9am: I’m currently on a trip to the US this week, both to Washington DC and to San Francisco that is geared towards journalists and citizen journalists. The “social media tour” is essentially a schedule of meetings with the US State Department and the White House, being exposed to how the Obama administration is using social media for public policy. The second half of the trip takes place in San Francisco, where we get to tour the offices of Google, Twitter, Facebook and Apple – getting to see how they work and what they have planned.

For full disclosure, this trip is arranged by the US State Department, and is part of an exchange program that has been running for decades, and actually – just a bit of history - Abdul Salam Majali was the first Jordanian to go on such a trip in his early days. The program has obviously evolved over time, to where it is today. In any case, the point of this trip is to get a sense of best practices when it comes to social media and public policy. As someone who is heavily involved in social media and is academically involved in public policy, I thought this would be a great opportunity to see how those two world collide. During trainings we often conduct with 7iber, Obama’s use of social media during his campaign has become a classic example of how these tools have been used to mobilize and spread information. Suffice to say, it will be interesting to see the architects of that social media strategy.

This post will be an online diary of the trip where I’ll just express various observations.

9:30am: Getting in to the State Department is like walking in to an American airport.

10am: Just met Secretary of State, Hilary Clinton in the Treaty Room at the State Department, but unfortunately she only had time for three questions. Fadi from the Palestinian News Network fortunately got to ask her about the recent situation that unfolded last week when Vice President Biden visited Israel on a peacekeeping mission only to be informed by the Israeli government that they were planning on building 1,600 illegal settlements in Jerusalem. Her response, while a bit lengthy, essentially boiled down to the US’s “commitment” to establishing a two-state solution and “whenever the Palestinians do something wrong, we will speak up, and whenever the Israelis do something wrong we will speak up.” Diplomatic answers for a diplomatic job. For a moment, I was reminded how close she was to getting the democratic nomination last year; a hair away from the presidency.

Her appearance was unscheduled so there was no time to really prepare for questions, but had I the chance, my question would have likely been about recent moves by the Jordanian government to censor the web. As she was speaking I remembered her speech back in January regarding free Internet. And while that speech was likely targeting China over Google’s decision to disband from the country and escape its Great Firewall – it also took place around the same time Jordan’s Supreme Court ruled on a case, opening the door for prosecution of what is said online. A draft of a Cyber Law by the government was also leaked online causing even greater worry, especially by local electronic newspapers who felt targeted. I mention Clinton’s speech because there is a belief in some circles, by some people working in this sector, that it was that speech that inspired the Jordanian government to put any moves towards web censorship on the back burner. I am not one of those people.

10:40am: Gathered in a room full of journalists who are all in the middle of doing write ups. It’s always interesting to distinguish between those who are working in mainstream journalism and those involved in social media; the latter always have nothing to do when there are no wireless connections around. For some odd reason, the State Department gets “nervous” with wireless connections and so there are none inside the actual main building. They also get “nervous” with cell phones, laptops, recorders and any other kind of electronic device – all of which are banned from important rooms like the Treaty Room.

12pm: Met Alec Ross, who is Clinton’s senior advisory of innovation. People in my line of work are pretty familiar with his name, as Ross was one of the architects of Obama’s social media strategy during the campaign, and was one of the co-founders of One Economy, the non-profit that a did a lot of great work in the 2000’s regarding bridging the digital divide (the bee hive, for those of you more familiar with that website, was one of their offspring). Ross talked a great deal about social media and how the state department has been using it. That ongoing experiment is something that’s pretty exciting to watch; the ways in which it evolves naturally. Ross mentioned the recent earthquake in Haiti and how, via the state department, they were able to create the messaging system that allowed Americans to donate $10 with an SMS the day after the news, raising millions in the process.

Tuesday, March 16th

9am: At the Newseum. Probably one of the most interesting museums I’ve ever had the pleasure of visiting. In a modernist design it blends the archives of history well with modern happenings. At its heart is a 4D theater that hosts the story of some major developments in American media and journalism history, including Nelly Bly and Edward R. Murrow. The museum is an archive of media history including a section dedicated to Berlin wall, and includes several slabs of the actual wall, as well as a section dedicated to 9/11, creatively displaying an endless series of front pages from around the world covering the next day’s news. The museum opened in 2007, but it is an ongoing evolution it seems. The blending of digital technology with a medium as old as newsprint is simply fantastic. One wall displays the front pages of newspapers from around the world, of that very day. The nerve center of the museum, filled with a team of people running the technology that fuels the place, is actually a transparent room that resembles a control room at a typical news station – so you get to see people at work, running the museum.

11:30: Off to the Democratic National Convention.

12pm: Today is an interesting day simply because Obama’s controversial health care bill is being debated in Congress, so everyone in government seems to be busy, including those meeting with us at the DNC.

12:15pm: At the DNC, meeting with two interesting individuals who worked on Obama’s campaign (I’ll update their names later on), specifically developing the social media strategy. These guys were at the forefront of the political campaign and were leaders in a story that is told and retold in social media circles. It is one thing to be an architect of such a strategy and be involved in the macro-planning of it, and it is another thing to be on the ground and getting to see what works and what doesn’t. Their experience, regardless of what politics, is priceless.
What is perhaps interesting to note is that social media for them may be better defined as digital media. In other words, what was used in the campaign was well tailored to areas and states where Internet access is low (reminding me Jordan). There was an enormous reliance on the use of mobile phones, which again reminds me of Jordan. The fact that mobile penetration is so much higher than that of the Internet is a major variable. Messages have to be tailored for that specific technology.

Fortunately, they stuck around long enough to take a great deal of questions. Again, it’s a busy day, even at the DNC.

It’s interesting to note that most of the group accompanying me, while young and willing to recognize the power of social media, are still mainstream journalists who do not quite connect with it on a human level. Having studied the Obama campaign’s social media strategy quite well over the past year, I managed to ask one question that I always wondered about. Having moved from campaigning to governing, how has the strategy changed with regards to that one fluctuating variable: passion…? During a campaign, people are hyped. The atmosphere is energetic, be it those people working on the campaign or those people who are being mobilized or those audiences being addressed. People are generally hyped and passionate about what’s going on. But what happens when the campaign is over and the passion shift, and gets divided in to small bits? When it’s no longer about choosing a presidency, but choosing a health care plan, or even smaller policy issues on a very local or state level. What impact does social media have then? Is it directly proportionate to the level of available passion on-the-ground?

1:30pm: Leaving the DNC only to find that the circus is in town. No, I mean literally. The circus is in town. Two dozen elephants marched right past the DNC prompting its employees to take a break from a very busy day to watch the march from the building’s terrace. If the Democrats lose the vote, let it be known that their employees were distracted by a circus outside their windows when they should have been manning the phones! Sounds like a Karl Rove tactic.

2pm: Unfortunately, the meeting at the White House was canceled and instead we are skipping forward to the Capitol Building to take a tour and meet with congressmen.

2:25pm: You can hear protesters outside the Capitol building. Some calling Obama a savior - others calling him a socialist. Socialism in the US is of course equivalent with Satanism, mainly due to Cold War era Hollywood produced anti-communist propaganda.

2:40pm: Getting in to the Capitol Building is a hassle. It’s exactly like security clearances at the airport except the security guards are almost always commanding and aggressive with people. This is perhaps a universal truth it seems. Empower the most blue-collar of workers with some authority and they will almost always use weild it in the most aggressive manner, and at the end of the day they’re “just doing their job”. Shoes off, jackets off, laptops out, bags scanned.

4:00pm: Tour is never-ending. Having just read Dan Brown’s The Symbol, my mind is constantly looking for all the Masonic symbology in the building including getting a first hand look at the image lining the ceiling of the rotunda, the apotheosis of George Washington. All history aside, I am simply dead tired of walking at this point, as is everyone else it seems.

4:10pm Gathered in a room where congressmen usually get sworn in, we await congressmen Byrd, a republican from Utah. He makes an appearance and takes some questions. His answers are of the conservative variety, including the typical “bombing Iran should always be an option on the table” response. Inspired by a commenter on this blog, I ask about the house bill that targeted arab media. He doesn’t remember the bill or the vote on it.

9pm: The day is long over but I decided to go for a walk, aiming to see the White House before I leave. Lost somewhere near the Washington Monument and George Washington University, I finally find my way. It’s much smaller than I imagined. I’ve seen villas in Abdoun that are bigger.

Interestingly, some protesters still linger outside. I arrive at the moment when they are clashing with just an ordinary Washington resident whose passing by and is probably an Obama supporter – at least from what I gathered from their rantings back-and-forth. The police are there, and trying to keep both people calm and far apart. The Obama supporter screams at the protesters “If you don’t like America, you can leave!”, which is usually what gets screamed at other groups who are demanding their rights and in the process deemed un-American (i.e. immigrants). It was hilarious to see it being thrown at a bunch of out-of-state conservatives.

Wednesday, March 17th

10am: Off to San Fransisco for a series of meetings with Facebook, Google, YouTube and Twitter. Or, in other words, the coolest part of this trip.

11am: The whole team is divided in to groups, with each group consisting of a small number of journalists who are lead by one person from the state department team. The idea is that this will help us get through the airport quicker. A paper with the names and groups is passed around the bus. My name appears at the top of group 1. Everyone in group 1 is Arab. This is no coincidence.

1pm: Upon getting our border passes and checking our bags, we head down to the security clearance area. We have been warned beforehand not to take offense of their security measures. We have been warned several times. What is interesting is that none of these warnings make things any less offensive. Approaching two security guards whose job is to look at our passports, visas and boarding passes before letting us go through security clearance, every Arab is told to step aside while others are allowed through. Slowly, one by one, group 1 reunites miraculously. At this point we are laughing at our predicament. The last person in our group is Moroccan and as he steps up to the TSA employee, I tell the other group that he might be the only one to get through. My theory is that Morocco is a fantasy like country with romantic notions that have been long embedded in American culture, specifically Hollywood movies. In other words, it isn’t necessarily deemed to be an Arab country. My whispered theory is a half joke but the Moroccan is allowed through, so I don’t know, I could be right.

We are then escorted by a TSA officer to a “special” line at the security clearance. Typical procedures take place. No shoes, no jackets, no belts, laptops out, bags separately, and then through the metal detector. Right after we pass the metal detector we’re put in this transparent quarantine box that probably has the dimensions of an elevator. What’s hilarious about the situation (and at this point I’m laughing a great deal) is that other people in the security lines next to us, pass us by casually, with everyone trying not to stare at the Arabs in the box.

One by one we are taken out and patted down. And I mean patted down. I mean every inch of us. In detail. Like, one of those 5 minute pat downs where it would’ve been just easier to undress completely. The funniest part is that the security officer is informing you out loud that he is patting you down, and that at this point, he is going to touch your sensitive areas with the back of his hand. To be fair, the officer assigned to me was fairly respectful, in contrast to the guy next to him. He uses the word “sir” after every sentence, and for some reason we all found this to be funny. It’s the equivalent of someone telling you not to take offense. “Sir, please spread your arms and legs while we violate you, sir. Thank you sir.”

Then our feet are checked. Then our palms are swabbed for chemical traces. Then our carry on bag is completely emptied. Every thing is checked. Every electronic device is swabbed and run through a machine. Every paper is looked at. Laptop is turned on and off. Swabbed. Scanned.

Eventually this entire process, which for an ordinary person would probably take 10-15 minutes, is over for us in over twice that time. We then proceed to have lunch at Wendys.

5pm: Arrive in San Francisco. Finally, a city that is bright, sunny, green and alive.

9pm: Walk along the Wharf down to Pier 39. It’s St. Patrick’s Day so people, the overwhelming majority are white and probably not Irish, are dressed in green and heading out to bars to drink the night away. It’s a tradition. No one knows why.

Thursday, March 18th

8am: Off to Facebook.

10:19am: Speaking to Barry Schnitt, Director of Policy Communications at Facebook. The place is actually pretty small, right off Stanford University. I don’t think Schnitt even got through his presentation before being bombarded by questions. It’s fascinating to hear questions from people who are from all over the world, and thus, ask questions that are more geared toward their locality. Most of the questions are laced with underlying notions of privacy. Obviously, in the Web industry, Facebook and Google are the two main entities that the world looks to when it comes to the question of online privacy. While Google has traditionally taken the lead here, Facebook is quickly becoming the principle actor in the spotlight for obvious reasons: it’s a world based on the notion that people are creating profiles of themselves, loaded with information about themselves.

On a side note, it’s actually great to be in a room where you can actually sit at a table and blog, take photos, record with a flip, and when your laptop runs low on power, charge it with the dozen Apple adapters at the table. And more importantly, there’s a stellar fast Internet connection, which helps you stay connected to news about Facebook - in case one runs dry on questions.

10:31am: An interesting question asked is about Facebook’s categorization of disputed and/or controversial territories, like Palestine, specifically Jerusalem. The answer was that their mission is to let the user choose instead of choosing for them. However, what they’ve done is (supposedly) programmed this choice according to language. So, hypothetically, if you have Facebook in Arabic, Jerusalem will be categorized as, well, not Israel. Don’t know if that’s accurate or not.

11:15am: The next two people speaking are off the record. For a company like Facebook, which is typically known as being the young, hip and cool organization - they’re really pretty uptight about information and giving out information.

—
Please note that there are a great deal of typos and grammatical errors as the main aim for this post is to be updated quickly and on the road. I will review the language later.

More photos and videos to be added.

Like I said, this is an issue many would prefer to avoid - some due to the belief that it does not affect them personally as they do not write or comment or interact in any shape or form with that arena of “red lines”, and some due to the fact that they do not see how a censored Internet in Jordan will affect them or change the way they do things. This approach is a bit unfortunate in my opinion, simply because censorship is something that affects an entire society and finds ways to trickle down. From the information we receive to the way we interact and behave - the lingering presence of laws and penalties for speaking ones mind induces self-censorship at the highest levels. And the ripple effect is endless…

Lastly, to those cynical of social media’s ability to “change things” I don’t think I need to recount the cases where the opposite has been found to be true. But at the end of the day, the idea isn’t to simply post, tweet, comment and spread the word around in hopes that the Jordanian government will wake up the next day and shift the paradigm. It is about creating a conversation that is online and permanent. It is about creating awareness and generating interest. It is about rallying together in hopes of laying the groundwork for something bigger and better. That’s why these tools are important, regardless of the demographic that one may be convinced are their users.

Without awareness, without that conversation happening on the grassroots level, then nothing can ever happen. No movement can ever be built. And thus nothing will ever change.

We have to escape from this mindset that we are individuals and not a collective; that we are powerless; that we are too small; too insignificant; that we can play no role in the decision and policy-making process that determines the very way in which we live. We have to escape from this mindset that has had us believing it is up to the government to determine for us what we rights we are allowed to and what rights it believes we shouldn’t have. We have to escape from this mindset that has disabled us for so long and raising awareness at the most fundamental level is the first step.

The task isn’t easy and it’s almost always a long journey. But personally, I find some comfort in the words of anthropologist Margret Mead:

“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed, citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.”

Thanks to all.

“More and more states are enacting or considering repressive laws pertaining to the Web, or are applying those that already exist, which is the case with Jordan” - Reporters Without Borders, Internet Enemies Report, March 12th 2010

While Jordan didn’t make this year’s Internet Enemies list, to join the likes of fellow Arab nations such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Syria and Tunisia - it is undoubtedly on the path towards this notorious list. Jordan has never been known for its free speech, only its “relative” free speech, or, in other words, its ability to remain “less worse” than neighboring nations who have more extreme speech conditions. This doesn’t make Jordan good or great, simply better than the disparaging context that surrounds it, which isn’t saying much at all.

As everyone in the Kingdom knows by now, 2010 started out only several weeks ago with the government seemingly on the march towards Internet censorship - or as they like to call it, “regulation”. While a supreme court case set a precedent, behind the scenes there seemed to be movement to enact a “Cyber Law” that would reign down a flurry of regulation of free speech online. As I wrote back in January, such moves are classic attempts by the Jordanian governments to implement policies that directly contradict His Majesty King Abdullah’s proclaimed vision for the country. This is not uncommon practice in the Kingdom, but it is nevertheless a case of citizen’s receiving guarantees on one hand and broken promises on the other.

However, in recent weeks, it has become abundantly clear the government’s problem with the Internet is the surge of electronic newspapers that have emerged in recent times. In some cases, many of these electronic newspapers have tread into scandalous territory, be it in hopes of generating sensationalism and thus traffic, or settling scores using a free medium, or guaranteeing advertising revenue. For the latter, those working in the traditional media sector have commonly attempted to point out how some of these electronic newspapers have sought to secure advertising on their site by blackmailing people, companies and organizations, with threats of launching online campaigns against them. In that vein, some of the content that has emerged on some of these sites is typically tabloidish, even going so far as to call people crooks (with no provided evidence), or even making haphazard claims about their character and their families.

The government is in a bind. If it regulates and enacts cyber laws it will be perceived by the international community and by human rights organizations such as Reporters Without Borders, as being oppressive. And while such prospects regarding human rights has never stopped the government in the past, relative free speech and expression may be one of the last things going for it at this point in time, and the government cannot afford to look increasingly oppressive in a delicate investor climate. On the other hand, there is the sense that something needs to be done to stop what is being said online.

Thus the first Pavlovian instinct of the Jordanian government: enact laws. Regulate. Censor. Prohibit. Threaten.

It is a gray line and the government is probably aware by now that it cannot have it both ways. It must choose a path.

However, one has to wonder, are there not already laws that one can utilize if they are slandered online? Can these laws not be used by ordinary citizens as needed? The answer, in my opinion, is a resounding yes. This is a country where if someone says something about you, you have the legal right to pursue them, even if they said it online. So why enact laws that regulate all free speech, in order to ensure the prosecution of some irresponsible speech. Moreover, why risk legal ambiguity, as witnessed in that court ruling earlier this year, in the last remaining real estate of freedom in Jordan?

Simply utilize the laws already in existence, which protect the rights of all citizens against defamation. The only sticky point here is that government officials should not be allowed to sue electronic media or any other form of media while in a position of political power. Stepping down from that position and pursuing the law as ordinary citizens is one thing - doing it from a political pulpit in a country where the separation between the executive and judicial branch are questionable at best, is simply wrong.

Moreover, the government’s progressive instinct when it comes to a so-called Cyber Law, should theoretically be to have a law that protect intellectual property online or protects people and organizations from spam or identity theft - not enacting a law to prosecute people for what they say online.

Lastly, when it comes to electronic newspapers or any other newspaper or media publication for that matter - free speech is meant to guarantee the freedom of all. Protecting the right for a tabloid magazine to say whatever it wants to say is the only way to ensure that “legitimate” publications have the right to whatever they want to say. Tabloids and scandalous material will always have its audience, be it in Jordan or elsewhere, and there isn’t anyone on the ideological spectrum that doesn’t roll their eyes at them. But the economic argument is that people tend to utilize their right to choose. The forces of the free market determine what is deemed credible and legitimate and what is not. In the overwhelming majority of cases worldwide, “legitimate” media always gets the share of credibility from the readers, i.e. the consumers. Those lacking credibility tend to slowly face their own demise due to lower demand and thus lower sales.

The government responding to these publications with censorship only lends them legitimacy and credibility, and there is no entity that offers a surge of credibility in Jordan than its own government. We’ve seen this in the political sphere as well as the media arena.

So on today of all days, I hope these words can inspire some good sense in decision-makers, and hopefully Jordan can continue to remain off that Internet Enemies list.

Over the past year, pieces on the board game seem to have been shifting adversely - from the parliament’s lawsuit against Khaled Mahadein’s online article to the very recent case that was brought to the country’s Supreme Court, which resulted in a very unfavorable ruling - to revealed designs that the government may be planning to implement a “Cyber Law” to regulate the online world.

All of these moves, and more, are implications that we, as members of this online world, are under threat. What we say and what we do online is under threat. The guarantees once made are slowly disappearing in the face of increasing government intervention.

In other words, there has never been a more important time to fight back, to take a stand, to speak up, to mobilize, to say something.

As a Jordanian blogger I can only call on those who are fellow bloggers to take this upcoming day as a chance to voice your support for a free Internet in Jordan.

For my fellow tweeps, I can only ask that you come together to tweet those posts produced by the blogosphere, or tweet your own messages in support of a free internet. Perhaps we can use the single hashtag of #FreeNetJo to unite our tweets.

Put up a badge found on RWB, or wear a twibbon. For those participating in Blog About Jordan Day, feel free to make this topic the subject of your post. You can also join the Facebook event and pass it on to friends just as a way to spread the word locally.

Let’s simply come together on this day (and yes, I know it’s a Friday) to do something that says to the world and to our government that we are present, that we stand for something, that what we think and say matters, and that it matters enough to stay free and uncensored.

Blog, Tweet, Retweet, Comment, Spread Posts, Wear a Twibbon, Join the Facebook Group, Invite your Friends!

Be EVERYWHERE!

Spread the WORD!

THIS IS AN ONLINE RALLY FOR FREE SPEECH IN JORDAN!

Thanks.

I don’t ever recall any one on this level being detained on suspicion of corruption in Jordan’s recent history - at least not this publicly. Without a doubt, the view from the street suggests that this is the first dose of credibility for the Rifai government’s push on anti-corruption and pro-ethics “movement” that has traditionally been all-talk and little action.

Obviously, the real test lies in what happens next. Most of them will post bail no doubt (they can afford to buy the prison itself 100 times over), but whether this unfolds in to an actual trial, it will be a sight to see. The Jordanian equivalent of putting Al Capone on trial.

But as someone who is old enough to know better, I wouldn’t hold my breath just yet.

The first step is to put Jordan on the map. Literally. The supporters map on Earth Hour is a reflection of commitment and Jordan should not be the country in the Middle East with a mere 500 supporters. Let’s aim for at least 2,000 this year…

Simply add your name or organization here and let’s get that number up.

Court transcripts said the victim had been staying with the defendant at the time of the murder as her husband had been in prison for the previous two years for a criminal offense.

“The defendant noticed that his sister was talking on the phone for long hours and suspected that she might have been involved in an extramarital affair,” court papers said.

“He decided to get rid of her to defend his family’s honour and acquired a knife for that purpose.”

On the day of the incident, the court added, the defendant waited until three of his sister’s four children went to school, then entered her room and started stabbing her without a word. [source]

It baffles me - not the crime - but the way people think. Yes, to most men, talking on the phone for more than 4 minutes is a waste of time and any male who has long conversations on a phone is probably talking to a significant other (that’s just how we think) - but to simply apply this as justification, actually, worse, to apply this as reasoning is just. I don’t know. Is there a word for it? Has any language yet to invent the appropriate adjective?

I have struggled to understand the concept of honor in our society, and since I confess to living in an urban bubble where the same social and cultural dynamics are not as applicable as they are elsewhere in the Kingdom, I continue to struggle to understand how honor in Jordan is understood; is cleansed, and, more importantly, to what extent it is cheapened when it leads to death for the most frivolous of reasons. In these social environments when family honor is the most cherished of treasures, to what extent is it devalued when someone decides to kill his sister for talking too long on the phone, or even worse, for being abducted and raped?

Understanding it takes in to account that most Jordanians invest an immense sense of pride in honor and will destroy anything that tarnishes it. Thus, the young girl becomes the biggest liability - the biggest target and source of shame for a family. For all sexual transgressions are anchored to the young females of the family who are quickly married off in the name of preservation. And understanding that is, for me, difficult. I can’t claim to know what it’s like to live in these specific environments. I can’t claim to even imagine the difficulties that come with living in a community where your honor is essential to your co-existence. I can’t claim to understand how a 69-year old man could so easily shoot his daughter on her wedding day and…

…When the police and criminal prosecutor arrived at the scene, the father fired several rounds in the air, saying he was celebrating the killing of his daughter, an official source close to the investigation told The Jordan Times at the time of the incident.

“I have cleared the family’s name and cleansed my honour. Let everyone in my town know that I killed my daughter for this reason.” [source]

It just baffles me.

Perhaps the legal solution is no longer the right solution. Perhaps it is time to redefine honor. Perhaps it is time to shift mindsets by using the same weapon that motivates these killers: shame. Perhaps it is time to tie shame as the outcome of an honor crime rather than the crime being the path to overcoming or avoiding shame. For it’s not honor that is obviously the issue here, it is the shame that comes with that honor being tarnished.

It would be interesting to see a national campaign that takes the word “shame” to a whole new level. Something grassroots. Something simple and straight to the point. Something that creates an environment where someone who kills in the name of honor suffers more shame than he ever imagined possible. It would be interesting to see it applied to judges, tribunals and even any member of parliament who votes down any attempts by the government to change the law. It wouldn’t need to be a document or a petition - just a simple symbol. A brand. A brand that people can easily identify and will do anything in their power not to be caught dead being associated with it. A brand like a scarlet letter.

Anyways.

It baffles me.

With a gigantic deficit of at least JD1.4 billion on our back, it seems that pointing out the country is drowning in debt is simply an understatement these days. While some are asking where that money actually went, the natural government reaction is of course to tax the people who are already struggling to make ends meet. Yes, perhaps one of the better policies to emerge in recent times was the decision not to tax incomes under 1,000JDs and that is arguably representative of the vast majority of Jordanians whose income is no where near that figure. However, in lieu of this taxation, one’s income is taxed on pretty much everything that moves under the Sun. From staple goods like rice, sugar, coffee and tea to blood. Yes, blood. You know that joke that the only thing left for the government to tax is air, well I’m pretty sure that it’s not only true these days, but that there are probably policies in place that tax air as well, framed nicely as an environmental policy.

When times are financially tough, households will always tighten their belts. This is a natural reaction of the people. If you suddenly make less, or if you suddenly have to pay more for what your dinar is worth - then tightening the belt is in order. In other words, when times are tough people look to their own households (or purses) to put things in order. The higher and more comprehensive the taxation, the greater the tightening, which of course is a natural reaction that never helps a government climb out of debt, especially when it needs people to spend and thus fuel the machinery that is the national economy.

However, the important part here is that the people look to themselves first, usually because they have no other option. The government seems to rarely do that. When economic plans are announced regarding addressing the deficit, they usually involve new taxes. But how many times has the government announced that it will look to tighten its own belt? I would argue that it is a rare occurrence. In the past 12 months, while new taxes are introduced some of the biggest cases of corruption have appeared and then, ever so promptly, disappeared - never to be heard from again. Were they resolved? Was the money, which at times stood in the millions, ever recovered? Corruption, it seems, continues to be on the rise in the public sector and this is just judging by the amount of press coverage it has received in the past year alone. It is an industry that represent millions upon millions of dinars leaking through a public sector in shambles. If one is drowning in a sea of debt does he not look to at least attempt to plug the holes in his own boat first?

What about over-expenditure? What about mis-expenditure? Is the government in a position to do some self-reflection and determine what it does and doesn’t need in terms of its own expenditures? Based purely on observation, every year it seems we see government officials being driven in the absolute latest Mercedes or SUV - and this is despite the presence of a policy determined to encourage the purchase of hybrid cars. Do these vehicles alone not represent millions - do their consumption of fuel (which comes out of the taxpayer’s pocket) not represent millions?

Or how about the state-owned Jordan Television, which somehow manages to house 1,850 employees, 300 of whom are just gardeners; 150 of whom are just drivers. If the minimum wage of JD150 is applied here (just as an example) then those 300 gardeners represent JD45,000 monthly, or JD540,000 annually. The 150 drivers represent JD270,000 annually. This is just in one public institution. I’m not calling on everyone to be fired, I’m simply asking if JTV needs 300 gardeners and/or 150 drivers?

The list goes on and on, and I’m sure if one simply analyzed the cabinet’s budget for the year they’d see unnecessary expenditure at a time when belts require tightening. It is actually in the government’s interest to tighten its own belt simply because it not only costs it a whole lot less than taxing the people, but because getting people to spend will inevitably yield higher returns a la the multiplier effect.

I missed my five year blogoversary by one day, which is perhaps a testament to the difficulty of finding time to blog these days. Yes, I haven’t been blogging as much as I would like to these days. 7iber has me occupied most of the time lately. But nevertheless, it has been five years since this blog was established and since then it has taken me on an long and winding journey. Along the way some of the posts here have sparked some of the most interesting conversations in Jordan I’ve had the pleasure of reading. Along the way a little community grew. Some of whom even chastise me for not posting enough during those hectic times in my life when this blog becomes a luxury. Some even send emails during those absences to make sure I haven’t been “hauled away”. Along the way it has surprised me. Whether it’s a public official leaving a comment or a post consisting of a single picture and a caption being able to spark a 40-comment long discussion - this blog has surprised me. Along the way I’ve voiced my frustrations with specific Jordanian issues only to find that many others share those same frustrations. Along the way it became my mouthpiece. Along the way it became my refuge. Along the way it became the refuge for others. Along the way it has changed as I have changed. Along the way it has fluctuated. Along the way it has become a chronicle of evolving personal viewpoints. And for that especially I am thankful. For what good is a blog that has lasted for five years only to demonstrate that its author has never changed his mind?

I will be making an effort to blog more often. I will also be making an effort - and hopefully soon - to redesign this space to host a new look and feel. In the meantime, thanks to everyone who has been reading, commenting, following, spreading, sharing, fighting and writing throughout all these years.

And although I am a poor man who can barely cover his own hosting fees, I still want to show my gratitude to this growing community by having a little contest to celebrate the blogoversary. Here’s how it’ll go…

1) Search the blog and select your absolute favorite post and/or discussion on The Black Iris.

2) Leave the link in a comment on this very post along with a single sentence (aim for no more) of why you’ve chosen it.

3) The commenter who leaves the 50th link will get a $25 gift card from Amazon.

You can only post a MAXIMUM of TWO comments with a link, and let’s establish an honor system because I don’t want to have to check ip and email addresses to make sure there’s no voter fraud. We’ll probably see enough of that later this year during election time.

In the case that no one leaves a comment or we don’t get to 50, the gift card goes to me. And yes, I’ve already picked out a book!

AP PHOTO - A Jordanian man looks at clothes inside a lingerie shop at a shopping mall in Amman, Jordan. Jordanians, like the rest of the world, celebrate Valentine’s Day in the 14th of February every year.

As many probably know or have read by now, many of the Tawjihi results that were released yesterday were indeed false, due to, what is being reported by the Ministry of Education, as a technical error. The issue was naturally brushed aside as just a normal error that is simply no big deal. It probably couldn’t have come at a better time to highlight what I was talking about last week regarding our educational system. It is interesting to note that despite the fact that it probably was a technical error (which affected 41,000 students in the country) it is yet another strike against the credibility of the tawjihi system, which in the past decade has faced various similar fiascos, including students getting their hands on the exams beforehand, the supposed publication of various unsolvable mathematical questions, and now this, a technical error producing the false results of tens of thousands of students. Can you imagine the faces on all those kids who were driving around all of yesterday honking their horns and hanging outside their car windows waving flags. Now who’s going to tell them that they probably failed? How can the next generation of tawjihi students ever trust their government enough to spend the day honking their horns in celebration ever again? That’s unfortunate.

But on a serious note…

Naturally, there have been calls for the resignation of the minister, which anyone with half a mind would tell you isn’t the solution to the greater problem. Heck, it’s not even much of a solution to this particular problem. The prime minister has requested an investigation, which is code for some low-level employee who burned the CDs with the grades and distributed them to the publishing websites being fired shortly.

And we won’t have to hear about anything related to tawjihi for a couple of more months.

UPDATE: Feb 8th. It seems tawjihi students have launched a protest this morning outside the Petra News Agency demanding a retake of the exams and citing their lack of trust in the results. Lack of trust and an erosion of credibility is a predictable result of this fiasco. Moreover, the government seems to be standing by the Minister of Education, claiming that a resignation is not on the table.

And while these words, and many more, have been brewing in my head as of late, for some reason I was struck dumb when I saw today’s advertisement on their site, promoting a company that offers Internet for US soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is the self-described: “Premier Satellite Military Telecom in Afghanistan and Iraq. Internet in Afghanistan and Iraq especially for U.S. Military Personnel, Contracting Officers and DoD Contractors we deliver VSAT equipment to most of all military addresses in Afghanistan, Iraq and the Middle East, within 5-7 days.”

I know even Jordan’s role in these words is sketchy, but I mean, come on - as a newspaper, can we at least be subtle? Are there really no other advertisers for the Jordan Times? Should we start a fundraiser?

Just a fleeting thought…

Click to enlarge.

AP PHOTO - A veiled Jordanian woman walks next to billboard with a model picture promoting a hairstyling show in Zara Expo in Amman, Jordan Tuesday Feb. 2, 2010

Yesterday, I received that annual message from Orange Telecom, which I’m sure most of you have gotten by now. The love letter reads:

“Dear Customer, wither reference to the law of the additional Annual University fees, kindly note that 1JD will be deducted from your balance. Thank you for your cooperation.”

What is interesting about this message is that someone at Orange thought it was probably a good idea to be a bit transparent with the customers who have just found themselves inexplicably 1 dinar short this month. I wish this was the same kind of transparency we, as citizens, could expect from our government. No one is told why this money is deducted (1JD for most Jordanians is a lot), and more importantly, where it goes? How much is raised (judging by the incredibly high market penetration I assume it’s a lot)? Who is benefiting?

But I’ll get back to this in a while. Allow me just to back track a bit, because this week there was also another interesting message that we all may have heard, and this time it came from outside the country. From Davos in fact. Where upon Her Majesty Queen Rania, on a panel discussing global education, she said these words:

“There is no better equaliser in this world than education; it’s the greatest justice you can give people.” [source]

The great justice indeed. Without a doubt, Queen Rania has been relatively good on this issue. There are few people on the world stage today that are wielding their celebrity to tackle this issue, and that is something Queen Rania has definitely done. However, as a Jordanian, my focus tends to be homeward bound, and it forces me to wonder what’s been done locally.

Some wonderful initiatives have been set up and our lead by the Queen herself - be it the Madrasati initiative that attempted to bring private, public and civil society sectors together to improve the infrastructure of schools, or even the Teacher’s award that looks to honor the best educators in Jordan, which in itself is setting an experimental incentive for teachers in the country. The Queen has also built an elite private school in the center of the affluent west Amman, as has King Abdullah who also saw fit to allow registered Iraqi children to study in Jordanian public schools a few years back.

There is also quite a bit of royal involvement with Injaz - a USAID-funded project that has done a number of interesting things inside the classrooms of Jordanian public schools. The list goes on and on. The impact of all this is still out as it education is one sector that takes a significant amount of time to demonstrate actual change.

However, what we do know is that little has changed in the educational curricula, i.e. what students are actually studying. We know that the Tawjihi system is a mess. We know that university students who have just graduated can easily find a job teaching 7th graders in public schools even though they have no training in teaching methods and are actually graduates with with low aptitudes when it comes to their field of study. We know that some of the university programs that applicants with low Tawjihi scores can apply to, include Islamic studies as well as journalism and languages. We know that while officials boast about the number of higher educational institutions in the country and the rise in educational tourism, but that few have noted the dwindling numbers of Arab student enrollment or the fact that no Jordanian university has made it recently (if ever) to the globally-compiled list of the best 500 schools in the world. We know that public university classrooms are indeed overcrowded - as are public schools - and that the eligibility criteria is massively flawed. We know that upon graduation from Tawjihi there are students who receive royal grants that vary from the increasing of their GPA to financial scholarship to the reserving of a seat in a university program - and we know that these students can range from those whose parents are teachers, refugees or from the army as well as citizens applying through the royal court.

We know our national curricula lacks any room for critical thinking or even creativity, with the standard ministry textbook being widely accepted as gospel and pretty much the only source of information for Jordanian students expected to eventually compete in the information age as part of a knowledge-driven economy. We also know that while officials boast about Jordan’s high literacy rate that, in reality, measuring literacy in Jordan has never been an exact science (i.e. one that would produce realistic numbers) and, in fact, many, many students cannot read or write at a comprehensible level, while even more drop out in order to work medial jobs - typically in car maintenance.

But above all, we know that there is no money. Teachers are underpaid, schools are underfunded, programs are cut, and any chance of reforming the actual educational curricula, which as at the crux of the issue, is deemed almost hopeless due to the hefty price tag that comes with such a pursuit. In fact, according the minister Walid Maani, a five-year plan to overhaul the entire system will cost JD395 million, which we obviously do not have, and what little comes our way is typically donor-driven and thus unsustainable by mere definition.

“Let’s admit it. It is a matter of money in the first place. We cannot make a single move without the necessary funds.” - Walid Maani

The problem is not just a lack of funding but that we are yet to truly come to terms with our status quo. Our national numbers do not seem to reflect the realities on the ground, which many of us are privy to observing or even experiencing first hand. The system is as strained as it can get, not only due to a population of which the overwhelming majority are students, but add to that the many non-Jordanian students, such as Iraqi refugees who now have access to public schools.

And while initiatives that look to upgrade the physical structures of the classroom are indeed important, I would argue that what’s being taught inside the classroom (and how it’s being taught) is just as important. We honor our teachers with competitive awards, but the reality of the situation seems to suggest that instead of awards, the government needs to stop hiring university graduates as teachers and, instead, send them to teaching school, as is the international experience.The lack of proper teaching methods as well as the proper experience is one of the main reasons there is no room for public discourse, critical thinking or creativity inside our classrooms and this due to the fact that teachers were never taught how to teach.

Moreover, what money we do have or have managed to garner, seems to be spent almost haphazardly. These 5-year plans seem to be geared towards upgrading our systems from their current conditions, when in truth, they should be geared towards making us globally competitive within 5 years. Naturally, this is no easy task, but it depends largely on where the money goes and how it is spent. With this in mind, it is perhaps time for the government to bring the public along for the ride. Education is pretty much the number one issue that communities worldwide are heavily involved in but unfortunately, in Jordan, like many other issues, it is one that the public has little involvement in. Even parent-teacher associations seem to be missing, and thus, for the most part, parents are completely uninvolved with their children’s learning and development - a major step that would render them the best advocates for what they are learning to begin with. For this to happen the willingness to be transparent needs to happen and that is something I, and perhaps most, are convinced the government is somewhat incapable of doing - even on the level of informing people where that 1JD goes.

The will seems to be there. The fact that education is highlighted in what I would argue is an unprecedented manner is an important first step. The fact that there is recognition from the very upper echelons of power is something. But it is not enough. The personal involvement of either a queen or a king is not enough to move this particular mountain. Celebrity isn’t going to do it this time; it is a task for communities and their open and consistent discourse with the authorities.

The saying in Jordan since I can remember is that people are the country’s only asset. I would argue that in the 21st century, a competitively educated people are the country’s only asset. For Jordan, education remains the country’s only silver bullet.

For those who read Roald Dahl’s Fantastic Mr. Fox during their childhood, or thereafter, Wes Anderson’s adaptation is definitely a fantastic take. Written by Anderson and Noah Baumbach, Fantastic Mr. Fox isn’t exactly a childhood classic as much as it is an adaptation for the more mature audience. Filled with the platitudes, aesthetics and deadpan humor that make an Anderson film so engaging and real, Fantastic Mr. Fox brings adult characters to life in a stop-motion animation that is perhaps more likable to younger audiences. But the script and directing has all the tell tale signs that one is watching an Anderson film, and like most of his movies - from Bottle Rocket and Rushmore, to The Royal Tennenbaums and The Life Aquatic - audience will either fall absolutely in love with it, or hate it. As a fan of Anderson’s work, I am admittedly part of the former group.

While the plot of a fox who has a knack for stealing chickens but is forced to retire from a life of crime in order to enter fatherhood is simple enough, the story is really about how a character like Mr. Fox (voiced by George Clooney) grows tired of fighting his natural instincts. He attempts to get back to his old career of thievery unbeknown to his wife, Mrs. Fox (voiced by Meryl Streep) only to face off with three farmers who spend the rest of the film trying to kill him. Similar to most of Anderson’s movie, the protagonist is a flawed character in search of that blaze of glory - always scheming, always falling apart, always coming back at the last minute for a moment of redemption after coming to terms with their true nature. “I’m a wild animal,” Mr. Fox admits in a scene of honesty with his wife. But beneath the dominating layer of that single character are others who are struggling to come to the forefront, such as Mr. Fox’s son, Ash (voiced by Jason Shwartzman) who tries everything to live up to the high bar his father has set just by being his naturally talented self. Ash is of course ignored and passed off as being “different”, but nevertheless sets off to prove himself and find his proper place in things before the story ends. The film is steeped with the undertones of a dysfunctional family trying to stick together during a crisis meant to tear them apart.

The animation is incredibly simple and enjoyable. Like most of Anderson’s movies, the characters seem to always be dressed in 1970’s style corduroys, and keep to a certain aesthetic. It is probably not a film intended for children, but rather one that plays straight to the heart’s content of much older audiences, particularly those familiar with Anderson’s work and perhaps waiting to see if he is able to break away from his traditional formulaic film making and create something new. Surprisingly, he manages to accomplish the latter while keeping true to the former.

By my book, it is arguably one of the best films of 2009 and does for stop motion animation what no other film has ever dared to do.

Also Watch: The World of Roald Dahl and the Official Featurette

It’s fairly interesting to note the number of corruption cases that seem to have made headlines in recent months. This past year in fact has arguably been one of the most corruption-laden years in recent Jordanian history. From Basem Awadallah being accused of human trafficking and his subsequent resignation, to Sahel Majali being involved in dubious behavior regarding the Decent Housing Decent Living - an initiative to offer affordable housing to less fortunate in the country. And if these weren’t high profile enough, they were followed by a stream of embezzlement cases. From missing money at the Ministry of Industry and Trade, to missing money at the Ministry of Agriculture, and more recently, the Greater Amman Municipality (GAM).

Naturally, it is difficult, if not downright impossible to prove most of these case. The ones you can are the ones that likely done by lower level employees who can be used as scapegoats, and tend to be involved in cases of outright stealing, which is relatively easier to prove. The high profile cases are not only impossible to prove - no one even bothers with them. In the case of Awadallah and Majali, for instance, corruption tends to manifest itself in the most intricate of manners that is often difficult to catch it unless you have some understanding of financial structures. Nevertheless, the result is usually a resignation or political marginalization, and then you never hear from them for a long time. At least until things have settled down, and they’re brought in again. How did they get caught in the first place? No, it’s not due to investigative journalism (although the media does play a role) - in my opinion it is usually due to one of two things: the country is just too small to keep secrets that big, and often you’ll find that in these high-profile dealings, someone gets rubbed the wrong way, someone is cut out of a deal, someone holds a grudge, and thus, someone leaks the story.

This is of course just my opinion, and while that usually counts for little, it is however somewhat reflective of public perceptions regarding government corruption. And politics is, after all, all about perceptions.

Enter the Rifai government.

From a so-called Code of Conduct, which is slowly becoming a trend, to various anti-corruption “measures” being taken, we are lead to believe that the government is taking corruption seriously. For anyone who believes any of this, a closer examination of the political landscape is desperately needed. How can any government take corruption seriously simply by signing a document it wrote up itself, and making several speeches? Fighting corruption requires setting up automatic mechanisms that are here to stay, usually in the form of independent entities that have both the power and the authority to deal with corruption no matter who is involved. Be it a minister or an employee.

But we don’t have that, and it doesn’t look like we’re heading in that direction any time soon. In a recent statement, Rifai said something I found quite interesting. It is along the lines of the same recycled language regarding corruption that we’ve heard many times before in Jordan:

“It is the state’s first enemy: it weakens public confidence in government institutions and contradicts equal opportunity and justice, in addition to its disastrous impact on the reputation of the country’s economy and investment environment,”

I find these words interesting simply because public officials tend to always politicize and economize corruption. It’s always about public confidence or investor confidence - there’s always something at stake, something to lose. But no one ever stands up and says you know what, corruption is immoral. The reason corruption rubs people the wrong way is because of the morality that surrounds it. It is that morality, or rather immorality, that manifests in the people being wronged. Instead, we say corruption is bad because it makes us, the government, look bad.

But this is all besides the point. The language being used these days is forceful and serious, but it all boils down to this government not wanting to be attached to the past government’s image, and thus doing their utmost to shift public perceptions. Because politics is, after all, all about perceptions.

However, our problems stem far deeper than a newspaper headline of some corruption case involving a single person. Scapegoats are commonly use to detract attention from the greater problems, the problems that imply, if not insist, that corruption does in fact stem from much deeper issues. When high-ranking government officials are business-minded individuals with private sector mentality - far from the much-needed public servant - there is always a risk. It doesn’t matter if they resign from the board of anything and everything they’ve ever been on, a stint in the public sector offers opportunity, especially if everyone knows they won’t be around for very long. It is like letting loose a hungry child in a candy store and then expecting him to restrain himself by sheer will.

But even this is both a generalization (which is not to say it isn’t a reality) and indeed not the biggest problem.

The bigger problems lie beneath that individual - the system of corruption that sustains their actions and make them possible. From money laundering via “investment opportunities” to bribing members of the security apparatus to a judicial system that is far from independent. There is a network that is alive and well, and most importantly, hidden. It is practically impossible for anyone, be they a minister or an employee, to pull off anything without tapping in to this network. Even citizens are some times exposed to glimpses of this network, some even engage with it from time to time, but those who are a part of it depend almost completely on it. It is a network consisting of many names and faces; some known, others not so much. It is obviously an unofficial network, and I merely call it that due to its interconnected nature.

For journalists, which are supposed to be one of the major channels to fight corruption, it is fairly impossible to prove any of this, and what corruption we do hear about is usually stories that are leaked to the press, and those stories are almost always red herrings - distractions designed to divert our gaze away from the bigger problem. Besides, the media is not set up to hold anyone accountable. It merely reports on what it is told, or what it is allowed to report.

So, with no independent mechanisms of accountability in place, corruption will likely continue to not only exist in Jordan, but thrive. While the Iraq war opened the floodgates for such corruption in Jordan back in 2003 and onwards, it would be folly to think that such opportunities won’t come again.

The solution?

There is little the people can do to combat public sector corruption, and the rare few that might consider it for even a moment will instantly consider their safety first. In all likelihood, most of us will eventually and inevitably be forced to deal and interact with this network, in its smallest form. It will come in the guise of someone asking for a bribe, but that individual will not be alone; he will have the support of the network to which he belongs. These thriving networks of corruption tend to get so big that they eventually self-destruct and collapse, and if left unattended, leave behind fertile ground for other networks to emerge.

This is of course not to say that everyone in the public sector is corrupt. I would argue that the overwhelming majority are not. However, as history has shown, it is usually a minority that are strong enough and interconnected enough and picky enough as to who they allow to become a part of their network - that tend to run the tables.

But again, this sort of corruption can only be solved through a top-down purge and a subsequent establishment of mechanisms of accountability. This is unlikely to happen any time soon.

On a final note, this is quite an inspiring video from TED, where lawyer Shaffi Mather has decided to take on the booming business of corruption in India’s public sector by using social entrepreneurial methods. From what we can gather from his talk, the idea is to establish a business where citizens can accomplish an ordinary task they would otherwise need to bribe someone in government to do, by paying this institution. The idea is that the fee would likely be much cheaper than the bribe, thus not only offering a sense of affordability to the citizen, but also depriving government officials, which would weaken their support system. It is a naturally controversial proposal, and many idealists would likely argue that citizens shouldn’t be paying anyone at all when it comes to getting what their entitled to. However, using corruption-plagued India as the case study, one could also argue that this initiative is meant to address the realities of “what is”, rather than what “should be”.

U.S. Department of State NONIMMIGRANT VISA APPLICATION

38. Do you seek to enter the United States to engage in export control violations, subversive or terrorist activities, or any other unlawful purpose? Are you a member or representative of a terrorist organization as currently designated by the U.S. Secretary of State? Have you ever participated in persecutions directed by the Nazi government of Germany; or have you ever participated in genocide?

You’ve gotta be a bit more subtle than that…

The following are a series of interesting quotes from US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s speech on global Internet freedom. In light of what’s been happening in Jordan recently over initial moves by the government to regulate the Internet, and in the process censor free speech, I thought the following excerpts were of some relevance to the times.

“…the internet is a network that magnifies the power and potential of all others. And that’s why we believe it’s critical that its users are assured certain basic freedoms. First among them is the freedom of expression. This freedom is no longer defined solely by whether citizens can go into the town square and criticize their government without fear of retribution. Blogs, email, social networks, and text messages have opened up new forums for exchanging ideas - and created new targets for censorship.”

“Those who use the internet to recruit terrorists or distribute stolen intellectual property cannot divorce their online actions from their real world identities. But these challenges must not become an excuse for governments to systematically violate the rights and privacy of those who use the internet for peaceful political purposes.”

“Countries that censor news and information must recognize that, from an economic standpoint, there is no distinction between censoring political speech and commercial speech. If businesses in your nation are denied access to either type of information, it will inevitably reduce growth.”

It was interesting to see the speech address attempts at censorship by America’s allies in the region, specifically Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and to an extent, Tunisia - but ignore similar recent attempts made by Jordan. Interestingly enough, since Obama’s speech in Cairo, Jordan, as well as the rest of the region, has seen a rise in the number of US-funded project proposals focusing on social media - either by the State Department or by USAID - the latter, while independent, seems to get most of its “guidance” from the former. Many of these projects are aimed at increasing free speech in various countries throughout the region, as well as using web tools to connect citizens to information and larger communication platforms. These projects are funded in the millions and it’s also important to note that none of them tackle digital security in the context of safeguarding those who utilize these technologies - something Lynch picks up on in his analysis. I suppose, there’s some irony to be found in this dilemma that now arises in Jordan.

I wholeheartedly believe that governments such as that of Jordan’s do not entirely believe in free speech as a fundamental human right, but rather, understand it as a privilege granted to its citizens at a cost, and can be stripped away at any given moment when the citizens misbehave. It is bound up in legalities as a way to control it and regulate it; smothered in red tape. It is not perceived to carry the same weight as a billion dollar investment in a skyscraper, even thought free speech and thought has proven itself worldwide to be a source of innovation that is worth much more than any financial investment, and also has the advantage of not depreciating in value like skyscrapers. It is interesting how similar governments of developing nations who fear criticism will look at free speech as a cost, while developed nations have figured out a way for free speech to be economically advantageous.

So if it’s money the government understands then I can only hope that the number of such state department projects are increased. Simply because the Jordanian government, which is incredibly donor-driven (predominantly USAID), will likely back away once it begins to see that the economic cost of censoring the Internet - vis a vis its support of any judicial rulings and/or proposed legislation that induces both fear and thus self-censorship amongst Internet users - is indeed, greater than the social cost of having to weather criticism by the people.

Speeches like these remind us that in the 21st century, the Internet is not merely a barometer for freedom of speech, freedom of expression and freedom to access information - it is the barometer of freedom, period.

But what better timing than this to have something to pick one’s spirits up.

Ok Go, the band that gave the world that creative music video of them dancing on treadmills, are out with a new album and a new song called “This Too Shall Pass”. Ironically, the band that gained its primary exposure on the web when it’s creative low cost dancing videos went viral, is now being told by their record company EMI that fans will no longer be able to embed their new single. Talk about social media done wrong. Ok Go have put out an open letter explaining the situation and asking people to embed their video on video, the only place that allows for embedding. Oh, and EMI has just sued vimeo.

So watch it while it lasts…

OK Go - This Too Shall Pass from OK Go on Vimeo.

Thank you.

A few days ago we were all surprised to learn that a ruling from Jordan’s Supreme Court decided to include “websites” as subject to the country’s notorious Press & Publications Law. The reason bloggers, technologists, activists, journalists, free thinkers and anyone with a half a brain and a beating heart has been up in arms about this decision recently, is due to the fact that the press and publications law is not only vague, but including “websites” in this court ruling makes it all the more ambiguous. It’s easier when you’re dealing with newspapers and magazines - traditional forms of print media that have a single format and a single product - but when you say “websites” what does that mean? As some have asked (or assumed), will blogs be included? Worse yet, will comments left on blogs be included? What about a tweet? What about retweeting someone’s controversial tweet? What about Facebook? These are all questions we need to be asking, and the reason we have few answers is largely due to the government’s approach of the issue; a status quo that we have begged our state to change; a void of information creates a space for misinformation, speculation and inevitably, exaggeration.

Nevertheless, these questions should be asked, they should be debated, they should be grappled with and that should happen within the safe confines of a local conversation, many of which you can find scattered throughout Jordan’s online world this week, and a particularly interesting one of which you can find on 7iber.

But this is not a post about questions, answers and ambiguities.

For the sake of full disclosure, that this is one issue I aim to fight hands on and not merely with a keyboard and this will hinder what I can and express in this post (self-censorship for the better good). It goes without saying that behind the scenes people are already working to lobby government in hopes of putting a stop to these moves before the country’s last thread of free speech disappears in to the dark abyss, never to return. At this stage, everyone concerned, including Internet users in Jordan, are all undergoing a “learning” process where unknowns are being unraveled and legalities are being deciphered, none of which is an easy task when the government’s idea of informing the public is a press release, followed by silence. Nevertheless, fighting something like this requires educating oneself so that the battle is not whittled down to the poetry of free speech and civil liberties, when in fact this issue stretches beyond that. In order to fight something you have to clearly define what it is you’re fighting, and in this matter, things are far from being clear at this point.

But this is not a post about free speech or civil liberties.

This is not a post about ramifications and consequences, predictions, assumptions or conclusions.

This post is about the way things work in Jordan - or sometimes, don’t.

This post is about gaps.

Because at the heart of such court rulings, government shifts, reactionary states and on-the-ground interpretations - is a gap, and frankly speaking (if such a thing is still possible in Jordan), there are just too many gaps in our country. There is a gap between vision and implementation; between leadership and government, between government and people, between people and people.

There is a gap between King’s comment left on this blog little under a year and a half ago and where we stand today:

Abdullah II - July 5, 2008: Thank you all for your feedback and comments. I am very happy and proud to see so many responsible citizens engaging in this dialogue. People must not be afraid to express their opinions without using aliases. We are a country of freedom, tolerance, diversity and openness, and everyone has the right to express their thoughts – no matter what they are – in an atmosphere of respect, so long as they are not personally offending others, attempting character assassination or undermining the nation’s interest. Your comments only indicate how deeply you care about Jordan and its future and I am happy that we are partners in the development process.

The court’s recent ruling and the government’s current stance on the matter stands undeniably in stark contrast to the King’s comment, which one could label as a vision for the web.

Personally speaking, I am not a proponent of those who wield the web for sinister purposes, including articles, posts and comments that are intended to offend others or character assassinations. While I do recognize that these things do happen online unfortunately, I also recognize that people are free to pursue those whom have done them harm online through the current legal system that is available to all of us. Is the government concerned with safeguarding the people from such slander and defamation? I don’t know.

Because there is a gap between what the government thinks and what the government tells us (or in this case, doesn’t tell us). There is a gap in communication; a daunting void. We’re not told anything, so we don’t know much, which means we’re forced to speculate. And by the way, you really know things are bad when you have to start speculating about what rights you have as a citizen.

Now if the government’s concern stretches beyond protecting the people, and is more aligned towards the web being used to criticize it - the government - then they will find themselves as declared enemies of free speech. Governments should be open to criticism and the people, vis a vis the media (both online and offline), should be at the helm of such criticism. How else can governments improve, change, be held accountable and sustain an open door of transparency? These are elements that should never be commandeered by the government. Transparency is not a privilege that the government bestows on us; it is a right that is demanded by the people. And so is free speech for that matter.

HM King Abdullah only recently spoke about creating a new era of transparency in government. It is now on the government to understand that it cannot be the entity that holds itself accountable, which is akin to a student grading himself. This is a task that is left to a proper mechanism of checks and balances that can only be maintained by the people and the tools at their disposal, the strongest of which is a flourishing free media sector.

But again, there is a gap.

There is a gap between a vision at the very top and the process it takes toward implementation; the trickle-down from King to prime minister to ministers to deputies to middle management to employees and subsequently, to the people. And in a country where the system of governance is much more complex than that, the trickle-down effect becomes increasingly intricate in nature.

There is a gap between what is said and what is done; what is told to us and what is done. This is not an interpretation, nor is this merely an opinion. It is a fact. It is a reality that exists within the realms of this Kingdom and is unfolding all around us. It is a gap that we experience daily. It is a gap that needs to be closed.

It has long left us in a daze of confusion.

Confusion breeds fear.

Fear breeds censorship of the self.

I can only hope that this new government is keen on working to bridge those gaps in order to not only fulfill HM King Abdullah’s vision but that of the will of the people as guaranteed by the Jordanian constitution. It is a process that will require bringing the people in to the folds of a public debate, and not shutting them out by infringing on what little mediums and platforms of communication they have left.

The Jordanian state has had a long legacy of fighting extremism in all it’s forms. I can only hope that they recognize this court ruling and any subsequent attempts to regulate the Internet in Jordan as being an extremist reaction to a fixable problem. I can only hope that they recognize the way to finding a solution to a public issue is to include the public.

AP Photo - Jordanian boys warm themselves at a workshop during their break in Amman.

Keep warm today, and remember that some people have it worse than you.

On another note, whatever happened to our child labor laws?

Never mind.

“So who murdered Samir Kassir?” asks world renowned journalist Robert Fisk in an article published in The Independent the day after Kassir’s death. It is this question that Fisk repeats throughout his analytical, yet angry piece republished in Kassir’s book as a relevant introduction. While Fisk and the rest of the world may have their valid suspicions, who murdered Smair Kassir remains an unanswered question, and more importantly, perhaps an increasingly relevant one in the context of Kassir’s book.
(more…)

I know it’s been a tough month for you. Security breaches have been all over the international media and things just don’t look great right now. I know in such times it’s easy for you to retreat to safer grounds where fear tactics and terrorism rhetoric is comforting, but please, can we put an end to it before it gets out of hand? The only governments who have been instilling fear in their people to either justify their actions or shut off debate and any source of opposition and/or questioning of their actions have been swallowed up by the history books - the pages of the early 21st century our generation will likely burn. Your public handling of recent security-related stories has not been exactly great, but that’s no one’s fault but your own really. The less you tell people the more they’ll speculate, and you just can’t remain silent for days and then come up with a statement littered with “Amman bombings of 2005″ and expect Jordanians to swallow it like the Bush years that littered American media with “9/11″ sentiments.

For one, Jordanian society differs dramatically from fear-riddled societies you might find in the US and the UK. The average Jordanian has seen enough terror, in the guise of poverty, unemployment, low standards of living, high prices, corruption, censorship, state-induced fear in the state, and various other realities of life in Jordan - to say nothing of living in a region where explosions, bombings, invasions, occupations and wars are also daily realities around us - that we’ve really become anesthetized to the whole thing.

In the past two weeks or so, the memory of the Amman bombings has been invoked way too many times by government officials, predominantly by state spokesperson, Nabil Sharif, most recently, well, today. I am not blaming individuals of course as the government pretty much functions as single entity. If someone says something it’s because someone has told them to say it. And if someone told them to say it, it’s because someone advised them that this was the line to take.

It’s not.

It only makes matters worse.

We all lived through the horrendous act of violence on November 9th and we don’t need to use the memory of the people who died that day as a way to justify current state policies because that is essentially, my dear government, what you are doing. It is a policy that ruined America and was used to justify the mess of a war that’s happening right next door - to say the least. And as sure as day it will ruin any other government that chooses to scare its citizens into submission and to shut out any opposition by resurrecting memories.

And for the moments when you’re not saying it in your own name, can you tell the people who say it for you to knock it off as well please?

An act of terrorism on Jordanian soil is indeed a red line, but so should be the act of politicizing it - and the people who died for it - for political gain. It is, in my opinion trampling on their memory, and moreover, a very dangerous slippery slope if the lessons of the western hemisphere in the past decade have taught us anything. And while we’re at it, Bush’s “we’ll smok’em out of their cave” and “we’ll fight them there so we don’t have to fight them here” also proved to be folly rhetoric and I’ve noticed the use of the latter in government statements these past two weeks.

The constant resurrection of terrorizing statements like the “Amman bombing” and “remember the Amman bombings” and “people died in Amman,” will not, in my opinion, convince the average Jordanian to approve of state policies because the government knows what’s good for them. I do not think you can, nor do I believe it is wise, to pursue a tactic where a systematic use of terror is employed in order to coerce the citizens in to submission.

And, in fact, that is actually the very definition of terrorism according to the Webster dictionary:

ter·ror·ism (n): the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion

8:45pm: If you’ve been driving around Amman tonight you’ve probably notice traffic is everywhere, and so are the Jordanian police. Most of the traffic circles have been highly controlled since around 4pm, specifically the 4th to the 7th circles. Police are diverting traffic and their police vans are blaring sirens and speeding through most of western Amman - up until the airport road.

A little mall opened in Swefieh and people were swarming there at around 6pm, and right now Khaberni is reporting that police shut down the area due to a security threat that was reported earlier in which someone claimed the building was going to collapse. The report turned out to be false according to the news site.

But something smells fishy about that report, specifically since there were really few police in that exact area around the building - only 1 or 2 traffic cops directing traffic as expected at a mall opening in Amman. In contrast, police were swarming around the 4th and other circles, cutting off a lot of traffic from move towards the circles, forcing them to go around instead.

If someone hears something, let me know.

8:56pm: A friend who just contacted a security officials was told that children’s TV channel was offering free goodies of some sort at the mall and this is what caused the eventual half-a-city shutdown. You can see their poster in the picture above.

In the meantime…

I will point you to this well written article published on 7iber where a conversation is beginning to emerge. Please leave your comments and thoughts there, and participate in the discussion. Right now, a conversation is needed as the first step. Right now, interested parties need to come together. Right now, people need to get off the bench and be an active player in the conversation instead of passive observers.

A conversation needs to start somewhere.

So check it out.

It seems the Israeli Ambassador to Jordan was the target of a bomb attack on his car earlier today (6pm). The AFP reports:

JERUSALEM — Israel’s ambassador to Jordan escaped unharmed in a bomb attack on his car in Jordan on Thursday, the Israeli foreign ministry said in a statement.

“In the afternoon there was a bomb attack on the car of the ambassador. There were no injuries and the convoy continued on its way,” the ministry said. It said Jordanian authorities were investigating the incident.

“The Israeli embassy convoy left Amman and was headed for the Hussein bridge when the blast occurred,” an Israeli diplomat told AFP in Amman by telephone, referring to the crossing between between Jordan and the Israeli-occupied West Bank, also known as Allenby bridge. The bridge stands about 50 kilometres (30 miles) west of Amman.

Israeli diplomats often travel home on Thursdays, the start of the Muslim weekend in Jordan, and return on Sundays to Jordan, which has had a peace treaty with the Jewish state since 1994. [source]

Information is still fairly limited at this time and local news is not covering it. Ammon News however has been quick to gather some interesting reports, one of which indicates that the blast was actually two roadside bombs that blew up in the Adaseeyeh area, which is actually a bit further up from the actual bridge and closer to Amman (I believe it’s technically in the Amman governorate). Ammon is also reporting that the former Israeli ambassador was also a passenger along with the current ambassador and another Israeli diplomat.

8:20pm: Israeli press is all over this story.

Haaretz is reporting that the Israeli ambassador was NOT in the motorcade of diplomats. However, Al Jazeera claims otherwise. The newspaper also claims that the Israeli Defense Force (better known as the Israeli Occupational Force here in Jordan) entered the Kingdom alongside Jordanian security. This is a bit confusing as I would imagine that happening only if the attack took place right near the bridge, and at this point the exact location isn’t exactly clear.

Ynet is reporting the blast happened 20km away from the bridge. If this is true then the IDF did seem to enter deep into Jordanian territory.

With what’s been happening lately in Jordan regarding terrorism, I am hoping this is not a backlash. That’s the last thing we need. Moufaq Mahadin of Arab Al Yawm is on Al Jazeera right now (8:43pm) criticizing Jordan’s role with the CIA-mukhabarat fiasco that has dominated local politics the past week or so.

8:54pm: Jordanian media seems to be officially reporting this now, with the news getting a brief mention on the 8pm nightly news and on Al Ghad’s site in the past half hour.

9:07pm: According to the Jerusalem Post, the Israeli embassy in Amman is on a 24-hour lock-down with employees not being able to leave without a security escort. Interestingly enough, the Post also calls it one of the most highly guarded Israeli embassies in the world. I don’t doubt that at all. The Post, along with other Israeli media, seem to be looking to Hizballah for responsibility of this attack, deemed to be a feared attempt to avenge the February 2007 assassination of Hizbullah’s Imad Mughniyeh in Damascus.

10:33pm: Ammon has been putting up a few low-quality shots of the blast site where, according to AFP, the bomb left a crater 10 centimeters (four inches) deep and 80 centimeters (32 inches) wide.

10:44pm: Better resolution pictures have been published by Reuters and the Associated Press…

11:03pm: Ynet, via al-Arabiya, is reporting that a taxi driver has been arrested as a suspect in the bombing. Ammon is also reporting this, adding that the suspect was nabbed after a police chase. That was pretty quick.

11:48pm: Jordanian foreign minister, Naser Judeh’s phone call to the Israeli ambassador, Danny Nevo - who it seems was definitely not in the convoy - is being reported by Haaretz now but they seem to be a bit behind on the news of the aforementioned taxi driver. Interestingly enough, Haaretz points out that this is the first time a road side bomb has been used in Jordan to target someone, with shooting being more of the Jordanian style. Let’s hope it’s the last.

02:36am: While the aressted taxi driver’s involvement is still under investigation, Israeli press has been concluding that more arrests will follow given the intricate nature of the attack - blaming Islamic extremists for the act (be they Hizballah, Hamas or Al-Queda). Jordan’s Al-Ghad seems to agree, quoting a senior official in the security apparatus as saying the attack could be attributed to Al-Queda. At this point any drawn conclusions are speculative at best, and one should be cautious of any eagerness by the Jordanian GID to tie this to an organization that embarrassed them a few days ago. The senior official also seems to point to the possibility of Al-Queda attempting to send a message that it has the capability to breach the GID’s legendary security grip.

Haaretz is calling this an attack of “good intelligence” but “poor execution.

More importantly, they also highlight that this is the second security breach for the GID (mukhabarat) in a month, which must be a historic record for the Kingdom. One can only help but wonder whether metaphoric heads will begin to the role at the mukhabarat soon, beginning with a resignation at the top:

Jordan’s security services, which control the country by taking stringent measures against terrorism and against those considered enemies of the royal family, began investigating the incident yesterday. It can be assumed that they are receiving assistance from Israeli intelligence. Security ties between the two countries are close, despite the periodic tensions between King Abdullah and Israeli government leaders. From the Jordanians’ point of view, they have failed at providing security to the Israeli representatives. This is Jordan’s second serious incident of terrorism against a friendly state in recent weeks. [source]

GETTY PICTURES - Father of Jordanian Mahmoud Mahdi Zeidan, a Taliban fighter killed by US in Waziristan, looks on at the family’s home in Irbid Camp for Palestinian Refugees, on January 11, 2010 in Irbid, Jordan. Zeidan was a spiritual leader as well as a fighter with the Taliban and was killed whilst on an American militarty operation.

In what has got to be one of the silliest stories of the new decade thus far - a move to name a street in Al Mazar after former Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein, has been revoked after a great deal of interference by the Jordanian government, supposedly lead by the Kuwaiti foreign ministry. It is simply amazing that in a time when Iraq has been torn apart for nearly a decade by American occupation, while the West Bank continues to be torn apart by Israeli occupation and while Gaza continues to be caged in by Israeli and now, evidently, Egyptian forces - that two governments in the region have mobilized political efforts on the naming of a street in a little town.

What makes this even more ridiculous is the fact that both the Jordanian and Kuwaiti government are under the impression that they can sweep public perceptions under the rug and pretend the people’s opinion even exists, let alone matters. Like it or not, Saddam still has overwhelming support in Jordan - and before anyone says anything racial I’ll point out that such support emanates from both Jordanians of Palestinian origin and Jordanians of Jordanian origin - whatever that’s supposed to mean to people these days.

Case in point, Al Mazar is a town that is as Jordanian and tribal as it gets. And in response to the government’s beurcratic enforcement, they’ve decided to do something a bit more clever:

As a town in Jordan has shelved a plan to name a street after Iraqi former leader Saddam Hussain in the wake of the political and diplomatic furore it sparked in Jordan, Kuwait and Iraq, a Jordanian tribe has decided to name all the males born this year as Saddam and all its daughters “Raghad”, “Hala” or “Rana” after Saddam’s daughters. [source]

Now if the Jordanian and Kuwaiti government team up again and go all Moses-in-the-reeds on the public by banning the aforementioned names, they will have catapulted this to the top of the silliest-stories-of-the-decade list, and we’re only two weeks in to the new decade.

I understand the foreign policy of the situation. I understand that massive Kuwaiti investments come with the ability to influence and even determine Jordan’s domestic policy much like American foreign aid does. But to the extent of getting involved in a street sign? To the extent of threatening to freeze ties with Jordan? Really? And as for the Jordanian government, if the smallest bread crumb of democratic value that is alive on the Jordanian street comes in the form of the people, vis a vis town councils, being able to choose their own street names - what does it say when that too is so easily devalued? So easily bought?

Moreover, I understand the need for political sensitivities, especially being a citizen of a country that was largely politically and economically cut off from the rest of the Arab world for it’s leader’s views on the first Gulf War; an embargo of sorts that included Kuwaiti participation (to say nothing of treatment to our citizens living in that country).

But the past is the past, right?

I also understand the delicacies of regional diplomatic relations but if it comes at the expense of one’s own people and their will, that should be a deal breaker. Personally, I am not a fan of Saddam but I recognize the fact that the majority of Jordanians loved the man, and who has the right to deny them that? Venture in to the rural parts of the country and you’ll find Saddam’s name spray painted on walls in a show of political graffiti. Again, I may not like it, and some of you reading this might not either, but it is what it is. My concern here has less to do with the beliefs of others and who they choose to admire, and more to do with the idiocy that comes with two governments getting involved with the naming of a street sign and what signals that sends to people who have little rights to begin with. I’d like to emphasize that point before someone argues otherwise.

Naturally, this story is not without its own twisted irony as Al Mazar, which is in Karak for those who don’t know, is actually home to the grave of Jafar Al-Tayyar, and every year Shi’a pilgrims, mostly from Iraq and Iran, flock through there by the hundreds.

Naming a street after their favorite person in the world is anything but subtle.