HH Princess Ameerah Al Taweel being interviewed on women's rights in Saudi Arabia by Piers Morgan on CNN:
Showing posts with label laws. Show all posts
Showing posts with label laws. Show all posts
Sunday, September 25, 2011
Wednesday, April 6, 2011
Making Sense of Bahrain
A direct copy and paste, SUHAIL ALGOSAIBI writes below about trying to make sense of all the hate and the madness in Bahrain following the crisis which took place in March
"I recently had dinner with a CNN crew, who had just finished interviewing me and a few others about the so-called “Arab Spring”, and the role social media played in it.
They had been to Tunisia and Egypt before coming to Bahrain, and they told me how different Bahrain was from those two countries. They seemed genuinely confused. I think this was the first conflict they covered where there was no obvious victim and no obvious villain. They asked me lots and lots of questions during the dinner, and I tried to answer as best I could – and as fairly as I could.
Since that dinner I’ve been reflecting more on the recent crisis. And was trying to make sense of some of the events, and more importantly, I was trying to understand all this hate that I keep seeing online. Some of which was aggressively directed at me – from both sides!
The Dictionary Definition of Polarisation
I think Bahrain’s indomitable Foreign Minister, Sh. Khalid Bin Ahmed Al-Khalifa, described it best when he said people are polarised. Here’s the dictionary definition of “Polarise” from my Mac: “[verb] divide or cause to divide into two sharply contrasting groups or sets of opinions or beliefs.” I like the “two sharply contrasting” bit. Basically, it’s “either you’re with me, or against me.” There can be no in between. If you’re not fully on my side I will hate you, slander you and personally attack you. And if you’re with me, I’ll love you, support you and protect you.
Rather sad, don’t you think?
Honestly, this is not the Bahrain I know and grew up in. Though I don’t condone the polarisation and extremism, I try very hard to understand where it’s coming from. I try not to judge and not to force my opinions on others.
Anyway, today’s post is about trying to understand and explain some of this polarisation and hate that we see today. And as I’ve said many times before, I don’t claim to fully know all the facts, nor to understand this crisis 100% (frankly I don’t think anyone does).
Where The Protestors’ Frustration/Anger/Hate is Coming From
There is a not insignificant Shia section of society that – rightly or wrongly – feel marginalised in our society. They feel victimised, and have been feeling like this for a long time – for generations.
They feel that they are not given their full rights as Bahraini citizens. Not only that, but they feel they are being intentionally marginalised. Also, they feel discriminated against and disrespected by the Interior Ministry. They feel their human rights are not met, and they also feel like the government is trying to dilute their numbers through the “sunnification” of the population, by giving Sunni Arabs and Asians Bahraini citizenship.
It is my belief that for a small portion of this section of society, this perception has morphed into loathing and blind rage (possibly caused/encouraged/fuelled/endorsed by outside interference). The object of this blind rage was the government and the ruling family, who they perceive as being responsible for the supposed mess they are in.
And for these people, the end justified the means. And the means included exaggerating, lying, fabricating, attacking, and doing whatever else helped their cause, and the rest of the population be damned! They wanted nothing but the total removal of the current regime, and some even wanted nothing but a Royal blood bath. But it is my contention that not all protestors wanted this, and that not all protestors were rioters. But admittedly, the lines were vague. Who can untangle that web?
The hate of the extremists spilled over into hating all those who supported the government, and did not see things from their perspective. When the recent crackdown started, they felt even more victimised and saw it as the government’s excuse to commit further alleged crimes against them. Which of course lead to more hate, and more polarisation. They just could not comprehend how someone could not see things from their perspective.
Where the pro-government Frustration/Anger/Hate Is Coming From
I think the views of most Sunnis (wallahu A’lam) can be summarised as follows; they also had some frustrations with the government, but they don’t believe in getting it through protests and blatant disrespect for the law. I think most believed that a person’s rights should be sought through the current system, and not by replacing it completely. (Arguably though, they are not suffering as much as the people in the other camp).
When they look at their Shia brethren, they see that members of their society are among the wealthiest in the country, and that they have reached the highest echelons in the government and the private sector. They wonder why they feel victimised. They also wonder why (supposedly) so many poor Shia men marry several wives and have lots of children, and then complain about their lot in life. Many Sunnis are bewildered by what they perceive as the Shia “Culture of Victimhood”.
Many Sunnis were afraid for their safety during the protests. They seethed while they saw the rioters running amuck. They hated their king and the ruling family being openly insulted like this. They could not understand the perceived duality of the protesters (peaceful yet violent).
The extreme Sunnis hated the protestors and their leaders. And that hate spilled over into hating virtually all Shias. And the fact that the Opposition leaders did not condemn the violent acts, nor try to rein them in, only made matters worse.
They perceived them as ungrateful, disloyal, Iran-loving traitors, who should be punished severely. And they hated everyone who even showed a tiny shred of support or sympathy for them. They genuinely could not understand how anyone could not see things from their perspective.
They hated the perceived arrogance of the opposition leaders, and they couldn’t wait for revenge.
And boy did they get it!
Welcome to The Mother Of All Crackdowns
You know the story, the government lost patience with the protestors/rioters. When they realised that this was more than just a peaceful request for reform, and saw Iran’s fingerprints all over the movement, they cracked down with all their might. Everyone and anyone who showed support for the protestors was a suspect. And the spate of arrests started.
Now the extreme Sunnis rejoiced. It was party time! “Take that you evil traitors!” was the theme. And that! And that! …
The conflict became personal with the rioters on one side, and security forces and the army on the other. While the protesters brazenly defied law and order, attacked people, fabricated attacks against themselves at the same time acted like victims, the government forces seethed (Remember that several of the opposition leaders have received multiple Royal pardons in the past). The protestors won the first round, but the second was won by the government forces, by knock out! Some reportedly enjoyed releasing their frustrations at road check points.
Meanwhile, the moderates cried.
Their voices were mostly unheard, and they had hoped that this could be resolved peacefully. They kept waiting for wise men to prevail. And they still wait.
Some Personal Reflections…
The other day an anti-government acquaintance told me how he was mistreated by the security personnel at a checkpoint. He said “where did all this hate and rudeness come from?” I resisted the temptation of reminding him of the “down with Al-Khalifa” placards at the Pearl roundabout, and the loathing that came from the rioters. Loathing begets loathing. It should never have, but the conflict became personal. Very personal.
My point is that crack downs by definition are brutal. Who’s ever heard of a gentle crack down? When national security is threatened, security forces are not too concerned with constitutional rights. Especially with rioters who were this cunning.
Let me give you an example. A Bahraini friend told me this story many years ago. He was walking down a street in Paris, when suddenly a police van stopped next to him. Several policemen grabbed him violently, and threw him into the van. As I recall, he was beaten and taken to the police station. Poor man was totally confused and wondering what was going on. Later he learnt that a “Moroccan looking” man was suspected of planting a bomb in a Metro Station on the street he was walking along.
Many hours later the police realised they had the wrong man, and let him go. Without a even a hint of an apology! I don’t relay this story to justify anyone’s behaviour, but I do want to point out that when national security is threatened, security forces see red. There are more examples of this in the West, most notably in the US after 9/11, where stories of constitutional/human rights abuses are plentiful.
Do Shias Have More Loyalty To Iran Than to Bahrain?
No, absolutely not! There are a few things I want to say about this. First, if you had asked me at the start of this crisis whether I thought Iran was involved I would have laughed. Today I am convinced that Iran is involved. But I’d be lying if I said I know exactly how. The prevalent theory is that Iran had some sort of long-term sinister plot in Bahrain, which they tried to bring forward when the protests happened. Also, it is said that some of the opposition leaders have very close ties to Iran and/or Hezbollah. I don’t usually believe in conspiracies, but as I mentioned in a previous blog post, I do think Iran is involved.
Having said that however, I think the vast majority of protestors did not know of the Iran involvement. And I think that few of them actually felt more loyal to Iran than to Bahrain.
As for the general Shia population, I know they have no loyalty or affinity to Iran. Besides, why would a multi-generational Arab feel any loyalty to a country who’s language he doesn’t even speak? I think it’s cruel to paint all our Shia brethren with the same, broad brush.
Why I Refuse to Hate
Look, like many others during this crisis I got angry. I was angry at the rioters for making me feel unsafe, and making me worry about my family. I was angry that my business got affected and that I make heavy losses since the crisis began. I can go on an on.
But I refuse to hate.
What’s the point? It’s in the past now, the government won and the rioters were exposed. Will me hating really add value? Let the extremists and haters hate, I will have none of it. I’d rather work on rebuilding our country.
So What’s All This Talk of Forgiveness?
I think my last couple of blog posts confused some people. So maybe some clarification is in order. Personally, not only do I not hate the protesters/rioters, I choose to forgive them.
But as I explained in my last blog post, forgiveness does not mean I condone the actions of the rioters that broke the law. Nor does it mean that they should not receive their just punishment – quite the contrary, I think they should. Justice should prevail, and the law should be applied to everyone who broke it during the crisis.
Forgiveness is about making peace within yourself, and not letting the actions of others affect you and the way you think and behave. I’d rather focus on the future, not the past.
And I humbly ask you to do the same."
Will adding more hate really help matters? What kind of country do you want our children to live in? I keep hearing from both sides how “we will never forget…”, you don’t have to forget, but you can choose to forgive and let go. Forgiving does not mean forgetting. It means moving on.
"I recently had dinner with a CNN crew, who had just finished interviewing me and a few others about the so-called “Arab Spring”, and the role social media played in it.
They had been to Tunisia and Egypt before coming to Bahrain, and they told me how different Bahrain was from those two countries. They seemed genuinely confused. I think this was the first conflict they covered where there was no obvious victim and no obvious villain. They asked me lots and lots of questions during the dinner, and I tried to answer as best I could – and as fairly as I could.
Since that dinner I’ve been reflecting more on the recent crisis. And was trying to make sense of some of the events, and more importantly, I was trying to understand all this hate that I keep seeing online. Some of which was aggressively directed at me – from both sides!
The Dictionary Definition of Polarisation
I think Bahrain’s indomitable Foreign Minister, Sh. Khalid Bin Ahmed Al-Khalifa, described it best when he said people are polarised. Here’s the dictionary definition of “Polarise” from my Mac: “[verb] divide or cause to divide into two sharply contrasting groups or sets of opinions or beliefs.” I like the “two sharply contrasting” bit. Basically, it’s “either you’re with me, or against me.” There can be no in between. If you’re not fully on my side I will hate you, slander you and personally attack you. And if you’re with me, I’ll love you, support you and protect you.
Rather sad, don’t you think?
Honestly, this is not the Bahrain I know and grew up in. Though I don’t condone the polarisation and extremism, I try very hard to understand where it’s coming from. I try not to judge and not to force my opinions on others.
Anyway, today’s post is about trying to understand and explain some of this polarisation and hate that we see today. And as I’ve said many times before, I don’t claim to fully know all the facts, nor to understand this crisis 100% (frankly I don’t think anyone does).
Where The Protestors’ Frustration/Anger/Hate is Coming From
There is a not insignificant Shia section of society that – rightly or wrongly – feel marginalised in our society. They feel victimised, and have been feeling like this for a long time – for generations.
They feel that they are not given their full rights as Bahraini citizens. Not only that, but they feel they are being intentionally marginalised. Also, they feel discriminated against and disrespected by the Interior Ministry. They feel their human rights are not met, and they also feel like the government is trying to dilute their numbers through the “sunnification” of the population, by giving Sunni Arabs and Asians Bahraini citizenship.
It is my belief that for a small portion of this section of society, this perception has morphed into loathing and blind rage (possibly caused/encouraged/fuelled/endorsed by outside interference). The object of this blind rage was the government and the ruling family, who they perceive as being responsible for the supposed mess they are in.
And for these people, the end justified the means. And the means included exaggerating, lying, fabricating, attacking, and doing whatever else helped their cause, and the rest of the population be damned! They wanted nothing but the total removal of the current regime, and some even wanted nothing but a Royal blood bath. But it is my contention that not all protestors wanted this, and that not all protestors were rioters. But admittedly, the lines were vague. Who can untangle that web?
The hate of the extremists spilled over into hating all those who supported the government, and did not see things from their perspective. When the recent crackdown started, they felt even more victimised and saw it as the government’s excuse to commit further alleged crimes against them. Which of course lead to more hate, and more polarisation. They just could not comprehend how someone could not see things from their perspective.
Where the pro-government Frustration/Anger/Hate Is Coming From
I think the views of most Sunnis (wallahu A’lam) can be summarised as follows; they also had some frustrations with the government, but they don’t believe in getting it through protests and blatant disrespect for the law. I think most believed that a person’s rights should be sought through the current system, and not by replacing it completely. (Arguably though, they are not suffering as much as the people in the other camp).
When they look at their Shia brethren, they see that members of their society are among the wealthiest in the country, and that they have reached the highest echelons in the government and the private sector. They wonder why they feel victimised. They also wonder why (supposedly) so many poor Shia men marry several wives and have lots of children, and then complain about their lot in life. Many Sunnis are bewildered by what they perceive as the Shia “Culture of Victimhood”.
Many Sunnis were afraid for their safety during the protests. They seethed while they saw the rioters running amuck. They hated their king and the ruling family being openly insulted like this. They could not understand the perceived duality of the protesters (peaceful yet violent).
The extreme Sunnis hated the protestors and their leaders. And that hate spilled over into hating virtually all Shias. And the fact that the Opposition leaders did not condemn the violent acts, nor try to rein them in, only made matters worse.
They perceived them as ungrateful, disloyal, Iran-loving traitors, who should be punished severely. And they hated everyone who even showed a tiny shred of support or sympathy for them. They genuinely could not understand how anyone could not see things from their perspective.
They hated the perceived arrogance of the opposition leaders, and they couldn’t wait for revenge.
And boy did they get it!
Welcome to The Mother Of All Crackdowns
You know the story, the government lost patience with the protestors/rioters. When they realised that this was more than just a peaceful request for reform, and saw Iran’s fingerprints all over the movement, they cracked down with all their might. Everyone and anyone who showed support for the protestors was a suspect. And the spate of arrests started.
Now the extreme Sunnis rejoiced. It was party time! “Take that you evil traitors!” was the theme. And that! And that! …
The conflict became personal with the rioters on one side, and security forces and the army on the other. While the protesters brazenly defied law and order, attacked people, fabricated attacks against themselves at the same time acted like victims, the government forces seethed (Remember that several of the opposition leaders have received multiple Royal pardons in the past). The protestors won the first round, but the second was won by the government forces, by knock out! Some reportedly enjoyed releasing their frustrations at road check points.
Meanwhile, the moderates cried.
Their voices were mostly unheard, and they had hoped that this could be resolved peacefully. They kept waiting for wise men to prevail. And they still wait.
Some Personal Reflections…
The other day an anti-government acquaintance told me how he was mistreated by the security personnel at a checkpoint. He said “where did all this hate and rudeness come from?” I resisted the temptation of reminding him of the “down with Al-Khalifa” placards at the Pearl roundabout, and the loathing that came from the rioters. Loathing begets loathing. It should never have, but the conflict became personal. Very personal.
My point is that crack downs by definition are brutal. Who’s ever heard of a gentle crack down? When national security is threatened, security forces are not too concerned with constitutional rights. Especially with rioters who were this cunning.
Let me give you an example. A Bahraini friend told me this story many years ago. He was walking down a street in Paris, when suddenly a police van stopped next to him. Several policemen grabbed him violently, and threw him into the van. As I recall, he was beaten and taken to the police station. Poor man was totally confused and wondering what was going on. Later he learnt that a “Moroccan looking” man was suspected of planting a bomb in a Metro Station on the street he was walking along.
Many hours later the police realised they had the wrong man, and let him go. Without a even a hint of an apology! I don’t relay this story to justify anyone’s behaviour, but I do want to point out that when national security is threatened, security forces see red. There are more examples of this in the West, most notably in the US after 9/11, where stories of constitutional/human rights abuses are plentiful.
Do Shias Have More Loyalty To Iran Than to Bahrain?
No, absolutely not! There are a few things I want to say about this. First, if you had asked me at the start of this crisis whether I thought Iran was involved I would have laughed. Today I am convinced that Iran is involved. But I’d be lying if I said I know exactly how. The prevalent theory is that Iran had some sort of long-term sinister plot in Bahrain, which they tried to bring forward when the protests happened. Also, it is said that some of the opposition leaders have very close ties to Iran and/or Hezbollah. I don’t usually believe in conspiracies, but as I mentioned in a previous blog post, I do think Iran is involved.
Having said that however, I think the vast majority of protestors did not know of the Iran involvement. And I think that few of them actually felt more loyal to Iran than to Bahrain.
As for the general Shia population, I know they have no loyalty or affinity to Iran. Besides, why would a multi-generational Arab feel any loyalty to a country who’s language he doesn’t even speak? I think it’s cruel to paint all our Shia brethren with the same, broad brush.
Why I Refuse to Hate
Look, like many others during this crisis I got angry. I was angry at the rioters for making me feel unsafe, and making me worry about my family. I was angry that my business got affected and that I make heavy losses since the crisis began. I can go on an on.
But I refuse to hate.
What’s the point? It’s in the past now, the government won and the rioters were exposed. Will me hating really add value? Let the extremists and haters hate, I will have none of it. I’d rather work on rebuilding our country.
So What’s All This Talk of Forgiveness?
I think my last couple of blog posts confused some people. So maybe some clarification is in order. Personally, not only do I not hate the protesters/rioters, I choose to forgive them.
But as I explained in my last blog post, forgiveness does not mean I condone the actions of the rioters that broke the law. Nor does it mean that they should not receive their just punishment – quite the contrary, I think they should. Justice should prevail, and the law should be applied to everyone who broke it during the crisis.
Forgiveness is about making peace within yourself, and not letting the actions of others affect you and the way you think and behave. I’d rather focus on the future, not the past.
And I humbly ask you to do the same."
Will adding more hate really help matters? What kind of country do you want our children to live in? I keep hearing from both sides how “we will never forget…”, you don’t have to forget, but you can choose to forgive and let go. Forgiving does not mean forgetting. It means moving on.
Monday, August 16, 2010
Mass Weddings
Not from the GCC, but the Arab world. Mass weddings in Gaza with adult men and child brides,
Somehow the video somehow didn't ring true ... this is what HOAX SLAYER says about the video:
Claims that 450 pre-pubescent girls were married in a mass wedding sponsored by Hamas are untrue
Messages like the example included above are currently circulating via email and have also been posted to a great many blogs, online forums and social networks around the world, where they have generated a flood of often vitriolic anti-Islamic sentiment and very heated debate.
The messages claim that hundreds of pre-pubescent girls were forced to marry adult grooms in a recent mass wedding ceremony in Gaza organized by Palestinian Islamic organization, Hamas. According to the messages, 450 brides, most of whom were under ten years old, were married to 450 grooms most of whom were in their mid to late twenties. The messages accuse Hamas of actively and willfully promoting pedophilia and condemn the act as "bizarre & shameful".
Support for these claims is centered around several photographs supposedly showing tiny "brides" dressed all in white and holding the hands of their much taller, grown-up "grooms". However, while a mass wedding did indeed take place in Gaza in July 2009, the claim that the photographed children were actually the brides in the ceremony is untrue.
These photographs represent virtually the entire "body of evidence" that supports the claims in these indignant protest messages. However, this supposed photographic "evidence" is in fact meaningless because they do not actually depict child brides at all. Instead, they show young family members of either the bride or the groom. At such Muslim wedding ceremonies, it is a tradition for young girls to dress up and play a role in the celebrations in a way similar to how flower girls are used in Western wedding ceremonies. Although these young girls do look like little brides, they are certainly not the ones getting married.
Hamas has vehemently denied that any children were married at the event. In fact, a Hamas official told WorldNetDaily that the youngest girl married at the ceremony was 16 years old while most were over 18 years of age.
These scurrilous and inflammatory reports began circulating soon after the Hamas sponsored mass-wedding took place. A 30 July 2009 AFP news article notes:
Nearly a thousand Palestinians celebrated marriage on Thursday night in a ceremony organized by Hamas in the north of the Gaza Strip.
Hamas dignitaries including Mahmud Zahar, one of the militant group's top leaders, were on hand to congratulate 450 grooms who took part in the carefully stage-managed event.
"We are saying to the world and to America that you cannot deny us joy and happiness," Zahar told the men, all of whom were dressed in identical black suits and hailed from the nearby Jabalia refugee camp.
Each groom received a present of $500 from Hamas, which said its workers had also contributed five per cent of their monthly salaries to add to the wedding gift.
Much has been made of the fact that no photographs of the real brides have made it into news reports about the event. This seeming omission has been seized upon by many commentators as more evidence that the children in the photographs really are the brides in spite of denials by Hamas and others.
However, the absence of the brides is in fact just a reflection of how Muslim public ceremonies are conducted. News reports indicate that "the 450 brides shared none of the glamour, taking seats among the audience" while their grooms actively participated in event ceremonies.
And a SkyNews video report about the mass wedding notes in reference to the brides that "The women are elsewhere". Tim Marshall, the journalist who presented the SkyNews video, was actually there at the mass wedding ceremony. In a blog post about his attendance, Marshall reiterates that the brides were elsewhere, noting that some of them were among the guests. He also writes:
The men and women are sitting, Most ignore the speeches, some even ignore the prayers. Then the fireworks explode, the cheering begins, and in march the Hamas scouts, bashing drums, looking every inch the future Hamas fighters many will be. Then the grooms, aged about 18 to about 28. They are holding hands with their young nieces and cousins, little girls aged from about 3 to 8, made up to the nines, wearing white wedding dresses.
Up they all go to the stage, the cheering and music grows ever louder. The girls were having the time of their lives, but, getting a little bored after a while, came down off the stage to dance with each other and play games.
Our report on this put it into context saying that it took place just a mile from the Israeli border and was a message from Hamas about its strength confidence and future fighters. Oh and that the brides were elsewhere. Pretty straightforward. It never struck me for a moment that the little girls might later be described in the bloggersphere as the brides! How naive I am.
Moreover, the 2009 mass-wedding is not at all unprecedented. An October 2008 New York Times article reporting on a Hamas sponsored mass wedding held in that year, notes that it was the tenth such event held in Gaza. The article also mirrors reports about the 2009 event, noting:
The 300 grooms were dressed in black pants, white shirts and colorful ties but no jackets, because of recent budget cuts. The brides, sitting separately among the women, wore head scarves and black robes over their evening dresses but were easily spotted by their heavy makeup. The couples had all signed marriage contracts before the event.
Ironically, reports about the 2008 event also featured photographs of young girls clad in white bride-like dresses. The New York Times article shows such youngsters dancing in front of the grooms. Apparently, the poison-pen denizens of the blogosphere saw no reason to conclude that the children in photographs of the 2008 mass wedding were actually the brides, so one wonders why they have so rabidly done so in 2009.
Perhaps the 2009 images are a little more compelling and it is, I suppose, at least possible that whoever first perpetrated these inflammatory falsehoods did so out of genuine misunderstanding. What is less forgivable - "bizarre & shameful" even - is that many hundreds of bloggers have gleefully perpetrated such errant nonsense in their publications without taking the few minutes required to check the veracity of its claims.
While free speech is (or should be) a fundamental human right, perhaps even home-based citizen journalists should take at least some responsibility in ensuring that the information they publish is factual and accurate
Somehow the video somehow didn't ring true ... this is what HOAX SLAYER says about the video:
Claims that 450 pre-pubescent girls were married in a mass wedding sponsored by Hamas are untrue
Messages like the example included above are currently circulating via email and have also been posted to a great many blogs, online forums and social networks around the world, where they have generated a flood of often vitriolic anti-Islamic sentiment and very heated debate.
The messages claim that hundreds of pre-pubescent girls were forced to marry adult grooms in a recent mass wedding ceremony in Gaza organized by Palestinian Islamic organization, Hamas. According to the messages, 450 brides, most of whom were under ten years old, were married to 450 grooms most of whom were in their mid to late twenties. The messages accuse Hamas of actively and willfully promoting pedophilia and condemn the act as "bizarre & shameful".
Support for these claims is centered around several photographs supposedly showing tiny "brides" dressed all in white and holding the hands of their much taller, grown-up "grooms". However, while a mass wedding did indeed take place in Gaza in July 2009, the claim that the photographed children were actually the brides in the ceremony is untrue.
These photographs represent virtually the entire "body of evidence" that supports the claims in these indignant protest messages. However, this supposed photographic "evidence" is in fact meaningless because they do not actually depict child brides at all. Instead, they show young family members of either the bride or the groom. At such Muslim wedding ceremonies, it is a tradition for young girls to dress up and play a role in the celebrations in a way similar to how flower girls are used in Western wedding ceremonies. Although these young girls do look like little brides, they are certainly not the ones getting married.
Hamas has vehemently denied that any children were married at the event. In fact, a Hamas official told WorldNetDaily that the youngest girl married at the ceremony was 16 years old while most were over 18 years of age.
These scurrilous and inflammatory reports began circulating soon after the Hamas sponsored mass-wedding took place. A 30 July 2009 AFP news article notes:
Nearly a thousand Palestinians celebrated marriage on Thursday night in a ceremony organized by Hamas in the north of the Gaza Strip.
Hamas dignitaries including Mahmud Zahar, one of the militant group's top leaders, were on hand to congratulate 450 grooms who took part in the carefully stage-managed event.
"We are saying to the world and to America that you cannot deny us joy and happiness," Zahar told the men, all of whom were dressed in identical black suits and hailed from the nearby Jabalia refugee camp.
Each groom received a present of $500 from Hamas, which said its workers had also contributed five per cent of their monthly salaries to add to the wedding gift.
Much has been made of the fact that no photographs of the real brides have made it into news reports about the event. This seeming omission has been seized upon by many commentators as more evidence that the children in the photographs really are the brides in spite of denials by Hamas and others.
However, the absence of the brides is in fact just a reflection of how Muslim public ceremonies are conducted. News reports indicate that "the 450 brides shared none of the glamour, taking seats among the audience" while their grooms actively participated in event ceremonies.
And a SkyNews video report about the mass wedding notes in reference to the brides that "The women are elsewhere". Tim Marshall, the journalist who presented the SkyNews video, was actually there at the mass wedding ceremony. In a blog post about his attendance, Marshall reiterates that the brides were elsewhere, noting that some of them were among the guests. He also writes:
The men and women are sitting, Most ignore the speeches, some even ignore the prayers. Then the fireworks explode, the cheering begins, and in march the Hamas scouts, bashing drums, looking every inch the future Hamas fighters many will be. Then the grooms, aged about 18 to about 28. They are holding hands with their young nieces and cousins, little girls aged from about 3 to 8, made up to the nines, wearing white wedding dresses.
Up they all go to the stage, the cheering and music grows ever louder. The girls were having the time of their lives, but, getting a little bored after a while, came down off the stage to dance with each other and play games.
Our report on this put it into context saying that it took place just a mile from the Israeli border and was a message from Hamas about its strength confidence and future fighters. Oh and that the brides were elsewhere. Pretty straightforward. It never struck me for a moment that the little girls might later be described in the bloggersphere as the brides! How naive I am.
Moreover, the 2009 mass-wedding is not at all unprecedented. An October 2008 New York Times article reporting on a Hamas sponsored mass wedding held in that year, notes that it was the tenth such event held in Gaza. The article also mirrors reports about the 2009 event, noting:
The 300 grooms were dressed in black pants, white shirts and colorful ties but no jackets, because of recent budget cuts. The brides, sitting separately among the women, wore head scarves and black robes over their evening dresses but were easily spotted by their heavy makeup. The couples had all signed marriage contracts before the event.
Ironically, reports about the 2008 event also featured photographs of young girls clad in white bride-like dresses. The New York Times article shows such youngsters dancing in front of the grooms. Apparently, the poison-pen denizens of the blogosphere saw no reason to conclude that the children in photographs of the 2008 mass wedding were actually the brides, so one wonders why they have so rabidly done so in 2009.
Perhaps the 2009 images are a little more compelling and it is, I suppose, at least possible that whoever first perpetrated these inflammatory falsehoods did so out of genuine misunderstanding. What is less forgivable - "bizarre & shameful" even - is that many hundreds of bloggers have gleefully perpetrated such errant nonsense in their publications without taking the few minutes required to check the veracity of its claims.
While free speech is (or should be) a fundamental human right, perhaps even home-based citizen journalists should take at least some responsibility in ensuring that the information they publish is factual and accurate
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Death by Driving
With just about everyone I know having lost someone in a road accident in Saudi Arabia (and we live in Bahrain) it comes as no surprise to find out Saudi Arabia has one of the highest rates of road accident deaths in the world.
However, Saudi Arabia is not the only GCC country with high death rates; Oman, the UAE, Qatar and Bahrain have rates which are almost as high. Bahrain, for example, a country with just 1 million inhabitants looses one person every other day through road accidents. These are the only places in the world I've seen barriers installed across pavements as a matter of course to prevent people driving on them.
Someone once suggested the hideously bad driving might improve if it were labelled, 'A Jewish Plot to Kill Arabs'
Here's a great video which explains just how many thousands of people die each year on the roads in Saudi. Thank you and congratulations to Ala’a al-Maktoum for making such a thought provoking piece and to SAUDI JEANS for bringing it to my attention:
However, Saudi Arabia is not the only GCC country with high death rates; Oman, the UAE, Qatar and Bahrain have rates which are almost as high. Bahrain, for example, a country with just 1 million inhabitants looses one person every other day through road accidents. These are the only places in the world I've seen barriers installed across pavements as a matter of course to prevent people driving on them.
Someone once suggested the hideously bad driving might improve if it were labelled, 'A Jewish Plot to Kill Arabs'
Here's a great video which explains just how many thousands of people die each year on the roads in Saudi. Thank you and congratulations to Ala’a al-Maktoum for making such a thought provoking piece and to SAUDI JEANS for bringing it to my attention:
Thursday, November 26, 2009
Vilence Against Women
This landed in my in-box today:
Bahrain Human Rights Watch Society (BHRWS) launch: Bahraini Civil Network to Combat Violence Against Women (BCNCVAW)
A PETITION urging authorities to introduce a family law and a labour law to stop violence against women and protect expatriate workers was launched by a Bahrain human rights group today.
More than 100 people have already signed the BHRWS petition, which specifically requests the protection of women and children.
The petition was launched by the BHRWS' Respect Movement on the occasion of the 10th anniversary of the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women.
Signatures will be collected until the end of the month and the petition will be presented to the UN, in Geneva. It will also be sent to the UN Human Rights Commission and international organisations.
BHRWS Regional and International Relations Director and (BCNCVAW) Director Samira Al Sada said urgent action was needed from the Bahrain authorities because people were suffering.
"There are more than 72,000 expat domestic workers whose wages are around BD45 per month and who work more than 12 hours a day with no rest," she said.
"Many who are running from abuse still have cases in court, but Bahrain joined the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) in 2001."
"There are many cases to address, for example there are many Bahraini women married to expats or expats women married to GCC men like Rebecca Jones and her son Adam who are still waiting for their children to get citizenship and some are in a bad situation. And she said that the news and HOPES that a Adam mother would be temporarily reunited with her ten-year-old son today, who was allegedly kidnapped in Qatar almost two months ago, appeared dashed last night was particularly upsetting considering that today marks the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women.
"Although this isn't physical violence, it is a typical example of the sort of treatment that women can suffer in the region," she added
And she saied today BHRWS launch: Bahraini Civil Network to Combat Violence Against Women (BCNCVAW) As BHRWS launch this Civil Network, BHRWS call all everywhere to join us. Break the silence. When you witness violence against women and girls, do not sit back. Act. Advocate. Unite to change the practices and attitudes that incite, perpetrate and condone this violence.
BHRWS secretary-general, Faisal Fulad said efforts from all sectors were needed to ensure that women, children and domestic workers had the rights they deserve.
Gender-based violence, he said, was a form of discrimination that seriously curbs women's ability to enjoy rights and freedoms on a basis of equality with men.
"We have to take appropriate measures, especially in the field of education and legislation, to modify the social and cultural patterns of conduct of men and women and to eliminate prejudices, customary practices and other practices based on the idea of the inferiority or superiority of either of the sexes and on stereotyped roles for men and women."
The petition was welcomed by female victims of abuse and they were the first to sign the petition.
"This law will ensure the basic rights of all mothers and their children and grant them dignity and respect in the society that they live in,' they said.
'It is important to include domestic workers under the labour law so they can also be assured of their basic rights."
To electronically sign the petition, which remains open until the end of the month, go to www.bhrws.org.
Bahrain Human Rights Watch Society (BHRWS) launch: Bahraini Civil Network to Combat Violence Against Women (BCNCVAW)
A PETITION urging authorities to introduce a family law and a labour law to stop violence against women and protect expatriate workers was launched by a Bahrain human rights group today.
More than 100 people have already signed the BHRWS petition, which specifically requests the protection of women and children.
The petition was launched by the BHRWS' Respect Movement on the occasion of the 10th anniversary of the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women.
Signatures will be collected until the end of the month and the petition will be presented to the UN, in Geneva. It will also be sent to the UN Human Rights Commission and international organisations.
BHRWS Regional and International Relations Director and (BCNCVAW) Director Samira Al Sada said urgent action was needed from the Bahrain authorities because people were suffering.
"There are more than 72,000 expat domestic workers whose wages are around BD45 per month and who work more than 12 hours a day with no rest," she said.
"Many who are running from abuse still have cases in court, but Bahrain joined the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) in 2001."
"There are many cases to address, for example there are many Bahraini women married to expats or expats women married to GCC men like Rebecca Jones and her son Adam who are still waiting for their children to get citizenship and some are in a bad situation. And she said that the news and HOPES that a Adam mother would be temporarily reunited with her ten-year-old son today, who was allegedly kidnapped in Qatar almost two months ago, appeared dashed last night was particularly upsetting considering that today marks the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women.
"Although this isn't physical violence, it is a typical example of the sort of treatment that women can suffer in the region," she added
And she saied today BHRWS launch: Bahraini Civil Network to Combat Violence Against Women (BCNCVAW) As BHRWS launch this Civil Network, BHRWS call all everywhere to join us. Break the silence. When you witness violence against women and girls, do not sit back. Act. Advocate. Unite to change the practices and attitudes that incite, perpetrate and condone this violence.
BHRWS secretary-general, Faisal Fulad said efforts from all sectors were needed to ensure that women, children and domestic workers had the rights they deserve.
Gender-based violence, he said, was a form of discrimination that seriously curbs women's ability to enjoy rights and freedoms on a basis of equality with men.
"We have to take appropriate measures, especially in the field of education and legislation, to modify the social and cultural patterns of conduct of men and women and to eliminate prejudices, customary practices and other practices based on the idea of the inferiority or superiority of either of the sexes and on stereotyped roles for men and women."
The petition was welcomed by female victims of abuse and they were the first to sign the petition.
"This law will ensure the basic rights of all mothers and their children and grant them dignity and respect in the society that they live in,' they said.
'It is important to include domestic workers under the labour law so they can also be assured of their basic rights."
To electronically sign the petition, which remains open until the end of the month, go to www.bhrws.org.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Adam Disapears
Over the past couple of weeks a British expatriate mother, Rebecca Jones, has been interviewed by many of the Gulf-based English language newspapers. She is fighting to have her son, Adam, who is half English and half Qatari, returned to her family home.
The following local Gulf newspapers give detailed overviews on what is happening in the Adam case at: Gulf News and at the Gulf Daily News: here and here
Divorce
In general when parents split, the choice of where the children live differs between Muslim and western cultures. In general, in Muslim cultures children are given to the father and in western cultures the children are given to the mother.
For more information on what happens when divorce or death occurs in a mixed marriage, have a look at this {wgaw: divorce} or this {wgaw: pre-nuptual agreements}
If you're interested in reading more about Adam's case, there's an extended debate about the case and the court ruling, with lots of cross-cultural information (and very little ranting) at qatar living
Also
Adam's mother and step-father have put information about what has happened to their family on Bahrain Human Rights website Facebook and YouTube:
The following local Gulf newspapers give detailed overviews on what is happening in the Adam case at: Gulf News and at the Gulf Daily News: here and here
Divorce
In general when parents split, the choice of where the children live differs between Muslim and western cultures. In general, in Muslim cultures children are given to the father and in western cultures the children are given to the mother.
For more information on what happens when divorce or death occurs in a mixed marriage, have a look at this {wgaw: divorce} or this {wgaw: pre-nuptual agreements}
If you're interested in reading more about Adam's case, there's an extended debate about the case and the court ruling, with lots of cross-cultural information (and very little ranting) at qatar living
Also
Adam's mother and step-father have put information about what has happened to their family on Bahrain Human Rights website Facebook and YouTube:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
