…from beneath the crooked bough, witness 230 years of brutal tyranny by the al Khalifas come to an end

State Minister for Information Affairs criticises the opposition for misusing a call for national dialogue
16 December, 2012 – BNA

Manama, Dec. 16 (BNA)— State Minister for Information Affairs Samira Ibrahim bin Rajab, the government’s official Spokesperson, criticized, in a statement to Asharq Alawsat newspaper, the opposition for misusing a call for a national dialogue and falsely promoting it in the media.

Any national dialogue to overcome the crisis will not ignore any component of the Bahraini society and will not be with one side at the expense of the other. It will, however, be complementary to the national consensus dialogue that took place in July 2011 and will commence as soon as the opposition stops violence and relinquishes conditions and restraints put to engage in that dialogue, it was stressed. …source

Bahrain king says he respects ‘liberties’ as clashes erupt
17 December, 2012 – By Al Arabiya

King Hamad said on Sunday that Bahrain still respects “liberties” and “tolerance,” as witnesses reported that police dispersed dozens of protesters in Shiite Muslim villages.

“Bahrain will remain a nation of law, institutions, liberties and tolerance between different religions and cultures,” he said in a speech marking National Day.

“Ensuring national consensus was and still is a purely Bahraini feature, without any foreign interference.”

The monarch also praised the Sunni-ruled kingdom’s “armed, security, and National Guard forces who are always ready” to ensure “security and stability.”

As he made his speech in Manama, police clashes broke out between police and youth protesters who took to the streets of several Shiite villages, witnesses said.

Acting head of the Bahrain Center for Human Rights Yousef al-Muhafedha told AP hundreds of protesters were dispersed by riot police firing tear gas in a neighborhood near the capital Manama. Elsewhere, masked youths blocked roads with burning tires.

No casualties were reported.

Most opposition religious leaders are suspected to have ties with Iran, which is accused of being behind the trouble in this small country.

On Friday, thousands demonstrated in Manama chanting slogans against the regime and calling for reform.

Protest groups are calling for large-scale marches later this week, according to Associated Press.

Bahrain was shaken by a protest movement in February 2011 led by Shiite protesters demanding a constitutional monarchy.

At least 80 people have died since the start of the unrest, according to the International Federation of Human Rights.

Bahrain, despite of wide criticism of crackdown on opposition, is considered provide more freedom women and the media than most Gulf states.

Bahrain’s crown prince this month renewed an appeal for dialogue to end the impasse, which was welcomed by the opposition, but there seems to be no end in sight to increasingly violent protests. ….source

Bahrain police fire tear gas, grenades on protesters as ‘Martyrs Day’ rally starts
17 December, 2012 – Russia Today

Bahraini security forces have fired tear gas and stun grenades as crowds of protesters gathered in the capital Manama. Some people were injured and arrested amid the preparations for a larger ‘Bahrain’s Martyrs Day’ demonstration.

­Some locals have reported witnessing extensive use of teargas, pellet shotguns and sound bombs that have caused severe and critical injuries to protesters.

Groups of protesters gathered and chanted slogans in the narrow streets of Manama’s traditional market district. Activists also blocked public streets in preparation for a mass demonstration to mark ‘Bahrain’s Martyrs Day,’ an annual commemoration for two protesters killed in 1994.

Local witnesses reported that police made several arrests, including women. …source

Bahrain Martyr Day December 17th 2012
17 December, 2012 – ABNA

Martyrs’ Day is an annual observance held on December 17th in Bahrain to honour those recognized as martyrs for the nation.

Martyrs’ Day is an annual observance held on December 17th in Bahrain to honour those recognized as martyrs for the nation. The government of Bahrain has chosen the 16th December as the National day of Bahrain, when the truth is Bahrain gained independence from Britain on the 14th August 1971. The people of Bahrain have never accepted nor agreed to it since the previous.

In 1994 uprising the first two martyrs, Hani Alwasti and Hani Khamis were killed on 17th December. Since then the Bahraini people designated it as Martyrs’ Day.

Many lost their lives during the 1990’s uprising including women such as Fahdela Almetghawy and Zahra Kadhem. Now in 2011 the martyrs continue to fall, the youngest martyr is Sajida Faisal Jawad. Sajida was only a baby girl of just 5 days of age. She had inhaled tear gas in her house.

Tens of thousands Bahrainis held a huge demonstration today 17th December 2012 in commemoration of their martyrs in Manam capital of Bahrain. …source

SaudiPrisoners: Saudi Bloggers Demand Rights in One of World’s Most Repressive Regimes
14 December, 2012 – by Morgan Hargrave – Movements.org

Saudi activists and bloggers are launching an awareness campaign on Twitter to publicize the issue of the political prisoners in Saudi Arabia. The campaign, starting on December 17th and using the hashtag #SaudiPrisoners, aims to draw attention to the reported 30,000 political prisoners currently under detention, and increase pressure on Saudi Arabia to reform. The Saudi regime is considered to be one of the world’s worst abusers of human rights. As the BBC put it last year: “Demonstrations are illegal in the autocratic kingdom of Saudi Arabia, a country with no legal political parties or mass movements that has been governed by the House of Saud for 80 years.” Yet reports on the severe lack of freedom are relatively rare worldwide, and there is little discussion of the Mabahith (the Saudi secret police) and the horrific plight of Saudi political prisoners that are put behind bars simply for expressing their thoughts and beliefs peacefully.

The primary contributer to the campaign is Saudi blogger Hadeel Mohamad, who blogs at thehadeel.wordpress.com and tweets via @The_hadeel. We will follow up with Hadeel next week via a live Twitter and Facebook chat, so keep an eye on the blog and our Twitter feed (@AYM), but suffice it to say that we will be following the #SaudiPrisoners campaign closely. Can an important issue like political prisoners catch on with the growing wave of social media users in the kingdom? Can a young woman and her fellow bloggers get their voices heard in a country where the people are far from free to express themselves?

Hadeel translated the campaign statement for us, and it reads as follows:

“Arbitrary arrest” and “arbitrary detention” are described as the arrest or detention of an individual in a case in which there is no evidence of a crime committed, and/or not permitted due process of law. These human rights violations are characteristic of dictatorships and police states. The Saudi government routinely conducts both arbitrary arrest and arbitrary detention, providing no explanation for the arrest, not showing an arrest warrant, and completely divesting a citizen’s rights to a lawyer and often trial courts. The detainees are often held in solitary confinement, without access to phone their families, for over 24 hours, and subjected to physical or psychological torture during interrogation. The detainees’ families are often kept in the dark about their whereabouts.

According to “The Saudi Civil and Political Rights Association,” or ACPRA and other organizations, the number of arbitrary detainees in Saudi Arabia is estimated to be 30,000. Most of them are detained because of crimes of conscience and political opposition.

Many prisoners have been in jail for years without proof of crime, or charges made; and when charged, they’re usually charges without merit, like contacting foreign organizations (UN, Amnesty,etc), discrediting the country, supporting the Bahraini revolution and “obstruction of the development wheel” for those who call for a constitutional monarchy.

In case of any peaceful demonstration or “sit-in,” the participants, usually, family members of prisoners, are arrested. Then, other family members gather in protest and are arrested as well. It’s not unusual to meet a Saudi family that is comprised of two or three generations that have been detained and or imprisoned. Today, anyone and everyone face the risk of arrest; those who write, tweet, protest, upload a video to youtube. No one citizen can be secure in staving off the risk of being detained.

The Saudi government believes that these rampant human rights violations will go unchecked, and the victims’ plight will go unchallenged. In the name of human rights for all, we ask you to stand in solidarity with 30,000 prisoners, their families and the rest of us, who might run the risk of arrest at anytime. On December, 17, Hadeel Mohamad among many others will launch a campaign for those people.

Follow the campaign, or join in the discussion, using hashtag #SaudiPrisoners on Twitter. And stay tuned for more analysis from Movements.org here on the blog and on our Twitter feed @AYM. We will feature Hadeel next week in our ongoing #ActivistChat series where you will able to join the discussion and ask questions liv

Saudi activists and bloggers are launching an awareness campaign on Twitter to publicize the issue of the political prisoners in Saudi Arabia. The campaign, starting on December 17th and using the hashtag #SaudiPrisoners, aims to draw attention to the reported 30,000 political prisoners currently under detention, and increase pressure on Saudi Arabia to reform. The Saudi regime is considered to be one of the world’s worst abusers of human rights. As the BBC put it last year: “Demonstrations are illegal in the autocratic kingdom of Saudi Arabia, a country with no legal political parties or mass movements that has been governed by the House of Saud for 80 years.” Yet reports on the severe lack of freedom are relatively rare worldwide, and there is little discussion of the Mabahith (the Saudi secret police) and the horrific plight of Saudi political prisoners that are put behind bars simply for expressing their thoughts and beliefs peacefully.

The primary contributer to the campaign is Saudi blogger Hadeel Mohamad, who blogs at thehadeel.wordpress.com and tweets via @The_hadeel. We will follow up with Hadeel next week via a live Twitter and Facebook chat, so keep an eye on the blog and our Twitter feed (@AYM), but suffice it to say that we will be following the #SaudiPrisoners campaign closely. Can an important issue like political prisoners catch on with the growing wave of social media users in the kingdom? Can a young woman and her fellow bloggers get their voices heard in a country where the people are far from free to express themselves?

Hadeel translated the campaign statement for us, and it reads as follows:

“Arbitrary arrest” and “arbitrary detention” are described as the arrest or detention of an individual in a case in which there is no evidence of a crime committed, and/or not permitted due process of law. These human rights violations are characteristic of dictatorships and police states. The Saudi government routinely conducts both arbitrary arrest and arbitrary detention, providing no explanation for the arrest, not showing an arrest warrant, and completely divesting a citizen’s rights to a lawyer and often trial courts. The detainees are often held in solitary confinement, without access to phone their families, for over 24 hours, and subjected to physical or psychological torture during interrogation. The detainees’ families are often kept in the dark about their whereabouts.

According to “The Saudi Civil and Political Rights Association,” or ACPRA and other organizations, the number of arbitrary detainees in Saudi Arabia is estimated to be 30,000. Most of them are detained because of crimes of conscience and political opposition.

Many prisoners have been in jail for years without proof of crime, or charges made; and when charged, they’re usually charges without merit, like contacting foreign organizations (UN, Amnesty,etc), discrediting the country, supporting the Bahraini revolution and “obstruction of the development wheel” for those who call for a constitutional monarchy.

In case of any peaceful demonstration or “sit-in,” the participants, usually, family members of prisoners, are arrested. Then, other family members gather in protest and are arrested as well. It’s not unusual to meet a Saudi family that is comprised of two or three generations that have been detained and or imprisoned. Today, anyone and everyone face the risk of arrest; those who write, tweet, protest, upload a video to youtube. No one citizen can be secure in staving off the risk of being detained.

The Saudi government believes that these rampant human rights violations will go unchecked, and the victims’ plight will go unchallenged. In the name of human rights for all, we ask you to stand in solidarity with 30,000 prisoners, their families and the rest of us, who might run the risk of arrest at anytime. On December, 17, Hadeel Mohamad among many others will launch a campaign for those people.

Follow the campaign, or join in the discussion, using hashtag #SaudiPrisoners on Twitter. And stay tuned for more analysis from Movements.org here on the blog and on our Twitter feed @AYM. We will feature Hadeel next week in our ongoing #ActivistChat series where you will able to join the discussion and ask questions live. …more

Saudi Arabia: Arrest and detention of prominent human rights defender, lawyer and former judge, head of the Saudi Civil and Political Rights
Gulf Center for Human Rights – Sheikh Suliaman Al-Rashudi – 16 December, 2012

On the morning of Wednesday, 12 December 2012, prominent human rights defender, lawyer and former judge, and head of the Saudi Civil and Political Rights Association (ACPRA), Sheikh Suliaman Al-Rashudi, has been arrested as he was on his way heading to the Qassim region. According to some reports, he was taken to the detention centre at “Naif Academy for Security Sciences” located in the east of Riyadh city. The arrest comes hours after the publication of a lecture given by Sheikh Al-Rashudi entitled “the rule of demonstrations and sit-ins in Islamic law” in which he explained the legality of peaceful demonstrations and sit-ins to claim confiscated rights.

Sheikh Al-Rashudi was arrested several times in the past, including his arrest on 2 February 2007, by officials from the Directorate of General Investigations (DGI) in Jeddah, together with eight other advocates of reform and defense of civil rights who have been named “Reformists of Jeddah”. He spent nearly five years in a continued detention during which he was transferred between prisons in Jeddah. On 22 June 2011, Sheikh Al-Rashudi has been released on bail.

The nine detainees including Sheikh Al-Rashudi were convicted of alleged involvement in, forming a secret organization, attempting to seize power, incitement against the King, financing terrorism, and money laundering. On 22 November 2011 the Specialized Criminal Court in Riyadh handed out on the nine prominent advocates of reform prison sentences ranged from five to 30 years, where Suliaman Al-Rashudi sentenced to 15 years’ imprisonment and 15 years’ travel ban following release. Although the case is at the appeal stage in the very same court, the Saudi Interior Ministry used the verdict to arrest Sheikh Salman Al-Rashudi and imprison him.

The Gulf Centre for Human Rights expresses serious concern over the arrest and detention of Sheikh Sulaiman Al-Rashudi by the Saudi authorities and believes that these measures are only a direct result of his legitimate and peaceful work in defense of human rights in Saudi Arabia.

The GCHR urges the authorities in Kuwait to:

Immediately and unconditionally release human rights defender Sheikh Salman Al-Rashudi;

Guarantee the physical and psychological integrity and security of Sheikh Salman Al-Rashudi;

Guarantee in all circumstances that all human rights defenders in KSA are able to carry out their legitimate human rights activities without fear of reprisals and free of all restrictions including judicial harassment.

The GCHR respectfully reminds you that the United Nations Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognized Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, adopted by consensus by the UN General Assembly on 9 December 1998, recognizes the legitimacy of the activities of human rights defenders, their right to freedom of association and to carry out their activities without fear of reprisals. We would particularly draw your attention to Article 6 (c) “Everyone has the right, individually and in association with others: (c) To study, discuss, form and hold opinions on the observance, both in law and in practice, of all human rights and fundamental freedoms and, through these and other appropriate means, to draw public attention to those matters” and to Article 12.2, which provides that “the State shall take all necessary measures to ensure the protection by the competent authorities of everyone, individually and in association with others, against any violence, threats, retaliation, de facto or de jure adverse discrimination, pressure or any other arbitrary action as a consequence of his or her legitimate exercise of the rights referred to in the present Declaration”. …more

Bahrain’s Changing Opposition
13 December, 2012 – Reese Erlich – Pulitzer Center on Crisis Reporting

MUHAZZA VILLAGE, Bahrain — After nearly two years of frustration, the Arab Spring uprising against Bahrain’s King Hamad bin Isa al Khalifa, a key US ally, is growing increasingly tense.

Following a series of brutal government crackdowns, young protesters who say they have little choice are taking a more militant approach, and in some cases, resorting to violence.

In late October, Bahrain’s conservative monarchy banned all demonstrations, but human rights activists estimate that at least 100 illegal protests have been held since then.

At 7 p.m. sharp on a recent night here in Muhazza, a small village just outside the capital, residents gathered for one such show of discontent. The scene appeared peaceful: old men in long, white robes stood calmly next to children wearing jeans, T-shirts and baseball caps. Women completely covered in black hijab sat nearby, shouting slogans against the all-powerful Bahraini monarch.

But for the traditional opposition, there was a troubling new contingent of young men, their faces covered in checkered headscarves. They circled the outskirts of the rally, disdainful of their elders entreaties to remain peaceful. This night they did not engage in violence. But in other villages, youth have hurled rocks and Molotov cocktails at police.

Activists say this more militant trend is gaining support as nonviolent tactics fail to yield results.

“They are a real force in the movement now,” said Ali Salman, leader of the Al Wefaq Islamic Society, the largest opposition group in Bahrain. “We tell them to remain nonviolent, but some don’t listen.”

In most countries, the low-key Muhazza protest would barely interest law enforcement. Here, in less than 10 minutes, police fired tear gas. The crowd fled into nearby stores and apartments. Children and seniors stayed indoors. But within a few minutes, everyone else poured back into the streets, shouting “Allah Akbar” (God is Great).

This night’s action repeats itself frequently in Muhazza. Villagers say they have been under siege for six weeks. Police set up checkpoints in Muhazza during the day, and conduct raids at night. …more

Bahrain: Activist in solitary confinement for over 12 days
17 December, 2012 – Bahrain Center for Human Rights

The Bahrain Center for Human rights expresses grave concern over the ill-treatment of Activist Mohamed Al-Tal who is being held in solitary confinement for more than 12 days according to information received by the Center.

Activist Mohamed Al-Tal has been in detention since 14 Oct 2012 when he was summoned for interrogation on the charge of “participating in illegal gathering” in reference to the Friday protest in Manama (12 October 2012) titled “Self determination”. He was held in the Dry Dock detention center until the beginning of Dec 2012 when several prisoners were subjected to abuses and attacks following the formation of a coalition of Prisoners of Conscience (see BCHR report here bahrainrights.org/en/node/5539). Al-Tal was then moved to the West Riffa police station where he was put in solitary confinement according to his lawyer, Mr Mohamed Al-Marzooq. He was not informed of the reason for this transfer or why he is being held in solitary confinement.

Al-Tal has been previously detained for several weeks following his arrest from a previous protest in Manama. He is already standing trial in a different case on similar charges in which he is accused of participating in illegal gathering in Manama. The next hearing of his trial will be on 14 Jan 2013.

His lawyer has requested the release of Al-Tal while guaranteeing his place of residency to avoid losing his job as a teacher, and to allow him to attend his medical appointments.

The Bahrain Center for Human Rights believes that the placement of Al-Tal in solitary confinement is in violation with the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, article 30 “(1) No prisoner shall be punished except in accordance with the terms of such law or regulation, .. (2) No prisoner shall be punished unless he has been informed of the offence alleged against him and given a proper opportunity of presenting his defence. The competent authority shall conduct a thorough examination of the case.” And article 32. “(1) Punishment by close confinement .. shall never be inflicted unless the medical officer has examined the prisoner and certified in writing that he is fit to sustain it.”

The Bahrain Center for Human Rights believes that activist Mohamed Al-Tal is targeted because of his peaceful exercise of freedom of assembly in accordance with the universal declaration for human rights.

Based on the above, the Bahrain Center for Human Rights calls on the government of Bahrain to immediately put an end to the solitary confinement of Mohamed Al-Tal. The BCHR also calls for Al-Tal’s immediate release and dropping of all trumped up charges against him and all other detainees who are being held for exercising their freedom of assembly. …source

British state terrorism from Northern Ireland to Syria
14 December, 2012 – Finian Cunningham – PressTV

The surge in violence and killing of civilians, with a notable agenda of inciting sectarian war, is proof that the British expertise in fomenting terror is paying dividends for the Western imperialist objective of destabilizing Syrian society and the government of President Bashar al-Assad.”

This story connects far-flung places. Kenya, Malaya, Northern Ireland and now Syria. The one over-arching theme is British counter-insurgency strategy, or more plainly, the use of state terrorism by British forces to achieve political objectives.

The story came alive again this week with two seemingly unrelated news developments. First, we learn of deeper involvement of Britain’s military in the violence raging across Syria. British military officers and Special Forces are reportedly training – in Jordanian territory – foreign-backed militants to step up their campaign of terrorism across Syria.

These terror gangs, whom the Western mainstream media call “freedom fighters”, have been plunging Syria into bloody chaos for the past 22 months, with car bombs ripping through civilian neighbourhoods and death squads massacring whole villages, the latest being Aqrab in Hama Province where over 125 people where murdered this week. Ample evidence shows that the mercenaries, recruited from various countries including Libya, Saudi Arabia and Iraq, are covertly supplied with weapons and training from the US, Britain and France via the conduits of Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey.

The surge in violence and killing of civilians, with a notable agenda of inciting sectarian war, is proof that the British expertise in fomenting terror is paying dividends for the Western imperialist objective of destabilizing Syrian society and the government of President Bashar al-Assad.

The second development this week was the publication of an official British report into the murder 23 years ago of Belfast lawyer Pat Finucane. The two issues, Syrian violence and the killing of Mr Finucane, are intimately related – although the British government and its media have done their best to bury any connection.

Let’s unravel the layers of obfuscation.

When the review of Mr Finucane’s murder by Sir Desmond de Silva QC was published this week, British Prime Minister David Cameron offered an apology to the family of the Belfast man. “I am deeply sorry,” said Cameron in the British House of Commons, and he went on to acknowledge that the killing pointed to “shocking levels of collusion” between British security forces and loyalist death squads. The latter were paramilitaries recruited from Northern Ireland’s pro-British civilian population that perpetrated many heinous murders during the conflict in that territory between 1969-1994.

However, the widow of Mr Finucane and their children denounced the latest review as a “white wash”. Geraldine Finucane has good reason to dismiss the report because it portrays the murder of her husband as a rogue act of violence. Cameron added to the white wash by saying that the case represented a “failing” by the British military forces to prevent the murder.

This is typical official British deception. For what the murder of Pat Finucane reveals is not a failure, but rather a successful deployment of Britain’s policy of state terrorism – a policy that involved the systematic collusion between British military intelligence and loyalist death squads. This practice was and is a central part of British counter-insurgency tactics – a policy that was overseen from the highest office of British government in Downing Street.

Much of Britain’s “dirty war” strategy, as an institutional practice, can be attributed to one of its most decorated military commanders – General Sir Frank Kitson.

Kitson published his war manual – Low Intensity Operations – in 1971. It has since become a standard text for British military counter-insurgency techniques, or as we have noted, state terrorism.

Kitson developed his techniques from his involvement in suppressing popular uprisings in the British colonies of Kenya during the Mau-Mau rebellion (1953-55) and in Malaya (1957) against a communist
insurgency there.

In 1970, the then Brigadier was dispatched to Northern Ireland, which itself was on the cusp of a renewed Irish republican struggle against British rule in that province of the United Kingdom. One of Kitson’s innovations was the recruitment of what he called “counter gangs”. For his endeavours and “meritrocious service”, he was later knighted by the British Queen, later going on to serve as her aide-de-camp and elevated to Commander-in-Chief of UK land forces from 1982-1985.
[Read more →]

Turk activist reveals ugly truth in Bahrain
Hürriyet Daily News – İpek Yezdani – 14 December, 2012

A Turkish forensics expert sneaked into Bahrain as a tourist and conducted a secret autopsy to prove that government forces had tortured a 23-year-old Bahraini man, Yousef Mowali, who had been diagnosed with schizophrenia.

Dr. Şebnem Korur Fincancı, who has devoted her life to fighting torture and human rights violations around the world, proved with her autopsy that the victim was electrically tortured to the point that his life was at risk.

Mowali had left his home near the international airport to go for a walk on Jan. 11 and never returned. Police said they found Mowali’s body floating in the sea on Jan. 13 in the Amwaj region not far from his family’s home in Muharraq. A state doctor reported the cause of death as drowning and ruled out signs of violence.

However Mowali, who had been diagnosed with schizophrenia a few years earlier, was taken into custody by the police during his walk.

His family, who were only able to receive his body after eight days, wanted a second autopsy report done by an independent forensic pathologist in order to prove that torture was used.

Following the family’s request, human rights activists in Bahrain contacted the International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims (IRCT) for help.

“The lawyers in the IRCT sent an email to our group and asked for a forensic expert who could take the risk to go to Bahrain and examine the body of a torture victim. I was the most suitable among all of us because I did not need a visa to go inside Bahrain and did not look European at all, so I would not attract any attention,” Fincancı said.

Fincancı went to Bahrain Jan. 20 and stayed at the home of an activist to make it easier to collect what she needed for the forensic examination.

“I bought the surgical equipment in Bahrain, and we also found the necessary chemical solutions to put tissue samples in. I wore a long dress and hijab in order to look like a relative of the family who was visiting to express condolences. There were several police outside the place of the funeral but they were not suspicious of me because they were probably expecting a man and a European,” Fincancı said.

Fincancı made the two-hour-long forensic examination secretly inside the place where the funeral was being held. …more

Egypt’s Constitution, The Opposition, and the Dialogue of the Deaf
By ESAM AL-AMIN – 14 December, 2012 – COUNTERPUNCH

December 8 was the day President Muhammad Morsi had chosen two nights earlier during his address to the nation. In his speech, he called for an open dialogue with the opposition and other political parties as they tackled the political crisis engulfing the country since he issued his controversial constitutional declaration of November 22.

With the exception of Al-Ghad Party, all leaders of the National Salvation Front (NSF), the main opposition coalition that includes most secular parties, refused to attend the meeting with the president, insisting first on the annulment of the constitutional declaration and the cancellation of the referendum scheduled for December 15. The NSF’s main leaders, including former presidential candidates Amr Moussa, Hamdein Sabbahi, and Dr. Mohammad ElBaradei, not only boycotted the gathering but also issued a stern warning that if the president did not accede to their demands they would escalate their protests by calling for general strikes and civil disobedience.

Other revolutionary youth groups such as the April 6 Movement also refused to attend the meeting, charging that it was a ploy by the besieged president in his attempt to placate the opposition. Former presidential candidate and moderate Islamist Dr. Abdelmoneim Abol Fotouh, of the Strong Egypt Party, also boycotted the meeting on the grounds that the president had not demonstrated seriousness in trying to resolve the political dispute.

A missed opportunity: A dialogue with oneself

By the afternoon of December 8, fifty four prominent individuals showed up to meet with Morsi and his top lieutenants. Most of the participants were senior representatives of Islamist parties such as the Muslim Brotherhood’s affiliated Freedom and Justice Party (FJP), which Morsi headed before becoming president, the Salafist Al-Noor Party, Al-Wasat, Al-Asala, and other smaller Islamist parties. Dr. Ayman Noor of Al-Ghad Party also participated but his was the only secular party in attendance. In addition, many constitutional scholars such as Dr. Ahmad Kamal Abol Magd, Dr. Tharwat Badawi, Dr. Gamal Gibreel and Dr. Muhammad Salim Al-Awwa took part in the meeting that also included other renowned intellectuals such as author and columnist Fahmy Howaidy and political scientist Dr. Manar El-Shorbagy.

After a twelve-hour marathon meeting, the participants held a press conference announcing a new constitutional decree by the president that annulled the infamous Nov. 22 declaration. On its face, it was a major concession to the opposition since this was its principal demand ever since the previous decree had been issued. Although the new declaration voided the previous one, it also preserved some of its direct consequences, primarily the sacking of the former general prosecutor.

Morsi’s main motivation for issuing the first decree was to place his decisions outside any judicial review in order to prevent the Supreme Constitutional Court (SCC) from dissolving the Constitutional Constituent Assembly (CCA), charged with drafting the new constitution, and Majlis Al-Shura (the upper house of parliament, dominated by the FJP and Al-Noor Party). But when the CCA concluded its work on November 30 followed by the presidential announcement of holding a general referendum on December 15, there was no more danger of the SCC dissolving the CCA. If the court were to eventually dissolve the Majlis Al-Shura, the FJP calculated that it would likely win any new Shura elections over its divided rivals.

So in Morsi’s judgment replacing the constitutional declaration was a desirable outcome since he would appear to have given a concession to the opposition without endangering the work product of the CCA. But perhaps a more important reason for backing down was the strong negative reaction of Egypt’s judges, an overwhelming number of whom were on strike because of his earlier decree. Most judges also threatened that unless Morsi rescinded that decree they would not supervise the referendum as stipulated in law, which in turn would have doomed it and delayed the passing of the constitution. In short, it was a smart political move by Morsi to issue the new decree by appearing conciliatory, getting the referendum on the agenda, and gaining back most of the judges.

According to the participants in the meeting, most of their time was spent discussing ways to cancel or postpone the constitutional referendum, the other main demand of the opposition. Ultimately, the constitutional scholars in attendance concluded that the president could not delay the referendum on technical legal grounds. The March 2011 public referendum that passed with 77 percent of the vote stated that once the CCA concluded its work the public must vote on it within fifteen days. Hence, the legal scholars reasoned that any cancellation or postponement could only occur by holding another public referendum. But what no one argued was the fact that the president had earlier contravened the same public referendum unilaterally in his first decree when he extended the time frame of the CCA from six to eight months. These same scholars failed to point out that such an extension could not have occurred by a presidential decree but would have required a public referendum.
[Read more →]

The “International Cartel” of Drug Money Banks & Their Political Protectors

Banking on Criminality: Drug Money & the Above-the-Law Global Banking Cartel
14 December, 2012 – boiling frogs

In what the New York Times declared as a “dark day for the rule of law” on December 11, 2012, HSBC, the world’s second largest bank, failed to be indicted for extensive criminal activities in laundering money to and from regimes under sanctions, Mexican drug cartels, and terrorist organizations (including al-Qaeda). While admitting culpability, and with guilt assured, state and federal authorities in the United States decided not to indict the bank “over concerns that criminal charges could jeopardize one of the world’s largest banks and ultimately destabilize the global financial system.” Instead, HSBC agreed to pay a $1.92 billion settlement.

The fear was that an indictment would be a “death sentence” for HSBC. The U.S. Justice Department, which was prosecuting the case, was told by the U.S. Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve that taking such an “aggressive stance” against HSBC could have negative effects upon the economy. Instead, the bank was to forfeit $1.2 billion and pay $700 million in fines on top of that for violating the Bank Secrecy Act and the Trading with the Enemy Act. In a statement, HSBC’s CEO stated, “We accept responsibility for our past mistakes… We are committed to protecting the integrity of the global financial system. To this end, we will continue to work closely with governments and regulators around the world.” With more than $7 billion in Mexican drug cartel money laundered through HSBC alone, the fine amounts to a slap on the wrist, no more than a cost-benefit analysis of doing business: if the ‘cost’ of laundering billions in drug money is less than the ‘benefit,’ the policy will continue.

As part of the settlement, not one banker at HSBC was to be charged in the case. The New York Times acknowledged that, “the government has bought into the notion that too big to fail is too big to jail.” HSBC joins a list of some of the world’s other largest banks in paying fines for criminal activities, including Credit Suisse, Lloyds, ABN Amro and ING, among others. The U.S. Assistant Attorney General Lanny A. Breuer referred to the settlement as an example of HSBC “being held accountable for stunning failures of oversight.” Lanny Breuer, who heads the Justice Department’s criminal division, which was responsible for prosecuting the case against HSBC, was previously a partner at a law firm (along with the U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder) where they represented a number of major banks and other conglomerates in cases dealing with foreclosure fraud. While Breuer and Holder were partners at Covington & Burling, the firm represented notable clients such as Bank of America, Citigroup, JP Morgan Chase and Wells Fargo, among others. It seems that at the Justice Department, they continue to have the same job: protecting the major banks from being persecuted for criminal behavior.

With a great deal of focus on the $1.9 billion in fines being paid out by HSBC, little mention was made of the fact that HSBC had roughly $2.5 trillion in assets, and earned $22 billion in profits in 2011. But not to worry, HSBC’s executive said that they “accept responsibility for our past mistakes,” and added: “We have said we are profoundly sorry for them, and we do so again.” So not only did the executives of the world’s second largest bank apologize for laundering billions in drug money (along with other crimes), but they apologized… again. Thus, they pay a comparably small fine and face no criminal charges. I wonder if a crack dealer from a ghetto in the United States could avoid criminal prosecution if he were to apologize not once, but twice. Actually, we don’t have to wonder. In May of 2012, as HSBC executives were testifying before the U.S. Senate in Washington D.C., admitting their role in drug money laundering, a poor black man was convicted of peddling 5.5 grams of crack cocaine just across the river from the U.S. Capitol building, and he was given 10 years in prison. …more

Americans Are The Most Spied On People In World History
5 December, 2012 – by WashingtonsBlog

TechDirt notes: In a radio interview, Wall Street Journal reporter Julia Angwin (who’s been one of the best at covering the surveillance state in the US) made a simple observation that puts much of this into context: the US surveillance regime has more data on the average American than the Stasi ever did on East Germans.

Indeed, the American government has more information on the average American than Stalin had on Russians, Hitler had on German citizens, or any other government has ever had on its people.

The American government is collecting and storing virtually every phone call, purchases, email, text message, internet searches, social media communications, health information, employment history, travel and student records, and virtually all other information of every American.

Some also claim that the government is also using facial recognition software and surveillance cameras to track where everyone is going. Moreover, cell towers track where your phone is at any moment, and the major cell carriers, including Verizon and AT&T, responded to at least 1.3 million law enforcement requests for cell phone locations and other data in 2011. (And – given that your smartphone routinely sends your location information back to Apple or Google – it would be child’s play for the government to track your location that way.) Your iPhone, or other brand of smartphone is spying on virtually everything you do (ProPublica notes: “That’s No Phone. That’s My Tracker“).

As the top spy chief at the U.S. National Security Agency explained this week, the American government is collecting some 100 billion 1,000-character emails per day, and 20 trillion communications of all types per year.

He says that the government has collected all of the communications of congressional leaders, generals and everyone else in the U.S. for the last 10 years.

He further explains that he set up the NSA’s system so that all of the information would automatically be encrypted, so that the government had to obtain a search warrant based upon probably cause before a particular suspect’s communications could be decrypted. But the NSA now collects all data in an unencrypted form, so that no probable cause is needed to view any citizen’s information. He says that it is actually cheaper and easier to store the data in an encrypted format: so the government’s current system is being done for political – not practical – purposes.

He says that if anyone gets on the government’s “enemies list”, then the stored information will be used to target them. Specifically, he notes that if the government decides it doesn’t like someone, it analyzes all of the data it has collected on that person and his or her associates over the last 10 years to build a case against him.

As we’ve previously documented, the spying isn’t being done to keep us safe … but to crush dissent and to smear people who uncover unflattering this about the government … and to help the too big to fail businesses compete against smaller businesses (and here).

And as we point out at every opportunity, this is not some “post-9/11 reality”. Spying on Americans – and most of the other attacks on liberty – started before 9/11.

Senator Frank Church – who chaired the famous “Church Committee” into the unlawful FBI Cointel program, and who chaired the Senate Foreign Relations Committee – said in 1975:

Th[e National Security Agency’s] capability at any time could be turned around on the American people, and no American would have any privacy left, such is the capability to monitor everything: telephone conversations, telegrams, it doesn’t matter. There would be no place to hide. [If a dictator ever took over, the N.S.A.] could enable it to impose total tyranny ….

We can debate whether or not dictators are running Washington. But one thing is clear: the capacity is already here. …more

Everyone is Fair Game: Spy Agency Conducts Surveillance on All US Citizens
By Russia Today – Global Research – 14 December, 2012

The Obama administration overruled recommendations from within the US Department of Homeland Security and implemented new guidelines earlier this year that allow the government to gather and analyze intelligence on every single US citizen.

Since the spring, a little-know intelligence agency outside of Washington, DC has been able to circumvent the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution and conduct dragnet surveillance of the entire country, combing massive datasets using advanced algorithms to search and seize personal info on anyone this wish, reports the Wall Street Journal this week.

There’s no safeguard that says only Americans with criminal records are the ones included, and it’s not just suspected terrorists that are considered in the searches either. The National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) has been provided with entire government databases and given nearly endless access to intelligence on everyone in the country, regardless of whether or not they’ve done anything that would have made them a person of interest. As long as data is “reasonably believed” to contain “terrorism information,” the agency can do as they wish.

What’s more is the NCTC can retain that information for years, reviewing it whenever they’d like to take a look.

The update to the agency’s policies, reported by RT at the time and reexamined this week in the Journal, expose any person in the country to invasive and nearly endless government surveillance.

“This is a sea change in the way that the government interacts with the general public,” Mary Ellen Callahan is reported by the Journal to have said during a Situation Room meeting earlier this year within the walls of the White House. At the time, Callahan was chief privacy officer at DHS as well as one of the only staffers inside the Obama administration concerned with what was about to happen.

According to documents obtained by the Journal through Freedom of Information Act requests and conversations between the paper and persons familiar with that Situation Room sound-off, Ms. Callahan unsuccessfully argued against updating a 2008 Justice Department memo about what intel the NCTC can have and how they use it. Just weeks after that meeting, new guidelines were authorized and, within months, Ms. Callahan was working elsewhere.

Despite her efforts, a 32-page document, “Guidelines for Access, Retention, Use and Dissemination by the National Counterterrorism Center and other Agencies of Information in Datasets Containing Non-Terrorism Information,” went into effect, and with that the NCTC was no longer restricted to only terrorism-related intelligence and instead

“The 2008 memo’s title referred to NCTC’s access to ‘terrorism information’ contained in non-terrorism datasets. The 2012 title simply refers to ‘information’ in those datasets,” reports the Journal. “The removal of the world ‘terrorism’ is an indication of how this memo expands NCTC’s mandate to allow surveillance of US citizens based on more than just the terrorism information.’”

Indeed, the changes aren’t just within the name of the document. The 2012 update to the NCTC’s data-mining policies expand the intelligence the agency can comb while at the same time removing safeguards that were in place for privacy’s sake. Under the new rules, data on innocent Americans can be retained for five years, and intel on anyone “reasonably believed to constitute terrorism information” can be kept until the end of time.

“It’s breathtaking” in its scope, one former senior administration official tells the Journal.

According to the paper, “flight records, casino-employee lists, the names of Americans hosting foreign-exchange students and many others” can be collected indefinitely and searched at will within the NCTC, an agency only nine years old and not nearly as well-known as her sister spy groups: the CIA and FBI.

Once the NCTC has the info, though, they can decide who else can be made privy to it. If the US government is so inclined, intelligence on specific citizens can be sent to any foreign nation in the world. …source

Government Spying Out of Control
by Andrew P. Napolitano – 13 December, 2012 – AnitWar.com

After President Richard Nixon was forced from office in 1974, congressional investigators discovered what they believed was the full extent of his use of the FBI and the CIA to engage in domestic spying. In that pre-digital era, the spying consisted of listening to telephone calls, opening mail, and using undercover agents to infiltrate political organizations and, as we know, break into their offices. Nixon claimed he did this for the protection of national security. He also claimed he was entitled to break the law and violate the Constitution. “If the president does it, that means that it’s not illegal,” he once famously said.

Since no one was prosecuted on the basis of data stolen or retrieved by his spies, the courts rarely encountered this behavior and never had to rule on it, and thus it went largely unchecked. A few victims challenged the spying, but the Supreme Court ruled that without palpable harm, the challengers lacked the legal ability to complain in court — what judges call “standing.”

But many Americans did complain to Congress, which in 1978 enacted the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, commonly called FISA. FISA provided that all domestic surveillance be subject to the search warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment, except for spying on foreign agents operating in the U.S. For those cases, FISA established a secret federal court that has been authorized to issue search warrants to spy on foreign agents.

The constitutional standard for all search warrants is probable cause of crime. FISA, however, established a new, different and lesser standard — thus unconstitutional on its face since Congress is bound by, and cannot change, the Constitution — of probable cause of status. The status was that of an agent of a foreign power. So, under FISA, the feds needed to demonstrate to a secret court only that a non-American physically present in the U.S., perhaps under the guise of a student, diplomat or embassy janitor, was really an agent of a foreign power, and the demonstration of that agency alone was sufficient to authorize a search warrant to listen to the agent’s telephone calls or read his mail.

Over time, the requirement of status as a foreign agent was modified to status as a foreign person. This, of course, was an even lesser standard and one rarely rejected by the FISA court. In fact, that court has rarely rejected anything, having granted search warrants in well over 97 percent of applications. This is hardly harmless, as foreign persons in the U.S. are frequently talking to Americans in the U.S. Thus, not only did FISA violate the privacy rights of foreigners (the Fourth Amendment protects “people,” not just Americans); it violated the rights of those with whom they were communicating, American or non-American.

It gets worse. The Patriot Act, which was enacted in 2001 and permits federal agents to write their own search warrants in violation of the Fourth Amendment, actually amended FISA so as to do away with the FISA-issued search warrant requirement when the foreign person is outside the U.S. This means that if you email or call your cousin in Europe or a business colleague in Asia, the feds are reading or listening, without a warrant, without suspicion, without records and without evidence of anything unlawful.

The Patriot Act amendments to FISA also permit the feds to use anything they see or hear while spying in a federal court. The amended FISA statute permitting these warrantless searches of emails, telephone calls and postal mail expires at the end of this month. Last month, the House quietly voted to extend this dreadful authority for another five years, and in the next week, the Senate will consider doing the same.

What’s wrong with Congress?

FISA gives the government unchecked authority to snoop on all Americans who communicate with any foreign person, in direct contravention of the Fourth Amendment. The right to privacy is a natural human right. Its enshrinement in the Constitution has largely kept America from becoming East Germany. Moreover, everyone in Congress has taken an oath to uphold the Constitution, which could not be more clear: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects…” shall not be violated, except via a warrant issued by a neutral judge upon the judge finding probable cause of crime. If we let Congress, which is a creature of the Constitution, change the Constitution, then no one’s liberty or property is safe, and freedom is dependent upon the political needs of those in power. …more