Updates from AIJAC

Arab media update

June 21, 2001
Number 06/01 #08

Below are three recent translations from the Arab media. The first is a particularly crude antisemitic piece glorifying Hitler and denying the Holocaust from a government controlled Egyptian daily, Al-Akhbar. It remains both a disgrace and an obstacle to peace that 20-years after the Arab-Israel treaty, the official Egyptian press remains grossly anti-semitic and a major source of Arab Holocaust denial.

Second is a discussion on the subject of Holocaust Denial on Al-Jazeera, the Qatari Arabic satellite TV station which has been hailed by many as potentially liberating the Arab world from the government-controlled official media. Unfortunately, this program was not atypical for Al-Jazeera, appealing to the lowest common denominator, that is, the most extreme view on the Arab-Israel conflict and Jews. The program gave Holocaust deniers the dominant voice and the most airtime, and a sensible Arab liberal, 'Afif Al-Akhdhar from Tunisia, was essentially shouted down by the host and other guests when he tried to argue that denial is both unproductive and unsustainable.

Finally, to avoid giving a monolithic picture, I offer a moderate Egyptian voice, playwright Ali Salem, arguing for the benefits of peace with Israel. Unfortunately, his views are very much minority ones in the Arab media, not often heard. All the translations below were supplied by MEMRI (Middle East Media Research Institute), a Washington-based independent think tank.

The Egyptian Government Paper Al-Akhbar Once Again Defends Hitler

Following criticism of President Husni Mubarak during his visit to the US in early April 2001, the Egyptian government daily Al-Akhbar temporarily ceased publishing articles defending Hitler. Recently however, the paper again published an article by Mahmoud Muhammad Khadhr, a cleric from Al-Azhar University, entitled "In Defence of Hitler"(1). Following are experts of the article:

"No one was sorry when Hitler vanished from the world; he took his own life, as did many of his ministers and [military] officers. They did it so that they wouldn't have to see the faces of the old ape, Churchill, and the big bear, Stalin, who would sentence them to death with no one to defend them or ease their punishment."

"Each one of them has the right to a defence, whatever their infractions may have been, and even if they admit to their [crimes]. But Hitler's executioners took this right away from him and attributed to him crimes that he committed and that he did not commit. I do not know what would have happened to Churchill, de Gaulle and Roosevelt, had Hitler won. Perhaps the crimes for which they deserve the death sentence would have been much worse than all that Hitler has done."

"But all of Hitler's crimes and infractions were forgotten by the world, except for one crime that was exaggerated and blown completely out of proportion, thanks to the insistence of world Zionism to continue to stoke the fire. The reason for this was the emotional need of the Sons of Jacob to extort Germany and to eat away at its resources. It is hard to believe that the Europeans and Americans, who are entitled to thinking, confirming or denying anything - including the [existence of] the prophets and God himself - cannot address the 'Jewish Question', or more precisely, the false Holocaust, whose numbers and scope they have exaggerated until it has reached the level of the merciless destruction of six million Jews, only because Hitler saw them as an inferior race unworthy of living next to the Germanic race, which must rule the world."

"Anyone who knocks on this door encounters the most horrible accusations and is tried in all of the European countries and in the US for anti-Semitism, for two reasons:"

"The first is Zionism's control over thinking in the West. This control testifies to the degree of oppression of thought by the Zionist propaganda apparatus in those nations. No one can oppose this oppression, for fear of being tried and sent to prison, or having his livelihood and his reputation threatened..."

"The second reason is, without a doubt, the great fear that the lies of Zionism will be exposed if the subject [of the Holocaust] is investigated by facts and if logical conclusions are made."

"The first dubious fact is the number of six million Jews who were burnt in the gas chambers. Did they have families, children, who demanded compensation, or did Zionism see itself as their only heir? If we assume that every person had an average of five family members, this would bring the number of Jews affected to thirty million. It is certain that many Jews escaped before the ship sunk, that many of them therefore, survived, despite the so-called extermination and burning [in the gas chambers]. This would mean that the number of Jews in Germany was sixty million, although the total number of Germans has never reached this number."

"Even if we cross off one zero from the six million and are left with a tenth of this number, it would still seem exaggerated and would have to be investigated."

"No one can ask why Hitler punished the Jews. The reason had nothing to do with that broken record known as anti-Semitism. If Hitler was an anti-Semite, why was this anti-Semitism mentioned only after the World War was declared? Hitler could have expelled - in the period in which he built Germany up and prepared it for the War in order to recover what it lost in WWI - this undesirable [Jewish] race from Germany and planted it in South Africa or anywhere else in the world. Did Hitler attack the Jews or did their crime deserve even more?..."

"The Zionists were a fifth column in Germany, and they betrayed the country that hosted them, in order to realize their aspirations. This had to be exposed, [and indeed], Hitler discovered that the Zionists were spies for the Allied Powers. Inevitably, he was enraged and took revenge on them for this great betrayal."

"Both the Zionist movement and the Allied Powers had an interest in keeping this matter a secret, so that people would not know that the Zionists were punished for helping the Allied Powers, for betraying [Germany], and for stabbing Hitler in the back."

"Even Germany and the government set up by the Allied Powers could not tell the truth, although they knew it, because it was under the influence of the Allied Powers, and because defeated nations must pay. Thus, the Zionist movement took control over the subject from Europe and the US and has easily made laws with which they try anyone who wants to raise the subject. Even historians can research any subject except for this forbidden one. Furthermore, the influence of the Zionist oppression has reached some Arab countries, who prevented the meeting of two conferences of historians who want to investigate the subject and expose the truth. The conference was delayed more than once, but some of Egypt's main journalists promised to host this conference and we hope that it will succeed in exposing the secrets surrounding this subject..."

"We denounce racial discrimination and the persecution of any person on the basis of religion, race or colour, anywhere in the world. Those who yell about false persecutions that allegedly occurred half a century ago, must not ignore the persecution of others, their expulsion from their houses and their land, and the confiscation of their property. They should not commit those crimes that they claim were committed against them."

"Likewise, Germany should pay compensations to the victims of mines that were planted in the Western desert [in Egypt], and compensations for the land that lay untouched for half a century, before it pays compensations for false crimes that have no proof except for false and misleading claims."

Endnote (1) Al-Akhbar, May 27, 2001

Zionism and Nazism: A Discussion on the TV Channel Al-Jazeera

Dr. Faysal Al-Qasem's weekly talk show of May 15,2001, on the Qatar TV channel Al-Jazeera, discussed the question, "Is Zionism worse than Nazism?"[1] Against the background of this program were on the one hand, the anti-Semitic remarks made by Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad, and on the other, the manifest signed by 14 Arab intellectuals, denouncing the planned international conference of Holocaust deniers in Beirut.

The program hosted Dr. Hayat Al-Hwayek 'Atiya, "researcher of Zionism" and follower of Holocaust denier Roger Garaudi and translator of his book into Arabic. Liberal Tunisian intellectual 'Afif Al-Akhdhar represented the opposition to Holocaust denial in the Arab world.

At the opening of the program, Al-Qasem, posed the following question to Dr. 'Atiya: "Is there a difference between Zionism and Nazism?" 'Atiya responded that the question should be looked at from two perspectives, the logical and the textual. Logically, she claimed, "the question must be asked: 'what is it exactly that we denounce in Nazism?'" According to her, there are two elements in Nazism that should be denounced: "The first is the racism, that is, the belief in the superiority of the Aryan race over the rest of the races, and the second is the military expansion at the expense of others, stemming from this belief."

After establishing these two points, Dr. 'Atiya stated that these two principles "precisely existed in the Zionist mentality and ideology... ever since the days of the Jewish Torah... the belief in being the 'Chosen People' is one of the foundations of the Zionist project. As for the expansion, there is nothing left to say, because we are living through it."

As for the textual perspective, 'Atiya cited "some of the words of both Jewish and Nazi intellectuals. Nahum Goldman says that there is a common trait to both German Nazis and Jews, and that is the selectivity and the belief in a common destiny as a divine mission. Writer Michel Rashlan compares sections of Mein Kampf to the Jewish Torah, and comes to the conclusion that... the ideological roots of the Nazis can be found in the Book of Joshua... In 1935 a French newspaper published an interview with the Nazi theoretician, Alfred Rosenberg, in which he said he supports Zionism and is enchanted by it, because of its similarity to Nazism..."

'Afif Al-Akhdhar was asked to respond to the comparison between Nazism and Zionism, but he began by addressing the manifest by 14 Arab intellectuals, denouncing the planned conference of Holocaust deniers in Beirut.

The conference was subsequently cancelled by the Lebanese government following protests from Arab intellectuals and Jewish groups: "The only reason for which I did not sign the manifest was that I was not asked to. Furthermore, if they had not been in a rush, hundreds of Arab intellectuals would have signed it," explained 'Afif Al-Akhdhar.

The main reasons given by Al-Akhdhar regarding his stance against the conference of historical revisionists in Beirut are as follows: He explained that from a political point of view, following the collapse of the Soviet Bloc, no policy can succeed if it is not favourable to international diplomacy and public opinion. "If we adopt the Nazis' garbage," he explained, "we will lose on our issue, namely the liberation of the Arab lands occupied in 1967... Politically, if we support revisionism and Holocaust deniers... we will lose international diplomacy."

Al-Akhdhar began by emphasizing that he does not denounce revisionist historians only for political reasons, but also on moral grounds. Before he could finish his explanation 'Atiya interrupted him and would not allow him to continue. "Madame," Al-Akhdhar said to her, "do not be a Nazi and do not be fascist."

Once Dr. 'Atiya was given the stage, she complained: "He did not answer the question. He avoided the subject. I was talking about the 1930s, when there was no revisionism and no Holocaust. I was talking about the cooperation between Zionism and Nazism... he evaded history in order to attack the Beirut conference... He should not be telling us about appeasing diplomacy and the media. [The Arab intellectuals] living in the West only want to appease. Those of us who live here are not interested in appeasing anyone; we are interested in the truth... The Jews supported the Nuremberg Laws because they made the Transfer easier..."

Dr. 'Atiya's comments angered Al-Akhdhar, who accused her of "talking like the Taliban, saying that 'the media doesn't interest her.'" According to him, "whoever wants to recover the land and establish a homeland for the Palestinians must take the international media into consideration."

"There is no doubt that there is a commonality between Nazism and Zionism," Al-Akhdhar said, but he quickly added, "this commonality exists between Nazism and all nationalist movements," which are based on one principle, namely the centrality of ethnic and racial elements. That is why they use expressions like "the Chosen People" or the phrase common among Islamists: "We are the greatest nation delivered to mankind." "The nations that have given up national narcissism and the centrality of ethnicity," he added, "are the nations that have risen to a higher level of civilization."

On the defensive, 'Atiya claimed she is involved in the media, even in the French language, and denied having said the media was unimportant. She added that she is a Maronite Christian and therefore "I cannot be compared to the Taliban."

Al-Qasem raised the possibility of renewing the UN resolution equating Zionism to racism, and Al-Akhdhar claimed this proposal "is un-political": "While there is a consensus that Israel is not a Nazi state, you get up and yell that Israel is a Nazi state. Then you get into trouble, just like one of the leaders did recently [meaning Bashar Assad]. Then you approach international diplomacy and waste weeks and months trying to explain and clarify and claim that your comments were taken out of context, etc. The main thing for us is the struggle against the occupation and the settlements. What is the point, then, to constantly say: Israel is Nazi, Israel is worse than Nazism, Israel is worse than fascism, etc. We cannot fight against international diplomacy, because then we will lose our cause... We must learn from Israel and be realistic."

On the other hand, 'Atiya claimed that dealing with the Holocaust serves the general interests of the Arabs and Palestinians. "The media is psychology," she explained, "the comparison of Zionism to Nazism in the media is a blow to Western psychology, because the Western conscience is particularly sensitive to the Nazis."

The discussion was then opened to audience participation. On the line was Ibrahim Alloush of Jordan, editor of the anti-Semitic web-site The Free Arab Voice and board member of the League Against Zionism and Racism. He claimed that "The Holocaust myth has three aspects. First, there is the lie about the policy of extermination of the Jews; second, the lie about the killing of six million Jews in the Second World War; and third, the lie about the gas chambers. The most important aspect about the Holocaust myth are the tales about the gas chambers, because they are where [the locations] the Jews were supposedly exterminated. If we prove that the gas chambers did not exist, as the [revisionist] historians have done, the entire Holocaust myth will collapse."

Alloush agreed with 'Atiya's assertion that Holocaust denial serves Arab interests, "because it is not merely a historical question, but an issue of contemporary politics and media. The importance of the Holocaust myths for the Palestinians, Arabs and Muslims, is that they justify the need for the existence of an occupying Zionist state, because the Jews need a state of their own for safe refuge. Secondly, it also justifies the Zionist movement's violation of UN resolutions, claiming what happened to the Jews in the so-called Holocaust gives them a excuse for not following international law..."

Alloush also addressed the intellectuals who signed the manifest against the Beirut conference and stated they "betrayed their role as intellectuals because they asked an Arab government to prevent intellectual activity. They also betrayed their political role as Arab intellectuals, because instead of fighting Zionism, they joined it and adopted its rhetoric... Accepting the Holocaust is the heart of cultural normalization with the Zionist enemy..."

Al-Akhdhar said that although Dr. 'Atiya's activities could be described as a media campaign, "it is a media campaign aimed at Arab public opinion, which is already in her pocket." He, on the other hand, is trying to win over the world's public opinion. Al-Akhdhar explained, "she has no chance of writing in any international newspaper, besides the revisionist newspapers which are distributed secretly. She cannot say it on CNN or on any Western TV station. Instead of dealing with the Nazi's garbage and the lies of the revisionists and the deniers, we should be translating the works of the Israeli new-historians. They have truly exploded the Zionist founding myths, according to which Palestine was a land without a people... They have proved that the Palestinian people was exiled and that Arab villages were turned into Jewish villages."

Enraged, 'Atiya responded, "It is a shame that an intellectual should stand on the side of the strong and not on the side of the truth... President Bashar Assad said that Zionism is equal to Nazism. This is a courageous position that must be commended rather than be denounced in order to appease the West... Why does he (Al-Akhdhar) call for translating the writings of the Israeli new-historians? Because they are Jews? At the same time, however, he denounces the French, the American and the English historians."

At this point, the show's production team brought French Holocaust denier Robert Faurisson on the line. Faurisson said, "Historical revisionism is the most dangerous thing for Zionism. Historical revisionism that proves the hard and bitter facts about Zionism -- this is the nuclear weapon of the poor. We have proved and are still proving that there was no massacre or Holocaust of the Jews, and that there were no gas chambers for the Jews and that the figure of six million victims is exaggerated... if you want to protect Palestine, you cannot do so with guns and shells, but by saying the truth about the biggest lie of the Twentieth and Twenty-First Centuries, the lie of the Holocaust.

Al-Akhdhar's response to Faurisson was that it is his right and the right of all American and European researchers to research what they want and to say whatever they feel. However, it is not constructive for the Arabs to use the following statements: "When 96% of the German people denounce Nazism, it is strange that we [Arabs] should come and say to the German people: You are wrong. Nazism was not a disaster, the Jews simply invented a massacre that never happened, and invented gas chambers that exist only in their imagination. This is a kind of stupidity and insanity. I am not opposed to Garaudi or Faurisson writing, I am against us adopting this rhetoric..."

At this point, Dr. 'Atiya lost her cool again and yelled at Al-Akhdhar: "I do not allow you to speak in the name of the Arab intellectuals... Three days ago we held a conference at the Jordanian Writers' Association. 150 intellectuals attended, none of whom were willing to sign. What you say is shameful."

The show's host, Al-Qasem, joined 'Atiya and said Al-Akhdhar's statements "are full of contradictions. At first he calls the revisionists garbage, and now he said that Faurisson has the freedom to write what he wants but that it would be a mistake for us to use it.

At this point, the host cited statements of Rabbi Ovadia Yosef against Arabs and his call for exterminating them. Al-Akhdhar explained that "Rabbi Ovadia Yosef is a criminal and insane person, and his is a case for mental doctors. He was even denounced in Israel. He is like the Taliban."

The host, Al-Qasem, lost his cool and defied his guest: "Mr. 'Afif Al-Akhdhar, why is it that every time the Zionists expose their true character, you act just like the Western media, and begin to call them insane. When Goldstein killed the people at prayer, they said he was crazy. These people express Zionism's true belief. They are the true spokesmen of Zionism. He [Ovadia Yosef] is by no means insane. He is the official spokesman of the Jewish people who voted for Sharon."

'Atiya joined in with Dr. Al-Qasem and explained that Rabbi Ovadia Yosef "is a religious man, and the Book of Joshua goes even further. This man expresses his religion."

Al-Qasem decided at this point to cite [a caller] Abd Al-Hamid Thakr's opinion from Al-Jazeera's web site: "Sons of Zion, whom our God described as the descendants of apes and pigs, will not be deterred unless there is a true Holocaust that will exterminate all of them at once, along with the traitors, the collaborators, the scum of the [Islamic] nation..."

At this point, Dr. 'Atiya took out a large picture of the baby, Iman Hiju, who was recently killed in the territories from Israeli fire. On the picture, written in red, "The murderers of the prophets are the murders of the innocent". She cried out: "This is the Holocaust, this is the Holocaust. There is no Jewish Holocaust, there is only a Palestinian Holocaust." In addition, 'Atiya claimed that 'Afif Al-Akhdhar "is weaving conspiracies against the Palestinian Holocaust by repeating what the Western media says.

The two exchanged insults, Al-Akhdhar calling 'Atiya a liar, and she referring to him as a "Nazi" and a "fascist". Al-Akhdhar then summed up his view of 'Atiya's position: "Faurisson and Garaudi can write what they want, and they will always write garbage. Garaudi, for example, is garbage. As a person he is garbage."

Concluding the show, the host, Dr. Faisal Al-Qasem, read the results of the internet poll held on the Al-Jazeera web site comparing Zionism and Nazism. 12,374 people participated in the poll and the results are as follows: "84.6% of Arabs said that Zionism is worse than Nazism; 11.1% said that Zionism is equal to Nazism; 2.7% said that Nazism is worse than Zionism. All that is left for me to do is to congratulate the Zionists for this painful result; indeed, they have excelled in exceeding the Nazis."

An Egyptian Intellectual in Praise of Peace with Israel

"The Parrots - The Enemies of Peace Between Egypt and Israel"

(In his weekly column in the Egyptian weekly "Ahbar Al-Yaum" [May 5, 2001], renowned Egyptian playwright and supporter of peace, Ali Salem, criticizes the enemies of peace in Egypt. )

"War between Egypt and Israel is impossible in President Mubarak's era even if the Israeli public elects Odavia Yosef who is so hateful towards the Arabs. But war is possible and even certain in another era when a group of political extremists takes over in Egypt."

"The Egyptian-Israeli peace agreement is strong and stable even more than the supporters of peace themselves believe it is. To this very date we have not heard that any of the parties has violated it or expressed dissatisfaction with it. Even the most bitter opponents of the agreements know what stability it gained for Egypt. It gave her a certain amount of freedom and prosperity that, by the standards of our region, may be considered maximal."

"In Israel too, even the most extremists know that peace with Egypt realized for them a dream that was for decades a mission impossible. It wasn't just the line that was drawn between peace and war, but also the line that turned Egypt from a state with a revolutionary totalitarian regime to a state with a civil society, a state of institutions... Simple people in Egypt welcomed that peace agreement after long anticipation and began to work seriously on Egyptian infrastructure and all other beneficial projects."

"However, while separating the two countries was easy just by marking the boundary with border signs - the separation of old revolutionary ideas from new ideas [calling for] peace and freedom - was rather an impossible task."

"Thus, a free market emerged [in Egypt] in which the old merchandise of old ideas jumbled with the new ideas. Despite the difficulty in marketing repression in the market of freedom, the owners of this revolutionary ideology gave their life in defense of it, knowing that this is their last battle. However, the train of Israeli-Egyptian peace departed and all that remained for them was to curse the passengers and throw mud at them while any attempt to stop the train would mean falling under its wheels."

"The revolutionary ideology is an enjoying and even profitable ideology. It does not demand professionalism, nor research or knowledge. It does not demand hard work to improve the peoples' standard of living as individuals and as a nation. It needs only one thing: to turn the human being into a little parrot with glimmering colours that repeats old slogans that were dropped long ago after it became clear what catastrophes they cause."

"Alas, what terrible torture this little parrot suffers when he is demanded to say things that he himself thought. Alas, what a pain he feels when you demand of him to think of the people's problems and to propose suitable solutions. How terribly the columnist-parrot suffers when you deprive him of the instructions from above and demand of him to reach the truth independently, and state it for the best interest of his country and its people and be responsible for his statements."

"Articles, poems, songs, movies, television series, books, research, symposia - all can be summed up in one quick parrot-sentence: Peace[squawk]...War[squawk]...Sadat[squawk]...Abd Al-Nasser[squawk]... Sinai was lost... Sinai was taken back...The Egyptian regime... The Iraqi regime...[squawk]..."

"Unfortunately, there is no way in the world to turn parrots into eagles, nor to turn peacocks into normal human-beings who would recognize the huge achievements of others. The only reason for the ongoing attack on President Sadat's initiative in Camp David was the envy for the amazingly quick manner in which it was carried out. Within less than two weeks this man [Sadat] managed to counter the most extreme men in Israel [meaning Begin], make peace, restore his land and spare his people bloodshed. The man who said clearly in the October War [in 1973]: "We can fight" - said [at Camp David] to the whole world: "We also want peace and are capable of shouldering it as we have shouldered past wars."

"I have a little story for the young generation: In May 1967 Egypt asked the U.N. Emergency Force to withdraw from Sinai and closed the Sharm Al-Sheik Straits. This was the first time the Egyptians ever learnt that the Israelis are crossing Egyptian waters in accordance with the agreement that has been reached after the war of 1956. So we closed the straits and made a huge political and media celebration. We told the whole world: "Any ship that will cross the straits to Israel or from it will be immediately destroyed by us." That's what we said and it was a declaration of war. At the same time instructions were secretly given [to the Egyptian Army] not to harm any ship on its way to Eilat or from it. We heard it from Air Force Field Marshal Al-Dgheidi in a lecture that was recorded in the 'Al-Nidaa Al-Jadeed Association."'

"So these are the constant characteristics of the revolutionary ideology: On the public level - screaming, shattering, blaring, spreading myths of courageous battles, thrashing agreements, etc. while on the secret level - 'what needs to be done needs to be done...'"

"Let me repeat: War between Egypt and Israel is not possible in President Mubarak's time but [only] when a revolutionary government rises to power in Egypt."

"These revolutionaries are incapable and unwilling to act in a productive way. They think of nothing but the power which they cannot achieve except by waging war... then the war machine will take off... after a few days of killing and fighting and after a few thousands Egyptians and Israeli corpses [pile-up] a cease-fire will reached, only to be able to begin preparing for the new battle... This is how these revolutionaries stabilise their rule in a suffocating atmosphere in which 'no voice should be higher than the voice of battle," namely, their own voice..."

"The present generation must see to it that it transforms Egypt to the coming generations with a certain amount of peace that will be impossible to destroy and with a certain amount of freedom that will be impossible to wipe out."

"If you agree with me on that - meet me again [in my next weekly column] - next Saturday. If you don't - you are surely, one of those who like to see heads of states coming down from the balcony on the clouds... [hinting to a known show appearance of Saddam Hussein]. In this case, too, meet me, so I can get on your nerves..."

The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) P.O. Box 27837, Washington, DC 20038-7837 Phone: (202) 955-9070 Fax: (202) 955-9077 E-Mail: memri@memri.org http://www.memri.org

Copyright © AIJAC 2001
Last Updated 21 June, 2001