Egypt: Christian Doctors Run Hospital for Muslim Patients

Patients wait for their turns at Harpur Memorial Hospital in Egyptian Delta town of Menhouf

Edward Yeranian
Voice of America
7 April 2009
Tensions between Christians and Muslims in Egypt often make headlines, but the work of a group of Christian doctors paints a more upbeat picture of religious coexistence. The doctors run a hospital for mostly Muslim patients in Egypt's heartland - the Egyptian Delta town of Menhouf.
The afternoon call to prayer sounds in the predominantly Muslim Egyptian Delta town of Menhouf as doctors examine patients at the Harpur Memorial Hospital run by the Anglican diocese of North Africa.
Unlike most hospitals in Egypt, Harpur receives no money from the government and its mostly Christian staff of doctors donate their time to care for the hospital's primarily Muslim clientele.
It is a labor of love, says Dr. Samir Bakheet, a 62-year old gynecologist from Cairo, who runs the hospital:
He says most of his doctors are Christian, and that patients from across the region come because they trust the doctors and respect them. Our doctors, he says, have a strong faith and strong sense of purpose, which is to serve the sick. We are not here to make a profit, he insists.
The head nurse, Madame Hana'a, turns to a gruff looking old patient whom she calls Uncle Mahmoud, and asks how he is doing:
What brought you here, Uncle Mahmoud, she asks. His intestines have been bothering him, he says, and his whole body is weak. But, he adds, the doctors have done a good job of fixing me up.
Dr. Bakheet says 50,000 patients are treated at the hospital every year and a quarter of a million go through the doors, if their families are included. He says 90 to 95 percent of the patients are Muslim.
Anesthesiologist Dr. Michel Awad, who gave up a lucrative job in Cairo to come to Menhouf, says the work is rewarding and the hospital's founder, an Irish doctor named Frank Harpur, set an example for others to follow:
"Dr. Frank Harpur is an Irish doctor who came at the beginning of the 1890s. He used to go with a houseboat down the branches of the Nile to the Delta area," said Dr. Awad. "He used to get offshore and to see the patients, and then go back to Cairo."
Dr. Harpur was so successful, notes Michel Awad, that he is still remembered for eradicating a parasite which was plaguing the countryside:
"At the beginning, there were many farmers who suffered from parasites, notably one parasite called enclostoma, feeding on the blood of the farmers, so they were getting weak and unable to do much work," he said. "Dr. Harpur and his team brought the treatment for this parasite and they treated many patients, so by and by word spread in the country and the government adopted the same treatment."
Douglas Penman, a third-year medical student from Sheffield, England is working for a short period at the hospital and says what the doctors accomplish is impressive:
"The commitment to serve the Muslim population in Menhouf is quite impressive," he said. "They charge a lot less than the government hospitals and they work at a better standard. The sheer volume of people that they manage to get through, is quite impressive."
Children are a large part of the work at Harpur Hospital, and some are too shy to talk, but the doctors coax them, softly.
"What is your name?" asks Dr. Samir. "It is Malek Abdel Ghaffar", the young patient replies timidly. She says her eyes are bothering her and her mother says they are swollen.
Anglican Bishop Mouneer Anis, who oversees Harpur Hospital, says its work is especially meaningful to him, since he is also a medical doctor:
"The medical program is very near to my heart, because I myself am a medical doctor. I graduated in Cairo University medical school in 1974 and I worked in a hospital for 21 years before I became a bishop," he said.
He says the medical program is a way for him and other doctors to apply the Christian teaching of compassion for others:"Jesus, when he came to our earth, he went around doing good for all people, regardless of their religion, their gender, their economic status, and sometimes the church itself cannot do this," he said.
The Bishop compares his team's medical work to that of a Good Samaritan, who goes where organizations like churches cannot go.
ukcopts association

Egypt: Muslims attack Christian-owned shops in Alexandria

Reuters5 April 2009 ALEXANDRIA, Egypt, April 5 (Reuters) -
Hundreds of Muslims pelted Christian-owned shops and a police station with stones in the Mediterranean port city of Alexandria on Sunday after a Muslim man was killed, an eyewitness said.
A security source said the violence started after word of mouth reports a Muslim man, identified as Ahmed Abdel Razeq Gomaa, had been stabbed to death in the street by his Christian landlords.
Crowds of Muslims assembled near a mosque for funeral prayers for Gomaa chanting "They'll die, they'll die," in reference to the three Christian landlords, brothers Ayman, Atef and Farag Tagy, the witness said.
Police and security vehicles were positioned in the area.
Security sources said the Muslim man was the sole Muslim tenant in the building owned by the trio, and had been injured in an earlier fight with the brothers. One security source added that the three landlords had been detained over the death.
Christians account for up to 10 percent of Egypt's population. Relations with the Muslim majority are usually harmonious, but disputes over land, religious buildings or women sometimes lead to violence.
In 2006, there were three days of sectarian clashes in Alexandria after a Muslim stabbed a Coptic Christian to death. Authorities said the attacker was mentally ill. (Writing by Aziz El-Kaissouni; Editing by Jon Boyle)
uk copts association

Obamateurism of the Day-President Obama: What Is It That You Do Not Understand?

President Obama: What Is It That You Do Not Understand?
Right Side News
8 April 2009
Mr. President, “Change, Yes We Can,” was not about changing America to Socialism, Communism or Marxism and appeasement or softening your tone about the Taliban or Muslim extremists
At the G20 summit, President Obama once again repeated the same mantra, “The United States wants the Islamic Republic of Iran to take its rightful place in the community of nations.” Apparently, the White House staff does not read my articles so President Obama continues to parrot the same mantra everywhere he goes.
Mr. President, you are either extremely naïve, (as we suspected you would be) you lack foreign policy experience, or you are extremely ignorant. You are not even a classic orator as many people have suggested you are, like JFK.
At best, I describe you as the greatest reader from a teleprompter. Without this device, you seem completely at a loss for words. Here I give our former president, George W. Bush credit; at least he spoke from the heart.
OK, let us get back to the situation in Iran. Mr. President, the Iranian people do not recognize the Islamic Republic as a country, but call these terrorists occupiers who must leave Iran or to be crushed decisively by hook or by crook. President Obama, what is it that you do not understand? Why is it so difficult for you to comprehend that the Islamic regime is a terrorist entity and the Iranian nation is fed up with them? Nothing less than an overthrow of this bloodthirsty regime is acceptable to millions of Iranians.
Since 1979, this illegitimate government of “Allah” has been waging a brutal war against the entire population of Iran who has been fighting for individual and religious freedom for many years. Millions of Iranians have been hanged, butchered or are dying in prison. We simply ask you stop appeasing the Islamists all over the world and given them legitimacy. That was not why your were elected.
Mr. President, Iranian people want you to stop appeasing the mullahs and are asking the world to file legal charges against the leaders of the Islamic Republic for wanton violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The charges would be for their crimes against humanity and genocidal actions against religious and political groups, for support of international terrorism, for demolition of religious sites and cemeteries, for rape, torture, and summary executions of prisoners of conscience, for forgery of documents, for acts of blackmail and fraud, and for much much more.
Mr. President, “Change, Yes We Can,” was not about changing America to Socialism, Communism or Marxism and appeasement or softening your tone about the Taliban or Muslim extremists. It was not about emptying out our treasury department and writing hot checks as though it belongs to you. Only a person who has no allegiance to the United States constitution would terrorize Americans with anti-American agendas, one after another, and create fear in the hearts of the American people. Did you know that the number one selling items in America are now guns and ammunition? Guns are selling like hotcakes, so fast that gunmakers cannot keep up. BUT WHY? Who said you could not stimulate the economy? Maybe you need to read for yourself.
President Obama’s plan undermines the most powerful motive for wealth production: incentive. It is the incentive that makes a person work hard to provide for his own and his family’s living, and secure his financial future. Society after society has tried and failed the economic solution of “spreading the wealth around.” It doesn’t work. All it does is to discourage the hard-working and rewards the sloth. It is suicidal to buy into that failed policy, and that’s exactly where President Obama aims to take us and this is a dangerous scheme with both houses on his side.
In his recent trip to London for G20 summit, President Obama was reaching out to shake the hand of King Abdullah, one of the leading men of terror in our current life. Saudi Arabia is a hub for terrorism. Seventeen terrorists out of nineteen terrorists on the 11 September 2001 attacks were from Saudi Arabia, supposedly our friend and ally. Here is the travesty, the most powerful man on earth bends over and bows deeply to Saudis’ King Abdullah, who is well known for his support of Wahhabi Islamism all over the world.
Mr. President, many Americans are still in shock by your action at the G20 summit. American Presidents do not bow to any monarchs from any country, period. Your appearance looked submissive, insulting to millions of Americans and treacherous at worst. Your naiveté is really making it difficult for Americans to like you. Even among your completely brainwashed fans and, should I dare to say, some media zombies like Keith Olbermann and Chris Mathew too!
And now, the Saudi King’s petrodollar, along with other 56 member nations of the Organization of the Islamic Conference are pressuring the United Nations to pass a universal law prescribing imprisonment for criticizing Islam, an ideology of terror. The Cairo declaration states "that all rights are subject to Shari’a law, and makes Shari’a law the only source of reference for human rights."
Only a person who was not born in the United States would commit such a fatuous act. Only a person who considers himself a citizen of the world willfully attempts to demolish the greatest republic and democracy in the world, America, as fast as he can. Apparently, this president is familiar with Niccolò Machiavelli’s work:
“When seeking office, the aspirant must pretend to be what he is not. After seizing power, he should impose his agenda quickly and ruthlessly before his subjects realize what he is doing and have time to react.”
President Obama, making his first visit to a Muslim nation as president, declared Monday "The United States is not and never will be at war with Islam. In fact, our partnership with the Muslim world is critical ... in rolling back a fringe ideology that people of all faiths reject."
Mr. President, first and foremost, you made a fool out of yourself again. Your ill-advised coziness with the Muslim nations will bring down our nation faster than any foreign enemy. America has never been at war with Islam. On the contrary, it is Islam that has waged a war with the infidels and wants to conquer the world. Below are some quotes from Islamists and academic or educational sources:
“Islam is a revolutionary doctrine and system that overturns governments. It seeks to overturn the whole universal social order...and establish its structure anew...Islam seeks the world. It is not satisfied by a piece of land but demands the whole universe...Islamic Jihad is at the same time offensive and defensive...The Islamic party does not hesitate to utilize the means of war to implement its goal.” (quoted by Yvonne Haddad, "Islamists and the Challenge of Pluralism," Washington, D.C.: Center for Contemporary Arab Studies at Georgetown University, 1995, p. 10.)BE
“Islam wants the whole earth and does not content itself with only a part thereof. It wants and requires the entire inhabited world. It does not want this in order that one nation dominates the earth and monopolizes its sources of wealth, after having taken them away from one or more other nations. No, Islam wants and requires the earth in order that the human race altogether can enjoy the concept and practical program of human happiness, by means of which Allah has honored Islam and put it above the other religions and laws. In order to realize this lofty desire, Islam wants to employ all forces and means that can be employed for bringing about a universal all-embracing revolution. It will spare no efforts for the achievement of this supreme objective. This far-reaching struggle that continuously exhausts all forces and this employment of all possible means are called jihad.” (quoted by Rudolph Peters, Jihad in Classical and Modern Islam, Marcus Wiener Publishers, Princeton, N.J., p. 128.
Mr. President, if you have not been exposed to Islamic history, (I think you have) please allow me to enlighten you briefly. The Arabs who sallied out of the Arabian deserts did not fan out to the outside world with the Quran in one hand and flowers in the other, preaching love and peace from street corner to street corner, thereby capturing the hearts and minds of the people. Islam was forced upon every people at the point of the sword and the imposition of backbreaking jazyyeh (special taxes) levied on those who were spared death and allowed to retain their religious beliefs. In spite of paying heavy Jazyyeh, the non-Muslims were treated, at best, as second-class citizens in their own homelands.
Mr. President, fourteen hundred years of Islamic terrorism is far too long for any people, although the Jews hold the record for that misfortune. The Jews have at long last returned to their homeland (and you have turned your back on them) even though they are still encircled by the vicious Arab Islamists who would like nothing better than to drown every last one of them in the sea, very much similar to the way the Islamists forced our Zoroastrian people out of the country or the remaining few to the edges of inhospitable desert.
As I mentioned before the election, it is shortsighted and even dangerous to lose our cool in the face of present problems by placing our full trust in a charismatic inexperienced man who promises a great deal that he will certainly fail to deliver. Did anyone listen?
Mr. President, it appears you, as U.S. President, have a yearning to make friends with terrorist countries such as Syria and the Islamic Republic without any consideration of the savagery of their regimes against their people. On the other hand, I, as a citizen of America have an obligation to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
I am a recent "shareholder" in this magnificent "company" -- United States of America. The charter that lights the path of this country is the constitution. I vehemently disagree with those who are more than willing to violate the constitution and call it little more than a body of suggestions that can be disregarded when expedient. To me, the constitution is our nation's most sacred document. It is the document that binds its vastly diverse constituents as equal loyal members.
I strongly feel that you, Mr. President, and your supporters have not abided by the explicit provisions of the constitution. You are creating a constitutional stand off. For this reason, I am launching my protest and am demanding that the truth about your eligibility to be the president of this great nation be conclusively established before we witness the end of this republic, which deeply troubles me and millions of my fellow Americans.
The certificate on your website is, at this point in time, just a picture. It has never been verified by any government agency. The state of Hawaii has never verified it.
The 10/31/08 statement from the Hawaii Department of Health does not say anything about where Obama was born. (it does NOT establish that Obama is Natural Born Citizen.) The Certificate of Live Birth, or COLB (a COLB is a completely different document, one that can be registered much later than at the time of birth) is in the possession of the Hawaii Department of Public Health and is also SEALED.
President Obama, based on what has been disclosed thus far, and your refusal to show your natural born birth certificate or COLB, it is obvious that you are not a natural born U.S. citizen. We the people have the perfect right, and the ineludible duty, to be completely certain that the current President is a natural born U.S. citizen, for we the people are the ultimate guardians of the constitution.
According to your grandmother and siblings, you were born in Kenya, and perhaps are an Indonesian citizen. Hence, you would be ineligible to be our President and represent the policy of the United States. Perhaps it would be expedient to pay attention to one of the most erudite constitutional professors in this country, Alan Keyes, who says: Stop Obama or U.S. will cease to exist.
ukcopts association

Obamateurism of the Day

We covered this yesterday when it happened, but in my estimation, the worst amateur moment thus far in the Obama presidency came when the President of the United States executed a bow to a monarch so deep that he literally had to take a step back to balance himself. Not just any monarch, either, but one of the most repressive among those nations friendly to the US. Interestingly, this came just after Barack Obama met with another monarch, and the contrast between Barack Obama’s show of respect is striking. I put together this video to demonstrate it:


watch video


http://hotair.com/archives/2009/04/03/obamateurism-of-the-day-12/
People criticized George Bush for holding hands with the Saudi king, but holding hands does not signify submission to another’s authority, and certainly not in the manner that Obama’s bow does here. Holding hands is a sign of friendship. And for those who believe that a bow is another sign of friendship, note that Obama didn’t execute a bow like this for the Queen of the UK, and the Saudi monarch doesn’t bother to reciprocate, either.
So what’s the protocol for heads of state? Anderson Cooper hinted at it in his coverage of Obama’s meeting with the British monarch:
When President and Mrs. Obama met the Queen tonight, there was a handshake, and both the President and the Queen both nodded respectfully to each other.
Was it a bow? Not quite. It was more of a, “I know you are a head of state and so am I. We are both heads of state together and this is what heads of state do when they meet other heads of state.” In other words they bow to each other without actually bowing.
Well, that certainly went out the door, didn’t it? And I’m certain that Obama’s fans will try to rationalize this, but my good friend Scott Johnson at Power Line notes that the DU had already put together a defense of Michelle Obama if she didn’t curtsy when meeting the Queen:
In fact, protocol dictates that she not do so.
Angier Biddle Duke, President Kennedy’s Chief of Protocol told this very poignant story…
Before the Kennedy’s first state visit to England, Jacqueline Kennedy asked Duke whether she should curtsy to the Queen. He told her no because she was the wife of the head of state and heads of state and their wives do not go around bowing and curtsying to one another.
Three years later, after her husband’s funeral, Mrs. Kennedy received guests in the White House family quarters. When Prince Philip greeted her, she curtsied to him. Duke was surprised because Mrs. Kennedy was a stickler for protocol and had a steel trap memory for such things. Noting his surprise, Mrs. Kennedy whispered to him:
“Angie, I’m no longer the wife of a head of state.”
Duke said he immediately left the room and wept.
So, don’t be surprised if Mrs. Obama does not curtsy to the Queen. Also don’t be surprised if she gets jumped all over for it - but she’ll be doing - or not doing - exactly what she’s supposed to.
Indeed. And President Obama shouldn’t have bowed to the Saudi monarch, either. No American President should ever make such an obsequious display to any monarch — ever.

www.hotair.com

Palestinians can learn from Jews

SALIM MANSUR – SUN MEDIA
19 - March - 2009 /
During the past few weeks Canadians once more witnessed the mindset driving Arab and Palestinian politics.
The leadership of the Canadian Arab Federation (CAF), in hurling public abuse at senior political leaders in Ottawa dropped its cultivated mask of responsibly serving its community, to display the streak of political ugliness carefully hidden from view.
Then the spectacle of the Israeli Apartheid Week on various university and college campuses across Canada disclosed how greatly infected are the organizers - Arab-Palestinian students and their supporters - with anti-Semitism.
In abusing federally elected leaders the CAF leadership inexcusably insulted the people of Canada .
Moreover, the intemperate conduct of the CAF leader - Khaled Mouammar is a Palestinian-Arab and Orthodox Christian - was indicative of the problem exacerbating Palestinian suffering, despite receiving much political, diplomatic and financial support from around the world.
Palestinians are an abused people, but they are not the only ones in a world where there has been much abuse of people lacking power to fend for themselves. Jews were an abused people, and the abuse directed at them eventually became the Holocaust.
But the lesson Jews have provided, especially for Palestinians, is that an abused people can turn their history around and succeed despite the odds ranged against them. What is most importantly needed - and this is the profound lesson provided by the Israelis - is equanimity of the mind in politics, sense of realism in a world riddled with irony and tragedy and an abiding faith in good people can do together in overcoming adversity.
Instead of learning from Jews - it would have been amply reciprocated - Palestinians, and Arabs in general, soaked up the racist ideology directed against Jews imported from Nazi Germany as it went down in flames in 1945.
The recent study, Jihad and Jew-Hatred: Islamism, Nazism and the Roots of 9/11, by Matthias Kuntzel, a German historian, should be required reading on this subject.
The demonization of Jews and Israelis in the borrowed language of Nazi Germany discloses the extent to which Palestinians and their supporters, as Kuntzel details, are the carriers of revived anti-Semitism in our time.
History is a contested ground, yet there are incontestable historical facts that cannot be erased.
Palestinians as an abused people have been most abused by their Arab brethren. The list of such abuse - for instance, the massacre of Palestinians carried out by Bedouin soldiers of the late Jordanian King Hussein's army in September 1970 - is painfully long.
But the finger-pointing at Israelis for all of Palestinian suffering is the oldest canard of blaming Jews for the ills of non-Jews. This is anti-Semitism that has run as a swollen river - not a mere tributary - in Europe 's history reaching its apogee with Adolf Hitler at the helm of Nazi Germany.
The argument made that Arabs cannot be faulted with anti-Semitism since they are ethnically Semite is rubbish. Anti-Semitism is racial hatred directed exclusively at Jews by any people, though it originated in the bosom of Christian Europe with Martin Luther holding Jews responsible for the world's ills as far back as 1543.
An intemperate mind is fuel for violence, and combined with anti-Semitism it makes for predictable wreckage.
This mindset has imprisoned Palestinians as they repeatedly demonstrate unwillingness in learning from history, or from the wreckage of their own making.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YWEzZjZhOTQyMzgzZWFhZTk1NGYwNjczZTJhMTc2ZGQ=

Woman sentenced for jihad leaflet

Tuesday, 31 March 2009
Woman sentenced for jihad leaflet
BBC
A woman who wrote a leaflet encouraging people to carry out jihad, or holy war, has been sentenced to a community order at Manchester Crown Court.
Shella Roma, 29, of Oldham, had pleaded guilty to dissemination of a terrorist publication, and received a three-year order, with supervision for two years.
Roma was arrested after a photocopy shop employee was alarmed by a document she had produced, and alerted police.
The pamphlet contained an essay, "The Call", encouraging jihad. The eight-page essay mentioned the 9/11 attacks and the war on terror, and repeatedly asked: "Will you go to Jihad (holy war)?"
In the hands of vulnerable people, this document could have inspired them to cause harm
Det Ch Supt Tony Porter Greater Manchester Police

It ended: "Jihad: the choice is yours."
The staff member at the business in Ashton-under-Lyne contacted police, who arrested Roma - a mother-of-one - on 31 January, 2008.
Officers searching Roma's home found 137 of the 200 documents that were copied, but the remaining 63 have never been recovered.
Judge Clement Goldstone QC said Roma had "sought to distribute them in two ways, by leaving them in your home for anyone who wanted to help themselves too, and, more significantly, by giving them to your husband to distribute outside the mosque to which normal, practising Muslims had gone to pray".
Det Ch Supt Tony Porter, of the Greater Manchester Police Counter Terrorism Unit, said: "Roma was an isolated, self-motivated person, and not a professional propagandist, but in the hands of vulnerable people, this document could have inspired them to cause harm.
"This case shows how important it is for people to come forward and report any concerns about suspicious activity."

state talking on arabic&islamic religion Condemns Human Rights Violations Only When Perpetrated by Non-Muslims

Arab Liberals:
The Arab state talking on arabic& islamic religion Condemns Human Rights Violations Only When Perpetrated by Non-Muslims
MEMRI:
In response to the sweeping condemnation in the Arab and Muslim world of Israel’s actions in Gaza, and the calls to prosecute Israeli leaders for war crimes, liberal Arab writers have accused the Arabs and Muslims of hypocrisy. The liberal websiteAl-Sultan emphasizes the role of the traditional Islamic mentality - and of political Islam, which exploits this mentality - in promoting inflexible xenophobic and antisemitic attitudes. Following are excerpts from the two articles: Paradise“Kamal Ghobrial wrote: “…[There are] courageous [heroes] who zealously [defend] human [values], especially when it comes to Muslim blood - for, according to these courageous jihadists, only [Muslim] blood is valuable, while the blood of others is basically worthless and can be spilled without a qualm. More than that, spilling it is a kind of sacrifice through which one can attain paradise.“[I would like to remind] all these people… that [Sudanese President Omar Al-Bashir] is accused of spilling the blood of his own Sunni Muslim people. The arm of justice has reached him in order to hold him to account for crimes perpetrated during his presidency against thousands of innocent people. [These crimes] outraged everyone - except, of course, the Arabs, who are outraged only in specific circumstances and in response to deliberate incitement.“Will we witness demonstrations in the Muslim and Arab capitals and cities calling for international justice to be carried out and demanding that the accused [i.e. Bashir] be immediately turned over to the [international] court to receive the punishment he deserves…? Or will we see the opposite?“[I believe that,] once we calm down from our emotional reaction [to the plight of] our children and brothers in Gaza, whose blood is being spilled… we will see the avenging angels of the [Arab] television networks, who support terrorism, make an [ideological] U-turn for the second time this year. They will drop the refrains about defending human rights, and rally to the defense of the accused [i.e. Bashir]. More than that… they will claim that the allegations against him are part of the global conspiracy against the Arabs and the Muslims.“The essential and baffling question is this: The [Arab and Muslim] outrage that is being witnessed by the region and the world - does it [really] stem from human sentiment and solidarity with the Palestinian people? If the answer is yes, we would expect to see the same reaction to the [plight of the] Darfurians… [However, it turns out that the Arab reaction to atrocities depends upon who the perpetrator is].“The Palestinians were victimized by the Zionist and American enemy… while the Darfurians were victimized by their own leader [who is a Sunni Muslim. It follows that the support for the Palestinian people] does not stem from love for the Palestinians… but from hatred for the other… for Zionists or Christians.“If the perpetrator of massacres against Kurds and Shi’ites in Iraq, and later [of massacres] in Kuwait, i.e. Saddam Hussein… is [considered] our hero and a leader of the Arab nation, then we will [obviously] disregard his crimes, and wake up only when some [non-Muslim] comes along to rescue us from his brutal jaws…“[Another] example is the Muslim Brotherhood. Today, they are recruiting thousands in every Egyptian city and collecting money for the residents of Gaza… However, they, the Gama’a Al-Islamiyya, and the [Islamic] Jihad did not bat an eyelid [at the crimes of Bashir and Saddam]. Instead, they encourage terrorism in Egypt, kill its citizens, soldiers, and security officers, and especially target Copts and foreigners…” [1]“Why Is It That Offenses Against the Dignity Of Arabs And Muslims Are ‘Blatant And Obvious’ Only When the ‘Perpetrator’ Is Israel? Why This Racial Discrimination In Defending Human Rights?”In his article, Fakher Al-Sultan accused traditional and political Islam, as well as its leaders, of encouraging hatred towards the other, and especially towards Jews. He too argued that it is the identity of the perpetrator that determines whether the Arab and Muslim world will condemn human rights violations or ignore (or even encourage) them.He wrote: “The Summer 2006 Israel-Hizbullah war in Lebanon is a striking example that shows the need to [examine] the essence of a popular religious outlook [prevalent] among Arabs and Muslims - namely the tendency which was legitimized [by the religious principle] of rejecting all non-Muslims. [This tendency is part of] the traditional religious outlook of [various] branches [of Islam]. It is manifested in [the ideology of] political Islam, and is taken to extremes in the actions and policy of Hizbullah…“The sweeping popular support enjoyed by Hizbullah [in 2006] - was it sincere and natural, or did it stem from the fact that the enemy was the state of Israel, ‘the racist religious Jewish [state]?’ Perhaps it had to do with the traditional religious outlook of political Islam - [that is,] with the way [in which political Islam] views other religions, especially the Israeli Jew?“In fact… why are the Muslims and Arabs categorically interested in the fate of the Lebanese and Palestinians, but are not so intensely interested in the fate of other Arab and Muslim peoples, such as the Iraqis, Sudanese, Afghanis, Somalis and others, who have faced much more severe persecution, terrorism and military [violence]?…“The traditional religious outlook, which is being manipulated by political [forces], has covertly granted categorical religious legitimacy to any struggle against the Jews or Israel. It has also infected the Arabs and Muslims with egomania, so that all backwardness and all killings are [automatically] blamed on the other - on the foreigner or the non-Muslim, and especially on the Jew.“The [Arab] nations, other than the Lebanese and Palestinians, are not confronting the Israeli ‘enemy,’ but are fighting a domestic enemy. Consequently, the Arab and Muslim interest in their fate… is shamefully [negligible], and in most cases, [the reaction is complete] indifference…“When Saddam Hussein invaded and devoured Kuwait in 1990, he deliberately evoked the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, claiming that the way to the liberation of Jerusalem passes through Kuwait… [He did] this because it was clear to him that the popular Muslim view, which is rooted in [the Muslims’] traditional historic-religious outlook, rests on a basic principle which intensifies the hostility towards the Jews and the state of Israel.“[Saddam] took full advantage [of this fact]… [In this way,] the Iraqi tyrant… managed to enlist the support of the Arab and Muslim peoples, especially the Sunnis [who espouse] the traditional religious outlook. However, at the same time, he accidentally exposed the fallacy and preposterousness of this outlook, and of the politically manipulated devoutness, which are based on the principle of ’support your brother, whether he is the oppressed or the oppressor,’ especially when the ‘enemy’ is Israel.”“We therefore have to ask: What will be the fate of the Muslim peoples who are doomed to [be the victims of] home-grown oppression, terrorism, tyranny and extremism? Why shouldn’t they receive the same amount of popular assistance and religious support [as the Lebanese and Palestinians], in order to confront their own dictatorial and oppressive regimes?“Why [do we witness] these populist Islamist attacks on the actions and policies of Israel and the U.S. - [who are accused of violating] the rights of the peoples, such as the Palestinians and the Lebanese - while at the same time there is conspicuous silence in the face of the inhuman atrocities and tortures carried on in almost all prisons in the Arab and Muslim countries? Why this strange silence in the face of human rights violations of all kinds, including the rights of women and children, the rights of foreign workers, and the political and social rights of individuals and peoples?“Why is it that offenses against the dignity of Arabs and Muslims are ‘blatant and obvious’ only when the ‘perpetrator’ is Israel? Why this racial discrimination in defending human rights? Why distinguish one enemy from the other when the results of the oppression are the same?“[This approach] is mostly the fault of the traditional religious outlook and of political Islam. The religious scholars who promote this kind of outlook and interpretation are responsible for perpetuating this discriminatory [approach], which can be very simply characterized as inhuman racism. [The proponents of] this approach do not come out against oppressors and against various acts of oppression [as such], but only against acts of oppression perpetrated by Jews, and only because it corresponds to their [religious] outlook, serves their populist goals and furthers their political agenda.“This approach… finds in the struggle against Israel fertile grounds for promoting its totalitarian religious slogans that correspond to its ideology. It characterizes every crisis as a struggle between what is completely lacking in religious validity and what is absolute religious truth. According to shari’a, [this truth] must be defended even it this contravenes our national and social interests and comes at the cost of thousands of innocent lives.“Whenever there is a confrontation involving the state of Israel, the politically-manipulated traditional religious mentality… must always draw a dichotomy between the believers, representatives of Allah, and the representatives of Satan, [who are] traitors, agents, infidels and polytheists. This mentality [always] discerns a struggle between the forces of truth and the forces of falsehood, and uses the religious texts as a whip [to enforce its views]. This is meant to prevent any potential criticism against the Muslim side of this burning religious confrontation between the Jews and the Muslims…“Therefore, the proponents of this type of religious devoutness, [i.e.] those who espouse the traditional religious outlook [and the proponents of] political Islam in some of the Arab countries and societies that are controlled by religious slogans and mystical fantasies, impose the familiar old [method of] resolving their confrontation with the non-Muslims, and especially the Jews. That is, they [hold that] the Muslim public must choose between joining the Muslim side [of the struggle], which is the side of the truth, and joining the [opposite] side, which is the side of falsehood - for there is no room for any intermediate ‘grey area’ view.“In their opinion, every individual [is one of two things]: either a Zionist, agent and traitor, or a Muslim who believes in Allah and in the plan of politically guided traditional Islam, and who is convinced that Allah will [eventually] give the Muslims victory and eliminate the Jews and their state…“Hizbullah’s abduction of the two Israeli soldiers in the summer of 2006, as well as Hamas’ actions [in 2009, and its decision] to continue firing its wretched rockets [into Israel] - should they not be subjected to objective and comprehensive criticism?“More than that - should we not subject these two movements [as a whole], their leaders and their ideology, to criticism? Is it correct to deal with such profound and violent crises only by criticizing the Israeli side, while disregarding the political behavior of the religious groups…?“[These groups] claim that their conduct and policy are based on transcendental religious methods that may not be criticized, since they [emanate] from the true and original divine [source], and represent a divine stance opposing the stance of the devil.” [2][1] http://www.elaph.com/, January 13, 2009.[2] http://www.elaph.com/, January 12, 2009.

All articls of March 2009

▼ 2009
▼ March (22)
“Forbidden” Romance Leads to Burning of Christian
GAFFNEY: Embracing of Shariah?
Muslim extremists abduct more Coptic girls ‎and Th...
The Third Jihad: vedio
Islamist Hate Exposed - Islamist School in Fairfax...
the situation of the Copts in Egypt -The Most Resp...
Egypt says adoptive moms were human smugglers
Wilhelm H. Ludwig letter to president Mubarak -Met...
When it comes to Islamic Saudi Academy textbooks, ...
From the Lips of an Islamist - VIDEO -Islamist t...
A bit of History - 2007: fighting for Democracy in...
Secretary of States' Human Rights Statement in Egy...
Report to Public Prosecutor IN EGYPT : Three Salaf...
THE TRUTH ABOUT ISLAM
AND WHERE IS THIS COMING FROM???
Moderate" Egypt Imitates Saudi Arabian Extremism
Egyptian Expats Demand Mubarak Indictment
COALITION OF COUNTER-TERRORISM EDUCATORS
Jihad, Martyrdom, and the Torments of the Grave
Netherlands Supreme Court: Insulting Islam is not ...
Islam: The great "Religion of Peace" and its call ...
Brother Kills A Terrorist in Search for Kidnapped ...