Islamists Tear Down U.S. Flag In Egypt Over Anti-Islam Coptic Short Film

Although no-one knows exactly which anti-Islam film being produced in the U.S. pissed off the hordes in Egypt (and Libya), about 2,000 to 5,000 or so Islamists and soccer-Ultra fans joined forces and made their way to the Embassy in Cairo. Then a few proceeded to scale the Embassy walls and tore down the flag, replacing it with a plain black, al Qaeda-esque flag with:

“There is no god but Allah and Mohammad is his messenger.”

Warning shots were fired into the air by U.S. marine guards, and eventually Egyptian security forces took over, surrounding the compound.

More militant types in Libya actually tried to burn the U.S consulate down in Benghazi by lobbing a Rocket Propelled Grenade into the consulate. There was also fighting between the consulate guards and the militants over there which killed one American, and wounded another.

According to one witness in Cairo, the short film is being produced by some Egyptian Coptic Christian expats now living in the U.S.  This, in turn, has angered Coptics in Egypt, obviously afraid of retaliation.  Amil Ameen, a Copt and political commentator, said that these kinds of films:

“hurt Coptic Egyptians before their Muslim brothers.”

They also took advantage of the situation to stick it to the U.S. over its policies (though no mention of the money we give them), and waving pieces of the torn flag at news cameras.

The protests were organized by a few people:

Several individuals claimed responsibility for organizing the demonstrations, including Salafist leader Wesam Abdel-Wareth, who is president of Egypt's conservative Hekma television channel.

Mohammed al-Zawahiri -- the brother of al Qaeda's leader Ayman al-Zawahiri -- added that "we called for the peaceful protest joined by different Islamic factions including the Islamic Jihad, Hazem Abu Ismael movement."

"We were surprised to see the big numbers show up including the soccer Ultra fans," he said. "I just want to say, how would the Americans feel if films insulting leading Christian figures like the pope or historical figures like Abraham Lincoln were produced?"

He added that "the film portrays the prophet in a very ugly manner, eluding to topics like sex, which is not acceptable."

Some Americans might be offended, but they'd suck it up, and  you definitely would not find us out there tearing down some country's flag. According to one source, the film portrays Mohammed as gay, but then they've done the same thing to Jesus Christ, and there have been no violent protests.

Because of threats U.S. Embassy personnel were forewarned to stay away. The Embassy, in its usual politically correct way said that it:

"condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims -- as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions."
"Respect for religious beliefs is a cornerstone of American democracy," the statement said. "We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others."

The only other thing I could find about the film is the following on Al Ahram:

The controversial film is reportedly being produced by US-based Coptic-Christian Egyptians, including Esmat Zaklama and Maurice Sadeq.

Maurice Sadeq, a Coptic lawyer based in the US, announced earlier this week that the US-based 'High Authority of the Coptic State' would broadcast the 13-minute film on Tuesday to commemorate the 12th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks in New York and Washington.

Right or wrong, tacky or not, we have freedom of speech in this country, it's our inalienable right.



Sources: Al Arabiya, CNN, Al Ahram, 

UPDATE 9/12/12:
See the trailer that incited all the violence in Libya and the protests in Egypt.

Salafi Leader Bassem al-Zarqa Wants The Word "Civil" Clarified, Says All Egyptians Salafis

Salafis, those uber-conservative, ultra religious Saudi Arabian brand of Muslims that are poised to take control of the Egyptian government alongside their Muslim Brotherhood brothers refuse to get down with the word "civil", at least until they fully understand what it means.  So what exactly is their problem?  What I gather is that in post-revolution, post-Mubarak Egypt the liberals are battling the soon-to-be majority Islamists over a secular "civil" state versus a religious Sharia dominant Egypt. 

The Egyptian Salafi al-Nour Party, via  Bassem al-Zarqa (one of its members), recently told Al Arabiya News, that

“Salafis reject the use of the word ‘civil’ in a way that does not clarify what it entails and they are now trying to reach an understanding on its meaning with other political powers in Egypt."

“Salafism means following the teachings of the Prophet and his companions. It is based on those teachings that both religion and state were founded, so we can say that all Egyptians are Salafis.”

Wrong. Not all Egyptians are Salafis- there are a heck of a lot of Coptic Christians and secular-minded Muslims living in Egypt who would beg to differ, including Hani Nessira, an Egyptian writer. Nessira explains why Salafis have such a major problem with words like "civil" and "democracy":

“From the Salafi point of view, democracy and civil state mean giving people power over God’s laws and this for them is unacceptable. The creation of a civil state is part of Egypt’s history and it can be traced back to even before the 19th century.”

So, of course they would reject those words, because there is no room for democracy in an Islamist,  Shariah compliant country.  Unfortunately,  a non democratic, non "civil" Egypt would be most detrimental to the Copts who even under a predominately secular, civil state have been terribly persecuted over the decades.  Emad Gad, a Copt and member of  one of the more liberal political parties believes that the Salafis' have a problem with the word "civil"  because of their attitude towards non-Muslims living in Egypt.

“Salafis do not recognize the presence of Egyptian Christians and consider a Pakistani Muslim closer to them than an Egyptian Christian. Therefore, they undermine the principle of citizenship,” he said.

Well, if they believe that all Egyptians are Salafis (as al-Zarqa cleary stated), that doesn't leave room for
anyone else, does it.

According to Gad,  there have been

.... several fatwas issued by Salafi clerics and which label Christians apostates and prohibit dealing with them.


“The Salafi discourse is confused and has very dangerous implications which become clear in their statements about democracy as a form of apostasy.”

Gad wants the Salafis to be more upfront about their position on things like, free speech, freedom of religion, rotation of power- you know, all those democratic principles that the liberal activists fought so hard to achieve during their revolution in Tahrir Square.

“They also need to state whether they are willing to accept whatever the majority of Egyptian political powers agrees on or not,” he concluded.

I think it's a little too late, since the Islamists have pretty much won a majority in the elections there. And, somehow, I don't think the Salafis are ever going to come to terms with the word "civil".