Bahrain Justice Minister: Doctors & nurses who treated demonstrators "participated in attempts to topple monarchy"

Via FLC

(AP) - MANAMA, Bahrain – "Several doctors and nurses who treated injured anti-government protesters during months of unrest in the Gulf kingdom have been charged with acts against the state and will be tried in a military court, the justice minister said Tuesday. Khaled bin Ali Al Khalifa said the charges against 23 doctors and 24 nurses include participating in attempts to topple the island's Sunni monarchy and taking part in illegal rallies..."

Posted by G, M, Z, or B at 10:05 AM

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Arab revolutions and uprisings: Beware of media disinformation

 

Posted by realistic bird on May 1, 2011

{Disinformation} by Juan Kalvellido

The case of Syria and Bahrain

by realistic bird

The role of the media is to inform and to present events as they are. However, this role has been hijacked to use media networks for other purposes. One of the reasons I blog is to present people with information many media might not focus on so in this light I wanted to share some points I was able to compile over a period of few weeks. The amount of disinformation and inconsistencies in the media has been systematic to the degree that it has become obvious there is an aim to shift our views to believe certain things. I was shocked with the amount of people who were led astray by this disinformation. People I used to see as “thinkers” and have knowledge of geopolitics were taken by a few media tricks. So, the main question to ponder is if these media were really telling us exactly what is happening then why all these distortions?

Syria

Let’s start with the “eye witnesses” and the “activists” who are being used in the media as a source of updates and information. One could argue that these networks can’t get information if the government doesn’t allow journalists on the ground then in these situations alternative sources have to be used but at least if the source says something nonsensical or off somehow this person will not be used again, right? For example a witness on a Arab station claimed he is in Dara’a and capable of seeing and hearing everything; first he claimed there is mutiny within the ranks of the army and second he can hear the army orders even when he is hundreds of meters away as he said himself. Does this man have bionic eyes and ears? The rumor that the army is breaking up is not new and there is a previous report about Western media stating the same thing which turned out to be false. If we assume for the sake of argument that the soldiers are being shot by other security men in this situation we are talking about tens of deaths and some with mutilated bodies but Syria has institutions and the government would have no apparatus to gain control if it did that, so the whole argument is absurd to begin with. This means that the army and police are being targeted then not all the protests are peaceful. A second “witness” called ‘Abdullah’ talks to Al Arabiya from Dara’a then on Al Jazeera from Duma, it seems the man can’t stay put in one place. A third example of a witnesses who keeps claiming there is no electricity, fuel or phones in Dara’a yet he tells the anchor that he saw things on the TV and he is able to call every day. These are just examples of many of the illogical ramblings of some “witnesses”. These channels take the word of these “witnesses” and immediately put it as a fact. Where are the fact checkers? Where is the professionalism? On the other hand there are reports (Western media lie about Syria – eyewitness reports) that contradict these “eye witnesses”:

RT: What’s happening in Syria? What have you seen? And that are the Syrians saying?
Anhar Kochneva: Not even once did I come across anyone who would in any way support these riots; and mind you, in the line of my job, I deal with all sorts of people. There are many vehicles with the president’s portraits driving the streets throughout the country – ranging from old, barely moving crankers to brand new Porsches and Hummers. You can’t force people into hanging up portraits. It means that people, irrespective of their status and income, support the president rather than the rebellion. I saw quite a number of young people walking or driving around with Syrian flags. How can you force a young person hanging out with friends to wave flags? I think it’s difficult too. If you understand the mentality of the Syrians you can tell there is a sincere impulse from a forced obligation.
On March 29, I saw a rally in Hama to support the president – indeed, many thousands of men and women, with their children, and entire families went out. The streets were flooded with people. It was quite a shock to see Al-Jazeera presenting rallies in support of the president as if they were protests against him. It was just as surprising to see the Israeli websites post photos and videos of supporters’ rallies with comments saying those were opponents of the regime. There you have people holding portraits of Bashar al-Assad and flags, and we’re told that these people are against him.
RT: The media reports mass anti-government rallies.
AK: There’s a powerful misinformation swell going on. On April 1, the media reported a large anti-governmental rally in Damascus. I was in Damascus on that day. This rally never happened – I didn’t see it, and neither did the locals.
On April 16, Reuters news agency wrote that 50,000 opponents of the regime took to the streets of Damascus, and that they had been dispersed with tear gas and batons. Damascus’ residents realize that such a rally could not take place in the city unnoticed. How many policemen would it take to disperse it? And how come nobody saw it except Reuters? Five hundred people in the streets of Damascus are a large crowd. Reuters broadcast their material around the world, including Russia. One source lies, and then this lie is like a snowball rolling downhill creating a fake reality, and picking up rumor and speculation…
/Presently, a lot of young unarmed policemen get killed. The media propaganda immediately labels them as victims of the regime. I repeat, policemen are unarmed. The Syrian police are not too good with guns, because nothing like this has happened here for a long time. But the killed rookies are reported as either victims among the protestors, or as policemen who refused to shoot at their fellow countrymen, depending on the editors’ preference. Goebbels’ words seem to be true: the bigger the lie, the more easily they believe it…
/ RT: What role are Syrian emigrants playing in the Syrian destabilization?
AK: It’s an open question. There was a leak claiming that Dan Feldman, Hillary Clinton’s special representative for the Middle East, met representatives of the Syrian opposition in Istanbul in mid-April and suggested the tactics for assassinations of civil and military officials. In less than three days, on April 19, several military officials had been brutally killed in Syria. Not only were they attacked and shot dead, some victims of the attacks, including three teenage children of a Syrian general, who were in a car with him, were cut to pieces with sabres.
Murders committed with a high degree of brutality are aimed at intimidating the population. The news that children had been cut to pieces served that purpose quite well. (Read all the report)

The videos also can’t be verified, I’m sure not all of them are false but at least don’t show a video if it doesn’t make sense. On Friday 29/4/2011 it was raining heavily in Syria, they even had hail yet in some videos the people are dry and no rain/water on the ground (the Syrian media is not up to standard but one channel made a point to compile the inconsistencies, documented here, there are many videos in Arabic).
Another odd occurance is the role of ones who say they are “islamists” and attack Bashar Al Assad by claiming he has an alliance with the Israelis. Even I saw odd posters held by some people in the streets putting a dollar sign on the head of the Syrian president. If anyone knows any history and politics the last thing one can accuse Al Assad with is that he is an American puppet or a Zionist collaborator. The countries that control the media in question are the ones who can be labeled in that manner. Another rumor said that the Israelis want Al Assad to remain but two things were revealed from the Israelis themselves to put this to rest. First, just watching the Israeli media they are ecstatic about the unrest happening in Syria and they specifically said it regains what it lost in Egypt. Second, there is a false idea that the Israelis would have a problem if those “islamists” take the upper hand for I saw a program on Israeli TV in which they were discussing a video from a man who claims to be from the Syrian opposition  labeled as a “Sheikh” asking Netanyahu to stop supporting Al Assad and saying no one can get rid of “Israel”. The two Israeli youths of the program then hope that nothing happens to this man and add “insha’Allah” to it too. Moreover, a recent revealed wiki leaks cable from the US embassy in Lebanon about the former PM Sa’ed Al Hariri in which he suggested that the Syrian regime needs to be removed and replaced by a combination of Abdel Al Karim Khadam and the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood (who support peace with “Israel”).

13. (S/NF) If the regime were to fall in Syria, who would
be there to fill in the vacuum? Perplexed that the Alawites,
who make up only 7-8 per cent of Syria, could rule so
exclusively as “a family business” over a vast Sunni
majority, Saad suggested that the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood,
in partnership with ex-regime figures like Abdel Halim
Khaddam and Hikmet Shehabi (“though he’s still close to the
regime”), could step into the void. Saad claimed that the
Syrian Brotherhood is similar in character to Turkey’s
moderate Islamists. “They would accept a Christian or a woman
as President. They accept civil government. It’s like
Turkey in Syria. They even support peace with Israel.”
Saying that he maintains close contact with Khaddam (in
Paris) and Syrian Muslim Brotherhood leader-in-exile Ali
Bayanuni (in London), Saad urged us to “talk to Bayanuni.
See what he’s like. You will see wonders.”

One of the most shocking revelations was the way Al Jazeera Arabic dealt with the happenings in Syria and Bahrain. More of its credibility was lost when a video (in Arabic) of the “thinker” Azmi Bashara and an anchor discuss what uprisings to talk about and which ones to ignore. In the video Bashara tells the anchor not to ask him about Jordan and complains why he asked him about Bahrain, the anchor answers he had to clean up the network’s reputation regarding that (I assure the anchor it did not work) and they will take 40 min to focus on Syria. The second incident is the resigning of the well-known and truly professional head of Al Jazeera Bureau in Lebanon Ghassan Bin Jeddo. The reasons cited by him where about the lack of objectivity of the network (on Bahrain) and its incitement tactics (on Syria). In addition, a Syrian anchor on Al Arabiya resigned for the way the network is dealing with the events in Syria. Another issue to be raised is why are these networks not considering potential evidence about a role of Saudis royals in this presented by Lebanese politician Wi’amWahab? Wahab showed checks with hundreds of thousands of dollars given to key people (one being Lebanese MP Jamal Al Jarrah who belongs to Hariri bloc) accused by the Syrians of sending weapons to Syria. These networks will not focus on that because they belong to Saudi Arabia and Qatar who seem to have found common interests now. Here I must point out how ironic it is that these undemocratic countries support the wants of the people as long it is not on their lands or near them. Other reports (in Arabic) reveal messages from UAE, Qatar, Turkey, and some Europeans are being sent to Syria with a list of demands, the main one to detach from Iran, Hezbollah and Hamas. If that happens Syria will be given economic and social “help” from Gulf countries and any security related aid (yes we did see what they did in Bahrain, I will mention later on).

Everybody is in an uproar to save the Libyans and the Syrians but calling for help from the same ones who have killed/helped others to kill hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, Palestinians, Lebanese, Pakistanis, Afghanis, and many others around the world is nothing but insanity. Who in his/her right mind thinks the US gov. and some European governments will save the Libyans and Syrians? When in their whole history have these gov. did anything outside of their interests? In addition they have also supported the dictators the people are fighting. Do we have to wait until the Zionists are sitting right there on the table besides the new despots to wonder what went wrong? Do we need to reach that point? The US and its allies are basing their actions against Syria in the UN partly on false information; does that remind you of something? How about Iraq and its WMDs. Yes Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator and yes he killed his people but are the Iraqis well and happy now? Have we learned nothing from the woes of our brothers and sisters in Iraq?

Whatever is happening in Syria certain media has made a point of using  information which is not verified or lacks common sense for other reasons than just to support the supposed uprising of the Syrians. The people who follow closely these media need to take this into consideration.

Bahrain

Has anyone noticed any proper focus on the protests and uprising in Bahrain? Or how about the regime crimes: killings (Video, pictures (very graphic)), arrests, verdicts of execution, torture (1, 2), destruction of religious sites and mosques , intimidation of people , etc. (other crimes documented)? Don’t the people of Bahrain deserve freedom too? If anyone has an excuse that they don’t then this person doesn’t believe in freedom and is rather lying to him/herself. The reasons given by some not to support the people in Bahrain are nothing short of disgusting (sect related and being instigated by Iran). Whatever the reasons given there is no excuse for the actions of the regime and the GCC forces that invaded the country and violated numerous human rights laws. How about the destruction the mosques (some historical) and the burring/desecration of the Qur’an? This should be enough to make people flare up but where is the media when you need it? Al Jazeera, Al Arabiya, BBC Arabic, France 24, and a huge list of other media such as newspapers and websites are all owned by Saudi Arabia, Qatar, other gulf countries and their allies. The gulf countries are part of the GCC forces who invaded Bahrain with no good reason because that is not their purpose to begin with to interfere in an internal matter and aid the regime to do horrible crimes. Then it is clear why Bahrain is out of the picture and the anchors in these networks pretend nothing is happening over there, just mention what the Bahraini regime says or sometimes do reports not including all the information.

I support every call for reform and freedom, we all have to because they are a necessity and a human right. Yet, we can’t react to unreliable news. If those media were supporting the uprisings for real and not for some agenda for the country of origin then why the need to distort things? There is definably unrest in Syria and Bahrain, one is hyped and the other is hidden. We are damned if we don’t revolt because we will be left with the dictators and we are damned if we do because others will use it to push their plans. From a fellow Arab I really hope for a better tomorrow but being high on “freedom” doesn’t mean we close our eyes to what others are doing.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

“Aljazeera” Channel Merchandises the “Arabic Spring”: From Bahrain to Syria

Qatar use Al-jazeera as a blakmailing tool

By Hussein Hamiyyeh

The Qatari "Aljazeera" Channel has renounced the professional standards it claims to possess; this was once it decided, with prior planning and determination, to strangle the Bahraini uprising at the level of its media and to keep secret the massacres that the royal family "Al Khalifa" is committing against the people of their country. Hereupon, most of those astonished by this surprising fact have tried to dwarf the reasons beyond such renouncement and restrict it within two limits; the first is that the State of Qatar (the Channel's owner) has commitments to fulfill as regards its neighbors of the Gulf Cooperation Council, and this prevents it, thus, from exposing the Bahraini events with at least a neutral eye of media.

As for the second reason, it has been related to the level of the doctrinal recruitment of this Channel's staff, which is a recruitment that holds hatred and rancor for the Shiites that constitute the great majority of the Bahraini people.

It's actually silly to reckon to such explanations, especially when Qatar (that owns this Channel), has used the Channel as a political instrument to grow more dominant and break the regional equations in order to acquire roles and locations in these equations, which do not meet with the strategic capabilities of this humbly sized and populated country in comparison with the other players in the regional arena. In fact, there are other situations and previous times when "Aljazeera" Channel performed its media share honorably - totally disregarding what is said today as respects the Bahraini situation. The media performance of "Aljazeera" did embarrass very much Qatar when it came to its gulf neighbors and caused tension at the level of diplomatic relations (as was the case with Kuwait, Bahrain, and Saudi Arabia) in the past.

"Aljazeera" would respond to that by saying it had a media policy independent from the Qatari State and not submissive to the government (despite the fact that none is ready to reckon this allegation as correct or take it seriously). Likewise, it is unbelievable that the doctrinal belonging of "Aljazeera's" staff is the reason beyond the renouncement, for the renouncement has come in the context of a mission that "Aljazeera" impossibly has no relation with and that is the exposure of the Bahraini uprising as a doctrinal one.

Anyway, in case "Aljazeera" has to a certain extent succeeded at shadowing what is going on in Bahrain concerning the oppressive and inhumane acts, then the Bahraini rebels, in spite of the expensive price of torture, coercion, and martyrdom they have paid, have highlighted (through exposing "Aljazeera's" stance towards their uprising) the attempts that are taking place at the black chambers of international capitals and the "role" of some regional capitals to encompass the Arabic revolutions and place barriers and obstacles ahead of their flow or seek to exploit these revolutions to protect the gulf crowns and treasuries at a side and lessen their dangers for the "Israeli" security and the Western interests at another side.

Definitely, the attempts at this level are countless, and the sides orchestrating these attempts are today on a feverish race to gain the American approval to accredit them. At this level, the racers are clearly using all that they have (whether it's their provisions or reserves) to show their political, diplomatic, military, security, and media potentials and competencies to win the American prize. It is not confidential that for a period of time, Qatar has been allured by the game of playing the major roles and showing at the stage of the grandest events to please its ambitions, which over exceed Qatar's strategic need as a small country.

Therefore, it has decided to enter the competition for the American accreditation, even if this competition places Qatar into a crowdedness with countries like Turkey and those of the European Union or even if this might bring Qatar into antipathetic relations with Syria and Iran; yet, even if this brings about the envy among Qatar, Riyadh, and the other Gulf capitals. However, Qatar is not going to miss this chance, particularly when it sees that it is the most capable of accomplishing the list of the American conditions and wishes at these critical times the region is going through. The wishes can be summarized as such:

- Isolating the influence of the Arabic revolutions and the uprising climates they provoke in the Nation's atmosphere away from the "Israeli" security, in addition to maintaining the present security equations that ensure the sustenance of the Western interests and their expansion in the area
- Holding control over these revolutions and redirecting them in a manner serving the Western policies in general and the American ones in particular; this means creating barriers and obstacles to prevent revolutions from breaking out in the remaining countries of what used to be called the "Arabic Moderation Camp"; in the meantime, cloning revolutionary models (specifically the Libyan model) at the States of the withstanding and resisting axis, even if this means doctrinal riots (as is the case of Syria today)

- Diverting the change produced by the Arabic revolutions towards the direction that serves the continuation of the "Israeli"-American project that failed in both the July Aggression and the Gaza War; this means continuing to partition the Islamic World and divide it into combating doctrines (Sunnites and Shiites), in addition to altering the priorities of the Arabic world from the "Israeli" enmity to the antagonizing of Iran and the resistance movements in Lebanon and Iraq.

To render its regional role greater and receive the American signature for this role, Qatar relies on its credit, which enables it to do so. In fact, it has accumulated this credit through the past era, and this credit can be exposed as such:

• Since Washington D.C. wants to continue the "Arabic Spring" in the remaining Arabic countries similarly to the Libyan model (currently dragging Syria to trap it in this model), it sees that supporting the Qatari role is beneficial and can be used later on as an international and regional mediator upon the long Qatari expertise in regard to this domain; Qatar has gained this expertise through leading mediations in several internal conflicts in different Arabic countries, among which are its mediation in the Lebanese-Lebanese conflict (the Doha Agreement), its mediation in Yemen (between Sana'a and the Houthis), and the agreement it has made between Khartoum and the rebels of Darfur.

• Making use of Qatar's media capabilities through "Aljazeera" Channel or the media means that it owns in more than an Arabic country, especially when both of the internal and external Qatari media claim to have inspired the Arabic revolutions and to have been the main reason beyond their breaking out and success

• Making use of Qatar's diplomatic competency and qualifications at this level, regarding its branched relations with most of the parts involved in the ongoing, regional conflict, whereby Qatar has relations with Iran, Syria, the Gulf States, "Israel", the Islamic disciplines (particularly the Salafis), and the non-governmental organizations that are active in several Arabic countries

• Its role concerning passing the Western desires directly while treating the Libyan case, dissimilarly to the hesitation of the American allies in such situations, whereby in the "London Meeting", Qatar broke all nationalistic interdictions "and supported the international military interference after it had provided the official Arabic cover for that." It also called for "arming processes of the Libyan opposition and sought to encourage the States of the Libyan neighborhood to share the interference process against Libya".

While Washington D.C. is facing confusion and hesitation in dealing with the flowing regional hesitations, research centers leak sayings that "all of these stances have created a growing American realization that the Qatari diplomacy will be better for the United States as long as all diplomacies of the other American allies oppose the American intentions and drives when it comes to international interference against another Arabic side." The leaks also say that "the problem that will face Washington D.C. is how to encourage Riyadh to accept the diplomatic and regional Qatari power and how to find an alternative role for Riyadh that keeps its regional weight, whereby no Qatari diplomacy arises at the expense of the Saudi Arabian one."

Hereupon, it is easy to understand the stance of "Aljazeera" Channel towards the Bahraini uprising (or towards what is going on in Syria), whereby the media shadowing that it has practiced to cover up the savagery of Al Khalifa's Bedouin governorship (or its practice that is counter to the Syrian incidents) has aimed at Doha's reaching to a double satisfaction of both Riyadh and Washington D.C. to convince Saudi Arabia of accepting the new Qatari role as the United States undertakes finding an alternative role that keeps Riyadh's regional weight, whereby no Qatari diplomacy arises at the expense of the Saudi Arabian one."

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

"Bahrain does not exist as far as Al Jazeera is concerned..."

"Bahrain does not exist as far as Al Jazeera is concerned..."

DUBAI (Reuters) - "Pan-Arab broadcasters who played a key role reporting Arab uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt are helping dynastic rulers police the gates of the Gulf to stop the revolts from spreading on their patch, analysts say. Qatar-based Al Jazeera, the leading Arabic language network, was pivotal in keeping up momentum during protests that toppled Zine al-Abdine Ben Ali and Hosni Mubarak, both entrenched rulers who were no friends of Qatar's ruling Al Thani dynasty. When Al Jazeera's cameras turned to Yemen, it was as though its guns were trained on the next target in an uprising longtime Arab leaders were convinced was of the channel's making.....

For viewers watching protests spread across the region, the excitement stopped abruptly in Bahrain.  Protests in Oman and Saudi Arabia have also received scant attention in recent months. "Bahrain does not exist as far as Al Jazeera is concerned, and they have avoided inviting Bahraini or Omani or Saudi critics of those regimes," said As'ad AbuKhalil, politics professor at California State University. "Most glaringly, Al Jazeera does not allow one view that is critical of Bahraini repression to appear on the air. The GCC has closed ranks and Qatar may be rewarded with the coveted post of secretary-general of the Arab League."....  

Al Jazeera acknowledged "challenging terrain" in Bahrain.  "There has been a particularly heavy news agenda in recent months, with uprisings taking place simultaneously in multiple countries across the Arab region," a spokesman said."Editorial priorities are weighed on a number of factors at any given moment. All news organizations have faced these pressures, but despite this and the challenging terrain in Bahrain, we have covered events in the country extensively." (bla, bla, bla, blaaaaaa...) .......... 

"There has been fantastic pressure from Saudi Arabia on Qatar to join in (the Gulf military operation) in Bahrain, and at least to rein in Al Jazeera," said a London-based analyst who did not want to be named due to the sensitivity of the issue. Qatar and Saudi Arabia -- rivals for leadership roles in the Gulf -- ended years of frosty ties in 2007. The result was the end of any serious discussion of Saudi politics on Al Jazeera..."

Posted by G, M, Z, or B at 10:14 AM

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian