“On October 13, 1881, a short time before moving to Palestine, Eliezer Ben Yehuda held what is thought to be the first modern conversation in Hebrew with two friends at a Paris café. That moment became the impetus for Ben Yehuda’s at times tortuous revival of the language, which for centuries had been relegated solely to the written word. Upon his arrival in Palestine later that year, Ben Yehuda began testing his belief that Hebrew formed the sole common lingual connection between Jews of all backgrounds. Indeed, although taught only as a written language, he succeeded in holding basic conversations in the long-lost language from the moment he stepped off the boat in Jaffa…….. One of the most serious obstacles to the modern revival of the language, however, continued to pose problems for the education that was being endowed on the first generation of Hebrew schoolchildren. Having been relegated to the written language of religious texts for so many centuries, Hebrew lacked many of the modern words necessary for mundane and simple conversation…………..”
Ben Yehuda was what we might call a ‘Salafi’ in the Middle East (perhaps a little stretch here). A Salafi is someone who goes back to precedents and predecessors and follows what he (never she) believes they would have done. That is a true puritan Salafi, a Salafi on paper, unlike the Salafis we have around the Gulf region who are extremely opportunistic. They wouldn’t be able to revive anything, let alone a dormant language. The modern Salafis often refer to Jews as “descendants of pigs and monkeys”, which tells us what they truly think of the old Prophets (all of them except one). They also come close to worshiping tribal polygamous princes, but that is okay, they also like the polygamy part (well, one aspect of it) and they like the funding. Ben Yehuda was a bright Jewish “Salafi”, what we have in our region are mostly dumb and bigoted and primitive Salafis who have nothing useful to contribute. They do cause a lot of harm. I suspect that the late Imam Mohammed Bin Abdulwahhab (of Nejd) was probably the last truly Salafi cleric, although no doubt he was also as bigoted as the more recent version. He also gave us Wahhabism and this whole “effing” Salafi movement that is much more harmful than, say, the Ba’athists. (I am not going to repeat my old info about distinguishing the Arabian Imam Mohammed Abdulwahhab from the late great Egyptian singer and musician Mohammed Abdel Wahab who as not a Salafi, probably didn’t know wtf the term meant). Cheers
mhg
The semi-official Saudi dailyAsharq Alawsat reports that Ahmad al-Tayeb, the Shaikh of al-Azhar and a former functionary of Mubarak’s ruling party, has met with the Saudi Minister of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs in Cairo. The newspaper headlines that the two have reached an agreement to stand firm in the face of any attempts to “touch (or is it fondle) Sunni societies”, a blatant sectarian statement if there ever was one. They did not specify who or what was threatening to touch “Sunni societies”, no reference was made to Hip-Hop, Rap, or Angry Bird. I know the Saudi muftis frown upon Barbie and Sponge Bob. An official invitation for Egypt to join the GCC will not be far now, unless the Egyptian ‘uprising’ becomes a true ‘revolution’ that sweeps away military rule.
Mr. al-Tayeb was appointed by former dictator Hosni Mubarak from among his ruling party functionaries, whereby he promptly dropped the civilian suit for a cleric’s robe (not thobe). The Saudi Minister of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs is yet another Al Al Shaikh, this time Abdulaziz Al Al Shaikh. Readers of my blog know by now that there are many Al Al Shaikh in top Saudi government positions, including ministers, the chief Mufti, and the chief justice. My readers also know by now that all the Al Al Shaikhs are descendants of Imam Mohammad Bin Abdulwahhab, after whom the Wahhabi sect was named. The Imam Abdulwahhab was a close ally of the Al Saud from way back in the days before the early Old West. The two clans have intermarried over generations (but it is usually a one-way traffic if you know what I mean).
The Salafi Imam Abdulwahhab is not to be confused with the late great Egyptian musician and singer Mohammed Abdel Wahab who was never a Salafi or a fundamentalist. Not even an Evangelical nor one of the Hasidim. Cheers
mhg
American media raised a storm last week when an Evangelical religious pastor supporter of the Texas Governor called the Mormon (sect) of Mitt Romney a “cult”. Initially, having been conditioned back on my Gulf to certain derogatory remarks, I was surprised at the media storm. In recent years on my Gulf people often call each others’ sects and faiths things that are worse than a mere “cult”. This has been especially the case since growth of the imported Salafi Wahhabi cult. It has exasperated sectarian divisions into open hostility. This pastor must have been reading the website of the sectarian Saudi Alarabiya network, or maybe he has been watching the extremely sectarian-baiting television and other media of the Bahrain government. At least he did not call Mr. Romney a terrorist plotter and an agent of a foreign regime (not the Saudi regime). And he does not need to import foreign mercenaries and import officially-approved American weapons, all with Saudi money, to shoot at Mr. Romney.
“Meshal al-Zaidi says he was drawn into Kuwait’s protest movement by political ideals, not the economic grievances that helped spur revolts in poorer Arab countries. “My friend drives a Porsche Cayenne, another a Porsche Panamera, you’ll see the best cars at Kuwaiti protests,” said al-Zaidi, a 25-year-old who runs a public relations firm and attends rallies seeking the ouster of Prime Minister Sheikh Nasser al-Mohammed al-Sabah. “It’s not about money, it’s not about oil, it’s about real democracy.”………” Bloomberg News
No, it is not all about real democracy. It is hardly about democracy. God knows there is plenty of corruption and mismanagement in Kuwait, although not nearly as much as in Saudi Arabia or Bahrain. Hell, they even hired Tony Blair as a consultant: now that can’t reflect any true commitment to honesty and clean management, can it? But then all that is really lowering the bar. Although some, a few, of the protesters want more freedom and accountability, there are many more among them who have no desire for democracy. Just ask almost anyone who shows up at these small events about Saudi Arabia, and they’ll either praise that country’s regime or get evasive. Unfortunately most of the so-called protesters are either of the local Wahhabi faux-liberals or the Islamists (die-hard Salafis) with a few bored-to-death others thrown in. Some may be part (pawns) of an intense power struggle within the ruling elite.
The Wahhabi faux-liberals are already tweeting and ‘column-izing’ against the currents protests in Saudi Arabia, labeling them an “Iranian” plot, just as they do in Bahrain. I don’t think they are stupid, nobody can be that stupid (or can they?). The Salafi Islamists among them have no desire to have any form of enhanced democracy, but they are great opportunists. Some of these Islamists seem to be the loudest, more media-grabbing among the “protesters”. They failed to get rid of the current prime minister through a parliamentary vote since most members voted against them (either out of conviction or for self-interest). That is when they tried the street. Many of these same Salafis have pushed for more restrictions on the freedom of expression in the legislature. They mostly look toward Salafi Wahhabi corrupt Saudi Arabia as the “model”, to the extent of pushing for some form of political ‘consolidation’ presumably under some form of Saudi rule (perhaps a satrapy like Bahrain?). This local columnist here gives a glimpse into some of the “Saudi” loyalties at work. He is too shy to mention the country’s name directly. He points out that the government is guilty and responsible for past policies that created the current atmosphere of corruption and unrest. Cheers
mhg
“The current differences among the Libyans would not stand in the way of forming the forthcoming government after fully liberating the country, the head of the National Transitional Council (NTC) told Al Arabiya. Mustapha Abdul Jalil said that Libya is currently passing through a critical phase on all sides, but once a full control on Sirte is achieved, a series of “drastic changes” will follow. In his special interview with Al Arabiya, Jalil said that sharia (Islamic law) will be the main base of legislation in the new Libya. A balanced Islamic religion, away from extremism, will be applied in the country, he added……….” Alarabiya (Saudi)
Alarabiya headlined this in itsArabic edition as“Abdul Jalil denies he permitted reopening the Jewish Synagogue in Tripoli”. And “Abdul Jalil says Libya will not be radical in the future”. It did not say that “Libya will reinstate the monarchy with an imported Saudi prince, possibly Bandar”. Now why is this semi-official Saudi network stressing the “synagogue” issue in the Arabic version? Could it be because there are no synagogues nor any churches nor any temples in Saudi Arabia and they and their Salafi agents want this to be the form? You betcha. He also said that they will have the “Shari’a” as the main source of law. This means, if they follow the Saudi model, that certain social mores will apply and that they will disregard Islamic rules about corruption and repression. Sort of like Saudi Arabia (and almost all other Islamic countries but to a lesser extent, with or without the Shari’a). Cheers
mhg
BFF Alarabiya network reports that the powerful Committee for the Propagation of Vice (religious police, the Wahhabi inquisition) has started a new campaign to get its message, wtf that be, across the country and eradicate certain types of behavior. The shaggy denizens of the Committee are now using large trailers equipped with latest technology in terms of multimedia to travel around the provinces and save souls. They trailers will be also chasing holiday crowds, meaning that wherever there are public festivities in that distinctly non-festive kingdom, the religious police will show up to make things even less festive (if at all possible).
The report
says they will focus on things like prayers and sorcery (magic, witchcraft) and women. Not necessarily but most likely in that order, since sorcery and magic are usually attached to women in Saudi Arabia these days (sounds familiar huh? But almost four centuries later).
This is odd, since from my travels I know that the ones whose souls really need ‘saving’ are the Saudi men, just ask any hotel manager in Beirut, Bahrain, Cairo, Dubai, Bangkok, Manila, etc, etc. A few years
ago the Committee surprised everyone by banning the acquisition of dogs and pussy (as in cats) in Saudi Arabia. They allegedly also toyed with the idea of banning women anywhere outside the bedroom but changed their minds for some reason. Cheers
mhg
“Sheikh Saleh al-Lohaidan, one of Saudi Arabia’s most senior clerics, said he was not consulted about King Abdullah’s decision to grant women more political rights, one of the first signs of discontent from powerful conservatives since the reform was announced. In a speech last week the Saudi monarch announced that women would vote and run in future municipal council elections and serve in the appointed Shura Council which advises the king on policy. King Abdullah said his decision was made after consultation with the country’s most senior clerics, who have extensive political and social influence……..” Apparently the absolute king has his own “kitchen clergy” also called “palace clergy” that he consults. This old chap is clearly not part of it. I suspect that the various princely factions may have their own “ulema” or cleric factions. Imagine, each senior prince has his own kitchen full of pliant clerics; it is possible. Yet this Salafi cleric also knows that 1915 is a long way off, depending on one’s age. It may be a race with time between this cleric and the absolute king. Besides it is a meaningless vote for “advisory” municipal councils. Cheers
mhg
BFF “When King Hamad came to power in 1999, he initially sought to put an end to the violence and sectarian tension that had characterized much of the 1990s by releasing political prisoners, expanding freedoms for the press and civil society, abolishing the most repressive aspects of the security apparatus, and encouraging dialogue with the opposition to help draft a new constitution that would devolve authority to an elected parliament. These efforts gained overwhelming support from most Bahrainis who yearned for more political and civil liberties, and particularly from Shi’a who faced systemic discrimination in the political, economic, and social spheres. Despite initial expectations, however, the resulting 2002 constitution failed to deliver on the King’s promises, dashing hopes and creating deep mistrust between the ruling family and the political opposition. Tensions were exacerbated when an alleged government report was leaked in 2006 detailing a plan to weaken the Shi’a community politically and alter the country’s demographics through the systematic naturalization of Sunni expatriate workers…………..” Not only did the al-Khalifa fail to fulfill their contract with the people of Bahrain, the one agreed at independence. (Their failure to democtratize as promised did not much bother the elite who were not victimized and it certainly was welcomed by the other oligarchies of the Gulf states). It was, it is, the apartheid system that they and their retainers of the elite have insisted on keeping in place. Of course getting rid of the apartheid system would mean a more open political system and more freedoms. More important, it would mean the election of an effective legislature and accountability for corruption by the ruling dynasty. That is why the rulers of Bahrain and their masters and protectors in Saudi Arabia, the absolute tribal princes, insist on keeping the discriminatory system in place. That is why they have resorted to fanning the flames of sectarian fears and passions among the people of Bahrain and the people of the Gulf GCC region. That is why they are willing to foot the bill for the importation of foreign mercenary thugs and torturers by the regime. What they don’t understand is that the people of Bahrain (and one or two other Gulf states) are not like the people of Saudi Arabia who have been trained and terrified over several generations to silently bow and accept the writ of the princes. Even the people of the Arabian Peninsula are stirring now against the restrictions imposed by the potentates and their Salafi lackeys among the clergy. Cheers
mhg
“A Saudi Arabian ministry statement carried by the state news agency, SPA, stated that Abdul Hamid al-Fakki “practiced witchcraft and sorcery,” which are illegal under Saudi Arabia’s Islamic sharia law. Al-Fakki was beheaded in the western city of Medina on Monday, the interior ministry announced. In October last year, Amnesty International said it had appealed to King Abdullah in a letter to commute Fakki’s death sentence. His execution brings to 42 the number of people beheaded in Saudi Arabia this year, according to an AFP tally based on official and human rights group reports…………” Saudi reforms continue unhindered, according to tribal liberals on my Gulf. As if to prove it, another “sorcerer” was beheaded last week in a Saudi public square (this is only the last of many). He was a poor foreigner from Sudan this time. He was beheaded by the regime for allegedly practicing “sorcery and witchcraft”. Magic is seriously frowned upon in the Kingdom without Magic. I wonder if the Lebanese TV magician Ali Sabat who performed magic on “Lebanese” TV. I believe he is still in prison awaiting something (he was supposed to be beheaded but the princes decided to keep him around for a while after an international campaign). Oddly, or maybe not so oddly, the usual Western glitterati are not out in force showing their outrage, condemning this most recent execution. Nor is Bernard-Henri Lévy. Cheers
mhg
BFF “The Saudis are afraid of the Arab spring, because they don’t want anti-Saudi forces, including such enemies as Iran and Al Qaeda, to increase their influence in the Middle East, and they believe the revolutions in the region might have just this effect. Some of the older Saudi leaders have seen this movie before. The nationalist revolutions of the 1950’s and 1960’s, inspired and galvanized by Gamel Nasser’s Egypt, nearly toppled the House of Saud. Nonetheless, today’s Saudi princes appear to recognize that something has genuinely changed in the Middle East: The younger generation of Arabs is no longer prepared to accept unaccountable, corrupt, and brutal governments. Saudi Arabia, a self-proclaimed bulwark of Islamic conservatism, where popular democracy has never been considered a legitimate form of rule, has been more aggressive in some arenas than in others. Domestically, the royal family struck quickly, adopting a ban on public demonstrations and acts of civil disobedience. The Kingdom’s traditional interpretation of Islam construes political legitimacy in terms of a ruler’s proper application of Islamic law. In return, his subjects owe him obedience within the constraints of Sharia religious law…………..”
There is a Hadith that purports to indicate that Prophet Mohammed urged Muslims to obey their “Muslim” rulers as long as they allowed and facilitated the practice of Islam, no matter how lousy the rulers are. This Hadith has been at the center of Salafi alliances with despotic Arab rulers. It has supplied the rulers with a “loophole” to get away with all kinds of corruption and injustice. It is used by absolute Arab monarchs as an alibi, with the Salafis as allies. Of course there are other Hadiths against corruption and thievery by rulers, and against despotism, but these are ignored. I have never believed in the veracity of that Hadith, not even as a kid. Needless to say, I still have strong doubts about its veracity. For 1400 years this particular Hadith has been just too convenient, too useful for ruling tyrants of our region. Cheers
mhg
Rattlesnake Ridge 
BFF