Beyond the Teddy Bear: Sudan, the Darfur Genocide, and Islam

That Gillian Gibbons, a British school teacher, being likely to get 40 lashes - more, if a judge feels like it - is serious. Particularly since the Sudanese government seems to bent on making an example of this dangerous infidel.

People in a moderate Sufi sect were distributing leaflets in Khartoum's Arab market, by the city's Great Mosque. They want the (Muslim) faithful to protest.

"What has been done by this infidel lady is considered a matter of contempt and an insult to Muslims' feelings and also the pollution of children’s mentality as an attempt to wipe their identity," is what the leaflet says.
(TimesOnline.co.uk)

That "moderate Sufi sect" wants a million people to protest in the streets after prayers tomorrow.

Stay tuned?

Sixteen hours ago, as I'm writing this, another blogger posted "Gillian Gibbons and Sudan - why is nobody mentioning Darfur?" I followed the link (http://casabill.blogspot.com/2007/11/gillian-gibbons-and-sudan-why-is-nobody.html), and got a "Page Not Found" message. Checking the blog confirmed that yesterday's post has been removed.

2 questions:

1. Why was that blog post removed?
2. Why isn't Darfur being discussed, in connection with the blasphemous teddy bear?

Although I'd love to cook up some wild conspiracy theory, it's much more likely that the blogger who posted that Gibbons - Sudan - Darfur piece wasn't forced to delete it. I generally write offline, check what I've written, and then post a finished work. Not everyone works that way, and I've occasionally posted in haste: then repented (and re-written) at comparative leisure.

Bill, the blogger whose post I wrote about, left a comment a little while ago. He explained what happened, and told me where to find that post. Here is the new, improved, and - now - correct link: Gillian Gibbons and Sudan - why is nobody mentioning Darfur?. Thanks for the help, Bill!

Why isn't Darfur being discussed in articles about Gillian Gibbons and the terrible teddy bear?

My guess is that it's very, very, hard for many people to think about the connection. Particularly people in the 'better' and 'more intelligent' circles.

I'll get back to that, after a little background about Sudan.

---

Darfur? Sudan? Where's That?

Since Darfur, and for that matter, Sudan, aren't among the best-known places in the world, Here's some background. The following facts are from The CIA's "The World Factbook." That document is a great deal more detailed - and polite - than my summary.

Sudan lies south of Egypt, with borders on Egypt, the Red Sea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Uganda, Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Central African Republic, Chad, and Lybia. Sudan's capital is Khartoum. Darfur is a border region of Sudan, bordering Chad and the Central African Republic.

Northern Sudan is mostly Muslim, Arab, and hasn't been doing too well, economically. Southern Sudan is mostly Non-Muslim, Non-Arab, and has been relatively prosperous. The country got independence from Britain in 1956.

Since then, there have been a string of military regimes with Islamic leanings and/or Islamic governments in Sudan. Also, two major civil wars: mostly over the unfair (?) way that non-Muslims were doing better than Muslims. (My comment - with Sudanese Muslims focusing their energies on saving Islam from things like teddy bears, is it any wonder that non-Muslims make more money in Sudan?)

Having an Islamic (Sudan style) government may help one facet of the Sudanese economy, though.

"Sudan is a source country for men, women, and children trafficked for the purposes of forced labor and sexual exploitation; Sudan may also be a transit and destination country for Ethiopian women trafficked for domestic servitude; boys are trafficked to the Middle East, particularly Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, for use as camel jockeys; small numbers of girls are reportedly trafficked within Sudan for domestic servitude as well as for commercial sexual exploitation in small brothels in internally displaced persons (IDP) camps...."

Here's a list of religious beliefs in Sudan:

• 70% Sunni Muslim (in north)
• 5% Christian(mostly in south and Khartoum)
• 25% indigenous beliefs

---

The Darfur Genocide: a Non-Crisis that Never Happened?

I could be mistaken, but it seems that the Darfur genocide was ignored until 2004, when then- U. S. Secretary of State, Colin Powell, said

"that genocide has occurred in Darfur and that the government of Sudan and the Janjaweed bear responsibility, and that genocide may still be continuing." Following that, the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives, unanimously declared "that the atrocities unfolding in Darfur, Sudan, are genocide."

Around that point, the genocide became a non-crisis that wasn't happening, and an American plot. Some anonymous USAID workers cited in "The Guardian" (UK) said that the Americans were using the wrong numbers. The UN World Food Programme used a survey and decided that, although people were going hungry, the crisis (non-crisis?) was being handled well. And, that USAID head Andrew Natsios, who told UN officials that "We estimate right now, if we get relief in we'll lose a third of a million people and, if we don't, the death rates could be dramatically higher, approaching a million people." was lying.

Later, the USAID assistant administrator, Roger Winter, told foreign journalists that the numbers were 30,000 killed during the 'on-going crisis in Darfur,' on top of 50,000 people dying from malnutrition and disease. He still said that the situation was a "humanitarian disaster of the first magnatude."

"The Guardian" had an explanation, and an insinuation:

"Under the Bush administration, the work of USAID has become increasingly politicised. But over Sudan, in particular, two of its most senior officials have long held strong personal views. Both Natsios, a former vice-president of the Christian charity World Vision, and Winter have long been hostile to the Sudanese government."

You hear that? "Christian charity World Vision! Maybe those Christians are part of the plot against Islam. You know, the one that Gillian Gibbons and the blasphemous teddy bear are in on.

I'd prefer to be wrong about this, but I think that there's much better than even odds that the Darfur genocide isn't getting much attention because mostly-Muslim and Arab outfits are killing mostly-non-Muslim, non-Arab people. Worse yet, quite a few of the non-Muslims are Christian. And African. Black.

That leaves traditional news media on the horns of a dilemma. Blacks are being slaughtered and starved to death by Caucasians. That's news!

But, these Caucasians aren't the European sort. They're Arabs: and as non-Europeans, aren't part of the oppressor class. In fact, they're part of the oppressed class. Just ask the Palestinians. (I know: the Middle Eastern situation isn't that simple - just like someone from the sovereign state of Georgia might not appreciate being called a Yankee.)

With such a confusion of oppressors and oppressees, I'm afraid that it's 'way too easy for me to see the Darfur genocide as a tragedy that got ignored because it doesn't fit the standard western-oppression editorial model.

Back to the Teddy Bear

My guess is that Gilliam Gibbons, and Mohammed the Teddy Bear, will be back in the news tomorrow, when a massive spontaneous demonstration is planned in Khartoum.

Posts on "British Teacher Home from Sudan: Gillian Gibbons, Muslim Clerics, and a Teddy Bear named Mohammed"

Related posts, on Islam, Christianity, Religion, Culture and the War on Terror.
Related posts, on tolerance, bigotry, racism, and hatred.

Sudan Defends Islam Against Blasphemous Teddy Bear

Sudan got around to charging Gilliam Gibbons. She's the British school teacher who blasphemed the prophet you-know-who, by - get this - letting a boy in her class suggest the name "Mohammed," which is his name.

Oops. By using you-know-who's name, I probably committed blasphemy, too. At least by Sudanese standards. Forget it. I don't live in Sudan, thank God. It's easier to write out "Mohammed,"¹ than dance around it.

A few more details about Gibbons' "offense" came up in "The New York Post" today.

• Sudan authorities say that she's guilty of inciting religious hatred. If she's found guilty (and how unlikely is that?), she'll most likely get 40 lashes. Unless Sudan follows Saudi Arabia's lead, and adds extra lashes.
• The name "Mohammed" was suggested by one of the class - a boy in her class named Mohammed.
  • It seems that giving the name "Mohammed" to a teddy bear is blasphemous, but giving it to a boy isn't: Unless young "Mohammed" is going to have lashed and/or stoned and/or beheaded parents soon.
• Gibbons is being charged under article 125 of the Sudanese legal code
  • This is significant, since it shows that Sudan uses a written legal code - this bizarre accusation isn't being made up out of thin air by some Sudanese official who forgot to take his medication
• Besides lashes, Gibbons may be facing six months jail time and a fine
• This imbroglio started when some of her pupil's parents complained about the teddy Mohammed.
• The British government is involved. Their officials are talking with Sudanese officials. (Let's hope no British officials are accused of blasphemy.)

The Sudanese government claims that being attacked for doing something that Muslims don't like is an isolated incident. Given all the people who have been hurt and killed, from the 1972 Munich Olympics to 9/11 and the present, that's a little hard to believe.

At least the recent attacks have been over genuinely spiritual values, like the naming of teddy bears.

The Teddy Bear Conspiracy

Sudanese clerics have earned more of my respect, by clearly stating what's going on. Here's the situation, from their point of view:

• Naming that teddy bear "Mohammed" is part of a larger Western "plot" against Islam.
• Naming the teddy bear was intentional blasphemy.
  • "What has happened was not haphazard or carried out of ignorance, but rather a calculated action and another ring in the circles of plotting against Islam."
    "It is part of the campaign of the so-called war against terrorism and the intense media campaign against Islam."
    From a statement by the Sudanese Assembly of the Ulemas. (Ulemas: "the body of professional theologians who are regarded as the authority on religious law.")
• The Muslim Council of Britain urged the Sudanese government to intervene. (Which side the Muslim Council of Britain is taking isn't clear in "The New York Post" article.)

In a way the Sudanese Assembly of the Ulemas has a point. Western news media seems to have gotten over its reluctance to report atrocities committed by non-western societies, and that isn't making Islam look good. The fairly steady trickle of reports on lashings, stonings, and beheadings, in Islamic nations doesn't paint a flattering picture.

On the other hand, the recurring theme of women being lashed and stoned for peccadilloes suggests that contemporary Islam might be a tolerant and nurturing home for people who follow the practices and philosophy of the late Marquis de Sade.

Religion - or Culture?

It's easy to say that Islam is the common thread connecting burqas, beheadings, and honor killings. Particularly since the Muslims who commit these atrocities say that they're doing what Mohammed told them to, and are following the will of Allah.

There's something else that most of these expressions of sadistic jurisprudence have in common. They happen in "Islamic" countries in the Middle East and northern Africa.

The largest Islamic country in the world, in terms of numbers of Muslims, is Indonesia. That country's home to a little upwards of 200,000,000 Muslims. Even percentage-wise, Indonesia is more Islamic than America is Christian: 86% Muslim for Indonesia; 78% Christian for America, including Mormons.

Indonesia, a very Islamic country, isn't flogging women for not wearing a burqa, or beheading people for being insufficiently Islamic. In fact, the Bali nightclub bombing, back in 2002, is just one incident in continuing fight Indonesia has with Islamic groups like Jemaah Islamiyah, and Al Qaeda affiliates that want Indonesia to be an Islamic state like northern Sudan or Afghanistan under the Taliban.

There's no question, I think, that something is terribly wrong with places like Saudi Arabia and northern Sudan.

Living in Fast-Forward, Culture Shock, and All That

I don't think that the problem is necessarily Islam. Look at the map, and look at the relatively uniform culture of the countries in northern Africa and the Middle East. The impression I get is that these are places where men were living comfortably in a mosaic of tribes, living their lives in much the same way that their ancestors had since the time of Abraham.

Then, a few centuries ago, European colonial powers dragged them into the

• Age of nation-states
• Age of Reason
• Age of Enlightenment
• Industrial Revolution
• Cold War
• Space Race
• Information Revolution

To people still accustomed to burqas and Sharia, a world of Barbies and sports cars must be terrifying. It's no wonder that they go a little crazy, trying to adjust.

Non-Muslims might consider the possibility that the insanely intolerant, violent, behavior of "Islamic" countries doesn't stem from Islam. The traditional cultures of many of these places were old-fashioned when Rome ruled the Mediterranean, and hadn't been forced to deal with outside ideas until the last few generations.

---

¹ Why not "Muhammed," or one of the other Latinized spellings? I'm using an Associated Press stylebook, and that resource says that "Mohammed" is the way that the Prophet of Islam's name is spelled in English. It's one of a number of commonly-used efforts to bring that name into a language that uses the Latin alphabet.

(Thanks to "The Sudanese Name Game" for steering me to "The New York Post" article, and to "American Islamic Congress Slams Sudanese Government over Teddy Bear Case, Demands British Teacher Be Freed Immediately")

Posts on "British Teacher Home from Sudan: Gillian Gibbons, Muslim Clerics, and a Teddy Bear named Mohammed"

Related posts, on Islam, Christianity, Religion, Culture and the War on Terror. Related posts, on tolerance, bigotry, racism, and hatred.

Islam vs. the Blasphemous Teddy Bear

Gillian Gibbons discovered that Sudan isn't Liverpool. She
committed blasphemy, by letting her class of seven-year-olds name a teddy bear "Muhammad."

She was teaching in a private school, teaching Muslims and Christians.

Is This What It'll Take to Get Along?

I think I have a way for western women teaching in Islamic regions to avoid committing blasphemy.

• Put a cloth over your head, hemmed to reach the ground
• Say nothing
• Do nothing
• Hope that you're mistaken for a coat rack

Unless coat racks are blasphemous, too.

Posts on "British Teacher Home from Sudan: Gillian Gibbons, Muslim Clerics, and a Teddy Bear named Mohammed"

Related posts, on Islam, Christianity, Religion, Culture and the War on Terror.
Related posts, on tolerance, bigotry, racism, and hatred.

SITE, Osama bin Laden, and Online Security: What Part of "Secret" Doesn't Washington Understand?

On the morning of September 7, an Osama bin Laden video taken from Al Qaeda's online system by a private intelligence company was turned over to senior American officials. By that afternoon, the video was being broadcast on the news.

I like to be kept informed as much as anybody, but the company, SITE Intelligence Group, says that making the video public ruined years of work.

"'Techniques that took years to develop are now ineffective and worthless,' said Rita Katz, the firm's 44-year-old founder, who has garnered wide attention by publicizing statements and videos from extremist chat rooms and Web sites, while attracting controversy over the secrecy of SITE's methodology." That's how the Washington Post put it.

"While attracting controversy over the secrecy of SITE's methodology?!"

Let's think about it:

• A bunch of religious nuts have decided that they're supposed to kill Americans, wholesale.
• Being smart fanatics, they do their planning and preparation in secret
• Among other things, the fanatics set up a secure online communication system.
• A private-sector investigation firm cracks into the system, making it possible to learn of the next attack.

And there's controversy over whether or not the firm should tell how it cracked into the terrorists' system??!!

As it is, thanks to some bozo or bozos on Capitol Hill, Al Qaeda now knows that its online security has been breached, and has probably plugged the hole by now.

I sometimes wonder if the people inside the Beltway really understand what's going on. Although it isn't as obvious as the Luftwaffe's regular bombing of London, back in WWII, the war on terror is very real.

Happily, attacks like 9/11 replays of 2002 and 2003 didn't happen. Not for lack of effort, though. People like Khalid Shaikh Mohammed haven't stopped trying to promote their brand of Islam, and I don't expect them to.

I'd feel safer if the people whose job it is to run this country acted as if they realized that we're all at risk.

This Osama bin Laden video isn't the first time that that classified information has been leaked in Washington. As the St. Petersburg Times put it, writing about the fuss over the leak of September 10, 2001, messages in Arabic, "Leaking is a Washington tradition, especially on Capitol Hill. By leaking information to a reporter, members of Congress can make a point without leaving their fingerprints."

Much as I admire and respect traditions, leaking classified information while there's a war on simply doesn't make sense. The British, for example, after they cracked the Enigma code, the British had the good sense to keep the fact secret.

I'm going to make a prediction, and I hope I'm wrong.

The presidential campaign will whip our elected officials into a frenzy next year.

At least one candidate is going to demonstrate his or her knowledge of world affairs and Washington by leaking - or openly discussing - information that would have best been left under wraps until after the war.

Related posts, on Individuals and the War on Terror.