On Syrian Drama...and Damascus

A short clip with the awesome Abbas el Nouri and his - "Yil'an Abu Sharafak!"

Syrian drama is frequently commented on these days, and rightly so. The most famous of these was Bab el Hara, which enjoyed enormous popularity during its second and third seasons but there are plenty of other series which have been just as good if not better. One of these is called al Hosrom al Shami - Damascene Sour Grapes (I'm not quite sure how else to translate Hosrom)*.

This series can only be described as an epic tale of a particular period of Damascus' history, at the start of the 18th century. The city is wracked by strife and conflict, the rich gobble up the poor and the honest starve to death whilst thieves grow fat. Although compared to Western shows the show appears amateurish at times, the acting was fantastic and the story line had wonderful twists and turns. I have to admit I am really impressed and can only recommend this to anyone who hasn't seen it yet.

In short, this is a dirty, lowdown view of Damascus far removed from the idealistic, macho vision of the city in Bab el Hara, where the bad guys are conveniently packaged as either the French or traitors. In this series there were saints and sinners, whores and virtuous maidens, thieves and honest men. The lives of all the characters are intertwined and linked in a way that only becomes clear near the end. More importantly, it had snide references to the excesses that Damascus has seen over the ages by those supposedly in charge of it.

This city has been tempting to many and has attracted all sorts of people over the years. In fact many people living in the city today, whether they are aware of it or not, are not considered true Damascenes by - ostensibly - the true Damascenes or Shwam. These are the old families who have been in the city for generations and regard her jealously as well as highly.

I think the show struck a cord because there was always this subtle insinuation about how people from outside the city were always bespoiling it. This is something I was constantly to hear as I grew up, about how beautiful Damascus was and how all these strangers moving in made it overcrowded, polluted and unsafe. In effect, Damascus was and is a victim of her own success. I know that those comments were tinged with class resentment yet I can't help feeling a twinge of regret for the Damascus that my father recalled growing up in, a Damascus that really was lush, green, clean and smelt of jasmine and roses. Where everybody knew everybody else. Idealistic, but he has a point. Early in the series rape is shockingly brought to the viewer's attention, the idea that the sacred, the pure, is bespoiled by evil. It is Damascus that has been raped, and the men who were supposed to protect her failed miserably to do so.

The series is laced with much sadness and you will sense something familiar in all the characters and what they go through. Nothing sacred is spared profanity and you reap what you sow - this is the lesson we are taught here. But more importantly, the story of Damascus is not over, it is still being written...

* I've got the disks for the second season and I'm tempted to watch the first episode before going to bed. If you haven't seen it, I recommend you do so when you have a chance. Buy it now on pirated DVD, available at all quality bastas in Damascus or in the stalls of Sheikh Muhiyeddin.

.

The Politics of Greed in the Middle East

Slowly making cautious forays into the international arena, Britain's new prime minister David Cameron has recently stated he feels 'anger' at the slow pace of Turkey's admittance into the EU. I'll bet he does. The strategy of keeping Europe as an exclusive Western club and keeping out the West's traditional and long time enemies, especially Muslim ones, has meant that Turkey, long the crown jewel of European powers in the Middle East, has forged new ties with unfashionable countries like Syria and Iran. Good.

Cameron is a wily one, and I think we should watch him closely in the coming years. He's recognised that the Bush-era ideological fervor will have to die down or be put away now that Europe and the United States are in a far weaker position than they were in ten or fifteen years ago. I'm sure he'd love to entice the Turks back to Europe, it will do no good at all to have a stable Middle East with two major countries like Turkey and Iran working together to establish free trade zones, diplomacy and economic ties at a time when the whole EU project is looking quite shaky.

Why shouldn't the Middle East be stable and create its own economic network? We have potentially enormous markets if a way of generating enough jobs and disposable income for workers can be found. It was like that once before and there is certainly no real reason why it shouldn't be so today. Unlike Europe the region shares a common cultural, religious or linguistic background. If one bond is not enough between two groups, then you can take your pick between religious, national or cultural ties. When all else fails, money for those who prize it above all else. It makes sense literally for these ties to be strengthened and for each local despot to draw from the well. To each according to his ability, to each according to his greed...to bastardise Marx's words.

So let's have that pup Cameron making his speeches (he is an excellent speaker by the way), it makes no difference. The real issue for the region has always been Israel and it is here where the likes of Cameron can hit where it hurts. It is simply not possible to create this project with a nuclear armed pitbull terrier killing all the chickens. But perhaps greed will succeed in moving the Arabs where religion and nationalism have failed. If Mr Cameron thinks it is a good idea to let Turkey "pave a road from Ankara to Brussels", somebody should remind the good prime minister that the road doesn't stop at Ankara, but carries on all the way to Tehran. And the traffic goes both ways...

.

Syrian realpolitik

I've been thinking hard about that niqab ban that was put in place by the Syrian minister of education and the more I mulled it over, the more things began to make sense. My first impulse in an earlier blog post was to avoid both sides of this argument, but seeing some of the stupid arguments made by people in support of it drove me to criticise both the decision and its supporters very strongly. Still, something just didn't make sense about the whole business.

In a way this is typical for Syria - it is a byzantine maze of intrigue, strange decisions and alliances. Why would Syria ban the niqab when we are the strongest allies of Iran, Hezbullah, Hamas and a more Islamic Turkey? Not only that, but the number of women this would have actually affected was, to my knowledge, negligent and hardly worth the fuss. No, the timing which came with the French decision to do a ban was no coincidence. I think this whole exercise was a PR exercise which complements Syria's regional strategy of positioning itself as the one the West can talk to. Syria will be the conduit to Iran, to Lebanon and the Palestinians. From an economic perspective it gives Syria that air of being "moderate" and this isn't bad if it wants to do business with Europe or its Arab allies. Syria intends to become the gateway to the real Middle East.

Domestically it's perfect. Syrians aren't really niqab fans and it isn't as prevalent as some would like to think. Those affected by it are not important or influential enough to kick up a fuss. Religious people are safe in the knowledge that the niqab is not a religious obligation, Syrian secular people can rest assured the country is not becoming a Saudi Arabia and everybody can start to "debate" and feel clever with arguments for and against this wise decision made by the powers that be. A completely artificial debate is generated, which can be a good thing. It is good to distract stupid people with something, it lets decision makers focus on the real issues without interruption.

Politics is beautiful sometimes, and I do think that the Syrians are masters of it.

.

Some people have too much time on their hands.

The importation of more stupid Western-style activism for the most ridiculous things continues. This time in Amman a woman staged a "lettuce-protest" in order to promote vegetarianism. Maybe next we'll hear about a branch of the Animal Liberation Front opening in Damascus or Baghdad.

.

Farid Alatrach - Kilmet Etab PART 1

Beautiful song from Fari al Atrach, I've neglected the great male singers of the Arab world for far too long, so I think it is time I address this imbalance. Enjoy...

.

"Nasrallah's big freak out" author's big freak out

So the author from Beirut to the Beltway felt like venting out after Nasrallah's speech the other day. Apparently this anonymous journalist believes nothing is permanent in Lebanon and that Nasrallah knows it. It would do him good to remind himself of that fact, as a man who places all his faith either in the United States or in Israel. Yes, nothing is permanent in Lebanon, be it the Israeli occupation of the South which ended in 2000, the myth of Israeli supremacy in Lebanon which ended in 2006 or that Lebanon would always be under French mandate or dominated by Maronite Christians. This wasn't so much Nasrallah's big freak out as it is a big freak out for people like the author of Beirut to the Beltway. Truly, nothing is permanent and Nasrallah knows it. It's a shame the same could not be said for the author of that article.

.

Sovereignty 101 for Arab countries

Scottish ministers and officials will not attend a US Senate hearing over the release of the Lockerbie bomber. I'm not particularly concerned with the details of the case, but I liked the response given to the United States, one which Arab states should take note of as it demonstrates what a sovereign country behaves like when its laws are questioned. Now compare this with the way Iraq's legal system is, the land where Hammurabi first passed his laws, and see the temerity with which the English or the American occupiers come to "teach" Iraqis how to govern themselves. It makes me want to cry. Well, not really. But I don't like it anyway.

"Clearly, the Senate Committee has responsibility to scrutinise decisions taken within the US system, and Scottish ministers and public officials are accountable within the Scottish Parliament system. That is the constitutional basis of our democracies.

"The Scottish Parliament's justice committee has already undertaken a full inquiry into the decision on compassionate release, and the Westminster Scottish affairs committee has also examined the issue in terms of the formal inter-governmental relations that exist within the UK. That is right and proper."

.

The Gorillaz are coming to Damascus. Some thoughts.

Syria's strange love affair with all things English continues with the imminent visit of the Gorillaz to Damascus. Apparently they will be playing at the capital's old citadel (once used as a prison), that is fast acquiring the new label of "downtown" amongst our uber-trendy fashion elites. You know there was another eminent British singer who visited Damascus many years ago, Samantha Fox. Shawaya* in Syria were wearing her t-shirts and playing her songs on cassette for years to come. I expect our chic neo-shawaya with their fake Beiruti accents to dazzle us all just as much.

*Shawi is the Syrian version of what are popularly referred to as chavs in the United Kingdom. The only difference is that the neo-shawaya today are rich whereas the older shawaya were not. This term is not to be confused with nawar, or gypsies. Although people described as nawar are commonly referred to as having no class, a shawi is just of a different nuance. Today's neo-shawaya can be seen dressed up smartly to go to KFC or congregating in the Shaalan to ogle the opposite sex. They are also intensely patriotic but don't know why. Ultimately they just aren't cool...

Anyway. Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you Samantha Fox...cringeworthy yet catchy.

.

لما انت ناوي - محمد عبد الوهاب

Thank you to the wonderful Lasto Adri for her refined taste in music.

.

Rereading al Ghazali

I like to revisit good books and now that I've successfully completed a post-graduate diploma in law I'm finding that my life is returning to some level of normalcy. This morning I leafed through the first of the four books of the Ihya that I have. I had read it before, in fact the other three books remain unread and if I complete it this time it will be the third time I have read it in its entirety, yet I still get new things from it.

This time I was struck by something I had not noticed before. al Ghazali draws a distinction between the traditional scholars of "Fiqh" or jurisprudence, who deal with the observance of The Law and those with knowledge of the "Batin" or inside. This might ring alarm bells with some traditionalist Muslims who will instantly exclaim that there is no such thing mentioned in the Qur'an or the Sunnah, but someone who pays attention to what he is reading will note the subtle meanings the author intended.

I'd already been thinking deeply about the idea that some knowledge can be reached but not expressed. If I remember correctly the Greeks called this kind of knowledge gnosis, or "irfan" in Arabic. One hint from al Ghazali was a brief phrase where he pointed out that the knowledge of the Qur'an and the prophets was different. Not like the calculation of mathematics, nor like the experience and experimentation of medicine, nor was it like the argumentation of the kalam practitioners. Yet these are the three areas that critics of religion demand of religous people. For al Ghazali, over 1000 years ago, religion was something different to what was popularly thought of it.

But what is it then? Well, he gives hints not too different to some of the cryptic hadith and some of the more vague Qur'anic phrases. Improving your manners, avoiding obscene and rude behaviour, contemplation, thought, all of these do not immediately give you a ticket to paradise, whatever that is. Instead, they seem to be cultivating and nurturing a person with a particular mindset who is only then capable of noticing certain things, or asking certain questions. I guess there is a point here. If you re-read a book you read when you were a teenager you will always notice new things and interpret things differently. Why shouldn't the same apply to something like the Qur'an or hadith, especially when it is your ego and self that you have been cultivating and looking after. In effect, it is about nurturing a human being that is truly honest with themselves, and sensitive to the effects of the world around them on their self. This human being would also be sensitive to the effect that they would have to the world around them, and be able to see how little actions can have much bigger consequences.

Such a person could then, with little effort, be able to see how words, mannerisms or actions could affect their surrounding world. Some people might be so successful, they could even change the course of world history. Prophets?

I'm going to leave blogging about this topic for now...This Ramadan will be interesting.

.

Thoughts on Afghanistan

Watching Channel 4 News tonight I find it amusing to see the pompous attitude of William Hague, Britain's Foreign Secretary, whilst making statements about the war in Afghanistan. Mark my words, there is no "Afghan" side to this war. This is a conflict purely between NATO and the Taliban and the minute the Western powers withdraw from Afghanistan there will be a complete collapse of the ridiculous Afghan government that cannot govern beyond its own cities.

One thing I found amusing was Hague's comment that British forces were there on the "invitation" of the Afghan government and with a NATO mandate. I racked my brains trying to think where I had heard that before, and remembered that was what the Syrian official position regarding Lebanon used to be. Meanwhile the death toll of British troops has increased to an almost steady trickle this week. Not that Mr Hague cares.

.

Iyad Allawi visits Damascus

The post-invasion Iraqi constitutional system is in tatters as the country finds itself with no government. It'll be interesting to see what comes out of the meeting with Syria's president and with Moqtada al Sadr. I have to say I have been neglecting events in Iraq for some time and there have been many changes over the past two years. I think I'll post something about that when I've caught up with events and had time to digest the information.

.

Some arguments used in support of Syria's Niqab ban

There are a number of arguments circulating popularly regarding the Niqab ban and I thought it would be helpful to outline the main ones and see whether they can withstand any scrutiny. I don't think it is helpful to provoke bitter and divisive debate about what will prove to be a highly controversial issue. Furthermore, and I hate having to do this, I have to say that I am not a fan of the niqab nor am I looking to Islamise any society. For some people apparently this disclaimer might make what I am about to say a bit more credibility. So in the interests of spreading some common sense, I decided to say it.

Here are the points and a brief outline of why I think these issues are non-starters for a debate on the neqab. From my point of view, the Neqab is an Islamic phenomenon, and the only appropriate response to it is using the Qur'an and the Sunnah and allowing young Muslims to know their Islamic rights and be able to resist being "fanaticised". The answer is not in poorly thought out decisions by the Ministry of Education.

The first argument is that it is alien to Islam and an imported fundamentalism which is incompatible with Syrian ways.

Firstly this argument is quite similar to the French "burka-ban" arguments. That somehow being essentially French precludes wearing such foreign styles of dress or that there is a typical Syrian. Firstly this is not an "alien" style of dress in Syria, our great grandparents all used to wear such clothing before the occupation of the French. In fact the alien dress is what most people in Syria are wearing today. If you want to ban alien forms of dress from hostile countries that have occupied us in the past, why not begin with the necktie or jeans? The United States carried out an attack on Syrian soil, killing Syrian citizens, only recently. Why not ban American forms of dress in light of such terroristic attacks? Or do we only tolerate the attacks and dress-code of some terrorists but not others?

The second argument is that it erases the identity of the woman and is sexist.

Assuming that such a noble and lofty aim as women's rights was behind the latest decision to ban the niqab, why then are women still being commodified in every sense possible in Syrian popular culture. An intense social pressure (similar to that which is allegedly imposed on Syrian women wearing niqabs) encourages many girls, and from a young age, to sexualise themselves. This is not to paint all women who do not wear Islamic dress with the same brush, but a rule which is aimed at one extreme whilst ignoring another is quite inconsistent. Those same people cheering for a ban on the neqab would go livid if somebody wrote an article calling for the ban of the mini-skirt, tight jeans or low-cut blouses. Both extremes are a minority in Syria, but only one of them is being banned through official government intervention. Why?

The third argument, quite sleazy, is that the neqab is being used as a front for prostition.

This is ridiculous and there isn't even an argument. Prostitution exists in all countries and comes in as many ways as there are to avoid prohibition and social disapproval. I'm sure there are plenty of prostitutes who do not wear a neqab, why does nobody have a problem or complaint about them?

The ban makes the problem more difficult for women forced to wear the neqab.

In this argument, women are caught between a rock and a hard place. Is there immense social pressure on some women to wear it, and are they threatened by domestic violence? The answer is yes. But this ban is not aimed at limiting domestic violence, there are just as many women who do not wear a niqab that are also victims of domestic violence. We should not confuse these issues.

Education requirements in modern Syrian universities require an academic exchange incompatible with the niqab

A particularly stupid argument made by someone I know is especially ignorant, but it is important I mention it because it has emerged before. This is a variation to a similar argument made in England that it is important for human social interaction that you can see the person's face when you are speaking to them. This begs the question, how are human beings able to listen to the radio or speak over the telephone then? As for being an impediment for academic exchange, that is ridiculous. There is a university in Syria called The Open University, where courses are mainly delivered over the internet and exams are undertaken in person. How does having a niqab affect this or any other type of academic exchange. The answer is simple, it does not.

There are security concerns for women with neqabs

This is the final argument used in desparation when all else fails. Again, this begs the question, were the people who assassinated Imad Mughniyeh, or who set off car bombs in Damascus, wearing niqabs? In fact has there ever been a case in Syria in the past twenty years where a woman in a niqab posed any kind of security threat? The answer is no. Furthermore, that is not the reason given by the Minister of Education Ghiath Barakat, his words were that he was concerned that these women will introduce fundamentalist ideas to young impressionable students. But if so, why are students who obtain their ideology from the United States or Europe still allowed to mingle freely?

The Ministry of Education's ban on the niqab is arbitrary and discriminatory. It introduces a dangerous new level of control over what people are allowed to wear, setting a precedent for more invasive measures in future. This is a poorly thought out and implemented decision and there should be a concerted campaign to call for the sacking of the Minister of Education.

.

Bassam al Qadi of the "Syrian Women Observatory" (I know, I've never heard of them either), has written a silly argument about why he supports banning the niqab in Syria's university campuses. Not once in his article does he consider that some women would choose to wear this voluntarily. But that is fine, because it's only wrong when the "fanatics" seek to deny a woman her voice. Men like Bassam al Qadi are allowed to speak for her instead because they know what she wants before she does.

Welcome to the ugly side of Syrian secularism.

.

More on the Syrian Niqab ban

Syria's Minister of Education, Giath Barakat, has given his reasons for banning the niqab from university campuses throughout the country:


"طلابنا هم أبنائنا لن نتركهم عرضة لأفكار والعادات المتطرفة", مشيدا بـ "أخلاق المجتمع السوري الذي اثبت على مر العصور الوعي والقدرة على التصدي للكثير من العادات السيئة وشارك بفاعلية وجدية في ضد حملات الغزو المنظمة

"Our students are our children and we will not leave them vulnerable to radical ideas" and he called upon the "morals of Syrian society which have proven over the passage of time a maturity and capacity in dealing with many bad habits and has been effective against organised invasion campaigns"


I suggest Dr Barakat starts by banning subversive television series' like Bab el Hara where all the women in these sinister historical dramas are shown to be wearing the niqab or "mlayeh" as some Syrians with false consciousness used to call it. Apparently these foreign ideas have been bubbling away in Syria for over 1000 years, ever since these subversives came in with their camels under their bloodthirsty general Khaled Bin Waleed. Thank God (can I still say that?) that we now have Dr Barakat to save our robust Syrian morality from this foreign invasion. Somebody should remind the good Minister of Education that we kicked the French out of our country over sixty years ago and that this is Syria, heart of the Arab and Islamic world, not France or Germany.

Elsewhere in the article he said he responded to calls by "concerned parents" who were worried about the influx of these women in neqabs who had joined the universities "under the pretext of getting an education". Yes, because it's inconceivable that these barbarians would actually be interested in learning anything to better their lives or futures. I mean look at them, they're following some kind of subversive and sinister ideology which is telling them they aren't allowed to steal, cheat, sleep around, smoke, do drugs, or drink. They should even work hard and think independantly according to these radicals. Apparently their Mullahs are telling them that they must seek knowledge, but we all know this is certainly a coded instruction to go and radicalise our delicate Syrian flowers with their corrupting ideas.

What on earth is a man like him doing as the Syrian Minister of Education, and what on earth is it his business telling students what to wear? Will he take a similar stance if, for example, concerned parents came to him asking him to ban the wearing of tight jeans by girls? Or do the precious morals of his Syrian society only go one way?

Click here to see what average Syrians on the Shabab Syria discussion forum think about this ignorant decision.

.

تحسبهم جمعا وقلوبهم شتى

There is a great article by the Independent today about the release of Megrahi. I know we can only speculate on what actually happened, but as the saying goes "there is no smoke without fire" and the alleged "deal in the desert" has left more than just a suspicion of what Mr Blair might have agreed on with the immortal Colonel. What is interesting, as it always is in such articles, is the timing of it all. You see in September last year there was an outcry, but the fact is that nobody was asking that Tony Blair be questioned in front of a US Sentate Committee. Fast-forward till today and you find the Americans are very unhappy about the whole Gulf of Mexico fiasco with BP, referred to erroneously by Obama as "British Petroleum".

We're being told that all of this is because British-American relations are at an all-time low. The reality is probably much simpler. There is a change of the guard in both the United States and the United Kingdom. It is no coincidence that a period of Republican rule in the United States largely overlapped with New Labour's dominance in the United Kingdom. Obama and his Democrats have no interest in the realpolitik of Bush, nor does Cameron appear interested in the pragmatic politics of Blair. This does not mean there will be a change of foreign policy for either country, only that, with the change of emperor, the old guard face either exile, the sword, or to drink poison. There is certainly nothing that dramatic on the cards for Blair or Bush's acolytes, but we can expect a metaphorical slap on the wrist.

The fact that BP has been "hung out to dry", so to speak, does not indicate any concern by the United States about the environment or making big-business accountable. It is about the bottom line, money. The United States has not been having a good decade and we can expect it to turn on more and more traditional allies if things get worse there. BP was also once known as the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, and it played a key role in overthrowing Prime Minister Mossadegh in the famous coup that brought the Shah of Iran, Reza Pahlavi, back to power. One journalist stupidly wrote that it is lucky the company doesn't have its old name, presumably because idiots like him will assume there is some connection to Iran. Kermit Roosevelt has some very interesting things to say about American and British collusion, and the assistance of the AIOC during that period.

The fact that BP's alleged involvement in all this is now the subject of American scrutiny tells us that nothing is permanent, and old friends could potentially become enemies again. But that is going too far. If the American's have any sense, they will wrap up this faux-pas, some matters must never be brought to light no matter how bitter an argument is, and this Megrahi affair is one of them. A quiet wrapping up of this story should be expected.

.

Debate as Syria bans the Niqab in Schools - كذلك كنتم من قبل فمن الله عليكم

Syria Comment has just posted a link claiming that Syria has banned the niqab in schools. No doubt this will attract all manner of comments and discussion. Very few people, I expect, will defend the niqab, rather they will be defending conventions on human rights. Those that attack it will range from the outright vulgar and anti-Islamic to the enlightened defenders of civilization who recall the good times of the twentieth century when life was a party and it was all just harmless fun.

The problem is I don't feel inclined to enter the fray on either side of this debate. I mentioned before that it is a sham debate, manufactured, and framed to elicit precisely the reactions that it does. I have seen discussions about banning the burqa or niqab arise from circles and people who, prior to the 2001 attacks, would have been seen as fringe elements of society, or at least they certainly wouldn't have felt comfortable saying what they do today in polite company. Today, after considerable numbing of people's sensitivities by the press and media, it is fine to say things about Muslims,. In much the same way as some circles of Muslims or "anti-war" activists I have been amongst said the most horrible things in a blaise manner that I found unsettling. But it was only possible for them to say such things because of the invasion of Iraq and the souring of the conflict in Afghanistan.

Up until quite recently I would have joined in the fray with much gusto but instead today I feel the urge to turn my back on these mad people. I just don't ask myself the same questions anymore. I suggest you all go and find your own way the best you can, nobody can give you understanding. It can only be discovered.

.

فيروز يا مرسال المراسيل

على صبح هل جمعة الحلو

.

عبد الحليم حافظ ـ جانا الهوى

.

Oum Kalthoum أم كلثوم هذه ليلتي وحلم حياتي

.

Burqa Debates

The burqa debate that is "storming" the continent is a manufactured one but it has the potential to become quite serious. Sadly you still have some Arabs who think that the European "Englightenment" candle was the brightest the world has ever seen, and this makes them strut arrogantly like peacocks, with a misplaced confidence. See the delightful Mona al Tahawy who thinks she is a feminist (she also thinks that's a good thing) but then does the equivalent of diving into the water to avoid the rain. Yes, Ms. al Tahawy has taken the brave position of supporting a ban on the burqa by restricting a freedom to restrict a freedom which she thinks will restrict freedom. On another note, observe in this other interview how she does not have to tell the interviewer even once that she used to live in Israel. Did you know that Mona al Tahawy lived in Israel? She'll tell you if you didn't... That she lived in Israel...because she did...you know?

.

The kidnapped Iranian researcher arrives in Iran, but...

I've noticed there is very little media coverage about the kidnapped Iranian researcher Shahram Amiri, who has just returned to the Islamic Republic following what seems like a period of captivity in the United States. This sparse coverage tells me some very important things. Namely that on certain key issues, mainstream channels appear to 'overlook' stories about their national governments that they are not supposed to focus on. Recall the British "IT" worker captured in Iraq a few years ago and only recently released. In that story too there has been very little coverage or follow-up on what happened to him, why he was held and by whom. This was maintained even whilst he was in captivity.

We live in a world where people can be kidnapped whilst on hajj, made to disappear, made to be heroes or villains, poisoned by radioactive sushi, or thrown out the windows of expensive London apartments, with complete impunity. Such a delightful maze of mirrors and smoke that we live in.

.

Maysaloon is now four years old

Four years and one day ago I decided to begin blogging. I also decided to post a blog on this day about a new story at the time, the capture by Hezbullah of two Israeli soldiers...Since that day Maysaloon has grown and developed into something beyond what I originally envisaged. Like everything in life there have been rough patches but as they say, what doesn't break your back makes you stronger. Today, like most people with no money and little musical taste, I celebrate with everybody's favourite has-been... I give you the amazing Walid Tawfik, the greatest singer the Middle East never had.

.

The Maqam's of the Athan - an interesting discussion

Thank you M for sending me this very informative interview about the scales used for the different Athans. Unfortunately the clip is not the complete interview, but it is still very interesting. A maqam is the Arabic word for a musical scale. There are many maqams in Arabic music, unlike in Western music which, according to my limited understanding of music, consists either solely or mainly of the Major and Minor Scale. These Maqams are grouped into some key parent maqams and mostly branch out with slight variations. These variations amount to the immense diversity we hear in different Muslim calls to prayer around the world. Except for Riyadh, where no scale is used, unless you can call awful a scale that is...

.

The death of a spy

The mysterious death of Ashraf Marwan continues to make headlines here. His wife has now claimed that the Mossad is responsible for his death and that, at the time, he had been hard at work on his memoirs which might have exposed various intelligence agencies in the region during the 1970's.

I think it is very likely, from what I have read about this case, that the man was murdered, and naturally a sloppy police investigation and lack of interest from British circles for the death of a very wealthy man of his stature is more than a little bit suspicious. But the question that puzzles me is why would anybody who wants to kill this man have waited for so long after the 1970's to do so? It has been almost forty years since the October War. What, if anything, would his memoirs have said that would be so outrageous to have in the public domain even after all this time? Unless it is not the memoirs, but perhaps something else that made him a target.

I'm sure if Ashraf was killed by somebody who was not liked by the British, there would have been an utter outcry,and no stone would have been left unturned to prove a connection. We saw a stark example of this in the sensational radiation poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko in 2006, the year before Ashraf's ejection from his expensive London flat. All this makes the silence by the British government absolutely deafening...

.

Warda : Isma3ouni 1 إسمعوني

The beautiful Warda...you know? If I ever had the chance, I would have married Om Kalthoum, Warda, Najat al Saghira and Samira Tawfik. If I were to have four wives it would be with these women.

.

عبد الودود

Happy Independence Day to Algeria...

.

The Maysaloon guide to being a Syrian Intellectual

In Syria, 'intellectuals' have a ready made template of authors, musicians, poets and public personalities that are rolled out to show how civilized and sophisticated we are. The list usually includes:

Muhammad al Maghut
Nizar Qabbani
Lena Shamamyan
Malek Jandali
Gibran Khalil Gibran

There will also be pictures of obscure Syrian painters with awful abstract paintings that my neighbour's four year old might have come up with. Usually involving naked women with strange contorted bodies and sagging breasts - because that's what you do if you're an artist. You draw rubbish which is offensive to people.

"Intellectuals" from Syria usually lack any substance, so make a habit of only reading the titles and synopsis of books, or read books which have fancy titles but are utterly incomprehensible or useless. They are also very good at doing the things they think an intellectual should do. To be one, there are certain key things you must master. See the list below:

1. Chain smoking - you need to do this to show that you are obsessed about your work, your cause or your struggle. The more outlandish the brand the better. When in doubt, pick something with a Spanish or French name.

2. Alcohol - you need to drink this like a fish. Work hard and play hard and all of that. It's also anti-establishment and you can't be a rebel if you just prefer drinking green tea or liquorice juice.

3. Massive library of books - the older the better. Doesn't have to be about any particular knowledge. Just cram in the odd book about some French philosopher, some books about poetry, and some books by other intellectuals. Also, it helps to scribble notes in the pages. Again, any books about sex, sexuality or atheism give you a massive boost. On no account must you have a book about religion unless it is critical of it.

4. Manic depressive - this aspect gives you that "troubled genius" aura. Usually you can get a good start on this by owning a few books by French post-modernist philosophers. No need to actually read what they wrote. If you're too lazy to try and read them in full, then just get some used copies of the books, put them on your shelf and memorise the author's name. It helps to remember a basic synopsis of what its about, then use liberally in your discussions. Sprinkle with some lines by Abu Alaa al Ma'ari.

5. Find a regular haunt - preferrably some cafe in a rundown old district. Sit there every evening and, by this time you should have mastered points 1-4, wait for a Western journalist. When they come, you can do one of two things. Either the "I don't care what they do to me anymore" nihilist persona, or you can try the persecuted intellectual approach, looking nervously over your shoulder and whispering things.

Some final very important points - Western journalists love it when you talk about homosexuals. So throw that in for good measure, and sex. Always mention something about sex. The other thing to remember, and you will usually be prompted if you forget, is to talk about how oppressed women are in the Arab world. You've got to get the right balance between self-righteous indignation and despair. Usually this works well when you've sorted out the manic-depressive bit in step 4.

There you go, the Maysaloon 5 step guide to being a Syrian intellectual.

.

Arbitrary death sentences

A 43-year-old Iranian woman is facing death by stoning unless an international campaign launched by her children forces the authorities to quash what her lawyer calls a bogus conviction.

Firstly I would like to point out that I in no way identify myself with the international human rights perspective which is taking the lead in the outcry about cases such as this which occur in countries like Iran. I find the basis of their arguments to be abhorrent, and were it not unjust to side with the opposing view, I would support the Iranian position. But I cannot. The Iranian court judgements concerning the stoning to death of people guilty of adultery are applied in far too arbitrary a manner and, in my opinion, contrary to what the Prophet and the Qur'an teach.

There is no question about what the Qur'an says concerning limits that must not be crossed, especially concerning issues such as theft, murder, adultery and even perjury. In the case of adultery, it is unfortunate that news articles carried by the Guardian carry very little, if any, information about the cases or the reasoning of the judges. There is a famous hadith concerning the Prophet's dealing with an adulteress which affirms the very strict limitations that must be placed on applying so strict a punishment. Even in Christianity, there is the famous "Let he without sin cast the first stone" saying which affirms both the existence of the prohibition and the strict limits on applying the punishment.

You do not impose the حد or limit by handing out death sentences like chiclets. The role of a judge is an awesome burden and not one to be taken lightly. The Iranian judges should never be allowed to forget this fact.

.

"Days of Glory" (aka Indigines)

Rachid Bouchareb was recently the centre of much attention at the Cannes film festival due to his controversial film "Hors la Loi" (Outside the Law). Most of the criticism came from the "French Algerians" who took exception to the content of the film and its portrayal of the Algerian war of independence. Perhaps it was in order to avoid such controversy that his earlier film was given the ridiculous title of Days of Glory, rather than Indigenes, which means the farmers or natives in the French language. In Arabic the title of the film was given as البلديون which might mean the country boys but I think I am missing a local Algerian nuance in assuming that.

Still, the title was not what irked me, but rather the synopsis of the film, which seemed to indicate that the film was about the brave heroism of Algerians who wanted to defend their "Fatherland", France, from occupation. Upon watching the film, one quickly realises that the film hints subtly at the irony, and lunacy, of mostly Berber men being enlisted at the start of the film to save France. It seemed an accurate portrayal of some of the naivety that was perhaps present amongst many of these young men who were sent to their deaths in the killing fields of Europe. Later, however, we notice that all is not well on the liberty, fraternite and egalite front. Black soldiers are not allowed tomatoes like their French counterparts in the mess, African soldiers were not given the same luxuries that white soldiers were given, and ultimately, the sacrifice of these Algerian men in the war was never acknowledged.

The film might have been portrayed in France as highlighting the plight of these men and their bravery in helping to liberate that country, but I think any Arab or Muslim watching this film will feel something quite different. There is a distinct realisation that it was not only our countries that were exploited, but the souls of generations of fine young men and women were crushed and expended. We were cannon fodder then and we are so now, cheered on by the occupier's jingoism.

Following the end of the Second World War, the French committed the worst massacres in Algeria to keep it decisively as a province of France. These massacres were the catalyst for Algeria's war of independence, a war that would earn the country the sad title of بلد المليون شهيد (The country of a million martyrs). It will take more than creative repackaging of a DVD to hide this true nature of the relationship between the two countries. Somehow, the theme that the ideals of a French revolution betrayed Algerian Muslims who "were good enough to be French" is a tired one, and unconvincing. The film, however, is excellent and I strongly recommend it. Some of the scenes were heart-wrenching and the characters were people you could really connect with. Massaoud, one of the characters, and his relationship with Irene, a French woman, brought a touch of sadness and romance into this film, and another human perspective.

I look forward to watching Hors la Loi when it is released.

.