Kuwaiti Imam Urges Creation of Games to “Slaughter Jews”

In a 2006 interview with Kuwait TV, an Islamic religious leader issued a call for computer games which require players to "slaughter Jews."

We don’t have the exact air date of the video at left, although a Washington Post article from September of 2006 references the video.

We’re presenting it now because this is the first time that GP has located the actual footage. Among Imam Nabil Al Awadi’s remarks:

As their games corrupt our morals, now they are making games with their current wars.

Their wars, that are not Islamic, in Islamic countries have turned into a computer games. When the child plays, he adopts a character that is not Islamic, that kills Muslims.

Why, gentlemen, should it not be the opposite? Why can’t we produce a few games like these? Why can’t we make games that instead of teaching children how to slaughter the Muslims, they can teach them how to free the Al-Aqsa mosque. The child will play and slaughter Jews and others.

Not only children, but adults too, will kill heretics and free the Al Aqsa mosque. There are games with pit battles, it’s nice!

Along with Al Awadi’s comments, a narrator shows clips and explains Islamic-themed battle games.

GP: While the clip is somewhat dated, it shows the extent to which video games are seen by some as a vehicle to politicize – and militarize – youth.

Via: Jumpcut

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditEmail this to someone


  1. 0
    Badluck1313 says:

    But… there are Christians, Jews, and other assorted religions in the Middle East. There is never reference to the conflict being religion-based. You are being prejudiced.

  2. 0
    sortableturnip says:

    I want to make a video game where you are an adult and your child is playing the DS and you hear from the DS "Islam is the light".  Then you go out and kill muslims because you believe they are trying to infect children with their religion…

  3. 0
    gamadaya says:

    No, no, another person said that the extremists could be priests or rabbis. But come on, it’s basic racial profiling. You’re in some sandy middle-easter country, you’re an American soldier, and the occupants of said country are shooting at you. It’s pretty obvious what their religion probably is, and it’s sure as hell not Hinduism.

  4. 0
    Badluck1313 says:

    I don’t remember ever saying that there were no Muslim extremists, or that every enemy in CoD 4 is a rabbi or a priest. I am just saying, in a game where no religious motivation is presented, it is prejudiced to assume that all enemies in a Middle Eastern setting are Muslim.

  5. 0
    gamadaya says:

    It’s racism, to clear that up. Maybe a smiggin of retardation on the side, but mostly racism.

    But you are probably right. It is probably rabbis and priests that you are fighting. I mean, the game is supposed to be realistic, so why not model it after the real world, where clear minded, progressive muslims have to live among the radical Jews and Christians that are tearing up the middle east?

    Edit: missed the reply. So I guess it was retardation after all…

  6. 0
    KlaxonSignal says:

    Frankly I am sick of people killing each other.

    We behave like chimpanzees. Chimpanzees with ideology.

    Be it the ideology of greed exhibited by the United States, or religious ideology of the jews and muslims of the middle east.

    Instead of using technological innovation in the interest of warfare, we should use it produce more resources for people, and alleviate economic disparity, and produce a better quality of life.

    In short, more videogames, less guns.

  7. 0
    Arell says:

    While the man is obviously clouding the issue with his own racist perspective, I would’t mind a game where Americans or Israleis were depicted as the antagonists.  Many viewpoints have merit, and it would be interesting to see a conflict from the Muslim side of things.  I would object, however, to a game where it’s simply an excuse to "slaughter" Jews, or even Muslims for that matter.  There should be a reason for the conflict in the game, and the game should not merely be digital retaliation for a supposed slight.

  8. 0
    Frank says:

    My first thought here was CoD4 but then I had a thought.  Since there are people of many religions over there it is entirely possible that the guy who just fired an RPG at me is also a man who attends mass every sunday.  Maybe the guy who just came around the corner and opened up on my squad with an AK47 is also a former rabbi.  The only game where I see it possible to slaughter muslims is one of the civilization games where religions come into play.  Other then that I don’t see any games where you can slaughter muslims.

  9. 0
    Badluck1313 says:

    No. No you don’t. Turnip is not tied with you, because he contributes, on occasion. Stop posting facepalm. You are an idiot, and it stopped being funny a long time ago.

  10. 0
    Shadow D. Darkman says:

    Actually, I’m fine with Second Place. Hell, me and Turnip obviously tie for it, if Turnip’s not taking second place for posting more pics than me.


    "Game on, brothers and sisters." -Leet Gamer Jargon

  11. 0
    HarmlessBunny says:

    The United Nations that carried the war to the Germans and the Japanese, Canada did play a decisive role which did include securing Juno Beach during D-Day, the horrific test invasion (massacre) of Dieppe, and the battles of Sicily and Italy. Saying that the Americans didn’t do much is a bold statement. When they did finally arrive in 1941 to all the fronts, they carried a huge burden of the war. Their victories were infact brutal and precise as they fought side by side with commonwealth troops.

    America yeah can get a bit over zealous about their role, but lets face it…they did a SHIT LOAD of the work. The British and Chinese held the Japanese at bay, the Americans won the pacific war. As for the European front, they did a lot of work. Not just fresh troops and equipment to through at :)

    Britain did hold off Germany for almost 3 years but it took the Soviet Union, America, and the Commonwealth combied to bring them down.

  12. 0
    Bennett Beeny says:

    "Well, we all do the same things, but… history from an American perspective is different from history from a Canadian perspective, for example.  When we learn about the War of 1812, we learn that we a) won, and b) burned the White House down."

    Hang on… I learned that too.  It’s not just a Canadian ‘perspective’ – it’s the facts.  Americans learn FANTASY – i.e. that they won the War of 1812 – whereas people of other nations learn HISTORY.

  13. 0
    Positive_Gamer says:

    We were called the Allies for a reason, not the "Americans and Those Other Guys" or the "Canadians and Some Other People", but the Allies.

    If you seriously think Americans claim we did everything, the only americans you must be talking to are 12 yr olds in forums screaming "America Rulz!" (Note:  Some 12 yr olds are quite intelligent)

  14. 0
    KayleL says:

    I would expect the Americans would not know the key rolls that Canada played in WWII (which was huge in some areas) but I would expect that Americans would at least know how other countries did the most work as the Americans cames with fresh supplies and soldier. It’s not like America did all the work, and I think they should recognize it.

  15. 0
    Hannah says:

    Well, we all do the same things, but… history from an American perspective is different from history from a Canadian perspective, for example.  When we learn about the War of 1812, we learn that we a) won, and b) burned the White House down.  Since it was the last war fought on Canadian soil, we’re very proud of this fact.  Americans generally don’t learn about it at all, or if they do, they learn a version that makes them look better or emphasizes the fact that Canadians were technically British in those days since it was before 1867, though I don’t think it makes a difference.

    Oh, and when we learn about WWII, we learn a lot about the role that Canada played in key battles.  Sometimes we also learn about how we pretty much single-handedly liberated the Netherlands.  We learn about the American role too, but also that Russia and Britain did most of the dirty work before and after America eventually showed up with fresh troops.  As I understand it, most Americans are convinced that they saved everyone’s asses and the rest of us, even countries who sacrified a significant portion of their population and were fighting Germany from day one, should feel grateful.

    Given that there are differences even between countries as similar as Canada and the US, I would imagine that Muslim countries would see history in a completely different light, and honestly, I would find it very interesting to see that perspective in a video game.

  16. 0
    Bennett Beeny says:

    "America is like the only nation I know where people actually feel bad about things that their ancestors did hundreds of years ago… "

    Yeah, right.  If they felt THAT bad, they could always give back the territories they stole from the Indians and pay reparations for the genocide.  Until they feel that bad, I’m not going to give much weight to the notion that America is the most empathetic nation on the planet.  Sorry.

  17. 0
    MrKlorox says:

    A genocide is a genocide. Doesn’t matter if there were two hundred or two billion killed. They were exterminated/assimilated with approval by the US government.

    Makes me think of that song that goes "If Hitler was on the twenty dollar bill, how would the Jews feel?"

  18. 0
    Bennett Beeny says:

    When I was in British high school (1973 – ’78), History classes glossed over basically everything until the 1910s.  It’s not that history teachers are avoiding unpleasant facts – it’s just that at that time the people behind the history syllabus felt that the 20th Century was the most relevant to modern society.  I’ve always disagreed with that notion (did then, do now), but that’s how it was in the 1970s classroom.  Other periods of history were left to the universities, and you can be sure that the universities did not ignore unpalateable facts.  That only seems to happen in the US educational system, where nationalist indoctrination has always been more important than actual history.

  19. 0
    Drazgal says:

    It has been over a decade since I was in school but during the 90’s it was practice to teach UK history until the discovery of the new world, then to skip to WW1 missing out everything in between.

    Wonder why eh 😉

  20. 0
    BrandonL337 says:

    I thought I was the only one that noticed that

    There have always been motherf*ckers, there will always be motherf*ckers, but what we can’t do is let them control our motherf*cking lives. -John Oliver, December 1st, 2008

  21. 0
    Monte says:

    That’s all true, god knows i’ve made similar arguments in the past, but that doesn’t really change my point at all…

    whether you call them terrorists or freedom fighters does not change the fact that they are america’s enemies; they can put a positive spin on it call themselves freedom fighters, but they will still admit to being america’s enemies and wishing us death. And that’s the point; the "bad guys" that are killed in american war games are not just "Muslims" but "enemies of the united states and our allies, who just happen to also be Muslim"… these games can not be called as "being about killing muslims" as that would include muslims who are not our enemies, arabs that are more moderate in their views, and civilians… the only people targeted in those games are the ones that plan to take american lives or the lives of our allies, people that are down right proud to call themselves our enemies… American war games are about killing our enemies, not killing a certain race or people of a certain religion

    A game that would be about "Killing jews" does not equate to such a game cause that’s sounds like its just a game about genocide… 

  22. 0
    Sukasa says:

    The problem though is that there is a very thin line between "terrorist" and "freedom fighter" and depending on the perspective what is a terrorist/traitor/villan to one group, could be a freedom fighter/hero/patriots to another.  If the term terrorism had existed 200ish years ago, the British could probably easily say Washington and the other patirots to be considerered terrorists.  "Muslim terrorists and enemies like them", are quite overrated.  We americans do a much better job killing each other then anyone over seas, rather its driving a car or some college/mall shooting. The typical american is more likely to die in a car accident(hell or even chocking on a pretzel) than to be killed by a muslim or some other international who dislikes america.

  23. 0
    shady8x says:

    Have you never played a game set in the US?

    In GTA all you do is kill Americans, some of them are Jews (most of the Russians)… the goal is just as much about massacring Americans and Jews as any game that supposedly has a goal to kill Muslims…

    As for the racist Imam that thinks more should be done to train child soldiers to commit murder suicides of Jews… I hope he gets hit by a car or something…

  24. 0
    Chaplain99 says:

    I think the question we should be asking ourselves is not, "How stupid are they to suggest something like this?" but rather, "What would happen if that kind of game DID get out?"

    What if there WAS a popular game made in the Middle East that "forced" players to kill Americans, Jews, etc.  I’m not saying "slaughter" them, but I keep thinking about America’s Army and the OpFor team.  Isn’t that kinda the same thing (aside from you ALWAYS playing against masked terrorists.)?

    How would we respond to something like that?  I mean, wouldn’t we just be getting back what we’ve been dishing out for the past couple of years?


    "HEY! LISTEN!"

  25. 0
    Monte says:

     Yes, but to say those games are not about "killing muslims" completely misses what the game is about. The game is not about killing muslims, but about killing terrorists and enemies like them, people that wish us harm. To call those games as being about killing muslims or being genocidal is to miss the point entirely. Hence the idea that none of us can say we have never seen a game about killing muslims…

    except maybe flash games… you can find most anything in flash game form…

  26. 0
    insanejedi says:

    Or Mexico, or Vietnam, or Africa… or (and so on)

    I don’t think there was any game where you kill explicitly told muslims. The middle easterns have always been just Arabians, and in Call of Duty 4 it’s Arabians and Russians. The Arabs have always been targeted as "terrorists," "insurgents", or general army infiantry, but never put the title of "religious fanatic" or so on.

  27. 0
    hayabusa75 says:

    I think you need to facepalm more often, Shadow.  Last I heard, Jack Thompson was beating you for the gold medal in the Broken Record Olympics.

    "There is no sin except stupidity." – Oscar Wilde

  28. 0
    Shadow D. Darkman says:

    I’m sorry, but this bullshit is just too stupid for me to say anything about it but…

    And I’m serious, I can’t say anything else without the words being wasted.


    "Game on, brothers and sisters." -Leet Gamer Jargon

  29. 0
    shady8x says:

    America is like the only nation I know where people actually feel bad about things that their ancestors did hundreds of years ago… They also let the ‘victims'(actual victims died long ago) have more rights than everyone else and parade around telling ridiculous over exaggerations of what actual happened…

    Name one other nation like that…

    I am not from US so when I was learning US History in US and they started talking about the terrible murder of millions of Indians(something that many Americans actually believe…), I asked how that was possible when historians estimate no more than 2 million throughout all of north America at the time the settlers came… and than 90%+ died from diseases… so when I asked how the millions were killed, the teacher told me ‘it was millions and that is that’… sorry but that doesn’t sound like whitewash…  though maybe only that school teaches things like that…

  30. 0
    DavCube says:

    Dude, most countries do that. (whitewashing bad parts of history) I’d heard several times when i was in middle school that UK textbooks only have a few pages or so on the American Revolution. Something like that, anyway, don’t quote me on it.

  31. 0
    MaskedPixelante says:

    Well, you’re not going to convince an American developer to do that. Aside from America’s desire to whitewash all the parts of history that don’t make them look good, they have this nasty habit of bending over backwards to avoid from offending certain groups of people.

    —You are likely to be eaten by a Grue.

  32. 0
    JustChris says:

    Tying your faith to a religion in itself isn’t harmful to others. I’m not one of those people that says religion cannot work at all. Religion in the context of competition, however, is harmful. Most religions tell you that theirs is superior to all others. Why do our gods see competition as being favorable to their image? It makes people no different than corporate shills.

    When you attempt to convert someone, you are trivializing your religion by treating it as a product. "Oh, you foolish heretic! Don’t fall for inferior brand X religion when you can be a part of this instead!"

    Keep competition out of religion, and it works. Showing a competitive spirit for your religion undermines the moral benefits that are supposed to be tied that religion.

    Raw competition makes us more primal and ruthless. Therefore, morals and competition in the name of those morals go together as well as water and sodium. I am not saying that religious people should avoid being competitive at all costs. Just keep it away from the context of advertising your religion. We have members of different religions hating their competitors so much, it’s a wonder why the word "religionism" hasn’t been as popular as "racism" or "sexism".


  33. 0
    Zaruka says:

    it sad that both isam (sry if mispelled) and christanity (sry if mispelled) have a lot of ideas in common but becuse they are differnt cultures they hate each other so much. The sad thing is though out history and the world the extreamest groups of both sides are look at by both sides as how the reliagion acts thus creating more extreamest. I dont know im neither reliegion so i might be wrong but i think it stuiped to get carried over by are pride and ideals. Plus by the sounds of this guy extream and no one will make any game. oh

    Thanks Zaruka

  34. 0
    mogbert says:

    Funny, the closest I’ve seen is where we have to kill the terrorists. We never sit down over tea and discuss religious difference. Unless he is trying to say that all terrorists are muslim, which I think is just plain rude of him. (originally I had written that he thought all muslims are terrorists, but upon examining the logic, it was the other way around).

    I sit next to a muslim at work, and other then being paranoid, he is ok. He ordered two copies of the koran online lately, and one came shrink wrapped and the other wasn’t. He was sure that "they" were searching through his things. I just told him that some of the books just don’t come shrinkwrapped…

    just like the nice federal officers told me to say. (j/k)

  35. 0
    HarmlessBunny says:

    Last I checked, I don’t play games that "slaughter Muslims" as a goal in them. Just another sick mind with an agenda trying to bend half truths and complete fabrications to further their own goals. People like that make me sick.

Leave a Reply