Agora

Note from Agora: I know I’ve been away for some time. I just got thoroughly sick of thinking about the two little weasels Akkari and Laban. I’ll be returning to my regular schedule now.

This is a translation of an interview Mohammed Sifaoui did yesterday with Politiken. Sifaoui is the French Journalist who did a documentary exposing the Danish Imams Ahmed Akkari and Abu Laban as dangerous extremists:

French Journalist: Danish Imams are Extremists

The man behind the controversial French documentary thinks that Abu Laban and Ahmed Akkari are extremists disguised as moderates.

By Thomas Lauritzen, Paris

He is rather reluctant to say the words because he has the greatest respect for the Danes - but Mohammed Sifaoui feels that it is necessary to tell us that we are “naive”.

“All you good and well-meaning people at Politiken, in the rest of Denmark and Europe, you hurt your and moderate Moslems’ cause when you let extremists call the tune,” he says.

“They’re not bombers - they’re worse”
And for Sifaoui there’s no doubt the Danish Imams such as Ahmed Akkari and Abu Laban are just that, extremists but disguised as moderates.

“Actually, I was sort of seduced by Abu Laban the first day. He seemed both friendly and tolerant. But it was lucky that I stayed with them for some days, because then all of the extremist ideology was revealed,” Sifaoui says about his travels in Denmark this February which, i.a., revealed Ahmed Akkari’s famous ‘bomb threat’ against the Social Liberal politician Naser Khader.

“I have never suggested that Abu Laban or Ahmed Akkari are terrorists themselves - in the sense that they’re bombers. They’re something much worse: They’re the the ideologues which give the young mad-man the necessary excuse - the ideological grounds - for carrying out an act of terror in Denmark.”

Lives with Death Threats
The Algerian-French journalist and writer Mohammed Sifaoui has spent 18 years revealing and criticising the extremist movements which in his opinion slowly but surely have infiltrated a naive Europe.

He hasn’t been lacking in death threats. He lives under police guard and our meeting at a Parisian café is set up at the last minute.

“I do know with who I am dealing. I know the millieu and take my precautions,” as he says.

A Man with a Mission
Sifaoui is both loathed and admired, a controversial man with creative journalistic methods who refuses to be afraid. He doesn’t hide that he is a man with a mission.

“I have never wanted to condemn or hurt anyone and I have never attacked the Koran or Islam. I am a practising Moslem myself. But I have a mission and it is journalistic: To reveal the truth about extremists and terrorists.”

But don’t they know this about you - why do they let you into their confidence and say that sort of thing in your presence?

“I didn’t mention my surname and nobody asked . My first name, Mohammed, is what everyone and his cousin is called in the Arab world and I also used a middle name. They accepted me as a ‘brother’”

Don’t you have any reservations about not presenting yourself as yourself?

“If I have to steal information, I will. I have no scruples about that with these people. Besides, they knew very well that I was a journalist.”

Has no Concrete Knowledge of an Attack
Why is it that they threatened you anyway in the end - as the documentary shows?

“A delegation of Imams arrived from Sweden and I think one of them recognised me. Then the threats came, warning me to not show anything creative. And that’s the point: How can those people say that they are democrats and moderates? They threaten a journalist just because they find out that he’s against terror and extremism.”

There’s been some confusion in Denmark about the interpretation of what you’ve filmed. For example, whether Ahmed Akkari had concrete knowledge of a possible plot against Naser Khader?

“I have never thought he was talking about organising an attack himself and that’s not the way my documentary portrays it. He says ‘I wonder if a couple of men oughn’t to go see if one can blow him up…’ I have no knowledge of a concrete plot. But I know for sure that Akkari and Abu Laban hate Naser Khader abysmally. If someone were to kill him, it wouldn’t bother them the least.”

The Conversation about the ‘Martyr Operation’
Now you’ve also supplied an outtake to the Danish media where Abu Laban apparently speaks of his knowledge of someone who want so create ‘havoc’ and execute a ‘martyr operation’. Why didn’t you use that in your documentary?

“I brought 40 hours of tape to France and I couldn’t use all of it. I don’t know who he’s talking about either. And I have no precise information that this person will do something concrete.”

It seems strange that Abu Laban in the same outtake mentions that he - or someone - wants to contact the General Secretary of the the Arab League. He isn’t a terrorist, I wonder?

“No, the two remarks are seperate, the way I see it. First Abu Laban speaks of Amr Moussa and then he changes the subject and speaks of the martyr operation.”

Ready to supply outtakes
What does it mean? And why are you showing it now?

“Because it shows the same as the piece in the car with Akkari: that these people are extremists who have no problem talking abour martyr operations.”

Abu Laban says it’s just a figure of speech?

“Of course he says that. And Ahmed Akkari is suddenly a great comedian. It’s very normal double-dealing for the extremists that they hide behind explanations like that in the West. But as an Arab and a Moslem I can assure you that no normal person in the Moslem world sees the word ‘martyr operation’ as a figure of speech.”

Are you prepared to show more outtakes?
“Yes, if they keep saying it was all a joke, just a figure of speech and so on. In that case, I have loads of material showing that that is their normal rhetoric. ”

For example?
“For example I have a take from a sermon where Abu Laban tells of how to behave when burying ‘our brothers who die a martyr’s death in the fight against the zionist enemy.’ Will Abu Laban say that that too is a metaphor? And do the Danes really believe a man who supports suicide bombers in another country but maintains that he is against them in Denmark?”

The Police have questioned Akkari and Abu Laban and not yet indicted them. Do you know anything more concrete about their intentions?

“I have no precise knowledge of concrete plans. If I had heard anything like that, I would have gone directly to a police station. If the Danish police wish to talk to me, if I can be of assistance, I am always available. I am a public person. But I really hope that the Danish intelligence service know significantly more about Abu Laban, Ahmed Akkari and their friends than I do.”

PIS are naive
On the contrary, a high-ranking commander with the Police Intelligence Service (PIS) has said that the Imams have often been helpful?

“That makes me smile. In that case, either the Imams of Denmark have succeded in hoodwinking the PIS and that would make the PIS would be very naive. Or else - and I think that’s the case - the PIS wants to pour oil on troubled waters, though they know otherwise.”

Why should we, the Danes, believe your account of this - a French journalist with a mission, a man who knows nothing of Denmark?

British journalists used to ask me the same question, right until the terror bombs in London in July of 2005. The same thing happened: the same ideological framework, created by spiteful speech, which led to the actions of some mad people. And the same thing happened with the murder of the director Theo Van Gogh in the Netherlands. That climate, that vulnerability has now been given to Denmark and all Danes abroad by Abu Laban and Ahmed Akkari.”

But what is the answer to the question: Why should we believe you?

The answer is that that’s up to you to decide. I am positive that the Danes are smart enough to form an opinion about this themselves. What I’m saying is: I mean you no harm. But others do because they think it will give them power in the Moslem community in Denmark. Did my visit harm you? No, the visit the Imams paid the Arab countries, spreading false, dangerous accusations about your country harmed you. They are the ones who owe an apology to the Danes. Not the Prime Minister and not Jyllands-Posten.”

What is your opinion of the Jyllands-Posten’s caricatures?

I am shocked by several of them as a Moslem. I don’t like them at all. But I will always defend the right of an artist to draw whatever he likes. That’s democracy for you. And that’s what Abu Laban and the others don’t understand.