Her blonde locks falling over her large curious eyes, the 4-year-old blonde child played with the toys in her hand. Her mother, seemingly in a hurry, took away the toys and tucked her baby girl in bed. “Where are you going mom?” the innocent girl asked. “I’m going to work. Now you go to sleep” she answered. She quickly got dressed, grabbed the cigarette pack, door keys, purse and rushed outside the door. Going down the stairs, the sound of her stilettos echoed through the walls and she could almost hear her heart beating fast with anticipation. A bit of walking and she finally reached the highway. As she stood there by herself, she took out her small mirror to even out the carefully designed make-up powders that saturated her face. Then a car stopped and a man in the driver’s seat asked her a question she had grown accustomed to: “What’s the deal tonight?” In her tight burgundy dress that just about covered her upper thighs, she bent down, allowing him a deep view into her cleavage, inspected the interior of his car, and responded as she had grown accustomed to: “30 dollars. That’s my only deal”. He instantly extended his hand and opened the door for her to get in. They took off to an unknown location.

This is a story told to me by Leila – The pseudonym of a 24-year old divorcee whom I met, during my investigation into one of Lebanon’s underground worlds: female prostitution.

Leila’s World

Leila’s world is usually avoided, ignored or rejected by the mainstream public, often perceiving it as a shameful, scandalous and sometimes illegal job. Yet, it is a world that is vibrant with the activities of many of the likes of Leila and her “clients”. In Leila’s world, there is a “market” of “clients” and “goods and services”. Tourists from around the region flock to this world, shaping its “supply and demand” for years, but also deepening its roots within society as an ‘evil’. We often choose not to speak of this world, but we all know that it exists. For the sake of public morality, we decide to compromise the truth. Yet the fact remains that female prostitution in Lebanon is a bitter truth that conceals within its many layers the reality of deprived families, abandoned women and neglected children. The glittering lights of nightclubs and the luxury of 5-star hotels may draw a festive picture on the cover of Leila’s story. However, the glitz and glamour of nightlife in Lebanon is nothing but a layer of thick painting on a very bitter social reality in which women, mothers, sisters, and daughters are the stars.

To the onlooker, Leila could appear just like any other normal woman going about her day, but the truth is that she lives a double life. She is a mother during the day and a prostitute during the night trying to make enough money to get herself and her daughter through another day. Indeed, this is the case with the likes of Leila, all of whom find themselves driven by different reasons to lead double or hidden lives. What do we know about this life? How does sleeping with total strangers for the sake of money feel? Is it a feeling of pleasure or disgust? Fulfillment or guilt? As recent research has shown, the woman usually finds herself in a routine, which she has gotten used and eventually numbed by. “I got used to my conditions; they became a part of my identity. I adapted, submitted and became very tolerant to the degradation that I experience” explains Leila, indifferently.

A Narrow Gateway

Seeking answers to many questions in that matter, I referred to “House of Hope”, Lebanon’s only non-governmental organization in the field of sexual exploitation and prostitution. According to well-researched statistics provided by this organization, out of the women who are benefiting from its services in 2007, 103 were subjected to physical violence 78 were victims of sexual harassment, 71 to rape, 29 to incest with ages ranging from 13 to 45 years.

Heba Abou Chakra, an experienced social worker who deals directly with the female victims, explains that due to the sensitivity of the matter, it is difficult to reach out to the victims. “They usually come to our center through the word-of-mouth, or we find them indirectly through the HIV cases which other medical centers detect” she says, explaining that many of the prostitute cases are related to sexually-transmitted diseases, drugs and incidents of domestic violence, which are all associated with prostitution. Each and every female victim needs great support, not just a shelter; According to Abou Chakra, “there is a need for medical, legal, psychological, physical and hygiene support”, adding that some prostitutes resort to the center with their children, who in turn need special kind of support, such as schooling. In one of the recent cases narrated by Abou Chakra, a female prostitute who was sent to prison while being pregnant lost her baby twice. “Frequent abortion is common among female prostitute prisoners” she explains, adding that some prostitutes accept to sleep with strangers “for a price as low as $10 or sometimes the price of a sandwich”. Sadly enough, the need that drives these ladies is often degrading.

Looking at the other side of the problem, there is Abou Karim, the pseudonym of a 45-year-old owner of a super night club north of Beirut. To him, prostitution is a thriving business that has high seasons and low seasons: “Clients in luxurious hotels request photo albums of the ladies I recruit. They make their choice and I deliver the goods. It’s a regular job” says Abou Karim, who inherited this “trade” from his father. The woman has no choice but to abide by Abou Karim’s orders, since he provides her with shelter, food and financial support. Most importantly, explains Abou Karim: “She should do whatever the client desires. Afterall, the client is always right”.

In a case involving cash and jewelry theft, the article’s headline reads “Maid Stole her Employer’s Lingerie,” promoting a condescending, farcical image of domestic workers. In another article, two migrants imprisoned after sleeping together in an employer’s house are referred to as “Kuwait’s Romeo & Juliet.” The attention drawn to the ‘humor’ in these cases often mask the seriousness of the situation. Such severe criminalization of minor “violations” have become normalized, infantilizing domestic workers by denying them even the simplest independent decision making. Every inch of a domestic worker’s life becomes a point for government and employer control; “domestic dictatorships” and the legal systems that support them seek to dictate nearly the entirety of workers’ lives. These attitudes and laws work to mold workers into “robo-maids,” whose sole existence is committed to domestic service (despite salaries incommensurate with 24/7 labor).

This is not to say that domestic workers never commit serious crimes, or that sponsors are at fault when they do. But the severe responses to relatively unremarkable infractions – even if they are not life threatening, even if they do not result in extended jail times – are still attacks against the humanity of non-citizen workers. In a recent case, a maid was sentenced to one month in jail after leaving a sick toddler home alone, even though she called the child’s mother immediately after leaving. The worker was charged with “absconding” despite leaving only to attend her mother’s funeral in time, and only after her sponsors had denied her salary to return home.

These seemingly “minor” acts of legal aggression against domestic workers – in which the charges appear less serious, or the disproportionate punishment comparatively ‘soft’ – function as a part of the larger oppressive social structure by stripping migrants of their dignity and validating further human rights violations against them. The expression of total ownership, control and power over workers’ existence – the psychological enslavement – is the same dehumanization that occurs in more conspicuous cases of abuse.

The coverage of these stories is not necessarily reprehensible – though the intentionally bizarre headlines do contribute to the triviality – as awareness of such preposterous cases is essential to minimizing their occurrences. But we cannot scoff and stop at the headlines – we must recognize that concealed beneath the mirth likely lay another story of abuse and injustice.

[This article first appeared on our site Migrant-Rights.org]

Over the years, different people the world over embraced different interpretations of “freedom.”

Janice Joplin used to sing of freedom as “…nothing left to lose.” Is that what it means to be free? Or is that the state of mind that is needed to put everything on the line, and to venture forth in search of freedom?

The framers of the U.S. Constitution thought of freedom as conferring certain inalienable rights to the citizenry, such as freedom of religion, speech, a free press, free assembly, and free association.

On January 6, 1941, President Roosevelt spoke of the four fundamental freedoms that people “everywhere in the world” are entitled to: freedom of speech, freedom of worship, freedom from want and freedom from fear.

However you define it, the notion of freedom has captured hearts and minds of people in all four corners of the world. And still somehow, it is often difficult to define what exactly it means to be free. Yet we realize, as we fight for freedom, that it is important to understand what it is to be free, so that at the end of the day, we know what it is we’re looking for, and recognize what it is when we finally find it.

Certainly there is a role for government to play in assuring to their people the basic right of freedom. Liberty is enhanced to the extent that governments undo the shackles of oppressive rule, external control, interference, regulation, etc. Freedom also grows as a person comes to believe that he is the master of his destiny and that he can make the decisions to chart his course in life, without excessive and unreasonable interference from government. And of course, freedom connotes a fundamental respect for human life, and the protection of a person’s right to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

However, just as government can play its role, the individual himself has a role to play as well, in fighting for and sustaining a sense of personal freedom. It could well be argued that the greatest freedom of all is the freedom to think. Rene Descartes famously said, “I think, therefore I am.” Inherent in the human condition, and our existence as free human beings, is our ability to think, and I would add, our ability to think clearly, with common sense and personal dignity, unhampered by the biases, suspicions, prejudices and superstitions which are thrust upon us, at an early age, by the societies we find ourselves.

As we search for freedom in such diverse places as the Middle East, or the Far East, or the West, or wherever the need arises; if it is really freedom we’re after, and if we dare to be true to ourselves, then we have no choice but to let go of past prejudices and wrong-headed thinking, in favor of what makes sense, and what promises hope for the future.

Our challenge, as freedom fighters, is not an easy one. All too often, we are called upon to put everything on the line, in hope of finding something that may never be found. But perhaps the greatest challenge of all, as we seek our freedom, and the freedom of others, is to break the chains that bind us to the thinking of the past, and that keep us imprisoned in the psychological cages that we have built for ourselves. If we find the courage and the wisdom to break these chains of the mind, then, and only then, will we shine the light on the path to freedom.

Please join us, with your comments, at www.sellingavisionofhope.org

I think I started reading psychology in the year 2000 when I was about 15 years old. Psychology helped me a lot in understanding motives and ways of thinking of others, so that was a great help to me in my political activism. Also, a book I read before, about psychology of militarists for Sigmund Freud,, helped me dealing with militarists in my struggle for peace and non-violence. My activism led me to jail, so I thought to use the wasted time here in making a field study doing some psychological analysis for criminals jailed with me. I’ll try to summarize my major notices, categorize them, even knowing that these information could have been written before by researchers on criminology and psychology, but I believe that adding a new field-study from a prison in Egypt, made by a prisoner could be of a positive value.
* Sample of study
- About 30 prisoners (drug dealers, thugs, robbers, killers)
All came by military trials

1- Denial
* Denial was the greatest psychopath. I saw here criminals are living in a parallel world, different from reality.
* Nearly, every prisoner believes that he is innocent, everyone denies his crime. For moments, I felt that I’m the only one made things against the law. Some people claim that they didn’t commit their crime, but police faked the case to harm them. Others don’t see anything wrong with their crimes; just as the drug dealer who says that there is nothing wrong in selling narcotics (even he knows that it causes harm). Also, the killer who sees that it was a normal reaction from him to kill the person who insulted him or tried to get close to one of his females.
* One of the prisoners usually says “I believe that God would stand with me, because I didn’t harm anybody ever in my life”… This man killed, injured, hostaged, was jailed in lots of countries for more than 25 years and was active in trading drugs in more than 5 countries, in Europe and Middle East!
* As being with a group came by military trials in a very exceptional time, this made us very interested to follow the political news. Everyone was hoping that a political change could happen, leading to canceling military trials and freeing them. They can’t accept the idea that they harmed innocent people and deserve to be punished and rehabilitated in jail to be good citizens… But, look at it from another view, I, myself, don’t believe that I’m guilty, I don’t believe that I made anything wrong and I intend to continue my activism when I be released!

2- Schizophrenia
* Denial leads to having two identities; real one outside the prison and the other identity is the innocent one inside the jail and in front of investigators.
* I noticed also that most of criminals have two or three names. It’s common in Egypt to have two names (without a noticeable cause for that), but criminals have lots of names for lots of purposes. They use this variety to run from investigations and trials (as an accusation to Mr. A doesn’t lead to accusing Mr. B, when the investigator doesn’t know that Mr. A is Mr. B). Having two names helps them to hide their crimes from their families or any other people they don’t want them to know about their crimes. Also, having two names helps them escape from police officers and secret service.
* The direct result of having two names is having two identities (personalities) and you can be surprised at any second of changing in manners of the man in front of you. He just switches between both of them or switch on and off the other identity he doesn’t want to show in jail.
* Practically, when you deal with them, you find some of them faithful, religious, courageous, slightly enlightened… etc. But, all of that can change in seconds to see a selfish bloody person, full of hatred.
* Prisoners are also pretending all the time; pretending being rich is a common thing here. Lots of prisoners here pretend to be millionaires, they act as if they are going to buy you and your family. By time, you discover that they are poor people. Even if you didn’t get information proving they aren’t rich as they claim, their way dealing with money and how they fight for small and cheap things, make you believe that those people can’t have the amount of money they claim.

3- Lying
* Prisoners lie just for lying. One of them says a piece of a poet every day (the same piece); a part of it says, “tell me about prisoners and their lies; tell me about lies which run in their views”… Also, this man claims that he never lies, even though he lies every second!
* Prisoners don’t lie for a logical cause, they are just used to giving wrong answers as a normal reflex. They also feel power in deceiving others. They keep telling opposite (contradicting) stories about their lives. They tell false names for their sons. They could even claim of being sons of families, other than their true families.
* Dealing with prisoners taught me that you should believe that he is lying until he proves the opposite. You can’t deal with them as if they are telling they truth.

4- Ego
* Prisoners have enlarged egos. I think that the ego is the cause of all crimes. The man who kills another man because of a couple of words, the ego forced him to kill. The same with stealers and rapists. Ego is the mother of all crimes.
* The criminal doesn’t understand the idea of having borders between him and others. He sees it’s normal to interfere in others’ lives, insult them, use them, make fun of them, on the other hand, he can’t accept being treated the same way.
* Criminals also don’t believe in private property. When he sees something he likes, he just goes on and takes it (without a permission from its owner) and he doesn’t see something wrong with this. That’s why stealers don’t see something wrong in taking others’ money.
* Ego of criminals also gives them the impression that they have the right to use others and use them as slaves. When he wants something, he just orders any weak prisoner to do it. You need to have also an enlarged psycho-pathetic ego to make them fear you, and so fear of treating you the same way.

5- Complicated relation with religion
* I think this could be part of the schizophrenic point, but it has notices which should be focused on.
* Criminals have very fantastic opinions. They don’t see that Bin Laden did anything wrong. They don’t respect Jews or Christians in general (even though they respected me, thinking I’m a Christian). They hare non-believers and atheists. They are ready to kill or injure anyone telling them a bad opinion about their religion.
At the same time, they don’t pray nor fast. Their crimes (killing, injuring, stealing) are banned in their religions and they don’t see anything wrong in committing them. They use narcotics everyday, even they believe it’s forbidden by God.
* Criminals also are superstitious. They believe that dreams are messages from God which will come true. They feel good or bad when they hear specific types of birds. They believe in ghosts. They also believe in lots of myths not related to Islam.

6- Self-hatred
* This gets on surface when he is weak. It becomes obvious that he hates his life, his principles, may be even himself.
* When someone emotionally close to him tells him bad news, talk to him hardly, he starts blaming everyone led him to that crime, takes decisions to stop making crimes when he is released. Deep inside, he wishes if he had a different (regular/normal) life. Maybe, the hard time we live here in jail is the cause which makes him hates his crimes.

7- Sex-phobia and homophobia
* I believe it’s normal to be a homosexual when you are forced to live years without seeing a female. But, even if it’s spontaneous and good for them, they are still homophobic. When they know about a gay prisoner, they start insulting and beating him.
* But, this behavior isn’t related only to homosexual behavior, they nearly do the same thing towards whoever they know that he masturbates or owns sexual pictures with him.
* Schizophrenically, they like to talk a lot about their sexual adventures, with stimulant sexual details!

8- Continuous making of troubles
* Life in jail is very boring. Some prisoners will have to spend in prison 20 years or more. Egyptian prisoners have nearly nothing which can help you spend time without being bored. That’s how prisoners discovered a new way to kill time: making troubles.
* One of the prisoners told me, “the prisoner is a son of a bitch, if you gave him a finger, he will take you all, he will step on your head”… He was describing how prisoners deal with each other inside jail.
* The advantage of making troubles is that it kills lots of time and it brings with it lots of positive and negative feelings. They need those feelings while they are isolated by speechless walls.
That’s why prisoners fight each other every moment, interfere in others’ privacy, deliberately understand every word as an insult to use it to begin a fight… etc.
* Prisoners don’t know how to spend time positively and prison management doesn’t try to teach them how to do that. They don’t like to read newspapers or books. They usually aren’t interested in continuing their study from within jail.
* Long boring time and the inability to use it pushes them to use narcotics continuously to kill time and drugs make them make more troubles, and the cycle goes on.

- Final general notices

• Being a prisoner myself, made it hard for me to focus more than this. I wish I could make larger and more detailed research.
• Also, I felt changes in my behavior inside jail. Some changes are good adaptation, others are bad changes, I’ll need to visit a psychiatrist to fix them. What I’m trying to say is that in prison, there is a behavioral state affecting anyone inside and each prisoner is forced to take reaction towards it.
• Legally, there should be a psychiatrist and a social professional in jail to help prisoners. I don’t know if they exist, but if they do, we are not in contact with them in an way. This way in prison management doesn’t fight crime, but produces new criminals to society.

Maikel Nabil Sanad
El-Marg prison
18-5-2011

(A picture of the “sign of peace”)

Over 6 decades, Egyptians tried many strategies for opposition, starting from opposition from within the ruling party (and it’s the weakest strategy), to the militant opposition (and it’s the most violent strategy) – all these attempts failed. Till Egyptians discovered a new strategy, “the peacefulness” and the Egyptian revolution came out chanting “peaceful… peaceful”, and the peacefulness succeeded in achieving what the Kalashnikov couldn’t.
6 weeks as well is approximately the period of the Arab-Israeli conflict… For 64 years, Arabs tried many strategies dealing with Israel (starting from being agents to terrorism), and also all the attempts failed… So, why don’t we start adopting a peaceful strategy dealing with the state of Israel to reach full rights to all the peoples of the region? That research paper is an attempt of me to explain how peaceful means can end that conflict completely, thus all the peoples of the region rest and their suffering ends.

However, dear reader I have to warn you, if what leads you to deal with that case is the motivation of revenge and the desire to get-rid of Jews then that research isn’t directed towards you, so don’t waste your time reading it. This research is directed toward who wish to end the conflict by fair way giving all parties their legitimate rights.

The first scene: Security Council decision – November 1947
The first scene which I’m going to concentrate on between numerous historical scenes I’m going to present. It’s the events which followed the decision of Security Council to divide Palestine in November 1947… What were the reactions on the decision? Were these reactions correct or wrong?
After 6 days of issuing Security Council decision, the Arab League met and took a decision to prevent Security Council decision by force (by weapons)… Arabs ignored the peaceful and the diplomatic ways, they didn’t resort to a dialog and didn’t discuss Security Council in its decision. All they did was each one of them went to bring his weapon and chant “death to Jews”.

At the time when Arabs were drunk with the fever of blood-shedding Jews, Israelis were making a world-wide diplomatic campaign to convince the whole world to support the born state of Israel. The United States of America felt that Security Council decision will ignite a war in the region, so it provided a recommendation that to Security Council demanding canceling the partition plan. As usual, Arabs were busy preparing violence, they didn’t care for that American step, and Israelis didn’t go back to their homeland until they convinced the Americans to take back their recommendation from Security Council.

Here, a question arises: What if Arabs thought about peaceful means, and traveled as well to to convince the Americans with their point of view, also the rest of Security Council members? What if America didn’t take back its recommendation about canceling the partition plan? Arabs could have canceled the Security Council decision, therefore obstructing the establishment of the state of Israel from the first place, but unfortunately they were busy with violence, weapons and the desire to kill, so they lost everything.

The second scene: declaring the state of Israel – 15 May 1948
Days passed after the decision of Security Council and it wasn’t canceled. Based on the decision, Israel declared its independence as soon as the British mandate for Palestine ended. So, why didn’t also the Palestinians declared their state at that time, backed by the legitimacy of Security Council decision, and it’s the decision in which Israel adheres to strongly because it’s the decision which gave it legitimate existence? The answer simply is that Palestinians and Arabs were busy with war and blood, and they weren’t interested in peaceful ways, of the type of holding a parliament and heading to the United Nations to declare a Palestinian state.
Once more, Palestinians wasted a golden chance because of being busy with violence.

The third scene: Moshe Sharet initiative – 1953
After declaring independence, David Ben-Gurion headed the Israeli government, who was a Zionist leader adopting radical stances firm against Israel. The chance for achieving peace at his era was very weak. In the year 1953 the Israeli Knesset had its second Prime Minister for Israel who was Moshe Sharet, who was contrary to Ben-Gurion, believing in peace and giving Arabs their rights. Moshe Sharet demanded from the Israeli Knesset to delegate him in making peace talks with Arabs. The Knesset agreed to delegate Moshe Sharet in negotiating on anything and everything (including the right of Palestinian refugees to return inside the Israeli lands).
Moshe Sharet went to all Arab leaders asking for dialog, all of them refused and insisted to settle the conflict by war and violence. Gamal Abdel Nasser agreed on the dialog on the condition of secrecy, because Gamal Abdel Nasser didn’t have the courage to face his people that he was making peaceful negotiations with Israel.
Thus, Moshe Sharet fell in 1954 because of Moshe Sharet failure to convince Arabs of peaceful mechanisms to settle the conflict. David Ben-Gurion became once again to be Prime Minister closing many doors for a peaceful solution to the conflict.

Why Arabs don’t ask themselves: What if they accepted Moshe Sharet initiative? What if these negotiations succeeded and the Palestinian state was established at then, and the refugees came back home? Once again, Arabs lose because of their adherence to violent mechanisms and their objection to peaceful mechanisms.

The fourth scene: the assassination of king Abdallah – 1951
After the Arab defeat in in 1948 war and the truce agreement with Israel in Rhodes – February 1949, and because of not declaring a Palestinian state, Gaza became under the Egyptian administration while the West Bank under the Jordanian administration.

King Abdallah Ben Al-Sharif Hussein, king of Jordan, realized the importance of reaching a peaceful solution to the conflict after the failure of the military attempt. He went to visit Jerusalem along with his peaceful efforts, but the Palestinian terror was waiting for him. He was assassinated inside Aqsa mosque, so that the first peaceful Arab effort be assassinated towards Israel.

After 60 years of assassinating king Abdallah, we ask ourselves: did Abdallah’s benefited Palestinians? Of course not, because Jordan was dragged to a conflict with Israel which didn’t end except after the agreement of Wadi Arabah in 1994, while the West Bank was subject to Israeli occupation and still to that day suffering of a spread of the Israeli army and Israeli settlements in. If king Abdallah hadn’t been assassinated, the West Bank would have now been without settlements and Jordan wouldn’t have lost in its economy and its youth in a conflict for 40 years with Israel. Once again, Arabs lose because of their inclination toward violence and their objection to the peaceful means.

The fifth scene: the Egyptian peace treaty – 1979
In the year 1977, Sadat realized the importance of what king Abdallah was doing in the year 1951, so he decided to start an Arab peace initiative. He visited Jerusalem in November, 1977 and afterward, immediately the Egyptian-Israeli peace talks started. All the Arab parties in the conflict were invited to to join the peace talk, but the Arabs found it hard to make a peaceful work. They launched the “The Three No’s of Khartoum”, objecting any peaceful solution to the conflict, adhering to militarist settlement.

Today, after 32 years of signing the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty, we ask ourselves: what if Arabs accepted the peaceful negotiations in Sadat era? What would the Arabs have lost if they negotiated at that time without a result? Was what Jordan take in 1994 more than what it would have taken if it joined Sadad initiative in 1979? Was what the Palestinians take in Oslo, 1993, more than what would they have taken in 1979?
Once again, Arabs waste the chance because of their adherence to the armed solutions not the peaceful solutions.

The sixth scene: Camp David 2 – year 2000
In the year 2000, many positive circumstances gathered. President Bill Clinton was at the end of his presidency and wanted to end the conflict in the Middle East before he leaves office. At the same timing, Israel was lead Ehud Barak of the Labor Party of Israel – Labor Party is a leftist political party known by its support to peace process. Israel was on the eve of parliamentary elections, so Barak needed a success facilitating obtaining many seats in the next Knesset.
The talks had actually started at Camp David, Yasser Arafat, Ehud Barak, Bill Clinton, and who views what Israel offered at that time, would realize that Israel offered an offer in which Palestinians won’t obtain a similar offer forever. A state on the borders of 1967, Eastern Jerusalem the capital city, dismantling of settlements and the return of a percentage of refugees. Palestinians will go after two month from now (in September 2011) to the United Nations too declare a Palestinian state and they know well that they won’t obtain what Israel offered them in Camp David 2.

Yasser Arafat signature was only required and the United States guaranteed the agreement, in other words America would compel Israel to implement. However, Mubarak was annoyed of his absense in the talks, so as, he realized that it is of his interest that the conflict continues, so the relationship between Yasser Arafat and the Egyptian Intelligence was exploited, and he was pressured into objecting to sign the treaty. Emotionally provoking vocal phrases were raised, of the type: resistance, occupation, martyrs, uprising, treason, agents, Zionists. Arafat apologized and didn’t sign the treaty saying to Bill Clinton, “if I signed the treaty, you’ll walk in my funeral soon”.

What happened later on? George Bush, the son, came to White House, he wasn’t a man of peace of any kind. In the Israeli elections, Israelis felt that what Labor Party says is useless with Arabs, so Labor Party together with Meretz lost most of their seat and the Israeli right rose to authority, represented by Likud of the militarist background, allying itself with religious political parties of type of “Shas” and “The Jewish Home”. It objected to Camp David 2 and almost destroyed Labor Party, to the extent it’s now a very weak political party in Israel which isn’t influential in political life. Ehud Barak who used to be a hero of peace, didn’t forget at all the Arabs destroyed his strength and transformed him from a strong leader to a chief of a weak political party, so, Barak became an impeder to peace more than a supporter to it.

So, what do Arabs benefit of objecting Camp David 2? Did the Palestinian uprisings give the Palestinians 1% of what would have Camp David 2 give them? What would Arabs do now after the partners of peace in Israel have been destroyed and the governance there was took-over by fanatics and religiously-biased? Do Arabs imagine that they would get more than what was offered to them? What would happen now to any peace agreement after half of what Israel offered in 2000 became unacceptable and not possible to be offered in 2011? What did the Palestinians benefit of being the “sons of stones”? Wouldn’t be better for them to be the “sons of peace”?

Seventh scene: Arab Spring – 2011
When the Tunisian revolution started in December 2010, everyone looked at it as an exceptional case specific to Tunisia, and everyone dealt with the approach of “Egypt isn’t Tunisia” and “Libya isn’t Tunisia”. But, when the revolution succeeded in Egypt in overthrowing Mubarak and when the revolutions in Libya, Yemen, Syria and Bahrain erupted, everyone realized that the Arabic-speaking peoples knew the strength of the peaceful revolutions.

The Israeli right stood confused in front of a fateful question: “what if the Palestinians started a peaceful revolution”? Israel was accustomed to that the Palestinian resistance is militant, because using violence against Israel allows it to use its army in the framework of self-defense and no one would blame Israel when it chases child-kidnappers or killers of civilians. But, if the Palestinians started a peaceful revolution, Israel won’t be able to use its army, so what would it do? No one in Israel (and specifically the Israeli right) found an answer on that question, and the fear remained to them of a Tunisian revolution.
But, as one of Israel leaders said that “Israel’s success doesn’t depend on its smartness, but on the stupidity of its enemies”. The Palestinians wasted the chance in the second uprising in 15 May 2011, contrary to the rest of the Arab peoples, the Palestinians didn’t look for a Palestinian Tahrir square to protest in peacefully. Palestinians didn’t realize that the peacefulness has no relation with penetrating the borders, infringement on the territorial waters of Israel and chanting racist words. A peaceful sit-in disseminating racist ideas is exactly as the sit-in of Mostafa Mahmoud square, where peaceful protestors chanting shit thought, and of course that won’t lead to a result. The chance is still available for Palestinians to adopt the peaceful method of Tahrir before it’s too late.

(A picture of the biggest demonstrations in the history of Israel, Tel Aviv, 6 August 2011)

Peaceful Strategies toward Israel
- Why won’t we start trying peaceful strategies with Israelis and see if it would succeed as the peaceful Egyptian revolution succeeded? We tried violence for 6 centuries, so why don’t we try the peacefulness for 6 months?

- Before the eruption of the Egyptian revolution, the Egyptian demonstrators were at the beginning of their demonstration giving flowers to police officers and tell them “we’re not demonstrating against you,but against the regime”… So, why don’t we send flowers to Israelis and tell them “we are not antagonize you as individuals, but we are against your policies toward us and Palestine”?

- Also, before the Egyptian revolution, one of the opposition groups published on the internet a list with telephone numbers of Egyptian police officers and we started a campaign of calling those officers, trying to convince them to stop assaulting demonstrators… That campaign succeeded in attracting numerous police and army officers and ex-officers and their families, and they participated in our revolution.

So, why don’t we start in the same thing with Israelis? Why don’t we start communicating with ordinary Israeli individuals and tell them that the Mossad and the Israel Defense Forces actions are unacceptable, inhumane and obstruct peace in the region? Why don’t we convince try to them with the justice of our cause, if we really believe-in its just.

What if we each Egyptian person started adding two Israelis on his friends list on Facebook? If there were million Egyptians, each one of them can only affect two Israeli citizens, that means that we are affecting 2 million Israeli citizens (or a quarter of Israel census)… So, what if we put in consideration that Egypt has approximately 10 million Facebook users, and that each on of them has the ability to add 5000 friends to his friends list. The soft force is much stronger than any other violence you imagine.

It’s of my interest, of your the interest and the whole world’s interest that the conflict ends in Middle Easy, therefor I wish that we start a true beginning in Arab peaceful attempts for the sake of putting an end to the conflict and blood-shedding, and to establish a fair warm peace built on coexistence between the peoples of the region.

Maikel Nabil Sanad
El-Marg general prison
2 ع [‘ayn]
2011/7/29

With so much little attention given by Arabs to the situation of Somalia, I thought I should write about it for a bit.

Somalia, Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya and Uganda are among countries in a vast African region being affected by severe drought.

An illustration of the drought in East Africa and the African Horn.

The UN has warned that the situation is deteriorating to the point of famine in some areas, with hundreds of thousands facing starvation in the next three months – the year’s driest period.

In Somalia, continuing violence in southern and central parts of the country, compounded by drought, has seen 135,000 people flee so far this year.

In June alone, 54,000 people fled across the borders into Kenya and Ethiopia – three times the number of people who fled in May.

The UN Refugee agency warned on Tuesday that more than 50% of Somali children arriving in Ethiopia are seriously malnourished.

As families walk for days and sometimes weeks to reach refuge at camps in Somalia’s neighbouring countries, vulnerable children are often too weak to survive the journey.

Something must be done to help the Somalians, we are witnessing massive loads of people slowly dying from hunger and starvation, while some people do not even stop to finish a meal before throwing it in a garbage can. Donations are needed to help buy food and supplies and have them delivered so these people can be properly fed. We have a humanitarian crisis in our hands and these people need our help, caring for one another is what essentially makes is human beings.

Donations can be made through these organizations,

• International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)
• CARE
• International Rescue Committee (IRC)
• Doctors Without Borders
• UNICEF
• MercyCorps
• İnsani Yardım Vakfı (IHH)

Do not waste anymore time, use that credit card and donate if as little as $1-5, coming from you and a few hundred thousand. That $1 would amass to maybe $1 million through the cumulative effect. You can make that difference, from the very comfort of your home with only a computer and internet access. I hope when you are done reading this post you will not hesitate to spare 30 minutes of your time and help Somalia.

While the beach scene may seem idyllic on its face, not everything goes smoothly on such occasions. A Palestinian woman, who has five of her brothers in Israeli prisons, and whose other brother was killed when he entered a settler religious academy armed with a knife, said, “This is all ours,” when she first entered Tel Aviv. The Israeli women reminded her, however, that his was their home. Another Palestinian woman admitted that her husband’s family did not approve of her visits, “How can you be with the Jews, they ask me, are you a collaborator?”

So perhaps the deep seated divide between these two people is still there, only to be temporarily papered over by an occasional act of defiance, an occasional visit to the beach. But something about this story struck me as significant. Perhaps it was the fact that women, and not men, were taking the initiative to defy the law, but in a gentle, and non-violent manner. Women, on the whole, seem to have a keen sense of right and wrong, and are not naturally inclined to obsess over ideological differences. Women have better things to do with their time. They tend to build bridges, not walls.

Our daughter gave birth to her fourth child this week. At a moment’s notice, my wife and she sprang into action, making the necessary arrangements to bring this child into the world, and to care for her as best they could. For the most part, the men sat back, watched, and marveled at it all. Who are women, I often ask myself. They are the givers of life, and the caretakers of life, and as such are uniquely qualified to reconstitute their societies consistent with a Vision of Hope, a vision of Peace, Prosperity and Freedom.

There are many instances, around the world, of a disconnect between the policies of government and the aspirations of the people. The majority of Israelis and Palestinians want peace, but their leaders seem disinclined to make the effort. In the Arab world, the man on the street wants a decent job and the personal freedom to live his life as he sees fit. And yet, the powers that be remain committed to a model that is repressive and out of step with the will of the people. In the United States, Republicans and Democrats, who are debating a solution to debt crisis, are willing to play a game of chicken with the full faith and credit of the country, which could wreak economic havoc in the U.S. and around the world.

Leaders, on all sides of the fence, get caught up in ideological traps, traps which imprison their thinking, traps which make it difficult to find common ground, and traps which make compromise a dirty word. At a time when global problems require global solutions, narrow-minded ideological positions keep us cooped up in our own little worlds. And it’s going to take more than a Day at the Beach for us to enjoy the light of day.

One of the Israeli women mentioned Rosa Parks, “…I admire her, because she had the courage to break a law that was not right.” Yes, but that was not enough. What was needed was a vision, a big vision of hope. Dr. King was a man possessed of such a vision, a vision of civil rights and equal treatment under the law. Ordinarily, Rosa Parks’ refusal to give up her seat on the bus, would have been a non-event. But Dr. King was no ordinary man. He was a man possessed of a vision, a big vision of hope. He saw in Rosa Parks an opportunity to give substance to his vision, and soon enough, the reality on the ground grew to fill up the space created by the vision. Such is the dynamic of change in the world, and such is the prescription for change in the Middle East.

So let us enjoy our Day at the Beach. Let us continue to push the envelope, just a tad, and without violence, to get our voices heard. But let us, as well, find the courage and the wisdom to give purpose to our passions. Let us embrace a Vision of Hope, a vision of Peace, Prosperity and Freedom, and let us give substance to that vision by changing peoples’ lives for the better, with new realities that speak louder than words, and which help to break the walls of ideological divides.

Please join us, with your comments, at www.sellingavisionofhope.org

The recent murder of Vittorio Arrigoni, age 36, comes to mind, although there are numerous examples to be found in all the nooks and crannies of the Middle East. Vittorio was an Italian activist and journalist, who chose to live in Gaza since 2008, and who championed the rights of Palestinians for the last several years. He was abducted quite recently by a radical Islamic group inspired by al Qaeda, and was used as a bargaining chip to pressure Hamas, the ruling political faction in Gaza, to release some political prisoners, including a Sheikh whom they consider their leader.

The group threatened to kill Vittorio if their demands were not met, and a short deadline of 30 hours was put in place. Perhaps the victim tried to convince his captors that he too was fighting for justice for Palestinians. But in the end, the group decided to mete out its own brand of justice. In an unfortunate turn of events, the group’s demands were not met, and Vittorio was strangled to death, even before the deadline had elapsed.

Up until several days ago, I would have thought that Hamas was pretty extreme, calling for such tidbits as the destruction of the State of Israel, and death to the Jews. But now, however, it seems that this Salafist group may be even more extreme than Hamas, murdering an advocate for the Palestinian cause, even as Hamas watched in disbelief, and was rendered powerless to stop it from happening. Is it possible that this extremist group, which has become a thorn in Hamas’ side, could be a wake-up call to Hamas, that maybe there is a better way to move forward? Perhaps, but I wouldn’t hold my breath if I were you.

Such is the nature of extremism. There is no stopping it once it takes hold. One act of terror begets another, as the cold-hearted calculus of our cause takes us to a place where there is no mercy, where almost anything goes, and where almost any heartless act of violence is deemed justifiable in the name of a greater purpose.

Aristotle taught us, a long time ago, that the truth is rarely to be found in the extremes. Rather, truth is usually to be found somewhere in the middle. In short, truth is not an extremist position. For example, if you were to ask Aristotle to define courage, he would probably say that it is somewhere in the middle between being foolhardy on the one hand, and being a coward on the other. It is somewhere in the middle, somewhere that Aristotle called The Golden Mean.

As we search for new paths in the Middle East, paths that are more likely to take us to a better place, we should never lose sight of the fact that there are people out there who will tell us “No!” at every turn. These are people who are very committed to their cause, and for whom failure is not an option. Many of them have convinced themselves that God is on their side, and they have no qualms about killing in His name, even though it is precisely His creatures they are killing.

We should keep the extremist agenda in mind as we venture forth to realize a Vision of Hope, a vision of Peace, Prosperity and Freedom. An opportunity exists, this time around, to make something happen along these lines. But the extremists will leave no stone unturned in their efforts to derail us. Therefore, we will have no choice but to commit ourselves as strongly to our cause as they are to theirs. We will embrace moderation as tightly as they embrace extremism. We will dare to see the world in shades of gray, as they see only black and white. We will accommodate ourselves to our sense of self-doubt, as they convince themselves of the certainly of their cause.

To triumph over extremism, we will chart for ourselves a course that is likely to take us to a new Middle East, and we will not deviate from our journey, even as fear and intimidation are thrust upon us. We realize that much of what preceded us has led us astray, and we know too that there are those among us who would wish to confound our sense of right and wrong, but we will be true to ourselves as we venture forth to what promises to be a promised land.

Please join us at www.sellingavisionofhope.org

For those who don’t know, Salman Taseer was an avid critic of Pakistan’s blasphemy laws, and he thought Asia Bibi should be pardoned for blaspheming about the Prophet Muhammad (may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). He was killed by his own guard Mumtaz Qadri in the name of Allah, for advocating a blasphemer. I could go on about how this whole issue was fabricated to be about blashphemy and minority rights when in fact it was a property feud, but I won’t because the fact of the matter is that whatever happened, happened because of what was believed by the public (Mumtaz Qadri) and what was brought to light by the media, NOT what really happened and whether it really even happened at all or not.

In one sentence: What happened to Salman Taseer was wrong. Period. It’s human life and it was taken away by someone other than Allah. This is haram.
All those arguments about killing people in the name of God, well, as fellow blogger and friend Mehreen Kasana said, “God does not need human protection.” And God sure as hell does not want you to take someone’s life because that is not what Islam preaches. How many times do we have to whip out the Hadith saying whoever kills a man has killed all of humanity.

I’m not going to go into details, because there are several other bloggers out there who do a much better job than me to provide you with all the evidence.

All I have to say is this: Mumtaz Qadri was not a hero, and Salman Taseer was no hero either. Salman Taseer was corrupt like all other politicians, and Mumtaz Qadri was a bigot like all uneducated, brainwashed humans. But Salman Taseer did not deserve to die like that, just like Aafia Siddiqui did not deserve to be treated that way, or the hundreds of other innocent civillians who didn’t deserve to die in drone attacks.
None of these humans deserved to die. Human life is not cheap, and it is NOT so worthless that we kill it because of our xenophobic tendencies.

Salman Taseer might have been wrong to advocate Aasia Bibi’s pardoning in a state that is run on Sharia Law, but that is precisely what Pakistan is not: run on Shariah Law. We don’t follow Shariah Law in any of our courts, we fight for democracy but whip Shariah out when it comes to blasphemy. Why don’t we follow Shariah for all those years of murders, for robbery, for theft? And what appalls me are the large number of people belonging to s0-called globalized, civilized population who advocate this downright ridiculous ’cause and are celebrating this murder as ‘Aashiq-e-Rasul’. It’s like one minute they were out there singing along to Munni and comparing her with Sheila Ki Jawani, and all of a sudden this is about protecting Islam and fighting against blashphemy.

As for Aasia Bibi, how do we really know for sure whether she committed blasphemy or not? Do we have evidence? And this is precisely where Qadri is wrong; to have killed without even knowing really for sure, without concrete evidence. To have killed at all.

I don’t support Salman Taseer, no. I don’t support any of the involved parties. Where was justice when it came to Aafia Siddiqui? Why didn’t Taseer sit next to her and address the media? Why didn’t Mr. Lion-of-Punjab be all fierce and heroic when Aafia Siddiqui was kept in a male prison? But I am against him being killed for voicing what he believed in. I will start believing in blasphemy laws when Pakistan starts applying them. Islam is not a pick and choose religion and I’m SICK of this twisted interpretation of a religion that spread a revolution solely through love, unity and good character. When the disbelievers cursed the prophet, not once did he curse them back, but kept showing mercy and love. He did not go around killing every single disbeliever who blasphemed. He corrected them through dialogue, through rationality and character.

Boycotting social media websites and internet, protesting around the city, suicide bombing, killing blasphemers and murdering their advocates is NOT in support of Islam. It will not implement Shariah in Pakistan, if that’s what you really even what. People seriously need to remove their brains from their buttholes and understand what the beautiful religion of Islam preaches.

STOP shattering the image of Islam and Pakistan. This is not who we are. This is not who we were and this is NOT what we were taught.

What about an idiotic statement like “I’m not racist but…”?? Urban dictionary defines “I’m not racist but…” as follows.

Something an idiot says just before making a comment that proves the idiot is, in fact, a racist.

This statement makes it easier for the speaker to make racist comment without knowing that he/she is passing one of the most stupid remarks. Respondent/listener to this speaker can see the racist comment coming after “but”.

Every-time you would hear someone saying “I’m not racist, but…” you can bet it will be followed by the racist/bigoted/narrow-minded phrase. People say this phrase often to cover up their racist attitude towards others.  They try to portray themselves as bias free, moderate, liberal, democratic, respecting diversity and religious freedom people.

Few days back, I was going through several videos on youtube.com regarding ground zero mosque controversy I found an interesting fact about a town named Mossman in Australia that its people are known to be most racist in the world. What I found there was the same rhetoric statement “I’m not racist but..”.

Why these people need to say it??

A blogger (perhaps non Muslim) answers this question and sums up the whole discussion in a very kool way by saying

“Bottom line is, if you’re a moron, and you’re going to say something bigoted, then just say it. Spare the “I’m not racist” rhetoric. Everyone can see right through your bullshit”

Related Videos
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_R6DfwqUSuY[/youtube]

*Originally posted at I’m No Superman
Syed Abdul Wahab Gilani
Author is an MS scholar of Management Science.
Member Youth Parliament Pakistan (Sargodha Youth Assembly).