The Syria Revolution Video click here

Over its’ short life the Internet has provided platforms for various forms of social media that are changing the world. Power is being returned to the people by giving the individual an unprecedented ability to communicate and organize.

This is perhaps the most powerful form of democratization that the world has yet to experience, as the revolts in Tunisia, and Egypt have demonstrated.

Now, due to recent protests in Algeria the government of Abdelaziz Bouteflika has filled the streets with thousands of riot police and has resorted to firing plastic bullets and teargas art the protesting crowds, according to many western news agencies. Yet the most telling reaction of this corrupt and unpopular government was the interruption of access to Facebook and other social media accounts, caused by the disruption of Internet services in the country.

The Internet attack was directed towards those calling for an end to the oppressive government of President Abdelaziz Boutifleka, as well as sites organizing the mobilization of protesters in various cities in the country.

“The government doesn’t want us forming crowds through the internet,” said Rachid Salem, of Co-ordination for Democratic Change in Algeria. Reported Nabila Ramdani of The Telegraph Newspaper*

Reports from Algeria also indicate that the government is restricting people’s movement by controlling the entry into some cities in Algeria, and that many reports of the protests by the public and journalists are being blocked where possible by the government, although some information is supposedly being transmitted through alternative internet servers.

The revolt, that began with the internet communication of the martyrdom of Mohamed Bouazizi in Tunisia in December 2010, continues to threaten other governments in the Middle East including the Syrian Baath Party and President Bashar-al-Assad, as well as President Ali Abdullah Saleh, of Yemen who allegedly has said that he would not seek another term in office.

Go here for the Facebook page http://www.facebook.com/Syrian.Revolution, although this demand for change has apparently come mostly from Syrians living abroad as access to this social media network is officially prohibited in Syria.

As with the unrestricted distribution of information through Wiki Leaks, the Internet has begun to hold governments and the powerful people who are involved within these organizations accountable to the public at large for their actions. The public is beginning to have access to unrestricted information that is exposing the unfair governmental restrictions on the media in many countries in the west as well as in the less democratic governments of the Middle East.

Finally the public is being able to organize peaceful and coordinated protests and have their voice heard by the world.

* Sunday 13 February 2011  The Telegraph – Link here

In December 2010, a twenty-six year old youth, Mohamed Bouazizi, protested the abusive power of the government that had been ruling for most of his short life. Mr. Bouazizi showed his defiance by committing suicide by immolation, an act of self-destruction that marks his death in a way that is unlike others as it was a form of protest set with purpose and conviction.

In our difficult world today, we see suicide as a terrorist act, an act of war, performed by an extremist sect for specific political purposes, or as desperate behaviour of the mentally unhealthy. Yet, self-immolation has had a long history dating back to Hindu and Buddhist vows of sacrifice, and has only slowly become an extreme form of protest.
As a result of the communicative power of the social media in which we live, the lonely death of Mr. Bouazizi has not only set off a series of imitation suicides across North Africa,* his death has radically changed the political situation within Tunisia. The normally inconsequential loss of a single individual in poor rural Tunisia by suicide has started a chain of events that has caused the government of Zine el Abidine Ben Ali to fall and the citizens of Tunisia to claim their right to self-determination. In a region of the world that is commonly held by dictatorial leaders, this rare form of protest has pungent significance as it is certainly a reflection of the hopelessness felt by much of the Arab public, and has become a symbolic expression of dissidence in countries intolerant of any expression of political opposition.

As with the cases of self-immolation in the United States during the Vietnam War, the government successfully restricted the media from publicizing these deaths.** It is expected that this would again be the case, as the Arab governments in Egypt, Mauritania, Algeria, Yemen and Saudi Arabia, among others hurry to prevent any mention of these acts protest.

As with all suicides, this was a desperate reaction but one that requires monumental commitment and retains selfless purpose, for Mr. Bouazizi’s action was neither for his own nor his family’s benefit. Like the protest of Thich Quang Duc in 1963, who’s self-immolation in Vietnam was in protest of religious discrimination, so was Mr. Bouazizi’s suicide the ultimate form of protest crying out for the freedom from oppression and the right to economic liberties that should not be unreasonably withheld.

Although this behaviour cannot be encouraged, like the suicide bomber, this is an act of last resort and it was not without effect, this protest against an oppressive authority was heard by the world. Although his motives appear to be of despair and disheartenment, there remains an innocence within this act of self-destruction, but the most disturbing aspects of all was that Mr. Bouazizi felt that he had no other way of drawing attention to his plight.

As difficult as it is to commend this act of suicide, it would be much more acceptable to the world if we were to consider it an act of martyrdom to benefit the people of Tunisia and perhaps the Arab world.

*A Brief History of Self-Immolation By Josh Sanburn Thursday, Jan. 20, 2011. Time Life.
www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2043123,00.html
“The latest count of protesters who have set themselves on fire in North Africa is up to eight, with four in Algeria, two in Egypt and one in Mauritania, as well as Bouazizi’s act in Tunisia.”

**Norman Morrison, Alice Herz, Roger LaPorte, and George Winne, all died in or due to injuries received in acts of self-immolation, as protest in the United States.
Buckley, Thomas. “Man, 22, Immolates Himself In Antiwar Protest at U.N.” New York Times 10 Nov. 1965: A1+
Jones, David R. “Woman, 82, Sets Herself Afire In Street as Protest on Vietnam.” New York Times 18 March 1965: A3

WikiLeaks brings some truth to our lives for the first time in a long time.

As our governments hide behind secrecy laws and information gathering techniques that conceal their disrespect and disregard for the law and the lack of accountable for their actions.

Jonathan Weller describes in the Huffington Post several reasons to celebrate the Wiki Leaks phenomena, his points are:

1. “anything that reminds the powerful that they cannot act with complete impunity all the time has to be a good thing” “given that the direction of public life has all been away from holding the powerful accountable, consider the WikiLeaks disclosure a (small) reversal of that most unwelcome trend.”
2. “we’re getting a lot of important information here, things that the public has a right and a need to know, including disclosures about malfeasance and wrong-doing by government agents, without a lot of downside except, again, to embarrass those agents and their bosses.”
3. “The leaks have also, one can hope, helped to expose further the lie that is the notion of a liberal US media.”

Indeed the actions of WikiLeaks have allowed a transparency that brings to light the misdeeds of many governments and now with the arrest of Julian Assange the denial of bail in a sex-crimes investigation only reminds this writer of the actions of the Malaysia government in the jailing of their opposition leader on sodomy changes.

I for one, support an organization that places the truth and transparency of the actions of our governments ahead of their claims that WikiLeaks has placed in danger the lives of agents for those governments.

The trumped up charges of sexual misconduct against Julian Assange are at best dirty antics.

Call for the return of our Freedom of Speech

WikiLeaks can be found presently at wikileaks.ch
References
Jonathan Weiler Professor of International Studies, UNC Chapel Hill

The full article can be found at this link.

by Madeleine Albright The Huffington Post (Nov 11, 2010)

The signatories below and I welcome the many initiatives that are underway among governments, in civil society, and within the religious community to expand areas of cooperation between the Muslim community and other actors. President Obama’s trip to Indonesia this week is an important example of the high-level attention that must be given to these relationships. Despite such efforts to enhance communications, serious obstacles remain. In almost every part of the globe, there continue to be people who have chosen — whether out of ignorance, fear, or ill will — to sow conflict where reconciliation is needed. It is up to responsible voices on all sides to make the case for constructive action based on shared interests and values. This is a duty that extends beyond governments alone, to include decision makers and other people of influence from all sectors of society. The standard we seek to achieve is not mere tolerance, but a widespread attitude of genuine mutual respect.

As former foreign ministers, we have a particular interest in solving practical problems. We favor policies and initiatives that will improve the environment for cooperation across the boundaries of nation and creed. We recognize, of course, that the present state of relations between Muslims and the West must be viewed within an historical context and that the terms “Muslim” and “the West” refer to entities that are resistant to easy generalization. We also acknowledge that the prospects for success will be profoundly affected by the future direction of events in such areas of conflict as Afghanistan and Pakistan, and by progress in the Middle East peace process. We believe, however, that certain broad steps can and should be taken to strengthen the foundation for intercultural understanding.

First, we must be willing to conduct an honest self-examination that does not gloss over differences or duck hard issues. Superficial courtesy is easy, but the path to agreement on the application of moral principles is arduous. A dialogue that matters will examine, among other topics, the legacy of imperialism, women’s rights, freedom of worship, the criteria for just war, educational standards, and the appropriate relationship between religious and civil law.

Second, we must communicate better by eliminating from our vocabulary terms that recall past stereotypes or that reflect ignorance or disrespect. The idea that the West has singled out Islam as an enemy is nonsense; so is the allegation that Islam provides a rationale for terrorism. On whatever side, the actions of a few cannot be used to condemn the many.

Third, we must emphasize the firm connection that exists between democratic and Islamic values while also heeding the lesson of Iraq, which is that democracy must find its roots internally. Neither Islam nor any other religious faith should be used to justify despotism or to validate the suppression of civil society.

Fourth, we must establish common ground on questions of immigration and integration in all of our countries and others. Leaders in and outside of government must search for answers that take into account economic and demographic realities, while discouraging reactions based on prejudice or fear. Here, as elsewhere, a balance between rights and responsibilities must be maintained.

Finally, we should continue to expand business, scientific, academic, cultural and religious contacts that provide a social bridge connecting the Muslim world to non-Muslims in the West.

There exists no single instrument for transforming relations. There are, however, a number of tools that can be used by political, religious, business and academic leaders to generate progress. These include official policies, educational initiatives, and public-private partnerships of all types that reinforce certain basic precepts, such as:

• The common moral foundation of the three Abrahamic faiths;
• Respect for human rights based on the legal equality of persons and the inherent dignity and value of every human being;
• A rigorous commitment to truth – in official pronouncements, in the media, in the classroom, and on the Internet;
• Support for broad-based economic development so that young people everywhere are able to look to the future with hope; and
• An honest effort to view the world – historically and contemporaneously – through the eyes of the “other.”

Improving the overall relationship between Muslim communities around the world and the West is a task that has political, religious, intellectual, social, cultural, and economic components. It requires the best efforts of leaders from all sectors and from both sides of the divide.

Governments must not shy away from a leading role in this process but rather constantly strive to guide and develop mechanisms for integration in their societies. It will take time and require patience, but the objective is vital if we are to learn from, not repeat, the mistakes of the past.

Madeleine Albright – United States

Halldór Ásgrímsson – Iceland

Lloyd Axworthy – Canada

Shlomo Ben Ami – Israel

Erik Derycke – Belgium

Lamberto Dini – Italy

Alexander Downer – Australia

Jan Eliasson – Sweden

Rosario Green – Mexico

Igor Ivanov – Russia

Marwan Muasher – Jordan

Ana Palacio – Spain

Niels Helveg Petersen – Denmark

Lydie Polfer – Luxembourg

Malcolm Rifkind – United Kingdom

Adam Daniel Rotfeld — Poland

Jozias van Aartsen – The Netherlands

Hubert Védrine – France

Knut Vollebaek – Norway