When contacts with al-Ikhwan are undeniable, its leaders say “I have been in touch with it when I was a University student”, or the like. In Britain there even exist a Web site of the Muslim Brotherhood,
http://www.ummah.org.uk/ikhwan/
and it bears the advice “The maintainer of this page is not a member of Al-Ikhwan patry [sic] and does not approve or agree with everything they say. This page is there for the soul perpose [sic] of answering the questions you always had and never knew who to ask. This page has no political perpose [sic] of any kind and no connection what so ever to any organization or institution.” This shows how members of the Muslim Brotherhood are ready to verbally deny their membership at the same moment that they engage in propaganda for it.
Notwithstanding this secrecy, experts know that the organization exists, is active, and is powerful through funds it receives from affluent Saudi princes. It does not operate in its own name, but under the name of its different local branches. In Israel it is called Hamas, in Italy it is called “Union of the Islamic Communities and Organizations in Italy (UCOII), while in North America it is divided into different sub-sections, such as AMSS (Association Of Muslim Social Scientists), CSID (Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy), IANA (Islamic Assembly of North America), ICNA (Islamic Circle of North America), ISNA (Islamic Society of North America), ICSC (Islamic Center of Southern California), IIIT (International Institute of Islamic Thought), IISS (Islamic Institute of Social Sciences), MAYA (Muslim Arab Youth Association), MPAC (Muslim Public Affairs Council), MYNA (Muslim Youth of North America), TINA (Tanzim-e Islami North America), UASR (United Association for Study and Research), WAMY (World Assembly of Muslim Youth), WISE (World and Islam Study Enterprise), while CAIR plays the role of coordinator of all of them.
CAIR is deeply related to Hamas from the very beginning, since it was founded in 1994 by militants of a pre-existing organization the Islamic Association for Palestine. The IAP itself was founded by Hamas leader Mousa Mohammed Abu Marzook. In 1996, the U.S. government deported Marzook, and CAIR vehemently protested.
One of CAIR's original advisory board members, Siraj Wahhaj, served as a character witness for Omar Abdel Rahman, the blind Egyptian cleric convicted in 1995 of conspiracy to bomb New York landmarks. CAIR described Rahman's conviction as a “hate crime”.
In 2003 the U.S. Congress hosted a hearing titled “Two Years After 9/11: Connecting the Dots”. CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad and Chairman Omar Ahmed were invited to testify at the hearing, but both declined to attend. In their absence the committee heard “compelling evidence that Saudi Arabia financially and ideologically supports a network of American organizations that act as the defenders, financiers, and front groups of international terrorists. CAIR has been a major player in this network since its creation in 1994, with a particularly soft spot for the suicide-bombing death squads of Hamas.” As a matter of fact, before being appointed as CAIR Executive Director, Mr. Awad was Public Relations Director for IAP, an organization which worked to collect funds for Hamas in the U.S. and even published the Hamas charter in English. Awad himself publicly declared, “I am in support of the Hamas movement” at a 1994 forum at Barry University in Florida.
Ismail Randall Todd Royer, a communications specialist at CAIR's Washington headquarters, pleaded guilty in January, 2004, to belonging to the Kashmiri Lashkar-e Taiba terrorist group and illegally acquiring firearms and explosives in order to train for terrorist missions against India. He was sentenced to 20 years in prison.
This is far from being an exception. In September, 2003, CAIR community relations director Bassem K. Khafagi, pleaded guilty on immigration and bank-fraud charges; in Detroit. Khafagi co-owned a print shop with another man who has since been charged with illegally sending goods into Iraq. In July, 2004, a founding member of CAIR's Texas chapter, Ghassen Elashi, was convicted of conspiracy and money-laundering charges in connection with the shipment of high-technology items to Syria and Libya. Before he become IAP's President, Rafeeq Jaber was a founding director of CAIR and a member of the board of the outlawed Holy Land Foundation, a “charity” collecting funds for Hamas in the U.S. Mohammed Nimer, who directs CAIR's Research Center, was on the board of the UASR, identified as a strategic arm of Hamas in the U.S.; in turn, the UASR was also founded by Hamas leader Marzook. Ibrahim Hooper, CAIR's Director of Communications, who also worked for the IAP. This shows how easy it is for the members of the Muslim Brotherhood to move from one position and from one organization into another section of the same network.
When New York Senator Chuck Schumer says that CAIR members have "intimate links to Hamas" he is totally right. Those links simply depend on their role as two different peripherical branches of the same secret terrorist organization, i.e. the Muslim Brotherhood.
IsraPundit: Similarly, is there an established connection between CAIR Canada and terrorist organizations?
Sheikh Palazzi: In contrast with what happened with CAIR U.S., no criminal charges have ever been filed against CAIR Canada or any of its officers. Even so, the links between the two organizations do exist, and are not limited to the name. On its Web site and in its publications, CAIR lists CAIR Canada as one of its local affiliates, giving it the same status as a state or regional CAIR chapter. On December 30, 2004, both CAIR and CAIR Canada were named as defendants in 9/11 Terror Lawsuit. One reads therein: “Council on American Islamic Relations and CAIR Canada […] have aided, abetted, and materially sponsored and al Qaeda and international terrorism. CAIR is an outgrowth of the Hamas front group the Islamic Association of Palestine. The FBI's former associate director in charge of Investigative and Counter-Intelligence Operations described the Islamic Association of Palestine as an organization that has directly supported Hamas military goals and is a front organization for Hamas that engages in propaganda for Islamic militants. It has produced videotapes that are very hate-filled, full of vehement propaganda. It is an organization that has supported direct confrontation […].CAIR and CAIR-Canada have, since their inception, been part of the criminal conspiracy of radical Islamic terrorism. These organizations play a unique role in the terrorist network. They emanate from the notorious HAMAS terrorist organization and like so many of the terrorism facilitating charities named and indicted by the United States government they are engaged in fund raising under the guise of assisting humanitarian causes they are, in reality, a key player in international terrorism.”
I hope the related trial will contribute to make the connections between CAIR, CAIR Canada, Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood even more evident and documented.
IsraPundit: If the connection between CAIR and terror is clear cut, how do you explain that the governments of both the US and Canada have not cracked down on CAIR, and in fact, the State Department sends its representative to speak at a CAIR meeting?
Sheikh Palazzi: I cannot explain it except by mentioning the role of oil power in the contemporary world.
Evidence connecting the House of Saud to al-Qa’ida, to Hamas, to the Muslim Brotherhood and to other terrorist organizations are clear cut, but the civilized nations seem to be afraid to take an uncompromised step to identify their enemy and the fifth columns within.
When asked whether he was afraid of the consequences of 9/11 on U.S.-Saudi relations, Crown Prince Abdullah answered by saying, “There is no risk, since we control them, but they do not control us.” I am compelled to say that with the passage of time, I become increasingly convinced that his claim is valid. Prince Abdullah and his family have invested billions in funding both al-Qa’ida and Hamas, and still they are received as honoured guests in Washington as before.
I hoped 9/11 would open the eyes of the U.S. public, but things didn’t turn out that way. The War on Terror targeted the Taliban and Saddam Hussein, but left the Saudis unpunished; Saudi Arabia is not even listed among the rogue states which fund terrorism, and George W. Bush can even claim that “Saudis are our allies in the War on Terror”, i.e. in the war against those terrorists who were funded by Saudi Arabia itself from the very beginning.
I cannot avoid saying that the White House’s foreign policy appears to me extremely contradictory. It proclaimed goal is “spreading democracy”. In the Middle East there now exists a single democracy and a single reliable US ally, i.e., Israel. And what is the White House doing? It is compelling Israel to withdraw from Judea, Samaria and Gaza, in order to permit the creation of a State lead by the terrorist of the Olympic Games of Munich and Holocaust-denier Abu Mazen. Democracy is humiliated, and terrorists are rewarded by being perceived as statesmen. President Bush goes on campaigning for “a State for the PNA”, and the PNA thanks him by arranging demonstrations where the Stars and Stripes flags are burned.
Taking all this into consideration, the fact that the State Department sends its representative to speak at a CAIR meeting should not be a surprise. It means appeasing the Saudis, exactly like implementing the Road Map.
IsraPundit: On another issue, I’d like to ask for your opinion concerning a report that Oriana Fallaci is being sued for defaming the Koran. What is your position on this issue?
Sheikh Palazzi: According to my knowledge, Oriana Fallaci has not been sued in Italy for “defaming the Koran” (a penal offence which does not exist in Italian legislation) but for “defaming religion”.
The act which considers “defaming religion”, a penal offence, was passed in the ’30’s, after the Agreement between the Italian government and the Vatican which ended the conflict between Italy and the Catholic Church and permitted the foundation of the Vatican City State. That agreement declared Catholicism to be “the only religion of the State”, and the legislation was upgraded to make defamation of religion a penal offence.
“Defamation of religion” was consequently understood as meaning “defamation of the State religion”. The same Italy-Vatican Agreement was revised in the ’80’s, and Catholicism ceased to be “the State religion”. Italy became a non-confessional State wherein – as our Constitution states – “all religions are equally free in front of the law”. The Anti Religion Defamation Act, however, was not abolished. On the contrary, our Supreme Court stated that “the act must be understood as referring to defamation of any religion which is believed by Italian citizens”.
Criticizing existing religions from the point of another religion, from the point of view of secularism, etc., is obviously part of freedom of speech and legal, but slandering religions, insulting their representatives and especially instigating hatred toward their believers is a crime. I am convinced that Ms. Fallaci is violating Italian law in her articles and books, is circulating false and slandering information about Islam, is instigating hatred against Italian citizens on the base of their religious identity, and consequently I hope she will be tried and duly punished. She openly writes that any Italian Muslim is a fifth column of terrorism and a potential Bin Laden, and I think this is a kind of hate crime no civil society should permit.
I regret that the one who sued her, a certain Adel Smith, is a psychopathologic subject, who is himself guilty of defaming Catholicism and instigating hatred against Catholics and against the Catholic Church. That person likes getting publicity at all costs, and has no right to claim he represents Muslims. However, Ms. Fallaci was already sued in European courts. In France she was absolved and in Switzerland she was found guilty.
Regarding France, I appreciate the fact that she was sued by the League Against Racism and Antisemitism (LICRA), the same organization which sued Garaudy, Irving and other revisionist writers. I think racist and hate propaganda must be fought irrespective of which ethnic group is targeted. That Ms. Fallaci deprecates antisemitism cannot cover her role in promoting a Ku-Klux-Klan-like campaign targeting any individual who happened to be a Muslim. That is the reason why I appreciate that those European intellectuals who form LICRA sued her, and why I hope for an exemplar punishment and for the ban of the hate- literature she produces.
From a more general point of view, I must say that if terrorism is causing a person like Mr. Fallaci to become so popular, this is surely a point in favour of terrorism itself. Until ten years ago, no Italian newspaper and no Italian editor would have published articles and books which contain uncontrolled manifestations of the most trivial and hysterical racism. Bin Laden wants the Muslims to assimilate a black-and-white perspective: “we” against “them”. “We” represent “good” and “they” represent “evil”. Oriana Fallaci thinks exactly the same, and wants to misrepresent the war on terror as a new crusade, as a war between “Christianity” and “Islam” has she conceives them. Before 9/11, what Ms. Fallaci writes would be considered the fruit of hysteria of a sick mind, fond of crusades and new wars of religion. Now her positions are to some extent getting popular. The “strength of hysteria” which characterized Ms. Fallaci’s writings is actually replacing the real “strength of reason”, i.e. the ability to efface a threat through rational discourse..
IsraPundit: A Newsweek report about the Koran desecration in Guantanamo has caused a storm in the Arab world and has resulted in the deaths of many people. What is your assessment?
Sheikh Palazzi: In my opinion, what happened shows how deeply anti-Americanism is rooted in the Arab world, and how religious feelings can be easily inflamed in order to promote anti-American hatred.
To propagate that kind of hatred, rumours are enough, and there is no need for information to be confirmed. People who never protest when their regimes daily desecrate the Koran by violating basic human rights, by denying the Muslims their right to a safe future under the protection of the law, are nevertheless ready to demonstrate, to riot and even to kill, in order to permit their hatred for America to explode.
On May 16, Fouad Ajami published on the Wall Street Journal an article in which the contemporary Arab world is described as “Bush Country”, as an area whose inhabitants are thankful to President Bush for the “temptation of democracy” that “George W. Bush has brought to their doorstep.” Rhetoric apart, the consequences of Newsweek’s report show that the reality is quite different from wishful thinking. Anti-American hatred has become a common feeling in the Arab street, and no effective step was taken to stop those who manipulate it.
Resorting to American technology, Al-Jazeera TV network has become the most powerful instrument in changing millions of Arabs into staunch enemies of America, and none seems to care about it. The Emir of Qatar, the one who funded the creation of that huge network of anti-American propaganda, is still regarded as a “friend of America”, and even as a personal friend of President Bush. The same happened with those Saudi princes who have been funding al-Qa’ida for years. The autocratic dictators of Saudi Arabia and Qatar go on being treated as “friends of America”, and continue to invest in anti-American propaganda exactly like they did before 9/11.
The same Emir of Qatar also permitted to Dr. Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the leading ideologue of suicide terrorism, to make Qatar a base for the worldwide system of pro-terror Islamist banks and charities. As a consequence, Arab businessmen who want to strengthen their position inside the global market are almost compelled to compromise with that system, which means getting involved in that financial Wahhabi network which has its headquarters in Qatar and its branch in all those parts of the world were anti-American hatred is cultivated.
As opposed to Mr. Ajami, I am by no means optimistic about the immediate future. Some “experts” inside the U.S. State Department are now suggesting that in order to win the war on terror against “terrorist Islamists”, the U.S. must reach a “global agreement” with “political Islamists”, i.e. with the leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood. In other words, Wahhabi terrorism is actually winning the war, in the sense that its terror attacks actually contribute to making Wahhabi politicians more powerful and more influential inside Western society. To make a clear example, the leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, Dr. Yusuf al-Qaradawi, was recently received as a honoured guest by the Mayor of London. British soldiers are daily targeted in Iraq, together with the other soldiers of the Coalition, and the Mayor of London claims that the one who calls them “legitimate targets” is a “moderate Muslim scholar” who is welcome to Britain.
As long as European politicians behave in this manner, the only alternative left to concerned Europeans is embracing Ms. Fallaci’s racism. The space for a rational alternative between those who call ideologues of terror “moderate scholars” and those who depict every Muslim as a potential terrorist is getting narrower and narrower by the day.
An IsraPundit e-interview with Prof Palazzi
Editor's note
Recently, the press reported about three issues related to Islam: the State Department representative talk to CAIR, the Oriana Fallaci affair, and the desecration of the Koran in Guantanamo. I asked Sheikh Palazzi to comment on the three issues, and with his permission, I am posting his responses below.
To read more of Sheikh Palazzi’s commentary, use our search engine, which is located just above the calendar in the right-hand column of IsraPundit. Scroll down to the search engine and enter “Palazzi”.
IsraPundit: On May 14, 2005, World Net Daily published a story entitled, “State Dept. official to address Islam lobby”. The article quotes you as having stated,
Similarly, the article quotes Matthew Levitt, senior fellow in terrorism studies at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, as having stated:
My question is this: what reliable documentation establishes the connection between CAIR on the one hand, and Hamas/Moslem Brotherhood on the other hand?
Sheikh Palazzi: First of all, one must fully understand the nature of the Muslim Brotherhood (al-Ikhwan). It is a secret organization inside which positions of leadership is inherited from father to son. From this point of view, it is similar to Mafia. It hates publicity, and no document actually proves its existence. Were one to look for the Constituent Act or for the Statutes of the Muslim Brotherhood, one would never be able to find them. Members of the organization in most of cases claim it simply does not exist, and if it exists they have never been in touch with it.
When contacts with al-Ikhwan are undeniable, its leaders say “I have been in touch with it when I was a University student”, or the like. In Britain there even exist a Web site of the Muslim Brotherhood,
http://www.ummah.org.uk/ikhwan/
and it bears the advice “The maintainer of this page is not a member of Al-Ikhwan patry [sic] and does not approve or agree with everything they say. This page is there for the soul perpose [sic] of answering the questions you always had and never knew who to ask. This page has no political perpose [sic] of any kind and no connection what so ever to any organization or institution.” This shows how members of the Muslim Brotherhood are ready to verbally deny their membership at the same moment that they engage in propaganda for it.
Notwithstanding this secrecy, experts know that the organization exists, is active, and is powerful through funds it receives from affluent Saudi princes. It does not operate in its own name, but under the name of its different local branches. In Israel it is called Hamas, in Italy it is called “Union of the Islamic Communities and Organizations in Italy (UCOII), while in North America it is divided into different sub-sections, such as AMSS (Association Of Muslim Social Scientists), CSID (Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy), IANA (Islamic Assembly of North America), ICNA (Islamic Circle of North America), ISNA (Islamic Society of North America), ICSC (Islamic Center of Southern California), IIIT (International Institute of Islamic Thought), IISS (Islamic Institute of Social Sciences), MAYA (Muslim Arab Youth Association), MPAC (Muslim Public Affairs Council), MYNA (Muslim Youth of North America), TINA (Tanzim-e Islami North America), UASR (United Association for Study and Research), WAMY (World Assembly of Muslim Youth), WISE (World and Islam Study Enterprise), while CAIR plays the role of coordinator of all of them.
CAIR is deeply related to Hamas from the very beginning, since it was founded in 1994 by militants of a pre-existing organization the Islamic Association for Palestine. The IAP itself was founded by Hamas leader Mousa Mohammed Abu Marzook. In 1996, the U.S. government deported Marzook, and CAIR vehemently protested.
One of CAIR's original advisory board members, Siraj Wahhaj, served as a character witness for Omar Abdel Rahman, the blind Egyptian cleric convicted in 1995 of conspiracy to bomb New York landmarks. CAIR described Rahman's conviction as a “hate crime”.
In 2003 the U.S. Congress hosted a hearing titled “Two Years After 9/11: Connecting the Dots”. CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad and Chairman Omar Ahmed were invited to testify at the hearing, but both declined to attend. In their absence the committee heard “compelling evidence that Saudi Arabia financially and ideologically supports a network of American organizations that act as the defenders, financiers, and front groups of international terrorists. CAIR has been a major player in this network since its creation in 1994, with a particularly soft spot for the suicide-bombing death squads of Hamas.” As a matter of fact, before being appointed as CAIR Executive Director, Mr. Awad was Public Relations Director for IAP, an organization which worked to collect funds for Hamas in the U.S. and even published the Hamas charter in English. Awad himself publicly declared, “I am in support of the Hamas movement” at a 1994 forum at Barry University in Florida.
Ismail Randall Todd Royer, a communications specialist at CAIR's Washington headquarters, pleaded guilty in January, 2004, to belonging to the Kashmiri Lashkar-e Taiba terrorist group and illegally acquiring firearms and explosives in order to train for terrorist missions against India. He was sentenced to 20 years in prison.
This is far from being an exception. In September, 2003, CAIR community relations director Bassem K. Khafagi, pleaded guilty on immigration and bank-fraud charges; in Detroit. Khafagi co-owned a print shop with another man who has since been charged with illegally sending goods into Iraq. In July, 2004, a founding member of CAIR's Texas chapter, Ghassen Elashi, was convicted of conspiracy and money-laundering charges in connection with the shipment of high-technology items to Syria and Libya. Before he become IAP's President, Rafeeq Jaber was a founding director of CAIR and a member of the board of the outlawed Holy Land Foundation, a “charity” collecting funds for Hamas in the U.S. Mohammed Nimer, who directs CAIR's Research Center, was on the board of the UASR, identified as a strategic arm of Hamas in the U.S.; in turn, the UASR was also founded by Hamas leader Marzook. Ibrahim Hooper, CAIR's Director of Communications, who also worked for the IAP. This shows how easy it is for the members of the Muslim Brotherhood to move from one position and from one organization into another section of the same network.
When New York Senator Chuck Schumer says that CAIR members have "intimate links to Hamas" he is totally right. Those links simply depend on their role as two different peripherical branches of the same secret terrorist organization, i.e. the Muslim Brotherhood.
IsraPundit: Similarly, is there an established connection between CAIR Canada and terrorist organizations?
Sheikh Palazzi: In contrast with what happened with CAIR U.S., no criminal charges have ever been filed against CAIR Canada or any of its officers. Even so, the links between the two organizations do exist, and are not limited to the name. On its Web site and in its publications, CAIR lists CAIR Canada as one of its local affiliates, giving it the same status as a state or regional CAIR chapter. On December 30, 2004, both CAIR and CAIR Canada were named as defendants in 9/11 Terror Lawsuit. One reads therein: “Council on American Islamic Relations and CAIR Canada […] have aided, abetted, and materially sponsored and al Qaeda and international terrorism. CAIR is an outgrowth of the Hamas front group the Islamic Association of Palestine. The FBI's former associate director in charge of Investigative and Counter-Intelligence Operations described the Islamic Association of Palestine as an organization that has directly supported Hamas military goals and is a front organization for Hamas that engages in propaganda for Islamic militants. It has produced videotapes that are very hate-filled, full of vehement propaganda. It is an organization that has supported direct confrontation […].CAIR and CAIR-Canada have, since their inception, been part of the criminal conspiracy of radical Islamic terrorism. These organizations play a unique role in the terrorist network. They emanate from the notorious HAMAS terrorist organization and like so many of the terrorism facilitating charities named and indicted by the United States government they are engaged in fund raising under the guise of assisting humanitarian causes they are, in reality, a key player in international terrorism.”
I hope the related trial will contribute to make the connections between CAIR, CAIR Canada, Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood even more evident and documented.
IsraPundit: If the connection between CAIR and terror is clear cut, how do you explain that the governments of both the US and Canada have not cracked down on CAIR, and in fact, the State Department sends its representative to speak at a CAIR meeting?
Sheikh Palazzi: I cannot explain it except by mentioning the role of oil power in the contemporary world.
Evidence connecting the House of Saud to al-Qa’ida, to Hamas, to the Muslim Brotherhood and to other terrorist organizations are clear cut, but the civilized nations seem to be afraid to take an uncompromised step to identify their enemy and the fifth columns within.
When asked whether he was afraid of the consequences of 9/11 on U.S.-Saudi relations, Crown Prince Abdullah answered by saying, “There is no risk, since we control them, but they do not control us.” I am compelled to say that with the passage of time, I become increasingly convinced that his claim is valid. Prince Abdullah and his family have invested billions in funding both al-Qa’ida and Hamas, and still they are received as honoured guests in Washington as before.
I hoped 9/11 would open the eyes of the U.S. public, but things didn’t turn out that way. The War on Terror targeted the Taliban and Saddam Hussein, but left the Saudis unpunished; Saudi Arabia is not even listed among the rogue states which fund terrorism, and George W. Bush can even claim that “Saudis are our allies in the War on Terror”, i.e. in the war against those terrorists who were funded by Saudi Arabia itself from the very beginning.
I cannot avoid saying that the White House’s foreign policy appears to me extremely contradictory. It proclaimed goal is “spreading democracy”. In the Middle East there now exists a single democracy and a single reliable US ally, i.e., Israel. And what is the White House doing? It is compelling Israel to withdraw from Judea, Samaria and Gaza, in order to permit the creation of a State lead by the terrorist of the Olympic Games of Munich and Holocaust-denier Abu Mazen. Democracy is humiliated, and terrorists are rewarded by being perceived as statesmen. President Bush goes on campaigning for “a State for the PNA”, and the PNA thanks him by arranging demonstrations where the Stars and Stripes flags are burned.
Taking all this into consideration, the fact that the State Department sends its representative to speak at a CAIR meeting should not be a surprise. It means appeasing the Saudis, exactly like implementing the Road Map.
IsraPundit: On another issue, I’d like to ask for your opinion concerning a report that Oriana Fallaci is being sued for defaming the Koran. What is your position on this issue?
Sheikh Palazzi: According to my knowledge, Oriana Fallaci has not been sued in Italy for “defaming the Koran” (a penal offence which does not exist in Italian legislation) but for “defaming religion”.
The act which considers “defaming religion”, a penal offence, was passed in the ’30’s, after the Agreement between the Italian government and the Vatican which ended the conflict between Italy and the Catholic Church and permitted the foundation of the Vatican City State. That agreement declared Catholicism to be “the only religion of the State”, and the legislation was upgraded to make defamation of religion a penal offence.
“Defamation of religion” was consequently understood as meaning “defamation of the State religion”. The same Italy-Vatican Agreement was revised in the ’80’s, and Catholicism ceased to be “the State religion”. Italy became a non-confessional State wherein – as our Constitution states – “all religions are equally free in front of the law”. The Anti Religion Defamation Act, however, was not abolished. On the contrary, our Supreme Court stated that “the act must be understood as referring to defamation of any religion which is believed by Italian citizens”.
Criticizing existing religions from the point of another religion, from the point of view of secularism, etc., is obviously part of freedom of speech and legal, but slandering religions, insulting their representatives and especially instigating hatred toward their believers is a crime. I am convinced that Ms. Fallaci is violating Italian law in her articles and books, is circulating false and slandering information about Islam, is instigating hatred against Italian citizens on the base of their religious identity, and consequently I hope she will be tried and duly punished. She openly writes that any Italian Muslim is a fifth column of terrorism and a potential Bin Laden, and I think this is a kind of hate crime no civil society should permit.
I regret that the one who sued her, a certain Adel Smith, is a psychopathologic subject, who is himself guilty of defaming Catholicism and instigating hatred against Catholics and against the Catholic Church. That person likes getting publicity at all costs, and has no right to claim he represents Muslims. However, Ms. Fallaci was already sued in European courts. In France she was absolved and in Switzerland she was found guilty.
Regarding France, I appreciate the fact that she was sued by the League Against Racism and Antisemitism (LICRA), the same organization which sued Garaudy, Irving and other revisionist writers. I think racist and hate propaganda must be fought irrespective of which ethnic group is targeted. That Ms. Fallaci deprecates antisemitism cannot cover her role in promoting a Ku-Klux-Klan-like campaign targeting any individual who happened to be a Muslim. That is the reason why I appreciate that those European intellectuals who form LICRA sued her, and why I hope for an exemplar punishment and for the ban of the hate- literature she produces.
From a more general point of view, I must say that if terrorism is causing a person like Mr. Fallaci to become so popular, this is surely a point in favour of terrorism itself. Until ten years ago, no Italian newspaper and no Italian editor would have published articles and books which contain uncontrolled manifestations of the most trivial and hysterical racism. Bin Laden wants the Muslims to assimilate a black-and-white perspective: “we” against “them”. “We” represent “good” and “they” represent “evil”. Oriana Fallaci thinks exactly the same, and wants to misrepresent the war on terror as a new crusade, as a war between “Christianity” and “Islam” has she conceives them. Before 9/11, what Ms. Fallaci writes would be considered the fruit of hysteria of a sick mind, fond of crusades and new wars of religion. Now her positions are to some extent getting popular. The “strength of hysteria” which characterized Ms. Fallaci’s writings is actually replacing the real “strength of reason”, i.e. the ability to efface a threat through rational discourse..
IsraPundit: A Newsweek report about the Koran desecration in Guantanamo has caused a storm in the Arab world and has resulted in the deaths of many people. What is your assessment?
Sheikh Palazzi: In my opinion, what happened shows how deeply anti-Americanism is rooted in the Arab world, and how religious feelings can be easily inflamed in order to promote anti-American hatred.
To propagate that kind of hatred, rumours are enough, and there is no need for information to be confirmed. People who never protest when their regimes daily desecrate the Koran by violating basic human rights, by denying the Muslims their right to a safe future under the protection of the law, are nevertheless ready to demonstrate, to riot and even to kill, in order to permit their hatred for America to explode.
On May 16, Fouad Ajami published on the Wall Street Journal an article in which the contemporary Arab world is described as “Bush Country”, as an area whose inhabitants are thankful to President Bush for the “temptation of democracy” that “George W. Bush has brought to their doorstep.” Rhetoric apart, the consequences of Newsweek’s report show that the reality is quite different from wishful thinking. Anti-American hatred has become a common feeling in the Arab street, and no effective step was taken to stop those who manipulate it.
Resorting to American technology, Al-Jazeera TV network has become the most powerful instrument in changing millions of Arabs into staunch enemies of America, and none seems to care about it. The Emir of Qatar, the one who funded the creation of that huge network of anti-American propaganda, is still regarded as a “friend of America”, and even as a personal friend of President Bush. The same happened with those Saudi princes who have been funding al-Qa’ida for years. The autocratic dictators of Saudi Arabia and Qatar go on being treated as “friends of America”, and continue to invest in anti-American propaganda exactly like they did before 9/11.
The same Emir of Qatar also permitted to Dr. Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the leading ideologue of suicide terrorism, to make Qatar a base for the worldwide system of pro-terror Islamist banks and charities. As a consequence, Arab businessmen who want to strengthen their position inside the global market are almost compelled to compromise with that system, which means getting involved in that financial Wahhabi network which has its headquarters in Qatar and its branch in all those parts of the world were anti-American hatred is cultivated.
As opposed to Mr. Ajami, I am by no means optimistic about the immediate future. Some “experts” inside the U.S. State Department are now suggesting that in order to win the war on terror against “terrorist Islamists”, the U.S. must reach a “global agreement” with “political Islamists”, i.e. with the leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood. In other words, Wahhabi terrorism is actually winning the war, in the sense that its terror attacks actually contribute to making Wahhabi politicians more powerful and more influential inside Western society. To make a clear example, the leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, Dr. Yusuf al-Qaradawi, was recently received as a honoured guest by the Mayor of London. British soldiers are daily targeted in Iraq, together with the other soldiers of the Coalition, and the Mayor of London claims that the one who calls them “legitimate targets” is a “moderate Muslim scholar” who is welcome to Britain.
As long as European politicians behave in this manner, the only alternative left to concerned Europeans is embracing Ms. Fallaci’s racism. The space for a rational alternative between those who call ideologues of terror “moderate scholars” and those who depict every Muslim as a potential terrorist is getting narrower and narrower by the day.
Posted by Joseph Alexander Norland at May 31, 2005 08:01 AM