Superstitions independent

Superstitions independent
Unanimous parliamentary blocs, the three old («accord» and »Authenticity» and »the Islamic pulpit») to reject the decision to stop support for Hydrocarbons, clearly and without ambiguity, but independents who are mired in their reluctance.

«Authenticity» said he had come the role of the House of Representatives true to prove their sincerity as they raised slogans of election, in the forefront of improving the living situation of citizens, and expressed fears of attempts to occupancy of Representatives and the People and the Press for the failures in one housing, education, health and labor market. More importantly, that the cessation of support would apply to the harm of all groups, and undermines all the efforts of the former State to maintain the rate of inflation.

«Accord», referring to the contradiction in the government's position, instead of taking the proposals prior to improve the living situation of the citizen, they rush to pass such laws frustrating, away from the discussion of the most important issue, which is the equitable distribution of wealth, and its associated land and property in general.

The «platform» announced its rejection of the resolution, and its readiness to respond to it in parliament, «because it affects all citizens, it is unreasonable to take such a decision away from the House of Representatives, and in clear violation of the Constitution ... It is therefore impossible to agree Babriani »!

Three positions are clear, but «independent», described formally posed by mercury mass agitator. Unfortunately for them they face a difficult test even before the new parliament, either to stand with the people, either to align with the government and her thumbprint on what you want.

Independents are not a reality, but are the opinions and whims of various, and they have to prove the contrary. Volatile and fluctuating attitudes towards stopping subsidies for goods and fuel to prove it. Some of them even tried and failed privilege to play the role of the first lawyer for this policy Malthusianism devastating to the lives of the vast majority of the people.

Three blocs declared their position at least an apologia if the government tried to pass a resolution without reference to the elected representatives, Independents They still wrapped around the waterwheel and the Government of seeking excuses for the lame. Is there a Congress government in the world are giving their necks, saying: «lifting support if applied it would not affect people with limited income and middle-»? Does the government will find a carpet softer than this block? What do they mean the word «independent» then? Are they honest with themselves while claiming that the cessation of support will not affect the poor and middle classes? It is convinced of this myth? It is guaranteed to them? Why «Izaalon» and accuse them of conspiring in the press when we criticize the abusive attitudes of the overwhelming majority of the people?

Let's be clear ... It is not a guarantee does not affect the decision to stop support to the middle classes and poor, even the government can not guarantee that, all I said bubbles of butter! It is also no guarantee at all the rest is not affected by prices of goods as if lifted fuel subsidies, even the Ministry of Commerce. Vgol inflation ahead of us on the doors, a certificate of Chamber of Commerce, which confirmed that the support was a major cause of price stability. To be sure, prices will rise again within twenty-four hours of the Declaration of the removal of subsidies.

Has failed all attempts of government and liberals to convince citizens and one that the cessation of support is in the best interest, and the «independent block confident that the removal of subsidies would not affect low-income», then the myth from the days of Malthus Varmint




Qasim Hussain
Bahraini newspaper Al Wasat - No. 3019 - Sunday, December 12, 2010, corresponding to 06 Muharram 1432 AH