Bassioni drowns in Bahrain: Bahrain mirror reveals how intelligence penetrated his committee, women, drinks and deals
15 October, 2011 – Bahrain Mirror

Bahrain Mirror (Exclusive): “There is no room for flattery after what Bassiouni said in his latest statement”, that is what a prominent figure in the protest movement in Bahrain said yesterday after the chairman of Bahrain Independent Commission of Inquiry had said on a radio interview.

Signs of anger were clear on the face of the prominent figure who is managing the largest files, he says: “Does Bassiouni want to make fun of us? He is dreaming! He has to know that our cause has dumped the credibility of space channels and senior figures into the trash bin, we won’t let anyone whoever that one is to play down with our sons and daughters’ blood, we won’t allow the historically biggest counterfeiting scheme and escaping from a deserved punishment that are supervised by an international judge (…), he has to know that our flesh is bitter”

The prominent figures adds: “Does Mr. Bassiouni think that we were sleeping all that time? We gathered information about the Commission that they can’t imagine in their nightmares. We observed and recorded details and kept them for a day we want them for. Does he think that we don’t understand that he reneged on his promise after the Al-Ayam daily scandal and his scandal, his promise that he said that he would not give any statement to any of the media outlets before publishing the report”


He adds angrily: “What has this population done when it was slain while chanting ‘peaceful’? What have the doctors done so that Mr. Bassiouni says about them they are not angels? Who’s the angel then? Is it the King who has ordered the martial law and gave the green light for the worst and filthiest practices of killing, torture, abuse, imprisonment, insult, raiding homes and demolishing mosques? Then he went ahead and hailed what the Peninsula Shield, the Army, the National Guard, and the mercenary forces had committed. That what you, Mr. Bassiouni, consider as the innocent reformist. Does anyone think that they can sell us and exonerate the wild wolf, and then to get their retiring reward and leave? Bahrain would be only a shame that would chase them if they did it!”

“Bahrain Mirror” asked that prominent figure that remained the whole previous Friday chasing the minute details about Bassiouni’s Commission, hunted what the opposition and the rights groups have of exclusive information. He says in a creased face: “We have plenty but we aren’t rushed, but we’re compelled to imply only the tip of the iceberg. Bassiouni forces us to talk. After his statement, the Minister of what so called Human Rights in Bahrain, to prepare the public opinion and confirm Bassiouni’s ideas, said there is no systematic violations of human rights in Bahrain, and both parties (the government and the population) did mistakes. How bad his description was, when he described the revolutionary young people saying: the revolutionary Shia. That’s a new professional mistake that should be added to his other mistakes since he has come. That is improper in the minimum and a shame in the maximum”.

The tip of the iceberg says that: “There is a contract between a company owned by Bassiouni and the authorities in Bahrain. The contract will be signed immediately after the report has been issued or shortly before that, and the Commission has seen red nights of prostitution, alcohol, and women, arranged by the Intelligence Service in Bahrain. And what Bassiouni said was not correct about his getting the minimum of the salaries received by the judges that the UN appointed. We know the role of the chief of the investigators Mr. Khalid Ahmed Mohiuddin, and Bassiouni’s role in neglecting well-established proofs that condemn the State. Those proofs prove the worst systematic crackdown and the flagrant violations of human rights. We know the number of resignations and dismissals of the Commission and their reasons one by one“.

Our interviewee relaxes his frowns and extends his legs forward and carefully gives more details: “There are two investigators who resigned from the Commission. There are many reasons, some of them are serious, but what I can say is the investigators who resigned disputed about the nature of the Commission, and the excessive relationship of several of its members with the authorities, in short, they smelt something!”

He adds: “Mr. Mahmood Cherif Bassiouni owns a company which is in the process to sign a contract that if it hasn’t signed it yet, it’s a contract with the authority to train the employees in the Ministry of Interior. There is information that questions the Commission’s work integrity, that’s why several investigators left it. Can you imagine that some of the investigators did not accept the constant adulation that Mr. Bassiouni offered to the King? They saw it clearly that he was talking as a junior employee, and he was adamant to stress an image that the world has discovered it was fake and lies, the image of the Reformist King. Many of the commissioners and the investigators found what Bassiouni had said was untrue and questionable”

The information source says: “Those investigators who resigned or preferred to stay and be patient in the Commission can’t talk as they are obliged by the non-disclosure contracts that they signed”.

What about the red night? The prominent figure smiles and says only: “Two members of the Commission were caught in a prostitution case in Bahrain. We scrutinized the source that brought the women to them and all the logistics. It was the State Security Apparatus. It penetrated some members vertically and horizontally. It entered to some of them from their weaknesses. Those two members were Arabs. They were turned around by women and alcohol. They were fired from the Commission. I’m pointing to a tricky point here, that Mr. Bassiouni was the one who personally selected all the investigators in the Commission. There are others who were trapped by different means other than women. The State Security Apparatus was successful in penetrating the Commission and had influence in it. That’s why many complaints were raised about the coldness and neglect by a number of the investigators towards many cases that were not investigated extensively”.


He adds: “Mr. Bassiouni officially denied any resignations, but that’s a lie. We confirm that there were resignations and dismissals”. ….more

Saudi Arabia: Stop Arbitrary Arrests of Shia – Arbitrary Detentions Spark Clashes in Eastern Province
October 11, 2011 – Christoph Wilcke, senior Middle East researcher at Human Rights Watch

(Beirut) – Clashes in Saudi Arabia’s Eastern Provinceshow the urgent need for Saudi officials to stop arbitrary arrests of peaceful protesters, relatives of wanted persons, and human rights activists, Human Rights Watch said today.

Interior Ministry officials said that the clashes, which broke out in ‘Awwamiyya, a Shia town, on October 3, 2011, and continued into the next day, injured 11 security personnel and three citizens, two of them women. Sources on the ground told Human Rights Watch that the likely trigger was the arrest on October 2 of two elderly residents of ‘Awwamiyya – Hasan Al Zayid, in his 70s, and Sa’id al-‘Abd al-‘Al, in his 60s – to pressure their sons to give themselves up to the police. The sons were wanted in connection with peaceful demonstrations from February to June in the Eastern Province.

“Seizing the elderly and infirm father of a wanted man to force him to surrender is thuggish through and through,” said Christoph Wilcke, senior Middle East researcher at Human Rights Watch. “Even more so when the state was pursuing the man for nothing more than peaceful activism.”

The Interior Ministry said that it would respond to the recent clashes with an “iron fist” against what it called “radicalized or hired instigators.” The statement blamed an unnamed foreign country, understood to be Iran, for instigating the strife.

Al Zayid collapsed shortly after his arrest and was taken by ambulance from ‘Awwamiyya to a nearby hospital. Fadhil al-Manasif, a local human rights activist who had been detained from May 1 until August 22 without charge for his alleged role in the peaceful demonstrations, went to the ‘Awwamiyya police station around 7:30 p.m. to protest the arrests of Al Zayed and al-‘Abd al-‘Al, saying they were illegal. When he followed Al Zayed’s ambulance to the hospital, security forces at a checkpoint arrested him.

Some hours later, officers transferred al-Manasif to Dhahran police station, where he remains. Inquiries by local activists revealed that he had been charged with “breaking the glass of a police vehicle” and “resisting security officers.” Police have not allowed al-Manasif’s family to visit him. …more

Saudi warns it will not tolerate riots during hajj
Sun, October 16 2011 -Antara News massacre

Jeddah, Saudi Arabia (ANTARA News/AFP) – A top Saudi official warned on Saturday that the kingdom will not tolerate any riots at the annual Muslim pilgrimage to Mecca next month, at a time of rising tension with Iran.

“We will not allow anything that would disrupt the peace of the hajj pilgrimage and disturb the pilgrims. That is why we shall not tolerate any damage, riots or chaos during the season of hajj or out of it,” Prince Khaled al-Faisal, governor of Mecca province, told reporters.

“The most important responsibility for this country is ensuring the comfort and security of the pilgrims,” added the Saudi royal who heads the committee for the hajj.

Pilgrims have already begun to arrive in western Saudi Arabia for the hajj, which this year peaks in the first week of November with all pilgrims, numbering over two million, gathering in the plain of Arafat, just outside Mecca, home to the holiest shrine in Islam.

The Saudi warning, echoing similar stern messages from authorities ahead of every annual pilgrimage, coincides with a dramatic rise in tension between Riyadh and Tehran.

The US Justice Department on Tuesday accused elements in Tehran of plotting to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to Washington, a charge strongly denied by Iran but which Saudi Arabia wants to take to the UN Security Council.

Saudi security forces have in the past clashed with Iranian pilgrims holding anti-US and anti-Israeli protests. In 1987, police efforts to stifle such a demonstration sparked clashes in which 402 people died, including 275 Iranians. …source

Saudi Arabia’s Invisible Hand in the Arab Spring
John R. Bradley – October 13, 2011 – Foreign Affairs

On October 4, a brief, ominous release came from the state-controlled Saudi Press Agency in Riyadh acknowledging that there had been violent clashes in the eastern city of Qatif between restive Shiites and Saudi security forces. It reported that “a group of instigators of sedition, discord and unrest” had assembled in the heart of the kingdom’s oil-rich region, armed with Molotov cocktails. As authorities cleared the protesters, 11 officers were wounded. The government made clear it would respond to any further dissent by “any mercenary or misled person” with “an iron fist.” Meanwhile, it pointed the finger of blame for the riots at a “foreign country,” a thinly veiled reference to archrival Iran.

Saudi Arabia has played a singular role throughout the Arab Spring. With a guiding hand — and often an iron fist — Riyadh has worked tirelessly to stage manage affairs across the entire region. In fact, if there was a moment of the Arab revolt that sounded the death knell for a broad and rapid transition to representative government across the Middle East, it came on the last day of February, when Saudi tanks rolled across the border to help put down the mass uprising that threatened the powers that be in neighboring Bahrain. The invasion served an immediate strategic goal: The show of force gave Riyadh’s fellow Sunni monarchy in Manama the muscle it needed to keep control of its Shia-majority population and, in turn, its hold on power.

But that was hardly the only advantage King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz Al-Saud gained. The aggression quelled momentum in Saudi Arabia’s oil-rich eastern province among the newly restive Shia minority who had been taking cues from Bahrain. The column of tanks also served as a symbolic shot across the bow of Iran: The brazen move was a clear signal from Riyadh to every state in the Middle East that it would stop at nothing, ranging from soft diplomacy to full-on military engagement, in its determination to lead a region-wide counterrevolution.

From the Arab Spring’s beginning, Riyadh reached directly into local conflicts. As far back as January, the kingdom offered refuge to Tunisia’s deposed leader, Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali. Eager that popular justice not become the norm for Arab dictators, Riyadh has steadfastly refused to extradite Ben Ali to stand trial. (He remains in Riyadh to this day.) Moreover, Ben Ali’s statements, issued through his lawyer, have consistently called on Tunisians to continue the path of “modernization.” For fear of upsetting his Saudi hosts, he has not been able to express what must be his horror as a secularist at the dramatic emergence of Ennahda (“Awakening”), the main Islamist party, on the Tunisian political scene. Ennahda’s meteoric rise is widely believed to be, at least in part, bankrolled by Saudi Arabia and other Persian Gulf countries. …more

Anti-govt. protest held in Saudi Arabia
14 October, 2011 – PressTV

Anti-government protesters have taken to the streets in eastern Saudi Arabia, calling for democratic changes in the Persian Gulf kingdom, Press TV reports.

The Thursday protest rally was held in the town of Awamiyah in Saudi Arabia’s Eastern Province.

Over the past months, Saudi activists in the Eastern Province have staged several anti-government protests, demanding reforms and the immediate release of political prisoners.

Awamiyah has recently been under siege by Saudi security forces.

Human Rights Watch says more than 160 anti-government protesters have been arrested since February as part of the government’s crackdown on demonstrations in Saudi Arabia.

According to the Saudi-based Human Rights First Society, the detainees have been subject to both physical and mental torture. .source

Angst in the Gulf
Al-Ahram Weekly – October 14, 2011

While not on the scale of Bahrain, Saudi Shia rioted yet again for better conditions, reports Rashid Abul-Samh

Saudi security forces probably did not realise that their arrests of two elderly men in their 70s in the village of Awamiyah in the Eastern Province on the night of 3 October would lead to riots in this Shia-majority area for two nights running, injuring 14 people, including 10 policemen.

Saleh Al-Zayed, 72 years old, was one of the men arrested, in an attempt by police to force his son and that of the other man, accused of participating in anti-government protests, to surrender. Al-Zayed suffered a heart attack, the news of which ignited the violent protests outside the police station in which Shia youths threw Molotov cocktails and fired guns at security forces. Videos uploaded to YouTube showed groups of young Saudis, their faces covered by t-shirts, taunting police and blocking roads with empty oil barrels and bonfires.

Comprising roughly 10 per cent of the kingdom’s population of 23 million, the two million Shia live mostly in the oil-rich Eastern Province, and have been protesting regularly for more freedom ever since Saudi forces were dispatched to neighbouring Bahrain in March to help the ruling Sunni Al-Khalifas put down the Shia-led protests there.

Shia have long faced discrimination in Sunni-majority Saudi Arabia which follows a very conservative Wahhabi interpretation of the religion, in which Shia are considered heretics. Human Rights Watch in a 2009 report called on the kingdom to set up a national committee to ensure that Shia had equal access to higher education, equality in employment, including in the security forces, high ministerial positions, and freedom of worship. Unfortunately, to date little has been done to improve the situation of the Shia.

The Saudi Interior Ministry slammed the latest riot, blaming the violence on “a group of outlaws and rioters on motorbikes”, who had gathered in Awamiyah near the city of Qatif “carrying petrol bombs”. It vowed to use an “iron fist” in dealing with such disturbances, and blamed the riot on incitement “from a foreign country that aims to undermine the nation’s security and stability”, according to the Saudi Press Agency. This is usually taken as code-language for meaning Iran was behind the unrest.

Sheikh Nimr Al-Nimr of Awamiyah, a prominent Shia cleric, was quick to call for calm, urging protesters to use “words” rather than “bullets” in their fight for more freedom and equality. “The [Saudi] authorities depend on bullets and killing and imprisonment. We must depend on the roar of the word, on the words of justice,” said Nimr in his sermon on the night of 4 October. He said the youth were provoked into rioting after police fired live bullets at them. …more

Bahraini activists launch press association in exile
Mohamed Elmeshad – Sat, 15/10/2011 – ALMASRY ALYOUM

Freedom of press in Bahrain has long been a contentious issue highlighted by human rights organizations such as Amnesty International and the Arab Network for Human Rights Information.

Independent Bahraini journalists have formed the Bahraini Press Association (BPA), which “aims to defend Bahraini media workers” as well as highlight the plight journalists working from the island, according to the group’s founding statement from July 2011. Initially registered in London, BPA also operates regionally, with 80 members in total, out of Cairo and a number of other countries.

“Inaugurating the BPA when we did was a necessary response to the changing situation after 14 February (when the uprising in Bahrain uprising began), with the military intervention in mid-March, and the subsequent daily infringements on freedom of speech and violations against journalists,” said Hussain Yousif, BPA’s Middle East and Cairo coordinator. Yousif, who cannot return to Bahrain for fear of imprisonment, said that the BPA would not exist in Bahrain given the current conditions, which they consider hostile to journalists.

“What’s happening to Bahrain’s journalists is an extension to what journalists in Egypt and the rest of the Arab world went through. Syndicates and human rights activists have been very gracious in hosting us,” said BPA’s coordinator from London, Adel Marzouk.

BPA released a report on violations against journalists, both local and international, working in Bahrain since February. It estimates that around 120 journalists have been harassed one way or another for independent reporting.

“These journalists have either been arrested, laid off, fined or tortured due to their independent reporting,” said Marzouk.

Publisher Kareem Zahrawi and blogger Zakariya al-Ashira died in custody under “mysterious circumstances,” according to the report, titled “Word Leading to Death.” …more

‘US arms sales to Bahrain rise’
Jun 11, 2011 – PressTV

The US increased its military sales to Bahrain just before Manama began its brutal crackdown on protesters in February, says a report by the US State Department.

The annual report that provides sales figures between the US weapon manufacturers and foreign governments showed a USD 112 million increase in military sales to Bahrain between 2009 and 2010, The Washington Post reported.

In total, the US government has approved USD 200 million in military sales to the Persian Gulf kingdom during this period.

Previously, the sales included military hardware for aircraft and military electronics. However, in 2010, the US government also approved the sale of USD 760,000 in rifles, shotguns and assault weapons to Bahrain.

Since the anti-government demonstrations began in mid-February this year, the Al Khalifa regime has confronted the demonstrators with armed military and police, firing live ammunition. Scores have been killed and hundreds injured.

This comes as the West has remained silent on the Al Khalifa regime’s massive crackdown on the anti-government protesters.

Maryam al-Khawaja, activist from Bahrain Center for Human Rights, in a conference in Berlin on Friday, criticized the “double standards” of the West regarding the “non-stop campaign of state terror” committed by the Al Khalifa regime.

“In Libya, you saw foreign troops coming in to protect and save people from their government who is killing them; in Bahrain, you saw foreign troops coming in to save and protect the government from its people who are unarmed, and who are demanding things like human rights and freedoms and democracy,” she said.

Bahrain is a key US ally in the Persian Gulf region and hosts the US Navy’s Fifth Fleet.

Chris Bambery, the Middle East analyst, said in an interview with Press TV on Friday that Bahrain is also “a major banking center for British and American finance.”

In 2009, the first year of US President Barack Obama’s term, Washington sold an overall of USD 40 billion in military hardware to countries in the Middle East and North Africa.

This is an increase from the final year of former President George W. Bush’s term in 2008, when the US State Department approved USD 34.2 billion in military sales.

US Resumes Arms Sales to Bahrain
By Aaron Ross – Sep. 23, 2011 – MotherJones

Less than three months after including Bahrain on a list of human rights offenders requiring the United Nations’ attention, the Obama administration seems to have changed its mind. The US now believes Bahrain is “an important force for political stability and economic progress in the Middle East,” according to a statement from the Defense Department, which intends to sell $53 million worth of military equipment and support to the Gulf state, including bunker buster missiles and armored vehicles.

“This is exactly the wrong move after Bahrain brutally suppressed protests and is carrying out a relentless campaign of retribution against its critics,” said Maria McFarland of Human Rights Watch, which flagged the sale yesterday. “By continuing its relationship as if nothing had happened, the US is furthering an unstable situation.”

McFarland was referring, of course, to the Bahraini government’s crackdown earlier this year against peaceful protesters, primarily Shiites, who momentarily captured the West’s attention with their demands for greater political, social, and economic rights from the ruling Sunni monarchy. In response, state security forces killed over 30 people and arrested some 1,400 more. Many were reportedly tortured.

The heavy-handed tactics succeeded in crushing the initial wave of protests, but the situation remains volatile. Police continue to violently repress anti-government activists; on Friday, they fired rubber bullets and tear gas at protesters during a demonstration ahead of tomorrow’s parliamentary by-elections.

With the exception of its statement at the UN and tepid condemnation from the White House, the US has refrained from publically criticizing its longtime ally, which hosts the Navy’s Fifth Fleet. In 2010 alone, the US approved more than $200 million in arms sales to Bahrain. Although the proposed $53 million deal is the first since last November, it will almost certainly go through, a Defense Department spokesman told Mother Jones. That’s because Congress would have to pass specific legislation to stop the sale—an unusual, if not unprecedented, action.

How exactly selling arms to this island kingdom of around a half-million citizens will “contribute to the foreign policy and national security of the United States,” as the Defense Department announcement claims, is unclear. The State Department, to which DOD referred that question, has yet to respond.* But whatever the explanation, McFarland argues, the move casts a shadow on the US’s professed support for the ideals of the Arab Spring. “It will be hard for people to take US statements about democracy and human rights in the Middle East seriously when, rather than hold its ally Bahrain to account, it appears to reward repression with new weapons,” she said. …source

“Convenient” Base Is Unexamined Excuse for U.S. Silence on Bahrain Crackdown
Posted: 10/13/11 – by Robert Naiman – Huffington Post

Pressure is building on the Obama administration to delay a proposed arms sale to Bahrain, which brutally suppressed its pro-democracy movement and continues to squash dissent, the Washington Post reports. The Pentagon wants to sell $53 million worth of armored Humvees and anti-tank missiles to Bahrain, a plan slammed by human rights groups, who want the U.S. to end its silence on the crackdown in Bahrain.

This week, five Senators — Sens. Casey, Durbin, Cardin, Menendez, and Wyden — weighed in against the arms sale in a letter to Secretary of State Clinton:

“Completing an arms sale to Bahrain under the current circumstances would weaken U.S. credibility at a critical time of democratic transition in the Middle East,” the senators wrote. “We urge you to send a strong signal that the United States does not condone the repression of peaceful demonstrators by delaying the possible arms sale until the Bahraini government releases its political prisoners, addresses the independent commission’s recommendations, and enters into meaningful dialogue with Bahraini civil society and opposition groups.”

In noting that the U.S. has been quiet on the crackdown in Bahrain, press reports usually mention the fact that the U.S. has a naval base there. In one sense, this is obviously a good thing: it’s a key piece of information, clearly, about possible U.S. motivations for silence. If this fact weren’t reported at all, one would have cause for legitimate complaint. But the way this fact is often cited gives the impression that it’s a foregone conclusion that the Administration can’t speak up about human rights in Bahrain because of the naval base.

Doesn’t this assumption deserve some interrogation? If we say boo, do we lose the base automatically? And even if we did lose the base, would that be so awful? And if losing the base were a big concern, might not it be short-sighted in the long run to tie ourselves so closely to the regime? If the Shia majority victimized by the regime perceive that the base is the reason for our silence, doesn’t this make it more likely that when democracy comes to Bahrain, a democratically-elected government will kick out the base? If the base were really so crucial, wouldn’t we consider that? Is the presence of the base a “get out of jail free card” for justifying current policy?

Shouldn’t these questions be considered before automatically assuming that “U.S. interests” demand our silence on the crackdown?

For example, in the same Washington Post report, we find:

Actually ensuring that the kingdom lives up to its promises [of reform], however, is complicated by a host or regional considerations.

The kingdom, in addition to serving as a home base for the U.S. Navy’s 5th Fleet, is a bulwark against Iranian power in the region.

Two points are raised here: 1) the base and 2) “a bulwark against Iranian power.” Let’s consider them in turn.

Is the base necessary to the U.S.? A February 17 report in the New York Times called the base “mainly a matter of convenience.” The Times reported that the U.S. naval base in Bahrain was “mainly a matter of convenience rather than necessity to the United States Navy,” noting that the Navy “has only 2,300 personnel there working in the comfort of an isolated compound, and making relatively little use of local port facilities for its major warships, which stay mainly at sea and at other anchorages.”

Isn’t that report striking, given that the opposite — that the base is key to the U.S. — is generally assumed? Was the February 17 New York Times report wrong? Shouldn’t someone have to produce an argument that it was, before the claim that the base is key to the U.S. can be assumed? Isn’t it noteworthy that the assertion that the base was mainly a convenience disappeared from the New York Times after the crackdown, when U.S. policy, previously balanced between the desire to support democracy and the desire to maintain the status quo, came down squarely on the side of the maintaining the status quo? Doesn’t that suggest that the presence of the base is not mainly a reason for the U.S. policy of silence, but mostly an excuse for it?

What about “bulwark against Iranian power”? Clearly, the current government of Bahrain is currently part of the U.S.-led alliance against Iran, and under a democratic government in which the majority Shia population were enfranchised, maybe Bahrain would not be quite so enthusiastic a member of this alliance. But is the current Bahrain government a “bulwark” against Iran? The word implies something really important. The population of Bahrain is a little over a million people. The population of Iran is 78 million, Iraq 38 million, Egypt 82 million, Saudi Arabia 26 million. “Bulwark”? …source