Is a bastardisation of the translation of an Arabic idiom which is better transcribed in English as “Cleaner than a white thobe” at least – thobe being the Arabian traditional male garment – which might have taken away the derogatory insinuation given by the use of the word “dress”. This Arabic proverb is akin to the English idiom “pure as the driven snow”, but for reasons not apparent to me, the GDN decided in its own lack of wisdom to translate it as such in relation to the Bahraini minister bin Rajab’s declaration of innocence. My suspicion is that they are taking sides, we do not see the same skew in reporting when they talk about the other minister under investigation by parliament.

Not that it would make any difference whatsoever of course; parliament itself is skewed in its current make up, which is sectarian to the core. Am I at all surprised then that Attiyatallah himself was declared innocent of misleading the country by a committee whose members already amply declared their position, even before he was greeted and led to his plush seat in the investigation committee by beaming members of the investigation panel? Of course not. This is a foregone conclusion.

As is the matter of convicting bin Rajab for his financial and administrative irregularities. In that committee, Al-Wefaq’s has the numbers.

The downside for the future of this country is once again the affirmation of the cloud of sectarianism; one in which a person votes for his tribe and sect regardless of the guilt and culpability of the person or issue in question.

One of the main grievances people of Bahrain have is the iniquitous distribution of the electoral districts. We find that in the 2006 elections for instance, the Northern Governate contains a total of 91,874 voters electing nine members of parliament; while in the Southern Governate, the voters there number only 16,571 but they get to elect six members of parliament. This means that while members of parliament in the Northern Governate average one MP for every 10,802 votes, we find that in the Southern Governate the average is one MP for every 2,761 votes!

This means that one vote in the Southern Governate equals two and a half of those in the Northern Governate. Iniquitous by any standard, but when you consider that this results in direct representation in an elected parliament, one cannot help but think of clear discrimination on the part of the government against a large swathe of the country’s population. Comparing numbers in other districts affirms this clear and unadulterated prejudice.

One person is taking the government to task about these issues where it counts; lawyer Abdulla Al-Shamlawi is suing the government in its own courts [Arabic] for this iniquitous distribution of electoral districts on behalf of a citizen in District 1 in the Northern Governate, a Mr. Mattar Ibrahim Al-Mattar.

Al-Shamlawi’s battle is a winning one logically and he is driving the Legal Department – representing the government – into a spiral of self destruction as he is taking every illogical single point they throw to the fore, deconstucts it and replies with facts and solid logic, especially when you consider that they are trying to defend the indefensible.

Apart form the various seminars and workshops and demonstrations which are almost a weekly occurrence since they drew the illogical and completely illegal electoral boundaries, this, I feel is the cherry on the cake and the most effective method to get this iniquitous situation corrected.

Well done Mr. Al-Shamlawi. Much respect and admiration and God’s speed.

Divine intervention couldn’t have come at a more fortuitous time for the government to start to re-impose another heinous State Security Law, the very one which Bahrain suffered from for 30 years and was the main cause of the dissolution of the 1973 parliament and suspending parliamentary life in this country until it was rescinded by his majesty king Hamad on him assuming the throne.

Now, with the killing of a policeman in mysterious and unsubstantiated circumstances – as some observers maintain – the government has latched on to this particular incident, painful as it is, to start the process of imposing a clampdown not unlike that of the State Security Law:

Tough new policing measures were urged by Cabinet yesterday following the killing of an officer in Karzakan. These include [1] banning Molotov cocktails, [2] closely monitoring sectarian websites, and drawing up a [3] police masterplan to combat violence. Interior Minister Shaikh Rashid bin Abdulla Al Khalifa has been instructed to draw up a plan aimed at further empowering Public Security forces. Chaired by Prime Minister Shaikh Khalifa bin Salman Al Khalifa, the Cabinet reiterated its full trust in the forces to assume responsibilities, stressing the need to further enhance levels of readiness.

The Cabinet was also updated on the Karzakan crime and the efforts to track down suspects.

The [4] Information Ministry was also instructed to monitor websites inciting hatred and instigating sectarianism in an attempt to drive a wedge in the community and sap national unity. Legal measures will be taken against websites found flouting rules and regulations.

The Justice and Islamic Affairs Ministry has also been instructed to [5] ensure mosques are not instrumental in promoting sectarianism or fuelling hatred.

The Government also called on the legislative authority to quickly approve the [6] law incriminating possession or use of Molotov cocktails.

It also condemned the killing of 24-year old policeman Majid Asghar Ali Kareem Baksh, extending sincere condolences to his grieving family.
GDN

A Godsend? To authoritarian governments, possibly. Here we have full measures that on the face of it would ensure stability and restore harmony, but I cannot help but shudder to think of the restrictions of personal freedoms and those of expression they affirm. It is as if sectarian thought and action could be curtailed by the use of such draconian measures. What they do – those draconian measures, that is – is further entrench sectarian hatred, chase those who promote that hatred underground and penalise those who are brave enough to stand behind their convictions by voicing their opinions.

This is not the way to manage this situation, with all due and proper respect.

Tribalism and sectarianism are two facets which are deep within the fabric of our society, especially over the last few decades. They have come completely to the fore by the use of religiosity to control the minds of naive novices even at state-run universities as is evident by the various publications, audio and video media being continuously and plainly distributed in that august edifice of education; while tribalism – an even more dangerous foe – is being lauded and propagated by events like beduin poetry recitals and romantic flood-lit dances extolling the virtues of war.

What is needed are concerted efforts to recognise what ails this country. An honest appraisal of our deficiencies and put in place actions – not just studies – that will resolve these problems by effecting cultural change to the community.

Through my work on the Just Bahraini campaign, I have raised these points with several people; young and old, businessmen and women, high government officials to normal people in the street to university professors. Almost without exception, the response was a clear recognition of tribalism and sectarianism suffered by the community, some bring in what they feel are solid examples of this discrimination while others, a few, mind you, excuse such behaviour as a natural human trait. To those, who condone and even encourage tribalism and sectarianism as a “natural and intrinsic way of our life”, I have no time, nor do I spend much time trying to change the way that they have been brought up. The exercise is futile.

To me, as I do in sales, I don’t waste time on those who say “yes”, they’ve already been sold. Nor do I waste time on those who steadfastly say “no” as the effort is too great and the end-result is probably not worth pursuing. I do; however, spend the majority of my time on those who say “maybe” as those are the people who might actively receive new information and have the capacity – hopefully – to evaluate situations and have a good chance of changing their points of view and by doing so become better human beings.

How do you think people can change the very culture they have been raised in to be a better one? To be more tolerant of others and their views and to accept that others can and do have differing, sometimes contentious opinions?

Put in laws which criminalise discrimination by all means, we won’t be the first country to adopt such measures, in fact, I think the United Nations already has codes which condemn discrimination in all its forms as do many countries around the world. Bahrain has signed Human Rights codes which already criminalise such discrimination, alas, it has not rewritten its local laws which directly contradict the international conventions. It is this that we should encourage the government and parliament to immediately do. I think that with the application of these anti-discrimination laws and measures, culture will start to change. Yes it might take a couple of generations or more, but a start must be made. We cannot continue to live in this divisive atmosphere.

But action and engagement are probably much more important. If the government is serious about achieving social harmony, it is well within its power to start the process by example. It won’t do so; however, by continuing to restrict the honour of serving in the armed forces and police to members of a certain sect or even worst, to non-Bahrainis. Nor will it lead by example by entrenching sectarian thinking by allowing whole ministries and state institutions to be saturated by members of certain sects, nor, for that matter, will it be the example to be emulated if even the ministerial positions are given on sectarian basis rather than one of capability and applicability to the job being offered.

Engagement also means transparency and welcoming criticism. Where is this transparency in dealing with the Bandargate situation? Could the government’s position be classified by anything but opaque? So far we have seen the apparent government’s machinations even within the parliament – the chamber in which the protection of democracy and democratic institutions should be protected – to restrict any action which might be taken in this situation’s reparation. Let me not mention the judicial case which necessitated the complete gag imposed on the press in discussing this rather important situation which – ironically – could easily be used as a rallying point of complete cultural and societal change to the better.

I have hope, of course. But I must confess that my optimism is waning when I see articles as those quoted above. Rather than opening up and recognising a problem, what we continuously find instead are paroxysms of denial and rules by violent reaction, rather than by common sense.

So prepare yourselves, my friends, for living under a new State Security Law. Watch your step because the Ministry of Interior might have unlimited powers in looking through keyholes at what you might do. The Ministry of Information will further restrict the Internet and the press while the Ministry of Islamic Affairs is going to dictate how you practice your religion.

The end result is Big Brother all over again. Or in our case, the 1990s to be exact.

Welcome to the New New State Security Law. One in which I can’t think that anyone in their right mind is going to regard Bahrain as Business Friendly.

Skepticism is the feeling du jour as far as reporting about Bahrain is concerned, it seems. Here’s how the Economist covered it:

Wefaq must now deal with one of the trickiest sectarian issues raised by its supporters: a widespread rumour that the government is handing out passports to Sunnis from other countries in an attempt to turn the Shias into a minority. These fears were raised in a report in 2006 by a former government adviser, Salah al-Bandar, who said he had confidential government documents revealing such a plan, The government hotly denies any such thing. The row has flared up again with the publication of government statistics that show the population jumping by 41% last year and the number of citizens growing by 15%, against a previous rate of 2.4%.

I disagree with this premise, it’s not just Wefaq’s issue to explain those utterly ludicrous explanations given by Voldemort as to the sudden hike in our numbers, but the whole country, and now, the world, who need clear and unambiguous answers to this heinous situation.

The Economist‘s skepticism continues:

This week, just before its officials were to attend a UN meeting to review Bahrain’s human-rights record, the government said it would set up a new human-rights task-force. What a coincidence.

I’m sure some brightspark will try to attack the Economist as a left-wing Imperialist propaganda pamphlet not worthy of consideration; nevertheless, what we all feel on a daily basis puts paid to those kind of pseudo-intellectual drivel.

Thanks Emma for the heads-up.

It’s that time again.. I’m in the airport awaiting my flight to Jordan and it suddenly hit me that I didn’t announce the traditional Mahmood’s Den Scapegoat of the Moment! Silly me.

Alrighty then… I don’t think there is anything nor anyone more deserving of very valid blame other than…

The Parliament!

If I were to be generous, I would happily share the MtvSM privilege with the CIO or eGov or whatever you want to call those brainiacs who think that being transparent means embarrassing a whole swathe of our countrymen by publishing their names without consent and displaying them as paupers awaiting a measly handout of BD50, rather than deserving human beings who should very well share the wealth of their country. But I’m not in a very generous mood at the moment.

Therefore, please do blame all the ills of the world generally, and ours specifically on this joke of a parliament. One that is diligently trying to reduce its efficacy even more than what it is at the moment and one that is thinking in nothing more than a narrow and short-sighted sectarian way to further encumber itself – and by inference our whole country and society – with restrictions and completely voiding itself from the limited responsibility they have been given.

All this without paying heed to what is happening in the world around us. Even Nepal and Bhutan will deservedly pass us by as they develop their democratic, social and economic systems and we’re still in this sectarian and tribal mentality, thanks to this parliament, its bylaws and our constitution.

Someone should look into the Bhutan situation; a country that measures itself not by Gross National Product, but by a hippy-like Gross National Happiness. Even with that, their far-sighted king imposes democracy by changing his country from an absolute monarchy through to a constitutional one.

Enough rants for now, they are about to call me to the plane… in any case, you have the MtvSM has been announced and I invite you – my friends – to go ahead and give them several pieces of your minds.

Au revoir

If you’re in Bahrain, you must have felt the tension over the past few months. This tension could in large part be attributed to the Bandargate scandal in which some members of the government and royal family have been implicated in disseminating sectarian strife; a conspiracy which has kept the Bahraini political and apolitical scenes alight.

That powder keg is very close to explosion.

Over the last 3 weeks, parliament, at least the House of Representatives part in it, could not be convened due to vociferous demands by Al-Wefaq (+1) to question the main minister involved in Bandargate on financial irregularities which might be enough to impeach him. The other side of the House adamantly refused to let that intrinsic legislative tool be used claiming that the questioning is unconstitutional and using every single trick they can get hold of to hinder it. So much so that the House’s main legal council quit rather suddenly and flew back to his native Egypt – some say due to him being pressured and cajoled to change his position of which he maintained the constitutionality of the motion.

The “loyalists” as they have become known – wrongly in my view – ditched the main legal council’s advice, ridden roughshod on the second council who agreed with the first, and took the advice of the most junior of councils who seems to have given them what they want.

Al-Wefaq and Aziz Abul continue to hold onto the constitutionality of their demand and did not budge from their position. They want to question Ahmed Attiyatallah and have threatened to continue to disrupt the House’s proceedings until they get their demand. According to the Constitution and the Bylaws, they are well within their right to question said minister.

If you have been following the snippets of news over the past few days, there has been several shuttle meetings between Al-Wefaq and the higher powers in society; Al-Wefaq even met first with the prime minister and then the king to share their views with them. Both, apparently, did not want to interfere in the legislative process but gave their overt blessings that any minister – even if from within the royal family – is not above questioning.

Al-Dhahrani, the speaker of the house, still insists on the unconstitutionality of the motion and wants the house to vote on it. A process that Al-Wefaq is completely against due to it being against the House’s bylaws first, and second, because they can never win that vote given that the current make-up of the House is 22 against and 18 for. You will be interested to know that Al-Wefaq is represented by 18 votes in the House, even though they have gained 63% of the actual vote! But that’s another story.

Tomorrow promises to be stellar. Will parliament be dissolved because the intransigence of the proponents and the opponents of the motion, or will it continue to be disrupted without a solution in the offing?

I personally do not believe that it will be dissolved. A magic solution – as is typical in this country – will appear at the last minute and will save the moment. The stakes are far too high for this “democratic experiment” to fail now.

My mind is still boggled as to why the parliament itself is against using a very important tool like questioning a minister. Other than them being interfered with and pushed into their respective positions, I really have no explanation to this laughable situation.

Well, tomorrow is another day. The sun will continue to shine and business will continue to be done and migrant workers will continue to strike and buildings will continue to be built in spite of everything. The “boom” that we are experiencing; however, might well have a different sound to it come tomorrow.

We shall wait and see.

You know how much I love the GDN, right? And hold it at the highest regards? Yes, I’m being sarcastic here, but even with that, I am really surprised by a few changes in their reportage I have witnessed over the last few weeks; one might even use the adjective “daring” to describe some of the things they printed.

Take today for instance, right there on the front page they trespass on the law and actually use that dreaded word “bandargate“!! It possibly is the only national paper which have had the balls (recently) to print it. I wonder if they now will be penalised and shut down for a while for their temerity!

Have a look yourselves:

So the question is, where did the balls come from, or is the guy who usually applies the brakes on holiday?

For the third week running, parliament abrogates its basic responsibility to oversee the operation of the executive branch by completely negating both the Constitution and Parliamentary Bylines. [audio clip]

I feel that this “experiment” might have reached an impasse now. I don’t foresee an effective way forward other than going back to the drawing board and adopting a new constitution which respects the foundations of human rights and dignity. What we are witnessing now is nothing more than a direct result of the inequities visited upon us by the contentious 2002 constitution and the behind the scene machinations which are further strengthened by the absence of real political will to seek a solution.

If these basic things are not resolved, and resolved quickly, the apparent milk and honey which a few are enjoying will disappear faster than the trust people have put in this new new era.

Whenever I’m away, the first thing I do when I wake up is check the news back home. It continuously brings me back to our own version of surreal reality.

Yesterday’s news hit the mark quite squarely, thank you very much; our illustrious parliament dropped the second impeachment proceedings [translate] against a sitting minister. Of course, as expected, the “opposition” within parliament preached fire and brimstone and demonstrated their objection by occupying the parliament’s chamber while it was in recess. That is, they had a nice “sit in”.

That will teach ‘em.

Contrast that with a mingling session we were invited to last night on Capitol Hill. I had a chat with several staffers who work on several committee in the House, a few of those in the Oversight Committee. My questions to them on how they go along their business must have appeared quite childish, I suppose, because of the look on some of their faces: “Your chairman can subpoena anyone he likes and no one can interfere? No way!” and “So who’s watching the watchers in your case then” and more of that sort of stream. Well, the answers were quite mundane to them. In the first instance it’s a resounding yes, while in the second was “the Press of course.”

Going back to our own situation, the metrics are a little different. The answers to the same question, should I ever have the misfortune in mingling with our own parallels, would most probably have been “only when we think that the king would allow it” to the first, while the second would resoundingly be “the government, of course!” Silly me.

Well, I shan’t lose sleep over this latest episode. It’s just not worth it as they will never change. They are peons put in place to continue the charade of pseudo-democracy in order to score points with the outside world. “Of course we have an elected parliament!” and those from the outside naively believe the good stuff and give us the requisite pat on the back and we continue to blunder toward an uncertain future.

I couldn’t believe my eyes when I read in the papers over the last couple of days that MP Salah Ali of Al-Menbar (Muslim Brotherhood) political bloc is spearheading a campaign to open the Bandargate scandal and issue forth a “truth and reconciliation” effort to treat and then close this folder and move on as a country.

Although I want to believe Ali with every atom of my body that he has no vested interest in this and wants indeed to achieve a long awaited closure, my mind tells me to not jump the gun and reminds me that it was him and his friends in the Muslim Brotherhood who perceivably benefited the most by the machinations described in the Bandargate report – from mysterious financial contributions to bulldoze them through the elections to those travelling posse of 8,000 votes the sums of which was certainly very telling.

I also no longer believe that there is any intent by the people who have access to the national buttons to actually do anything about this. It’s not even a matter of burying heads in the sand as poking their fingers in our eyes and directing us to the closest wall to bash our heads against. No movement, in other words, will ever happen without a clear and courageous political will which is sorely lacking at the moment.

I really really want to believe that this initiative is genuine, but there is just far too much stink around this latest endeavour to pull my nose off the muck and enjoy the roses.

When Lord Palmerston said the eternal words which translate to a country does not (and should not) have perpetuals enemies nor allies, but permanent interests, who would have thought that we would see this tenet acted out in our very own parliament by two self-appointed stalwarts of political Islam in Bahrain to attain their own ends? Both are targeting their arrows at sitting ministers; Al-Wefaq wants Attiyatallah’s head, while Al-Asalah wants Fakhro’s.

I can understand the first; as their leader’s public promise on the still-felt repercussions of the Bandargate scandal, but I can’t understand the motives for the second.

The papers reports about the Bahrain Investment Wharf project in Hidd, which is owned by Ta’ameer, suggest that Al-Asalah have determined that it was let for 50 years to BIW at considerable sub-market value and they want to exercise their parliamentary privilege and create an investigative committee to look into this project. The minister of industry and commerce Hassan Fakhro is adamant that not only did he and he ministry not do any wrong, but have benefited the country in this deal when compared to like-projects in the surrounding area.

The parliamentary by-laws require a minimum of five members to submit a request for the formation of an investigative committee and as Al-Asalah’s members in parliament exceed that, they didn’t need Al-Wefaq’s support in order to get that committee request tabled. When they will need them; however, is if (or is it “when”) they table a motion of no confidence against the minister to ensure that they will get the two-thirds majority to force the minister to resign. Whether it will actually be allowed to get to that stage is anyone’s guess. Mine is that it won’t.

The upside of this is that both blocs have unequivocally demonstrated that when it comes to political interests, all other considerations get sidelined, even ideological ones which they themselves have heretofore held sacrosanct. They’ve even had this marriage of convenience notorised by appending their signatures to a hastily hand-written document which set their agreement in effect; they will not stand in each other’s way in applying the various constitutional tools in their over-sight roles.

Meaning? Al-Wefaq now have the written agreement to go forth with the Bandargate investigation, and finally, maybe, boot the one who should not be named out. But at the expense of Fakhro’s head and goodness knows what else Al-Asalah will rummage through in the future, which given their past stances against Bahrainis’ freedoms, does not bode well.

But time will tell whether that written document will actually hold any water. We’ll wait and see.

I think there are a few people in the island who are squirming in their seats this morning. Or maybe they’re still blasé about the effectiveness of parliament especially as they seem to enjoy untold support and protection from those who are higher and mightier.

UPDATE 071101: Well this “agreement” didn’t take long. The papers this morning are carrying reports about Al-Asalah back-tracking and spinning it as it has never been and they didn’t enter into any such agreement. Typical. No back-bone probably because the wind-up butterfly wasn’t cocked properly.

Why does it take the House of Representatives five whole months to notify the council that the parliamentary probe proposed by Al-Wefaq into the allegation of ministerial misconduct by Ahmed Attiyatallah and his connection to the Bandargate scandal

has been administratively dropped in compliance with the Chamber’s Bylaws? Isn’t this a primary abrogation of the elected chamber’s main responsibility of governmental oversight? Or was it – as customary to that august institution – acquiescing once again to pressures?

Regardless. The guy is not off the hook, as he should never be, until an honest and deep probe is effected into his self in full view of citizens not to gloat of course, but to set a solid stake in the ground which can serve as a clear and unambiguous warning to corrupt people and with those who live their lives with malicious sectarian intent.

Two new faces replace old and bedraggled ones after being “harassed” by an Islamist-led parliament. In other countries this kind of “harassment” would probably be classified as nothing more than a gentle tickle, but hey, some good things are happening and we should be positive.

I don’t know much about Al-Hamar, other than being the brother of the previous Minister of Information and majority stakeholder in Al-Ayam newspaper as well as being the special media consultant to his majesty the king. Mr. Faisal Al-Hamar has been in the Ministry of Health for 32 years, most recently he was tasked with the deanship of the College of Health Sciences so he had some managerial history under his belt, whether he will be able to tame the beast and turn it into even a scowling and bad-tempered tom-cat remains to be seen, an outcome that a lot of Bahrainis would be rather satisfied with. Such is the reputation of the Ministry of Health which he has taken over which doesn’t need resuscitation but major invasive surgery to get it to a station at which Bahrainis would not tend to kiss their loved ones goodbye and hand them a shovel before entering its hallowed halls.

Jehad Bukamal takes over the Ministry of Information. Now that could be a breath of fresh air. Let me tell you why, Bukamal is first and foremost a businessman, a member of the Chamber of Commerce and an ex-member of parliament. He is also a moderate, so maybe – it is my fervent hope in any case – that he will drag that ministry from the dark ages and bring it to the real world, and maybe he will break the Islamist’s hold on that throbbing organ and let it release its creative juices which has been suppressed for ages, most certainly since it’s departed MP sat on it.

Maybe now – I hope once again – we will see less of the useless pre-packaged religious programs (especially those presented and chaired over by sitting members of parliament! Talk about conflict of interest!) and change them with community-centric ones and maybe we will actually get some entertainment out of that very important edifice. Who knows.

Oh, maybe we will even get to hear the myriad of beautiful different accents from all over Bahrain and see their faces, and not get presented with just one “type” for a joke or be presented exclusively in degrading situations.

Maybe we will finally get rid of that stupid and inappropriate slogan of “The Arab Family TV” and replace it with a much more appropriate “Bahraini Family Fun Channel”!

Maybe also now hotels will collectively exhale!

Maybe now the tourism department will actually change into a real tourism-encouraging catalyst rather than continue to be nothing more than thinly covered Religious Police with a political drive.

One continues to hope.

One also hopes that this rather limited reactionary change in cabinet is an aperitif and not the entrée. There is at least one more who has sold Bahrain and Bahrainis that still needs to be removed, to save what is left of our face.

Regardless of anyone’s apprehensions regarding the Smart Card, the PR machine in its regard has been accelerated of late to shove it down our throats with various PR pieces and laws as well as whole governmental divisions being enacted.

How is all of this going to affect us in Bahrain is anyone’s guess. My private guess is that it is going to be detrimental to our freedom – at best. Not because the card itself is a bad idea, not at all, things are moving in that direction the world over anyway. It’s failure in Bahrain is the almost complete absence of its supporters simply because of the people who have been assigned to oversee it, and the clandestine organisation that is pushing it.

No project can succeed if it lacks the basic necessity of trust. This one, for all the potential good that it can otherwise bring, is destined to doom. Bahrainis simply lack the necessary trust to make it successful. Oh they will go and get that card issued, to be sure, because as we have seen with the CPR card that preceded it, no earthly transaction could be completed in this country without it.

What’s left to do but tell those who care to simply “brace brace brace” as this thing will come crashing down, or at least will never reach its full potential.

Unless of course full transparency is adopted and those who have hijacked this project for nefarious deeds are removed.

Strategic rift in Bahrain’s royal court

Some members of the ruling family reportedly back hard-line Sunni groups; others advise helping disenfranchised Shiites.

Leading members of Bahrain’s royal family have thrown their weight behind hard-line Sunni Muslim groups, some of whom share the outlook of Al Qaeda, in an attempt to counter a perceived Shiite threat, government officials and critics say.

The strategy, first exposed in a government report that surfaced last year, has revealed a rift within the court of the ruling Khalifa family.

One faction believes in reconciliation with the Persian Gulf nation’s disenfranchised Shiite Muslim majority. The other believes in suppressing Shiite aspirations, even if it means supporting Sunni groups propelled by the same ideologies that inspire Osama bin Laden.

A ranking government official who is a member of the royal family said there was “no doubt” that a hard-line movement existed within the Bahraini power structure.

“Then, there are the moderates who believe that cohesion is the way to go forward,” he said.
LA Times – 7/7/07 – free registration required, full article also appears here and here. Thanks for the heads-up JJ

Count me in with those who want social cohesion. 110%. No qualifications.

The thing that needs qualification; however, is why would a country as minute as Bahrain make it with such heavy-duty articles to some of the world’s top publications other than the world is somewhat sitting up and taking notice that inequity should not go unreported? The spotlight has been shining on us for decades but its beam has specifically been focused on us especially over the last few years and all the world is seeing is the aggregate negative that emanates from this country. That doesn’t mean that the positive is ignored, not at all, this particular article is a case in point. However, for the positive to start to outweigh the negative, we need to stop the frivolity of accepting the various diversions from our main causes and problems by giving weight to worthless pursuits such as going for Guinness world records or paid for prizes and treating those as the germane issues of the day and expending countless litres of ink in their discussion.

What needs to be done by those of us who are “moderates” is to pony-up and do something concrete to further our points of view and tell the hard-liners that they can’t play their game any longer. Their dirty laundry has been spoiling our horizons for long enough and we are taking back our future.

It’s time for them too move aside and we shouldn’t be overly concerned of their just final destination which surely cannot be anything but the growing garbage heaps of history.

Need we really give them the time of day then?