By Walid Shoebat
The crucifixion of opponents to Muhammad Mursi in front of the presidential palace is a story that went viral; it was initiated by Arabic Sky News and created much buzz; it is now being challenged by many as “another Christian legend”. World Net Daily brought in a YouTube video to show that the original article existed which one journalist, Jonathan Kay of the National Post discounted as not enough evidence. One of Kay’s reasons for dismissing the story was that:
“…the story doesn’t just allege that a crucifixion has taken place somewhere in Egypt: It alleges that multiple crucifixions have taken place in front of the presidential palace. That would be the equivalent of, say, mass lynchings taking place in front of the White House, or a giant gang rape taking place in front of Ottawa’s Centennial Flame fountain.”
By this, Kay forces an insane comparison in which he compares the White House to Egypt’s Presidential Palace ruled by Mursi, an Islamist. It is akin to claiming that Nazis burning books in Germany on May 10, 1933 was impossible since we must first find American universities doing the same.
That’s merely a spec; we are here to reach to the truth of the matter. Kay’s standard was apparently a video of Biblically horrifying precision, like a scene from Mel Gibson’s The Passion of Christ to surface as evidence for him to “believe”. He discounts that Sky News even issued the article:
(Update: In response to my article, WND has posted a new article claiming they have confirmed the original Sky report — but the only relevant new evidence produced is an obscure Youtube video produced by a third party, which purports to reproduce text from the deleted Sky web story).
But such an “update” doesn’t hold water. Kay’s honest journalism is tarnished, the use of “purports”, “obscure”, and “third party” are pepper flakes intended to spice up his original screw-up, where he claimed that the Sky News report never even existed. I could easily produce several reputable media sources that show the original article posted on Sky News. One out of those several shows not only the Sky News article but also a photo of a naked man who was rescued by security forces. Al-Watan even mentions Sky News deleting the article and they showed the original article.
Kay’s update to his report is meaningless.
While I must agree that news out of Egypt is at times filled with bias, in addition to Sky News, there is a fully credible eyewitness who can be heard at Al-Haq wa-Dalal radio. They interviewed Ramda Fuad, a leader in the women’s division of the Egyptian National Party. Fuad was the main organizer of the demonstrations opposing Mursi in front the Presidential Palace. She described the beatings and burnings of tents set up by opposition. What she adds is in fact confirmed by other sources, that the Muslim Brotherhood as she stated “stripped men naked” (photos were produced), “beat women in horrifying ways” and even witnessed one of the crucifixions:
“they propped up a young man and tied him up on a tree”.
The interviewer interrupted:
“What do you mean they tied him to a tree? I heard of a crucifixion.”
“Yes, this is the incident… I saw a young man was beaten to a pulp while he was hung on the tree… Yes this is what I witnessed … he was a young man less the 21 years old.”
Fuad explained that…
“…women even ran to mosques and men ran after them to attack them in the mosques. No one was spared.”
Her eyewitness testimony checks out. Al Dostour al-Watany, another Egyptian source under the title “The Muslim Brotherhood Crucify Dissidents in Front of The Presidential Palace in Egypt” showed a gruesome photo originally taken of a man the Egyptian security forces finally saved. Fuad’s story is confirmed since a young man, whose side resembles that of a shark victim can obviously be seen. Was that all manufactured? Al-Wai Al-Arabi (Arab Awakening) produced another photo of a naked man just as Fuad described; he was covered with a blanket after being rescued from the crucifixion scene.
How about some independent reports? Al-Madanya (The Secular) did its own independent investigation as to what happened on August 8th, in front of the Presidential Palace. They provide several witnesses to the event:
“The Arab Foundation expresses its condemnation of the unknown individuals as well as President of the Republic d. Mohamed Morsi who in front of the federal presidential palace assaulted supporters of Tawfiq Okasha … the Brotherhood attacked them with sticks and knives and Molotov cocktails on the evening of August 8th as it was reported that some of those were crucified on the trees in which the attacks, according to information available resulted in the killing of two people and injuring dozens.”
Why don’t western liberals at least do what The Lawyers Union in Egypt did by demanding an investigation and probe into the accusations against Muhammad Mursi relative to the events on August 8th in which it is alleged that Republican Guards were prevented from intervening to rescue what they termed “Muslim Brotherhood gangs that perpetrated the most despicable attack on civilians”.
Shadi Tal’at, the president of the Lawyers Union, approved the report.
If western media wants video and photos from an area that media was not allowed in, the question I ask is: When did these same media ever report on Syrian Muslim Brotherhood and Salafi rebels lynching, beheading and otherwise executing thousands? We’ve obtained several videos of horrifying scenes, which are more than just slightly reminiscent of what occurred in Nazi Germany. Neither the left nor the right is reporting on these atrocities.
Conscientious objectors in the Middle East are having much difficulty finding any Western conscience in reporting the truth provided from Arabic sources which are crying out for Western attention. Syria is on the brink of becoming Muslim Brotherhood territory. Will the headlines then say as what happened in Egypt “Moderate Muslim Brotherhood Victory in Syria”?
Here is the truth of the matter: Kay was right on an assumption he made; no one can produce a Passion of the Christ type crucifixion that occurred outside the Presidential Palace with a Jesus look-alike showing bloody hand marks. That is if one defines crucifixion that nails must be hammered into the hands and the feet. Crucifixion is when a victim is affixed to a tree or a cross by ropes or nails, or some combination thereof. In this case, the evidence is clear; crucifixion by roping victims to trees did happen. Must we wait until the Brotherhood perfects its vices? Are these liberals helping the other liberals in Egypt by shedding doubt? Are they in denial of horror to prevent having to confront it or are they aiding and abetting the Muslim Brotherhood?
However, all of that actually avoids the big picture. As we see the Arab Spring become an Islamic winter, more and more Islamic terminology is necessary in order to learn. The discussion in the Egyptian parliament on legal issues like Hiraba is fact. Hiraba refers to Islamic law regarding punishments and now the Muslim Brotherhood gangs are beginning to exercise it. The injunction comes straight out of the Quran:
Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment” (Q5:33)
It includes 4 styles of punishments: public execution (Qatl), crucifixion (Salb) and as crazy as it sounds, amputating one hand and one foot from opposite sides or exile (Nafy).
During the Egyptian elections, it is a fact that the Egyptian Member of Parliament from the Nour Party (Salafist) announced that he would like to see strict enforcement of Sharia law relative to punishment for various forms of criminal behavior:
“The penalties according to Azzazy’s bill as we said are “execution” in the case of “murder”, or “cutting one arm and one leg from opposite sides” (min Khilaf) of the culprit’s body in the cases of “robbery and forcible taking of property”. If the taking of possessions is accompanied by murder, the penalty would be “death” or even “crucifixion”, to be determined by the judge.”
Sheikh Mahmoud Ashour, former Undersecretary of Al-Azhar also supported the bill. Remember, the primary difference between Salafists and the Muslim Brotherhood is that the latter believes in muruna or the lifting of prohibitions to portray it as more secular and moderate while the former uses no such deceit. Both groups seek the same ends, just different means. During the elections, MP Gamal Heshmat from the Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party actually praised the bill. Even Malik Alwan, the main Sheikh of the Sufi Supreme Council supported it. Westerners still promote a legend that Sufi Muslims are simply mystics. This is false. Even Hamdin Sabahi, one of the candidates for president who lost, supported the second article of the Constitution of Islamic law and says:
“…there is no difference between Muslim and Christian when it comes to Hiraba.”
Hiraba applies to both Christians and secularists. Muhammad Salim el-a’wwa, another candidate who lost, supported the bill as well. He said that under former People’s Assembly Speaker Sufi Abu Taleb, draft laws were adjusted to match Islamic Sharia but were later shelved intentionally.
It does not really require a change in Section two of the Egyptian Constitution, which currently states that:
“Islam is the religion of the nation and Sharia is the first or the central source of the law.”
All that Egypt needs to pass the bill is to insist on fully following section 2. All of this stems from the Arab Spring, which the West supported. Shame on them. We knew this would be an ‘I told you so’ moment’. It’s now an Islamic winter.
Crucified Dissidents In Front of The Presidential Palace
Thursday, August 9th, 2012, 3:19 AM Abu Dhabi 11:19 PM Greenwich
Arabic Sky News
Sky News correspondent confirmed that members of the Muslim Brotherhood crucified dissidents to Muhammad Mursi naked on trees in front of the presidential palace. In addition, other demonstrators from the Muslim Brotherhood closed the gates not allowing entry to Media City in the area of Sixth of October as they attacked popular media figures. The demonstrators also yelled slogans denouncing the Farayeen TV station Tawfiq Akasheh and others whom they termed ‘Corrupt Media’ as one attacked the editor of Yaum Sabi’ (Seventh Day) Newspaper Khalid Salah. Eyewitnesses also confirmed that groups from the Muslim Brotherhood arrived in special busses and motor vehicles attacking with signs that say ‘The Media of Corruption’. These groups then were divided in sections to close the entryways blocking entry and exit from Media City.