The recent public comments by Malaysian prime minister Mahathir Mohammad, to the effect that Jews “rule the world”, and those made by US Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence Lt. General William Boykin, to the effect that Moslem warriors worship Satan, have set off a series of articles in the Arab press on the clash of cultures between Islam and the Jewish and Christian worlds.
The Arab News English-language newspaper, out of Saudi Arabia, recently carried an article expressing the Arab view that Islam is “demonized” in the West just a day prior to the aforementioned comments by Mahathir. “If not faced and destroyed...” the article contended, that demonization “could result in a new holocaust, the victims this time Moslems.” The writer continued with some examples of the “defamation of Moslems in the international media. Moslem equals terrorist; Moslem equals killer; Moslem equals fanatic; Moslems want to take over the world, to kill Americans, to kill Westerners; they have the money behind them to carry out these plans.”
The article goes on to make the Holocaust analogy explicit: “The experience of Europe's Jews in the first half of the 20th century provides a frightening parallel. In newspapers and books, on the radio, at public meetings, from pulpits, in restaurants and cafes, they were similarly demonized: The Jews killed and ate babies; they were plotting to take over the world; they used their wealth to further such plans. The message was persistent and went deep into the public psyche. That led to the gas ovens.”
Even the defensive Saudi article, however, is forced to admit that the Western defamation “has been further fueled by the words and deeds of the handful of alienated Moslem bigots and associated psychopaths who indeed want to lash out at the West.”
A day later, Mahathir made his now-infamous comments regarding Jewish conspiracies and power, which led to more defensive comments in the Arab press. London’s al-Quds al-Arabi wrote in response to the world condemnation of the Malay leader that “Mahathir Mohamad is being subjected to a fierce terror attack from Israeli, American and European officials because of his speech at the Islamic summit about the Jews dominating international decision-making and using it to start wars against Moslems.” The newspaper went on to echo Mahathir’s accusations, and to add some conspiracy charges of its own: “The so-called US war against terrorism is an Israeli war initiated in the Jewish state’s interests. The aim of occupying Iraq and changing its regime was not to protect the Iraqi people… it was to lay the foundation for Israel’s total domination of the region… the reason for our hatred of Zionist groups is their policy of destroying our homes, killing our children, displacing our families and occupying our country not the fact that they are Jewish or Christian.”
In Iran, the Arabic-language newspaper al-Vefagh also came to Mahathir’s defense, saying that his statements were “based on history, which represents reality in the hearts of Moslems. He spoke about what has been the cause of hatred against (Jews) for many decades…”
In Lebanon, a columnist for an-Nahar newspaper wrote of the best way for the Islamic world to “confront” Jewish and Christian beliefs. Only with “dynamic diplomacy”. As the writer notes, even Iran’s President Mohammad Khatami said, “There is no place for Al-Qaeda among us… because terrorism gives our religion a bad image.”
Then came the publication of comments by US Lt. General Boykin. An a-Sharq columnist, in Beirut, characterized Boykin’s statement as an accusation against Moslems of “idolatry.” Such comments, the columnist contended, prove that the US is involved in a war against Islam, while the “war on terror” is just camouflage. The war in Iraq, for instance, according to the writer, was a war aimed at “reining in Moslems” and not to topple Saddam Hussein. Recalling the international reaction to Mahathir’s public remarks, the columnist continued, the “provocative anti-Islam remarks made by a prominent US army general are yet to receive such condemnation.”
Egypt’s al-Wafd carried a column expressing Moslem despair at changing Western minds regarding Islam. “Muslims try to extend their hands in peace and friendship,” the writer claimed, “but they gain nothing but insults and regret. Western leaders have disregarded all OIC Summit recommendations to focus instead on Mahathir Mohamad’s remarks questioning why 1.3 billion Muslims could not stand up to a few Jews. Those very leaders, however, could not move a finger in protest of the remarks made by a top US aid, in which he described the war on terror as a crusade, a war between Christianity and Islam.”
The Arab News English-language newspaper, out of Saudi Arabia, recently carried an article expressing the Arab view that Islam is “demonized” in the West just a day prior to the aforementioned comments by Mahathir. “If not faced and destroyed...” the article contended, that demonization “could result in a new holocaust, the victims this time Moslems.” The writer continued with some examples of the “defamation of Moslems in the international media. Moslem equals terrorist; Moslem equals killer; Moslem equals fanatic; Moslems want to take over the world, to kill Americans, to kill Westerners; they have the money behind them to carry out these plans.”
The article goes on to make the Holocaust analogy explicit: “The experience of Europe's Jews in the first half of the 20th century provides a frightening parallel. In newspapers and books, on the radio, at public meetings, from pulpits, in restaurants and cafes, they were similarly demonized: The Jews killed and ate babies; they were plotting to take over the world; they used their wealth to further such plans. The message was persistent and went deep into the public psyche. That led to the gas ovens.”
Even the defensive Saudi article, however, is forced to admit that the Western defamation “has been further fueled by the words and deeds of the handful of alienated Moslem bigots and associated psychopaths who indeed want to lash out at the West.”
A day later, Mahathir made his now-infamous comments regarding Jewish conspiracies and power, which led to more defensive comments in the Arab press. London’s al-Quds al-Arabi wrote in response to the world condemnation of the Malay leader that “Mahathir Mohamad is being subjected to a fierce terror attack from Israeli, American and European officials because of his speech at the Islamic summit about the Jews dominating international decision-making and using it to start wars against Moslems.” The newspaper went on to echo Mahathir’s accusations, and to add some conspiracy charges of its own: “The so-called US war against terrorism is an Israeli war initiated in the Jewish state’s interests. The aim of occupying Iraq and changing its regime was not to protect the Iraqi people… it was to lay the foundation for Israel’s total domination of the region… the reason for our hatred of Zionist groups is their policy of destroying our homes, killing our children, displacing our families and occupying our country not the fact that they are Jewish or Christian.”
In Iran, the Arabic-language newspaper al-Vefagh also came to Mahathir’s defense, saying that his statements were “based on history, which represents reality in the hearts of Moslems. He spoke about what has been the cause of hatred against (Jews) for many decades…”
In Lebanon, a columnist for an-Nahar newspaper wrote of the best way for the Islamic world to “confront” Jewish and Christian beliefs. Only with “dynamic diplomacy”. As the writer notes, even Iran’s President Mohammad Khatami said, “There is no place for Al-Qaeda among us… because terrorism gives our religion a bad image.”
Then came the publication of comments by US Lt. General Boykin. An a-Sharq columnist, in Beirut, characterized Boykin’s statement as an accusation against Moslems of “idolatry.” Such comments, the columnist contended, prove that the US is involved in a war against Islam, while the “war on terror” is just camouflage. The war in Iraq, for instance, according to the writer, was a war aimed at “reining in Moslems” and not to topple Saddam Hussein. Recalling the international reaction to Mahathir’s public remarks, the columnist continued, the “provocative anti-Islam remarks made by a prominent US army general are yet to receive such condemnation.”
Egypt’s al-Wafd carried a column expressing Moslem despair at changing Western minds regarding Islam. “Muslims try to extend their hands in peace and friendship,” the writer claimed, “but they gain nothing but insults and regret. Western leaders have disregarded all OIC Summit recommendations to focus instead on Mahathir Mohamad’s remarks questioning why 1.3 billion Muslims could not stand up to a few Jews. Those very leaders, however, could not move a finger in protest of the remarks made by a top US aid, in which he described the war on terror as a crusade, a war between Christianity and Islam.”