Time for Hollywood to make a Mohammad bio-pic

There’s a lot of talk about freedom of speech, freedom of expression, and freedom of the press right now in light of what happened in Paris at the offices of Charlie Hebdo, but what will our response be in the West?

Shall we be so intimidated that we will cower away in fear as that which is intolerant forces us into their coerced definition of tolerance? You know what happens then: when tolerance becomes a one-way street it leads to cultural suicide.

We have the President of Turkey, Recip Erdogan basically saying, “you got what you deserved” — and our President, Barack Obama, refers to Erdogan as his friend. How many of you watched the movie, “Kingdom of Heaven?” Sure, many say, great movie but it was historically inaccurate in many ways — first of all, there was never an explanation as to why Pope Urban II called for The Crusades in 1095 — because of Christian pilgrims being attacked by Muslims.

Well, it’s time we find some courage to historically portray the truth, and my good friend Bill Siegel — who took me to my first ever NY Knicks game, and has a pretty well-known and exceptional fiancee named Monica Crowley — has penned a pretty good recommendation for Hollywood in the Washington Times.

Siegel thinks it’s about time Holllywood will depict the story of Mohammad’s life. According to Siegel:

What would an accurate and fair film of Mohammad’s life show?

One would see “Jihad” in action with Mohammad beheading 600-900 Jews of the Banu Quraizah tribe as their heads roll into trenches, taking women and children as slaves, leading more than 25 raids, taking 20% of the booty for himself and Allah, and reneging on treaties.

One would see him consummating one of his thirteen or more marriages with the 9-year-old Aisha and how the revelations he timely received from Allah conveniently grant his desires, including Allah’s arranging Mohammad’s adopted son to divorce his wife so that Mohammad could marry her.

One would see the early “tolerant” and “peaceful” revelations so often cited abrogated by later ones revealed when Mohammad had full power to dominate.

One would see him solicit an assassin to murder the poet who, much like Charlie Hebdo, insulted him, would see how he terrorized to weaken his enemy’s will so that little else was required to cause its ultimate submission to him, Allah, and Islam, and hear him utter at his life’s end, “I have been made victorious by terror.”

One would see him structure his community into a bigoted hierarchy in which Muslims lived according to one set of rules while certain others (Christians and Jews primarily) were granted protection so long as they submitted to the shamefully humiliating lesser status requirements of being a Dhimmi. All others were forced to convert or die.

Do I think Hollywood will heed the recommendation and the offered storyline? Nope, they ain’t got the cojones, but this is a superb piece Bill wrote in The Washington Times — and he ain’t skeered of no “Fatwa.” Maybe someone, somewhere will find the courage to do a film based on Bill’s concept. It’s also reflected in the book by Robert Spencer, The Truth About Muhammad.

I for one am sick and tired of listening to all the excuses and wrong explanations using revisionist history. It’s time people came to understand the first Mecca phase, Medina phase, the second Mecca phase, and then the Islamic conquest phase — which has been resurrected thanks to Jimmy Carter allowing the Ayatollah Khomeini to rise to power.

So read my friend and brother Bill Siegel’s astute and exceptional piece – it’s the historical and irrefutable truth about Muhammad. However, will it ever be told on the big screen? Or have the Islamic jihadists and totalitarians won causing us to self-censor because we’re afraid of being called Islamophobes?

Read Bill’s full article here.

34 COMMENTS

  1. “Time for Hollywood to make a Mohammad bio-pic”…..Not so fast .
    Child pron is illegal and they could not portray Mo accurately…./ just sayin’

  2. It would certainly give the White House and Ambassador Susan Rice (the designated spokesperson making the rounds of all of the Sunday news shows to espouse the Administration’s line) a new and even better scapegoat on which to blame the next highly organized and very deadly Islamist attack on U.S. facilities and personnel overseas (or even here at home) – which is probably being planned right now, even as we speak..

  3. Your “historical inaccuracies” are aplenty. Carter allowed the Ayatollah to rise to power? LOL The CIA is the one the brought down a democratically elected president there because he had nationalized the oil reserves! Our CIA puppet’s failure there (The Shaw (enraged the people there and they installed more powerful religious factions. Somewhat similar to what many on your site would like to do in America (but with a different religions) And why were we even involved there in the first place? Oil. Talks to Cheney and Bush 1 about that one. But hey, I do appreciate the summary on the basis of their religion because safely, based on it, Bill Maher must be right. Like all religions, it seems they begot more violence, Jesus being the excepting. And not many so called Christians in American seem to subscribe much to his calling of Peace and Forgiveness. Instead they want guns, and lots of them! So much for Love, Peace and Forgiveness huh?

    • So you are a fan of the Ayatollah? It appears as though you don’t know enough of him or the CIA LOL

      btw our Lord Jesus Christ is the word of God and there is more to it than just Peace and Forgiveness I regret to inform you. A lot more. I do appreciate your summary despite the way it is sort of all over the place, but if one is to speak of the Word then one should understand it. We are in this world but not of it, you can start there 🙂

  4. A lot of what you take on in your vigilance would be worth learning if you didn’t keep peppering it with obvious attacks on one made of side of the isle. As if we haven’t had our fill of republicans messing things up terribly. Please. It diminishes your entire position to be so blatantly one sided.

    • One sided as to what? Asking for a movie to be made that is historically accurate as to the life of Mohammed and the birth of Islam? Millions of people would love to see a major motion picture made that told the truth of islam as supported by historical fact.

      But yes, you are so right – that would mess up everything LOL! Truth and fact what is it and all.

      • I’m not at all for the ayatollah but your rant (and I am also a believing Christian) sounds a lot like the ayatollah. This is the problem. We can’t have our political system run by religious zealots. I praise God and love the Lord with all my heart but history has shown when we mix religion of any kind directly into our politics there are many problems. That doesn’t mean our values can’t be fought for however. Our founders were very wise to both give religion total freedom and to keep our government free from religions. What we did to Iran was create a vacuum that allowed a religious leader to take control. Do you want that for America? If not for our separation of church and state our country would be in ruins like Iran. You look at the civilizations that have the most wealth, happiness, functionality and strength they are all democracies that keep religion from controlling the government and yet allow them to worship freely.

      • My mine concern here is that the host of this site, Allen, oversimplifies the issue with Iran by of course blaming a democrat! LOL and he creates a body of lies perpetuated by his unknowing followers by doing that.

      • So what lies did he create for readers to perpetrate in this article?

        It does give his opinion as it is his blog and I would think and except as much. If he sees a place for blame upon a person and that person is a democrat then a democrat will be blamed.

      • Elle, the lie is that the The Ayatollah gained power as a result of Jimmy Carter. Or that Jimmy Carter was “the one to blame.” He was around before Jimmy Carter and the situation was much more complicated and involved than blaming it on one president. Think about how foolish and short sided that is to just highlight and blame Carter for something going on in another country with a religious body of people? When a writer like Allen states emphatically something like that, without going into all the reasons the Ayatollah is and was important in Iran, then he’s essentially lying. And that lie is then repeated by people that trust him. It’s just not the simple. “Blame Carter!” LOL And the funny thing is President Jimmy Carter was one of the most, if not the most, dedicated Christians ever to serve in the White House. And yet, “right wing” conservative Christians love to blame him for everything. lol

      • Jimmy Carter was Ayatollah’s wet dream. We have him to thank for the beginnings of modern terrorism. He continues to misrepresent Israel every chance he gets and to support terrorists. Yes, he has lots of blame to claim.

        His dedication to Christianity does not excuse his naivety.

      • Elle, you show an uncanny ability to regurgitate the retail version of major events. You seem to ignore that, for instance, the Ayatollah was a force in the 60’s so much so he was forced into exile. Also, that he was welcomed back from his exile with millions (5 million plus?) Iranians cheering on his desire to overthrow a failing monarchy (that was sympathetic to the west and her ideals). Additionally, the Iran and Iraq war had a lot to do with giving the Ayatollah rising power. And any historian will tell you that Iran and Iraq had long standing issues, that are very complicated to sort out. Iraq and Iran had ongoing skirmishes way before Carter was in office with border disputes dating back hundreds of years and into the Persian and Ottoman wars. Let me be clear, I am opposed to everything that the Ayatollah stood for and how he ruled Iran. (Please stop using the Sarah Palin like game of accusing me of being a fan of the Ayatollah because I want to have an intelligent discussion about the subject). He was an irrational and religious dictator that backed his own religious dogma as the “only” way. He framed the augment as “anyone against me is against God.” Sadly, his desire to install a theocracy based government, in place of the more “neutral” secular government, rings dangerously close to our own religious right’s way of wanting to govern than anything a “liberal” in America would embrace. Liberals are for open thought, open lifestyles, freedom to learn and question anything, questioning and challenging religious and governmental authority equally. The right wing wants to govern more from their narrow perceptions of their bibles, sensor and control personal lives into their own brand of standards. Remember, Khomeini was first pushed into exile first way before Carter (for 14 +- years?) for standing up against their Shah on some of the monarchy’s “western style” agendas. Yes, Iran had a great possibility to be the civilization it once was, but a religious leader (or as he called it “GOD”) took control. So there were forces long before Carter was involved that created the making of the Ayatollah and much of it had to do with internal conflicts stirring up covert operations, oil companies, Israel, Iraq, American values encroachment, religious doctrine, the Islamic faith (deeply rooted there) and the resulting problems with the Shah. The Ayatollah inspired his people into the hell hole they are in today. And his ability to rise to power was much bigger than our Presidents here in America. You know, it just goes to show the arrogance of some in America that think we have control over something like this. We don’t! In our efforts to take over a sovereign nation, rule it with force or covert actions, we’ve ultimately failed. Where we excel, is in leadership by inspiration, economic fairness, freedom, equality, fair and just treatment, creating and sustaining the middle class, worker’s and women’s rights, a secular based government, freedom FROM and FOR religion, peace making, and opportunities for the downtrodden. Jesus would define this as ruling from the heart, out of love, instead of by rules and laws (or guns). This is how America can lead the world. Not with guns and “God” as so many republicans and so called conservative Christians here seem to think. All the ideals that really inspire and lead the world are what you would probably call “liberal.” Now don’t get me wrong, I’m all for a strong defense and a strong offense when it’s appropriate. But we lose our power to act unilaterally and on the right side of ideals and “values” when we abuse that sacred reserve. The Ayatollah was a religious leader that played politics. He believed religious leaders should be in politics and that they should rule, not that a neutral government should rule. Our puppet, the Shaw got played by the Ayatollah and because of his own failings he did not inspire his people to stay the western course. Jimmy Carter, had little to do with that and was made more a point of blame for those forces that brought trouble into the region. When Allen just blindly targets Carter for the blame he shows lack of depth and truth. In truth, it’s much much more complicated. And again, to acknowledge a four year President is to blame for an ongoing issue with a civilization with hundreds of years and then recent decades of conflict have more to do with religious forces than anything involving the US. It shows an extreme lack of understanding. I would say we played a role but not the role we should have, and that was the fault of many US leaders and covert operators before, during and after Carter. For instance our failure during the Bush years to secure Iraq has given Iran much greater strength. Before Bush left office, Iran had take over most of the oil rich southern regions of Iraq, something I’m sure republicans will try to blame Obama for someday. Insofar as our own focus on our country’s role in the Ayatollah and his Iran, there are many more players involved than just President Carter. I hope, after you research it a bit you can agree with that.

      • With this you seem to sum up your thoughts:

        “Liberals are for open thought, open lifestyles, freedom to learn and question anything, questioning and challenging religious and governmental authority equally. The right wing wants to govern more from their narrow perceptions of their bibles, sensor and control personal lives into their own brand of standards.”

        First – paragraphs, learn how to use them.

        Second – You have been mislead by the leftist version of Iranian history. For that reason I’m pretty sure I could not give two craps about your take on the US.

        Have a great day.

      • Love it. You finally show your true colors.

        Criticize something as daft as paragraphs on a comment board (not discuss the content). Actually, I didn’t think about them because I hurried through the prose to get it out and move on to something else.

        So you would rather label my discussion about true events as a “leftist version of Iranian history” instead of explain yours? I understand. You probably don’t have an informed point of view so you have to insult me, blame Carter and grade my writing. lol 🙂

        Does this really just indicate you want to believe your own version instead of discuss it or have insight to add (other than blaming Carter for the whole thing)? So your not interested in intelligent discussion, only your faux news version? Ok, enjoy that then!

        I actually enjoy the discourse and thought provoking discussion. And you seemed reasonable at first. Now I guess you seem more interested in staying spoon fed by the right ring political sound bites spewing out of the likes of this site and Faux News. Blame Carter, Blame Obama (unless it’s good!) and hail all praise on anyone that looks like, sounds like and prays like yourself. Hey, that’s just like the Shia and the Sunnis! And this is where the problems begin.

        I wouldn’t expect you to care about my version of anything because you probably “could not give two craps” about anyone’s point of view other than the one that fits your snug little box you must keep yours in. Leaving that behind is called getting a liberal education. Which is what I meant by liberal, as well. Our country was founded on liberal ideals. Which drives home the point. The closed box type of approach to life and politics is what allows the Ayatollah’s of the world to control. It’s exactly what our founders feared the most. Better get busy converting America away from this pesky democracy that allows others, different than yourself, to live freely. Then you can have your own theocracy too! 🙂 Have a good week Elle. I’m over and out.

      • First off you literally don’t know jack about me and you are very incorrect in your assumptions.

        My colors are Red, White and Blue.

        If you are going to stack that much text, it’s common courtesy to use paragraphs. Otherwise no one will read what you are so rushed to try and get out to the world LOL

        I did discuss the content. You just didn’t like my opinion of Carter. I reiterate for you: He was a tool back then and he a tool now. You don’t agree. That’s ok with me. Like I said I don’t really care. I was honestly just curious as to the “lies” you were saying West was spreading – which not surprisingly turns out to only be your opinion.

        No sense in trying to rehash what was. But somehow that is important to you? Lots of people like myself lived the history. Seriously don’t need to dissect it with you, no offense intended.

        Carter is an embarrassment to the US and basically seems to be going senile in a very public and sad way. It would be best for him to just be quite.

      • I agree Carter may be going senile and that it’s time for him to be quiet. So we do agree on some things! 🙂

      • Yes, it pains me to see him currently. He has lost the dignity that all other former presidents have maintained once out of office. I think he is hurting us.

        I don’t live in a closed box. I discern what happens around me, in and to my country and in the world. I live in this world but I am not of it.

        Prayer and salvation is a personal matter as I see it and I do not bother myself with what another seeks. I only seek to protect and defend what is mine and I do so with the word of God in mind. If others don’t that is their business.

      • Again what lies did Allen West create in this article since you say this is what he did and that those lies are now “perpetuated” by his “unknowing followers” just trying to get a answer to this as I already asked you once.

        What are the lies West has created with this article where he is putting up the idea that there should be a movie made about islam and mohammed except that it should be historically accurate and be truthful and honest? I am not sure I could see any “lies” so if you don’t mind can you lay the lies out for me as you charge him in this way. I am just very curious what they are.

        He did not actually speak to much at all about Iran in the article in case you didn’t notice. He mentioned Ayatollah Khomeini once in connection to Jimmy Carter. One sentence, that was it.

        So exactly what is your deal here? You seem to sympathize with Iran but present yourself as Christian.

      • Ha! My rant sounds like the ayatollah! That made me laugh, it is funny. . .

        Then you make a very good case against islam as it is exactly religion and politics together. America good grief no would never come to be like islamic countries. Despite the US being mostly Christian, no one is by law forced into Christianity or penalized for heresy and such.

        There is only one religion on the earth that wants to spread and take over and that is islam. All other religions of the world co-exist except islam.

      • You may not be aware but there is a concerted effort to spread christianity into countries. Somalia was one such country and it’s ended badly. But I certainly agree with you that as Christians we’re not trying to use violence to convert others. However, we have been very active for some time, with violence, as a country in Iraq, Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan. Are you away the Osama Bin Laden was a friend of the US and worked for us against the Russians in Afghanistan? We also were friends with Saddam and supported him while he wages war against Iran, killing, many estimate, up to 1 million people there. It’s not all sunshine for our country in the past but I do think we’ve done better lately..and unfortunately it makes us look week too. But Jesus was strong in his weakness. He was not violent, he didn’t carry a gun, he healed, he loved, he served and he gave to others that were different than him. For instance, he would see illegal immigrants as his friend and ‘invite the in to your home as if they are family.” What’s happened to America with the “more guns!” crowd is we are falling apart from the inside. There are over 30,000 deaths a year contributed mainly to handguns and most of it is family violence and suicide. Now we are allowing kids to get AK-47’s after coming off their hi’s of video games and taking anti-depressants and other forms of legal pharma. We’ve got to get back to what Jesus really stood for. Peace, Forgiveness, Healing, Service, Hospitality and as he would say the most important of all Love. Too many people in the churches are self righteous, judgmental, (look what they do to gays?) and are part of a political party that actually supports bigotry, exclusiveness and power to the wealthy. This is the opposite of what Jesus was hope for us. I don’t mean that you are literally like the Ayatollah. My point was we have to be careful bring any one religion into the power structure of politics and government. My goodness that just causes separation and trouble because unfortunately all the religions have such opposing beliefs and belief so strongly in their own form of religion (even different types of churches in Christ’s body) that it would just bring trouble. Heck, many churches have major riffs with groups within their own church!

      • So rcbarron, you seem to sort of be all over the place with this long comment back to me. Would maybe be a better practice to zero in on one or two ideas. So let’s just start at the beginning.

        You say that the CIA has a concerted effort to spread Christianity into other countries. You gave Somalia as an example of this and then said this ended badly.

        So just sticking to this one single topic can you please go ahead and give me evidence of this mission and perhaps link me to any information that would support this statement of yours.

        Having a lot of personal experience and knowledge regarding Mogadishu I find it very interesting that you would use Somalia as an example of how the CIA seems to be running covert operational missions to spread Christianity into other countries such as Somalia. Look forward to your reply and again stick to this topic and focus on it without going off into half a dozen other areas of discussion.

      • I can sum up my response in one simple focus. “The Fellowship.” Ever heard of them? And I didn’t say just the CIA (or that the CIA was specifically doing it) I mentioned government officials. I was referencing our outreach to “christianize” the world through United States Officials including the use of (and working with and coordinating with); CIA operatives, diplomats, heads of states, congress, presidents, dictators etc around the world and combining that with economic interests for chosen investors, and gaining American influence. One such effort with US government officials and The Fellowship took place with the dictator in Somalia in the 80’s, Siad Barre. Additionally, Uganda has more recently been the focus of their work there, and the resulting laws threatened against gays in Uganda. Indonesia and Brazil as well. The discussion was centered around “do we, as a nation, work to convert others to Christianity.” And my answer is Yes, absolutely. And we use groups like The Fellowship (or they us US, to deal with diplomatic attempts to open up countries for business, laissez-faire access and gaining countries as allies. If you have not heard of The Fellowship, then you are not alone. They are secretive yet have had incredible power in US politics and Global influence dating back to the 1920’s. They are apolitical even “areligious” in there dealings and yet markedly Christian and specifically Jesus focused. They are polar opposite of the loony right wing religious zealots that we see on TV all the time. The Fellowship is not a bad thing, I’m just saying that it’s there and has been there and is very well known in powerful political circles. Of course that doesn’t mean that bad things don’t come out of some of their attempts or that, as men, they are not prone to problems as well. It’s probably just best for you to research The Fellowship first on Wikipedia. If you are interesting in drilling down you may read some well documented and researched books or articles about them. I believe Wikipedia would be the best place for you to start. They may even mention books written about them. What’s interesting is that all their records are now completly sealed and unavailable to anyone. Interesting huh? 🙂

      • Elle, and I do apologize for spelling and words wrong. I’m on my iPhone and its a hurdle for me to type on this small keyboard! 🙂

      • Yes is very hard to type on the tiny keyboard without making mistakes. Some people have adapted to them and are quite good, but they practically live on their phones.

        I find them necessary but rather like a ball and chain at times.

  5. Lol @ Allen West complaining about inaccuracies in a film or revisionist history; another blog he has typed up in the comfort of his glass house.

    Recommendation: if you have a good story to tell about a religious figure, be it Mohammed or whoever, write it up and pitch it – or get together with someone who knows screenwriting and have them write it for you. Just remember, it’s gotta be marketable and have promise to make money if Hollywood is going to be interested in making it. Allen West knows what I mean because that what he is all about too, putting out a product (this site for example) that’s gonna appeal to a market and bring in money for him; also like Hollywood, accuracy is secondary to profitability.

    If Allen really believes in this, then he should do what other people do when they deeply believe in a film project but Hollywood doesn’t – go out and put the financing together yourself and get it made. Put your money where your mouth is.

    • It’s time. Let’s have a movie on Islam. What are we waiting for????

      We just had Noah and countless others on Christian themes, what are we waiting for here???

      I know you and I are on odds but I am all for creatives making art and that is what it’s all about. The art of the times describes us. What were WE willing to step up and make art about???

      Working on my graphic novel now, highly inspired by the current events, infused by personal experience and how I see the world and so on – start working on your own screenplay. . . . . .unless you just want to complain about West not going and doing it lol.

      For the love of it all – history has a stake in how art portrays it, artists are historians of their times. That is something to give thought to. Despite our differences, I think we have a common ground in this.

      My first degree has to do with all this, and I know that artists play a huge role in history. Without us/them the world has no idea how the world actually “LOOKED” at any given time. It is all very interesting given the times and given the past.

      Your thoughts?

      • Graphic novel? Very nice – interesting medium. Lots of room to do your own thing there.

        I am writing a screenplay 😉 Like your project, personal experience plays an part, though the world will be a bit smaller. Baseball serves as a backdrop to a story about dealing with death.

        The intersection of art & history is indeed interesting. One of the more memorable courses I took while in school was a seminar on the memory of the Civil War in American culture. Artists can have an influential hand in how history is remembered.

        It may indeed be time for a movie on Islam, I don’t know – but who’s going to make it and who is going to watch it?

      • Well good for you, lots of room to do your own thing with a screenplay too!

        Artists are visual historians. Since Lascaux no?

        I think everyone would want to watch it, and yes who is to make it?

        Spielberg lol

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here