Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News: Muslim Brotherhood

Showing posts with label Muslim Brotherhood. Show all posts

Wednesday, October 30, 2013

Pro-Brotherhood riots at Al Azhar, other Egyptian universities

Egyptian security forces stormed al-Azhar University campus on Wednesday to quell student protests against the military-backed government.

It was the first time police forces have moved onto a campus since a 2010 court ruling.

The interior ministry ordered the police intervention following a request by the administration of the prestigious university, Al Arabiya correspondent reported.

Students supporting ousted President Mohammad Mursi have been holding regular protests on campus, sometimes prompting the suspension of classes.

During Wednesday’s protests students smashed windows, hurled chairs and covered walls of an administrative building with graffiti insulting the military backed interim government and Minister of Defense Gen. Abdel Fattah al-Sissi.

“Sissi is a dog. Down, down with the lord of the army,” one protester scribbled, according to Reuters. One police officer yelled: “Arrest anyone you see. Bring me those kids. If you see anyone just arrest them right away.”

Demonstrations at al-Azhar are a sensitive matter as the institution has historically taken the government side.

Islamists appear to have adopted a policy of choosing sensitive sites such as al-Azhar University to display their views instead of taking to the streets in big numbers, Reuters reported.

Video of the riots:

Al Azhar has been considered the center of "moderate Islam" for a while.

However, many Egyptians are claiming that most of those arrested were not in fact students, but outside Muslim Brotherhood agitators. In fact, one politician compared the Brotherhood infiltrating Al Azhar to Jews "storming the Al Aqsa Mosque." Nothing about Talmudic rituals, though.

Looks like the students disagree.

The rioting is spreading to other universities, like Cairo University, Alexandria U and Mansoura U.

August 1948: The Arab League starts to slide into Islamism

I just found this fascinating article from the Palestine Post, August 22, 1948:

Robert Martin, who had been in the Arab States since the outbreak of the Palestine war, went to Cyprus to file dispatches on the situation which the Syrian military censors refused to pass for transmission.

He summarizes his impressions as follows:

A tragically unexpected and potentially dangerous result of the conflict in Palestine is the increasing trend among the Arabs toward meek acceptance of nationalistic, totalitarian governments.

The Arab League was formed in 1945 to protect the independence of all Arab countries...But critics of the League believe that it is tending to become Islamic rather than Arabic.

One minor point of evidence is that the former Lebanese Foreign Minister, Kamid Frangieh, a Maronite, had never been permitted to attend a League meeting. When the League's Military Committee assembles, the Lebanese Chief of Staff, Gen. Fuad Shehab, a Christian, is barred, and his place is filled by a Moslem officer of inferior rank.

Other critics believe that the League ismoving away from its former professed ideal of promoting regional unity and democracy, and has become fundamentally a bulwark against the West. If true, the League will become the spokesman of reaction rather than of progress.

In the eyes of some Arabs, the chief offenders are the youth groups, especially the Young Men's Moslem Association and the Moslem Brotherhood, whose leaders are in part graduates of Al Azhar University. Under their guidance, Islam is tending to become more and more a retreat into the past, breaking away from everything that is Western and progressive. They preach Moslem orthodoxy, and in their minds religion and politics are inextricably entwined. They have progressed beyond the mere acceptance of the constitutional provision that "the religion of the state is Islam" and now look to the State to bar all outside thought or culture.

Self--centered and feudalistic, this concept of Islam inevitably denies the oppressed people in the Arab States any improvement in their status. For these interpreters of the revived Islam are linked up with their landlords, who are the keystones in the feudalistic family, tribal and social system.

Martin's major mistake, of course, was to attribute this pivot towards Islamism as being a reaction to Israel. (Linkage has been around a long time!) After all, even he admits that the banning of Christians from meetings was happening from the beginning of the League, and the League's apparent first decision was to boycott Jewish products - not Zionist, but Jewish - back in 1945.

Even so, his description of radical Islam of 1948 is remarkably similar to what we are seeing in Egypt and elsewhere in the Arab world 65 years later.

Secular Egyptian paper says Muslim Brotherhood is acting out the Protocols of the Elders of Zion

We've seen before how the secular Egyptian party al-Wafd has pushed the most bizarre anti-Zionist, anti-semitic and anti-American conspiracy theories around.

Today they continue, with a long article that (yet again) describes the forgery known as the Protocols of the Elders of Zion - and how the Muslim Brotherhood is part of this vast Jewish conspiracy.

For example, the first protocol supposedly says that the Jews must cause strife and infighting in the nations they want to destroy - and that's what the Muslim Brotherhood did!

The ninth protocol says to fool people with false slogans - and that is what the Muslim Brotherhood did!

The tenth protocol forces world leaders to adhere to the wishes of the Jews in order to stay in power - and this is exactly what the Muslim Brotherhood did!

The article goes on and on, piling idiocy upon stupidity upon crazed conspiracy.

Remember, these guys represent the secularists - the best of the best of Egypt, the ones that the West is hoping will take over (although they pretend that the West loves Morsi and always did.)

Once again, I cannot find the tiniest pushback to these crazed anti-semitic conspiracy theories in the Egyptian media. Either the sane voices are too afraid to speak up, or they don't exist.

Either way, it is not an auspicious sign for the future of Egypt.

The Guardian's whitewash of the Muslim Brotherhood

Last week, The Guardian looked at the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and - surprise! - managed to find that it was not nearly as bad as those ignorant Westerners think:

"There can be no question that genuine democracy must prevail," Mohammad Mursi, a brotherhood spokesman, wrote in an article for Tuesday's Guardian. "While the Muslim Brotherhood is unequivocal regarding its basis in Islamic thought, it rejects any attempt to enforce any ideological line upon the Egyptian people."

Although the Brotherhood appears to have firmly embraced democracy, the means for reconciling that with its religious principles are not entirely clear: the issue of God's sovereignty versus people's sovereignty looks to have been fudged rather than resolved.

The Brotherhood continues to maintain that "Islam is the solution" while at the same time demonstrating a kind of pragmatism that suggests Islam may not be a complete solution after all.

For example?

One example is jizya, the poll tax on non-Muslims, which is clearly prescribed in the Qur'an. The original idea was that non-Muslims, since they did not serve in the military, should pay for their protection by Muslims.

Today, most Muslims regard jizya as obsolete.In order to follow Qur'anic principles strictly, though, it would have to be reinstated. In 1997, the Muslim Brotherhood's Supreme Guide at the time, Mustafa Mashhur, did suggest reintroducing it but, in a country with around 6 million Christians, this caused uproar and the movement later backtracked. For non-Islamist Muslims, jizya presents no great problem: they can justify its abolition on the basis of historicity – that the circumstances in which the tax was imposed no longer exist today. For Islamists, though, this is much more difficult because the words of the Qur'an and the practices of the earliest Muslims form the core of their ideology.

The Muslim Brotherhood wants Egypt to be an Islamic country. The only way that can occur is through democracy. But if it acts too Islamic now, it can never gain the power it craves. So it tactically chooses what to emphasize and what to downplay.

This is not evidence that it believes that "Islam may not be a complete solution after all." It is evidence that they know how to play the game, very well. The Guardian completely misses the point.

The Guardian's misinterpretation gets worse:

Years of repression at the hands of the Egyptian authorities have made the brotherhood more interested in human rights than many might expect from an Islamist organisation. When the European parliament criticised Egypt's record in 2008, the Mubarak regime responded with fury, while Hussein Ibrahim, the brotherhood's parliamentary spokesman, sided with Europe.

"The issue of human rights has become a global language," he said. "Although each country has its own particulars, respect of human rights is now a concern for all peoples" – though he specifically excluded gay rights.

Rather than deploring criticism from abroad, he said, the Egyptian government would do better to improve its human rights record, which would leave less room for foreigners to cause embarrassment.

The Brotherhood's interest in human rights extends in exactly one dimension - human rights for Islamists in Egypt. While the Guardian parenthetically concedes that the Ikhwan would not support human rights for gays, it pointedly ignores the other groups that the Brotherhood does not see as legal equals:

Women
Jews and Christians
Atheists, Hindus and other beliefs that are considered "idol worship"

We have a movement that openly looks upon Muslims as being a higher class than the rest of the world, and that advocates discrimination (or death) against everyone else. And yet The Guardian praises them for their stance on human rights!

Other criticisms of the article can be found at CiFWatch.

Jordan's Muslim Brotherhood, tribes threaten kingdom

From AFP:

Less than a week after his appointment, Jordan's new premier is facing potential upheaval, with the Islamist opposition refusing to join his government and key tribes warning of a popular revolt.

Prime Minister Maaruf Bakhit is trying to form a cabinet tasked with pushing through reforms to counter popular discontent inspired by Tunisia's revolt and ongoing anti-regime protests in Egypt.

Bakhit has met MPs, senators, trade unions as well as the powerful Islamist movement, which said on Sunday it has rejected an offer to join the new government after questioning the prime minister's reformist credentials.

At the same time, 36 members of major tribes, which form the backbone of the regime in Jordan, condemned the country's "crisis of authority" and corruption, warning of a popular revolt.

"We did not discuss the details of the offer, but all what I can say is that taking part in this government under the current circumstances is out of the question," Hamzah Mansur, leader of the Islamic Action Front (IAF), the political arm of the Muslim Brotherhood in Jordan, told AFP.

"We are not asking for miracles. Our demands are realistic, practical and do-able. We demand early general polls in line with a new electoral law."

The tribal leaders joined the Islamists in their demands.

And from CNN:

In unprecedented criticism of Jordan's royal family, three dozen prominent Jordanian tribal figures issued an urgent call for reform Sunday and warned that the country may follow Tunisia and Egypt into turmoil without it.

The statement from 36 members of the country's major tribes attacked what they called the interference of Queen Rania in running the country. The queen, "her sycophants and the power centers that surround her" are dividing Jordanians and "stealing from the country and the people," the letter states.

The tribal figures said they were sending a clear message to King Abdullah II. They warned that if corruption was not prosecuted and reform was not implemented, "similar events to those in Tunisia and Egypt and other Arab countries will occur." The internet and satellite television had overcome the ability of regimes to stifle the thirst for information, the statement said.

There has been no response from the royal palace to the statement, which was posted on a popular Jordanian website. But the website, ammonnews.net, later complained that it had been the target of "intentional hacking" and that the statement had been removed.

The fun never stops!

What the West needs to understand about the Muslim Brotherhood

It is maddening to see Western reporters get the Muslim Brotherhood so very wrong.

The MB publicly eschewed violence in the 1960s, but it was a tactical move (and a response to Nasser's crackdown on them), not a sea change in their methods.

The MB is now saying that they do not seek an Islamist state and that they will not field a candidate for President - and these are tactical moves as well.

The question that Western observer need to be asking is: what are their goals?

They are very explicit in answering that question. Their main goal is to restore the caliphate, creating a single state run according to Islamic precepts that would stretch from Spain to Indonesia.

Once you know what their goals are, it is shortsighted to accept their statements made today as indicating anything opposing those goals. In fact, everything they are saying is consistent with their overarching goal of overthrowing not just Egypt but the governments of dozens of states with Muslim majorities or that were once under Muslim conquest.

The goals of the Muslim Brotherhood are exactly the same goals as their offshoots Hamas and Al Qaeda. At this time, their methods are different, but that does not make them any less of a long-term danger to world peace.

While it is not an MB offshoot, one only needs to look at how Hezbollah effectively has taken over Lebanon. They also claimed they did not want to upset the status quo; they also claimed to respect democracy; they also claimed that they did not want to field a candidate to lead the country. Yet here they are, with veto power over everything that happens in that state and with their own independent army and communications system, poised to gain more power in the coming years as Christians flee and organized opposition withers or flees in fear. The most-watched (and feared) speeches in Lebanon are from Hassan Nasrallah, who is not even part of the government. They became the de-facto rulers of Lebanon - even without being a majority - by executing a strategy that completely and thoroughly outmaneuvered any competition. They are still treading carefully, and going slowly, but one day in the not too distant future Lebanon will wake up to being an Iranian satellite with no possible recourse.

Islamists take a very long-term view of events. While Westerners think in terms of election cycles, Islamists think in terms of centuries. To these groups, a decade is an eye-blink.

To Islamists, the Crusades were an unfortunate century or so, which they rectified. They look at Israel the same way - as an anomaly that will inexorably be destroyed in the coming decades, due to their current strategy of picking away at it piece by piece and enlisting clueless Westerners to rally to the cause in the name of "international law" and "human rights" that the Muslim world itself utterly rejects. Their patience and ability to take the long view is their strength.

The important word is "strategy." The Islamists have one - a long term plan - and the West does not.

In most Arab countries, the Islamists have been quietly gathering strength for the eventual takeover of the lands - if not this decade then in five. They act with one voice. They use social service programs to gain acceptance with the masses. They engage in outreach to gain adherents. They happily use new and old media to spread their ideology. They are executing a brilliant, long term strategy.

Their strength comes from their single-minded purpose, their lack of internal dissent, their apparent authenticity and honesty, their seeming care for every Muslim, and their consistent message over the decades.

Is their any countervailing strategy that the West has? Is there any already existing, pro-Western movements in Egypt or any other Arab country that have been quietly building up an organization and adherents, ready to take advantage of the political vacuum and chaos that could occur at any time?

The very idea is absurd. To Westerners, creating a pro-democracy satellite TV station that is not viewed by anyone is the height of strategic thinking. And even if we had a strategy, the next occupant of the White House would probably change it, as would his successor.

Western-style freedoms and democracy are not as easy a sell as we think. And building truly democratic institutions is time consuming.

Egypt and Tunisia shows us how poor our planning has been. We should have been prepared for these events - because our enemies sure have been. (and, yes, the Muslim Brotherhood is gearing to eventually take over Tunisia as well, even though they are relatively weak now.)

Even worse, the Islamists have co-opted Western terminology to advance what is ultimately an anti-Western, anti-freedom agenda, making any legitimate Western ideals seem like a cheap knock-off of Islamist propaganda.

They have a strategy. We don't. And you cannot win over the long term without one.

(See also here.)

Syria's Muslim Brotherhood poised for action

We saw in Egypt that the Muslim Brotherhood was not the instigator of the protests but quickly took advantage of the potential power vacuum to position itself as the largest and best organized opposition group.

Déjà vu time.

After a series of independent calls on Facebook and elsewhere to hold a "day of rage" in Syria this Saturday, some of which attracted thousands of members, the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood had put out its own call for protest, calling for a ten part plan to reform Syria.

Just as in Egypt, their public position is not overtly religious but couched in terms of democracy and freedom (the single reference to religion is a call to have Syria rid itself of Iranian Shiite influence.)

MB leader wants to ready Egyptians for war with Israel

From the LA Times:

The Obama administration said for the first time that it supports a role for groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood, a banned Islamist organization, in a reformed Egyptian government.

The organization must reject violence and recognize democratic goals if the U.S. is to be comfortable with it taking part in the government, the White House said. But by even setting conditions for the involvement of such nonsecular groups, the administration took a surprise step in the midst of the crisis that has enveloped Egypt for the last week.

Monday's statement was a "pretty clear sign that the U.S. isn't going to advocate a narrow form of pluralism, but a broad one," said Robert Malley, a Mideast peace negotiator in the Clinton administration.

Which makes this so much easier to swallow:

A leading member of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt told the Arabic-language Iranian news network Al-Alam on Monday that he would like to see the Egyptian people prepare for war against Israel.

Muhammad Ghannem reportedly told Al- Alam that the Suez Canal should be closed immediately, and that the flow of gas from Egypt to Israel should cease “in order to bring about the downfall of the Mubarak regime.” He added that “the people should be prepared for war against Israel,” saying the world should understand that “the Egyptian people are prepared for anything to get rid of this regime.”

The original Al-Alam article is here.

(h/t Qumran Qumran and Avi B.)

Muslim Brotherhood on El Baradei: "He's only temporary"

From this Russia Today video, starting around 2:15, interviewing a Muslim Brotherhood member:

Mohammed El Baltagy: "We didn't choose El Baradei. We chose him only for a short period of change. He's only temporary."

Notice how el-Baltagy phrases it, as if the Muslim Brotherhood is calling the shots of the current uprising and using players as pawns to gain leadership.

El Baltagy is a major figure in the Muslim Brotherhood.

Much of the rest of the video is about Egyptian skepticism over El Baradei, making some would-be analysts look like complete fools.

The Muslim Brotherhood, 1948 (John Roy Carlson)

Last July I linked to some writings by the amazing John Roy Carlson. (Unfortunately, the Google Books link no longer shows large portions of the book I screen-captured.)

Here is a description of the "Moslem Brotherhood" in Egypt that Carlson wrote in 1948, published in the Palestine Post, as part of a larger article about Egypt altogether.

The article goes on to describe Al Azhar University, and ends with the ominous and prophetic words, "The Jew, if left to his own resources in Egypt, is doomed to pogrom and persecution."

Hamas hooking up with Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt? (UPDATE)

From Stratfor, a report that they admit is unconfirmed:

The Egyptian police are no longer patrolling the Rafah border crossing into Gaza. Hamas armed men are entering into Egypt and are closely collaborating with the MB. The MB has fully engaged itself in the demonstrations, and they are unsatisfied with the dismissal of the Cabinet. They are insisting on a new Cabinet that does not include members of the ruling National Democratic Party.

Security forces in plainclothes are engaged in destroying public property in order to give the impression that many protesters represent a public menace. The MB is meanwhile forming people’s committees to protect public property and also to coordinate demonstrators’ activities, including supplying them with food, beverages and first aid.

OlehGirl adds, based on tweets she's been monitoring:

The border between Gaza and Egypt has pretty much ceased to exist, at least as far as armed Hamas militants are concerned. Towns in the Sinai close to the Gaza border have been taken over by Muslim Brotherhood protesters, with Hamas militants from Gaza joining their ranks. The border, according to twitter updates and now more ‘official’ confirmation, is pretty much open season.

As of last evening I’ve been getting twitter reports that the Muslim Brotherhood, backed by local Beduins, have pretty much ousted Egyptian forces from villages such as El Arish along the Gaza/Egyptian border. For the last 8 hours, I’ve gotten twitter updates suggesting that Hamas men from Gaza have been freely crossing the border, now virtually open, to provide reinforcements to the Muslim Brotherhood.

So the US was pouring $1.5 billion into Egypt annually partially to stop stuff like this from happening.

As I wrote in the run-up to Egypt's elections last October:

Any way you look at it, Egyptians have no freedom and no democracy. But before free elections can be held, a few years of true freedom needs to come first, so the people can make truly informed decisions. This means freedom of the press and freedom of assembly, not to mention freedom of religion.

The government might be better than some of the alternatives but it is sacrificing freedom altogether, and the result is that all Egyptians are losing.

And now, the Muslim Brotherhood - which may be the only opposition party that is well organized enough to take full advantage of the chaos - is poised to use the banner of "freedom" to turn Egypt into an Islamist, theocratic nightmare - an even worse situation than it has been under.

UPDATE: A Firas Press article reminds us that the Egyptian army is restricted from some areas of the Sinai, including Rafah, under the Camp David accords - so Hamas can easily help along the anarchy.

Wikileaks: State Dept. profile of Mubarak

Here is part of the profile of Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak written before his visit to the US in 2009. It looks like a very good analysis of how Mubarak tries to balance a moderate stance against the threat of the Muslim Brotherhood:

He is a tried and true realist, innately cautious and conservative, and has little time for idealistic goals. Mubarak viewed President Bush (43) as naive, controlled by subordinates, and totally unprepared for dealing with post-Saddam Iraq, especially the rise of Iran's regional influence.

3. (S/NF) On several occasions Mubarak has lamented the U.S. invasion of Iraq and the downfall of Saddam. He routinely notes that Egypt did not like Saddam and does not mourn him, but at least he held the country together and countered Iran. Mubarak continues to state that in his view Iraq needs a “tough, strong military officer who is fair” as leader. This telling observation, we believe, describes Mubarak’s own view of himself as someone who is tough but fair, who ensures the basic needs of his people.

¶4. (S/NF) No issue demonstrates Mubarak,s worldview more than his reaction to demands that he open Egypt to genuine political competition and loosen the pervasive control of the security services. Certainly the public “name and shame” approach in recent years strengthened his determination not to accommodate our views. However, even though he will be more willing to consider ideas and steps he might take pursuant to a less public dialogue, his basic understanding of his country and the region predisposes him toward extreme caution. We have heard him lament the results of earlier U.S. efforts to encourage reform in the Islamic world. He can harken back to the Shah of Iran: the U.S. encouraged him to accept reforms, only to watch the country fall into the hands of revolutionary religious extremists. Wherever he has seen these U.S. efforts, he can point to the chaos and loss of stability that ensued. In addition to Iraq, he also reminds us that he warned against Palestinian elections in 2006 that brought Hamas (Iran) to his doorstep. Now, we understand he fears that Pakistan is on the brink of falling into the hands of the Taliban, and he puts some of the blame on U.S. insistence on steps that ultimately weakened Musharraf. While he knows that Bashir in Sudan has made multiple major mistakes, he cannot work to support his removal from power.

¶5. (S/NF) Mubarak has no single confidante or advisor who can truly speak for him, and he has prevented any of his main advisors from operating outside their strictly circumscribed spheres of power. Defense Minister Tantawi keeps the Armed Forces appearing reasonably sharp and the officers satisfied with their perks and privileges, and Mubarak does not appear concerned that these forces are not well prepared to face 21st century external threats. EGIS Chief Omar Soliman and Interior Minister al-Adly keep the domestic beasts at bay, and Mubarak is not one to lose sleep over their tactics. ...

¶6. (S/NF) Mubarak is a classic Egyptian secularist who hates religious extremism and interference in politics. The Muslim Brothers represent the worst, as they challenge not only Mubarak,s power, but his view of Egyptian interests. As with regional issues, Mubarak, seeks to avoid conflict and spare his people from the violence he predicts would emerge from unleashed personal and civil liberties. In Mubarak,s mind, it is far better to let a few individuals suffer than risk chaos for society as a whole. He has been supportive of improvements in human rights in areas that do not affect public security or stability. Mrs. Mubarak has been given a great deal of room to maneuver to advance women’s and children’s rights and to confront some traditional practices that have been championed by the Islamists, such as FGM, child labor, and restrictive personal status laws.

...11. Israeli-Arab conflict: Mubarak has successfully shepherded Sadat's peace with Israel into the 21st century, and benefitted greatly from the stability Camp David has given the Levant: there has not been a major land war in more than 35 years. Peace with Israel has cemented Egypt,s moderate role in Middle East peace efforts and provided a political basis for continued U.S. military and economic assistance ($1.3 billion and $250 million, respectively). However, broader elements of peace with Israel, e.g. economic and cultural exchange, remain essentially undeveloped.

I actually feel sympathy for Mubarak, and his points about the Shah, Musharraf and the Palestinian Arab elections are cogent - as is his fear that the ultimate winner of the invasion of Iraq is Iran.

There is a bitter irony that the most moderate Arab states) Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia) also are the ones whose citizens are the most anti-semitic, according to polls. [I have not seen a Saudi poll on this matter, chances are the government would not allow the question to even be asked.] Real peace with Israel - full diplomatic relations and normalization - seems as distant as it did in the 1970s. The way that these governments think is not in terms of peace and democracy but in terms of managing conflict, which may be the only realistic way to stop regional situations from devolving into anarchy.

Sometimes, the alternative to the Cold War-era thought process of "He may be a bastard but he's our bastard" is much worse - for the entire world.

UPDATE: The New Republic looks at this exact issue today.

Al Azhar to start dialogue with Those Who Must Not Be Named (Zvi)

From JPost:

Scholars at the oldest Islamic university in the world issued a proclamation on Tuesday that lifted an ancient ban on dialogue with Jews, The Jerusalem Post has learned.

The statement drafted by Sheikh Fawzi al-Zifzaf, chairman of the permanent committee for dialogue at Al- Azhar University in Cairo, was read during a gathering of senior faith and political leaders at Parliament in London.

“And the point of origin of this invitation is Islam itself [calling for] brotherhood and mutual understanding and the strengthening of bonds between Muslims and followers of the other religions, and the establishment of bridges of dialogue with scholarly institutions in Europe and America,” Zifzaf wrote.

The event was hosted by the Children of Abraham charity and Al-Azhar Institute for Dialogue with the Monotheistic Religions.

The Egyptian Sunni institute, founded in 970 CE, has had open channels of communication with Catholics and Anglicans since the 1990s; however, until now, it has had no direct talks with Jewish scholars.

While the proclamation did not mention Judaism by name, a spokesman for the grand mufti of the UK and alumnus of Al-Azhar, Sheikh Prof. Mohamed Elsharkawy, told the Post on Wednesday that its message was aimed at a Jewish audience.

“You’ve got to understand there are extreme sensitivities,” the spokesman said.

“I’m not at liberty to say how hard it was to draft the document. In the process, the people who have taken the document forward have done so at great risk and danger, and so they’ve done that very carefully. There already exists a dialogue with Christians, so anyone with two brain cells can add up to what is being said here.”

Zvi comments:
What's the point of making a declaration that dialog with Jews is (supposedly) acceptable when Al-Azhar is not even willing to name Jews in the declaration?

“You’ve got to understand there are extreme sensitivities,” the spokesman said.

Why do I need to understand that?

The only thing that I have got to understand from this statement is that they STILL can't bring themselves to admit that I and the rest of the Jews are full human beings, and that it is okay to talk to us as human beings.

We're not talking about actually TREATING us as human beings, of course - even a DIALOG with us is banned.

In the process, the people who have taken the document forward have done so at great risk and danger, and so they’ve done that very carefully.

With all due respect, that is ridiculous.

These guys have a significant effect on the beliefs of mainstream Sunnis. They have a much greater effect than most other opinion shapers. They can argue intelligently based on their (purported) expertise, and many members of their religion will accept their rulings. There is danger for newspaper reporters who say that dialog is important; there is danger for politicians; but very little for members of this particular group.

In addition, these same men have regularly inflamed hatred against me and mine (Jews in general). It is therefore up to them to take the risks required to BEGIN to undo the crippling hatred that they, themselves have sown and watered so assiduously.

“This is a landmark decision, and Al-Azhar deserves praise for it,” Schneier said.

Again, that's ridiculous.

Al-Azhar will deserve praise when it does the right thing and names Jews as people with whom it is okay to have a dialog. Until then, all I see is an attempt to turn an explicit ban on dialog into an implicit ban. In the absence of a formal termination of the ban, many imams and others will be concerned that any attempt at dialog will be retroactively interpreted as some sort of treason. "We never meant the ruling to apply to Jews!" Some loophole will invariably be found.

In the absence of a formal statement paving the way for dialog with Jews, spoken explicitly, in Arabic, in front of Arabs rather than in English, vaguely, in front of Englishmen, there will continue to be nothing.

In the absence of a ruling permitting dialog (just DIALOG!) with Jews, what exactly have the great sages of Al-Azhar actually done? Nothing but PR for naive and stupid Westerners.

Islamists in Jordan call for teaching schoolkids to hate Jews

Al Quds al Arabi reports that the Islamic Action Front in Jordan, which is part of the Muslim Brotherhood, has called on Jordanian schools to add more incitement in their textbooks against Jews and Israel.

In 2006/2007, Jordanian schools started teaching a little bit about Jewish history, and this is regarded as unacceptable.

The announcement calls for a return to the curriculum that Jordanian textbooks have had until then (and that were used in Palestinian Arab schools as well) where the Jews were regarded as dishonest and corrupt. The IAF also calls for schools to teach about Israeli threats to Jordan, the true face of "world Zionism" (which means world Jewry) and alleged Jewish destruction of Muslim holy places.

Anti-Israel sentiment on the increase in Jordan

From the Financial Times:

Last month, a Jordanian non-governmental organisation published an advertisement for candidates to join an environmental training project in the Jordan Valley. This neglected to mention the project was in co-operation with Israel, on the Israeli side of the border but it was identical to many previous ads. It prompted a storm of protest after an Islamic newspaper revealed the Israel connection.

“They circled my name and phone number in the ad as if to target me,” says the Jordanian organiser, who prefers to remain anonymous. “I do not feel physically threatened and luckily there has been no leverage on me but many others avoid going into the same field of peace co-operation because of such tactics.”

Jordan is the only Arab state where NGO’s openly initiate such co-operation in several fields, including the environment, journalism, healthcare, youth work and even political research.

Israel’s peace with Egypt is cold and few Egyptians collaborate openly with Israelis. In Jordan, protests against such ties – from the country’s anti-normalisation movement, consisting mainly of Islamists with some pan-Arabists – are as old as the country’s 1994 peace treaty with Israel but they are getting louder.

Official tolerance for this movement fluctuates with the state of relations between the government and the Islamists, and with the Israeli-Jordanian relations. The latter have been bleak in recent months.

“It is worse than at any time since the signing of the peace treaty,” says Jordanian analyst and writer Oraib Rantawi. “I’m hearing things from the inner circle of the ruling elite [code for the people close to King Abdullah II] I have not heard before. They are talking about Israel as the enemy.”

...The NGOs involved in joint Israeli projects feel the increased ambivalence towards the treaty. “The government is keeping a closer watch on what I do and can do less to rein in the anti-normalisers,” says the Jordanian organiser.

Badi al-Rafaih is a leader of the anti-normalisation movement and member of the Muslim Brotherhood. He says: “Years ago I was arrested and even beaten up for what I do. But now nobody wants to defend Israel or have anything to do with it.”

For those who hope for peace in the Middle East, this is the best one can expect - a frigid detente that itself will remain under pressure from extremists, forever.

Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood urges release of mass murderer

In 1997, a group of Israeli schoolgirls visited what was known as "Peace Island" between Jordan and Israel. A Jordanian soldier opened fire on them, massacring seven 11-year old girls.

Al Arabiya reports that the Muslim Brotherhood of Jordan, fresh off of its more extremist turn, is now urging Jordan's king to pardon the murderer, Ahmad Daqamseh.

But before you think that this is just a fringe extremist group that can be ignored, it is worth recalling that last year a much more heterogeneous group of Jordanians demanded the exact same thing. And they included the president of the Arab Human Rights Organization and the head of the Jordan Bar Association. They justified their demand by saying that "pardoning Daqamseh will have a great effect on people."

As I wrote then, let's hope that King Abdullah will remain as aghast at this crime as his father was and let the killer rot. At the time, King Hussein went to Israel to pay his condolences to the families and truly condemned this act, not like the fake "condemnations" that we are used to hearing from Palestinian Arab leaders.

Jordan's Muslim Brotherhood gets more radical

There was a major meeting of Jordan's Muslim Brotherhood over the past month, and one of the most contentious topics was whether it should maintain an official relationship with Hamas.

Some members, considered "doves" in the context of extremist Islam, wanted to distance themselves from Hamas and the clear damage it has done to the Palestinian Arab cause. It also looks like there was some disagreement as to the extent of the Ikhwan's cooperation with the Jordanian government, which the hawks blame for having a peace treaty with Israel.

It appears that the "hawks" won the day, and amid much contention four of the "dove" leaders have resigned from the Muslim Brotherhood's executive council.

This might bring Jordan's Brotherhood more in line with Egypt's branch, which was the source for every radical Sunni Muslim group in existence today.