Wednesday, September 13, 2006

A Discourse of Immorality

So I refused to write for a while, just wanted to wait, wait until something worthy of commenting on appears on the Lebanese political arena. I didn't want to rush to conclusions or make faulty judgements. I wanted to see where the country will head after the war.

More and more the divide in the country grows; it's a divide on the vision. PM Seniora in his efforts during the war to reach out to the international community was successful, successful in pushing to end the Israeli aggression, successful in garnering plenty of funds to kickstart the reconstruction effort, and successful on a diplomatic level to set a course for the country following the war. His efforts reminded me of the late PM Hariri in 1996 when he rallied the world during the Israeli Grapes of Wrath campaign and manged to coin a new term for our resistance then, the Lebanese resistance.

Right after the war, Aoun unleashed a scathing attack on the Cabinet, then the "choir" followed. But the most significant of the calls for dismantling the government came from Hizbullah the past three days. Yesterday Sayyid Nasrallah accused Seniora of immoral acts and of colluding with the enemy on Al-Jazeera. I wonder what the vieweres were thinking while they watched Sayyid Nasrallah. Perhaps they were conflicted because Seniora was also a hero during that war in his own right. How easily people forget....

At any rate, Al-Mustaqbal daily today published an article reminding Sayyid Nasrallah that if Seniora's reception of Britich PM Tony Blair was immoral, then what about Qatar, for instance? Qatar, which her Emir's visit to Lebanon was trumpeted by Hizbullah, hosted on its airport runways the first batch of smart bombs that headed to Israel before the war.

Again, if Sayyid Nasrallah considered Seniora's reception of Blair as hurtful to many's feelings, then what about when Nasrallah presented a submachine gun as a gift to the Syrian Head of Intelligence in Lebanon Rustom Ghazaleh on the eve of their troop withdrawal from Lebanon, ignoring the feelings of many Lebanese who considered the Syrian regime as the culprit in PM Hariri's assassination (to say the least).

What about also when Parliament Speaker Berri, as Hizbullah's representative during the war (as claimed by Hizbullah then), met with U.S. State Secretary Condoleeza Rice while the fighting was still ongoing? Couldn't we consider that a meeting between the U.S. and Hizbullah? Wouldn't that be immoral in Sayyid Nasrallah's eyes?

When immorality becomes a concept used widely in political rhetoric, then in my view the political discourse has regressed to a dangerously low level, regressed to the olden days. And we all remember what those days were like....

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


Firas said...

I read that article last night and thought it was on the money. Time for Hizbullah to step down from its pedestal and recongnize that they cant dictate 3/4th of the Lebanese population with no reaction.

FGA said...



Bad Vilbel said...

I've learned a long time ago, to stop trying to use logic and moral equivalence, when reading anything that's declared by most of our politicians. This is no exception.

Guys like Aoun, Nasrallah and everyone else, have no principles. Therefore no moral equivalence can be applied. The word du jour is "Double Standard".

I choose to look at the bigger picture instead.

Loli said...

Thank you, Bad Vilbel, for voicing what I wanted to say. Nasrallah's statement has nothing to do with morality. He just wants to topple the Lebanese government. Time for Nasrallah to step back. We know the game he and Aoun are playing.

Bravo 2-1 said...

You raise many good points. But at times like these, fierce rhetoric can exceed reason.

Anonymous said...

You nailed Nasrallah with Ghazale's gift

R said...

I don't understand the illusions we have about our politicians. They are not what we want or expect them to be, they are what they are. That statement might seem superfluous but my point would make more sense if we look at lebanon, pre-Syrian withdrawal and then post-Syrian withdrawal.

Before, HA did not NEED to show its true colors, it was happy doing its own "resistance" thing, and filling the role of the state in its areas. The Syrians provided the cover and the backing. On the other hand, with the exit of the Syrians, the vacuum created by the absence of the state in HA areas, is more obvious, and less acceptable.

Looked at from this perspective, HA is cornered (not by anyone in particular, but by the physical absence of the cover that the Syrians gave them). The anomalous status quo that they grew on, allowing them to have a security apparatus, an army, and the ability to provide social services is no longer there. Or at least is no longer justifiable.

That is why they NEEDED to launch the operation on July 12, and why they need to undermine the government of Siniora. Expecting any change in their behaviour is therefore naive.

If they concede they lose, so they won't willingly concede...

AM said...

Thank you Doha for the post, in a way fasshaytili khel2e. I was on the verge to explode when I read about it and just wondered until when are we gonna let these people play with the heads of our compatriots who seem to believe every word they say ... sigh ...

Lirun said...

while i hate the thought of HA lingering at my border with lebanon.. i also hate the thought of a lebanese civil war.. almost as much quite frankly..

how is this averted.. how can lebanon be preserved from the HA's undeclared battle for rule?

do you have any faith in the international forces?

wishing peace to us all


Chas said...

Of all the casualties in this conflict the loss of Lebanon's democracy would be the most tragic and enduring in its effects.

Lebanon needs unity.
I hope that the presence of international peace keepers helps stabilize the situation .. but what really has to happen is that Lebanons democracy NEEDS TO START WORKING!

I don't know if anyone here really needs to be reminded how high the stakes are. Stop backing horses and save the racetrack!

Peace, Chas

KAREN said...

I wonder why people are so quick to blame Syria for the assassination of Hariri. What does Syria have to gain? Nothing. What does Israel have to gain? Much. So. Who really had a hand in the assassination? I wouldn't be suprised if Israel was behind this. Not one bit. Without Syrian soldiers on the border, Israel was abe to murder and destroy as much as they could. If Hezbollah wasn't at the border, the escalation of murder and destruction would have been greater than it is.

Negotiations with Israel? Well Lebanon has no choice does she? My first question at the table would be: "Why did you throw cluster bombs all over Southern Lebanon as you were leaving? Couldn't leave it alone, huh? You still wanted to get a few more murders in, didn't you?"

why-discuss said...

Blair is on his way out. His objection to call for a ceasefire, thus allowing Israel to kill and destroy even more civilians is despicable. He is even criticized in his own country about that. But here, the chorus of anti-hezbollah find ridiculous arguments such as Qatar or Condy Rice to justify Blair's invitation to Lebanon.
I am sorry, I don't buy that, Blair made a huge mistake and should not have been absolved so easily by the 14 march choir. But sometimes deep rooted hatred and the lure for money make people blind.

Lirun said...

sherrii - dude.. amnesty just declared on bbc its opinion that HA is guilty of war crimes.. how does this affect the lyrics of your "i love HA - they are so peaceful and groovey!!" song that you have been rocken since the violence errupted?


wishing us never to have to consider these issues again..


Hani G. said...

Doha this piece of yours was wonderful. Simple and to the point. It was a trigger to what dark events ran through my head...

This may require a separate post, but think back to a year and half ago when what we know as March 14 and March 8 came about. March 8 had no chance to succeed! Everything was ripe for the picking...

In my view, March 14 have failed. I am of the March 14 camp and shall forever support their call for what is only right and just. As a group, I as a supporter have been thoroughly disappointed with March 14.

Too many Chiefs in the group - while March 8 all decided that their political future is best determined by the decisions made indirectly by Hizb and Sayyed Hassan.

March 14th were played all along. There were warnings from the start by members of March 14 but of course selfish interests and fear of the other got the better of them.

I still have hope for March 14, but they need to be more assertive and they need to show more strength! March 8 and their group of screaming bandits are tipping the scale....

Sherri said...


I do not support Hezbullah, but I admit I have often defended them from what I believed were unjust attacks on them. I never said Hezbullah was without any faults, and have referred multiple times in my comments, to past Amnesty International Reports (a report of July 26) that have identified war crimes violations by both Hezbullah and Israel.

Amnesty's condemnation of Hezbullah as committing war crimes is not new.

The issue of Israeli war crimes received more news coverage, because as a result of their war crimes over 1000 innocent civilians lost their lives.

What is important now is unity in Lebanon between all of its groups, which includes Hezbullah and the Shiite Muslim population. The groups need to set aside their differences and work together for the good of the country.

I continue to pray for the cease fire to hold and continued peace beween Lebanon and Israel

Lirun said...

i had a trip today to the north of israel..

i was very close to the border..

it was like the war never existed..

we hiked up a waterfall actually through the water climbing the water thrashed rocks and then went kayaking in the jordan river.. all so close to th eborder of syria and lebanon..

it was soo much fun.. so surreal.. i havent enjoyed myself so much in so long..

driving past all of our beautiful towns on the way to lebanon i was chatting to my colleague about how nice it would be to have a holiday home in the north.. the prospects of a war and the recent history of violence seeming like but a dream..

as we drove towards the kayaking station a whole area of forest was cleared and charred to the root.. a katyusha had fallen right where we were now driving..

how quickly the world moves on..

israel is very focussed on rebuilding its north..

i pray that in the near future our work trip doesnt have to end there but can continue past our border and safely to our northern neighbour..

sick of this stupid animosity crap


yuval from tlv said...

hmm did anyone expected something else out of HB?

it's like saying - alright, i have a small cancer, but i feel superb!
if you wait a few years, you'll find yourselfs in emergency room, crying out for anesthetization.

i truely don't know, or understand much about the Lebanese politics,
but you have to disarm the one's who take away your soverignity..

when it's simply bonding with Syria, then it's cooporating with them, then it's being an armed milition, then it's draging a whole nation into a war..
when will you wake up?
when they'll try to kill memebers of your own parliament who oppose them?

cause right now, they're threatning.. but it won't take long befor they act.

chuck said...

amnesty at last did the something i admit i did not expect.

finaly the obvious is being declared.

"During the recent 34-day war between Hizbullah and Israel in which both sides committed serious violations of international humanitarian law, Hizbullah’s rocket attacks on northern Israel amounted to deliberate attacks on civilians and civilian objects, as well as indiscriminate attacks, both war crimes under international law. Its attacks also violated other rules of international humanitarian law, including the prohibition on reprisal attacks on the civilian population."

chuck said...

amnesty international :

Fearless said...


Even a cursory perusal of the Arab press, will reveal that Hizbullah's status in Lebanon has changed for the worse, as many Lebanese come to the rather shocking realization that the south of their country, unknown to them, had in fact been transformed into an Iranian and Syrian launching pad against Israel posing an existential threat to their own livelihoods and to their entire country. Hizbullah is now on the defensive, trying to protect its political assets against a more assertive Lebanese domestic majority, that seems more determined than ever to contain Hizbullah's "state within a state," so that they are not drawn again into a destructive war with Israel, without as much as a word of consultation.

Many in Lebanon, especially non-Shi'ites, but also some important Shi'ite spokespersons, are calling for an end to the armed phase of Hizbullah's development and its integration into the Lebanese political system, like all other political parties, lest further provocation of Israel will expose Lebanon to even greater devastation in the future. In other words, they are demanding the disarming of Hizbullah.

Muna Fayyad, a Shi'ite professor at the University of Lebanon, and the Mufti of Tyre, Sayyid Ali al-Amin, for example, both questioned the right of Hizbullah to bring disaster on the Shi'ites of Lebanon, by dragging them into an ill considered adventure they never wanted, in the interests of a foreign power like Iran, about whom they were never consulted.

NASRALLAH NOW has to contend with his newly constructed image as the destroyer of Lebanon rather than its protector, as he himself regularly claimed before the war, as a main justification for the very existence of his militia. His recent interview (explaining that he would not have ordered the abduction of the two Israeli soldiers had he expected such a ferocious Israeli response) is indicative of this new predicament.

Arab commentators are considerably less impressed with Nasrallah's strategic genius than some of their Israeli counterparts seem to be in their moments of self-critical excess. They question the wisdom of his decision-making, as they wryly ridicule his claims of victory. A poll conducted in Lebanon in late August revealed that two thirds of the non-Shi'ite public believed that Hizbullah had actually been defeated in the war.

Hazim Saghiya, writing in Al-Hayat, questioned whether victory could be celebrated on the ruins of Lebanon by a leader who had to remain in hiding. Another commentator in Al-Hayat, Hasan Haydar, compared Nasrallah's interview of apology to Egyptian president Gamal Nasser's admission of defeat in 1967. The Arabs, he noted, were still paying for the defeat in 1967, and he wondered for how long the Lebanese and the Arabs would be paying for Nasrallah's "ill-considered 'victory.'"

Abd al-Mun'im Sa'id, the Director of the Al-Ahram's Center for Political and Strategic Studies, urged the Arabs to follow Israel's example and set up a commission of inquiry to establish how Nasrallah could have dragged Lebanon into war without the country and the home front having being at all prepared. He dismissed Nasrallah's contention that preparation of the home front was the responsibility of the state, arguing that the state could hardly prepare for a war about which it had no advance knowledge. As opposed to Israeli journalists, who tended to glorify Nasrallah's credibility, Abd al-Mun'im questioned why Hizbullah had failed to fire its long-range rockets after Israel had repeatedly bombed Beirut, even though Nasrallah had vowed to do so. And what about the relative ineffectiveness of the short range rockets? The damage they caused was limited, and a significant proportion of the Israeli casualties were actually Arabs.

ALL OF the above have emboldened the Lebanese government to deploy its army in the South, which it had not done for over 30 years, and to accept the stationing of a more robust international force there as well. Neither of these had hitherto been acceptable to Hizbullah. These forces will not disarm Hizbullah, which will no doubt make every effort to rearm and replenish its depleted stocks. All the same, they do serve the purpose of reasserting the sovereignty of the Lebanese state in all of its territory. This in turn adds to all the other factors seeking to reduce Hizbullah's freedom of action to operate militarily against Israel from the South.

None of this would have happened had it not been for the severe damage Israel inflicted upon Hizbullah's civilian, political and military infrastructure. The civilian backbone of Hizbullah, the Shi'ite community of Lebanon, has incurred heavy loss of life and enormous property damage, which will take years to repair. The period of reconstruction might not be free of criticism for the leadership that led the community to this disaster.

And once rehabilitated would the Shi'ites of Beirut and the South be ready to endanger everything and go through their recent ordeal all over again, for what Hizbullah might feel required to do in the service of Iran and Syria? Moreover, a new Shi'ite middle class has emerged during the last generation and they are eager to integrate into the mainstream if Lebanese politics, something they might not be able to achieve as long as Hizbullah is perceived to be serving the interests of foreign powers.

IN DIRECT military terms Hizbullah's losses were heavy and will not be easily replenished either. Key installations and command and control centers were totally destroyed in the Dahiya area of Southern Beirut and in the South of the country. Fortified positions, bunkers and stores in close proximity to the border with Israel have been demolished, and it is highly unlikely that Israel will allow their reconstruction under any circumstances.

The organization lost between a quarter to a third of its fighting men. Bravado aside, in numerous encounters Hizbullah fighters fled the field of battle, leaving their equipment behind, to avoid direct confrontation with Israeli ground forces.

Much of Hizbullah's long and medium range rocketry has been destroyed. They still have large stocks of the short-range rockets, which were the great majority of the over 4,000 rockets fired during the war into Northern Israel. But their effectiveness is limited. It is true that the North of the country was almost brought to a standstill and the trauma of hundreds of thousands of Israelis in shelters or living as internal refuges in other parts of the country will not be forgotten. But in terms of loss of life the thousands of rockets were less effective than a pair of suicide bombers.

The Iranian strategic outpost that had been built up for future use against Israel has been defanged, at least for the meantime. It must have cost hundreds of millions to construct and has been lost prematurely, spent not very effectively and not at a time of Iran's choosing. Moreover if intended to deter Israel from taking action, it achieved quite the opposite result.

Hizbullah, at this stage, is observing the cease-fire. They do not want a second round now. Nasrallah needs a breather, and has no choice but to accept the hitherto unacceptable in the form of the restoration of Lebanese state sovereignty to the South. The euphoria in the Arab media has also subsided. The "rabbits and mice" have left the shelters and it is the Lebanese and Hizbullah who must now survey the damage wrought unto them. Nasrallah's references to Israel as a society as flimsy as "cobwebs" seem somewhat less appropriate from the ruins of South Beirut.

AN EGYPTIAN commentator, Ali al-Ibrahim, noted recently that the Arabs had learned to differentiate between victories on television and real victories in the field. How long will it take the Israelis to do likewise?

Israel's achievements in the war should not be underestimated.
Whether these achievements of the war prove lasting or not is another question.

Can the Lebanese led by Fuad Seniora's government build on the new political realities that the war has created? Will they be able to withstand the pressure that is bound to come from the Iran-Syria-Hizbullah axis that will seek to undo the consequences of the war and reestablish the status quo ante? Only time will tell, but these are questions that would not even have been asked had it not been for the war against Hizbullah.

Chas said...

Interesting post, thank-you.
you should read Mirvat's blog for an equeally interesting and very moving post on the same topic from a different perspective.
(I can't make links, so you have to cut and paste)

Just one comment, which I do not believe undermines the general drift of your post. The very questions that you suggest would not have been asked in your last paragraph were, in fact, very much on Lebanon's political agenda before the war.
I doubt the war has made them any easier to deal with .. but as you say, time will tell.
But I believe that all nations with an interest in peace, including Israel, should not simply stand by while Lebanon sorts out its future. They should all do whatever they can to support and encourage democratic and progressive forces in Lebanon and at the same time refrain from any actions which may serve to de-stabilize the country.

Peace, Chas

Lirun said...

i dont recommend mirvats blog for a perspective at all.. it is wholly one sided.. demonises israel without any control - whether of reality or history and certainly not of fairness.. all you can get from that blog is her emotional perspective..

we have not simply been standing by while lebanon has aspired to democracy.. thousans of comments have been posted about this.. we have extended a hand in peace repeatedly.. a peace deal was in fact signed and retracted by lebanon.. we stood firm while we absorbed countless rockets..

yesterday i was in the north of israel again.. and i suddeny became panic stricken when i noticed that a whole area of greenery had been burned to a crisp.. i found myself constantly scanning my surroundings looking for schrapnel and other unexploded devices and hoped none of those had fallen into the river bed i was walking in..

one of my friends yesterday.. a right winged guy who volunteers as a medic in his spare time was called to assist someone with a snake bite.. the guy was an arab farmhand and his employer was treating him unfairly by refusing to recognise the incident as a workplace incident which would trigger a better degree of coverage but increase the employer's premium.. my friend treated the wound with full loyalty.. and secured the work place classification of the injured guy.. my very very right winged counsin who is a surgeon in ER regularly sows together palestinian terrorists that have blown them selves us before reaching their targets "us" and then puts them on life support at a cost of tens of thousands of shquels a day.. these are just examples..

what i am trying to say - and anyone in israel who has ever seen a road accident will know that our insticts - from a cultural perspective are to help.. anything you see that looks different is either where help is not welcome or where circumstances have driven us to adopt a divergant course of action..

our post violence overtures to lebanon have been clearly rejected.. to some that may seem reasonable.. but it prevents us from assisting in a more practive way..

if you are suggesting that any future attack by HA on israel should simply be absorbed as it previously was for 6 years.. then i have no idea what to say..

wishing peace to us all


turtlecurls said...

The issue of Israeli war crimes received more news coverage because it was published first. Wonder why it was...? A more credible move would have been to publish them together.

Sherri said...


Please go to Amnesty International site and look under reports. They issued a report on 7/26/06, addressing war crimes issues of both Israel and Hezbullah, together in one report.

The war crimes issues regarding Israel received more news coverage and were the subject of more reports and news releases, because of the loss of human life associated with Israel's war crimes, over 1000 innocent civilians killed, approx. 40% of them children.

Bombs raining down and taking the lives of the innocent civilians of Lebanon, day after day, for over 30 days, as the world sat back and watched and did nothing to stop the genocide, the ethnic cleansing.

Just like the world sits back and watches the genocide occur in the Darfur Region of Sudan this very moment. Over 400,000 lives lost in Sudan. Why do we let this happen? Is it because they are black? Is it because they are Muslim?

I was listening to an interview with George Clooney and his father. George Clooney's father said they are the most lonely people in the world. They are suffering and dying, their government will not protect them, and noone will help them unless the United Nations acts. The African Union is scheduled to leave, and they (the government there) refuse to allow United Nations forces into the country.

After the Holocaust, didn't someone say "Never Again." But we let it happen over and over again, the Armenians, Rwanda, horrible things happening in Africa, mutiliating children and child-bearing women to prevent them from having the ability to even have children, in attempts to wipe out targeted ethnic or religious groups.

We do not have peace in the world, because we choose wars over peace. Countries set their primary goal as security, not peacefully living side by side with their neighbors. Our priorities are wrong.

Concerning my own country, I just read somewhere a quote that the US is blessed by God as long as the US remains a good country. When we stop being a good country, we will no longer be blessed by God. I think we are already in that second stage. I have been listening to arguments by my President that we should continue to torture people in secret prisons and reinterpret the Geneva Convention, so that these actions will be legal.

I hope and pray for peace in the Middle East, an end to the suffering and dying in Iraq, Afghanistan, Gaza, and the West Bank, that the cease fire continues to hold in Lebanon, and that there are no wars with Iran. I pray for an end to the genocide in Darfur, peace in the Congo and Somalia. And an end to all other wars presently occurring in the world.

I pray we change our priorities and choose peaceful resolutions instead of violence and wars.


Chas said...

Of course Mirvat is one-sided - she is a pro-arab, anti-Israeli blogger and, you may not like it , but that is a perspective, and not an uncommon one!
Anyway I was looking for her post with a view to her take on internal Leb poitics since the war, not her views on Israel.

You can hardly expect to be "flavour of the month" in Lebanon right now, it seems that quite a lot of time will need to pass and a lot of trust re-built before humanitarian gestures from Israel are accepted at face values. That is one of the hidden casualties of war .. trust.

I am not suggesting that Israel "absorb" any future rocket attacks ( I fervently hope there will be none ) or indeed any aggressive acts, just that the response be measured to the degree that it does not de-stabilize Leb. (ie if a rocket were to damage an outbuilding in N.Israel, then the response should be limited to damaging an outbuilding in Leb, or rough equivalent. Not levelling an appartment building.)
I would also strongly advocate that Israel avoids any targetted assasinations in Lebanon.
Peace, Chas

turtlecurls said...

The official post war evaluations were published on 8/23/06 for Israel & 9/14/06 for Hezbollah (based on their site). No assessment was made of Lebanon's actions. The article you mention is a during war cursory assessment without access to do the real research of the post war articles & was treated as such by the media.

You seem to take what you see at face value. In politics, especially in this part of the world, that's likely to have one believing the proproganda designed to support a viewpoint. Everything needs further evaluation to be understood & for a thoughtful conclusion to be had. For instance, the 1000 in Lebanon vs. less in Israel has been easily ascribed to the lesser accuracy of Hezb rockets & also to the extensive number of Israeli shelters. The Arab Israeli communities which has built less shelters (they didn't expect to be targets of other Arabs) had more casualties. Another factor described in this is that the Lebanon count didn't distinguish civilians from Hebz supporters who stayed in troubled areas to fight, i.e. had switched their civilian hats for militant ones. Also, I have seen lower counts of 600 saying the original numbers were inflated (often happens in crisis). I'm not saying that these facts are the absolute ones. What I'm saying is that there are more factors to consider than a number count -- and only considering the surface presentation looses much of the depth & complexity of coming to an understanding of what happened & what actions to support.

I can say that I do the same thing sometimes, but I'm always surprised, when I look, at how many other factors play in. You seem to looking for a thoughtful way to see the whole thing. (based on prior posts I've read) I hope you will start to do research beyond the front story you first see. The risk otherwise is to support the agenda or even propoganda (often fear or hate-based) of a specific group without realizing you are doing it.

Specific to the question of the Amenesty reports, Amenesty has a reputation of long history of critising Israel without commenting on other actions like suicide bombings. It's a vast improvement that they included a two part report. I do think it raises a question on why they chose to release them weeks apart instead of at the same time.

Lirun said...


you know i am not a fan of violence but what you say makes no strategic or tactical sense..

the HA knows that we prize our life highly.. they know we will release 1000s of murderers for 3 dead bodies.. they know how loudly our pain echoes.. and it makes no sense to develop a currency of damage..

you hurt me 12345paineos worth 537637 in hizbapain and i need to fall within a range of 3% statistical regression.. doesnt work..

you do not deter someone shooting at you indiscriminately and randomly by tickling their underarm..

i hated the sloppiness of the last war - i thought it costly on human life.. it was slow and frankly such a war to me violates the rule of what is kosher..

but mirvat doesnt express anger or rage but mere blindness to issues.. her blog is agenda drivern.. she doesnt seek to enlighten you but rather to darken our views with her sentiment.. a personal unproductive sentiment..

while i blog there and banter with her.. it is choppy tide and dangerous surfing for a learning mind..

i say swim with caution..

Chas said...

OK, point taken, but I am really thinking more in terms of Lebanon's possibly fragile democratic future, and the effect that any action by Israel may have on that. Let me say that I hope and pray and believe that it is a totally hypothetical debate.
As far as Mirvat goes, I find her blog helpful, but that does not mean I agree with her, though I do on some issues, and others I understand but do not agree. I do want to understand her point of view, including what may be dark, because it represents part of the political reality of the region.

I have debated on darker sites and emerged unscathed!
Did you know that she calls you her "Evil twin"? And you said of her "... I love her passion and conviction. reminds me of me ..."

I am going to lock you both in a room for a month! If you both come out alive the problems of the ME would be solved! ;)

Peace, Chas

Lirun said...

are you kidding?! we'd probably fall in love..


Chas said...

QED! hehehehe


IMBch said...

See the power of dialogue??? People falling in love - May that's what we should try to establish - Contacts across the border between Israel and Lebanon. Peace will come with people not with Government.