Posts from — June 2012

Bahrain puts doctors on trial
Joshua Colangelo-Bryan – 1 June, 2012 – Global Post

Hassan Mushaima, another opposition leader given a life term, had advocated “marches, demonstrations and civil disobedience” to call for the “establishment of a democratic republic,” according to the verdict. The court sentenced Ali Abduleman, a prominent blogger, to five years in prison (in absentia) even though its verdict did not cite a single piece of evidence against him.

The special military courts also convicted 20 doctors and medical personnel of transparently political offenses, such as joining in “slogans and chants” that expressed “hatred and contempt for the governing regime.” Nada Dhaif, an oral surgeon, was sentenced to 15 years because she participated in a sit-in, took part in an International Women’s Day march, and assisted with a medical tent that treated protesters. Deya Ja’far, a nurse, was convicted in part because she allegedly stepped on a photograph of Bahrain’s prime minister. And the court convicted Fatima Haji, a rheumatologist, for allegedly asking Manchester United’s manager to observe a moment’s silence before a match.

Last June, after intense international criticism of the government’s general crackdown on protesters, the king appointed the Bahrain Independent Commission of Inquiry, consisting of five international human rights experts. On Nov. 23, the commission issued a 489-page report, which concluded that authorities had committed systematic human rights violations. The commission also called for judicial review of military court verdicts, which, the commissioners explained, meant that the government should free those convicted for peacefully exercising internationally recognized rights. …more

Commentary: Among the ridiculous crimes in the US ally: doctors jailed for chanting slogans, a nurse convicted for stepping on the prime minister’s photo.

In Bahrain, life in prison just for protesting
Joshua Colangelo-Bryan – 31 May, 2012 – Global Post

NEW YORK — “Of course we have free speech in Bahrain,” the official told me. “But you cannot ask to change the government — that’s a crime.” While it was striking to hear a government representative speak so candidly, it wasn’t exactly news.

Having extensively researched criminal trials in Bahrain, the island nation off Saudi Arabia’s coast, I knew this perverse understanding of “free speech” has been the basis for hundreds of prosecutions against peaceful protesters and activists, often leading to lengthy prison sentences.

On May 16, authorities initiated the latest such prosecution, opening the trial of Nabeel Rajab, a prominent human rights defender, on charges of “offending an official body.” The relevant offense, according to the government, was caused when Rajab criticized authorities via Twitter for not prosecuting attacks by armed groups against civilians.

Such charges, which once would have perhaps seemed satirical, are by now just commonplace. Indeed, over a year ago, amid massive pro-democracy demonstrations, Bahrain’s king established special military courts, called National Safety Courts. These courts convicted hundreds of people for engaging in peaceful protest and assembly activities that are protected by international law and Bahrain’s constitution — or would be if courts actually applied the constitution.

For example, in a high-profile case against 21 activists and opposition figures, the military court sentenced eight defendants to life terms, 10 others to 15-year terms, and three to shorter terms. What manner of conduct led to these severe punishments?

According to the verdict, Abdulhadi al-Khawaja, a human rights advocate and protest leader, had “advocated the overthrow of the regime” by protesting in favor of a republic, as well as “a willingness to sacrifice, disobedience, a general strike, and marches.” Prosecuters also charged that he had “insulted the army” and “impugned the integrity of the judiciary.” …source

Just How Many Cyberattacks Will Iran Take Sitting Down?
By Russ Wellen – 1 June, 2012 – FPIP

At the New York Times, Thomas Erdbrink reported on the latest cyberattack on Iran via a virus known Flame. “Iran’s Computer Emergency Response Team Coordination Centre,” he writes, “fears that it’s potentially more harmful than the 2010 Stuxnet virus. … In contrast … the newly identified virus is designed not to do damage but to secretly collect information from a wide variety of sources.”

At Asia Times Online, Pierre Klochendler elaborates:

“Flame can easily be described as one of the most complex threats ever discovered. Big and incredibly sophisticated, it redefines the notion of cyber-war and cyber-espionage,” Alexander Gostev posted on the Securelist blog of Kaspersky Labs, the company that uncovered the worm. Gostev is head of the firm’s Global Research and Analysis Team.

Meanwhile, reports Erdbrink, an Iranian cyber defense official said, “‘Its encryption has a special pattern which you only see coming from Israel,’ … While Israel never comments officially on such matters, its involvement was hinted at by a top official there.”

It’s curious that Iran hasn’t obviously retaliated to the cyberattacks, killings of nuclear scientists, and sabotage of imported nuclear components, much of which seems to have been perpetrated by Israel. Klochendler reports on one possible reason.

“Iran’s brush with Duqu and disastrous encounter with Stuxnet prove that the Islamic Republic is, indeed, lacking in the field of cyber-security,” [Assaf Turner, chief executive officer of the Israeli-based Maya Security company] asserted on the Israeli news site YNet.

But, at NPR, Tom Gjelten reports.

“[The Iranians] have all the resources and the capabilities necessary to be a major player in terms of cyberwarfare,” says Jeffrey Carr, an expert on cyberconflict who has consulted for the U.S. Department of Defense.

Furthermore, writes Gjelten:

Sanctions imposed on Iran by the U.S. and its allies are so severe as to constitute a form of economic warfare. … Under the circumstances, could the Iranians be tempted to consider a cyberattack on the U.S.?

“There is a great deal of worry in terms of what they may be able to do if they’re pushed to the brink,” says cybersecurity researcher Dmitri Alperovitch. “If they believe the regime is threatened, if they believe they’re about to be attacked, [they may consider] how can they employ cyberweapons, either to deter that attack or to retaliate in a way they can’t do militarily.”

How long can Iran be expected to sit back and take it? It’s ironic that it’s suffering the sanctions and attack at a time when it not only seems to have halted terrorist operations on foreign soil — but has no nuclear-weapons program. ….source