By Franklin Lamb * | Sabbah Report | www.sabbah.biz

This observer tends to get a haircut about every four months whether I need it or not. But this morning I got more than a trim from my Hezbollah friend and barber, Abass, named after Abass ibn Ali, the brother of Hussein, both martyrs and heroes of the epic 680 a.d. internecine Muslim battle at Karbala in present day Iraq. The Battle of Karbala, for Hezbollah members and Shia Muslims generally, symbolizes the triumph of good over evil and the willingness to sacrifice one's life for justice and the greater good of one's family, community or "Ummah." The reason for mentioning this is that my barber was ecstatic and claims his party has just experienced a "Karbala moment!"

When I mentioned that his statement could be taken different ways, since all the resistance fighters were killed at Karbala, Abass continued:

"Well, what I mean is that we in Hezbollah are pretty well known for kicking and keeping the Zionists out of Lebanon but our Party also seems to be catching on how to work in Lebanese and regional politics. And our people will benefit as we create social programs and honest government for the first time in Lebanese history. Do you agree that we are beginning to play the Lebanese political game pretty well?"

I do agree.

With a speed that surprised many here, and with equally surprising cross-sectarian acquiescence this morning, Hezbollah and its allies constitutionally toppled Hariri's government, constitutionally imposed new consultations to form a new government, and constitutionally transformed a minority into a majority and vice versa.

Hezbollah is known for studying political subjects very carefully and being quite flexible when events warrant. Two weeks ago when the Party of God pulled 11 MPs from the pro-US Saad Hariri government, it was thinking about nominating former PM Omar Karami to replace Hariri. The two time former Prime Minister, Karami, is strongly pro-Syrian, supports the Resistance and Hezbollah keeping its weapons. He also has zero use for the Special Tribunal for Lebanon that will likely indict a minimum of four Hezbollah officials. Now in his eighties, Karami is still fairly spry and may have assumed the post, if Hezbollah formally offered. In fact he might have thought the job was his but in the midst of fast moving events, Hezbollah decided to opt for nominating Nigib Mikati an American educated, Sunni billionaire who made lots of money in telecommunications and a lot more when a South African firm bought his company. Moreover, Sayyed Nasrallah said in his last speech that Omar Karami was the favored candidate, but the latter did not offer to take the job due to his old age. So the best thing to do was thought to be to talk to Mikati, as he is known to be a centrist and that his candidacy would have a less negative impact on the Hariri camp. Mikati is not close to Hezbollah and certainly has never been an ally.

In fact, Hezbollah, the Saudis, Europeans, and increasingly the Americans support Mikati as a World Bank type technocrat along the lines of former Lebanese PM Fuad Siniora or Salam Fayyad in Palestine but who can hopefully, not just ignore, but help clean up the governments rampant corruption. Hezbollah's nominee Mikati is known as a pro western moderate who was elected to Parliament in 2009 on the US backed Hariri ticket. The US would publically endorse him except for the fact that Hezbollah nominated him with Iranian, Syrian and Saudi backing. This hostile reactive US stance may change because Washington will find it difficult to boycott Mikati since the Europeans are endorsing him. Also, the negative international reaction to the Hariri camp violence on 1/27/11 in Tripoli and Beirut is awkward for the Obama administration to justify since the US has accused the Hezbollah led opposition of using "terrorist tactics" when some elements thought to be allied with the party engaged in similar street violence in the past. So the shoe is now on the other foot.

Some of the early winners and losers 48 hours following what the pro-US March 14 team and the US State Department are still calling "the coup":

Saad Hariri and his US backed Future Movement: Both are big political losers this morning but Saad still has a couple of important options. For the past nearly two years Saad was told by the US Embassy that Washington wanted him to "hang tough" and refuse to compromise on the Special Tribunal for Lebanon. The US conceived and engineered the STL in the UN Security Council to get Syria out of Lebanon and Bashar Assad out of Damascus following the Valentine Day 2005 murder of PM Rafik Hariri and 22 others.

Saad obediently did as told and consequently lost his premiership. Hezbollah warned him several times that he would be out if he did not disavow the STL which Hezbollah views as nothing more than a US-Israeli bludgeon to try to destroy it. When the Hezbollah led opposition pulled down his government on January 12, 2011, Saad was ready to fight to keep his job. But his US and Saudi backers "stabbed Saad in the back as did some of his closest political and personal friends," according to a Future Movement source.

Meanwhile, both Saudi Arabia and the Obama Administration realized that Saad could not secure the 65 votes from Parliament (they were right; he got just 60) so they decided to let Syria name the non-ideologue, Nigab Mikati, a personal friend of President Bashar Assad. Omar Karami may have been the first choice but he too was dropped because he also could not get 65 votes and had a checkered past including being too cozy with Syria. The US and the KSA decided better to let Syria back into the Lebanese Government than risk Iran taking complete control.

Saad Hariri reportedly feels betrayed by his fellow Sunni billionaire alliance member Mikati, who he got elected MP in 2009 on his personal ticket. But in reality Mikati's 87% election results showed that his candidacy helped Hariri's candidates because Mikati's name was on the ballot as part of the Hariri list. Nevertheless, their meeting yesterday morning lasted about 6 minutes and was stone cold. The Hariri TV channels including Future TV chose to publish just 30 seconds of the encounter. When Hariri left the meeting and was asked by a journalist if he would join the Mikati government he said "Lashou." ( meaning: "For what?, or what's the use?" ).

Just hours later, the March 14 alliance informed Makati that it would not participate in his government. But both may still. The Saudi's are already encouraging Saad to swallow his pride and cooperate with the next government. Eventually the Americans will likely also after they get over their shock and sour grapes and Jeffrey Feltman talks with the French and some Europeans leaders this weekend.

This morning, Saad is said to be still inconsolable by yesterday afternoon's private session with the US Ambassador, the motherly Maury Connelly, and repeated this morning that he will not join a government "appointed by Hezbollah." But his March 14 movement leadership is qualifying his rejection and strongly pressing PM designate Makati to put in writing for all to see a commitment that his government will not under any circumstances accept the three Hezbollah no's. They are: no STL funding, no STL Lebanese judges working at the STL, and no Lebanese government cooperation with the STL including scrapping the Lebanese-UN Memorandum of Understanding pledging cooperation on such matter as arresting and extraditing those soon to be named by the STL.

March 14, including their leader Hariri, is still insisting on their price for participation, which is that the new government support the STL and that the Lebanese government control Hezbollah's arms. They will lose on both demands as Hezbollah will not budge on either. Yet, discussions are being held on how to resolve these issues and, unlikely as it may appear at the moment, solutions may be found to dissolve these 'red lines'.

If Saad stays out of the Mikati government, he will champion the STL but he will lose more March 14th support because some of his closest team members are said to be planning to jump ship and to put politics about their claimed principles in order to grab some well-paid Cabinet chairs. March 14, via Fuad Sinoria, their Parliamentary leader is making lots of noise about Hezbollah weapons but it's largely as a bargaining chip ploy to get good cabinet posts when the time is right.

This current March14, playing hard to get stance, suits US diplomat Jeffrey Feltman, one of the architects of the 2005 "Cedar Revolution" and who is currently on his 62nd trip to the region to assure anyone listening that he and the US government "respects the sovereignty, freedom, and independence" of Lebanon, whatever any of those words mean anymore, given US actions in the region. In Paris yesterday, Feltman repeated that there persists mutual French-U.S. concern on how the Hariri cabinet was "toppled under threat and intimidation" and he emphasized the need for the US and its allies to press for the implementation of UN Security Council Resolutions 1701 (disarm Hezbollah) and 1757 (indict and convict Hezbollah).

Jeff could be forgiven for feeling a little bit like Saeb Erekat when on 10/21/09 the soon to be ex-PA "peace negotiator" complained to George Mitchell that, "The region is slipping away like sand through our hands." Feltman, not for the first time, is under great pressure from Washington and Tel Aviv to "do something!"

Rampant rumors circulating here include one that the US Embassy could be closed if, as expected, the US and Israel launch the expected massive international defamation and vilification campaign in the coming weeks timed to drive home the expected STL indictments that Washington believes will include key Hezbollah officials.

Hezbollah has the most direct control over the government of Lebanon including the Parliament, the next 30 seat Cabinet, and the government bureaucracy. Contrary to US-Israel claims the party is not thrilled with having the chance to run the government. Hezbollah sees itself as a resistance movement first, last, and always and many in the party do not relish its "pure mandate" being sullied or getting sidetracked by running Lebanon's really complicated government.

Hezbollah will now push its clean government and anti-corruption agenda and get it enacted into law but the party is quite content to leave it to others to work constantly with all those self-absorbed sects and their leaders. To a large extent, it will operate through MPs who are not Hezbollah party members. It intends to immediately begin work on improving the big Four issues that all Lebanese urgently want addressed: water, electricity, pollution, traffic among others including the environment and jobs creation. Hezbollah wants to be seen as serving the people while it builds its resistance movement. It is preparing to unveil its domestic legislative agenda which will include most of the ten 'good government' initiatives that its ally Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri delivered to Mikati yesterday.

Hezbollah's 12-member bloc told the new Prime Minster that it favored a government of "national partnership," according to its head MP Mohammad Raad who advised the media: "Hezbollah did not set pre-conditions [on Mikati] and we won't accept such a thing. We did not ask for specific portfolios and we await the formation process."

Iran benefited with important political gains as it continues to rise and move in the region in the direction of Palestine.

The United States' hegemony continues to recede in the region and is increasingly viewed, post Palestine Papers, as the enemy of Arabs and Muslim. Its pariah status grows because Washington continues to prop up, fund and arm the Zionist occupation of Palestine.

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

Related posts:

• Will Hezbollah support the right to work for Palestinian refugees in Lebanon?
• Norman Finkelstein – Hezbollah, the Honour of Lebanon
• Are US-Israel intelligence agencies blocking Palestinian civil rights to weaken Hezbollah? – by Franklin Lamb

Kids in Deheisha Refugee Camp, July 2005. Photo by: Shabtai Gold.

Local political pressures are mounting on the Party of God

Part IV of a series concerning the international campaign to legislate civil rights for Palestinian refugees in Lebanon

By Franklin Lamb* (Shatila Palestinian Refugee Camp, Beirut) | Sabbah Report | www.sabbah.biz

The current relationship between the Palestinian refugees in Lebanon and Hezbollah is not as clear cut as often assumed, despite the frequent inspiring brotherly words of Hezbollah's leadership and the fact that the Party enjoys the support of more than 90% of the camp refugees, none of whom can vote. What this means is that the willingness of the Lebanese Resistance to spend its domestic political capital to legislate the right work to work for Palestinian refugees is not settled as of mid-May 2010.

The Hezbollah-PLO historical connection is well known in Lebanon. If Grand Ayatollah Imam Sayyed Ruhollah Mousavi Khomeini was the omnipresent but unseen father at the birth of the Party of God (whose very name he approved), the Beirut headquartered Palestine Liberation Organization was in some ways the infant organization's nurturing and occasionally doting 'uncle.' This familial relationship weakened, but did not collapse after the PLO's leadership and local power base were gutted in the summer of 1982.

The out of country lectures of Imam Khomeini and various Shia scholars who matriculated at Najaf and Qom and who often referenced the 680 c.e. Ashura passion play of Karbala, were supplemented by lectures from pro-Palestinian Shia clerics including the pro-Palestinian Grand Ayatollah Mohammed Huseein Fadlallah,( an admirer but not an avid follower of Khomeini) Abass Mousawi, and Raghad Harb among others. All inspired Lebanon's youth to follow the examples of the Karbala Ashura heros Ali, Hussein, Abbas and Zeinab in order to work for and achieve justice for Palestine. A frequent theme was and remains: Every day is Ashura, and every land is Karbala. In the same Lebanese neighborhood's the PLO supplemented the idealists education with teachings the likes of Franz Fanon, Mao, Vo Nguyen Giap and Che Guevara. The Palestinians added contemporary examples of Karbala type sacrifices and steadfastness of scores of martyrs such as 19 year old Dalal Mughrabi from Rashedeyeh camp near Tyre, leader of the March 11, 1978 Kamal Al 'Odwan Operation inside Palestine. In important aspects both movements melded into a common Resistance cause.

The March 1968 battle of Karameh inside Palestine near the Jordanian border revealed to the region that Israel was not invincible and Arafat's frequent clarion following the June 1967 war that "every Arab and Muslim must pledge to fight until "martyrdom" linked the PLO in the minds of many Shia, with Kabala and later Hezbollah.

PLO aid to the Islamic Resistance

Six years before the 1979 Islamic Revolution ousted the US-UK installed pretender to the Peacock Throne, via Operation Ajax on August 19, 1953, and nine years before Hezbollah was founded, the PLO supported, trained and helped arm elements of the Khomeini inspired movement inside Lebanon. On the orders of Yassir Arafat and his deputy, Khalil al Wazir (Abu Jihad) large quantities of weapons were gifted or sold cheap to Islamist groups, the only conditions being that the fighters were pledged to resist Israeli aggression and their PLO weapons were not to be used against Lebanese civilians or each other. Events would soon demonstrate that some of these loosely configured group, including the Farsi accented "foreigners" seen increasingly around Shatila and Burj al Barjeneh refugees camps and Dahiyeh, were indeed serious about resisting Israeli aggression.

Today in South Beirut, the Bekaa Valley and south Lebanon plenty of veterans of various groups operating in the 1970's and early 1980's vividly recall receiving help from the secular PLO resistance with its tolerance for a wide spectrum of religious views as well as the godless. One former fighter, now a Hamra Street lawyer in Beirut, told this observer just this week that the PLO taught the ABC's of resistance tactics to Hezbollah. "We taught them a lot. But they also learned much from our many errors and that learning helped make them a formidable organization today." The PLO respected the seriousness, discipline and honesty of the young men arriving in Lebanon and welcomed them.

One well known example of the PLO-Hezbollah symbiosis and deepending releationship in this perod was Hezbollah's legendary military leader Imad, Mughniyeh from the southern Shia village of Tair Dibb. Imad, joined the PLO at age 13 and by 18 distinguished himself at the June 1982 battle of Khaldeh south of Beirut's airport. One friend of Imad's recently recalled that the young Fateh member was impressed fighting side by side with Islamic resistance fighters who joined the battle against the Israeli forces advancing on West Beirut. He also served as a body guard for Lebanon's senior Shia cleric, Mohamad Hussein Fadlallah as well as PLO leaders Yassir Arafat, Abu Jihad and Abu Iyad, as part of his Fatah's Force 17 duties.

Regarding the PLO assistance to Islamic fighters in the summer of 1982,mentioned above, it was Mughineh who was put in charge of the weapons distribution. ( On August 18, 1982 the late American journalist/researcher Janet Stevens was given 250 brand new Chinese made plastic handled ak-47's wrapped in grease and heavy plastic. She enlisted this observer and two others for a 2 a.m. burying project in the then vacant lot next to the Commodore Hotel to hide them, she presciently advised us, from Israeli forces that she was sure would find an excuse to enter West Beirut. Not until the hotel, expanded and dug up the vacant lot around 1992 for a new swimming pool, were the weapons discovered.)

When Imad Mughineh was assassinated, widely thought to have been by Israel aided by its Syrian spies, he received the title: "Leader of the Two Victories" given to him by Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah, the reference being to his leadership in both the May 2000 and the July 2006 victories against Israel. Today, this epithet and Imad's photo hangs in every Palestinian refugee camp in Lebanon illustrating the respect of both communities.

PLO Shia tensions in South Lebanon

Lebanon's Shia population, oppressed for hundreds of years by the Ottoman Empire, colonial powers including France as well as by fellow Lebanese, supported the Palestinians and initially welcomed those arriving at their door steps during the 1948 Nakba.

Palestinian-Shia relations were bound to deteriorate following the Cairo Agreement in 1969, when Yasser Arafat, the new chairman of the PLO, and General Emile Bustani, the commander of the Lebanese military, signed a deal allowing the PLO free reign in South Lebanon. The Lebanese government was opposed to the agreement but the weak government was pressured by the Arab League and Gamal Abdul Nasser, for the failure of the Arab regimes during the 1967 war, a fight Lebanon sat out. The Cairo Agreement "legitimized" the PLO's presence in Lebanon and granted it the right to carry out guerrilla attacks against Israel at will from Lebanese territory.

The Shia-PLO relationship worsened rapidly between July 1981 and June 1982 as the PLO increased its heavy arms in South Lebanon from 80 cannon and rocket launchers to 250 and beefed up its forces to 6,000 (of its approximate 18,000 of whom about 5,000 were alleged to be foreign mercenaries from such countries as Libya, Iraq, India, Sri Lanka, Chad and Mozambique.) During this period some commanders allowed their troops to run roughshod over the local population and naturally sympathies for Palestinian refugees due both to Israeli reprisals and PLO abuse eroded fast and have not been fully restored. PLO crimes against the southern population ran the gamut from 'property requisitions' to thefts, extortions, plundering of villages, arbitrary arrests and killings. While officially condemned by its leadership, the PLO did not do enough to stop it. By the late 1970's some Shia, including the newly established Amal militia organized armed resistance against the PLO 'occupation'.

To this day, some in South Lebanon bitterly mention three modern day occupations of their villages following half a millennia of discrimination and marginalization by the Ottomans and French among others. These more recent occupations include the PLO from the early 1970's until 1982, the Israeli army from March 14,1978 until May 24, 2000 and their financed and micro managed right wing surrogates, the "Southern Lebanese Army (SLA) from May 1976 until May 24, 2000 still fester.

Local political pressures on Hezbollah

Some in and out of Parliament are suggesting that if Hezbollah publicly pushes Palestinian civil rights legislation, especially the most urgent right to work , the party which is currently having good success broadening its popular base within the Sunni and Christians communities, could lose some support and especially among its south Lebanon Shia base. A new rival Shia party, the Lebanese Option Gathering ( LOG) led by Ahmad Assad son of the former Speaker of Parliament is challenging Hezbollah in at least one of its three base areas. It was LOG that during the 2009 Parliamentary election publicly boasted being funded by Saudi Arabia and paid voters handsomely with what it claimed was a wink and nod from the American government. The Ahmad Assad organization is stepping up its criticism of Hezbollah for neglecting the needs of South Lebanon. Since some Shia oppose the right to work for Palestinian refugees who make up a significant minority in the Southern Shia where jobs are even more scarce than in the Beirut area, some political analysts see this issue as a lose-lose for Hezbollah.

One sympathetic Member of Parliament allied with Hezbollah explained during a meeting with representatives of the Palestine Civil Right Campaign in early May:

"Hezbollah is in a tough spot on this essential issue. If Hezbollah backs the right to work for Palestinian refugees it risks losing some of its Shia, Sunni and Christian supporters. If it doesn't back the right to work Hezbollah arguably makes a mockery out of its claimed raison e'tre. How can it lead the fight for justice in Palestine while its literal next door neighbors wallow in disgusting open sewer camps with no chance to earn a living and live in dignity. What would its hard earned and much valued credibility amount to?" Others point out that since Palestinians cannot now and will never vote in Lebanon backing a civil rights law is a political black hole for Hezbollah.

Weakening this argument a bit, both Hezbollah and the PLO leaders acknowledge individual Palestinian crimes against the Shia in the South Lebanon confrontational zone with. Both sides agree that the PLO Beirut leadership should have done more to stop individual abuses during the 1974-1982 period. Hezbollah members also acknowledge that since the late 1960's virtually all militia in Lebanon had individuals who abused the civilian population and the Party appears able to let bygones be bygones. One party member reminded this observer that the PLO helped Hezbollah during its bloody intra Shia battles with Amal and its was Hezbollah's then Secretary-General Abass Mousawi who refused to join the Amal 1985-87 Palestinian Camp wars and if fact helped end them by intervening with Syria.

To add to Hezbollah's political problems on this issue, longtime Palestinian nemesis Samir Geagea ("I was born with my views on Palestinians!", he jokingly told one interviewer recently) and the Lebanese Forces have been making a significant political comeback since his July 2005 release from prison, including in this month's municipal elections. "Geagea's Christians" are cutting into Amin Gemayels Phalange Party and his other Christian rival Michel Aoun's Free Patriotic Movement. This could be part of the reason why Aoun, a key Hezbollah ally, when asked about granting civil rights to Palestinian refugees, squints, gets red faced and starts badmouthing the idea and reminds his audience, that "there are 500,000 Palestinian refugees in Lebanon and our country is going to implode, Ya Allah." Actually, General Aoun inflates the true figure which is close to 250,000 Palestinian refugees remaining in Lebanon although 423,000 are registered with UNWRA.

Hezbollah is expected to add to its public endorsements of civil rights for Palestinian refugees in Lebanon by declaring soon exactly what it intends to do in Parliament. It is said to be studying the various proposals and quietly discussing the issue with a wide range of parties, Palestinian factions and local and international NGO's. Some political analysts in Lebanon believe as Hezbollah goes on the right to work for Palestinian refugees so goes Parliament. The consequences of its decision will be major for the Lebanon's refugees, the region and the National Lebanese Resistance.

* Franklin Lamb is doing research in Lebanon and volunteers with the Palestine Civil Rights Campaign. He can be reached at fplamb@palestinecivilrightscampaign.org.

Related posts:

• Norman Finkelstein – Hezbollah, the Honour of Lebanon
• Can Lebanon come in from the Cold?
• Updated (2): Fath al-Islam Reality & Palestinian Refugees Misery

Earlier this month, a semi-official Iranian news agency lashed out at Dr. Yousuf al Qaradawi, widely considered one of the most eminent living Muslim religious scholars. The agency, called Muhr, castigated the great Alim, or religious scholar, for an interview he had given to an Egyptian newspaper in which he warned against organized efforts by some Shiite circles to convert Sunni Muslims to the Shiite branch of Islam. The Iranian news agency went as far as accusing al-Qaradawi of playing into the hands of Zionists and Jewish rabbis!!

I don't usually write on religious matters, especially Sunni-Shia affairs. However, I do believe that a clear and unmistakable message should be sent to Shiite circles in Iran and elsewhere, namely that Sunnis are not about to become Shiites and that public support for Iran and Hezbullah in some Sunni countries doesn't indicate that Sunni Muslims are infatuated with the Shiite faith.

The Sunni masses do support Hezbullah because this is the right thing to do. Hezbullah after all is fighting Israel, the evil brat of Zionism which is the ultimate enemy of Islam and Muslims.

The same thing applies to public support for Iran against the Zionist-controlled American administration which is trying so hard to deprive Iran of its right to develop nuclear technology.

People, regardless of their religious affiliations, support just causes irrespective of other considerations.

However, Sunni support for Iran against American hegemony doesn't mean that the Sunni masses, which constitute more than 90% of Muslims worldwide, are coming to terms with the despicable habit of cursing the Companions of Prophet Muhammed, such as Abu Bakr, Omar Ibn al Khattab and Othman Ibn Affan.

Let us be very clear about this, cursing the Sahaba, as far as Sunni Muslims are concerned, is and will always remain the ultimate redline.

There can be no Muslim unity unless the Shiites brothers, especially in Iran, abandon this hateful and provocative ritual.

Luckily, some Shiite Ulema or scholars have realized this fact and adopted positive positions toward showing respect to the feelings of their Sunni brothers.

This writer has always supported Iran against Western, especially American predators.

While studying in the United States nearly three decades ago, I regularly took part in anti-Shah demonstrations on American campuses.

We shouted aloud "Tau Margi Shahi Kha'en, Nehzat Idameh dorat" (until the death of the treacherous Shah, the struggle will continue), and " Istiklal, Azadee, Hokomati Islamee" (Independence , Freedom, Islamic Government."

I have also written numerous articles in support of Iran and Hezbullah and will continue to do so for reasons having to do with the moral principle of siding with the weak and the oppressed against the unjust and the insolent.

Hence, the Iranian brothers, especially the people at Muhr, shouldn't think that this defense of Sheikh Qaradawi is coming from a "Zionist agent" as they are almost innately tempted to dismiss criticisms of some of their objectionable practices and attitudes.

I had the honor to meet with Sheikh Qaradawi many years ago. And I have ever since been following up rather closely his pronouncements and positions which I have found to be quite rational and wise.

Sheikh Qaradawi has been a fierce critic of Israeli criminality and the Nazi-like oppression the Zionist regime is meting out to the helpless Palestinians. However, he has never voiced hatred or hostility toward Jews as Jews, as Zionist propaganda circles claim.

He has been a constantly loud voice urging Muslims and Arabs to show solidarity with the Palestinians.

Indeed, one would exaggerate little by saying that had it not been for Qaradawi's efforts, the Palestinian ordeal would have been much worse.

As to his positions on Iran and Shiites, al- Qaradawi has always adopted decidedly moderate positions in this regard.

He had warmly welcomed the Iranian revolution back in 1978 as the vast bulk of Sunni Muslims did. He also stood against the Iran-Iraq war, calling it a catastrophe.

In recent years, al-Qaradawi stood against extremist Sunni groups such as al-Qaida which adopted a radical theological stance viewing Shiites, especially the Ithna Ashari Shiites (followers of the Twelve Imams) as heretical.

This position invited hostile reactions from some of the Salafi groups (fundamentalist puritanical Orthodox Sunni Muslims) especially in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf region.

Indeed, Qaradawi's uncompromising views on Israel, American imperialism, the Palestinian plight and the ongoing American war on Islam, dubbed deceptively as "the war on terror" have prompted many western governments such as the US and UK to declare him a persona non grata.

So how could a man as such be serving Zionist interests when the Zionists themselves have spared no efforts vilifying and inciting against him?

Shiites circles in Iran and elsewhere miss no opportunity urging Muslims to get united in the face of Israeli aggression and expansionism. This is certainly a commendable and admirable stance.

However, true Muslim unity can't be achieved while some influential Shiite circles in Iran and probably elsewhere retain the old repulsive practice of cursing the Sahaba of Rasullullah, or companions of the Prophet.

Is Shiism a religion based on cursing?

A few months ago, the highest-ranking Shiite Marjie (religious scholar) in Lebanon, Rev. Sheikh Muhammed Hussein Fadulullah issued a fatwa or religious edict prohibiting the cursing of the Sahaba.

Sunni Muslims warmly welcomed the fatwa and many Sunni intellectuals and religious leaders hoped that it would lead to a genuine reconciliation between the two camps.

However, that fatwa was eventually met with widespread opposition by some influential Shiite ulema in Iraq and Iran who couldn't abandon the malicious canard that Sunni Muslims were Nassibi or Nawaseb (enemies of Imam Ali), the First Shiite Imam who is also the Fourth Sunni Caliph.

In truth, Sunni Muslims don't hate Ali and his family. On the contrary, they love them so much. Don't Sunni Muslims, as do all Muslims, recite at the end of their daily prayers "O God, may thy Peace and blessings be upon Muhammd and the family of Muhammed as Thou had bestowed they peace and blessing on Ibrahim and the family of Ibrahim."?

Besides, history shows that Imam Ali had an active working relationship with the very people many Shiites claim they hated him and dispossessed him of his divine right to become the leader of Muslims after the death of the Prophet.

Not only that, Ali actually had his own daughter married to Omar Ibn al Khattab, the man many Shiites hate most.

Well, does a man have his own daughter married to the man he hates most?

In addition, Imam Ali had three of his sons named after Abu Bakr, Omar and Othman, the first three Caliphs. Hence, one is prompted to seriously question the Shiite claims that Ali hated these caliphs. Well, a man doesn't name his own children after his worst enemies.

Ali was known of his exemplary bravery and courage. This is why it is highly unlikely that his collaboration with the caliphs occurred under duress. Ali was not the type of man who would cower under duress. He was not the type of man who would play the role of a hypocrite. His heart and his tongue were the same.

In a nutshell, the Shiite brothers should realize that Muslim unity can't be achieved while certain Shiites keep up reviving ancient hatred by cursing and vilifying historical figures Sunni Muslims glorify and love.

Such behavior would only perpetuate Muslim disunity. It would also prove that some Shiite religious circles are not really serious about Muslim unity.

(end)

Related posts:

• Cartoons, more devastating!
• What money can buy?
• Call for action: Yousuf stranded at Gaza borders!

Sectarian? God forbid… Shia and Sunni love each other! We only have ‘few’ stupid people like these in the video clip below (aka Iraq New Army!!). Some call themselves Shia (Iraq army) and the other call themselves Sunni (occupation resistance -also western media calls them ‘insurgent’). Both kill each other on daily bases and come crying at the end of the day claiming it is all because of the occupation. However, the only difference between the two parties is that the ‘New Iraqi Army’ fights alongside the U.S. occupation, while the ‘Iraqi resistance’ is being fought against by the Iraqi army and the occupation forces. So, where will the sectarian war come from? Ha… sound odd!!! Do they really think we are stupid?

No one can ignore the occupation responsibility in Iraq, however, Iraqis should also admit that they are not less hateful to each. In fact, if and only if, their sectarian differences hate is not fueled by occupation and Iran, then, Iraq would have never been in this position today.

This clip comes from Channel 4 in the UK. The Raw Story says ‘Shocking’ video: Shi’a Iraqi soldiers beat Sunnis as US trainers watch:

Now ask yourself, what kind of plans Bush and Blair has to stop the violence? Why the U.S. soldiers just allow and cheer on sectarian violence? How are they being trained? Who’s doing the training? and who they are training?

If I ever agree with bush on something, it would be his efforts to counter Iranian impact on Iraq. It is no good or safe for Iraq and the Arab World that US leave Iraq for Iran to become the new occupation. If occupation is the main reason for Iraq crises, Iran is the fuel and I don’t see this coming to an end until a new Saddam is born in Iraq!!

Related posts:

• Iraq: The Women’s Story
• IRAQ-The hidden story (The Truth)18+
• Iraq Hostages Were Palestinian Solidarity Activists

A new poll commissioned by the Council for the National Interest Foundation shows that a significant number of Americans are wary of the power of the Israel lobby, and believe it is behind the invasion of Iraq and the current belligerent tone of the White House and Congress toward Iran.

The poll, which was carried out by Zogby International, reveals that 39% of the American public "agree" or "somewhat agree" that "the work of the Israel lobby on Congress and the Bush administration has been a key factor for going to war in Iraq and now confronting Iran." However, a similar number, 40%, "strongly disagreed" or "somewhat disagreed" with this position. Some 20% of the public, or more than one in five, were not sure.

The poll suggests that the espionage charges against two employees of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and the publicity given to a new study of the power of the Israel lobby by two mainstream academic professors has had an affect on people's awareness of the lobby.

It is not surprising to know what money can buy if we know how it was spent.

The American Israel Political Affairs Committee (AIPAC) continues to spend freely on congressional junkets it runs to Israel.

The junkets are underwritten by the American Israel Education Foundation (AIEF), which is the 501(c)(3) wing of AIPAC.

In the period between July 2005 and July 2006, it spent $583,131 in travel expenses, sponsoring 62 trips to Israel for lawmakers, their relatives, and congressional staff. This was about one-third the entire amount spent on congressional travel that was reported for the whole year. In January, a CNI alert discussed the threat to these AIPAC trips as part of the new legislation curbing the funding provided by lobbies. The legislation, when it passed, turned toothless by the time it reached its final form.

According to Kimberly Geiger who reported on these developments for SFgate.com, the average cost is about $8,000 per person - hardly lavish for a trip that includes first-class airfare, hotel, and food expenses for a one-week trip, but probably more than most ordinary citizens can afford. The CNI Foundation, for example, is able to take delegations to the Middle East at the cost of $200 a day, albeit travel is not first-class nor are the accommodations four-star. [Source]

What money could not buy? (or to put it more accurately; what AIPAC made sure not to buy these people)

Five years after 9/11, only 33 FBI agents have even a limited proficiency in Arabic, and none of them work in the sections of the bureau that coordinate investigations of international terrorism, according to new FBI statistics. Maybe they don't need it because they know that Arab has nothing to do with 9/11. In that case, we can consider them smart enough not to waste their money.

On the other hand, this article highlights how dumb, uneducated, and ignorant some FBI and congress officials are. Imagine how the leaders and drivers of the barbarian war in Iraq do not know or understand the difference between "Shiias and Sunnis."

If you don't know who you are murdering, how could you possibly claim to have a just cause?

But so far, most American officials I've interviewed don't have a clue. That includes not just intelligence and law enforcement officials, but also members of Congress who have important roles overseeing our spy agencies. How can they do their jobs without knowing the basics?

[...] I asked the F.B.I.'s spokesman, John Miller, about Mr. Bald's comments. "A leader needs to drive the organization forward," Mr. Miller told me. "If he is the executive in a counterterrorism operation in the post-9/11 world, he does not need to memorize the collected statements of Osama bin Laden, or be able to read Urdu to be effective. ... Playing 'Islamic Trivial Pursuit' was a cheap shot for the lawyers and a cheaper shot for the journalist. It's just a gimmick."

[...] I asked Willie Hulon, chief of the bureau's new national security branch, whether he thought that it was important for a man in his position to know the difference between Sunnis and Shiites. "Yes, sure, it's right to know the difference," he said. "It's important to know who your targets are."

That was a big advance over 2005. So next I asked him if he could tell me the difference. He was flummoxed. "The basics goes back to their beliefs and who they were following," he said. "And the conflicts between the Sunnis and the Shia and the difference between who they were following."

O.K., I asked, trying to help, what about today? Which one is Iran - Sunni or Shiite? He thought for a second. "Iran and Hezbollah," I prompted. "Which are they?"

He took a stab: "Sunni."

Wrong.

Al Qaeda? "Sunni."

Right.

[...] Take Representative Terry Everett, a seven-term Alabama Republican who is vice chairman of the House intelligence subcommittee on technical and tactical intelligence.

"Do you know the difference between a Sunni and a Shiite?" I asked him a few weeks ago.

Mr. Everett responded with a low chuckle. He thought for a moment: "One's in one location, another's in another location. No, to be honest with you, I don't know. I thought it was differences in their religion, different families or something."

[...] Representative Jo Ann Davis, a Virginia Republican who heads a House intelligence subcommittee charged with overseeing the C.I.A.'s performance in recruiting Islamic spies and analyzing information, was similarly dumbfounded when I asked her if she knew the difference between Sunnis and Shiites.

"Do I?" she asked me. A look of concentration came over her face. "You know, I should." She took a stab at it: "It's a difference in their fundamental religious beliefs. The Sunni are more radical than the Shia. Or vice versa. But I think it's the Sunnis who're more radical than the Shia."

But c'mon, who needs dare to know the difference if AIPAC is paying?!

Related posts:

• Did you know?
• Did you know?
• Did you know?

Saudis plan to fence off border with chaos
Via: Times online

Just what Iraq's need. Saudis Arabia plan to fence off Iraq. They have invited bids for the construction of a security fence (isn't that the same name used for what is called the Israeli Apartheid Wall?) along the entire length of its 900km (560mile) desert border with Iraq in a multimillion-pound project that will attract interest from British defense companies.

Ahh... That fine then, it's just one of the Brits shares of the cake!

The barrier is part of a package to secure the Kingdom's 6,500km of borders in an attempt to improve internal security and bolster its defenses against external threats.

Saudi Arabia is concerned that the chaos in Iraq could cause an overspill of sectarian violence and terrorism. The kingdom claims to be winning the battle against al-Qaeda's Saudi wing but wants to protect itself against Saudi insurgents returning from Iraq.

"There's no suggestion that the border isn't secure at the moment, so it could be a bit of an expensive white elephant," a European diplomat in Riyadh said. Saudi militants joining the insurgency use other routes, such as Syria.

Exactly! So what's the "fence" for?

BTW, I wonder why they are using the word "fence", not "wall". I understand the fence to be something to make my yard look pretty, but this is not what Saudi is after. This is a WALL!

Riyadh is worried by the rise to power in Iraq of the Shia majority, with its close links with Iran, which Saudi Arabia mistrusts. It is concerned that its Shia minority, which is concentrated in the oil-producing eastern province, may become radicalised.

So, the world is turning on Shia. Yesterday it was president Mubarak, and now it is Saudi security and Shia threats.

One interesting thing here is the mix of... everything. The writer of this article is smart enough (or ignorant enough) to try to pass the following:

1. A "fence" between Saudi Arabia and Iraq will protect Saudi in the FUTURE from the so called insurgents. Assuming that work on the "fence" will start...tomorrow, it will take few YEARS to complete, which the writer suggest that war in Iraq will continue for few (a lot) more years. Otherwise, what would the "fence" be for if there is no war in Iraq anymore?
2. I don't understand why we need Brits to build a "fence". Millions of cheap-hand labor are already working in Saudi, or can be brought from East-Asia to do the job. So, why British companies? Unless they are going to build a new WORLD-WONDER, HIGH-TECH, "FENCE".
3. The writer confirms that West claims that Syria is the route for insurgents. While this might have been true, or/and might still be the case, but what about Iran or other neighboring countries?
4. The writer suggests that the "fence" will stop the insurgent from coming back from Iraq through the Iraq-Saudi borders. The question is; why can't they return from where they went? In this case, Syria? Just another mystery!!
5. Of course the writer won't miss the day-fashion. Shia/Iran threat. I just don't understand if this writer knows that what he calls "insurgents" are actually Sunni's, so is Zarqawi and all of Al-Qaida terrorists. So, how and why this stupid link?

Of course it has nothing to do with the claimed threats other than it is a fashion as I said. Neither the Iraqi National Resistance nor the so called Insurgents has anything to do with Shia or Iran. The whole story is to add more oil on the Iraqi civil war.

C'mon guys, this is only business. War is nothing but BUINESS!

Related posts:

• U.S. gave the Israelis a wall, and New Orleans gets Flooded!
• Dear Hillary, Wall means ‘Annexation’
• Graffiti on “The Annexation Wall”

Two Kuwaiti Shia Muslim lawmakers have called on the interior minister and security officials to protect a Shia mosque that came under attack by a mob of teenagers. The attack took place on the night of October 7 in Jahra, 40 kilometers (25 miles) west of Kuwait City, when at least 50 people, mostly teenagers, burned a car outside the mosque and pelted worshipers with stones.

Related posts:

• Short trip to Kuwait
• Kuwait’s Al-Sabah Dean: ‘reconcile guys’
• Australians torture Australian in Kuwait Jail