A reader pointed me to a very strange article he’d come across:
As this made no sense, I took a look to see what it was all about.
I’m not sure how an article could come out wrong-headedly. The article it cites, from the UAE’s Gulf News, says nothing about dropping English. Instead, it reports that the Saudis are insisting that the Hijri or Islamic calendar be used for dating purposes on all official and business documents. This does makes sense because the Hijri Calendar is indeed the national calendar. Translations from one calendar to another already create problems when they’re necessary. Performing those translations when not necessary just creates more problems.
The Gulf News article also quotes an unnamed Saudi daily saying that hotels and the like should use Arabic to greet customers on the phone. That’s a suggestion, not a ban. It makes sense, too, because Saudi Arabia’s population speaks Arabic, though English has certainly become an unofficial second language.
English is the language of instruction at both King Abdullah University of Science and Technology and King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals. It is taught in Saudi public schools starting at the fourth grade.
Two recent articles in Arab News also stress the importance the Kingdom and its residents place on English:
Saudi weekly magazine Majalla runs a story on the Salafist war against arts and culture in Egypt. Not only are actors and directors being arrested for supposed ‘crimes against Islam’, but the hard-line conservatives are also calling for bans on the books of Nobel Laureate Naguib Mahfouz and the covering of statues of the pharaohs in wax. At least they’re not calling for them to be destroyed or the Pyramids torn down.
Egyptian artists note that these are actions and ideas proposed by Salafists, but also note that the ‘more modern, more moderate’ Muslim Brotherhood says nothing about them, only claiming to ‘support culture’. Today’s Egypt is a far cry from the expansive cultural environments of its past, even as recently as the 1960s.
Islamists on Art
Ati MetwalyWhen Asran Mansour, a Salafi lawyer, filed a case against Adel Imam, renowned Egyptian actor, for “defaming Islam” in his films, no one expected that the verdict issued on 24 April 2012, by Judge Mohamed Abdel Aty would sentence Imam to three-months hard labor and a fine. Though the case was dropped on 26 April afternoon, the news outraged Egypt’s artists and equally angered international supporters of freedom of expression and creativity.
Adel Imam’s case is one of the many indications that Islamists are implementing limits on culture and freedom of expression. Also on trial with Imam were directors Nader Galal, Sherif Arafa, and Mohamed Fadel, and writers Wahid Hamed and Lenin El-Ramly, who faced the same charges of “defaming Islam.” Their cases were also dropped on 26 April.
The arts and culture scene will not be silent regarding Imam’s sentence—just as it will not remain passive when challenged by many other limitations posed on culture. The fight against such religious-based censorship is expected to be a long and painful one for all of Egypt’s creative minds.
…
Saudi Arabia’s Grand Mufti has ignited a needless firestorm. In comments made in Kuwait earlier this week, the Sheikh Abdul Aziz bin Abdullah called for all Christian churches in the Arabian Peninsula to be destroyed. He bases his opinion on a hadith that purports to state that the prophet Mohammed said there was no room for other than Islam in the region.
It goes without saying that this provocative statement did indeed provoke reaction and outrage from religious groups – including non-Christian groups – as well as the Islamophobes and Saudi-bashers. The outrage is deserved as this is truly the antithesis of the cooperation and mutual understanding that King Abdullah has endlessly sought.
Indeed, if a Christian religious authority, say the Pope or the Archbishop of Canterbury were to call for the destruction of all mosques in Europe, there would be more than a little outrage coming from the Muslim world. That outrage would be correct, as well. This is a breathtaking example of intolerance and deserves to be condemned and mocked.
Destroy all churches in Gulf, says Saudi Grand Mufti
Elizabeth BroomhallThe Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia has said it is “necessary to destroy all the churches of the region,” following Kuwait’s moves to ban their construction.
Speaking to a delegation in Kuwait, Sheikh Abdul Aziz bin Abdullah, stressed that since the tiny Gulf state was a part of the Arabian Peninsula, it was necessary to destroy all of the churches in the country, Arabic media have reported.
Saudi Arabia’s top cleric made the comment in view of an age-old rule that only Islam can be practiced in the region.
The Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia is the highest official of religious law in the Sunni Muslim kingdom. He is also the head of the Supreme Council of Ulema (Islamic scholars) and of the Standing Committee for Scientific Research and Issuing of Fatwas.
…
Really, Saudi Arabia? Really? Isn’t it about time that Saudi society and law were forced to grow up and stop believing in fairy tales?
This court case could be used to spell the end of this nonsense, but it won’t unfortunately…
From Emirates 24/7:
Lawyer wants jinn to testify in court
Says court should summon genie in corrupt judge caseA Saudi defence lawyer has asked court to summon a jinn (genie) claimed to have possessed a judge who has been arrested on corruption charges, the Saudi Arabic language daily Okaz reported on Saturday.
The lawyer, Salim bin Atteyya, told court that the jinn must be present in court to testify in the case of the corrupt judge in Madina, Islam’s second holiest shrine after Makkah, the newspaper said.
“The case of the corrupt judge in Madina has taken a new turn and witnessed new developments as the lawyer of an absent defendant has asked court to summon the jinn to testify,” the paper said.
“If what the accused judge said about the jinn, then this jinn could be bad and blasphemous…this jinn could have been sent by a bad sorcerer because witchcraft is bad and non-Islamic.”
…
One place Christian and Muslim clerics can agree is that social networking media are fraught with danger. One doesn’t have to be religious at all to recognize that the same weaknesses that cross the Internet as a whole are to be found in the social networking sites as well. There’s no simple way to verify ‘information’ carried through the media, but the networks like Facebook, Twitter, and the like all seem to make contact more personal. One thinks he is talking with another individual, and that may well be the case. But it is also possible that one is speaking with a member of a group, with an agenda, merely replaying what are known as ‘talking points’, items that promote a particular point of view in a more or less coordinated way. This needn’t be considered insidious; in fact, someone posting something may not even be aware of its provenance or intent. If it ‘sound right’, it will be repeated without much thought.
Instant communications have been a blessing in many ways, but they’ve also been a bane. They’ve made it harder to discern fact from non-fact, wishful thinking, or outright lies. Often, the best one has to go on are feelings, not the most reliable of senses. Because feelings don’t have to go through any process of reason, they are particularly susceptible to becoming pure emotion, where hatred and disdain are all too easily communicated.
Gulf News reports on agreement between the Pope and Saudi Arabia’s Grand Mufti about the caution necessary to avoid the dangers of social networking…
Saudi Mufti, Pope urge caution with social media
Saudi Arabia’s Grand Mufti and Pope Benedict XVI have urged people to “exercise proper discernment in the face of the surfeit of stimuli and data” that they receive on the internet
Habib ToumiManama: Saudi Arabia’s Grand Mufti and Pope Benedict XVI have urged people to “exercise proper discernment in the face of the surfeit of stimuli and data” that they receive on the internet.
In Riyadh, Shaikh Abdul Aziz Al Shaikh said people cannot take the social-networking website Twitter as the source of their knowledge if they do not really know who is behind the posted comments.
“Twitter is used to issue fatwas [religious edicts] without evidence or substantiation,” the mufti said. “It is used as a platform to spread lies by some people who seek fame by insulting and denigrating other people,” he said in his Friday sermon in Riyadh.
“People should be well aware of such dangers. The site should not be used to exchange accusations or to misquote people. Muslims should be careful not to be drawn into wrong acts and must instead engage in constructive criticism,” he said.
…
Google, it appears, is stretching its reach far beyond being a mere search engine. Gulf News reports that Google will serve to moderate the latest installment of the National Dialogue the Saudi government is conducting with its citizenry. Google has done this in Egypt and Tunisia before, but this is certainly a first in the Gulf.
Google to moderate e-dialogue
Jumana Al Tamimi, Associate EditorDubai: After launching cyber-interaction initiatives between citizens and high-ranking figures in both Egypt and Tunis, Google will be moderating the ‘Kingdom’s Dialogue’ in Saudi Arabia starting from next Monday.
The initiative, which is being launched by the King Abdul Aziz Centre for National Dialogue, is the first of its kind in the kingdom.
Interested people will post their questions on the web page of the ‘Kingdom’s Dialogue’. The most popular questions will be forwarded to the first ‘guest’ Prince Faisal Bin Abdullah Al Saud, the Kingdom’s Minister of Education.
By Thursday’s morning, 2,329 people had submitted 2,128 questions with 17,702 votes having been cast.
…
Saudi media is reporting heavily on the imminent fall of Col. Qaddafi in Libya. While it appears that he has lost control of the country, he seems to still be able to control some forces within Tripoli itself. His whereabouts remain a puzzle, though. There are assorted claims that he is still in Libya, if not Tripoli; in Algeria; in Chad; perhaps even in Venezuela. One place he is unlikely to be is Saudi Arabia as his plans to assassinate King Abdullah (when he was still Crown Prince) closed that door of escape firmly.
Arab News is carrying international wire reports on what’s happening in Libya:
Libya rebels sweep into Tripoli as Qaddafi defenses collapse
BEN HUBBARD | APTRIPOLI: Libyan rebels raced into Tripoli in a lighting advance Sunday that met little resistance as Muammar Qaddafi’s defenders melted away and his 40-year rule appeared to rapidly crumble. The euphoric fighters celebrated with residents of the capital in the city’s main square, the symbolic heart of the regime.
Opposition fighters captured Qaddafi’s son and one-time heir apparent, Seif Al-Islam. The prosecutor at the International Criminal Court in the Netherlands said he would contact the rebels to discuss his handover for trial on charges of crimes against humanity.
…
Saudi-owned Al-Arabiya TV supplements its own reporting with agency reports:
Qaddafi plea: ‘Save Libya’; Seif Al Islam captured,
eldest son surrenders to rebelsQaddafi gov’t military surrenders to rebel council
amid euphoric advance on TripoliDefector says Qaddafi not courageous enough to commit suicide
A quotation from the last piece, by a Kuwaiti legislator, pretty much sums up Saudi attitudes, I believe:
“Mubarak’s departure is a victory for the youth and a loss for Israel, Gaddafi’s departure is a victory for the people and a loss for comedy and Bashar (al-Assad)’s departure will be a victory for Syria and a loss for Iran.”
It troubles the Saudi government to see long-ruling leaders deposed. It runs against a Salafi view that people should support their rulers unless those rulers lose their legitimacy. The issue, of course, is just who gets to define the line where legitimacy prevails. The Saudi government didn’t think that Mubarak had crossed that line, though clearly most of the world and most Egyptians did. The Saudis have declared Bashar Al-Assad’s reign to have lost it legitimacy. As for Libya, well the Saudis basically consider Qaddafi to be nuts and want nothing to do with him.
What and who come after Qaddafi, though, are big questions. They are, unfortunately, questions for which no one has any good answers. Only time will tell whether the rebels will be able to construct and maintain a decent government.
While Shariah and Western courts differ in many ways, they both share a problem with media reporting on cases in prejudicial ways. This Arab News article discusses the case of a schoolteacher accused of raping 13 girls. As there have been two teachers so charged, I’m not sure which one is being discussed here. It doesn’t really matter, though, as the issue is larger than a single case.
Media does have responsibilities. Sometimes, it forgets them; sometimes, it intentionally ignores them in order to ‘grab more eyes’ and a few more riyals or dollars. The more sensational or salacious the story, the better it is for the media bottom line. The temptation, though, can lead to grave injustice toward the accused who, under both American and Islamic law is presumed innocent until proved guilty in a court of law.
For the Saudis, the case du jour is that of a serial rapist. In the US, it is the case of a mother accused of killing her child. In the American case, a jury found the mother not guilty. Media coverage before and during the trial, though, greatly prejudiced viewers against the mother. CNN’s Headline News coverage, led by the inaptly named Nancy Grace, was utterly disgraceful. In stirring up public prejudice, it led to death threats against jurors, judges, and of course the accused herself when she was acquitted. In fact, Reuters is now reporting that the mother is the most hated person in America!.
As the piece notes, though, the public does have a right to know that crimes are being committed, that arrests are being made, and that trials are taking place. Doing so without prejudicing legal process can be tricky, but journalists are supposed to be professional, able to do hard work.
Schoolteacher’s case highlights need to curb media trial
WALAA HAWARI | ARAB NEWSRIYADH: When the Saudi publishing law was amended in March 2011 many expressed their dissatisfaction as they considered it a way to restrain the media. The amendment aims to protect members of the Senior Scholars Authority, statesmen, government employees and any other individual or company from being defamed. However, some people believe that this amendment is simply there to protect any corrupt person from being exposed in the media.
In the case of a schoolteacher accused of raping 13 young girls, Fayez Al-Shihri, academic at King Fahd Security College and expert on information crimes, believes that the concept of free press has been misused. The accused was prejudged and slandered by the media before the conclusion of investigations and before the judge had said his final word.
“This is an obvious and clear violation of publication law, human rights and general social ethics,” said Al-Shihri, adding that publishing widely and without restrictions about the case violated press ethics.
Should the investigation prove the accused innocent, Al-Shihri pointed out, he would have the right to sue all publications and websites for slander.
…
Saudi Gazette, coincidentally, runs a piece in which the National Society for Human Rights reminds readers that those accused of various crimes that led up to the disastrous floods in Jeddah in 2009 are also innocent, until proved guilty:
The big news of the day is Saudi Arabia’s pulling it ambassador from Syria. (Kuwait did likewise.) Al-Arabiya TV reports that King Abdullah announced the move as a reaction to the bloodshed that has flowed through the streets of several Syrian cities. Al-Jazeera TV carries a similar report. The Gulf Cooperation Council condemned the Syrian government’s action in trying to put down popular dissent; the Arab League also expressed its displeasure.
Saudi pulls envoy from Syria,
denounces violence, urges end to bloodshed
By MUSTAPHA AJBAILI — Al ArabiyaSaudi Arabia’s King Abdullah Bin Abdul Aziz demanded an end to the bloodshed in Syria and recalled his country’s ambassador from Damascus, in a rare case of one of the Arab world’s most powerful leaders intervening against another.
In a surprise speech early Monday, the Saudi monarch said that Syria’s future lies in choosing between wisdom or chaos. It was the sharpest criticism the oil giant has directed against any Arab state since a wave of protests roiled the Middle East and toppled autocrats in Tunisia and Egypt.
“The Kingdom today stands up to its historical responsibilities towards its brothers,” King Abdullah said in a speech statement obtained by Al Arabiya TV.
“The repercussions of the events in Syria are not part of the religion, nor values, nor ethics,” King Abdullah added.
“The Syrian government knows Saudi Arabia’s past positions towards it,” the King added, calling upon the Syrian regime of Bashar Al Assad to implement immediate comprehensive reforms.
…
Arab News‘s coverage has been primarily news agency reports, the latest a compendium.
I see the Saudi government as conflicted about the issue of Syria. At its heart, the Saudi government does not want to see heads of government challenged and thrown out of power. It has propped up the Syrian regime over decades, seeing it as the legitimate government. Now, however, that legitimacy is being questioned. If the Ba’ath Party regime falls, good things are likely to happen regionally, if not precisely in Syria. Since the 1980s, Syria has been Iran’s entry into the Arab world. Notoriously, during the Iran-Iraq war, Syria was allied with Iran. Syria has served as a conduit for Iranian arms, money, and influence in the region, affecting Lebanese politics (and chaos) as well as supporting rejectionist groups in the Israeli-Palestinian conflicts. Having a less-friendly-to-Iran government in Syria would very much serve long-term Saudi interests. Whether that happens, though, is going to depend on whether the Assad group can stay in power. It seems to me that while it is winning some aspects of the conflict through repressive military action, it will not be able to continue much longer. Syria is still too dependent on foreign largesse to make up shortfalls in its own economic activity. A cutback by the Saudis or other GCC states will only tighten the vise.
There are various pieces in print and on the Internet that suggest Saudi motivation to be based purely on Sunni-Shi’a conflict. The minority Alawite group from which the Assad regime springs is seen as a Shi’ite sect—when it’s seen as being Muslim at all. It has served to protect minority religions interests at the expense of the majority Sunnis, sort of a mirror-image of the situation in Bahrain. The commentators seem to believe that the alternative to Alawite/Shi’a rule is rule by fundamentalist Islamists, primarily the Muslim Brotherhood. I don’t think that’s the case. While the MB are certainly active and present, they do not represent a hugely popular group, particularly in their restrictive views on culture and society. If nothing else, the Ba’ath Party pushed women’s equality in the workplace to every aspect of daily life. Iranian influence curbed many of the more liberal aspects of Syrian life and I don’t think the Syrians are looking for another repressive group to substitute for them.
An interesting piece from Asharq Alawsat. It talks about various Facebook campaigns calling for viewers to boycott several TV series planned for Ramadan due to either their content or the fact that actors and producers have ‘bad politics’.
The series in question all appear to be Egyptian productions. Actors who offered vocal support to the Mubarak regime during the weeks of unrest before his fall are being targeted and called out for their politics. Others are being cited because they have material—like belly dancing—that many consider inappropriate for broadcast during a religious period. For most of the series in question, the campaigners are simply calling for viewers to not watch. That’s perfectly appropriate. No one should be forced to watch anything they don’t want to see. They can turn the dial or turn off the TV and be spared from that which discomforts them.
One series, though, is the subject of legal action undertaken by Al-Azhar University’s Islamic Research Academy and Facebook groups are calling for it to be banned. The title, “Al-Hassan and Al-Hussein”, and subject matter certainly offer opportunities for contention as it involves the early days of Islam and the split between the Sunni and Shi’a. I don’t think contentious issues should be blocked by law, censored, but do think that the producers better know what they’re doing. There are those who are always ready to take exception to the slightest error or points of view that differ from their own. They should be prepared to argue their issues, not call on the mere discussion to be banned.
Facebook campaign to ban Ramadan dramas
Nisreen al-ZayatCairo, Asharq Al-Awsat – Just a few days before the beginning of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, a number of Facebook groups have started a campaign calling for Muslims to boycott a number of television drama series set to be broadcast on Arab satellite television during the Islamic holy month. A number of users on the popular social network have established Facebook pages and groups calling for Muslims to boycott 4 television drama series that are scheduled to be broadcast during Ramadan.
Ramadan is the ninth month of the Islamic calendar; it is the Islamic month of fasting during which all Muslims refrain from eating and drinking between sunrise and sunset, in addition to performing more prayers, and spending more time in religious contemplation.
The Facebook campaign calls for the boycott of the television drama “Samara”, starring Egyptian actress Ghada Abdel Razek; this television series was written by Mustafa Muharam and directed by Mohamed al-Naqli. Around 23 thousand people joined a Facebook group calling for the boycott of the “Samara” television series, criticizing Abdel Razek’s performance, including a number of scenes featuring the actress performing the belly dance. The Facebook group stresses that the broadcast of this series is unsuitable during the Muslim holy month. Egyptian actress Ghada Abdel Razek is no stranger to controversy, and she was one of the Egyptian entertainment figures who came out to defend the Hosni Mubarak regime and criticize the 25 January revolution.
…
While Saudi Arabia has not made many public statements about the situation in Syria, Chinese new agency Xinhua report, it is making its displeasure felt in other ways. Saudi satellite TV channels, all with connections to the Saudi government, are boycotting Syrian soap operas! Syrian musalsalat or series, have overtaken Egyptian ones in both number and quality—and Egypt is having its own political problems in even making the series.
Unrest across Syria casts shadow on soap operas
Hummam Sheikh AliDAMASCUS, July 9 (Xinhua) — It appears that Syria’s once- flourishing soap opera industry is losing its glory and sliding into a recession after Arab television networks and satellite channels declined to buy Syrian soaps in retaliation for Syrian actors’ positions towards the country’s current political crisis.
Since the eruption of protests in Syria in mid March, Syrian actors and actresses have shown conflicting attitudes towards the events, with some of them supporting the protests while others openly backing the Syrian government and attacking the protests as aiming to undermine the country.
Syrian actors complain that they have been boycotted by Arab TV satellite channels owned by wealthy Saudis and Qataris, whose governments are now maintaining cool relations with Syria. The reason, they said, is their overt backing of the Syrian government and the reforms announced by Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.
Abdul-Rahaman Abu al-Qassem, a prominent Syrian actor, confirmed to Xinhua that the Syrian drama industry has been ” greatly influenced by what is happening in Syria,” noting that most producers depend on the Gulf funds in this respect.
…
Syrian soap operas are also a topic at the Economist newspaper. It reports on the rise in popularity of the Syrian dialect of Arabic. Not only is the dialect used in the soaps, but it is increasingly being preferred in dubbing foreign TV shows from Turkey and Europe. The article notes that there are regional differences at play, though. Many TV shows, primarily out of India and Pakistan, are being dubbed in Gulf dialect for Gulf audiences. The article notes that Iran, as a means of extending its political reach, is promoting the use of Syrian dubbing as Syria is its sole ally in the Arab world. So, the boycott of Syrian soaps may be hitting two birds with one stone.
EVERY Arabic-speaking country has its own lively dialect, each one a world away from the classical Arabic of the Koran and the modern, sterile-sounding version used by pan-Arab channels such as Al-Jazeera. Some have much in common; the Levantine tongues of Syria, Lebanon, Jordan and Palestine, for example. Those of Morocco and the rest of the Maghreb are gobbledygook to many Arabs. Fast-paced Egyptian, with its abundance of jokes and puns, is the cockney of the Arab world.
Egypt has long dominated the Arab film industry and with it, the world of dubbing. But thanks to the increasing popularity of Syrian musalsalaat, or soap operas, filmed on location rather than in studios, the Syrian vernacular with its soft lilting tones is on the up. It is used in everything from “Bab al-Hara”, a saga about a Damascene neighbourhood under the French mandate to programmes dealing with Islamic extremism and adultery. Even Turkish soap operas such as Gümüs—Nour in Arabic—have been been dubbed into Syrian. The Syrians have been faster on their feet commercially when it comes to dubbing, and have offered cheaper rates than the Egyptians, where much television output is still in the hands of lumbering state broadcasters. Many also think that Syrian Arabic is closer in sound to classical Arabic, so more appropriate to a pan-Arab audience.
…
Today is the day. Online protesters have called for Saudi women to get in the car and drive. Not surprisingly, Saudi media has no reports on the matter, in part due to the fact that Saudi dailies are morning papers, already printed before women were to take to the road. Their online presences, though, don’t have anything yet, either. That, I have to assume, is because this is a story the editors have been told is ‘non-reportable’.
Media outside the Kingdom, though, are not so controlled…
Al-Jazeera TV reports that not only are some women driving, but they intend to keep it up until a royal decree acknowledges their rights:
Saudi women launch bid to defy driving ban
Activists in the kingdom say action will keep going until a royal decree allowing women to drive is issuedA campaign to defy Saudi Arabia’s ban on women driving is under way, with reports of some women getting behind the wheel in the country.
Activists have not appealed for mass protests in any specific sites, but have urged Saudi women to begin a mutiny on Friday against the male-only driving rules.
Women who have driving licences obtained abroad are being urged to run their errands themselves without relying on male drivers.
“We want women from today to begin exercising their rights,” Wajeha al-Huwaidar, a Saudi women’s rights activist, said.
She has posted internet clips of herself driving in 2008.
“Today on the roads is just the opening in a long campaign,” she said. “We will not go back.”
…
The Washington Post runs with an Associated Press story claiming that several women had indeed taken to the road. Interestingly, there are also reports that some Saudi men have dressed themselves in abayas and driven around in order to confuse police. That’s not without risk to them, though, as cross-dressing is highly frowned upon, both for security and religious/moral reasons.
‘Saudi women, start your engines:’
Campaign against driving ban hits the roadDUBAI, United Arab Emirates — Several Saudi women boldly got behind the wheel Friday, including one who managed a 45-minute trip through the nation’s capital, seeking to ignite a road rebellion against the male-only driving rules in the ultraconservative kingdom.
Activists — inspired in part by the uprisings around the Arab world — have not appealed for mass protests in any specific sites. But they urged Saudi women to begin a growing mutiny against the driving restrictions that are supported by clerics backing austere interpretations of Islam and enforced by powerful morality squads.
Encouragement poured in via the Internet. “Take the wheel. Foot on the gas,” said one Twitter message on the main site women2Drive. Another urged: “Saudi women, start your engines!”
The defiance could bring difficult choices for the Western-backed Saudi authorities who have far have escaped major unrest from the Middle East turmoil. Officials could either launch a crackdown on the women and facing international pressure or giving way to the demands and angering traditional-minded clerics and other groups opposing reforms.
…