Smooth Stone

Via MEMRI:

To view this Special Dispatch, visit:
http://www.memri.org/bin/opener_latest.cgi?ID=SD177807

Arabs in Europe have launched a public campaign to stop Al-Jazeera TV broadcasts in Europe. In a petition, they accuse the channel of fostering extremism among European Arab youth and of supporting terrorism.

While the petition’s initiators have not provided their names, it seems likely that they are Iraqi expatriates; although various Arab news websites, such as Elaph,(1) have reported on the campaign, the petition itself has been posted primarily on Iraqi websites. These sites include the Iraqi news site Sotaliraq; (2) the Iraq of Tomorrow news site; (3) the Al-Najaf News site; (4) the website of Al-Fayhaa TV, a liberal Iraqi station; (5) the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan website; (6) Bahzani, a news and opinion website focusing on the Yazidi community and other Iraqi minorities; (7) the Yezidi Community website; (8) the website of the Gilgamish Center for Kurdish Studies and Research; (9) and the Kurdistan Times e-journal. (10)

In addition, on November 28, 2007, Iraqi exile Joseph Shallal wrote an article on the Arab left-liberal Modern Discussion website urging a boycott of Al-Jazeera.

TO VIEW MEMRI TV’S PAGE OF AL-JAZEERA CLIPS VISIT:
http://www.memritv.org/subject/en/166.htm

The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) is an independent, non-profit organization that translates and analyzes the media of the Middle East. Copies of articles and documents cited, as well as background information, are available on request.

MEMRI holds copyrights on all translations. Materials may only be used with proper attribution.

In an investigative article in the Egyptian weekly Roz Al-Yousef, journalist Asma Nassar revealed that a popular Koran commentary for children published in Egypt contains virulent incitement against Christians and Jews, and calls on both children and adults to fight them. Nassar’s critical article presents excerpts from the book and comments from Muslim scholars who participated in its writing and from senior Al-Azhar figures.

The following are excerpts from the article:(1)

How Could Al-Azhar Approve This Book for Publication?

The article stated: “This Koran commentary, intended for children, includes erroneous ideas which incite against the followers of the [other] monotheistic religions. For instance, the interpretation of the Al-Fatiha Sura [the first Sura of the Koran], states that [the expression] ‘those who earn Thine [i.e., Allah's] anger’ refers to the Jews, and [the expression] ‘those who go astray’ refers to the Christians.(2) This [rendering] contradicts the tenets and the tolerant character of the Islamic faith.

“We wished to find out who was behind these inciting interpretations, especially since they are intended for children and teach them notions of hatred and extremism. It should be noted that the Muslim scholar Gamal Al-Bana was the first to call attention to this book, in his critical article about various Koran commentaries which contradict the principles of shari’a…(3)

“We discovered that the book was first published 10 years ago by Dar Al-Sahaba Lil-Turat in Tanta, and was edited by Sheikh Magdi Fathi Al-Sayyed. Since then, there have been five more editions, and the book has been translated into several languages, including Indonesian, Malaysian, and Turkish. The question arises: How could the [Al-Azhar] Academy of Islamic Research allow the publication of such ideas? After all, [one of its] duties is to monitor [publications] that misrepresent Islam and disparage the [other]monotheistic religions. Considering [the Academy's] involvement in cultural conflicts, and its persecution of anyone who has innovative ideas in areas of thought, culture and philosophy, its [scholars] ought to revert to their original role.

“The hidden poison [of extremism] has seeped into the pages of this book, which was approved [for publication] by the Al-Azhar Academy of Islamic Research… [after being] examined by four of its scholars. [One of the authors] of the introduction is the president of Egypt’s Koranic schools, and a hadith expert at Al-Azhar University, Dr. Ahmad ‘Issa Al-Ma’sarawi…”

Deliberate Inculcation of Extremist Ideas

The article continued: “Overall, the book is characterized by incitement to extremism and by extremist interpretations that do not reflect the true meaning of the verses… [For example,] the book divests Islam of its most fundamental principle – [the principle of] peace – and even incites against this [notion] in its interpretation of the [following] verses: ‘Forgive them, and overlook [their misdeeds], for Allah loveth those who are kind [5:13]‘; ‘And if the enemy inclines towards peace, then incline towards it and trust in Allah, for He is all-hearing and all-knowing [8:61].’ [The book states that] these verses are abrogated by the ‘Verse of the Sword,’ which descended later, and which says: ‘Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the Latter Day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book [i.e. among the Christians and Jews], until they pay the jizya [the Islamic poll tax on non-Muslims] and they are in a state of subjection [9:29].’ [According to the book], peace and reconciliation agreements [with Christians and Jews] have been forbidden since this verse was revealed.

“In its interpretation of this verse, [the book] says: ‘Allah commands the believers to fight all the infidels who do not believe in Allah and in the Latter Day [i.e. in the Day of Judgment], who do not follow His instructions regarding what is allowed and prohibited, and who do not believe in the true faith, which is Islam – i.e. the Jews and the Christians’…

“One of the most appalling parts of the book is a section quoting several verses from the Al-Maida Sura ['The Table Spread'], which the book labels as ‘proof of the heresy of the Christians.’ The ideas planted [by this section] in the children’s minds are like a time bomb that will lead to civil war, since the children learn by heart [verses that indoctrinate them] to accuse the Copts of heresy. This is totally inexplicable, and also contradicts [the spirit of] the Egyptian constitution…
“In its interpretation of verse [9:41] – ‘Go forth light and heavy, and strive hard in Allah’s way with your property and your persons; this is better for you, if you know’ – the book says: ‘Allah the Almighty told the believers – both young and old – to set out and fight for the sake of Allah.

“In explaining verse [9:66] – ‘O Prophet! Strive against the disbelievers and the hypocrites, and be stern with them. Hell will be their home, a hapless journey’s end’ – the book says: ‘Allah commanded the believers to wage jihad against the infidels by [fighting them] with the sword, and to wage jihad against the hypocrites by imposing upon them the punishments and constraints mandated for those who violate the commands of Islam…”

The article further stated: “The expected consequence of this [book] is that, in future, thousands of young children will be willing to blow themselves up [in terrorist operations] against [non-Muslims]. This is the danger [that this book represents]. [The book's aim] is not to interpret verses, but to deliberately instill children with ideas that incite [to extremism]. This is evident from its deliberate ignoring of other verses… that reflect the true [face of] Islam, which does not discriminate among the followers of the monotheistic religions but [calls for] brotherhood among them…”

Senior Al-Azhar Scholar: This is Ignorance, Taken from Outdated and Erroneous
Commentaries

Nassar’s article also elicited various responses to its criticism of the book. Former Al-Azhar vice-president Dr. Mahmoud Zalat Al-Qasbi, who co-authored the book’s introduction, said: “I never saw the interpretations [quoted in Nassar's article]. I was asked to write the introduction, and that was my only involvement with the book.” Al-Qasbi added that, had he seen these interpretations, he would have requested to have them changed, since he believed that offensive references to other religions were contrary to the principles of Islam. He also said that, in his opinion, the Al-Fatiha Sura had nothing to do with the Christians or Jews, since ‘those who go astray’ can also refer to many Muslims.

Dr. ‘Abd Al-Mu’ti Bayoumi, member of the Al-Azhar Academy for Islamic Research, likewise expressed reservations about the book, saying: “It is ignorance on our part [to rely on] old and erroneous [Koran] commentaries without examining and contemplating [the verses anew]. Islamic thought needs to be reformed…” Bayoumi went on to warn against instilling these poisonous ideas in the younger generation.

Nassar also presented statements by Islamic scholar Gamal Al-Bana, who exposed the book in August 2007. He said: “The interpretations [found in the book] are generally similar to commentaries by [the Muslim Brotherhood theorist] Sayyed Qutub and other [Islamic scholars] of his ilk, who harmed the image of Islam with their erroneous interpretations of the Koran. Islam is pluralistic by nature, and does not aim to judge other religions or accuse others of heresy – that [role] is reserved for Allah on the Day of Judgment…” On the interpretation of the “Verse of the Sword,” Al-Bana commented:

“Conciliation, tolerance and peace are principles of the Islamic faith, and whoever rejects them, rejects the postulates of that faith… Children must not be exposed to these commentaries, just as they should in general be left out of arguments they cannot understand, since [religious disputes] concern only the experts.”

Endnotes:
(1) Roz Al-Yousef (Egypt), September 21, 2007.
(2) Verses six and seven of the Al-Fatiha Sura say: “Show us the straight path – the path of those whom Thou [i.e. Allah] hast favored, not the [path] of those who earn Thine anger nor of those who go astray.”
(3) Al-Bana’s article appeared August 1, 2007 in the Egyptian daily Al-Masril-Yawm.

*********************
The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) is an independent, non-profit
organization that translates and analyzes the media of the Middle East. Copies of articles and documents cited, as well as background information, are available on request.

MEMRI holds copyrights on all translations. Materials may only be used with proper attribution.

The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI)
P.O. Box 27837, Washington, DC 20038-7837
Phone: (202) 955-9070
Fax: (202) 955-9077
E-Mail: memri@memri.org
Search previous MEMRI publications at www.memri.org

This is hilarious. Add this to the procurement of mythology inherent in Islam, along with Burak the magical Winged-Horse. From Iran Accuses U.S., Israel of Manufacturing “Genetic” Weapon to “Kill Specific Peoples”:

Iranian Gen. Mir Feysal Bagherzadeh has accused the U.S. and Israel of “seeking to manufacture a [genetic] weapon which could kill specific peoples in a limited geographical area.”

From Hamas Children’s Magazine Glorifies Martyrdom:

The Hamas children’s magazine Al-Fateh is published biweekly in London, and is posted online at www.al-fateh.net. In stories, poems, riddles, and puzzles, the magazine includes incitement to jihad and martyrdom and glorification of terrorist operations, as well as characterizations of Jews as “murderers of the prophets” and laudatory descriptions of parents who encourage their sons to kill Jews. In each issue, a regular feature titled “The Story of a Martyr” presents the “heroic deeds” of a mujahid who died in a suicide operation or who was killed by the IDF. The magazine includes illustrations of child warriors, presenting them as role models. The magazine’s titular character, Al-Fateh (“The Conqueror”), is depicted as a small boy on a horse brandishing a drawn sword.

Just when you think Islam can’t go any lower. From Hamas Video Lauds “Chunks of Flesh of Jews”:

Hamas broadcast a music video on its Al Aqsa TV channel that showed terrorist attacks against Israeli citizens, accompanied by the lyrics, “In black bags, chunks of flesh of Jews” and “We want Sharon’s head.”

See Video (MEMRI-TV)

It’s not like we didn’t know this, considering that 14 of the 19 Muslims who attacked the United States on September 11th, were, in fact, Saudis. From The Involvement of Saudi Nationals in Terrorist Activity:

A public debate has emerged in Saudi Arabia regarding the involvement of Saudi nationals in terrorist activities throughout the world. The Lebanese news agency Al-Markaziyya reported, citing a diplomatic source, that Saudi Arabia had demanded that Syria round up the 980 Saudi al-Qaeda members currently at a refugee camp in Syria, and hand them over to Saudi authorities as a precondition for any negotiations between the two countries. 73 Saudis are imprisoned in Jordan.

There are also reports of Saudi involvement in terrorist activities in the Nahr al-Bared refugee camp in northern Lebanon. According to Lebanese security apparatuses, Saudi nationals constitute 30% of the members of Fath al-Islam. Saudi Maj.-Gen. ‘Abd al-Karim Khalaf told the Saudi daily Al-Watan that 70 Saudi nationals had been arrested in Iraq. He added, “The majority of those arrested acknowledged during interrogation that they had come to Iraq following fatwas issued by ‘ulama calling for armed activities there.”

By MEMRI

On July 2, 2007, a participant on the Islamist forum www al-ommh net/vb calling himself “Al-Mustaqim” posted the following question [1]: “My brothers… I wish to hear your opinion about the London operation: [2] Did it advance our cause or [intensify] the anger against our ummah?”

The next day, the forum webmaster posted a reply in which he enumerated Britain’s “crimes” and explained how the operation benefited the Muslims.

Below are excerpts from his reply: [3]

England Has Been Fighting the Muslims Since Before the Days of Our Grandfathers

“The Crusaders do not need a reason to show hostility to our Islamic nation. They have been fighting Islam… since the dawn of history. They have been fighting it since the [days of the] Crusaders’ military campaign against the land of Islam. At that time, England became the [main] base of this military campaign, and in our modern era, it occupied Muslim countries such as Egypt, Palestine and others.”

“England handed Palestine to the Jews on a golden platter, so they could build a terrible state exclusively for themselves. At this time, English forces besieged the mujahid Sheikh ‘Izz Al-Din Al-Qassam [d. 1935]… and his followers… and he became a martyr… After the [1917] Balfour Declaration, that terrible state was established in Palestine, and the Jews ruled Palestine with the financial, moral and political support of England.”

“[In 1956,] England took part in the ‘tripartite aggression’ against Egypt, along with France and the Jews… [England] was [also] part of the military force which attacked Bosnia, not [in order to assist] the Muslims there but in order to… prevent the establishment of an Islamic state there in the wake of the overwhelming victory of the mujahideen… [In addition,] England joined the Crusader forces which attacked Afghanistan and… Iraq… [In sum,] England has been fighting the Muslims since before the birth of our grandfathers and until today.

“The benefit of the attack on the London Underground is [that] it brought home [to the British people] that they are no longer [immune] to the [attacks] of the mujahideen. Just as they kill our people, so will they be killed; just as they kill our children, so will their children be killed; and just as they destroy our cities, so will their cities be destroyed. We have [finally] become equals… after they made us feel, [for many years,] like lambs who go to the slaughter without resisting, because they [i.e. the English] were the masters.”

The Attack Harmed Their Economy

“Another benefit [of the attack] is that it was [a blow to] England’s infrastructure and harmed it economically… [In addition,] the attack delivered a severe blow to the global stock market: The index lost 200 points in less than 30 minutes, which caused them great economic harm, and prompted them to spend millions in order to increase their level of [security]… Not to mention the [considerable] number of people who converted to Islam after 9/11 and the London bombings.”

[1] The www al-ommh net forum is hosted by Interserver Inc., located in New Jersey, U.S.

[2] It is not clear whether this refers to the 2005 London Tube bombings or to the June 2007 bombing attempt in Piccadilly.

[3] www al-ommh net/vb/showthread.php?t=19229

Qualifiable predictions via MEMRI:

In the past few days, Arab and Iranian media reports have pointed to the possibility that Lebanon’s current political crisis may become a violent conflict after July 15, 2007.

It should be noted that certain international events concerning Lebanon and Syria are expected in mid-July, specifically:

1. The U.N. Security Council session scheduled for July 16, 2007, which is to discuss a report by U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon on the progress in the implementation of U.N. Security Council Resolution 1701. This discussion will be devoted in part to the report submitted by a delegation sent by Ki-Moon to the Syria-Lebanon border to assess border supervision. According to the London daily Al-Hayat, the delegation’s recommendations included the stationing of international experts in border control to aid Lebanon’s security apparatuses in monitoring the Syria-Lebanon border. [1]

2. Between July 15 and 17, 2007, the submission of another report to the U.N. Security Council, by the head of the International Investigation Commission into the murder of former Lebanese prime minister Rafiq Al-Hariri, Serge Brammertz.

The following are excerpts from these Arab and Iranian media reports:

On July 5, 2007, the Iranian news agency IRNA reported that Syrian authorities had instructed all Syrian citizens residing in Lebanon to return to their country by July 15, 2007. [2] The next day, the Israeli Arab daily Al-Sinara similarly reported, on the authority of a Lebanese source close to Damascus, that Syria was planning to remove its citizens from Lebanon. [3] Also on July 5, the Lebanese daily Al-Liwa reported rumors that Syrian workers were leaving Lebanon at the request of the Syrian authorities. [4] In addition, the Syrian government daily Al-Thawra reported that Syrian universities would accept Syrian students who were leaving Lebanon due to the instability there. [5]

These sources offered a number of explanations for Syria’s calls for its citizens to leave Lebanon. IRNA tied these calls to Lebanese President Emil Lahoud’s ultimatum to the Lebanese opposition to decide on how to deal with the crisis in Lebanon, and also claimed that the calls were connected to Syria’s intention to mobilize reserve units in expectation of an attack on it by Israel. On the other hand, the Lebanese daily Al-Liwa tied Syria’s calls to the upcoming additional report by the International Investigation Commission into the Al-Hariri assassination, which is expected next week.

Click here to read more translations about The Lebanese Opposition: After Mid-July, We Will Establish a Second Government in Lebanon, Al-Mustaqbal Warns of Syrian-Iranian Plan for Coup in Lebanon, Hizbullah Arms Itself in Preparation for the Next Stage; One of Its Military Targets May Be Beirut, Change in Iranian Policy: From Preventing Civil War in Lebanon to Adopting Syria’s Position.

From Fears in Arab World Following Gaza Coup: Hamas Is Threatening Entire Arab World, via MEMRI:

The Arab world as a whole has not yet formulated a clear position on the events in Gaza. While the Arab countries fully backed Mahmoud Abbas in his struggle against Hamas, spokesmen and senior officials have refrained from burning bridges with Hamas.

The same trend is evident in the Arab media. Most articles avoided siding clearly with either Fatah or Hamas, calling on both sides to reach an understanding through negotiations. However, some op-eds have harshly condemned Hamas’ violent takeover of Gaza, saying it has dealt a death blow to the Palestinian cause and has destroyed any hope of resolving the Palestinian problem.

Talal Salman, owner of the Lebanese daily Al-Safir, wrote: “Palestine has collapsed in a pool of its own blood, and the only ones to blame are those who promised to liberate it.”

In an op-ed titled “The Gaza Earthquake,” Asharq Al-Awsat editor Tariq Al-Humayd wrote: “The preparedness of the Hamas fighters…proves that while Hamas and its leaders were crying out about lack of funds, Hamas was amassing arms and ammunition. Someone is providing it with regular funding, and as a result it appeared to be better prepared than the legitimate authorities. The source of the funds is obviously Iran.”

Ahmad Al-Jarallah, editor of the Kuwaiti daily Al-Siyassa, wrote: “By means of Hamas’ takeover in Gaza, the Iran-Syria axis has managed to destroy the Mecca agreement, to sabotage the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, and to block the role of Saudi Arabia.”

Jordanian journalist Raja Talib wrote in the Jordanian government daily Al-Rai: “Reality has shown that even if Hamas was originally a Palestinian [movement], it is now completely [committed] to the ideological agenda of Tehran.”

Egyptian intellectual Ma’moun Fandy likened Hamas to a computer virus that threatens to destroy the Arab world. He wrote in Asharq Al-Awsat: “The Muslims must understand that the Hamas emirate is a model that the Islamists aim to implant in all their countries….We are now faced with a dangerous virus, in the form of the Hamas Emirate. A symptom of this infection was Hizbullah in Lebanon, and we see some signs of it in Egypt and Algeria as well – especially since the mother virus, the Muslim Brotherhood, has existed in Egypt for ages, in all its potency.”

See also Hamas Conquest of Gaza Disturbs Arab World:

The conquest of Gaza by Hamas has frightened Arab leaders, demonstrating the rising threat to the status quo in places like Cairo, Amman, and Riyadh posed by political Islam. And it gave Iran yet another foothold on Arab borders. Egypt is trying to contain the popularity of the Muslim Brotherhood, while Jordan is struggling to hold down the Islamic Action Front, the political arm of the Brotherhood. Much of the region has been unsettled by Qaeda-minded terrorist groups.

Via MEMRI, from A Culture of Violence Rules the Palestinian Territories:

The all-against-all infighting and its basic code have become the mental and psychological makeup of the Palestinian people, as a natural result of the predominant discourse of hostility and incitement. This discourse has been adopted by Palestinians of all persuasions and in all the factions – religious, pan-Arab revolutionary, and leftist. It is a discourse whose aim was sowing hatred, having recourse to violence, and enjoying spilling blood.

At first it was directed against the so-called Israeli enemy, and it uprooted any possibility of or tendency towards rational mutual comprehension or of recourse to discussion, dialogue, and negotiation – what is known as peaceful resolution – and it raised the slogan of “clinging to the choice of resistance.” But one clings to goals, not methods, and resistance (meaning armed resistance) cannot, psychologically and culturally, be the only choice for peoples to achieve their goals, without there being any alternative.

The discourse of violence had already managed to be the only one on the scene, which was emptied of any counter-discourse when the rational thinkers fled or were forced to keep out of sight – amidst the vast flood of feelings of violence that began to sweep away everything in its path.

The predominant discourse of violence, most of which was formed by the religious discourse, was not the discourse of a means that attempts to achieve a goal, but rather was a discourse of violence and sacred killing in the name of jihad.

This was translated into political language in the slogan that the Arab-Israeli struggle is an existential struggle, and not a struggle over borders, and its implementation in practice was the so-called martyrdom-seeking operations for killing Israeli civilians. The hatred was transformed from hatred of Zionism to hatred of Jews – “the sons of apes and pigs.”

Perhaps no one has noticed that when you take an individual or a group away from the culture of using reason and peaceful dialogue, and replace it with the culture of violence and of killing those who are different, you cannot then afterwards control it and direct it to be used against one single side.