Egyptian Navy Attack: The Plot Thickens and the Mysteries Deepen

The attack last week on an Egyptian Navy vessel off the coast of Damietta has been wrapped in mystery from the start, beginning with how far offshore it was (reports range from 10 nautical miles to 70 kilometers) and who attacked it. I noted in passing late last week that some Jihadist websites were claiming that it was really an attempted mutiny, but I dismissed that, considering the source. I may have been premature, and there are a number of other reports further muddying the waters.

The Beirut-based electronic newspaper Al-Modon has published an account which it claims is the true story, (link in Arabic), to the effect that an officer of the patrol launch 6 October, Ahmad ‘Amer, with five sympathizers he had smuggled board, took command of the ship and killed the crew; when the base radioed the ship, responded that it was a vessel of the Islamic Caliphate. Another boat, 25 April, was sent to intercept, its weaponry malfunctioned, and in the end the Air Force had to intervene.

The story seems far-fetched, but an account in the respected independent newspaper Al-Masry al-Youm reports that a Russian-flagged merchant vessel had been forced into Port Said and its crew were being interrogated to determine if they were involved, and then appears to corroborate at least the involvement of  Ahmad ‘Amer. Quoting Al-Masry al-Youm's English version, Egypt Independent:

Authorities are also investigating captain Ahmed Mostafa Amer, who was driving the navy vessel on the day of the attack in lieu of his supervisor Major Mohamed al-Fujairy, who was injured a week ago in a car accident.

Security services are also attempting to identify whether the car accident was intentional or not, Amer’s relationships at the Port Said navy base, Syrians and Turks in Damietta or others who have had relations with people from the two countries of Syria and Turkey. Another 32 suspects including Egyptians and foreigners are being questioned.

Meanwhile, Damietta port authority canceled a ceremony that was scheduled to honor Major General Mostafa Amer, former chief of the port authority, and father of captain Amer. The ceremony was to be held on occasion of his retirement.

This version does not explicitly say there was a mutiny but clearly seems to imply it.

Besides the aforementioned Russian vessel, which may have merely been in the wrong place st the wrong time, of the much reported 32 persons arrested, at least 16 have now been released, apparently having merely been innocent fishermen in the area..

As Daily News Egypt columnist Amr Khalifa notes,

Close inspection of every story, scenario and possibility indicates contradictions and a healthy dose of question marks in each. Cemented in fact is, 48 hours after Sinai Province declared itself an IS follower, a particularly brazen, well organised, terrorist attack targeted the Egyptian navy. No small feat, this is nothing short of a minor disaster for a regime struggling to earn its security stripes against multiple groups who have chosen the militant route against the army. A central part of the dynamic at play involves the dearth of information, generally, doled out by the security apparatus and more specifically in this terror at sea.

Credibility in all relationships emanates from truth. In this regard, the Egyptian army is failing Egyptians. This has, in turn, left many Egyptians and Egypt watchers wondering what precisely transpired off the north eastern coast of Egypt this week. Based on the wild stories of the past three days, no one will know, with certainty, who bears responsibility for this attack until a video emerges showing excerpts and claiming responsibility. Egyptian memories are laden with horrific imagery from a Sinai Province video , released on Friday, but with little trust because of nearly zero info, it is likely the public will believe nothing less.

Meanwhile, absent official details, confusion reigns and rumors run rampant.

The "Saudi-Israeli Alliance" Story is Hardly New and Dubiously Sourced

You may have heard of the UK Sunday Times' story about an alleged Saudi-Israeli alliance to strike Iran. The whole article is behind a paywall, but based on the part showing, the real take-away may be the line "Riyadh is understood already to have given the go-ahead for Israeli planes to use its airspace in the event of an attack on Iran." That isn't quite an "alliance," but of course there's no denying that the Saudis and the Israelis share a fear of Iran's nuclear program and worry about the upshot of a Geneva deal. The Saudis have, of course, vehemently denied the story, saying it "has no relations or contacts with Israel of any kind or at any level." While that may ignore unofficial back channels that most of us know have been used in the past, any official cooperation is highly unlikely. (I'll leave out the question of of the route Israel took on the 1981 Osirak raid and certain undisclosed US operations during the 2003 Iraq War: there is some reason to believe that Saudi Air Defenses can be, well, inattentive when they choose to be.)

But I wouldn't sweat the story anyway. Marsha B. Cohen, at LobeLog, takes down the Sunday Times in context, however:

Mahnaimi’s [the source of the story] corpus of “scoops” for the Sunday Times over the past decade include well over a dozen reports that an Israeli military strike on Iran is imminent. Mahnaimi has also provided fanciful depictions of secret high-tech weaponry Israel might deploy in an attack like “the gamma pulse that could send Iran back to the stone age” and a bacteriological ethnic bomb Israel had developed that would only harm Arabs.

Two previous Sunday Times reports have alleged that the Saudis were comfortable and cooperative with the prospect of an attack on Iran through their air space.

On July 5, 2009, in an article titled, “Saudis Give Nod to Israeli Raid on Iran,” Mahnaimi quoted a diplomatic source who claimed that “The Saudis have tacitly agreed to the Israel air force flying through their airspace on a mission which is supposed to be in the common interests of both Israel and Saudi Arabia.” According to Mahnaimi, then Mossad chief Meir Dagan had held secret talks earlier that year and had assured Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that “Saudi Arabia would turn a blind eye to Israeli jets flying over the kingdom during any future raid on Iran’s nuclear sites.”

On Jun. 12, 2010, a very similar report by the Sunday Times‘ Hugh Tomlinson alleged — citing an unidentified US “defense official — that Saudi Arabia had practiced standing down its anti-aircraft systems in order to allow Israeli warplanes passage on their way to attack Iran’s nuclear installations. He added that the Saudis have allocated a narrow corridor of airspace in the north of the country. Saudi sources denied the report. Prince Mohammed bin Nawaf, the Saudi envoy to the UK, declared that any such move “would be against the policy adopted and followed by the Kingdom,” and that Saudi Arabia would not allow any violation of its territories or airspace.

Mahnaimi reported on May 13 of this year that Israel was preparing to join Saudi Arabia, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates and Turkey in establishing “an early warning system to detect Iranian ballistic missiles.” The American-brokered proposal, Mahnaimi wrote, “may eventually lead to technicians from Turkey, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Jordan working alongside Israelis in joint command-and-control centres.”

Israeli news sources, including Haaretz, the Times of Israel, the Jerusalem Post, Israel Today and Y-Net are today uncritically reporting the Sunday Times‘ claim that an Israeli-Saudi attack is in the works, without mentioning the almost identical stories of 2009 and 2010, or the plethora of predictions of an Israeli attack on Iran during the course of the past decade that never happened.

Among Mahnaimi's other headline-makers was a 2010 report, also in the Sunday Times, that all three Israeli Dolphin-class subs were armed with nuclear missiles and all sitting off the Iranian coast. You remember the nuclear holocaust of 2010, don't you? (For the record, the Dolphins do carry ship-to-shore cruise missiles that could carry nuclear warheads, but they don't have the range of SLBMs. Also, all submarines, even Egypt's and ours, must pass the Suez Canal on the surface as it's too shallow to submerge. As far as I am aware, that only happened once, in 2009, with one sub, and it later returned. The subs could go around Africa, though they would need a submarine tender on the surface, and likely a friendly fueling base since they are diesel, not nuclear-powered, though they may have such facilities available in Eritrea or Djibouti. But they sure haven't all three been sitting off Iran with their nukes locked and loaded since 2010, that's for sure.)

Questioning the Tunisian "Sexual Jihad" in Syria Story

You've probably already seen the stories, all over the media, claiming that Tunisian Islamist women are traveling to Syria to wage "sexual jihad" by providing comfort to jihadi fighters in Syria. Even the Tunisian Interior Minister has confirmed the story, saying his Ministry is blocking such travel. But Sana Saeed questions the bona fides of the whole story:

Unfortunately for what seems to be that blind spot people have when it comes to stories on Muslims and sex, there doesn’t seem to be any evidence of Tunisian female warriors going to fight a holy sex war.

Sucks, I know.

Despite the lack of clear evidence of a sex war pandemic, this hasn’t stopped news media outlets all over the world from grabbing, expanding, and running with this story.

She links the story to earlier wild stories about fatwas on sexual issues and notes that the evidence remains scanty and in some cases denied by those being quoted:

In December, Lebanese news channel Al Jadeed reported that hardline and popular Salafi scholar Shaykh Mohamad Al Arefe, a loud and inciting opponent of the Syrian regime, had issued a fatwa (a non-binding religious opinion) allowing the gang rape of non-Sunni Syrian women by rebels. Not only did the scholar vehemently deny expressing any such opinion, on Twitter and in later sermons (both links in Arabic), but the story was debunked by the Electronic Intifada’s Ali Abunimah.

On March 27, 2012, the Pan-Arab news site Al Hayat, published a piece discussing the apparent crisis of young Tunisian girls and what was being referred to as “Sexual Jihad.” It claimed that the impetus behind this was another fatwa from Al Arefe, in which he urged young women to go in engage in the so-called sexual Jihad by offering themselves to the rebels. There was, however, no proof of this fatwa and those close to Al Arefe also thoroughly denied the cleric had ever made such a ridiculous statement.

Usually most of these stories that seem to have no clear  sourcing are not endorsed by the country in question's Interior Minister, admittedly, but Saeed's takedown of the story seems to have some solid points.

They Used to Call it "French North Africa" because its Rulers were in France. Of Course Today ... Oh, Wait

NOTE: A version of this article was posted this morning but was subsequently inadvertently deleted. I have reconstituted it as best I could.

As this article (in French) notes, three North African leaders (the Presidents of Algeria and Mauritania and the King of Morocco) have been in France for several weeks.

Algerian President Bouteflika, as we knew, has been in Paris since late April, when he suffered a "minor stroke," from which he is rumored to be in a coma officially said to be "improving day to day" despite no photos having been made public.

Mauritanian President Mohamed Ould Abdel Aziz has been in Paris as well on a "private visit" since attending a meeting in Brussels on May 15. There is speculation about his health as well; you may recall that last October he was wounded when his own Army shot up the Presidential motorcade in a "tragic accident" which was discovered after the President had "accidentally" been shot five times. He received lengthy treatment in France for that as well.

And King Muhammad VI of Morocco is also on a private visit to Paris since May 10. While there have  been recent rumors about the King's health as well (though he's not yet 50), he may be avoiding the political issues at home produced by the Istiqlal Party's intention to withdraw from the ruling coalition.

Of course, they may all just love Paris in the springtime. But who's watching the store at home?

Taboo Words About the Man "Improving Every Day": " L’après-Bouteflika"

It's been over a week since we were last assured that Algerian President Abdelaziz Bouteflika, rumored to be in a coma, was in fact "improving every day." So it's presumably still true, right? Right? You wouldn't want French-based Algeria-watching websites to start talking about " L’après-Bouteflika," would you?

That's what I thought.  A simple hospital photo in which the man looks conscious might stop all this ugly speculation, hmm? And help the 2014 campaign. I'm not sure even Algeria could manage to rig the election of a comatose man, so let's reassure the folks a bit? Hmm?

.

Bouteflika's Health: Rumors and Denials

Nearly a month after Algerian President Abdelaziz Bouteflika suffered a small stroke (excuse me, "transient ischemic attack," he remains out of the country and unseen in public. With Presidential elections due next year, the 76-year-old President's health remains a matter of speculation, especially since many expected him to seek a fourth term.

Now rumors are swirling, as are denials. Bouteflika has reportedly been moved from the Val-de-Grace military hospital in Paris to the Invalides Military hospital, but with his health unclear. A number of French publications have reported that he is in precarious health, possibly in a coma.

For the first time in some years two Algerian newspapers, Mon Journal and its Arabic version Djaridati, have  been censored and been blocked from publication for publishing the rumor that Bouteflika is in a coma and has returned to Algiers. Publisher Hichem  Aboud was quoted as saying:

“According to my sources -- I personally did not see anything,  but I have my sources, which I cross-check and verify -- the president is in Algeria,” Hichem Aboud, head of both newspapers, told FRANCE 24.

“My sources say that he’s neither in Geneva, Switzerland, nor in the Val-de-Grâce hospital in Paris. He is in Algeria. He arrived at dawn on Wednesday [May 15], after leaving Paris at 3am,” specified the former member of the military who now opposes the regime.

“His health is declining, which is why they transferred him to Algiers,” said Aboud. “The Val-de-Grâce hospital could no longer help. We’ve been told he’s in a deep coma that can go on for days or weeks. That is what we put in those two pages.”

The government denies these reports. Prime Minister Abdelmalek Sallal has said he is "improving every day," but his doctors have ordered a "complete rest."

Rumors about Bouteflika's health have persisted for years. After surgery for a gastric ulcer (officially) in France in 2005, rumors spread that he had stomach cancer, and this was denied; he subsequently won a third term.

He has not yet announced for a fourth term but so long as the issue is open his party allies are reluctant to declare their own candidacies.

Usually during past health crises, Bouteflika has taken pains to make a public appearance; when he was rumored on the Internet to have died in 2012, he was promptly shown on television meeting people. His absence from appearing even in photographs from the hospital after a month is doubtless fueling the rumors of a coma.
 

Turtlegate: Did King Farouq's Turtle Die (Again?) Last Week, or Not?

Apparently not. I was too busy last week to mention the widespread report that a turtle that had once belonged to King Farouq and that was believed to be the second oldest turtle in the world, had died at the age of 270 at the Cairo Zoo in Giza. The story may have originated with the sensational paper Yom 7, but was widely repeated, for example here.

There were variants. The turtle was not 270; it was 280. Or 217. It had been given to the Giza Zoo by King Farouq in 1936, or by Khedive Ismail in the 1870s. Or Khedive Tewfiq.

It was suggested it was the turtle that Farouq's daughter Princess Ferial is riding in this picture, from the late 1930s or 1940-ish (Ferial was born in 1938.)

Gradually, someone must have noted the varied stories weren't terribly consistent. Then someone noticed that the King's turtle had reportedly died in 2009. Oh, and again in 2011. And again last year.

A couple of Twitter posts:

As the first of those posts suggests, people were grasping at any story linking to King Farouq as a contrast to the present situation; this may be one reason why the story spread so quickly. This story in Britain's Independent debunks the whole story, saying the turtle, named Samir, actually died 15 years ago, quoting Egypt's Director of Regional Zoos. (But what would he know?) It suggests the story was made up (fairly clearly true) to discredit President Morsi (less clear).

Hassan Nasrallah Health and/or Death Rumors

The last Hassan al-Nasrallah rumor I ran here  was Haifa Wehbe's denial that she'd once been married to the Hizbullah Secretary-General, or as one great headline put it, "‘I didn’t marry Hezbollah’s leader,’ Lebanese sex-icon says."

Extremely fundamentalist Shi‘ite cleric that he is, I'm sure Nasrallah would have take a "death before dishonor" approach to those rumors, given Haifa Wehbe's low-cut dresses and tendencies for certain parts of her to pop out while cameras are rolling. But the latest round of rumors suggest Nasrallah is in ill health. Hizbullah denies them all,  insisting he's OK and still in Lebanon,  but the rumors, most of which have shown up in the Israeli and/or Turkish press, say he (choose one or more) 1) was flown to Iran suffering from cancer, for treatment; 2) was flown to Iran for treatment of wounds received in an attack by Syrian rebels; 3) is dead of either of the above or something else.

The surest way to prove you're not dying or dead would seem to be a public appearance. Of course he never provided proof he wasn't married to Haifa Wehbe, but ... no. I don't think he needed to. But a public appearance seems essential right now.

Craziest Denial of the Week: Haifa Wehbe Did Not Marry Hassan Nasrallah

Or maybe of the year: "I didn't marry Hezbollah's leader, Lebanese sex-icon says."

Did Not Marry Hassan Nasrallah

"Lebanese super star Haifa Wehbe denied on Thursday reports spread earlier saying that she was married to Hezbollah’s secretary general Hassan Nasrallah during her adolescent years.

"Haifa criticized media outlets that carried the alleged rumor, saying: “Next time they will make me marry Obama,” as quoted by the official website of the Lebanese Broadcasting Corporation.

Did Not Marry Haifa Wehbe

"Several local news media outlets quoted Haifa telling the Voice of Russia radio station that she was married to Nasrallah when she was an adolescent."

I really can't make any snarky comments that could surpass the headline itself. So I won't.

Sorry to Be Late on the Really Important News

You know, I'm just one blogger. When Egypt is plunging again into political violence, when Bashar al-Asad is mixing his Sarin precursor chemicals, as Damascus is burning, when Israel is opening up settlement in the E-1 corridor and so much else is happening, it's little wonder I miss some of the major stories. I know I was late on such really important stories as Kim Kardashian's Excellent Bahrain Adventure, but I feel particularly remiss that I dealt with an American tabloid star famous for, well, being famous, and have failed to comment for a month about the major news of the Arab world's reigning tabloid queen; Lebanese singing diva Haifa Wehbe. A month ago she announced that she and her most recent husband, an Egyptian, had divorced. We've mentioned Haifa here before, and of course regret the end of any marriage. Nor do we believe the story that her husband has political ambitions and found her the wrong sort of wife for the Muslim Brotherhood era. I mean, Haifa reportedly recently became a grandmother for the first time. How could even the Muslim Brotherhood object to a Lebanese grandmother?

OK, it's true she's not everybody's Lebanese grandmother.

Nor will we give any credence to gossip about semi-nude videos or curious behavior with the King of Bahrain,  since scurrilous rumors should not be spread about Lebanese grannies.

Tomorrow.we will return to the world of revolutions, oppression, Sarin gas warheads and the imminent expiration of the Mayan Calendar.

When Tabloid Stars Meet the Arab Uprisings

I realize I have been remiss to those of my readers for those who rely on this blog for the latest gossip about US tabloid figures and reality TV stars; I know this is a Middle East blog, but even so I completely failed to post anything at all last month about the opening of Paris Hilton's store in Mecca, which drew some criticism from the Saudi clerical establishment.

This time, however the demonstrations and controversy over Kim Kardashian's opening a milkshake shop in Bahrain, and her tweeted comments praising the place, demand some comment.

Now I must confess that I am far from clear exactly why Kim Kardashian is famous, or why she obviously makes more money than I do, or possibly more than the whole Middle East studies community put together do. But I must say I do agree with these comments from Juan Cole:

The real scandal of the Kim Kardashian visit to Bahrain is that it is what it took for Western media to mention the word “Bahrain” on the evening news. I did a search at Lexis Nexis Broadcast Transcripts under “CBS and Bahrain” for the past 3 months and got … 10 hits. Now, this methodology is inexact. I am not singling out CBS but it is useful because it can’t be confused with anything else (ABC could be Australian Broadcasting Company) and it does not have a cable news sister, so we really are looking at evening news and Face the Nation. Even so, I got several non-CBS items among the hits. Conclusion: Bahrain has been almost invisible as an issue in most US television news reporting . . .

But did Kim Kardashian show up in Manama? Why that they put on t.v.
ABC news reports on the controversies surrounding the reality-show star’s visit to Manama promoting her milkshake shops.

Marc Lynch also picks up on the theme:

Kim Kardashian's December 1 trip to Bahrain to promote milkshakes brought all the Middle East tweeps to the yard.  Her visit attracted both delerious young fans and a raucous protest (reportedly cleared away by the time she arrived), with conflicting accounts as to whether she actually ended up mixing a tear gas flavored milkshake.  The Middle East twitterati had a field day of outrage and humor over the news, with pretty much my entire Twitter feed (and Bahrain's Foreign Minister) retweeting her now deleted "OMG can I move here please?" tweet.   It's easy to poke fun at Kardashian.  But did Kanye's girlfriend really do anything different than those foreign policy wonks willing to participate in Friday's 2012 Manama Dialogue?
Kardashian went to Bahrain and Kuwait to promote "Millions of Milkshakes."  She evidently had a great time, declaring at the end: "Thanks Sheikh Khalifa for your amazing hospitality. I'm in love with The Kingdom of Bahrain." For this, she was roundly mocked by Bahraini opposition and Middle East commentators. Bahraini activist Maryam al-Khawaja posted an open letter to Kardashian inviting her to meet with human rights activists during her trip.   The one bright note, such as it was, came from @Therwees: "Kim Kardashian tweeting about Bahrain makes more news than actual Bahrain."

Part of this dismay and the attention paid to it comes from the star's tweets during her visit to Bahrain, which, of course, continues to endure major protests which are firmly put down, and which has been widely criticized by human rights groups.  She seemed pretty oblivious to that:
But she drew plenty of criticism on Twitter as well:

One last thing: milkshakes??

Has Bushra al-Asad Left Syria?

I'm going to note this Reuters report that Bushra al-Asad, Bashar al-Asad's sister and the widow of Assaf Shawkat, who was killed in July, has left Syria for the UAE. Shawkat was the longtime intelligence chief, and later Deputy Defense Minister, and died in a bomb blast aimed at senor security officials.

Bushra, who is Asad's older sister, is a key member of the family and her departure with hr children would be another sign of the unraveling of the inner circle. But I would also note that there is a lot of disinformation floating around and claims such as this should be taken with some skepticism. Asad's wife Asma has been the subject of such rumors as well, but has regularly shown up in Damascus to refute them.

The Short-Lived Internet Death and Subsequent Resurrection of Abdelaziz Bouteflika

In case you missed it, Algerian President Abdelaziz Bouteflika died for a while over the weekend, but like Husni Mubarak and others who have died on the Internet, Bouteflika's death was greatly exaggerated and limited to social media rumors. He has, in fact, died frequently in the rumor mills since 2005. French blogger Alain Jules, whose original post said Swiss sources indicated he had been declared clinically dead in a Swiss hospital, but whose original post has since been replaced by a "Mea Culpa au President Bouteflika et a ses Compatriotes," was apparently the sole origin of the story, after which various Algerian opposition sites and Twitter took it and ran with it.

Unlike Husni Mubarak, whose last of many Internet deaths was last June and was actually reported by the official state news agency, there was never any major media report of Bouteflika's alleged demise. The Algerians took a little while to deny it, which may have fueled the speculation.

[Update: Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal is not dead either, despite media reports.]

Bouteflika yesterday: Apparently he's feeling MUCH better now:

Some Things Never Change: Lebanese Diva Rivalry

A little Monday morning superficial celebrity news: Lebanon may be suffering spillover violence from the Syrian civil war; Egypt and Tunisia may be undergoing multiple debates about women's role in society, but some things never change: we still have the Arab entertainment pages filled with catty rivalries between Lebanese celebrity divas.

From Al-Bawaba:

Lebanese double-talent singer-actress Cyrine Abdel Nour has come out and said that she is not threatened by Lebanese queen of pop Haifa Wehbe. Cyrine, who does not consider the sultry beauty her competition insists that she is concerned with being a good actress and a success in her trade, while Haifa focuses more on her looks and putting on a good show. . .

In a further comparison of herself with her 'non-arch-rival', Cyrine firmly denies rumors of being on the plastic surgery bandwagon, adding that she is not against cosmetic improvements or touch-ups if a person feels that enhancement would make them a happier person. No doubt, the diplomatic celebrity would describe Haifa as a happy woman. Miaowww!

Cyrine Abdel Nour

Haifa Wehbe

While both ladies sing and act, and both are big in the Arabic equivalent of the tabloids, no one seems to confuse them with earlier generation singers like Umm Kulthum or Fairuz. Cyrine's catty remarks that Haifa "focuses on her looks" and her remark about plastic surgery (and I don't think she meant a nose job) is indeed a bit snarky given the fact that, as these two publicity photos suggest, neither diva is exactly shy about displaying her considerable, um, forward-deployed assets. While both may be welcome exceptions in an era of hijab and niqab, as these photos show, the "double talent[s]" the article refers to may not mean singing and acting.

This is your cheesecake, double-entendre and gossip quota for the week.

AJE Claims Arafat Showed High Levels of Polonium at Time of Death

Allegations that the late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat was poisoned have always seemed far-fetched, the usual Middle Eastern conspiracy theories, despite the fact that his doctors never offered a cause of death and there was no autopsy after his death in 2004. Rumors that he died of AIDS, liver disease, etc. were rampant but unproven.

Al Jazeera English is claiming today to have conducted a nine-month investigation and is reporting that a radiation laboratory in Lausanne, Switzerland, has found high levels of radioactive polonium in Arafat's personal affects (clothing, toothbrush, etc.), suggesting his body contained the radioactive substance in his last days. Polonium was responsible for the death of exiled Russian former spy Alexander Litvinenko, who died in London in 2006. According to the AJE report (a fuller hour-long report will reportedly be aired soon):

Polonium is present in the atmosphere, but the natural levels that accumulate on surfaces barely register, and the element disappears quickly. Polonium-210, the isotope found on Arafat's belongings, has a half-life of 138 days, meaning that half of the substance decays roughly every four-and-a-half months. “Even in case of a poisoning similar to the Litvinenko case, only traces of the order of a few [millibecquerels] were expected to be found in [the] year 2012,” the institute noted in its report to Al Jazeera.

But Arafat’s personal effects, particularly those with bodily fluids on them, registered much higher levels of the element. His toothbrushes had polonium levels of 54mBq; the urine stain on his underwear, 180mBq. (Another man’s pair of underwear, used as a control, measured just 6.7mBq.)

Further tests, conducted over a three-month period from March until June, concluded that most of that polonium – between 60 and 80 per cent, depending on the sample – was “unsupported,” meaning that it did not come from natural sources.

I have no idea if Arafat was really poisoned, but this does at least suggest an agent that was used, which  previous conspiracy theories have not.  Palestinians will of course assume Israel was behind any poisoning plot. Whether it is possible to confirm any of this at this late date is of course questionable. And one must wonder why, given the amount of questions at the time, this was not discovered (or revealed) at the time of his death?

Full disclosure: Al Jazeera English reporter Clayton Swisher, who worked on this story for the past nine months, is a former colleague of mine at the Middle East Institute.

The Al Jaseera English report (again, a longer report will be aired later today):

Well, I'm Glad THAT's All Cleared Up Now

Today was the original day when the election results in Egypt were to be announced. Now it appears they'll be announced Sunday.That announcement has, of course, put a stop to all the competing rumors. [No, Just Kidding!] There are confident reports making it pretty clear that one side or the other is going to win. Or vice versa.

Here's a report that says that SCAF will never let the Muslim Brotherhood be declared the winners.

And here's a report that says the Muslim Brotherhood candidate will be declared the winner on Sunday:

Take your pick. Meanwhile there have been statements suggesting that the new President's term will last only until there is a new constitution in place, so that even if Morsi wins he might be out in new elections in less than a year, with Big Brother SCAF keeping a close eye in the meantime.

Most of these reports come from reporters who heard it from a friend who has a cousin who's close to somebody in SCAF, and similar confident sourcing. I suspect some of these "military source" quotes may be from somebody's nephew who's a second lieutenant in the Quartermaster Corps or some such, too. And is thus privy to the inner workings of the high command. (Notice I said second lieutenant. If it was a first sergeant I might believe it.)

All the rumors should probably be discounted. Although I think we can be confident that Husni Mubarak is still either dead or alive. Or vice versa.

But wait! Hold the presses! This one may be true:

"Mideast UFO" Captivates Social Media; Turns Out to Be Russian Missile Test

I think it was Ronald Reagan who once reflected that one thing that would end our geopolitical rivalries would be an alien invasion. Any hopes that Middle East tensions would be relieved by the arrival of aliens has faded, however, now that it appears the great "Mideast UFO" last night was nothing but a Russian ICBM test.

I have several things I'm working on that will turn up on the blog in the coming days, but I can't think of a better way to segué into the weekend than a good UFO story. Or even a so-so UFO story.

Actually, I shouldn't be so flippant. Many people in Syria thought the regime was launching a chemical weapons attack, a reminder that even something relatively harmless (and distant) can nevertheless cause panic in a tense situation. This Storify collection on the phenomenon, put together by Andy Carvin and giving a good view of the Twitter evolution on the story, includes tweets like these:

Now to the actual sighting. Let's start with this:


Some may recall a similar "spiral UFO" from Norway in 2009 that turned out to be a failed Russian missile test. So, apparently, is this one, though Russia claims the test hit its target in Kazakhstan, and space expert James Oberg explains here that the spiral is created by a roll aimed at dumping fuel before impact, so the test may have been successful. Although supposedly the missile impacted in Kazakhstan, it was apparently high enough above the horizon to appear nearly overhead in Turkey, Armenia, Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan and Israel, among others.

You can find reportage and more videos at The Huffington Post, Zeinobia's Egyptian Chronicles blog, Zeinobia also tweeted a particularly Egyptian angle to the UFO:

So it appears this dramatic phenomenon was another Russian missile test, but it clearly caused a ruckus in the Middle East, especially in Syria, where rumors of a chemical weapons attack alarmed a great many people. But the aliens were just Russians this time.

Anatomy of a Hoax and Media Credulity: The "Egypt Necrophilia Law" Story

A quote attributed (dubiously) to Mark Twain has it that "A lie can go halfway around the world while truth is getting its boots on." And that was before the Internet. There was a classic example of this yesterday, when a story so grotesque, bizarre, and appalling that you'd think no one would believe it without evidence (and there was none) managed to turn up in print media and all over the Internet before a few intrepid souls noticed that there was no credible sourcing to the story. It's a case study in the down side of instant 24/7 reporting, and it tells us something about the tendency for Western media to believe absolutely anything about Islamists. Even this, from the (usually) respectable, liberal, Huffington Post, which is less sensational than some of the reports:

Egypt’s new Islamist-dominated parliament is preparing to introduce a controversial law that would allow husbands to have sex with their deceased wives up to six hours after death.

Known as the “farewell Intercourse” law, the measure is being championed as part of a raft of reforms introduced by the parliament that will also see the minimum age of marriage lowered to 14 for girls.

After an inevitable "WHAT!!!???" response, which of the following options do you think was the reaction of many (thankfully, not all) of the media?:

1. Traditional journalistic due diligence: Who has introduced this outrageous law in Parliament. What are the sources of the story? Where is this supposed bill in the Parliamentary process? When was it introduced? Why would anybody believe this outrageous story without even citing the name of one Member of Parliament supporting such a bill? Or:
2. Just reprint it without checking with anyone. After all, I saw it on the Internet, so it must be true. 

Yes, a lot of folks who should know better chose door number two.

It's such an outrageous story that one is reminded of Josef Goebbels' famous dictum that "the bigger the lie, the more people will believe it." This story, improbable as it ought to have seemed to anyone with common sense, somehow went halfway round the world before truth could get its boots on. Several Egyptian reporters/bloggers and an American or two have gradually reconstructed where this grotesque report came from, and I am trying to summarize all their findings here.

I'll cite specific instances below, but this story turned up in English first, I think, in the English website of Al-Arabiya, was picked up by the tabloid The Daily Mail, and then started to turn up all over the place: in rabid right-wing Islamophobic sites, of course, but also in liberal venues like The Huffington Post. For the right, it proves the morbid perversity of Islam; for the left, it proves the repression of women. Both points might be well taken if anyone had the slightest evidence that any such law exists. No one has produced any.Yet by the time it gets to The Daily Mail, the story has become:

Egyptian husbands will soon be legally allowed to have sex with their dead wives - for up to six hours after their death. The controversial new law is part of a raft of measures being introduced by the Islamist-dominated parliament.

Now it "will soon be legally allowed" under a law "introduced by the Islamist-dominated parliament." It sounds like it's a done deal, about to be rammed through a pliant parliament. Very alarming, except for the minor detail of not being true

There were a few voices who actually used their heads and called BS early on. Several Egyptian journalists and bloggers, notably journalist Sarah Carr and blogger Zeinobia, who I'll quote in discussing how this bizarre thing got started below, and Dan Murphy at the Christian Science Monitor, in a piece entitled "Egypt 'Necrophilia Law'? Hooey, Utter Hooey.  Murphy's response should have been the first reaction of any serious reporter, or of anyone familiar with Egypt. It was pretty much mine, which is why I didn't mention the story. (Well, my reaction wasn't precisely "utter hooey," because I'm not sure I've ever actually said, or even thought, "hooey," but apparently you can't say "bullshit" in The Christian Science Monitor.)

As Murphy put it:

There's of course one problem: The chances of any such piece of legislation being considered by the Egyptian parliament for a vote is zero. And the chance of it ever passing is less than that. In fact, color me highly skeptical that anyone is even trying to advance a piece of legislation like this through Egypt's parliament. I'm willing to be proven wrong. It's possible that there's one or two lawmakers completely out of step with the rest of parliament. Maybe. 

No one has proven him wrong. Although Murphy and the Egyptian blogosphere were raising red flags, the story made its way around. Gossip sites and sensational sites joined the Islamophobic sites in repeating the tale.

Andrew Sullivan, whose widely-read blog at The Daily Beast is usually above this sort of thing, but who distrusts fundamentalism whether Christian or Muslim, quoted The Daily Mail (since he's British, I doubt if he had it confused with The Economist as far as reliability goes), and had some harsh words for Islam. ("One wonders: what part of Islam requires fucking your dead wife?") Admittedly and to his credit, he has since noted and quoted the evidence that the story's untrue, but it's further evidence of how far this story went and how respectable media bought it for a while.

So how did this story go so far? The following reconstruction is based on others' work, mostly 1) Egyptian journalist Sarah Carr, who posted a response to the Daily Mail article (which is now buried in a comments thread that runs to more than 800, but which she posted to Facebook for the record) and has since pursued the issue, blogger Zeinobia, who was also on the case early, and Murphy's previously cited CSM article. Carr, I think, nails the unspoken presumptions that helped spread the story:

While I appreciate that the Daily Mail sifts the Internet daily for news pieces that will confirm to its readers that Muslims are all book-burning, wife-incarcerating, turban-wearing lunatics, and while I appreciate that this item is particularly attractive because of its salaciousness, if Lee Moran had troubled himself to do a little bit of research beyond translating an op-ed and a TV talking head, he would have discovered that in fact, a draft law to allow men to bonk their deceased wives does not exist. This may seem remarkable, given that Egyptians (i.e. scary mooslems) revolted in 2011 for PRECISELY this right, but there we are.

If Mr Moran's googling had been more thorough he would have discovered that this rumour was started by a local wacko who, alas, has a public platform by virtue of the fact that he owns a satellite channel.

This is what seems to be the timeline:

1. The only named person who is known to have actually claimed that Islam supports this bizarre idea is a Moroccan sheikh, Zamzami Abdelbari, a fringe figure, and even he apparently said it was a repulsive practice. I've spoken before somewhere on this blog about my reluctance to indulge in the latest "crazy sheikh/crazy fatwa" report, in which the media focuses on a so-called "fatwa" from some self-proclaimed "sheikh" with a following that may include his immediate family, and treat this as some sort of "official" ruling. This guy has nothing to do with Egypt.

2. Next, the plot moves to Egyptian satellite TV owner/talk show host/conspiracy theorist Tawfiq Okasha. Okasha has been a critic of the revolutionaries, a conspiracist who sees the US and Israel behind everything, a rabble-rouser last mentioned on this blog as being blamed for promoting attacks on the US Embassy. Zeinobia compares him to the US' Glenn Beck. This broadcast (Arabic) seems to be the first appearance of this idea  of "Farewell intercourse"  (مضاجعة الوداع) in Egypt:



3. Next, the story moves to the state-owned Al-Ahram where a secularist, anti-Islamist columnist named Amr Abdel Samea edtorialized that the Egyptian National Organization for Women were protesting this and a proposed law reducing the marriage age (which actually is advocated by some Islamists.) The link is in Arabic. It doesn't clearly cite a specific bill or any advocates of such a bill. It refers to "talk about" such a bill, but not specifying by whom. It's more a case of  a rhetorical "if the Islamists have their way they're liable to do something this crazy."

4. Abdel Samea's op-ed then provokes in turn a sensational TV commentary from Gaber al-Qarnouty on the channel ON TV. He quotes Abdel Samea but talks as if there is actually a draft law under discussion. It has gone from nightmare scenario to stated fact:



5. It's this Qarnouty broadcast that was picked up by the English website of Al-Arabiya, in the post that was then picked up throughout the West:

Egyptian prominent journalist and TV anchor Jaber al-Qarmouty on Tuesday referred to Abdul Samea’s article in his daily show on Egyptian ON TV and criticized the whole notion of “permitting a husband to have sex with his wife after her death under a so-called ‘Farewell Intercourse’ draft law.”

“This is very serious. Could the panel that will draft the Egyptian constitution possibly discuss such issues? Did Abdul Samea see by his own eyes the text of the message sent by Talawi to Katatni? This is unbelievable. It is a catastrophe to give the husband such a right! Has the Islamic trend reached that far? Is there really a draft law in this regard? Are there people thinking in this manner?” 

Of course, the answer to Qarnouty's rhetorical questions are "No, no, and no." But the next step is the jump to the Daily Mail report that "Egyptian husbands will soon be legally allowed to have sex with their dead wives." The fact that there's no basis for the report that anyone has yet found, is of course lost in translation.

Sarah Carr again:"Conclusion: It's a load of bollocks." That's the British equivalent of Murphy's "utter hooey." It's a crock.

Once again, at the end of the day there no "there" there, there's no story. Most of the respectable media that reported the story yesterday have put up hedging clarifications, but this is a story that didn't need to spread so widely to begin with. There may be a Moroccan sheikh who's this far over the edge, but there's no necrophilia bill in the Egyptian Parliament.

Rumor or Disinformaton? Iran says ‘Omar Suleiman to Assist Crown Prince Nayef?

This is one of the wilder stories out there, and one must consider the source: Iran's PressTV, quoting Iran's Fars news agency: "Nayef Hires Egypt's Ex-Spy Chief."  Iran of course loves to portray Saudi Arabis in a bad light, but they're claiming that when Egypt's former intelligence chief and (briefly) Vice President &slquo;Omar Suleiman arrived in Saudi Arabia for the Hajj, newly  elevated Crown Prince Nayef appointed him his security advisor,

And, of course, they manage to mention Suleiman's close ties with Israeli intelligence.

Bear in mind that Nayef has been denouncing Iran for the alleged plot against the Saudi Ambassador to the US. This belongs in the category of coffeehouse gossip at best, given the source. But it's also something I couldn't resist passing on.

Rumor of the Day: Venezuelan Plane in Djerba to Evacuate Qadhafi Family?

Xinhua, the Chinese news agency, is quoting a Tunisian radio station as reporting that a Venezuelan plane has arrived on the southern Tunisian island of Djerba, in order to evacuate members of the Qadhafi family to Caracas.

A Qadhafi departure may still be wishful thinking, but the rumors are certainly intensifying. Of course, Hugo Chavez' own future is looking a little cloudy at the moment, too.

UPDATE: I may have called this the "rumor of the day" too quickly. as it's also rumored that 1) Qadhafi had a heart attack; 2) Qadhafi has a terminal illness; 3) former number two man ‘Abdel Salam Jallud has gone over to the rebels. Allegedly some rebel Facebook page has a picture of Jallud in the Jebel Nefusa, so that one might even be true.