By: Najeh Ibrahim

I used to believe that the Jews are the worst blackmailers on earth, as I followed their behavior towards Germany and Austria concerning the Holocaust, until I witnessed the conduct of some Christian Copts abroad.

The latter do their best to blackmail the Egyptian government, the Islamic movements and the Egyptian people as a whole.

Moreover, they do the same thing with their fellow Christians in Egypt. They act like this only to achieve cheap personal interests.

They wait for any clash between Muslims and Christians to launch their protests around the European capitals.

In the past they called Bush and today they call Obama to bring his troops to put an end to the injustice done against Christians in Egypt.

They also asked the US and Europe to suspend military and economic aid to Egypt. Add to this their call to the American congress to press on the US administration to apply the persecution law, which allows the United States to interfere militarily to help persecuted minorities, on Egypt.

Such people are not only betraying their homeland, they are also stabbing their fellow peaceful Christians in Egypt in the back.

They found their goal in Naja Hammadi accident. They started to follow their path but this time they added a new demand which was the elimination of the second article of the Egyptian constitution, which stipulates that the Islamic Sharia is the main source of legislation.

They were followed, of course, by secularists and leftists, who support such people hoping to earn some dollars or to go on TV.

They allegedly say that the second article is the only cause of these events. And I wonder did all who took part in the clashes read the article? This is nonsense.

Every now and then they claim this article is the reason of all evils. It is the reason of sectarian strife. It is the reason of the absence of justice. It is the reason of retardation and so on and so forth.

Here, I like to mention that sectarian strife has started since 1970s i.e. before issuing this article.

We all know that such accusations are targeting Islam as a religion not the second constitutional article.

I say to such people Islam in Egypt was strong before this article and will always be.

Islam didn't gain strength and people's love from an article of law or any other earthly reason.

It gained its position because it is the truth that Allah revealed;

"(We take our) color from Allah, and who is better than Allah at coloring. We are His worshippers."

They allege that the article doesn't worth so much. This is nonsense. They don't know how Islam is deeply rooted in the hearts of Egyptians since the Islamic opening. This article expresses the feelings of the majority of Muslims in Egypt.

The Egyptian jurist and historian Dr. Tarek al Beshry says:

"the article has existed since 1923 by consensus… it is more fixed than any other article… it is not used by a party or a political group to make some propaganda or gain people's sympathy… since the religion of the state is Islam, the Sharia should be the main source of legislation. Otherwise it will be nonsense.

It is not logical to describe the most fixed constitutional article as null.

It is not logical to say that the Egyptian society has known the Sharia as a source of legislation only since Saddat came to power in 1971 and as the main source of legislation since May 1981."

It is astonishing that some leftists and secularists continually attack this article. They want to forbid every thing for Muslims and allow it for non-Muslims.

Greece is an orthodox majority country. The third article of its constitution stipulates that:

"The prevailing religion in Greece is that of the Eastern Orthodox Church of Christ"

Moreover, Greece used to refuse building mosques along the past centuries. The first and only mosque was built three years ago.

Think about the orthodoxies' behavior when they are a majority in Greece and when they are a minority in Egypt.

They consider mentioning the religion of the state as violating the rights of citizenship and contradicting the principles of the civil state although the Egyptian constitution doesn't specify the president's religion.

What would they do if it stipulates the head of the state must be a Muslim?

Look at the second section of the constitution of Argentina. It says:

"The Federal Government supports the Roman Catholic Apostolic religion."
Is it acceptable for every nation and faith to specify the religion of the state and its head and not acceptable for Islam and Muslims?

Why do you want to suppress the majority to satisfy a minority which will not be relaxed unless the state becomes an orthodox Christian?

Is the constitution made according to the minority in any country around the world?

It is right that a country should keep the rights of all its citizens whether they are a majority or a minority. Their rights are preserved by Islam and no other religion can do this except Islam.

However, the constitution should be put by the majority. This is the case in all the democratic regimes in the west, which some liberals and secularists in Egypt like to follow except when it is in favor of Islam.

Extremist Copts should know that the United States doesn't like the Egyptian Christians as well as the Muslims. What it really likes is its interest.

Christians who bet on the US or the West will lose. If they want to win, they should keep good relations with their fellow-Muslim citizens.

Extremist Copts abroad are deceiving the Christian masses inside Egypt. The former claim that they are working to keep the latter's rights through pressing on the Egyptian government and the Muslim citizens to fulfill their desires.

The peaceful Christian masses in Egypt, who represent the majority, should know that this extreme minority will harm them. They seek only the interests of their own and the ones who give them money.

Will such people watch Allah? If not, will they leave their homeland live in peace?

Translated by: Fatima Suleiman

Back to Beyond the Event