Let’s wait and see what happens in september. but i can’t help but wonder, what is more plausible. That a rogue element of Hizbullah a well trained and disciplined organization managed to pull off a very sophisticated assassination? or that the powers that be have struck a deal?

It is pretty clear to me that “Israel” and the US were behind Hariri’s assassination and that this entire international tribunal has been a circus freak show from day one. Its intent is to create chaos and instability inside Lebanon in order to weaken or destroy the resistance. All the recent arrest of spies all over Lebanon working on the behalf of that criminal, cancerous entity to the south give a clear indication that “Israel” has had a hand in all assassinations inside Lebanon. The STL should at least be questioning these spies and looking into the possibility that “Israel” stood behind Hariri’s assassination, but apparently this has never been their mandate. Their instructions have been to pin the blame on Syria and/or Hizballah in order to serve the interests of the Jewish entity in the region.

Rather by trying to implicate in anyway Hezbollah, they would cunningly manage to avoid all the hard questions concerning the alleged motive of the attack and those who are really beind it.

not too fast,T Desco

Is Mandeel Niqab?

All the evidence points to Syria. The Detleve Mehlis report nearly comes out and says this.

Of course, this is in keeping with Syria’s modus operandi in Lebanon. The Baathist regime has brutally murdered many of Lebanon’s politicians. It is clear that the regime murdered Kamal Jumblatt and Bachir Gemayel. In addition, the long list of Lebanese politicians who have been assassinated via powerful car bombings after advocating for Lebanese independence from Syria’s occupation further indicates that the regime views murder as a political tool.

As we focus on Rafiq Harriri’s murder let us not forget those other Lebanese who were brutally murdered after advocating for independence from Syrian occupation forces: Pierre Amine Gemayel, Samir Kassir, George Hawi, Gebran Tueni, Walid Eido, and Antoine Ghanem.

There is not a single piece of evidence that points to Syria, other than that Syrian troops were in Lebanon at the time of the assassination. The Detlev Mehlis report was a comical report based on the testimony of what proved to be false witnesses planted by certain forces who have not been held accountable for deliberately attempting to obstruct the investigation.

All real evidence points to “Israel” and the US. All the spies that have been uncovered and the type of work they were tasked with point to clear “Israeli” involvement in not only Hariri’s murder but also all subsequent assassinations. The only true criminal, cancerous entity in the region is “Israel.” And it is the one entity that has been a source of instability since its very inception.

As I argued before, it seems unlikely that Assad knew anything about the attack. So if ‘Syria’ knew, as the former US official suggests, why didn’t the Syrian president…?

I always doubted that Syria was behind the Hariri assassination because it was obviously so disadvantageous for Syria. It would have been an extremely bad move by Syria, but for Hizbullah to do it would have been sheer madness.

There are so many problems (‘motive’, anyone?), so many questions (e.g. about ‘Ghamlush’). I hope we will hear some answers in the coming days, starting tomorrow at 7 p.m. (Beirut time). 😉

Seen from a purely Syrian perspective, Hizbullah and Hamas are major ‘trumps’ in any future negotiations with Israel. So what we are seeing right now is (among other things) an attempt to severely weaken Syria’s hand prior to any negotiations over the Golan Highs. A weakened Syria is more likely to make concessions.

BTW, as much as I appreciate Gareth Porter, I have a massive problem with his take of the Amiri case: if the CIA suspected him of being a new Yurchenko, why did they let him go after the first video?

One metaphor too far

Michael Young: New Yorkers are not keen to see their buildings turned into parking space by bin Laden (just as he did with the WTC).

How much disdain for your fellow countrymen do you have to have to even think of using that metaphor in a column?

It should be rather obvious even to those following Young’s contrived reasoning that two parties clearly benefited from the Hariri assassination and the developments that ensued (cui bono): Israel and Sunni extremists:

“According to As Safir, the Hizbullah secretary-general told Jumblat that a top official informed him about fears from a violent reaction from Sunni fundamentalism in case the STL indicts Hizbullah members.”
Naharnet, July 22, 2010

I got the time of the press conference wrong:

“Nasrallah will hold his conference at the Shahed school hall on the airport road at 8:30 pm.
As Safir daily said that the Hizbullah secretary-general will make a well-toned stance that could also include a “big surprise” for the Lebanese.

It added he will unveil new information about the international tribunal and spy networks.”
Naharnet, July 22, 2010

of course, with Israeli spies having very likely manipulated the ‘intel’ re. the Hariri assassination, the investigation is probably bogus. In the end, it’s hard to see how Hezbollah benefitted or stood to benefit. As relentless as US and Israeli smears against Hezbollah are, they have been working hard for a decade now, successfully, to establish themselves WITHIN Lebanese politics, not outside them.

Eppie,

It is true that the Iranian and Baathist sponsored terror group Hezbollah has worked to place itself within the Lebanese political system. It has been quite successful at slowly taking over Lebanon. As we saw in May 2008, Hezbollah is not afraid to kill fellow Lebanese in order to subjugate the country. What you say is correct, they have worked to position themselves as actors within Lebanese politics, but for Hezbollah the ballot box is not the preferred mechanism of political success. The AK-47 and shooting fellow Arabs is how they have chosen to become politically successful.

There is an important distinction to be made here. We ought to be in favor of terror groups becoming political actors, but only if they relinquish violence, otherwise they end up using their guns in the political process.

Eppie:

You are right, the most likely culprit in the Hariri assassination is “Israel” and there is no doubt that the investigation is bogus, as it has been a complete charade from day one. But in my opinion all this is just a ruse to try to create chaos in Lebanon in a bid to destroy the resistance. It is a strategy, however, that has proven to be a failure and will fail once again. The resistance will not allow anyone to destroy it, and when traitors and collaborators attempted to attack the resistance in May of 2008, they were quickly disarmed and stability and normalcy were returned to Lebanon. The resistance is ready to play that role again, and regardless of the wishes of “Israel” and the US, as well as some political opportunists inside Lebanon, Lebanon will be saved once again by the nobility of the resistance.

You guys have got all this thing about HA and STL wrong.
Israel is not going to destroy HA and muqawama
Syria will be doing that.
Anyone who carefully listened to Nasrallah, will conclude he was as much upset with Syria as he was with all the other players.
Wait until King Abdullah visits Damascus and Beirut soon and ready yourselves for the surprises.
Bashar sold Iran already.
Even Egypt had some ‘positive’ words about him lately: ‘becoming realistic’.
In short, Syrian regime = opportunism par execellence That is the only way it can survive.

Almasri,

I am disappointed ,I didn’t expect to see that from you ,

Norman,

I am an observer just like everybody else.
Listen to nasrallah and judge for yourself.

Where al masri i can find what he said

Norman,

You could have googled المؤتمر الصحفي لسماحة السيد حسن نصرالله. You get links to latest videos by the Sayyid. It is video number 1. But here’s the direct link,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y44IPaA_4tQ&feature=related

Here are also links to related articles,

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/22/AR2010072204296.html

http://abna.ir/data.asp?lang=3&id=196693

http://www.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/9A8A056A-4524-4D8E-BBF6-A9A63A559DE5.htm?GoogleStatID=1

http://www.alarabiya.net/views/2010/07/24/114693.html

Also take into consideration the composition of the delegation that accompanied Hariri in his latest visit to Damas. Some of the figures were previously persona non-grata. Hariri met Nasrallah right after the visit.

Almasri:

I don’t get how you came to your conclusion @ 13, I listened to all his speaches of 22 July, nothing there in relation to your conclusion.

Husam,

Are you well versed in Lebanese politics?

The sayyid wants those who accompanied Hariri to Damas to have apologized to Syria before being allowed in. That passage in the speech is also a reminder to Bashar (3atab) of the Sayyid’s favors towards him (Bashar) after 2005, and now is being ‘rewarded’ by being left alone to face the STL. There were also news, which I read recently but failed to keep a record of, of Iranian leadership displeasures with Syria. At the time of reading, I thought they were irrelevant until the press conference came about.

Things will become clear after the King’s visit(s). There is a ramadan holiday coming up.

To the many wishful thinkers out there …

So Syria will be the power that destroys HA. So, Syria, having withstood the incredible pressures in the past few years to break its ties with Iran and HA, and having been proven correct in its bets, now suddenly has decided to become “moderate” and is on its way to “sell” Iran and HA?

هل من إمكان لفهم هذه «التحشيشة»

An article for Ibrahim Al-Amin in Al-Akhbar 22-Jul-2010

دمشق للحريري: حزب الله هو الخطّ الأحمر

أوردت الأوساط القريبة من رئيس الحكومة، سعد الحريري، أنه عاد من دمشق بتفاهم مع القيادة السورية على أمور كثيرة، تخص تطوير العلاقات بين البلدين. لكن ما أضافه المقربون من الحريري أن الأخير عاد مرتاحاً إلى موقف الرئيس السوري بشار الأسد للتطورات الجارية في لبنان، لكن من دون تفاصيل. إلا أن التوضيحات الإضافية من جانب مساعدي الحريري أخذت بعداً من نوع آخر، وخصوصاً عندما صار الحديث يتناول تعليقات وتفسيرات من النوع المختلف. منها التحليلات المبالغ فيها لمعنى الصورة الثلاثية التي جمعت الأسد والحريري ووزير خارجية تركيا داوود أوغلو.
وفي سياق التحليل السياسي والإعلامي لهذه الصورة، يعود هؤلاء إلى الصورة التي سبق أن جمعت الأسد مع الرئيس الإيراني أحمدي نجاد والأمين العام لحزب الله السيد حسن نصر الله. وأخذت المقارنة بعداً إضافياً عندما أجاد هؤلاء في البحث واعتبار الصورة الجديدة بديلاً مقترحاً من الرئيس السوري للصورة القديمة. ولمزيد من التوضيح، يذهب أحد أبرز أمنيّي 14 آذار إلى القول إن سوريا لم تكن في أجواء ما أعلنه نصر الله في خطابه الأخير، وإنها لا تتفهم ما يجري، وهي قلقة على السلم الأهلي وتدعم إعادة التوحد والحوار. ثم يترك فريق الحريري للعموم استنتاج أن دمشق هي إما تتفهم «نقزة» رئيس الحكومة وفريقه من مواقف نصر الله، وإما أنها على الحياد.
سبق هذه الاستنتاجات تحليل آخر رافق زيارة الحريري الأولى لدمشق، مفاده أن سوريا هي صاحبة المصلحة في هذا النوع من التواصل، وأنها تسعى إلى توسيع دائرة التواصل مع الفريق القريب من السعودية، وأن الأسد في صدد الابتعاد عن التحالف مع إيران وحزب الله.
كيف يستوي التحليل بأن سوريا تريد الابتعاد عن المقاومة العربية التي كانت مصدر الرهان والقوة؟

إلا أن الأمر لا يتوقف عند هذا الحد؛ لأن في هذا الفريق من يقود تناقضاً داخلياً هو الأغرب من نوعه في سياق مقاربته العلاقة مع سوريا. فمن جهة، يتحدث هؤلاء عن أن دمشق نجحت واستطاعت تجاوز كل دوائر الضغط التي تعرضت لها على مدى السنوات الخمس. ومن جهة ثانية، هم يعتقدون أن سوريا تواجه أزمة وتريد التخلص من عبء التحالف مع إيران. فيما يعرفون أن سوريا عندما تعرضت للضغط خلال تلك الفترة كانت أمام خيار الابتعاد عن إيران، مقابل أخذ موقع متقدم في الوضع الإقليمي، وكان عليها كذلك الابتعاد عن الدور الراعي لقوى المقاومة في فلسطين ولبنان والعراق، وتحديداً وقف التواصل مع حزب الله وإقفال بوابة الدعم العسكري والعمل على إبعاد قادة حماس والجهاد الإسلامي وقوى المقاومة الفلسطينية من دمشق. ومع ذلك، فهي لم تقبل بذلك، وواجهت الضغوط على مختلف أنواعها. حتى إن صحافياً إسرائيليا كتب أخيراً تعليقاً لافتاً عن الأمر، قائلاً إن الأسد رفض مشورة كثيرين طالبوه بالتعاون مع الولايات المتحدة الأميركية، وقرر المغامرة بالعلاقة مع المقاومة، لكنه فاز في هذه المغامرة.
والسؤال هنا: كيف يستوي التحليل؟ والآن بعدما ربحت سوريا خياراتها، كيف ستعود عن التحالفات التي قامت عليها سياستها في الفترة الصعبة، وهي ذاهبة نحو تحالفات مع الفريق الذي خسر الرهانات، وهو الآن يعيد ترتيب مواقعه والنظر في حساباته؟
وبالعودة إلى آخر التحليلات، فإن المنطق الذي يريد فريق الحريري وبقية قوى 14 آذار العمل عليه، هو القائل بأن سوريا الآن تفضل مقاربة الأمور من زاوية الحفاظ على ما حققته من مكاسب في السنوات الأخيرة، وأنها لن تتأخر في اختيار العلاقة مع الدولة اللبنانية إذا ما أُجبرت على الاختيار بينها وبين حزب الله.
هل من إمكان لفهم هذه «التحشيشة»؟
بدايةً، ولناحية المعلومات، فإن المحادثات التي أجراها الرئيس الحريري في سوريا، أو تلك التي أجراها معاونوه مع مساعدين للرئيس السوري، ركزت على ملفات كثيرة من بينها الملف الأكثر حساسية الآن والمتصل بمواقف السيد نصر الله، والخشية من لجوء المحكمة الدولية إلى خطوة غبية تستهدف المقاومة، وقد سمع الحريري ومساعدوه موقفاً واضحاً، فيه الآتي:
إن سوريا تريد تأكيد موقفها الداعم للسلم الأهلي في لبنان، وهي ترى في الانقسام مصدر خطر على سوريا نفسها، وإن تجربة سنوات الانقسام الأخيرة دلت على ذلك. كذلك تعتقد سوريا أن الأمور تحتاج إلى حوار يقوم على حد أدنى من الثقة المتبادلة التي تتيح التوصل إلى تفاهمات على الأمور الاستراتيجية، كما على الأمور الحياتية اليومية في لبنان. لكن سوريا تحتفظ بثوابتها:
أولاً: إن قوى المقاومة العربية، وفي طليعتها حزب الله، وعلى رأسه السيد نصر الله، هي خط أحمر يطابق الخط الأحمر المرسوم حول النظام في سوريا.
ثانياً: إن سوريا تعيد التأكيد أن التحالفات في لبنان يجب أن تقوم على حوارات وتواصل ومصارحة.
ثالثاً: إن سوريا لا تثق بالعمل الجاري في ملف التحقيق الدولي الخاص بجريمة اغتيال الرئيس رفيق الحريري، وهي تلفت انتباه من يهمه الأمر إلى أن ما يحفظ الاستقرار هو الابتعاد عن الفبركات وخلافه.
ثمة قاعدة واضحة لدى المسؤولين السوريين، تقول إن الأمور قد تكون متجهة إلى مزيد من التعقيد، لكن الأهم في المسألة هو أن الحريري وفريقه يظهرون تفهماً لهواجس حزب الله، لكنهم عندما يصلون إلى مرحلة الإجابة يقفون مرتبكين: ليس في يدنا ما نقوم به، كل الملف عند الولايات المتحدة وبريطانيا وفرنسا والسعودية.

Syria will not sell out Iran or HA unless the price is right.

Almasri: Reality and politics are 2 different things. Some things we will know, and some things we will never know. No, I don’t know Lebanese news and politics all that much, but I don’t think Syria is on a verge of divorce. And, I don’t believe Syria’s relation with HA is such that requires both leaders to throw lines in between speaches. Perhaps Nasrallah is bringing out Bashar’s flexibility that did not require a formal apology as good thing ((he (Bashar) should have asked, but he did not)).

Call me crazy, but Nasrallah’s speeches seems to me more clear, confident and sincere than all the other clowns in the Lebanese circus.

Syria will not stop Hezbollah , one , because she does not want to and second because she can not ,

I wouldn’t call you crazy Husam. But to say that nasrallah’s speech shows more calm than other players (i wouldn’t call it circus anymore because there seems to be quite a bit of sobriety on their parts) is a stretch of a statement.
1) Hariri offered Nasrallah his father’s blood and the saving of HA’s head (and party) for the sake of internal stability. Nasrallah, briefly rejected the offer in his speech. Hariri scored big on that. Be careful where the circus may lie from now on.
2) That is as much as Hariri and his Arab backers can offer. The rest is not up to them. Syria here MUST do its part. We do not know what the consequences will be.
3) Iran’s sanction are under chapter 7. STL is under chapter 7. Syria is in the middle. You go figure.
4) I do not know what Abdullah will say to Bashar in light of the above. We can only speculate. He could be carrying a final message as in 2005 when Bashar was called to Riyad and didn’t get past the airport. Bashar’s soldiers left Lebanon within one week.
5) I agree with you. Syria will sell for the right price. That is probably why Egypt is ‘positive’ about Bashar becoming realistic recently. It could be the price is now set at realistic levels. Egypt stood against KSA in recent attempts for Arab reconciliation.

Some so-called ‘philosophers’ capable of only making disparaging comments and incapable of making retractions due to arrogance now are telling us that al-Akhbar speaks for Syria and its regime. WOW. I raise my hat to that.

May be such ‘philosophers’ can make sense out of al-amin’s assertion
ثالثاً: إن سوريا لا تثق بالعمل الجاري في ملف التحقيق الدولي الخاص بجريمة اغتيال الرئيس رفيق الحريري، وهي تلفت انتباه من يهمه الأمر إلى أن ما يحفظ الاستقرار هو الابتعاد عن الفبركات وخلافه.
with what Syria recently announced about its determination to try any Syrian indicted by the STL. Also, how does Syria feel about the Sayyid claiming Hariri told him that he (Hariri) already knows the contents of the STL upcoming indictment statement. Where in fact Hariri only spoke of circulating rumors in the media to Nasrallah? Is Syria going to admonish the sayyid and tell him to shut up and stay away from fabrications in order to preserve internal peace?
Glad to know alamin recognizes the implications of Lebanese stability upon Syria’s own.
Go read some empty philosophy books. How pathetic?

Norman, I hope you are right. But the fall is going to be full of surprises.

Alamasri:

I don’t like jumping to conclusions. Why are you dismissing the Israeli involvement in Hariri’s killing?

I need to see hard evidence, not phone records because these can be fabricated.

Aren’t you at least patient enough to wait until Nasrallah shows us the supposedly “so much interesting breakdown” of the complex details he promised he will do in his next speech?

I am not saying you are wrong, I am saying hold your horses.

As for the circus in the middle east, like everywhere else, a circus showing is scheduled daily.

Husam,

I am not dissmissing any scenario including the Israeli one.

Either Hariri is lying or Nasrallah is.

1) if Hariri is telling the truth, then nasrallah jumped to conclusions based on rumors and hastily made a press conference which only serves to heighten internal tension.

2) Hariri is lying and he indeed told nasrallah he knows what is in the indictment. In this case nasrallah fell into the trap and prematurely rejected a ‘reasonable’ offer pending further evidence.

In either case case who is the clown in this circus?

Al masri,

you must remember what they said about a taping of President Assad threatening Hariri and that Maher and Asef are involved and the only way for Bashar Assad to save himself is to admit and surrender Maher and Assef and Ghazali, he refused and he was right to do that because it was a trap to convect Syria , now they are doing the same thing to Nasrallah , If Hariri J offered what you said , it was also a trap to see if Hezbollah will full into it and accept which means that he is guilty in the first place , we should remember that indictment does mean guilty or convection and Hariri should be careful that any attempt at discrediting Hezbollah and Nasrallah will be faced with an overthrow of his government ,

The problem that in Lebanon and the wide Mideast is that there does not seem to be a decisive victory for anybody and that keeps the area in a chronic conflict without future , a win by a party and reconciliation afterward is better for everybody ,

The one who killed former Lebanon PM is technically, physically, and politically Israel. Anyone believes differently must prove it by only showing beyond doubt evidence. Simply no one can because no one has any evidence that would implicate Syria. Israel did it beyond doubt.

Israel created itself through terrorism, can only survive by using terrorism, and it has been doing so since its creation in 1948. Today, Israel is the only remaining apartheid regime in the world. The question is how long Israel can survive?

Norman,

I think there is a big difference between what happened when the investigation was going on at the time Assad was asked to hand over certain people and what we have right now. There was no tribunal at that time. At one point after Mehlis was dismissed, everyone seemed to be satisfied with the impartiality of the investigation including Syria and HA. If I recall correctly, there was a deal to stay away from certain personalities in Syria and Syria would support the investigation and later on the tribunal. HA was not part of this deal at that time. But nobody was talking about HA being involved then. So, there was no need to include HA in that deal.

Besides what do you mean by this,

“we should remember that indictment does mean guilty or convection and Hariri should be careful that any attempt at discrediting Hezbollah and Nasrallah will be faced with an overthrow of his government ,”?

Well, by Western standards, we know an accused is innocent until proven guilty. Is it impossible for Nasrallah to understand and accept this concept? Could he not teach his followers that this is how those accused would be looked at until proven otherwise? After all he can just make a command and all of his followers would be happy to oblige!

Finally, the issue does not need such a press conference which would only serve to heighten internal tensions. And this applies in either case whether Hariri knows the actual indictment statement or whether he was just discussing rumors with Nasrallah.

So, I believe Hariri is keeping around him some good qualified advisers, while Nasrallah seems to be out of touch.

King Abdallah’s visit to Syria will bring nothing new. No dramatic changes are expected. The Saudi monarch is being pragmatic and is in fact cozing up the winning side.

Syria has not changed any of its stands: it has not broken its ties with Iran, not with HA or Hamas. It has not surrendered any of its officers to the international tribunal investigation, and it has built bridges with Turkey, and a number of international powers.

Saudi Arabia reached a frenzy in 2006/2007 and the Saudi press and its Lebanese employees were openly calling for the dismantling of the regime. Now all of those have shut up against Syria. It was the Saudi king that made his famous U turn, not Syria.

I do not see any compelling reasons for Syria to sell out on HA. HA has been a responsible, rational, and formidable force on Syria’s side. Those who see Syria dropping HA at this stage for no reason at all are not painting a coherent picture. The extrapolation seems to draw on little other than wishful thinking.

In fact, one might in 2005 have doubted that Syrian elements may have had some involvement with Hariri’s assassination, and that has been proven incorrect now. But to try to use Hariri’s Qamees (shirt) to frame HA defies all logic and all reason. Hariri S and Nasralla had the best of relations and HA gained nothing at all from the events that followed. Where is the motive? (please answer without the aid of narcotics)

I have seen this just too many times: Some people begin with unfathomable loath towards HA and the Syrian leadership, and just allow their hatred to take advantage of their better judgment, reading every single piece of news as a definite step towards the demise of those forces. Green envy just eats them up as they watch the discipline, commitment, and success of HA and Syrian policy, while they’re preaching hot air from behind their thick argeeleh smoke clouds.

Some ideas:

-1-
– the sectarian danger is even greater than some people (e.g. E. Muhanna) seem to realize: the STL indictment will not be about Hariri alone!

SPIEGEL (Follath): “And, once again, there was evidence of involvement by the Hezbollah commando unit, just as there has been in each of more than a dozen attacks against prominent Lebanese in the last four years.”

UN 8 (Brammertz): 78. In addition (…) the Commission’s findings suggest that there may be a link between the group claiming responsibility for the Hariri killing and the group that claimed responsibility for the attacks on Samir Kassir, Gebran Tueni and Pierre Gemayel.
81. Communications analysis conducted so far has helped confirm the Commission’s hypothesis that a number of individuals may be relevant to the Hariri case and one or more of the other cases.

UN 10 (Bellemare): “25. The Commission can now confirm, on the basis of available evidence, that a network of individuals acted in concert to carry out the assassination of Rafiq Hariri and that this criminal network, the “Hariri network”, or parts thereof, are linked to some of the other cases within the Commission’s mandate.”

(my emphasis)

– in short, Shi’ites seen targeting leaders of all other sects

– however, this leads to an additional motive for these attacks (1. revenge on behalf of Syria): 2. stirring up sectarian tensions to ignite a civil war

-2-
– STL may be adopting ‘lobster cooking’ strategy (first indicting 3, then 20, then…?), expecting Hizbullah to sit still while the heat is being turned on
– ‘rogue elements’ theory is obviously absurd
– final indictments could still target leadership
– or a construct like ‘International Hezbollah’ (Mughniyah)
– or even Revolutionary Guards (Iran)!

-3-
– expect new Siddiqs!

– the ‘findings’ will be based on more than just communication analysis
– e.g. the link between phones and ‘secret’ commando unit has to be human intelligence
– witnesses could also identify the person who bought the 8 phone cards (Ghamlush)
– or the 2 persons who bought the van, etc.

– as a result the indictment will be convincing for March 14, Saad Hariri, the Western media, etc.

They are trying to destroy Hezbollah by legal means after Israel could not do that by force , It might be time for Hezbollah to take over call for one man one vote and opportunity for anybody in Lebanon to be president , prime minster or a parliament speaker

anybody can be in any position , countrywide election , and equality to all , investigation in Lebanon rebuilding scam which made Hariri a billionaire while inflicting significant debt on Lebanon ,