In response to the many articles published in the Arab press critical of the Al-Jazeera TV channel, Faysal Al-Qassem, host of Al-Jazeera's "Opposite Direction" talk show, published an article in the Qatari daily Al-Sharq, claiming that the liberals in the Arab world are worse than terrorists.
Al-Qassem's article clearly reflects the growing strength of the new Arab liberals and the weakening of extremist elements – such as Faysal Al-Qassem – in face of the "Liberal Offensive."
The following are excerpts from his article: [1]
'The New Liberals Appear Civilized, but Conceal Fanaticism and Extremism'
"… The Arab arena has recently experienced a new group of extremists [who are] more dangerous to the Arabs than the fanatic fundamentalists. [There are] few differences between the old and new kinds [of extremists]: the new [extremists] do anything they want throughout the world, and gain respect and esteem, while the other kind hide in caves in Afghanistan and languish in the darkness of the jails; the first [kind] wear new suits and Western clothes, [while] the old [kind] are clad in Arab robes, Afghan clothes, and hats. In addition, [the second kind grow] long beards, while the new extremists are clean-shaven.
"The faces [of the new liberals] give an impression of being civilized, but they often conceal a most serious type of fanaticism, extremism, cancellation of the 'other' and eradication of those objecting to their beliefs and views. The apparel of the fanatic or extremist is of no importance. What is the use of your saying 'I am civilized,' and then opposing, negating and boycotting any dialogue or idea that contradicts your so-called 'civilization'? What is the use of your wearing the finest Western clothes while thinking in the same mentality as [the two Arab tribes of] Dahis and Ghabra' [2] and as [the extremist Egyptian group] 'The Saved from the Inferno?' [3]
"Do not be misled by appearances and by the liberal so-called 'secular' trends that might be no more than a cover. Some of the new Arab liberals are like those termed by the famous Russian author Tolstoy 'the arrogant cultured ones.' Tolstoy has a marvelous saying that: 'Those who most arrogantly claim to be cultured and civilized are in fact the most despicable arch-murderers and slaughterers in history.' Tolstoy, in his apt comment, pointed to the massacres and wars perpetrated by the Europeans and the Americans one against the other in the course of the dozens of all-out wars they conducted. WWII alone led to the deaths of 60 million Westerners, who presumably were killed by those belonging to the civilized and cultured West.
"It seems that the Arabs who purport to be civilized and liberal and who consider themselves men of culture and civilization have borrowed from their Western masters that [same] violence which is camouflaged by the veil of culture and civilization exposed and denounced by Tolstoy. They disseminate their ideas and their destructive beliefs under the guise of enlightenment, freedom, and liberalism, while they, in their own special way, spread destruction in the land and commit acts of hideous eradication. They are not true liberals, imbibing the milk of true liberalism. They soon expose themselves through their flippancy, their quick anger and their inability to tolerate the other."
'Liberals' Are No Different from Those Declaring Others to Be Infidels and from Ideological Terrorists
"I have never heard that the extremists, the fanatics, and the fundamentalists – whom the new liberals attack for no reason – threatened the media… In their dealings with the media, [the fundamentalists] show more wisdom, diplomacy, and reason than those who purport to belong to the new liberalism. They [the fundamentalists] may have criticized [the media] or accused them of collaboration, but the matter never reached the point of threats of childish lawsuits, foolish incitement, and organized mafia-like attacks against them, merely because some [of the media people] disagreed with them, thought their proposals to be stupid, or offended some of their idols, as those purporting to be liberals do.
"Note the following expression, which appeared in one of the 'liberal' statements full of fanaticism and hysteria: 'By what right does the media dare to speak out against the general ideological stream called liberalism? And by what right does it rain curses upon the new Arab liberals?' I ask you [liberals]: By what right do you want to silence the people while you 'fight' for freedom of expression and freedom of the press in the Arab world…?
"Didn't liberalism originally rely upon liberty and acceptance of the 'other,' whatever the dispute with it may be? Haven't those purporting to be liberal ever heard about Voltaire's famous saying: ' I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend [to the death] your right to say it?' Why do our new liberals take from their Western masters only what is convenient for them? Why do they adopt Western liberal ideas selectively…?
"How do those purporting to be liberal differ from those who declare [other Muslims] to be infidels, and from the ideological terrorists, when they [themselves] try to intimidate a journalist or a writer who attacked them or disagreed with them? Don't their notorious electronic attacks against someone or another come under the heading of ideological terror, of the policy of silencing [people], of cultural era dication, and of explicit incitement? Why do they allow themselves to attack and to damage all the basic principles, the holy and Islamic symbols [and allow themselves to attack] Arab policy and cultural affairs under the motto that 'nothing is sacred' and with the pretext of freedom of expression, while they, at the same time, explode like a volcano when you say the slightest thing against them…
"If we wish to further unmask this new bunch of those purporting to be liberals, we must be aware of one thing that may resolve the enigma about them: nobody had heard of them beforehand. They appeared out of the blue, with no prior warning, like wild mushrooms or like a skin rash, following the U.S. invasion into Afghanistan and Iraq, as if to say: 'We are the cultural secretion of this invasion.' Then they began to wreak terror upon the Arab cultural arena in a way no different than that of the fundamentalist extremists, and certainly [no different] from that of their masters, who hold the principle of preventive wars and scorched earth, as we shall see in the future."
The Liberals' Expressions Seem to Have Been Taken from Osama Bin Laden's Speeches
"It may be that the most compelling proof of their being influenced by the extremist fundamentalist ideology is [the fact] that they sometimes make use, unconsciously, of some of the expressions, concepts, and even the literature of this ideology, so much so that whoever reads their latest communiqués might think at first that they were written by [bin Laden's deputy] Dr. Ayman Al-Zawahiri.
"… Those who praise and laud the U.S. invasion into Iraq and who deny anything national or Islamic have suddenly begun to be concerned about the unity of the Arab and Islamic nation. Unbelievable! Note their use of the word 'nation' – it seems utterly foreign and opposed to their [political] line. They scorned – and continue to scorn – the Arab and Islamist nationalists who make use of this word."
New Arab Liberals Echo U.S. Military Doctrine
"The Arabs are far too intelligent to be led astray by a few misleading expressions [from the realm] of culture and ideology, such as the notion of 'new liberalism.' As the famous German philosopher and theorist Engels said, 'The best way to know what the cake tastes like is to eat it.' This of course holds [true] for anything else, including new ideas and beliefs. It is not enough for you to say to me: 'I am a new liberal;' in order for me to believe you and respect you I have to test you. And now we have tested you [the new liberals] through your communiqués, which exude a nasty smell of the Inquisition trials and of despicable McCarthyism. A friend of mine, who belongs to the 'new liberals camp,' told me how the signatures on the communiqué were collected by force, by a quasi-military system, and how the names of those who refused to sign were added against their will.
"It appears that certain new Arab liberals are influenced by the U.S. military doctrine led by the 'poet' [Donald] Rumsfeld, the [U.S.] Secretary of Defense, whose officers used to say to the independent journalists trying to report on the war on Iraq: 'We cannot guarantee your safety if you do not join the U.S. information effort.' [They sounded] as if they were indirectly threatening murder in the event that [the journalists] did not report the invaders' point of view. We have seen how the spiritual forefathers of the new Arab liberals did not hesitate to kill reporters and to bomb the centers of some media outlets in Afghanistan and Iraq, merely because they reported on the battles and the massacres differently than [the way] the Americans would have wanted.
"It seems that certain 'new Arab liberals' are echoing the U.S. military doctrine. One of their communiqués, directed toward some of the media outlets, contained the following threat: 'I hope that you [a media outlet] hear us, and the rights are restored before your rights are taken from you by others by all means [available].' Note the expression 'by all means!' The free Arab press would have expected the arrows and blows to come from those described as '[regimes] of darkness and enemies of liberty.' But the arrows and threats are coming from those claiming to be the bearers of the torch of culture, openness, tolerance, enlightenment, and civilization.
"By Allah, how does this 'extremely liberal' threat, directed towards one of the Arab media outlets, differ from the threat recently made by [Iraqi] Defense Minister [Hazem] Al-Sha'lan, who said: 'From now on we will respond to some of the media outlets not only with words. Be prepared for our means of defense.' Do we need terrorists when we have such liberals?"
Endnotes:
[1] Al-Sharq (Qatar), December 19, 2004.
[2] Two pre-Islamic Arab tribes that fought an all-out war between themselves over a dispute about horse-racing.
[3] This was an extremist Islamist group, established in Egypt during the 1970s.
