Wednesday, June 01, 2005

FPMers: What Has Become of the Independence Uprising?

I'm truely confused by Aoun's actions...So what about the Reformist Program? Is included in the program a clause that basically stipulates the Parliamentary representation of "loyalists" whom we all united have agreed few months back that they needed to step down? And how do the FPMers feel about this? I'm not asking of you to respond by bashing Jumblatt, Hariri, or Qornet Shehwan, but I'm asking of you to respond to the question I pose about allying with those who never had a vision nor a program for their country and who not only upheld the Syrian puppet regime, but are puppets in their own right. I hope to get a response to an issue so confusing to me, because we all stood together side by side calling for our independence. What has become of that?

"Nobody knows how many rebellions, besides political rebellions, ferment in the masses of life which people earth."

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Dear Doha...

Well given the fact that they were all Syrian puppets and loyalists, including Arslan, Jomblatt, Harriri, HIzbullah and Berri,etc... and now that Syria is out, it is all about political agendas, reforms and programs. So to those loyalists and puppets a program was brought forward. Some, such as Arslan agreed to the program or reforms and others refused. Some people rejected to take the program as a package as it included a condition of auditing. To them auditing would mean that they would be exposed of all the theft and crimes that they have committed in mususing and robbing government finances in the past 15 years. This is an understandable rejection to General Aoun's program on their behalf. How could one comit a crime and advocate for a transparent investigation into the crime.

JaD said...

May god bless his saul ....

we are all samir kassir true . it shocks me that the situation keeps like this in lebanon.

Anonymous said...

I don't think Aoun's actions are really confusing if one wants to understand.
I'll try to exPlain in the simplest form:
First the WHY:
Aoun thinks he represents N percent of the populAtion and thus things it is only fair he get X percent nouweb.
The rest of mo3arada are only willing to give him Y which was much lower than X
He things it's not fair and he would rather fight the elections outside the mo3arada even though the law is not fair will give him more representatives in the parlimenT.

I don't know if Aoun was asking too much or if the mou3arada was giving him too little but they disagreed.
Now if "we7det el mou3arada" was a priority for Aoun he would have settled for less, and if we7det el mou3arada was a priority for Jumblat, Hariri they would have given him more but obviously it is not the top priority for any of them.
I think this easilly explains why he decided to run against them without going into the blame game of who is trying to cancel who. We don't know the numbers Y or X or N to be able to judge. In fact since those numbers are not easily obtainable both parties can go on TV and claim the others are trying to cancel them, everyone beleives the person they like more :-)

Now the WHO:
The way i see things and I guess that's how the FPMers see things is that all the blocks who have been in the parliment since 92 are "roumouz el solta" and have allowed syria to keep influence in lebanon for far too long. Also when it stopped suiting them they changed their minds be it when Lahoud was elected (for some) when lahoud was re elected for others, when israel left for some, when Hariri was assasinated for others ...
The point being if you want to look for something to differenciate main concerned parties:
Hizbollah Amal Joumblat and hariri lahoud murr franjyeh erslen kornet shewwan ...
Let's see what criteria we can pick

Roumouz el solta: Joumblat is no different than amal or franjyeh they are all roumouz el solta (they have had koutal in the parliment and wouzara in most of the last wizarat)
Let's say you want to be more picky ...

Political position towards syria after Hariri was assasinated: in this regard are amal hizbolla franjyeh erslen are in the same camp.

Roumouz el fased: jumblat (wizaret mhajjarin) berri (majless el janoub) hizbolla (internationnal calls) and the list goes on ... basically everyone got his share ...

Popular representation on the ground: Franjyeh and murr (sadely) have more representation on the ground than most of the kornet shehwen members ...

So basically all those condemning the ta7aloufet of michel aoun are being hypocretical somewhere in their reasonning: Saad hariri said he did not have any tashnack on his listcause they were not in 14 March yet he had hizbolla representative on his list which was not in 14 March ... Frankly it is his list and he can put whoever he damn pleases on it but the logical reasonning is just a flase for his action.

In all cases I think Aoun saw that arslan is as bad/good as jumblat so it didn't bother him working with wim.
I think he sees Murr as more rotten than the alternative so he won't be mit7alef ma3ou (and if he does I think shame on him)

Now I think the reason most of the people who can't see that think the criteria of separation should be the before hariri was killed, who was with him (good guys) and who was against him (bad gyus) but I think that does not hold because I don't beleive frnajyeh or erslan had any part be it knowledge or cover up of the assasination
for example sleiman franjyeh was against him (for intikhabet reasons) even though Hariri himself said he was friends with franjyeh like walid jumblat not long before.

In all cases I understand why lots of people especially supporters of Hariri and jumblat can'y grock this but imho unless lajnet el ta7'i' finds that jumblat or erslen had any part in what happened to hariri they are not worse or better than anyone else.

I hope I tried to explain thinks without bashing anyone or prazing anyone...
Did any of this make sense ?

IN fact can I make a last guess?
It is easy for you to understand how the 2000 law passed WITHOUT being an under the table deal between hariri jumblat and some of kornet shehwan and Berri while you really don't see why many people can't be conviced that they have not been stabbed in the back by the way some of the mo3arada let the law slide!

Am I way off the mark?

Sorry for posting (semi) anonymously but i guess the reasons are obvious in light of the fasad paragraph (and especially today ).

PS I wish we could all be half samir kassir and I know we'll never be close.

Anonymous said...

Aoun is the one who paid the price of syrian occupation and her allies rule for 15 years;

Rafic hariri ,walid joumblat nabih berri ...were the heroes of that black period

Now that syria is out the moment of truth is here ,he is asking for these 44 billions ,and they are refusing and that s obvious...
Hope that lebanon will not be again a hostage to these people because we are going ,all of us ,to pay a hard price...