Bethan Tichborne to appeal against public order conviction for telling PM he had ‘blood on his hands’ during anti-cuts protest

Activist ‘shocked’ at conviction for yelling at David Cameron
Mark Townsend and Tracy McVeigh – guardian.co.uk – 16 March 2013

A woman has described her shock after being found guilty of a public order offence for telling David Cameron he had “blood on his hands”.

Bethan Tichborne, 28, said initially she assumed her court summons was a bureaucratic error after she was arrested for protesting against cuts to disability benefits. But she was told by a district judge that her comments must have hugely insulted the prime minister.

Cameron was switching on the Christmas lights in his Witney constituency in Oxfordshire, in December, when Tichborne tried to climb a barrier with her homemade placard. The one-woman protest, she claims, was against cuts leading to the deaths of people with disabilities. She believes her conviction at Oxford magistrates court last week was politically motivated.

District Judge Tim Pattinson told her: “It is difficult to think of a clearer example of disorderly behaviour than to climb or attempt to climb a barrier at a highly security-sensitive public occasion.”

Judge Pattinson praised Tichborne’s previous good character but said her comments that Cameron “had blood on his hands” could “hardly be more insulting to anyone, whether a politician or not”.

The 28-year-old was convicted of using threatening words or behaviour to cause harassment, alarm or distress.

Tichborne, a teaching assistant who works with disabled children, said that she now intends to appeal against the conviction. “My faith in the court system is a bit shaky but on the other hand I feel I’ve got to hold them to account.”

She added: “I am really quite shocked and quite sad … I had a placard that said Cameron has got blood on his hands and shouted disabled people are dying because of Cameron’s policies.

“The judge said stuff in his verdict that made it very clear it was political, like he couldn’t think of anything more insulting or offensive.”

She also alleged police beat her up moments after she tried to scale the barrier separating Cameron from the crowd. …more

Bypassing Saudi human rights in the name of oil and jobs
25 March, 2013 – Jon Snow – 4News

Charles and Camilla are safely home from Saudi Arabia and assorted Gulf states.

They were in Saudi at a somewhat bumpy moment. The royal couple never got closer than a thousand miles from the “public killing grounds”, as they are somewhat candidly described.

Had they got a lot closer, they might have seen the blood drying from the execution of seven alleged robbers.

I use the word “alleged” because the UN and various human rights groups, including Human Rights Watch’s Middle East section, have argued that the trials of the men – some of whom were juveniles – conducted under sharia law, were deeply flawed.

The suspects were charged with being part of a gang of thieves in the Saudi town of Abha. There was no evidence that any of the accused had killed or injured anyone.

Actually there may well have been rather less blood in the aftermath of the killings than usual. The death sentences were carried out, for the first time, by firing squad. The kingdom has run out of execution swordsmen, so it is no longer possible to disconnect the accused’s head from his or her body. It was a practice which led to a gushing of much blood from the severed neck.

In the same period, two of Saudi Arabia’s most prominent advocates of non violent reform – Mohammed Fahd al-Quatami and Abdullah al-Hamed – were jailed for 10 years apiece.

Charles and Camilla were not alone in bypassing human rights as a discussion point with their hosts. US Secretary of State John Kerry and America’s Attorney General Eric Holder were both in Saudi in recent days. They too decided not to raise human rights. I hate to use the phrase, but the per capita execution rate in Saudi is higher than in any other country on earth.

I have blogged before on the issue of Saudi-financed warfare. I have yet to be contradicted on the claim that there is not a British military boot in overt or covert action anywhere in the world, where the enemy is not in some way financed by Saudi interests.

Can it really be British jobs and a British thirst for oil that neutralise the reality that this just may be a state that it is perhaps unwise to retain as a ‘most favoured nation?’

Charles and Camilla were not alone in bypassing the matter. …source

British Ambassador asserts that those who perpetrate blasts are terrorists and he describes Human Rights Watch recent allegations as high-handed and arrogant
25 March, 2013 – BNA

Manama: March 25—(BNA)— The British Ambassador in the Kingdom of Bahrain, Mr. Iain Lindsay, described as terrorists those responsible for explosion acts in Bahrain and urged political and religious factions to denounce violence, asserting that there are clues that those who stand behind acts of violence receive Iran’s support and backing.

Ambassador Mr. Lindsay criticized Human Rights Watch Organization for its alleging that Bahrain has not achieved any progress in its promises of accomplishing reforms; and he described the Organization as high-handed and arrogant.

The UK Ambassador in an exclusive interview published by the Gulf Daily News (GDN) today said that the ongoing National Dialogue is the only way to end the political stalemate which dates to more than two years. However, he added that the United Kingdom is concerned towards the support provided by Iran to those involved in acts of violence. He also added that the British Government explicitly voiced its concernment towards increasing evidences of Iran’s shifting its position from exploiting Bahrain’s problems for propaganda purposes to its provision of support to persons who commit acts of violence.

Ambassador Mr. Iain Lindsay did not mention the details of such evidences or the type of support provided by Iran; however, he said that an investigation conducted by the Committee on Foreign Relations in the British Parliament regarding relations with Bahrain gleaned these evidences.

Mr. Ian Lindsay emphasized that “we condemn Iran’s meddling in Bahrain’s internal affairs and in the affairs of any other country; and, we firmly believe that Bahrain can make progress if it is given the chance and if Bahrainis are given the chance to solve their own problems by themselves.

The British Ambassador to the Kingdom of Bahrain accentuated that the National Consensus Dialogue (NCD) which has continued for more than one month now has the support of the international community. The Ambassador said that the dialogue is still in its early days and that the United Kingdom had had a similar experience when it sought to reach an agreement in Northern Ireland. We know from our experience in Britain and Northern Ireland that the process of dialogue could take a long time and may meet with good days or other bad days and that patience and persistence are a must, Mr. Iain Lindsay explained. …more

Iran ‘backing street violence in Bahrain’
25 March, 2013 – Robert Smith – Trade Arabia

Bahrain’s political, religious and community leaders are being urged to condemn violence on the streets, with the UK citing increasing evidence that those behind it were receiving support from Iran.

British Ambassador to Bahrain Iain Lindsay labelled those behind a spate of bombings as “terrorists” and called on all groups to denounce such acts in an exclusive interview with our sister publication, the Gulf Daily News.

He said the ongoing National Dialogue was the only way to end a political stalemate that stretches back more than two years, but added the UK was concerned about Iranian support for those engaged in acts of violence.

“The British government has said publicly that we are concerned by the fact that we see increasing evidence of Iran moving from exploiting Bahrain’s problems for propaganda purposes to providing support to people here who are bent on violence,” he said.

Lindsay declined to elaborate on the evidence or the type of support Iran was providing, but said an inquiry by the UK Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee (FAC) into Britain’s relations with Bahrain had been made aware.

“We condemn Iran’s meddling here and indeed elsewhere and we firmly believe that Bahrain will make progress if Bahrain is given a chance and Bahrainis are given a chance themselves to resolve their problems,” he said.

A National Dialogue that brings together four key factions to find solutions to Bahrain’s current problems, which date back to anti-government protests in February 2011, has been underway for more than a month.

Critics have questioned the value of the process with participants struggling to even agree an agenda for the talks, but the ambassador said they should take comfort in the fact that the process had the support of the international community.

He added it was still “early days” and the UK had a similar experience as it sought to reach an agreement on Northern Ireland.

“We know from our own experience in the UK and Northern Ireland that this sort of process can take a long time,” he said. …more

Cabinet: Security of Bahrain and Saudi Arabia Are Inextricably Linked
24 MArch, 2013 – BNA

Manama, March 24 (BNA)—The Cabinet, Chaired today by His Royal Highness Prime Minister Prince Khalifa bin Salman Al Khalifa, emphasized that the security of Bahrain and Saudi Arabia are inextricably linked due to the solid ties and common destiny binding both countries.

The ministerial council voiced Bahrain’s support to all measures taken by Saudi Arabia to maintain its security and stability, lauding the competence of the Saudi security bodies in uncovering the espionage network working for a foreign country.

The council also reiterated thanks and gratitude to Saudi Arabia for its political and economic support to Bahrain.
…source

The Dirt Done Iran by the House of Saud
21 March, 2013 – Finian Cunningham – Pacific Free Press

Saudi claims of “busting a spy ring” involving Iranian and Lebanese nationals this week smell of yet more dirty tricks by the creaky House of Saud.

But the repeated formula for attempting to smear Iran used by the Saudis and their Western and Israeli partners is in danger of becoming a parody.

Saudi authorities detained 18 individuals across the kingdom this week, who, it is claimed, were working for a “foreign state” in a plot to target vital installations.

“Sixteen Saudis, an Iranian and a Lebanese were arrested in coordinated and simultaneous operations in four regions of the kingdom,” including the capital Riyadh and the holy city of Mecca, the Saudi interior ministry said in a statement.

Wow. Do you feel the bombast in those words “coordinated and simultaneous operations”?

The suspects “gathered information on vital installations which they provided to the country” they had been working for, added the Saudi intelligence experts.

Iran was not mentioned specifically, but the inclusion of an as-yet unnamed Iranian national is something of a finger of accusation that tries to be subtle, but is, in fact, a clumsy attempt to fabricate.

The Lebanon connection can also be seen as a Saudi bid to implicate Hezbollah. That combination is a gauche effort to appear neat, from the Saudi point of view, to resonate with the hoary Western stereotype of Iran and its alleged sponsorship of international terrorism.

The purported busting of an alleged Iranian-led spy ring in Saudi Arabia makes for good headlines in the supine Western media. But between the headlines is the unmistakable stench of another dirty tricks operation, aimed at smearing Iran and covering up the reality of Saudi repression and state-sponsored terrorism across the Middle East.

Scarcely mentioned in the Western media coverage is that the arrests also involved Saudi nationals from among its Shia population in the country’s Eastern Province. This hard-pressed minority within Saudi Arabia has been holding peaceful protests for political freedoms for the best part of two years, closely aligned with their confessional brothers and sisters in nearby Bahrain. In both Bahrain and Saudi’s oil-rich Eastern Province, the House of Saud has sent its shock troops in to try to crush the movement for democracy with brutal, unremitting repression.

Since Saudi forces entered Bahrain in March 2011, up to 100 unarmed civilians have been killed and thousands more mutilated or imprisoned for daring to demand the right to democratic government. Likewise in Saudi Arabia, hundreds have been arrested and thrown into unknown dungeons by the same system of monarchial tyranny that the Western governments have backed to the hilt.

What better way to distract from this reality of crushing democracy than to cook up a tall story about a foreign spy ring – and an Iranian spy ring at that.

That relocates the problem from one of long-overdue political rights among the population of Bahrain and Saudi Arabia to one of foreign subversion. Irony upon irony, it also diverts from the fact that Saudi Arabia has over the same period been backing terrorists in Syria causing murder and mayhem for the criminal Western objective of regime change.

The latest claims by the Saudi authorities bear the usual hallmarks of a psyops smear. Details are all-too vacant and the allegations rely on innuendo and sensationalism. Observers familiar with Bahrain will recognize the tired old pattern of “foreign subversion”. Arrests, accusations, momentary headlines, bombastic claims of probes to “reveal the foreign plotters”… followed, always, by scant substance of anything. Political theatrics that have become ridiculous parody.

Recall the “sensational plot” that the Saudis and the Americans made media song and dance of when they accused Iran of trying to assassinate the Saudi ambassador in Washington at the end of 2011.

Whatever happened to the follow-up substance to that risible ruse? Or the two hapless Iranians who allegedly were planning an all-out bombing blitz on Israeli properties in Kenya in May 2012?

Then there were similar claims by Israeli intelligence of Iranian international terror plots in Georgia, Thailand, India, Azerbaijan and Bulgaria, also last year.

Despite copious coverage in the Western media of these threadbare tales, none of these “sensational plots” have amounted to follow-up prosecutions, let alone proof of official Iranian involvement. …more

Major medical ethics conference is cancelled in the troubled kingdom

Bahrain hit by doctors’ desertion
Robert Fisk – 24 March, 2013 – Pacific Free Press

Bahrain’s already tarnished reputation for human rights will receive a body blow today with the cancellation of a major conference on medical ethics in the tiny island monarchy, and the resignation of the Irish director of Bahrain’s principal medical school.

At least 20 civilians were killed by government forces – opposition leaders say the figures is four times as great – in the failed uprising by the majority Shia Muslim community against the minority Sunni-led government of King Hamad bin Isa al-Khalifa two years ago. Security forces stormed hospitals in the kingdom and tortured patients in medical care, tearing apart the hitherto non-sectarian health service. The Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland (RCSI) – which trained many of the doctors later arrested by the regime – was bitterly criticised after the violence for not condemning government brutality.

But Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) will today announce its decision to cancel next month’s international meeting – in which medical and human rights experts were to speak for two days on “medical ethics and dilemmas in situations of political discord or violence” – while Professor Tom Collins, president of the Medical University of Bahrain, will tell his 1,100 students and 240 staff at lunchtime that he is resigning in protest at the cancellation. The university is run by the RCSI and was co-sponsor of the conference with MSF.

At least 40 Bahraini doctors, many of them attached to the RCSI medical university on the island, were arrested and charged after the mini-uprising of 2011 – four are still in prison – although Professor Collins has pleaded for their release. A prestigious roster of speakers was to have included Professor Patrick Roe, the president of RCSI, a consultant general surgeon at Beaumont Hospital in Dublin, Anastasia Crickley of the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, and Baroness Nuala O’Loan, Northern Ireland’s first – and highly controversial – police ombudsman from 2000 to 2007. Many attribute Catholic trust in the new Police Service of Northern Ireland to the work of Lady O’Loan. The organisers were to show a film, Access to the Danger Zone, on MSF doctors in Afghanistan and other wars, narrated by Daniel Day-Lewis …more

Kerry: Iraq helping Syria’s Assad by allowing arms flow
By Anne Gearan – 24 March, 2013 – Washington Post

BAGHDAD — Iraq is helping to shore up the besieged regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad by allowing Iranian arms and fighters to cross into Syria from Iraq, Secretary of State John F. Kerry charged Sunday.

During an unannounced trip to Baghdad, Kerry lobbied Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki for greater scrutiny of flights that cross Iraq. He appeared to make little headway with Maliki, a Shiite with long-standing ties to Iran and little inclination to do U.S. bidding 10 years after the American invasion that toppled dictator Saddam Hussein.

Maliki is a prickly leader whose relations with U.S. officials have grown more strained since the departure of American forces and the re-emergence of widespread sectarian violence in Iraq. Maliki’s consolidation of power worries his U.S. backers. His dealings with Shiite Iran worry them more.

“Iraq’s success will take enormous cooperation,” Kerry said. “It’ll take dialogue, and it’ll take courage. It’ll require the resolve to defend the sovereignty of the country and its airspace. . . .

“We all want to see Iraq succeed. There’s such an enormous investment of our treasure, our people and our money in this initiative.”

The Obama administration has been unable to persuade Iraq to block overflights from Iran or even to perform regular inspections.

“We had a very spirited discussion,” Kerry said after the meeting with Maliki, “and I made it very clear to the prime minister that the overflights from Iran are, in fact, helping to sustain President Assad and his regime.”

Kerry began the session with Maliki by joking that he had been assured that the Iraqi leader would “do everything that I say.” Maliki had a good-natured reply: “We won’t do it,” he said through an interpreter. Both men smiled.

Iraq says Iranian flights over its territory carry only humanitarian supplies for the civil war in next-door Syria, and the only two known inspections of Iranian aircraft found just those supplies.

The United States says the sheer volume of flights and overland vehicle traffic to Syria through Iraq points to regular arms shipments. A senior U.S. official traveling with Kerry said there are flights nearly every day. The official would not say how the United States is certain that the planes are carrying weapons for Assad, an Iranian ally, but repeatedly asserted that is the case. …more

The Iraq War: A resolute rebuttal
By Cameron Quinn – 25 March, 2013 – The Oxford Student

This piece was written in response to Harry Gillow’s defence of the Iraq War, also written for OxStu, which can be found here.

Harry Gillow is brave, if nothing else – it takes guts to try to defend the indefensible. But guts don’t guarantee a solid argument, and Mr Gillow’s “tentative defence” of the Iraq War, relying as it does on factual inaccuracies and hubristic assumptions, simply fails to convince.

Mr Gillow begins his article with a preamble lamenting the naïveté of US and British war planners for not understanding “the dangers of military adventures,” yet he remonstrates President Obama for his risky “isolationist” foreign policy. Obama’s “isolationism” apparently encompasses his vast expansion of Bush’s drone killing programme, his cyber-attacks against Iranian nuclear sites (an “act of war” according to the Pentagon), his military build-up in the Pacific, American involvement in Libya and Mali, and plans for military strikes in Syria and Iran.

It isn’t until halfway into his “defence” that Mr Gillow arrives at his arguments for why the Iraq war wasn’t “a disaster”. He informs us that Iraq “is now one of the few functioning democracies in the Middle East.” This will be news to Iraqis. Corruption in the Iraqi government is rife. Torture, rape and executions are practically everyday occurrences. US-installed Prime Minister Maliki, has recently taken steps to consolidate his power, in actions that have been compared with those of Saddam during the 1990s.
Oil: Never far from the centre of the problem

Oil: Never far from the centre of the issue

Another supposed bright spot in post-occupation Iraq is that “[o]il production, the lifeline of its economy, is up one million barrels per year from 2003 levels”. This is a bright spot indeed for the multinational corporations that bought the rights to exploit Iraq’s oil fields, a major objective of the war. The revenues from Iraq’s oil reserves, the largest in the world, will now flow into the pockets of international investors, though not into programmes and services that might improve the lives of ordinary Iraqis.

No matter. The “greatest vindication of the Iraq War,” which “removes the most powerful argument against the invasion” is to be found elsewhere, in (favourably) comparing the US-led invasion and occupation of the country with the tragic bloodletting that has accompanied many of the popular uprisings of the Arab Spring. “[T]hat Iraq would have seen a similar eruption into sectarian violence is almost certain,” Mr Gillow tells us. That is, thanks to the invasion, Iraq did not see such an eruption: “[T]he presence of coalition troops was clearly the only thing preventing a collapse into full-scale anarchy”.

Of course, as anybody familiar with the most basic facts of the Iraq war will know, the majority of the violence in the country after 2006 occurred not between coalition troops and Iraqi insurgents, but between Sunni and Shi’a militia groups in what US intelligence officials – and Mr Gillow himself in his second paragraph – have called a sectarian “civil war”. In other words, three years into the US occupation, Iraq erupted in sectarian violence – violence that caused thousands of Iraqi deaths and displacements, and has continued at varying levels of intensity until today. What’s more, overwhelming evidence shows that top US military officials directly fomented sectarian tensions by organising, training, and commanding a network of brutal Salvadoran-style Shi’a torture squads as early as 2004 to combat a mostly Sunni insurgency.

It is worth noting that under Saddam’s secular dictatorship, sectarian divisions did not play a significant role in Iraqi life: Iraqis were often unaware of and indifferent to their neighbours’ or even their family members’ religious loyalties. Following the invasion, however, these once-ignored Sunni-Shi’a differences have become the major fault-lines in Iraqi society and politics, to the point that the country may one day be torn into three separate states, along ethno-sectarian lines.

It would not be overstating the case, then, to say that the US invasion of Iraq in fact stoked the once-dormant sectarian tensions in the region that have since exploded following the Arab Spring uprisings. We could phrase it this way: the presence of coalition troops was clearly the only thing ensuring a collapse into full-scale anarchy.

In his conclusion, Mr Gillow warns foreign policy elites against the “the temptation to ignore the internal squabbles of the Islamic [sic] states,” lest they be “remembered for allowing the disintegration of society across an entire region”. As we have seen, however, this is precisely what Western governments will be remembered for in Iraq. The disintegration of Iraqi society and of the Middle Eastern region was precipitated not by Western “isolationism,” but by military interventions promising stability and democracy. …more

President Obama’s Second Term: Selling Death and Buying Assassins In the Middle East, North Africa and South Asia
24 March, 2013 – James Petras – thepeoplevoice.org

Introduction

As President Obama enters his second term with a new Cabinet, the foreign policy legacy of the past four years weighs heavily on their strategic decisions and their empire-building efforts. Central to the analysis of the next period is an evaluation of the past policies especially in regions where Washington expended its greatest financial and military resources, namely the Middle East, South Asia and North Africa.

We will proceed by examining the accomplishments and failures of the Obama-Clinton regime. We will then turn to the ongoing policy efforts to sustain the empire-building project. We will take account of the constraints and opportunities, which define the parameters resulting from imperial military ambitions, Israeli-Zionist influence in shaping policy and the ongoing anti-imperialist struggles. We will conclude by examining likely polices and outcomes resulting from current strategies.

The Clinton-Obama Imperial Legacy: The Accomplishments

The greatest success of the Obama-Clinton (OC) imperial legacy was the virtual elimination of organized domestic anti-war dissent, the demise of the peace movement and the co-optation of virtually the entire ‘progressive’ leadership in the US – while multiplying the number of proxy wars, overt and covert military operations and ‘defense’ spending. As a result, the entire political spectrum moved further to the right toward greater militarization abroad and increased police-state measures at home.

Facing mass revolts and the overthrow of long-standing client regimes in Egypt, Tunisia and Yemen, the Obama-Clinton (OC) Administration moved rapidly to reconfigure new client regimes while preserving the state apparatus – the military, intelligence, police, judicial and civilian bureaucracy. The empire dumped incumbent regimes in order to save the repressive state, the key guarantor of US strategic interests. Washington reminded its client rulers that ‘There are no permanent alliances, there are only permanent imperial interests’. Washington successfully engineered a political pact between conservative Islamist leaders and parties and the old military elite. The new political blocs in Egypt upheld Israeli annexation of Palestine, the brutal blockade of Gaza and the neo-liberal economic order. Washington repeated the ‘reshuffle of clients’ in Yemen and Tunisia. The OC intervention temporarily aborted the pro-democracy, anti-Zionist and anti-corruption popular revolt. The OC policies secured a temporary respite, but the subsequent effort by Egypt to secure an IMF loan has led to a stalemate amid deteriorating economic conditions and rising political protest. The successful imposition of new client regimes amenable to US hegemony in Egypt, Tunisia and Yemen, in the face of popular revolts, marked the beginning of a series of favorable political-military outcomes in the region for the OC regime.

Facing Israeli annexation of ever-widening swaths of Palestinian land and the end of any pretense of ‘peace negotiations’, Washington continued to provide Israel with massive military assistance, modern weapons systems and unconditional political support in the UN. By submitting to Israel the OC regime succeeded in retaining the political support of the domestic Zionist power configuration (ZPC). The OC regime’s economic handouts supported the puppet Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) as it policed the West Bank for Israel. Despite losing the vote to seat the Palestinians as a non-voting member in the UN, Washington succeeded in blocking full membership. The OC regime succeeded in fulfilling its role as Israel’s handmaiden, despite opposition from the vast majority of UN members.

The OC regime succeeded in tightening sanctions on Iran, by securing Russian, Chinese and Arab League support, without provoking a potentially destructive war. The US sanction policy toward Iran is largely designed and implemented by key Zionist appointees in the Treasury (formerly Stuart Levy, now David Cohen) and in Congress, by legislators bought and directed by the powerful America-Israel Political Affairs Committee (AIPAC).

The US, under Obama-Clinton, destroyed the independent nationalist Gadhafi government via a joint air war with the EU and tried to set up a client regime. In turn, Libya became a key recruiting ground for violent Islamist mercenaries invading Syria and weapons depot supplying Islamist terrorists. The OC regime’s military success in Libya was part of a general strategy to accelerate the expansion of US and European military operations in Africa. This includes setting up drone bases and promoting African mercenary armies from Uganda, Kenya, and Ethiopia to expand imperial control in Somalia, Mali and elsewhere.

In the Gulf region the US succeeded in propping up the autocratic Bahrain monarchy, as it killed and jailed opponents and outlawed the mass pro-democracy social movement among its oppressed Shi’a majority population. The OC regime successfully secured Gulf state financing for the Libyan and Syrian wars.

In Iraq, the US has succeeded in dividing the devastated nation into fragments of warring fiefdoms, Shi’a, Sunni, Kurd and subsets of each. It succeeded in destroying a once modern and secular society, an advanced economy and independent nationalist regime. Initially the OC regime hoped to establish a client outpost in Iraq from which to secure Washington’s wealthy petro-clients in the Gulf, especially among the patrimonial dictatorships in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait and United Arab Emirates. …more

While ensuring to perform a simple exercise that was planned long time ago, Moscow has responded to the announcing from Paris and London to send weapons to Syria, by sending a naval fleet on site. Any Franco-British intervention, direct or indirect, would lead to an escalation and confrontation with Russia.

The American plan of the last minute
By Ghaleb Kandil – 25 March, 2013 – Voltairenet.org

The painful truth that the secretary of state John Kerry finally accepted is that any solution in Syria is a defeat for the United States, the West, the petrodollars kings and Turkey. Also, Washington and his allies try to circumvent this solution by announcing their intention to arm the terrorist gangs and threatening to widen the battlefield before sitting down at the negotiating table in a Russian-American summit which date will be soon, according to diplomats.

At the request of Kerry, the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of France and Britain, Laurent Fabius and William Hague, called for arming rebels in Syria. Then Prime Minister of Her Majesty, David Cameron, has denied these intentions, while President François Hollande almost stammered at the meeting of the European Union. Knowing that weapons and communications equipment provided by the West are already for months in the hands of terrorists, who are unable to make significant progress on the ground, despite the support of U.S, Western and Arab instructors, in Lebanon, Jordan and Iraq.

After a severe political warning issued by Russia, information was conveyed that promises to provide new weapons designed primarily to boost the morale of armed gangs with the approach of the Russian-American negotiations. Till the last minute, Americans want to use the capacity and energy of those they invented, trained, armed and financed. Is not that the reason they were created?

A dramatic political development took place last week in Syria, when Russia has launched a stern warning to the address of American who maneuver and delay on the principles Geneva agreement. The Franco-British announcement about sending arms to the rebels was an opportunity for Moscow to underline that this decision constitutes a violation of international law. Sergei Lavrov’s remarks, Russian deployment of warships to the Syrian port of Tartous, arfe a reminder of the red lines that the West must not overstep about the type of weapons they send to terrorists.

During his last tour in the Middle East, John Kerry has flip-flopped on the terms of the agreement with Russia in Geneva. But he was finally forced to make a political statement which had the effect of a shock to his allies and auxiliaries, recognizing that President Bashar al-Assad was an unavoidable negotiator. So, Washington finally abandoned the condition of a president’s departure, as a precondition for national dialogue.

Despite this, the United States remains tempted by the plan of the last minute, trying to change the internal balance of power in Syria in preparation for the start of negotiations. This is a desperate move to avoid total political defeat. It is in this context that we should interpret the training of Syrian terrorists by U.S. instructors in Jordan, sending 3,000 tons of weapons purchased in Croatia by Saudi Arabia and Qatar, and scenarios on a Israeli intervention in order to build a security zone in Syria, entrusted to terrorists.

But in the opinion of experts, any Israeli military adventure in Syria and Lebanon would be a catastrophe for the that state, for Western interests and for the entire region. The balance of forces is indeed strong and well anchored, and the axis of the Resistance, with its international alliances -Russia, China and the Brics- has the necessary capacity to thwart any offensive and to break U.S. hegemony over the world.

In this context, the experts agree on the fact that despite the war in which it is engaged, the Syrian army still has significant capabilities in addition to anti-air defense and ballistic missiles, which remain intact. …more

Obama warns of extremist threat in Syria
Matthew Lee – Associated Press – 22 March, 2013

AMMAN, Jordan (AP) — Anxious to keep Syria’s civil war from spiraling into even worse problems, President Barack Obama said Friday he worries about the country becoming a haven for extremists when — not if — President Bashar Assad is ousted from power.

Obama, standing side by side with Jordan’s King Abdullah II, said the international community must work together to ensure there is a credible opposition ready to step into the breach.

“Something has been broken in Syria, and it’s not going to be put back together perfectly immediately — even after Assad leaves,” Obama said. “But we can begin the process of moving it in a better direction, and having a cohesive opposition is critical to that.”

He said Assad is sure to go but there is great uncertainty about what will happen after that.

“I am very concerned about Syria becoming an enclave for extremism,” Obama said, adding that extremism thrives in chaos and failed states. He said the rest of the world has a huge stake in ensuring that a functioning Syria emerges.

“The outcome is Syria is not going to be ideal,” he acknowledged, adding that strengthening a credible opposition was crucial to minimizing the difficulties.

STORY: Israel apologizes to Turkey over flotilla deaths

Eager to resolve another source of tension in the region, the president earlier Friday helped broker a phone call between the Israeli and Turkish prime ministers that led to the restoration of normal diplomatic relations between the two countries.

Obama had come to Jordan from Israel, where Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu placed a call to Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan to apologize for the deaths of nine Turkish activists in a 2009 Israeli naval raid on a Gaza-bound international flotilla.

“The timing was good for that conversation to take place,” Obama said.

Obama, at a joint news conference with Abdullah, said his administration is working with Congress to provide Jordan with an additional $200 million in aid this year to cope with the massive influx of refugees streaming into the country from Syria.

Abdullah said the refugee population in his country has topped 460,000 and is likely to double by the end of the year — the equivalent of 60 million refugees in the United States, he said.

Obama also said he would “keep on plugging away” in hopes of getting the Israelis and Palestinians to reach a peace agreement.

“The window of opportunity still exists, but it’s getting more and more difficult,” the president said. “The mistrust is building instead of ebbing.”

On Iran, Obama reiterated that the U.S. is open to “every option that’s available” to keep the country from developing a nuclear weapon.

He said it would be “extraordinarily dangerous” for the world if Iran does become nuclear capable, and he expressed his desire for using diplomatic means to halt Iran’s nuclear aspirations. Iran insists its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes.

“My hope and expectation is that among a menu of options, the option that involves negotiations, discussions, compromise and resolution of the problem is the one that’s exercised,” Obama said. “But as president of the United States I would never take any option off the table.”

Obama arrived in Jordan on Friday evening, the final stop on a four-day visit to the Middle East that included his first stop in Israel as president. …more

Iran slams international silence on chemical weapons use in Syria
24 March 2013 – Islamic Invitation Turkey

da6f28c1539e3e56d5f5ee6b230ea053_LAn Iranian deputy foreign minister has criticized the silence of international community following the use of chemical weapons by militants against the people of Syria.

According to Press TV, Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister for Arab and African Affairs Hossein Amir-Abdullahian slammed the silence of the international community and said, “Using chemical weapons against Syrian people and police is a very painful event.”

He added: “As the biggest victim of chemical weapons, Iran strongly condemns using of these weapons by terrorists and extremists in Syria who act under the disguise of opposition.”

At least 25 people were killed and 86 others injured after militants fired missiles containing poisonous gas into Aleppo’s Khan al-Assal village on March 19. Women and children were among the victims.

The attack came after Syria’s opposition coalition, known as the Syrian National Coalition, chose a Syrian-born American citizen, Ghassan Hitto, as the prime minister of what they call an interim government.

The Syrian government says the chaos is being orchestrated from outside the country, and there are reports that a very large number of the militants fighting the Syrian government are foreign nationals. …source

Syria chemical weapons: finger pointed at jihadists
Angry Arab News Service
“However a senior source close to the Syrian Army has given Channel 4 News the first clear account of what he claims is believed to have occurred on Tuesday. He is a trusted and hitherto reliable source who does not wish to be identified. The Syrian military is said to believe that a home-made locally-manufactured rocket was fired, containing a form of chlorine known as CL17, easily available as a swimming pool cleaner. They claim that the warhead contained a quantity of the gas, dissolved in saline solution. The source said that the town of Khan al-Assal has been in government control since March 13 but – like so much of the area – has been much fought over and parts of the area change hands with relative frequency. Rebel Sunni groups with al-Qaeda sympathies have been attacking the town, where the population is predominantly Shia. The military’s version of events is that the home-made rocket was fired at a military checkpoint situated at the entrance to the town. The immediate effects were to induce vomiting, fainting, suffocation and seizures among those in the immediate area. A second source – a medic at the local civilian hospital – said that he personally witnessed Syrian army helping those wounded and dealing with fatalities at the scene. That Syrian soldiers were among the reported 26 deaths has not been disputed by either side.” …source

A Syrian Army source gives the first account of what is believed to have been a chemical attack – and it could mean that one of the West’s biggest fears is about to come true. Channel 4’s Alex Thomson reports. Whatever happened last week in the town of Khan al-Assal, west of Aleppo, it achieved something extraordinary in the Syrian civil war: unity among Washington, Moscow and Damascus

Syria chemical weapons: finger pointed at jihadists
By Alex Thomson, 23 March, 2013, The Telegraph

Whatever happened last week in the town of Khan al-Assal, west of Aleppo, it achieved something extraordinary in the Syrian civil war: unity among Washington, Moscow and Damascus.

All welcomed the rapid decision by Ban Ki-moon, the United Nations secretary-general, to investigate an alleged chemical attack that reportedly killed 26, including Syrian soldiers.

Unusually, the request for that investigation came from the Syrian regime, which claimed that Islamic jihadist rebels launched a chemical weapons attack. Since then, precious little evidence in any way has come from the area despite an awful lot of diplomatic noise around the world.

However a senior source close to the Syrian Army has given Channel 4 News the first clear account of what he claims is believed to have occurred on Tuesday. He is a trusted and hitherto reliable source who does not wish to be identified.

The Syrian military is said to believe that a home-made locally-manufactured rocket was fired, containing a form of chlorine known as CL17, easily available as a swimming pool cleaner. They claim that the warhead contained a quantity of the gas, dissolved in saline solution. …more

The torture and ill-treatment of detainees remains one of Amnesty International’s long-standing and serious concerns in Bahrain. Over the years the organization has documented numerous cases of torture, which have been raised with the government and placed on the public record. The government denies the use of torture in its prisons, and yet continues to deny independent international human rights bodies access to the country to investigate such claims. To Amnesty International’s knowledge, the government has failed to carry out a single independent investigation of its own into allegations of torture. No one has been brought to justice or convicted for such crimes to date.

“No policeman or any other person with authority shall use violence or threats or promise of benefits towards any person during an investigation into the commission of an offence in order to influence the statement he may give”.

Bahrain: A Human Rights Crisis
25 September, 1995 – Amnesty International

INTRODUCTION

In early December 1994, widespread protests erupted in Bahrain as thousands of people took to the streets calling for the restoration of democratic rights – namely, the reconvening of parliament and respect for the country’s Constitution. The Bahraini Government responded by ignoring these demands and attempting to stifle these calls by violating basic human rights.

Over a ten-month period, several thousand people – including women and children – were arrested and many continue to be held without charge or trial. Among them were prisoners of conscience. At least 100 of them were subsequently charged, convicted and sentenced to terms of imprisonment, and in one case to death, following grossly unfair trials. Scores of detainees are believed to have been tortured under interrogation, and two have died in custody. Security forces and riot police were deployed in large numbers in the streets to quell demonstrators. A variety of weaponry, including live ammunition, was used for this purpose. To date, 10 civilians have been killed in circumstances suggesting that they may have been extrajudicially executed. At least 20 Bahraini nationals were forcibly exiled from the country or were denied entry after attempting to return.

Throughout, the Government of Bahrain has denied that forces under its authority have committed these widespread violations of human rights. It has sought to maintain – both at home and abroad – that it has acted within the law with regard to arrest and detention procedures, that the rights of detainees in custody were respected, and that those convicted received the benefit of fair trials. Furthermore, the government has sought to justify its strong-arm tactics in quelling demonstrators by pointing to acts of violence – the killing of three law enforcement officers and acts of sabotage – which it accused “extremist elements” of having perpetrated. It has stated publicly that such acts of violence were carried at the instigation of hostile foreign powers.

The government, however, has failed to provide the evidence to support its public statements, both with regard to the question of foreign involvement in the current political unrest and with regard to the manner in which the authorities have handled the mass protests. It has failed to make known the names of those arrested and their places of detention, and has denied the vast majority of them access to relatives and defence lawyers. Most of those convicted were tried in camera before the State Security Court, the proceedings of which fall far short of international standards for fair trial. To Amnesty International’s knowledge, the government has failed to set up investigations into any allegations of torture or into incidents involving the killing of demonstrators. No one has been brought to justice for any of these crimes. Moreover, the government continues to deny Amnesty International access to the country to investigate these allegations or to observe ongoing trials. Thousands of appeals sent by Amnesty International members on behalf of individual detainees remain unanswered.

This report addresses the range of Amnesty International’s concerns about human rights violations committed since December 1994. In gathering its information, the organization has interviewed a wide range of victims, including former detainees now abroad as well as others who remain in Bahrain. Amnesty International has obtained testimonies from victims of torture and ill-treatment; some of the allegations of torture made are supported by medical evidence. Testimonies and information were also obtained from numerous eye-witnesses to the killing of demonstrators, from the relatives of those convicted following unfair trials, and from defence lawyers. The fear of further reprisals by the authorities means that some of these sources – particularly those who remain in Bahrain – are not identified at their own request.

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL’S CONCERNS IN BAHRAIN

The Government of Bahrain has engaged in a consistent pattern of systematic human rights violations since the early 1980s. These violations included the arbitrary arrest and prolonged administrative and incommunicado detention without charge or trial of suspected political opponents; the torture and ill-treatment of detainees, particularly during pre-trial detention, in order to extract “confessions”; grossly unfair trials before the State Security Court; and the forcible exile from the country of Bahraini nationals. While executions have not been carried out in Bahrain for many years, Amnesty International remains concerned about the introduction by law of new capital offences and the continued passing of death sentences. …more

Zainab Al-Khawaja: Letter From A Bahraini Prison
24 March,2013 – by Zainab Al-Khawaja

Great leaders are immortal, their word s and deeds echo through the years, decades, and centuries. They echo across oceans and borders and become an inspiration that touches the lives of many who are willing to learn. One such leader is the remarkable Martin Luther King Jr. As I read his words, I imagine him reading out to us from another land, another time, to teach us some very important lessons. Above all, he tells us, we should never become bitter or sink to the level of our oppressors; that we should be willing to make great sacrifices for freedom.

As seeds of hope and resistance to oppression started flowering across the Arab world, the people of Bahrain saw the first signs of a new dawn. One that promised an end to a long night of dictatorship and oppression, a long winter of silence and fear, and to spread the light and warmth of a new age of freedom and democracy.

With that hope and determination, the people of Bahrain took to the streets on 14 February 2011 to peacefully demand their rights. Their songs, poetry, paintings and chants for freedom were met with bullets, tanks, toxic tear gas, and birdshot guns. The brutal Al Khalifa regime was determined to end the creative, peaceful revolution, by resorting to violence and spreading fear.

Faced with the regime’s brutality, Bahrainis showed great restraint. Day after long day, protesters held up flowers to soldiers and mercenaries who would shoot at them. Protesters stood with bare chests and arms raised shouting, “peaceful, peaceful” [silmiyya, silmiyya] before they fell onto the ground, covered with blood. Thousands of Bahrainis have since been detained and tortured for so-called crimes such as “illegal gathering” and “inciting hatred against the regime.”

Two years later, the Bahraini regime’s atrocities continue. Bahrainis are still being killed, detained, injured, and tortured for demanding democracy. When I look into the eyes of Bahraini protesters today, too many times I see that bitterness has overtaken hope. The same bitterness Martin Luther King Jr. saw in the eyes of rioters in the slums of Chicago in 1966. He saw that the same people who had been leading non-violent protests, who had risked life and limb without the desire to strike back, were later convinced that violence is the only language the world understood.

I, like King, find myself saddened to find some of the same protesters who faced Bahrain’s tanks and guns with bare chests and flowers, today asking, “What’s the use of non-violence? What’s the point of moral superiority, if no one is even listening?” Martin Luther King Jr. explains that this despair is only natural when people who sacrifice so much see no change in sight and feel their suffering has been worthless.

Ironically, change towards democracy has been so slow in Bahrain largely due to the support that the world’s most powerful democratic nations continue to give to the dictators here. Through selling them arms and providing economic and political support, the United States and other western governments have proven to the people of Bahrain that they stand with the Al Khalifa monarchy against the democratic movement.

As I was reading through Martin Luther King’s words I found myself wishing he were alive. I found myself wondering what he would have to say about the US administration’s support of Bahraini dictators. What he would say about turning a blind eye to the blood and tears being spilt in the quest for freedom. All I had to do was turn a page, and this time Martin Luther King spoke not to me, but to you, to Americans:

John F. Kennedy said ‘those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.’ Increasingly, by choice or by accident, this is the role our nation has taken—the role of those who make peaceful revolution impossible by refusing to give up the privileges and the pleasures that come from the immense profits of overseas investment. I am convinced that if we are to get on the right side of the world revolution, we as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of values. (..) a true revolution of values will soon cause us to question the fairness and justice of many of our past and present policies.

These are revolutionary times. All over the globe men are revolting against old systems of exploitation and new systems of justice and equality, are being born… We in the west must support these revolutions.

It is a sad fact that because of comfort, complacency… and our proneness to adjust to injustice, the western nations that irritated so much of the revolutionary spirit of the modern world have now become the arch anti-revolutionaries. We must move past indecision to action. We must find new ways to speak for peace… and justice throughout the world, a world that borders on our doors. If we do not act, we shall surely be dragged down the long, dark and shameful corridors of time reserved for those who possess power without compassion, might without morality, and strength without sight.

The echo of Martin Luther King’s words has travelled across oceans, through the walls and metal bars of a Bahraini prison, and into the overcrowded and filthy cell I live in. I hear the words of this great American leader, whose unbending dedication to morality and justice made him the great leader he was. As I marvel at his wisdom from my tiny cell, I wonder if the people of the United States are also listening.

Being a political prisoner in Bahrain, I try to find a way to fight from within the fortress of the enemy, as Mandela describes it. Not long after I was placed in a cell with fourteen people—two of whom are convicted murderers—I was handed the orange prison uniform. I knew I could not wear the uniform without having to swallow a little of my dignity. Refusing to wear the convicts’ clothes because I have not committed a crime, that was my small version of civil disobedience. Denying my visitation rights, and not letting me see my family and my three-year-old daughter, that has been their punishment. That is why I am on hunger strike.

Prison administrators ask me why I am on hunger strike. I reply, “Because I want to see my baby.” They respond, nonchalantly, “Obey and you will see her.” But if I obey, my little Jude will not in fact be seeing her mother, but rather a broken version of her. I wrote to the prison administration that I refuse to wear the convicts’ uniform because “no moral man can patiently adjust to injustice.” (Thoreau).

What makes jail difficult is that you are living with your enemy, even in the most basic ways. If you want to eat, you stand in front of him with your plastic tray. And every day, one faces the possibility of being ridiculed, shouted at, or humiliated for any reason. Or for no reason. But I have let the words of great men and women help me through these times. When the “specialist” threatened to beat me for telling an inmate that she has a right to call her lawyer, I did not shout back. I repeated King’s words in my head: “No matter how emotional your opponents are, you must be calm.”

Until one day, I had had enough of people telling me that I am getting all my rights and refusing to face that I have responsibilities. After hearing that sentence over and over, I finally got angry. And what is worse, I felt so frustrated that I shouted back.

But then hadn’t a great man once said that in the struggle for justice we, “must not become bitter” and that we should “never to sink to the lever of our oppressors”?

A doctor came to see me and said “you might fall into a coma, your vital organs might stop working, your blood sugar levels are so low, and all this for what… A uniform!”

I replied: “I am glad you weren’t with Rosa Parks on that bus, to tell the woman who sparked the civil rights movement, “that it was all for nothing but a chair.” When the doctor started asking about the African American movement, I offered my Martin Luther King book. If you know me you would know that I very rarely offer to give away my books.

Sometimes, through his words, Martin Luther King has been a companion, a cellmate more than a teacher. He says, “No one can understand my conflict who hasn’t looked into the eyes of those he loves, knowing that he has no alternative but to take a stand that leaves them tormented.” I do understand. He wrote as though he sits beside me. “The jail experience… is a life without the singing of a bird, without the sight of the sun, moon, and stars, without the felt presence of fresh air. In short, it is life without the beauties of life, it is bare existence—cold, cruel, degenerating”.

My father, my hero and my friend, sentenced to life in prison for his human rights work has also refused to wear the grey prison uniform. As usual, the government tries to “put us in our places” by taking away what means most to us. They will not allow my father his family visit. And to further taunt him, they, for the first time, said he would be able to visit me in prison if he wore the uniform. Cruelty is the Al Khalifa regime’s trademark, but unwavering courage and patience is my dad’s. No emotional pressure will break him.

The family visit is the one thing one looks forward to in prison. My father and I will not be seeing our family or each other, but the struggle for our rights will continue. Until we see our family next, we hold them in our hearts.

Yesterday I fell asleep while looking at my prison cell door with its iron bars, and I had a dream. But this time it was a small and simple dream, not of democracy and freedom. I just saw my smiling mother, holding my daughter’s hand, standing at the door of my prison cell. I saw them walk through the metal. My mother sat on my prison bed as my daughter and I lay side by side, our heads in her lap. I tickle Jude and she laughs, and my heart fills with joy. Suddenly I feel we are in a cool and protective shadow, I look up and see my father standing by the bed, looking at the three of us and smiling. I dream of those I love, it is their love that gives me the strength to fight for the dreams of our country.

Zainab Alkhawaja

Isa Town Women Prison
…source

Two jailed Bahraini activists refusing fluids in hunger strike: rights group
25 March, 2013 – Reuters

(Reuters) – Two jailed activists on hunger strike in Bahrain are also refusing fluids in protest at being denied visits from their family, a rights organization said on Monday.

But the Bahraini government said Zainab al-Khawaja was accepting fluids and denied that her father, leading Shi’ite activist Abdulhadi al-Khawaja, was on any form of hunger strike.

Bahrain, the base for the U.S. Navy’s Fifth Fleet, has been in turmoil since 2011, when majority Shi’ite Muslims intensified demands for an end to the Sunni monarchy’s political domination and for full powers for parliament.

Zainab al-Khawaja was sentenced to three months in jail this month, accused of insulting a public official, after an appeal court overturned her earlier acquittal.

She has been on hunger strike since March 17 and began refusing fluids on Sunday, the Bahrain Center for Human Rights said in an e-mailed press release. It said her father, who is serving a life sentence for his role in the 2011 uprising, was also on hunger strike.

“Both Abdulhadi al-Khawaja and his daughter Zainab al-Khawaja were denied family visits for the second time this weekend, prompting them to start a dry hunger strike today, 24 March,” the center said in the statement.

The Bahraini government said only Zainab was on hunger strike, which she began on March 18. “But she is taking all kinds of fluid,” Sameera Rajab, Bahrain’s information minister, told Reuters by telephone from Manama.

“She is in good health and is receiving 24-hour health care. Her father is not on hunger strike,” Rajab said, adding the pair had been denied family visits because they refused to wear the prison uniform.

“They break the rules and then they go on hunger strike,” she said.

The human rights center said some detainees, among them Abdulhadi al-Khawaja, had until recently not been required to wear the uniform and that enforcing the rule was “a new tool used to humiliate prisoners of conscience and identify them as criminal prisoners.”

Bahrain’s opposition and government resumed reconciliation talks last month for the first time since July 2011, but little progress has been reported in several sessions of negotiations. …source

Bahrain blocks marches for jailed rights activist
23 March, 2013 – Associated Press – Reuters

MANAMA, Bahrain: Security forces in Bahrain have fired tear gas to prevent protesters from reaching the house of a jailed human rights activist who is the focus of an international campaign seeking his release.

Riot police clashed with hundreds of marchers trying to gather at the home of Nabeel Rajab, who has been sentenced to two years in prison on charges of backing “illegal” protests.

Authorities also set up roadblocks to keep cars from reaching the house.

Rajab, head of the Bahrain Center for Human Rights, is among dozens of activists and political figures jailed during the more than two-year unrest in the Gulf kingdom.

Majority Shiites in the Sunni-ruled nation are seeking a greater political voice.

International rights groups have called for Bahrain to release Rajab and other jailed activists.
…source

Bahraini regime forces arrest rights activist Sayed Yousif al-Muhafdah
25 March, 2013 – Shia Post

Bahraini forces have arrested the prominent rights activist, Sayed Yousif al-Muhafdah, during an anti-regime protest rally as the Al Khalifa regime intensifies its brutal crackdown on demonstrations.

According to reports, Bahraini police arrested Muhafdah while he was taking part in a protest held in the village of Saar, located 16 kilometers west of the capital, Manama, on Saturday.

The protest turned violent when regime forces attempted to prevent the demonstrators from marching toward a nearby village by setting up road blocks and firing tear gas at the crowd.

The protesters were reportedly trying to reach the house of the rights activist Nabeel Rajab in the village of Bani Jamrah.

On Friday, thousands of Bahrainis staged a similar demonstration near in the village of Bilad al-Qadeem near Manama, demanding political and voicing support for political prisoners.

The Persian Gulf kingdom was rocked by a popular uprising in mid-February 2011, when the people — inspired by the popular revolutions that toppled the dictators of Tunisia and Egypt — have embarked on massive street protests on an almost daily basis.

The Bahraini government promptly launched a brutal crackdown on the peaceful demonstrations and called in troops from Saudi Arabia and other neighboring Arab states to help Manama quash the popular movement.

Scores of people have been killed in the crackdown, while the security forces have arrested hundreds, among them doctors and nurses accused of treating injured revolutionaries.

A report published by the Bahrain Independent Commission of Inquiry in November 2011 found that the Al Khalifa regime had used excessive force in the crackdown and accused Manama of torturing political activists, politicians, and protesters. …source