January 05, 2007
“It's Like a Phish Concert for Terrorists”
BEIRUT – While Hezbollah occupied the Beirut city center in an attempt to bring down the government, I teamed up with my American friend Noah Pollak, who works as assistant editor at Azure Magazine in Jerusalem, and took a trip to Hezbollah’s stronghold in South Lebanon. We wanted to survey the devastation from the July War and see if we could find civilians who had been used as human shields by the Party of God.
Before we went to the south, however, Noah wanted to meet Hezbollah members downtown. He had never been to Lebanon before, and I was happy to show him around and introduce him to the “party” that fired missiles in our direction when we covered the July War together from the Israeli side of the border.
He arrived in Beirut at 2:00 a.m. His taxi driver took him alongside the edge of Hezbollah’s downtown encampment. Even in the middle of the night demonstrators were out the streets screaming slogans.
“What are they saying?” Noah said to the driver.
The driver rolled down his window and told the demonstrators an American was in the car and wanted to know what they were saying. One of the men in the street came up to the taxi.
“We will cut Seniora,” he said, referring to Lebanon’s elected prime minister. “We will cut him!”
Noah laughed to himself and knew he had come to Lebanon at the right time.
The next day I took him downtown so we could sit and talk with the malcontents and the disgruntled. First, though, we had to stop by one of the Hezbollah propaganda stands so I could buy a “resistance” scarf and go incognito into the tent city. Don’t laugh. It actually worked. All the hostile paranoia I had to put up with from Hezbollah’s security agents vanished entirely as soon as I put a Hezbollah scarf around my neck. The goons with their sunglasses and ear-pieces stopped staring at me, stopped tracking my movement, and stopped getting twitchy when I took pictures. They are strikingly obtuse individuals if wearing a scarf is all it takes to blend in.
So I picked up a scarf at the stand. Flags, t-shirts, and rear-view mirror ornaments were also for sale. Noah bought the biggest Hezbollah flag he could find.
A Lebanese woman walked by and smirked as she asked us where we were from.
“United States,” I said.
“And…” she said. “You like Hezbollah?” She tried hard not to laugh at us.
“Not really,” I said under my breath so the vendor couldn’t hear. “We just want souvenirs because we think it’s funny.”
She smiled and knowingly nodded.
I bought a Hezbollah t-shirt in Baalbeck last year – because it’s ironic and funny, not because I would ever actually wear it. A Lebanese army soldier watched me hand the vendor five dollars, and he shook his head sadly in grave disappointment. He was twenty years older than me, and I doubted he would understand the flip ironic GenX/Southpark sense of humor. Surely he thought I was a duped useful idiot.
Noah and I paid for our items. I put the scarf around my neck and felt as ridiculous as I must have looked.
Oh well. Hezbollah’s security brutes left me alone, so it was worth it. (Needless to say, I would not dare wear that scarf in any other part of Beirut.) Noah’s complexion allows him to pass as Lebanese (or as someone from anywhere else around the Mediterranean) so his appearance wasn’t a magnet for the paranoid and the suspicious.
He and I walked toward the tent-city and passed an angry-looking group of young women on their way out. One woman narrowed her eyes at me.
“Where are you from?” she said. She looked me in the eye, looked at my Hezbollah scarf, looked me in the eye again, looked back and my Hezbollah scarf. Then she yelled at me: “Are you from the States?!”
“Yes,” I said. “We’re from the States.”
For a second I thought she was yelling at me because she was anti-American. We were at the Hezbollah encampment, after all. But that wasn’t it. She yelled at me because she thought I was a stupid American who supported Hezbollah. (Not everyone who ventured downtown during the sit-in supports the “resistance.” Some were there as horrified onlookers.)
One of the young woman’s friends took her by the shoulders and turned her away from Noah and me. As they began walking away she nodded her head and flexed her hands as though she were trying to restrain herself and calm down.
Some Westerners really do show up in Lebanon and support Hezbollah, or at least get defensive on Hezbollah’s behalf. (Meanwhile they spend all their time in the liberal parts of Lebanon where Hezbollah is hated. So on some level they know who their friends are.) I wasn’t at all annoyed that this young woman yelled at me. She reminded me of a man I met last year while hitchhiking in the mountains.
"Tell me something," he said. “Lots of Americans come here and think we like Hezbollah. Why? We hate that. We hate Hezbollah!”
So Noah and I walked the grounds without getting any attitude or even attention from Hezbollah security. We did, however, get some unwanted attention from Hezbollah’s fans.
Next to the closed-off area of downtown where most of the restaurants are located is a small Roman ruin site. It was discovered for the first time in the 1990s when civil war-era rubble was cleared out of the way.
Noah and I leaned up against the railing next to two young Shia women wearing headscarves. Noah snapped a picture.
“Look,” one of the women said and pointed down at the ground next to a pillar. “It’s a picture of Hassan Nasrallah.”
Sure enough, there is was.
“Yeah,” Noah said. “It’s down there with the trash where it belongs.”
“Noah,” I said under my breath. “No need to be rude.” I did agree with him, though, that Nasrallah belonged in the garbage.
We talked amongst ourselves, about what I don’t remember. I smiled at the two women so they wouldn’t feel bad.
Then an older man walked up to Noah and me. He said something in Arabic, something I did not understand. Then he plowed his shoulder into Noah’s and knocked Noah sideways. He hadn’t heard Noah’s insult directed at Hassan Nasrallah. Nor could he have possibly known our political views. He was just mad because he heard us speaking English. My Hezbollah scarf didn’t ward everyone off. It only seemed to work with the oblivious security agents.
“Hi,” Noah said to him as though nothing had happened. “What’s up?”
I braced myself for anything. Our rude new “friend” said something else unintelligible and stalked off.
“Merry Christmas!” Noah said to his back.
Beirut is a cosmopolitan city when Hezbollah doesn’t squat in the middle of it.
Aside from this guy and two other random hostile individuals, Hezbollah’s camp-out was more mellow than it was the first time I went down there. The passion had cooled. Fewer people screamed slogans. The energy level was lower. Most appeared to have succumbed to some kind or torpor. It isn’t easy to be hopped up on protest adrenaline for several days in a row. Eventually you have to sit down, eat a sandwich, and smoke a nargileh.
The environment downtown was very different from what most Westerners would likely expect from a civil disobedience movement mounted by a Syrian-Iranian proxy militia.
Prominent figures gave public speeches to roaring applause, not to bullets shot into the sky.
College students made circles with chairs and held teach-ins.
Patriotic and Arabic pop music blared through speaker towers.
Snack stands were set up all over the place.
“Dude,” Noah said. “It’s like a Phish concert down here. Only it’s a Phish concert for terrorists.”
We walked the maze of tents and snapped pictures, looking for someone who seemed approachable enough to be interviewed. Few people paid us any mind, and we sat on a curb to drink a soda and smoke a cigarette.
Three young men walked up to us.
“Hello,” said the first. He introduced himself as Jad. “Where are you from?”
“We’re from the U.S,” Noah said.
“Welcome to Lebanon,” he said. “What is your impression?” Lebanese often ask me this question.
“You mean, what do we think of the political situation?” I said.
“Yeah,” he said.
“Eh,” I said. “We’re Americans. We’re not the biggest fans of Hezbollah.” The contrast between what I said and what I was wearing (the Hezbollah scarf) did not seem to register.
“Where are you from?” Noah said.
“From Beirut,” said another of the young men.
“Do you mean the dahiyeh?” I said. Dahiyeh means “suburb” in Arabic. It specifically refers to Hezbollah’s “capital” of Haret Hreik just south of Beirut.
“Yes,” he said. “From the dahiyeh. Have you been there?”
“I have, he hasn’t,” I said and gestured to Noah.
“This is your first trip to Lebanon?” Jad said to Noah.
“Yep,” Noah said and sipped from his drink. “It’s great.”
The five of us discussed Lebanese and international politics. The conversation was perfectly civil and pleasant even though they supported Hezbollah and Noah and I (obviously) did not. I didn’t write everything down, so I can’t quote very much. The discussion was more social and less of an interview. But I did take some notes when Noah asked a very important question.
“So,” Noah said. “What do you guys think of Iran?”
“Syria and Iran are helping us,” Jad said. “We don’t want them to rule in Lebanon. I like drinking and chasing girls and having a good time. We don’t want to be like Iran. If Hezbollah tried to make us like Iran, that would be a big problem for us.”
They were secular Shia. And yet they supported Hezbollah, an Islamist militia that is controlled by an Islamist dictatorship. As a noteworthy counterpoint (and I’ll write much more about this in the near future), I met a Shia cleric in the dahiyeh with a PhD in religion from Qom in Iran who is a strident opponent of Hezbollah.
Counterintuitive as it may be, Islamists are sometimes supported by secular people while facing hostility from the religious. The Middle East is rarely as simple as it appears.
The Shia have long been politically and economically marginalized by the Sunnis and Christians of Lebanon. Hezbollah, you might say, is the revenge of the Shia. Their appeal is much more sectarian and political than it is religious.
Two men heard that we were speaking in English and, once again and for no other reason, felt compelled to come over and harass Noah and me.
“Where are you from!” the first man yelled.
“United States,” I said and looked away from him, uninterested.
He grit his teeth, leaned forward, and jutted his face up next to mine.
“Do you like Bush?” he demanded.
“No,” I said passively.
“Do you like Olmert?” he said, referring to the Israeli prime minister in a particularly nasty tone of voice.
“No,” I said. “No,” I repeated more forcefully. I was honest with him, too. Ehud Olmert is arguably the worst prime minister in Israel’s history. Huge numbers of Israelis agree with that assessment, and even many Lebanese I spoke to said they wished Ariel Sharon (who is seriously hated in Lebanon) were prime minister instead of Olmert.
This guy really looked like he was spoiling for a fight. If I were Olmert’s biggest cheerleader I would likely have kept my mouth shut at that moment. He was satisfied, though, when I said I didn’t like Olmert. So he and his buddy walked off.
An older fat man in a red shirt interjected himself into our conversation. He had the wide open eyes of an agitated extremist. He got into a mildly heated political argument with Noah, who remained calm and collected throughout. I was having my own conversation with the more civil and interesting young man named Jad. I did catch two telling points from the enraged man in red, however, and they bear repeating.
“Gulf Arabs give bombs to Israel to kill my people!”
This, of course, is nonsense on stilts. Israel does not receive weapons from Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, or any other Arab country. Don’t write off what he said as just another Middle Eastern conspiracy theory, though. He is aware that an important geopolitical shift has occurred.
Sunni Arab regimes – most notably Egypt and Saudi Arabia – took Israel’s side during the opening of the July War. And every Arab government in the world except for Syria’s supports Lebanon’s government against Hezbollah’s “resistance.”
Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah has a new talking point that seems to be filtering down. He’s accusing Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Seniora of being a tool of the “Zionist Entity.” Seniora is continuing the July War on Israel’s behalf, according to Nasrallah, because he’s pushing for Hezbollah’s disarmament.
Seniora gets a lot of grief from commenters in the West for not moving quickly or decisively enough against Hezbollah. Look, though, at what he has to deal with.
It’s also worth pointing out that Al Qaeda accuses Hezbollah of being Zionist tools because Nasrallah won’t allow Sunni terrorists to come into Lebanon and use the south as a launch pad for strikes into Israel.
Six Arab governments – Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Morocco, Algeria, the United Arab Emirates, and Tunisia – say they will pursue nuclear weapons programs now because Iran’s atomic bombs need to be countered. None of these Arab countries sought nuclear weapons to offset those acquired by Israel. They fear and loathe the Shia of Lebanon and Iran (and most likely Iraq, as well) more than they worry about the Zionists regardless of what they may say.
The wider Sunni-Shia war in the Middle East, whose epicenter now is in Baghdad, may supplant the Arab-Israeli conflict some time in the future. For now, though, the Arab-Israeli conflict is used by both sides of the inter-Islamic divide to score propaganda points against the other.
“We have one enemy,” said the angry man in the red shirt. “The Israeli army. Us and the Yehudi people are friends.”
Hardly any Jews in the world are silly enough to believe Hezbollah are their friends. Israel does have friends in the Shia community, however, even though they are a minority.
This should not be too hard to believe. When Israel invaded South Lebanon in 1982 to evict terrorists in the (Sunni) Palestinian Liberation Organization, the Shia of Lebanon hailed the Israelis as liberators. This was the natural, instinctive, default position of Lebanon’s Shia as recently as the 1980s. It was only after Israel stayed too long and behaved obnoxiously during the occupation, and after Iran’s Revolutionary Guards infiltrated the area and whipped people up into a radical frenzy, that the current Hezbollah-Israeli conflict took shape.
Israel’s Lebanon proxy – the South Lebanese Army – later was formed in the south to combat the “resistance.” It started out as predominantly Christian, but most of its members were Shia at the end.
I was slightly embarrassed on Lebanon’s behalf after showing Noah downtown. He hadn’t met any liberal or moderate Lebanese people yet. Hezbollah would like you to believe that their warmongering and bigoted conspiracy theories are mainstream, but it isn’t so. Even their Christian “allies” in the Free Patriotic Movement part ways with them on this stuff. Only Amal, the other major Shia political party, defends Hezbollah as a militia and a state-within-a-state any more.
No matter, though. First thing in the morning Noah and I had plans to take a road trip to the South, to Bint Jbail and the surrounding region, with serious professional Lebanese enemies of Hezbollah. They were well-trained in combat and they knew the safest roads in the area. It was time to go looking for civilians who were used as human shields during the war. Our time together in Beirut was over.
Post-script: Please help support independent journalism. I have no corporate backing, and I cannot visit foreign countries and file these dispatches without your assistance.
If you would like to donate money for travel expenses and you don't want to use Pay Pal, you can send a check or money order to:
Michael Totten
P.O. Box 312
Portland, OR 97207-0312
Many thanks in advance.
Like many American arabists, you know everytrhing about the Middle East, but you understand nothing.
Posted by: Michael at January 5, 2007 11:44 AMTHANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU!
(for exposing the truth behind Hezbollah and its supporters)
may i note for readers who are not knowledgeable of what has been happening in Lebanon:
The article clearly stresses in one part that Hezbers are asking for the downfall of Sanioura's government while calling it a "zionist hand".
You (readers) have to realize that during the war, Nasrallah always praised the government in those taped speeches, and right after the war, his ally head of Amal Movement, Nabih Berri, called this government that "government of resistance" due to its role in stopping the war and defending Lebanon in the UNSC, where it did a tremendous job.
Now, these same people, (Nasrallh, Berri) calim that this governemnt is the government of the Devil, etcetera...
Orwell once warned of this day, Nasrallah is our Big Brother.
Posted by: a Lebanese at January 5, 2007 12:01 PMLooks like Hizbullah is about to have another go at the government:
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3348833,00.html
Posted by: Renée C. at January 5, 2007 12:03 PMI completely agree with your feelings on Olmert. Sharon's stroke will probably turn out to be one of those watershed moments in history where had it not happened things would have been completely different.
I'm no big fan of Netanyahu, but he would be better than Olmert. Hell, my grandmother would be better than Olmer (and make better latkas too).
Posted by: Scott Kirwin at January 5, 2007 12:13 PMMichael: Like many American arabists, you know everytrhing about the Middle East, but you understand nothing.
Brilliant response (not), and perfect timing considering that a Lebanese person came along immediately afterward and debunked your non-argument.
Go ahead and throw Chomskyism at us, but believe me when I say we've heard it all before.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at January 5, 2007 12:15 PMThe rascist imperial silent genocide conducted by the American government is comparable to the Nazi regime. Stop your stalinist oppression of my clones. Bring down the rascist aparthied state Isramerica and buy my books. (the trust funds don't fill themselves people)
Posted by: Nom Choomsky at January 5, 2007 12:36 PMAnother insightful report Michael.
One question- I keep hearing contradictory information regarding sectarian rifts in Lebanon and other countries (like the much different Iraq).
One one hand I hear that the average person gets along fine with individuals from other sects, yet also there are examples of one or more sects oppressing or otherwise "keeping down" certain sects.
In what ways were the Shia held down in Lebanon by the Sunnis and Christians? Was it unfavorable government policies of some sort, or a kind of unofficial discrimination? Would a Shia living in a Sunni area have the same kinds of problems?
The entire Sunni vs. Shia thing seems pretty difficult for us Western types to grasp.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 5, 2007 01:17 PM"Slip of tongue or admitting bitter fact"
The Israeli daily "Yediot Aharonot" published in its website last Tuesday an interview with the Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert in which he admits that Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah is "the bravest man in the world". The interview with a Romanian journal was published in Hebrew for only five minutes before the site's administration deletes it. Olmert said that Sayyed Nasrallah "is the bravest man in the world, fears nothing and works courageously and as an experienced for the future although he is a leader for a terrorist organization."
But when the journalist asked Olmert "do you really mean Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah in Lebanon?" he noticed the "slip of tongue"- according to Yediot - and answered, "I'm joking!"
The website also mentioned that the interview tape was seized from the Romanian journalist, and the interview was made again with a promise from the journalist not to mention Olmert's words.
Olmert has said previously, in an interview last October, that he does not want to "insult, annoy or underestimate Nasrallah, but he has lost his appetite to fight Israel for several years."
I really want you to comment this article while i comment yours...
---------------------------
I really like the article's title (not), especially since you quoted Mr.N saying it....
However, I dont really know what you are trying to prove with your adventure in downtown beirut, anyways heres what i noticed through ur article:
(1)- first of all i quote you "All the hostile paranoia I had to put up with from Hezbollah’s security agents vanished entirely as soon as I put a Hezbollah scarf around my neck." and "Hezbollah’s security brutes left me alone, so it was worth it."
mmmm... let me ask you a question here, what did you expect? i mean let's say you didnt buy ur scarf and Mr.N ddnt buy his flag neither... WHAT DID YOU EXPECT?
have you ever tried to enter the area... no no wait... :"the tent-city" without your scarf??
I mean you should be very queen and sure that as long as you dont want "to act badly" they wont interfeer ur buisness...
hundreds of reporters (westerns) go around the area without anyone bothering them.... SO AGAIN! WHAT THE HELL DID YOU EXPECT?
whats the worst case scenario for you??
is it for them to know ur american and that ur anti-hezbollah?? well understand this very well my friend they wont bother you at all and by they i mean the hezbollah members cuz the people will treat you a lil differently;) lol
unlike israeli freedom...
(PS: israeli freedom is aterm born after the freedom of journalism during the last war on the israeli side)
everyone overhere is allowed to express his opinion even if it was non-sens-racist-stupid-imperialist-anti-arab/muslim opinion....
(2)- my second comment is based on the pictures you took and some of ur comments on them...
well i noticed through out the article you spoke abt a city-tent controled by hezbollah members and a demo organised by hezbollah and a low activity day after day and other stuff...
lol, first of all the area you and Mr.N covered is thee martyrs square , in other words (and since you claim ur an expert) its the square where most of the demonstrators are supporters of FPM , SNP , Marada , etc... and not hezbollah supporters ( i mean there are of course some but the vast majority are supporters of the other parties in the opposition)
however im sure ur sence of... i dont really know how to say it... maybe "journalism"?? im sure ur sense of journalism have pushed you to take a tour in the riad el soloh square but not with Mr.N maybe before...
and im also sure you noticed that noone will ever bother you nore interfere in ur buisness but again ur an anti-hezbollah journalist... a man like you lives on ruining the opinion of people in hezbollah sumtimes even for no reason....
so like i said in a previous post in ur blog... you are ready to change stuff, make stuff, lie even...just to support a story/an adventure and this is of course the case in ur last couple of articles.
3- my third comment is based on some conclucion u made from how the people dealed with you downtown...
A- the woman
"A Lebanese woman walked by and smirked as she asked us where we were from.
“United States,” I said.
“And…” she said. “You like Hezbollah?” She tried hard not to laugh at us.
“Not really,” I said under my breath so the vendor couldn’t hear. “We just want souvenirs because we think it’s funny.”
She smiled and knowingly nodded."
----------
the woman my friend did not smile at you bcuz she believes ur right.... she feels sorry for ur A$$ lol hehehe (this is in case she heard what u said "not really" and understood it) coz maybe she thought u wer joking...
overhere if i was buying a hezbollah scarf bcuz i like them and someone asked me do youlike hezbollah? a majority will answer NO!
NO! as in.... what the hell do you think i mbuying a freakin hezbollah scarf...is it possible that i hate them?
B- THE ANGRY WOMAN
"He and I walked toward the tent-city and passed an angry-looking group of young women on their way out. One woman narrowed her eyes at me.
“Where are you from?” she said. She looked me in the eye, looked at my Hezbollah scarf, looked me in the eye again, looked back and my Hezbollah scarf. Then she yelled at me: “Are you from the States?!”
“Yes,” I said. “We’re from the States.”
For a second I thought she was yelling at me because she was anti-American. We were at the Hezbollah encampment, after all. But that wasn’t it. She yelled at me because she thought I was a stupid American who supported Hezbollah. (Not everyone who ventured downtown during the sit-in supports the “resistance.” Some were there as horrified onlookers.) "
------------------------
again... a very stupid conclusion... (as much as it hurts me to say it)
the angry woman you saw is a smart woman who felt in ur eyes that ur taking the scarf as a cover... she yelled at you not because ur were a stupid american who supported hezbollah!! (well maybe bcuz ur a stupid american..) but bcuz its very weird and ridiculous act what you were doing with Mr.N ... i mean really!! i didnt know untill now.. whats ur goal of the adventure and the cover especially...
a proof of what i said is: "
One of the young woman’s friends took her by the shoulders and turned her away from Noah and me. As they began walking away she nodded her head and flexed her hands as though she were trying to restrain herself and calm down. "
lol she felt for a second like she wanted to convince you that u didnt need the cover noone will ever harm u nore bother you, she felt verry sorry for you am sure.... but the other woman thought differently ( stupid f**ks!! hehe the 2 of you ... lets leave them alone) and decided to take her friend whos still feeling sorry 4 u away...
C- THE MAN IN THE MOUNTAIN
DONT HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY... ITS UR STORRY.... i cant tell ur lying and some people do hate hezbollah of course...
finally this...
"It’s also worth pointing out that Al Qaeda accuses Hezbollah of being Zionist tools because Nasrallah won’t allow Sunni terrorists to come into Lebanon and use the south as a launch pad for strikes into Israel. "
its very worth pointing at this Mr.T.... this means hezbollah are not the terrorist you claim they are... a terrorist is just like osama's people a person who just wants to harm others... and thats not hezbollah's case....
like the man in the red shirt said: we have one ennemy...and that is the israeli army! and the israeli army only... the americans and the jews are our friends... i bet u dont know jewish communities stiill live in lebanon and unlike u said shiaa dont like jews... look at iran's case... they held a meeting not so long ago... ahmadi nejad sat witgh many anti-zionism jews... JEWS!
but again this is u Mr.T you are the person whos ready to do anything to change reality and lie just to make a point and opinion whos more and MOREE people are not believing it anymore...
thanks a lot
ALi*
Wow. Your reporting is particularly interesting in the light of this and this. The central contention in these two articles is that we err and indeed assist Al Qaeda when we roll up these hatreds and grievances into one campaign, that being precisely what the enemy and his media campaign needs.
Understand, disaggregate and either delay, resolve or defeat in detail are instead the way to go. Your account helps enormously to illustrate this.
Posted by: ZF at January 5, 2007 01:39 PMi mean let's say you didnt buy ur scarf and Mr.N ddnt buy his flag neither... WHAT DID YOU EXPECT?
have you ever tried to enter the area... no no wait... :"the tent-city" without your scarf??
LOL! I'm speechless. Brilliant question ALi*. Brilliant.
Posted by: Mertel at January 5, 2007 01:47 PM"Hi," Noah said to him as though nothing had happened. "What’s up?"
I braced myself for anything. Our rude new "friend" said something else unintelligible and stalked off.
"Merry Christmas!" Noah said to his back.
Eh. Noah should consider himself lucky. In Iraq, his head would've already been rolling on the floor. And that's only if they didn't find out he was a Jew visiting from Israel.
Posted by: abraham at January 5, 2007 01:51 PMIt was only after Israel stayed too long and behaved obnoxiously during the occupation, and after Iran’s Revolutionary Guards infiltrated the area and whipped people up into a radical frenzy, that the current Hezbollah-Israeli conflict took shape.
What do you mean?
Israel came in in 1982, the same year Hezbollah was born. The Iranians had already been there.
The chronology you're implying doesn't quite add up.
Posted by: Tony at January 5, 2007 01:56 PMAli is banned for trolling.
Sorry, Ali. No one who accuses me of lying and making things up is allowed to post you. Your accuses do not even deserve a response.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at January 5, 2007 02:04 PMThe environment downtown was very different from what most Westerners would likely expect from a civil disobedience movement mounted by a Syrian-Iranian proxy militia. Prominent figures gave public speeches to roaring applause, not to bullets shot into the sky.
I'm sorry your expectations were not met. Usually when people are confronted with a reality quite different than what their preconceived notions would have predicted they re-evaluate. You seem to lack the capability to alter your thinking in the face of conflicting evidence. That's a trait I find most depressing in people.
"Syria and Iran are helping us," Jad said. "We don’t want them to rule in Lebanon. I like drinking and chasing girls and having a good time."
...
Counterintuitive as it may be, Islamists are sometimes supported by secular people while facing hostility from the religious. The Middle East is rarely as simple as it appears.
This is a rather banal (if not misleading) observation. You act like this sort of thing is foreign to America, when it practically defines our culture. The Middle East is not as complicated as you think. It is to you because you're an outsider.
I was slightly embarrassed on Lebanon’s behalf...
I think your dispatch shows that some Lebanese were embarrassed for you.
Posted by: abraham at January 5, 2007 02:11 PMAbraham: I'm sorry your expectations were not met.
I didn't expect anything of the sort. I have lived in Lebanon and know the place well.
The Middle East is not as complicated as you think. It is to you because you're an outsider.
Um, no. I understand this very well. Most Americans, however, do not. Most think Hezbollah is motivated primarily by what is written in the Koran and that people support Hezbollah mostly because they want an Islamist state in Lebanon.
I think your dispatch shows that some Lebanese were embarrassed for you.
Yes. The ones who thought an American was stupid enough to support people who scream Death to America.
You are an exceptionally tedious individual, and there is no longer any point in talking to you.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at January 5, 2007 02:17 PMUm, no. I understand this very well. Most Americans, however, do not. Most think Hezbollah is motivated primarily by what is written in the Koran and that people support Hezbollah mostly because they want an Islamist state in Lebanon.
Please explain how anything you've said doesn't reinforce this incorrect stereotype? Amidst all of your demonzation of Hizballah, whatever little useful information you might be relaying is lost on the reader. I don't see you attempting to explain Hizballah in any useful way, i.e. as someone without bias would explain a highly nuanced situation such as this. So please explain to me how your constant denigration of Hizballah, which mirror your personal hatred for them, serves either your readers or the people of Lebanon? All you are doing is stirring up more hatred and distrust.
You may have lived in Lebanon at some point, but Hizballah lives there. It is their home and their country, not yours. I wish you would expend your money and energy on the problems in your own neighborhood, which would actually make a difference.
You are an exceptionally tedious individual, and there is no longer any point in talking to you.
I already made the same conclusion about you, but I was being polite by attempting to engage in debate, which is more productive. I'm sorry you're not receptive to conflicting ideas and opinions, although I give you a point for being (at least somewhat) tolerant.
Posted by: abraham at January 5, 2007 02:32 PMEh. Noah should consider himself lucky. In Iraq, his head would've already been rolling on the floor.
Counterintuitive as it may be, Islamists are sometimes supported by secular people while facing hostility from the religious. The Middle East is rarely as simple as it appears.
Talk about mixed messages - are you trying to sell stupid, simplistic terroristic threats or are you trying to sell the idea that terrorists are complex, honest and misunderstood? If you've ever studied marketing (and from the propagandistic nature of your comments, I assume you have) you'll know that a campaign to sell soap, dog food or Hezbollah needs to stay on message, at least for the length of a comment string.
And the whole 'pretending to be an expert' routine is also tired. We already know that 9 out of 10 Chomskyites and Stalinists prefer Hezbollah, but their opinions just don't matter
Posted by: mary at January 5, 2007 03:19 PM
Abraham: Please explain how anything you've said doesn't reinforce this incorrect stereotype?
Because I'm saying the exact opposite of the stereotype is what's real.
See, this is why you're tedious, Abraham. You aren't reading carefully, and you can't get over the fact that I don't like Hezbollah.
I can't imagine why you think I should support a bigoted and illegal warmongering militia in Lebanon anyway, especially when most Lebanese don't even like them and would rather live in peace and prosperity.
I wish you would expend your money and energy on the problems in your own neighborhood, which would actually make a difference.
I'm a foreign correspondent, not a local school board reporter. I am not going to demote myself because you think I should.
You really have your work cut out for you if you expect Americans to support Hassan Nasrallah's agenda of perpetual war.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at January 5, 2007 03:21 PMTalk about mixed messages - are you trying to sell stupid, simplistic terroristic threats or are you trying to sell the idea that terrorists are complex, honest and misunderstood?
Mary, one of the two paragraphs that you quote abraham as saying was actually from Michael's post.
Posted by: double-plus-ungood at January 5, 2007 03:45 PMMichael,
You are repeating the same old leftist/arab nationalist/islamist propaganda that blames Lebanses Christians and Sunnis for the Shi'a's poverty:
The Shia have long been politically and economically marginalized by the Sunnis and Christians of Lebanon. Hezbollah, you might say, is the revenge of the Shia.
In fact, Lebanon's economic system is mainly free-market capitalism, meaning the political system is economically NEUTRAL; because the government is involved so little in the economy, it does not have the power to favor or marginalize ANYONE. (Unless you are a Marxist, in which case you think that government allowing wealth-earners to keep their money constitutes opression of the poor.)
The Lebanese Christians' wealth is a consequence of the value they (in general) place on education and hard work. The Lebanese Sunnis' wealth is a consequence for their value (again, in general) of enterpreneurship.
Hizb Allah is not a response to anything; like Shi'a poverty, like the Shi'a customs such as their Ashura parades where men slash open their heads and children's heads with swords, it is a symptom, product and consequence of the primitive cultural values that dominate Shi'a Lebanese society.
Posted by: Tony Abu Tuz at January 5, 2007 03:50 PMAbraham:
Are you really that thick? You quote MJT concerning what most Westerners might expect from a Hezbollah rally. If you had bothered reading more than one or two of his posts, you would know that MJT enjoys de-bunking the prejudice that some Westerns hold concerning "the violent and dangerous" anture of the Middle East.
You wrote: "You may have lived in Lebanon at some point, but Hizballah lives there. It is their home and their country, not yours." The domestic opponents of Hezbollah, supporters of the March 14th movement, also live in Lebanon. Thus, it is also their home, and thus by your own logic, it is you that might benefit from confining your energies solely to your own local issues.
You also write; "Please explain how anything you've said doesn't reinforce this incorrect stereotype [Hizbollah supporters are advocates of an Islamist state]?"
Did you fail to read Michael's last post? It plainly states "And although they are an Islamist party [Hezbollah], their main goal at this point, I don’t believe, is to turn Lebanon into an Islamist state, because they know it’s impossible. For one reason, more than a third of the country are Christians, and they will fight them to the end if they try to create Lebanon as an Islamist state. But also, there is the fact that the Sunni don’t want it, either, and if they did, they would be arguing about which kind of Islamist state to have. But also, the truth is that the majority of the Shia also do not want an Islamist state in Lebanon, and they never have."
Also, in his linked interview with Hugh Hewitt, MJT states, "But you should keep in mind, though, that these Aounist Christians, they have what they call an understanding with Hezbollah, and one point of that understanding is that Hezbollah needs to be disarmed, and mainstreamed into Lebanese society." In that same interview, he further opined, "And they [Hezbollah supporters] said look, Iran helps us, but Iran doesn’t control us. And if Iran were actually trying to control us, this would create a serious problem, because they like to drink alcohol, they like to date and chase girls and have fun, and they know these things are not allowed in Iran."
I am not sure how MJT could have more clearly expressed his opinion that Hezbollah supporters are generally not advocates of a Lebanese Islamist state. In the future, I suggest that you please do try to read a bit more carefully before insulting our host.
Posted by: Mark-In-Chi-Town at January 5, 2007 04:13 PMMichael,
Another correction:
Israel’s Lebanon proxy – the South Lebanese Army – later was formed in the south to combat the “resistance.” It started out as predominantly Christian, but most of its members were Shia at the end.
Actually the SLA was formed in the 1970's in response to the PLO's brutal occupation of south Lebanon at that time.
SLA was not a "proxy" of Israel; although it was helped immensely by Israel, it was a real Lebanese group arising in response to severe situation (occupation and terrorism by the PLO) on Lebanese soil against Lebanese people.
By contrast, Hizb Allah IS a proxy of Iran.
Also, my impression was that the SLA was comprised of 1/3 Maronite Christians, 1/3 Druze, and 1/3 Shi'a, but those are only rough estimates based on what I heard.
Posted by: Tony Abu Tuz at January 5, 2007 04:22 PMThey are strikingly obtuse individuals if wearing a scarf is all it takes to blend in.
Yep.
I recall some Israeli official, either IAF or Mossad (probably Mossad), saying something to the effect of "the reason we have such a formidible reputation is because our adversaries are idiots".
Posted by: rosignol at January 5, 2007 05:43 PMHI MICHAEL TOTTEN !!!!!!!
I have few comments about your article:
“Lots of Americans come here and think we like Hezbollah. Why? We hate that. We hate Hezbollah!”
I think it should be “Lots of Americans come here and think we hate Hezbollah. Why? It’s not like that. We like Hezbollah!”
Do you agree with me?
When you talk about the old man and say that “he was just mad because he heard us speaking English.”
He seems pretty rude. But are you trying to conclude anything else apart from that?
And I stopped reading the article at this point.
I truly find you writing style very interesting and intriguing. I also genuinely respect that you are not trying to be objective; I mean your bias is clear. Whoever reads the article will immediately know your position which is “all the way anti-hizbullah”.
To conclude with, your friend Noah seems cool, but I think he might have an attitude problem.
Thanks for giving me the opportunity to share my thoughts
Posted by: calculator at January 5, 2007 06:44 PMMichael, don't ban Ali. His rambling & insane comments are quite entertaining. Ali why don't you post at the Comment is Free Guardian site, you will find many soulmates there. Unfortunately Ali represents a good chunck of the so called educated engaged youth. Scary.
Posted by: ruth at January 5, 2007 06:49 PMLet Ali stay. I think he provides an interesting window into the mind of a conspiracy theory obsessed Arab.
Posted by: Corinne at January 5, 2007 07:12 PM“And…” she said. “You like Hezbollah?” She tried hard not to laugh at us.
“Not really,” I said under my breath so the vendor couldn’t hear. “We just want souvenirs because we think it’s funny.”
Now that's great journalism.
Posted by: TallDave at January 5, 2007 07:22 PMHas anyone noticed something? It even nearly escaped me when i was caught off-guard. I have to hand it to you Professor, you are really doing a hard job bitterly searching and trying desperately hard to find certain individuals who bear a scratch of a mild anti-social act. Such as barging your poor friend.
When you disgustingly diss and cuss a leader whos popularity reaches a peek of thousands, or to be kind, tens of millions, and who is known by billions across this globe, you are demeaning these people to the lowest grade anyone can bring down any person, because this person is their ideoological, spiritual, political role model, when you are no-ones. This guy has never hurt you, or touched you, but you seem very keen on taking the piss out of him. Whoever does this, i believe deserves more than a tiny bardge. From this article, i could see the only people acting ignorant and anti-social and extremely rude and offensive were you two, not individual hizbollah supporters.
Back to my point, while you vainly look for these people in order to write about them, when no-one even has first-hand or live evidence that what you claim is not a fabrication, at least a photo pf someone just looking threatening, because surely every picture you have taken of the hizbollah supporters seem to be friendly, especially those 3 smoking the nergilah, while the pro-governmentaql people were recorded on video rioting against the demonstrators and at least 7 convicted for killing a total of two demonstrators so far, now please tell me which is worse. Or where we say SINIORA GET OUT, while they insult our imams. Anyway, your vain search always finds you really pathetic results in which you have one person asking you, maybe rudely maybe not, whether you like the two persons responsible for butchering their people i.e. olmert and bush. Please, step out your small soon to become self-destructive bubble in which you and your friend live in.
Put yourself in the shoes of these people. You are a shia whose people have been living for hundreds of years deprived of any rights, prosecuted, ignored, deprived and living in the worst living standards possible, and bearing the brunt of nearly every war. Then, your community forms a resistance which later develops into a legitimate political party and a social organisation which happens to be the only party created by the people, for the people to help the people. They magically happpen to be the only people willing to represent the shias, the only, sry not PEOPLE, the only organisation that doesn't ignore the shias, the only organisation to look after them etc etc you know the rest and most importantly the only organisation that strugles to deprive them of poverty, illness and illiteration as well as introduces and protects their rights, even if it means to fight for them.
Anyway. It is worth noting that this is how israel was even created, the jews worked together, formed alliances etc etc to create israel. The only difference is that the roots of the creation of israel goes back to the terror stern gangs which used to bomb british hotels housing both palistinians and jews, as well as christian british. Another difference is that israel was the main cause of how many wars during its 60 year long existence? exactly, how many are hizbollah responsible for? Im going to go with the flow and say one, the july war. Thats it. Im not talking about skirmishes or small covert campaigns or operations or incidents because everyone knows israel has commited a couple of million only in the west bank, let alone gaza and the rest. Israel is starting to threaten america's lead with the total number of wars started, and it has only existed for 60 years. So yes, israel is a virus that must be removed, before it spreads as much as it has.
Go back to UN maps and see how much israel was ENTITLED to recieve, and look at todays map and look at how much they control, they countrol nearly double their permitted size, and im not going to go into the settlements.
I think everyone will agree that YES, the jews were deproved, and prosecuted etc but so were many other people, including the shia. Here's iran the axis of evil, they have never started a war since their revolution, why? They fought in one war, that was with iraqs saddam, but everyone knows who started it and who promoted and sponsored it, and who provoked it and who funded it and whos interest it played in first and foremost. Compare that with israel, which has nukes already, why don't you attack israel for that, but iran who don't even have them yet you attack them as if they own the biggest arsenal of them. You are starting to make a contreversy over something that hasn't existed yet, and thats iranian nukes. Israel has nukes, get rid of them first, then come to get rid of the iranian none existant nukes. Not the twisted other way round.
Your reporting totten is VERY double sided, even i mostly argue both points, i always give encoutering points and then tend to explain those too. It does not need two to find out HOW israel was created. They didn't just walk into palistine and wow theirs really big land with no-one their so they made it into a country. Why, i can right now step into a rain forest or desert or high mountain or barren land in america and claim its mine because no-one was their if the case was like that. But its not. They slaughtered the palistinians and the rest fled, when they fled the israelis said oh oh oh look, theyre going on the enemies side so now they are not entitled to their land anymore. That is one sick and twisted method. Iran was not created like that and niether was even syria.
I do not like the syrian regime, or even the leaders. What i like is some things about their politics. I like the fact the Baathi political priority is to oppose israel no matter what, and to work for a unified arab super or mother state, just like the united states, but instead of american united states, this would be arabian united states. Not that i support their ideology, no way, only those two factors. Arab unification and opposing and staying opposed to the enemy while they still commit crimes and atrocities day in day out.
We, my friends, are the last people to drive anyone in the sea, we have been deprived, but unlike the zionist jews, have learnt how bad an experience it is/was and do not wish it on ANYONE, which is why we do not oppress anyone, not in iran and not in southern lebanon. If a jew goes to south lebanon and sits in a circle of hizbollah men and says "im a jew, my political view is this this...." the hizbollah men would probably ignore the person who was talking and listen to the man, not stand up and shoot him.
I also wanrt to point out that it is factually incorrect and inacurate to say iranian REGIME. they are not a regime. They are a fair democratic system who hold elections, who have multiple parties, even communist ones which is quite extraordinary to find in any religious nation, they have all sorts of elections such as presidential, governmental, parliamentary/assembly etc etc Their islamic law is their constitution, just like every country has a formal constitution based on an ideology, theirs is based on islam. Their contitution can be summed up into thiese few words wich were said by khomayni "our religion is our politics, and our politics is our religion", at least iran HAS a formal contitution, unlike britain, which has an informal, i.e. unwritten one. As far as i know mr totten, you were never stopped and searched/strip searched and held for weeks and months on suspicious of being a terrorist in niether iran or lebanon, any paert of lebanon, but you have in israel and you do in western countries, believe me.
Posted by: hezbollah lover at January 5, 2007 07:30 PMGo back to UN maps and see how much israel was ENTITLED to recieve, and look at todays map and look at how much they control, they countrol nearly double their permitted size, and im not going to go into the settlements.
...of course, that additional land was captured in wars started by Israel's neighbors, not the Israelis.
Sorry, 'hezbollah lover', the rule is that when you lose a war, you should not expect to get all of your marbles back when it's over, thanks for playing.
Please educate yourself.
Posted by: rosignol at January 5, 2007 07:36 PMHezbollah lover, who needs to argue with you when you manage to contradict yourself within the one comment:
So yes, israel is a virus that must be removed, before it spreads as much as it has.
We, my friends, are the last people to drive anyone in the sea... but unlike the zionist jews, ... do not wish it on ANYONE, which is why we do not oppress anyone,
I wasn't going to read it all, but now I'm glad I did. Entertaining stuff.
Posted by: Mertel at January 5, 2007 07:56 PMMary, one of the two paragraphs that you quote abraham as saying was actually from Michael's post.
oops - true, I meant to grab this one ..."This is a rather banal (if not misleading) observation. You act like this sort of thing is foreign to America, when it practically defines our culture. The Middle East is not as complicated as you think. It is to you because you're an outsider."
Posted by: mary at January 5, 2007 09:10 PMHey Abu Tuz,
You need to clean out your teez before it soils your thoughts any worse that it already has. Last time I checked the Shia are doing pretty damn well all over the world. Have you been to West/East Africa to see their little empire or how about Australia or how about right here in the US. Next time you run your mouth with that anti-Shia shit, try to clean out your own first. I have no tolerance for your kind and as far as i'm concerned you can have your sunni-shia war all you want; find me one single sunni dominated army that would be ready to stand up to hizballah's fighters. when you do, let me know.
as for you, you're shit is getting funnier and funnier each time i read it. it's honestly the most unprofessional, worthless, entirely unintelligent, excessively simple-minded yet somehow comical enought to be entertaining piece of enquirer-esque rubbish. you need to get off your high horse and come back down to this planet where rational human beings don't go to foreign countries and run all over the locals only to come back home and denigrate the fuck out of them. hizballah is not going anywhere my friend, and as for bint jbeil, well i'm afraid you stumbled upon the wrong town to find anti-hizballah crowd. and if you're looking for human shields, you'd probably find thousands b/c the shia of the south are willing to die for their land and that's why they fight b/c they're not like the cowardly egyptian, jordanian and syrian armies that came before them, they're ready to die for their land, for their dignity and for their children's future, not for some fucked up idea of religion or "islamism" as you put it. it's funny how popular nasrallah is in the middle east today and yet you think everyone hates hizballah. they're the single most efficient and uncorrupt provider of public goods in the entire region. find me one of your democratic "moderate" governments in the region that can do things w/ even half the efficiency and equity of hizballah. until you can clean up your act my friend, you are nothing but an irrelevant shmuck begging readers of his half-assed blog for money. so keep begging my friend, keep begging. meanwhile, hizballah is going to keep getting stronger and stronger and justice will prevail. it always does.
mary, you don't give me anything to respond to other than the same tired cliches ("Chomskyist", etc.) that I can read if I decide for some reason to violate my sensibilities and visit LGF.
I'm sorry that what I write is considered too "expert" for you, but I don't have time to summarize it in a Cliff Notes version for those who aren't capable of parsing it properly.
Posted by: abraham at January 5, 2007 10:11 PMNext time you run your mouth with that anti-Shia shit
I am not anti-Shia, I am anti-Hezbollah. And since you have nothing interesting or productive to say, only insults, you are summarily banned.
Buh-bye.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at January 5, 2007 10:21 PMOne thing you can say for Islamist fanatics:
They take criticism well. :P
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 5, 2007 10:44 PMSorry Abraham, but i have no interest in the opinion of someone who cheers for terrorists and headchoppers.
But, just in the interests of blog etiquette, I should point out that in some blog comment boxes, if you want several separate paragraphs to be italicized (to indicate that the paragraph is part of a quote), each paragraph needs to be enclosed by its own individual italics tag. (ie. <I>quote</I>)
That way, when someone is trying to get ready for dinner while proofreading a legal document and commenting on a blog post, they won't mistakenly copy the wrong (non-italicized) paragraph.
Posted by: mary at January 5, 2007 11:05 PMMary: Sorry Abraham, but i have no interest in the opinion of someone who cheers for terrorists and headchoppers.
I second that. It's probably best to ignore him at this point.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at January 5, 2007 11:18 PMFirst, my response to Corine. Please don't generalize! I am an Arab and I hate conspiracy theories. I even argue with my wife who is obsessed with conspiracy theories! I hate Hizb-Iran!
Second, my response to the Christians and Sunni caused poverty to the Shia. Lebanon is a very society. You get education, you have more opportunities. You have money, you get education. But how can you educate your 12 kids when you are not educated yourself?
I think that the root problem in Lebanon now is the tribunal! Hizb-Iran is afraid that they will come after them (Do you remember the marines that were killed by Hizb-Iran?)
Last comment, Iran is acting like Germany when Hitler was a rising star but with potential nuclear weapons! We better take care of Iran's nazi regime and the Bashar Asad's gang in Syria before they do a 9-11 event on our land!
Posted by: Ghassan at January 5, 2007 11:19 PMI love how you Hezbollah freaks have the nerve to come on here and tell us that you don't hate Jews as IF THEY CARE FOR YOUR VALIDATION! We DO hate you for killing both Jews and 241 American peacekeepers and we will never forget what you've done no matter how hard you try to whitewash your crimes and murderous ideology.
Posted by: Corinne at January 6, 2007 12:24 AMGhassan, I did not write that ALL Arabs are conspiracy theory obsessed, I was only writing about Ali in particular who is clearly an example of one. I apologize if I was not clear and my intention was not to offend...
Posted by: Corinne at January 6, 2007 12:31 AMAbraham: Please explain how anything you've said doesn't reinforce this incorrect stereotype?
Because I'm saying the exact opposite of the stereotype is what's real.
See, this is why you're tedious, Abraham. You aren't reading carefully, and you can't get over the fact that I don't like Hezbollah.
I assure you I'm reading every word. However, you did not address my primary criticism, which is that you demonize Hizballah, using pejoratives such as "brute", "goon", "terrorist", "dictatorship", "extremist", (and then there's "The conversation was perfectly civil and pleasant even though they supported Hezbollah"), and you relate stories of being harrassed by them as if you're an innocent reporter just trying to get a story, when you are admittedly an anti-Hizballah agitator. What are your readers supposed to come away with when you only provide selective quotes and incidences that support your agenda driven writing? If not purposely, you are subconciously steering your readers towards the conclusion you want them to have, which is your opinion that Hizballah is a menace to Lebanon, while ignoring the many positive aspects of that organization. It is a disservice to people trying to understand the situation.
My primarily complaint is that your writing on the topic is superficial and rife with your own personal opinions that do not necessarily reflect the reality of the situation.
I read your articles and honestly I come away with the impression that they are just one big string of hyperbole written by someone who deep down inside really doesn't like Arabs (or perhaps just poor Arabs). Furthermore, it doesn't help that you link to LGF and other blogs of that ilk. The company you keep makes you suspect, which is one reason why I am not inclined to take what you write seriously in the way that you intend.
When I ask you to supply background or sources for material you reference (such as the opening "quote" in this latest screed) I get no response. This is a big bright red flag flapping in the wind. These aren't "tedious" inquiries: they are very simple and yet serious questions that I would like answered so that I may guage your credibility. If you won't provide sources, you have no credibility. It's as simple as that. I'd like to be able to take what you say seriously, but I cannot accept it as it is presented.
Correct me if I have the wrong impression but I assume you are not attempting to write fiction and you consider this political analysis of sorts. So when I read political analysis, I only find it useful to the extent that traditional journalistic practices are employed so that I can properly weigh your analysis against other material that I've read and against my own personal knowledge and experience. I may be "tedious" but perhaps it's because I want to find you useful.
You really have your work cut out for you if you expect Americans to support Hassan Nasrallah's agenda of perpetual war.
This is what I'm talking about. You make these types of unfounded proclamations and then get irritated when you're called on it. All I'm saying is back up your assertions: provide me with some manner of support for your claim that Nasrallah has an "agenda of perpetual war" and I will just shut the fuck up already.
If you want to continue putting out these dispatches based on your own personal opinion, replete with your own admitted biases, fine, more power to you. But as long as I continue to read it I will question the veracity of what you write and demand evidence to support your claims.
One other criticism I have is that it's evident that you don't have a sense for Arab idiom, especially as it's rendered into English by people who don't have a command of the language. Case in point: your quote of the man who exclaimed that he wants to "cut" Sanyurah. What is your take on that? Do you literally think he meant he wanted to cut Sanyurah, as with a knife? I am not necessarily asking for an answer. Just consider it.
Posted by: abraham at January 6, 2007 12:39 AMSorry, your system doesn't preserve HTML tags across linebreaks. Perhaps I shouldn't try to be so clever with my HTML typesetting.
The first section above should have appeared as follows:
Abraham: Please explain how anything you've said doesn't reinforce this incorrect stereotype?
Because I'm saying the exact opposite of the stereotype is what's real.
See, this is why you're tedious, Abraham. You aren't reading carefully, and you can't get over the fact that I don't like Hezbollah.
Posted by: abraham at January 6, 2007 12:42 AMI do not like the syrian regime, or even the leaders. What i like is some things about their politics. I like the fact the Baathi political priority is to oppose israel no matter what, and to work for a unified arab super or mother state, just like the united states, but instead of american united states, this would be arabian united states. Not that i support their ideology, no way, only those two factors. Arab unification and opposing and staying opposed to the enemy while they still commit crimes and atrocities day in day out."
The way I see it you advocate perpetual war over someone else's grievances and support the imperial ambitions of a foreign country (the ruling ideology of which you do not support, except for its central tenets). Way to go!
Posted by: Bruno at January 6, 2007 12:43 AMAll I'm saying is back up your assertions: provide me with some manner of support for your claim that Nasrallah has an "agenda of perpetual war" and I will just shut the fuck up already.
Stop assuming that people are writing in bad faith just because they write something that contradicts your own ignorance. If he says something you don't know about:
1. Go back through the archives.
a) Michael's a good writer who deserves to have all of his articles read before you pass judgment on him
b) It's not his responsibility to repeat anything for you.
c) This isn't a university class, so he's not responsible for your education. That's up to you, so he doesn't have to prove anything.
So
d) If mike never supported something you want proved, look it up yourself and
e) follow the links to the Lebanese bloggers and newspapers etc. so you can find out the things you won't find in books.
And don't mind that there's no point 2, everything seemed to fit better as subpoints [is "subpoints" a word?].
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 6, 2007 12:53 AMAnd Abraham, don't be surprised that you're not getting much traction in this comment section. We come here to read Michael Totten, who is an interesting read, an intelligent writer and a nice guy. And you're none of the above.
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 6, 2007 12:56 AMMichael
for your information and knowledge.
the roman ruins near st.Georges church have been excavated in the late sixtees.
as well as another site under the clock in front of the parliament.
Hariri senior put back the clock on the roman ruins because it was offered by one of his sect.
it is called abed clock
Posted by: the real joe at January 6, 2007 01:30 AMTo follow the two Tony's, a few factual "adjustments":
1. The SLA was not created to combat Hezbollah. In 1978, Israel entered Lebanon. The Lebanese government send the troops to the southern region, and those troops commanded by Haddad became the SLA.
2. (countering one of the Tony's) they were an Israeli proxy army.
3. The GCC (of which Saudi Arabia and the UAE are members) announced that they will begin nuclear programs for energy purposes. Obviously, they are developing a nuclear program for the possibility to create nuclear weapons, but they have not announced a weapons program.
Posted by: Charles Malik at January 6, 2007 03:00 AMThis is an excellent write up. MJT more greese to your elbow. I will keep reading your blog.
Posted by: Furica at January 6, 2007 03:43 AMAbraham:
The company you keep makes you suspect, which is one reason why I am not inclined to take what you write seriously in the way that you intend.
Posted by: Mertel at January 6, 2007 05:58 AM"Some Westerners really do show up in Lebanon and support Hezbollah, or at least get defensive on Hezbollah’s behalf."
There was an "International Conference for Solidarity with the Resistance" in Beirut from 16 till 19 November in the UNESCO buildings. Organised by Hezbollah and the Lebanese communist party. 300 people where present "from Brazil to India, from Congo to Norway". They wanted to "strengthen the international solidarity with the resistance against war and exploitation in Lebanon, but also in Palestine and Iraq". The report of 2 of the Belgian participants can be found here: http://www.uitpers.be/artikel_view.php?id=1523 (in Dutch) Ironically, it was published in a magazine called “Vrede” (Dutch for Peace).
One of the speakers on this conference was the Socialist Belgian (Walloon) senator Pierre Galand. http://www.pierregaland.be/ (in French)
Socialists in Europe seem to think all enemies of the United States are their comrades.
Abraham, the Nasrallah quote is from the Daily Star.
And, I'm sorry, but if you want me to "back up" my claim that Nasrallah is has an agenda of perpetual war, you're a fool. Give me a break.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at January 6, 2007 08:19 AMAbraham: I come away with the impression that they are just one big string of hyperbole written by someone who deep down inside really doesn't like Arabs
Because I don't like Hezbollah?
You're a lunatic. And this sort of lunacy is precisely the sort of thing that makes right-wing American bigots think Arab=terrorist. Because the minute someone criticizes or opposes terrorism we're accused by people like you of being a anti-Arab, as if they are the same thing.
I'm opposed to Hezbollah primarily because I don't want Israel to invade Lebanon again and ruin the country. But you feel free to think whatever stupid bullshit you want. It's a free country.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at January 6, 2007 08:35 AM"this sort of lunacy is precisely the sort of thing that makes right-wing American bigots think Arab=terrorist. Because the minute someone criticizes or opposes terrorism we're accused by people like you of being a anti-Arab, as if they are the same thing"
This is the money-quote of the thread. It can easily be applied to the tactics of CAIR and MPAC as well as fellow terror-supporter 'Abraham'.
Posted by: Li'l Mamzer at January 6, 2007 09:05 AMrosignol,
...of course, that additional land was captured in wars started by Israel's neighbors, not the Israelis.
Sorry, 'hezbollah lover', the rule is that when you lose a war, you should not expect to get all of your marbles back when it's over, thanks for playing.
No, actually the rule is that when you militarily occupy land you don't transfer parts of your own population into it. Please educate yourself.
If Israel wanted to formally annex the West Bank, that would be one thing. But then they'd have to make the WB Palestinians Israeli citizens, and goodbye Jewish ethnic supremacist state!
Posted by: hed at January 6, 2007 09:38 AMRosignol: @Please Educate Yourself"
You are an official joker my friend. Israel was officially in a state of war with only Egypt in 1967, British secrets revealed around 1 or 2 years ago, nearly 40 years after the 6 days war, revealed that syria and jordan were drawn in the conflict by israeli generals who placed brigades near each other on all borders and started attacking each other. This gave Israle the excuse to attack it's neighbours under the name of self-defence and pre-emptive attacks because it saw itself so strong that it could win, and did win.
Therefore, your claim is baseless, because it was israel that started the war, and it was started by deception and pre-emptiveness, which means they tricked the people they were NOT in war with, and suprise attacked all neighbours, wether they were at war or not.
So, my friend, you go educate yourself and find another source of info other than those of rupert murdochs.
Posted by: hezbollah lover at January 6, 2007 10:26 AM"Next time you run your mouth with that anti-Shia shit
I am not anti-Shia, I am anti-Hezbollah. And since you have nothing interesting or productive to say, only insults, you are summarily banned.
Buh-bye." Professor totten, he wasnt talking to you, he was talking to abu tuz who insulted the shia religion the worst possible way anyone could ever do it. Why don't you ban abu tuz? Why only Ali* and this guy 'abu teez abu tuz',,,im surprised im not banned yet. But your a regular, when you hear something you can't counter or you don't like because your brainwashed head can't sink t in because you're too fanatical about your neo-con ideas that your reject and delete them instead of aprehending them and using them as some source of info, opinion or statistic, it shows how efficient you are as a human, let alone as a writter. Do not ban everyone that criticises you, because believe me you could gain more good than bad if you actually listen to the criticism, because then you can take something to mind or heart, lead to some kind of change and make you a better person.
cheers
Posted by: hezbollah lover at January 6, 2007 10:46 AMhe was talking to abu tuz who insulted the shia religion the worst possible way anyone could ever do it.
I'm guessing that the insult you're refering to is this:
Hizb Allah is not a response to anything; like Shi'a poverty, like the Shi'a customs such as their Ashura parades where men slash open their heads and children's heads with swords, it is a symptom, product and consequence of the primitive cultural values that dominate Shi'a Lebanese society.
I understand entirely that if Hezbollah runs Lebanon then all criticism will be silenced. However, in the more civilized west, we DO allow society to be criticised. That's why our society is better than yours, since it allows criticism, it actually adjusts and improves over time.
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 6, 2007 11:07 AMHezbollah Lover, I don't ban everyone who criticizes me. The fact that you are still posting here is proof enough of that.
Ali was talking to me, at least part of the time, telling me to "keep begging" for money, et cetera.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at January 6, 2007 11:23 AMAbraham:
provide me with some manner of support for your claim that Nasrallah has an "agenda of perpetual war" and I will just shut the fuck up already.
Allow me to assist:
"For 23 years, we have been talking to our people, motivating them, talking about martyrdom, the honor of martyrdom, and the place of the martyrs… We love martyrdom... each and every one of us hopes to be destined to martyrdom at the hands of those people, the killers of the prophets”
Hassan Nasrallah, July 24, 2006, Al-Jazeera TV
“Two parties are fighting in Southern Lebanon, the highest hope of a soldier or an officer in one of the parties [IDF] is to return to his family and his home, while the highest hope of an individual of the other party [Hizbullah] is to achieve martyrdom”
Hassan Nasrallah, Thisreen newspaper, June 1999
“Israel is our enemy. This is an aggressive, illegal, and illegitimate entity, which has no future in our land. Its destiny is manifested in our motto: 'Death to Israel.' Some people may wonder and say: 'Is there no end to this hostility?' Yes, there is an an end. If the Zionists leave our lands and holy places and give them back to their owners, this conflict will come to an end.”
Hassan Nasrallah, Al-Manar TV, Feb 20, 2005
So, now, are you going to keep to your side of the bargain?
Posted by: Mertel at January 6, 2007 11:40 AMAbraham, the Nasrallah quote is from the Daily Star.
WHERE??? What volume, what issue, and what page? Haven't you ever heard of a fucking reference!?
The article that "quotation" came from has been subsequently disavowed by Jamil Mrowe, the editor-in-cheif and publisher of the Daily Star! But don't believe me, ask your buddy Michael Young. No other account of that quotation exists because it was never spoken. But you bought it hook, line and stinker because it fits your bullshit agenda!!
And, I'm sorry, but if you want me to "back up" my claim that Nasrallah is has an agenda of perpetual war, you're a fool. Give me a break.
What's with the name-calling, Totten?
You're just pissed off because I've called you on your bullshit and you have no good response. Any "journalist" worthy of the title could easily present references to back up their claims. Why can't you?
I'm opposed to Hezbollah primarily because I don't want Israel to invade Lebanon again and ruin the country.
You're opposed to Hizballah because they pose a threat to Israel, which is your real concern.
Why do you link to LGF, Totten?
Posted by: abraham at January 6, 2007 11:43 AMSo, now, are you going to keep to your side of the bargain?
I will, as soon as you present something that actually proves Nasrallah has an "agenda of perpetual war" and doesn't instead contradict this bullshit thesis.
Some people may wonder and say: 'Is there no end to this hostility?' Yes, there is an an end. If the Zionists leave our lands and holy places and give them back to their owners, this conflict will come to an end.
Fucking DUH!
Posted by: abraham at January 6, 2007 11:47 AMAbraham, you've been disputing one quote while ignoring a dozen equivalent and suggestively similar quotes (most with references) that have been given over the past few threads.
In such a context you can't get away with posing righteous like this, you just seem like a dishonest asshole.
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 6, 2007 11:50 AMAbraham, if Jamil Mrowe disavows the quote, I'll check with Michael Young about it. This is the first I've heard of it.
Why do I link to LGF? Because Charles provides useful links to interesting articles. I often disagree with his opinions, but so what? He provides a useful service.
You're opposed to Hizballah because they pose a threat to Israel, which is your real concern.
Wrong answer. Hezbollah's threat to Israel is exagerrated, while Hezbollah's threat to Lebanon is understated. (Although I do support Israel's right to not be attacked from Lebanon.)
I opposed Israel's invasion of Lebanon from the very beginning. Lots of my readers were angry at me for this. Oh well. I have my opinions, and I will write them no matter who doesn't like it.
Now sod off. You're an asshole, and I'm sick and tired of you. So is everyone else here except perhaps for "Hezbollah Lover."
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at January 6, 2007 11:55 AMMike, I should probably put this in the Hugh Hewitt section, but I wanted to stick it nice and tight where you'd be looking.
Not that you necessarily have to, will, or should care, but here's a good example of the aspects of your posts that bother me, i.e. the non-dispassionate nature and the easy labeling.
I've suggested before that the loose moral labels and judgments you slip into your articles are sort of a code you use to say what side you're on - your own version of sectarianism. You make sure regulate a given percentage of red meat ("Nasrallah belongs in the garbage") into your stories to make it palatable when you introduce contrary figures (nice Aounians, the pro-Hizb shias who like to chase women, etc).
The problem with this sort of thing is that the sectarian conditioning of your tone crowds out whatever nuances of the scenario itself you are depicting in your content.
In your interview with Hugh Hewitt, to get to my point, you came right out and said, "There's probably not going to be a civil war, because there were various escalations suggested by Hizb, and Siniora promised generalized violence in response, and therefore Hizballah... decided not to create a scenario of mass violence in response,". Even though Hizb the biggest and strongest party around and might easily perceive itself as having a decent shot at winnning.
Now you say that in an off-link middle-of-interview with Hugh Hewitt, but I don't think your posts on the situation make that point. I don't think your readers get that point either, usually.
The reason is because of the sectarian coding of your articles. (terrorists choosing to refrain from violence? what! terrorists don't do that!) Most of your articles build up a picture of a Hizballah that would stop at nothing to destroy its enemies. But their decision making in the critical scenario has contrasted with that. I know that, and you know that, but you have a hard time getting near that kind of nuance when you just stick to the facile impressions on the street (The security guys yell at me, so Hizballah is evil)
Loose, negative language and labels condition readers to perceive the objects of reporting as likely to behave according to the cariactures created by the labels.
That's why the dispassionate tone of mainstream media started in the first place. The opposite of dispassionate is sectarian. And you've seen yourself as well as anyone how sectarianism leads to wildly illogical thinking and false simplification.
Posted by: glasnost at January 6, 2007 12:24 PMPoint taken, Glasnost.
But I do take issue with the label "sectarian." I don't oppose Hezbollah because they are Shia, and I don't support Seniora because he is Sunni, etc. I did not grow up in Lebanon and I don't think in those kinds of categories.
"Partisan" might be the word you're looking for.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at January 6, 2007 12:37 PMI haven't really read the comments section closely to form detailed opinions, except perhaps that I think it's a shame (a nice, neutral, nobody's fault-shame) that the pro-arab commentors and Mike + his crowd can't find a way to debate facts and ideas without so much in the way of insults and acts of symbolic rejection.
But, this quote from abraham caught my eye:
I will, as soon as you present something that actually proves Nasrallah has an "agenda of perpetual war" and doesn't instead contradict this bullshit thesis.
That sounds like something I might have said in another place and time, even though today, Nasrallah's perpetual war sounds reasonable as well. (Context is everything, ain't it?) So, to change the tone and raise a polite question, if Nasrallah has an agenda of perpetual war, yet we just had an inter-Lebanese confrontation that seems to have decidedly occurred without war, how do we reconcile this discrepancy? If Nasrallah's agenda is perpetual war, why did he choose to avoid war with March 14?
Posted by: glasnost at January 6, 2007 12:38 PMGlasnot,
He doesn't want a civil war in Lebanon, but I think it's obvious that he wants war without end with the Israelis.
Israel would make peace with Lebanon and Hezbollah in two seconds if Nasrallah (and Assad, etc.) decided to knock it off. And everyone but the most delusional knows it.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at January 6, 2007 12:42 PMHey, look, it's the pat on the head every dissident hopes for. :-) Thanks, Mike. Maybe I'll pick on your opponents for a few days now.
Posted by: glasnost at January 6, 2007 12:42 PMGlasnost, if I can add my U$0,02, it seems to me HA seeks to prolong the conflict with Israel indefintely, not because of any real serious grievance, but because playing the resistence gives them cross-sectarian legitimacy and cover for their guns.
In this sense only I agree with the assertion that HA wants perpetual war. I don't see any enthusiasm on the part of Nasrallah and his supporters for a hot civil war.
Posted by: Bruno at January 6, 2007 12:52 PMIsrael would make peace with Lebanon and Hezbollah in two seconds if Nasrallah (and Assad, etc.) decided to knock it off. And everyone but the most delusional knows it.
Ah, one of my favorite topics of semi-philosophical speculation on this kind of subject - two opposing sides, one which really wants to make peace and blows a whole bunch of stuff up, and the other which really wants to slaughter everyone and ends up giving four people leg cramps instead, upon whom can we bestow the coveted title of "The Other Guy Is The Real A**hole, not us"?
I don't know what Nasrallah wants, myself (The next progressively irritating question to Mike would be "If Nasrallah wants perpetual war, why hasn't Hizballah launched anymore rockets since the ceasefire? Do you mean he wants intermittent perpetual war?"., but his organization derives more benefits from it than other organizations in Lebanon.
Comparing the Israel-Lebanon conflict to suing your neighbor about his driveway for a minute, the problem with it is the difference between the end of hostility and actual peace. In an atmosphere of mutual suspicion and hostility, every little random event becomes another war, even under the far-fetched possibility that no one is really gunning for it. Whoever really wants to make peace the most in this mess, whoever it is, should make more of an active, systematic campaign to make friends, on an organizational, institutional, and societal level, with whoever wants to make peace less than them. If it doesn't work out, you can always kill them later, like you're otherwise going to end up doing anyway.
If you're convinced war is certain and inevitable, what does it mean to want peace? Does your organizational behavior differ from one who wants both wants war and considers it certain and inevitable?
Posted by: glasnost at January 6, 2007 01:35 PMWhoever really wants to make peace the most in this mess, whoever it is, should make more of an active, systematic campaign to make friends, on an organizational, institutional, and societal level, with whoever wants to make peace less than them.
Yes of course, the only reason that Hezbollah and Israel aren't best of friends is that Israel never really tried to be friendly. After all Nasrallah just wants to be loved!
May I suggest an alternate course? The saner members of Lebanese society should throw out the laws that make contact with Israel treason, on a social level they should shout down the bigotted, fascist assholes that make up Hezbollah and then you can have ties between the countries.
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 6, 2007 01:50 PMThat's why the dispassionate tone of mainstream media started in the first place. The opposite of dispassionate is sectarian. And you've seen yourself as well as anyone how sectarianism leads to wildly illogical thinking and false simplification.
A logical, dispassionate evaluation of Hezbollah's influence on Lebanese politics would note that Hezobllah's existence as an armed and powerful militia objectively threatens the sovereignty of the democratically elected Lebanese government. That dispassionate, factual evaluation would also note that Hezbollah's very existence is a threat. Therefore, any demands they make are de facto extortion.
Many people in the mainstream media think that they have to give equal weight and equal respect to all sides in a conflict. That's not an objective evaluation of the facts, it's more like a media version of the special olympics, where everyone gets a prize, not because they deserve it, but because everyone is equally special.
This 'everyone is special' brand of non-objectivity is relatively new. Ernie Pyle didn't feel the need to present both sides of the conflict during WWII, he didn't objectively present the Nazi point of view.
Hezbollah will actively seek peace when they're too weak to demand war. Instead of parroting Hezbollah's propaganda, the media should objectively evaluate the threat they pose and objectively evaluate their weaknesses. Their job is to provide necessary information, and that's the information we need.
Posted by: mary at January 6, 2007 01:56 PMThe point of "everyone is special" journalism is that it's cheap to produce:
1. it requires no knowledge to produce and no time to write, because the 'journalist' just has to nod his head no matter what's told him
2. it burns no briges so you always have access
3. it offends no dangerous people, so you rarely have to protect your 'journalists'
Another problem with a lot of modern media outlets, I have noticed, is their propensity to paraphrase or quote sources with nary a care about the said source's veracity.
"Jews believe the Western Wall, also known as the Kotel, is the last remaining retaining wall of the ancient Jewish Temple." But some Muslim scholars and political leaders disagree. The late Yasir Arafat repeatedly claimed that the Jewish Temple never existed in Jerusalem at all..."
The above is a made up example. However, Arafat did in fact deny the temple ever existed in Jerusalem, and the NYT's and others simply repeated his delusion without qualification, as if it might be a legitimate point, which historically and archaeologically it most certainly is not. They are "Dispassionate" to the point of having not enough "passion" to bother to inject truth into a story that is, in the end, designed to educate and explain a situation, not muddy the waters. Indded, people read news articles to understand a situation, to get the facts, not for the media to simply parrot lies of one source or another.
That is why MJT's style of reporting is so refreshing. If one of his sources spouts lies or non-facts, MJT let's his readers know. The result is greater understanding of a conflict and not just a "he said she said" news story.
Posted by: Zak at January 6, 2007 02:16 PM"Ah, one of my favorite topics of semi-philosophical speculation on this kind of subject - two opposing sides, one which really wants to make peace and blows a whole bunch of stuff up, and the other which really wants to slaughter everyone and ends up giving four people leg cramps instead, upon whom can we bestow the coveted title of "The Other Guy Is The Real A**hole, not us"?"
Ah, my favorite pseudo-intellectual, Chomskyesque, European style argument where the side who inflicts the most damage is most definitely the more evil of the 2 and the aggressor EXCEPT of course, when such a country is European, (i.e. Britain bombing of Dresden).
Can someone please point me to a war that was won by "proportionate" response?
"I don't know what Nasrallah wants, myself (The next progressively irritating question to Mike would be "If Nasrallah wants perpetual war, why hasn't Hizballah launched anymore rockets since the ceasefire? Do you mean he wants intermittent perpetual war?"., but his organization derives more benefits from it than other organizations in Lebanon."
Too easy, my friend. Hezbollah obviously does not have an unlimited arsenal in Lebanon and therefore couldn't re-arm during the summer conflict as Israel was bombing the ports and airport, etc. However, if Hezbollah engages in an "intermittent perpetual war" there is time and ability to re-arm under the useful eye and cover of UNFIL. Besides, as a "divine" political terror organization, they have other responsibilities in addition to war.
They also need to repay the favor to Syria for helping them arm in the first place, so they need a kind of "time-out of conflict" to persue their other agenda which is seeking the 1/3 +1 seats in gov't where they will be able to block the International Tribunal against Syrian dictator, Bashir Assad. One hand washes the other you see.
There it is in simple terms laid out for all to see except those who, of course, don't want to see it.
Posted by: Katy at January 6, 2007 02:34 PMbuss tizi abu tuz,
"Hey Abu Tuz,
You need to clean out your teez before it soils your thoughts any worse that it already has"
hahaha, i like it so much, apparantly nobody did understand it unfortunatly, abu tuz was really ashamed he didn't reply yet.
we should always call him abu tuz, that's what he looks like.
"So, my friend, you go educate yourself and find another source of info other than those of rupert murdochs."
"The above is a made up example. However, Arafat did in fact deny the temple ever existed in Jerusalem, and the NYT's and others simply repeated his delusion without qualification, as if it might be a legitimate point, which historically and archaeologically it most certainly is not. "
Is this the same American MM that the anti-islamists like Daniel Pipes and Robert Spencer rail against because they just don't get it about the muslim threat? The same American MM that people like hizbo/fatso mullah lover says that just bleats anti-muslim/arab propaganda?
Is this the same Murdoch of Fox that blows Prince Alwaleed on a regular basis since he owns a substantial interest in Fox (who lavishes his billions on CAIR and every other front and Columbia and Harvard to maintain their Chomskyesque ministries)?
Naah. That would be some whacked-out conspiracy theory.
Posted by: ankhfkhonsu at January 6, 2007 03:12 PMdo u know what i really like and admire about hassan nassrallah:
i love him, because he pisses off all the stupid arabs outside lebanon, and the americans, and the israeilies yes, i love him a lot and thank god we in lebanon have him.
MJT no matter how much you are trying to destroy his image like a lot of your freinds, we will always love him, god bless him.
by the way, i am christian, and i started liking hezbollah the day israel waged war against lebanon, actually thx god for oppening my eyes so clearly.
to israelies, good luck in the ME as long as you will stay behind this stupid idiology: israel racist state or jewish state as u wish to be called, actually you are same as iran "the islamic state" or KSA the islamic kingdom.
understand that there is no presence of a pure race or upper race, we are all equal.
and just remember that you were born through humun reproduction and not somthing else, coz simply there is no other way.
Posted by: sandra at January 6, 2007 03:30 PMto israelies, good luck in the ME as long as you will stay behind this stupid idiology: israel racist state or jewish state as u wish to be called, actually you are same as iran "the islamic state" or KSA the islamic kingdom.
It doesn't surprise me that, in the middle east, there is an endless stream of propaganda that tells every imaginable lie about Israel.
But what I can't get over is that Arabs never question it. In other parts of the world people resent being lied to. Arabs seem to revel in it.
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 6, 2007 04:05 PMIn other parts of the world people resent being lied to.
Uh huh.
Posted by: double-plus-ungood at January 6, 2007 04:18 PMSorry, that was snarky. What I meant to say was that there is a large amount of media manipulation done in our own societies, and we don't seem to mind it much. The stream of lies surrounding Pat Tillman's death comes to mind, for example, and the self-censorship of the American media dealing with civilian casualties in Iraq.
Posted by: double-plus-ungood at January 6, 2007 04:23 PMIsraeli-Arabs cerainly have more rights than Palestinians living in Lebanon (or elsewhere, for that matter). You should learn some basic facts, Sandra, and stop projecting.
Posted by: Zak at January 6, 2007 04:25 PMI was thinking of more pervasive lying such as what passed for news when the Soviet Union was still censoring and spinning. Certainly our media isn't the highest quality possible, but it's infinitely better than the yellow press of the middle east. But your unwillingness to make the critical distinction between, say a yellow press that promotes hated and a commerical press that's merely cheap and shoddy, between the unredeemably bad and the ordinary is exactly what I expect from you DP.
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 6, 2007 04:30 PMBut after all, I was talking about the dynamics of mass hatred, a subject that DP has shown himself to be entirely blind to, again and again.
I should expect his unclear on the concept, missing the point snarks every time I bring up that subject.
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 6, 2007 04:35 PMI shouldn't imply that all of the hatred-promoting press in the middle east is an offical yellow press. Mostly the middle eastern press just reflects the horrible state of the society it's in, yellow or not. Just as the press in the southern states once promoted hatred of blacks, the middle eastern press promotes all sorts of hatred, and, even more disturbingly there is absolutely no voice countering it, at least in the case of hatred of Israel.
It's the lack of any sane counterweight (of any size) which indicts the culture.
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 6, 2007 04:43 PM“We will cut Seniora,” he said, referring to Lebanon’s elected prime minister. “We will cut him!”
Just another "peaceful" demonstration.
She yelled at me because she thought I was a stupid American who supported Hezbollah.
I wish there were more Lebanese like this, which brings us to:
sandra "writing," by the way, i am christian, and i started liking hezbollah the day israel waged war against lebanon,
So that would be AFTER hezbollah waged war against Israel? (Not to mention, everything that happened to Lebanon this summer would NOT have happened but for Hizballah! Duh. But keep on "loving" them! Jeezus.)
I guess I shouldn't be surprised that logic is not exactly a strong suit of a Hizballah lover.
And even more daft, srael racist state or jewish state as u wish to be called, actually you are same as iran "the islamic state" or KSA the islamic kingdom.
So funny. The wishful thinking of the "moral" (and I use that term loosely) relativist.
By the way, how's sectarianism working out for you these days, anyway?
Posted by: SoCalJustice at January 6, 2007 04:51 PMThe very idea of a pro-Hizballah Lebanese (or other pro-Arab Government) individual whining about Israel being racist is priceless. The hypocrisy is staggerting.
Your government belongs to a regional international organization called "The Arab Leauge."
That would be as if there was no such thing as the EU, but instead was called "The White Union" and if the continent of Africa ditched the "AU" for "The Black Union."
Change the name of "The Arab League" to "The Middle East League" before you start complaining about "racism."
Everyone else uses geography, not ethnicity for their international organizations.
Grow up or - honestly - shut up about it already. It just makes you look like huge hypocrites.
Posted by: SoCalJustice at January 6, 2007 05:06 PMsoclajustice, "By the way, how's sectarianism working out for you these days, anyway?"
great especialy against jews, they finally have killed the christ.
Posted by: sandra at January 6, 2007 05:09 PM"Now sod off. You're an asshole, and I'm sick and tired of you. So is everyone else here except perhaps for "Hezbollah Lover."" Michael J. Totten.
Why thank you, even though you were slightly harsh, but still. Im just hoping that not another GenX/Southpark ironic/sarcastic homour where im actually the biggest asshole :(. Lol i hope not.
Anyway, this just shows me that you are at least taking into consideration what i have to say, and you respect my views, and i respect you for that, and don't worry, i also take all points made by any/everyone, not jsut you. Believe me, i study them, i research and i do my best to find out the truth which will make me more knowldgeable. Knowledge is power.
And believe me Mr Totten, that everything i say is what i solemnly believe in and think is the most honest answer i can give, which is why i even bother to type on blogs, because i know others wil reply and suggest totally different ideas and i take them into account, but obviously all the while referring back to my morals and sensibility.
I am sorry if i insult you, or any others, or if i shout i.e. caps, at you or anyone else. I just don't know how to do italics or bold so i just do caps hehehehe.
PS, call me Ahmed Youssef, or just Ahmed.
Cheers
Posted by: hezbollah lover at January 6, 2007 05:12 PMWTF?
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 6, 2007 05:12 PMsandra,
no - your Nasrallah is still alive, Habibi.
*sigh
What a waste.
Posted by: SoCalJustice at January 6, 2007 05:13 PMOops I was responding to Sandra's frankly insane:
soclajustice, "By the way, how's sectarianism working out for you these days, anyway?"
great especialy against jews, they finally have killed the christ.
I'll say it again. What the fuck is wrong with her?
I grew up in Canada and the United States, both cultures that find hatred shameful. But look at her, reveling in it and (as I first pointed out) in lies designed to promote hatred.
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 6, 2007 05:18 PMA logical, dispassionate evaluation of Hezbollah's influence on Lebanese politics would note that Hezobllah's existence as an armed and powerful militia objectively threatens the sovereignty of the democratically elected Lebanese government. That dispassionate, factual evaluation would also note that Hezbollah's very existence is a threat. Therefore, any demands they make are de facto extortion.
Lots of assumptions. Did Saddamn Hussein's Fedayeen Saddamn, his armed militia, threaten the sovereignty of his government? Do the janjaweed (sp?) threaten the sovereignty of Sudan? Or, if that's too easy of an example, why did the Irgun, rather than the Palmach, become a threat to the sovereignty of Israel, and at what point in the formation of Israel was that decision made - and in what manner was it made?
But let's take what you've said at face value. Hizballah, a threat to the sovereignty of the Lebanese government. To the extent that they're not the same thing, sure, there's nothing illogical or anti-dispassionate about noting Hizballah's capacity to threaten, contest, interfere with the sovereignty of the Lebanese government. It's accurate.
Of course, to equate "sovereignty" with "control", all independent, non-government actors have some capacity to threaten the control of a government over some outcome it is trying to achieve.
Nevertheless, the Hizballah / March 14 conflict is , yep, not something you'd want to leave out of the story.
So..... we ... agree.
As for extortion, most demands (at least, successful ones) made of everyone by anyone are backed up by an ability to produce unpleasant consequences otherwise, i.e. threats and demands go hand in hand. At least as far as I can see. So... we agree? Except, some people have the right to make threats, and others don't, I imagine you'd say. The elected ones? So who elected my boss?
Here we have a microcosm of my point to Mike: you've given Hizballah's demands a name, extortion. But "extortion" can apparently be used to describe a wide variety of behavior, even if the connotations of the name suggest a narrow variety. Thus you inhibit your readers from perceiving the anomalous aspects of the situation (how does civil disobedience differ from armed robbery?), and therefore, genuinely perceiving the situation as a whole. Thus, ultimately, you have not educated them: the reverse, in fact.
The sovereignty of the government is ultimately built on the people, including the third of them that support the other armed organization in the area. Thus, we're back at the root of the problem. What both segments do to solve it is a choice with a wide variety of possible results.
Posted by: glasnost at January 6, 2007 05:19 PMSoClJustice:- Your government belongs to a regional international organization called "The Arab Leauge."...no such thing as the EU, but instead was called "The White Union" and if the continent of Africa ditched the "AU" for "The Black Union."
Well, firstly, Arab is not a colour, its the native person living in an area or country or state that talks its native language, arabic. The arabs are not only present in the middle east, which is why it is not replaced by middle east, i.e. there are arab countries in northern, eastern and even western africa. Secondly, iran is part of the middle east, but isn't arab. So to use the middle eastern term is incorrect. The european union cant replace european by white because not all europeans are white, and same goes to africa, not all africans are black. You've mixed up colour, race, ethnicity and ...well, language.
Posted by: hezbollah lover at January 6, 2007 05:29 PMNot everyone living in Arab countries is Arab either. Ask the Kurds, or the Greek orthodox, or the Berber, or the Copts...
Posted by: Bruno at January 6, 2007 05:35 PMhezbollah lover,
That's quite a list of apologia and excuses you've come up with to justify your own particular (and obvious) brand of racism.
Congratulations.
Posted by: SoCalJustice at January 6, 2007 05:59 PMSo to use the middle eastern term is incorrect.
Wow. It's only "incorrect" as a term because of the ethno-exclusionary practices that the group of "Arab" countries comprising the "Arab League" chose to employ.
They could have decided to organize on region (like everyone else has) rather than ethnicity. That's the point - which you have clearly missed.
Your racism is so ingrained, you're blind to it.
Amazing. Or, actually, judging from your name and your allegiance, decidely not amazing.
Just sad.
Posted by: SoCalJustice at January 6, 2007 06:03 PMDPU, you are most fortunate in that the Canadian MSM is so accurate, non-biased and all inclusive in their news coverage.
Anyone who sole sources their information on any topic is an idiot and is well deserving of their ignorance.
Jeez, how old does one have to be to realize that you have to spend SOME time in researching any given topic from MULTIPLE disparate sources to have any chance of a "real" (for whatever real is) view or perspective on that topic.
Posted by: Ron Snyder at January 6, 2007 06:12 PM"DPU, you are most fortunate in that the Canadian MSM is so accurate, non-biased and all inclusive in their news coverage."
The artifact is not as a result of geography. Look at the source of the comment.
I have the same geographic vantage point and quite frankly I have always found DPU rather amusing...callow but amusing, nonetheless.
Posted by: ankhfkhonsu at January 6, 2007 06:38 PMActually I do think that the canadian press is quite good.
Though I've been afraid to read the Globe and Mail since it changed hands some years ago for fear of finding out that what was once a jewel is now a pebble.
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 6, 2007 06:48 PM"Not everyone living in Arab countries is Arab either. Ask the Kurds, or the Greek orthodox, or the Berber, or the Copts..."
Ah, yes and at the time that these places were conquered by the Arabs/Muslims, their populations consisted of these peoples in the vast majority. It does take a certain amount of time to kill, beat ,bully, intimidate and humiliate the dhimmi into submission.
Be patient.
It may take a few more generations or another century or two, and then it could be the Arab or Muslim League.
And then it will 100% representative.
Posted by: ankhfkhonsu at January 6, 2007 06:52 PMWell, firstly, Arab is not a colour, its the native person living in an area or country or state that talks its native language, arabic. The arabs are not only present in the middle east, which is why it is not replaced by middle east, i.e. there are arab countries in northern, eastern and even western africa. Secondly, iran is part of the middle east, but isn't arab. So to use the middle eastern term is incorrect. The european union cant replace european by white because not all europeans are white, and same goes to africa, not all africans are black. You've mixed up colour, race, ethnicity and ...well, language.
Fine, but not everybody in every Arab country speaks Arabic as their native language, or identifies as Arab. For example, the Berbers of North Africa, or the Kurds in Syria and Iraq… or the near-one million Jews who used to live in the Arab-dominated lands before being ethnically cleansed.
Posted by: Zak at January 6, 2007 07:57 PMI should expect his unclear on the concept, missing the point snarks every time I bring up that subject.
Sigh. I guess the first apology wasn't enough.
Josh, I am dreadfully sorry that I snarked. I offer a complete and utter apology. The snark I made was totally uncalled for and unprovoked, and was in no way fair comment, and was motivated purely by malice, and I deeply regret any distress that my comments may have caused you, or your family, and I hereby undertake not to repeat any such snark at any time in the future.
Posted by: double-plus-ungood at January 6, 2007 08:06 PMDoes anyone think that DP actually got the point?
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 6, 2007 08:10 PMDPU, you are most fortunate in that the Canadian MSM is so accurate, non-biased and all inclusive in their news coverage.
Good lord, who claimed that? Was it me? Where?
Posted by: double-plus-ungood at January 6, 2007 08:12 PMAs I said, callow.
Perhaps silly and immature is more appropriate.
Posted by: ankhfkhonsu at January 6, 2007 08:13 PMDoes anyone think that DP actually got the point?
I wanted to get the hurt feelings out of the way so we could discuss it without further rancor. Or shall we not bother and just see who can yell the loudest?
Posted by: double-plus-ungood at January 6, 2007 08:13 PMPerhaps silly and immature is more appropriate.
Yup, that's it. By the way, you say "...quite frankly I have always found DPU...". Always? I thought you were fairly new around here.
Posted by: double-plus-ungood at January 6, 2007 08:16 PMOr shall we not bother and just see who can yell the loudest?
I prefer the deal we had where we don't talk.
Anyway this might be more fun.
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 6, 2007 08:25 PMThe Muppets. Yeah, that's brilliant.
I knew he reminded me of someone but I couldn't quite put my finger on it.
You nailed it.
It was Miss Piggie.
Posted by: ankhfkhonsu at January 6, 2007 08:30 PMI'm a big Miss Piggy fan.
I'm jealous, no one ever said that I was like the glamorous Piggy.
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 6, 2007 08:33 PMDid Saddamn Hussein's Fedayeen Saddamn, his armed militia, threaten the sovereignty of his government? Do the janjaweed (sp?) threaten the sovereignty of Sudan?
As you say, the Fedayeen Saddamn were Saddam's army. And we all know that the janjiweed are sponsored by the Sudanese government.
Hezbollah is supported by the Iranian and the Syrian government. They are not supported by the majority of the Lebanese people or their legally elected government. That's not to say that existence of Saddams Fedayeen or the Sudanese janjiweed should be tolerated, but in comparison, their existence is more legitimate than Hezbollah's existence. Your comparison doesn't make Hezbollah look good.
The majority of Hezbollah's support does not come from legitimate government sources - it comes from Iran's yearly contribution of some $100 million, revenue from "investments in Lebanon" proceeds from overseas criminal enterprises ranging from the blood diamond trade in West Africa to cigarette smuggling and audiovisual bootlegging in the Americas. This is an openly criminal, illegal, foriegn state-funded militia that has no legal right to exist as a militia.
Hizballah, a threat to the sovereignty of the Lebanese government. To the extent that they're not the same thing, sure, there's nothing illogical or anti-dispassionate about noting Hizballah's capacity to threaten, contest, interfere with the sovereignty of the Lebanese government. It's accurate.
Yes, it is, according to every nearly every government on the planet and the UN. Glad to see you agree.
But "extortion" can apparently be used to describe a wide variety of behavior, even if the connotations of the name suggest a narrow variety. Thus you inhibit your readers from perceiving the anomalous aspects of the situation (how does civil disobedience differ from armed robbery?), and therefore, genuinely perceiving the situation as a whole. Thus, ultimately, you have not educated them: the reverse, in fact.
Verbal tap dancing is rarely an effective obfuscation. Extortion is defined as an attempt to:
1) Cause physical injury (substantial pain) to anyone; or
(2) Cause damage to property; or
(3) Engage in other conduct constituting a crime; or
(4) Accuse anyone of a crime or cause criminal charges to be instituted against anyone; or
(5) Expose a secret or publicize an asserted fact, whether true or false, tending to subject
anyone to hatred, contempt or ridicule; or
(6) Falsely testify or provide information or withhold testimony or information with respect
to another's legal claim or defense; or
(7) Use or abuse the defendant's position as a public servant by performing some act within or related to the defendant's official duties, or by failing or refusing to perform an official duty, in such manner as to affect some person adversely; or
(8) Perform any other act which is calculated to harm another person materially with respect to the person's health, safety, business, calling, career, financial condition, reputation or personal relationships.
None of the above should or could be defined as 'civil disobedience'.
The sovereignty of the government is ultimately built on the people, including the third of them that support the other armed organization in the area.
As I've already pointed out, Hezobllah's primary support does not come from legitimate sources, it comes from Iran's yearly contribution, "investments in Lebanon" proceeds from overseas criminal enterprises ranging from the blood diamond trade in West Africa to cigarrette smuggling and bootlegging. Are you trying to say that this illegally armed, criminally funded organization has the right to threaten the legitimately elected government of Lebanon? Are you trying to say that nearly every government on the planet and the UN and its many resolutions demanding that Hezbollah give up its weapons are wrong?
Posted by: mary at January 6, 2007 09:15 PMZak: not everybody in every Arab country speaks Arabic as their native language, or identifies as Arab. For example, the Berbers of North Africa, or the Kurds in Syria and Iraq… or the near-one million Jews who used to live in the Arab-dominated lands before being ethnically cleansed.
Also, the Maronites of Lebanon.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at January 6, 2007 09:18 PMI prefer the deal we had where we don't talk.
What an interesting idea. Use a medium that consists entirely of communication to, uh, not communicate.
Posted by: double-plus-ungood at January 6, 2007 09:21 PMSome Westerners really do show up in Lebanon and support Hezbollah, or at least get defensive on Hezbollah’s behalf. (Meanwhile they spend all their time in the liberal parts of Lebanon where Hezbollah is hated.
Typical liberals. They wouldn't spend two seconds hanging around the people they actually defend. It's all talk cause they think it pisses off the Man.
Posted by: David at January 6, 2007 09:22 PMYou nailed it.
It was Miss Piggie.
You're demonstrating your superior maturity by calling me Miss Piggie?
Allrighty then.
Posted by: double-plus-ungood at January 6, 2007 09:24 PMDavid,
I do know one Westerner (European guy) who actually lived in the Hezbollah dahiyeh before he finally had to leave and move into a Christian area where he felt more welcome and comfortable.
When I asked him why on earth he wanted to live with Hezbollah, he said because the Palestinians would not let him live in one of the refugee camps. They said he must be a spy.
The Hezbollah people thought he was a spy, too, which is why he eventually had to live somewhere else.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at January 6, 2007 09:30 PMEver read the biographies of John Walker Lindh?
When he was an adolecent/teenager he spent his time online pretending to be some sort of five-percenter elder. The five-percenters are a group that split off the nation of Islam when Elijah Muhammad admitted that his teachings were fiction and converted the group to Islam...
The five percenters still believe the Elija's original racist fable that black men are the only real humans on earth and that white people are demons that were created by some evil sorcerer to torment the real people and "grafted" on to the human race.
So obviously, John Walker Lindh, a white kid, had some sort of hatred for, well, everyone he knew, and, I suppose, himself, if he thought it through that far.
I only bring this up as an example of the sort of messed up psychology that might make a westerner want to join a group like Hezbollah.
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 6, 2007 09:49 PMGlasnost is stunning in his Chompsky-esque (please don't think that is flattering) Weltanschauung. Earlier he compared the invasion with Hezbollah's kidnapping soldiers (giving them leg cramps) as though they aren't made up of the lowest of cowards: simple, soulless, ignorant terrorists who seek out the defenseless to slaughter en-mass and then hide under cribs and skirts, knowing that (unlike them) Israel might hesitate to kill women and children.
Glasnost then pretends that the concept of political leverage is equivalent to an armed militia. That's like comparing a legitimate legal/justice system with the mafia.
Michael Totten provides an invaluable service ...
I've never had a conversation with an Arab or Persian where we didn't get along famously. One of my dearest friends is a Lebanese Catholic and one of my favorite places to go in Portland is Al Amir's (awesome restaurant, the Lebanese owners are gracious, personable and know how to poor a drink).
I understand strong religious sentiment and can accept that Muslims want their culture to reflect their heritage, especially in their homeland. On a side note, perhaps instead of a fully elected Parliament in Iraq they could have allowed their Sheiks to be a "House of Lords" like the British? Islamic nations don't have to have a system exactly like us to be "ruled by the governed".
I am convinced that people with polar opposite personal views on any number of subjects can live peacefully and respectfully with each other. Say what you will about the Iraq War, but those who supported it never thought that Muslims are somehow less evolved and incapable of a democracy and must be ruled by an authoritative government. The same cannot be said about all those who opposed it.
Michael Totten is doing what he can to prevent a War of Civilizations, and we kid ourselves if we don't think it is closer than anyone realizes. He's on the side of the Angels here. If I run into him at Al Amir's, he drinks for free.
Posted by: Dennis at January 6, 2007 09:50 PMLet me get this straight: The Israelis are the racist ones while the Lebanese refuse to make the Palestinians, who have been living in their country (in dirty refugee camps) for over 60 years, citizens? What about all the Lebanese Christians who are not allowed back in the country or allowed to vote? Give me a break.
Posted by: Katy at January 6, 2007 10:18 PMKaty: What about all the Lebanese Christians who are not allowed back in the country or allowed to vote? Give me a break.
Who, exactly, are you talking about? Which Lebanese Christians can't go home or vote?
By the way, the Palestinian Christians were given Lebanese citizenship in the 1970s.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at January 6, 2007 10:35 PMOf course that Hamas member we were arguing with a couple of weeks ago mentioned that he supports unpatriating the Palestinian Christians who were allowed to get Lebanese citizenship.
So he has solidarity with the Sunni Palestinians to kill the Israelis and go back to Israel, and wants to kick out the Christian Palestinians as well.
They're pure love over at Nasrallah's
Feeeel the love.
Some Lebanese blogger told me that the reason that Sunni Palestinians can't get citizenship in Lebanon is doing so would make Sunnis a majority. So I guess he meant that the Shiites and Christians are against giving the majority of Palestinians citizenship (or rights etc..)
Another wierdness is the nonsense claim I've seen that giving Palestinians citizenship would destroy the Lebanese economy. Actually integrating people into the economy as giving them rights does, improves the economy over making them helpless.
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 6, 2007 10:42 PM"Who, exactly, are you talking about? Which Lebanese Christians can't go home or vote?"
Michael,
It is a well known fact that many Christian Lebanese cannot return to their homes, specifically the Christians of Mount Lebanon. It is a well known fact that there is a limit to how many Christians from the Arab world are allowed to get Lebanese citizenship. And it is a well known fact that Christian Lebanese who were driven from Lebanon but are still citizens cannot vote. I hear that from the Lebanese I know constantly and it is obviously a very sore subject. You never heard about all this?
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-christians2jan02,1,7610610.story?track=rss
Posted by: Katy at January 6, 2007 11:43 PMKaty, they are allowed back in the country, just not back at their village.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at January 7, 2007 12:08 AMNot saying that's okay or anything, I just thought you were talking about something else. Perhaps the former SLA members in Israel.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at January 7, 2007 12:10 AMMJT,
"Katy, they are allowed back in the country, just not back at their village"
yes michael, in order to see how good and secular is walid jumblat, it is right the only place lebanese christian can't get back are in the mountain, the chouf, in walid jumblat heartland, god bless him how not secterian he is, and the thing that make me laugh the most is that he is the head of the socialist party.
this man is seriously sick.
Lira,
I answered that question here.
And by the way, I never "forcasted" a civil war. I said the liklihood of a civil war was higher than it had been previously but that anything could happen.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at January 7, 2007 09:35 AMAnother small correction to something said by a commenter:
The Greek Orthodox historically identify as Arabs. In fact, most continue to do so today, even in Lebanon. The Greek Orthodox in Lebanon play identity politics down the middle. Although many Lebanese Orthodox are fervently Christian after the civil war, they find a middle path between Phoenician and Arab identity.
One must not forget that Lebanese/Syrian Christians created the concept of Arabism and Arab identity, and were responsible for the revival of the Arabic language in the 18th and 19th centuries.
Posted by: Charles Malik at January 7, 2007 10:55 AMMichael,
There is a big debate over voting law in Lebanon. Lebanese citizens abroad are not allowed to vote. One must be physically present in Lebanon to cast a ballot. This disproportionately effects Christians.
Jumblatt and Hariri pay to fly their supporters in from abroad simply to vote. It makes a huge difference in the Chouf.
Posted by: Charles Malik at January 7, 2007 10:57 AMCharles Malik,
Seems like a good law to have. No reason to let people living abroad for many years a right to vote in a country that they pretty much no longer live in.
Posted by: NM at January 7, 2007 12:00 PMOn the issue of "blending in", a number of writers have discussed this tactic.
http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/654
This weblog entry "Passing as Shi‘i in Iraq" has specifics, and links to articles by Pipes and others about the general topic of passing as Muslim when absolutely necessary.
Since journalism in the ME continues to be hazardous (knock on wood for all concerned), this information should be shared as widely as possible, but with two caveats:
1) In journalism, passing as a religion different from one's own (or lack of same) should be subject to similar ethical limits as would be required for posing as a shopper in a store or similar activities. Don't laugh, before fauxtography, etc, journalists used to take ethics seriously, and some still do!
2) In daily life, one should if at all possible avoid the "passing as" strategy in daily life. Examples from today and from history suggest that when "passing as" becomes institutionalized in a sub-culture, it is a slippery slope to second class citizenship, or worse.
Best of luck and STAY SAFE.
Posted by: John Hadjisky at January 7, 2007 12:40 PMJosh: Of course that Hamas member we were arguing with a couple of weeks ago mentioned that he supports unpatriating the Palestinian Christians who were allowed to get Lebanese citizenship.
I don't remember seeing that on this site. Are you referring to an argument you had elsewhere, and do you mind linking to it?
Love reading your posts, by the way.
Hezbollah lover -- love you too! Kissie Kissie Kissie! I'm still waiting for you to justify Al Manar's broadcasts of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Viva La Resistance!
Posted by: M.Corilianus at January 7, 2007 01:22 PMI don't know anything about this topic, but re: Lebanese ex-pats...
NM,
Shouldn't voting rights be determined on citizenship and not time outside the country?
If you stop being a Lebanese citizen, then fine - but there are plenty of legitimate reasons why people live outside their country of citizenship for lengthy periods of time.
If you're an American citizen, you don't lose your right to vote based on time outside the U.S.
Posted by: SoCalJustice at January 7, 2007 01:48 PMJust two points:
I agree with Abraham about LGF. That site is incredably racist towards Arabs and Muslims, and if Charles Johnson is not personally, those who fill his message boards certainly are. His postings are made with the purpose of making Arabs and Muslims worthy of hate, with sensationalized stories and inflamatory rhetoric. One does not walk away from that site with any kind of understanding of anything other than that its right and good to hate Muslims as a people and to treat them accordingly. Look at the comments over there and tell me that if its intent is not to be a hate site it is certainly one in practice. If he were posting the kind of things he does about black people in the same format with Americans coming about saying what they do about Arabs/Muslims about black people, wouuld you link to him? How about if it were about Jews? All his site does is undermine Muslims and Arabs that are not loonatics by making the whole of our race and religion to be such. The site is hyperbole the vast majority of the time, which is interesting but extremely dangerous (especially for those folks who are the object of the venom spewed over there, such as myself!) His site is no different from Debbie Schlussel's or other racist websites. It could double for "Stormfront"'s message boards.
Finally, I would like to thank Charles Malik for pointing out the fact that the Greek Orthodox Arabs are in fact Arabs, and helped to create Arab identity. My mom's family (who are Orthodox) is more Arab in their sentiments and ways than most Arab Muslims I know. It is very annoying to hear people talk about Christians in blanket terms as if the only ones that exist are Maronites or Catholics. Most of the Arabs in my family are Christians, and so are most of the rest of those in America.
Posted by: Nouri Lumendifi at January 7, 2007 02:12 PMJust two points:
I agree with Abraham about LGF. That site is incredably racist towards Arabs and Muslims, and if Charles Johnson is not personally, those who fill his message boards certainly are. His postings are made with the purpose of making Arabs and Muslims worthy of hate, with sensationalized stories and inflamatory rhetoric. One does not walk away from that site with any kind of understanding of anything other than that its right and good to hate Muslims as a people and to treat them accordingly. Look at the comments over there and tell me that if its intent is not to be a hate site it is certainly one in practice. If he were posting the kind of things he does about black people in the same format with Americans coming about saying what they do about Arabs/Muslims about black people, wouuld you link to him? How about if it were about Jews? All his site does is undermine Muslims and Arabs that are not loonatics by making the whole of our race and religion to be such. The site is hyperbole the vast majority of the time, which is interesting but extremely dangerous (especially for those folks who are the object of the venom spewed over there, such as myself!) His site is no different from Debbie Schlussel's or other racist websites. It could double for "Stormfront"'s message boards.
Finally, I would like to thank Charles Malik for pointing out the fact that the Greek Orthodox Arabs are in fact Arabs, and helped to create Arab identity. My mom's family (who are Orthodox) is more Arab in their sentiments and ways than most Arab Muslims I know. It is very annoying to hear people talk about Christians in blanket terms as if the only ones that exist are Maronites or Catholics. Most of the Arabs in my family are Christians, and so are most of the rest of those in America.
Posted by: Nouri Lumendifi at January 7, 2007 02:12 PMSorry for the double post.
Posted by: nouri Lumendifi at January 7, 2007 02:14 PMInterestring bio on Daniel Pipes. He has quite a pedigree actually and in fact wil debate his views against Comrade Ken, the mayor of London this month.
I'm sure that Robert Spencer, with a Phd. in Islamic studies also knows nothing about Islam and its politics as well?
Ne c'est pas Ibrahim?
At least he can opearate a medium that people can look at and analyse on the basis of facts and its intelligence, as opposed to your dreadful blog that consists of no commentary other than you and "Samir"
Just like Kenney and Spenney, but without an audience.
Posted by: ankhfkhonsu at January 7, 2007 02:31 PMCharles Johnson of LGF is a decent guy who performs an invaluable service.
My only reservation about him is that he's too pessimistic in his outlook, in as much as he doesn't fully share Bush's vision that Arabs would choose to live in liberty under the rule of law, if only they could bring themselves to believe that such an option is genuinely available to them.
Posted by: Kolya at January 7, 2007 02:35 PMLegitimacy comes from the support provided by the people. If a group's goals are not shared in some part by the people it claims to represent, it won't get the kind of backing that Hizballah gets in Lebanon. That so many words are being spoken about Hizballah confirms their legitimacy.
What you also fail to realize is that Hizballah was (and arguably still is) a legitimately elected component of the current government. They obviously have support from a significant portion of the people.
So I suppose Hezbollah is just as legitimate as the Nazi party circa 1930s Germany.
Posted by: Mertel at January 7, 2007 03:00 PMnL: "Finally, I would like to thank Charles Malik for pointing out the fact that the Greek Orthodox Arabs are in fact Arabs, and helped to create Arab identity."
This is very interesting. I undertand 'Greek Orthodox' refers to the church (like 'Roman Catholic'), but I assumed they were largely 'ethnic' greeks too.
Posted by: Bruno Mota at January 7, 2007 03:19 PMOh no. The Greek Orthodox Church in the Arabic speaking countries is comprised mainly of ethnic Arabs with much ethnic Greek clergy. For many years now, the clergy has been Arab. Many can trace their roots back to the Ghassanid Arabs who were under the rule of the Byzantine empire and shared the same church. The Melkite Byzantine Greek Catholic Church is a sort of spin off of this, because it split from the Orthodox Church. They use Arabic in their services and liturgy. A lot of Arab nationalists were Orthodox. The founder of the Baath Pary, Michel Aflaq, the leader of the PFLP, George Habash, leader of the DFLP, Nayef Hawatmeh, and many Arab members of the Israeli parliament. There are also Orthodox that started non-Arab movements like the Syrian Social Nationalist Party (Antun Saadeh). Charles Malik wrote parts of the UN Declaration of Human Rights. A lot of Orthodox endorse the Arab identity because they associated "Phoencianism" or other sorts of identity with the Catholics/Maronites, with bigger numbers and more influence. My mom's family is Antiochian Greek Orthdox, almost every one in her church is Arab. My brother in law (and now my sister) is Greek Catholic (Melkite), his church is basically all Arab, with some Italians and Poles (via marriage mostly). The Arabic speaking Orthodox in Turkey are also identify as Arab from what I have heard as well. My mom only knows Arabic because of she was raised in the church (she was born in the States).
Posted by: Nouri Lumendifi at January 7, 2007 03:54 PMMichael, and all, this is a very good read, imho:
Will Hizbullah Execute Ahmadinejad's Threats?
by Joseph Hitti--President of the New England Americans for Lebanon
Here is an excerpt from the article:
As recently as this past August, Hizbullah's leader Hassan Nasrallah declared, in an interview with the Iranian magazine Risalat Al-Hussein ["The Message of Hussein"] that it is "the wish of Hizbullah to one day establish an Islamic Republic [in Lebanon] because Hizbullah believes that the establishment of an Islamic government is the only way to achieve stability in society, and it is the only way to resolve social differences, even in a society consisting of diverse minorities." The prospects of the new year of 2007 are looking increasingly "encouraging" for the Lebanese: living under a Hizbullah-led Islamic Republic of Lebanon that is supplied with Iranian-made nuclear weapons. Let the fireworks begin!
Posted by: Renée C. at January 7, 2007 04:27 PMSoCalJustice,
It all depends on how long a person decides to live abroad. If its 6 months or even maybe 1-2 years I have no problems with them being allowed to vote. However, if they actually decide to live (key word) in another country than they should lose the ride to vote. This shouldn't be a concern since ideally they would be integrating themselves in their new home.
This was a major problem in Canada this summer where many Lebanese take up dual citizenship. During the evacuations they expected the Canadian government to flip the bill even though they had been out of the country for upwards of many years.
Posted by: NM at January 7, 2007 04:30 PMI'd also add that Lebanon is unique in that there might be more lebanese outside the country than inside. Letting them vote would cause the absurd position of having the government decided by people not even in the country.
Posted by: NM at January 7, 2007 04:31 PMNouri, thanks, that was very informative.
Posted by: Bruno at January 7, 2007 04:32 PMI also would like to add that LGF is in fact anti- muslim and anti-arab.
Just as one example they called muslim culture barbaric because of the animal sacrifices they have during their latest holiday. One wonders whether they would classify Spain a barbaric nation on account of bullfighting?
It picks out the worst from a society and uses it as a representative of the general population.
Posted by: NM at January 7, 2007 04:35 PMI mistyped, of course it was a Hezbollah member we were arguing with who wanted to kick Christians out of Lebanon.
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 7, 2007 04:41 PMYeah, you opposed it, but you didn't necessarily rally against it, did you?
Abraham really is an asshole, isn't he.
I hope he's banned and his posts, deleted. The owner of the site already told him to go away after all.
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 7, 2007 04:43 PMWhile I for one do not mean to make mock of Ashura - mortification of the flesh has honorable antecedents - it may be noted that:
1) It does look bizarre, no two ways about it, to those who are not used to such things - anyone in America who did this in public would be arrested and confined for their own good.
2) Many Westerners do indeed decry bullfighting as barbaric.
3) While bullfighting is merely an entertainment spectacle, and can therefore be disgusting without any greater meaning, a religious rite is holy and therefore is held to a higher standard, unless Ashura is also meant as entertainment, which I did not think was the case.
Posted by: nichevo at January 7, 2007 04:44 PM"I'd also add that Lebanon is unique in that there might be more lebanese outside the country than inside. Letting them vote would cause the absurd position of having the government decided by people not even in the country."
There's something like 6 million Lebanese in Brazil, so I hear, a few thousand in West Africa, couple of hundred thousand (maybe a million) in the US, not all citizens, but many are. Just a factor to consider.
Posted by: Nouri Lumendifi at January 7, 2007 04:46 PM3) While bullfighting is merely an entertainment spectacle, and can therefore be disgusting without any greater meaning, a religious rite is holy and therefore is held to a higher standard, unless Ashura is also meant as entertainment, which I did not think was the case.
It is not meant to be entertaining. It is supposed to be about suffering and mourning the death of Hussein bin Ali/Battle of Karbala. Not all Shias commemorate Ashura using chains (zanjir) either, I've personally not seen it done any way other than with tastles or just by beating the chest. Nevertheless it is not a happy holiday, like Christmas or something. It is a showing of devotion and commemorance. It may look funny, but that does not make it heathen like running a bull around for the heck of it, or hunting for sport. And it is not always done by tearing up the flesh.
Posted by: Nouri Lumendifi at January 7, 2007 05:08 PMAs for LGF, I'd just like to say that it's possible for a flawed person to perform a valuable service.
For instance, when Chomsky was railing against the Nixon administration for lies about the Vietnam war, he was doing a valuable service even if his own unstated motivation was support for communism, even totaltiarian communism.
That said, when LGF started covering the middle east the stories were hard to find. Now there are so many stories that LGF can pick and choose, and LGF does seem to generally avoid positive stories.
I would say that LGF has lost most of its value by now.
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 7, 2007 05:10 PMNot that they're filtering out a lot of hopeful stuff, just a tiny trickle. There's almost nothing hopeful about the middle east.
Pessimists like Johnsom may be right, after all.
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 7, 2007 05:26 PM"Now after the Syrians were pushed out last year, Michel Aoun came back, and he found that he was sort of pushed aside by the Christian and Sunni elite of the country, and he wanted to be president. And his only way that he could see of actually getting the presidency was to align himself electorally with whoever else was being excluded by the Christian and Sunni elite. And the only game in town was Hezbollah. So his alliance with Hezbollah is mostly tactical, and has really very little to do with ideology." MJT
This is 100% incorrect, please revise the facts. EVeryone was allied together AGAINST Aoun because 1 the rest of the sunnis and christians were allied against him, and the march 14 was allied with hizbollah, and hizbollah was against Aoun because they thought he was still a nut-case.
After hizbollah was used in the elections by the march 14 (exept micheal Aoun because hizbollah and him were not allied) to gain a majority, michel aoun gained 70% of the christian vote dispite being side-stepped, hzibollah saw he was a major player in the political arena, just like they were, and that he was side-stepped unfairly, just like hizbollah was straight after the elections , so they allied themselves to each other, because that way both are more powerful, rather than trying to be rambo's and aattempting to go it by it all the way alone. Secondly, this was a big oppertunity for hizbollah to show they did not only concern themselves just with the shia's but to prove they cared for the rest of the lebanese, no matter who they were or wot religion or political colour. This is why they are allied with amal, every ex-PM in lebanon (all sunnis) arslan (leader of druze party) communist party, suleiman franjiyye etc etc etc
Posted by: hezbollah lover at January 7, 2007 05:38 PM"So what they really want is they want Shia power in Lebanon as much as possible. And the reason, the only way they can get it is to be the only political party in the country that has an army. And the only way that they can justify having an army is if they are in a constant state of war with the Israelis." MJT
If this is true, i wonder why they were created after the israelis invaded lebanon, and not before. Why not in 1975, or all the years after this throughout and when the civil war broke out? Why not when the president, always a maronite christian, held total power over everything. A PM used to be just a clown to entertain everyone, while the decision maker was the christian president. Why did they only come into existance, formally, 3 years after lebanon was invaded.
Posted by: hezbollah lover at January 7, 2007 05:45 PMHL, your last post was a simple non-sequiter. There's no reason for the creation of a party to reflect on its current goals.
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 7, 2007 05:47 PM"Not that they're filtering out a lot of hopeful stuff, just a tiny trickle. There's almost nothing hopeful about the middle east."
Charles Johnson provides a valuable service simply by posting the stories that expose the MSM and the bad actors (Hamas, Hezbollah, etc.). If you want false positives, read something else. There's a good reason LGF enjoys its popularity. Even Charles posts stories that indicate a positive change once in a while and he has a stock image of a flying pig to accompany them.
Posted by: Li'l Mamzer at January 7, 2007 05:57 PMI've sent him dozens of "pig flying" moments, and posted a few in his threads, and I don't think he's ever published one of them.
For instance:
Pictures of candle light vigil by British Embassy in Bahrain
That was a while ago. Since then I my attempts were all posted in the threads so I don't have an email copy...
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 7, 2007 06:04 PMJosh: "LGF does seem to generally avoid positive stories."
While it's true that LGF specialises in exposing the negative side of Arab and Islamic cultures, Charles's motives are neither racist nor xenophobic.
Rather, his aim is to expose the hatred, racism, xenophobia, and systematic dissembling that characterises all the terrorism-supporting regimes and movements, as well as much of the Arab political and religious leadership. If you don't like what you read there, don't blame the messenger.
Moreover, Charles does look out for, and publish, genuinely positive stories from the Arab/Muslim world. Once again, if you find an insufficiency of good news at LGF, don't blame the messenger.
Where is the good news that you believe Charles is filtering out?
Posted by: Kolya at January 7, 2007 06:08 PMM.Corilianus - "Hezbollah lover -- love you too! Kissie Kissie Kissie! I'm still waiting for you to justify Al Manar's broadcasts of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Viva La Resistance!"
AwWwWwWw isn't that just so sweet :D
Well, lebanon is a democracy...so freedom of speech :P BTW take note that israel did ask some kind of centre that controls broadcasting to protest against the show, not because it was damaging the look of zionism, but because, as they said, "biased and one-sided". So, in fact, they didn't deny anything as being factually incorrect on that TV series, just that it didn't show the other side of the story, so in a way the israelis are themselves calling it true!!
But what do i know, im just another hizbollah lover :D KISSIE KISSIE bk to you lol
P.S. Just like when a billion persons are offended by some cartoons depiciting our holy prophet - for the fun of it, but turned serious when they were being reprinted against and again in many western newspapers just to defy the muslims and cause more outrage, but when you question them they quickly say AH AH AH freedom of speech, and politicians and PM's and presidents got involved saying that they simply can not put restrictions because it degrades the democracy (how ironic since they support so many dictator ships, anyway, thats another story for another day), but then, when a person not so long ago was put in front of court for expressing some doubts concerning the Holocaust in one of his books - a 'crime' for which he publicly apologised and regretted - gets sentenced to 3 years in prison, while those norwegians do not get any sentence, do not express any apology or regret for mimicking our holy and sacred prophet, and causing outrage to hundreds of millions of muslims! Or when Salman Rushdi, again dissed the muslim faith more extremely and disgustingly than i have ever heard of it being dissed, gets political protection and asylum in london? Or even the pope! who called islam wicked and evil, he also gets away with it under freedom of speech.
I mean come-on, im with freedon of speech, but at LEAST don't use it as a political weapon or a weapon in which to wage double-standard bigotedness against the people. If its freedom of speech, then everyone should be able to say w.e. they want, no matter what it is or who they are, otherwise if somethings are allowed to be said, and others are not, why can't something which upsets a billion people be put under the don't i.e. the carttons( even though this might also be called freedom of expression - same thing) but don't allow something that upsets how many? 12million? OK, ill be kind, a BILLION. They both upset the same ammount of people, why is one allowed and the other is not?
Posted by: hezbollah lover at January 7, 2007 06:14 PMThe reason why LGF is spot-on and indispensable is that it serves up information we really have to get. That is why I go there. It's up to me to go elsewhere for other sources of information, and I do. Nobody is saying LGF supplants anything else.
Posted by: Li'l Mamzer at January 7, 2007 06:15 PMLet's say there was a service run by a bunch of non-English speaking Muslim Arabs who personally held Americans in the same regard as Charles Johnson holds Arabs (whatever that regard may be), who similarly posted articles culled from the World press covering Americans at their ugliest, exposing the worst of what happens or at least gets reported in our society...Would such a site be representative of America in the way LGF presents Arabs? Would that be a site you would recommend to a foreigner who is trying to understand American society, especially if we assume the kind of commentary to be expected from its visitors would be in a similar vein to that on LGF?
Are you kidding? Why would Muslim Arabs have to run such a service when the New York Times, CNN, the Guardian, Reuters, the BBC and nearly every media outlet in the world already offers articles portraying Americans at their ugliest?
That's your job too. So, what motivates your efforts? What makes you get up every morning and say "how can I slander and defame America today?"
By the way, have you ever read the comments section of the 'Guardian?' Or the Daily Kos? That makes anything on LGF look tame by comparison.
Posted by: mary at January 7, 2007 06:25 PMSo, in fact, they didn't deny anything as being factually incorrect on that TV series
Everything you write is full of illogical crap like this and insults our intelligence.
Really it's impossible to argue against a self-satisfied moron who presents non-sequiters as proof over and over. Israel did not admit any "truth" to the well known forgery, "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" you fascist, bigoted, syphilitic cretin! The wording you quoted was obviously an attempt to politely ask for just a little time to make a rebuttal, as of course they deserved. And of course you know perfectly well that that is all that they were saying.
Anyway, we can see from hezbollah lover's method, how anti-semetic propaganda is invented in the middle east.
Israel politely asked for some time to rebut an antisemetic show, a show of the worst possible sort. And the reaction was that hezbollah lover twisted the words and now he can go around spreading the lie that Israel has admitted the truth of "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion"
If this doesn't get you banned from these pages then Michael has no ethics.
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 7, 2007 06:26 PMYou're looking pretty young and sprite there Mr. Totten, signing up for military service in Eyerak soon?
Posted by: marzalis at January 7, 2007 06:40 PMThank you, Nouri. I had also believed that it was a sort of mourning. I did seem to recall that some used swords, striking themselves in the face - think I saw it in a video. Nonetheless, that is all perfectly coherent. Ancient Christians, I believe, once wore hair shirts as they believed constant temporal suffering to display some sort of merit. There were other such rituals as well.
The thing is, they did that in medieval times, but no longer. I don't know the relevant doctrinal changes, but that stuff is AFAIK a thing of the past. And though bullfighting persists, there were numerous other bloodsports in Europe that are no longer countenanced.
I suppose the surprise on our end is that the Shia practices have not changed with the times. If we saw a procession of monks hitting themselves in the head we would think they were a little crazy too.
What is your opinion of the modern practices of Islamic jurisprudence such as amputation of limbs, decapitation, stoning? Are those excepted from barbarism because of their religious imprimatur? You also, as I recall, continue to perform animal sacrifice, which even Judaism has renounced. Do you think that these practices should continue for eternity, or that one day they will be reformed?
Posted by: nichevo at January 7, 2007 06:47 PMmarzalis, do you have a point other than the one on top of your head?
Posted by: nichevo at January 7, 2007 06:48 PMWhats wrong with you Joshua? You can't keep up a mature convo with a 17 year old without going crazy and insulting people with your filthy tongue?
I simply watched this on the news, and it wqas everywhere believe me. And no, i live in london and i believe i have more sources that Al-Jazeera or Al-manar TV's (which btw, the latter was banned from hotbird so it cant be watched), trust me, i watch more than one TV channel lol i do have more than one chanel, honest. lol
Go do some research and you will see, all i did was pass on the reports, i didn't make this shit up. I said Israel protested against the show on a basis that it was biased and one sided, not factually untrue. If it was bullshit, israel would have said so, wouldn't they? Copy Paste me ONE remark in which any zionist said "this tv show is fuking incorrect and its bulllshit lalalalal"
GD luck lol
Posted by: hezbollah lover at January 7, 2007 06:58 PMAbraham is banned, his post-banned comments have been deleted, and his IP address is blocked.
When I ban someone for obnoxious behavior, I mean it.
If you want to argue with me, that's fine. That's great. Just be polite, that's all I ask.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at January 7, 2007 07:02 PMCopy Paste me ONE remark in which any zionist said "this tv show is fuking incorrect and its bulllshit lalalalal"
Here's one.
The series is saturated with horrifying stereotypes of Jews, anti-Semitic stereotypes, references to the infamous anti-Semitic forgery The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, and includes a heinous dramatization of the killing of a Christian child and the use of his blood to make matzah.
Or do you not know what the word forgery means?
Since you can't even recognize obvious and blatant racism, that wouldn't be much of a surprise either.
You're not acquitting yourself or your "cause" - such that it is - very well here.
Posted by: SoCalJustice at January 7, 2007 07:08 PMAre you kidding? Why would Muslim Arabs have to run such a service when the New York Times, CNN, the Guardian, Reuters, the BBC and nearly every media outlet in the world already offers articles portraying Americans at their ugliest?
That's your job too. So, what motivates your efforts? What makes you get up every morning and say "how can I slander and defame America today?"
By the way, have you ever read the comments section of the 'Guardian?' Or the Daily Kos? That makes anything on LGF look tame by comparison.
My efforts? What are you talking about? I don't slander America. If you're refering to my blog, I write mostly about power politics, and very rarely about the antics of stupid Americans (though you call politicians that).
With regards to Guardian and Daily Kos, I find them just as repugnant (especially because Kos tried to bully people in my state into voting for a coward for the Senate and regularly uses anti-American and anti-Arab rhetoric), but that isn't the topic of discussion now is it? Not to mention that their coverage is not so expressly targeted at Arabs and Muslims. Don't try to dodge the question. If you think the NYT portrays Americans at their "worst," you're sorely mistaken, you should take a look at some of the nonsense that finds its way into some Arabic papers and television. NYT reads like propaganda when compared with what's out there. And I'm sure they believe they're doing a "valuable service" by telling the world about demon Americans, just like Charles thinks he's doing a great service by fomenting the same kind of hatred.
What's my agenda? I'm an American Arab. I don't take kindly to being defamed or having people incite hatred against me. I like hamburgers, shawarma, heavy metal, rugby, and Henry Kissinger. I go to church on holidays with my mom and I participate in Muslim holidays with my dad. And I don't like having rocks thrown at me, being spit on or having crowds of non-Arabs (or Arabs) try to stomp my face in because I'm a "terrorist" (all of which has happened before). Valuable service. Right. Tell a black person the Klan's newsfeed provides a "valuable service".
"What is your opinion of the modern practices of Islamic jurisprudence such as amputation of limbs, decapitation, stoning? Are those excepted from barbarism because of their religious imprimatur? You also, as I recall, continue to perform animal sacrifice, which even Judaism has renounced. Do you think that these practices should continue for eternity, or that one day they will be reformed?"
I think that none of those practices are modern. Amputation, decapitation, etc. are all reactionary. They are practiced by a minority of backward Muslims anyhow. Barbaric, yes. Irrational? You betcha. Animal sacrifice, I'm alright with. Lamb is yummy. It isn't like the animals are just left to die at some alter. You eat them. Kill em, say a prayer, much 'em. Delicious.
Posted by: Nouri Lumendifi at January 7, 2007 07:09 PMHezbollah Lover, you are over the line. No one will use my blog to defend or promote The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Ever. Period. This is not a "freedom of speech" issue. You will take it somewhere else.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at January 7, 2007 07:19 PMMary, lighten up on Nouri. He is not the kind of person you (apparently) think he is. I know him, sort of (online), and he is a good guy.
Nouri, I don't quite agree with you about LGF, in part because I know Charles personally and can factor some things into his blog that you cannot. I absolutely agree about the comments on that site, however. They are disgusting.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at January 7, 2007 07:23 PMI would like to politely ask everyone else not to force me to deal with comment moderation any more for a while. My wife just made dinner. I have a life. Thank you.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at January 7, 2007 07:26 PMYe, and you dont know what the word REFERENCE means?
And you don't know what CONSPIRACY means?
The forgey was refering to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, not the show the diaspora. This person, who wrote that report, was trying to suggest that the show may be reffering to the protocol....
Then he calls it a conspiracy, which means it could be true or maybe not, but does not call the actual show in correct, just anti-semitic, idiot.
Posted by: hezbollah lover at January 7, 2007 07:27 PMWell...granting that Meat Is Good ;>...
if amputations, clitoridectomy, etc., are barbaric vestiges, why is not the self-mutilation of Ashura? Why has this not devolved into beating oneself with a palm frond or some other symbolic sort of implement?
What I meant by modern is that they are still practiced. I agree with you, they seem to be done the same was as ever it was in Mohammed's (uh, pbuh?) time. In particular, I seem to recall that Saddam Hussein had some people's hands taken off in a particularly unpleasant way. If you were going to have to have amputations, at least they could be done with modern medical practices.
IF you were going to continue to chop off hands and feet, that is!
Posted by: nichevo at January 7, 2007 07:28 PMALSO worth noting, the writter says alot about stereotyping. A stereotype is to categorize everyone from a certain people the same depending on how the majority is or behaves. So this person says stereotypes (horrific and anti-semite ones - without noting that a semite includes an arab, oh well) of jews are being aired on the show, so he's admitting that the majority, or at least alot, of the jews are like how they were presented in the show! Nice.
I make a god damn good lawyer, don't you think loool, PS plz plz plz keep your lid on, don't explode, like an osama terrorist hahahaha get it? looool am just messing :D
Posted by: hezbollah lover at January 7, 2007 07:31 PMYou asked for one link and you got it.
Now you're just digging a deeper hole and demonstrating further - if that's even possible - what an ignoramus you are.
Or now are you prepared to tell us that Jews use the blood of Christian children to make matzah?
You're a jackass, kid. But it's fun to watch you spin.
I really did love your Arab League v. E.U. apologia yesterday, btw - it was stunning in its complete lack of awareness.
Keep it up. It's quite entertaining.
Posted by: SoCalJustice at January 7, 2007 07:36 PMAlright sorry Totten, i didn't start it, he did. And i hardly know anything about it, all i did was re-write reports i read around 3 years ago...well suttin like that.
Im not being anti-semitic or anything, im just explaining to this boy thast al-manar put up the diaspora the same reasons why those cartoonists were allowed to publish those cartoons - freedom of expression and speech- im not defending or protecting anyone, just listing the facts :)
Soz if i offended anyone, but im not defending the protocols thing, im just challenging tthe person who said al-manar is producing and airing bullshit to prove to me that the diaspora is entirely bullshit, not the protocol thing, i don't know anything about that.
Posted by: hezbollah lover at January 7, 2007 07:38 PMPlease shut up SoCalJustice, you sound more stupid than you think you do, so much that now im getting embaressed for you,,,and its not a very nice experience :) :P
Posted by: hezbollah lover at January 7, 2007 07:39 PMI make a god damn good lawyer, don't you think
No.
Seriously.
You wouldn't.
Posted by: SoCalJustice at January 7, 2007 07:41 PMPlease shut up SoCalJustice,
Says the "great lawyer"!
Nice comeback.
What a joke.
Johnny Cochran, eat your heart out!
Too funny. What a tool.
Posted by: SoCalJustice at January 7, 2007 07:43 PMTrust me lol i do. Im already studying international law and economics lol
I got 13 A* GCSE's like 3 years ago and i got 5 A* Alevels. I know what im talking about hun ;)
Posted by: hezbollah lover at January 7, 2007 07:45 PMStudy harder - because it's not showing.
Honestly.
Your theory on the political organization of Arab League vs. E.U. yesterday demonstrated as much.
You need a lot of work.
Posted by: SoCalJustice at January 7, 2007 07:47 PMMore advice for you.
Your "i didn't start it, he did" will go over in court just as well as your "Please shut up."
Like I said - you need a lot of help.
Posted by: SoCalJustice at January 7, 2007 07:49 PMWhat the hell is wrong with you man, all i said is that there are reasons why its called ARAB league and MUSLIM league. Its pretty clear what is meant by both. Only ARAB countries are allowed in the former, and because arab countries are not in a region it would be dumb to call it the western, northern, eastern african + middle eastern and gulfern league! you tell me, whats a better name for it?
Posted by: hezbollah lover at January 7, 2007 07:50 PM"if amputations, clitoridectomy, etc., are barbaric vestiges, why is not the self-mutilation of Ashura? Why has this not devolved into beating oneself with a palm frond or some other symbolic sort of implement?"
It has. The bloody self-flagelation is not universal. Most of the time its just beating on the chest and marching rhythmically, at least as I've seen it. Tastles (im not sure what to call them) are used in many places instead of metal, so I would say it has evolved. The bloody amputation type punishments are really only practiced in the very backward areas of the penninsula and Africa. You don't find that BS in Algeria, Tunisia, most of Egypt, Lebanon, Palestine, etc where most folks live. I would reckon it to be far less practiced in Malaysia, Indonesia, and such places. I think they are given more coverage than they ought to be. People get the impression that every body does that, when that's way far from the truth. I think the first time I remember seeing a Muslim person on American television was when 20/20 had this segment on some Somali supermodel (who was very hot) who was forced ot have a clitorodectemy and was campaigning against it. I had no idea what it was or where Somalia was. I remember thinking that my sister had had that done. Of course she had not, but one would think that Muslims were some kind fo cave people cutting people up all the time from the way people cover "religious" practices. That doesn't mean that stuff should be talked about, otherwise it would never be irradicated, but I think there's too much hoopla made over it. There's always talk about 'Arab body/genital mutilation" as if it is some kind of universal Arab practice.
Posted by: Nouri Lumendifi at January 7, 2007 07:51 PMApologies for the thread drift, but just wanted to call your attention to some pop culture blowback for the jihadis. This brother led metal band is causing a big stir in the blogosphere. I actually think CAIR has a point about the lyrics, but the sentiment towards the jihadist is one likely to explode after the next terrorist attack on American soil. Ironically Michael Moore might have been right when he commented that 9/11 would have never happen if there were more black folks on the plane. Watch the video and you'll see what I mean.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d9oX5Q2ftmA
I now return you to your regularly scheduled academic food fight.
Posted by: Imaim at January 7, 2007 07:54 PMOh pleae, don't be so jealous that im smarter than you are. This is blog, not a courtroom just to remind you, bcuz you seem really baffled!
Im not in uni at the age of 17 for no reason you know, there's a reason why i go to one of the top uni's at the age of 17! And trust me, it's not for being dumb. If i can at least sustain an arguement with anyone, including alot of knowledge only aquired through research and studying, with people here older than i am by many multiple times, and people whose proffesions have lasted longer than my lifes, i do deserve some credit! Don't be so harsh because my blog nickname starts with someone you don't like and ends in the dreaded LOVER!
Never hate, only appreciate! cuz people hating never rating are the same people who have no futures, like you, hating on me
Posted by: hezbollah lover at January 7, 2007 07:55 PMWow, you're developmentally mentally challenged a bit.
A) It's not called the Muslim League - there is a separate organization called the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC).
B) And the reason it's called the Arab League is a concious choice based on ethnicity - as opposed to other similar international regional organizations that opted to organize around geography.
C) You laying out the "reason" why they call it the Arab League doesn't make it a non-racist decision. It's just demonstrates fact that you can't recognize racism and have no idea what you're talking about.
whats a better name for it?
Geez. This is really hard for you, isn't it?
Here's the answer: it shouldn't exist as is - based on race/ethnicity, at all. It should disband and reorganize based on geography and account for every ethnic group in the region (so as to not be racist) - just as the E.U., A.U. and O.A.S have - and other comparable regional international organizations have done.
It's really not that difficult a concept. Is that really all a handful of A levels is worth these days? Pity for the U.K.
That's all.
Posted by: SoCalJustice at January 7, 2007 07:57 PMIm not in uni at the age of 17 for no reason you know,
Affirmative action?
And trust me, it's not for being dumb.
Unfortunately, you don't seem all that trustworthy, mate.
If i can at least sustain an arguement
The real funny thing is that you honestly think that's what you're doing here.
It's almost adorable.
Never hate, only appreciate!
Says "Hezbollah Lover" - awesomely immune to irony.
Again. Just adorable.
Posted by: SoCalJustice at January 7, 2007 08:01 PMMary, lighten up on Nouri. He is not the kind of person you (apparently) think he is. I know him, sort of (online), and he is a good guy.
..umm..sure, but I wasn't addressing the bit about LGF to Nouri. I was addressing it to abraham (and abraham's chomskyesque site) which is somewhat anti-American.
That's why I cut and pasted a bit from abraham's comment, starting with "Let's say there was a service run by a bunch of non-English speaking Muslim Arabs .. which apparently has since been deleted.
My response had nothing to do with anything Nouri said. Sorry if it appeared that way. It was supposed to have been addressed to abraham.
I'm going to have to start attaching names to comments...
Posted by: mary at January 7, 2007 08:14 PMGreat post, crappy comments (except for rosignol and a few others). One of the best sites on the web.
I wonder who Abraham is. An academic is my guess! (wants all those footnotes)
Posted by: Abu Nudnik at January 7, 2007 08:14 PMNever hate, only appreciate!
That's great HL. Why don't you get Hezbollah to use it replace their current slogans of "Death to America" and "Death to Israel".
Good luck.
Posted by: Mertel at January 7, 2007 08:20 PMIm not in uni at the age of 17 for no reason you know,
I can't imagine what that reason is. I can deduce that it's not for any ability to communicate in English, nor to reason, nor argue rationally, it's not for knowledge, nor judgement, nor maturity, nor perspective, nor personality... I'm guessing you passed a few tests ahead of your classmates. So what?
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 7, 2007 08:25 PMBaby baby baby, why you getting so worked up for? I love hizbollah to death, yous eriously don't understand. I nearly cried whenever i used to hear sayyid hassan's speeches because he is the greatest man to ever have walk earth, i don't know who YOU follow, all i know is that sayyid hassan has sacrificed his normal life, and sentenced himself to live an ubnormal life until his dimise, voluntarily, for my own well-being.
He is the only man with ethics and morality in this world. Where is your proof whoever claimed that hizbollah deals with blood diamonds? The irony is that not very long ago their was a scam revealed where it was actually authorities of the west worked out a way to make diamonds from war-zones become legit. An even more ironical thing is, a movie just came out telling a story about seara leone and how US + British governments and top businessmen are in on the blood diamond trade, not hizbollah
All everyone here is doing is giving me accusations. I swear to you, on anything w.e you want me to swear on i solemnly tell you this honestly that i seriously don't give a shit about any accusations you fire towards me or hizbollah. Get me the proof and your talk would be more welcome. Baseless accusations are not welcome. Everyone knows what America is and how it was created and its wicked history and even wickeder conspiracies (some-one can be charged on conspiracy, but not on accusation), and everyone knows israels history and creation too. And yes, they also know all about how Iran was, and how it became and islamic country, as well as how hizbollah was created. Believe me, if someone were to sit down and seriously just look at the differences, they would call themselves fundamentally hizbollah lovers lol
I mean you think about it, for a country to create a weapon that now is so widely possesed that if a small quantity of those missiles are used the earth would be destroyed 7 times over, a country which was illegally robbed from aboriginals, a country which was stolen from its natives all the while massacring them, then going to africa to capture blacks to run a slave trade, all the while telling the africans they were there to civilize them like the rest of the world when that same country actually exploited the land, another country colonised nearly the whole world, well at least took over nearly every single world, then you come with this bull about muslims trying to control the world? Why is that allowed mr totten but not the controversial protocol of the elders of zion, they are both anti-semitic because muslims are originally arabs who are also semites. Muslims know and so does everyone that if they are to stay under the state that they are in, in which they can hardly have any control over their own land, the future will not bring more domination of lands but rather the loss of more to israel, or maybe america and britain and god knows who else.
Please, be realistic when you talk man, it gets me pissed off when people chat about something that probably will never happen for another 10,000 years. The muslims are poor, divided, occupied and opressed, how the hell are they going to run the world? If coca-cola runs half the world with its super giant economic market, in which hardly any other muslim company could challenge, not even the oil industry (coke is more expensive tha oil, believe it or not - check it out for yourselves, you seem to complain alot about the cost of your arab oil litre but not the american made coke litre?) and im keeping inside the other massive companies such as nestle and pepsi and timmy johnsons and and and the list is endless.
Hizbollah are the true saviours of islam and its teachings, people seem to forget it is forbidden to slap a prisoner let alone beheading them. Our ethics in hizbollah are different to those in any other party and religioun. If ever we can have a discussion face to face, which i know wont happen because you wouldnt wonna c MY face, i can understand why though its ok, but if we did i would tell you one or two things about my ethics and ideology and maybe you would walk away not such an extremist.
Here i am, im pro-hizbollah and no-one here can say im an extremist. But i know alot of people would say you are.
Posted by: hezbollah lover at January 7, 2007 08:30 PMOh no, now I see what you were talking about - Nouri's repsonse, posted, 07:09 PM.
I really am sorry about the misunderstanding, and Nouri's site is great. I've visited it before, maybe referred by Charles?
In any case, this comment thread is getting too confusing for me to handle, so I'm going back to baking cookies.
Posted by: mary at January 7, 2007 08:30 PMImaim:
Thanks for the link. We finally have it all in one all encompassing package with The Stuck Mojo music video, choice MEMRI cuts and the other stuff.
CAIR has no point. It is an organization that is dedicated to the destruction of our civilization.
The last image of "Fuck You CAIR" says it all
Your interruption of that moron hizbo/islamist apologist was timely and such a relief from such dreadful puerile dross.
Posted by: ankhfkhonsu at January 7, 2007 08:34 PM"at least took over nearly every single world"
sorry a typing mistake, i was thinking of too many things at one time, i meant took over most of the world...
Posted by: hezbollah lover at January 7, 2007 08:35 PMSo you're gay for Nasrallah and you live in London.
Sigh. You should make friends with likeminded people, may I suggest calling up George Galloway? He also has a hard on for fascist monsters.
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 7, 2007 08:35 PMlove hizbollah to death, yous eriously don't understand. I nearly cried whenever i used to hear sayyid hassan's speeches because he is the greatest man to ever have walk earth, i don't know who YOU follow, all i know is that sayyid hassan has sacrificed his normal life, and sentenced himself to live an ubnormal life until his dimise, voluntarily, for my own well-being.He is the only man with ethics and morality in this world.
I mean what can you say after that? It's so sad.
This kid is attracted to monsters and he needs to realize it before he blows up a bus.
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 7, 2007 08:41 PMi don't know who YOU follow
Kid, we don't need to follow anyone.
Neither do you.
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 7, 2007 09:12 PMJosh Scholar, quit being a dick to Nouri. He has a great blog and almost always offers a reasonable and interesting comment on issues about the M.E.
Posted by: mikek at January 7, 2007 09:27 PMRichard Dawkins was wrong when he said, a few days ago, that we should have saved Saddam so that we could study what makes an evil man or a despotic leader.
What we should be studing is what attracts followers to totalitarian leaders. Look at little HL up there, nearly crying because he's so moved by Hassan Nasrallah's foolish speeches. Poor child must believe every lying word. Poor sacrificing Nasrallah[?!!], the only man with ethics and morality in this world ?!! Jesus fucking Christ!
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 7, 2007 09:29 PMUhm, Mikek? I was talking to "hezbollah lover" not Nouri.
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 7, 2007 09:31 PMIncidentally, for those interested, Hezbollah banned the bloodletting of Ashura in the parts of Lebanon they control. They did this because they say it is "barbaric." Their words, not mine, for what it's worth.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at January 7, 2007 09:36 PMBoys, don't make me pull over this car.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at January 7, 2007 09:37 PMYes, I guess a group that is so heavily involved in the drug trade as Hezbollah is(and all Lebanese know about it), should be considered righteous. As I said, people will only see what they want to see.
Michael, maybe you should write about their involvement in the drug trade in one of your future posts. Some people seem to have a selective memory when it comes to that and maybe they need a reminder.
Posted by: Katy at January 7, 2007 09:45 PMI mean you think about it, for a country to create a weapon that now is so widely possesed that if a small quantity of those missiles are used the earth would be destroyed 7 times over, a country which was illegally robbed from aboriginals, a country which was stolen from its natives all the while massacring them, then going to africa to capture blacks to run a slave trade, all the while telling the africans they were there to civilize them like the rest of the world when that same country actually exploited the land, another country colonised nearly the whole world, well at least took over nearly every single world, then you come with this bull about muslims trying to control the world?
Study the history of almost any spot on the globe and it's no different. Did Arabs used live in most of the countries that are majority Arab now? They did not! Lots of stealing, massacring and slaving in that history. Not all of it over today (see the Sudan).
However if you look at America or Canada NOW you find that they've uniquely created a new kind of culture where different ethnic groups can live together without sectarianism. They may be the most recently colonized countries, but they're also the countries that have invented the solution to ethnic conflicts that have plagued humanity since our inception.
You can say NO SUCH thing about those backward middle eastern sectarian leaders you worship! They have NOT learned to live without hatred. They hardly learned to consider outsiders human at all. Remember the "Why aren't the Lebanese Lebanese" advert?
You're collecting these bits of history, out of context, just so that you can reinforce your prejudice that everyone is sectarian and filled with hatred except Hezbollah. You have that equasion backwards. You can collect irrelevencies forever, but it doesn't change the shape of the world, it only blinds your own eyes.
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 7, 2007 09:48 PMYou're too young to have context.
The reason you see so much talk about the crimes of the past in western society is that there has been a drive, for the last few generations to purge our societies of all kinds of bigotry, and facing the bigotries of the past, the colonialism, the slavery etc. is part of our mostely successful drive to purge our society of bigotry. The west has changed completely.
You don't hear such things about middle eastern societies, not because they're so much better than the west, but because they're so incredibly worse. They've mostly never taken responsibility for crimes of their past nor of the present, and they're full of bigotry that's not being fought against at all.
You hear all about the massacres of Indians, precisely because we'd never do that now, you hear all about slavery because we would never do that now, you hear all about colonialism because we're not making colonies anymore, you hear all about racism because racism isn't acceptable in our socity anymore, you hear all about sexism because we're creating a non-sexist society, and on and on.
That we admit our past wrongs isn't a sign that we're the evil scum of the earth as the propagandists for backward, unreformed regimes claim, quite the opposite. It's those who claim that they've always been pure who are lying to you and who are still mired in hatred and in every other evil that we're busy reforming out of our culture in the west.
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 7, 2007 11:00 PMNouri Lumendifi Jan. 07, 07.09:
~~~I'm an American Arab. ... I like .... Henry Kissinger.~~~
Really?? :D
Posted by: tsedek at January 8, 2007 02:25 AMtsedek,
I find Henry Kissinger intellectually stimulating. Plus he's one of the most successful immigrants in recent history. Gotta give him props.
SoCalJustice:
"B) And the reason it's called the Arab League is a concious choice based on ethnicity - as opposed to other similar international regional organizations that opted to organize around geography."
Do you remember what the Arab League was created for? IT was to unite the Arab states into one. It is a nationalist organization. It is different from the other international organizations (it isn't a regional body either, it members come from all over Africa and Asia). You haven't really proved that its racist, only that it is different from other groups, partially because you don't seem to understand why it exists in the the first place. It was formed by the British to make the formerly British and French manadates, plus Egypt, cooperate with European/American foreign policy. The old monarchies all were memberes of the same family (at least off the penninsula. Egypt's ruling family was also different), and had expressed the desire to eventually form one state. IT was supposed to forward "Arab national aims" and things like that. The Arab League's existence is no more racist than Israel or Turkey's.
Posted by: Nouri Lumendifi at January 8, 2007 03:31 AMThen, how do you explain the massacring of hundreds of thousands, and the millions forever disformed because of the two nucleur and atomic bombs dropped on horishima and nagasaki? Surely that didn't happen such a long time ago?
What about the displacement of a whole naio i.e. palistine, to create another war-mongering and terrorist entity i.e. israel. Did you know that the palistinians are the only people whithout a state to claim? Why doesn't america fund and help them enforce their own state? WHy was a whole people displaced under the name of creating a state for the jews, who were living in a diaspora. Everyone knows that yes the jews came out of a tragedy, the Holocaust, but they are now using that event in history against the whole world, while being hypocritical because they were the reason why another people are now stateless and have been the cause of tragedied against those people.
This world i s full of hypocracies and double-standards. In hizbollah, we are welcome to any kind of friendship with anyone. This is proven by when hizbollah accepts to sit down and talk all who reach out to them. Like you said, if some-one wants to make peace and friendships, they do it under conditions of not occupying the same nation they want to "be partners in peace" with, they do not kill those people, drive them out of their homes etc.
I for one, i won't say everyone knows because i have been criticised for saying it and have also realised its the same method used by extremist media outlets, such as all murdoch owned tv/newspaper and radio outlets to indoctrinate people, so i for one knows that Israel's existance was the source of every single war in the middle east, exept perhaps the iraqi wars against which were sponsored by america and the west in general.
Until we learn not to exchange accusations but instead halt all activities of crime including massacring and occupying, sit on a table and agree on a peaceful and honorable solution to all sides. I do believe the palistinians and lebanese want to reach a solution to the crises and one of the conditions to reaching those targets is to allow all palistinians a share of their land, originally theirs, and allow all palistinians a right to return.
Allways find the actions that cause the reactions, not the other way round. Hizbollah is a reaction of the hostilities which israel possed to lebanon and its security, including its invasion, destruction, corruption, occupying and even trying to forcefully make a puppet governement which is willing, and did, sign a truce and eventually peace treaty with israel even though they were the enemy of the country and while they were killing our people and occupying our land.
Hizbollah has always been faithful to its promises. You see hizbollah meeting and negotiating with saudi arabia, even though that country was the most country to oppose and backstab hizbollah whom they were forming an understanding with, and whom betrayed hizbollah because they represented a different sect of islam to thiers. We are all human beings before we are anything else. Let america truely exercise democracy by stoping it wars and starting re conciliation, halt sponsoring any militia or military force which practices in any civil strife or conflict, to halt support and sponsorship of dictators in the middle east instead of claiming to "urge" these dreadful regimes to practice democracy when they know they clearly won't listen.
At least hizbollah accepts womens rights, the simplest thing to do in a democracy or in a sense any modern society/civilisation. They allow women to drive, they have women broadcasters and tv shows specially for women of all rac es and religiouns and let these womens words be heard, while other arab regimes do not even allow women to drive or practice the minimum standards of rights. You are going to excuse me for this, but everyone knows hizbollah is much more democratic, modern, reasonable and "less criminal" than every single arab regime in the middle east. Why does america sponsor only the latter but not the former if they truly did seek democracy and freedom.
Hizbollah has proven to be the true creator of freedom and democracy while every arab regime neglected to do so, but ill say further, these regimes actually promote de-democratisation and de-freedoming, with american support and sponsorship. Why?
Before you criticise others, have a look at your own side and try holding them to account so no-one else sees you as a hypocrite. You have no idea what kind of activities i participate in or anything i have achieved from them, or i aim to achieve, but from your tone, i can tell what type of person you are and what policies you support.
Posted by: hezbollah at January 8, 2007 03:32 AMThat was my post btw ^^^
Posted by: hezbollah lover at January 8, 2007 03:39 AMLet's assume for the sake of the argument that half the population of Britain took to the streets, slept out in the cold, raised the national flag and flew banners demanding the resignation of Tony Blair. Would the western world flock to London to offer him support? Would the US, Israel and half the enlightened democracies denounce the crowds as ignorant mobs easily swayed by agitating demagogues? Would he and his government legitimate their rule on the basis of foreign support? Would Blair declare to the world at large that the support of his own people was secondary to the support of international allies?
Let's assume for the sake of another argument that Tony Blair came into office following elections in which he swept more than three quarters of votes in the biggest electoral turnout in the history of the UK. Would the European Union, the US and Israel rave and rant before sulking in a corner and declaring that they didn't really like Tony Blair's politics and had therefore decided to starve the British people for making such an unsavoury choice?
Do these two scenarios seem surreal?
They didn't seem so surreal when they were applied to both Lebanon and the West Bank. And I am willing to bet my lunch money for a whole year that should an independent international committee be formed to gauge the degree of support for both the Hamas government and the opposition movements in Lebanon, they would reveal that both the Lebanese and Palestinian nations were in favour of those whom the west considers "personas non grata".
Posted by: hezbollah lover at January 8, 2007 04:06 AMSee my comment to He Who Was abraham on the other thread. It is silly to harp on Hiroshima and Nagasaki without considering the alternatives (not to mention your deficient fact basis). Were the Allies to go home and let Japan continue to rape East Asia? If not, and you allow that they were to win the war, this was surely more humane, if you like, than either invasion or a starvation blockade. The Japs certainly had no kick coming - just ask any Chinese or Filipino.
Not to mention, if those cities had not come to stand for such ritualized horror, who's to say the sentiment against their use would have developed so early? If there were no prejudice against the use of nuclear weapons, the civilized world could have solved a lot of problems a lot quicker, including many originating in your neighborhoods. You may notice, for instance, that we haven't nuked Iran, tempting as it is for so many reasons.
Meanwhile, under the aegis of noting the speck in your neighbor's eye and ignoring the beam in your own, why never a word about all the killing your compatriots have done? In Iran and Iraq, in Sudan, in every Islamic country the blood runneth over. But since it's your guys, who cares? Not you. It must be in'shallah.
Your arguments are just rationalizations to excuse and justify your own bad behavior. You'd be the biggest murderers of all time, only you haven't the technology. Just imagine Saddam and Khomeini in 1980-88 with nukes. (Imagine the sides in Lebanon with a nuke apiece or some lovely gas!) Why have the GCC nations suddenly started showing interest in their own nuclear programs? Not because of Israel - they've had nukes for decades, it seems. No, the ones they're afraid of are in Iran, because you know they'll use them.
The biggest question civilization faces - I mean Western Civilization, of course, the only one currently worthy of the name - is whether you can be made to see reason or must simply be made to obey.
Iraq is the acid test. Hope you pass; it's harder than A-levels, and it's a group project.
Posted by: nichevo at January 8, 2007 04:09 AMYou know what, i give up on arguing with people like you, who block out everything they don't want to hear, at least THINK of what i said. Skim-read it, i'd still respect you for that. I just said... oh forget it.
Everyone knows what would happen if iran was to be targetted with nukes, and its not a pretty sight. Believe me, it would be a world war till the last flesh cell on the bone. Go do some research about where every drop of oil leaves the gulf/middle east, you will find its a tight passageway which is owned by iran. All iran has to do to cause a world wide depression and cause the world step back a million step backwards without the oil the world depends on for technology and fuel just by either mining that see area or blocking it with their submarrines and warships. That the end of your bloggin and your AC and thats your laptop battery dead, and thats you going back to horses after ditching the car because theres no fuel to running you and thats you starving to death because food can not be transported with trucks anymore, that fuel is gone to power them.
Thats what would happen if iran was so intent on doing such evil mischieves as you and all distorted people think iran is achieving to do.
It doesn't need two to know the consequences of doing such a stupid thing to iran who has gained awareness and respect and ultimately fear of attacking against through its power and its defiant stand.
Posted by: hezbollah lover at January 8, 2007 04:40 AMDid you know that the palistinians are the only people whithout a state to claim?
Really? The Kurds, Tibetans, American Indians, Australian Aboriginals, Hawaiians, Pashtuns and many, many others would be fascinated to learn that.
Of course, the Palestinians are one of the select few who insist on blowing up both themselves and others, so they get a little more attention.
Do you really believe all this nonsense you've been fed? Do you ever bother to question it? I could explain to you about the Palestinian state that was offered, and rejected, in 1948 or in 2000 but I figure you're old enough to google it yourself.
By the way, I find it intriguing that someone who can't write English properly is now fluently quoting latin. Maybe that's what happens when you don't get any sleep ;)
Posted by: Mertel at January 8, 2007 06:04 AMNouri -
Do you remember what the Arab League was created for? IT was to unite the Arab states into one. It is a nationalist organization.
Nouri - go up and see how this discussion started.
It is different from the other international organizations (it isn't a regional body either, it members come from all over Africa and Asia).
Of course it's different (that's the point!) and yes, it is regional).
You haven't really proved that its racist, only that it is different from other groups, partially because you don't seem to understand why it exists in the the first place.
That's wrong, Nouri, and an interpretation that assumes "nationalism" is a proper organizating principle for regional international organizations.
It purports to perform similar functions to other major regional international organizations - all organized by geography.
That IS the point.
IT was supposed to forward "Arab national aims" and things like that.
Umm, exactly. And one REPRESENTED by that organization cannot legimiately claim RACISM on the part of others due to an expression of nationalism.
Does that make sense? Because it's obvious.
The Arab League's existence is no more racist than Israel or Turkey's.
Again - go up the thread and see how this discussion started - you're missing the context. Start with my comment at 5:06.
You are saying Israel (and Turkey, for example) aren't racist. Fine. I am claiming hypocrisy on the part of people represented by the Arab League who feel differently than you.
That is all.
Cheers.
Posted by: SoCalJustice at January 8, 2007 06:52 AMNouri - I apologize if the tone was overly combative in my last post.
Haven't had morning coffee yet, and this thread - with sandra's blatatant and offensive racism and HL's - well - being himself - has not brought out the best in people - myself included.
But in theory - I agree with you. I don't have a huge problem with the idea of the Arab League - with one notable exception - people who support it (and countries themselves that organize as "Arab" - like the Syrian Arab Republic or the Arab Republic of Egypt, for example) calling others racist for similar similar expressions of nationalism.
So again, I apologize.
Posted by: SoCalJustice at January 8, 2007 07:08 AMLike SoCal, let me apologize if the tone is overly combative in this post. I am trying to get across some truths to you, HL, and you will not like them.
You may think you know how such a scenario would play out, and you're right, that if we went in trying to be as delicate as we have been, it would be trouble. One thing that is clear is that you regard compassion, restraint, a willingness to compromise as weakness and push back accordingly. The scenarios under this aegis, however, would be very different from what you have seen.
Since Jimmy Carter in the 1970s the US has been planning (not preparing to do so, just figuring out how) to seize and control Gulf oil, primarily to defend it from the Soviet Union. We know where the targets are, who are the key people, the key sites. If we decided to act as evil as you make us out to be, we could easily - EASILY - seize and pump and ship all the oil we wanted. And Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, whoever, would submit, collaborate, stay out of the way, or die. Islam means submission? You'll find out what submission really is.
The biggest problem we have in Iraq is that for some reason we are trying to make the people like us. And in doing so we are trying (you can say we are failing but believe it or not we are trying) to be nice. You have no idea what happens when we turn on No More Mr. Nice Guy.
You might get a missile off from the tip of the Straits of Hormuz, but it would only happen once, and then those caves would be rubble and ashes. Those minefields won't last long either, assuming you get a single minelayer out of port. You might sabotage a pumping station one night, but that would be the last time an Arab or a Persian got within a mile before being blown to hell. You might catch some poor soldier or contractor off duty and ambush him and cut off his head; but the Marines who came looking for him wouldn't be knocking on doors and asking questions, unless bombs knock and flamethrowers ask questions.
If we were prepared to keep the oil flowing in face of the Warsaw Pact, it would be better for you to not even dream of opposing us, if we were determined to do this. We wouldn't be delicate anymore. We wouldn't hold fire, or hesitate to return fire, for fear of harming civilians. The only thing you can do is hide behind civilians. You've proved it a thousand times.
With all the force in Iraq, do you really think that if all we cared about was pumping the maximum of oil and selling it, and took all our troops trying to protect Sunni and Shia from each other, took all our troops chasing al-Qaeda, took all our reconstruction teams trying to bring Iraqis electricity and clean water and hospitals and schools, and gave them no other job but to protect the oil and the supply routes and kill anything or anyone that vaguely resembled a threat, that we couldn't do it? Couldn't sell you out to Syria entirely for peace on that front? Couldn't let Iran play with nukes a little while longer if need be? Couldn't bomb Waziristan, not into the Stone Age, but into the Pleistocene?
If so, then I have to hand it to you - the bribes or blackmail or sexual favors or whatever you handed out at university must really have worked; because if you believed that, you wouldn't have any brains at all, let alone enough to earn those good grades you spoke of.
Before us you are as insects. No, really. I do not mean that you are subhuman; I mean that before us your power is nothing. The fact that you kill a few GIs every night in Iraq, or a hundred poor Iraqis at a gas station or recruiting station or mosque, is because we expose ourselves to you. We get bitten because instead of spraying with insecticide, we swat at the mosquitoes one by one, and we try not to hit the beautiful butterflies they lurk among. True, we can't always tell them apart in the dark, but we try, even at the risk of another bloodsucker finding us before we find them.
All that effort is for the sake of Iraqis, the beautiful, purple-fingered butterflies among them. Only for their sake, and that of the whole Middle East. If we didn't care about you, we would conduct our operations in such a way as to remain entirely untouchable.
Living in London as you do, I don't know what you see, but it appears that you see only weakness. You wouldn't understand true strength if it bit you on the ass. No, that's not fair - the only way you recognize true strength is when it bites you on the ass. Were we the bad guys you make us out to be, you would never dare to post the comments you do.
HL, just as with the Israelis in Lebanon, you ain't seen nothing yet.
By the way, I think I read every post of yours. Most of them are lies and distortions. The best of it is what the Greeks called "sophistry," which is the bending of words to fit your desires. You may get off some good lines, but despite what your culture has taught you to think, that doesn't make your delusions into reality.
Or if that's unfair, what point did you make that I ignored? That Hez. are really the good guys? Let's say that's true, which it's not. It's unimportant either way. Hez has nothing to do with the oil. Lebanon has no oil. What, Hez will attack Israel if the US invades or bombs Iran? Wow, that would be something new. Not!
Well, it would be something new for you if Israel stopped caring entirely about Lebanese civilians - and stopped getting hassled for it by a news media whose power is turned off by you. It would be something else entirely new if Europe stopped defending your killers because the oil that was at risk comes first to them; if Iran had no missiles left to send you and no money to buy them in the first place; if Syria ceased to exist as a functioning state; if all the Arab regimes who now pay you lip service were to remove their shade for fear of what we might do.
You strut and pose because you think you've got our number. You scream because you don't know what pain is. Well, there is still time to learn the hard way.
Sure, you have some insight into current conditions. But in the finest tradition of every tyranny since the Caesars, you make the mistake of assuming that present trends will continue. If we ever take the gloves off, you will understand, but then it will be too late. You wouldn't be safe in London or Paris either if it came to that. All those firebrand imams would shut up or disappear, and everybody who ever met them.
You think the French will lie down and die, or fight the US, because you threaten to stop the oil? France alone could keep the oil flowing. And all those beurs in all those banlieues will stop burning cars and start behaving themselves or they will find out why the banlieues were designed the way they were.
We are like the Death Star. You have no idea of our power. And the Luke Skywalker among you hasn't been born. One day you might hire him, but you will never conceive him.
BTW, if you're thinking that Pakistan or Iran will somehow save you with a few homemade or stolen nukes, think something else. We were prepared to do nuclear battle with a nation possessing thousands of them.
Your only hope is to catch up with the 21st Century and stop being a problem. There is NOTHING more important in the world for you to do than to get on our good side. Whatever you want in life, you will get it faster being our friends than our enemies.
Why? Because we don't WANT to do any of that. But if you make us believe we must - we will.
Go ask Japan. They started out raping little Asian girls and ended up arranging for their own daughters to become prostitutes to keep the American GIs satisfied. And they had a fine, honorable warrior spirit and a modern industrial base.
Go ask Germany. They started out burning and pillaging Europe and when the Allies got through with them they barely had stone left upon stone. (Speaking of rape, I think the estimate is about three million German children born in 1946 that had Russian fathers in 1945.) And they had a united militaristic culture and an organizational framework that was the envy of the world.
Industry? Honor? Organization? You import food to stay alive, never mind tools and electronics and medicines and weapons! You import maids from the Philippines and turn them into sex slaves! You make Westerners rich operating your oilfields and your armies and your businesses because you can't do it yourselves!
What will happen to the Middle East when the West discovers a new energy source? What would you be doing now if there were no Western colleges to educate you? Herding something? Growing something? Stealing something? Trading something that somebody else grew or herded or stole? The computer you're expressing yourself with - how would you pay for that? With dates? Camels? Sand? Used Korans?
All you have is oil, and a creed that makes you think death is good. We can take the oil if we want to. You can have all the death you want. What you can never have is victory. Unless you redefine what victory means to you.
I keep repeating myself, so sorry, but it's because you never seem to get the message. Make it simple - just imagine that you had all our power. Then imagine what you would do to us (shudder). That's what we can do to you, only worse, because we're better at it.
The only reason we don't, I say again, is because people like George W. Bush believe that you can be, for lack of a better word, saved. Saved from yourselves. From the cesspit your once glorious culture has become. What would ibn Khaldun think of you? Maimonides? Saladin? Richard the Lion-Hearted? He'd go through you like a scythe through ripe wheat. Assuming he thought it worth his time.
...
Mike, again, I'm sorry if this was over the top. I'm trying to make them understand what they're up against. They think they've got our number. They can't count that high.
Posted by: nichevo at January 8, 2007 11:33 AMBy the way, HL, you see how much easier it is to read when I use paragraphs?
Posted by: nichevo at January 8, 2007 11:36 AMnichevo, did someone pee in your wheaties? What set you off? Trying to beat Nasrallah at bloodthirsty rhetoric isn't the way to give some mixed up kid a sane perspective, because no one on any side is in a hurry to start a region-wide war least of all us. And AFAIK Hezbollah isn't threatening any oil fields.
They think they've got our number. They can't count that high.
That's true though. Middle eastern culture really didn't learn anything from WWII. I hope they don't demand a do-over, because this time it doesn't have to take more than a day to kill millions, and we can be home in time for lunch.
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 8, 2007 11:53 AMNichevo, I appreciate your long post, and imho it was not over the top at all. Because we are a caring nation, some folks take that as weakness. That is a dangerous mistake. Your post was a very necessary one, thank you.
Posted by: Renée C. at January 8, 2007 02:35 PMYeah, I guess a bit of undersleep and maybe overreaction. Just trying to get through to him, which is probably a waste with a 17-year-old as they already know everything. But everything he knows is WRONG! And it is poison to him and everyone like him. You just wish you could get a kid like that by the collar and shake him till the dung falls out of his ears.
He flings around Hiroshima and Nagasaki but he doesn't realize that can happen to HIM. He thinks that Iran will bankrupt themselves to save Hez by shutting down the Straits (uh, what will they do for money?), never mind that he thinks they can. He thinks that they can destroy a civilization, by interdicting oil, whose soft drinks are worth more than his oil. He hasn't thought of getting into the soft-drink business, though.
He thinks that 4 million Basij are going to cross the border into Iraq in Toyota pickups, be welcomed by the populace, and be allowed and helped to swarm hundreds of miles into the interior and overcome US forces, without being met by a welcome wagon loaded with cluster bombs.
Or else he thinks that in some sort of way, some sheik or mullah is going to wave a magic wand and make us disappear, because at all events he thinks that the Iranian armed forces can stand up in front of one US armored division for five minutes. Just in case that doesn't go so well, he also thinks that someone else will help them. He thinks that the rest of Sunni Arabia just grooves on the idea of Iran being a big bad superpower with nukes.
He thinks that he is in London by accident and that nobody is doing him a favor by letting him come and study. He thinks that the university he attends and the civilization around him there was created by his inferiors. He thinks that their government is a joke like his own and that parliamentary procedure and the rule of law mean exactly what he wants them to mean at any given moment.
He thinks that his culture has nothing to learn from them, but somehow was sneakily subjugated by them and now deserves payback from them, like everybody else who was ever in line in front of an Arab, bumped into an Arab, or ordered pepperoni on his pizza next to an Arab when he was hungry. He thinks that Arabs killing infidels, or even Arabs killing Arabs or non-Arabic Muslims and vice versa, doesn't count, but that every hair on every head in the ummah is sacred and mussing one is a crime against both Allah and humanity.
He thinks everything in Lebanon and the rest of his region is just fine if only the evildoers could be got rid of. (Which of course is not him or anyone he knows, since Nasrallah according to him is bigger than Mohammed.) Then all the Arabs and all the Muslims would really, really love one another and never fuss or be mean. Especially after Hez. saves Islam.
He thinks Islam is the future and deserves to rule the world, and inevitably will without any visible mechanism, but he thinks that Islam will stop at some reasonable point once they've got what's theirs, never mind which what is which theirs. He thinks that Hez. will free and unite Lebanon, destroy Israel, and disappear into a cloud of Nelson Mandelas and Bill Gateses. He thinks that Islam and Muslims have never done anything bad in all history but if they did, they must have had a damn good reason.
He thinks that Syria will leave Lebanon alone. He thinks that Israel should sit there and be rocketed and do nothing about it but whine, like he does when they hit back. Maybe, just maybe, if all the Jews could fit into a million-story building on two or three blocks of downtown Tel Aviv, he thinks they could be allowed to stay there, but he probably wouldn't commit himself one way or the other; after all, they could just move into a two- or three-million-story building one block square.
He thinks the United States is omnipotent, but should conciliate Hez. and any other Middle Eastern tribe who wants something for nothing, not the reverse. (Tribes who have something to offer and can in some way benefit the US, we should have no truck with.)
No, you're right, you explained it all. He's seventeen. But there are thirty-seven-year-olds, fifty--seven-year-olds, seventy-seven-year-olds, ninety-seven-year-olds, who think exactly as he does, so when and how is he ever going to learn? And by some miracle, if he does, and if he then returns to his native land, he'll be eaten by sharks!
Sure, why am I mad?
Posted by: nichevo at January 8, 2007 02:47 PMI think Nichevo's post is over-the-top, and I wouldn't want my comments section to be filled to the brim with this sort of thing.
At the same time, people like "Hezbollah Lover" should probably realize that a significant percentage of Americans do think like Nichevo, and pissing them off is not the smartest idea.
If 51 percent of Americans come around to Nichevo's point of view, there is not a damn thing more moderate people like me will be able to do about it.
The idea of an actual "clash of civilizations" fills me with horror and dread. At the same time, I know who will surely win if it comes down to that. Hopefully the more fanatical of the Islamists will not have to learn that the hard way. Moderate Middle Easterners (some of whom are my friends and leave comments on this blog) will go down with them.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at January 8, 2007 02:47 PMMike, please do not allow any lack of clarity on my part to confuse you. I do not want this. I DO NOT WANT THIS. I support Bush to the hilt because he has seen the danger, and is pouring American lives and riches into the effort to stop this avalanche.
He MUST be supported in this endeavor. The alternative is what we all dread. Not fear, because we'll win, but dread, because there ain't enough soap to get clean of that sort of work. The problem is that our adversaries don't feel the need for soap, they seem to like the feel and smell of blood on their hands.
I believe most Americans see this, including you. Even the ones who are going La-la-la-la-we-are-not-listening. The key to watch out for is for 51% of Americans to go from IF to WHEN.
Posted by: nichevo at January 8, 2007 02:52 PMMeanwhile, I will chill. Or try to. Message received and understood.
I don't know which is worse: if they're bluffing, or if they think they ain't. Do you remember Vito explaining to Michael about Luca Brasi in The Godfather? (the book, not the movie):
Michael nodded. He had brought it off. Albert Neri was his man to the death. And of course it was a trick learned from the Don himself. While learning the business, undergoing the long days of tutelage by his father, Michael had one time asked, “How come you used a guy like Luca Brasi? An animal like that?”Posted by: nichevo at January 8, 2007 03:02 PMThe Don had proceeded to instruct him. “There are men in this world,” he said, “who go about demanding to be killed. You must have noticed them. They quarrel in gambling games, they jump out of their automobiles in a rage if someone so much as scratches their fender, they humiliate and bully people whose capabilities they do not know. I have seen a man, a fool, deliberately infuriate a group of dangerous men, and he himself without any resources. These are people who wander through the world shouting, ‘Kill me. Kill me.’ And there is always somebody ready to oblige them. We read about it in the newspapers every day. Such people of course do a great deal of harm to others also.
“Luca Brasi was such a man. But he was such an extraordinary man that for a long time nobody could kill him. Most of these people are of no concern to ourselves but a Brasi is a powerful weapon to be used. The trick is that since he does not fear death and indeed looks for it, then the trick is to make yourself the only person in the world that he truly desires not to kill him. He has only that one fear, not of death, but that you may be the one to kill him. He is yours then.”
The fact that you found it surprising that secular or even other religious Shi'a might not be natural supporters of Hizb'Allah means that your knowledge and understanding of the history and politics of Lebanon is very superficial.
You didnt mention the communist flags being sold with the Hizb'Allah gear. You didnt talk about the Christian supporters of 'Aoun who support Hizb'Allah.
You have the typical stereotyped image of Lebanon. I suggest you stop reading The Wall Street Journal and Bernard Lewis and get with the real world.
Bela kalaam fadi.
Posted by: Abu Sinan at January 8, 2007 04:40 PMAnd if you don't believe me:
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=23924_Sunni-Shiite_War_in_Microcosm#comments
(warning: lgf link)
It's a video, it may amuse you. Needs Windows Media Player embedded.
Get a load of fatty on the right...
Posted by: nichevo at January 8, 2007 04:43 PMAbu Sinan is banned for abject stupidity.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at January 8, 2007 05:24 PMMJT, I am one of those Americans who could quite easily be moved to the "when" category, and the Arab Muslim world would be remiss if they do not understand the position the radical Muslims are placing the Muslim world in.
Posted by: Ron Snyder at January 8, 2007 05:25 PMMichael, PLEASE do take a sec and try to understand what some of us meant with our comments. What Nichevo said needed to be said for this very reason:
MJT: The idea of an actual "clash of civilizations" fills me with horror and dread. At the same time, I know who will surely win if it comes down to that. Hopefully the more fanatical of the Islamists will not have to learn that the hard way. Moderate Middle Easterners (some of whom are my friends and leave comments on this blog) will go down with them.
Some folks, especially the younger ones, need to take a big long look at where this world could end with all this terror. A "clash of civilizations" fills me with horror and dread too!!! THAT is the reason WHY I felt that Nichevo needed to say what he said. A sort of "wake up call" for those who may be lurking with the idea that Jihad, global Jihad, is an okay thing with no real price to be paid. I don't want it to come to this either. That's why I read here, and bring others here.
Posted by: Renée C. at January 8, 2007 06:42 PMRenee: A "clash of civilizations" fills me with horror and dread too!!!
Don't worry, I know, I get that. I'm sure Nichevo would rather not go down that road, either.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at January 8, 2007 07:35 PMAbu Sinan is banned for abject stupidity.
Any blogger who bans people for stupidity (and who can actually distinguish stupidity) is a man after my heart.
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 8, 2007 09:29 PMYour comment:
[This should not be too hard to believe.[shia's being friendly to Israel] When Israel invaded South Lebanon in 1982 to evict terrorists in the (Sunni) Palestinian Liberation Organization, the Shia of Lebanon hailed the Israelis as liberators. This was the natural, instinctive, default position of Lebanon’s Shia as recently as the 1980s. It was only after Israel stayed too long and behaved obnoxiously during the occupation, and after Iran’s Revolutionary Guards infiltrated the area and whipped people up into a radical frenzy, that the current Hezbollah-Israeli conflict took shape.]
...So, it could have actually been Israel behind the bombing of or Marines in Beirut....
Posted by: Peter at January 9, 2007 02:00 AMSoCalJustice,
I still disagree that it is hypocritical for Arabs to complain about Israeli ethnic cleansing and userpation of Palestinian and Syrian territory. Very few of the Arab states actually possess regimes that resemble Israel's own with respect to ethnic policy (Syria, Iraq, Libya and Lebanon being exceptions). Simply saying, "well you live in the Arab League so you can't talk about it" is a false arguement and ignores the matter at hand. That's like when people from the Third World tell Americans "Oh, well your country discriminates against black people" or telling Europeans "you have a serf class of Muslims and black Africans" when they critisize human rights in their countries. Calling it "Racist" doesn't help your arguement. It would help your arguement to say that Israelis have the same right as Arabs to organize themselves nationally. Calling what is very obviously not a racist organization racist just makes your arguement look desperate.
Nouri,
One potential problem here, I believe, is that you are not following this "conversation" (such that it is) from the beginning - having jumped in at the end.
Go read sandra's post from January 6 @ 3:25 pm.
That is what I was responding to. She is a Lebanese - or says she is - (one of your exceptions, btw - you should at least add Egypt and Saudi Arabia to that list if you want to be taken seriously) making the following claim (and not the claims re: usurpation of territory you just brought up in your latest post):
israel racist state or jewish state as u wish to be called, actually you are same as iran "the islamic state" or KSA the islamic kingdom. understand that there is no presence of a pure race or upper race, we are all equal.
I hope you will agree with me that that is pure bullsh*t, especially coming from her.
And that is the kernel from whence this larger "discussion" evolved.
I don't believe I ever said - or even implied that Arabs or Arab League subjects could not complain about anything or any injustice, real or perceived - so please don't put words in my mouth. As I said earlier, I merely called out the blatant - and obvious - hypocrisy on matters of nationalism - when throwing around the "racism" card.
Cheers.
Posted by: SoCalJustice at January 9, 2007 07:38 AM"But everything he knows is WRONG!"
No, my friend, everything i know isn't wrong.
Its everything YOU know thats wrong. No point in playing the blame game, ill just answer your stupid comment that you just writ.
"And it is poison to him and everyone like him. You just wish you could get a kid like that by the collar and shake him till the dung falls out of his ears."
Well, according to MJT, thats what fanatical terorist fundamentalist islamists terror groups do to journalists, you're not one of them are you?
"He flings around Hiroshima and Nagasaki but he doesn't realize that can happen to HIM."
Yes, you sick person, i know that can happen. And i wouldn't be surprised if it does. America was the one to produce the arms race, which resulted in an over-flow of nucleur weapons that they sometimes end up in black-markets. Thats what YOU should think about. If America uses them, you don't mind do you? But i wonder, i really can't imagine this, but what would the world say if we ended up with these weapons? Its alright for india, but not pakistan, its alright for israel, but not iran? Im against the whole thing, but if you have them, whats our guarantees you won't use them against us? The only guarantee is to have one ourselves.
If Iraq/Saddam really DID have these weapons, you really think the US would invade Iraq? Lol you must be kidding if you thought so.If they would, why won't they invade North Korea? They have weapons of mass destruction and the biggest tyrant, with a police state, all the while being the mist secret state in the world. We hardly know their population.
"He thinks that Iran will bankrupt themselves to save Hez by shutting down the Straits (uh, what will they do for money?), never mind that he thinks they can."
No, actually, i don't think they would do that. But what you don't understand is that hizbollah doesn't have ALL this money just from iran. Irans economy is doing much worse than that of lebanon, but still assist hizbollah. What you seem to not understand is that hizbollah is now mature enough to make their own money, other than their bussiness' they have donation schemes and funding schemes. They do not rely on either syria or iran for money, just on weapons.
"He thinks that they can destroy a civilization, by interdicting oil, whose soft drinks are worth more than his oil."
I never said civilization. I didn't even utter those words. But if comes down to the real deal, they can blow a fucking hard blow to world economy. I mean, for fuck sakes, if the stock market created a world wide economic recession and depression, what do you think will happen if iran closes the straits, which they can do and would do if they were threatened.
"He hasn't thought of getting into the soft-drink business, though."
Its not a bad idea, but coca-cola is dominating the market :P
"Some sheik or mullah is going to wave a magic wand and make us disappear"
No, not at all. Im just saying go watch the TV and hear, just listen and hear what people say about hizbollah throughout the arab and muslim world. People during the war were saying if sayyid hassan ran out of rockets to fire at israel, i'll give him my kids to fir at them instead.
Hizbollah has been the cause of more than 5000 sunni to shia converts in kuwait alone, one of the smallest countries in the middle east. This is the influence of hizbollah and the likes of it. The only thing keeping us back, the arab and muslim world, are the corrupt leaders the US promotes in those countries.
I pity you if you think that if the scholars of the arab world unite and call 1.2 billion muslims to war with israel and the US, that you would still win. How pathetic are you if you believe in that crap. Our Arabic and islamic nations have the capabilities to wage a war with the west and sustain one with them but all are unwilling to do so. They want to live in peace and humiliation instead. Im criticised because i don't go with the flow, but i'd rather die standing than live on my knees. The only time i do get down to my knees is infront of god and god only.
"At all events he thinks that the Iranian armed forces can stand up in front of one US armored division for five minutes."
Now, you are just being a little stupid and getting a bit too carried away. Iranians fight till the end. America has sustained a 3,000 man loss and are being forced out of iraq by their people. Britain fucking lost under 150 and the criticism of the government here is crazy.
While we are ready to sacrifice for our beliefs and nation, your soldiers are going their because they are told to. If Iran was willing to loose more than a million human being in their war in iraq, hoq much do you think they are willing to loose against America? I can tell you, the iranians are wishing the americans come because they would fight to the very end. Im admitting to you, if it was a full-out war between the two side, America would eventually win. At the end of the day they would capture the country. But that's not the point. What is, is how much america will and be able to sacrifice. How much do you think the americans will loose? A pathetic 3000 like in iraq, where an estimated 900,000 soldiers gave up during the war? come-on. The americans would have to pay a very very VERY dear price for it to defeat iran and they're simply not willing to do so.
But thats not even the problem. Once they invade the country, who, just tell me, WHO will obey the americans in IRAN???? This is iran who just started a revolution they all wanted, you think they will welcome their archest of enemies, america, into their country? After the MASSIVE blow to the americans, a guerilla war will rage against them, but this is a country arounf 7 times the population of iraq. And they do not have saddam loyalists or the pathetic al-qaida with the devil leader. They have well-trained revolutionary guards to say the least who will carry on the war after the occupation until every single one of them is dead. The you say they will use one or two nukes and thats iran gone. Then i reply, true! very very true! which is why i want iran to have nukes, to prevent anything like that happening. Because it won't only be bad for iran and iranians, but for the world in general.
"Just in case that doesn't go so well, he also thinks that someone else will help them."
Syria is Allied to Iran, they have an alliance agreement that says if one gets atacked the other must join in defence. Even if they don't join, Hizbollah and Hamas will definitely join, because if Iran falls, so will they. No Doubt about that. Iran falls, who will be willing to sell weapons to Hizbollah? If syria falls, how will Hizbollah recieve their weapons. So i believe hizbollah is finished if any of those two countries fall and i believe if any of those two countries are attacked and have to fight a full out war, hizbollah will 120% join in. If hizbollah is claimed to have used only 7% of their strength, and has the bravest man in the world as their leader, according to olmert not me, then god help anyone from the rest of the surprises they hide in their sleeves, and god help israel, well not really.
"He thinks that the rest of Sunni Arabia just grooves on the idea of Iran being a big bad superpower with nukes."
No they don't, but they can't do shit about it can they? Because if they can, they would've done it long time ago. They tried, i.e. Saddam, but FAILED.
"He thinks that he is in London by accident and that nobody is doing him a favor by letting him come and study."
No, I admire this country, and believe in it, and in its people. But i just don't like it's leaders and the decisions they make. We have very little political choice in Britain. There are two dominant parties and the third, lib dems, are the biggest after those two, but hardly count for 10% of the vote.
Britain is the most aware country about Palistine, and the british people are the mosed opposed to the occupation than any other nations people are, including even some arab countries and specially the western nations' people.
Im proud of having british citizenship, and hate outsiders who criticize the same country they live in. I have understanded the country i live in and adjusted to it. I never diss it, i might criticize its government which is my right since im a british citizen, but not its law, decrees, constitution, people, way of life etc etc. I respect the fact that no-one in britain dies of starvation to say the least.
"He thinks that the university he attends and the civilization around him there was created by his inferiors."
My friend, civilization was created in lebanon. We have the longest inhabitted city, byblos, in the world. Its nearly 7,000 years old and its still inhabitted to this day. The first alphabet was created in lebanon, tyre. Mesopotamia IS civilisation, while all of your ancestors were still licking each other clean, we used towels.
Islam brought 90% of the knowledge you know and learn. We were the ones to translate books of Greek, Latin, Chinese among the many into arabic and english, and we were the ones to carry on establishing the ideas of past geniuses who couldn't carry on to prove their theories. We made what is now called a university or school. We had metropolitan cities while much of europe and america (which wasnt even a country back then) still used twigs to build your hutts.
Please do not start anything about civilization. Muslims were the ones to further man kinds knowledge of scince, maths, astronomy, medicine and even warfare and crop technology. We, for the first time, had people converting into islam because of the security it provided, the correct principles it taught (NO NOT AL-QAIDA I FUCKING HATE THEM just in case you were wandering, and no im not bothered to give you and ethics and ideology class about what i, and the rest of lebanon's/irans/most shia do or do not believe in, to say the least we do not slap P.O.W's). And for the first time people were converting to islam because of their technological and educational advance.
The thing that went wrong was the mangols invaded and destroyed every book in sight and the only/biggest library in the world (in baghdad) and the crusaders followed suit. The myth goes that we fought to advance into al andalus, now spain, which has been proven wrong many many times, their is a documentary on google video, ill send a link later on.
TO be continued...im.
"But everything he knows is WRONG!"
No, my friend, everything i know isn't wrong.
Its everything YOU know thats wrong. No point in playing the blame game, ill just answer your stupid comment that you just writ.
"And it is poison to him and everyone like him. You just wish you could get a kid like that by the collar and shake him till the dung falls out of his ears."
Well, according to MJT, thats what fanatical terorist fundamentalist islamists terror groups do to journalists, you're not one of them are you?
"He flings around Hiroshima and Nagasaki but he doesn't realize that can happen to HIM."
Yes, you sick person, i know that can happen. And i wouldn't be surprised if it does. America was the one to produce the arms race, which resulted in an over-flow of nucleur weapons that they sometimes end up in black-markets. Thats what YOU should think about. If America uses them, you don't mind do you? But i wonder, i really can't imagine this, but what would the world say if we ended up with these weapons? Its alright for india, but not pakistan, its alright for israel, but not iran? Im against the whole thing, but if you have them, whats our guarantees you won't use them against us? The only guarantee is to have one ourselves.
If Iraq/Saddam really DID have these weapons, you really think the US would invade Iraq? Lol you must be kidding if you thought so.If they would, why won't they invade North Korea? They have weapons of mass destruction and the biggest tyrant, with a police state, all the while being the mist secret state in the world. We hardly know their population.
"He thinks that Iran will bankrupt themselves to save Hez by shutting down the Straits (uh, what will they do for money?), never mind that he thinks they can."
No, actually, i don't think they would do that. But what you don't understand is that hizbollah doesn't have ALL this money just from iran. Irans economy is doing much worse than that of lebanon, but still assist hizbollah. What you seem to not understand is that hizbollah is now mature enough to make their own money, other than their bussiness' they have donation schemes and funding schemes. They do not rely on either syria or iran for money, just on weapons.
"He thinks that they can destroy a civilization, by interdicting oil, whose soft drinks are worth more than his oil."
I never said civilization. I didn't even utter those words. But if comes down to the real deal, they can blow a fucking hard blow to world economy. I mean, for fuck sakes, if the stock market created a world wide economic recession and depression, what do you think will happen if iran closes the straits, which they can do and would do if they were threatened.
"He hasn't thought of getting into the soft-drink business, though."
Its not a bad idea, but coca-cola is dominating the market :P
"Some sheik or mullah is going to wave a magic wand and make us disappear"
No, not at all. Im just saying go watch the TV and hear, just listen and hear what people say about hizbollah throughout the arab and muslim world. People during the war were saying if sayyid hassan ran out of rockets to fire at israel, i'll give him my kids to fir at them instead.
Hizbollah has been the cause of more than 5000 sunni to shia converts in kuwait alone, one of the smallest countries in the middle east. This is the influence of hizbollah and the likes of it. The only thing keeping us back, the arab and muslim world, are the corrupt leaders the US promotes in those countries.
I pity you if you think that if the scholars of the arab world unite and call 1.2 billion muslims to war with israel and the US, that you would still win. How pathetic are you if you believe in that crap. Our Arabic and islamic nations have the capabilities to wage a war with the west and sustain one with them but all are unwilling to do so. They want to live in peace and humiliation instead. Im criticised because i don't go with the flow, but i'd rather die standing than live on my knees. The only time i do get down to my knees is infront of god and god only.
"At all events he thinks that the Iranian armed forces can stand up in front of one US armored division for five minutes."
Now, you are just being a little stupid and getting a bit too carried away. Iranians fight till the end. America has sustained a 3,000 man loss and are being forced out of iraq by their people. Britain fucking lost under 150 and the criticism of the government here is crazy.
While we are ready to sacrifice for our beliefs and nation, your soldiers are going their because they are told to. If Iran was willing to loose more than a million human being in their war in iraq, hoq much do you think they are willing to loose against America? I can tell you, the iranians are wishing the americans come because they would fight to the very end. Im admitting to you, if it was a full-out war between the two side, America would eventually win. At the end of the day they would capture the country. But that's not the point. What is, is how much america will and be able to sacrifice. How much do you think the americans will loose? A pathetic 3000 like in iraq, where an estimated 900,000 soldiers gave up during the war? come-on. The americans would have to pay a very very VERY dear price for it to defeat iran and they're simply not willing to do so.
But thats not even the problem. Once they invade the country, who, just tell me, WHO will obey the americans in IRAN???? This is iran who just started a revolution they all wanted, you think they will welcome their archest of enemies, america, into their country? After the MASSIVE blow to the americans, a guerilla war will rage against them, but this is a country arounf 7 times the population of iraq. And they do not have saddam loyalists or the pathetic al-qaida with the devil leader. They have well-trained revolutionary guards to say the least who will carry on the war after the occupation until every single one of them is dead. The you say they will use one or two nukes and thats iran gone. Then i reply, true! very very true! which is why i want iran to have nukes, to prevent anything like that happening. Because it won't only be bad for iran and iranians, but for the world in general.
"Just in case that doesn't go so well, he also thinks that someone else will help them."
Syria is Allied to Iran, they have an alliance agreement that says if one gets atacked the other must join in defence. Even if they don't join, Hizbollah and Hamas will definitely join, because if Iran falls, so will they. No Doubt about that. Iran falls, who will be willing to sell weapons to Hizbollah? If syria falls, how will Hizbollah recieve their weapons. So i believe hizbollah is finished if any of those two countries fall and i believe if any of those two countries are attacked and have to fight a full out war, hizbollah will 120% join in. If hizbollah is claimed to have used only 7% of their strength, and has the bravest man in the world as their leader, according to olmert not me, then god help anyone from the rest of the surprises they hide in their sleeves, and god help israel, well not really.
"He thinks that the rest of Sunni Arabia just grooves on the idea of Iran being a big bad superpower with nukes."
No they don't, but they can't do shit about it can they? Because if they can, they would've done it long time ago. They tried, i.e. Saddam, but FAILED.
"He thinks that he is in London by accident and that nobody is doing him a favor by letting him come and study."
No, I admire this country, and believe in it, and in its people. But i just don't like it's leaders and the decisions they make. We have very little political choice in Britain. There are two dominant parties and the third, lib dems, are the biggest after those two, but hardly count for 10% of the vote.
Britain is the most aware country about Palistine, and the british people are the mosed opposed to the occupation than any other nations people are, including even some arab countries and specially the western nations' people.
Im proud of having british citizenship, and hate outsiders who criticize the same country they live in. I have understanded the country i live in and adjusted to it. I never diss it, i might criticize its government which is my right since im a british citizen, but not its law, decrees, constitution, people, way of life etc etc. I respect the fact that no-one in britain dies of starvation to say the least.
"He thinks that the university he attends and the civilization around him there was created by his inferiors."
My friend, civilization was created in lebanon. We have the longest inhabitted city, byblos, in the world. Its nearly 7,000 years old and its still inhabitted to this day. The first alphabet was created in lebanon, tyre. Mesopotamia IS civilisation, while all of your ancestors were still licking each other clean, we used towels.
Islam brought 90% of the knowledge you know and learn. We were the ones to translate books of Greek, Latin, Chinese among the many into arabic and english, and we were the ones to carry on establishing the ideas of past geniuses who couldn't carry on to prove their theories. We made what is now called a university or school. We had metropolitan cities while much of europe and america (which wasnt even a country back then) still used twigs to build your hutts.
Please do not start anything about civilization. Muslims were the ones to further man kinds knowledge of scince, maths, astronomy, medicine and even warfare and crop technology. We, for the first time, had people converting into islam because of the security it provided, the correct principles it taught (NO NOT AL-QAIDA I FUCKING HATE THEM just in case you were wandering, and no im not bothered to give you and ethics and ideology class about what i, and the rest of lebanon's/irans/most shia do or do not believe in, to say the least we do not slap P.O.W's). And for the first time people were converting to islam because of their technological and educational advance.
The thing that went wrong was the mangols invaded and destroyed every book in sight and the only/biggest library in the world (in baghdad) and the crusaders followed suit. The myth goes that we fought to advance into al andalus, now spain, which has been proven wrong many many times, their is a documentary on google video, ill send a link later on.
TO be continued...im tired.
We have very little political choice in Britain.
Time for you to face reality. Our politicans represent the public pretty fucking well. British people, unlike the the victims you call citizens in Southern Lebanon can't claim that their government doesn't represent them, not honestly.
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 9, 2007 04:06 PMIslam brought 90% of the knowledge you know and learn.
Uhhuh. How much did Islam contribute in the 20th century? The 19th?
The Islamic world is CENTURIES behind the rest of the planet, by now.
I'd thank you for the Library of Alexandria but its existance predates Islam by centuries.
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 9, 2007 05:48 PMOkay, this is getting long. So I will not quote except brief excerpts. I should warn you that this will probably make you very angry.
thats what fanatical terorist fundamentalist islamists terror groups do to journalists
You're not a journalist and I am not an Islamofascist security goon. And I would not really do it, it is just an impulse and would obviously not work - the supply of dung in your skull seems infinite. It's more the kind of thing a father would do to a son - for a son, really.
Of course we are not related so the impulse is triply inappropriate, it just goes to show how cute everybody thinks you are. The point is that your head is filled with delusions that can potentially bring you to great harm.
And i wouldn't be surprised if it does.
Then why, dear boy, do you keep offending us? See, that's what I mean by stupid.
Blah, blah, arms race. Yes, much better to let the Japanese run riot over the Far East. Much better to let the Soviets take over the whole Eurasian landmass. Because the Soviets would have been SOOO nice to you, right?
I do mind if the US uses these weapons. It may be necessary but for sixty years we have done everything possible to avert their use. You notice we didn't use any in Vietnam, for instance.
If you got them, the world would say, "Poor Lebanon (or Iran or whoever), what a world of hurt they brought upon themselves." Yes, it is not all right for you because you act like savages. Probably if every sect in Leb. had nukes they'd use 'em on the other sects.
If you want to avoid punishment (never mind a guarantee), it is more sensible to behave well than to behave ill. This is another part you don't get.
I already explained to you that we were prepared to deal with Saddam's WMD. It is of course one reason we struck when we did, that we thought he didn't have nukes yet, but I repeat that for sixty years we have been preparing to fight on a nuclear battlefield.
The reason we don't attack NK is 1) we are trying to resolve the situation without this expedient, especially as the regime is tottering and may only need a push; 2) even without nukes, they have amassed a massive arsenal of rockets and cannon that can do great damage to the ill-located SK capital city of Seoul. Believe it or not it is harder to take out 10,000 rocket launchers in caves than it is to destroy one nuclear weapons site.
And part of the reason we don't know their population is because people keep dying suddenly, or gradually from hunger worse than anything your poorest Shia know.
hizbollah doesn't have ALL this money just from iran.
Right, they also commit various crimes and "schemes" - good word, that. Tell me, what do they produce? Nothing. They are parasites. But you miss the point. Where do the rockets come from? The Hezbollah Rocket Engineering Lab? No, you can't even make your own soft-drink bottles. They come from Iran. No money, no rocketee. Or are you going to pay them? Going to smuggle rocket parts into Iran so they can build them and send them to you?
I never said civilization. I didn't even utter those words.
It's what you meant. Or what it means, even if you don't know what you are saying. Yeah, if they could do it there would be a problem, at least until KSA built pipelines north and west, or until the big shale plants light up.
But anyway, no they can't close down the Straits, even with these much-overrated magic missiles the commies sold them. They can make a mess for a short time, that's it.
Its not a bad idea, but coca-cola is dominating the market :P
Haha, but again, don't you understand about competition? Pepsi is doing just fine, there are independent soda and juice and tea/coffee drink makers all over. Take some of your brighter weapons-makers and tell them to make a drink that doesn't taste like crap. Then make a factory and produce the stuff, stop making war, and believe it or not you might sell lots of it.
what people say about hizbollah throughout the arab and muslim world
Yes, they say lots of crazy stuff, like you. If we killed enough of them, they would stop. If we kill enough of the massed 1.2 billion, the rest will stop. Japan quit after we killed around ten percent of their population and then they were (since you have introduced profanity to the discussion) our bitch. And they have ten thousand times as much honor as your degraded culture. Arabs have been living on their knees for millennia.
But let's pretend that the mulahs have stuffed some guts up into you. Let's say that you're as hardcore as the American Indians. In their case I think we had to kill about 80% of them, piecemeal.
With nukes, how long would it take to kill 10% - 120 million Muslims? Half an hour. To kill the rest of them - not even 80%, 95-100% - if they didn't quit? Another half an hour.
Then a little while to mop up on the few who live anywhere at all valuable, like London or Detroit. Assuming they also wanted to die, but in general the ones who come to the US at least come here because they're not like the maniacs they flee.
Let's say Europe has some work to do. Let's say that would take a week. A month? (The ones in better prepared countries like France, probably closer to half an hour.) But that's a rounding error to 1.2 billion.
Meanwhile, half an hour after those two half-hours, Boots & Coots arrives at the stumps of the oil wells in Arabia, wearing lead-lined suits, and starts drilling. Oil is pumping in a week.
But we'll feel really bad about it. All choked up. Honest, there could be tears.
Iranians fight till the end.
Sure, I respect Iranians. Iran is Persian, they're not Arabs. But even so, the five minutes is not how long they'll fight, it's how long they'll live. You don't understand the kind of weapons and tactics we have. You simply have no comprehension. Their Korean War-era technology will crumple like used toilet paper under the fire of our machine guns, let alone our tank cannon, missiles, and aerial antiarmor weapons. Do yourself a favor - google JSOW or the AGM-154A/B/C.
If Iran was willing to loose more than a million human being in their war in iraq, hoq much do you think they are willing to loose against America?Iraq was only able to kill that many. But you really think they hate us worse than Iraq? Don't believe everything your read, kid. Especially everything YOU read ;>
Besides, we don;t need to "come" in the sense of invading. We can get everything we want by dropping bombs and firing missiles and no Iranian need ever see a soldier or a tank. I was talking about Iran coming into Iraq to fight us. Maybe they would do that after we bombed their nuke sites. That's when we kill 4 or 5 million Iranian soldiers (if you count Basij as soldiers).
Meanwhile, as this is happening, Ahmadinejad is being torn limb from limb. I don't know whether they'll do the imams, but I wouldn't bet they will stay in power as they are.
So either way, all the resistance junk is just that. The only place we might come in is to seize the oilfields. If they do that, I will, if allowed, come to Bushehr and drink a cup of coffee, true Mocha if I can get it, while Iran's pathetic armed forces try to do something about it. I promise to blog about it, but maybe no pictures, they will be too terrible. Remember, I'm a soft Westerner, I don't enjoy the sight of blood and maimed corpses.
Nukes? That would only be necessary, maybe, if Iran gets some.
Syria is Allied to Iran, they have an alliance agreement that says if one gets atacked the other must join in defence....
ROFLMAO Muahahahahahah!
Two words: As. If.
Assuming they would even try, have you looked at a MAP lately? What would they send? Flowers and body bags? Hez. would be massacred, meanwhile, in any Arab country they traversed to get there.
Meanwhile, you notice how your statement contradicts what you said, or rather makes my point, about Hez's dependency on Iran.
BTW, keep making these cracks about Olmert. They're good for more laughs.
No they don't, but they can't do shit about it can they? Because if they can, they would've done it long time ago. They tried, i.e. Saddam, but FAILED.
Genius, did you notice the part about how they are making noises about developing their own nuke programs? No, they are not as smart or as capable as Iran, but they have all the money they need to buy brains. And uranium.
Britain is the most aware country about Palistine...
Let me explain this, as delicately and carefully as possible, because I don't want to hurt Michael's feelings. I do believe however that it is correct on the facts:
Britain and France and other European powers for centuries have been traveling around the globe, exploring distant lands, and ejaculating inside their girls and boys (occasionally the reverse) and otherwise satisfying their needs at the expense of the natives.
In particular, the Arabs have been pleased to cheaply sell or rent the children of the poor for this purpose; whereas in other lands it was often more of a loan, as in the South Seas, or a theft, as in Africa, in your region it was typically a commercial transaction.
The trade has evolved to the point where there is two-way commerce: since the discover of oil, rich Arabs have been coming to Europe and paying extravagantly to ejaculate inside European girls and boys. But since the Arabs pay so much more, being rich, the Europeans realize a favorable balance of trade, even though there are only thousands of rich Arabs and millions of relatively rich Europeans. As in Saudi, there have been attempts to import poor people and steal or cheaply rent their bodies for ejaculation as well as whippings and such, but it looks bad in the papers.
Europeans, therefore, are favorably inclined towards Arabs. The Jews preferred not to involve themselves in this traffic, and also have no oil, therefore have less to offer Europe, science and technology and art aside. The creed which they originated (Christianity, evolving out of Judaism) is of progressively less value to Europe, so the fact that you profess a rather zany one is of less importance compared to the traffic in certain black and white fluids. In addition, Israelis are reputed to be rude, whereas one famous Arabic trait is a fulsome politesse.
Besides, you buy their cars and stuff. Also, politics has gone to hell, so it's no wonder Europe is trying so hard to cut its own throat. And you generally have the sense not to chant "Death to France" or "Death to Germany" even though Muslims there (many of who are of course not Arabs, so who cares) are often treated far worse than in America or Israel.
As soon as your black fluid runs out, you will either have to import a lot more white fluid (less likely with the new Islamofascist puritanism) or cars, and export a lot more sand, dates and camels to pay for 'em (the cars, not the ejaculations), to stay in good with them.
Unless the Muslims in Europe take over, which I don't really expect, because if it comes to that they will massacre you like Syria or Jordan.
My friend, civilization was created in lebanon.
Or in Iraq, Turkey, wherever. Good for you! Thousands of years ago you did something right!
Now, are you an idle rich kid or do you expect to have to work for a living someday? If the latter, let me give you a phrase that has great business import:
"What have you done for me LATELY?"
What this means is: If you were a good employee five or ten or twenty years ago - a good doctor or dockworker or baseball player - but you are a sucky one now, you will be fired.
In the same way, the Mesopotamian civilization, the glories of al-Andalus (uh, ask the Spanish how they feel about that), etc., are all in the distant past. Lately, you suck. You are a sucky region of the earth. You are nonperforming, living on past glories and dwindling black fluid.
Who on earth really wants to live in Byblos if they could afford something nicer? Who in London, or anywhere in Britain, would trade their flat for one of equal size in Byblos? (Besides you, of course, though one wonders why you're not there.) Certainly in Iran they are cramming into English schools so they can learn to live in America or Australia or wherever. They don't want to live in Iran because the ayatollahs took a great country and stuffed it into a meatgrinder.
You might have been great five hundred years ago, or five thousand, but now...what good are you?
I mean in objective terms - individually many of you may be nice people and have qualities; Michael likes you; but collectively, your countries are all useless. The only value of the Middle East is for resource extraction, maybe some tourism, . Other than the stuff that comes out of the ground, you are (materially) worthless like Alec Baldwin.
Yes, some of you (Lebanon being a fair example) get by on trade and such, but if not for oil there would be no trade, because the zoos have all the camels they need (we don't eat or ride them, we have beef and pork and cars), there is plenty of sand on Western beaches and deserts, and nobody really likes dates very much.
You would all be living like you did a hundred years ago before anybody thought of drilling. In general your best hope would be to emigrate and try to make a living somewhere else, if you could get in. Or you could learn from the Israelis, but I suppose you'd rather eat sand and dates and camels.
As for preserving documents of ancient cultures - yes, thanks for stealing them and then not destroying all of them.
...
Now, don't feel bad, you tried very hard and this is really the best sort of defense to justify your existence that could be made. The problem is that facts, especially current events, are against you.
You can resent all of the above, especially the bit about the ejaculations (though have you ever seen an Egyptian postcard?), but you tell me this, if you respond to nothing else:
What are you going to do when you run out of oil, or when it becomes unimportant because we make it ourselves or use alcohol or hydrogen or nuclear power or solar cells?
I say dates...camels...sand. What do you say? Information technology or biotech? Carmaking perhaps, machine tools, aerospace? How about horticulture? There are some nice greenhouses in Gaza...oh, right.
I think you should look again at soft drinks, it's not really that hard. Or maybe you could hire out all over the world as demolition experts. Destruction is now your core competency.
PS I'm glad you hate al-Qaida. That means it is at present not absolutely necessary to kill you.
PPS None of this is meant as a reflection on you personally. You seem like a nice young fool and when not angry, polite, which counts.
Posted by: nichevo at January 9, 2007 07:06 PMIf we had 10 Nichevos this site would be LGF junior.
There's a line, somewhere, between trying to open someone's eyes and trying to make them hate you.
You're on the wrong side of that line. You're actually sabotaging your cause by creating emotional barriers to realization.
After all, there's nothing that destroys a man's ability to reason, feel and care, nothing that turns him into a devil or a beast like anger and hatred.
Try not to add to your audience's hatred.
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 9, 2007 08:34 PMNot that Hezbollah Lover is a great listener.
He seems estatic to have given up all of his critical facualties to Hezbollah. He will not judge them, only love them. That's completely insane.
I know plenty of schizophrenics who are saner.
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 9, 2007 08:38 PMAnyway there's no point trying to talk to HL while he's busy comparing imaginary dicks with Nichevo.
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 9, 2007 09:50 PMYou could be right, Josh. Although he's held up pretty well so far. But am I really going to create a (new) mental block?
What happens when people like HL argue amongst themselves? Say two Hez talking baseball or camel-racing or whatever. Sooner or later one of them is a Persian shoe, the other is a camel apologist, it comes to blows or at least finger-pointing. Surely the arguments approach or exceed this degree of heat, phrased less politely (I hope I was polite).
Do they get mental blocks against each other? Or do they get off the topic onto dames or shishkebab and go their ways peacefully, or join each other for some narghil and a sandwich?
Or put it this way - I'm sure the rhetoric during the Iran-Iraq War approached or even exceeded stomachs-roasting-in-hell. Then in 1991 during Desert Storm Saddam sent his airplanes to hide in Iran. And now, Iran is infiltrating into Iraq, and HL thinks that if we make them mad, they are going to swarm across the border and be welcomed as liberators with flowers and candy while they destroy the coalition forces.
So is it more racist, bigoted or ethnocentric to assume they can't handle harsh remarks or harsh truths, or to posit that this is what they're used to, and is the way to get through to them, with vivid word pictures that try to mirror their own style? I guess I'm trying to have it both ways - answer them in their own language without sinking to their level.
I believe I have avoided personalization, eat-shit type of rhetoric. Maybe some of the camel remarks are unkind but really, what are the exports of the Middle East? I guess I don't know how their total net GDP would equal Israel's without oil. Gum arabic? Tent pegs? Perfume? Maybe some cheap pottery or textiles? Or fine ones? How many fine rugs can they weave or ancient artwork can they dig up?
I asked him for alternatives. Maybe they have big gold deposits we don't know about. Or Red Sea mud will be a lucrative beauty product. Or they will start cloning sheep so they don't have to import superfreighters of them to survive. But I'm calling it just as I see it. They have nothing.
The only thing I might take back is the bit about whoring out their sons and daughters. I think it is true, but perhaps that approaches redline. Nonetheless, inasmuch as shame is such a big issue over there, that's why they're really mad. An Iranian counselor at summer camp, a nice pleasant handsome fellow, told me that one of the offenses of the US was that under the Shah, we had started recruiting Iranians as security guards - I asked him, why security guards? He didn't know but he maintained it - and that seemed to bug him as much as that we supported his purported despotism.
So if Brits and French and Portuguese went off whoring in Algeria and Jordan and Brazil, why wouldn't that be a casus belli? As such, it should be treated. This is more suggestive in that Israelis and Americans are not notorious, AFAIK, for whoring in the Middle East, sailors aside. Displacement and sublimation would be naturals for a shame culture.
(By the way do you think that's unfair to Europe? Or to Britain, if you like?)
As for the military aspects, this is beyond dispute, no?
Whether by the collar or by the word, HL and millions of Muslim youth need some sense shaken into them. Sweet reason seems to be working rather indifferently, I am just trying a different approach. The LGF people are a bit too much for me, I don't go there often. I don't call anybody a camel-felching fucktard or even a splodeydope, and I don't like to watch it happen. I haven't called HL any names except "fool" and "genius."
HL and his millions need to understand the strategic military, social, economic and political calculus. If a man has a broken foot is the thing for him to keep hopping up and down on it? More to the point, if a patient with emphysema continues to smoke, sometimes you show him a picture of his lungs to make him want to stop. Anything is better than letting him get cancer. If he has cancer, you cut out the tumor - if you can - rather than let it metastasize or occlude his airway.
I don;t know how to get therough to HL. Do you know how to get through to HL? Have you found anything that works? Please let me know. Michael's site is great for Westerners who want to better understand his subjects - for instance, his guides give me a much better feeling about at least some Lebanese, assuming they were sincere, which seems likely enough - but I wonder how it reaches the people where he goes. Some obviously come here and comment sensibly; others not so much.
HL is fairly sensible in that he is not rabid; the fact that he believes the moon is made of green cheese does not seem to make him want a rocket ship. But he seems perfectly happy to root on the Dutch astronauts.
You can say that Hez has a point, just as, reaching, you can say here or there that Hitler had a point - on Versailles, say. But Hitler got fifty million people killed, ten or so being his, IIRC. And his military was much more competitive. I would expect the proportions for Islamofascism to be reversed if not worse. And the total number, of course, to be much greater.
They just have to change. They want us to change, so in theory it is not an unreasonable demand for someone to change their ways. I submit that is them more than us. If we are right and they are wrong - if we are 80% right and they are 90% wrong - who should it be that changes?
They are playing chicken. Do you as a Brit know what playing chicken is? It's when two cars head for each other on a straightaway and the first who turns aside is "chicken." One trick of this game is to be drunk, or to throw the steering wheel out the window. A sensible opponent will then turn aside because it's not worth one's life and collision is certain or entirely unpredictable.
But when the crazy is driving a Yugo and you are riding a train, or an Abrams or Challenger tank, the kindest thing you can do is get some coffee into that sod! Or shoot out his tires. Yes, you'll definitely scratch your paint something fierce. But the Yugo will be an accordion. And when the game is not "chicken" but "control of the world," it's far less of a viable option to turn off the road.
If we were to lose this thing because we can't stand the sight of blood and they can...well, I'm just not sure it will result in less blood.
Yes, I will smack someone awake, if I can, to stop him sleepwalking off a cliff. I'm worried that Michael will ban me and that would be a pity because I quite enjoy his site, but I am approaching desperation in terms of awakening the sleeper. I don't know how to nice them into peacefulness, civility, whatever you want to call it. They have the right to their own opinions. But they don't have the right to their own facts.
I repeat: what is the best approach? Someone let me know. If Arabs are the equal of other men, which I have to assume is the case, there is no reason they cannot enter modernity. There is no reason why they shouldn't except that they are not obliged to do so. It is not I who wants to let them go to hell; that is the Buchanans, who know it, and the leftists, who don't, or who think they can take us with them. (The remaining deindustrialized few hundred million or so will presumably then be nice and green and collectivist.)
Once the oil runs out, perhaps they have the option of degenerating into bucolic squalor; then at least they may not have the resources to blow themselves and each other to hell, and nobody will have to risk themselves except archaeologists and date/camel/sand vendors. Is that what they want? Can that possibly be what they want?
I don't see any choice, any viable choice, for them except to figure out how to do it. I suppose mass re-education or psychotherapy would be impractical, but...maybe Valium or cannabis in the water? Better than poison or a genetically tuned sterility drug.
The best idea I have is to make Iraq a success and show them an Arab role model. Failing that, next least bad would seem to be population transfer so that all the relevant tribes or sects can live with each other and never have to deal with The Other. Next...
Next?
Or am I wrong and they should take over the world? (Until they bump up against China, of course.)
Posted by: nichevo at January 9, 2007 10:00 PMAs for comparisons, Josh, my ego isn't in this. I have nothing to prove. In my own way I am trying to help. Or should I be learning from you, who is doing so well with the lad?
Boy, you Brits really have that condescension thing down. Glad you can't see who my tailor is. (I am applying to a Euro bank with a big base in London, so I guess I better learn how to deal with it. Happily, it's casual dress.) Meanwhile, you're closer to Luton than I am. What's your answer? You don't seem closer to one of those.
Posted by: nichevo at January 9, 2007 10:06 PMDamn, I need a bath. Sorry, Michael.
Posted by: nichevo at January 9, 2007 10:08 PMNich, it's just the tone and the length that's I consider a problem.
Anyway HL has already proven himself immune to all ideas. He's a boy in love with Hezbollah, just as he named himself. Subconscously he knows that this is his big problem, or he wouldn't have picked that handle.
But he's stuck; you can tell that he's built his entire world view, organized every thought in his mind around this one obsession, and when he gives up on Hezbollah he'll be completely lost. In that moment he'll have lost his point of view about everything in the world.
I wish I knew how this happened to him. If it was his own doing, well that's just bad luck. But if some adult destroyed the boy's mind, then I'd like to see the man beaten.
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 9, 2007 10:13 PMBy the way I'm not British. I'm an American who grew up in Canada.
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 9, 2007 10:15 PMOr were you talking to HL about being British?
Posted by: Josh Scholar at January 9, 2007 10:16 PMNo sir, I thought I caught a "we" when you were defending Britain's polity.
In America, kids get their skulls filled with mush all the time - Canadians too I bet. But often they grow out of it. Hey, I used to think gun control was a good idea! ;> But in his milieu, what forces would coincide to counteract this indoctrination?
If my choice of words is at issue, I could pull in quotes from John Adams, Hilaire Belloc, G. K. Chesterton, T. E. Lawrence, saying the same things in more flowery language.
Maybe some kind of propaganda effort? But then the usual claptrap applies...
Posted by: nichevo at January 9, 2007 11:20 PMLength, sure.
Posted by: nichevo at January 9, 2007 11:20 PM;>
Posted by: nichevo at January 10, 2007 12:06 AMYou guys miss the points of everything i say so completely. I seriously do know Arabs, ALOT, close to most would probably very accurate, are backwards and self-destructive. But what do you expect of a people who live and only know this lifestyle after being blone back to the stone ages by the extremist sunnis who faught son against dad over what land goes to which person.
I seriously do understand this. But it didn't take the barbaric west a fortnight to turn from unciviliced bear hunters with a cloth over the crotches into civilized and freedom + rights living persons. But even now, when an israeli is asked "what would you feel if you were in a fighter jet and just dropped a ton-bomb onto a civilian structure?" would reply "a bump on the wing" it shows how in-human and how much more backward this is. They may look modern but mentality far outpasses backwardness. It has no words to describe such remarks. This person is not an average airman, its Dan Halutz, im sure he sounds very familiar to everyone here.
The Hezbollah Rocket Engineering Lab?
How do you know hizbollah doesn't have one? For your information, they actually do have a unit which, ironically, has the same name you just mentioned. Yes, a unit called the Hezbollah Rocket Engineers Unit. They are responsible for many things, among them they are responsible for firing the rockets, placing anf finding co-ordinates, upgrading rockets (such as the katyusha's found powered with solid fuel, rather than crude), who knows, if hamas is able to make rockets, as pathetic as they seem, how do you know if hizbollah, which is by far much more developed than hamas or any other faction in the middle east, could make a rocket a 1000 times better?
Another unit worth noting for is the Hezbollah Explosives Engineers Unit - they are responsible for, well lol eplosives such as mines, warheads, research etc
No, you can't even make your own soft-drink bottles.
Your sarcastic statements insult your knowledge. If Hizbollah is clever and modern enough to have some of the best medical facilities in lebanon, i think they can make a soft drink. They have many things which are their own productions - foods, drinks, blabla but are not invested in because they are too busy investing in charities for the poor, homeless and parentless.
You, nichevo, seem to really undermine hizbollah, but really over-power your powers and those of the western world.
They come from Iran.
www.wikipedia.com, search where the Katyushas are made and who makes them. Search where and who makes the cornets etc Yes their are many made by iran, but they are paid for by hizbollah. You know, you have a good or service, i come to yo with big bucks and buy them off you? Its called trade. Yes, believe it or not arabs do know how to trade. Amazing, right?
I want to tell you something further about how i think. I think that the world is too big, as in both power, physically and mystery for me/my opinion, to cause any change. My advice to you, is you are going way too wild and carried-away by visiting extremes your own president has never thought of. ANyway to stay with the point. Trade is your answer. Money for rockets. Known fact, hizbollahs rockets do not only consist of only katyushs. They always like to surprise the enemy in every battle and war. You are also forgetting. Hizbollah is a party. A little teeny weeny puny one and america + israel really big huge superpowers and they somehow always earn their respect through force. America is too scared to set foot in lebanon, even as peacekeepers after that truck bomb. confirmed by Rice when asked why american marines wont be joining in,,"we have had a history in the region: - rice. The other respect comes from nearly every single israeli. They all admit hizbollah soldiers are brave, strong and fearless. Olmert "hassan nasrallah, despite being the leader of a terrorist organisation, is the bravest man in the world. He works very hard and efficiently and successfuly to guarantee his and his peoples future" another time, he almost as if begs pardon or execuses sayyid hassan when he wants to comment on some stuff "no intentions to offend or insult nasrallah in any way, but i believe he has lost apetite for another war".
If we kill enough of the massed 1.2 billion, the rest will stop.
Well done. I don't see why you shouldn't deserve a round of applause. Seriously, bravo for achieving such a distinctively bold and unique ideology and solution for the world's problems. But if you do that, who will the west do bussiness with when theres a sixth of the world missing?
Then, how many nukes does it take to kill all these people? If one single nuke once nearly cracked the earths outer crust in some texas desert, how long do you think the earth will bear when hundreds of cities are nuked in "half an hour"? I predict in the first 5 seconds.
Japan quit after we killed around ten percent of their population and then they were (since you have introduced profanity to the discussion) our bitch.
You know what, you hit the nail not on the head, you hit it in the balls...right on. We, in hizbollah, will fight and fight so that we are not made your bitches. We are now 90% of the way. We have most of our land back, most of our fighters and citizens, alot more respect from the world. We also decisively won our own enemies respect. How can this party have such influence on multi-trillion-making-a-year superpower? Its phenominal. Withought even killing one of you're soldiers or citizens we strike fear in your hearts. Our name make george bush pain all over. We did this just by daunting you with the pathetic "death to america". Do you see where i am coming from, its too hard and long to explain to you the true explanation of what it is, but the fact is that withought touching a single american we were able to make every one of you fear and consequently fear us.
I do understand you're point of view that you are able and maybe one day willing to kill all of us with coupla nice bombs from the sky, but you do not have an idea of us shia people, never mind the rest of the muslims. Our ideology, forgety the rest of the shia im going to just talk about in hizbollah, because thats my central concern, when im big and powerful enough to have concerns about a wider region of concern then ill talk about the rest, in hizbollah we are willing and would love to be martyred in the cause of defending our rights, respect, dignity, honour and aims in life and the hereafter. We are willing to die standing than live on our knees being you're "bitches". Get that into you're head if you don't. You think you're going to upset us if you kill us all? We're already dead, how can we get upset? But we die as martyrs of religion and faith, we stride and march into heaven alongside with the prophets and Imams. You'll be doing exactly what we want to achieve in life and that's martydrom. You all love you're lifes too much to give your lifes for a cause, while we love our life but not more than our love of being martyred knowing we are doing the right thing for the generations to come. While you lot are lover of life, we are lover of martydrom. Don't get me wrong, we love life too, but one where we are living in dignity and respect, not "bitches". Thats not even a red line. Thats no line, anything 1000 steps easier than living as your bitches is still worse than a red line. Anyways, who wouldn't want to achieve martydrom which guarantees you paradise?
Our ideology is much different than yours, and when your puny minds understand it only then can we reason. Their is no shame in death, the shame is the way you die. Saddam who died a humiliating death which he deserved since a very long time ago, or hadi nasrallah who had yet to understand the beauty of life, but would rather die defending and freeing his land so his brethrens could enjoy theirs. The greatness of our brave warriors is that they were willing to scrifice themselves and their souls to achieve a victory they might not be alive and present to enjoy or celebrate. Do you understand?
No money, no rocketee.
we have both, thank you.
Arabs have been living on their knees for millennia.
Im not arguing, but who are the arabs you have in mind when you say the word. In your theory you seem to give me two choices, either submerge to our all powerful influence and live on your knees like our japanese and arab bitches, or defy us and pay with your billion lives. I choose the billion lives. Life is nothing but a test, you can make some mistakes but make them up in other parts of the exam, but when its a 50 mark test, and you reach the 30 mark question, you can't afford to get it wrong, because if you do, irrelevent if you get the other 20, you fail. Yes? Your two choices are in themselves offensive and insulting because you degrade me into your bitch before i give an answer because you think you can impose one of both on me by force. The only thing you don't understand is that death in itself is a protest against you. With every life lost, the scream will only get louder not quieter. It may sound stupid, but just read the full story of imam hussains martydrom and come back to me. I would beg you if i have to to actually read the whole story, then if you're feeling realy pro-reading, read the narratives etc. Martydrom = defiance not submission or waste.
With nukes, how long would it take to kill 10% - 120 million Muslims? Half an hour.
Maybe. But the drawback being it would be at the price of the world destroyed 7 times over.
To kill the rest of them - not even 80%, 95-100% - if they didn't quit? Another half an hour.
Again Maybe. But at the price of destroying probably something the size of neptune 10 times over. Another thing, you must have some very smart Nukes. Are these muslim-killing-only nukes? Middle east is full of muslims + jews + christians + druze + athiest + + + + + + + + And what about the rest of the world's muslims living in non-arab and non-muslim countries?
The destruction of israel would come at the expense of destroying 6 million jewish israelis, which account for just over a thrid of the worlds jewish population. I don't think the jews controlling the west would accep this, would they? especially since they believe each one jew is worth humankind. They wouldn't want to sacrifice a jewish soul for coupla billion muslim ones would they now, let alone 6 million! Jewish ZIONISTS too. Its starting to become hard to find these in big numbers. Anyways, if israel saw whats going on and realised that the nukes would carry on and destroy it and everything around it, it would retaliate with their own nukes against every country in every corner of the world, start a nuke war, and destroy humankind.
This is self destructive and ludicrous tactic. You just dream in some next imaginated world that has no logical sense at all.
I'm a soft Westerner, I don't enjoy the sight of blood and maimed corpses.
Ofcourse! you just proved it with your insightful views.
Hez. would be massacred,
Their have been many chances to do so, the recent summer one not being an exeption. Everytime you have failed, why haven't you done it already? Israel set up a jail in northern israel to put every hizbollah person that would be captured after hizbollah was crushed and "massacred". Don't think that israel + west didn't try! They did, believe me. But failed. Very Very Very badly. PS MJT israel formally admitted 2 days ago they were defeated in lebanon.
though one wonders why you're not there
I happen to believe there are too many hearts with arms fighting but not enough minds with pens. "The ink of a scholar is holier than the blood of a martyr" I live by this quranic verse. There are too many fighters, i myself believe i could contribute much more with my knowledge. Knowledge is power. Hizbollah operatives, even the dust cleaners (sic), must have a degree in uni to enter the organisation, otherwise bye bye habeebi So don't think in any way any of them are dumb, they are all educated people. But at the same time, you need a mix of military power as well as knowledge power to gain the ultimate power. You can't rely on just one purely withought considering the other. You must consider and act on both. You need the mix.
but now...what good are you?
Much more useful than someone who lives in fanastasia.
Other than the stuff that comes out of the ground, you are (materially) worthless like Alec Baldwin.
Oh well, at least i'm worth more than someone who fantasises about how to get rid of 1.2 billion people and thinks its physically possible to do in an hour. Don't you think? In my p.o.v you're not even worthy of living if you're as stupid as to think this way. Logic is your way of survival, and you're struggling my friend.
Yes, some of you (Lebanon being a fair example) get by on trade and such, but if not for oil there would be no trade, because the zoos have all the camels they need (we don't eat or ride them, we have beef and pork and cars), there is plenty of sand on Western beaches and deserts, and nobody really likes dates very much.
Their is no oil in lebanon, we still have a fairly ALRIGHT economy, not poverty is good enough, no shame in being poor, or in poverty, but easier to be the former than being the latter. Britain hardly exports anything other than services such as banking and telecommunication. 85% of britains work force work in the services sector. 3% in manual labour such as mining etc. The rest in normal labour (mix of good and service) such as catering, transporting goods etc.
Dubai is perfect example, using all their oil money to build the city of the next generation, because they know damn well that oil is not forever available, and are able to invest their money into making a beautifully perfect tourist attraction. The only thing im against is that they hardly produce or make their own productions. The steel is imported, the economists angineers and scientists are all foreign etc etc etc The arab world has neglected to create a motor. A small simple motor but would rather instead of invest in education and research, they like to make their buildings higher and nicer, and its not even their own people ideas, its some next western. Thats the difference between them, and us. We fund research and promote educated people, they don't. they find the easy way out.
What are you going to do when you run out of oil, or when it becomes unimportant because we make it ourselves or use alcohol or hydrogen or nuclear power or solar cells?
When that day has come, saudi arabia will be bombed back to the dedouin ages by the US for being bedouin, oil will be exclusive for whoever finds a way of creating it cheaply. auanfortunate if its an arab, because he will be assasinated and his ideas stolen, and if the arab state has been fortunate enough tio recieve it qand turn the theory into practice and actually create oil cheaply in labs, then the west will surround, siege the country, hunger its people, massacre them, bomb them and intimidate + terrorize them into submission. This is why we are a failure.
Bujt, by that time, people like me and hizbollah would have invested so mcuh in research and education that we are able to have, god willing, at least in lebanon, an economy that provides services best, especially banking, like we used to and wouldn't need to rely on any export for our annual budget and economic growth.
PS I'm glad you hate al-Qaida. That means it is at present not absolutely necessary to kill you.
Every person with a sense of humanity would do so. But the person i hate more than osama, who if we stretch to its peak has killed how many? i wonna be an idiot and say a million, i would hate the person more who thinks he can, able and willing to kill 1.2 billion people in the name if sorting the world's problems. And not to be hypocryt, i'd have to hate every killer alive or even dead today, and which i do such as blaire and bush who have bathed and swam in blood of the arabs and are thursty for more.
You seem like a nice young fool and when not angry, polite, which counts.
I would've said the same to you, but then i'd just be being too nice and generous. I hate people who exagerate. You should know.
He seems estatic to have given up all of his critical facualties to Hezbollah. He will not judge them, only love them. That's completely insane.
This confirms to me that you nothing about me. Ive said a million times im one of the most critical people you have probably ever met but you just don'tknow me enough to know that yet. I question my own sect, religion, beliefs and political + spiritual leaders to find answers than those given by them. I agree and disagree in alot of things. For example i disagree with the fact that in islam sharia if someone converts from islam to anything else he's legit to be killed, and in some cases (if he becomes athiest) must be killed. Im so against it and think its wrong, as much as im against "death to america" because i believe in "what you don't accept on yourself, don't accept on others", we wouldn't accept anyone saying "death to the arab world" or "death to the lebanon", but we say "death to america". Their are its justifications and alot of people mis-interpret it as us demanding for the death of AMERICANS. So no-one gets mixed up or has a bad idea of us, i would rather scrap that idea.
they can't handle harsh remarks or harsh truths
ONE, who's THEY? and if its got me included ill just say i actually do handle harsh remarks, proven by this rather lengthy article, but your harsh "truths" are anything BUT truths. You're jsut living in a fantasy world where they've already designed rockets and nukes that kill muslims only. What is this, islam-guided missiles?
You're statements in a way are most likely to be racist and based on a racist mind-set because i bet you anything right now you have some kind of stereotypical image of a muslim person, some dude who's half paki half arab with a turban and a dish-dasha standing in a desert with a camel next to him, since you're so obsesed and probably have a fetish over these animals. But im sorry my friend, lebanon is the last place where you fetishy desires could be fulfilled because lebanon doesn't have any camels. Sorry to break it to you, yes its painful and hard, but what can you do. Consider saudi and oooo egypt, them two countries have camel stadiums and parks and shit, not in lebanon.
Everyone here must understand lebanon. Lebanon isn't just another arab country in that region. Lebanon is a sole and unique case in this world. Yes, our country is in the region most troubled and most violent and backward and dumb and stupid people who produce leaders like abdullah and mubarak and OLMERT. But our people are peace loving people, modern people etc etc Our atmosphere of fun and life is better than the wests, from my experience at least MUCH better than london soddy and gloomy one. We are if you like the only people to escape the stereotypes and actually have the brains to move forward. But one thing. We are not poland, we do not get invaded and shrug at it and say oh well, theyre stronger. Thats not lebanese. We love peace, but wage war on those who force it on us. For us, to sacrifice women, children, houses, infrastructure and a couple of factories and holiday resorts is worth it if in return we guarantee and safe keep the dignity. Patriots all the way. Westeners - proved to be parrots all the way. You just keep repeating what your leaders and press tell you.
They have nothing.
oh, and you're sure about that?
I don't know how to get therough to HL. Do you know how to get through to HL? Have you found anything that works? Please let me know.
Have you ever tried reasoning. Yes, killing a billion person is a very effective and brilliant idea, and a very good sight for a soft westerner like you, i don't know what a hardcore would expect. But for once, just try reasoning. Here i am, i am arguing back, but i am reasoning with you at the same time. I explain how, why, and when and what. You just say "DA DA DA DA Wake up and das final." i can DA DA DA you back but we won't get anywhere soon, believe me.
I am approaching desperation in terms of awakening the sleeper.
yea well it sometimes turns out to be that you're the high and drowsy one that you think everyone's asleep aside from you, when the real sleeper here is you batata.
HL and his millions need to understand the strategic military, social, economic and political calculus.
I just want to liberate my land and prisoners and be left alone. I don't want calculus balbulus anything. I want to live and let live. You don't humiliate me, i don't bother you. You're afterall much more powerful than me, why would i want a poke at you for. But if you humiliate me and my people and think you can get back to your den without any disturbance then ooooh you're wrong, because i won't just poke you all night, ill be shaking your den all night.
I don't know how to nice them into peacefulness, civility, whatever you want to call it. They have the right to their own opinions. But they don't have the right to their own facts.
I don't need you to peacify me, if i didn't want a peaceful way out i'd be down there with a gun in my hand, not a text book. I seriously am not asking for much. Give back all land which really doesn't mean much to you because its not big enough, and the prisoners who aren't worth a jewish toe to you, and the water you steel, let america import it for you, and leave us alone. That's all. Israel has invaded and occupied lebanon since 1948. Tell me which of the parties that israel fights against existed in 1948. Hizbollah? Its founders weren't even born yet. Hamas? Their founders god hadn't even considered creating yet. Fatah? Their founders were still trading the equivilant of pokemon cards. Israel has ocuppied the 7 villages from lebanon since 1948 without any justification what so ever. They are now forgotten. Thats what will happen to shebaa and kafar shouba if they stay too long in enemy hands without being resisted for. Israel is not the generous kind.
If Arabs are the equal of other men, which I have to assume is the case
You disgust me. If killing 1.2 billion wasn't enough for you, you try to de-humanise us? That's worse than red-lines and insult. Please control yourself and preserve your manners.
Anyway HL has already proven himself immune to all ideas.
Im the exact opposit of that. Think of me as an oppurtunitist. Very open, very aware and ready to talk about new opportunities anytime anywhere. But not when you insult or accuse me.
He's a boy in love with Hezbollah
And you're a sick child fantasising of the day you'll kill a billion...all muslims...with muslim seeking missiles...and your name is dipsy...and live in teletubbie land lol. Please man, go find someone else to tell your "scary" stories to, im 17, not 1
Posted by: hezbollah lover at January 11, 2007 01:40 PMMy advice to you, is you are going way too wild and carried-away by visiting extremes your own president has never thought of.
You are mistaken.
I am quite certain that President Bush has considered what the likely outcome of an Iran with nuclear weapons is.
I am also quite certain that several of the people who work for President Bush have also thought about this.
Thinking about these things is part of their job, as is planning what to do if these possibilities ever become reality.
I am also quite sure that at least one of these plans involves a very very large number of dead people, and I do not mean Americans. I mean people in the middle east.
It is not the current plan. It is one of the alternatives if the current plan fails.
What I do not understand is why so many people in the middle east want the current plan to fail. Can you tell me?
Do they not understand what the alternatives are? Do they not understand that the United States cannot leave the middle east until an alterative to petroleum is invented? Do they not understand that the United States does not care one iota for the details of the Shia vs Sunni feud or what one tribe did to another, be it a thousand years ago or yesterday. We do not care if you live in peace and prosperity or chaos and poverty. What the United States and every other industrialized economy cares about is that the resource that fuels the industrialized economies that is the basis for our power continues to flow... and that anyone interfering with that flow is calling down a wrath that has razed cities and can kill millions of people in the blink of an eye, a wrath second only to that of the almighty himself.
Do they want that?
Too many people in the middle east mistake restraint for weakness, and it is leading to a confrontation that will kill many people who do not need to die. While you are in Britain, make history one of the subjects you study. Study what the Europeans did to each other from 1939 to 1944. Study what the US did to Japan between 1941 and 1945. Study how the US and the USSR spent half a century preparing to unleash even more titanic forces of destruction upon each other... and understand that those weapons still exist, locked away in arsenals in case they are needed.
The west is restrained in the use of force because we understand the consequences.
Posted by: rosignol at January 11, 2007 09:38 PMThanks, rosignol. I hadn't been back in awhile and I was afraid HL might feel neglected. Of course he is happy talking to himself. Would he be the Arabic equivalent of a chickenhawk or a 101st Fighting Keyboarder?
Posted by: nichevo at January 12, 2007 12:59 PMBTW, regarding fears for the earth's crust: We and the Soviets conducted appx. 2000 nuclear tests in Nevada (and a few other places in the US) and in their desert ranges in the USSR. AFAIK the earth's crust is still as solid as HL's own.
Ahh, the bravery of ignorance.
Posted by nichevo at January 12, 2007 01:01 PM
BTW, regarding fears for the earth's crust: We and the Soviets conducted appx. 2000 nuclear tests in Nevada (and a few other places in the US) and in their desert ranges in the USSR. AFAIK the earth's crust is still as solid as HL's own.
Ahh, the bravery of ignorance.
(reposted from the Interview with Hugh Hewitt post)
Posted by: nichevo at January 12, 2007 01:02 PM"Its also worth pointing out that Al Qaeda accuses Hezbollah of being Zionist tools because Nasrallah won't allow Sunni terrorists to come into Lebanon and use the south as a launch pad for strikes into Israel."
...and you got mad at me over this point...
I guess its water under the bridge.
Posted by: Freedom Now at January 13, 2007 01:40 AMRidiculous. U consider urself a journalist reporting what u saw and witnessed first hand?
I'm an American Lebanese guy, born and raised in Jounieh, Lebanon (about 20km north of beirut), been living in California, USA for the last 5 years now but i go back to Lebanon every summer and every chance i get.
I spent about 4 months and some in Beirut, dating from September 06 to January 07, and witnessed all the demonstrations and sit ins u are talkin about from day one. and i actually was present on day one (December 1st 06) which happens to be the biggest protest in recorded Lebanese history, with about a million and a couple thousand people marching throughout downtown. thats about 1/3 of the Lebanese population.
First of all i would like to inform you, that it is not a Hizbollah protest, though Hizbollah is a part of it, neither is it a pro syrian, or iran or anti US or none of that bullshit u guys seem to hide behind. Its an opposition sit in, protest, whatever we are calling it, led by General Michel Aoun's Tayyar movement which happens to be the biggest Christian movement in Lebanon, Hizbollah is also part of it, so is the Amal movement led by the parliemant speaker Berri and another Christian movement led by parliemant member Franjieh. So to make my point clearer, it is not an Islamic Extremists, or Terrorits like Mr Noah claimed protest.
Me and my american gf were present there for the majority of the time we stayed in Lebanon, we wore nothing but our regular clothes (no scarfes, no hizbollah colors, none of that) and we were still welcomed and treated like everybody else, we spoke english all the time with everybody that was present there and nobody seemed to have a problem with it, we were never approached by anybody in a way that was hostile or even close to it..
It is sad if we are gona call your piece anything close to journalism, a journalist is supposed to show the facts and connect the reader to the story as is. nothin more nothin less. u showed ur bias throughout the piece in a desperate attempt to show ur side of it, but u know and i know and Lebanon know, the majority of the people in Lebanon know what the real story is and who the real terrorists are.
U have to excuse me now, me and my gf are gettin our bags ready to head back to Lebanon this week, and go get something to eat in downtown where americans are more welcomed that any other people, and ive witnessed that first hand and so have all my friends that have been there too.
No buying hizbollah flags, no nothings, speaking english, walkin around with earrings, tattoos and wifebeaters on. the girls in shortskirts and anything they would wear here in Long beach, CA.
Im out now, keep up ur work and try to get the facts straight in ur next story.
P.S: One more thing, next time u visit Lebanon, ask about the restaurant next to Virgin Megastore downtown, that is a real good Lebanese and American food place, and guess what? its owned by hizbollah.
Me and my girl have a table booked there for the weeked.
Peace.
压力开关
压力变送器
压力传感器
流量开关
流量计
液位计
液位开关
温湿度记录仪
风速仪
差压开关
可燃气体检测仪
wow power leveling
wow powerleveling
runescape power leveling
runescape powerleveling
runescape power level
runescape money
runescape gold
buy runescape gold
buy runescape money
runescape items
runescape accounts
buy runescape accounts
buy runescape items
cheap runescape money
cheap runescape gold
runescape gp
dofus kamas
dofus kamas
Achat DOFUS Kamas
Guild Wars Gold
buy Guild Wars Gold
GW Gold
陈楚生
runescape
rs gold
runescape
runescape
runescape gold
runescape money
runescape gold
runescape tip
runescape money
runescape item
runescape
runescape item
runescape gp
runescape item
runescape cheat
runescape gp
runescape cheat
runescape tip
runescape gp
runescape money
rs gp
buy runescape gold
buy runescape money
cheap runescape gold
Hi!If you are a rs player,use little time to read the article,please.Thank you!
Free News:If you buy Runescape Gold more than 5M we will give you 1M for free!This
is a rare opportunity!
We are a professional Store, we supply Runescape gold cheap.
And we will supply more items for you. All we do is just for your best experience
in games.
http://www.igxy.com/game/runescape
runescape cheats money
buy runescape money
buy rs money
buy rs2 gold
buy rs2 money
rs2 money
rs2 gold
runescape cheats
rs money
rs gold
rs coins
money
gold
coins
runescape
runescape money
runescape gold
runescape coins
http://www.100bless.com
runescape cheats money
buy runescape money
buy rs money
buy rs2 gold
buy rs2 money
rs2 money
rs2 gold
runescape cheats
rs money
rs gold
rs coins
money
gold
coins
runescape
runescape money
runescape gold
runescape coins
哈尔滨热线
哈尔滨电脑维护
哈尔滨电脑维修
哈尔滨电脑报价
wow gold
wow gold
wow gold
wow gold
wow gold
wow gold
World of Warcraft Gold
rolex replica
World of Warcraft Gold
rolex
beijing hotel
beijing hotel
china tour
china tour
great wall
great wall
beijing travel
beijing travel
beijing
beijing
窃听器
窃听器
手机窃听器
手机窃听器
翻译公司
机票
性病
尖锐湿疣
搬家公司
搬家公司
展览公司
中高年 転職
転職
派遣会社
アルバイト 求人情報
人材派遣
パチンコ 攻略
ダイエット
合宿免許
おなら
フランス語
婚約指輪
競馬
ブライダル
競馬 予想
お見合い
商务网
保洁公司
塑钢门窗
ups电源
心脏病
试管婴儿
试管婴儿
捐卵
捐卵
rolex replica
婚庆
婚庆公司
北京婚庆
北京婚庆公司
代孕
试管婴儿
wow power leveling
powerleveling
powerleveling
power leveling
power leveling
wrath of the Lich King
wrath of the Lich King
wow powerleveling
wow powerleveling
wow power leveling
wow power leveling
powerleveling
powerleveling
power leveling
power leveling
wow powerleveling
wow powerleveling
wow power leveling
wow power leveling
powerleveling
powerleveling
power leveling
power leveling
卫星电视上海卫星电视卫星电视安装安装卫星电视圣诞树网站建设google优化Google左侧优化google排名Google左侧排名GOOGE左侧优化排名 上海google优化google优化排名上海google左侧排名上海google排名上海google左侧优化google优化Google左侧优化短信群发短信群发器短信群发群发短信短信群发器小灵通群发器小灵通短信群发器短信群发软件手机短信群发软件短信群发设备手机短信群发设备手机短信群发器网站建设网站设计网站制作美女图片美女写真性感美女制服美腿西洋美女走光偷拍网友自拍包装印刷上海包装印刷免费电影免费下载电影免费在线电影上海印刷上海包装弯管弯管上海hp笔记本维修上海惠普笔记本维修上海IBM笔记本维修上海DELL笔记本维修上海联想笔记本维修上海东芝笔记本维修上海acer笔记本维修上海华硕笔记本维修上海索尼笔记本维修上海sony笔记本维修上海hp笔记本维修上海IBM笔记本维修弯管 弯管加工 路灯节能路灯监控 合同能源管理google优化google左侧优化google排名google左侧排名卫星电视卫星电视安装上海卫星电视安装卫星电视安装卫星电视卫星电视卫星电视安装上海卫星电视
Posted by: 111 at November 29, 2007 12:33 AMrunescape money runescape gold runescape money runescape gold wow power leveling wow powerleveling Warcraft Power Leveling Warcraft PowerLeveling buy runescape gold buy runescape money runescape items runescape gold runescape money runescape accounts runescape gp dofus kamas buy dofus kamas Guild Wars Gold buy Guild Wars Gold lotro gold buy lotro gold lotro gold buy lotro gold lotro gold buy lotro gold runescape money runescape power leveling runescape money runescape gold dofus kamas cheap runescape money cheap runescape gold Hellgate Palladium Hellgate London Palladium Hellgate money Tabula Rasa gold tabula rasa money lotro gold buy lotro gold Tabula Rasa Credit Tabula Rasa Credits Hellgate gold Hellgate London gold dofus kamas buy dofus kamas 血管瘤 肝血管瘤 音乐剧 北京富码电视 富码电视 富码电视台 7天酒店 7天连锁酒店 7天连锁 自清洗过滤器 过滤器 压力开关 压力传感器 流量开关 流量计 液位计 液位开关 温湿度记录仪 风速仪 可燃气体检测仪 wow power leveling wow powerleveling Warcraft PowerLeveling Warcraft Power Leveling World of Warcraft PowerLeveling World of Warcraft Power Leveling runescape power leveling runescape powerleveling
runescape money runescape gold wow power leveling 棕榈树
eve isk
eve online isk
eve isk
eve online isk
runescape money
runescape gold
runescape account
runescpae money
runescape gold
runescape account
runescape money
runescape gold
runescape account
[url=http://www.runelevel.com]runescape money[/url]
[url=http://www.runelevel.com]runescape gold[/url]
[url=http://www.runelevel.com]runescape account[/url]
[url=http://www.rs2powerleveling.com]runescape money[/url]
[url=http://www.rs2powerleveling.com]runescape gold[/url]
[url=http://www.rs2powerleveling.com]runescape account[/url]
[url=http://www.rs2lostcity.com]runescape money[/url]
[url=http://www.rs2lostcity.com]runescape gold[/url]
[url=http://www.rs2lostcity.com]runescape account[/url]
货架
货架
仓储货架
仓储货架
仓库货架
仓库货架
货架厂
货架厂
货架公司
货架公司
南京货架
上海货架
托盘
托盘
托盘
托盘
塑料托盘
塑料托盘
钢托盘
钢托盘
钢托盘
钢托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
钢制托盘
钢制托盘
钢制托盘
仓储笼
仓储笼
仓储笼
仓储笼
仓库笼
仓库笼
仓库笼
仓库笼
折叠式仓储笼
折叠式仓储笼
手推车
手推车
静音手推车
静音手推车
物流台车
物流台车
钢制料箱
钢制料箱
手动液压托盘搬运车
手动液压托盘搬运车
