Bin Laden Chose Wrong Path in History: Khashoggi
ARAB NEWS: DAMMAM: Prominent Riyadh-based Saudi journalist Jamal A. Khashoggi, who fought alongside Afghans and other Arabs including Osama Bin Laden in the war against the erstwhile Soviet Union in the 1980s, described Bin Laden’s killing as no big news. “If you ask me, it is no news because I expected this to happen a long time ago,” he told Arab News in an exclusive interview.

Khashoggi said the fact that Osama survived for this long after Sept. 11, 2001, attacks was the real story. “It was a big failure of US intelligence,” he said.

According to him it is a very peculiar thing to happen in a very peculiar year. “The news of his killing comes at a time when the Al-Qaeda ideology has been completely rejected by the Arab world. Al-Qaeda was in eclipse … to be very specific it was buried in January 2011 in Tahrir Square in Cairo,” he said, referring to the massive people’s movement that swept aside longtime Egyptian ruler Hosni Mubarak.

“In a sense it is the right ending for Osama because the recent development in the Arab world clearly indicated that there was no place for him or his ideology,” said Khashoggi. “The rise of the nonviolent movement in the Arab world was the complete rejection of the Al-Qaeda philosophy.”

Khashoggi said he felt sorry that Bin Laden chose the wrong path when he was at the crossroads of history. “He hijacked our religion and chose the path of violence. I remember how we were all in the grip of violence in the early and mid-2000s, here in Saudi Arabia, Algeria … there were suicide bombings, bomb blasts, killings. His ideology did not conform with my understanding of Islam,” he said. » | Siraj Wahab | Arab News | Monday, May 02, 2011

Editorial: Warm Welcome to Barack Obama
ARAB NEWS: For too long the Arab world has been waiting in vain for a US administration that will address the rights of the Palestinians within a viable sovereign state of their own. For too long America’s friends and allies within the region, among whom the best and most long-standing has been Saudi Arabia, have been urging on successive US presidents the reality that the terrible injustices done to the Palestinians underpin the violence and extremism that has gripped the region. For too long Washington has not listened to our message that its slavish and unquestioning support for a bullying and expansionist Israel has, in fact, sabotaged America’s wider foreign policy goals in the Middle East and throughout the Muslim world.

As today we welcome President Barack Obama to the Kingdom, dare we hope that we are greeting a US leader who is at last listening to the advice and warnings that have so long been ignored in Washington? Saudi Arabia has itself provided one of the major building blocks for a lasting resolution. The 2002 Arab Peace Initiative, first proposed by King Abdullah when he was crown prince and later endorsed unanimously by the Arab League summit in Beirut, remains in place. It negates Israeli protests that they have no partners for peace, because it offers 22 Arab states who will recognize Israel as part of a comprehensive and just settlement for Palestinians. Once the Arab countries recognize Israel, the rest of the Muslim world will follow suit.

The American president has to cut through much lumber left by his predecessors. At the heart of it lies a legacy of often-deep distrust that has built up in the Arab world.

From time to time Washington promises to tackle the Palestinian issue, especially when it wanted Arab support for the Iraq war or its confrontation with Iran. Because it failed to honor this pledge, it encouraged extremism among Palestinians who felt the betrayal bitterly and gave the bigoted thugs of Al-Qaeda an excuse for their fanatical violence. Obama’s people say that when he addresses the Arab world in Cairo tomorrow, he will be speaking from the heart. No doubt. But he should know that he needs also to be speaking to the hearts of Arab people themselves, who have learned to disbelieve Washington’s warm words and will only now judge America by its deeds.

No one believes the president has a magic wand. In the Likud government of Benjamin Netanyahu he faces an apparently intransigent negotiator. But it is often the most inflexible sticks that break first. Despite the powerful Zionist Washington lobby, Obama has the power to bring about radical change for the Palestinians, for Israelis too and for the whole region. He is a man who has dedicated himself to change and indeed represents it in his own presidency. His domestic and international agendas are daunting. But it seems he recognizes how pivotal a Palestinian settlement is to a large portion of US interests. His welcome here today is, therefore, all the warmer for the high hopes with which we greet him. [Source: Arab News | Wednesday, June 03, 2009

Editorial: Don’t Pin Much Hope on Obama
ARAB NEWS: Having welcomed the historic victory of Barack Obama in the US presidential election, let us begin by shedding too much expectations of him. They are likely to be dashed — generating a great deal of pain and resentment into the bargain.

There are some quite extraordinary notions circulating about what sort of president he will be, particularly in this part of the world — for example, that he is going to turn years of American Middle East policy on its head. This is a willful, and ultimately destructive, fantasy.

Despite attempts by his more extreme opponents during the campaign to paint him as un-American, President Obama is not going to run the White House in the interests of anyone other than the American people. Nor should his victory be seen as a defeat or comeuppance for the US, although that is how it is being presented in some corners of the world. That is to ignore that a majority of Americans, fed up with the past and seeing him as the personification of the American dream, voted enthusiastically for him. He is, by virtue of his election, everything that America stands for. He is Uncle Sam, the all-American kid, The Chief.

As president, Barack Obama is going to defend American interests first, not those of some other nation. There will be attempts at dialogue, even at finding peace in the Middle East, but no one should imagine that they would be radical or pursued with all his energy and determination. Iraq is one thing — and even then there can be no certainty that every last American troop will be pulled out from there in 16 months. But a president whose deputy is Joe Biden, a man who last year said that Israel is “the single greatest strength America has in the Middle East” and who is proud to call himself a Zionist, is not going to turn his back on the Israelis. His appointment of Rahm Emanual as his chief of staff makes that doubly certain. Emanual is an even more convinced Zionist (his father was a member of the Zionist terror organization Irgun), not to mention a prominent figure in the US Jewish lobby. Far from challenging Israel, the new team may turn out to be as pro-Israeli as the one it is replacing. >>> Editorial | November 7, 2008

The Dawning of a New Dark Age – Paperback (US) Barnes & Noble >>>
The Dawning of a New Dark Age – Hardcover (US) Barnes & Noble >>>

Sam Harris: Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks
THE HUFFINGTON POST: Geert Wilders, conservative Dutch politician and provocateur, has become the latest projectile in the world's most important culture war: the zero-sum conflict between civil society and traditional Islam. Wilders, who lives under perpetual armed guard due to death threats, recently released a 15 minute film entitled Fitna ("strife" in Arabic) over the internet. The film has been deemed offensive because it juxtaposes images of Muslim violence with passages from the Qur'an. Given that the perpetrators of such violence regularly cite these same passages as justification for their actions, merely depicting this connection in a film would seem uncontroversial. Controversial or not, one surely would expect politicians and journalists in every free society to strenuously defend Wilders' right to make such a film. But then one would be living on another planet, a planet where people do not happily repudiate their most basic freedoms in the name of "religious sensitivity."

Witness the free world's response to Fitna: The Dutch government sought to ban the film outright, and European Union foreign ministers publicly condemned it, as did UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. Dutch television refused to air Fitna unedited. When Wilders declared his intention to release the film over the internet, his U.S. web-host, Network Solutions, took his website offline.

Into the breach stepped Liveleak, a British video-sharing website, which finally aired the film on March 27th. It received over 3 million views in the first 24 hours. The next day, however, Liveleak removed Fitna from its servers, having been terrorized into self-censorship by threats to its staff. But the film had spread too far on the internet to be suppressed (and Liveleak, after taking further security measures, has since reinstated it on its site as well).

Of course, there were immediate calls for a boycott of Dutch products throughout the Muslim world. In response, Dutch corporations placed ads in countries like Indonesia, denouncing the film in self-defense. Several Muslim countries blocked YouTube and other video-sharing sites in an effort to keep Wilders' blasphemy from penetrating the minds of their citizens. There have also been isolated protests and attacks on embassies, and ubiquitous demands for Wilders' murder. In Afghanistan, women in burqas could be seen burning the Dutch flag; the Taliban carried out at least two revenge attacks on Dutch troops, resulting in five Dutch casualties; and security concerns have caused the Netherlands to close its embassy in Kabul. It must be said, however, that nothing has yet occurred to rival the ferocious response to the Danish cartoons.

Meanwhile Kurt Westergaard, one of the Danish cartoonists, threatened to sue Wilders for copyright infringement, as Wilders used his drawing of a bomb-laden Muhammad without permission. Westergaard has lived in hiding since 2006 due to death threats of his own, so the Danish Union of Journalists volunteered to file this lawsuit on his behalf. Admittedly, there is something amusing about one hunted man, unable to venture out in public for fear of being killed by religious lunatics, threatening to sue another man in the same predicament over a copyright violation. But it is understandable that Westergaard wouldn't want to be repeatedly hurled at the enemy without his consent. Westergaard is an extraordinarily courageous man whose life has been ruined both by religious fanaticism and the free world's submission to it. In February, the Danish government arrested three Muslims who seemed poised to murder him. Other Danes unfortunate enough to have been born with the name "Kurt Westergaard" have had to take steps to escape being murdered in his place. (Wilder's has since removed the cartoon from the official version of Fitna.) Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks >>> By Sam Harris

The Dawning of a New Dark Age (Paperback – USA)
The Dawning of a New Dark Age (Hardcover – USA)

Arab News on Fitna
ARAB NEWS: A number of Islamic scholars and leading political figures have called for a boycott of Dutch products in protest at the film by Dutch MP Geert Wilders which attacks the Qur’an and equates Islam with violence.

It is a revolting, blasphemous and deliberately insulting film. The desire not to let this abomination pass without response is wholly understandable. Nonetheless there is little logic to a boycott. It is not the Dutch who have committed this outrage. It is an individual — albeit an MP — but one who does not represent the Dutch mainstream. It would be different if the film had been made by the Dutch government or a member of the Dutch royal family or had been approved by the Dutch Parliament.

In fact, the Dutch government has resolutely condemned the film — Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende went on television to castigate it and its maker — while Dutch TV stations have refused to show it and there has been widespread public disapproval. Moreover, at the last election, Dutch voters specifically rejected the far right with its anti-Muslim agenda. Editorial: Wilders’ Film >>> | April 18, 2008

The Dawning of a New Dark Age (Paperback - UK)
The Dawning of a New Dark Age (Hardback - UK)