From hazem at zureiqat.com  Sat May 10 03:04:56 2008
From: hazem at zureiqat.com (Hazem Zureiqat)
Date: Sat, 10 May 2008 03:04:56 -0400
Subject: [LCM Articles] Sahar Khateeb's Outcry
In-Reply-To: <20080510065929.8B8A120FA5@astra.go.com.jo>
References: <20080510065929.8B8A120FA5@astra.go.com.jo>
Message-ID: <cac37cf30805100004p719a6169p56131676b714c439@mail.gmail.com>

http://www.nowlebanon.com/Arabic/NewsArticleDetails.aspx?ID=41980

--
Hazem
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/lebanon-articles/attachments/20080510/1b0b7912/attachment.htm

From loai at MIT.EDU  Sat May 10 03:12:58 2008
From: loai at MIT.EDU (Loai Naamani)
Date: Sat, 10 May 2008 03:12:58 -0400
Subject: [LCM Articles] Sahar Khateeb's Outcry
In-Reply-To: <cac37cf30805100004p719a6169p56131676b714c439@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20080510065929.8B8A120FA5@astra.go.com.jo>
	<cac37cf30805100004p719a6169p56131676b714c439@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <05bc01c8b26d$47c96720$d75c3560$@edu>

Thanks Hazem. The full version is here:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=sfCkdbANYlE - Best, L.

 

From: Hazem Zureiqat [mailto:hazem at zureiqat.com] 
Sent: Saturday, May 10, 2008 3:05 AM
To: Hazem Zureiqat
Subject: Sahar Khateeb's Outcry

 

http://www.nowlebanon.com/Arabic/NewsArticleDetails.aspx?ID=41980

--
Hazem

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/lebanon-articles/attachments/20080510/e54f384f/attachment.htm

From jado_m at yahoo.com  Sat May 10 05:15:44 2008
From: jado_m at yahoo.com (jad mezher)
Date: Sat, 10 May 2008 02:15:44 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [LCM Articles] Sahar Khateeb's Outcry
Message-ID: <873857.98343.qm@web39702.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Although I totally condemn what's going on, including the occupation of "Future" TV, regardless of my personal opinion of the station, no TV in Lebanonis unbiased, not even close to that by the slightest distance, including the journalists that work at those stations. They are all propaganda tools in the hands of?their?parties. Reiterating my total condemnation of the occupation, I believe we all know that what happened has nothing to do with how Sahar behaved towards the opposition?but with what the station that she works in stands for, which is basically a Hezbollah bashing machine. Same thing applies to Manar, LBCI, OTV etc. All, bashing machines.
And, what do you expect when people bash each other?!?! 
Increased tension of course.
?
I just want to quote something that Jesus Christ said:"He who is without sin, let him cast the first stone".
All are guilty. So easy on the ego guys. Hopefully, through all your hatred, you're gonna be able to see at least that.
?
Peace.


----- Original Message ----
From: Loai Naamani <loai at MIT.EDU>
To: LCM Articles <lebanon-articles at MIT.EDU>
Cc: Hazem Zureiqat <hazem at zureiqat.com>
Sent: Saturday, May 10, 2008 3:12:58 AM
Subject: Re: [LCM Articles] Sahar Khateeb's Outcry


Thanks Hazem. The full version is here: http://youtube.com/watch?v=sfCkdbANYlE ? Best, L.
?
From:Hazem Zureiqat [mailto:hazem at zureiqat.com] 
Sent: Saturday, May 10, 2008 3:05 AM
To: Hazem Zureiqat
Subject: Sahar Khateeb's Outcry
?
http://www.nowlebanon.com/Arabic/NewsArticleDetails.aspx?ID=41980

--
Hazem
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/lebanon-articles/attachments/20080510/3435f96a/attachment.htm

From jado_m at yahoo.com  Sat May 10 09:41:25 2008
From: jado_m at yahoo.com (jad mezher)
Date: Sat, 10 May 2008 06:41:25 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [LCM Articles] Tfouh 3layna
Message-ID: <253089.52851.qm@web39704.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

http://youtube.com/watch?v=7JkGM7rqFww

jad
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/lebanon-articles/attachments/20080510/5632d9c6/attachment.htm

From ayah at media.mit.edu  Sat May 10 10:10:43 2008
From: ayah at media.mit.edu (ayah bdeir)
Date: Sat, 10 May 2008 10:10:43 -0400
Subject: [LCM Articles] Sahar Khateeb's Outcry
In-Reply-To: <873857.98343.qm@web39702.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <873857.98343.qm@web39702.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <92A2841D-801F-4B76-906A-08CD5735CD65@media.mit.edu>

Jad,

The outcry is not about the TV station, nor what the TV station stands  
for. For once, a video who has circled the world in a mere 24 hours,  
is about the people, not the parties and the agendas. Even if Sahar el  
Kahteeb is part of Future TV, Sahar represents a lot of people who are  
not political, and have never taken political stances in Beirut, and  
have always played devil's advocate on behalf of all parties involved,  
and trust me, these are many. Unfortunately, these people have now  
been forced into a corner.

How do you "look through the hatred" when your parents spent 2 hours  
sitting in the bathroom in Verdun, because they are scared sh*tless of  
their fellow compatriots, turned gunman on their streets. How do you  
look through the hatred when our family turns on all the lights and  
sits by the door and prays that no one breaks into another home. How  
do you look through the hatred when you live abroad, and you have to  
look at pictures online or on tV of your own neighborhood turned into  
a warzone, not because of a war, but because of a show of force. They  
did not choose to have a show of force between parties, and just take  
a hold of government buildings or just block roads or just speak to  
the parties, they chose to scare the people of their own country, and  
when you do that, it's true, this is another era.

Lots of people didn't even have any hatred to look through, and did  
open heir homes in July, and did cook for the refuges, and did make  
donations, and did play devil's advocate all this time with all their  
heart, but even if they never took a stand, now they have been forced  
into one.

Ayah


On May 10, 2008, at 5:15 AM, jad mezher wrote:

> Although I totally condemn what's going on, including the occupation  
> of "Future" TV, regardless of my personal opinion of the station, no  
> TV in Lebanon is unbiased, not even close to that by the slightest  
> distance, including the journalists that work at those stations.  
> They are all propaganda tools in the hands of their parties.  
> Reiterating my total condemnation of the occupation, I believe we  
> all know that what happened has nothing to do with how Sahar behaved  
> towards the opposition but with what the station that she works in  
> stands for, which is basically a Hezbollah bashing machine. Same  
> thing applies to Manar, LBCI, OTV etc. All, bashing machines.
> And, what do you expect when people bash each other?!?!
> Increased tension of course.
>
> I just want to quote something that Jesus Christ said:"He who is  
> without sin, let him cast the first stone".
> All are guilty. So easy on the ego guys. Hopefully, through all your  
> hatred, you're gonna be able to see at least that.
>
> Peace.
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Loai Naamani <loai at MIT.EDU>
> To: LCM Articles <lebanon-articles at MIT.EDU>
> Cc: Hazem Zureiqat <hazem at zureiqat.com>
> Sent: Saturday, May 10, 2008 3:12:58 AM
> Subject: Re: [LCM Articles] Sahar Khateeb's Outcry
>
> Thanks Hazem. The full version is here: http://youtube.com/watch?v=sfCkdbANYlE 
>  ? Best, L.
>
> From: Hazem Zureiqat [mailto:hazem at zureiqat.com]
> Sent: Saturday, May 10, 2008 3:05 AM
> To: Hazem Zureiqat
> Subject: Sahar Khateeb's Outcry
>
> http://www.nowlebanon.com/Arabic/NewsArticleDetails.aspx?ID=41980
>
> --
> Hazem
> _______________________________________________
> Lebanon-Articles mailing list
> Lebanon-Articles at mit.edu
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/lebanon-articles

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/lebanon-articles/attachments/20080510/44f92a32/attachment.htm

From frem at MIT.EDU  Sat May 10 11:25:48 2008
From: frem at MIT.EDU (Sandra Semaan Frem)
Date: Sat, 10 May 2008 11:25:48 -0400
Subject: [LCM Articles] Sahar Khateeb's Outcry
In-Reply-To: <92A2841D-801F-4B76-906A-08CD5735CD65@media.mit.edu>
References: <873857.98343.qm@web39702.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<92A2841D-801F-4B76-906A-08CD5735CD65@media.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <20080510112548.5qg3akveuvmgckkk@webmail.mit.edu>

Jad,

one thing about the stone casting quoted from Jesus- I hope i misunderstood
you-It should be used to make people re-question about casting them from the
very beginning, and not to justify those who already casted them.

SF


Quoting ayah bdeir <ayah at media.mit.edu>:

> Jad,
>
> The outcry is not about the TV station, nor what the TV station 
> stands  for. For once, a video who has circled the world in a mere 24 
> hours,  is about the people, not the parties and the agendas. Even if 
> Sahar el  Kahteeb is part of Future TV, Sahar represents a lot of 
> people who are  not political, and have never taken political stances 
> in Beirut, and  have always played devil's advocate on behalf of all 
> parties involved,  and trust me, these are many. Unfortunately, these 
> people have now  been forced into a corner.
>
> How do you "look through the hatred" when your parents spent 2 hours  
> sitting in the bathroom in Verdun, because they are scared sh*tless 
> of  their fellow compatriots, turned gunman on their streets. How do 
> you  look through the hatred when our family turns on all the lights 
> and  sits by the door and prays that no one breaks into another home. 
> How  do you look through the hatred when you live abroad, and you 
> have to  look at pictures online or on tV of your own neighborhood 
> turned into  a warzone, not because of a war, but because of a show 
> of force. They  did not choose to have a show of force between 
> parties, and just take  a hold of government buildings or just block 
> roads or just speak to  the parties, they chose to scare the people 
> of their own country, and  when you do that, it's true, this is 
> another era.
>
> Lots of people didn't even have any hatred to look through, and did  
> open heir homes in July, and did cook for the refuges, and did make  
> donations, and did play devil's advocate all this time with all their 
>  heart, but even if they never took a stand, now they have been 
> forced  into one.
>
> Ayah
>
>
> On May 10, 2008, at 5:15 AM, jad mezher wrote:
>
>> Although I totally condemn what's going on, including the occupation 
>>  of "Future" TV, regardless of my personal opinion of the station, 
>> no  TV in Lebanon is unbiased, not even close to that by the 
>> slightest  distance, including the journalists that work at those 
>> stations.  They are all propaganda tools in the hands of their 
>> parties.  Reiterating my total condemnation of the occupation, I 
>> believe we  all know that what happened has nothing to do with how 
>> Sahar behaved  towards the opposition but with what the station that 
>> she works in  stands for, which is basically a Hezbollah bashing 
>> machine. Same  thing applies to Manar, LBCI, OTV etc. All, bashing 
>> machines.
>> And, what do you expect when people bash each other?!?!
>> Increased tension of course.
>>
>> I just want to quote something that Jesus Christ said:"He who is  
>> without sin, let him cast the first stone".
>> All are guilty. So easy on the ego guys. Hopefully, through all your 
>>  hatred, you're gonna be able to see at least that.
>>
>> Peace.
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: Loai Naamani <loai at MIT.EDU>
>> To: LCM Articles <lebanon-articles at MIT.EDU>
>> Cc: Hazem Zureiqat <hazem at zureiqat.com>
>> Sent: Saturday, May 10, 2008 3:12:58 AM
>> Subject: Re: [LCM Articles] Sahar Khateeb's Outcry
>>
>> Thanks Hazem. The full version is here: 
>> http://youtube.com/watch?v=sfCkdbANYlE  ? Best, L.
>>
>> From: Hazem Zureiqat [mailto:hazem at zureiqat.com]
>> Sent: Saturday, May 10, 2008 3:05 AM
>> To: Hazem Zureiqat
>> Subject: Sahar Khateeb's Outcry
>>
>> http://www.nowlebanon.com/Arabic/NewsArticleDetails.aspx?ID=41980
>>
>> --
>> Hazem
>> _______________________________________________
>> Lebanon-Articles mailing list
>> Lebanon-Articles at mit.edu
>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/lebanon-articles
>
>






From jado_m at yahoo.com  Sat May 10 11:39:37 2008
From: jado_m at yahoo.com (jad mezher)
Date: Sat, 10 May 2008 08:39:37 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [LCM Articles] Sahar Khateeb's Outcry
Message-ID: <8197.22667.qm@web39707.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

I am not justifying anyone. I am just saying that EVERBODY should restrain themselves and not cast them in the first place because all are guilty.


----- Original Message ----
From: Sandra Semaan Frem <frem at MIT.EDU>
To: ayah bdeir <ayah at media.MIT.EDU>
Cc: jad mezher <jado_m at yahoo.com>; lebanon-articles at MIT.EDU
Sent: Saturday, May 10, 2008 11:25:48 AM
Subject: Re: [LCM Articles] Sahar Khateeb's Outcry

Jad,

one thing about the stone casting quoted from Jesus- I hope i misunderstood
you-It should be used to make people re-question about casting them from the
very beginning, and not to justify those who already casted them.

SF


Quoting ayah bdeir <ayah at media.mit.edu>:

> Jad,
>
> The outcry is not about the TV station, nor what the TV station 
> stands? for. For once, a video who has circled the world in a mere 24 
> hours,? is about the people, not the parties and the agendas. Even if 
> Sahar el? Kahteeb is part of Future TV, Sahar represents a lot of 
> people who are? not political, and have never taken political stances 
> in Beirut, and? have always played devil's advocate on behalf of all 
> parties involved,? and trust me, these are many. Unfortunately, these 
> people have now? been forced into a corner.
>
> How do you "look through the hatred" when your parents spent 2 hours? 
> sitting in the bathroom in Verdun, because they are scared sh*tless 
> of? their fellow compatriots, turned gunman on their streets. How do 
> you? look through the hatred when our family turns on all the lights 
> and? sits by the door and prays that no one breaks into another home. 
> How? do you look through the hatred when you live abroad, and you 
> have to? look at pictures online or on tV of your own neighborhood 
> turned into? a warzone, not because of a war, but because of a show 
> of force. They? did not choose to have a show of force between 
> parties, and just take? a hold of government buildings or just block 
> roads or just speak to? the parties, they chose to scare the people 
> of their own country, and? when you do that, it's true, this is 
> another era.
>
> Lots of people didn't even have any hatred to look through, and did? 
> open heir homes in July, and did cook for the refuges, and did make? 
> donations, and did play devil's advocate all this time with all their 
>? heart, but even if they never took a stand, now they have been 
> forced? into one.
>
> Ayah
>
>
> On May 10, 2008, at 5:15 AM, jad mezher wrote:
>
>> Although I totally condemn what's going on, including the occupation 
>>? of "Future" TV, regardless of my personal opinion of the station, 
>> no? TV in Lebanon is unbiased, not even close to that by the 
>> slightest? distance, including the journalists that work at those 
>> stations.? They are all propaganda tools in the hands of their 
>> parties.? Reiterating my total condemnation of the occupation, I 
>> believe we? all know that what happened has nothing to do with how 
>> Sahar behaved? towards the opposition but with what the station that 
>> she works in? stands for, which is basically a Hezbollah bashing 
>> machine. Same? thing applies to Manar, LBCI, OTV etc. All, bashing 
>> machines.
>> And, what do you expect when people bash each other?!?!
>> Increased tension of course.
>>
>> I just want to quote something that Jesus Christ said:"He who is? 
>> without sin, let him cast the first stone".
>> All are guilty. So easy on the ego guys. Hopefully, through all your 
>>? hatred, you're gonna be able to see at least that.
>>
>> Peace.
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: Loai Naamani <loai at MIT.EDU>
>> To: LCM Articles <lebanon-articles at MIT.EDU>
>> Cc: Hazem Zureiqat <hazem at zureiqat.com>
>> Sent: Saturday, May 10, 2008 3:12:58 AM
>> Subject: Re: [LCM Articles] Sahar Khateeb's Outcry
>>
>> Thanks Hazem. The full version is here: 
>> http://youtube.com/watch?v=sfCkdbANYlE? ? Best, L.
>>
>> From: Hazem Zureiqat [mailto:hazem at zureiqat.com]
>> Sent: Saturday, May 10, 2008 3:05 AM
>> To: Hazem Zureiqat
>> Subject: Sahar Khateeb's Outcry
>>
>> http://www.nowlebanon.com/Arabic/NewsArticleDetails.aspx?ID=41980
>>
>> --
>> Hazem
>> _______________________________________________
>> Lebanon-Articles mailing list
>> Lebanon-Articles at mit.edu
>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/lebanon-articles
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/lebanon-articles/attachments/20080510/4711c8cb/attachment.htm

From gaoude at MIT.EDU  Wed May 14 11:14:28 2008
From: gaoude at MIT.EDU (Georges Aoude)
Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 11:14:28 -0400
Subject: [LCM Articles] Airport Road...
Message-ID: <20080514111428.05rxgfh4qpkws84o@webmail.mit.edu>

http://www.naharnet.com/domino/tn/NewsDesk.nsf/getstory?openform&CB686BEE7888B477C2257449002574E3

-------------------------------------------
Georges Aoude
Ph.D. Candidate
Aerospace Controls Laboratory
Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Massachusetts Institute of Technology


From dimanajjar at gmail.com  Wed May 14 11:10:25 2008
From: dimanajjar at gmail.com (Dima Najjar)
Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 08:10:25 -0700
Subject: [LCM Articles] Four Days that changed the Middle East
Message-ID: <4ad8f16e0805140810t283a147csf016138de14b3bd6@mail.gmail.com>

A fresh view..


Click the following to access the sent link:

Four days that changed the Middle East
<http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?article_ID=91914&categ_ID=5&edition_id=10>


Or copy and paste the following link in your browser address bar:


<http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?article_ID=91914&categ_ID=5&edition_id=10>

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?article_ID=91914&categ_ID=5&edition_id=10



*
*

*Abstract:*

Events in Beirut and other parts of Lebanon continue to move erratically,
with simultaneous gestures of political compromise and armed clashes that
have left 46 dead in the past week. The consequences of what has happened in
the past week may portend an extraordinary but constructive new development:



-- 
Dima Najjar
+97150 413 4343
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/lebanon-articles/attachments/20080514/fb55feb8/attachment.htm

From patrickz at MIT.EDU  Wed May 14 15:26:44 2008
From: patrickz at MIT.EDU (Patrick Zeitouni)
Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 15:26:44 -0400
Subject: [LCM Articles] Four Days that changed the Middle East
In-Reply-To: <4ad8f16e0805140810t283a147csf016138de14b3bd6@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4ad8f16e0805140810t283a147csf016138de14b3bd6@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20080514152644.ypb89htdmxskckw8@webmail.mit.edu>

Rima,
A quick comment on the fresh view you mentioned.
First, I had a chance to listen to Rami Khoury talk at the Kennedy School of
Government at Harvard last year, and I have to say that Rami is very much a
Hizballah apologist. While he tried to portray himself as neutral and discuss
both sides of the conflict, it was very apparent what his political sentiments
were.
As such, I would very much take the article with a grain of salt. While
Hizballah did achieve a military victory of some sorts, I believe that it lost
something much more valuable, the respect of all non-shiite Lebanese who now
see it as an instrument of Iran, Syria, and Shiite dominance.
I believe the government made a key decision not to deploy its opwn gunmen or
the Internal Security Forces (ISF) who number in the 10,000 and are 
composed of
mainly Sunni and Christian. That would have put a strong counter attack to
Hizballah, at the expense of starting a new civil war. Fortunately some (i.e.
NOT March 8) are still committed to the principles of negotiation through
dialogue, not violence.
Where this will take us, I don't know. While this is part of a U.S. vs. Iran
power play (as the Hizballah likes to portray it), it is also an Iran 
vs. Saudi
Arabia play (Shiite vs. Sunni) and another effort by Syria to remain relevant,
regain influence in Lebanon and retain its tool of applying pressure on Israel
to get the Golan's back.
Let's be realistic when we talk about this situation. It's about people with
guns who don't want to give up their guns, and want to be the big boys and the
bullies of the block.
I welcome your thoughts and opinions on the matter!
ciao
Patrick



Quoting Dima Najjar <dimanajjar at gmail.com>:

> A fresh view..
>
>
> Click the following to access the sent link:
>
> Four days that changed the Middle East
> <http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?article_ID=91914&categ_ID=5&edition_id=10>
>
>
> Or copy and paste the following link in your browser address bar:
>
>
> <http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?article_ID=91914&categ_ID=5&edition_id=10>
>
> http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?article_ID=91914&categ_ID=5&edition_id=10
>
>
>
> *
> *
>
> *Abstract:*
>
> Events in Beirut and other parts of Lebanon continue to move erratically,
> with simultaneous gestures of political compromise and armed clashes that
> have left 46 dead in the past week. The consequences of what has happened in
> the past week may portend an extraordinary but constructive new development:
>
>
>
> --
> Dima Najjar
> +97150 413 4343
>




From abitdodgy at hotmail.com  Wed May 14 20:42:17 2008
From: abitdodgy at hotmail.com (Mohamad El-Husseini)
Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 20:42:17 -0400
Subject: [LCM Articles] Four Days that changed the Middle East
In-Reply-To: <20080514152644.ypb89htdmxskckw8@webmail.mit.edu>
References: <4ad8f16e0805140810t283a147csf016138de14b3bd6@mail.gmail.com>
	<20080514152644.ypb89htdmxskckw8@webmail.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <BLU109-W557747F4E714C2A5E4DEACA0C90@phx.gbl>


Patrick,
 
I would be remiss not to direct your attention to a graphic video the contents of which I advise against viewing. If you are not familiar, it captures the gruesome torture and murder of 10 SSNP members in Halba. In addition to being tortured as they took their dying breaths, their limbs were hacked and their bodies left to the disposal of their murderers, who wasted no time indulging in gratuitous gore. Not only is this reminiscent of what happened in Nahr El Bared, but it should cast a doubt on the theory that one side prefers dialog to the other.
 
I condemn HA's actions, and their use of force was criminal and irresponsible. But it has not gone unanswered, even if the balance of power leans heavily to one side: the route of government partisans is not indicative of their preference for dialog. They were over-powered. 
 
To quote a friend, "a semi-government that lacks the representation of one of Lebanon's major sects, whose legitimacy and constitutionality are seriously questioned, in the midst of internal turmoil, in the heat of daily Israeli threats of a new war on HA and Lebanon, weeks after the assassination of HA's military commander, against the advise of the army command, in the absence of a president and in its final dying hours, takes the unprecedented step of outlawing HA's communication network, fully aware of the sensitivity of the issue."

Finally, at risk of offending people, none of Lebanon's traditional parties ever preferred dialog had they a to use violence. The illustrious history of our political class and 18 years of butchery by the same people who rule today speaks for itself...
 
The war never ended, it was just bandaged and the binds are loosening once more.
> Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 15:26:44 -0400> From: patrickz at MIT.EDU> To: dimanajjar at gmail.com> CC: lebanon-articles at MIT.EDU> Subject: Re: [LCM Articles] Four Days that changed the Middle East> > Rima,> A quick comment on the fresh view you mentioned.> First, I had a chance to listen to Rami Khoury talk at the Kennedy School of> Government at Harvard last year, and I have to say that Rami is very much a> Hizballah apologist. While he tried to portray himself as neutral and discuss> both sides of the conflict, it was very apparent what his political sentiments> were.> As such, I would very much take the article with a grain of salt. While> Hizballah did achieve a military victory of some sorts, I believe that it lost> something much more valuable, the respect of all non-shiite Lebanese who now> see it as an instrument of Iran, Syria, and Shiite dominance.> I believe the government made a key decision not to deploy its opwn gunmen or> the Internal Security Forces (ISF) who number in the 10,000 and are > composed of> mainly Sunni and Christian. That would have put a strong counter attack to> Hizballah, at the expense of starting a new civil war. Fortunately some (i.e.> NOT March 8) are still committed to the principles of negotiation through> dialogue, not violence.> Where this will take us, I don't know. While this is part of a U.S. vs. Iran> power play (as the Hizballah likes to portray it), it is also an Iran > vs. Saudi> Arabia play (Shiite vs. Sunni) and another effort by Syria to remain relevant,> regain influence in Lebanon and retain its tool of applying pressure on Israel> to get the Golan's back.> Let's be realistic when we talk about this situation. It's about people with> guns who don't want to give up their guns, and want to be the big boys and the> bullies of the block.> I welcome your thoughts and opinions on the matter!> ciao> Patrick> > > > Quoting Dima Najjar <dimanajjar at gmail.com>:> > > A fresh view..> >> >> > Click the following to access the sent link:> >> > Four days that changed the Middle East> > <http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?article_ID=91914&categ_ID=5&edition_id=10>> >> >> > Or copy and paste the following link in your browser address bar:> >> >> > <http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?article_ID=91914&categ_ID=5&edition_id=10>> >> > http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?article_ID=91914&categ_ID=5&edition_id=10> >> >> >> > *> > *> >> > *Abstract:*> >> > Events in Beirut and other parts of Lebanon continue to move erratically,> > with simultaneous gestures of political compromise and armed clashes that> > have left 46 dead in the past week. The consequences of what has happened in> > the past week may portend an extraordinary but constructive new development:> >> >> >> > --> > Dima Najjar> > +97150 413 4343> >> > > _______________________________________________> Lebanon-Articles mailing list> Lebanon-Articles at mit.edu> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/lebanon-articles
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/lebanon-articles/attachments/20080514/5ef51350/attachment.htm

From ayahbdeir at gmail.com  Wed May 14 20:43:15 2008
From: ayahbdeir at gmail.com (ayah bdeir)
Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 20:43:15 -0400
Subject: [LCM Articles] from the generation before us
References: <F490D3DD-66C8-4589-A6A3-2DA643B3D375@lanabdeir.com>
Message-ID: <83884106-A94E-4E99-915F-F0BC9E29D280@gmail.com>

Please watch and distribut widely.

Ayah

>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fq0SGkrBYvs&NR=1

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/lebanon-articles/attachments/20080514/79f02b04/attachment.htm

From antonio.tamer at gmail.com  Wed May 14 22:05:54 2008
From: antonio.tamer at gmail.com (antonio tamer)
Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 22:05:54 -0400
Subject: [LCM Articles] Four Days that changed the Middle East
In-Reply-To: <BLU109-W557747F4E714C2A5E4DEACA0C90@phx.gbl>
References: <4ad8f16e0805140810t283a147csf016138de14b3bd6@mail.gmail.com>
	<20080514152644.ypb89htdmxskckw8@webmail.mit.edu>
	<BLU109-W557747F4E714C2A5E4DEACA0C90@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <7a0929bc0805141905m488ed8f2id9c6650d9f5f0dd0@mail.gmail.com>

Please allow me to remind you Mohamad that the actions of one handful of
angry (and obviously enraged) people do not make for a generalization.

This kind of reference to war atrocity does not necessarily grant you
immediate access to one's ears - except maybe the naive and unexpecting.
I've seen the videos and am appalled by them, but this tactic of yours is
not very ethical - ie, to appeal to one's humane and sensible side in order
to get an unrelated (or faulty) point across.

Let's look at what you said:

> "a semi-government that lacks the representation of one of Lebanon's major
> sects, whose legitimacy and constitutionality are seriously questioned,
>
As far as I remember, the opposition (HA) resigned from the government.
Also, HA is disrupting llife in every single day. The government may not be
the best one to have ever been around(trust me, I have concerns about where
it is leading Lebanon), but it is definitely better than what Syria had in
place at the time it retreated.instead of normal participation, we see this
detachement and frustration at the increased political (oh and peaceful,
despite that atrocious reference of yours) success of March 14 and the
government. To be able to kick an occupying and terrorizing country (syria)
out like that with just demonstrations and organizations, that is
impressive.

in the heat of daily Israeli threats of a new war on HA and Lebanon
>
If I remember well, the provocations have been coming from HA's side, not
Israel. The warmongering and drums of waar have been one-directional (until
HA's provication of Israel in July 2006). In what could've been Lebanon's
best chance of peace, the lebanese (in all arrogance) declared victory when
Israel pulled out of most of Lebanon. And let's leave the shibaa farms out
of this debate, there is no Shibaa farms until Syria - an ally of HA -
decides so. Oh do you see here the sole justification for HA's persistance??

weeks after the assassination of HA's military commander
>
Let me remind you that this happened in Syria and the so-called commander is
labelled terrorist elsewhere. I suggest you dig up some bio.

against the advise of the army command
>
Army command? What advice? The army is there to protect, not dictate. I
surely hope you're not hinting at the idea of a military authority, and if
you indeed are, could you remind me of the last military regime that YOU
think was successful? In either case, the lebanese political system surely
was not designed for this kind of army command nonsense. No thanks!

in the absence of a president and in its final dying hours
>
This, we all know, is due to the increasing irritation of HA and Aoun's bloc
to achieve any single political victory. Instead, they refer to disruption
of life, armed attacks and assaults as well as demanding to be given rights
(no, it's VETO) beyond what is reasonable or acceptable.

takes the unprecedented step of outlawing HA's communication network, fully
> aware of the sensitivity of the issue
>
This, I may agree with you on except I never saw any governmental decree or
national consensus (without "sisterly" pressure) that HA has been granted
the right to establish a communication network. As far as HA's weapons, well
this story is settled. at least for me. I'm sorry if I won't go in that
dirty path of changing your perspective on what you should well be aware of
at this point.

So having chopped up your friend's brilliant quote, I ask you: What about
it?

Finally, at risk of offending people, none of Lebanon's traditional parties
> ever preferred dialog had they a to use violence. The illustrious history of
> our political class and 18 years of butchery by the same people who rule
> today speaks for itself...
>
I completely agree with you on that one - those in power have a strong
history of violence, that's true. But can you see some positive change at
least? Can you see that the pro-gov camp is not willing to fight? granted,
there are a couple of MK's in the mountains, but that is just tradition
and/or dinosaurs from the civil war. Just to keep things in perspective: HA
*has* a history of violence, and persistence of violence, and has been
exclusively targetting civilians in Israel, Lebanon, Germany and South
America without one single *noble *military victory. This is disgusting.

On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 8:42 PM, Mohamad El-Husseini <abitdodgy at hotmail.com>
wrote:

>  Patrick,
>
> I would be remiss not to direct your attention to a graphic video the
> contents of which I advise against viewing. If you are not familiar, it
> captures the gruesome torture and murder of 10 SSNP members in Halba. In
> addition to being tortured as they took their dying breaths, their limbs
> were hacked and their bodies left to the disposal of their murderers,
> who wasted no time indulging in gratuitous gore. Not only is this
> reminiscent of what happened in Nahr El Bared, but it should cast a doubt on
> the theory that one side prefers dialog to the other.
>
> I condemn HA's actions, and their use of force was criminal and
> irresponsible. But it has not gone unanswered, even if the balance of power
> leans heavily to one side: the route of government partisans is not
> indicative of their preference for dialog. They were over-powered.
>
> To quote a friend, "a semi-government that lacks the representation of one
> of Lebanon's major sects, whose legitimacy and constitutionality are
> seriously questioned, in the midst of internal turmoil, in the heat of daily
> Israeli threats of a new war on HA and Lebanon, weeks after the
> assassination of HA's military commander, against the advise of the army
> command, in the absence of a president and in its final dying hours, takes
> the unprecedented step of outlawing HA's communication network, fully aware
> of the sensitivity of the issue."
>
>
>
> Finally, at risk of offending people, none of Lebanon's traditional parties
> ever preferred dialog had they a to use violence. The illustrious history of
> our political class and 18 years of butchery by the same people who rule
> today speaks for itself...
>
> The war never ended, it was just bandaged and the binds are loosening once
> more.
>
> > Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 15:26:44 -0400
> > From: patrickz at MIT.EDU
> > To: dimanajjar at gmail.com
> > CC: lebanon-articles at MIT.EDU
> > Subject: Re: [LCM Articles] Four Days that changed the Middle East
>
> >
> > Rima,
> > A quick comment on the fresh view you mentioned.
> > First, I had a chance to listen to Rami Khoury talk at the Kennedy School
> of
> > Government at Harvard last year, and I have to say that Rami is very much
> a
> > Hizballah apologist. While he tried to portray himself as neutral and
> discuss
> > both sides of the conflict, it was very apparent what his political
> sentiments
> > were.
> > As such, I would very much take the article with a grain of salt. While
> > Hizballah did achieve a military victory of some sorts, I believe that it
> lost
> > something much more valuable, the respect of all non-shiite Lebanese who
> now
> > see it as an instrument of Iran, Syria, and Shiite dominance.
> > I believe the government made a key decision not to deploy its opwn
> gunmen or
> > the Internal Security Forces (ISF) who number in the 10,000 and are
> > composed of
> > mainly Sunni and Christian. That would have put a strong counter attack
> to
> > Hizballah, at the expense of starting a new civil war. Fortunately some
> (i.e.
> > NOT March 8) are still committed to the principles of negotiation through
> > dialogue, not violence.
> > Where this will take us, I don't know. While this is part of a U.S. vs.
> Iran
> > power play (as the Hizballah likes to portray it), it is also an Iran
> > vs. Saudi
> > Arabia play (Shiite vs. Sunni) and another effort by Syria to remain
> relevant,
> > regain influence in Lebanon and retain its tool of applying pressure on
> Israel
> > to get the Golan's back.
> > Let's be realistic when we talk about this situation. It's about people
> with
> > guns who don't want to give up their guns, and want to be the big boys
> and the
> > bullies of the block.
> > I welcome your thoughts and opinions on the matter!
> > ciao
> > Patrick
> >
> >
> >
> > Quoting Dima Najjar <dimanajjar at gmail.com>:
> >
> > > A fresh view..
> > >
> > >
> > > Click the following to access the sent link:
> > >
> > > Four days that changed the Middle East
> > > <
> http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?article_ID=91914&categ_ID=5&edition_id=10
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Or copy and paste the following link in your browser address bar:
> > >
> > >
> > > <
> http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?article_ID=91914&categ_ID=5&edition_id=10
> >
> > >
> > >
> http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?article_ID=91914&categ_ID=5&edition_id=10
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > *
> > > *
> > >
> > > *Abstract:*
> > >
> > > Events in Beirut and other parts of Lebanon continue to move
> erratically,
> > > with simultaneous gestures of political compromise and armed clashes
> that
> > > have left 46 dead in the past week. The consequences of what has
> happened in
> > > the past week may portend an extraordinary but constructive new
> development:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Dima Najjar
> > > +97150 413 4343
> > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Lebanon-Articles mailing list
> > Lebanon-Articles at mit.edu
> > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/lebanon-articles
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lebanon-Articles mailing list
> Lebanon-Articles at mit.edu
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/lebanon-articles
>
>


-- 
Antonio Tamer.
508 361 5943
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/lebanon-articles/attachments/20080514/bf97cdca/attachment.htm

From frem at MIT.EDU  Wed May 14 22:21:40 2008
From: frem at MIT.EDU (Sandra Frem)
Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 22:21:40 -0400
Subject: [LCM Articles] any comments?
Message-ID: <002101c8b632$6a5dc790$9901a8c0@LENOVO50339D8E>

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDe65-nF3FQ

 

I watched this video for two consecutive days...

Any impressions? 

Is our quest for cultural transcendence doomed to fail in the Lebanese
context?

 

Sandra S Frem

MIT School of Architecture and Planning

SMArchS in Architecture & Urbanism 09

T:  617.877.2207

E: frem at mit.edu

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/lebanon-articles/attachments/20080514/9a98af17/attachment.htm

From abitdodgy at hotmail.com  Wed May 14 22:44:04 2008
From: abitdodgy at hotmail.com (Mohamad El-Husseini)
Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 22:44:04 -0400
Subject: [LCM Articles] Four Days that changed the Middle East
In-Reply-To: <7a0929bc0805141905m488ed8f2id9c6650d9f5f0dd0@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4ad8f16e0805140810t283a147csf016138de14b3bd6@mail.gmail.com>
	<20080514152644.ypb89htdmxskckw8@webmail.mit.edu>
	<BLU109-W557747F4E714C2A5E4DEACA0C90@phx.gbl> 
	<7a0929bc0805141905m488ed8f2id9c6650d9f5f0dd0@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BLU109-W59250B8310D14B04436EA0A0C90@phx.gbl>


I was not making a generalization. I stated a fact that both sides engaged and 
are engaging in warfare. Who "started it" is of no consequence. To portray one 
side as peaceful and the other as brute aggressors is misleading, and indeed for 
naive ears. The fact that one side was swiftly defeated does not mean it has preference for dialog--perhaps after the fact, as that is an easy choice to make. I highlighted this not to get a "faulty point" 
across, but to reinforce what I stated above. 

Also, I would like to 
remind you that I am not taking sides. I'm neutral and honest in saying neither 
March 8 or March 14 are capable of promoting good governance and 
nationhood. I would never vote for either block.

In all of your critique of my friend's quote you make the 
assumption that March 14 are a government. March 14 are not a government; March 
14 are sect leaders. Lebanon has no government and has no president. Lebanon has 
sect leaders. 

There are fundamental problems afflicting Lebanon that are
far more pressing than HAs telecommunications network, and in their resolution an easier way may emerge to disarm HA and remove other obstacles to the state.

March 14 are not the reason Syrian occupation 
ended. The people are. The politicians of March 14 do not own the events of the 
"Cedar Revolution ". In fact, if anything, they sold it during the first 
election post Syrian hegemony.

And I disagree: Very little progress has been made. We still have corruption, poverty, economic crisis, no president, no electoral 
law, economic woes, etc... only now we are free to be corrupt without asking for permission first.

Finally, yes, HA has a violent record. And so do the dinosaurs of March 14, even if they "love life."


Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 22:05:54 -0400
From: antonio.tamer at gmail.com
To: abitdodgy at hotmail.com
Subject: Re: [LCM Articles] Four Days that changed the Middle East
CC: patrickz at mit.edu; dimanajjar at gmail.com; lebanon-articles at mit.edu

Please allow me to remind you Mohamad that the actions of one handful of angry (and obviously enraged) people do not make for a generalization.

This kind of reference to war atrocity does not necessarily grant you immediate access to one's ears - except maybe the naive and unexpecting. I've seen the videos and am appalled by them, but this tactic of yours is not very ethical - ie, to appeal to one's humane and sensible side in order to get an unrelated (or faulty) point across.


Let's look at what you said:
"a semi-government that lacks the representation of one of Lebanon's
major sects, whose legitimacy and constitutionality are seriously
questioned,
As far as I remember, the opposition (HA) resigned from the government. Also, HA is disrupting llife in every single day. The government may not be the best one to have ever been around(trust me, I have concerns about where it is leading Lebanon), but it is definitely better than what Syria had in place at the time it retreated.instead of normal participation, we see this detachement and frustration at the increased political (oh and peaceful, despite that atrocious reference of yours) success of March 14 and the government. To be able to kick an occupying and terrorizing country (syria) out like that with just demonstrations and organizations, that is impressive.


in the heat of daily Israeli threats of a new war on HA and Lebanon
If I remember well, the provocations have been coming from HA's side, not Israel. The warmongering and drums of waar have been one-directional (until HA's provication of Israel in July 2006). In what could've been Lebanon's best chance of peace, the lebanese (in all arrogance) declared victory when Israel pulled out of most of Lebanon. And let's leave the shibaa farms out of this debate, there is no Shibaa farms until Syria - an ally of HA - decides so. Oh do you see here the sole justification for HA's persistance??


weeks after the assassination of HA's military commander
Let me remind you that this happened in Syria and the so-called commander is labelled terrorist elsewhere. I suggest you dig up some bio.


against the advise of the army command
Army command? What advice? The army is there to protect, not dictate. I surely hope you're not hinting at the idea of a military authority, and if you indeed are, could you remind me of the last military regime that YOU think was successful? In either case, the lebanese political system surely was not designed for this kind of army command nonsense. No thanks!


in the absence of a president and in its final dying hours
This, we all know, is due to the increasing irritation of HA and Aoun's bloc to achieve any single political victory. Instead, they refer to disruption of life, armed attacks and assaults as well as demanding to be given rights (no, it's VETO) beyond what is reasonable or acceptable.


takes the unprecedented step of outlawing HA's communication network, fully aware of the sensitivity of the issue

This, I may agree with you on except I never saw any governmental decree or national consensus (without "sisterly" pressure) that HA has been granted the right to establish a communication network. As far as HA's weapons, well this story is settled. at least for me. I'm sorry if I won't go in that dirty path of changing your perspective on what you should well be aware of at this point. 


So having chopped up your friend's brilliant quote, I ask you: What about it?


Finally, at risk of offending people, none of Lebanon's
traditional parties ever preferred dialog had they a to use violence.
The illustrious history of our political class and 18 years of butchery
by the same people who rule today speaks for itself...
I completely agree with you on that one - those in power have a strong history of violence, that's true. But can you see some positive change at least? Can you see that the pro-gov camp is not willing to fight? granted, there are a couple of MK's in the mountains, but that is just tradition and/or dinosaurs from the civil war. Just to keep things in perspective: HA has a history of violence, and persistence of violence, and has been exclusively targetting civilians in Israel, Lebanon, Germany and South America without one single noble military victory. This is disgusting.


On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 8:42 PM, Mohamad El-Husseini <abitdodgy at hotmail.com> wrote:






Patrick,

 

I would be remiss not to direct your attention to a graphic video the contents of which I advise against viewing. If you are not familiar, it captures the gruesome torture and murder of 10 SSNP members in Halba. In addition to being tortured as they took their dying breaths, their limbs were hacked and their bodies left to the disposal of their murderers, who wasted no time indulging in gratuitous gore. Not only is this reminiscent of what happened in Nahr El Bared, but it should cast a doubt on the theory that one side prefers dialog to the other.


 

I condemn HA's actions, and their use of force was criminal and irresponsible. But it has not gone unanswered, even if the balance of power leans heavily to one side: the route of government partisans is not indicative of their preference for dialog. They were over-powered. 


 

To quote a friend, "a semi-government that lacks the representation of one of Lebanon's major sects, whose legitimacy and constitutionality are seriously questioned, in the midst of internal turmoil, in the heat of daily Israeli threats of a new war on HA and Lebanon, weeks after the assassination of HA's military commander, against the advise of the army command, in the absence of a president and in its final dying hours, takes the unprecedented step of outlawing HA's communication network, fully aware of the sensitivity of the issue."






Finally, at risk of offending people, none of Lebanon's traditional parties ever preferred dialog had they a to use violence. The illustrious history of our political class and 18 years of butchery by the same people who rule today speaks for itself...


 

The war never ended, it was just bandaged and the binds are loosening once more.


> Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 15:26:44 -0400
> From: patrickz at MIT.EDU
> To: dimanajjar at gmail.com

> CC: lebanon-articles at MIT.EDU
> Subject: Re: [LCM Articles] Four Days that changed the Middle East
> 
> Rima,

> A quick comment on the fresh view you mentioned.
> First, I had a chance to listen to Rami Khoury talk at the Kennedy School of
> Government at Harvard last year, and I have to say that Rami is very much a

> Hizballah apologist. While he tried to portray himself as neutral and discuss
> both sides of the conflict, it was very apparent what his political sentiments
> were.
> As such, I would very much take the article with a grain of salt. While

> Hizballah did achieve a military victory of some sorts, I believe that it lost
> something much more valuable, the respect of all non-shiite Lebanese who now
> see it as an instrument of Iran, Syria, and Shiite dominance.

> I believe the government made a key decision not to deploy its opwn gunmen or
> the Internal Security Forces (ISF) who number in the 10,000 and are 
> composed of
> mainly Sunni and Christian. That would have put a strong counter attack to

> Hizballah, at the expense of starting a new civil war. Fortunately some (i.e.
> NOT March 8) are still committed to the principles of negotiation through
> dialogue, not violence.
> Where this will take us, I don't know. While this is part of a U.S. vs. Iran

> power play (as the Hizballah likes to portray it), it is also an Iran 
> vs. Saudi
> Arabia play (Shiite vs. Sunni) and another effort by Syria to remain relevant,
> regain influence in Lebanon and retain its tool of applying pressure on Israel

> to get the Golan's back.
> Let's be realistic when we talk about this situation. It's about people with
> guns who don't want to give up their guns, and want to be the big boys and the

> bullies of the block.
> I welcome your thoughts and opinions on the matter!
> ciao
> Patrick
> 
> 
> 
> Quoting Dima Najjar <dimanajjar at gmail.com>:

> 
> > A fresh view..
> >
> >
> > Click the following to access the sent link:
> >
> > Four days that changed the Middle East
> > <http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?article_ID=91914&categ_ID=5&edition_id=10>

> >
> >
> > Or copy and paste the following link in your browser address bar:
> >
> >
> > <http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?article_ID=91914&categ_ID=5&edition_id=10>

> >
> > http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?article_ID=91914&categ_ID=5&edition_id=10

> >
> >
> >
> > *
> > *
> >
> > *Abstract:*
> >
> > Events in Beirut and other parts of Lebanon continue to move erratically,
> > with simultaneous gestures of political compromise and armed clashes that

> > have left 46 dead in the past week. The consequences of what has happened in
> > the past week may portend an extraordinary but constructive new development:
> >
> >
> >
> > --

> > Dima Najjar
> > +97150 413 4343
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Lebanon-Articles mailing list
> Lebanon-Articles at mit.edu

> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/lebanon-articles



_______________________________________________

Lebanon-Articles mailing list

Lebanon-Articles at mit.edu

http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/lebanon-articles




-- 
Antonio Tamer.
508 361 5943
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/lebanon-articles/attachments/20080514/97be2fdd/attachment.htm

From frem at MIT.EDU  Wed May 14 22:50:52 2008
From: frem at MIT.EDU (Sandra Frem)
Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 22:50:52 -0400
Subject: [LCM Articles] from the generation before us
In-Reply-To: <83884106-A94E-4E99-915F-F0BC9E29D280@gmail.com>
References: <F490D3DD-66C8-4589-A6A3-2DA643B3D375@lanabdeir.com>
	<83884106-A94E-4E99-915F-F0BC9E29D280@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <003501c8b636$7de04c80$9901a8c0@LENOVO50339D8E>

Thanks for this significant movie

 

 

Sandra S Frem

MIT School of Architecture and Planning

SMArchS in Architecture & Urbanism 09

T:  617.877.2207

E: frem at mit.edu

  _____  

From: lebanon-articles-bounces at MIT.EDU
[mailto:lebanon-articles-bounces at MIT.EDU] On Behalf Of ayah bdeir
Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2008 8:43 PM
To: lebanon-articles at mit.edu
Subject: [LCM Articles] from the generation before us

 

Please watch and distribut widely.

 

Ayah

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fq0SGkrBYvs
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fq0SGkrBYvs&NR=1> &NR=1

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/lebanon-articles/attachments/20080514/31cf568a/attachment.htm

From jkhoury at MIT.EDU  Wed May 14 23:52:07 2008
From: jkhoury at MIT.EDU (Joe Khoury)
Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 23:52:07 -0400
Subject: [LCM Articles] Four Days that changed the Middle East
References: <4ad8f16e0805140810t283a147csf016138de14b3bd6@mail.gmail.com><20080514152644.ypb89htdmxskckw8@webmail.mit.edu><BLU109-W557747F4E714C2A5E4DEACA0C90@phx.gbl>
	<7a0929bc0805141905m488ed8f2id9c6650d9f5f0dd0@mail.gmail.com>
	<BLU109-W59250B8310D14B04436EA0A0C90@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <E8D02C2ED2FB4BDC80A143BCE8D374DB@joe>

After reading all your thoughts, I thought I'd let you know what I think.

Every Lebanese citizen grows in his specific community and thus has a biased way of thinking. It is of no coincidence that people of a particular sect most probably are "convinced" that their leader is the right one. This comes from being brainwashed for all the years that your leader is right, and the opposite sect is wrong. After years and years of growing up in such a community, it becomes very hard for the child to change his opinion when he grows up, and that is especially true to the uneducated citizens that can't think on their own. This is very unfortunate, but I fully understand when a person says he is "convinced" that his leader is right, and that his leader's choices are the only logical choices.

I grew up in Lebanon, and I was lucky enough not to be brainwashed about neither politics nor hate against other religions. Therefore, being a very unbiased person, I was able to make up my mind.

As an unbiased person currently studying in the US, my way of thinking has become even more liberal. The way I look at Lebanese politics overlooks small details, such as someone from this sect brutally killed another guy from this sect, or someone blew the other person's on fire and so on.

I try to see the future of the country and my position in it. Looking at the bigger picture, I don't see the parties as Hezbollah or any specific March 14 group. I see about their principles and actions, and how these affect me. To me, I believe in peace, unity, prosperity, and a good life. Looking at the two parties, I noticed the following:

Hezbollah: We don't care if peace is better economically for Lebanon, We don't care if other people believe Lebanon should be like other Arab countries. Israel has killed my family in 1982, and I will never give up even if we have to sacrifice ourselves for the cause. We will fight them no matter what.

This reminds me of a Palestinian friend that I talked to last year. I asked him: No one denies that Israel had no right to come to your land in 1948, but no one denies that there is no way you can wipe it off the map. So, assume Israel told you now that they are willing to do a peaceful two-state solution, would you accept? He said: No, I prefer to keep fighting than accepting, because that is a "shitty" deal for us, as they still have half of our land. I replied: Yes, but right now, you are in a "shittier" position, with barely any land at all. Since you know you can't take them out, you have to choose the best solution available right now. What do you choose? Shit or Shittier? He said: I prefer to choose shittier, since at least I have my honor. I replied: Well, I definitely know now why a solution may never exist, but now, I am very surprised as to why you keep nagging about a better situation. Since you know that you can't take Israel out, and you insist that honor is of utmost importance, then the solution is impossible, and while you keep that way your thinking, don't be surprised if your country's situation never ameliorates.

This story is highly relevant to the current situation. When I hear Hezbollah say: I don't care about the well being of my country, they killed my family! They conquered us for many years! I will never accept a peace deal with these Zionists. I will keep fighting, even it means sacrificing myself in the name of the cause!

After hearing Nasrallah's speeches, I can't help but notice the resemblance to my friend's case. The difference however is very important. In Palestine, the Palestinians agree on fighting Israel till death, but in Lebanon, only Hezbollah feels that way. We all see Israel as an enemy, but the majority would much prefer if we were in some sort of peace.

I'll ask you a question: about 95% of Israel's borders are with Egypt and Jordan. After the 1967 war, they directly did peace deals with the Israelis, choosing peace and prosperity over honor, honor which leads them to poverty and fanaticism. I wonder why Lebanon, who shares only about 2% of its borders with Israel, and definitely the militarily weakest among all other Arab countries, should be the one to feel the lack of dignity when it comes to accepting Israel as a major force in the region.

Even if people still believe that it's a worthy cause, what right do they have to impose their beliefs on the rest of the Lebanese people?

I summarize March 8 and March 14 as two parties: Those who believe that Israel is an enemy worthy of indefinitely fighting for the sake of honor, ( I won't say security because look at Egypt and Jordan, they're perfectly secure since their peace deals in 1967). And those who acknowledges that Israel is an enemy, but believe that the cause is unworthy to sacrifice the peace and prosperity of a whole country. 

In other words, if you are a bear sharing a lion's cage, would you want to be his friend and live peacefully, or do you prefer fighting a guaranteed death in the name of honor?  Of course this analogy is not perfect, but I see a very important point. The US, UN, Europe and almost everyone are the great powers of the world. We must accept that. It's a fact. Almost everyone acknowledges it and desides that it's of their best interest to be on their friendly side, for the sake of their economy as well as international standing. Are we really that powerful to be the exception?

Therefore, I disagree with Hezebolla for many reasons:

 -   I believe the cause is unworthy to live in poverty and be recognized as a terrorist organization by ALL countries except for Syria and Iran.
 -   I also believe that even if they feel that way, they are allowed to do so, but in no way are they allowed to force that way of thinking on all Lebanese, thus forcing them into war whenever they please.
 -   Having unbalanced arms creates threats and eliminates democracy, as was exactly proved in the past days. The only reason the Government backed up on its decision is because Hezebolla had his weapons in the middle of Beirut, threatening to attack the Government's Palace if they don't change their decision. If that is not using weapons to influence by threatening, then I don't know what is.


I can go on talking about this forever, but to conclude, I will go into current small details to further fortify my point

- Saying that Hezbolla's weapons can be removed through dialogue is impossible, as they already tried that many times before and always came out to no conclusion. Even a few days ago, we hear Nasrallah saying: " the one who touches our weapons will have his hands cut" is a big indication that this is impossible.

- Saying that their weapons are only external is complete non-sense, as they will definitely use them in case of a war against fellow citizens, and that was proven in the last few days.


In conclusion, I am in no way saying that March 14 is perfect, and even a bad choice by some, but when the option is between a bad choice and a much worse choice, I'll definitely be rational and choose the bad choice, instead of dying in the name of honor and dignity.


Joe







From: Mohamad El-Husseini 
Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2008 10:44 PM
To: antonio tamer 
Cc: Dima Najjar ; lebanon-articles at mit.edu 
Subject: Re: [LCM Articles] Four Days that changed the Middle East


I was not making a generalization. I stated a fact that both sides engaged and are engaging in warfare. Who "started it" is of no consequence. To portray one side as peaceful and the other as brute aggressors is misleading, and indeed for naive ears. The fact that one side was swiftly defeated does not mean it has preference for dialog--perhaps after the fact, as that is an easy choice to make. I highlighted this not to get a "faulty point" across, but to reinforce what I stated above. 

Also, I would like to remind you that I am not taking sides. I'm neutral and honest in saying neither March 8 or March 14 are capable of promoting good governance and nationhood. I would never vote for either block.

In all of your critique of my friend's quote you make the assumption that March 14 are a government. March 14 are not a government; March 14 are sect leaders. Lebanon has no government and has no president. Lebanon has sect leaders. 

There are fundamental problems afflicting Lebanon that are far more pressing than HAs telecommunications network, and in their resolution an easier way may emerge to disarm HA and remove other obstacles to the state.

March 14 are not the reason Syrian occupation ended. The people are. The politicians of March 14 do not own the events of the "Cedar Revolution ". In fact, if anything, they sold it during the first election post Syrian hegemony.

And I disagree: Very little progress has been made. We still have corruption, poverty, economic crisis, no president, no electoral law, economic woes, etc... only now we are free to be corrupt without asking for permission first.

Finally, yes, HA has a violent record. And so do the dinosaurs of March 14, even if they "love life."




------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 22:05:54 -0400
  From: antonio.tamer at gmail.com
  To: abitdodgy at hotmail.com
  Subject: Re: [LCM Articles] Four Days that changed the Middle East
  CC: patrickz at mit.edu; dimanajjar at gmail.com; lebanon-articles at mit.edu

  Please allow me to remind you Mohamad that the actions of one handful of angry (and obviously enraged) people do not make for a generalization.

  This kind of reference to war atrocity does not necessarily grant you immediate access to one's ears - except maybe the naive and unexpecting. I've seen the videos and am appalled by them, but this tactic of yours is not very ethical - ie, to appeal to one's humane and sensible side in order to get an unrelated (or faulty) point across.

  Let's look at what you said:

    "a semi-government that lacks the representation of one of Lebanon's major sects, whose legitimacy and constitutionality are seriously questioned,

  As far as I remember, the opposition (HA) resigned from the government. Also, HA is disrupting llife in every single day. The government may not be the best one to have ever been around(trust me, I have concerns about where it is leading Lebanon), but it is definitely better than what Syria had in place at the time it retreated.instead of normal participation, we see this detachement and frustration at the increased political (oh and peaceful, despite that atrocious reference of yours) success of March 14 and the government. To be able to kick an occupying and terrorizing country (syria) out like that with just demonstrations and organizations, that is impressive.


    in the heat of daily Israeli threats of a new war on HA and Lebanon

  If I remember well, the provocations have been coming from HA's side, not Israel. The warmongering and drums of waar have been one-directional (until HA's provication of Israel in July 2006). In what could've been Lebanon's best chance of peace, the lebanese (in all arrogance) declared victory when Israel pulled out of most of Lebanon. And let's leave the shibaa farms out of this debate, there is no Shibaa farms until Syria - an ally of HA - decides so. Oh do you see here the sole justification for HA's persistance??


    weeks after the assassination of HA's military commander

  Let me remind you that this happened in Syria and the so-called commander is labelled terrorist elsewhere. I suggest you dig up some bio.


    against the advise of the army command

  Army command? What advice? The army is there to protect, not dictate. I surely hope you're not hinting at the idea of a military authority, and if you indeed are, could you remind me of the last military regime that YOU think was successful? In either case, the lebanese political system surely was not designed for this kind of army command nonsense. No thanks!


    in the absence of a president and in its final dying hours

  This, we all know, is due to the increasing irritation of HA and Aoun's bloc to achieve any single political victory. Instead, they refer to disruption of life, armed attacks and assaults as well as demanding to be given rights (no, it's VETO) beyond what is reasonable or acceptable.


    takes the unprecedented step of outlawing HA's communication network, fully aware of the sensitivity of the issue

  This, I may agree with you on except I never saw any governmental decree or national consensus (without "sisterly" pressure) that HA has been granted the right to establish a communication network. As far as HA's weapons, well this story is settled. at least for me. I'm sorry if I won't go in that dirty path of changing your perspective on what you should well be aware of at this point. 

  So having chopped up your friend's brilliant quote, I ask you: What about it?


    Finally, at risk of offending people, none of Lebanon's traditional parties ever preferred dialog had they a to use violence. The illustrious history of our political class and 18 years of butchery by the same people who rule today speaks for itself...

  I completely agree with you on that one - those in power have a strong history of violence, that's true. But can you see some positive change at least? Can you see that the pro-gov camp is not willing to fight? granted, there are a couple of MK's in the mountains, but that is just tradition and/or dinosaurs from the civil war. Just to keep things in perspective: HA has a history of violence, and persistence of violence, and has been exclusively targetting civilians in Israel, Lebanon, Germany and South America without one single noble military victory. This is disgusting.


  On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 8:42 PM, Mohamad El-Husseini <abitdodgy at hotmail.com> wrote:

    Patrick,
     
    I would be remiss not to direct your attention to a graphic video the contents of which I advise against viewing. If you are not familiar, it captures the gruesome torture and murder of 10 SSNP members in Halba. In addition to being tortured as they took their dying breaths, their limbs were hacked and their bodies left to the disposal of their murderers, who wasted no time indulging in gratuitous gore. Not only is this reminiscent of what happened in Nahr El Bared, but it should cast a doubt on the theory that one side prefers dialog to the other.
     
    I condemn HA's actions, and their use of force was criminal and irresponsible. But it has not gone unanswered, even if the balance of power leans heavily to one side: the route of government partisans is not indicative of their preference for dialog. They were over-powered. 
     
    To quote a friend, "a semi-government that lacks the representation of one of Lebanon's major sects, whose legitimacy and constitutionality are seriously questioned, in the midst of internal turmoil, in the heat of daily Israeli threats of a new war on HA and Lebanon, weeks after the assassination of HA's military commander, against the advise of the army command, in the absence of a president and in its final dying hours, takes the unprecedented step of outlawing HA's communication network, fully aware of the sensitivity of the issue."



    Finally, at risk of offending people, none of Lebanon's traditional parties ever preferred dialog had they a to use violence. The illustrious history of our political class and 18 years of butchery by the same people who rule today speaks for itself...
     
    The war never ended, it was just bandaged and the binds are loosening once more.

    > Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 15:26:44 -0400
    > From: patrickz at MIT.EDU
    > To: dimanajjar at gmail.com
    > CC: lebanon-articles at MIT.EDU
    > Subject: Re: [LCM Articles] Four Days that changed the Middle East 

    > 
    > Rima,
    > A quick comment on the fresh view you mentioned.
    > First, I had a chance to listen to Rami Khoury talk at the Kennedy School of
    > Government at Harvard last year, and I have to say that Rami is very much a
    > Hizballah apologist. While he tried to portray himself as neutral and discuss
    > both sides of the conflict, it was very apparent what his political sentiments
    > were.
    > As such, I would very much take the article with a grain of salt. While
    > Hizballah did achieve a military victory of some sorts, I believe that it lost
    > something much more valuable, the respect of all non-shiite Lebanese who now
    > see it as an instrument of Iran, Syria, and Shiite dominance.
    > I believe the government made a key decision not to deploy its opwn gunmen or
    > the Internal Security Forces (ISF) who number in the 10,000 and are 
    > composed of
    > mainly Sunni and Christian. That would have put a strong counter attack to
    > Hizballah, at the expense of starting a new civil war. Fortunately some (i.e.
    > NOT March 8) are still committed to the principles of negotiation through
    > dialogue, not violence.
    > Where this will take us, I don't know. While this is part of a U.S. vs. Iran
    > power play (as the Hizballah likes to portray it), it is also an Iran 
    > vs. Saudi
    > Arabia play (Shiite vs. Sunni) and another effort by Syria to remain relevant,
    > regain influence in Lebanon and retain its tool of applying pressure on Israel
    > to get the Golan's back.
    > Let's be realistic when we talk about this situation. It's about people with
    > guns who don't want to give up their guns, and want to be the big boys and the
    > bullies of the block.
    > I welcome your thoughts and opinions on the matter!
    > ciao
    > Patrick
    > 
    > 
    > 
    > Quoting Dima Najjar <dimanajjar at gmail.com>:
    > 
    > > A fresh view..
    > >
    > >
    > > Click the following to access the sent link:
    > >
    > > Four days that changed the Middle East
    > > <http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?article_ID=91914&categ_ID=5&edition_id=10>
    > >
    > >
    > > Or copy and paste the following link in your browser address bar:
    > >
    > >
    > > <http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?article_ID=91914&categ_ID=5&edition_id=10>
    > >
    > > http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?article_ID=91914&categ_ID=5&edition_id=10
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > *
    > > *
    > >
    > > *Abstract:*
    > >
    > > Events in Beirut and other parts of Lebanon continue to move erratically,
    > > with simultaneous gestures of political compromise and armed clashes that
    > > have left 46 dead in the past week. The consequences of what has happened in
    > > the past week may portend an extraordinary but constructive new development:
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > --
    > > Dima Najjar
    > > +97150 413 4343
    > >
    > 
    > 
    > _______________________________________________
    > Lebanon-Articles mailing list
    > Lebanon-Articles at mit.edu
    > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/lebanon-articles



    _______________________________________________
    Lebanon-Articles mailing list
    Lebanon-Articles at mit.edu
    http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/lebanon-articles





  -- 
  Antonio Tamer.
  508 361 5943 


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


_______________________________________________
Lebanon-Articles mailing list
Lebanon-Articles at mit.edu
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/lebanon-articles
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/lebanon-articles/attachments/20080514/e65da059/attachment.htm

From christoff at resist.ca  Thu May 15 01:38:14 2008
From: christoff at resist.ca (Stefan Christoff)
Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 22:38:14 -0700
Subject: [LCM Articles] ideas for interviews? Broadcasts from Beriut
	project...
In-Reply-To: <002101c8b632$6a5dc790$9901a8c0@LENOVO50339D8E>
References: <002101c8b632$6a5dc790$9901a8c0@LENOVO50339D8E>
Message-ID: <482BCC46.6030508@resist.ca>


Hello!

Writing everyone from Tadamon! Montreal, a Palestine / Lebanon 
solidarity group, on-line at: http://tadamon.resist.ca

Recently we started an interview project, that will feature voices from 
the ground in Lebanon to provide independent analysis concerning the 
current situation in the country...

Interview series is called "Broadcasts from Beirut", the first 
interviews are outlined below...

* Broadcasts from Beirut I: Interview with activist & publisher Samah 
Idriss in Beirut, Lebanon.
http://tadamon.resist.ca/index.php/post/1397

* Broadcasts from Beirut II: an interview with Bilal Elamine, former 
editor of Left Turn magazine.
http://tadamon.resist.ca/index.php/post/1416

* Broadcasts from Beirut III: Interview with Raed Rafei, a Lebanese 
reporter working with the Los Angeles Times.
http://tadamon.resist.ca/index.php/post/1425

Wondering if anyone on this has ideas on potential people that we could 
interview for this series, the mandate is as follows;

"A Tadamon! interview project aiming to highlight progressive voices 
from the ground in Lebanon on the ongoing conflict, voices independent 
from major political parties..."

Looking for ideas for interviews, from artists, musicians, activists, 
human rights workers, academics, etc.

Please write me with your ideas!

Thanks in advance for your responses.
-- Stefan, for Tadamon! -- http://tadamon.resist.ca






From tzovig at gmail.com  Thu May 15 04:54:00 2008
From: tzovig at gmail.com (Tzovig Ramian)
Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 11:54:00 +0300
Subject: [LCM Articles] Four Days that changed the Middle East
In-Reply-To: <E8D02C2ED2FB4BDC80A143BCE8D374DB@joe>
References: <4ad8f16e0805140810t283a147csf016138de14b3bd6@mail.gmail.com><20080514152644.ypb89htdmxskckw8@webmail.mit.edu><BLU109-W557747F4E714C2A5E4DEACA0C90@phx.gbl>	<7a0929bc0805141905m488ed8f2id9c6650d9f5f0dd0@mail.gmail.com>	<BLU109-W59250B8310D14B04436EA0A0C90@phx.gbl>
	<E8D02C2ED2FB4BDC80A143BCE8D374DB@joe>
Message-ID: <482BFA28.6050500@gmail.com>

Hi everyone,
I live in Beirut, so I've been living this situation, as well as seeing 
it, hearing about it from family, friends, news peeps. I've only skimmed 
the comments, my apologies. But I want to share my opinion.

There's 2 levels (at least) to what's been going on, and it's wrong to 
conflate them. One is the political level--people wanting power, money, 
guns, and control over Lebanon. Maybe they believe they know what's 
"best" for Lebanon and want to bring this about, or maybe they just want 
to make bank and are looking after themselves and their kin--likely a 
combination of the 2, I don't know. Who knows why people do things? 
Actually, people don't even know why they do things half the 
time--attribution error I think they call it. And this is everywhere in 
the world.

The second level is social. People HATE each other, ok? Let's sit 
crooked and talk straight. As much as there are some who overcome 
sectarianism and love people for people, and all that jazz--the majority 
of this country doesn't feel that way. And people who have guns want 
vengeance for what happened in the war and occupation. These last few 
days was their opportunity since it was a free for all. Get your gun, 
join whatever side is attacking the group you've been wanting to duke it 
out with since 1990, and let it out. This is of course what's going to 
happen when you have a society that doesn't learn their history in 
school, and where reconciliation attempts have been few and far between 
since the ceasefire at the end of the war.

A messed up political system that lends itself towards corruption + a 
society of armed people that are just waiting to take out their enemy 
and trust no one = what y'all been seeing.

Of course, add to this another level--global/regional. Israel, Syria, 
the US and Iran are just waiting for an excuse to invade and control 
this place (for "security purposes", of course, my ass). Lebanon is 
vulnerable to these external forces (well, I mean, they've infiltrated 
every inch of this place already, so it's not exactly right to say 
external I guess. External as in they have different interests from 
Lebanon's). Their policies affect our lives. Food and petrol are damn 
expensive as a result. Electricity, water and phone service are also 
crazy pricey, given that we're paying so much more than we should due to 
the greed of individuals in government who control these services and 
the policies that price them.

So add individual level issues to the global pressures plus social 
problems, and political problems.

Messiness. Lots of messiness.
Sigh.
~Tzovig



Joe Khoury wrote:
> After reading all your thoughts, I thought I'd let you know what I think.
> Every Lebanese citizen grows in his specific community and thus has a 
> biased way of thinking. It is of no coincidence that people of a 
> particular sect most probably are "convinced" that their leader is the 
> right one. This comes from being brainwashed for all the years that 
> your leader is right, and the opposite sect is wrong. After years and 
> years of growing up in such a community, it becomes very hard for the 
> child to change his opinion when he grows up, and that is especially 
> true to the uneducated citizens that can't think on their own. This is 
> very unfortunate, but I fully understand when a person says he is 
> "convinced" that his leader is right, and that his leader's choices 
> are the only logical choices.
> I grew up in Lebanon, and I was lucky enough not to be brainwashed 
> about neither politics nor hate against other religions. Therefore, 
> being a very unbiased person, I was able to make up my mind.
> As an unbiased person currently studying in the US, my way of thinking 
> has become even more liberal. The way I look at Lebanese politics 
> overlooks small details, such as someone from this sect brutally 
> killed another guy from this sect, or someone blew the other person's 
> on fire and so on.
> I try to see the future of the country and my position in it. Looking 
> at the bigger picture, I don't see the parties as Hezbollah or any 
> specific March 14 group. I see about their principles and actions, and 
> how these affect me. To me, I believe in peace, unity, prosperity, and 
> a good life. Looking at the two parties, I noticed the following:
> Hezbollah: We don't care if peace is better economically for Lebanon, 
> We don't care if other people believe Lebanon should be like other 
> Arab countries. Israel has killed my family in 1982, and I will never 
> give up even if we have to sacrifice ourselves for the cause. We will 
> fight them no matter what.
> This reminds me of a Palestinian friend that I talked to last year. I 
> asked him: No one denies that Israel had no right to come to your land 
> in 1948, but no one denies that there is no way you can wipe it off 
> the map. So, assume Israel told you now that they are willing to do a 
> peaceful two-state solution, would you accept? He said: No, I prefer 
> to keep fighting than accepting, because that is a "shitty" deal for 
> us, as they still have half of our land. I replied: Yes, but right 
> now, you are in a "shittier" position, with barely any land at all. 
> Since you know you can't take them out, you have to choose the best 
> solution available right now. What do you choose? Shit or Shittier? He 
> said: I prefer to choose shittier, since at least I have my honor. I 
> replied: Well, I definitely know now why a solution may never exist, 
> but now, I am very surprised as to why you keep nagging about a better 
> situation. Since you know that you can't take Israel out, and you 
> insist that honor is of utmost importance, then the solution is 
> impossible, and while you keep that way your thinking, don?t be 
> surprised if your country's situation never ameliorates.
> This story is highly relevant to the current situation. When I hear 
> Hezbollah say: I don't care about the well being of my country, they 
> killed my family! They conquered us for many years! I will never 
> accept a peace deal with these Zionists. I will keep fighting, even it 
> means sacrificing myself in the name of the cause!
> After hearing Nasrallah's speeches, I can't help but notice the 
> resemblance to my friend's case. The difference however is very 
> important. In Palestine, the Palestinians agree on fighting Israel 
> till death, but in Lebanon, only Hezbollah feels that way. We all see 
> Israel as an enemy, but the majority would much prefer if we were in 
> some sort of peace.
> I'll ask you a question: about 95% of Israel's borders are with Egypt 
> and Jordan. After the 1967 war, they directly did peace deals with the 
> Israelis, choosing peace and prosperity over honor, honor which leads 
> them to poverty and fanaticism. I wonder why Lebanon, who shares only 
> about 2% of its borders with Israel, and definitely the militarily 
> weakest among all other Arab countries, should be the one to feel the 
> lack of dignity when it comes to accepting Israel as a major force in 
> the region.
> Even if people still believe that it's a worthy cause, what right do 
> they have to impose their beliefs on the rest of the Lebanese people?
> I summarize March 8 and March 14 as two parties: Those who believe 
> that Israel is an enemy worthy of indefinitely fighting for the sake 
> of honor, ( I won't say security because look at Egypt and Jordan, 
> they're perfectly secure since their peace deals in 1967). And those 
> who acknowledges that Israel is an enemy, but believe that the cause 
> is unworthy to sacrifice the peace and prosperity of a whole country.
> In other words, if you are a bear sharing a lion's cage, would you 
> want to be his friend and live peacefully, or do you prefer fighting a 
> guaranteed death in the name of honor? Of course this analogy is not 
> perfect, but I see a very important point. The US, UN, Europe and 
> almost everyone are the great powers of the world. We must accept 
> that. It's a fact. Almost everyone acknowledges it and desides that 
> it's of their best interest to be on their friendly side, for the sake 
> of their economy as well as international standing. Are we really that 
> powerful to be the exception?
> Therefore, I disagree with Hezebolla for many reasons:
> - I believe the cause is unworthy to live in poverty and be recognized 
> as a terrorist organization by ALL countries except for Syria and Iran.
> - I also believe that even if they feel that way, they are allowed to 
> do so, but in no way are they allowed to force that way of thinking on 
> all Lebanese, thus forcing them into war whenever they please.
> - Having unbalanced arms creates threats and eliminates democracy, as 
> was exactly proved in the past days. The only reason the Government 
> backed up on its decision is because Hezebolla had his weapons in the 
> middle of Beirut, threatening to attack the Government's Palace if 
> they don't change their decision. If that is not using weapons to 
> influence by threatening, then I don't know what is.
> I can go on talking about this forever, but to conclude, I will go 
> into current small details to further fortify my point
> - Saying that Hezbolla's weapons can be removed through dialogue is 
> impossible, as they already tried that many times before and always 
> came out to no conclusion. Even a few days ago, we hear Nasrallah 
> saying: " the one who touches our weapons will have his hands cut" is 
> a big indication that this is impossible.
> - Saying that their weapons are only external is complete non-sense, 
> as they will definitely use them in case of a war against fellow 
> citizens, and that was proven in the last few days.
> In conclusion, I am in no way saying that March 14 is perfect, and 
> even a bad choice by some, but when the option is between a bad choice 
> and a much worse choice, I'll definitely be rational and choose the 
> bad choice, instead of dying in the name of honor and dignity.
> Joe
> *From:* Mohamad El-Husseini <mailto:abitdodgy at hotmail.com>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 14, 2008 10:44 PM
> *To:* antonio tamer <mailto:antonio.tamer at gmail.com>
> *Cc:* Dima Najjar <mailto:dimanajjar at gmail.com> ; 
> lebanon-articles at mit.edu <mailto:lebanon-articles at mit.edu>
> *Subject:* Re: [LCM Articles] Four Days that changed the Middle East
>
> I was not making a generalization. I stated a fact that both sides 
> engaged and are engaging in warfare. Who "started it" is of no 
> consequence. To portray one side as peaceful and the other as brute 
> aggressors is misleading, and indeed for naive ears. The fact that one 
> side was swiftly defeated does not mean it has preference for 
> dialog--perhaps after the fact, as that is an easy choice to make. I 
> highlighted this not to get a "faulty point" across, but to reinforce 
> what I stated above.
>
> Also, I would like to remind you that I am not taking sides. I'm 
> neutral and honest in saying neither March 8 or March 14 are capable 
> of promoting good governance and nationhood. I would never vote for 
> either block.
>
> In all of your critique of my friend's quote you make the assumption 
> that March 14 are a government. March 14 are not a government; March 
> 14 are sect leaders. Lebanon has no government and has no president. 
> Lebanon has sect leaders.
>
> There are fundamental problems afflicting Lebanon that are far more 
> pressing than HAs telecommunications network, and in their resolution 
> an easier way may emerge to disarm HA and remove other obstacles to 
> the state.
>
> March 14 are not the reason Syrian occupation ended. The people are. 
> The politicians of March 14 do not own the events of the "Cedar 
> Revolution ". In fact, if anything, they sold it during the first 
> election post Syrian hegemony.
>
> And I disagree: Very little progress has been made. We still have 
> corruption, poverty, economic crisis, no president, no electoral law, 
> economic woes, etc... only now we are free to be corrupt without 
> asking for permission first.
>
> Finally, yes, HA has a violent record. And so do the dinosaurs of 
> March 14, even if they "love life."
>
>
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 22:05:54 -0400
>     From: antonio.tamer at gmail.com
>     To: abitdodgy at hotmail.com
>     Subject: Re: [LCM Articles] Four Days that changed the Middle East
>     CC: patrickz at mit.edu; dimanajjar at gmail.com; lebanon-articles at mit.edu
>
>     Please allow me to remind you Mohamad that the actions of one
>     handful of angry (and obviously enraged) people do not make for a
>     generalization.
>
>     This kind of reference to war atrocity does not necessarily grant
>     you immediate access to one's ears - except maybe the naive and
>     unexpecting. I've seen the videos and am appalled by them, but
>     this tactic of yours is not very ethical - ie, to appeal to one's
>     humane and sensible side in order to get an unrelated (or faulty)
>     point across.
>
>     Let's look at what you said:
>
>         "a semi-government that lacks the representation of one of
>         Lebanon's major sects, whose legitimacy and constitutionality
>         are seriously questioned,
>
>     As far as I remember, the opposition (HA) resigned from the
>     government. Also, HA is disrupting llife in every single day. The
>     government may not be the best one to have ever been around(trust
>     me, I have concerns about where it is leading Lebanon), but it is
>     definitely better than what Syria had in place at the time it
>     retreated.instead of normal participation, we see this detachement
>     and frustration at the increased political (oh and peaceful,
>     despite that atrocious reference of yours) success of March 14 and
>     the government. To be able to kick an occupying and terrorizing
>     country (syria) out like that with just demonstrations and
>     organizations, that is impressive.
>
>         in the heat of daily Israeli threats of a new war on HA and
>         Lebanon
>
>     If I remember well, the provocations have been coming from HA's
>     side, not Israel. The warmongering and drums of waar have been
>     one-directional (until HA's provication of Israel in July 2006).
>     In what could've been Lebanon's best chance of peace, the lebanese
>     (in all arrogance) declared victory when Israel pulled out of most
>     of Lebanon. And let's leave the shibaa farms out of this debate,
>     there is no Shibaa farms until Syria - an ally of HA - decides so.
>     Oh do you see here the sole justification for HA's persistance??
>
>         weeks after the assassination of HA's military commander
>
>     Let me remind you that this happened in Syria and the so-called
>     commander is labelled terrorist elsewhere. I suggest you dig up
>     some bio.
>
>         against the advise of the army command
>
>     Army command? What advice? The army is there to protect, not
>     dictate. I surely hope you're not hinting at the idea of a
>     military authority, and if you indeed are, could you remind me of
>     the last military regime that YOU think was successful? In either
>     case, the lebanese political system surely was not designed for
>     this kind of army command nonsense. No thanks!
>
>         in the absence of a president and in its final dying hours
>
>     This, we all know, is due to the increasing irritation of HA and
>     Aoun's bloc to achieve any single political victory. Instead, they
>     refer to disruption of life, armed attacks and assaults as well as
>     demanding to be given rights (no, it's VETO) beyond what is
>     reasonable or acceptable.
>
>         takes the unprecedented step of outlawing HA's communication
>         network, fully aware of the sensitivity of the issue
>
>     This, I may agree with you on except I never saw any governmental
>     decree or national consensus (without "sisterly" pressure) that HA
>     has been granted the right to establish a communication network.
>     As far as HA's weapons, well this story is settled. at least for
>     me. I'm sorry if I won't go in that dirty path of changing your
>     perspective on what you should well be aware of at this point.
>
>     So having chopped up your friend's brilliant quote, I ask you:
>     What about it?
>
>         Finally, at risk of offending people, none of Lebanon's
>         traditional parties ever preferred dialog had they a to use
>         violence. The illustrious history of our political class and
>         18 years of butchery by the same people who rule today speaks
>         for itself...
>
>     I completely agree with you on that one - those in power have a
>     strong history of violence, that's true. But can you see some
>     positive change at least? Can you see that the pro-gov camp is not
>     willing to fight? granted, there are a couple of MK's in the
>     mountains, but that is just tradition and/or dinosaurs from the
>     civil war. Just to keep things in perspective: HA _*has*_ a
>     history of violence, and persistence of violence, and has been
>     exclusively targetting civilians in Israel, Lebanon, Germany and
>     South America without one single _*noble *_military victory. This
>     is disgusting.
>
>     On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 8:42 PM, Mohamad El-Husseini
>     <abitdodgy at hotmail.com <mailto:abitdodgy at hotmail.com>> wrote:
>
>         Patrick,
>
>         I would be remiss not to direct your attention to a graphic
>         video the contents of which I advise against viewing. If you
>         are not familiar, it captures the gruesome torture and murder
>         of 10 SSNP members in Halba. In addition to being tortured as
>         they took their dying breaths, their limbs were hacked and
>         their bodies left to the disposal of their murderers, who
>         wasted no time indulging in gratuitous gore. Not only is this
>         reminiscent of what happened in Nahr El Bared, but it should
>         cast a doubt on the theory that one side prefers dialog to the
>         other.
>
>         I condemn HA's actions, and their use of force was criminal
>         and irresponsible. But it has not gone unanswered, even if the
>         balance of power leans heavily to one side: the route of
>         government partisans is not indicative of their preference for
>         dialog. They were over-powered.
>
>         To quote a friend, "a semi-government that lacks the
>         representation of one of Lebanon's major sects, whose
>         legitimacy and constitutionality are seriously questioned, in
>         the midst of internal turmoil, in the heat of daily Israeli
>         threats of a new war on HA and Lebanon, weeks after the
>         assassination of HA's military commander, against the advise
>         of the army command, in the absence of a president and in its
>         final dying hours, takes the unprecedented step of outlawing
>         HA's communication network, fully aware of the sensitivity of
>         the issue."
>
>
>
>         Finally, at risk of offending people, none of Lebanon's
>         traditional parties ever preferred dialog had they a to use
>         violence. The illustrious history of our political class and
>         18 years of butchery by the same people who rule today speaks
>         for itself...
>
>         The war never ended, it was just bandaged and the binds are
>         loosening once more.
>
>         > Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 15:26:44 -0400
>         > From: patrickz at MIT.EDU <mailto:patrickz at MIT.EDU>
>         > To: dimanajjar at gmail.com <mailto:dimanajjar at gmail.com>
>         > CC: lebanon-articles at MIT.EDU <mailto:lebanon-articles at MIT.EDU>
>         > Subject: Re: [LCM Articles] Four Days that changed the
>         Middle East
>
>         >
>         > Rima,
>         > A quick comment on the fresh view you mentioned.
>         > First, I had a chance to listen to Rami Khoury talk at the
>         Kennedy School of
>         > Government at Harvard last year, and I have to say that Rami
>         is very much a
>         > Hizballah apologist. While he tried to portray himself as
>         neutral and discuss
>         > both sides of the conflict, it was very apparent what his
>         political sentiments
>         > were.
>         > As such, I would very much take the article with a grain of
>         salt. While
>         > Hizballah did achieve a military victory of some sorts, I
>         believe that it lost
>         > something much more valuable, the respect of all non-shiite
>         Lebanese who now
>         > see it as an instrument of Iran, Syria, and Shiite dominance.
>         > I believe the government made a key decision not to deploy
>         its opwn gunmen or
>         > the Internal Security Forces (ISF) who number in the 10,000
>         and are
>         > composed of
>         > mainly Sunni and Christian. That would have put a strong
>         counter attack to
>         > Hizballah, at the expense of starting a new civil war.
>         Fortunately some (i.e.
>         > NOT March 8) are still committed to the principles of
>         negotiation through
>         > dialogue, not violence.
>         > Where this will take us, I don't know. While this is part of
>         a U.S. vs. Iran
>         > power play (as the Hizballah likes to portray it), it is
>         also an Iran
>         > vs. Saudi
>         > Arabia play (Shiite vs. Sunni) and another effort by Syria
>         to remain relevant,
>         > regain influence in Lebanon and retain its tool of applying
>         pressure on Israel
>         > to get the Golan's back.
>         > Let's be realistic when we talk about this situation. It's
>         about people with
>         > guns who don't want to give up their guns, and want to be
>         the big boys and the
>         > bullies of the block.
>         > I welcome your thoughts and opinions on the matter!
>         > ciao
>         > Patrick
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         > Quoting Dima Najjar <dimanajjar at gmail.com
>         <mailto:dimanajjar at gmail.com>>:
>         >
>         > > A fresh view..
>         > >
>         > >
>         > > Click the following to access the sent link:
>         > >
>         > > Four days that changed the Middle East
>         > >
>         <http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?article_ID=91914&categ_ID=5&edition_id=10
>         <http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?article_ID=91914&categ_ID=5&edition_id=10>>
>         > >
>         > >
>         > > Or copy and paste the following link in your browser
>         address bar:
>         > >
>         > >
>         > >
>         <http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?article_ID=91914&categ_ID=5&edition_id=10
>         <http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?article_ID=91914&categ_ID=5&edition_id=10>>
>         > >
>         > >
>         http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?article_ID=91914&categ_ID=5&edition_id=10
>         <http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?article_ID=91914&categ_ID=5&edition_id=10>
>         > >
>         > >
>         > >
>         > > *
>         > > *
>         > >
>         > > *Abstract:*
>         > >
>         > > Events in Beirut and other parts of Lebanon continue to
>         move erratically,
>         > > with simultaneous gestures of political compromise and
>         armed clashes that
>         > > have left 46 dead in the past week. The consequences of
>         what has happened in
>         > > the past week may portend an extraordinary but
>         constructive new development:
>         > >
>         > >
>         > >
>         > > --
>         > > Dima Najjar
>         > > +97150 413 4343
>         > >
>         >
>         >
>         > _______________________________________________
>         > Lebanon-Articles mailing list
>         > Lebanon-Articles at mit.edu <mailto:Lebanon-Articles at mit.edu>
>         > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/lebanon-articles
>
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         Lebanon-Articles mailing list
>         Lebanon-Articles at mit.edu <mailto:Lebanon-Articles at mit.edu>
>         http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/lebanon-articles
>
>
>
>
>     -- 
>     Antonio Tamer.
>     508 361 5943 
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Lebanon-Articles mailing list
> Lebanon-Articles at mit.edu
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/lebanon-articles
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lebanon-Articles mailing list
> Lebanon-Articles at mit.edu
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/lebanon-articles
>   


From tzovig at gmail.com  Thu May 15 05:10:23 2008
From: tzovig at gmail.com (Tzovig Ramian)
Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 12:10:23 +0300
Subject: [LCM Articles] oops--forgot that last one....
In-Reply-To: <E8D02C2ED2FB4BDC80A143BCE8D374DB@joe>
References: <4ad8f16e0805140810t283a147csf016138de14b3bd6@mail.gmail.com><20080514152644.ypb89htdmxskckw8@webmail.mit.edu><BLU109-W557747F4E714C2A5E4DEACA0C90@phx.gbl>	<7a0929bc0805141905m488ed8f2id9c6650d9f5f0dd0@mail.gmail.com>	<BLU109-W59250B8310D14B04436EA0A0C90@phx.gbl>
	<E8D02C2ED2FB4BDC80A143BCE8D374DB@joe>
Message-ID: <482BFDFF.3070509@gmail.com>

Peace Vs. Justice. That's the other thing. Which do you value more? Some 
want peace and injustice. Others want justice forsaking peace. Galtung 
talks about the violence when either is lacking, and it's a personal 
preference. Would you rather live with direct violence of people killing 
people if it'll eventually get you to social justice and equality (which 
is what Islam values--social justice that is)? Or do you live with 
indirect violence of racism, discrimination, and corruption if it means 
at least no one's killing each other and you make nice with your 
neighbor (which is what Christianity values--love they neighbor, 
forgive, that is)?

Ok, it's generalizing a good deal, but think about it. Personally. Which 
do you want? Peace or Justice. The Lebanese are unfortunately split on 
this.

Hugs,
~Tzovig

Joe Khoury wrote:
> After reading all your thoughts, I thought I'd let you know what I think.
> Every Lebanese citizen grows in his specific community and thus has a 
> biased way of thinking. It is of no coincidence that people of a 
> particular sect most probably are "convinced" that their leader is the 
> right one. This comes from being brainwashed for all the years that 
> your leader is right, and the opposite sect is wrong. After years and 
> years of growing up in such a community, it becomes very hard for the 
> child to change his opinion when he grows up, and that is especially 
> true to the uneducated citizens that can't think on their own. This is 
> very unfortunate, but I fully understand when a person says he is 
> "convinced" that his leader is right, and that his leader's choices 
> are the only logical choices.
> I grew up in Lebanon, and I was lucky enough not to be brainwashed 
> about neither politics nor hate against other religions. Therefore, 
> being a very unbiased person, I was able to make up my mind.
> As an unbiased person currently studying in the US, my way of thinking 
> has become even more liberal. The way I look at Lebanese politics 
> overlooks small details, such as someone from this sect brutally 
> killed another guy from this sect, or someone blew the other person's 
> on fire and so on.
> I try to see the future of the country and my position in it. Looking 
> at the bigger picture, I don't see the parties as Hezbollah or any 
> specific March 14 group. I see about their principles and actions, and 
> how these affect me. To me, I believe in peace, unity, prosperity, and 
> a good life. Looking at the two parties, I noticed the following:
> Hezbollah: We don't care if peace is better economically for Lebanon, 
> We don't care if other people believe Lebanon should be like other 
> Arab countries. Israel has killed my family in 1982, and I will never 
> give up even if we have to sacrifice ourselves for the cause. We will 
> fight them no matter what.
> This reminds me of a Palestinian friend that I talked to last year. I 
> asked him: No one denies that Israel had no right to come to your land 
> in 1948, but no one denies that there is no way you can wipe it off 
> the map. So, assume Israel told you now that they are willing to do a 
> peaceful two-state solution, would you accept? He said: No, I prefer 
> to keep fighting than accepting, because that is a "shitty" deal for 
> us, as they still have half of our land. I replied: Yes, but right 
> now, you are in a "shittier" position, with barely any land at all. 
> Since you know you can't take them out, you have to choose the best 
> solution available right now. What do you choose? Shit or Shittier? He 
> said: I prefer to choose shittier, since at least I have my honor. I 
> replied: Well, I definitely know now why a solution may never exist, 
> but now, I am very surprised as to why you keep nagging about a better 
> situation. Since you know that you can't take Israel out, and you 
> insist that honor is of utmost importance, then the solution is 
> impossible, and while you keep that way your thinking, don?t be 
> surprised if your country's situation never ameliorates.
> This story is highly relevant to the current situation. When I hear 
> Hezbollah say: I don't care about the well being of my country, they 
> killed my family! They conquered us for many years! I will never 
> accept a peace deal with these Zionists. I will keep fighting, even it 
> means sacrificing myself in the name of the cause!
> After hearing Nasrallah's speeches, I can't help but notice the 
> resemblance to my friend's case. The difference however is very 
> important. In Palestine, the Palestinians agree on fighting Israel 
> till death, but in Lebanon, only Hezbollah feels that way. We all see 
> Israel as an enemy, but the majority would much prefer if we were in 
> some sort of peace.
> I'll ask you a question: about 95% of Israel's borders are with Egypt 
> and Jordan. After the 1967 war, they directly did peace deals with the 
> Israelis, choosing peace and prosperity over honor, honor which leads 
> them to poverty and fanaticism. I wonder why Lebanon, who shares only 
> about 2% of its borders with Israel, and definitely the militarily 
> weakest among all other Arab countries, should be the one to feel the 
> lack of dignity when it comes to accepting Israel as a major force in 
> the region.
> Even if people still believe that it's a worthy cause, what right do 
> they have to impose their beliefs on the rest of the Lebanese people?
> I summarize March 8 and March 14 as two parties: Those who believe 
> that Israel is an enemy worthy of indefinitely fighting for the sake 
> of honor, ( I won't say security because look at Egypt and Jordan, 
> they're perfectly secure since their peace deals in 1967). And those 
> who acknowledges that Israel is an enemy, but believe that the cause 
> is unworthy to sacrifice the peace and prosperity of a whole country.
> In other words, if you are a bear sharing a lion's cage, would you 
> want to be his friend and live peacefully, or do you prefer fighting a 
> guaranteed death in the name of honor? Of course this analogy is not 
> perfect, but I see a very important point. The US, UN, Europe and 
> almost everyone are the great powers of the world. We must accept 
> that. It's a fact. Almost everyone acknowledges it and desides that 
> it's of their best interest to be on their friendly side, for the sake 
> of their economy as well as international standing. Are we really that 
> powerful to be the exception?
> Therefore, I disagree with Hezebolla for many reasons:
> - I believe the cause is unworthy to live in poverty and be recognized 
> as a terrorist organization by ALL countries except for Syria and Iran.
> - I also believe that even if they feel that way, they are allowed to 
> do so, but in no way are they allowed to force that way of thinking on 
> all Lebanese, thus forcing them into war whenever they please.
> - Having unbalanced arms creates threats and eliminates democracy, as 
> was exactly proved in the past days. The only reason the Government 
> backed up on its decision is because Hezebolla had his weapons in the 
> middle of Beirut, threatening to attack the Government's Palace if 
> they don't change their decision. If that is not using weapons to 
> influence by threatening, then I don't know what is.
> I can go on talking about this forever, but to conclude, I will go 
> into current small details to further fortify my point
> - Saying that Hezbolla's weapons can be removed through dialogue is 
> impossible, as they already tried that many times before and always 
> came out to no conclusion. Even a few days ago, we hear Nasrallah 
> saying: " the one who touches our weapons will have his hands cut" is 
> a big indication that this is impossible.
> - Saying that their weapons are only external is complete non-sense, 
> as they will definitely use them in case of a war against fellow 
> citizens, and that was proven in the last few days.
> In conclusion, I am in no way saying that March 14 is perfect, and 
> even a bad choice by some, but when the option is between a bad choice 
> and a much worse choice, I'll definitely be rational and choose the 
> bad choice, instead of dying in the name of honor and dignity.
> Joe
> *From:* Mohamad El-Husseini <mailto:abitdodgy at hotmail.com>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 14, 2008 10:44 PM
> *To:* antonio tamer <mailto:antonio.tamer at gmail.com>
> *Cc:* Dima Najjar <mailto:dimanajjar at gmail.com> ; 
> lebanon-articles at mit.edu <mailto:lebanon-articles at mit.edu>
> *Subject:* Re: [LCM Articles] Four Days that changed the Middle East
>
> I was not making a generalization. I stated a fact that both sides 
> engaged and are engaging in warfare. Who "started it" is of no 
> consequence. To portray one side as peaceful and the other as brute 
> aggressors is misleading, and indeed for naive ears. The fact that one 
> side was swiftly defeated does not mean it has preference for 
> dialog--perhaps after the fact, as that is an easy choice to make. I 
> highlighted this not to get a "faulty point" across, but to reinforce 
> what I stated above.
>
> Also, I would like to remind you that I am not taking sides. I'm 
> neutral and honest in saying neither March 8 or March 14 are capable 
> of promoting good governance and nationhood. I would never vote for 
> either block.
>
> In all of your critique of my friend's quote you make the assumption 
> that March 14 are a government. March 14 are not a government; March 
> 14 are sect leaders. Lebanon has no government and has no president. 
> Lebanon has sect leaders.
>
> There are fundamental problems afflicting Lebanon that are far more 
> pressing than HAs telecommunications network, and in their resolution 
> an easier way may emerge to disarm HA and remove other obstacles to 
> the state.
>
> March 14 are not the reason Syrian occupation ended. The people are. 
> The politicians of March 14 do not own the events of the "Cedar 
> Revolution ". In fact, if anything, they sold it during the first 
> election post Syrian hegemony.
>
> And I disagree: Very little progress has been made. We still have 
> corruption, poverty, economic crisis, no president, no electoral law, 
> economic woes, etc... only now we are free to be corrupt without 
> asking for permission first.
>
> Finally, yes, HA has a violent record. And so do the dinosaurs of 
> March 14, even if they "love life."
>
>
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 22:05:54 -0400
>     From: antonio.tamer at gmail.com
>     To: abitdodgy at hotmail.com
>     Subject: Re: [LCM Articles] Four Days that changed the Middle East
>     CC: patrickz at mit.edu; dimanajjar at gmail.com; lebanon-articles at mit.edu
>
>     Please allow me to remind you Mohamad that the actions of one
>     handful of angry (and obviously enraged) people do not make for a
>     generalization.
>
>     This kind of reference to war atrocity does not necessarily grant
>     you immediate access to one's ears - except maybe the naive and
>     unexpecting. I've seen the videos and am appalled by them, but
>     this tactic of yours is not very ethical - ie, to appeal to one's
>     humane and sensible side in order to get an unrelated (or faulty)
>     point across.
>
>     Let's look at what you said:
>
>         "a semi-government that lacks the representation of one of
>         Lebanon's major sects, whose legitimacy and constitutionality
>         are seriously questioned,
>
>     As far as I remember, the opposition (HA) resigned from the
>     government. Also, HA is disrupting llife in every single day. The
>     government may not be the best one to have ever been around(trust
>     me, I have concerns about where it is leading Lebanon), but it is
>     definitely better than what Syria had in place at the time it
>     retreated.instead of normal participation, we see this detachement
>     and frustration at the increased political (oh and peaceful,
>     despite that atrocious reference of yours) success of March 14 and
>     the government. To be able to kick an occupying and terrorizing
>     country (syria) out like that with just demonstrations and
>     organizations, that is impressive.
>
>         in the heat of daily Israeli threats of a new war on HA and
>         Lebanon
>
>     If I remember well, the provocations have been coming from HA's
>     side, not Israel. The warmongering and drums of waar have been
>     one-directional (until HA's provication of Israel in July 2006).
>     In what could've been Lebanon's best chance of peace, the lebanese
>     (in all arrogance) declared victory when Israel pulled out of most
>     of Lebanon. And let's leave the shibaa farms out of this debate,
>     there is no Shibaa farms until Syria - an ally of HA - decides so.
>     Oh do you see here the sole justification for HA's persistance??
>
>         weeks after the assassination of HA's military commander
>
>     Let me remind you that this happened in Syria and the so-called
>     commander is labelled terrorist elsewhere. I suggest you dig up
>     some bio.
>
>         against the advise of the army command
>
>     Army command? What advice? The army is there to protect, not
>     dictate. I surely hope you're not hinting at the idea of a
>     military authority, and if you indeed are, could you remind me of
>     the last military regime that YOU think was successful? In either
>     case, the lebanese political system surely was not designed for
>     this kind of army command nonsense. No thanks!
>
>         in the absence of a president and in its final dying hours
>
>     This, we all know, is due to the increasing irritation of HA and
>     Aoun's bloc to achieve any single political victory. Instead, they
>     refer to disruption of life, armed attacks and assaults as well as
>     demanding to be given rights (no, it's VETO) beyond what is
>     reasonable or acceptable.
>
>         takes the unprecedented step of outlawing HA's communication
>         network, fully aware of the sensitivity of the issue
>
>     This, I may agree with you on except I never saw any governmental
>     decree or national consensus (without "sisterly" pressure) that HA
>     has been granted the right to establish a communication network.
>     As far as HA's weapons, well this story is settled. at least for
>     me. I'm sorry if I won't go in that dirty path of changing your
>     perspective on what you should well be aware of at this point.
>
>     So having chopped up your friend's brilliant quote, I ask you:
>     What about it?
>
>         Finally, at risk of offending people, none of Lebanon's
>         traditional parties ever preferred dialog had they a to use
>         violence. The illustrious history of our political class and
>         18 years of butchery by the same people who rule today speaks
>         for itself...
>
>     I completely agree with you on that one - those in power have a
>     strong history of violence, that's true. But can you see some
>     positive change at least? Can you see that the pro-gov camp is not
>     willing to fight? granted, there are a couple of MK's in the
>     mountains, but that is just tradition and/or dinosaurs from the
>     civil war. Just to keep things in perspective: HA _*has*_ a
>     history of violence, and persistence of violence, and has been
>     exclusively targetting civilians in Israel, Lebanon, Germany and
>     South America without one single _*noble *_military victory. This
>     is disgusting.
>
>     On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 8:42 PM, Mohamad El-Husseini
>     <abitdodgy at hotmail.com <mailto:abitdodgy at hotmail.com>> wrote:
>
>         Patrick,
>
>         I would be remiss not to direct your attention to a graphic
>         video the contents of which I advise against viewing. If you
>         are not familiar, it captures the gruesome torture and murder
>         of 10 SSNP members in Halba. In addition to being tortured as
>         they took their dying breaths, their limbs were hacked and
>         their bodies left to the disposal of their murderers, who
>         wasted no time indulging in gratuitous gore. Not only is this
>         reminiscent of what happened in Nahr El Bared, but it should
>         cast a doubt on the theory that one side prefers dialog to the
>         other.
>
>         I condemn HA's actions, and their use of force was criminal
>         and irresponsible. But it has not gone unanswered, even if the
>         balance of power leans heavily to one side: the route of
>         government partisans is not indicative of their preference for
>         dialog. They were over-powered.
>
>         To quote a friend, "a semi-government that lacks the
>         representation of one of Lebanon's major sects, whose
>         legitimacy and constitutionality are seriously questioned, in
>         the midst of internal turmoil, in the heat of daily Israeli
>         threats of a new war on HA and Lebanon, weeks after the
>         assassination of HA's military commander, against the advise
>         of the army command, in the absence of a president and in its
>         final dying hours, takes the unprecedented step of outlawing
>         HA's communication network, fully aware of the sensitivity of
>         the issue."
>
>
>
>         Finally, at risk of offending people, none of Lebanon's
>         traditional parties ever preferred dialog had they a to use
>         violence. The illustrious history of our political class and
>         18 years of butchery by the same people who rule today speaks
>         for itself...
>
>         The war never ended, it was just bandaged and the binds are
>         loosening once more.
>
>         > Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 15:26:44 -0400
>         > From: patrickz at MIT.EDU <mailto:patrickz at MIT.EDU>
>         > To: dimanajjar at gmail.com <mailto:dimanajjar at gmail.com>
>         > CC: lebanon-articles at MIT.EDU <mailto:lebanon-articles at MIT.EDU>
>         > Subject: Re: [LCM Articles] Four Days that changed the
>         Middle East
>
>         >
>         > Rima,
>         > A quick comment on the fresh view you mentioned.
>         > First, I had a chance to listen to Rami Khoury talk at the
>         Kennedy School of
>         > Government at Harvard last year, and I have to say that Rami
>         is very much a
>         > Hizballah apologist. While he tried to portray himself as
>         neutral and discuss
>         > both sides of the conflict, it was very apparent what his
>         political sentiments
>         > were.
>         > As such, I would very much take the article with a grain of
>         salt. While
>         > Hizballah did achieve a military victory of some sorts, I
>         believe that it lost
>         > something much more valuable, the respect of all non-shiite
>         Lebanese who now
>         > see it as an instrument of Iran, Syria, and Shiite dominance.
>         > I believe the government made a key decision not to deploy
>         its opwn gunmen or
>         > the Internal Security Forces (ISF) who number in the 10,000
>         and are
>         > composed of
>         > mainly Sunni and Christian. That would have put a strong
>         counter attack to
>         > Hizballah, at the expense of starting a new civil war.
>         Fortunately some (i.e.
>         > NOT March 8) are still committed to the principles of
>         negotiation through
>         > dialogue, not violence.
>         > Where this will take us, I don't know. While this is part of
>         a U.S. vs. Iran
>         > power play (as the Hizballah likes to portray it), it is
>         also an Iran
>         > vs. Saudi
>         > Arabia play (Shiite vs. Sunni) and another effort by Syria
>         to remain relevant,
>         > regain influence in Lebanon and retain its tool of applying
>         pressure on Israel
>         > to get the Golan's back.
>         > Let's be realistic when we talk about this situation. It's
>         about people with
>         > guns who don't want to give up their guns, and want to be
>         the big boys and the
>         > bullies of the block.
>         > I welcome your thoughts and opinions on the matter!
>         > ciao
>         > Patrick
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         > Quoting Dima Najjar <dimanajjar at gmail.com
>         <mailto:dimanajjar at gmail.com>>:
>         >
>         > > A fresh view..
>         > >
>         > >
>         > > Click the following to access the sent link:
>         > >
>         > > Four days that changed the Middle East
>         > >
>         <http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?article_ID=91914&categ_ID=5&edition_id=10
>         <http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?article_ID=91914&categ_ID=5&edition_id=10>>
>         > >
>         > >
>         > > Or copy and paste the following link in your browser
>         address bar:
>         > >
>         > >
>         > >
>         <http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?article_ID=91914&categ_ID=5&edition_id=10
>         <http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?article_ID=91914&categ_ID=5&edition_id=10>>
>         > >
>         > >
>         http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?article_ID=91914&categ_ID=5&edition_id=10
>         <http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?article_ID=91914&categ_ID=5&edition_id=10>
>         > >
>         > >
>         > >
>         > > *
>         > > *
>         > >
>         > > *Abstract:*
>         > >
>         > > Events in Beirut and other parts of Lebanon continue to
>         move erratically,
>         > > with simultaneous gestures of political compromise and
>         armed clashes that
>         > > have left 46 dead in the past week. The consequences of
>         what has happened in
>         > > the past week may portend an extraordinary but
>         constructive new development:
>         > >
>         > >
>         > >
>         > > --
>         > > Dima Najjar
>         > > +97150 413 4343
>         > >
>         >
>         >
>         > _______________________________________________
>         > Lebanon-Articles mailing list
>         > Lebanon-Articles at mit.edu <mailto:Lebanon-Articles at mit.edu>
>         > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/lebanon-articles
>
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         Lebanon-Articles mailing list
>         Lebanon-Articles at mit.edu <mailto:Lebanon-Articles at mit.edu>
>         http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/lebanon-articles
>
>
>
>
>     -- 
>     Antonio Tamer.
>     508 361 5943 
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Lebanon-Articles mailing list
> Lebanon-Articles at mit.edu
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/lebanon-articles
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lebanon-Articles mailing list
> Lebanon-Articles at mit.edu
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/lebanon-articles
>   


From abitdodgy at hotmail.com  Thu May 15 08:02:16 2008
From: abitdodgy at hotmail.com (Mohamad El-Husseini)
Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 08:02:16 -0400
Subject: [LCM Articles] Four Days that changed the Middle East
In-Reply-To: <E8D02C2ED2FB4BDC80A143BCE8D374DB@joe>
References: <4ad8f16e0805140810t283a147csf016138de14b3bd6@mail.gmail.com><20080514152644.ypb89htdmxskckw8@webmail.mit.edu><BLU109-W557747F4E714C2A5E4DEACA0C90@phx.gbl>
	<7a0929bc0805141905m488ed8f2id9c6650d9f5f0dd0@mail.gmail.com>
	<BLU109-W59250B8310D14B04436EA0A0C90@phx.gbl>
	<E8D02C2ED2FB4BDC80A143BCE8D374DB@joe>
Message-ID: <BLU109-W278E74C0C9C5560C17BC0CA0C90@phx.gbl>


Joe,



Thank you for sharing your thoughts. I hope before you started your
lengthy exposition you were aware that I am not "convinced my leaders"
are right. I have no leaders in Lebanon. I stated that clearly. I said
both sides are at fault while reiterating my condemnation for HA's use
of force. When both sides are at fault, the details become less
relevant. I only hope in claiming that both sides are wrong does not
according to the instincts of both parties make them hostile to me.



As to your main theme, I think you are incorrect and overly
presumptuous in claiming to know who wants war and peace, and that
disarming HA can not be done by dialog. It can, once major obstacles 
such as fundamental questions about our identity and power structure
are resolved. Otherwise what is your alternative, war? No thanks. 



In any event, if you wish to continue this chain we should do so in private as we have gone deep into the realm of opinion.

From: jkhoury at MIT.EDU
To: abitdodgy at hotmail.com; antonio.tamer at gmail.com
CC: dimanajjar at gmail.com; lebanon-articles at mit.edu
Subject: Re: [LCM Articles] Four Days that changed the Middle East
Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 23:52:07 -0400










After reading all your thoughts, I thought I'd let you 
know what I think.
 
Every Lebanese citizen grows in his specific community and 
thus has a biased way of thinking. It is of no coincidence that people of a 
particular sect most probably are "convinced" that their leader is the right 
one. This comes from being brainwashed for all the years that your leader is 
right, and the opposite sect is wrong. After years and years of growing up in 
such a community, it becomes very hard for the child to change his opinion when 
he grows up, and that is especially true to the uneducated citizens that can't 
think on their own. This is very unfortunate, but I 
fully understand when a person says he is "convinced" that his leader is right, 
and that his leader's choices are the only logical choices.
 
I grew up in Lebanon, and I was lucky enough not to be 
brainwashed about neither politics nor hate against other religions. Therefore, 
being a very unbiased person, I was able to make up my mind.
 
As an unbiased person currently studying in the US, my way 
of thinking has become even more liberal. The way I look at Lebanese politics 
overlooks small details, such as someone from this sect brutally killed another 
guy from this sect, or someone blew the other person's on fire and so 
on.
 
I try to see the future of the country and my position in 
it. Looking at the bigger picture, I don't see the parties as Hezbollah or any 
specific March 14 group. I see about their principles and actions, and how these 
affect me. To me, I believe in peace, unity, prosperity, and a good life. 
Looking at the two parties, I noticed the following:
 
Hezbollah: We don't care if peace is better economically 
for Lebanon, We don't care if other people believe Lebanon should be like other 
Arab countries. Israel has killed my family in 1982, and I will never give up 
even if we have to sacrifice ourselves for the cause. We will fight them no 
matter what.
 
This reminds me of a Palestinian friend that I talked to 
last year. I asked him: No one denies that Israel had no right to come to your 
land in 1948, but no one denies that there is no way you can wipe it off the 
map. So, assume Israel told you now that they are 
willing to do a peaceful two-state solution, would you accept? He said: No, I 
prefer to keep fighting than accepting, because that is a "shitty" deal for us, 
as they still have half of our land. I replied: Yes, but right now, you are in a 
"shittier" position, with barely any land at all. Since you know you can't take 
them out, you have to choose the best solution available right now. What do you 
choose? Shit or Shittier? He said: I prefer to choose shittier, since at least I 
have my honor. I replied: Well, I definitely know now why a solution may never 
exist, but now, I am very surprised as to why you keep nagging about a better 
situation. Since you know that you can't take Israel out, and you insist that 
honor is of utmost importance, then the solution is impossible, and while you 
keep that way your thinking, don?t be surprised if your country's situation 
never ameliorates.
 
This story is highly relevant to the current situation. 
When I hear Hezbollah say: I don't care about the well being of my country, they 
killed my family! They conquered us for many years! I will never accept a peace 
deal with these Zionists. I will keep fighting, even it means sacrificing 
myself in the name of the cause!
 
After hearing Nasrallah's speeches, I can't help but 
notice the resemblance to my friend's case. The difference however is very 
important. In Palestine, the Palestinians agree on fighting Israel till death, 
but in Lebanon, only Hezbollah feels that way. We all see Israel as an enemy, 
but the majority would much prefer if we were in some sort of 
peace.
 
I'll ask you a question: about 95% of Israel's borders are 
with Egypt and Jordan. After the 1967 war, they directly did peace deals with 
the Israelis, choosing peace and prosperity over honor, honor which leads them 
to poverty and fanaticism. I wonder why Lebanon, who shares only about 2% of its 
borders with Israel, and definitely the militarily weakest among 
all other Arab countries, should be the one to feel the lack of dignity 
when it comes to accepting Israel as a major force in the region.
 
Even if people still believe that it's a worthy cause, 
what right do they have to impose their beliefs on the rest of the Lebanese 
people?
 
I summarize March 8 and March 14 as two parties: Those who 
believe that Israel is an enemy worthy of indefinitely fighting for the sake of 
honor, ( I won't say security because look at Egypt and Jordan, they're 
perfectly secure since their peace deals in 1967). And those who acknowledges 
that Israel is an enemy, but believe that the cause is unworthy to sacrifice the 
peace and prosperity of a whole country. 
 
In other words, if you are a bear sharing a lion's 
cage, would you want to be his friend and live peacefully, or do you prefer 
fighting a guaranteed death in the name of honor?  Of course this analogy 
is not perfect, but I see a very important point. The US, UN, Europe and almost 
everyone are the great powers of the world. We must accept that. It's a fact. 
Almost everyone acknowledges it and desides that it's of their best interest to 
be on their friendly side, for the sake of their economy as well as 
international standing. Are we really that powerful to be the 
exception?
 
Therefore, I disagree with Hezebolla for many 
reasons:
 
 -   I believe the cause is unworthy 
to live in poverty and be recognized as a terrorist organization by ALL 
countries except for Syria and Iran.
 -   I also believe that 
even if they feel that way, they are allowed to do so, but in no way are they 
allowed to force that way of thinking on all Lebanese, thus forcing them 
into war whenever they please.
 -   Having unbalanced 
arms creates threats and eliminates democracy, as was exactly proved in the past 
days. The only reason the Government backed up on its decision is 
because Hezebolla had his weapons in the middle of Beirut, threatening 
to attack the Government's Palace if they don't change their decision. 
If that is not using weapons to influence by threatening, then I don't know what 
is.
 
 
I can go on talking about this forever, but to conclude, I 
will go into current small details to further fortify my point
 
- Saying that Hezbolla's weapons can be removed through 
dialogue is impossible, as they already tried that many times before and 
always came out to no conclusion. Even a few days ago, we hear Nasrallah saying: 
" the one who touches our weapons will have his hands cut" is a big indication 
that this is impossible.
 
- Saying that their weapons are only external is complete 
non-sense, as they will definitely use them in case of a war against fellow 
citizens, and that was proven in the last few days.
 
 
In conclusion, I am in no way saying that March 14 is 
perfect, and even a bad choice by some, but when the option is between a bad 
choice and a much worse choice, I'll definitely be rational and choose the bad 
choice, instead of dying in the name of honor and dignity.
 
 
Joe
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
From: Mohamad El-Husseini 


Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2008 10:44 PM
To: antonio tamer 
Cc: Dima Najjar ; lebanon-articles at mit.edu 
Subject: Re: [LCM Articles] Four Days that changed the Middle 
East

I was not making a generalization. I stated a fact that both 
sides engaged and are engaging in warfare. Who "started it" is of no 
consequence. To portray one side as peaceful and the other as brute aggressors 
is misleading, and indeed for naive ears. The fact that one side was swiftly 
defeated does not mean it has preference for dialog--perhaps after the fact, as 
that is an easy choice to make. I highlighted this not to get a "faulty point" 
across, but to reinforce what I stated above. 

Also, I would like to 
remind you that I am not taking sides. I'm neutral and honest in saying neither 
March 8 or March 14 are capable of promoting good governance and nationhood. I 
would never vote for either block.

In all of your critique of my friend's 
quote you make the assumption that March 14 are a government. March 14 are not a 
government; March 14 are sect leaders. Lebanon has no government and has no 
president. Lebanon has sect leaders. 

There are fundamental problems 
afflicting Lebanon that are far more pressing than HAs telecommunications 
network, and in their resolution an easier way may emerge to disarm HA and 
remove other obstacles to the state.

March 14 are not the reason Syrian 
occupation ended. The people are. The politicians of March 14 do not own the 
events of the "Cedar Revolution ". In fact, if anything, they sold it during the 
first election post Syrian hegemony.

And I disagree: Very little progress 
has been made. We still have corruption, poverty, economic crisis, no president, 
no electoral law, economic woes, etc... only now we are free to be corrupt 
without asking for permission first.

Finally, yes, HA has a violent 
record. And so do the dinosaurs of March 14, even if they "love 
life."




  
  Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 22:05:54 -0400
From: antonio.tamer at gmail.com
To: 
  abitdodgy at hotmail.com
Subject: Re: [LCM Articles] Four Days that changed 
  the Middle East
CC: patrickz at mit.edu; dimanajjar at gmail.com; 
  lebanon-articles at mit.edu

Please allow me to remind you Mohamad that the 
  actions of one handful of angry (and obviously enraged) people do not make for 
  a generalization.

This kind of reference to war atrocity does not 
  necessarily grant you immediate access to one's ears - except maybe the naive 
  and unexpecting. I've seen the videos and am appalled by them, but this tactic 
  of yours is not very ethical - ie, to appeal to one's humane and sensible side 
  in order to get an unrelated (or faulty) point across.

Let's look at 
  what you said:

  "a 
    semi-government that lacks the representation of one of Lebanon's major 
    sects, whose legitimacy and constitutionality are seriously 
  questioned,
As far as I remember, the opposition (HA) resigned 
  from the government. Also, HA is disrupting llife in every single day. The 
  government may not be the best one to have ever been around(trust me, I have 
  concerns about where it is leading Lebanon), but it is definitely better than 
  what Syria had in place at the time it retreated.instead of normal 
  participation, we see this detachement and frustration at the increased 
  political (oh and peaceful, despite that atrocious reference of yours) success 
  of March 14 and the government. To be able to kick an occupying and 
  terrorizing country (syria) out like that with just demonstrations and 
  organizations, that is impressive.


  in the heat of 
    daily Israeli threats of a new war on HA and Lebanon
If I 
  remember well, the provocations have been coming from HA's side, not Israel. 
  The warmongering and drums of waar have been one-directional (until HA's 
  provication of Israel in July 2006). In what could've been Lebanon's best 
  chance of peace, the lebanese (in all arrogance) declared victory when Israel 
  pulled out of most of Lebanon. And let's leave the shibaa farms out of this 
  debate, there is no Shibaa farms until Syria - an ally of HA - decides so. Oh 
  do you see here the sole justification for HA's persistance??


  weeks after the 
    assassination of HA's military commander
Let me remind you 
  that this happened in Syria and the so-called commander is labelled terrorist 
  elsewhere. I suggest you dig up some bio.


  against the 
    advise of the army command
Army command? What advice? The army 
  is there to protect, not dictate. I surely hope you're not hinting at the idea 
  of a military authority, and if you indeed are, could you remind me of the 
  last military regime that YOU think was successful? In either case, the 
  lebanese political system surely was not designed for this kind of army 
  command nonsense. No thanks!


  in the absence of 
    a president and in its final dying hours
This, we all know, is 
  due to the increasing irritation of HA and Aoun's bloc to achieve any single 
  political victory. Instead, they refer to disruption of life, armed attacks 
  and assaults as well as demanding to be given rights (no, it's VETO) beyond 
  what is reasonable or acceptable.


  takes the 
    unprecedented step of outlawing HA's communication network, fully aware of 
    the sensitivity of the issue
This, I may agree with you on 
  except I never saw any governmental decree or national consensus (without 
  "sisterly" pressure) that HA has been granted the right to establish a 
  communication network. As far as HA's weapons, well this story is settled. at 
  least for me. I'm sorry if I won't go in that dirty path of changing your 
  perspective on what you should well be aware of at this point. 

So 
  having chopped up your friend's brilliant quote, I ask you: What about 
  it?


  Finally, at risk 
    of offending people, none of Lebanon's traditional parties ever 
    preferred dialog had they a to use violence. The illustrious history of our 
    political class and 18 years of butchery by the same people who rule today 
    speaks for itself...
I completely agree with you on that one - 
  those in power have a strong history of violence, that's true. But can you see 
  some positive change at least? Can you see that the pro-gov camp is not 
  willing to fight? granted, there are a couple of MK's in the mountains, but 
  that is just tradition and/or dinosaurs from the civil war. Just to keep 
  things in perspective: HA has a history of violence, and 
  persistence of violence, and has been exclusively targetting civilians in 
  Israel, Lebanon, Germany and South America without one single noble 
  military victory. This is disgusting.


  On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 8:42 PM, Mohamad El-Husseini 
  <abitdodgy at hotmail.com> wrote:

  
    Patrick,
 
I would be remiss not 
    to direct your attention to a graphic video the contents 
    of which I advise against viewing. If you are not familiar, it captures the 
    gruesome torture and murder of 10 SSNP members in Halba. In addition to 
    being tortured as they took their dying breaths, their limbs were 
    hacked and their bodies left to the disposal of their murderers, 
    who wasted no time indulging in gratuitous gore. Not only is 
    this reminiscent of what happened in Nahr El Bared, but it should cast 
    a doubt on the theory that one side prefers dialog to the 
    other.
 
I condemn HA's actions, and their use of force was 
    criminal and irresponsible. But it has not gone unanswered, even if the 
    balance of power leans heavily to one side: the route of government 
    partisans is not indicative of their preference for dialog. They were 
    over-powered. 
 
To quote a friend, "a semi-government that lacks 
    the representation of one of Lebanon's major sects, whose legitimacy and 
    constitutionality are seriously questioned, in the midst of internal 
    turmoil, in the heat of daily Israeli threats of a new war on HA and 
    Lebanon, weeks after the assassination of HA's military commander, against 
    the advise of the army command, in the absence of a president and in its 
    final dying hours, takes the unprecedented step of outlawing HA's 
    communication network, fully aware of the sensitivity of the 
    issue."



Finally, at risk of offending people, none of 
    Lebanon's traditional parties ever preferred dialog had they a to use 
    violence. The illustrious history of our political class and 18 years of 
    butchery by the same people who rule today speaks for 
    itself...
 
The war never ended, it was just bandaged and the 
    binds are loosening once more.

> Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 15:26:44 
    -0400
> From: patrickz at MIT.EDU
> To: dimanajjar at gmail.com
> CC: lebanon-articles at MIT.EDU
> 
    Subject: Re: [LCM Articles] Four Days that changed the Middle East 
    
    
    
> 
> Rima,
> A quick comment on the 
    fresh view you mentioned.
> First, I had a chance to listen to Rami 
    Khoury talk at the Kennedy School of
> Government at Harvard last 
    year, and I have to say that Rami is very much a
> Hizballah 
    apologist. While he tried to portray himself as neutral and discuss
> 
    both sides of the conflict, it was very apparent what his political 
    sentiments
> were.
> As such, I would very much take the article 
    with a grain of salt. While
> Hizballah did achieve a military victory 
    of some sorts, I believe that it lost
> something much more valuable, 
    the respect of all non-shiite Lebanese who now
> see it as an 
    instrument of Iran, Syria, and Shiite dominance.
> I believe the 
    government made a key decision not to deploy its opwn gunmen or
> the 
    Internal Security Forces (ISF) who number in the 10,000 and are 
> 
    composed of
> mainly Sunni and Christian. That would have put a strong 
    counter attack to
> Hizballah, at the expense of starting a new civil 
    war. Fortunately some (i.e.
> NOT March 8) are still committed to the 
    principles of negotiation through
> dialogue, not violence.
> 
    Where this will take us, I don't know. While this is part of a U.S. vs. 
    Iran
> power play (as the Hizballah likes to portray it), it is also 
    an Iran 
> vs. Saudi
> Arabia play (Shiite vs. Sunni) and 
    another effort by Syria to remain relevant,
> regain influence in 
    Lebanon and retain its tool of applying pressure on Israel
> to get 
    the Golan's back.
> Let's be realistic when we talk about this 
    situation. It's about people with
> guns who don't want to give up 
    their guns, and want to be the big boys and the
> bullies of the 
    block.
> I welcome your thoughts and opinions on the matter!
> 
    ciao
> Patrick
> 
> 
> 
> Quoting Dima Najjar 
    <dimanajjar at gmail.com>:
> 
    
> > A fresh view..
> >
> >
> > Click 
    the following to access the sent link:
> >
> > Four days 
    that changed the Middle East
> > <http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?article_ID=91914&categ_ID=5&edition_id=10>
> 
    >
> >
> > Or copy and paste the following link in your 
    browser address bar:
> >
> >
> > <http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?article_ID=91914&categ_ID=5&edition_id=10>
> 
    >
> > http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?article_ID=91914&categ_ID=5&edition_id=10
> 
    >
> >
> >
> > *
> > *
> 
    >
> > *Abstract:*
> >
> > Events in Beirut and 
    other parts of Lebanon continue to move erratically,
> > with 
    simultaneous gestures of political compromise and armed clashes that
> 
    > have left 46 dead in the past week. The consequences of what has 
    happened in
> > the past week may portend an extraordinary but 
    constructive new development:
> >
> >
> >
> 
    > --
> > Dima Najjar
> > +97150 413 4343
> 
    >
> 
> 
> 
    _______________________________________________
> Lebanon-Articles 
    mailing list
> Lebanon-Articles at mit.edu
> 
    http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/lebanon-articles


_______________________________________________
Lebanon-Articles 
    mailing list
Lebanon-Articles at mit.edu
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/lebanon-articles



-- 
Antonio Tamer.
508 361 5943 



_______________________________________________
Lebanon-Articles 
mailing 
list
Lebanon-Articles at mit.edu
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/lebanon-articles

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/lebanon-articles/attachments/20080515/571b1328/attachment.htm

From gaoude at MIT.EDU  Fri May 16 11:14:30 2008
From: gaoude at MIT.EDU (Georges Aoude)
Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 11:14:30 -0400
Subject: [LCM Articles] send nora to beirut
Message-ID: <20080516111430.e18r2tv3higogswo@webmail.mit.edu>

Hi everyone,

my friend Nora, a Stanford alumnus, is planning to go to Lebanon mainly to
"document the recent crisis through articles, film, and photography". She is
looking for donations to support the expenses of her trip. For more details,
please visit: http://sendnoratobeirut.blogspot.com

Thanks!
Georges

-------------------------------------------
Georges Aoude
Ph.D. Candidate
Aerospace Controls Laboratory
Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Building 37, Room 372B
tel: (617) 324-7521
cell: (617) 314-4375


From hadidhabbab at hotmail.com  Tue May 20 16:49:04 2008
From: hadidhabbab at hotmail.com (Habib Haddad)
Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 20:49:04 +0000
Subject: [LCM Articles] =?windows-1256?q?_Away_from_Politics_-_=22Arabic_t?=
 =?windows-1256?q?yping_tool_wins_gong=22=FE?=
In-Reply-To: <20080516111430.e18r2tv3higogswo@webmail.mit.edu>
References: <20080516111430.e18r2tv3higogswo@webmail.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <BLU121-W39B38AD892311839A25BA4A5C40@phx.gbl>


Away from politics; Cambridge based start up wins "Best Web Technology award" (www.Yamli.com)
 
Full Article here: http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2008/05/15/arab-typing-tool-wins-award 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/lebanon-articles/attachments/20080520/034352cc/attachment.htm

From omarkanafani at gmail.com  Wed May 21 12:32:43 2008
From: omarkanafani at gmail.com (Omar Kanafani)
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 17:32:43 +0100
Subject: [LCM Articles] What Arab countries think of democracy
Message-ID: <34d248bf0805210932h38b278c4x5ec4e896f4e31a8@mail.gmail.com>

What Arab countries think of
democracy<http://centreforeuropeanreform.blogspot.com/2008/05/what-arab-countries-think-of-democracy.html>
via Centre for European
Reform<http://centreforeuropeanreform.blogspot.com/>by Centre for
European Reform on 21/05/08

by Clara Marina O'Donnell

Earlier this month, the Arab Reform Initiative (ARI) presented its first
report on the state of democratic reform in the Arab world. ARI is a
consortium of a dozen leading Arab research institutes which try to promote
peaceful democratic reform across the Middle East (CER and a few other
non-Arab think-tanks are associated with the initiative).

The report is a groundbreaking venture. It is the first collective and
coordinated effort by Arab research institutes to evaluate the state of
their political systems. By highlighting the progress towards democracy, or
more to the point, the lack thereof, ARI hopes to pressure Arab governments
into further reforms.

Launched at a conference in Alexandria, the report looks at eight Arab
countries ? Jordan, 'Palestine', Lebanon, Egypt, Algeria, Morocco, Saudi
Arabia and Yemen from July 2006 to June 2007. The report's 'democracy index'
measures progress towards democracy on the basis of four criteria: strong
public institutions, respect for rights and freedoms, the rule of law, and
equity and social justice. The results will open a few eyes. Jordan ranked
first, ahead of Morocco. And Palestine came third, ahead of Egypt.

Unfortunately, the rankings don't give us the full picture on the ground.
Most such indices are somewhat arbitrary but this one will be particularly
controversial. The choice of criteria and how they are assessed explain the
surprising results. For example military conflict is not taken into account,
which partly explains Palestine's good marks. Wage equality is used as an
indicator for democratic progress, allowing poverty-ridden Yemen to score
top marks in that category and increase its overall performance. For future
ARI reports to make real difference, the authors will need to refine the
methodology (something they recognise).

The Alexandria conference was remarkable as much for the conversations that
took place as for the long-awaited report. Rami Khouri from the American
University of Beirut argued that the push towards democratic reform has
slowed down, and in some places collapsed, over the last few years because
of wars and foreign influence (in particular the US 'war on terror');
ideological conflicts; and the resistance of the ruling regimes. Democratic
rights have become less important compared to security and stability. This
is particularly the case for countries in conflict such as Lebanon, Iraq and
Palestine. But the current situation is also being exploited by some
governments, such as in Syria and Jordan, where authorities justify
postponing reforms by the need to maintain stability.

Khouri also argued that the arrival in politics of Islamic parties, the
strongest opposition movements in most Arab countries, has been a
double-edged sword. On the one hand, it has increased the amount of people
calling for democracy. But at the same time it has reduced the desire for
reform from the governing elites and western powers, who do not want to see
Islamists in government.

Professor Mustapha Kamel Al Sayyid from Egypt lamented the lack of links
between Arab movements for democratic reform and European and American civil
society. Most Arab groups are averse to Western assistance because they
perceive it as neo-colonial. But Kamel argued that European civil society
groups had been a valuable source of support during the transitions to
democracy in Latin America and that Arab movements were losing out.

While taking into acount the many obstacles, the conference and the report
concluded that the Arab region 'showed an initial disposition towards
democratic transformation, albeit a still embryonic one'.

But even the conference itself was full of reminders of how difficult the
current situation is. One ARI member has been inactive for a year because it
is being hassled by its government. And the Lebanese participants could not
get home as Hezbollah had cut off access to Beirut airport.

Clara Marina O'Donnell is a research fellow at the Centre for European
Refom.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/lebanon-articles/attachments/20080521/861ec24a/attachment.htm

From binta3rab at yahoo.com  Wed May 21 15:56:21 2008
From: binta3rab at yahoo.com (Farrah Haidar)
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 15:56:21 -0400
Subject: [LCM Articles] Looking for Arab-Americans and Muslim-Americans NOT
	voting for Obama
In-Reply-To: <421622.1730.qm@web39707.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <BAY104-F2628AFDB169346D4779B67B5920@phx.gbl>
	<421622.1730.qm@web39707.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <009f01c8bb7c$bed9c220$6b00a8c0@BOOSTER>

Hi, all - 

 

I am pitching a story showing the nuanced variances of Arab-American and
Muslim-American opinion. With all these talk of "Obama rhymes with Osama",
the assumption is that all Muslim-Americans and Arab-Americans will go for
Obama but the polls show differently.  Arab-Americans were evenly split
among party lines in 2000 and are now slowly moving to the Democratic party.
The ones moving to the Democratic party are polling more favorable for
Clinton.  Muslim-Americans are usually overwhelming Democratic but have
polled more favorably for Clinton than Obama. 

 

I am looking for Arab-Americans or Muslim-Americans who are NOT supporting
Obama to talk about why they support their preferred candidate, etc.  They
should be willing to reveal their name.

 

If you are interested (or know someone who is), please contact me at the
contact information below.

 

Thanks,

Farrah Haidar

p: 617.500.4964

farrah at gettheboost.com

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/lebanon-articles/attachments/20080521/6f6bd35d/attachment.htm

From omarkanafani at gmail.com  Thu May 22 12:56:23 2008
From: omarkanafani at gmail.com (Omar Kanafani)
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 17:56:23 +0100
Subject: [LCM Articles] Something radically new after Doha
Message-ID: <34d248bf0805220956x79183744k74e89cfb81a0edaa@mail.gmail.com>

Something radically new after Doha
By Michael Young
Daily Star staff
Thursday, May 22, 2008

Whatever else is said about the agreement between Lebanon's leaders reached
in Qatar on Wednesday, it will likely transform the country's political
landscape. With the
election<http://amazon.com/gp/product/8778386926?ie=UTF8&tag=thedailystar-20&link_code=em1&camp=212341&creative=384049&creativeASIN=8778386926&adid=ad134c30-a43c-4480-b74b-dd6a38742205>
of
a president, alliances will change and with that we may see growing
intricacy and reversals in the relationships between March 14 groups and
opposition groups.

One thing that will not change, however, is the attitude of a majority of
Lebanese when it comes to Hizbullah's behavior. Party officials have
recklessly downplayed their armed occupation of Beirut two weeks ago, but no
one, least of all the Sunnis, will soon forget what happened. So even if
genuine politics return, those of compromise and shifting calculations, the
structural inability of Hizbullah to coexist with a sovereign Lebanese state
will not disappear. This may push domestic parties to acquire weapons for
when Hizbullah again uses bullets to overcome its political shortcomings.

Like most compromises, the Doha agreement has created winners and losers on
all sides - but remains nebulous enough so that the losers still feel they
might gain from it. But it's difficult not to interpret what happened in
Qatar as a definitive sign that
Syria's<http://amazon.com/gp/product/1741046092?ie=UTF8&tag=thedailystar-20&link_code=em1&camp=212341&creative=384049&creativeASIN=1741046092&adid=76ce5149-39de-493e-8dcc-d2d7e2d556ae>
return
to Lebanon is no longer possible. No doubt the Syrians were in on the
arrangement, and the suspicious delay in establishing the Hariri tribunal
until early 2009 makes one wonder whether a quid pro quo is taking shape
behind the scenes. Reports of a breakthrough on the Syrian-Israeli track,
the Iraqi Army's entry into Sadr
City<http://amazon.com/gp/product/B000GIWIVA?ie=UTF8&tag=thedailystar-20&link_code=em1&camp=212341&creative=384049&creativeASIN=B000GIWIVA&adid=7d512196-ef9f-4659-8d8f-eaa4a41fa7fa>,
certainly with an Iranian green light, and signs that a truce may soon be
agreed in Gaza, suggest a regional package deal may have oiled the Lebanese
deal.

If there was one message emerging from the recent fighting, it was that
Syria could not conceivably return its army to Lebanon without reconquering
the country. Hizbullah committed several mistakes, of which two were
especially egregious for Syria: The Sunni community, like the Druze and many
Christians, are mobilized and will fight any Syrian comeback; and the
Lebanese file is more than ever an Iranian one, because Hizbullah's destiny
is at stake. Syria's allies, other than Hizbullah, were ineffective in
Beirut and the mountains, in some cases even siding with the majority. This
confirmed that Damascus has less leverage than ever when it comes to
employing those smaller armed groups it completely controls.

The election of a president, even if he is the troubling Michel Suleiman,
opens a new phase in Lebanon, one in which it is possible to imagine
consolidating a state gradually breaking free from Syria's grip. That's the
priority today, and has been the priority since April 2005 when the Syrian
Army withdrew from the country. Whether Suleiman likes it or not, from now
on he is a president, not a candidate maneuvering to become a president,
which will require him to take a strong position on defending the
sovereignty of the state both vis-?-vis Syria and Hizbullah. That could
either push him closer to the position favored by March 14 and most
Lebanese, or it could damage him if he proves to be indecisive.

Will March 14 survive after this? It probably will in the face of an armed
Hizbullah and Syria's foreseeable efforts to regain a foothold in Beirut.
But the parliamentary majority may transform itself into a looser alignment,
united on the large issues but with its leaders behaving parochially when it
comes to elections and patronage. Once Suleiman is elected, he becomes an
arbiter, an axial figure, in the political game. Politicians will have to
position themselves either for or against him, as the president strives to
build up a power base for himself in the state, particularly in Parliament.
Expect Suleiman to use the army as his bludgeon, which would be regrettable,
and expect tension between the officers and traditional politicians.

One unanswered question is who will be prime minister. If it is Saad Hariri,
and it is difficult to imagine it won't be, the relationship between him and
Suleiman will determine the face of Lebanon in the coming year before
parliamentary elections. Neither of the two would relish a return to the
discord between Emile Lahoud andRafik
Hariri<http://amazon.com/gp/product/1845112024?ie=UTF8&tag=thedailystar-20&link_code=em1&camp=212341&creative=384049&creativeASIN=1845112024&adid=15785b87-d933-482d-b73c-5590c9c29add>.
On top of that, if Saad becomes head of the government, he would benefit
from using that position as a foundation to create networks of alliances
transcending those of March 14. An electoral compact with the Armenians,
particularly the Tashnag Party, would be a smart move, and could shift the
balance in Beirut decisively away from Hizbullah, Amal and Syrian peons.

Another question is what happens to Walid Jumblatt? The Druze leader has
placed himself at the center of March 14 - a key mediator and usually prime
initiator of the coalition's policies. With a new president in place,
Jumblatt's role will be largely determined by the relationship between
Suleiman and his prime minister. If the prime minister is Hariri and Hariri
and Suleiman work well together, Jumblatt could find himself isolated. In
that case, and if history provides any lessons, he will soon be contesting
Suleiman and the officers the president relies upon. Jumblatt also will have
to keep Suleiman away from his Christian electorate in Aley and the Chouf.
Expect him, in that case, to move closer to Christians as unenthusiastic
about Suleiman: Samir Geagea and Michel Aoun.

Aoun is the great loser from a presidential election. It's not like the old
general wasn't warned. He could have used his parliamentary bloc to be
presidential kingmaker; instead he decided to obstruct everything in order
to be elected himself. Now he has only dust to feed on, and in his final
years he may find himself trying to protect his shriveling flock from the
overtures of Suleiman, who, if he is clever, will pick up a large share of
the disoriented Christians. One can already imagine most of Aoun's
parliamentarians in the Metn gravitating toward Suleiman, knowing that their
re-election depends on the goodwill of Michel Murr, who will be instrumental
in moving the district the president's way.

Samir Geagea is in a better position than Aoun, both because of his close
ties to Hariri and the Christian community's propensity to create
counterweights to its presidents. However, his power in the Cabinet is
uncertain and he too will have to fight off Suleiman's poaching among his
voters. That's why his rapport with Aoun is bound to improve.

The matter of Hizbullah's weapons will be the first test for Suleiman once
he is elected. The president risks losing the Sunnis if he comes out with a
limp formula that sidelines any serious discussion of the topic. Now is the
time to put the question of weapons on the table seriously, and Suleiman, as
a former commander of the army, is in an ideal position to propose a
sensible compromise. A second test for the president will be the choice of a
new army commander. The head of military intelligence, George
Khoury<http://amazon.com/gp/product/1893905713?ie=UTF8&tag=thedailystar-20&link_code=em1&camp=212341&creative=384049&creativeASIN=1893905713&adid=1a48ae36-57b8-4778-948d-83c4fcca3d38>,
is pining for the post, but given the army's indolence during the fighting
in Beirut and Hariri's deep doubts about what happened, Suleiman may need
all his dexterity to propose a successor who satisfies all sides.

Can Hizbullah be pleased with the result? It will now be able to say that it
received veto power<http://amazon.com/gp/product/1416511709?ie=UTF8&tag=thedailystar-20&link_code=em1&camp=212341&creative=384049&creativeASIN=1416511709&adid=6ed17df8-ef8d-47b1-bbf0-74f5538a6073>
in
the government and that the matter of its weapons was not discussed in Doha.
It will also be able to convince its supporters that this was its latest
victory after the government's decision to withdraw the two decisions last
week that Hizbullah found offensive. But that may be only half the story. By
so foolishly taking over Beirut militarily, the party only scared the other
communities into sustained hostility. The two decisions the government went
back on were decisions it could never have implemented anyway, so Hizbullah
effectively revealed its coup plan at an inopportune time and for little
gain. The party also has lost two cards: It has dismantled its downtown
protest camp and won't be able to close the airport road for some time. Its
weapons have become a subject of legitimate national discussion. And what
kind of war can Hizbullah hope to wage against Israel in South
Lebanon<http://amazon.com/gp/product/0275928543?ie=UTF8&tag=thedailystar-20&link_code=em1&camp=212341&creative=384049&creativeASIN=0275928543&adid=06fc4225-3411-41db-a92a-32d6c4476dd9>
when
most Lebanese, and quite a few Shiites, have no desire for war? Most
importantly, Hizbullah has been about the negation of the state. If the
post-Doha process is about the building of a state, then the party and that
state will eventually clash.

Much will depend on Michel Suleiman. That the president will get only three
ministers in a new Cabinet affirms he has serious credibility problems on
all sides. Suleiman is an unknown quantity. Will he be a faithful partner of
Syria, as when he was army commander? Or will he realize that he can be more
than that? In many ways Suleiman is a peculiar creation as president,
someone never destined to inherit the office. Now he has a chance to become
the long-awaited patron of a new and consensual Lebanese political order.
Let's hope he's up to it.

*Michael Young<http://amazon.com/gp/product/0980076323?ie=UTF8&tag=thedailystar-20&link_code=em1&camp=212341&creative=384049&creativeASIN=0980076323&adid=2a9add63-b4a6-4c1f-a98f-635ef01e96c4>
is
opinion editor of THE DAILY STAR.*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/lebanon-articles/attachments/20080522/a1186dfc/attachment.htm

From ralphrabbat at yahoo.com  Fri May 23 17:36:46 2008
From: ralphrabbat at yahoo.com (Ralph R Rabbat)
Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 14:36:46 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [LCM Articles] Mideast conflict forces animation to grow up
Message-ID: <257117.45496.qm@web82008.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

http://www.cnn.com/2008/SHOWBIZ/Movies/05/23/waltz.bashir/index.html

 
Ralph
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/lebanon-articles/attachments/20080523/9e6b38d4/attachment.htm

From saads at alum.mit.edu  Fri May 23 17:43:37 2008
From: saads at alum.mit.edu (Saad Shakhshir)
Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 17:43:37 -0400
Subject: [LCM Articles] Mideast conflict forces animation to grow up
In-Reply-To: <257117.45496.qm@web82008.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <257117.45496.qm@web82008.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <230d1df80805231443q489f4074se6f14b74d4f80577@mail.gmail.com>

Yes, I read about this last week.  Here is a link to a page containing a
video report with the creator and a preview of the film.  Click on the
"Watch the report" link in the pink section of the page.

http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/politics/international_politics/israeli+account+of+shatila+at+cannes+/2201347


Saad Shakhshir

On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 5:36 PM, Ralph R Rabbat <ralphrabbat at yahoo.com>
wrote:

> http://www.cnn.com/2008/SHOWBIZ/Movies/05/23/waltz.bashir/index.html
>
> Ralph
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lebanon-Articles mailing list
> Lebanon-Articles at mit.edu
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/lebanon-articles
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/lebanon-articles/attachments/20080523/f2a41c4e/attachment.htm

From hadidhabbab at hotmail.com  Fri May 23 17:54:50 2008
From: hadidhabbab at hotmail.com (Habib Haddad)
Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 21:54:50 +0000
Subject: [LCM Articles] Mideast conflict forces animation to grow up
In-Reply-To: <230d1df80805231443q489f4074se6f14b74d4f80577@mail.gmail.com>
References: <257117.45496.qm@web82008.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<230d1df80805231443q489f4074se6f14b74d4f80577@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BLU121-W2845DA1120372973837F16A5C10@phx.gbl>

>From the link below:

"The slaughter of civilians by militiamen brought international condemnation on the Israeli army, which stood by and let it happen."
That's a strong euphemism ...


Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 17:43:37 -0400From: saads at alum.mit.eduTo: lebanon-articles at mit.eduSubject: Re: [LCM Articles] Mideast conflict forces animation to grow upYes, I read about this last week.  Here is a link to a page containing a video report with the creator and a preview of the film.  Click on the "Watch the report" link in the pink section of the page.http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/politics/international_politics/israeli+account+of+shatila+at+cannes+/2201347Saad Shakhshir
On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 5:36 PM, Ralph R Rabbat <ralphrabbat at yahoo.com> wrote:


http://www.cnn.com/2008/SHOWBIZ/Movies/05/23/waltz.bashir/index.html
 Ralph_______________________________________________Lebanon-Articles mailing listLebanon-Articles at mit.eduhttp://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/lebanon-articles
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/lebanon-articles/attachments/20080523/1b5d1c91/attachment.htm

From gaoude at MIT.EDU  Tue May 27 13:20:25 2008
From: gaoude at MIT.EDU (Georges Aoude)
Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 13:20:25 -0400
Subject: [LCM Articles] Mich hayne al wa7ad ykoun libnene
Message-ID: <20080527132025.sr8oocnfkc144swc@webmail.mit.edu>

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=POkQXyzkKNo

-------------------------------------------
Georges Aoude
Ph.D. Candidate
Aerospace Controls Laboratory
Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Massachusetts Institute of Technology


From zsaab at MIT.EDU  Wed May 28 23:29:22 2008
From: zsaab at MIT.EDU (Zeina Saab)
Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 23:29:22 -0400
Subject: [LCM Articles] "My Lebanon Experience" by Rabeh Ghadban
Message-ID: <20080528232922.i881fyzjhmo08osg@webmail.mit.edu>

Dear All,

This article was written by a young Lebanese-American friend of mine, Rabeh
Ghadban. Please take a few minutes to read what he has written about his
experience in Lebanon during the recent civil unrest.  I have reproduced it
below and it is attached as well.

Best,
Zeina

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Friends,

As many of you know, I have spent the last year in Lebanon working for a NGO
and pretending to get better at my Arabic.  However, the last few weeks of
events and my personal experience with much of what has gone on here, both
in the mountains and in Beirut, pushed me to write about the
disturbing transformation I underwent during the week fighting - from a
reformist to an armed man.

For those of you that are Lebanese, I hope this piece invokes some questions
about our new found settlement and the future of our state of affairs.

Best Always,

Rabeh Ghadban

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A collective apathy that will continue to kill:
My introduction to war and why Lebanon may never prosper

I had prepared to write a piece on the strategic outlook of Lebanon's near
future. One that tried to make sense of the confusion that has clouded the
recent events in Lebanon.  My parents grew up in this country and I returned
here a year ago to pursue a professional career, hoping that I would better
understand my attachment to this unpredictable state.  I spent the previous
year before my arrival in Beirut writing a thesis about Lebanon, studying the
need to incorporate Hezbollah and Shia aspirations more appropriately into the
confessional system.

I argued the need to implement reforms, such as a new electoral system and a
cooperative plan for security to gradually move away
from our intransigent sectarian framework. To me, it seemed easy. A gradual
shift was needed away from confessional power-sharing toward a system where
elected representatives would also be responsible to a national electorate
rather than just a sectarian enclave. This would help diminish the monopoly of
power by zu'ama and be a constructive first step toward creating a collective
Lebanese national identity - something that is largely absent beyond rhetoric,
and in fact is a necessary precondition of our system of governance, known more
widely as consociationalism.

My research made me believe I was aptly prepared to assess current events and
contribute to the progress of this country.  Accordingly, I actively engaged in
civil society and began work at a reform institution, but I was still uncertain
of the effectiveness of my efforts. The shameless developments of the past
week, however, have forced me to question all that I wanted to believe to be
true.  The dangers of Lebanon's subversive political paradigm and its
inevitable invitation of conflict have been brought to the fore, only to be
eclipsed by a state of insouciance, as euphoria has swept through the country
upon news of a peace accord and the election of a new president. This
concomitant interplay of these improbable opposites has proven to me what I was
too afraid to admit: Lebanon suffers from a clear case of a "memory for
forgetfulness."

With the memory of the war seemingly forgotten, the Lebanese population and our
political leaders yet again will almost fail to learn from price of conflict,
taking the dangerous risk of leaving the question of sectarianism open-ended
and without a clear solution. My personal testimony through the recent conflict
shows that although tensions have been pacified by the illusive edification of
the Doha Agreement, sectarian identity will supersede Lebanese statehood so
long as the population remain vacillate toward calls for change.

The emotional rollercoaster that has accompanied the recent events has turned me
away from the foggy strategic forecast that I had started to write and that many
academics have engaged in the last week, each one contradicting the other in an
imbroglio of analysis without any concrete steps forward. It disposed of the
blind idealist in me, which would normally not justify acts of violence and
appose the use of arms. It purposely leaves out the editorial that has framed
blame in a context of power politics between the United State's regional
objectives and the nascent Shi'a crescent. And it definitely doesn't
pretend to understand, nor compare, the government's sudden decision to alter
the status quo against Hezbollah and actively confront its mounting influence
against the violent actions of the Party of God and their sanctified call to
maintain their weapons. My story does, however, invoke a question that everyone
in this country must ask themselves if there is to be a future of coexistence.
What are you willing to do to prevent the next round of conflict?

As chaos erupted, I found myself disconnected to what was unfolding in the
streets just below my apartment. Silence was only intermittent, broken by the
sound of gunfire and explosions, confirming that Beirut had once again slipped
back into civil war. This usually bustling city was brought to a standstill and
tormented by masked men and young juveniles who, bereft of the memory of the
previous civil war, were trigger happy and looking for a fight.  Questions
raced through my head.  Could Lebanon really exist as a single entity or would
be better for us to admit defeat and retreat back into separate enclaves? Can
the silent majority really forge a country free of proxy battles and
unaccountable political elites that incite communal fear? In this moment of
uncertainty, as the fate of the country was tested, my faith in its future,
too, was put into question.

I spent much of the first night listening to the piercing crackle of gunfire and
woke up in the morning to a live battle taking place a block away.  I watched
intently, missing only popcorn and candy, not wholly able to believe that I
this was not just a movie.  Captured by the sound of gunfire, my relatives
decided it was time to make our way up to my home village of Aley, located east
of Beirut in the Chouf mountains.  Here I thought I would be much safer because
it is strategically located, assuming the mountains would be unfettered by the
conflicts of Beirut.  I arrived to Aley to find my calculations to be
incorrect.  Within hours, fights broke out in town and I was forced to spend
the night in the kitchen as gun shots and heavy weaponry had been fired less
than 50 yards away from my home, as the deafening reports reverberated through
the house.

A few hours of quiet, a couple skipped heart beats, and a night of clutched
hands between family members.  It was official - the movie was over and I had
survived my first war experience.

One day passed with relative calm, but the following day, a Sunday, did not
prove to be as peaceful.  The fighting was resumed on the mountain, this time
on multiple fronts that ranged from Choueifat up to Aley, to Bayssour and
Kayfoun and also later that night in Al-Barouk, encompassing both borders of
the Chouf mountains. It became clear that there was a real threat and I
unwillingly found myself stuck between two ideals. One that is informed by my
educational background and upbringing which taught me to use logic and reason
over violence, and the other which recognized that my home, my family and my
people were under attack and it was my duty to defend my land.

It was a disturbing transformation. I came to Lebanon as a reformist and
threatened to leave it a militiaman.   I had reached a crossroads.  I was told
I may have to kill the very opponents I had advocated to entrust greater
participation.  I was scared.  That night the situation appeared irreversible.
I was a fighter in a civil war, militia vs. militia, and I didn't have a
choice.

My dream for a new a Lebanon, where sectarianism would not supersede the
interests of the state, disappeared. I realized that if war continued, I only
had my community and my za'im to protect me.  The army was impotent, the
government were helpless, and I had lost all faith in the very state
institutions I had so vehemently defended up until this moment.  On this
unforgettable night, I placed aside everything that I knew to be right and
contemplated my capacity to kill.

Thankfully, the answer to that daunting question was left unanswered, as news
came that the attack was called off and an agreement had been reached.  But if
the attackers had come to my home, what would I have done? Would I have picked
up a pistol and shot?  This point of cognitive dissidence will undoubtedly
haunt us for a long time.  To think that I may have picked up arms reveals the
desperation I felt, left alone and unprotected by the state, selfishly hoping
that army?s call to disarm the mountain would fail. To think that night, for
that one moment, I was willing to exchange so thoughtlessly my humanity and
aspirations of reform for a weapon.

My transformation is a chilling prospect.  It embodies the exact repulsion that
will inevitably resurface with the passing of time and our willingness to
forget.  That night I found my self standing up for my co-religionists, my
sect, before the interests of a collective people.  I found myself with the
exact obtuse mentality I was disgusted with when I first arrived. I found
myself consumed by dissent for this country, enraged that it had forced me to
become a product of hate.

Now I ask myself: where do I go from here?  I can only hope this question is
being asked by each and every citizen of this country.  However, I fear it is
not. The often celebrated Lebanese spirit - one that is credited for its
persistency to endure difficult circumstances and is known to keep on living
even in the face of uncertainty - seems to be no more than a fa?ade.  To
believe such fallacies will only prove to disappoint, as to praise our
misgivings to be an act of courage and resiliency only perpetuates a
superficial and a defeatist truth.

The silent majority who want change and a life free of conflict, no longer
dependant on communal nepotism, remain mute and unwilling to take action
against our crooked political dynasty.  For this reason, Lebanon's potential
to prosper looks grim and difficult at best.  For this reason, I have begun to
lose faith in my homeland.  Disappointment shrouds my thoughts; not of the
oft-blamed politicians but of the people of this country.  Instead of speaking
out against our misfortune, we have accepted it as an unchangeable truth, a
necessary tax on our love for this country.

Lebanon has lived a lie for too long, marked by apathy amongst the majority of
the population and a devious willingness by the minority in power to manipulate
our trust. Without standing up and demanding reform and expecting accountability
and responsibility in governance our freedom from violence will be short lived.
Without recognizing that a state away from sectarianism offers our best hope for
mutual security, people in Lebanon will increasingly be faced with same dilemma
I experienced this week: either pick up arms and fight or escape this reality
by leaving the country. When the safety of latest agreement erodes and this
decision presents itself again, remember my plea for action, because it will be
too late to blame anyone but yourself.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: so not to forget.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 31232 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/lebanon-articles/attachments/20080528/952b60f2/sonottoforget.doc