in their own deadly way, standing for their Muslim brothers' and sisters' pride. Just as to you, the whole population of Islamic countries is fair game:

"Because those millions of peace-loving Muslims do not speak out and expose
terrorists and don't more fully cooperate with domestic and international
authorities trying to stop terrorists, they become enemies of the West just as
the peace-loving people in Germany, Italy and Japan became enemies of the Allied
powers during World War II. Like them, Muslims should be prepared to suffer the
full might of the West in its efforts to fight terrorism. I'm hoping that the
millions of peaceful Muslims take the proper action to avoid such an outcome.
I'm not that optimistic. We're involved in a clash with a culture that has
little regard for the Western values that hold the sanctity of human life and
liberty dear."

Can you imagine for a moment that Muslims on the street say that the West is a culture that has little regard for the Islamic values that hold the sanctity of human life and liberty dear? They are telling us that our Western civilians should be prepared to suffer the full might of the Islamic world in its efforts to fight oppression. Of course, whether in fact terrorism fights oppression, or is even Islamic in any way, is another issue, to which I would answer a resounding "No!" But the West makes it extremely difficult to take a stand in that way. You’re demanding, on pain of eradication, that Muslims do the West’s bidding for the West’s own interests, preferably in a state of prostration. Somehow, the sanctity of human life and its liberty don’t come off as the value being promoted.

We are, to them, a nation of 21st Century Marie Antoinettes who can't even conceive of what it's like to be poor or powerless. Marie Antoinette is certainly beautiful, respectable, and knows her little world well, but she sure as hell shouldn't be making all these blind, self-assured, self-righteous remarks about people she does not understand in the least. And when a bomb causes tea to spill on her perfect silk designer dress, not a tear is shed in the land of the perennial underdog. When she falls in a swoon, Muslims have a hard time working up a state of mourning. Just as, I suppose, we don’t get bleary-eyed over the wives and children of Guantanamo detainees.

When I heard about the London bombings, I was sick to my stomach. How could these people do this?? Why?? It only makes things worse ... for Muslims! As a Muslim, I am one of the many victims of terrorism and its counterpart, the Global War on Terror. I wanted to reach out and stop this. A large number of Muslims in the UK did just that, protesting the bombings and voicing their anger. But who listens, who hears? Those protests can‘t compete with the spectacular terror events. And again, the West is about as attractive an ally for the Muslim downtrodden as Ms. Antoinette was for the French poor. Being cheerleaders for the West's GWOT, one of history's most unimaginably vast examples of overkill, doesn’t play as a self-respecting option.

The West tends to put Muslims in the untenable position of either A) cheering on people who see their only option to fight oppression is to attack innocents, vulnerable civilians, the easy targets in often-horrific macho “Events“… or B) embracing the islamophobic, Marie Antoinette-impersonating, self-serving, fat cats of the West as the proper representatives of their collective soul.

Given this ugly, banal choice, and they go with their gut. And gut-decisions tend to be xenophobic. Oops! We’re the outsiders. It doesn't help that the word "terrorist" is variously applied to virtually any group that attacks Western targets, even military targets. Al-Qaeda in Iraq, for example, commits atrocities that would be unthinkable to, say, Hezbollah or even Hamas. Many suspect AQI is a Western-backed front organization to foment sectarian violence in Iraq. It's obviously not true, but, hey, after the Hamas-Fatah rift turned out to be a US covert action, causing unbearable human turmoil and agony among an already oppressed and occupied society ... well, what do you expect them to think? That we're all about cooperation and democracy? It's a hell of a hard sell, man.

The news to you is that neither terrorists nor the West represent the Muslim people, a non-homogeneous collection of homo sapiens from many countries, most of whom are barely on speaking terms with each other, if that, and agree on virtually nothing, not even agreeing to disagree, except in a few exceptional moments of triumph. For the most part, they survive psychologically and spiritually by either fantasy, religion, or both. Neither is conducive to calm, logic-based political action. We should cut them some slack, give them some understanding and nuance, try to get off our high horse and stop feeding the man-eating tigers that rule their lands, and stop invading them. After all, the terrorists also work on PR in the Muslim world. And we’re stepping all over our toes to show them how much we don’t give a damn about them, about democracy, or about the earth itself, for that matter, choosing always the capitalistically attractive direction du jour.

And you should stop these easy, careless platitudes that only shift responsibility away from those who can afford it and on to those who can't - whose poverty and powerlessness we support by our taxdollar-fed invasive foreign policies. We put al-Qaeda in Iraq for three trillion bucks. Osama bin Laden's son (and a few like-minded guys) stopped further al-Qaeda action in the US by showing him the Qur'an specifically prohibits this type of terrorist action, and that 9-11-style shows could actually incur God‘s wrath. (I know you want us to take the credit for this, but really - not even a bona fide attempt?? DHS has to manufacture internal terrorist threats to keep its budget up, for God's sake.) But of course, we don't talk to terrorists, as if they were a species of primate cyborg. Only when terrorists are seen by the society as an instrument of oppression, not a fight against oppressors, will there be a stronger movement against it - if they‘re not mowed down in the process, that is.

Guns are expensive and impressive. But talk - and I mean thoughtful, considerate discourse - is cheap and more effective. Sadly, it is something we can't do any more, having sold that ability to the loudest bidders. Yeah, man, it's all about pride, and being treated with a little respect, not a pawn to be mowed down in front of the self-styled "Masters of the Universe." And you, of all people, should know better.

Muslim Hero to New York Subway Jews

In a twist on post-9/11 worldviews, a young Muslim man risked his life to help two Jewish victims of a racist attack in a New York subway. The perpetrators were yelling "Merry Christmas!" and in response, a young Jewish couple said "Happy Hannukah!" - it being, in fact, Hannukah at the time and not Christmas, incidentally - to which the Christmas-yellers responded by a brutal physical attack. The Muslim, a Sunni originally from Pakistan - ooh, doesn't he fit the terrorist profile? - came to their rescue, and was himself beaten up by the Merry Christmas crew.

Now don't tell me about how many Christians are shuddering, saying "That's not typical of us!"

Will they instead say, "That's not typical of Muslims!" ... ???

Don't they represent Pat Robertson and his ilk? Don't those thugs represent Christendom and those who follow the many and sundry sects and visions and splinter groups of Christianity? Don't they speak for every and any Christian? If they yelled "Kill the Jews!" - well, didn't Hitler do that, too? So shall we arrest all Christians then, to save the Jews? Are not all Christians alike?

If you don't think so, then why do you apply the same great logic to Muslims? Is not Osama bin Laden the Spokesperson at Large for all Islam? Looks like Gitmo will be the destiny for a hell of a lot of people if we don't rein in our profiling proliferation...

We'll have to detain all Christians on suspicion of killing the Jews, and presumably, to appease the Evangelical wing, detain Jews because if Jesus comes again they might kill him, and of course, we're already detaining Muslims because they are known to be bloodthirsty. Humankind is really basically rotten, and that's what Guantanamo and the Patriot Act and the whole War on Terror are all about. It's about saving humans from themselves by locking them up so somebody can get rich.

Hopefully, that someone will ride the subway ... if there's anyone left to run it. In the meantime, those of us in the real world ought to sit back and enjoy this news story that has a good ending, breaking all the neocon Cheney-Bush-driven stereotypes that are pulling us back into a very dangerous netherworld.

A huge thank you to Hassan Askari!

Richard Posner Favors Surveillance of All US Muslims

"There, but for the grace of God, go I." Under surveillance, Sheikh Posner! To the Kangaroo Court you go!"

The title is a link to this brainboggling article, which is the culmination of all things Orwellian where reason is replaced by the knee-jerk notion, "Have you screwed bin Laden today?"

Of course, it speaks volumes for the "First Freedom," freedom of religion. Which was right up there in the First Amendment along with freedom of speech until Mr. Posner came along and saw fit to class all Muslims with UBL, who has been trying hard to repent, but we just won't let 'im, folks.

Now bear in mind that Richard Posner is a possible Supreme Court Justice contender, and considered a "libertarian" or "liberal" as opposed to an "authoritarian". The Aussie article where this story broke, reports:

" Melbourne QC Tim Tobin said it was a shock to hear such hard and isolationist positions coming from a judge known as a liberal thinker. While he was disturbed by the judge's proposed crackdown on US and Canadian Muslims, he suspected the sentiment would be welcomed by the Howard Government.
Judge Posner raised the prospect of secret trials as a "tailored regime" to prosecute terrorists in cases where there was a concern about classified information going public.
Queensland SC Glenn Martin said he had been "jolted" by the address: "I hope we never have secret trials in Australia." "

It sounds like the notion of Big Brother and Kangaroo Courts is resonating in the supposed halls of justice. These guys no longer believe in justice. For justice cannot be meted out on the basis of fear, or on the basis of emotions. Maybe he never heard of the Salem witchcraft trials. Maybe he forgot about the Spanish inquisition. When emotions, especially fear, are running high, well, it's hard to really believe in due process. Ask any crime victim. On the other hand, shall we give up 200 years of due process for which our founding fathers fought so hard because some old guys are so whipped up into a state of fear that they forget the cause of all their terror in the first place?

And what's that "cause"? It's their own demons: greed, blindness, power-lust, oppression, cruelty, and prejudice. Withdraw the troops from invasive ill-begotten wars, stop financing the eternal Israeli occupation of the Palestinians (with oppression and murder and bulldozing rampant), take care of our own Americans, hold together our respected and free Republic, give what we can to the hungry and downtrodden, and the "terrorists", especially the "Islamic terrorists", will vanish into the sunset, quite suddenly. Leaving a struggling but peaceful, and terror-free landscape. Not a dream, not a promise, but an obvious, glaring truth.

One species, too many lies. Truth endures.

Record number of Chinese Muslims making pilgrimage to Makkah

Many people do not know that Islam is alive and well in China. Oh, yes, and that it's universal, and has nothing to do with being of one ethnicity or another. Contrary to popular opinion.

Just some stats:

To prevent possible accidents, China's Regulations on Religious Affairs,
which was promulgated in 2004, stipulates that all outbound pilgrimage
activities of Chinese Muslims should be organized by the national Islamic
association, referring to the IAC.

China has more than 20 million Muslims, mainly living in Xinjiang,
Qinghai, Ganshu, Ningxia, Yunnan, Shaanxi, Inner Mongolia and Henan. Starting in
1985, nearly 100,000 Muslims have fulfilled their pilgrimages.

"Aliens in America": Comic Diplomacy Trumps Guns ... Hopefully

In the war on terror, is there a more effective weapon in ... comedy? In a new sitcom on CW network, "Aliens in America," comedy wins.

An interview with "Mad About You" co-creator David Guarascio on the altmuslim website reveals how the show was conceived and ultimately became the first TV series with a lead character who is also a Muslim Pakistani teen in suburban America - and the whole thing actually succeeds in being funny. As Guarascio says,
"We also started talking about politics and the giant gap that exists between Americans and really the rest of the world, specifically the Muslim world. In that stew, we sort of came up with the idea for the show."

The "situation" involves "all the insecurities, anxieties, and nightmare experiences of high school" and the interviewer, Wajahat Ali, notes "the main character Justin Tolchuk, played by Dan Byrd, is one of the unluckiest and dorkiest teenagers I've seen on television in a long time." Guarascio describes him as "feeling like an alien in his own school."
"So, the idea is that we are all sort of aliens in one way or another."
The reaction from the American Muslim community has been very enthusiastic. As Guarascio reveals,
"The first results we usually get from Muslims is "thank you for doing a comedy," Nobody ever called MPAC with a comedy, usually it's very serious, a drama, not always terrorism, but always very, very serious. So, they said thank you for a comedy because it allows people to relax a bit and is a lot more inclusive, and more can identify with comedy than drama."
Interestingly, the idea for the main protaganist, Justin, comes from the experiences of Guarascio's co-creator for the show, Moses Port, who
"comes from a small town that is entirely Christian and he was just one of the couple of Jewish kids in his school. During Christmas time, the whole school would sing Christmas songs together, and they would put Moses and one other kid on stage to sing Hanukkah songs. So, he has distinctive feelings about being marked for his differences."
The feeling of being a stranger in a strange land could, through the universal medium of humor, bring together people who, in other circumstances, have been at war. The real war on terror is in breaking down the terror, the fear, the xenophobia, the ethnic prejudices on all sides. With comedy? Well, it's universal, it's a common language, it's not aggressive, it's compelling, and compared with the military weapons we've spent so much on, maybe it's more effective.
We need a surge of great universal sitcoms... right about now...
After all, America has successfully brought together vastly different people from clashing cultures to live together in relative peace in one society. The very charisma of that idea helps form the bond that keeps us together.
Maybe this comedy-to-peace thing should go farther. How about a surge of great universal sitcoms? ... once we get those explosives out of the way...