Registered in notebooks

"Israeli soldiers beat a 70-year-old resident of a village near Ramallah on Wednesday morning, witnesses said. The elderly man was identified as Sharif Abed Ahmed Abu Hayya, 70, a Palestinian shepherd."

Israeli victories

"Israeli soccer matches were suspended during the assault on Gaza. When the games resumed last week, the fans had come up with a new chant: “Why have the schools in Gaza been shut down?” sang the crowd. “Because all the children were gunned down!” came the answer. Aside from its sheer barbarism, this chant reflects the widespread belief among Israeli Jews that Israel scored an impressive victory in Gaza — a victory measured, not least, by the death toll."

Hardcore Arab

"Professor Asad Abu-Khalil, a.k.a. The Angry Arab, is a hardcore, old-school Arab Marxist (albeit one who enjoys The Economist), but don't let either of those things frighten you away. Swallow his invective as if it were medicine, because he's great - look at his outstanding analysis of Obama's interview's significance. He also explains why Al-Jazeera devoted as much airtime to Obama's Al-Arabiya interview as local American news devotes to wars in the Congo: they'rejeallll-ooous..."

Bombs and cash

"U.S. commanders on Tuesday traveled to a poor Afghan village and distributed $40,000 to relatives of 15 people killed in a U.S. raid, including a known militant commander. The Americans also apologized for any civilians killed in the operation." (thanks Karim)

When Saudi Wahhabis rehabilitate

""The state has provided all the moral and material support to these repentants" in the five rehabilitation centers which were created in 2003 and hosted more than 3,200 patients surrounded by a hundred specialists, including psychotherapists and theologians." (thanks Olivia)

Hoax

The letter that was ostensibly written from Prince Salman to the Saudi King and printed on the first page of Al-Quds Al-`Arabi is a hoax.

Footprints of Zionism

"Gaza residents returning to their homes in Zeitun neighborhood find their houses covered with slogans such as 'Death to Arabs,' and 'One down, 999,999 to go.'" (thanks Marcy)

Shocking Kebabs

Shocking Kebabs. (thanks Julie)

De bekende blogger

"Maar lang niet iedereen was zo positief. De bekende blogger the Angry Arab, een Libanees-Amerikaanse prof politieke wetenschappen aan onder andere Berkeley, schreef dat Obama's "speech over het Midden-Oosten evengoed geschreven kon zijn door de (ultrarechtse politicus) Benjamin Netanyahu". Hij vergeleek die toespraak ook met "zuur strooien in de wondes van de kinderen van Gaza." 'Angry arab' professor Asad Abu Khalil vindt het ook ongehoord dat de "Palestijnse autoriteit" plots de enige spreekbuis van de Palestijnen blijkt - dat terwijl Abbas in de gehele Arabische wereld als een quisling wordt gezien en Fatah door jarenlange corruptie zijn geloofwaardigheid onder de Palestijnen is kwijtgespeeld."

Al-Akhbar newspaper

Al-Akhbar newspaper in Lebanon is really breaking new grounds, and breaking old taboos. And I am not saying this because I write in it. But I am saying this because they published a report on masturbation: this is the first non-kooky (and rational) article on masturbation that I have read in the Arabic press. And it is the first one which does not rely on the views of kooky clerics and priests.

Zionist standards

"Some of the rising popularity of Mr. Netanyahu and Mr. Lieberman may be a result of the frustration among those Israelis who believe that the war in Gaza did not go far enough."

How true

"Three O'clock is always too late or too early for anything you want to do." Sartre in Nausea.

The Ron Reagan show

I will appear live at 8:30PM (Pacific) on The Ron Reagan show on Air America. I forgot to ask about the topic.

PS The producer, thinking that I was on the east coast, told me the interview was at 8:30PM. So they called me at 6:00PM my time and I was running.

"Your Era, O Bin Baz"

Saja (who kindly translates some of my Arabic articles--and she does that on volunteer basis) kindly translated my article on Bin Baz (published in Al-Akhbar a few months ago):

"Your Era, Bin Baz

It is said that Abdulaziz bin Baz is only one man, and that his death would mitigate the influence of his fatwas (religious creeds). Those who say that forget that Islamic schools around the world follow educational curricula based on his exegesis and fatwas. He followed only Ibn Taymiya and Ibn Al-Qayyim Al-Jawziyyah’s fatwas, both of whom were extremely fundamentalist.

Abdulaziz Bin Baz: We never took this man seriously. We never took Saudi Wahhabism seriously. They represented intolerance, extremism and bigotry. There were initiatives during the twentieth century for tolerance, plurality, secularism and female’s liberation before King Faisal managed to quell them, following the horrendous 1967 defeat. The slogans of that era were progress, liberation and enlightenment. Saudi Wahhabism was receding and put on the defensive. It did not win people’s hearts and minds. Instead, it resorted to the position of defending the US and colonialism during the Cold War. During the fifties and sixties (until the 1967 defeat), Saudi Arabia had a difficult time buying off newspapers and consciences. Only the Beirut-based “Al-Hayat” followed Saudi policy in the region, and never deviated from it. Gamal Abdul Nasser was not in a position to clash with a regime that was viewed as leftovers of the Middle Ages. Arab parties (both loyal and deceitful ones) competed to offer programs for growth, modernization, progress and even liberation. But the oil sheikhs and Wahhabi sheikhs were viewed as men of the “tarboosh” and mocking them was necessary in Arab political literature, even in café discussions. This is what Yasin Al-Hafith meant by his term “Shakhboutism” in Saudi political ascension: it indicated their extreme backwardness (some in liberal Saudi media today rely on Yasin Al-Hafith’s traditions to defend “moderate” Salafism. Discourse about moderate Salafism is akin to talking about dry swimming). But the Saudi mufti (religious authority) (who did not descend from the Al-Sheikh family, meaning Wahhabism’s founder’s family), was very eminent in Saudi government since the beginning. He crystallized twentieth century Wahhabism, under which we still succumb in the twenty first century. A Saudi judge said a week ago that killing of owners of “deviant” satellite channels was permitted. Like other jurists of darkness and backwardness, he relied on Bin Baz for authority.

Here is a noteworthy scene from the sixties: King Faisal attends an opening ceremony to fundraise for King Abdulaziz University, but he notices the presence of Sheikh Abdulaziz Bin Baz and says “I seize the presence of our big brother, Sheikh Abdulaziz Bin Baz, whom I consider a father figure … and Sheikh Abdulaziz Bin Baz bears great responsibilities and important tasks to serve Islam and Muslims, not only in this country, but all over the Islamic world. I beckon him to honor us with just a few words on this happy occasion” (Al-Bilad, 16 October, 1964). This was the influence of Bin Baz on Faisal. King Fahd described him at his death as “the dearest of people” and called him “the father”. (An American ex-ambassador to Saudi Arabia told me that King Abdullah was careful not to smoke in public, to abide by Bin Baz’s teachings). Today we see his influence more than any other time. This is his era, his generation, and his fatwas flood us from every direction. They target the individual and mount increasing constriction on women. Saudi media tries to distract us with Rotana’s channels of decadence and debauchery so that we may forgive their fatwas of intolerance. They change their discourse from channel to channel.

Bin Baz represented the Wahhabism founded by Muhammad Bin Abdulwahhab and made it even more intolerant, extremist and hostile to women. He became a judge at the age of twenty seven, which entitled him to issue a large enough number of fatwas for generations to sink under after him, both in Saudi Arabia and those countries which follow Wahhabi Islam in return for more than a handful of dollars, such as Al-Azhar, which Muhammad Abduh, and later Gamal Abdul Nasser, tried to reform. Abdul Nasser deserves acknowledgement for adopting a reformist, tolerant model of Islam, especially in women’s issue, which comrade Mervat Hatem termed “state feminism,” without one’s full adoption of the Nasseri program. The extremist Bin Baz, who was an extremist in Wahhabi extremism, and made it the country’s official religion and policy foundation for spreading the message around the world by (reactionary) collaboration with the United States. Osama Bin Ladin held him in high esteem and didn’t criticize (gently) until recently. Bin Baz called for discarding all Sunni schools of thought. He denied in a rare interview with the Saudi Al-Majalla magazine that he had allowed following the Hanbalis (or others). He called for returning to Hadith (Prophet’s sayings) and his commentary. The more intolerant the commentary and extremist the exegesis, the closer it was to his thought and taste. He had no inclination towards jurisprudence books, and admitted that he never finished reading the books of Abi Dawud, Ibn Maja and even Imam Ahmad’s book. He only relied on Quran and Sunna, as he repeatedly stated. He objected to the broadcast of four schools of thought’s teachings because they resulted in “abhorred traditions” (P. 349, Aspects of Abdul Aziz Bin Baz’s Biography).

The influence of pro-ruler jurisprudence

Bin Baz might be women’s worst enemy in the twentieth century. His writings, declarations, speeches and fatwas with regard to women were repugnant. A woman was entirely vice in his opinion, which explains official animosity towards women in the Kingdom of Saudi Oppression. This appears in both intolerant Saudi religious media and lewd Saudi media that commercializes women. Bin Baz said in an interview with Ukath newspaper “as for publishing pictures of women on covers or inside of magazines and newspapers, that is a great abomination and serious evil which invites degeneration and falsehood. The same goes for misleading secular calls, or those which invite prohibited acts. All this is a great abomination.”

The current program of dispute between Sunnis and Shiis, which has become official Saudi policy (with American blessing at the beginning even though the United States, measured with a Tripoli yardstick, was cautious of the risks of spreading dispute because Salafism could easily get out of control), can be blamed on the Wahhabi creed and Bin Baz’s fatwas specifically, which in turn follow Ibn Taymiya’s fatwas. Saudi closed-mindedness was not temporary or casual, but calculated and blessed by religious institutions in the kingdom. Bin Baz decreed that “connecting refusniks [derogatory term for Shiis] and Sunnis is unacceptable because the theology is different. As it is unacceptable to bring Jews, Christians and idolaters together with Sunnis, it is similarly disallowed to bring the refusniks and Sunnis due to the theology differences we mentioned.” (Collection of Various Fatwas and Essays, Fifth Volume).

Another part of his legacy is superficiality, or giving branches precedence over the fundamentals of religion. When asked why he never combed his bushy beard, he answered “I fear any of it might fall off,” which contradicted sunna (prophetic teachings) in his opinion. He issued a fatwa, for example, that women were not allowed to wear high heels “it is prohibited to wear high heels because it exposes the woman to the risk of falling, and people are legally mandated to avoid dangers. It also exaggerates her height and her posterior, which is deceitful, and exposes beauty that faithful women are prohibited from displaying.” (Fatwa number 1678, recorded in Salih Al-Wardani’s book, Bin Baz’s Fatwas). He also proscribed wearing “the atheists’ distinct clothing” (Fatwa number 1620). As for hijab, he was clear in his letter on “Beautification and Hijab” when he declared that a woman’s face and hands were “vice”. In matters of marriage and divorce, he gave no room for emotions according to a hagiographic biography “the couple may say ‘we have children’ and he would say ‘even if you have a hundred, they won’t get lost’. The wife may say ‘I’ll die’ and he’d respond ‘many died before you in obedience to God and His commands.’” (p. 289 of Bin Baz’s Biography). Bin Baz dedicated a special pamphlet for prohibiting photography.

He would also encourage Muslim males (as Muslim females were vice in his opinion) to abandon countries of “polytheism” and return to Muslim countries. This took place within the old framework of separation between the house of Islam and the house of war (which some orientalists, like some Bin Ladinites, believe still dictates the essence of international relations between Muslims and others). Science had no place in Bin Baz’s jurisprudence; charms were a substitute for medicine, as “his grace used to use charms on himself and utter them on points of pain in his body.” (p. 511 of his biography). Some of his fatwas stemmed from pre-Islamic polytheistic practices, such as asking for forgiveness during times of drought. We have no idea how to reconcile the House of Saud’s celebration of their national holiday and Bin Baz’s insistence that “Muslims have no holidays aside the ones God legislated for his creation.” (p. 346 of his biography). But since when does the House of Saud consult religion, logic or science in its policies?

Bin Baz is responsible for advocating (with oil revenue support) for the culture of intolerance, backwardness, closed-mindedness and dejection. He warned “against attending assemblies of amusement and singing, and listening to malignant broadcasts, and gatherings for gossip.” He added “even graver are cinema theatres, and the like, watching lewd films which infect the heart and distract from the mention of God and reading his book, and provoke vile character, and abandonment of decent character.” (Bin Baz’s Biography). This is exactly the culture the Hariri family (whether deliberately, stupidly or foolishly) tries to spread to Lebanon. We remember the campaign that the scholars of Qretim waged against Marsel Khalifa’s song, which was a poem by Mahmoud Darwish. They were partners of Al-Azhar’s book burners who maintain silence about the suffering of the Palestinian people and the participation of the mummified president’s government in Sharm Al-Sheikh during the siege of Gaza. Instead, they monitor books which include secular thought, liberation and feminist thought, and they provoke the masses against cartoons that arrive from Denmark.

Bin Baz was influential in the Cold War in Arabic and Islamic context around the world. He issued fatwas against “destructive ideologies” in reference to leftist and progressive thought generally. There is a word of Latin origin (the root means to block enlightenment), which we often translate as “darkness”. It points to animosity towards thought and the era of enlightenment. This applies exactly to Saudi Wahhabism which flees progress and modernity, even their appearance, and in this regard it meets with the darkness of Christianity and Judaism. The Egyptian writer Ahmad Baha’uldin accused Bin Baz in the sixties of denying that the earth was spherical, based on an article the latter had written. However, in his response to Ahmad Baha’uldin, Bin Baz said he did not state either “affirmatively or negatively” about the earth’s sphericity, but he did reiterate the familiar tune (which mimics King Faisal’s speech) about destructive ideologies and socialists and their “apostate, Jewish leader Marx” (see the response on Bin Baz’s official website online). But Bin Baz was frank about denying the earth’s sphericity while he proves it indisputably. As for denying man’s landing on the surface of the earth, it is likely that Bin Baz waited spent his whole life awaiting proof.

However, Bin Baz’s usefulness to the House of Saud was political, par excellence. He had said that obedience of the prince was obligatory (“and he who obeys the prince obeys me”). Bin Baz’s obedience to the House of Saud continued in spite of the various phases that the kingdom went through politically. The princes of Saud didn’t consult him on all religious and educational matters; the import of Muslim Brotherhood scholars and their leaders to the kingdom, appointing them to high offices, and their contribution to devising educational programs and school curricula all occurred without Bin Baz’s approval. Bin Baz wasn’t enamored with the Brotherhood because they were not Salafist, which is enough to deem for a Wahhabi apostasy ruling. Bin Baz obeyed the House of Saud and called for Muslims to obey them. In the most dangerous decision the kingdom took, of inviting American troops (even though American troops started moving before Dick Cheney, American Defense Secretary at the time, received the official invitation), Bin Baz supported them and called on Muslims to support the war on Iraq (without referencing the identity of the foreign troops involved, which Saudi press described as “Arabic, Islamic and friendly troops.” The American friend in Saudi need is a friend indeed.

There was a Salafi revolt against Bin Baz that year, from Al-Qaeda to some reform currents in the kingdom which condemned Bin Baz’s agreement with the ruling family about all matters. Bin Baz changed when the House of Saud’s kings and princes started to publicly state their policies towards America and Israel, which had been secretive. Today we know that everything Abdul Nasser accused them of the fifties was right, and emphatically so. The Saudi scholar who used to foam at the mouth at Jews and “crusaders” (using Al-Qaeda’s language) and threatened against “the disreputed morals of the apostates among the children of Israel” and call for cursing them, spent his final days settling for peace with Israel, following the example of Al-Azhar’s sheikhs. But Bin Baz’s supplication was more comprehensive; he would call Muslims to “curse infidels including communists, Jews, Christians and all remaining polytheists.” (P. 320 of Bin Baz’s Biography). We don’t forget, and we shouldn’t forget, Bin Baz’s role in encouraging “jihad” in Afghanistan. When he stopped receiving Gulf money in the nineties, Yasir Arafat would mention the colossal figures of Saudi support for extremist Islamist groups which resisted communist rule in Afghanistan. (Who can deny today that communist rule there represented a golden era in the history of Afghanistan, at least as far as women’s rights and separation of church and state were concerned, even if it were repressive, exactly like the regimes of “American liberation” per the Bush doctrine?) Bin Baz marketed the House of Saud’s policies, which were an extension of American politics during the Cold War; the Saudi government used to pay travel expenses for every Saudi who desired to fight America’s enemies. These are your fatwas, bin Baz, your war and America’s war, you shakhbouti adviser to the sultan. Nothing moved the House of Saud and its jurists like they were moved for Afghanistan’s cause because it represented common ground with their allies in Washington (the movie “Charlie Wilson’s War” hints to that and to the House of Saud’s pliability to Ronald Reagan’s will during King Fahd’s rule).

The American ex-ambassador to Saudi Arabia, Hume Horan, who was fluent in Arabic (and later served the occupation authority in Iraq) knew Bin Baz’s significance and made an effort to meet with him. But King Fahd was uncomfortable with this meeting and asked the American president to withdraw his ambassador, and that is what happened (consult sources such as The Arabists by Robert Kaplan for other various reasons for King Fahd’s objection to Ambassador Horan). Some may say that extremism is an attribute shared by all religions, creeds and ideologies, and this is true. However, Wahhabi extremism relied on oil resources to incite hostility and hatefulness between people, destroy all possibilities for peaceful coexistence among Arabs and play a destructive role in fighting progressive thought. An ex-leftist (who was recently promoted to General Secretary of locals, tears and marxisms in “The Future of Salafism” – thanks, Hani - , meaning he was the right or left hand for Faris Khashan, who uses the internet to publish cheap sexual slurs to describe his opponents and doesn’t republish his essays praising Emil Lahhoud and Bashar Al-Asad thinking that we forgot about them) who tried to give excuses and justifications for the idea of Wahhabi apostasy rulings by referring to writings about uncleanliness among Shiis (the ex-leftist became a party to the ideological war between Islamic schools of thought). But the mufti of Tyre, Ali Amin, quickly responded live and silenced him because he had higher rank in the Hariri political establishment. Wahhabi hatred shouldn’t be confronted with another hateful ideology, of course.

Pro-state jurisprudence is not limited to an ideology, a sect, an era or a current. There are ruler’s advisers in Iran even though Khomeini (before taking office, of course) condemned them in his book about Islamic government. There are jurists in Najaf who support the American occupation of Iraq and yet never receive criticism from Hezbollah. It is difficult to explain this as anything but sectarian solidarity. There are reactionary jurists like Ibn Hanbal who refused (or refuse) to modify their beliefs and fatwas even if they had to endure torture. Those, even if you disagree with their perspective and logic, might be among the hundreds whom Al-Hayat newspapers was proud of the Saudi government for firing from their jobs after September 11. Some may have sinned by calling for the liberation of Palestine or gathering donations for its besieged people. As for Al-Qaeda’s ideology, it remains the official creed for the Kingdom of Oppression, in spite of Bin Ladin’s recent differences with the House of Saud (whom he knows, king by king and prince by prince) about foreign policy. Bin Baz enables the kingdom’s ideology that controls the official Arab system on behalf of America and its ally Israel. Although this is his era, his time, and his fatwas encumber women (and men) throughout the Islamic world, darkness will inevitably end, as it cannot last forever."

Wahhabi anti-Semitism

Al-Arabiyya website (yes, that famous station of King Fahd's brother-in-law) decided to insult (in Wahhabi minds) Iranian president by peddling a story that he is originally Jewish.

Lebaonese anti-Semitism: and proud Lebanese corruption

So LBC-TV had a show on Lebanese greatness--I am not making this up. Lebanese Forces anchor, May Shidyaq, invited a handful of Lebanese to celebrate Lebanese greatness. One of the guest is Ron Seikaly. He was asked about the "Lebanese lobby" and he went on to talk about "the Jewish lobby" and how it controls "the media, sports, entertainment" as he said. They also celebrated and honored Sam Zakem. But they did not tell the viewers that "In a federal indictment in Denver, former Ambassador to Bahrain Sam Zakhem and two associates were charged with accepting $7.7 million from Kuwait in 1990 to help win American public support for military action against Iraq. Zakhem, 56, who made an unsuccessful bid this year to become the G.O.P. Senate nominee from Colorado, was accused of failing to register with the Justice Department under the Foreign Agents Registration Act and of avoiding U.S. income taxes."

PS If you really want to understand my hostility to Lebanon, watch this show. They later mentioned on the show that there is a brillian Lebanese who "invented" a cure for cancer in France (I mentioned that dude before). They also said that it is "internationally known" that Lebanese men are handsome--but I think that they were talking about Samir Ja`ja` (Ga`ga`), the idol of May Shidyaq. They said that in philosophy, Gibran is a landmark. It was Jubran who said that there are "rotten teeth" in the mouth of that nation.

Standards of the Nation magazine

"Anger is boiling over in the Middle East over Gaza, and -- exactly as I predicted -- the result of the war has been to boost radicalism throughout the region, to strengthen the terrorist-inclined fanatics of Hamas, and to enhance the muscle of terrorist-inclined Israelis, including far-right parties such as Avigdor Lieberman's Yisrael Beiteinu and, of course, Likud's bombastic Benjamin Netanyahu." Look at the standards of the Nation magazine. Only the far right of Israeli body politics are characterized as terrorist-inclined. Netanyahu is merely "bombastic". (thanks Sousan)

Sultan bin Fahd

The scandal of Sultan bin Fahd.

Watch where you get your praise

"Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal praised Obama for "his desire to have a strong and fruitful relationship with the Arab world" and said his stance was a "positive development" in Washington's policy towards the Middle East." This is the same minister who praised George W. Bush for his "patience" weeks--literally, as Joe Biden would say--before Bush invaded Iraq.

Zionist music

"It's quixotic, being a peace activist in Sderot, an Israeli town that has borne the brunt of rocket attacks from Gaza. When Israeli air strikes on Gaza began last month, hundreds of people from Sderot swarmed to a vantage point known as Horseman's Hill to watch the fiery spectacle and cheer. Nomika Zion was not among them. "I listened to one of my neighbors telling Israeli TV that the sound of the bombing was like a symphony, that he's never heard such powerful music before," she says. "And I was thinking, How many people are dying because of that 'music'""

Signs of Anti-Semitism in Venezuela

"a Palestinian flag was waved during a parliament session." (thanks Hammouda)

The Economist

I have been behind in the Economist--the best magazine there is. But I must confess that their coverage of Gaza has not been good.

Dahlan speaks (Dahlan also likes Al-Arabiyya TV)

"All my positions and conduct are in the interests of the Palestinian people." He added that even his corruption and collaboration is in the interests of the Palestinian people. (thanks Badar)

Democracy technique

"According to a L.A. Times story on September 8th, Cambone was crowing that the new Army Field Manual instructions would give interrogators "what they need to do the job." The article noted:

The new manual includes one restricted technique that will only be used on so-called unlawful combatants – such as Al Qaeda suspects -- not traditional prisoners of war.

That technique, called "separation," involves segregating a detainee from other prisoners. Military officials said separation was not the equivalent of solitary confinement and was consistent with Geneva Convention protections."" (thanks Mai)

Fanatics of the world, unite--under Israel's flag

"Police claim Abhinav Bharat, the Hindu radical group blamed for the blasts, which killed seven and wounded more than 100 in Malegaon, had designed a flag and written a constitution and was preparing to form a parallel Hindu government in exile operating out of Israel." (thanks Laleh)

Lebanon's war on the Palestinians

"While Lebanese officials were publicly denouncing Israel's war on the Palestinians of Gaza, the Lebanese cabinet was busy making sure the Palestinians of Nahr al-Bared refugee camp in Lebanon never recover from the war waged on their community more than a year ago." (thanks Marcy)

A poem about the great George Habash

A beautiful poem by Ibrahim Nasrallah about the late George Habash. I don't have time to translate but it says: "This land, they said: is a field of death. You said: Life, it is." (thanks Mirvat)

Change you can believe in--if you are brainless

"Clinton: Israel has right to respond to Gaza rocket attacks" (thanks Olivia)

Change you can't believe in

" George Mitchell, President Barack Obama’s special Middle East troubleshooter, was chairman of a law firm that was paid about $8 million representing Dubai’s ruler in connection with a child-trafficking lawsuit." (thanks Ali)

Self-congratulation

It is quite funny, in fact. First, it is really petty and silly that AlJazeera is ignoring the interview with Obama on Al-Arabiyya. But it is really annoying the extent to which Al-Arabiyya is indulging in self-congratulation. They interviewed Saudi propagandists in the Arab world asking them why did Obama select Al-Arabiyya. And they all said in unison that he selected Al-Arabiyya because it is "objective." In reality, Al-Arabiyya was chosen because it serves US propaganda interests around the world. And just as keen Al-Arabiyya was in serving Bush and his wars, it is enthusiastically keen now in serving Bush. It is funny how quickly the station adjusted and only this week the reporters and anchors now slip cracks against Bush.

That was quick

"A Jordanian Foreign Ministry official says the country's ambassador has returned to Israel after an absence of several weeks that was widely interpreted as a protest over Israel's offensive in Gaza."

"Usurping Entity"

Regarding my appearance on AlJazeera yesterday, I told people I know that I took particular pleasure in referring to the Israeli advocate as "the representative of the usurping entity."
(ممثل الكيان الغاصب)

Bushama Speaks: Pitfalls of Economism

This exchange from the interview with AlArabiyya TV (the station of King Fahd's brother-in-law) summarizes it for me:
"THE PRESIDENT: Well, here's what I think is important. Look at the proposal that was put forth by King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia --
Q Right.
THE PRESIDENT: I might not agree with every aspect of the proposal, but it took great courage --
Q Absolutely."

There are several things to be said about this interview, and I don't believe that there is anything new in it whatsoever. I mean, CNN is lauding it as an example of how Obama (or Bushama) is willing to reach out to the Muslim world. I listened to it on my way from SF last night and CNN aired it in full. First, if the Bushama really wants to be different from Bush he would have selected AlJazeera and not al-Arabiyya. I mean, CNN does not know that Bush spoke to Arabic TV stations regularly, and Rice was a fixture on Al-Arabiyya TV. And they selected Al-Arabiyya because it is "friendly" to US interests and because on Al-Arabiyya TV US officials get softball questions. If Obama wanted to be different he would have chosen Al-Jazeera because it is the Arabs' favorite channel. Al-Arabiyya is the US government's favorite channel, and the US under Obama does not seem to want to respect the choices and preference of the Arab population. Secondly, Obama chose this station because he wanted to appease the Saudi royal family especially after the moping remarks of Prince Turki--the midwife of Al-Qa`idah and a key ally of the US. This president is signaling that he will be no different than Bush in coddling the Saudi Wahhabi dictatorship--a key ally of Israel today. Do you notice that Israel does not even make token noise about Saudi arms sales? It used to prod its lobby here in the US to put stiff resistance to any arms sale to Saudi Arabia, and then they deny the existence of a Saudi-Israeli conspiracy. Apparently, the Saudi King was not pleased that Obama or Bushama called Abu Mazen (the usurping president of the puppet PA) and Mubarak--and of course Olmert--on his first day on the job but not the Saudi autocrat. The president then called him the next day and the Saudi news agency reported that they discussed ways to even "strengthen and expand" the Saudi-American relations. Don't ever believe the promises of any presidential candidate regarding human rights or democracy when it comes to the Middle East: look at the example of the disgraced and failed president, Jimmy Carter who can't stop producing boring and insignificant books on the Middle East. Thirdly, there is nothing that Bushama said that was not said by Bush. The CNN guest, Aslan something who always impresses me with his lack of knowledge on the Middle East when he speaks on the Middle East, kept saying in awe that the president spoke respectfully about respect in his address to Muslims and Arabs. But so did Bush, and Bush went to a mosque in Washington, DC--in order to prepare for the bombs and missiles to fall on Muslim and Arab heads. Fourthly, Obama in talking about the Middle East--the Palestine question and beyond--suffers from an acute case of "economism" or economic reductionism. He has the tendency to reduce all Arab and Muslim issues to job and medical care. It is NOT only the economy--stupid. It is also about pride and dignity and Palestine AND about freedom from the severe oppression that people suffer under governments that are coddled and armed by the very same US of A. So the words fall hollow here. Fifthly, Obama as a representative of the White Man (and he can also be referred to as the White Man, analytically speaking just as Margaret Thatcher was a representative of the White Man) did not deviate from the deep racism that characterizes US foreign policy to the Arab-Israeli conflict. I mean when he refers to Israel's security as "paramount" he is basically saying (like previous US president) that the security of the Palestinians is inferior because they are seen as inferior people. There is no question about that. It means that and the racism is reflected clearly in the disregard of Israeli WMDs. It never comes up in any interview with US officials on Al-Arabiyya (it is featured regularly in AlJazeera as yesterday's interview with Brent Scowcroft showed). Karl Marx wrote somewhere about the danger of covering up the chain with flowers. Obama is no different than Bush but American bombs and missiles under his administration will be decorated and covered with flowers. If that is a reason to celebrate, please open the champagne bottles NOW.

Today in History: a year ago

"Radical PLO leader George Habash died in Amman, Jordan, at age 81." The great George Habash.

One-sided carnage

"Over the last four weeks the powerful Israeli propaganda machine has been churning out lie after lie about Hamas in order to excuse its own inexcusable onslaught. Israel stopped journalists going into Gaza, preventing any independent reporting on the war crimes its forces were committing. Truth is usually the first casualty in war. Gaza was not even a war in the conventional sense of the word; it was one-sided carnage." (thanks Green)

Obama wants more of that

"But the two young men who lay wincing in a hospital ward here told a different story a few days later, one backed up by the pro-American provincial governor and a central government delegation. They agreed that 13 civilians had been killed and 9 wounded when American commandos broke down doors and unleashed dogs without warning on Jan. 7 in the hunt for a known insurgent in Masamut, in Laghman Province in eastern Afghanistan. The residents were so enraged that they threatened to march on the American military base here."

They will serve two hours in jail

"Nine young Jewish men, most of them under the age of 18, were arrested Sunday night on suspicion of torching property belonging to Arab residents of the northern city of Nazareth Illit over the past few months." (thanks Olivia)

Registered in notebooks

""We all put our hands up and yelled, 'We're women and children. We're not the resistance,' " recalled Sherine Helw, Fuad's daughter-in-law. The soldiers opened fire on Fuad, said Sherine, and he died in front of his family."

Cows or...goats and chicken

Now this is not a cow but it is something. But we need the cows or the.....goats and chicken to be comfortable inside the tunnels. I did not like how squeezed this one (goat?) looks. (thanks Waqaas) (B'Tselem--but why is B'Tselem taking pictures of the tunnels? That is what I want to know.)

Embedded "philospher"

"Bernard-Henri Lévy, bien calé dans le char israélien qui le transportait - comme il l’a raconté si fièrement - n’a sans doute rien vu." (thanks Mirvat)

Colonial feminism in Denmark

"While the mother was sentenced, the father of the girls was found not guilty." (thanks Gabriela)

Lessons from Lebanonesia

"Visiting Georgian Deputy Premier Giorgi Baramidze said his country has a lot to learn from Lebanon." Look at those stupid stories that you find on An-Nahar website. I am sure that Georgia can learn from Lebanon: especially in the area of civil wars and sellling the country to outside powers, but the Georgian president is doing a good job already in that regard. (thanks Nir)

Dahlan o Dahlan

A reliable source in Palestine sent me this: "apparently, samer huwairah from al quds television was arrested by the pa on saturday because he put abdel sattar qasim on television".

The Palestine question

It is not Arab regimes that keep the flame of the Palestine question alive among the Arab people. Regular and constant Israeli brutality and savagery that does that.

US media covrage of Israeli terrorism

My comments on media coverage of the Israeli terrorist attack on Gaza in the Egyptian newspaper, Al-Badil.