Will Al Jazeera keep Muslim Apostate Cenk Uygur after Current TV sale?

After the sale of Current TV to Al Jazeera was announced earlier this year, Cenk Uygur, one of Current TV’s political pontificators, told POLITICO that he wouldn’t mind staying with the network when the dust settles:

Cenk Uygur of The Young Turks told POLITICO that unlike some of his Current TV colleagues, he’s open to staying with Al Jazeera America.


In theory, this should pose a problem for Uygur because Al Jazeera is essentially a media arm of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is extremely fundamentalist. Uygur, on the other hand, is a Muslim apostate by his own admission. In a 2008 op-ed by Uygur that appeared in the Huffington Post, he explained…

I am a fervent agnostic. I have argued vehemently against religion… Worse yet, I was born Muslim. I went to school in Turkey until I was eight (that will be translated as “attended a madrasa” by Fox “News” Channel).

Is it a good thing to be afflicted with Islamophobia? Pre-order the new book from Walid Shoebat, The Case FOR ISLAMOPHOBIA: Jihad by the Word; America’s Final Warning.

Note how Uygur is not just an agnostic but a “fervent” one. This makes him a Muslim apostate, does it not? Assuming the Current TV sale to Al Jazeera goes through, what should we make of things if Uygur is retained? After all, it would mean that a fundamentalist Arab Muslim network will be prominently featuring a “fervent agnostic” who used to be a “Muslim”.

Perhaps the answer might lie in the teachings of a prominently featured Muslim Brotherhood scholar on Al Jazeera – Yusuf Al Qaradawi. Qaradawi is a “fervent” proponent of Muruna, an Islamic practice that is similar to taqiyya but is far more stealthy in nature.

On the other hand, if Uygur is let go, it will mean that Al Jazeera is being true to Islam instead of to Muruna. Then again, according to Qaradawi, Muruna is true to Islam.

Then again, consider that the “fervent apostate” Uygur, in 2010, mocked Oklahoma’s anti-Sharia legislation. Why on earth would a “fervent agnostic” come to the defense of Islam in Oklahoma?

In a 2007 article penned by Uygur entitled, “This is Not a Christian Nation” the “fervent(ly) agnostic” “Muslim” apostate wrote the following:

My name is Cenk Uygur. And I am proud of it. It might sound a little different to your ear, but it doesn’t make it any less American. That’s the whole point of the country. If I wanted to live in a place where your race, ethnicity or religion mattered, there were plenty of other countries to choose from. I chose to be an American because I believed we were all equals in the eyes of the law.

Apparently, 42 United States Congressmen are not so sure. The House passed a resolution today celebrating the Muslim holy month of Ramadan. The point of the resolution was to show that we are an open country and that a Muslim-American is equal to any other American. That we are all to be celebrated as Americans. Forty-two representatives couldn’t get themselves to agree.

Islam is a political system in addition to being a religion. As such, requiring the celebration of Ramadan is one of countless examples that demonstrate ‘creeping sharia’, which is why Oklahoma passed the anti-Sharia legislation in the first place. Not only did Uygur mock that legislation but one year earlier, he mocked Congressmen who wanted to make a stand for Christianity by preventing that creep.

Uygur has a history of attacking Christianity while defending Islam. Consider what he said – in response to Pat Robertson’s critique of Islam – in 2009, just days after Nidal Malik Hasan’s Jihadist attack at Fort Hood:

“The cult of Christianity, historically has been the single most violent religion on the face of the earth – indisputable. The crusades, where they killed thousands upon thousands; the inquisition, where they stretched people on a rack; they did torture for an endless number of years; the witch hunts, where you boiled witches alive and drowned them and hung them and… let alone Christians that started things like… World War I and World War II and the holocaust and I could go on and on… the wholesale genocide of the native Americans, the slavery of Africans in this country…”

Here is the video (fast forward to the 1:42 mark):

In 1991, Uygur denied that the Ottoman (Muslim) Turks committed genocide against the largely Christian Armenians:

The claims of an Armenian Genocide are not based on historical facts. If the history of the period is examined it becomes evident that in fact no such genocide took place.

Uygur doesn’t sound like an equal-opportunity agnostic, which is why he just might keep his job. In fact, if it was one day discovered that he was practicing Muruna, we would not be surprised. If Uygur loses his job, it could mean he’s a victim of religious discrimination.

Don’t ask us how to explain all of this. Even a former Muslim who translated Qaradawi’s writings on Muruna has limits.


, , , , , , ,