Indict, Quit and Blame the system!

Franklin Lamb’s Saturday Mideast Report –- Al Manar

Daniel Bellemares' dilemma

It’s unlikely, but not impossible, that Special Tribunal for Lebanon  Prosecutor, Daniel Bellemare ever met,  U.S. Senator Wayne Lyman Morse (Dem. Oregon), one of three Senator’s to vote against Lyndon Johnson’s fake Gulf of Tonkin resolution that authorized the US military to bomb North Vietnam a generation ago and a  leading American legal scholar.  One can’t help thinking that Bellemare could use Morse’s  counsel on the subject of what some are calling  the Rafiq Hariri murder,  “ a Trial of the Century” while some international lawyers fear it could be a “Trial for a Century.”  Hezbollah Deputy Secretary General Sheikh Naim Qassem called the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL)’s pending indictment “an act of aggression against Hezbollah and Lebanon.” Others are calling the ITL project Israel’s 6th war against Lebanon.

Wayne Morse was the Senate’s acknowledged expert on courtroom Procedural Rights of the accused, whether in local, national, or international courts and in one famous Senate debate, the former law school Dean told his colleagues:  “ Senators,  I don’t have to remind you that without full Procedural Rights none of us have Substantive Rights in any Court of law, Local, State, National or International.”

What Wayne Morse meant of course was that the outcome of any Court or Administrative proceeding is largely  pre-determined by the  Procedures adopted by the tribunal.  And that is a major problem for those wanting the  Special Tribunal for Lebanon to represent justice and for Prosecutor Daniel Bellemare personally, who, said to be increasingly aware of the STL procedural pitfalls now reportedly wants out of what has increasingly become a farce dressed up to look like a Hall of Justice.

Prosecutor Bellemare, appears to be getting ready to heed his family’s wishes, advice of colleagues, and his own sinking feeling  about prospects for success with the Hariri case. He may be planning to do what many a Prosecutor has done with a seriously defective  case that he is being forced to bring to indictment by “superiors”, even when he has serious doubts about its viability:  indict and quit and let the “system” deal with the aftermath.  Perhaps citing  family or health issues “Bellemare will likely issue indictments to please the Americans and Israelis and then he  may well get out of town, knowing that this case is  thoroughly politicized and polarized and becomes more so every day. According to a senior lecturer in International law at the LSE any indictment will be DOA (dead on arrival) and many at the STL realize this. The reasons include the growing  doubts among STL and International lawyers regarding the scarcity of  probative, relevant or material telecom data evidence to convict anyone.   State Department lawyers realized this months ago but did not calculate the growing Lebanese and now international skepticism  over the path the STL is taking.  Time is running out for the indictment seekers.  Tel Aviv and Washington want the indictments out by December 15, before the STL, UN, State Department begin to shut down for the Holidays until after New Years.  The clock is ticking.  On 12/3/10 the Saudi-owned Asharq al-Awsat reported on the intensifying  Saudi-Syrian efforts at a resolution while at the same time there is a widening split between US-Israel efforts on the one hand for a fast indictment and France and Saudi Arabia who was the indictment delayed.

The loose cannon of recent revelations about possible Lebanese traitors working with the US Embassy and even Lebanese governmental officials to aid Israel in  attacking Lebanon while using their positions to prevent the Lebanese Armed Forces from performing its most basic function which is  to defend Lebanon may weaken the rush to indict.  Serious questions are being raised about the future of “Embassy Beirut”  from revelations contained in current and soon to be released Wilkileaks, according  to a UN Senate Foreign Relations Committee staffer.

Based on phone and internet discussions with international lawyers at the London School of Economics, the International Court of Justice in the Hague, and colleagues who work in the area of Public International Law an emerging consensus is developing concerning perhaps fatal procedural issues that continue to arise at the STL.  Such problems, which make it unlikely that the Hariri Assassination  case will ever go to trial.  Some international lawyers who have worked on international tribunals, are familiar with Rules of Procedures at the ICJ and the ICC  and are following the STL are increasingly concluding that there will not be a Trial.

The first “Procedure Rule” for the STL was adopted as urged by the US State Department  for the   Tribunal to be sanctioned under Chapter 7 of the UN Charter.  This allowed UN forces to enforce any ruling issued by the Tribunal with the use of maximum force it deemed necessary.  Since then a number of Procedural rules have been adopted in order to assure that Hezbollah is found to be  a terrorist organization.  Among those made public to date is the decision to try those accused in absentia, a rarity in international tribunals that obviously does not allow the accused the chance to present a defense. This was exactly Kofi Annan’s fear as he objected to  elements in UNSCR 1757. STL rules for admission of evidence, pleadings, hearsay evidence, demonstrative, circumstantial direct evidence are being broadened and to date, surprisingly  have not been effectively challenged by lawyers from the  195 UN Member States.  Some resistance from amicus curie international lawyers is starting to jell and this growing skepticism is another reason for the ‘rush to indict’ pressure from Washington, Paris and London among other locals.

International tribunals are intended for crimes against humanity, serial war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes like massacres  but not for an individual case of assassination. The  claimed justification that Hariri’s assassination threatens global security is obviously baseless. Bhutto was assassinated but she never got an international tribunal nor did Omar Karameh who was also assassinated  while in office. If anything, the Hariri case belongs in the International Criminal Court which was established in 2002.

International lawyers are comparing the STL with the tribunal for former Yugoslavia is dangerous. Shortly after an indictment was issued in that case, 8000 Muslims were slaughtered in Srebrenica, under the eyes of international forces. One analyst asked  “Do “they” want civil war to break out in Lebanon after the indictment, is this their scheme?”

Among dozens of evidentiary problems are the issue of several false witness, compromised physical evidence from the crime scene, serious contradictions regarding the weapons used to assassinate PM Hariri, failure to give sufficient attention to photos and video footage from the crime scene,  or conduct autopsies of the victims, presence of residues of enriched uranium reported by doctors who examined bodies of victims,  the errors involved in the arbitrary arrest of  four generals as ‘suspects’, rush to judgment concerning the involvement of Syria, staff leaks to preferred media outlets  sloppy investigative work including the harassment of  college students on campus and women at  a  South Beirut gynecological clinic, failure to seriously consider evidence of Israeli involvement, among many others

In Lebanon, the Lebanese Forces and March 14 regard the STL as more important than stability.  So does Hilary Clinton in her statement of 12/3/10. They want the indictment to be issued so that they study it and then say if they agree to it or not. But based on what? They couldn’t decide on how to try false witnesses for six months (because obviously this will make some March 14 heads roll) so  they may be incompetent on this issue as well. On 12/3/10 the Saudi-owned Asharq al-Awsat reported on the intensifying  Saudi-Syrian efforts at a resolution while at the same time there is a widening split between US-Israel efforts on the one hand for a fast indictment and France and Saudi Arabia who was the indictment delayed.

In addition to Bellemare’s departure, some staff and STL  insiders reportedly believe that President of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon, Antonio Cassese must step down  given his pro-Zionist activities and his often expressed views that , the armed resistance in Palestine, Lebanon, Iraq and Afghanistan should be tried for “terrorism”. These views are seen as corrupting the judicial process given Cassese key role in making procedural and evidentiary rulings as the case proceeds.

According to a legal analysts based at the Academy of International Law at the International Courts of Justice in the Hague, the double standards in the STL are pervasive. One example cited was that the ITL leaked that investigators interrogated Hezbollah members, yet when asked if Israelis were ever interviewed the Prosecutors Office is mute. In point of fact, an event said to have weighed heavily on Hezbollah’s decision to stop cooperating with the STL was the line of questioning and aggressive treatment five of its members received when Hezbollah asked them two years ago to meet with STL investigators. Reportedly, most of the questions had nothing to do with the individuals as possible suspects in the Hariri murder but rather the questioning covered security issues, sought personal information about Hezbollah leaders activities,  typical work schedules,  places frequented, home addresses, those in the Party who were friends with Rafiq Hariri, cars they drove, where they purchased gasoline etc.

May 25, 2001 Beirut: Former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri talks with Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, right. Photo Credit: Pulse Media

Reportedly two were asked about what Hezbollah thought about Rafiq Hariri. They reported that Hezbollah admired the Prime Minister Rafiq.  One reason is that Hariri more than once provided political counsel, sometimes cover, and insisted that the Lebanese resistance was just that, a resistance movement and hence exempted from the UNSCR 1559 and various  calls for the Hezbollah ‘militia’ to be disarmed. According to PM Rafiq Hariri’s wife Nazek, she could tell when Rafiq had met with Hezbollah officials, particularly Hasan Nasrallah, because he returned from such meetings  is a good mood and energized.  The men used aids de camp to arrange meetings that only Rafiq’s immediate family knew about.  Knowing that Israel had  total control of Lebanon’s phone system, Rafiq would sometimes ask his interlocutor, “ Do you have fruits?”, meaning was it convenient for he and Nasrallah to meet.  If it was, Rafiq Hariri would come to Dahiyeh and visit, usually in the middle of the night.  Hezbollah’s Secretary-General once wrote that he felt that PM Hariri understood Hezbollah and understood him personally.  Both, came from South Lebanon villages and from families of very modest means.  Both lost cherished sons. Both knew Lebanon’s position in the region and internal political configuration were not ideal and sometimes easy prey for foreign adventures.  Both were good Muslims. one Sunni the other Shia,  and deeply believed in dialogue and finding common ground while eschewing petty antagonism over differences in Koranic interpretation in favor of Muslim  unity and respect for Lebanon’s Christian communities.  Both appeared to relish their private conversations which are said to have ranged from internal, regional, and international politics, to family, Palestine, history, religion, telling each other jokes, and just ‘hanging out.’  By all accounts they respected one another and developed an abiding  friendship.  Both were Patriots and despite sometimes being accused  of being too cozy  with this or that external politic al power centers, both viewed themselves as Lebanese, “first, last and always”. A family member of PM Hariri remembers the Martyr Rafiq saying,  more than once to Nasrallah, “the day the government decides to disarm the Resistance that’s the day I quit politics.”

That there will likely not be a trial, the Hariri assassination case is of little concern to just about everyone, except the Hariri family who seek closure and justice. Israel and the US do not need or even want a trial anymore. Israeli Knesset member, Tzahi Hanegbi,  expressed hope on 11/10/10  that the Special Tribunal for Lebanon could open a battle with Hezbollah, amid Israeli worries of  losing a golden opportunity for a direct confrontation with Hezbollah. According to Hanegbi,  “It’s not important that the Lebanese who carried out the assassination be prosecuted. What’s even more important is to portray Hezbollah as a terrorist party which killed a popular and beloved leader in Lebanon. Gabi Ashkenazi said this week that Israel is closely monitoring the repercussion of the indictment to see if they might reach the border.

An indictment will serve US-Israel projects swimmingly  as the public quickly tires of this charade the one narrative that will be repeated for years will be:  “Shia Hezbollah was indicted for killing the Sunni Saint Hariri so let’s go hang em!” Only frustrated international  lawyers will be interested in the flaws in the case.  The important “historic fact” will forever remain the Indictment.  When the indictments are issued everyone can go home.  Other events will likely overtake this story and it will likely fade surprisingly fast for it was never much about the murdered Prime Minister and the other 20 killed and dozens injured. It was about Hezbollah being the last bone in Israel’s throat and the necessity of seeing the Lebanese Resistance destroyed by any means possible.

Dr. Franklin Lamb is Director, Americans Concerned for Middle East Peace, Beirut-Washington DC, Board Member of The Sabra Shatila Foundation, and a volunteer with the Palestine Civil Rights Campaign, Lebanon. He is the author of The Price We Pay: A Quarter-Century of Israel’s Use of American Weapons Against Civilians in Lebanon and is doing research in Lebanon for his next book. He can be reached at fplamb@gmail.com

Related posts:


  1. Debbie Menon on the 04. Dec, 2010 remarked #


    Franklin Lamb - director, Americans Concerned for Middle East Peace, Beirut; Richard Millett - journalist, London; and Dr. Saeb Shaath – Middle East affairs expert, Gaza

    ‘Tribunal is Israel’s 6th war on Lebanon’

    Following is the transcript of the interview:

    Press TV: Mr. Lamb, Lebanon’s Al-Akhbar newspaper has reported that Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman has said that Tel Aviv has contributed to the Hariri tribunal. How do you assess how that development’s been taken in Lebanon?

    Lamb: I don’t think it’s a surprise at all in Lebanon. Five years ago, before the tribunal really began its work, Israel was deeply involved in the critical decision of setting up the tribunal. And it was Israel and AIPAC (the American Israel Public Affairs Committee) and Howard Berman, who is the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, who convinced the Congress to pressure the White House and the State Department to do what? To create this tribunal under Chapter 7 of the United Nations Charter.

    From the beginning, not only was Israel involved, but they were able to achieve a very powerful and important decision, which was to put it under Chapter 7, which allows for the use of force to implement the decisions of the tribunal and to even come and arrest suspects if the tribunal directs them to do that and if the Security Council approves, so this is not new. Lieberman made those comments, but it’s not surprising at all because it’s well known that Israel has been involved from the beginning. Some people here say that Israel has been involved in the assassination itself — I do not know if that is true. Some say they’ve controlled it, but it’s not surprising the Lieberman would say that.

    Press TV: Mr. Millett, is it a good step that they are cooperating or does it prove Hezbollah’s accusations from the start that this tribunal is an Israeli ploy or has been tainted by Israeli involvement?

    Millett: I know you’ve been reporting that Israel is involved in some way, shape, or form with this tribunal. I think what Mr. Lamb is saying is conspiracy theory. I would think the last thing I would want to do is be involved in anything like this important investigation into the assassination of a Lebanese politician who was seeking to reform and move Lebanon forward. Israel knows that any association with the tribunal or Lebanon would undermine its authority, and I can’t see any way that they would really want to do that. Hezbollah and supporters of Hezbollah would be claiming this is a Western, Israeli Zionist plot to implicate Hezbollah. But we’ve seen a recent Canadian Broadcasting Corporation documentary, which has evidence implicating Hezbollah, telecommunications evidence that puts Hezbollah at the scene of the crime. We don’t know who was there or what was said when the telephone calls were made… telecommunications evidence does heavily implicate Hezbollah in this, and it’s not surprising to hear the voices now trying to once again underline that Israel’s involved.

    Press TV: To clarify, Press TV’s not reporting this as a fact, we’ve reported this news story that’s come out of Al-Akhbar newspaper in Lebanon, and I said at the beginning of the show these are reported comments by the foreign minister of Israel.

    Dr. Saeb Shaath, Mr. Millett alludes to this Canadian documentary broadcast on CBC. It said it had uncovered evidence that strongly implicated Hezbollah in the assassination, and to back that allegation it contained detailed diagrams showing how investigators traced interlinking networks of mobile phones, which they believe led from where the explosion and the assassination took place right to Hezbollah’s communications center under a hospital in Beirut’s south. It’s caused a big stir in Lebanon. Are these accusations about Israel’s involvement just another ploy by Hezbollah to divert attention?

    Dr. Shaath: The way I understand things is by the result of who is benefiting at the end of the day from the whole thing. When we look at this we are sure who is benefiting out of creating havoc and chaos in Lebanon from such a tribunal, which is under Chapter 7 of the United Nations (Charter) and (which) is going to be enforced by military action at the end of the day. So all of this, the Canadian documentary and all of that, they can falsify anything. There are wars being waged on the Middle East because of false information, as we know, in Iraq and Afghanistan. We know how they operate, but in here, the involvement of Israel is very clear.

    There was photographic footage that Hezbollah presented and there are the recordings of Israeli spies’ confessions proving that as well, and common sense on the Middle East, by any political analyst or anybody involved in the politics of the Middle East or international politics, will understand one simple fact by this tribunal, which is sponsored by the United Nations, and Israel is in the middle of it. They are aiming at weakening the resistance in the Middle East, especially in Lebanon. For one fact, if I want to go to the business side of matters, the Israeli government is under severe pressure by its own gas and petrol companies to protect their installations onshore and offshore of the Zionist entity under, they say, from the threat of the Hezbollah missiles, which can hit their target within ten meters from anywhere in Lebanon.

    Press TV: Just coming back to the (Canadian) documentary, Mr. Millett, CBC said that its month-long investigation was based on interviews with sources inside the inquiry and on documents leaked from the tribunal. Is that a problem? Doesn’t that, in a sense, discredit the tribunal as the big criticism that there seem to be moles and leaks every week when it comes to this tribunal and nothing’s really being kept private in terms of what is being investigated? Does that impact the credibility at all?

    Millett: Obviously there are problems with the tribunal. There is a slow start to the tribunal. One of the main problems is some of the main witnesses have been assassinated. Captain Wassam E, he did a lot of investigation into the telecommunications and the phone calls that were taking place just before and after the assassination, was assassinated along with one of his colleagues. And they found Wissam Hassan, who was the (ISF) intelligence chief (Hariri’s chief of protocol), was also implicated in making phone calls directly to Hezbollah. So we have to wait, obviously, for the full decision of this tribunal. You can’t obviously just go on the evidence necessarily of the Canadian documentary, obviously because we have to wait for the actual conclusions, which will hopefully be published towards the end of the year, but Hezbollah certainly has the motive to have taken out Rafiq Hariri. He was someone who wanted to get rid of Syrian forces from Lebanon and came back to Lebanon for Lebanese people and we saw the March 14th movement, that has since been seriously undermined by a Hezbollah coup and by the presence of President Ahmadinejad coming to visit Lebanon last month, and we saw Lebanon turn out in praise of Ahmadinejad. So we find evidence, we find the motive, but we obviously have to wait for the actual conclusions to be announced.

    Press TV: Mr. Lamb, we talk of Ahmadinejad’s visit to Beirut. Hariri’s expected in Tehran. What do you make of that trip? Is this all the lobbying trying to take place to keep things calm?

    Lamb: I think it’s very clear that the Iranians and the Saudis and the Syrians are trying to reach some sort of solution to deal with a very serious crisis. And with respect to Mr. Millett’s idea that there is a motive for Hezbollah, my goodness there is a motive, the primary motive is certainly Israel. Remember, this tribunal is being called Israel’s sixth war against Lebanon. We had 1978, 80, 82, and 93. We had 1996 and 2006. What the Americans and John Kerry, when he went through the Middle East, besides telling the Syrians and the Lebanese that Israel might attack at any time, the message that was delivered by Kerry in Tel Aviv was ‘Do not attack Lebanon, do not attack Iran.’ There is now a situation here where the resistance in Lebanon has already achieved deterrence. Israel cannot defeat Hezbollah, the Americans are saying. Israel, probably contrary to my colleague Norman Finkelstein and others who expect an attack any day, I don’t think we’re going to see one. Israel cannot defeat the resistance militarily. So what they are doing, and it’s brilliant in a sense, they’re waging their sixth war against Lebanon with this tribunal because they understand, because they were involved from the beginning in setting it up under Chapter 7, as your guests have said. That is a very potent weapon.

    Press TV: You’re saying you don’t think Israel would attack Lebanon, but it’s certainly causing a lot of internal tension. Do you think the tribunal could cause violence internally and going towards some sort of civil war situation in terms of different factions fighting each other?

    Lamb: I take your point and it’s an excellent point. Certainly that is the wish and it has been the project of Israel and the US under Feltman for the past seven years. But do I think it will succeed? No. I think it will be good from their point of view that they could do that, but I think there is too much sophistication here in Lebanon and too much awareness of the fact that this is an aggression. This tribunal is waged against Lebanon and it’s the equivalent of a war in some respects.

    I don’t see that happening. First of all, no one has the power to instigate that. I think if there was violence, I think the resistance would deal with it quickly, and it would have the support of the international community and the Arabs and surrounding states. Frankly, I don’t see either of those things happening. I could be very wrong, but I don’t see a civil war, I don’t see an invasion from Israel because Israel cannot pay the price. They have admitted that they might lose 5% of their population. The CIA has reported that one third of Israelis, if there was a war, would leave either to Europe of America. I say we have deterrence here, and that’s why we have this sixth war against Lebanon against the resistance through the tribunal, and that’s the danger, and I think this struggle could happen for ten years. You can imagine, if they get this judgment, there could be sanctions. I don’t think they’re going to have troops coming in here, they’re not going to do that, nobody’s going to try to arrest anybody here. They know they can’t do that. But they can sanction, they can defame, they can attack in a hundred ways the resistance in Lebanon, and that’s the danger of this tribunal if they convict. They may not convict. It’s not going to be easy to convict, but you see what’s happening now and the tactic.

    Press TV: Dr. Shaath, when it comes to these aspects Mr. Lamb’s talking about, to a certain extent the situation has been contained by this agreement we’ve between Saudi Arabia and Syria, by all the lobbying that’s been going on, with the visits by Iranian delegations. Saudi King Abdullah is unwell right now, and there are fears that any kind of agreement made between regional powers may fall apart. And we’ve had Samir Geagea coming out and saying that the talks and any kind of agreement has stalemated for the last few weeks. How do you see that situation?

    Dr. Shaath: This assassination, everyone knows it was done by a very sophisticated intelligence agency. And we know what agencies have this sophistication, between the Mossad and the CIA. The other point, this tribunal, as your previous guest said and I agree totally, that they are aiming at destroying the resistance from within to create a civil war in Lebanon and to create this within because militarily they cannot defeat it.

    Now, when we see that danger and the negotiations happening in Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iran, and Lebanon, the main role here is for the Lebanese political powers, for all of them to gather together and save their country right now, to denounce this tribunal, and to denounce anything coming out of this tribunal straight away to save their country, and to tell this Lebanon now, say this tribunal is serving outside players who want to destroy their own country. They have to take that step, and that can help any negotiations and can stop any foreign players. Otherwise, if one of these Lebanese brings legitimacy to this tribunal, it can bring us to a lot of troubled times ahead. But the resistance can handle it and play it right because we have responsible resistance in Lebanon that care about the population and the Arab world as well. And they are not going to discredit the resistance. They cannot do it. The Arab people and the Muslim people highly respect the resistance in Lebanon.

    Press TV: Mr. Millett, I’m sure you disagree with the points our other two guests have made. Do you think the tribunal in any way has been politicized?

    Millett: Well, I obviously think it has. Having Hezbollah as a state within a state, and as I’ve said, it has a motive, it’s backed up by Iran and we’re talking about the internal tensions. I agree there are internal tensions. Anyway, I think Hezbollah is causing those internal tensions, and I hope there isn’t, but if there is a civil war, they will seek to drag Israel into it, and I think that nothing good is going to come out of Hezbollah’s presence in Lebanon, and the presence of the Iranian revolutionary guard, of course, throughout Lebanon that has trained Hezbollah. We have to wait for the judgment to come out, but I think it’s obviously going to implicate Hezbollah. Hezbollah has blown up Jewish centers in Argentina and American barracks in Lebanon. It’s done this before, and I’m sure there’s going to be indictments against Hezbollah in relation to the murder of Rafiq Hariri.

    Press TV: Mr. Lamb?

    Lamb: Well just to say to our colleague in London, there is absolutely no evidence to support what you’ve said about the deeds of Hezbollah in Argentina… I think the truth in the matter is exactly the opposite of what you suggest. Hezbollah is the main force, the broad-based political movement in Lebanon that will stop a civil war.

    The Israelis want nothing more than a civil war, as do the Americans. The only reason there hasn’t been a civil war is because of the resistance. Look at what the resistance did with Omar Bakhri, this man had a life sentence as supposedly some sort of al-Qaeda wannabe, he’s an enemy arguably of Hezbollah. Hezbollah got a lawyer for him and they got him out of jail.

    Hezbollah reaches out to all the factions, the Christians, the Sunnis, the Druze, and the rest. They are a stabilizing factor. So with all due respect, I think you’re mistaken about that.

    Press TV: What you’re saying, though, goes against so much expert analysis and political statements that we hear that in fact Hezbollah is ‘the’ destabilizing factor in Lebanon.

    Lamb: Yes ma’am, we do hear some of that, but as you know and your colleagues know, that’s not the case. This nonsense about a state within a state and Hezbollah is against the people, the only reason Israel is not in Nabatieh, in Sur, in Tyre… today is because of the resistance. Why are they thinking about moving out of Ghajar? Only because of the resistance. Without the resistance, this country wouldn’t have the sovereignty; you wouldn’t have the army in the south for instance, so no, I completely disagree with that.

    Press TV: Dr. Shaath, researching this BBC analysis from their correspondent, it says that if the tribunal’s findings indicted Hezbollah, that would affect its image in the Muslim world as the heroic resistance against Israel. Do you agree? Is Hezbollah’s reputation now on the line?

    Dr. Shaath: No I don’t agree whatsoever because Hezbollah has presented a great example of resistance throughout the Arab world and the Muslim world on how to stand against the hegemony of the evil of the USA and the evil of Israeli acts in the Middle East, and that example is scaring them. They want to defeat Hezbollah in any way and tarnish its reputation, and they will not succeed because the guys in Hezbollah are very smart, very sophisticated, and they believe in their cause, and the people are behind them 100%. Hezbollah is one of the major stabilizing factors in the Middle East right now. Otherwise, Israel would be creating a lot of ghettos all over Lebanon and other areas in the Middle East. It’s the only force right now of the resistance which is telling them we can counter-attack you and we can defend our territory.

    So whatever they’re going to bring on, from tribunals, from war, our resistance in the Middle East, led by Hezbollah, is capable of handling itself, and it commands a lot of respect, and they can do something else, and they cannot. I’m sure they cannot. I know my area very very well.


  2. Dawoodi Morkas on the 04. Dec, 2010 remarked #

    Rafik Hariri was a man of the West. There is no secret to it. However the truck which was loaded with explosives that blowed Hariri, was unmanned, a step in the books of either Hamas or Hezbollah, both do such acts with suicide bombers, it is only Israelis who save their man, and in the case of Hariri Israel is the main accused.

    Iran has shown resilience and fortitude in the stance against the West to draw down on its nuclear program.

    No nation can be brow beaten. It is a message the West must understand, how feeble the opponent. Afghanistan is a point in study, where the nation which has nothing has made the USA the nation that has every thing in the universe, to come to the negotiation table and offer, the enemy, what ever the Afghans wants just to let them off the hook!!!

    Lebanon is also such a nation which was made to crawl by the West. It stood up in the shape of the Hezbollah, now the West wants to negotiate with them on the terms of the Hezbollah, Iran has played key role in the fight against the USA in Iraq, in Afghanistan and in Lebanon. Not to mention the Palestinian movement, where the Hamas have given a tough time to the Israelis who have all the gadgets that the USA possesses.

    Iran is being threatened by the USA; however, the war with Iran will also prove to be a turning point in history as the world will see another world power in shape of Iran taking the world arena for its court to address.

    USA is arming Israel to its brink, and has been given arms as a tool of bribe to calm down the rhetoric of the AIPAC and other Jew Organizations to get the Media controlled by Jews in line with USA programs, however, the ever sleeping population of the West must understand that a war of words is now almost over, the war if any extended in the Mid-East, would be a final round, this has been understood by the Mid-Eastern side with utmost clarity.

  3. Rehmat on the 05. Dec, 2010 remarked #

    The dog ate my homework….


Leave a Comment