Apparently two more bahrain online moderators have been detained, according to several sources. That brings the total to three so far: Ali Abdul Emam, Mohammed Al Mousawi, and Hussain Yousef.

I'm guessing the stated reasons for these arrests stem from posts and comments on Bahrain Online like:

The Prime Minister the Blood Sucking Serial Killer

The King of Bahrain puts on makeup a la the Democratic Iraqi Hulk

The King of Bahrain puts on makeup, and money is wasted to shine the image of his Comic reforms

The comments to these posts are even more "direct".

The stated reasons are one thing, and the alterior motives are another. What has the government to gain from these arrests? I honestly do not understand the reasoning behind them. Is it to knock down Bahrain Online in particular? The site is still running, and it is yet to be seen if it indeed will be shut down. Is it to send a strong message to all forums to behave themselves or shut down? There are tons of these sites around. Every village and alleyway in bahrain now has a forum: from Arad, and they only keep mushrooming. Do they honestly think that this will deter the others? It seems all it has done is to make anyone who has not yet been aware of forums to wake up to the growing phenomenon.

In the backdrop to this arrest there has been a sort of internet war going on between forums that are skeptical of the government, like Bahrain Online, and those that are more pro-government, particularly Bahrain Forums, the savvy (relatively) new generally pro-government forum. In fact, it is rumoured that the forum was started as a direct response to Bahrain Online to counteract its growing influence and dominance on the internet as a source of information. It seems that much more effort, money, and backing has been at the disposal of the new forum, and one wonders where all the support came from.

Credit where credit is due: the forum has by and large not stifled not any kind of debate, allowing government sympathizers and critics to contribute. It does however have stricter boundaries, where direct personal insult to any person, whether in the government or not, is not allowed. There is however particular emphasis on the royalty, where no questioning of the royal status is allowed. Overall, however, it does seem to include in its commentators viespoints that reflect a much wider spectrum than that of Bahrain Online (which is most just Anti-government). On this particular event, there is currently a debate between pro-Abdulemam and the moderators (whom a lot of are pro-government) going on, with the moderators seeming to take the government stand on issues.

It seems, however, that the government has reached the conclusion that Bahrain Online has become too dominant and influential to counteract simply by an internet war. Hence, the government has gone back to its old tactics of arrests. Or maybe this is again a reflection of the ongoing theory of the infighting between the royal family, where one part, the old regime, tries to harm the action of the new regime that supposedly is pro-reform?

side: please say hello to the newest Bahraini Blog author, Winds of Change. Please be nice to him/her, as it took me a while to convince him/her to blog. He/She is giving it a try, so try to encourage it!

¶ 11:24 PM

Apparently a Bahraini blogger has been arrested because of his activities as a moderator on a very popular forum, as Bahrania reports. Apparently the reason for the arrest is "defaming the royalty." It is too early to tell what is happening, so we'll have to wait and see, but hopefully he'll be released very soon.

Although he is not primarily a blogger, and the reason for his arrest is the very popular forum he helped found, it does bring to question the status of bloggers in Bahrain. So what are bloggers going to do? Will you just shut up? Maybe continue to lambast parliament, liberals, or wahhabis but carefully tiptoe around the thorny issue of the government? How about organizing an online petition or contacting the "Committe to Protect Online Bloggers"? How about upping the anti and organizing a united online day where every forum and blog posts a severely critical article of the government and see how they react?

Although we are no where as near as big a fish to fry as Ali Abdul Emam, whose site gets 80,000 hits a day, that could easily be one of us in jail in the future. Most probably all of us started a blog thinking it's a cool way to express oneself and spend his time, while also making a few friends along the way. What if, however, a smelly illiterate policeman, who has no second thoughts about using force, shows up one day at your house and threatens to take you or your sister away?

Time is ticking... Whatcha gonna do?

update: I don't know how accurate this is, but apparently the five charges levied against Ali AbdulEmam are:

1- المساس بالذات الملكية
2- التحريض على كراهية النظام
3- نشر أخبار تزعزع الأمن
4- مخالفة قانون النشر
5- مخالفة قانون الإتصالات

Which (roughly) translate to:

1-Abusing the royal entity
2-Instigating hatred to the regime
3- Spreading news that endangers security
4-Violating the Publishing Laws
5-Violating the Telecommunications Law

¶ 8:11 PM

Pretty soon I'm going to need a break, so where to go? Europe doesn't want me anywhere near it, thinking I'm either there to blow stuff up or to use their genour social security system. America does not like towelheads nowadays, so I'm basically stuck on this godforsaken island, where the only place I can go to is another even smaller island (homes sweet home). Hence, there is obviously one destination: the Ukraine.

In case you haven't heard, this is the new hotspot for tourists. Highlights include:

- A day trip to Chernobyl , the site of the nuclear disaster that was 100 times as strong as Hiroshima. Activities include a tour of ghost towns that have been deserted.


-For drink lovers, there is cheap and plentiful vodka, which apparently costs 40p a liter for the really good stuff. If you're really hardcore, you go for the homemade stuff served with jugs out of big tubs.

- There is the beautifully constructed and innovitavely named Tourist Hotel. This 3-star artchitectural gem has 1800 rooms in 27 stories, so no worry of being fully booked here.

-The birthplace of chicken Kiev.

To be honest I don't know much about the Ukraine, as I'm just going there on a whim. Has anyone visited the place? Does anyone know anything about it? If you do, any information would be appreciated!

¶ 8:48 PM

Here is the link that expands on what was said in the audio sequence.

¶ 5:05 PM

What have been the latest political developments and talking points in Bahrain nowadays? What has been the the major flashpoint and center of arguments? Well in one phrase: It's Sameera Rajab.

So who is Sameera Rajab? She is a column writer at Akhbar Al Khaleej newspaper, long rumoured to have Baathist tendencies. A few days ago, she wrote the following article:

إن سرعة تواتر الأحداث تعد احدى أهم الأدوات التنفيذية في الاستراتيجيات التي يراد خلط أوراقها ومراحلها المختلفة لإخفاء معالمها اعتماداً على المرور السريع الذي يُوَلّد حالة التداخل في الصور وما تخلقها من عدم الدقة في الرؤية... فهذه الوتيرة السريعة في الانتقال من حدث إلى آخر بحاجة لسرعة تعادلها في الرصد والمتابعة للتمكن من قراءة كل الأوراق وربط الأحداث بالسابق واللاحق في تسلسل منطقي... وهذا ما يجعلنا ننتقل في الشأن العراقي من موقع لآخر بسرعة تواتر أحداثه للتَمَكنْ من متابعة وربط كل خيوطه قبل غياب الصورة وتداخلها. لذلك، وبعد انتهاء الانتخابات المزعومة في العراق، نحن مضطرون لأن نترك خلفنا كل ما قيل وكُتِبَ عنها، إذ لم يعد يجدي كثيراً الحديث عن تعقيداتها السابقة، أو لمصلحة من تصب، أهي لمصلحة الأمريكان وتكريس سيادة الاحتلال أم هي لمصلحة العراق وتكريس سيادة الشعب العراقي... وعلينا أن نلحق بمتابعة ما برز على الساحة العراقية والإقليمية والدولية، إلى قبل ساعات من إعلان نتائج الانتخابات، التي تعد دليلاً أكيداً على صحة كل ما قلناه في تلك الفترة، فلم تعد المسألة بحاجة للمناقشات العقيمة أو الأخذ والرد بين الكتاب والسياسيين، فالوقائع أصبحت عنيدة، كما يقول المثل الأنجليزي... فبعد الزيارات المكوكية لجونداليزا رايس إلى أوروبا للتفاهم على تمتين العلاقات مع الحليف القديم حول الكعكة العراقية، وزيارة شيراك لأمريكا للتفاهم على مرحلة ما بعد الانتخابات في العراق، وزيارات رامسفيلد من أوروبا إلى العراق لترتيب أوضاع عملائهم في القوائم المرشحة تحاشياً للصراعات الجانبية، والقمة الرباعية في شرم الشيخ للحصول على المزيد من التنازلات العربية... بعد كل هذا الذي تم على المستوى الإقليمي والدولي في الفترة القصيرة منذ انتهاء الانتخابات حتى إعلان نتائجها، يهمنا أن نوضّح ماذا انتجت تلك الانتخابات على مستوى العراق، خلال تلك الفترة؟... ففي العراق الصورة كالتالي:

أولاً: لقد ثبت بإن السيستاني كان له الدور الأكبر في تعزيز أقدام الاحتلال في العراق ومنع مقاومته، إضافة إلى شرعنته من خلال الانتخابات وما سوف يأتي بعدها من قضايا التقسيم وإضعاف العراق لتصبح لقمة سائغة لبعض الجيران... وهذا ما جاء على لسان دونالد رامسفيلد، وزير الدفاع الأمريكي، وجونداليزا رايس، وزيرة الخارجية الأمريكية (الممثلين الرئيسيين للشيطان الأكبر)، من خلال ما أسبغا عليه من كلمات المديح والشكر والثناء على ما قدّمه لهم من خدمات جليلة، ومنها ما قالته الوزيرة رايس «لولا دعوة السيستاني للعراقيين بالصبر على الأمريكان لكان الأمر مختلفاً«، دون أن ننسى إن السيستاني أعطى مباركته لكل الخطوات التي قام بها الاحتلال منذ البداية، فلولاه لما تشكّل مجلس الحكم الانتقالي، ولا الحكومة المؤقتة التي من خلالهما تم نهب أموال العراق التي تقدّر ببلايين الدولارات (حسب تقارير مدققي الأمم المتحدة)... وهكذا كان «الجنرال« السيستاني السند الأساسي للاحتلال الأمريكي في العراق، مما دفع الوزيرة الأمريكية أن تعد باستمراره في هذا الدور في المرحلة القادمة.

ثانياً : لقد نشر زعماء «القوائم الملثمة« غسيلهم خلال الفترة القصيرة السابقة للانتخابات وبعدها، فعوضاً عن محاربتهم للمحتل، إذ بالمعارك تشتد بينهم في حرب مستعرة على المناصب، ليس فقط فيما بين القائمة والأخرى، بل حتى في داخل القائمة الواحدة... فعلى سبيل المثال هدد أحمد الجلبي (أبرز رموز القائمة السيستانية، رقم 169) بإنه سيحرق بغداد إذا لم ينل منصب رئاسة الوزراء، وادعى كريم شاهبور (المدعو بموفق الربيعي) بإنه أحق من غيره في استلام رئاسة الوزراء، ناهيك عن الآخرين مثل الشهرستاني وعادل عبدالمهدي وإبراهيم الجعفري... وغيرهم، ممن دعا الى الاتفاق بترشيح الجعفري (من القائمة 169 السيستانية) لمنصب رئيس الوزراء... ولا نعلم إن كانت هي مصادفة سيئة أن يحمل الجعفري والسيستاني الجنسية الإيرانية حتى يومنا هذا؟. ثالثاً: كان من أهم نتائج تلك الصراعات انه تم تثبيت المحاصصة الطائفية في العراق قبل صياغة الدستور تيمناً بقانون إدارة الدولة (الذي صاغه اليهودي نوح فيلدمان والأمريكي كنعان مكية)، وبهذا تم تكريس توزيع المناصب السيادية بين كردي وسني وشيعي.رابعاً: في السياق الطبيعي للتعامل بين الأمريكان وعملائهم، يستمر المحتل الأمريكي في التخلص من عملائه في العراق، فمثلما تخلصوا من الضحية أحمد الجلبي في المرحلة الأولى، أصبح واضحاً ان السيد أياد علاوي سيكون ضحية المرحلة المقبلة، مع استمرار تساقط المزيد منهم مع كل مرحلة جديدة في ظل الاحتلال، إن لم يتساقطوا في عمليات الاغتيال المتتالية التي تستهدفهم... من كل ذلك نستخلص أن أولئك الذين تزعموا القوائم أكدوا أن مصالحهم الشخصية تأتي في قمة أولوياتهم، بينما لا يعني لهم العراق أو الشعب العراقي شيئاً، بدءاً بتلك السلوكيات التي لا تليق برجال في سدة الحكم والقيادة، والمتمثلة في المهاترات والشتائم والتشهير وتبادل التهم مثلما جرى بين الشعلان (وزير الدفاع) وأحمد الجلبي، ومروراً بالتدافع للوصول إلى المناصب السيادية قبل إعلان نتائج الانتخابات، وانتهاء بتقسيم الوطن وبيعه بالقطعة لكسب التحالفات الأثنية والطائفية لتحقيق أهداف ومصالح ذاتية. لقد خيّل لي وأنا اتابع صفقات التحالفات والمناصب بين زعماء القوائم في الشمال والوسط والجنوب، ان أمر العراق أصبح بيد الأكراد، وهم من يتكرّم على العرب بهذا المنصب أو ذاك... وكما قال أحد العراقيين يبدو انه إذا استمر الوضع على ما هو عليه سيأتي يوم يطالب العرب بحقوقهم من الأكراد. وهنا جاء أخطر النتائج من هذه الانتخابات بما يتم وضعه من أسس لتقسيم العراق بدءاً بفصل الشمال عن الجسم العراقي كمرحلة أولى بعد أن تمكّنت القيادات الكردية من فرضه كشرط لتحالفهم مع إياد علاوي مقابل موافقتهم على حصوله على منصب سيادي، وبمباركة دونالد رامسفيلد «الجديد« (تسمية أطلقها على نفسه في زيارته الأخيرة إلى أوروبا)... وقد تحدد ذلك الشرط في مطالب محددة، وهي: الاعتراف بالفيدرالية، والاعتراف بكركوك جزءاً من كردستان، وإعادة أراضي أخرى (لم تحدد مساحتها) إلى كردستان، رغم محاولة الطالباني انكاره لفكرة التقسيم... هذا ناهيك عن صفقات أخرى بدأ بنسجها عدنان الباججي من جهة وغازي الياور من جهة أخرى، بعرض أحد المناصب السيادية على جلال الطالباني، عسى أن يميلوا لأحدهما في حال فشلهما في الانتخابات. فيا ترى هل يحق لأحد بعد هذا أن يتحدث عن فوائد الانتخابات في العراق ووصفها بالعرس الديمقراطي والخطوة التاريخية التي كان ينتظرها الشعب العراقي؟، وهل هذا هو النموذج الديمقراطي الذي وعد الأمريكان بإنه سيشع من العراق على الوطن العربي؟ .. وهل هناك ديمقراطية دون وطنية؟، أم المطلوب هو هذه الديمقراطية الصورية التي تمثلها مراكز القوى المدعومة بحراب المحتل والمستعمر؟...

The sentence that I have outlined in bold, (which roughly says, " and so "general" Sistani has been the main backer of the American occupation in Iraq")has caused a furore within the shia community in Bahrain. The world "general" and the overall line of the article that Sistani has been the main backer and reason for successof the Americans were the main offending points. There have been heaps of announcements of denounciation of the writer and solidarity with Sistani. Several religious authorities have issued statements, and so have notable figures in the community. Columnists, such as deyaa2 almousawi, also joined in the reply. Of course, forums did not miss out on the controversy either.

This, however, was not the end. A few days later, another column appeared in the same newspaper, this time by mahmood Gassab. Here is the column:

في يوم عاشوراء "يوم كربلاء" ليس هناك أفضل من استلهام دروسه وعبره، واستيعاب معانيه الخالدة، يوم أضاء للعرب والمسلمين وللإنسانية جمعاء دروب العدل، ورسم طريق مواجهة الظلم والعدوان، وبلوغ مرتبة الشهادة والتضحية بالنفس والأهل والأصحاب في سبيل تلك الأهداف النبيلة، وتتعاظم قيمة هذه الدروس اليوم بعد أن شاءت الأقدار بأن تكون أرض العراق، مرة أخرى ومن جديد، هي ساحة المواجهة بين الحق والباطل وتترأى أمامنا وتتكرر بعض صور ذلك التاريخ لتكون مدن مثل "النجف" و"كربلاء" و"سامراء" و"الموصل" و"الفلوجة" شاهدة على عظمة مبادئ الأمام الحسين المغروسة في روح العراقيين الأباة وهم يواجهون ظلم وبغي الأمريكان والصهاينة وعملائهم من الطائفيون والعنصريون وهم ينظرون إلى التاريخ، إلى هناك حيث انطلقت الشعلة والشرارة الأولى يوم قال الإمام علي بن أبي طالب "عليه السلام" "يوم العدل على الظالم أشد من يوم الجور على المظلوم" هذا القول البليغ الذي يعكس أهم جوانب فكر ومعاناة الإمام علي (ع) وهو الذي نشأ في حصن "رائد العدل الإسلامي" الرسول المصطفى محمد بن عبد الله (ص) وفي أجواء الوحي، وتشرب من ثقافة القرآن، لذلك حمل لواء الجهاد وناضل ضد الباطل والظلم من أجل سيادة العدل ولم يخدعه سلطان زائف ولم تستهويه السياسية الدنيوية الزايلة، كان قائداً ومجاهداً يعرف أهدافه بوضوح لا لبس فيه، وكان دائماً قادراً على وضع حد فاصل ومميز بين قضيته ومواقف عدوه، لذا فهو يقبل على محاربة الباغي المعتدي بمشاعر صادقة وإيمان عميق بالنصر، فالتصدي للظلم والعدوان كان دائماً من أولويات الإمام على بن أبي طالب (ع) والعمل على ترسيخ مبدأ الشهادة وجعلها مطلباً كالنصر

. ((أن ألف ضربة بالسيف أهون على من ميتة على فراش)) في هذه المدرسة "الجهادية" ومن هذه الروح المفعمة بحب والشهادة والرافضة للظلم والعدوان تربي وترعرع الإمام الحسين بن على (ع) هنا كانت الغرسة الأولى لقيم البطولة و الفداء في روح "أبو الشهداء" وهنا تعمقت نفسه بمعنى الجهاد والتضحية وترسخت مبادئ الرسالة الإسلامية. وصار لا هم له سوى إحقاق الحق " إن كان دين محمد لن يستقم آلا بقتلي يا سيوف خذيني" وكان يوم عاشوراء، وكانت "أرض كربلاء" هي ساحة المواجهة الفاصلة والحاسمة بين الحق الذي يمثله الأمام الحسين والباطل الذي يمثله يزيد بن معاوية. لقد سطر الحسين بدمائه الزكية الطاهرة نهج الثورة على الظلم والعدوان ورسم الخطوط العريضة في التصدي للبغي ورفض كل صور الإسلام الزائفة التي تحاول تسويق وتبرير القبول بالظلم أو التعايش معه، فثورة الحسين بأهدافها النبيلة وقيمها الخالدة قد هزت واقع الأمة وجاء استشهاده (ع) بمثابة الزلزال الذي فضح كل مناهج التخاذل والذل والخنوع للمعتدي

. ومع كل وضوح أهداف ثورة الحسين، وهي ذات الأهداف التي حارب من أجلها جده وأبيه عليهما السلام، فقد جرت محاولات عديدة لتشويه مقاصد تلك الثورة وجرى اختراع الروايات الكاذبة لطمس معالم وحقيقة الصراع الذي خاضه الحسين مع يزيد بن معاوية واتباعه، كانت تلك الروايات في بعض تفاصيلها ظالمة ومسمومة وهي ترمي للنيل من الإمام الحسين أو تصوره في غاية المهانة وذلك بالإدعاء بأن الإمام الحسين عندما تلقي نبأ مصرع ابن عمه مسلم بن عقيل، قد طلب من والي يزيد "عبيد الله بن زياد" أن يجعله يختار إحدى الثلاث، أما الرجوع إلى المدينة، أو أن يأخذه إلى يزيد ليضع يده بيده، أو السماح له بالالتحاق بثغر من ثغور المسلمين ليكون جندياً محارباً في جيش يزيد

. إن هذه الرواية الباطلة توحي بأن خروج الإمام الحسين لم يكن قائماً على أساس ولم يكن هدف الثورة مواجهة ظلم وطغيان يزيد بن معاوية. كما أن هذه الرواية تحاول أن تصور شخصية الحسين بأنها خائفة وانهزامية لا تتردد في تقديم التنازلات للعدو بمجرد حدوث المواجهة وقبل بدء القتال. فالعقاد في كتابه "أبو الشهداء" يرفض هذه الرواية جملة وتفصيلاً ويقول "أن حركة الحسين وخروجه على يزيد إنما كانت عزمة قلب كبير عز عليه الإذعان وعز عليه النصر العاجل فخرج بأهله وذويه ذلك الخروج الذي يبلغ به النصر الأجل ويحيى به قضية مخذولة ليس لها بعد ذلك حياة" أن من يقرأ ويعي أبعاد ملحمة "أرض الطف" "أرض كربلاء" التي نحيى ذاكرها هذه الأيام، ويعرف أن الجهاد الذي رفع لواءه الإمام الحسين وقبله جده وأبيه، هو ثابت من ثوابت العقيدة الإسلامية (وليست واقعة كربلاء مناورة ومفاوضات كما يحاول البعض تفسيرها بما يخدم مواقف محددة، فهذا الحسين يقول لابن الحنفية "لو لم يكن ملجأ لما بايعت يزيد" وقوله لوالي المدينة عندما طلب منه البيعة ليزيد "إن مثلي لا يبايع مثله") إن من يعرف هذا سينتابه شعور بالألم والغضب بسبب ما لحق بهذه المعاني والمبادئ من تشوهات على يد بعض الأدعياء عندما أطلقوا العنان للهوس الطائفي التبريري وأسقطوا الاعتبارات الوطنية والقومية والدينية، وجرى التعامل مع المحتل والسكوت على جرائمه وتجاهل ما فعله من قتل وتدمير "للمقدسات" واستباحة المدن وتشريد أهلها، ولم تصدر دعوة واحدة للجهاد والمقاومة للدفاع عن حرية واستقلال الوطن، وصارت الخيانة الوطنية تعبيراً عن الديمقراطية وحرية الرأي، وفي مقابل مكاسب طائفية ودنيوية زائلة جرى التخلي عن طريق الجهاد الذي يملك الشرعية الوطنية والدينية وهو الطريق الذي سار عليه أولئك الرجال العظام من المراجع والفقهاء الذين دافعوا عن تعاليم وقيم السماء وحملوا أرواحهم على الأكف ليصنعوا البطولات يوم قادوا المجاهدين انطلاقاً من الفهم الصحيح للشريعة الإسلامية وللواجب ومعنى الجهاد طالما هناك اعتداء واحتلال وعدوان واستباحة للأعراض والأموال، هكذا كانت فتاوي الشيخ مهدي الحيدري وهو الذي قد تجاوز الثمانين من عمره عندما اندلعت المقاومة في وجه الاحتلال البريطاني عام 1918م وهكذا هي دعوات وصولات بقية العلماء المجتهدين من أمثال الشيخ مهدي الخالصى ومحمد سعيد الحبوبي الذي قام بدور رئيس في حشد المقاومة ولم يترك موقعاً في مدينة أو قرية عراقية إلا وقام بزيارتها ووقف خطيباً داعياً إلى الجهاد مذكراً بأيام الجهاد المجيدة في تاريخ المسلمين، بالرغم من عدم تكافؤ موازين القوى وبالرغم مما كان يعانيه الشعب من ظلم وجور (الولاة العثمانيين) ومن بطش واستبداد (السلطة العثمانية) فقد تناست المراجع آنذاك كل تلك المظالم والمواجع ووقفت وقفة واحدة معلنة الجهاد ونصرة المقاومة، لم نسمع في ذلك اليوم "فتاوى" من قبيل "الوقوف على الحياد" أو "المقاومة السلمية" ولم تصدر دعوات انتهازية مثل "ضرورة اغتنام الفرصة" لتمكين "الطائفية" من السيطرة على مقاليد الحكم وغيرها من الدعوات التي هي في نهاية المطاف تمثل رضوخاً للغزاة المحتلين وتثبيت غزوهم للعراق دون أية معوقات أو مضايقات حتى في حدها الأدنى على شكل إضراب أو عصيان مدني كما فعل مثلاً "غاندي" في مقاومته السلمية في الهند، كما يحلو للبعض هنا أن يقارن (حيث لا مجال للمقارنة) بين تجربة "غاندي" في الهند وتجربة غيره في العراق، فالمقاومة السلمية التي قادها "غاندي" كانت تقوم على أساس شل الحياة في الهند، ووقف تقديم أية خدمات للغزاة المحتلين مما جعل استمرار الاحتلال وبقاءه مستحيلاً هناك، ليس كما هو حاصل اليوم في العراق حيث الاكتفاء بالتصريحات "المتضاربة" التي تحمل "ألف وجه" وتصدر "من وراء ألف حجاب" ووضع "الخطوط الحمراء" الوهمية التي سرعان ما تتحول إلى ضوء أخضر للاحتلال وأعوانه لاجتياح المدن وهدم البيوت على رؤوس أصحابها ودفن المواطنين أحياء في مقابرها؟؟ كما حصل في مدينة النجف مع أتباع "الصدر" وفي مدينة الموصل والفلوجة وغيرها من المدن العراقية، ويبلغ المسلسل المتخاذل هذا مداه بتقديم الدعم للأحزاب والقوى الطائفية الموالية للخارج في عمليات سياسية مشبوهة وفاقدة للشرعية لتنفيذ مأربها في تقسيم العراق وبيعه في المزاد العلني للاحتلال.

هذا هو الواقع الحاصل في "عراق اليوم" وهذه هي الأحداث والوقائع تكشف للعالم حجم الجريمة التي ترتكب بحق العراق وشعبه تحت دعوات زائفة وأطروحات مشبوهة، تقوم على أساس هدم الحواجز بين الحرية والعبودية وسياسة خلط الأوراق، والترويج لمنطق "الحياد المزعوم" بين قدسية حرية الوطن وبين قوات الغزو المعتدية ومساندة المشروع الطائفي العنصري، ونظراً لمكانة العراق التاريخية والاستراتيجية فإن تلك الجريمة تمتد لتطال الوطن العربي والعالم الإسلامي برمته فالعراق ذو مكانة عظيمة ومؤثرة في محيطه العربي والإسلامي فهو "أرض السواد" كما يقال ومركز الحضارة العربية وأرض "المقدسات" والأئمة الأطهار الذين نذروا أرواحهم الطاهرة في مواجهة الظلم والعدوان والانتصار للحرية والعدالة، فعندما يكون العراق حراً يكون كل العرب بل كل المسلمين أحراراً، فحرية "بغداد" أو "النجف" أو "كربلاء" أو "الفلوجة تساوي حرية القاهرة ودمشق والرياض والبحرين، وعبودية أية مدينة عراقية تساوي عبودية كل العواصم العربية، ولكن يبقي الأمل معقوداً دائماً على "أحفاد" سيد الشهداء و"أبا الأحرار" الحسين بن على (ع) والسائرون على نهجه والماضون على درب المقاومة والتضحية والفداء، الذين يسجلون اليوم في أرض العراق ملاحم البطولة بضرباتهم الموجعة للمحتلين الغزاة وعملائهم الصغار ممن ارتهنوا لإرادة المحتل. وبذلك يثبت العراقيون الأباة قوة تمسكهم وإيمانهم بقيم السماء وبمبادئ ثورة الحسين المتوهجة على مدى التاريخ والمشعة بالنور والضياء لتعرية وجه الظلم والظلام الذي حل بالعراق على يد المجرمين الغزاة وأعوانهم من أصحاب الفتنة الطائفية ومغذي نيرانها!!!

Basically this article, although it does not identify Sistani by name, makes it pretty clear that the author thinks that Al Sistani is an oppurtunist who sold out on Iraq just to further the interests of one sect. Furthermore, he says there is no way to compare him with Ghandi, since Sistani changed his mind constantly and went back on his proposed "red lines".

Calls for a boycott of Akhbar Al Khaleej have followed. What particularly outraged many people is that both writers are shi3i, which seems to have lit up the controversy even more. Even more, Mahmood Al Gassab is a member of the Al Tajamu3 al Kawmi (national gathering) political society (which has Baathist and Arab Nationalist tendencies), part of the four boycotting parties which is in an uneasy alliance with Al Wefaq, one of the most voiceforous objectors to this column. To add to this, he has just been elected to be on the constitutional comittee to follow on the resolution of the second constitutional conference. The situation has reached such an extreme where apparently the article is threatening to break up the alliance in the four boycotting parties, as Al Hayat Newspaper reports.

On the other frontier, MPs in parliaments are busy bickering between themselves about how to handle their situation with their government. After two years, no doubt concerned with upcoming elections, MPs have come to the sudden realization that the government has been extremely uncooperative with them and that they have not passed a single law that has had any impact on the population. Hence, after months of telling people to have patience and wait, they have decided enough is enough themselves. What has emerged is inner fights and cracks, with some advocating boycotting some parliamentary sessions, others favouring full resignations, some for the continuation of "fruitful and civilized talks", while each side accuses the other of being naive and uncooperative.


Hence, the boycotting parties and the parliament, the only two voices citizens have for opposition and checks on the government, have decided to indulge into inner fighting, resulting in both of them being in a weaker position. Guess who's laughing all the way to the bank?

¶ 6:47 PM

Here is the English version of the BBC's arab youth series focused on Bahrain.

Do you think it's an accurate reflection? I particularly liked the bluetooth "wa7deh saxiya (sexy girl)" and the hidden marlboro pack parts.

Admire the thick American accent on some participants!

¶ 5:27 AM

harriri

Rafik Al Hariri was buried yesterday in Lebanon. May he rest in peace.

The talk is all centred now on who is responsible, or more accurately, who ordered his killing.

Apparently an investigation has been set up, with Lebanon requesting the help of Swiss investigators in the search for evidence.

Most of the fingers of accusations are being pointed now towards Syria. After all, Rafik Al Hariri notoriously defected from being a supporter of Syria's stance in Lebanon, refusing for a long time to endorse amending the constitution to allow president Emile Lahoud (إميل لحود) to extend his presidency.

I for some reason, however, have my doubts over this theory. I simply cannot see what Syria had to benefit from killing Al Hariri in such a spectacular display. All this has caused is to focus the international eyes squarely on Lebanon and Syria's role in Lebanon, which is the last thing Syria needs with American presence in Iraq, and the tensions already existing with regards to UN resolution 1559, which in all essence demands that Syria withdraws its troops from Lebanon.

Why would Syria cause his death in such an eye-grabbing manner, with a horrific car bomb that left neighbourhoods miles away shaking from its force? Isn't this just a recipe to attract the world's attention, with Syria being the main target? Wouldn't it have made more sense for them to use a sniper or something less eye-grabbing (which should not be any more difficult for Syria than a car explosion considering they control all of the military present in Lebanon)?

What exactly did Syria as well have to gain from this? Although Al Hariri was against amending the constitution (primarily because of his political rivalry with Lahoud), he was not against Syria's main concern with Lebanon, which is Syrian troops remaining in Lebanon. In fact, he was considered a traditional supporter of Syria on this issue. Furthermore, it seems that Syria's main aim over the last decade or so in Lebanon was to keep the country stable and under its own control (although it did not go doing this in the best manner available). How did this assassination help that exactly? It seems to me all it has done is to intensify the differences between the opposing the factions in Lebanon and to galvanize support for the Syrian opposition.

For these reasons, I am quite sceptical of Syria being the instigator of this attack. What about the alternatives?

Well, the other points of accusations have been pointed mainly to four different parties: Islamic militants (maybe backed up Al Qaeda), Israel, the United States, and opposing Lebanese factions.

As to some kind of Islamic militant perpetrating the attack, the main evidence is that of a Group calling themselves Victory and Jihad (or more accurately, one person called Ahmed Tayseer Abu Adas), claiming responsibility for the bombing, apparently because of Hariri's business ties in Saudi Arabia (where he made his money), one of the main targets of Islamic movements. Furthermore, the method of assassination seems to follow the methods used by other Islamic insurgents elsewhere, particularly in Iraq: A suicide bomber using an explosive-laden car. One could also conceivably argue that the militants have a strong interest in seeing instability and tensions returning in the region, as is apparent from their actions in Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and recently Kuwait.

Another suspect could be Israel. Israel's interest and part in Lebanon's turmoil is long, starting with their involvement in the Lebanese civil war and their continued animosity towards Lebanese and Syrian backed Hizbullah. One could also argue that Israel can see some advantages from the international focus, pressure, and ramifications of such events on Syria, which could weaken its rival's position seriously (as is already evident).

One could also (at the risk of being accused of venturing into conspiracy theories) wonder whether the United States had any benefits from the attack. After all, the United States animosity towards Syria is very public, which has been gathering momentum recently, with new unilateral sanctions imposed and pressure for a security council resolution asking for Syrian troops to withdraw from Lebanon. This incident has provided the perfect background to increase pressure on Syria, which is evident by the White House spokesman mentioning Syria in the first official American reaction to the assassination. The United States also sees Hizbullah and some Palestinian groups, such as Islamic Jihad, as terrorist groups mainly backed up by Syria, that are an obstacle to a settlement in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Anyway, unlike what many others have done, I am not going to jump to conclusions, and I'm not going to level far-strung accusations without any more clear cut evidence. Let us wait for the results of the investigation, and see what preliminary conclusions they come up with.

Of course, political assassinations in Lebanon have a long history, with this being the latest in many. Internal warring factions, outside influence, and the nature of the borders of the country (two issues I've commented on before), have created an intriguing and very sad history and atmosphere of conflict and assassination. Here is an (incomplete list) of previous prominent political figures that have been murdered in Lebanon:

Kamal Joumblat 1917-1977 (كمـال جنبـلاط)

Prominent Pan-Arabist Socialist, whose main goals was an Independent Lebanon, a strong Arabic wide cooperation, and the creation and preservation of a Palestinian homeland. Assassinated in 1977, with the killing widely blamed on Israel.

Bashir Gemayel 1947-1982 (بشير جمايل

Leader of the Al Kataeb faction in Lebanon, and one of the main opponents of Syrian and Palestinian influence in Lebanon. Killed in an explosion in the Kataeb headquarters in 1982. Most blame Syrian or Palestinian parties for the assasination.

Rene Moawad

Elected president in 1989. He was considered a moderate with leanings towards the Syrian stance in Lebanon. Had many local foes, including general Michel Aoun and Bechara Khouri. His assassination is a mystery but is usually blamed on his domestic opponents.



Most of the assassinations, although accusations have been levelled, remain unsolved. We will have to wait and see the conclusions of this most recent investigations and the ramifications it will have.

¶ 12:14 AM

Rafik Al Hariri, the former prime minister of Lebanon, was murdered today along with scores of other people in a car blast. May his sould rest in peace.

Who was behind the attack? What was there to gain? No one is sure yet, but accusations have been pointed once again to the usual suspects. It is interesting to see the reactions of different forces:

This murder today is a terrible reminder that the Lebanese people must be able to pursue their aspirations and determine their own political future free from violence and intimidation and free from Syrian occupation.
Scott McClellan, White House spokesman

I cannot say for certain that Syria is behind this attack but there are many groups which could have carried it out. There is no doubt that Syria, which supports [the Lebanese Shia militia] Hezbollah, [the radical Palestinian groups] Hamas, Islamic Jihad and other groups that are opposed to the democratisation of the Middle East, is uncomfortable with the prospect of elections in Lebanon and the last thing they want is to be forced to leave Lebanon.
Silvan Shalom, Israeli foreign minister

An organised terrorist structure such as the Zionist regime has the capacity for such an operation whose aim is to undermine the unity of Lebanon. [Iran] vigorously condemns the terrorist action ... which cost the life of Rafik Hariri. [Lebanon should be vigilant] to prevent the Zionist regime from carrying out its sinister and expansionist projects in the region.
Hamid Reza Asefi, Iranian foreign ministry spokesman

The Syrian government and people stand alongside brotherly Lebanon in this dangerous situation and convey our sincerest condolences to the family of Mr Hariri and the families of the other victims.
Bashar al-Assad, Syrian President



Our condolences to his family and people.

¶ 7:24 PM

The second constitutional conference, held by the four boycotting parties in the NDAA office in Um Al Hassam, has just occured today. If you'd like to keep up with all the discussions and papers presented, here is the official website.

Remember that distant past when all the talk was about this crisis? Does anyone have any comments or inside scoops? Does anyone still care? Anyway, it's good that it's finally back on the agenda, even if only to hear the arguments presented. I'll start posting comments on what was discussed as soon as I find time to read up about it. Stay tuned!

¶ 11:41 PM

The day has finally arrived. The do or die day for the Bahraini team: will they whoop some hairy smelly iranian ass, or are they going to surrender to mediocrity? We will know withing the next 24 hours. Good luck Bahrain!

A few days ago I posted an arabic article that described an incident where a few Manama team supporters went around waving the iranian national flag, hurting the pride of many Bahrainis. How can these guys betray the country that they moved in, voluntarily leaving the country that they moved from (Iran)? How can this be anything but bad?

Me, ever the lone rider, I decide to see some good points from this.

Let me explain. In any country with a large immigrant population, you find the same event. Look at england for example. When the Indian or Pakistani national team come to play here, there are swaths of fans from Pakistani or Indian origin that fill the stadium supporting either India or Pakistan. The English press duly complains about this, regretting how they do not show any loyalty to the country that they have voluntarily adopted as their new homeland. They see it as a kind of embarrassment, that their own citizens support another country. That somehow their citizens prefer to wave the flag of another country, defying the land that they have chosen to move to by their own free will.

I actually take the other side, and flip the argument. I think it is a sign of the hosting country being more developed than the original country, and that it is the country where the migrants came from that should be ashamed. Basically, what these fans are attesting to is that the country that hosted them is in some ways much better from their original country, and that is why they are here, in Bahrain, and not in Iran. It is Iran that should be embarrased that large swaths of its people and their decendants have decided to move countries, abandoning their original homeland (whether Bahrain, UAQ, UK, or US). This points to one thing: Bahrain, in some ways, has managed to surprass Iran, to the extent that thousands of people of Iranian origin have decided to move to Bahrain and become Bahrainis. The political and economic situation has deteriorated so badly over the last century, that many have made the momentous choice of abandoning their original place of stay, leaving behind it's political and social regime, and choosing another place as their new homeland, embracing with it its political and social regime.

Things might be bad in Bahrain, but at least it's not as bad as it is in Iran.

So if by chance you see a couple of Iranian flags fluttering today in the stadium, do not think that it is a shame and a disgrace, but rather give a sly smirk and a grin, reflecting on how our tiny nation has managed to provide benefits the mighty juggernaut of Iran has failed to achieve. They might be able to beat us in a football game, but we have so far beaten them on the grander scheme of life.

Anyway, good luck to the team, and may we whoop some Iranian ass!

¶ 2:04 AM

Here comes the start of the Journey.

On 9th of February, the Bahraini Football team will embark on a journey that could end with their greatest achievement ever: qualifying to the world cup. Can you imagine that? Us in the world cup? How great would that be?

Anyway, let's not get carried away. First things first: WE HAVE TO BEAT IRAN ON WEDNESDAY.

Not a win, not a draw, but only a win will do.

Why? Other than it would provide the perfect start to us, I HATE THE GODDAMN IRANIAN FOOTBALL TEAM.

Now don't get me wrong: I like Iran. I like the country, I like the people, and most of all I adore their women. However, when it comes to football, I HAVE NOTHING BUT LOATHING FOR THEM.

Why? Well there are deep philosophical reasons, and there are pretty simple reasons.

The deep reason is the nationalism that can come out in sports, and how sports can healthily divert antagonism from wars and politics and into the pitch. All the problems Bahrain has had with Iran over the past decades can be brought out on the pitch, instead of in real life.

The other reason is pure spite. I hate the arrogant, cheating, sly, sleazy players and the tactics they used. I can't remember the last game I've seen Iran play without a couple of players being sent off, especially against Bahrain. The Iranians still hold a grudge against us for not letting them qualify to the last World Cup, and we need to gain vengeance for our defeat in the last Asian Cup. Should make for a good game!

Hence, over the next four days, I'm going to blog continuous posts about this occasion, and why we need to beat those arrogant good-for-nothing but cheating Iranian players.

Let us today look at the Iranian internet coverage of the game.

Here is an article that neatly encapsulates their view of us.

I urge people to check out the main site from which this article comes from, and see how the Iranians are one above us by attempting to do some sort of (mediocre) analysis of our team and the circumstances surrounding the game. Maybe we should learn from them.

Now other than the pretty shit english, the (unjustifiably) arrogant attitude, and the inexplicable ediotic mentality of thinking somehow Iran's team is better than everyone else, the article has a point: Football in Bahrain is in decline.

Now I've talked about the problem of our players not being rested and defensive problems that we have in a previous post. However, there is a much deeper long term problem.

I was discussing this with a cousin not too long ago, where I predicted football will be dead in Bahrain within ten years. He disagreed, saying football is already dead in Bahrain. Now this guy is a hadrcore Bahrain and Muharraq supporter, and he told me how he'd go to Muharraq games against teams like Al Shabab, although he does not even know who the hell Al Shabab are, but just because he adores Muharraq. All the last games he's gone to recently, there were only about 3 people in the stadium: Him, the 7ajji selling 7ab (sunflower seeds), and a bored na6oor (security guard). Even the rabe6a (supporting band) have given up going. Basically, NO ONE GOES TO GAMES IN BAHRAIN, except to those of the national team.

The reasons? Well look at the shit football pitches we have. Our national stadium is a shambles, reaching the stage of not being used for any football games for the last 2 years. My college's football pitch is infinitely better than any pitch we have in bahrain. How do you expect to develop a solid youth football foundation if there is no where for them to play? How can the authorities explain forking out $300 million on a risky venture such as the formula one while not being able to fork out even one million to build a decent to football pitch?

Admittedly, the wide availability of live european football in every household has had a bad effect on local football attendances as well. Why would someone fork out 1BD to go watch mediocre football when he can watch the highest class football for free in the comfort of his house or while smokeing a sheesha? This is a problem I don't know how we should deal with.

Then we have the overly beauracratic and sometimes corrupt system we have for running football and sports in general. Some sort of solution has to be found, or football will be six feet under very soon.


Anyway, it's not all gloom. We currently do have a very good (although overworked) team, and hopefully they can pull something off. I unfortunately cannot attend the upcoming game, being five thousand miles away, but I urge everyone to show support for our national team and help them whoop some Iranian ass!

Oh yeah, and it's the Arabian Gulf, not the Persian Gulf. Now watch how how a tiny nation that you wish was a part of your country whips your hairy asses!


update: Can anyone please let me know a way to watch the game online, as I am desperate. I haven't been able to find the Bahraini sports channel online, and I can't think of anywhere else that would show it. Does anyone know a link to the Iranian state channels or any other channel that would show it? Please let me know!

¶ 3:40 PM