Posts from — February 2013

New Document Details Arguments About Torture At A JSOC Prison
By Jeffrey Kaye – The Public Record – 6 February, 2013

Journalist Michael Otterman, author of the excellent book, American Torture: From the Cold War to Abu Ghraib and Beyond, was kind enough to forward to me some months ago a document he obtained via the Freedom of Information Act. The document consists of the after-action reports made by Colonel Steven Kleinman and Terrence Russell, two of the three team members sent by the Joint Personnel Recovery Agency (JPRA) to a top-secret special operations facility in Iraq in September 2003.

The reports, written shortly after both JPRA officials finished their assignment, present two starkly different accounts of what took place that late summer in the depths of a JSOC torture chamber. Even more remarkable, Col. Kleinman, who famously intervened to stop torture interrogations at the facility, had his own report submitted to Russell for comment. Indeed, Kleinman’s report as released contains interpolations by Russell, such that the documents become a kind of ersatz debate over torture by the JPRA team members, and at a distance, some of the Task Force members.

This extraordinary document is being posted here in full for the first time. Click here to download.

“Cleared Hot”

Kleinman told the Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC), which in 2008 was investigating detainee abuse in the military (large PDF), that he thought as Team Leader (and Intelligence Director at JPRA’s Personnel Recovery Academy) he was being sent to the Special Mission Unit Task Force interrogation facility to identify problems with their interrogation program.

Much to his surprise, he and his JPRA team were being asked to provide training in the kind of techniques originally used only for demonstration and “classroom” experience purposes in the military’s Survival, Evasion, Resistance, Escape, or SERE program. (JPRA has organizational supervisory control over SERE, though the constituent arms of the military services retain some independence in how they run their programs.)

But not far into his mission, JPRA’s Commander, Colonel Randy Moulton, told Kleinman and his team they were “‘cleared hot’ to employ the full range of JPRA methods to include specifically the following: Walling – Sleep Deprivation – Isolation – Physical Pressures (to include stress positions, facial and stomach slaps, and finger pokes to chest) – Space/Time Disorientation – White Noise”.

The story of the JPRA team visit and how it went bad, how Kleinman intervened when he saw a kneeling prisoner being repeatedly slapped, how he refused to write up a torture interrogation protocol for use at the TF facility — widely believed to be Task Force 20 (as reported by Jane Mayer in her bookThe Dark Side: The Inside Story of How the War on Terror Turned Into a War on American Ideals) — has been told at this point a number of times.

But never has the degree of acrimony and conflict that went on between Kleinman and his other JPRA team members, and the back and forth with superiors and TF personnel been so carefully detailed. …more

20 Extraordinary Facts about CIA Extraordinary Rendition and Secret Detention
5 February, 2013 – by Jonathan Horowitz & Stacy Cammarano – Open Society

After the 9-11 attacks against the United States, the Central Intelligence Agency conspired with dozens of governments to build a secret extraordinary rendition and detention program that spanned the globe. Extraordinary rendition is the transfer—without legal process—of a detainee to the custody of a foreign government for purposes of detention and interrogation.

The program was intended to protect America. But, as described in the Open Society Justice Initiative’s new report, it stripped people of their most basic rights, facilitated gruesome forms of torture, at times captured the wrong people, and debased the United States’ human rights reputation world-wide.

To date, the United States and the vast majority of the other governments involved—more than 50 in all—have refused to acknowledge their participation, compensate the victims, or hold accountable those most responsible for the program and its abuses. Here are 20 additional facts from the new report that expose just how brutal and mistaken the program was:

1. At least 136 individuals were reportedly extraordinarily rendered or secretly detained by the CIA and at least 54 governments reportedly participated in the CIA’s secret detention and extraordinary rendition program; classified government documents may reveal many more.

2. A series of Department of Justice memoranda authorized torture methods that the CIA applied on detainees. The Bush Administration referred to these methods as “enhanced interrogation techniques.” “Enhanced interrogation techniques” included “walling” (quickly pulling the detainee forward and then thrusting him against a flexible false wall), “water dousing,” “waterboarding,” “stress positions” (forcing the detainee to remain in body positions designed to induce physical discomfort), “wall standing” (forcing the detainee to remain standing with his arms outstretched in front of him so that his fingers touch a wall five four to five feet away and support his entire body weight), “cramped confinement” in a box, “insult slaps,” (slapping the detainee on the face with fingers spread), “facial hold” (holding a detainee’s head temporarily immobile during interrogation with palms on either side of the face), “attention grasp” (grasping the detainee with both hands, one hand on each side of the collar opening, and quickly drawing him toward the interrogator), forced nudity, sleep deprivation while being vertically shackled, and dietary manipulation.

3. President Bush has stated that about a hundred detainees were held under the CIA secret detention program, about a third of whom were questioned using “enhanced interrogation techniques.”

The CIA’s Office of Inspector General has reportedly investigated a number of “erroneous renditions” in which the CIA had abducted and detained the wrong people. A CIA officer told the Washington Post: “They picked up the wrong people, who had no information. In many, many cases there was only some vague association” with terrorism.

4. German national Khaled El-Masri was seized in Macedonia because he had been mistaken for an Al Qaeda suspect with a similar name. He was held incommunicado and abused in Macedonia and in secret CIA detention in Afghanistan. On December 13, 2012, the European Court of Human Rights held that Macedonia had violated El-Masri’s rights under the European Convention on Human Rights, and found that his ill-treatment by the CIA at Skopje airport in Macedonia amounted to torture.

5. Wesam Abdulrahman Ahmed al-Deemawi was seized in Iran and held for 77 days in the CIA’s “Dark Prison” in Afghanistan. He was later held in Bagram for 40 days and subjected to sleep deprivation, hung from the ceiling by his arms in the “strappado” position, threatened by dogs, made to watch torture videos, and subjected to sounds of electric sawing accompanied by cries of pain.

6. Several former interrogators and counterterrorism experts have confirmed that “coercive interrogation” is ineffective. Col. Steven Kleinman, Jack Cloonan, and Matthew Alexander stated in a letter to Congress that that U.S. interrogation policy “came with heavy costs” and that “[k]ey allies, in some instances, refused to share needed intelligence, terrorists attacks increased world wide, and Al Qaeda and like-minded groups recruited a new generation of Jihadists.”

7. After being extraordinarily rendered by the United States to Egypt in 2002, Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, under threat of torture at the hands of Egyptian officials, fabricated information relating to Iraq’s provision of chemical and biological weapons training to Al Qaeda. In 2003, then Secretary of State Colin Powell relied on this fabricated information in his speech to the United Nations that made the case for war against Iraq.

8. Abu Zubaydah was waterboarded at least 83 times by the CIA. FBI interrogator Ali Soufan testified before Congress that he elicited “actionable intelligence” from Zubaydah using rapport-building techniques but that Zubaydah “shut down” after he was waterboarded.

9. Torture is prohibited in all circumstances under international law and allegations of torture must be investigated and criminally punished. The United States prosecuted Japanese interrogators for “waterboarding” U.S. prisoners during World War II.

10. On November 20, 2002, Gul Rahman froze to death in a secret CIA prison in Afghanistan called the “Salt Pit,” after a CIA case officer ordered guards to strip him naked, chain him to the concrete floor, and leave him there overnight without blankets.

11. Fatima Bouchar was abused by the CIA, and by persons believed to be Thai authorities, for several days in the Bangkok airport. Bouchar reported she was chained to a wall and not fed for five days, at a time when she was four-and-a-half months pregnant. After that she was extraordinarily rendered to Libya.

12. Syria was one of the “most common destinations for rendered suspects,” as were Egypt and Jordan. One Syrian prison facility contained individual cells that were roughly the size of coffins. Detainees report incidents of torture involving a chair frame used to stretch the spine (the “German chair”) and beatings.

13. Muhammed al-Zery and Ahmed Agiza, while seeking asylum in Sweden, were extraordinarily rendered to Egypt where they were tortured with shocks to their genitals. Al-Zery was also forced to lie on an electrified bed frame.

14. Abu Omar, an Italian resident, was abducted from the streets of Milan, extraordinarily rendered to Egypt, and secretly detained for fourteen months while Egyptian agents interrogated and tortured him by subjecting him to electric shocks. An Italian court convicted in absentia 22 CIA agents and one Air Force pilot for their roles in the extraordinary rendition of Abu Omar.

16. Known black sites—secret prisons run by the CIA on foreign soil—existed in Afghanistan, Lithuania, Morocco, Poland, Romania, and Thailand.

17. Abd al Rahim al Nashiri was secretly detained in various black sites. While secretly detained in Poland, U.S. interrogators subjected al Nashiri to a mock execution with a power drill as he stood naked and hooded; racked a semi-automatic handgun close to his head as he sat shackled before them; held him in “standing stress positions;” and threatened to bring in his mother and sexually abuse her in front of him.

18. President Obama’s 2009 Executive Order repudiating torture does not repudiate the CIA extraordinary rendition program. It was specifically crafted to preserve the CIA’s authority to detain terrorist suspects on a short-term, transitory basis prior to rendering them to another country for interrogation or trial.

19. President Obama’s 2009 Executive Order also established an interagency task force to review interrogation and transfer policies and issue recommendations on “the practices of transferring individuals to other nations.” The interagency task force report was issued in 2009, but continues to be withheld from the public. It appears that the U.S. intends to continue to rely on anti-torture diplomatic assurances from recipient countries and post-transfer monitoring of detainee treatment, but those methods were not effective safeguards against torture for Maher Arar, who was tortured in Syria, or Ahmed Agiza and Muhammed al-Zery, who were tortured in Egypt.

20. The Senate Select Intelligence Committee has completed a 6,000 page report that further details the CIA detention and interrogation operations with access to classified sources. However, the report itself remains classified.

…source

Thus, a democratic resolution to Bahrain’s political crisis will not be achieved by the latest negotiations because the perpetrators of mass murder and injustice remain cozily embedded, by necessity for Western patronage.”

Bahraini regime holds gun to head in ‘negotiations’
10 February, 2013 – PressTV – By Finian Cunningham

The Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei described recent American offers of bilateral talks with Iran as tantamount to the US holding negotiations with a gun to the head.

The same apt metaphor, expressing the futility of conducting political talks under extreme duress, applies equally to the internal politics of Bahrain.

Today sees the beginning of yet another “national dialogue” in which the US-backed Al Khalifa regime has invited political opponents to – ostensibly – negotiate a solution to the country’s long-running crisis. The tiny Persian Gulf kingdom has been racked by daily political turmoil since a popular uprising erupted two years ago – on 14th February 2011.

Presumably, the regime now feels safe in holding discussions with the existing opposition parties – discussions within political parameters that have been bludgeoned by months of withering state terrorism and repression. The main opposition bloc, Al Wefaq, has already signaled that it is prepared to accept a revamped constitutional monarchy as part of a settlement. Notably, Washington and London have both been assiduously courting Wefaq to enter into the latest round of political talks with their surrogate, the Khalifa regime.

Meanwhile, more critical political opponents of the regime – who have wide support among the people – are locked up in prison, some serving life sentences on trumped-up charges of subversion. One of these leaders, Hassan Mushaima, is suffering from long-term illness that goes untreated. Another is Abduljalil Al Singace, who has just begun a hunger-strike along with other inmates. Other staunch political opponents, such as Saeed Shehabi, have been forced to live in exile.

These are the true voices of Bahrain’s political opposition who have called for the corrupt Khalifa regime to be sacked and banished, not entertained in any shape or form, to make way for a truly representative government elected by the people. But such voices will not be heard inside the Khalifa palace during Bahrain’s new round of “national dialogue.”

Predictably, the Western allies of the Bahraini regime, principally Washington and the old colonial ruler, Britain, have enthusiastically endorsed the latest political move. The reasons are self-serving and have nothing to do with finding a genuine democratic solution for the long-suffering people of Bahrain.

Indeed, the political talks are a subterfuge, really aimed at ensuring that democracy is denied. The Western governments – despite all their rhetoric about supporting democracy and human rights in the Middle East and elsewhere – are cynically well aware of the real anti-democratic objective in Bahrain. No doubt, they are the architects behind the sham political maneuver, which seeks to find “political compromise” – that is, “political cover” for continued misrule by Western-serving elites.

The current negotiations appear to be a magnanimous gesture from the Khalifa monarchy, reaching out to “its subject people”. This elite has ruled the oil-rich island as a corrupt family fiefdom ever since Britain granted nominal independence in 1971. The British imposed this dictatorship on the mainly Shia majority of Bahrain, and the Americans later became wedded to it, because the unelected elite – quaintly called a “constitutional monarchy” but in practice an absolute despot – was installed with the express purpose of serving the commercial and geopolitical interests of the Western powers, not the majority of Bahraini people. That imposter role continues very much to this day.

This is the same anti-democratic arrangement that prevails in Saudi Arabia and the other Persian Gulf oil sheikhdoms – all of them the illegitimate offspring of the conniving British Empire. And this is why democracy must not be allowed to succeed in Bahrain. Not now, not ever. The domino effect of democracy supplanting the Western-backed Persian Gulf dictatorships would be a disaster for Washington and London, the lynchpins of the petrodollar capitalist system.

Getting back to the issue of Bahrain’s new “national dialogue” and why it is bound to fail from the point of view of democracy, we can say this with certainty because the political talks are being conducted while the regime holds a gun to the head of the Bahraini people.

In fact, this is not a metaphor. Over the past two years, the Khalifa regime, led by King Hamad, has murdered, maimed and tortured thousands of Bahrainis, who have done nothing more than peacefully protest for the establishment of a democratic government. This regime is not interested in rights or law. How could it be when it has and continues to violate every precept and person it finds a threat to its barbarous rule? This regime is in no way willing to account for its crimes against the people. It has made clear that it has no intention of implementing the reasonable recommendations of the international Bassoon Report issued more than a year ago, calling for the release of all prisoners of conscience in Bahrain.

The Al Khalifa potentate retains a self-styled royal prerogative to commit crimes on a massive scale with impunity; sending its security forces into Bahraini villages to shoot indiscriminately at peaceful protesters, poison people to death in their homes with chemical gases, and to smash their way into houses to drag away occupants to unknown torture dungeons. Human rights activists and journalists, who bear witness to these violations, are likewise persecuted, gagged, harassed and jailed.

The vicious repression of the Khalifa royal dictatorship continues unabated precisely because Washington and London have turned a blind eye to its crimes. Not just turned a blind eye; the Western governments have actively supported the Khalifa thugs with copious supplies of crowd-control weaponry and affording the crucial cover of ongoing normal diplomatic and commercial relations.

The complete de facto absence of rule of law in Bahrain and the thuggish suzerainty of unelected despots is not some aberration of Western governments. This is how these governments prefer and need political business to be run in the Persian Gulf and elsewhere. Fascism is the optimum model of Western capitalism, as practiced in the Persian Gulf (and increasingly practiced in fully fledged form back home in the US and Britain.)

Thus, a democratic resolution to Bahrain’s political crisis will not be achieved by the latest negotiations because the perpetrators of mass murder and injustice remain cozily embedded, by necessity for Western patronage.

In Syria, where regime change is desired for expedient self-serving reasons, the arrogant Western governments, without justification, call for President Assad to stand down. Yet the same stricture is not even mooted by these powers when it comes to the truly despotic Bahraini regime. Why? Because regime change in Bahrain and the Persian Gulf is far from desired; the more despotic the better to uphold Western strategic interests.

The Khalifa dynasty retains all its corrupt dictatorial powers bequeathed by Britain and sustained ever since by Washington. The new “dialogue” is simply a cynical charade to conceal this. The very fact that the rulers – or more accurately their Western masters – called for the negotiations indicates that the process is framed to ensure that the regime will, in effect, stay in power, not to find a genuine democratic settlement.

The status quo may have to undergo a cosmetic revamp, re-branded as a “new constitutional monarchy”, and there may follow formal elections. But such a compromise that allows a despotic regime to persist within the political fabric is not a worthy compromise. It is a squalid cop-out. What really needs to be done is for this regime to be prosecuted for crimes against the people, crimes not just committed over the past two years, but over the past four decades.

This is, of course, why Washington and London are backing the dialogue charade, as they have done with previous regime-led initiatives, because these Western governments know that the purpose of the negotiations is to ensure that their Bahraini tyrant-client will remain safely ensconced in power. The regime provides the US with a base for its Navy Fifth Fleet and is an important staging post for Western militarism across the Middle East, as well as being used as a bulwark against Iran’s influence in the vital oil-producing region.

Perhaps more importantly, the Khalifa regime is a bulwark against democracy and the rule of law becoming established in the Persian Gulf. That would present a mortal threat to the geopolitical interests of Washington and London. For these capitalist powers, democracy is simply anathema. For them, the Persian Gulf must remain, at all costs, a feudal backwater ruled by tyrants and unelected despots, who prop up the destructive petrodollar global system and who buy billions of dollars worth of Western weaponry, all in implacable opposition to the democratic needs of the people. (The Western public also needs to realize -and realize quickly – this ugly nature of their so-called governments. For the same oppressive dictatorial measures for satiating the unelected capitalist elite are being applied increasingly to them as well. )

In a very real way, the gun being held to the head of the Bahraini people is ultimately being held by Washington and London.

Will these nefarious powers succeed in their intimidation against democracy? That will be determined by the mass of Bahraini people who refuse the sham offer of negotiations within the constricting and stifling comforts of the Khalifa palace. Despite the Western-backed state terrorism over the past two years, these noble people know that their right for democratic freedom will eventually be won – the hard way – on the streets by bravely facing down the regime’s police thugs. They have sacrificed and suffered too much already to give up now; and the blood and love of their martyrs will sustain them in the struggle for victory. …source

…MORE ABOUT EVENT

Chiapas: Indigenous Ch’oles block highway in north of the state
5 February, 2013 – SIPAZ blog

On 5 February, in observance of the 96th anniversary of the Mexican Constitution, approximately 450 Ch’ol women and men who pertain to the organization Laklumal Ixim (Our People of Maize) initiated a highway blockade on the Yajalón-Tila route so as to demonstrate that nearly two months into the administration of the new state government, “the communities and peoples continue to experience abandonment, misery, and looting.” In the communique participants denounce that “the ‘National Crusade against hunger’ is a farce that seeks merely to share crumbs to our communities that experience poverty, while our natural resources are handed over to foreign firms for exploitation. This is all a part of a strategy of counter-insurgency.” Furthermore, the members of the organization demand “that the Chiapas state-government cease this strategy of looting and abandonment toward the indigenous and campesino communities of the state, and that they instead attend to our demands and needs: a just price for electricity in accordance with the poverty of our people, quality healthcare and education, dignified infrastructure (homes, works, and roads), support for coffee-growers, projects and programs of support for the countryside to help women and men of indigenous communities, respect for our rights–ejidal, communal, and indigenous–cessation of the strategy of division and confrontation among communities as promoted by the FANAR (previously PROCEDE) that is being promoted above all by the agrarian governmental agency.” …source

Two Years After a Popular Revolution
Egypt’s Political Map: Clearing the Fog
by ESAM AL-AMIN – Counter Punch – 8 February, 2013

If parties from across all of Egypt’s political spectrum agree on one thing, it’s this: the country is currently witnessing the greatest turmoil since Hosni Mubarak’s ouster and is facing massive upheaval with no end in sight. The unity and resolve displayed by millions of Egyptians two years ago when they decisively deposed the authoritarian and corrupt Mubarak regime is long gone. Throughout these tumultuous two years, there emerged two major fault lines across the country’s political class: one that resulted from the revolution, namely the revolutionary vs. the counter-revolutionary groups; and one along ideological grounds, namely the Islamic vs. the secular parties.

All agree that the revolution was launched spontaneously by non-ideological youth groups, who paid the heaviest price and made the biggest sacrifices during the early days of the revolution. Such groups proclaim the mantle of the revolution and maintain that it has been hijacked by better-organized and established groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) and the Salafis.

The MB, however, asserts that although it did not publicly join the initial protests on January 25, 2011, it immediately joined forces within three days and protected the revolution as the group mobilized its massive membership and supporters across the country, especially during the battle of the camel on February 1, ultimately forcing the surrender of the regime ten days later.

The more conservative Salafi groups, while acknowledging that they were slow in joining the ranks of the revolution, argue that they embraced its objectives and the democratic process unleashed in its aftermath and thus legitimately represent the interests and aspirations of a substantial segment of Egyptian society.

On the other hand, the secular and liberal groups, including the Coptic Church, which are quite wary of the religious groups and are very adamant about limiting the role of Islam in political life, have been very frustrated in seeing decisive electoral victories by the more popular Islamic groups. Since the fall of Mubarak, Egyptians have been to the polls in largely free and fair elections on eight different occasions. And each time the voters decisively favored the Islamist groups.

In March 2011, the electorate voted 77 percent for a political process advocated by the Islamists that called for elections before writing a new constitution. Furthermore, between November 2011 and January 2012 Egyptian voters went to the polls four times to choose the upper and lower chambers of parliament. Once again the Islamist parties won over 73 percent of the contested seats. By June 2012 Egyptians went to the polls yet again in two stages to choose a president, eventually electing in a tightly contested race, though narrowly, the MB candidate, Muhammad Morsi. In December 2012, the Egyptian electorate went to the polls an eighth time, approving by a 64 percent majority a new constitution endorsed mainly by the Islamist groups, while strongly opposed by the secularist, liberal, and leftist parties as well as by many revolutionary youth groups.

As the second anniversary of the remarkable and peaceful Egyptian revolution approached in late January 2013, new alliances and coalitions were formed largely as the mistrust had widened between those who support and oppose Morsi, the Islamists’ agenda, or the new constitution. Consequently, new battle lines were drawn in anticipation of the new parliamentary elections scheduled for this spring.

With over 100 registered or declared parties across the country, what is the political map of Egypt two years after the revolution? …more

Criminal insanity of Clinton’s double-think
1 February, 2013 – By Finian Cunningham – PressTV

And yet given the outrageous provocation of continued Western aggression in Syria – and the very real danger of regional conflagration that that entails – Washington has the preposterous audacity to denounce Russia and Iran for not being constructive players and for assisting an ally through legal and justifiable means.”

In her farewell speech, outgoing US secretary of state Hillary Clinton accused Russia and Iran of “stepping up” military support for Syria and thereby adding fuel to possible regional conflict.

Her words displayed breath-taking myopia and double-think, and this from somebody who is being hailed as one of America’s brightest foreign diplomats in decades.

The first thing about Clinton’s remarks is: so what? Both Russia and Iran have long-standing mutual defense pacts with the Syrian government of President Bashar al-Assad. If those countries are sharing military equipment and personnel then that is perfectly legal under the terms of defense agreements signed between sovereign states.

Secondly – and how is this for myopia and double-think? – just as Clinton is remonstrating with Russia and Iran, the Western powers are entering their third of sending fighter bombers, helicopter gun-ships, drones, refueling mid-tankers and cargo planes plus thousands of military personnel to the West African county of Mali to crush separatist militants. That full-scale “stepping up of military support” is headed up by France, which claims that it is responding to an ally in need – the dubious regime in Mali’s capital, Bamako.

Unlike the support given to Syria by Russia and Iran, the French and Western intervention in Mali has tenuous, if any, legal foundation. The Francophile regime in Bamako is an administration that was put in power by a military coup last April. The junta’s appointed so-called interim president, Dioucounda Traore, is an unelected French puppet with no legally constituted popular authority.

The Western powers can’t even wave a fig leaf of a United Nations Security Council mandate for their Malian interference. The UNSC vote on the issue of Mali on December 20 only gave qualified authorization for an African-led military mission under the auspices of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). There was no authorization at the UNSC for a French or Western military offensive.

So, the French and latterly the British and Americans can weigh into Malian internal affairs with bombers and Special Forces – exacerbating violations by the corrupt Malian army – and this illegal military onslaught in Mali is supposedly permissible.

Whereas, Russian and Iran come to the aid of a sovereign state through a long-standing defense pact between sovereign states, and somehow this is an outrage, according to Clinton’s rational.

Speaking in Washington on Thursday, Clinton told the assembled supine press corps, “The Iranians have made it clear for some time that keeping Assad in power is one of their highest priorities. There is a lot of concern that they are increasing the quality of the weapons because Assad is using up his weaponry.”

Yes, Assad is “using up his weaponry” precisely because his country is under attack from Western-backed mercenaries.

As for Russia, Clinton went on, “The Russians are not passive bystanders in their support for Assad. We have reasons to believe that the Russians continue to supply financial and military assistance in the form of equipment to Assad.”

Again, so what? The only basis for Clinton’s condemnation is her own propagandized subjective and totally spurious logic. …more

Bahrain opposition parties: the regime calls for dialogue and opens fire on protesters
5 February, 2013 – ABNA

The wide presence of the Bahraini masses in nonstop protests over the past two years following the eruption of the pro-democracy revolution in 2011 has strongly proved that the national demands movement cannot be put down.

Bahrain opposition parties: the regime calls for dialogue and opens fire on protesters
(Ahlul Bayt News Agency) – The people of Bahrain have proved to this regime and to the world that their civilized and peaceful movement is stronger than the official brutal suppression, and that they will not give up on their humanitarian rights which are stated in local and international covenants and treaties.

The opposition parties said in the final communiqué of today’s protest, titled, “We are confident that we are victorious”, that while the regime pretends to call for dialogue, it opens fire on protesters causing a number of birdshot injuries during the last few days, and this proves that the regime’s call for dialogue lacks seriousness.

The opposition parties stressed that talking about dialogue while the security services are aiming guns at citizen’s heads is not possible. As long as prisons are filled with political prisoners and opposition figures, the call for dialogue is not serious. Bahrain needs a genuine dialogue and not a public relation party for the regime, while at the same time, its repressive policy continues.

The opposition parties stated that the national popular demands are mentioned very clearly in the ‘Manama Document’ and they are merely based on enabling the people to be the source of all powers to end the long era of tyranny and monopolism of individuals in the state’s decision making. The Manama Document put in points Bahrain’s vital need for an elected government instead of the current government that has put the country in set back through corruption, in addition to a legislative authority that is elected through fair constituencies, and an impartial judicial system and national security services which work for the protection of the nation and its citizens.

The opposition parties are fully persistent to the national popular demands of the Bahraini people, and to make the final say for the people through ballot boxes to express their opinions in any negotiation or political consensus as the people are the real source of legitimacy.

The opposition stressed that change is coming for Bahrain and the totalitarian rule must come to an end. Only real democracy can achieve stability and development to the nation and all citizens. …more

The Dark Side of America
02 February, 2013 – By Timothy V. Gatto

Saudi ArabiaI’ve been staying out of most world events as of late, preferring to watch things unfold silently as there are so many that seem to have all of the answers. I don’t claim to have any answers, but I sure do have a lot of questions. There is a good chance that many of you have the same questions that I have. Sometimes, the questions are more important than the answers. In this 21st Century, there are so many of our leaders that will give us the answers to any questions we ask, they just aren’t the right answers. In fact, they lie continuously.

One question I have is why do we support a collection of fundamentalist Islamic States like Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain and the UAE with their Wahhabi and Salafi militant Muslim sects? According to the “official” 9/11 explanation, all of the hijackers came from Saudi Arabia and were members of the extremist Wahhabi Muslim sect. Just like the majority of al-Qaeda.

In the recent fighting in Syria, the so-called “rebels” are made up of mostly non-Syrian Salafi and Wahhabi extremists. They also have support from Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the UAE and other nations that make up the Gulf Cooperation Council with help from Turkey, United Kingdom, Israel and France. Why put extremists in a country that was ruled by a moderate Alawite?

The so-called civil war in Mali is presumably being caused by forces loyal to al-Qaeda; in fact, they gave it the name al-Qaeda in the Maghreb (AQIM). French forces have responded to this “threat” by sending in 3,500 ground troops courtesy of the United States Military Airlift Command. Mali, which used to be a French Colony, has always had trouble with the Tuareg tribe in the north of that country. Former Libyan leader Mohamar Gadhafi employed many of these people in his army. When we engineered the “Libyan Spring” the Tuareg’s fled the country because they lost their employment and because “freedom fighters” were executing anyone of color at the time. They left with storehouses of arms and ammunition, a perfect beginning to finally wrest Northern Mali away from the rest of the country, something they have been trying to do for hundreds of years. Why is this an American interest? Why are we involved transporting French troops? Who gave authorization for our military to use our tax dollars to transport these French troops?

We saw what the blow-back led to in Libya. Not only was our Envoy and three other Americans killed and our compound burned out, but the country is separated into different fiefdoms with various strongholds led by different sects. Who is telling us the truth about what is going on over there? From the reports I’m reading about the insurrection in Mali from Global Research and others, this is an imperialist expansion for resources by the French.

The rest of Africa is just as perplexing. We have American military officers embedded with almost every army in every country on the continent. The continent is rich in mineral and metal deposits as well as oil and natural gas. Didn’t we learn from the debacle in Iraq that we just can’t go in and grab resources? Wouldn’t it have been cheaper to buy the oil?

Speaking of Iraq, American’s still don’t understand that this was an illegal and immoral war. John “Bomb Bomb Iran” McCain grilled Chuck Hagel about his opposition to the surge. Hagel told them it resulted in needless American deaths. I’m surprised he didn’t bring up the fact that at about the same time the surge was “working”, the Sunni’s started getting paid not to fight the Americans. Maybe it was just a coincidence (if you believe in coincidences). It’s really amazing that so many people in the U.S. never read the Downing Street Memo or realize that Bush and company planned on invading Iraq way before 9/11. Ignorance is bliss, so they say. Ignorance is frustrating, especially when it’s willful ignorance or should I say feigned ignorance.

There are a lot of supposedly ignorant Americans. Either they are ignorant or they just don’t have the backbone or the wherewithal to question authority in any shape or manner anymore. Seems to me that one of the greatest generations this nation ever witnessed was the one that took to the streets and protested the senseless death and carnage we rained down on Southeast Asia. While many in that generation forgot the effectiveness of grassroots protests and organization, the U.S. Government never forgot the lessons of that era. It dawned on them much too late in that war that the media was the message. Since then, they have incrementally gained total control of the American media.

The people in politics and the media like to call it “spin”. That’s another way to say propaganda without offending anyone’s sensibilities. They call torture “enhanced interrogation”. They call those who fight against Western domination and imperialism “insurgents”. When they resort to violence against out interests they are called “terrorists”. When they act on our behalf they are called “freedom fighters”. The government is very good at what they do.

Now that France has claimed victory in Mali, what will they do next? Will they keep a contingent of French Forces in that country to keep the peace? Will French firms move in and exploit the mineral and petroleum reserves there? What do you think?

Our peace-loving ally Israel reportedly bombed a Syrian facility outside of Damascus Wednesday. It was ostensibly done to stop Syria from transferring biological or nerve agent munitions to Hezbollah. With Syria fighting for its very survival, why would they start shipping their weapons out of the country? Does that make any sense? Yet, that was the reason given by the Israeli’s for the attack. They are also reportedly deathly afraid that these weapons will fall into the jihadist’s rebels hands.

“Israel has publicly warned that it would take military action to prevent the Syrian regime’s chemical weapons falling into the hands of Hezbollah in Lebanon or “global jihadists” fighting inside Syria. Israeli military intelligence is said to be monitoring the area round the clock via satellite for possible convoys carrying weapons.” Guardian 30 Jan 2013

So why was the attack described as an attack on a convoy by the media in the U.S.? This situation makes Russia nervous about the Israeli attack.

“If this information is confirmed, then we are dealing with unprovoked attacks on targets on the territory of a sovereign country, which blatantly violates the UN charter and is unacceptable, no matter the motives to justify it,” the Russian foreign ministry said in a statement on Thursday.’ Guardian 31 Jan 2013

Meanwhile, Israel has suffered a defeat in the UN where a United Nations Commission has declared that the settlements in the West Bank are illegal and that the approximately 500,000 Jewish settlers should leave or face possible war crimes charges. Where was the coverage of that little tidbit in the U.S. Press? …more

Bahrain: Massive resistance expected on 2nd anniversary of Revolution
8 February, 2013 – Bahrain Freedom Movement – warisacrime.org

As the preparations for the 2nd anniversary of the 14th February Revolution get underway, the field activities have warmed up extensively. At the same time supportive actions by the friends of Bahrain have risen sharply and are expected to become more widespread. In several cities around the world the pro-democracy activists have line up programmes of actions to express support to the Revolution that the Anglo-American alliance continues to target with various political and security means. The enmity of this alliance to the aspirations of Bahrain has been laid open especially the British Government dispatched several teams and personnel to help the Alkhalifa hereditary dictatorship repress the people. Despite the claims by some British officials to the contrary, Bahrainis continue to suffer repression in the form of torture, and collective punishment.

The 14th February Alliance has called for a general strike on that day and has taken many steps to ensure its success. Instead of attending workplace people will participate in country-wide protests to re-invigorate the Revolution and tell the world that they are intent on removing the cancerous Alkhalifa cell from power. It is a shame for the world community to tolerate medieval style dynastical rule that has been proven by its own commission of investigation to have committed systematic torture and extra-judicial killings. Furthermore, the Alliance has called for withdrawal of deposits from the banks linked to the Alkhalifa hereditary dictatorship. The stock market indicators have confirmed that in the first day of the campaign the Bahrain burse lost 10.43 points, while the banking sector index registered losses of 2.25 percent of its value.

The revolutionaries have been heartened by these figures and are aiming to cripple the economy which is one of the pillars of the Alkahlifa regime.

Meanwhile Mr Abdul Hadi AlKhawaja and his family have been nominated by one Member of the European Parliament for the Noble Prize for their pro-democracy activities and the personal risks they have suffered in the process. Anna Gomez, MEP, from Portugal said: “I am pleased, as a Portugese Member of European Parliament to nominate Abdul Hadi Al Khawaja and his two daughters, Zaianb and Maryam, from Bahrain, for the 2013 Noble Prize. The family have dedicated themselves, despite the risks and personal harassments to which they are exposed, for the peaceful defence of human rights and political reforms in Bahrain. The three have played a peaceful role in the popular protests in Bahrain, and represented the voice of the non-violent resistance, calling on the Bahraini authorities to respect human rights and implement peaceful political reforms”. This nomination has angered the regime, and there now fears for the safety of the members of the family from a regime t hat has adopted a policy of revenge against its opponents

On another level, Socialism International has called for the immediate and unconditional release of Ibrahim Sharif and the other prisoners of conscience. The organization said, in the communiqué at the end of its conference at Lisbon, Portugal, on Tuesday 5th February, expressed disappointment at the failure of the Bahraini regime to implement the BICI recommendations issued over 14 months ago and those of the UN Human Rights Council.

On 6th February IFEX issued a petition titled “Tell the King of Bahrain free expression is not a crime” asking people to sign it. It said: Who will fight for free expression and human rights in Bahrain when those speaking out are put behind bars? Sign the petition now! As the second anniversary of the pro-democracy protests in Bahrain approaches on 14 February, ask the King of Bahrain to free all human rights defenders, journalists and bloggers languishing in jail, some for life, simply for peacefully exercising their right to free expression and assembly. IFEX member, the Bahrain Centre for Human Rights (BCHR), the most vocal independent human rights organisation in Bahrain, has been particularly targeted, with past and present BCHR representatives serving prison sentences, or on trial, including: Abdul Hadi Al Khawaja, Nabeel Rajab and Yousuf Al Mahafdha.

Bahrain: Urgent Appeal, Prisoners’ Lives in Immediate Danger as Dry Strike Begins to Protest Unjust Imprisonment and Treatment
05 February, 2013 – Bahrain Center for Human Rights

The Bahrain Center for Human Rights is gravely concerned for the health and well being of the four prisoners who have begun a dry hunger strike in Riffa prison to protest the unjust imprisonment and torture they are subjected to at the hands of the prison authorities.

Mohd Almughni, Jaffar Hussain, Hussain Al-Aali and Radhi Ali began a hunger strike on the 7th of January, and are now on their 30th day without food. On the 1st of February, 2013, the BCHR received information that these detainees have stopped taking water as well. The health of these prisoners has already been greatly weakened as a result of the torture they are continually subjected to, the denial of medical attention, and now the hunger strike. The BCHR fears for the lives of these wrongfully imprisoned men, and calls for their immediate release.

According to the families, these prisoners have suffered from severe physical and psychological abuse. They have been severely beaten, forced to eat with their handcuffs on, forced to stand for long periods of time while blindfolded, and the air-conditioning in the prison cell is constantly on, despite the winter conditions. The prisoners are provided with water that is unsuitable for drinking, and are kept in a generally bad environment where they are held at Riffa prison (according to their families). Each of these men is currently being held in a cell measuring only two meters by two meters; some of these cells are shared other prisoners who do not speak a common language, and with whom they are not allowed to attempt to communicate. The prisoners are not allowed more than five minutes outside the cell each day, and they were allowed these five minutes only after four months of detention. They are not allowed more than five minutes of phone calls every two weeks. Starting January 2013, they have been given 1 hours visit every two weeks instead of 30 minutes visit every week. Except for Radhi, they are not allowed to receive any books from their families. They were not allowed to receive any of the medicines which they were taking before their arrest. They are not allowed to receive warm clothes for the cold season in Bahrain.

Due to the poor prison conditions and the torture they were subjected to, the detainees are now suffering from multiple health problems, physical and physiological:

• Jafar Eid started to suffer from problems with his kidney due to the unclean drinking water. He has walking problems as a result of beatings he received on his leg, and the small confines of the cell do not allow for rehabilitation. His vision is poor, and his cellmate has scabies.

• Hussain Al-Aali has tribology, which is escalating due to his inability to move in the small cell. He also suffers from pains in his back as well as poor vision.

• Radhi Ali Radhi is suffering from regular headaches, sinus problems and pain in his back. He was not allowed to receive the medicines he took before he was arrested. In January 2013, he suffered from problems with his kidneys.

Jaffar and Hussain have been forced to take pills which they say caused hallucinations.

The Bahrain Center for Human Rights has previously written about the severe torture and poor detention conditions these detainees were subjected to, including the poor conditions in which visitations are conducted. In fact, three of the detainees entered a ‘visitation strike’ in protest against the humiliating treatment they were subject to.
(See: http://www.bahrainrights.org/en/node/5522)

The detainees in this case are accused with “the making and possession of explosive materials”.

The Bahrain Center for Human Rights call for immediate action on behalf of the Bahraini authorities and the international community to:

– To immediately improve the detention conditions and provide the necessary treatment to Mohamed Al-Mughni, Hussain Al Aali, Jaffar Eid, Radhi Ali and all other prisoners in need of medical care in the prisons of Bahrain.

– For the authorities in Bahrain to abide by the international conventions which they have ratified, especially concerning the rights of prisoners to receive full medical care.

– End the practice of torture in the prisons of Bahrian.

– Hold accountable those involved in torture, and bring them to a fair and independent judiciary.

– Ensure that the accused prisoners receive a fair trial, starting with ensuring their protection from torture. …source

Protests Precede Reconciliation Talks in Bahrain
7 February, 2013 – POMED

Thousands of Bahrainis protested against the ruling monarchy on Wednesday ahead of the dialogue slated to begin on Sunday. Bahraini officials said on Tuesday that invitations were being issued to approximately 17 groups, including both supporters and opponents of the regime, to take part in the talks. Information Affairs Minister Samira Rajab said that the government had “every intention to make this dialogue a success,” but put the onus “on the other parties and their seriousness in pursuing dialogue.” The six main opposition groups agreed to participate, but suggested that disagreements with the government about the dialogue’s goal could compromise its success. Senior al-Wefaq official Khalil al-Marzouq reiterated the opposition’s desire that representatives of the ruling al-Khalifa family participate. He said, “We want a real dialogue, serious negotiations on a mechanism that will restore powers to the people and turn Bahrain into a constitutional monarchy.”

Gulf expert Kristian Coates-Ulrichsen believes that the talks will fail unless the government is prepared to sit down and work with the opposition on moving toward compromise. She asserted, “Given the fact that the government is effectively an outgrowth of the ruling family in Bahrain, any dialogue without their involvement will be meaningless fiddling around the edges.” The Bahrain Justice and Development Movement cautioned the groups against “walking blindly into something that is not yet guaranteed to be beneficial in ending the current crisis” and said the government must participate because it is part of the problem in Bahrain.

Meanwhile, Bahrain Watch revealed new evidence suggesting that the British company Gamma International sold computer surveillance software to the Government of Bahrain, an allegation that the company has denied. The report also claims that Gamma International may have provided Bahrain with updates and retains the ability to deactivate the software. …source

Bahrain’s government-initiated national talks to start on Feb 10
6 February, 2013 – 10 February, 2013

The invitations for almost 17 pro-regime and opposition groups will be issued on Wednesday, with the members of both the lower and upper house of the country’s National Assembly also attending the talks beginning on February 10.

“We have every intention to make this dialogue a success,” Bahrain’s Information Affairs Minister Samira Rajab said. “The onus is on the other parties and their seriousness in pursuing dialogue.”

Despite expressing readiness to attend the talks, the opposition groups have cast doubt over the effectiveness of the talks.
The major opposition bloc, al-Wefaq, also pointed out the differences between their goals and the government’s mechanism and aims of the meeting.

The opposition leaders seek the presence of the ruling Al Khalifa family as well as international experts in the talks, senior al-Wefaq official Khalil al-Marzouq noted.

“We want a real dialogue, serious negotiations on a mechanism that will restore powers to the people and turn Bahrain into a constitutional monarchy,” Marzouq opined.

Earlier in July 2011, Bahrain’s King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa called for a national dialogue on reform and announced an investigation into the handling of the uprising by Saudi-backed regime forces.

The dialogue did not yield results as al-Wefaq party quit the negotiations, complaining that since their onset, the government had been trying to muffle the voice of the opposition.

This is while, Anti-regime protests rage on in the Persian Gulf Island, with the demonstrators demanding an elected prime minister replace Khalifa bin Salman Al-Khalifa.

The Bahraini uprising against the Al Khalifa rule began in February 2011. The regime promptly launched a brutal crackdown on peaceful protests and called in Saudi-led Arab forces from neighboring states.

The Manama regime has arrested many rights activists, doctors, and nurses since the revolution began.

The Bahraini government is, meanwhile, supported by the United States despite its record of human rights abuse against its nationals.

…source

Anti-regime demos held in north Bahrain
7 February, 2013 – PressTV

Bahrainis have once again staged demonstrations against the ruling Al Khalifa regime in a number of villages.

On Wednesday, demonstrators took to the streets of the northeastern island of Sitra, the northwestern village of Diraz and the northern village of Nuwaidrat, chanting slogans against the Manama regime.

The protesters expressed determination to continue the uprising despite the crackdown by security forces.

The recent demonstrations were held ahead of national talks that are scheduled to commence on February 10.

Protest gatherings in Bahrain are planned to be held every day until February 14, which is the second anniversary of the uprising.

On Wednesday, Al-Wefaq National Islamic Society, which is the major opposition bloc in Bahrain, called for the establishment of a transitional government, which represents different national factions, as a first step to resolve the crisis in the country.

The group also called on the regime to put an end to the “ongoing crackdowns and media campaigns against dissidents.”

Despite expressing readiness to attend the talks, the opposition groups have cast doubt over the effectiveness of the talks. Six members from the opposition and eight from pro-regime groups will attend the talks.

The popular uprising began in Bahrain in mid-February 2011. The Saudi regime and the United Arab Emirates sent security and military forces to the country upon a request from Manama to help the Bahraini government quash the peaceful protests.

Dozens of people have been killed in the crackdown, and the security forces have arrested hundreds including doctors and nurses. …source

“Given the fact that the government is effectively an outgrowth of the ruling family in Bahrain, any dialogue without their involvement will be meaningless fiddling around the edges.”

Bahrain talks off to shaky start
BBC – 5 February, 2013

Wefaq leader Sheikh Ali Salman leads protest march Jan 2013 The national dialogue aims at ending two years of protest and unrest in Bahrain

Talks aimed at resolving political unrest in the Gulf island kingdom of Bahrain look set to get off to an uncertain start.

The six opposition societies have agreed to meet with other groups on Sunday in a bid to end nearly two years of unrest.

The country’s justice minister has said he will serve as a moderator and government representative.

But the main opposition party al-Wefaq has already voiced grave doubts about a positive outcome.

Khalil al-Marzook, a senior member of the party told the BBC the ruling family was risking “dragging the country into an ambush of more sectarianism”.

Bahrain has a Shia Muslim majority population ruled by a Sunni royal family. Shia have long complained of marginalization and discrimination.

Mr Marzook added: “They (the royal family) have the mindset of playing games rather than solving problems. It is time wasting and it is not in the interests of the country.”
Frustration

Part of the opposition’s frustration has to do with the refusal of the government to enter directly into negotiations aimed at ending an impasse that has severely damaged the economy and polarized the country.

In response to a question from the BBC about what role the government would play, a spokesperson replied: “Representatives of the government’s ministries will be present at the dialogue to oversee and make suggestions if needed, but will not be there to take part in the dialogue itself.”

But that statement and others like it have left observers, the opposition and even some government insiders scratching their heads.

Kristian Coates-Ulrichsen is an expert on Gulf politics and a research fellow at the London School of Economics. He believes that unless the government sits down and is prepared to work with the opposition on moving toward compromise, the talks will fail.
Crown Prince Salman al-Khalifa (30 January 2013) The opposition has called for Crown Prince Salman to join talks aimed at ending nearly two years of unrest

“Given the fact that the government is effectively an outgrowth of the ruling family in Bahrain, any dialogue without their involvement will be meaningless fiddling around the edges.”

Reformers and hardliners

The leader of al-Wefaq, Sheikh Ali Salman had called for the Bahraini Crown Prince Salman al-Khalifa to attend the talks but that is not likely to happen.

The crown prince is seen as a reformist in a court divided on how to respond to opposition demands.

Hardliners – centred around the appointed Prime Minister Sheikh Khalifa bin Salman al-Khalifa, who has been in his post since 1971 – are said to be opposed to the dialogue.

They fear that any concessions will only serve to encourage more demands from opposition leaders they deeply distrust.

On Wednesday against a backdrop of mutual suspicion, Sheik Salman flys to Moscow at the invitation of the Russian foreign ministry in a bid to bring pressure to bear on the ruling family.

“We are encouraging the international community to urge the al Khalifas to bring credibility, not more manoeuvres to the dialogue process,” Mr Marzook told the BBC.

The move, which caught some observers by surprise, may be part of a wider Russian initiative to improve an image that has been damaged by its stand on the Syria crisis.

“We’ve been asking for a meeting [with Russian officials] since July of last year,” Mr Marzook said, “but we just got the invitation on Sunday.”

This was the same day the Bahraini justice minister offered to renew a dialogue with the opposition. …source

Malina Suliman: The Graffiti Artist Waking Up Afghanistan
Reuters – Al Arabiya

Charred bodies lie scattered against blood-stained walls and debris covers the ground. The unusual thing in this gruesome scene is that the “blood” is red paint, and part of an art installation.

It’s a work by 23-year-old Afghan artist Malina Suliman. She risks her life, Suliman says, sometimes working by flashlight after dark, to create art in southern Kandahar province, still one of the most dangerous areas in the country.

Her pieces, which range from conceptual art to paintings and sculpture, are bold representations of the problems facing her generation.

“Many people had never seen an art installation,” Suliman said of “War and Chaos,” her exhibit last year, which depicts the aftermath of a suicide bombing, a not uncommon event in Kandahar.

“Some were offended and others were hurt because they’d experienced it before.”

Her pieces earned her an invitation last year to visit the Kabul palace of President Hamid Karzai, who is also from Kandahar, where she showed him her art.

Suliman’s work is now making waves in the Afghan capital, where she lived as a child after fleeing the violence of her native province. She had two Kabul exhibitions in December, a highlight of which was a sculpture of a woman in baggy clothing with a noose tied around her neck.
…more

…more ART HERE

The Children Killed by America’s Drones. “Crimes Against Humanity” committed by Barack H. Obama.
By Michel Chossudovsky – Global Research – 26 January, 2013

This is a list of names of innocent children killed by America’s drones

But behind each name there is the face of a child with a family history in a village in a far away country, with a mom and a dad, with brothers and sisters and friends.

Among the list, are infants of 1, 2, 3 and 4 years old.

In some cases brothers and sisters of an entire family are killed.

Four sisters of the Ali Mohammed Nasser family in Yemen were killed. Afrah was 9 years old when she and her three younger sisters Zayda (7 years old) , Hoda (5 years old) and Sheika (4 years old) were struck by an American drone.

Ibrahim, a 13 year old boy of the Abdullah Mokbel Salem Louqye family in Yemen was struck by a US drone, together with his younger brother Asmaa (9 years old) and two younger sisters, Salma (4 years old) and Fatima (3 years old)

These children are innocent. They are not different from our own children.

Their lives were taken away at a very young age as part of a military agenda, which claims to be combating “international terrorism”

These drone attacks are extremely precise. We are not dealing with “collateral damage”.

Drone operators have the ability of viewing from a computer screen their targets well in advance of a strike.

A family home is referred to as a “structure” or a “building” rather than a house. When they target a home with family members, they kill children. And they know that in advance of the drone strike:

“Bryant saw a flash on the screen: the explosion. Parts of the building collapsed. The child had disappeared. Bryant had a sick feeling in his stomach.

“Did we just kill a kid?” he asked the man sitting next to him.

“Yeah, I guess that was a kid,” the pilot replied.

“Was that a kid?” they wrote into a chat window on the monitor.” (The Woes of an American Drone Operator, Spiegel.de, December 14, 2012)

These children were killed on the orders of the US President and Commander in Chief Barack H. Obama.

The commander in chief sets the military agenda and authorizes these killings to proceed.

The killings were quite deliberate. They are categorized as “crimes against humanity” under international law.

Those who ordered these drone killings, including the president of the United States, are war criminals under international law and must be indicted and prosecuted

It should be noted that the drone attacks on civilians have increased dramatically during the Obama presidency:

…source

Saudi Arabia: 36 Days in Jail for Human Rights Sign
31 January, 2013 – FARS

TEHRAN (FNA)- Saudi Arabia’s harsh crackdown on demonstrations led many to start experimenting with new methods for showing dissent.

A public hunger strike was one example. In a series of tweets, Saudi Twitter user Mohammad al-Olayan told his own story of writing a human rights sign, namely “No to arbitrary detainment,” on his car, Global voices reported.

“On Sunday December 16th, I was arrested by emergency forces on my way back from work because of a “No to arbitrary detainment” sign on my car’s rear glass. I was transferred to al-Manar police (station) after my car had been photographed,” al-Olayan said on Twitter.

“A policeman started the interrogation and I denied responsibility. I told them that I had found the writing at dawn when I was about to leave to work and I couldn’t remove it because the ink was irremovable. I affirmed my statements with a fingerprint and I asked the policeman to allow me to leave even if this requires a third person since I did not commit any crime and did not violate any law, but he refused and told me that I am under detainment for interrogation.

“Then a policeman asked me to hand my mobile phone and my keys and took me to a very, very crowded communal cell with inhumane conditions. The policemen told me (to stop talking about humanity and get in,) but I refused to do so. He then took me to a solitary confinement cell, but it was leaking and full of dirt so I refused to get in so he took me to a hallway and said that no place left but this one I told him that this was a better place, so he tied me to an iron door then they took me to the communal cell at dawn (…)”

Al-Olayan continued by reporting further interrogation in which he was asked whether he had attended the public trial of two of Saudi Political and Civil Rights Association’s (ACPRA) co-founders. ACPRA found out about his arrest so they asked a volunteer lawyer to help him.

Al-Olayan was finally sent to court and he continued to deny responsibility. The judge issued an order to release him, after 36 days, on the condition of attending further sessions if he was ever called. …source

Bahrain: the regime must halt the persistent security repression to the peaceful demonstrations
ANHRI – 2 February, 2013

The Arabic Network for Human Rights Information (ANHRI), denounces today the use of the excessive force in dealing with the peaceful demonstrations that took place in several places in Bahrain to call for political and social reforms in the country and to solidarity with the detainees.

Bahrain security forces used the tear gas bombs and shut gun to deal with the peaceful demonstrations which took place in Friday February 1, to call for political reformations in addition to assure the continuation of the popular movement and persistence on the demands of the Bahrain revolution which will have its third anniversary after days. The security forces repressed the demonstrations which took place in Akr, Kranah, Gamarah, Sadd and Gad Hafs, which resulted in several injuries among the demonstrators and the news reported regarding the arrest of demonstrators.

The opposition forces announced series of protesting in conjunction with the second anniversary ofthe Bahraini uprising on February 14, 2011. The events include people’s demonstrations, celeberations and marches in differnet areas which include “Manama” which entitled “calls for the revolution”, which will start in the first of February 2013 until 16 February, it also included 48 of revolutionary events, marches and opposition movements to assure the presistence of the revolution in Bahrain and call for the democractic transformation such as the masses marches, which entitled differnetly, and people meetings, protests and marches in the heart of Manama.

ANHRI said that “the persistence of using excessive violence by the authorities to address the peaceful demonstrations of the people and prosecuting the activists, oppositions and harassing them, are attempts from the regime to infanticide the popular movement which calls for freedom and democracy”.

ANHRI said that “the persistence of the repressive policies of the regime, will end any attempt to negotiate and discussion between the opposition and the regime”.

ANHRI calls on Bahrain to respect the freedom of expression and peaceful demonstration which are legitimate to the individuals and citizens and garunteed by all the international treaties and charters. …source

Bahrain’s 2-year-old uprising at crossroads: Offers to talk and calls for greater rebellion
By Associated Press – 4 February, 2013 – Washington Post

MANAMA, Bahrain — Young men wearing masks lurk in the darkened alcoves of the old market in Bahrain’s capital. “To victory,” they whisper as they hand out pamphlets calling for greater rebellion after two years of nonstop unrest in the Gulf kingdom.

In another part of the city, leaders of established Shiite opposition groups study their next moves. One option is to open talks with the Sunni monarchy as a possible soft landing from the Arab Spring’s longest-running uprising against a sitting power.

The two faces of Bahrain’s tumult have never been clearer as the struggles in the strategic island — home to the U.S. Navy’s 5th Fleet— mark their second year next week.

The old guard Shiite political factions appear worn down by the ceaseless tensions and seem increasingly open to some kind of face-saving compromise with Bahrain’s Sunni leadership. Such negotiations are endorsed by Washington and other Western allies of Bahrain’s ruling dynasty.

On Monday, Bahrain’s justice minister, Khaled bin Ali Al Khalifa, said preliminary political talks are scheduled to begin Feb. 10 — just days before the second anniversary of the crisis. The official Bahrain News Agency called it an important step toward “national consensus.”

But the clashes and bloodshed also have elevated another voice from Bahrain’s streets: A shadowy network of youth groups and hard-line Shiites — knitted together by social media — that have coalesced around an angry axis. Calls to bring down the monarchy are now staples in the near daily skirmishes with security forces.

“No to dialogue! No to surrender!” several hundred protesters chanted during a recent confrontation between demonstrators with firebombs and riot police responding with tear gas and stun grenades.

It might seem like a worrisome groundswell for Bahrain’s Sunni rulers, who have managed to keep a close grip on power for decades under what critics call a two-tier system. The majority Shiites, about 70 percent of the population, claim they are relegated to the lower rungs with limited say in the country’s affairs.

Bahrain’s uprising seeks to tilt the scales toward the Shiites. But divides within the Shiite population — whether to battle harder or open talks — could end up giving Bahrain’s rulers more breathing space. If the main Shiite factions can be brought into negotiations, the opposition left on the streets would continue as an annoyance to the monarchy but less of a potential threat to their power.

“The confrontational elements in Bahrain — those who have effectively rejected dialogue as pointless — are certainty taking more charge of the tone on the streets,” said Toby Jones, an expert on Bahraini affairs at Rutgers University. “It invites a type of comparison to the 50s and 60s civil rights movement when activists had to be provocative enough to provoke police backlash and brutality and the cycle goes on.”

It’s not hard to lose track of little Bahrain on the greater Arab Spring stage.

Bahrain’s two-year death toll of more than 55 was exceeded in a single day in Syria. There is no clear center of gravity in Bahrain’s uprising like Egypt’s Tahrir Square. Bahrain’s protest hub of Pearl Square was cleared by police raids in the early weeks of the unrest and now is ringed round-the-clock by security forces, razor wire and concrete barricades. …more

Four prisoners began a dry hunger strike last week to protest the torture and human rights abuses that they have suffered at the hands of the authorities during their politically motivated detention. But it is not just these four that suffer, indeed torture is a well-accepted practice in the Gulf kingdom to the extent that a police officer with years of torture allegations against him was just promoted by the King to a high government post. The poor state of prison conditions in general is explored in a BCHR report released this week based on interviews with prisoners and their families.

Several other reports were released this week, including from Bahrain Watch, Human Rights Watch, the Bahrain Youth Society for Human Rights, which explore the failure of the authorities to work towards reforms.

…more