This post is a reply to a guest post over at Pommygranate’s blog, by Kizzie, a Sudanese Muslim woman, who currently resides in Cairo. In her post Kizzie tries to show that Female Genital Mutilation is not an Islamic practice, but rather a cultural one, partly basing her argument on the premise that the two are mutually exclusive. However, although FGM is a certainly a cultural practice that predates Islam, it is also an Islamic practice, which is what I am going to show below.

The reason that a Sudanese Muslim woman came to be guest-blogging on Pommygranate’s site, by the way, is the debate that has raged this week across the Australian blogosphere in the wake of Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s visit here last week. Ironically Ali barely mentioned FGM when she spoke on Sunday night.
The first bone in the debate was thrown by Kim at Larvatus Prodeo. Tim Blair then pulled her up on her smug insensitivity , while in the meantime the fireworks really started flying in the comments to Kim’s post. Blair followed up and Kim attempted to fire back, only to get blasted to pieces by Blair (see the Update in last TB link). Far back along the way FGM became the focus of the debate, as it rippled out through the blogosphere and finally here we are. Phew.

Now to answering Kizzie’s post. She starts off explaining where FGM is practiced (many African countries and some Arab countries in the Middle East, like, you may be surprised to learn, in Kurdistan, where most women are “circumcised”) and describes the four classifications of FGM, which disfigure the female genitalia to various degrees. No argument so far. Except the part where she uses the term Female Genital Circumcision, but than refers to it as FGM thereafter, which actually stands for Female Genital Mutilation. A telling manifestation of double-think right there, I’d say.

Kizzie’s argument is divided into two parts and in the first she attempts to argue that FGM is not an Islamic practice, giving three arguments to support her view. Looking at them one by one:

1. FGM predates both Christianity and Islam since it is believed to date back to time of the Pharaohs.

Well, noone is going to argue with that. A lot of Islamic practices predate Islam, and some predate Christianity also. Thats hardly an argument that all those practices are not Islamic. The Islamic practice of not eating pork was a Judaic one before Islam, the Islamic practice of five prayers a day was practices by Zoroastrians before Islam, the Islamic symbol of star and crescent was a symbol of a number of Moon-Gods before Islam, and so on and so forth. The covering of the female body, polygamy, the washing of extremities before prayer and meals, fasting, all these have been cultural practices somewhere before becoming Islamic ones.
Here’s how Sheikh Muhammad Al-Mussayar from Al-Azhar University put it (full quote and source further down):

”Female circumcision is no less valid just because it was practiced in Pharaonic times and in the Jahiliya. Islam accepted some customs, which were harmonious with human nature, and rejected others, which contradicted human nature.”

Anyway, what is important is how a person justifies their actions - is it because “thats just how we do things round here” (ie. a cultural practice, like shaking hands in the West or rubbing noses amongst the Eskimos), or is it because the practice is made compulsory or recommended by their religious belief system? I’ll get to the Islamic justifications (and recommendations) for FGM shortly.

2. FGM is found in non-Muslim societies example: Christians in Ghana and other non-Muslim societies in India and South America.

See my answer to one. If every Islamic practice was disowned because it was practiced by adherents of other religions there wouldn’t be much left thats Islamic. The question is does Islam give justification for the practice? When I get to the scriptural and scholarly references below it should be clear that it does. The distinction of Islam being a “complete way of life”, rather than merely a religion, as Muslims like to point out, gives extra weight to this argument, as virtually any act can be determined to be allowed, disallowed, recommended etc from the Sunnah (the tradition and example of the Prophet and his companions as recorded in the Hadiths). For the Islamic Ummah the lines between culture and religion are virtually non-existent, with an overriding Islamic culture superseding any local one. Anyhow, are there any Christian priests in Ghana giving religious justification for FGM or does it exist despite the opposition of the Church? Because there most certainly are plenty of Muslim Sheikhs giving religious justification for FGM.

3. If FGM was obligatory in Islam then Muslim scholars from all over the world wouldn’t be working together to ban its practice.

Here Kizzie tries to confuse the issue by using the word “obligatory”. FGM is certainly “obligatory” in most schools of Islam. In most schools it is seen as “noble”, “honorable” and “recommended”, but not obligatory. The distinction is much the same as that between the wearing of the hijab and the wearing of the niqab (which covers the face) in most Islamic schools. The niqab is deemed obligatory only in the more severe Islamic schools (the Wahhabi, Deobandi etc), by others it is viewed as kind “going the extra mile” to please Allah, a noble act of piety. Is wearing the niqab not an Islamic practice because most schools do not deem it “obligatory”?

Anyhow, Kizzie sites three example here, two of conferences and one of a “meeting” of Muslim scholars where FGM was denounced. Note that all three events are from the last 2 years. One conference was organized by a German human rights group and held in Cairo and involved scholars from Al-Azhar. The “meeting” was also held in Cairo’s Al Azhar university. The other conference was held in Nigeria and news reports again feature quotes from scholars from Al Azhar, which is the foremost Sunni institution in the world, so certainly has authority. It does appear that the issue has been seriously debated at Al-Azhar (links below). I do wonder though whether these denouncement draw a distinction between “female circumcision” and FGM, by which some Muslims only refer to infibulation.

I also wonder why it took 14 centuries for these denouncements to come out. Where are the Fatwas banning the practice, other than those against Infibulation, the most severe of the four forms, prior to the the 21st century? Why did the scholars not try to rid of the Islamic world of this barbaric practice before Western influence shamed them into doing so? Why was a German human rights group needed to start the conference in the first place?

As for “Muslim scholars from all over the world [..] working together to ban its practice” (I am only seeing scholars from Al-Azhar), well, what about all the Muslim scholars all over the world encouraging it and using the Sunnah to justify it? They certainly seem to have the superior numbers.

Before I start quoting some of these scholars, here are some quotations from the Hadiths that are commonly used to justify the practice:

Although there is no mention of it in the Quran itself, there are several hadiths, where Female Genital Mutilation is encouraged by Mohammad.

The first hadith is from Abu Dawud (Book 41, Number 5251): Um ‘Atiyyah is reported as an exciser of female slaves who had immigrated with Mohammad.
On one occasion Mohammad allegedly asked her if she kept practicing her profession, to which she responded in the affirmative. Then she added: “unless it is forbidden and you order me to stop doing it.” Mohammad replied: “yes, it is allowed.”
Mohammad then gave Um ‘Atiyyah specific instructions on the methodology for female circumcision (Aldeeb, 1994, p. 6), explaining to her that his method of “female circumcision” would bring radiance to the face of the woman.
This hadith is also quoted by al-Hakim and al-Baihaqi on the authority of al-Dhaahhak ibn Qais (al-Sabbagh, 1998, p. 17).

Another well-known hadith is that of Ahmad ibn Hanbal. He relates in his Musnad (5:75) from Abu al-Malih ibn, Usama’s father, that Mohammad said:
“Circumcision is sunna (tradition) for men and an honorable quality for women”

A third hadith states: “If the two circumcision organs (khitanan) meet, ritual ablution (gusl), becomes obligatory.” This is cited in Malik, Muslim, al-Tirmithi and Ibn Majah in their respective hadith collections and can also be found in other collections (al-Sabbagh, 1998, p. 38).

There are many documented justifications by Islamic scholars through the ages, based on these Hadiths. And many of them, coincidentally, are from the same aforementioned Al-Azhar university. Possibly because Egypt is pretty much FGM-central, with 97% of women there having been subjected to it. You’d think if the practice contradicted Sharia it would have become less prevalent, if not stamped out by now. Islamic countries don’t seem to have much trouble minimising alcohol consumption, for example. Anyway, lets hear from the Sheikhs:

In Reliance of the Traveler, a classical manual of Islamic law, endorsed by Al-Azhar in 1991 as conforming ‘to the practice and faith of the orthodox Sunni community,’ we find the following, with notes from several scholars and the translator:

e4.3   Circumcision is obligatory (commentary of Sheikh ‘Umar Barakat: “for both men and women”). For men it consists of removing the prepuce from the penis, and for women, removing the prepuce (Arabic: Bazr) of the clitoris (remark by the translator: “not the clitoris itself, as some mistakenly assert”). (comment by Sheikh ‘Abd al-Wakil Durubi: Hanbalis hold that circumcision of women is not obligatory but sunna, while Hanafis consider it a mere courtesy to the husband.)”

A look at the original Arabic show the text to actually say:

Circumcision is obligatory (for every male and female)
by cutting off the piece of skin on the glans of the penis of the male,
but circumcision of the female is by cutting out the clitoris
(this is called HufaaD).

Further commentary (from a non-Muslim):

The deceptive translation by Nuh Hah Mim Keller, made for Western consumption, obscures the Shafi’i law, given by ‘Umdat al-Salik, that circumcision of girls by excision of the clitoris is mandatory. This particular form of female circumcision is widely practiced in Egypt, where the Shafi’i school of Sunni law is followed.

Some years ago Pamela Bone asked Sheik Fehmi al-Imam of the Preston Mosque about FGM and his reply was “You probably don’t need it but women in hot countries do”. (The Age, 21/7/01 p7) (same link)

In 1981 the Great Sheikh of the same aforementioned Al-Azhar University “stated that parents must follow the lessons of Mohammed and not listen to medical authorities because the latter often change their minds. Parents must do their duty and have their daughters circumcised.”. (same link)

How things have changed after 20 years of Western influence!

Again from the same link:

   Sheikh Yussef Al-Qaradhawi, one of Sunni Islam’s most influential clerics and a spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood favors partial circumcision for women as a moderate, just, and reasonable solution best suited to reality. In a Fatwa on this issue, he wrote, “Anyone who thinks that circumcision is the best way to protect his daughters should do it. I support this, particularly in the period in which we live.”

And still more the learned men of Al-Azhar:

   On 12/2/2007 Al-Arabiya TV aired ‘Al-Azhar University Scholars Argue over the Legitimacy of Female Circumcision Practiced in Egypt.’ The debate was between Egyptian Al-Azhar University scholars Sheikh Muhammad Al-Mussayar and Sheikh Mahmoud Ashur.

Muhammad Al-Mussayar: notes “All the jurisprudents, since the advent of Islam and for 14 centuries or more, are in consensus that female circumcision is permitted by Islam. But they were divided with regard to its status in shari’a. Some said that female circumcision is required by shari’a, just like male circumcision. Some said this is the mainstream practice, while others said it is a noble act. But throughout the history of Islam, nobody has ever said that performing female circumcision is a crime. There has been a religious ruling on this for 14 centuries.”  “First of all, there are reliable hadiths in Al-Bukhari and Al-Muslim which support female circumcision. The Prophet Muhammad said: ‘If a circumcised woman and man have intercourse, they must undergo ablution.’ Unreliable hadiths do not cancel out the reliable ones. We have unreliable hadiths regarding prayer, fasting, charity, and pilgrimage. Should we abolish prayer and charity just because some hadiths are unreliable?..”Female circumcision is no less valid just because it was practiced in Pharaonic times and in the Jahiliya. Islam accepted some customs, which were harmonious with human nature, and rejected others, which contradicted human nature.” (reported by MEMRI.org 27/2/2007 and http://fgmnetwork.org) (same link)

So for 1400 years the scholars have been divided on whether it is an obligation (the Shafi’i school), sunna (the Hanbali school) or a “noble act”, an “honorable quality”, while in the Hanafi school it is apparently “a mere courtesy to the husband”. All a sudden in the last 3 years the final word comes out declaring the the practice neither obligatory or sunna, but suddenly Unislamic? Give me a break.

For more evidence still, see also this fascinating and shocking recent debate (and it is at least good to see they have plenty of those) involving a male lecturer from, once again, Al-Azhar university, debating a female lecturer (not sure from which institution) on the subject of FGM. The male sheikh again argues that milder forms of FGM are sunna, while total removal of the clitoris is forbidden, while the female lecturer argues against all forms of FGM. Dr. Muhammad Wahdan concludes:

In Egypt we have four and a half million spinsters. The definition of a spinster is a woman who has reached 30, without ever receiving a marriage proposal. We have a spinster problem in the Arab world, and the last thing we want is for them to be sexually aroused. Circumcision of the girls who need it makes them chaste, dignified, and pure.

But back to Kizzie’s post, and in part two of her essay, having apparently show FGM is not an Islamic practice, she tries to show that FGM is actually a social/cultural practice. Firstly Kizzie states that the less severe forms are practiced in Indonesia. I would have thought that only goes to prove my point? Then she goes on to point out some age-old cultural justifications for the ancient FGM tradition in Africa, which only serves to moot the waters, as ancient cultural reasoning does not trump modern Islamic reasoning, so I’ll simply leave that part alone. But as Indonesia has been brought up, I will follow up with that example. It is true that the type of FGM practiced in Indonesia is almost always not as severe as that of North Africa. And here I can agree that we are seeing “cultural differences”. FGM is a part of Islamic culture, it is an Islamic practice, which came to Indonesia with Islam and did not exist there prior. However the differences between how it is done there as opposed to say Egypt, can be put down to “cultural practice”. Lets not be confused by that distinction, however.

Here are some extracts from an article that appeared in The Age, in 2004 about FGM in Indonesia:

The practice of female circumcision in Indonesia has moved into hospitals. Greater genital mutilation is the likely result. Matthew Moore and Karuni Rompies report.

Hospitals across Indonesia are offering new parents a one-price surgical package for their just-born girls — as well as piercing their ears, they’ll circumcise them.

At Jakarta’s Hermina Hospital the price for the two procedures is 95,000 rupiah (about $A16), at IDI hospital in Surabaya in East Java it’s only 15,000 rupiah, while in Makassar’s Khadijah Hospital in Sulawesi, hospital staff quote 25,000 to 30,000 rupiah.

[..] While hospitals might be more hygienic, health care experts are worried by strong evidence that the move has led to more of the child’s genital tissue being cut because medical practitioners use different implements and techniques.

Village-based midwives and traditional healers have been circumcising girls in Indonesia for centuries, although the extent and details of the practice are only now emerging.

[..]

In an attempt to find out more about female circumcision, the US AID-funded study by the Population Council surveyed 1694 households in eight separate regions and found all the boys and 97.5 per cent of girls had been circumcised.

[..]

The concern now relates to changes due to circumcisions in hospitals, where health care professionals use scissors in more than 75 per cent of cases, which invariably means cutting flesh.

[..]
It’s not only babies who are circumcised, with one-third of those surveyed circumcised between the ages of five and nine, and some even older.

Several hours out of Jakarta in Bandung, the Assalaam Foundation has been holding free mass circumcisions for males and females for almost 50 years, with as many as 400 people turning up at a time. Syarief Hamid, treasurer with the foundation, which runs several schools, said the circumcisions were timed to honor the Prophet’s birthday, and were growing in popularity each year.

While religion is the main reason for circumcising girls, he says there are also health reasons. “I understand that a girl who is not circumcised would not have clean genitals after she urinates and sometimes that can cause cervical cancer,” he says. “The religious view is, if you are not circumcised you won’t have clean genitals after urinating. If then you pray, your prayer won’t be legal.”

[..]

Religion was the reason cited by 55 per cent of mothers surveyed for circumcising their daughters, although none could identify parts of the Koran or the Prophet Muhammad’s guidance, called Hadith, where it is stipulated. While 32 per cent nominated health and hygiene as the perceived benefit, 9 per cent said they did not know what benefit it would bring.

Masitoh Chusnan, from the women’s wing of Muhammadiyah, one of Indonesia’s two biggest Muslim organizations, says circumcision of girls is regarded in Islam as an honorable practice.

“The Hadith did not say it’s obligatory, but it is recommended to have it done,” she says. “There is the Prophet’s words saying girls must be circumcised, but you should not cut too much.”

[..] current practice shows no signs of a decline in popularity, with more than 90 per cent of mothers questioned supporting the practice continuing.

And one in five mothers even suggested social sanctions should be imposed on girls who were uncircumcised.

The above dove-tails perfectly with what the religious arguments above - it is not an obligation, but an “honourable practice”. But far disturbing still are stories about the hundreds, if not thousands of Christian women from Indonesia’s Molucca Islands who were forcibly converted to Islam and in the process forcibly circumcised:

Christian woman recalls horror of forced conversion to Islam

Posted on May 1, 2001 | by Brittany Jarvis

AMBON, Indonesia (BP)–”My scar healed quite fast, but the sad, humiliated feeling stayed. I feel like I’m no longer complete, both as a person and a woman.”

That is the testimony of Christina Sagat, a 32-year-old Christian from Kasiui, Indonesia, who was forcibly circumcised by her Muslim neighbors. Unfortunately, as traumatic as her story sounds, hundreds of women have endured similar oppression.

“My niece, Cecilia, who at that time was eight months pregnant, was also circumcised,” Sagat said. “My mother, who was in her 70s, was also circumcised. Teenagers, and even infants, were circumcised. I don’t understand these people.”

[..]

More details on whats been happening on Ambon Island and other Molucca Islands, where thousands of people have been killed, and hundreds of thousands displaced here. Hundreds of Christian families have been given the choice - convert or die. The women and children are then separated from the men and “converted”. Men and children are circumcised using the same dirty razor blade and then told to go and wash in the sea to disinfect the heavily bleeding wounds. Many of the ‘holy warriors’ perpetrating these crimes are members of Laskar Jihad, a Salafi-Jihadist group whose leader studied in Pakistan and considers himself more “fundamentalist” than Osama bin Laden, who he says is ignorant of true Islam. That doesn’t seem to stop his followers from wearing Osama t-shirts though. Laskar Jihad has between 3000 and 10000 fighters, who have been receiving training and assistance from the Indonesian Army. Strange that having studying in some madrassah in Pakistan this douche-bag has decided that circumcising women should go hand-in-hand with their conversion to Islam. This may be a somewhat extreme example, but it goes to show that there is at least a significant number of Muslims, even in Pakistan and Indonesia, who believe in the religious justification for FGM as a very Islamic practice indeed.

Kizzie says resents that when a Muslim kills a Christian man, in a post-9/11 world, his religion is invariably mentioned, whereas when, say, a Christian kills a Christian religion is not mentioned. Well, Kizzie, in a post-9/11 world Westerners have begun to take greater note of the fact that many Muslims use religion as justification for murder. Perhaps if the common occurence was that a Muslim and a Christian fought to the death over a donkey in the marketplace there would be no need to mention religion. However when the Muslim shouts ‘God is Great!’ in the act of murder and kills in the process of waging Jihad on the Kuffar, there most certainly is reason to mention his religion, because clearly religion was at least in part a motivating factor. Likewise when a child’s sexual organs are disfigured because it is supposed to be a “noble” act in the eyes of Allah, you bet we are going to take notice of the religious motivation behind the act. Because take away the religious justification, without a doubt the incidence of the practice would decrease and be easier to eradicate, when only the cultural motivations are left, no longer multiplied by the powerful force of religiosity.

Kizzie concludes by voicing her resentment that FGM has begun to be viewed in a religious rather than a cultural context and continues to assert the mutual exclusivity between the description of the practice of FGM as either cultural or religious. But clearly, as shown above, it is a cultural practice, that many Muslims view as religious and observe for religious reasons, thus it is a religious Islamic practice also. There is clear justification for that viewpoint in Islamic scripture, with there merely being a disagreement between various schools and scholars on whether the practice is obligatory or merely a “noble” or “honorable” act. And only in recent years certain Islamic scholars, mainly from Egypt, have began voicing an opinion that all forms of FGM are haram, ie forbidden, but this view goes against 1400 years of Islamic jurisprudence.

Ultimately, according to some Islamic schools FGM is obligatory (a minority position), and according to most others it is “noble”/”honourable” or sunna (tradition), which clearly serves as a powerful motivator based on religion. In both cases it can thus be described as an Islamic practice and will continue to be so until Muslims stop practicing it, Skeikhs stop using the Sunnah to justify it and its practitioners stop citing the Islamic religion as a motivating factor.

UPDATE (10/6): Kizzie has posted a reply. Not much there I disagree with, really, and don’t have time to comment further just now. Perhaps on Tuesday. Thank you for the debate, Kizzie.

Stratfor reporting on the case of some Russian multinational employees that were kidnapped by Nigerian militants last week (subscription only), in hope of gaining a ransom payout:

The Russian Foreign Ministry summoned Nigeria’s ambassador June 4 to discuss the June 3 kidnapping of six Russian employees of giant Russian aluminum producer United Company RUSAL in the Niger Delta. Thus far, the many militant groups in the Delta region have shown no regard for country of origin when kidnapping foreign residents. But this is the first time Russians have been kidnapped in the Niger Delta, and Russia is not likely to respond as other countries have to this common militant practice.

[..]

Consistent with its past dealings with armed groups that kidnap Russians, someone in the employ of either the Kremlin or RUSAL will retaliate against the individuals who participated in the kidnapping — or, should the attackers be affiliated with some larger organization, against other individuals in the organization. In September 1985, Hezbollah militants abducted four employees of the Soviet Embassy in Beirut. The KGB’s response to the kidnapping was to carry out reprisal kidnappings of several family members of the suspected Lebanese abductors and to send them back home in pieces. A few days later, the Soviets were released — unlike U.S. hostages kidnapped in Lebanon, some of whom remained in captivity for years.

Whatever the Russian response to the Niger Delta kidnappings, the desired effect will be to deter future attacks against Russian businesses and citizens. And any reprisal likely will happen after RUSAL has paid for the safe release of its employees.

There’s a lesson in there somewhere for all of us.

The people that gave the world Clonaid are back with a new project: Clitoraid. The aim of the project is to provide surgery that “restores sexual sensibility” to victims of Female Genital Mutilation.

Go to the Clitoraid website to “Adopt a Clitoris”, read some “touching testimonies” or make a donation for the construction of their “pleasure hospital” in Burkina Faso, which is due to start next week.

I reckon you’d have to be pretty brave to let these people anaesthesize you. But then, who in Burkina Faso has even heard of Raelism?

(h/t Right Truth)

A great three part essay on slavery in the Islamic world, entitled “Should The Islamic World Apologize For Slavery?” has been posted at Western Resistance. Extract:

[..] Modern Western nations’ involvement in the black slave trade lasted little more than 350 years, yet Islam has been involved in the black slave trade for more than 14 centuries, from the time of its founder. Mohammed owned black slaves, and in countries like the Islamic Republic of Mauritania, the black slave trade continues. According to Murray Gordon, the amount of black slaves taken by Muslims amounted to 11 million, though this figure is probably an underestimate. While white (and Arab) slave merchants bought and sold black people from the west coast of Africa, Muslim slavers in north Africa also engaged in a trade of white Christians, a trade that politically correct history books conveniently ignore. [TOD: some two million European Christians were enslaved by some accounts]

[..]
According to Bernard Lewis, author of Race and Slavery in the Middle East: “Black slaves were brought into the Islamic world by a number of routes - from West Africa across the Sahara to Morocco and Tunisia, from Chad across the desert to Libya, from East Africa down the Nile to Egypt, and across the Red Sea and Indian Ocean to Arabia and the Persian Gulf. Turkish slaves from the steppe-lands were marketed in Samarkand and other Muslim Central Asian cities and from there exported to Iran, the Fertile Crescent, and beyond. Caucasians, of increasing importance in the later centuries, were brought from the land bridge between the Black Sea and the Caspian and were marketed mainly in Aleppo and Mosul.”

Slavery is advocated in the Koran. Though Mohammed states that freeing slaves gains merit, he made no prohibitions against acquiring slaves. Women and girl slaves could be gained as “booty” in raids. Sura 33, verse 50 states: “Prophet, we have made lawful for you…. the slave-girls whom God has given you as booty.” These could be raped at will by Muslims who in no way contradicted the Koran - Suras 23:1 and 70:22 state that it is lawful to have sex with slave girls. The Hadiths are filled with references to slaves owned by Mohammed and his associates. In one Hadith Mohammed intervened to reverse one man’s emancipation of six slaves. By casting lots, Mohammed denied freedom to four of them.

[..] According to Bernard Lewis (page 38) the Arab philosopher Ibn Khaldun (1332 - 1406) wrote: “The only people who accept slavery are the Negroes, owing to their low degree of humanity and their proximity to the animal stage.”

Such attitudes still exist in Mauritania and also Sudan, where Arab elites enslave black people from the Dinka and the Shilluk tribes who live in southern Sudan. Since 1983 when the northern government of Simon Deng had been a Shilluk child slave, abducted to live in northern Sudan by an Arab. In May 2006 he went on a fact-finding mission to southern Sudan. He said that “villages are still being burnt, women are still being raped, and people are being sold into slavery.” Mr Deng now lives as a US citizen in New York.

Another Sudanese-born black man who is now a US citizen is Francis Bok. He came from a Catholic family in a Dinka village. In 1986, when aged seven, he was abducted by Arabs from the north who decapitated adults at a local market and stole the children. For ten years Mr Bok was a slave in a Muslim household - forced to convert to Islam - until he ran away. Some Dinka slaves who do not convert to Islam have had their Achilles tendons cut.

In 2000, a UNICEF representative estimated that 5,000 to 10,000 children were still slaves in Sudan. The Dinka Committee in 2001 claimed that 14,000 children have been abducted since 1983. In Sudan, as elsewhere, child slaves are subjected to cruel punishments.

[..] In 2003, it was revealed that a Saudi Sheik, Saleh Al-Fawzan, said: “Slavery is a part of Islam. Slavery is part of jihad, and jihad will remain as long there is Islam.”

Part 1.
Part 2.
Part 3.

If you only read one part, read the third, which describes how slavery continues to this day in some Muslim cultures.

“A Mauritanian woman and child stand inside a makeshift shelter in the Keube slum in the capital Nouakchott in this March 13, 2007 file picture. Herding camels or goats out in the sun-blasted dunes of the Sahara, or serving hot mint tea to guests in the richly carpeted villas of Nouakchott, Mauritanian slaves serve their masters and are passed on as family chattels from generation to generation. Reuters correspondent Ed Stoddard reports that U.S. evangelical Christians are united behind a new campaign to end modern slavery around the world. (Finbarr O’Reilly/Reuters)”

But there is a bit of surprisingly good news coming out of Mauritania - their recent elections have been deemed free and fair by observers, showing promise of a real transition to democracy, following a military coup in 2005. Also the UN Economic Commission for Africa has just released a report ranking Mauritania as the best economically performing country in Africa in 2006.

Or not.

(h/t Ryan Northcott)

In non-Hajj-related news, I am going on vacation mid next week for a couple of weeks, and will not be near a computer for most of that time. I won’t have time for much posting in the next week either, so its looking like this blog won’t be back in full force for another three weeks or so.

Anyone looking for something to read, I’ve recently been enjoying Michael Totten’s posts on the developing situation in Lebanon, where he visitted in December. Bill Roggio’s recent coverage of the war in Somalia as well as other global Jihad hotspots has been great also.

For a list of some fantastic blogs you should be reading, have a read of this interview, where Hugh Hewitt hammers to pieces Joseph Rago for his article in the Opinion Journal, in which Rago lamely attempted to write off the whole blogosphere as somehow irrelevant. In the interview, which is quite entertaining in itself, Hugh presents a lists of worthy blogs to set the stage for their discussion. Take a look, you’re bound to come across a couple of new gems.

And check out the new 910 Group movement, of which this blog is now a part. Blogs to read, forum to chat in, projects to be a part of it. Get into it.

A Moroccan Arabic-language magazine, Nichane, has been banned by “moderate” Morocco’s government for “offense against Islam.” In its December 9 issue Nichane published an article called ‘How religion, sex and politics make Moroccans laugh’ about common Moroccan jokes on those three subjects. The magazine’s editor, Driss Ksikès, and the journalist who wrote the article, Sanaa Al Aji, are now being sued by the State for “offense against the Islamic religion” and “publication and distribution of written material opposed to moral values.” According to the Moroccan author and blogger Lalai Lalami they face jail terms of 3 to 5 years. The magazine was only launched in September and was selling about 14,000 copies a week. The magazine’s website has been taken down, as has Sanaa’s blog. EDIT: Sanaa’s blog is back up.

A Moroccan blogger at “The view from Fez” says Nichane was the victim of “a very well coordinated campaign by conservative forces has been pushing for the baning of the satirical journal”. Reporters Without Borders have claimed the move by the Moroccan government was politically motivated: “These measures … arise from an electoral calculation ahead of polls which could be marked by a strong rise by the Islamist movement”. The View from Fez also commented on this trend:

It is worrying, that in a time when the West is calling for a greater voice for moderate Muslims, Morocco is caught in a bind. Analysts claim that the the kingdom is in danger of succumbing to a wave of political Islam imported from the Middle East that aims to unite Muslims under Sharia, or Islamic law, and reject western secular values.

As a recent widely published article put it: A visit to an average Moroccan town suggests the scarves worn by some young women are inspired by fashions further east, fitting tightly to the head and covering the neck completely and long beards, favoured by conservative Muslims, once hardly seen in the Maghreb, are a common sight in poor areas.

Prayers are broadcast in taxis, shops and banks. Newspapers speak of moral vigilantes patrolling beaches and upbraiding sunbathing couples. Office workers tell of pressure from colleagues to observe the fast at Ramadan.

According to a survey by the Sunergia Institute for L’Economiste newspaper this year, close to half of young Moroccans consider themselves religious conservatives and 42 percent of those agree religion should guide political parties.

The article is no longer available online, however is still cached by Google, so not very hard to retrieve. Here is the whole thing in Arabic, for anyone who can read it and is perhaps interested in translating it:

Expand article inpost

Close النكت. كيفاش المغاربة كيضحكو على الدين والجنس والسياسة
Imageالنكت ملح الحياة… الاجتماعية. المغاربة، كغيرهم، يضحكون على كل شيء، العلاقات الجنسية المحرمة دينيا، الملك المقدس رسميا، الإسلام المنزه عقائديا، وما إلى ذلك من مستجدات تبيح المستملحات. «نيشان» تحلل خصائص النكت المغربية وتحكي أكثرها إثارة للضحك.

ليس هناك موضوع لم تتطرق له النكتة في المغرب. هناك الثالوث المقدس، كما في جميع بقاع العالم: الجنس، الدين والسياسة. هناك النكتة الجهوية التي يُقشِّب من خلالها المراكشي على الفاسي والعروبي على السوسي والوجدي على البركاني. وهناك النكت التي تنتجها المخيلة الشعبية للتعليق على الأحداث الهامة التي تؤثر فيها وتتأثر بها: الإحصاء الوطني، مدونة الأسرة، زلزال الحسيمة، الفيضانات، انفجارات 16 ماي، الانتخابات… فهل المغاربة شعب نكايتي؟ كيف ننتج النكتة وكيف تتطور هذه الأخيرة؟ ما مدى تأثرها بالتحولات التي يعرفها المجتمع المغربي؟

النكتة، منين جات وفين غادية؟

يكاد يكون من المستحيل معرفة بدايات نكتة معينة ومؤلفها والتحولات التي طرأت عليها، خلال عملية تناقلها وتداولها. هناك من النكت ما يصمد ويعيش خلال سنوات، لا يتم خلالها إلا إلحاق بعض التغييرات الطفيفة عليها للتماشي مع المستجدات. بهذا الشكل نسبت نكت عن خاطري ولد سعيد الجماني -الله يرحمو- إلى ادريس البصري -الله يدكرو بيخير- وأخرى عن الحسن الثاني -تغمده الله بواسع رحمته- إلى محمد السادس -نصره الله- ونكت قديمة عن أشخاص عاديين إلى إسلاميين ملتحين، وهكذا دواليك… مع هذه التغييرات، يصير تحديد «الملكية الفكرية» للنكتة أمرا شبه مستحيل، لتصبح في ملك الجميع. كل شخص يرويها يضفي عليها طابعه الخاص ومرجعياته وحساسياته وميولاته وثقافته، كمثال النكتة التي برزت خلال فترة إطلاق برنامج انطلاقة لتشجيع ودعم المغادرة الطوعية للموظفين. تحكي النكتة عن موظفة استفادت من البرنامج وجنت منه مبلغ ثلاثين مليون سنتيم. جلست المرأة في صالونها تعد نقودها، وحين مر من أمامها زوجها الكهل الشايب، بادرته قائلة: «تاخد عشرة ديال المليون وتدير المغادرة الطوعية؟». حين يحكي الرجال هذه النكتة تتحول الموظفة إلى موظف والزوج الكهل العجوز إلى امرأة بلدية ببيجامة قديمة وشعر مشعكك. أيهما الأصل وأيهما النسخة؟ يستحيل الجزم في هذا الأمر، إلا بقدرة قادر…  يعتبر حسن نرايس في كتابه «الضحك والآخر، صورة العربي في الفكاهة»* أن «النكتة تنتمي إلى الكل وفي نفس الوقت لا تنتمي إلى أحد. إن صاحبها هو ذلك الذي يحكيها في مدة زمنية معينة ومحدودة. في الوقت الذي ننتهي من حكايتها، ينتقل انتماؤها إلى الكل وإلى الجميع، وكل واحد في استطاعته بل ومن حقه أن يحكيها دون ذكر المصدر الذي جاءت منه، وكل واحد من حقه أن يقول إنه صاحبها، ومن هذا المنطلق، فهي قابلة للتغيير والتحويل وتبديل كلمات بأخرى حسب الهوى، وحسب الجرأة والشجاعة اللتين يتحلى بهما ذلك الذي يحكيها».من هنا، يمكننا الجزم بأمر أكيد هو أن النكتة يتيمة لا أصل لها ولا نسب، ولا سبيل حتى لإثبات نسبها. مسكينة! هي ملك للجميع تتوارثها الثقافة الجماعية الشفوية، وتطورها حسب احتياجاتها ومستجداتها. في هذا الإطار، يعتبر جمال خليل، متخصص في علم الاجتماع، أنه «يتم تداول النكـتة بشكل سريع جدا إذا كانت الأسباب التي أدت إلى ولادتها غريبة نوعـا ما». لكن، ما مدى تقبل المغاربة بشــكل عام للنكتة؟ هل نحن شعب نكايتي وقشـابتو واسعة؟ يتفق الشاعر والكاتب المسرحي أحمد الطيب العلج مع جمال خليل في كون المغاربة شعبا نكايتيا عن حق، عرف كيف يحول كل القضايا التي تهمه إلى نكت تضحكه، إلا أن الأمر بدأ ينقص تدريجيا للأسف، لأن «المغاربة ضاقت اليوم سعة أفقهم وباتوا أقل من أجدادهم في تقبل النكتة والنقد»، حسب أحمد الطيب العلج. العهدة على الراوي!

قل لي لماذا تضحك أقول لك من أنت؟

إن كانت النكتة قد وجدت في كل الحضارات وعبر التاريخ، فقد كان دورها الأول ولا يزال هو الضحك والترويح عن النفس، من خلال إنتاج تصورات كاريكاتورية للواقع. إنها أيضا تحدٍّ واضح للمسكوت عنه وتجاوز مهم للطابوهات، التي لا يمكن الحديث عنها أو يصعب التطرق لها خارج إطار النكتة. بهذا الصدد يقول حسن نرايس في المؤلف نفسه بأن «الفكاهة غالبا ما تزيل القناع عن حقيقة الأشياء وتفرغ المكبوتات المدفونة، وبالتالي فهي تخرج الإحساسات الحقيقية من الظلمات إلى النور. فلننتبه إلى ما كتبه إيرفي نيكر: نريد أن نراهن أن الضحك -كما هو الشأن بالنسبة للبكاء- يفصح دائما عن حقيقة ما: قل لي ماذا يضحكك وماذا يحول بينك والضحك أقول لك من أنت وما هي مأساتك وما هي الأشياء التي تخيفك».من جهته، يعتبر جمال خليل أن «النكتة تعتبر بشكل عام نتاج نوع من المساءلة حول مواقف حقيقية متكررة، لكنها غير عقلانية. إنها تعبر عن تناقضات أو عن ممنوعات غير عقلانية داخل إطار أحداث حقيقية وواقعية». إيوا الله يخرج هاد الضحك على خير! والسؤال الآن هو: عـلاش كيضحكو المغاربة؟ يقــول كوكـلان كادي )Coquelin Cadet( في كتابه )الضحك( «إننا كتبنا كثيرا عن الضحك لكننا لم نحدد بشكل مطلق ما الذي يضحك». لكن المتعارف عليه أن هناك تيمة عالمية تلهم كل الفكاهيين وصناع النكتة.

فتماما كما في باقي دول العالم، يعتبر ثالوث الجنس والدين والسياسة أهم المواضيع التي تلهم النكت. إنها الرغبة في كسر الطابوهات ورفض كل الممنوعات. في هذا الصدد، يقول جمال خليل بأن «النكتة المغربية لطالم كانـــت تحوم حول الطابوهات، لكنها لم تتجاوزها حقيقة». سفر داخل عالم النكت.

الجنس: تايقولو «لا حياء في الدين»

النكتة الجنسية تنتفض ضد كل أنواع المنع والطابوهات: المثليون، الاستغلال الجنسي للأطفال، الوضعيات المختلفة للعلاقة الجنسية، التعامل مع بائعات الهوى… كل هذه أمور مقبولة ومتداولة داخل النكتة )فقط؟(، لكنها تظل حبيسة اللقاءات بين أشخاص من نفس الجنس أو السن أو بين أشخاص تربط بينهم علاقات حميمية تمكنهم من كسر هذه الطابوهات. باختصار، يصعب جدا تداول النكت الجنسية بين أفراد الأسرة. وحينما يتم تجاوز حاجز الحشمة، يقول راوي النكتة من باب الاستلطاف: «لا حياء في الدين». والدين هنا مرادف للجنس لأنه يحكم قواعده )أو هكذا يبدو(. أبطال النكت الجنسية أغلبهم ذكور. تحرر المرأة في المغرب ما زال لم يكتمل، والنكتة مثال على ذلك. في النكت الجنسية، المرأة حاضرة لتلبي رغبات الرجل وفانتـــازماته أو لتؤكد النظــرة الدونية للمرأة داخل العلاقة الزوجــية، والتي تختزل المــرأة في جسدها. خير مثال على ذلك، النكــتة الشهيرة التي مفادها أن امرأة في السـتين من عمرها فاجأت ابنتها -حديثة العهد بالزواج- تتجول في البيت عارية فسألتها عن السبب لتــقول لها: «هذا قفطان الحب أماما». عاد الأب من العمل مساء ليجـد زوجته تتجول في الــبيت عارية فسألها مســتنكرا عما يحدث. فردت المرأة: «لابسة قــطان الحب». أجابها الزوج: «ومالو مكمش؟».في أحسن الأحوال، تلعب المرأة في النكتة الجنسية الدور المقبول داخل المجتمع. دور «المتمنعات وهن راغبات». لكنها نادرا ما تبادر. بالمقابل، يبدو الرجل فحلا قويا كثير الشهوات يعرف كيف يحقق أهدافه. إنه الفاعل وصاحب القرار.حين يحكي الناس النكت الجنسية بينهم، قد يعمدون إلى تعويض الكلـمات «المزعجة» بمرادفاتها الفرنســية أو بإيماءات وإشارات من قبيل: «وراك عــارف»، «كمل من راسك»، «اللعيبة»… حين يتم كسر هذا الطابو واستعمال الكلمات الحقـيقية الواردة في النكتة، فهذا يعني أن الراوي والمستمعين وصلوا إلى نوع من الحميمية في عـلاقتهم يسمح بذلك. وقد يرددون بين الفينة والأخرى وإزاء كل نكتة من هذا الصنف: «شفتك خسرتي».النكت الجنسية ليست دائما مباشرة وحاملة لألفاظ تخدش حياء المستمعين. قد تحمل بعض النكت بين ثناياها نوعا من الرمزيات الذكية كمثال الشاب الذي استدعى حبيبته لمرافقته لشقته. سألته الفتاة بحياء مصطنع عن السبب فأجابها: «نمشيو نسمعو لعبد الحليم». أجابت الفتاة بنفس الحياء المصطنع: «ومللي يسالي عبد الحليم أشنو غادي نديرو؟» فأجابها الشاب بمكر: «نلبسو حوايجنا ونخرجو.»

الدين: للمُضحك مفاتيح الجنة

يتحدث جون ديجون في تقديم مؤلف حسن نرايس سابق الذكر عن «التعرية وتفكيك ما هو جدي. الدفاع عن النفس في مواجهة القوي والمهيمن عن طريق الضحك والمكر والمزحة والنكتة». وليس هناك ما هو مهيمن في الثقافة المغربية أكثر من الدين، طابو النكتة بامتياز. في ثقافة تعتبر الدين أكبر المحظورات وأشد الممنوعات قدسية، تأتي النكتة لتكسر هذه الرمزية ولتجعل من الدين موضوعا للهزل. كل شيء يصير مقبولا وواردا في النكتة الدينية. في السابق، كانت هذه الأخيرة تتحدث عن الفقيه والطلبة لتفضح عيوبهما: ميولات جنسية ليست دائما طبيعية، جشع وطمع، مكر… لكن النكتة الدينية اليوم تطورت لتمس أكبر وأهم الرموز الدينية: الله والرسول. كما أن للملائكة وإبليس حضورهما الذي لا يستهان به داخل إطار النكتة الدينية.يقول أحمد الطيب العلج إن والدته التي كانت امرأة متدينة تحفظ القرآن والأمداح النبوية، «لم تكن تجد حرجا في تناول بعض المسائل الدقيقة بالنكتة. وهذا نوع من التحرر عمد إلى تداوله المغاربة فيما بينهم من خلال تبريرهم لذلك بمقولة: شوية لربي وشوية لقلبي».العلج يذهب أبعد من ذلك حيث يقول إن للتنكيت على الفقيه رمزية تتجاوز شخص الفقيه نفسه «الفقيه لم يكن مجرد أستاذ يعلم الحروف، بل مجازا، العالم الذي يعرف أدق الأشياء في الدين.» أي أن التفكه عليه هو تفكه على الرمزية الدينية في حد ذاتها. بمعنى أن عبارة «الفقيه اللي كنتسناو براكتو دخل للجامع ببلــغتو» لا تتوقف، حسب العلج، عند حدود البلغة التي يلبسها الفقيه داخل المسجد، بل تعني أن الفقيه تجاوز الحدود المتعارف عليها والواجب على فقيه احترامها. وتماما كما بالنسبة للنكتة التي تتطرق لموضوع الجنس، فإن حضور الدين في نكتة ما يجعلها لا تحكى إلا في إطار حميمي، مع أشخاص يعرفهم الراوي ويدرك تقبلهم لهذا النوع من النكت. في هذا الصدد يؤكد أحمد الطيب العلج أن «المغاربة يتقبلون كل أنواع النكت ما دامت تضحكهم، وحتى لو تجاوزت حدود اللياقة». حين يسخر المغاربة من المقدسات في نكتهم، يختتمونها عادة بعبارات من قبيل «الله يسمح لينا»، أو «الله يخزي الشيطان الحرامي» أو «اللسان ما فيه عظم». وقد يذهب البعض إلى أبعد من ذلك «مستشهدين بقول الرسول -رفهوا عن هذه النفوس فإنها تصدأ كما يصدأ الحديد- أو بالآية القرآنية )لا يؤاخذكم الله باللغو في أيمانكم وإنما يؤاخذكم بما كسبت قلوبكم( البقرة 225». الكلام لأحمد الطيب العلج، وهو يعبر عن مدى قدرة البعض على تبرير رغبته في الضحك والتنكيت على المقدسات تبريرا دينيا، لأن الله لا يحاسب عباده على مجرد لغوهم ماداموا لا يؤمنون بما قالوا… يعني غير ضحكو مع راساتكم ولا خوف عليكم. قد تكتفي النكتة الدينية بوضع الممارسة الدينية موضع تساؤل، كما قد تذهب إلى أبعد من ذلك من خلال طرح أسئلة تتعلق بماهية الدين والله وجهنم والجنة. إنها تعبر عن تساؤل عميق ومكبوت عن المقدسات الدينية، في محاولة لسبر الغموض الديني وكل الأسئـلة العالقة فيه، والتي لا يعرف لها الفرد جوابا. للإسلاميين كذلك نصيبهم من النكت المتعــلقة بموضوع الديــن. فمنذ أحداث 16 ماي في الدار البيــضاء ونمو المد الإسـلامي في المــغرب، أصبح المغاربة يسخرون من الإسلاميين في نكتهم، ويصورونهم ككـائنات جبانة منافقة غير مرغوب فيها، تنجب مشاريع قنابل ومتفجــرات، تحرم كل شيء، لكنها لا تتوانى في تغيــير مواقفـــها خوفا أو دفاعا عن مصالحها. هذه الأحداث المأساوية ولدت لدى المغربي، الذي لا يقدر على مواجـهتها أو علاجها، الرغبة في الضحك منها.

السياسة: وعن الملوك، فلا تخجل

خلافا للمعمول به في العالم الغربي، فإن رجالات السياسة في المغرب لا يلهمون النكتة السياسية. باستثناء الملوك )الحسن الثاني ثم محمد السادس( وإدريس البصري، نادرة هي الشخصيات السياسية المعاصرة التي كانت موضوعا للنكتة.بعد تعيين وزارة إدريس جطو الأولى، انتشرت نسبيا نكتة مفادها أن الوزير الأول أصدر أول قانون له، وهو منع المغاربة قاطبة من المشي بأقدام حافية )وذلك بهدف إنجاح أعماله الخاصة من خلال شركة تصنيع الأحذية التي يملكها(. نكتة أخرى كانت تتلاعب بأسماء بعض الوزراء وعلاقتها بحقائبهم الوزارية، ليقول المغاربة إن الرسالة المقصودة من خلال تعيين الحكومة الحالية )حكومة إدريس جطو الأولى( واضحة، ومفادها أن المغاربة خاصهم يخويو البلاد. فالملك كان يقصد من خلال هذا التعيين أن السكنة غير حجيرة، والصحة بيد الله، والباسبور ساهل. تطورت النكتة فيما بعد لتطول السياحة اللي إيلا بغيتيها سير ضرب دويرة والطرقان اللّي الغالب الله.باستثناء هذه النكت، ونكت أخرى قليلة، فإن النواب والمسيرين السياسيين لم يلهموا بكثرة صناع النكت. رغم البحث والتنقيب والسؤال، إلا أنه لا أثر لنكت عن اليازغي أو الراضي أو اليوسفي أو العثماني… ولا حتى عباس الفاسي. «حين يتم إلغاء رجالات السياسة من طرف صناع النكتة، فهذا يترجم عدم اهتـمام عموم الناس بهم نظرا لضعف مساهمتهم الفعالة في الحقل السياسي. أي شخص، أينما كان مجال عمله، ينشر من حوله إحساسا بالرضى أو بالنفور. وحين يوجد في الخانة الثانية، أي النفور، فلا مجال لخلق نكت عنه، سواء كانت إيجابية أو سلبية». جمال خليل گال كلشي.المغاربة يلغون رجالات السياسة من حساباتهم لأنهم لا يؤثرون في اليومي. لا يتفاعلون مع الواقع. لذلك يُقصون من النكت المغربية. ثم إن رجالات السياسة في المغرب يأخذون ممارسة مهامهم السياسية مأخذ الجد أكثر من اللازم، ويمررون من خلال ظهورهم الإعلامي صورة الشخص «السياسي المحنك المعقول» الذي يتكلم لغة عالية وراقية ومثقفة تسمو عن الهزل والتقشاب، الشيء الذي يبعدهم أكثر فأكثر عن عالم الشعب. حتى أن الصحافة تناقلت منذ أشهر صورة لعدد من الوزراء وهم يتكرشخون بالضحك، خلال لقاء نظمه نور الدين عيوش، رئيس مؤسسة زاگورة. وشكلت الصـــورة حدثا حقيقيا وكأن المـغاربة يسـتغربون الأمر ويتساءلون إن كان وزراؤهم يعرفون الضحك فعلا.شخص واحد شكل استثناء لهذه القاعدة المغربية وهو خاطري ولد سعيد الجماني، الذي يعد، بعد الحسن الثاني وإدريس البصري، أشهر رجل سياسي في فترة حكم الملك الراحل (انظر الإطا) من جهتها، فإن النكت الملكية تعبر بشكل صارخ عن موقف المغاربة من ملكهم. في الوقت الذي كان الحسن الثاني يظهر في النكت كشخص قوي، ذكي، ماكتدارش بيه، يظهر محمد السادس شابا حنونا رقيقا بسيطا قريبا من الشعب وعصريا. خلال أزمة جزيرة ليلى التي اندلعت مع إسبانيا سنة 2002، جعلت النكـتة الملك يقول: «أنا باراكا عليا غير للا سلمى والموطور ديال الما».في المغرب، لم يعرف أبدا أنه تم قمع النكتة السياسية أو منع تداولها. بل على العكس من ذلك، يقال بأن الحسن الثاني كان يطالب باستمرار بأن يتم إطلاعه على جديد النكت. أحمد الطيب العلج يذهب أبعد من ذلك حين يقول بأنه يعتقد بأن «أغلب النكت التي أطلقت عن الحسن الثاني كان هو من أشد المروجين لها». فهل كان الملك يعتبر النكتة هي القناة التي تخبره عن مواقف المواطنين؟ بول فاليري كان يقول بأن «الذين يخشون النكتة ليست لديهم ثقة كبيرة في أنفسهم». وأداة القمع في المغرب لم تطل النكتة أبدا.

عنصرية أم جهوية؟
كلها وخيمتو

تأمل عميق للنكت الجهوية يعبر بشكل كبير عن مدى «العنصرية الداخلية» للمغاربة. المراكشي يهزأ من الفاسي والفاسي ينتقم من العروبي والعروبي يقشب على السوسي… لا حدود لهذا النوع من النكت التي تعمد إلى التنقيب عن «عيوب» الآخر ورسمها بشكل كاريكاتوري مبالغ فيه.
من خلالها، يظهر المراكشي قشاشبيا وضحايكيا ويحب الممارسة الجنسية من الخلف أو مع الأطفال. الفاسي دائما ضعيف الشخصية وبعكاك وغني وكتدار بيه وغالبا ما تخونه زوجته. السوسي زقرام والبركاني بليد وغبي. إنها إعادة إنتاج مواقف كاريكاتورية يتقوى من خلالها الانتماء القبلي، ويصور فيها الآخر بشكل كاريكاتوري مضحك. في هذا الصنف من النكت، يمكن اعتبار تلك المتعلقة بالمراكشي وبالفاسي أشهرها وأكثرها عددا. في بعض الأحيان، قد تجمع النكتة بين الانتماءين، وفي هذه الحالة، فإن النصر أو موضع القوة يكون دائما للمراكشي. بحال المراكشي اللّي مربي فاسي فالسطح. في نكات أخرى أقل انتشارا، يتعرض الرواة لجبالة وصحراوة والمكناسيين، لكنها تظل قليلة كما ومحدودة الانتشار جغرافيا.بهذا الصدد، يقول أحمد الطيب العلج بأن الأمر «لا يعبر عن عنصرية بقدر ما يعبر عن قدرة المغاربة على التفكه والتندر والضحك من هفواتهم». جمال خليل يؤكد نفس التصور مضيفا بأنه «مادامت النكتة الجهوية لا تشمل سبا أو شتما، فذلك يظل مقبولا ويمارس في كل البلدان». ويعتبر الكاتب المسرحي بأن «المغاربة كانوا في السابق أكثر تقبلا لهذا النوع من النكت، حتى حين كانت توضح هفواتهم أو عيوبهم بشكل مبالغ فيه، بالنظر لسعة أفقهم التي ضاقت اليوم».

ومن المستجدات ما أضحك

حافظ المغاربة على قدرتهم على الضحك من كل شيء. أليس لدينا مثل معروف يقول: كثرة الهم كتضحك؟ هكذا، فقد شكلت الأحداث المهمة التي عرفها المغرب موضوعات ملهمة لصناع النكتة: وفاة الحسن الثاني، اكتشاف البترول في تالسينت، أحداث 16 ماي، الإحصاء الوطني، المغادرة الطوعية، مدونة الأسرة، زواج الملك…يعتبر جمال خلـيل أن «العديد من النكت تكون مرتبطة بالثــقافة المغربية». أي أن المستجـدات والأحداث الجديدة الكفيلة بتغيير اليومي وبالتأثير على حياة المغاربة تطلق العنان لمخيلة صناع النكت الذين غــالبا ما ينطلقون من مواقف حقيقية لتركيبها بشكل كاريكاتوري يتطور باستمرار مع انتشار النكتة. فإزاء كل المواقف التي تؤثر في المغربي، يتفنن ذكاؤه في ابتكار نكتة جديدة تمكنه من الضحك من الحدث بدل البكاء. هـذا التعامل يمــكن الأفراد من تقبل الأمور بشكل أيسر. هنا يصبح الضحك أداة مقاومة فعالة ضد «هموم العصر». أحمد الطيب العلج يعتقد أن «الإنسان قد يضحك إمعانا في السخرية من نفسه». في القرن التاسع عشر، كان بيير أوگيستان بومارشي يقول إنه «يبادر بالضحك على كل شيء خشية أن يكون مضطرا للبكاء على كل شيء». هكذا إذن يمكن اعتبار النكتة، بدون منازع، خير تعبير عن هموم وأفراح وقضايا الشعب. في العديد من الأحيان، تتم إعادة إنتاج نكت قديمة وإعادة صياغتها حسب المستجدات. لكن النكتة عادة ما تختفي باختفاء الأسباب التي أدت إلى ظهورها أو بتحولها الى موضوع معروف ومستهلك لا يستدعي الضحك.الحيوانات أيضا حاضرة في نكت المغربي من خلال علاقته بها -حتى الجنسية أحيانا- أو من خلال جعلها تخدم رسالة رمزية تعوض من خلالها هذه الحيوانات البشر.في النكت التي يوجد فيها المغربي مع أشخاص من جنسيات أخرى، يصور المغربي باستمرار على أنه الأقل ذكاء والأضعف والمغلوب على أمره. فهل تعبر هذه الصياغة عن صورة المغربي عن نفسه مقارنة مع أشخاص آخرين، كشخص أدنى مرتبة وأقل قيمة؟ هل هي تعبير عن الإحساس بالقهر وبالنقص أمام الآخـر؟ جمال خليل يعارض هذا الطرح قـائلا بأن المغربي في هذه النكت «يظل سيد الموقف لأنه يحدد نهاية النكتة. إنه يعيش دائما الموقف الأشد غرابة. وهذا ليس شيئا سيئا في حد ذاته». لكن الملاحظ بشكل عام أن هذا النوع من النكت بدأ يفقد انتشاره.مواضيع أخرى تتطرق لها النكت المغربية: صبيطار الحماق، النسيبة )أو/و العگوزة(، السكايرية، المعاگيز، العلاقات الزوجية أو الزواج من أجانب، العلاقات مع البوليس أو مع السلطة بشكل عام…في النهاية، يبدو واضحا أن النكتة ولدت لتشكل نوعا من العلاج النفسي يمارسه الناس من خلال الضحك على أمور لا يستطيعون معالجتها بشكل مباشر. نيتشه قال في كتابه «المعرفة السعيدة )Le gai savoir( بأن «الضحك هو أن نفرح لمأساة ما، لكن براحة بال». هنا يصبح كل شيء قابلا للتنكيت. الفنان الكوميدي محمد الجم يؤكد هذا الأمر حين يقول بأن «كل ما هو مطروح في الحياة اليومية قابل للتنكيت». وبهذا الصدد، يتساءل حسن نرايس: «هل يوجد مقياس أو حد للضحك أو الفكاهة؟ نعم، إنه مقياس عدم الإخلال باحترام الكرامة البشرية». ما عدا ذلك، فالتقشاب يظل أجمل وسيلة للتعبير لا تطولها يد الرقابة. وسيلة تعبير تضحك كل المغاربة، برمضان ولا بلا رمضان.

* الضحك والآخر، صورة العربي في الفكاهة الفرنسية، مطبوعات إفريقيا الشرق، 2002

You can run the cached article’s URL through Google’s translator too (and get this). Here’s the Google translated extract about the jokes on Religion (I can’t make much sense of it either):

Expand inpost

Close
Religion : a funny way of the keys to Paradise
Talking John Dijon in providing good Nraes author of the aforementioned «erosion and the dismantling of what is serious. Self-defense in the face of strong and dominant through laughter, and the resourcefulness and humor prank ». There is a dominant culture in the Moroccan more than religion, Major humor distinction. In the culture of religion is the biggest taboos and the most sacred taboos, comes humor breaks this symbolism, and make it the subject of religion laughing. Everything becomes acceptable and واردا in religious humor. In the former, the latter speak of Faqih and students to expose their imperfections : Miolat nationality is not always natural, greed and ambition, مكر … But religious humor today evolved to affect the largest and most important religious symbols : God and his prophet. The Lucifer and the angels who attend significant within the framework of religious humor. Says Ahmed Al Alj that his mother was a woman practicing reservation Alameddah Quran and the Prophet, «did not find critical in addressing some critical issues JOKES. This kind of freedom to deliberately circulated among Moroccans through justify to the axiom : a little bit of me and my heart ». Alj go further, says that the humor on the back beyond the symbolic person Faqih himself «Faqih was not merely professor knows things, but metaphorically, the world knows precisely the things in religion.» Any Altvkh that it is Tvkh on religious symbolism in itself. The sense that the phrase «jurist who Kntsnao Brakto income for the whole Bblgto» not stop, as Alj, at the limits of Alblgh worn by Faqih inside the mosque, but it means Faqih exceeded permitted limits and to be respected jurist. Just as for the joke that address the subject of sex, the presence of religion in a joke what they do not tell only in the framework of Hamimi, with persons known to the narrator realizes intake of this type of jokes. In this regard stresses Ahmed Al Alj that «Moroccans accept all kinds of jokes as long Tdhakhm, and even if exceeded the bounds of decency». While making fun of Moroccan sanctuaries in Nkthm, Echttmonha usually terms such as «God allowed Lena», «God or the devil Dishonors Harami», «tongue which is a bone». Some have even further «citing the words of the prophet - Rfhua these souls they corrode iron and stainless-remained true to the verse or verses) are Iouakhmm lot of faith in God, but Iouakhmm including won your hearts (The Cow 225». Talk to Ahmed Al Alj, which reflects the ability of some to justify the desire to laugh and joke on the sacred religious justification, because God can bring worship to a mere Gohm, as long as they do not believe in saying … Mean-Dhko Rasatkm with no fear of you. .Religious humor has only a religious practice has been questioned, also had to go beyond that through the questions of what religion and God and heaven and hell. She wondered express deep anger and the religious sanctities, in an attempt to explore the mystery and religious questions outstanding, and that the individual does not know the answer to. The Islamists also their share of jokes on the subject of religion. Since the events of 16 May in Casablanca and the growth of the Islamic tide in Morocco, the Moroccan Islamists deride Nkthm, Isouronhm as genuinely cowardly hypocrisies undesirable, produce a draft bombs and explosives, deny everything, but they do not hesitate to change the attitudes of fear or in defense of their interests. These tragic events generated in the Moroccan, who dare not confront or treated, the desire to fool them.

UPDATE: Marcel Côté has a great post on this topic, as well as on the censorship of a number of bloggers in Tunisia. He also relays the theory that the magazine was banned due to outside pressure from “certain Gulf nations”.

(h/t Global Voices)

“Islam returns to a tolerant Andalucia” declared an MSNBC headline on Sunday:

Spain’s Muslim population – suppressed and then expelled 500 years ago by Catholic rulers – began to reemerge in the late 1970s as Spaniards converted to Islam. The 50,000 or so converts have been joined by an influx of North African and Pakistani immigrants,
swelling Spain’s Muslim population to about 1m.

Thats Andalucia in the south of Spain, or Al-Andalus, as the Muslims have historically called it.

Spain, you may ask, the place where 191 people died in the 2004 Madrid train bombing? Ah, but no problem! That was because of the war in Iraq, the article explains. You may recall that straight after the attack the Spanish voted in the Socialist government of the current Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, who promptly brought the troops home. (It was a very well timed attack, you see - three days before the election). Velo! Problem solved and order of tolerance restored!

Or not? An anomaly perhaps:

MADRID, Spain (AP) - A suspected Islamic terrorist cell broken up in Spain last week planned attacks on an arms and explosives depot and a supermarket, according to a leading anti-terrorism judge, ruling that seven suspects should remain jailed. [..] The seven were charged provisionally with belonging to an armed group called Salafia Yihadia, which Garzon said was part of al-Qaida’s network in North Africa.

This year so far 47 people have been arrested in Spain in connection with Islamist terrorism, bringing the total since 9/11 to over 300.

Handy for all, but I am sure still not quite clear enough for many, one of the men arrested left a note explaining to his mother what he was doing:

“Allah sent me to fight and to be sacrificed for his cause. We beg Allah to accept our effort and to give us shelter in the sublimity of his paradise. Do not suffer or cry for me. I will always be in your hearts.”

I don’t know if Allah is the “its the thought that counts” kind of guy, so perhaps no virgins for you, fucktard. (I do hasten to add however, this clearly has nothing at all to do with religion) But anyhow, what “his cause” is he on about? The troops are home, darn it! Well, as explained previously, just as a Muslim cannot leave Islam (the penalty for apostacy being death), so Muslim land cannot leave Islam. Once its part of Dar Al-Islam it must stay that way forever - no territorial apostacy allowed and it is the duty of Muslims to wage Jihad to keep it that way. Or return it to being that way, as the case may be. If you’ve been paying attention you may notice the attack above was planned in Ceuta, which is a North African enclave of Spain. Last May an Al-Qaeda linked declaration of war called for the liberation of Ceuta and Melilla, the other Spanish enclave in Africa. But if you’ve been paying attention for longer than the last 5 minutes you may know that besides the African parts, a good portion of Spain was for centuries part of Dar Al-Islam:

At the Jamal Islamiya mosque in this seaside town, a Muslim lament of historic proportions is proclaimed in large letters on a framed poster: “In 1492, we lost everything.”

For the mosque’s leader, and much of the Muslim world, the year marks the traumatic conclusion of Islam’s golden age, a time remembered like a collective wound.

It’s a period when the last piece of Muslim-held territory in Spain fell to Catholic monarchs, ending almost 800 years of Moorish rule on the Iberian peninsula.

Its what bin Laden calls the “tragedy of Al-Andalus”. In the Islamist psyche it is an old account that is yet to be settled with Spain, as even The Age notes. So I am sure they think its fantastic that Islam is returning to ‘tolerant’ Andalucia.

Speaking of Islamists and returning to Andalucia and speaking of last Sunday’s headlines, here’s another one for you: “Mujahedin fighters return to Spain from Iraq: report” (h/t JihadWatch):

MADRID - Mujahedin fighters have returned to bases in Spain after gaining combat experience in Iraq and are now a potential threat to European security, Spanish newspaper El Pais reported on Sunday.

According to El Pais the fighters worked alongside cells controlled by late Al Qaeda senior leader and Jordanian extremist Abu Musab Al Zarqawi, killed in June.

‘They are the new Trojan horse of Al Qaeda and its satellites on our territory and they are already preparing themselves,’ deputy director of the European police network Europol, Mariano Simancas, told El Pais.

‘They represent a serious threat for the countries of the European Union,’ Simancas added.

Hey, probably nothing. Zapatero brought the troops home, so the mujahedin are coming home too. Makes sense. Just keep cranking up the tolerance meter and you’ll be safe. Recent Spanish tolerance initiatives have included taking Christmas off school calendars and renaming a public school named after a past pope so as not to offend Muslims. One school has cancelled their traditional nativity play and handing out of presents because “Muslim children might be upset” (how cute, Reuters put that one in their Oddly Enough section!). Not ones to rest on past laurels, the Socialist government has gone further, suggesting that Catholics should only practice their faith in private and is mulling over negotiating with the ETA Basque terrorists - a skill that is sure to come in handy in future.

UPDATE (23/12): An article at FrontPage Mazagine covers the above and much more: “The Jihadist Dream to Liberate Spain”. Here’s an extract relating to the recent arrests that I mentioned above:

While the revelation of the terrorists’ plans was shocking, the fact that such planning took place in the border town of Principe Alfonso was not surprising in the least. The fact is that Principe has become a veritable caldron of Islamic extremism over the years. In their paper titled “Favorable situations for the jihadist recruitment: The neighborhood of Principe Alfonso (Ceuta, Spain),” Drs. Javier Jordan and Humberto Trujillo of the University of Granada detail the full extent of jihadist activity in the town.

Resembling the combustible suburbs of Paris, Principe is basically off-limits to the National Police and Guardia Civil except in emergency situations or raids because of the risk officers face when entering the town. Recently the local police office and its lone police car were burned. Not only are ambushes of police cars common in Principe, but emergency calls are frequently made in order to trap police officers. The resulting chaos has led to a situation where even the city buses can’t run safely.

The only authority in Principe comes from Islamic extremists who are intent on imposing their Salafist interpretation of Islamic law. For example, boys are routinely castigated for playing games with girls on the street. Jordan and Trujillo suspect that ‘moral squads’ which intimidate or attack girls who don’t wear the veil or men who drink alcohol in public may already exist.

Some extracts from Eric Reeves’ latest analysis of the situation in Darfur:

Failing to establish any urgent time-frame or meaningful benchmarks for a Darfur security force, the international community simply watches as genocidal violence spreads uncontrollably, threatening the entire region

By Eric Reeves

November 26, 2006 — Darfur and eastern Chad are now in the throes of uncontrolled, cataclysmic violence. Anarchic conditions are expanding with terrifying speed, even as the international community gives no evidence that it is prepared to act in any meaningful fashion to stabilize the crisis or to halt rapidly accelerating, ethnically-targeted human destruction. Humanitarian relief efforts are daily more deeply imperiled by intolerable levels of insecurity; and as UN Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs Jan Egeland has very recently reported to the Security Council, Khartoum’s grim war of attrition against humanitarian operations in Darfur is relentlessly more successful. Moreover, the possible collapse of the Chadian government of Idriss Deby before growing military pressure from Chadian rebel groups, supported by Khartoum, could have potentially catastrophic implications for humanitarian operations in eastern Chad.

The events of recent weeks—in Addis Ababa, Tripoli, Khartoum, Beijing, New York, London, Paris, Berlin, and Washington—make all too clear that diplomatic paralysis has set in, and that the genocidal quo will prevail for months.

[..]

In assessing Darfur’s realities, we do have at least one source of relentless, searing honesty—that of retiring UN aid chief Jan Egeland, who this week made his last report on Darfur to the UN Security Council (September 22, 2006). The report, and its accompanying document (“Fact Sheet on Access Restrictions in Darfur and Other Areas of Sudan”), make clear how far genocidal destruction is from ending, and how little the international community is doing to halt the violence or provide security for the humanitarian organizations that struggle heroically, amidst intolerable levels of insecurity and harassment by Khartoum.

Egeland begins his report with the most fundamental truth about Darfur:

“I just concluded my 4th and final mission as Emergency Relief Coordinator to Darfur. I return with a plea from beleaguered Darfurians for immediate action to finally stop the atrocities against them. For more than a thousand days and a thousand nights, the defenseless civilians of Darfur have been living in fear for their lives, and the lives of their children. The Government’s failure to protect its own citizens, even in areas where there are no rebels, has been shameful, and continues. So does our own failure, more than a year after world leaders in this very building pledged their own responsibility to protect civilians where the government manifestly fails to do so.”

Egeland also adumbrated a shameful chronology of Khartoum-sponsored civilian destruction:

“When I went to Darfur on my first visit in late June 2004, accompanying the Secretary-General, we saw a civilian population under attack, prompting the displacement of one million people. When I returned to Darfur last week, four million people, two-thirds of Darfur’s population, were in need of emergency assistance. The number of internally displaced has risen to an unprecedented two million. The attacks on villages and the displacement of tens of thousands of civilians continue, reaching the horrific levels of early 2004.”

To this figure of 4 million must be added some 400,000 conflict-affected civilians in eastern Chad: Darfuri refugees (220,000); Chadian internally displaced persons (90,000 according to the latest figures from the UN High Commission for Refugees); and approaching 100,000 Chadian civilians affected in other ways by the conflict that continues its massive spill-over into eastern Chad.

And there is also the ghastly death toll to date: some 500,000 people have already died from violence, disease, malnutrition, and despair since the outbreak of major conflict in February 2003 (the most recent mortality assessment by this writer, surveying all extant global morality data, is April/May 2006 at http://www.sudanreeves.org/Article102.html; no additional global mortality data have been published since the UN World Health Organization study of mortality rates in spring 2005).

Egeland rightly focuses specific attention on the atrocities recently committed in the village of Sirba (West Darfur), a now notorious and unusually well-investigated attack by Khartoum and its Janjaweed militia allies on innocent civilians:

“Villages, camps and communities outside the urban centers of Darfur are again being burnt and looted. Women and children are abused, raped and killed with impunity. Just ten days ago the village of Sirba saw three attacks by government forces and Arab militia that resulted in innocent civilians, mainly women and children, killed and injured. I met some of the victims in the hospital of El Geneina. A mother told me how she held her two-year-old daughter in her arms as the child was willfully shot in the neck by an armed man, despite her repeated begging to spare her daughter. The wounded child did, as I could see, miraculously survive and now recovers in the good care of the Sudanese local doctors. Neither the Government [of Sudan] nor the African Union was able or willing to show presence or deploy proactively in Sirba before the massacre, despite repeated warnings by villagers and aid workers of the impending attacks.”

The refusal of the African Union to deploy to Sirba, despite the clearly impending, ethnically-motivated attack on its residents, highlights the issue of what mandate will guide any force that is to change the security dynamic in Darfur.

[..]

Egeland continued his unsparing narrative to the Security Council (November 22, 2006):

“Just as I left Sudan this Saturday [November 18, 2006], two massive military operations started in the Jebel Marra and Birmaza area in North Darfur. A dozen villages were attacked and looted, driving more than 8,000 more innocent men, women and children from their homes, and leaving many killed and injured. In the Birmaza area, huge amounts of livestock were stolen and houses burnt, deliberately depriving the population of their means of survival. In the Jebel Marra, up in the mountains, where the nights are freezing at this time of year, the attackers systematically looted food, clothing, and blankets. This means that babies and small children who survived the attacks might now freeze to death. Let us be clear: these acts are crimes of the most despicable kind. They are an affront to humanity.”

The refusal of the international community to be moved sufficiently by this “affront” is the obverse moral failure.

The violence has now spread to Chad (from the same report):

Khartoum-supported rebel groups captured the key eastern Chadian town of Abeche on November 25, 2006. This prompted the French to close down its air base outside Abeche, including to humanitarian flights. There is extreme concern within the humanitarian community about the ability to provide relief for hundreds of thousands of people in this remote and bereft region. The situation on the ground is far from clear, but wire dispatches today (November 26, 2006) suggest that Chadian government troops have re-captured Abeche. On the other hand, Reuters reports that,

“A Chadian rebel column rumbled westwards towards the capital N’Djamena on Sunday [November 26, 2006] just hours after the army retook the eastern town of Abeche, a French diplomat said. The diplomat confirmed the French embassy in N’Djamena had issued a message informing its citizens that a rebel convoy was moving towards the city through Batha province—which would put the convoy at least 250 km (150 miles) from N’Djamena. ‘It’s difficult to tell how many (vehicles)…it could be anything from 10 to 60 to 80,’ the diplomat said.” (Reuters [dateline: N’Djamena], November 26, 2006)

Voice of America (dateline: Geneva) reports on the most immediate concern:

“UN High Commissioner for Refugees Antonio Guterres is warning that humanitarian aid for hundreds of thousands of Sudanese refugees from Darfur and displaced Chadians could be jeopardized by a fresh outbreak of fighting in remote eastern Chad. [ ] The UN refugee agency has its local headquarters in Abeche. Its staff of 300 cares for more than 200,000 refugees from Darfur, sheltered in 12 camps. It also assists many of the 90,000 Chadians who were displaced by unrest over the past year.”

[..]

The character of the violence in eastern Chad was captured in a recent (November 15, 2006) report from Human Rights Watch (“Chad/Sudan: End Militia Attacks on Civilians: UN-AU Summit Must Strengthen International Force in Darfur and Chad”):

“Since late October [2006], Human Rights Watch has documented several incidents of indiscriminate aerial bombing of civilians in northwestern Darfur and Chad by Sudanese government forces.”

Such cross-border military attacks by Khartoum’s Antonov aircraft are consistent with the cross-border attacks on civilians involving the regime’s bombers and helicopter gunships, documented by Human Rights Watch in February 2006 (and based on a “Human Rights Watch research mission to eastern Chad in January-February 2006”):

“The government of Sudan is actively exporting the Darfur crisis to its neighbor by providing material support to Janjaweed militias [ ], by backing Chadian rebel groups that it allows to operate from bases in Darfur, and by deploying its own armed forces across the border into Chad. [ ] Attacks on Chadian civilians accelerated dramatically in the wake of a December 2005 assault on Adré, in eastern Chad, by Chadian rebels with bases in Darfur and supported by the government of Sudan.” [ ]

“On some occasions, the Janjaweed attacks [in Chad] appear to be coordinated with those of the Chadian rebels. On other occasions, Janjaweed militias have carried out attacks inside Chad accompanied by Sudanese army troops with helicopter gunship support.” (Human Rights Watch, “Darfur Bleeds: Recent Cross-Border Violence in Chad,” February 2006, page 2).

[..]
A sense of the scale of recent destruction is also offered in the recent Human Rights Watch report:

“Chadian militia groups have attacked dozens of villages in southeastern Chad over the last 10 days, killing several hundred civilians, injuring scores of people and driving at least 10,000 people from their homes. In a wave of violence that is sweeping through rural areas, villagers are defending themselves with spears and poisoned arrows against militia groups of Arab nomads armed with automatic weapons. A clear pattern has emerged in which Chadian Arab militia groups are targeting non-Arab villages in southeastern Chad.”

“Militia groups attacked as many as 60 Chadian villages separated by several hundred kilometers of rugged terrain on November 4-5 [2006] and in the week that followed. The militias then loot the villages that have been cleared of civilians. In some instances, villages are attacked or destroyed but not looted, suggesting the motive is not robbery, and the level of brutality is rising. Human Rights Watch documented several attacks where militia members mutilated men in their custody and deliberately burned women to death.”

[..] And the ethnic violence that has defined conflict in Darfur has the potential to move even further west in Chad. Lydia Polgreen of the New York Times reported from Djedidah, Chad (October 31, 2006):

“Arab men on horseback rode into her village, shouting racial epithets over the rat-tat-tat of Kalashnikov gunfire. ‘They shouted “zurga,”’ [Halima Sherif] said, an Arabic word for black [*and also a derogatory racial epithet—ER*]. ‘They told us they would take our land. They shot many people and burned our houses. We all ran away.’ Scenes like this one have been unfolding in the war-ravaged Darfur region of western Sudan for more than three years, and since the beginning of this year Sudanese Arabs have also been attacking Chadian villages just across Sudan’s porous border.”

[..] “The violence in Darfur has been spilling over into Chad since at least early this year [but] the violence around one of the other interior villages that was attacked, Kou Kou, is different and ominous, aid workers and analysts say. It appears to have been done by Chadian Arabs against non-Arab villages in Chad, and was apparently inspired by similar campaigns of violence by Sudanese Arab militias in Sudan.”

[..]“If the racial and ethnic conflict that has infected Darfur is being copied by Chad’s Arabs, then the violence spreading beyond Darfur’s borders could presage even further regional conflict, said David Buchbinder, a researcher for Human Rights Watch who specializes in Chad. ‘The racial ideology is spreading, and that is very dangerous,’ Buchbinder said.”

(via The Passion of the Present)

And this from an AFP report:

Deby’s government spokesman, Hourmadji Moussa Doumgor, accused Saudi Arabia as well as neighbouring Sudan, which denies accusations of backing rebels in Chad, of mounting “a large scale operation to destabilise it”.

“This operation bears the hand of Sudan and Saudi Arabia,” said Doumgor, who is also communications minister. “It’s Sudan and Saudi Arabia that are equipping and training mercenaries, and providing them with the necessary logistics to attack Chad today on several fronts in the east.”

Doumgor said “the international community must be aware” that Chad faced “the kind of war for the promotion of militant Islam preached by Al-Qaeda of Bin Laden, which won’t spare any country in the region.”

He alleged that “60 percent” of Nouri’s men are “young Wahabites between 13 and 17 years old … recruited in the madrassas (Koranic schools) of Jeddah, Mecca and Riyadh”.

General Mahamat Nouri leads the Union of Forces for Democracy and Development (UFDD) rebel group, which had taken control of Abeche.

Any statements coming from Deby’s government of the world’s most corrupt state are to be looked at with the highest degree of skepticism, as he is a desperate crackpot who recently fabricated reports that the United States was helping him negotiate changes to conditions imposed on Chad by the World Bank on how it can spend oil revenue (most of it must be spent on education, health, poverty reduction and a future-generations fund - notably missing are weapons, which Deby went and bought anyway). And the above sounds like a ploy to rally some international counterjihadist allies to his side. Unquestionably Sudan is supporting rebel groups in Chad - much like Chad is supporting rebel groups in Darfur. Obviously more questionable is the direct involvement of Saudi Arabia and the claim that 60% of Nouri’s men are Wahhabis recruited there. And at least some of the rebel groups are certainly not Islamist - Deby has made many enemies and there are calls for his removal from many Chadian factions, including some in his government and military. On the other hand the Chadian Arab militias described above are clearly Arab Supremacist Jihadists, much like the ones carrying out genocide in Darfur.

The Khartoum-fed cancer has spread to another country.

The Meat Sheik shake down continues.

Mona Eltahawy in the Daily Star, Nov 4: “In appreciation of the radical imams of the West” (***)

Let us appreciate the radical imams of the West. As a liberal Muslim woman I am generally loathe to express gratitude to conservative men, but the more these imams perfect the ability to say something stupid - often in Arabic, thinking that no one will find out - the more attainable they make my goal: to show that these men do not represent all Muslims.

[..] Because these radical imams, who have failed to integrate in the West, have unilaterally appointed themselves as our spokesmen - and are so readily accepted as such by the media - their shortcomings are easily projected onto the community as a whole.

[..]The imams who are sent from Arab countries usually only speak Arabic and arrive with a suitcase full of stale ideas that are woefully out of touch with the concerns of the congregations they have been sent to tend to and even more out of sync with the culture and mores of their new homes.

Take Sheikh Taj al-Din Hamid Hilaly, Australia’s top Muslim cleric who recently asked for an indefinite leave of absence from his duties after he was barred from preaching for three months over having blamed women for rape. The Egyptian-born cleric is but the latest imam whose talent for placing his foot far into his mouth has ironically done the Australian Muslim community a huge favor.

Hilaly’s outrageous words - at one point in a sermon he described women who did not dress modestly as “uncovered meat” - earned him the wrath not just of mainstream Australian society, but more importantly, of many within the Muslim community itself, including the board of the Sydney mosque where he preaches. The board should have fired him. But short of that, the three-month suspension was a clear message that many Muslims in Hilaly’s congregation refuse to condone such a hatefully misogynistic attitude.

Some Australian Muslims defended Hilaly. While I cannot understand how anyone could defend such views, I can only welcome disagreement among Muslims. What a relief to have our differences so openly aired after years of lazy stereotyping that has portrayed Muslims as a homogenous lump.

You see why I have to thank Hilaly?

[..]To further appreciate the positive consequences of the blunders of imams, take the case of Ahmed Abu Laban, the Copenhagen cleric who helped organize a trip to Egypt and Lebanon last year to rally support among Muslim leaders for protests against the Prophet drawings in Jyllands-Posten.

His claims that he spoke on behalf of all Danish Muslims did wonders for the community. For one, it motivated Naser Khader, the first Muslim member of the Danish Parliament, to launch the moderate group Democratic Muslims. More poignantly, the sight of Abu Laban saying one thing to a Danish television crew and then almost in the same breath saying the complete opposite to an Arabic TV crew inspired many to join Khader’s group.

I have spent two of the past six months in Denmark researching the lives of Muslims there. Many told me that Abu Laban’s duplicity was pivotal in inspiring them to step forward and identify themselves as Muslims who disagreed with the imam. Danish journalists have told me they do not immediately turn to Abu Laban anymore to speak for Muslims. It looks like Muslims in Denmark are slowly being allowed the differences enjoyed by other groups.

So once again, let us appreciate the radical imams of the West.

The Stern Review.

Bjorn Lomborg in the Wall Street Journal, Nov 6: “Stern scare blunted by the figures: On the dodgy economic modelling behind the latest warming beat-up”

THE report on climate change by Nicholas Stern and the British Government has sparked publicity and scary headlines across the world. Much attention has been devoted to Stern’s core argument that the price of inaction would be extraordinary and the cost of action modest.

Unfortunately, this claim falls apart when one reads the 700-page tome. Despite using many good references, the Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change is selective and its conclusion flawed. Its fear-mongering arguments have been sensationalised, which is ultimately only likely to make the world worse off.

The review correctly points out that climate change is a real problem and that it is caused by human greenhouse-gas emissions. Little else is right, however, and the report seems hastily put together, with many sloppy errors. As an example, the cost of hurricanes in the US is said to be both 0.13 per cent of US gross domestic product and 10 times that figure.

The review is also one-sided, focusing almost exclusively on carbon-emission cuts as the solution to the problem of climate change. Stern sees increasing hurricane damage in the US as a powerful argument for carbon controls. However, hurricane damage is increasing predominantly because there are more people with more goods to be damaged, settling in more risky habitats. Even if global warming does significantly increase the power of hurricanes, it is estimated that 95 per cent to 98 per cent of the increased damage will be due to demographics. The review acknowledges that simple initiatives such as bracing and securing roof trusses and walls can cheaply reduce damage by more than 80 per cent; yet its policy recommendations on expensive carbon reductions promise to cut the damage by 1 per cent to 2per cent at best. That is a bad deal.

The Darfur Genocide.

Nat Hentoff in the Washington Times, Nov 6: “Darfur genocide continues”

Investments are pouring into Lt. Gen. Omar Bashir’s Sudan from the United Arab Emirates (even though all the corpses in Darfur are of black Muslims), China, India, Malaysia and Kuwait. And a Coca-Cola factory is thriving in Khartoum. Meanwhile, the U.N.’s High Commissioner for Human Rights “is urging the government of Sudan to order an independent investigation into recent military attacks.”

Gee, maybe Sudan’s dictator, Gen. Bashir, will invite Jacob to testify as to what he saw as his 4-year-old brother was murdered by the Janjaweed before he ever went to school.

And the world’s civilized nations, including ours, refuse to combine forces to go into those killing fields lest they disrespect the august murderous sovereignty of Gen. Bashir.

Melanie Phillips expressed her view this week that re-Christianisation is vital for Europe if it is to defend its Western values against Islamisation, an opinion I happen to agree with (h/t Saint):

The crucial insight here is that only a strong indigenous faith has the capacity to resist Islamisation. That is why the collapse of Christianity in Britain and Europe and its steady replacement by secularisation is so catastrophic for the defence of the west. The useful idiots who believe that only a secular society can hold off the forces of irrational belief at the heart of the Islamic jihad have got this diametrically the wrong way round. Secularisation produces cultural enfeeblement, because the pursuit of personal happiness trumps absolutely everything else. The here and now is all that matters. Dying for a cause, however noble, becomes an absolute no-no. It’s better to be dhimmi than dead – the view that has now effectively prevailed in Britain and Europe.

[..] Although the US is the high temple of consumerism, it is still a country with a very strong sense of its Christian faith. That fact is key to its robust sense of national identity, confidence and pride; and because it has such a strong sense of itself as a nation, it is prepared to fight to defend itself – the one bit of the analysis that the Islamists got wrong (although there are now deeply disturbing signs that the west’s cultural enfeeblement is beginning to erode American resolve too, at least around the edges).

That is why the cultural cringe of the Church of England before the advance of both secularism and Islamism is such unmitigated disaster, and why the Pope’s recent intervention was so significant. That is why those who sneer at President Bush’s strong Christian faith are cultural lemmings. And that is why I, a British Jew, argue that it is vital that Britain and Europe re-Christianise if they are to have any chance of defending western values.

She has drawn sharp criticism for this statement firstly because she does not herself subscribe to the belief system she is laying her hopes on and secondly because a re-Christianised Europe seems like a wild fantasy to some considering its current state. Writes Norman Geras:

A more serious problem still is that the re-Christianization of Britain and Europe just isn’t, as things currently stand, a credible societal project. Christians have been doing their bit to spread the Christian word for a very long time now. What is suddenly going to make the difference and bring new adherents flooding in, or ‘activate’ hitherto passive or lapsed believers?

Well, I can list several factors, that may not mean much when taken alone, but in combination may do just that.

1. Hundreds of thousands of Catholic Polish migrants have moved West since the 2004 EU enlargement round - about 300,000 to Britain alone. In Poland over half the population attends mass weekly, compared to under 20% in France or Italy. Poland accounts for about a quarter of Europe’s seminarians and thousands are migrating westward. Said Father Jan-Marie Szewek: “We Franciscans want to join in the rechristianization of Europe”.

Call it the Polish pastor effect.

2.According to some estimates the world’s fastest growing religion is not Islam but Christianity. Its just that most of the growth is happening in the Third World now and it is the Pentecostal Churches that are gaining the numbers. The Catholic Church is also experiencing strong growth. And this revitalised Christianity is starting to spill over back into the West. Says a Kenyan pastor in one of the largest churches in London: “I am in this country, believing that God sent me here in Great Britain to make a voice on His behalf to let them know that they need to repent and come back to God.”
Sociologist of religion Philip Jenkins, in his book “The Next Christendom: The Rise of Global Christianity”, argues that “within the next 25 years the population of the world’s Christians is expected to grow to 2.6 billion (making Christianity by far the world’s largest faith)”. An increased percentage of Christian migrants to Europe is likely, as European politics continue to shift towards the anti-Islamic immigration right. And the Pentecostal Churches have been growing rapidly in Australia even without a significant contribution from migrants. It won’t be too big of a surprise if its takes off in Europe too. Even the presence of a large Muslim population itself may contribute to a resurgence of religiosity amongst the secular Europeans, finding themselves inspired to seek their own Christian roots, much like European secularism draws many Muslim migrants towards secularism and more liberal interpretations of Islam. By the way, according to Wikipedia (edit: which quotes bible.ca) Christianity gets 2,500,000 converts per year, compared to Islam’s 865,000. Majority Muslim nations have higher birth rates, but that advantage is dimishing - birth rates are falling in Muslim majority nations, while Christianity is gaining in other countries with high birth rates.

3. Melanie Phillips is far from being the only non-Christian in Europe who holds to the above view. Said Oriana about Pope Benedict XVI: “I am an atheist, and if an atheist and a pope think the same things, there must be something true. It’s that simple! There must be some human truth here that is beyond religion.” Upon her death Oriana left all her books and papers to Pope Benedict. She had a private audience with him last year and considered him “an ally in her campaign to rally Christians in Europe against what she saw as a Muslim crusade against the West.” This emerging alliance between the anti-Islamisation secularists and conservative Christians is as natural, even as it is as odd, as the alliance between the Islamists and the far Left. And even religion needs good publicity. Don’t also underestimate the ability of Pope Benedict himself to pump some life back into European Christianity. And by the way, why did he chose the name Benedict? Here’s why:

He was thinking of not one, but two previous Benedicts.

Saint Benedict, Benedict XVIThe first was not even a Pope. In fact, he was just a simple monk who desired nothing more than to live a quiet life of prayer and work and lead others to do the same. This Benedict, born in the 5th century in Nursia, an area of Italy, fled the decadent urban life of Rome to seek a life of solitude in the country. Monastic life was chaotic and unregulated at that time, and so this young man gathered a band of monks around him and formed a community, writing a rule of life that was so practical that it became the pattern for thousands of monks and monasteries all over the world. These monks who followed this rule ultimately were the ones who evangelized and educated Europe during the “dark ages” and are still doing the work of evangelization and education today.

It is clear that Pope Benedict XVI is dedicated to gathering around himself a band of disciples who, through prayer and hard work, will lead to the re-Christianization of Europe and to the carrying of the gospel to lands that have not yet heard it.

4. In times of trouble and hardship people turn back to religion. It is as simple as that. As conditions in Europe worsen, with the aging of the population, faultering economies and problems that have come with over-immigration, and the going gets tough, the tough, and especially the weak, will get going to church.

5. Its the demographics, stupid. From the cover story of Prospect magazine, “God returns to Europe”, by Eric Kaufmann:

Europe—especially western Europe—is seen as the world leader in secular modernisation, and is used as the model by Norris and Inglehart for their theory of secularisation. But if western Europe really is the trend-setter for secularism, there is a problem: secularisation appears to be losing force in its own backyard. Western Europe can broadly be divided in two. On the one hand are Catholic countries like Spain or Ireland, where religiosity is still high—around 60 per cent of the Irish population regularly attend church—and secularisation arrived only in the second half of the 20th century. On the other are the largely Protestant nations (including Britain) and Catholic France, which secularised earlier. But survey data from 1981-2004 show that in these latter nations, on average, postwar generations are no longer becoming more secular. It seems as though western Europe, with the possible exception of Italy, will converge towards a church attendance rate of little more than 5 per cent. However this will mask a much larger proportion—around half—who continue to describe themselves as religious and affiliate with a religious denomination.

These people, described by Grace Davie as “believing without belonging,” are seen by some as carriers of a flimsy faith which will soon disappear, and which doesn’t affect behaviour or attitudes. But if this is the case, how do we explain the fact that the fertility of these non-attending believers is much closer to church attenders than to non-believers? The non-attending religious are also significantly more likely than non-believers to identify themselves as ideologically conservative, even when controlling for education, wealth, age and generation. And the religious population has two demographic advantages over its non-believing counterpart. First, it maintains a 15-20 per cent fertility lead over the non-religious. Second, religious people in the childbearing 18-45 age range are disproportionately female. Offset against this is the much younger age structure of secularists.

The pivotal question is where the balance lies between religious fertility and religious abandonment in the secular cutting-edge societies of France and Protestant Europe. The population balance in these countries stands at roughly 53 per cent non-religious to 47 per cent religious. My projections, based on demographic differences between the populations and current patterns of religious abandonment, suggest that the secular population will continue to grow at a decelerating rate for three or four more decades, to peak at around 55 per cent. The proportion of secular people will then begin to decline between 2035 and 2045. The momentum behind secularisation in the most secular countries is a reflection of the religious abandonment of the pre-1945 generations, which overwhelmed the fertility advantage of the faithful. The end of apostasy in more recent generations means a population more religious at the end of the 21st century than at its beginning. As in the case of the Mormons or early Christians, demography rather than mass conversion will be the main agent of change.

He then adds the compounding significance of immigration to the equation:

This slow shift against secularisation would have only a gradual impact on the spirit of European society were it not for immigration. Immigration from Latin America has enabled American Catholics to grow despite losing far more believers to other denominations than they get in return. In Europe, immigration will similarly drive the rise of the religious population, especially its Islamic part.

However, due to factors I have already mentioned above, Islam’s immigration advantage is likely to diminish while that of Christianity is likely to grow.

So lets not write off European Christianity just yet.

UPDATE: Michael Burleigh with a couple more possibilities in the Telegraph, Nov 7:

What he [Nick Spencer of the Theos think tank in Britain] describes as a new, diffuse concern with “wellbeing” will inevitably make religion more important to politics, in that politicians will have to address an essentially religious agenda, based on values and ultimate meanings, of the sort with which Senator McCain electrified the Conservatives when he addressed their party conference.

It is also probable that infantile Islamic enragement, and the sillier provocations of “diversity” officers in local government, will sooner rather than later trigger a much broader revival of cultural Christianity, as people balk at the insensitive disregard of this country’s two-millennia-old religious traditions, which are far from defunct in the moral imaginations of many.