skip to main |
skip to sidebar
10:34 AM
Reut R. Cohen
Courtesy of Jonathan Movroydis of Red County:
Muslim Brotherhood leader Ibrahim al-Houdaiby's peremptory, if not indignant snub of UCI English teacher Gary Fouse's question about a damning government exhibit about the Brotherhood's association with the Holy Land Foundation wasn't surprising, as it represents the seemingly immutable strategy of the archetypal Islamist: lie, cheat, and deny your motives, conveniently retake your oath in the spirit of jihadist pragmatism:
Bukhari 5,59,369 Mohammed asked, "Who will kill Ka'b, the enemy of Allah and Moham-med?"
Bin Maslama rose and responded, "O Mohammed! Would it please you if I killed him?"
Mohammed answered, "Yes."
Bin Maslama then said, "Give me permission to deceive him with lies so that my plot will succeed."
Mohammed replied, "You may speak falsely to him."
Mr. al-Houdaiby wants to call himself a reformer, an advocate for "justice, equality, and peace," and opposes the corruption and oppression that has defined the nearly 30 year reign of Hosni Mubarak. But during his lecture, al-Houdaiby expressed his deference for Hasan al-Bannah, extricating the Muslim Brotherhood founder from the movement's succeeding scholar Sayyid Qtub, the latter taking a supposedly more radical view of Islam. The New Yorker's Lawrence Wright writes about Qtub in his book the Looming Tower:
His revolutionary argument placed nominally Islamic governments in the crosshairs of jihad. "The Muslim community has long ago vanished from existence," Qtub contends. It was "crushed under the weight of those laws and teachings which are not even remotely related to the Islamic teachings." Humanity cannot be saved unless Muslims recapture the glory of their earliest and purest expression. "We need to initiate the movement of Islamic revival in some Muslim country," he writes, in order to fashion an example that will eventually lead Islam to its destiny of world dominion. (18-19)
Extricable from his predecessor? Wright continues with al-Bannah's thoughts on "world dominion:"
Their founder, Hasan al-Banna, had refused to link of his organization as a mere political party; it was meant to be a challenge to the entire idea of politics. Banna completely rejected the Western model of secular, democratic government, which contradicted his notion of universal Islamic rule. "It is the nature of Islam to dominate, not to be dominated, to impose its law on all nations, and to extend its power to the entire planet, he wrote." (p. 25)
While the regime of Hosni Mubarak is less than favorable, the imposition of Sunni-style theocracy is far less favorable. By generally dismissing a government exhibit that mirrors the al-Bannah's goals as forgery, and more ambiguously describing the prospect an enlightened pluralistic society to mollify the fears of an over arching application Sharia law, al-Houdaiby is attempting to re-package the Brotherhood's vision as presentable. However nuanced and modern it may seem, it constitutes a modern tactic to exploit the good nature of Western society. Yet, he still remains far from convincing.
Watch additional footage of the event from here.
3 comments. Leave a comment:
I am currently engaged in a back and forth with El-Houdaibi on my blog, fousesquawk. Reut has been kind enough to jump in with a response.
All of these entries are lengthy, so I won't publish them here. If anyone is interested, go to http:garyfouse.blogspot.com and go to the post entitled-Where is Ibrahim El-Houdaiby?
gary fouse
fousesquawk
Al-Houdaiby has sent me what appears to be his final response. He does not address Reut's posting. I have respoonded with my final points.
They are up on fousesquawk (http://garyfouse.blogspot.com) under the post;
Where is Ibrahim El-Houdaiby?
The below article appeared today in the Orange County Register (11-3-08). It was written by Register reporter Marla Jo Fisher, who has been following the on-going controversy at UC-Irvine between Muslim and Jewish students. Specifically, her article concerns a 2-week trip taken by 15 UCI students, Jewish and Muslim, to Israel in September. Last week, they reported on their experiences to a packed hall at the UCI campus.
Jewish and Muslim UCI students come together
MORNING READ: Students on both sides of issue trek to Israel to investigate first-hand what they've been arguing about.
By MARLA JO FISHER
The Orange County Register
"IRVINE: It was a trip people said could never happen.
Jewish and Muslim student leaders from UC Irvine, whose feud over Israelis and Palestinians has sparked national headlines and even a federal probe, set aside personal misgivings and the lack of any official sanction to explore together the issues over which they'd been sparring.
"It was so profound and so eye-opening, I can't even put it into words," said Sepi Termechi, a UCI student leader with the Jewish group Hillel, in a short video students produced about the trip.
Flying, driving, sleeping and eating together throughout Israel and the Palestinian territories, the 15 Irvine students met people whose children had been killed by Islamic suicide bombers – and those whose children were slain by Israeli snipers.
They heard from politicians, taxi drivers and people in the street.
And, as they told a full-house crowd of 450 at UCI's Crystal Cove auditorium last month, they returned with a new take on an argument they thought they knew well.
"I learned it was OK to disagree and it was OK to not have the same viewpoint as everyone else, said Sameera Ali, a UCI senior who belongs to the Muslim Student Union.
"And you can still have a discussion and not hate each other."
Bad reputation
Muslim and Jewish students have clashed at UCI for years about the Israeli government and the way it has dealt with Palestinians. While similar clashes have taken place at campuses around the nation - and controversial speakers on both sides of the issue have stirred tempers - UCI has gained a reputation in the blogosphere as one of the nation's most anti-Semitic campuses.
Officials at UCI deny this, as have students on both sides of the question. But frictions remain.
Outside groups with their own agendas have added fuel to the fire, culminating in a federal investigation that found no wrongdoing on the part of UCI officials, but remains a sore spot for some Jewish observers.
And the atmosphere has only fueled tension between campus student groups.
Carter sparks idea
The idea for an Israel trip was sparked in May 2007 by ex-president Jimmy Carter, who came to UCI to talk about his controversial new book on Israel and the Palestinians.
During his standing-room-only speech at the Bren Center, Carter challenged feuding students to go see the situation first-hand. He even promised to find them the money to go.
After the speech, some students immediately began discussing how they could take such a trip, but decided against accepting Carter's money. His positions on Palestinians had angered supporters of Israel, potentially making any trip sponsored by his foundation seem politically motivated.
Instead, the students decided to raise the money on their own.
However, they were disappointed when the University of California - citing a U.S. State Dept. warning against travel to Israel's West Bank and other territories - declined to offer money or any official sanction for the trip.
And that turned out to be a good thing, says graduate student and Middle East expert Daniel Wehrenfennig, who helped organize the project.
Without UC money, Wehrenfennig says, students had to turn to their own communities to raise the $60,000 they needed - and that including making requests of polarized groups that opposed each other politically.
Students come together
Campus activists from both sides of the Palestinian issue, who angrily faced each other down at annual events such as UCI's Zionism Awareness Week, sponsored by the Muslim Student Union, were invited to come along.
Some were initially loathe to participate.
"We called them out and said, 'You're so passionate to defend your position, but you have not really been there'," Wehrenfennig said. Even students who had been to Israel, he said, had not seen both sides of the issue.
Wehrenfennig, a doctoral student from Germany, used contacts from some of the 100 interviews he's conducted in Israel to help the students design an agenda. He also accepted suggestions from friends and supporters here.
As they planned the trek, Wehrenfennig said he saw loud, showy antagonists begin to show something new - mutual respect.
While the political demonstrations remained as controversial and strident as ever, he said they would end with students involved on opposite sides shaking hands and talking.
"The way things were before, they would scream at each other and go away, but would not engage," he said.
"There was no communication between the groups."
The full tour
For two weeks in September 15 UCI students from a variety of groups, and students of the Middle East, toured Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, Bethlehem, Hebron, Qalqilyah, Nazareth, Ramallah and Haifa.
Accompanied by Professor Paula Garb and UCI Vice Chancellor Manuel Gomez, who asked to come along as an observer, they visited mosques, churches, synagogues, checkpoints, terror victim burial sites and refugee camps. The group met with Holocaust survivors, negotiators, business people, soldiers and politicians.
Last month, the group made its first public appearance to talk about the trip. Their audience included UCI Chancellor Michael Drake, Irvine Mayor Beth Krom and philanthropist Susan Samueli.
Gomez said his proudest moment came when Ron Nachman, the mayor of Ariel, one of the largest Israeli settlements on the West Bank, told the students what he thought of them.
"He looked us over and said, 'I'm impressed with you guys,' " Gomez said. " 'I invited (U.S. Secretary of State) Condoleezza Rice here and she was afraid to come.
"You guys," he added, "were not afraid.'"
My response dated the same date (November 3, 2008)
"As one who has been teaching part-time at UCI for 10 years, it is a hopeful
sign if the Muslim and Jewish students who took a trip to Israel have come back with
greater understanding of both sides of the issue. I do take issue, however with
some of Marla Jo Fisher's comments in her article of November 3, 2008.
Ms Fisher states that "UCI has gained a reputation in the blogosphere as one of
the nation's most anti-Semitic campuses." She goes on to state "that outside
groups with their own agendas have added fuel to the fire."
It should be stated that 99% of the students at UCI are not involved in the
controversy whatsoever and are certainly not anti-Semitic. The problem is that
the Muslim Student Union, for years, has been bringing in virulently
anti-Semitic, anti-America, anti-Israel and, yes, anti-Jewish speakers to the
UCI campus on a regular basis who engage in what could only be called hate
speech. That is what has brought UCI its dubious reputation. Let me offer a
couple of examples:
Amir Abdel Malik Ali is an Oakland-based imam who regularly speaks at UCI. He
openly calls suicide bombers in Israel "heroes and martyrs".
Mohammed al-Asi is a Washington DC-based imam who has appeared on more than one
occasion at UCI. On one occasion at UCI, he stated, "Jews are low-life
ghetto-dwellers" and, "You can take the Jew out of the ghetto, but you can't
take the ghetto out of the Jew."
In addition to the Israel and Jew-bashing, these speakers regularly condemn
everything about America.
All of which is conveniently ignored by Ms Fisher as she blames "outside groups
with their own agenda" for fanning the flames."
Well, I am not an outsider. I work (part-time) at UCI, and my "agenda" is
standing up to and reporting on the hate speech that is brought to UCI by a
small minority of students and their speakers. I have personally heard the
words of these radical haters sponsored by the Muslim Student Union. I have
spoken out in the school newspaper, the UCI EEO office and the Orange County
Human Rights Commission, the latter of which was a complete waste of time.
As stated above, I welcome any endeavor that will bridge the gap between our
Muslim and Jewish students over the Israel-Palestinian issue. The real test of this trip will be the next time the MSU hosts a week of speakers on campus. If the same speakers and the same rhetoric comes back, then what will it have accomplished?"
Gary Fouse
At this point, I don't know if the Register will print my reply. It seems that Ms Fisher has her own agenda, which is to pooh-pooh the idea that there is anti-Semitism at the campus on the part of the MSU. She also seems to be a supporter of the university administration, which has been severely criticized for their unwillingness to condemn the hate speech by MSU speakers. Notice also that there was gratuitous slap at Condoleeza Rice as Fisher quoted Vice Chancellor Manuel Gomez, who in turn quoted the mayor of the town of Ariel (an Israeli settlement on the West Bank), "I invited US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice here, and she was afraid to come. You guys were not afraid".
Of course, Ms Fisher conveniently failed to mention that a US Secretary of State might be reluctant to visit an Israeli settlement in the West Bank because of the diplomatic message it might send. That would be a consideration that visiting university students would not be concerned about.
Finally, Ms Fisher appears to be very selective in choosing her sources for information. For example, she has brushed off the Independent Task Force on Anti-Semitism, whose findings are apparently contrary to her own. Why would a reporter trying to get the facts not get input from all interested sides?
As I stated in my response to the OC Register, I hope that this visit to Israel will lead to greater understanding between Jewish and Muslim students on campus. The proof of the pudding, however will be the next MSU-sponsored week of events on the campus. If it's the same speakers with the same rhetoric, then the trip will have failed to achieve its purpose.
gary fouse
fousesquawk
Post a Comment
Comments and feedback are welcome and appreciated. Please stay on topic and avoid profanities unless it is relevant to the discussion. By commenting on the site, you agree that you are not impersonating anyone else and that you are solely responsible for the content you post. In commenting on the website you agree that you are not violating copyright or intellectual property rights of others. Spam and commercial posts are not permitted and will not be published. Disagreement and debates are welcome, but comments which are slanderous, demeaning, obscene, resort to ad hominem, and/or are of a threatening nature will not be published. Opinions expressed in the comments section do not necessarily reflect the views of the website’s author. The author of the website reserves the right to reject or remove comments at any time and for any reason.