"Will FP stop giving these people a platform? "

It's pretty obvious that Likud have given their useful idiots their marching orders. It's no coincidence that within the same week, we Lindsay Graham convinced the public of Halifax that he belongs in a padded cell, Bibbi tried to get Biden to escalate the trash talk against Iran, and now this sorry piece of hyperbole.

you know, Im willing to concede that the Israeli Loby in this country is more powerful than it should be. im willing to listen when people say they are sick of Israel, and want to stop supporting them...afterall, they have gotten us into lots of trouble. However, what im not willing to listen to is the notion that somehow Hezbollah is a legitimate organization that deserves respect. It is a known FACT to every intelligence organization on the planet, the Hezbollah is an Iranian proxy. They blew up our embassy and marine barracks in Beirut in the 80's. they blew up Khobar towers in Saudi arabia in the 90's, they have hijacked and downed airplanes. they gave rise to Imad Mughiniya, who is certainly one of the most profoundly evil and crafty terrorist masterminds in world history. they have blown up Jewish community centers in Buenos Aires, and trained and advised FARC guerillas while stationed in Venezuela. now, Hezbollah currently has sleeper agents all over the Americas "hunting zionists" and planning for massive assymetric retalliation against US interest if we engage Iran militarily. Im sorry, they are not legit, they are a terrible organization, and we have been at war with them for a loooooong time. They are without doubt, one of the US's gretest foes. If AQ represents our Sunni terrorist enemies, then HB represents the shia ones. Read a book...the only thing Hezbollah deserves is to be destroyed. And I am not jewish, and I am not a particularly big fan of Israel, I am simply educated on the matter.

“However, what im not willing to listen to is the notion that somehow Hezbollah is a legitimate organization that deserves respect.”

Legitimacy is purely a matter of opinion, much like designating who is and who is not a terrorist group. No one is asking the US or any other country to respect Hezbollah, and I doubt Hezbollah is asking for it. Frankly, what Hezbollah is and does is none of our frigging business, along with whatever else goes in the Middle East. Hezbollah is a Lebanese concern and no one else’s.

“It is a known FACT to every intelligence organization on the planet, the Hezbollah is an Iranian proxy.”

Are they the same intelligence organizations that told us Iraq had WMD? Seriously, you care talking out of your hat. Hezbollah is as much an Iranian proxy as Israel is a US one.
Yes, they blew up our embassy and marine barracks in Beirut in the 80's and we would have done the same if China had invaded our shores and erected Marine barracks after bombing our cities.

No they did not blow up Khobar towers in Saudi Arabia in the 90's. One has to laugh at how many groups have been blamed for that attack. One day it was AQ, then it was Saddam Hussein, then it was Iran/Hezbollah, and back again. It all depends on who the Hitler du jour is.

No they did no hijack and down any airplanes.

Imad Mughiniya’s activities took place entirely within Lebanon’s borders and he ultimately did a great thing for his country. He all but eliminating the American presence in Lebanon in the 1980s. If he’d been an American, we’d have called him a hero and made him president.

For teh 100th time, Hezbollah had nothing to do with blowing up Jewish community centers in Buenos Aires, which is another attack that has been blamed on Iran and other groups.

The entire case against Iran/Hezbollah for the Argentina attacks was based on the testimony of an Iranian defector who was has been dismissed as unreliable by US officials, according to the FBI agent who led the US team assisting the investigation in 1997-98.

Hezbollah had nothing to do with FARC guerrillas, nor has Hezbollah ever operated outside of Lebanon.

Hezbollah has no sleeper in America. How is it that the US government believes in all these sleeper cells but has never found or arrested one of them?

We’ve never been at war with Hezbollah and pose no threat to the US (so long as the US minds it’s own business ad stays out of Lebanon).

Take your own advice read a book...a real one. Not one written by some right wing Islamophobic lunatic.

first off, I am decidedly liberal in my leanings. I can be hawkish on defense however (as evidenced here). I am certainly not an islamophobe, and I am open to anybody having any opinion and any belief and am proud as Americans (not sure if you are?) that we are able to do so. that said, your dissmisal of intelligence agencies, legitimate investigations, as simply "the same intel agencies who told us about Iraqi WMD" is EXTREMELY arrogant and misinformed. this leads me to believe that you must be another one of those leftist nuts who litterally believes nothing the gov tells you. I mean, I dont trust everything, but Ill check my sources, adn if it adds up, then Ill believe it. In this case, i would tell you, that the WMD argument was NOT MADE BY THE CIA. it was made by tenet, and bush, cheney, rumsfeld powel etc. People with an agenda. In the CIA, all internal documents, and books written by former case officers since declare that there were no WMDs in Iraq, and they said there werent, but Cheney had an agenda. The CIA, is, in fact a VERY legitimate source of info on almost anything, as they have probably some of the most intelligent, well traveled, liberal americans in existence in their employ.

also, I dont know where your getting your info on HB not bombing BA, or hijacking airplanes. they often did these things under the auspices of the IJO (islamic jihad organization) as a cover name. they are in fact all over South America (check my sources in one of my responses below). They also have a VERY active propoganda wing (not sure, but maybe you're a part of it...I mean, if everyone else on here is aipaic?). So, believe what you want about a terrorist organization. But they fight using civilians as cover, kidnap and torture western civilians, including a priest (father jenco) and have repeatedly supported terror, primarily against Israel, but also against many other western countries.

And if china "invaded" us, you can bet we wouldnt send a suicide bomber up to their embassy, which would be filled with non-combatants and locals working there, and blow it to bits. We wouldnt, not now, not ever. You are delusional if you think we would. We are better than HB, and always will be. Theya re a dispicable organization who essentially is preventing a country from moving forward. I mean, you want to tell me you honestly have no problem with lebanon, a historically tolerant and liberal country, being co-opted and led by a militant organization with the name "party of god"? You have no problem with that? great...move there then

I find that many liberals tend to be liberals at home, and right wing when it comes to US empire.

Reading between the lines, you clearly were sucked into the whole WMD, Iraq/911 BS and are ashamed to admit it. Yes, governments lie to us, they always have and only a fool would accept what they have to say at face value without intellectual analysis.

Much of what we are told by the government is not based on facts or even intelligence, but based on politics. For example, in spite of the fact that all 16 intelligence agencies agree Iran is not producing nukes, it is politically dangerous for anyone in Washington to veer off the talking point that Iran is a nuclear threat.

As you pointed out, the WMD argument was not made by the CIA, but by those in government who decided this was going to be the official government position. So when one reads a report that quotes government sources, you can be pretty confident in the knowledge that it’s BS.

Now to the BA bombings. Hezbollah have never been linked to any attacks outside of Lebanon. That’s al there is to it. Even the original accusations about eh bombings in Argentina were not directed at Hezbollah but Iran, and even they turned out to be false. Hezbollah simply isn’t that big an organization. Think what you like of Hezbollah , their agenda is strictly driven by nationalist inspiration.

There is no facts to support the claims that Hezbollah are anywhere in South America and none of your links make that case. If you do a search on the source of this story, it comes down to 2 sources – Israel and a Kuwaiti News Paper. In fact, Peres travelled to Brazil to convince their leaders that Hezbollah were in their midst, but alas, there is nothing to support this allegation.

Re China, I did ask you what the US would do is China’s military invaded ie. combatants, and built a military base.

As for being better than HB, and always will be, you’re welcome to your delusion, but until HB invade countries and kill millions, support the world’s most repressive regimes and tyrants, I’d say HB has a long way to go to achieve our levels of sadism and depravity.

Hezbollah was elected to repressent Lenanon by the Lebanese public. They are in a much better poisiton to know whether Hezbollah is going to take over the country by assassination and intimidation with the help of Iran.

It's called democracy Dave. If you don't like it, too bad. What goes on in Lebanon is Lebanon's business, not yours.

Hezbollah is not a threat to the US? Even though Iran has specifically stated that they will use Hezbollah sleeper agents stationed around the globe to plan attacks on American interest if we go to war with Iran. Let me begin a list of why we are at war with Hezbollah
-they are irans proxy terrorists. trained and financed by al-quds force
-they blew up the us embassy in beirut in the 80's
-they bombed the marine barracks
-they bombed the french barracks
-they downed airplanes and took hostages, executing Americans on board.
-they kidnapped CIA station Chief Buckley, torturing him for over a year before beating him to death and dumbing his remains.
-they kidnapped and killed scores of westerners.
-they bombed the Khobar towers in Saudi Arabia, killing many us servicemen.
-they bombed jewish community centers in Buenos Aires. killing innocent argentinians.
-They financed and supported Imahd Mughniya (?), who makes osama bin laden look like a child.

i could go on. sure bash Israel, whatever. But dont act like Hezbollah is not a terrorist organization. the truth is, the US is waiting for a time when we can exact our revenge on them...and it will be sweet indeed...a long time coming.

Do you have any links “proving that Iran has specifically stated that they will use Hezbollah sleeper agents stationed around the globe to plan attacks on American interest?

If we go to war with Iran, it will be us that it threatening them. Iran is not a threat because we are threatening it. It is neocon Orwellian logic. It’s a bi like saying that you’re a threat to me because you might come after me is I kill your children.

Now to address your points.

1. We are not at war with Hezbollah
2. Hezbollah are Lebanese nationalist movement
3. We call them terrorists ( meaningless term anyway) because Israel doesn’t like them
4. They blew up the us army barracks in Beirut in the 80's because the USS New Jersey had shelled Lebanon and the US allowed the massacre at Sabra and Shatilla to take place, in spite of assurance it would be protected.
5. Hezbollah have never downed airplanes or executed Americans on board.
6. Chief Buckley was a spy who got caught.
7. Hezbollah have killed scores no westerners
8. Bin laden bombed the Khobar towers in Saudi Arabia not Hezbollah
9. Hezbollah had nothing to do with the bombing of the Jewish community centers in Buenos Aires. Gareth Porter debunked this claim earlier this year.
10. The charges against Imahd Mughniya were debunked by the same report.

You could go on and I could go on correcting you.

Hezbollah is not a terrorist organization, but even if they were, so what? Israel was founded by terrorist organization, and then went on to elected the leaders of those groups to lead their country.

The US has no reason to exact revenge on Hezbollah. In fact, the US has much to be shamed of.

actually regarding the khobar tower bombings, according to official government documents: "The three year long investigation led the FBI to conclude that Iranians were involved in the attack"-BBC and that "On June 25, 1996, per official statement, individuals identified as members of Hezbollah Al-Hejaz (Party of God in the Hijaz)[1][2] by the United States, exploded a sewage truck packed with explosives adjacent to Building #131 in the housing complex."-FBI/ Attorney General

also: Gareth Porter is an unabashedly biased source who runs a website called "antiwar.com" if you think that somehow his opinions will be more valid than those of people actually involved in the investigation of terror, then you must be high. He is just as biased to the right as fox news is to the left...same shit different source.

while I agree that the shelling of the refugee camps in teh 80's was a terrible thing, it was hardly the u.s's fault. we had no part in that, show me one shred of proof that we did. More than likely is the fact that Israel acted on its own, as it often does, without consulting us, and then getting us into trouble.

There is also no question according to people who actually know what they are talking about (investigators, most journalists etc.) that hezbollah was indeed the culprit of the BA bombings.

according to WIKI (sources sighted on the web page):

Between 1982 and 1986, there were 36 suicide attacks in Lebanon directed against American, French and Israelis forces by 41 individuals with predominantly leftist political beliefs and of both major religions,[122] killing 659.[26] Hezbollah denies involvement in any attack, though it has been accused of some or all of these attacks:[123][124][125]
The April 1983 U.S. Embassy bombing (by the Islamic Jihad Organization),[126]
The 1983 Beirut barracks bombing (by the Islamic Jihad Organization), that killed more than 200 U.S. Marines at their barracks in Beirut[127]
A spate of attacks on IDF troops and SLA militiamen in southern Lebanon.[26]
Hijacking of TWA Flight 847 in 1985,[127]
The Lebanon hostage crisis from 1982 to 1992.[128]
Since 1990, Hezbollah has been accused of the following attacks and attempted attacks:
The January 15, 2008, bombing of a U.S. Embassy vehicle in Beirut.[129]
The 1992 Israeli Embassy attack in Buenos Aires, killing 29, in Argentina.[127]
The 1994 AMIA bombing of a Jewish cultural centre, killing 95, in Argentina.[127]
In 2002, Singapore accused Hezbollah of recruiting Singaporeans in a failed 1990s plot to attack U.S. and Israeli ships in the Singapore Straits.[130]
In 2009, a Hezbollah plot in Egypt was uncovered, where Egyptian authorities arrested 49 men for planning attacks against Israeli and Egyptian targets in the Sinai Peninsula.[131][132]

also, according to Small wars journal:

Hezbollah, Lebanon’s Iran-sponsored Shi’i Muslim terrorist organization, has established global networks in at least 40 countries. Its growing presence in South America is increasingly troublesome to U.S. policymakers, yet there are few experts on Hezbollah and fewer still on Hezbollah Latino America. Hezbollah’s operatives have infiltrated the Western Hemisphere from Canada to Argentina, and its activity is increasing, particularly in the lawless Tri-Border Area (TBA) of Brazil, Argentina, and Paraguay. This research was conducted to expose the actions and objectives of Hezbollah in the TBA. The majority of US officials and operators believe that Hezbollah’s terrorist wing is separate from its political wing, but these are misconceptions from people who “mirror-image” the American experience when assessing Hezbollah. Unfamiliarity with the organization makes these assessors vulnerable to its propaganda, which is a severe problem that permeates the US government and its operatives. People who think Hezbollah is or could be compartmentalized or disunited are not familiar with the organization and perceive Hezbollah through the lens of the organization’s extensive propaganda effort. Hezbollah has a large operational network in the TBA, which generates funds for the party, but its primary mission is to plan attacks and lie dormant, awaiting instructions to execute operations against Western targets. The following is a look at Hezbollah’s modus operandi, an analysis of how operational its networks in the Tri-Border Area are, as well as some possible solutions to this threat. First, is an examination of how Hezbollah traditionally operates to establish the context.

Download the Full Article: Hezbollah in South America

Cyrus Miryekta is a veteran paratrooper of both Afghanistan and Iraq with the 82nd Airborne, who has fought Islamists from 9 different nations in 3 separate countries. He recently earned his M.A. in Statecraft and National Security from The Institute of World Politics.

you CAN NOT POSSIBLY ARGUE THAT HB IS NOT A TERROR ORGANIZATION OR AT THE VERY LEAST A SPONSER.

You’d think that after the Iraq WMD fiasco, people would stop believing reports beginning with “according to official government documents”. Obviously you can fool some of the people all of the time.

Needless to say, the 911 Commission Report concluded that AQ were behind the Khobar attacks. Bin Laden even boasts about it.

Gareth Porter does not run"antiwar.com", eh works for IPS. I am not interested in Porter’s opinions, only the information he produces, which has debunked your outdated talking points.

The shelling of the refugee camps was not perpetrated by the US, but the shelling of Southern Lebanon by the USS New Jersey was. As for Sabra and Shatilla, it would be hugely naive to believe that Israel acted without the US knowing about it.

“There is also no question according to people who actually know what they are talking about (investigators, most journalists etc.) that hezbollah was indeed the culprit of the BA bombings.”

What people would they be? More of your government sources?
I do appreciate your Wikipedia link. Note that practically all the attacks took place within Lebanon.

As for Argentina, FBI agent, James Bernazzani, says Argentine investigators had no real leads on an Iranian link to the bombing when his team was in Argentina. Three top officials in the US Embassy in Buenos Aires at the time – including Ambassador James Cheek – have confirmed the absence of evidence linking Iran to the bombing. US officials, according to the FBI agent who led the US team assisting the investigation in 1997-98, dismissed the source for this as unreliable.

In 2002, Singapore accused Hezbollah of recruiting Singaporeans in a failed 1990s plot to attack U.S. and Israeli ships in the Singapore Straits.

There is not a single main stream report linking Hezbollah to the of recruiting of Singaporeans. It’s actually redicuo9us seeing as the Shiite Muslim population of Singapore is non existent.

There is zero evidence of Hezbollah presence in any country but Lebanon.
The US has perpetrated far greater acts of terrorism than any small resistance group that comprises no more than a few thousand members.
Your completely delusional.

you are not really providing any evidence to your side whatsoever. Did you read the Small wars journal article. its actually pretty good. While I would concede that HB is a far cry from AQ in its zeal, I would still say it is a terror organization anyways. Also, I could dispell your points in the same way you have done to mine. I have read the 9/11 commission report, and it says simply that there is a possible link between OBL and khobar, with a source saying he was seen being congratulated on that day. but that's it. Not exactly alot of evidence. Also, who else is gonna attack Jewish centers in argentina. of course there isnt much evidence. hB and Iran run professional intel/counter intel organizations, they dont leave traces. Is there any actual evidence that the hit team that recently killed that hamas guy in dubai were isareli? Not really. But everyone knows they were. they had the motivation, they had the means and they were the most likely suspect. The same is true with the terror attacks and HB. If not them, then who? That's your answer right there. HB NEVER claims their attacks. They NEVER do, because they are smart and they want legitimacy in the international community. AQ and every other group, on the other hand, including Hamas, ALWAYS claims their attacks. As a general rule...if its not claimed, then there is a group who has a reason to keep deniability in tact i.e. : a nation state or a savy political actor (HB). Maybe it is still you who need to read something about international tradecraft, and terrorism in the 20th/21st century. And if I am a product of american disinformation (hahahah, not bloody likely), then you are for sure a product of the HB and Iranian sponsored propoganda campaign. enjoy your night.

And the article was pathetic. There’s lots of hyperbole and hysterical accusation within it, but not a shred of evidence. None.

I have no problem with you calling HB a terrorist organisation Hurricane, but as I pointed out earlier, the term is meaningless. Groups like the MEK (Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization) and Jundula are listed by the State department as Terrorist Organisations, but that hasn’t stopped the US given support to them as they set off bombs in Tehran.
When the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan (Bin Laden and co) were fighting the Soviets, Ronald Regan declared them freedom fighters that they stood for the same values as our founding fathers. As the saying goes, one’s mans freedom fighter is another man’s terrorist.

One piece of evidence I forgot to mention about the Khobar attacks was that the Saudi’s themselves rejected the suggestion that Iran or Hezbollah had any involvement. Now given that the Saudis are no friends of with one of these groups, there is hardly a suggestion hat they are involved in a cover up.

You have asked who else would want to attack Jewish enters in Argentina. A fair question, though it underlines your painful ignorance of the region.

Argentina has a long a sordid history of being one of the most anti-Semitic states in the world. It wasn’t a sanction for Nazi war criminals by accident you know. As Porter reports, the perpetrators were most likely a group of right-wing anti-Semitic Argentineans.

Of course, if HB and Iran run professional intel/counter intel organizations and don’t leave traces, then there surely is no evidence left is there?

Yes there is plenty of evidence that the Dubai hit team were Israeli. The Israelis got caught red handed, on video and left a paper trail a mile long.

It seems that the entirely of your thesis comes down to the fact that because there is no evidence that Iran/Hezbollah did it, it must be them.

you're good. But we could do this forever. You have made alot of assumptions about me (as im sure ive done with you) but I am more aware of the things we are talking about then you think.
I will say that yes, Argentina has a history of anti-semitism, nazi escapees etc. But again, they would have claimed the attack. thats the whole basis of terror, you claim the attack to push your agenda. AQ has NEVER not claimed an attack, they always claim it, so do nazi right wing organizations etc...always, thts the point. But HB, like the professional military organization it sees itself as, never claims responsibility for attacks such as these...ever. Thats why there is no "proof" of their involvement in all these attacks i have brought up...but again: motive, means etc al points to HB, no question. I dont know where you're getting your intel, but it must not be from legitimate books and peer reviewed sources, because thats where i have gotten my info. And dont tell me the internet told you, or that you used your amazing intellectual prowess to make an educated guess.

Your logic is not only inconsistent, but based on faulty assumptions.

1. The entire allegation about Hezbollah/Iran being behind the Argentina attacks was based on the testimony of a witness that the FBI has deemed not to be credible. In fact the witness claims they saw the perpetrator driving a van, but couldn’t identify the perpetrator from pictures. Enough said.

2. Having decided that Hezbollah/Iran are to blame, you are backbiting your reasoning to rationalize your argument. Why would right wing anti-semites in Argentina claim responsibility for the attacks? Groups like AQ claim responsibility because for them, the attack is intended to provoke a disproportionate response, which will in turn, escalate the conflict. In the case of local extremists who hate Jews, their goals are to attack Jews and still go on living their lives in Argentina, so it’s perfectly logical they would prefer to avoid being fugitives in their own country.

Further to that argument, AQ and other terrorist groups are usually trying to resits occupation. There isn’t one in Argentina.

So you admit there is no proof that HB did it, which leaves you with a flimsy conspiracy theory based on the testimony of a discredited witness, which means that there are MANY questions.

Hezbollah do not have the means, nor did they have the motive. HB’s complaints are with the state of Israel, not Jews. In fact, the weakest link in this story is the illogical argument that Hezbollah would bother to travel half way across the world to attack a Jewish centre when there are so many more potential targets in Europe. What was it about Argentina that made it such a priority?

No legitimate or peer reviewed publication would base an entire thesis on the false evidence of a discredited witness. Such flimsy argument would never pass the peer review process.

dude, you are not living on this planet. your plan is to shoot down some Israeli airplanes to gain favor with the Arabs? You are a product of what international affairs education system again? Israel is a nuclear power, and no slouch militarily. They wouldnt question going to war with us if we shot down their planes...and yeah, that would be great...moron. The U.S. if anything needs to do exactly what we are doing. It is not for us to decide the future of the region. but, it is for us to protect our allies and our national interests i.e. oil, and counter terrorism. And yes, we need oil for everything, so no matter what, we need it...no matter what. that's reality. thats why we care about the middle east. Iran is different, and should be treated so, but if they were to take a step back from their hegemonic designs, maybe then Lebanon could get back to its old ways of being a bastion of liberal thought and progress in a sea of utter despair. Lebanon was once a great, great country, it has now become a proxy battle ground between Iran and the west, and Iran and the Saudis.

...but as we’ve seen in Iraq and Afghanistan, nukes are pretty useless in this day and age. Nevertheless, the last war Israel won on it’s own was in 1967. Israel escaped defeat in 1973 only because Nixon came to their aid, and needless to say, Hezbollah sent Israel packing in 2000 and 2006.

It’s hilarious to suggest that Israel would dare take on the US, without whom they’d be a 3rd rate power. In fact, during an interview, Mark Regev went white as a sheet at the suggestion that Turkey might send their navy to escort the next flotilla to Gaza.
What the US has been doing in the Middle East is destabilizing it, risking out national interests (ie. other states’ oil) and feeding terrorism. The 911 Commission report admitted as much.

Iran have no ‘hegemonic designs’. If they did, we might have seen evidence of them over the 270 years since they last attacked or invaded anyone.

Lebanon just needs to be left alone. America needs to get out of the Middle East and give up the delusions of Empire that have not only bankrupted us, but turned the US into a global basket case.

You are right that the presence of US troops only creates further trouble, no matter where in the Middle East. In spite of Hurricane’s ramblings, the US practically admitted that the attack on the Khobar tower was because of the presence of US troops in Saudi Arabia, one Bin Laden’s grievances.

As for the 2006 Wart, apparently you never heard of the Winograd Commission findings which stated:

“Israel embarked on a prolonged war that it initiated………..Though it was a war of our own initiative and waged in a defined territory, Israel did not use its military power wisely or effectively,”

Then again, perhaps Judge Winograd is also employed in the taqiyya business, right Marty?

Bombing Southern Lebanon was not an act of self defence. Hezbollah capture IDF soldiers in order to compel Israel to engage in a prisoner exchange, and Israel had agreed to on other occasions.

Israel certainly have rights to self-defense, but there was nothing about Israel’s subsequent actions which were consistent with self-defense. First of all, Israeli generals had been shopping their plans in Washington via Power Point presentation at least six months earlier, and furthermore, both Bush and Blair had been informed of Israel’s plans long before the cross border skirmish.

One has to marvel at how Israeli self-defense always seems to take place beyond it’s won borders.

Israel made no attempt to rescue/recover the bodies of the captures IDF troops. Israel’s response was to bomb Southern Lebanon, targeting civilian infrastructure, roads, bridges, the airport, factories etc., but interestingly not Hezbollah themselves.

Thom Friedman later explained Israel’s agenda was to inflict as much pain on the Lebanese community as possible in the vain hope that this would turn public opinion against Hezbollah,. As it turns out, the plan backfired.

Hezbollah is part of the government of Lebanon, which is why Hariri recently declare that Hezbollah is now a defacto part of Lebanon’s defence force. As if you highlight how irrationally Israel behaved, they were demanding the Lebanon’s military contain and disarm Hezbollah while simultaneously bombing Lebanese military bases.

This has nothing to do with Jewish rights, but common sense. As Ze'ev Shiff (Israeli journalist and military correspondent for Ha'aretz. ) once said:
“The Israeli army has always struck civilian populations, purposely and consciously. The army has never distinguished civilian from military targets, but has purposely attacked civilian targets.”

And also Abba Eben (Israeli diplomat and politician):
“There was a rational prospect, ultimately fulfilled, that affected populations would exert pressure for the cessation of hostilities, satisfying Israel's goals.”

Ahmadinejad got his warm reception in southern Lebanon, because Iran has injected large funds into repairing and rebuilding the destruction wrought by Israel’s bombing of civilian infrastructure and civilians dwellings.

The events leading up to Hariri’s assassination and following it are very telling. Following Hariri’s assassination, Syria was forced to pull out their troops from Lebanon, leaving Lebanon vulnerable to military attack/invasion. Shortly afterwards, Lebanon announced that it has arrested an Israeli spy network.

The answer to who is responsible is easy. Who benefitted from Hariri’s assassination and Syrian’s withdrawal?

Hezbollah has been the only group that has been able to resist Israeli attacks and occupation since the Wom Kuippur War and that’s what makes them such a thorn in the side of Israel. While Hezbollah are around, Israel cannot do as they please.

Israel has never proposed any kind of treaty with Lebanon, but merely made one sided demands.
Hezbollah are not the ones heightening tensions and creating provocations. Just this week, Israel violated Lebanon’s air space yetr again. In fact, according to UNIFIL, Israel has violated the terms of the ceasefire 2,500 times since 2006 and Hezbollah none.

That pretty much says it all and stands as clear evidence who the real destabilizing element is in the region.

for once, we agree. we do need to get out of the middle east. But how can we? when we need the oil they provide. By the way, saying that iran has no hegemonic designs is quite ignorant. Saudi Arabia, jordan, Turkey, qatar, UAE, Dubai etc have all asked for US assistance and military aid, because as Sunnis, they are afraid of the idea of Shia dominance. A nuclear Iran would force the middle east into an arms race. next would be Saudi Arabia, then probably Jordan. thats just what we need. Iran may not want territory exactly, but it certainly wants control. as is evidenced in its support for hezbollah, and its meddling in Iraq. Saddam, for all his faults, was the only thing standing between Iran and the rest of the region...thanks to the iraq war (the worst U.S. strategic blunder in history) Iran now has many options, and the region is very unstable.. this is evidenced in the recent, unbelievably large arms deal between Saudi Arabia and the United states.
oh, and if you honestly think that Israel is afraid of turkey...you are out of your mind. they have absolutely a top rate military, ranks among the worlds top 10 in skill and equipment easily. i wouldnt want to tangle with the israelis. ANd although I agree, that they need us to survive, that is less and less the case these days. I dont know what history books you were reading, but every time Arabs have attacked Israel they have gottne owned. the most recent war in Lebanon was absolutely won by Hezbollah, but Let me be clear, the reason israel pulled out was because they couldnt attack Hezbollah effectively because Hezbollah hides amongst the populace, just like the jihadis in Iraq. if you puch forward, you will kill more civillians than soldiers...its not worth a protracted struggle like that. but, to give credit where it is due...strategically speaking, Hezbollah absolutely won that engagement...especially from a media standpoint, they are quite savvy. Next time, I would bet all my money on israel beating them baddly though...and there will be a next time, there always is in the middle east, what a f'd up place.

It’s a fallacy that we need the oil. Only 12% of our oil imports from the Middle East, the rest coming from Canada and Mexico.

The reason we are there is not to protect our oil supplies, but to control who gets to buy the oil and who doesn’t. The theory being that if we go to war with China, then we make sure that they don’t any.

Sorry, but arguing that Iran is hegemonic because the tyrants in Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Qatar, UAE, Dubai are worried about Iran is proof of nothing. The majority of the Arab world cannot stand their own leaders and you might be surprised to find that the majority of the Arab world think that Iran having nukes would be a good thing.

Incidentally, far from being worried about Iran, Turkey has fostered healthy relations with Iran, along with Syria, and all our boogie men. Turkey decided that it no longer made sense to make enemies of it’s neighbours just to please Washington.

And yet we accuse Iran of destabilizing the region.

The suggestion that a nuclear Iran would force the middle east into an arms race is absurd. Iran is surrounded on 3 sides by nuclear armed states and yet we’re arguing that if they get one, it will be their fault that other states may obtain nukes?

Seriously, have you even though about this? In any case, Iran is not pursuing nukes.

So what is the problem exactly with Iran wanting to exert influence in the region? We have no problem with Saudi Arabia being the defacto main player (because they are under our thumb) and yet, a country with the larges population in the region is supposed to remain weak and obsequious.

Seems rather imperial and hypocritical wouldn’t you agree?

We agree that Iran supports Hezbollah, like the US supports Israel. So what? The US and Iran could be allies within hours if Washington wanted that to happen. For that matter, so could Iran and Israel. In 2003, Iran offered the grand bargain, which included the proposal to normalize relations with Washington and recognize Israel. It even offered to wash it’s hands of Hezbollah and Hamas. All it asked for in return was a guarantee that the US would not bomb them.

A crazy idea I know.

And what did Cheney do? He not only rejected the offer, he abused the Swiss ambassador for passing along the memo (as he was required to do).

And you have the gall to accuse Iran of being dangerous? Seriously man, when are you gong to wake up?

Saddam wasn’t standing between Iran and the rest of the region, he stopped the Shiite awakening. Iran were never going to invade or attack anyone. Just becasue the Us and Israel liek to invae and occupy other states doesn't mean that everyone agrees it's the smart thing to do.

As for the arms deal with Saudi Arabia, don’t be fooled. That hardware is simply going to sit under the Arabian sun and gather dust. Do you seriously think Saudi Arabia is going to send pilots to bomb Tehran? The deal was simply a boondoggle to keep Lockheed Martin in the black.

Yes Israel IS afraid of Turkey. Do you have any idea about Turkey’s military? Yes Israel are well equipped and skilled, but they haven’t got the resources to sustain a war beyond a few weeks – certainly not against a real military opponent. Th 2006 war along with Iraq and afgahnsitan should be solid proof that wars are not won by air power alone. Israel could go nuclear, but that would be a seriously big risk for Israel as well as Turkry.

In terms of ground troops, Turkey drawfs Israel.

As Gilad Aztimon pointed out, the last war Israel won was in 1967. 1973 was a near escape and Israel were staring at defeat until Nixon’s shipped arms to Israel. Since then, they’ve been smacked down by Hezbollah twice and simply been picking fights with the Palestinians.

Israel rely entirely on the US for their very existence. Their industry and security apparatus revolves entirely around US and European/British aid.

And don’t give me the usual taling poins about Hezbollah hiding amongst the population. First of all, Israel has demonstrated that it has never worried about hitting civilian targets. Seondly, the whole human shields propaganda line has been debunked.

Amnesty and HRW Claims Discredited in Detailed Report
http://www.ngo-monitor.org/article/amnesty_and_hrw_claims_discredited_in_detailed_report

Human Rights Watch: Troubling Report
http://www.nysun.com/opinion/human-rights-watch-troubling-report/46037/

Israeli 'human shield' claim is full of holes
http://www.thenational.ae/article/20090113/FOREIGN/591536290/1002

Ironically, it was Shin Bet who appealed an Israeli Supreme Court decision banning h use of human shields, because Israel has found them to be useful.

The reason Israel pulled out was because the Israeli public has no stomach for human casualties and they were starting to mount. Israel were already killing more civillians than soldiers, but as Ze'ev Shiff (Israeli journalist and military correspondent for Ha'aretz) wrote in his column at the time, “The Israeli army has always struck civilian populations, purposely and consciously. The army has never distinguished civilian from military targets, but has purposely attacked civilian targets.”

The reason Hezbollah won that engagement, though it came a huge cost to Lebanon, was because they were prepared to die for their cause and they are seriously resourceful. It's no small feat to intercept a signal from an Israeli UAV, decrypt it and extract the video surveilance footage, as they did when they released the footage to prove that a drone was tracking Hariri when he was assassinated.

I recall one Israeli general saying at the time that the problem was that no one in the IDF was prepared to die for this government.

Israel won’t win the next time either because winning wars means achieving a strategic objective and invading armies never have one. The US never had one going into Iraq and Afghanistan. For Hezbollah, the strategic objective is to survive the assault and resist invasion. It’s simple and clear. For Israel, anything less than destroying Hezbollah will mean failure and they never will, because such a policy will simply create an infite number of Hezbollah recruits. They couldn’t even destroy Hamas for the same reason.

There is no possibility of an "infinite" number of recruits. The number may be in the millions, but it is still very finite. The main problem for Israel is Israeli lack of will, and outside forces (primarily its sponsor - the USA) that are restraining Israel from launching a truly effective war. If Israel wanted to, it could launch a massive bombardment with thermobaric (fuel-air) weapons like the Russians did in Grozny, and follow up with napalm and huge fleets of monster bulldozers. All of Gaza could be reduced to flat and level sand in days, and its population reduced to zero. Something similar could be done to Southern Lebanon as well. Do not confuse Israel's last weak and ineffective Lebanon war with what they could really do if they were so motivated.

Israel's time is also running out - fast. If Iran acquires deliverable nukes, Iran will be able to base nukes in the territories of its allies in Gaza and Lebanon to hold off Israel, just as battlefield and intermediate range nukes were based in Europe during the cold war.

There is a delusional conception among hawks in the US and Israel that if they were allowed to get serious they could really win on the battlefield, but that is a flawed argument.

The United States has been engaged in two wars for over seven and half years. In that time, the executive has never been curtailed by the Congress; every request for further funding has been rubber stamped. Israel are not being restrained by any means. In the 2006 war and the 2008 assault on Gaza, the US were blocking all resolutions for a ceasefire until Israel had decided they had had enough.

The argument goes like this. The generals are holding "our boys back", not "letting them win." Whenever the U.S. comes up against a determined foe it can't handle, like the Vietcong or the Taliban, no credit is given to them. It's always, rather, that WE were never 'allowed' to win. Imagine that: the "greatest military" in history – so called - cannot quell resistance fighters armed with Kalashnikovs and IEDs?

To claim restraint, of course, is to miss the crucial point: its not altogether clear whether Israel or America CAN defeat a determined opponent. You assume, without foundation, that there is lurking within the Israeli or U.S. military some sleeping giant that merely needs to be awakened.

If Israel were to resort to thermobaric weapons, they would be opening a pandora’s box with such an escalation, leading to other players (like Turkey) being drawn into the conflict, which then involves NATO, Russia, etc. Such extreme measures are neither sustainable or effective, nor do they serve any strategic objective (unless you’re simply aiming to kill large numbers of civilians).

Napalm achieved what exactly in Vietnam? Bulldozers are fine for creating mass graves and demolishing homes, but such an option also means Israeli casualties, requiring a ground invasion and higher incidence of casualties by friendly fire. In 2006, Israel’s Merkava tanks were sitting ducks against Russian Kornet anti tank missiles.

There is also the fact that such a massive assault on Lebanon would require even greater material and logistic support from the US, implicating the US in such an outrage. Kiss US presence in the Middle East goodbye, along with the puppet governments. Overnight, the Middle East becomes a hot zone, Israel is completely isolated and whammo, game over.

Most of the insurgents who were caught by Saudi officials rushing into Iraq were otherwise moderate Muslism who had been radicalized by the Iraq invasion and occupation. In fact, most of them cited the revelations about Abu Graib as their motaive.
We are constantly reminded that there are 1.5 billion Muslims in the world are we not?
The main problem for Israel is not lack of will, it’s that:

a. Like the US, Israel has no stomach for casualties.
b. Israel has not been militarily threatened since 1973, and Israel’s reflexive standard line that every response is an act of self defence doesn’t wash, which is why

Last but not least, there is a psychological flaw.

Israel and it’s supporters cling to the delusion that it is still the same military outfit it was in 1967, having managed to ignore the strategic disaster when Egypt turned the tables on them in 1973, and then again in 2000 and 2006. Israel's weak and ineffective Lebanon war is a consequence of a military force that has grown accustomed to fighting a weak opponent. Israelis, who have grown accustomed to a very comfortable and materialistic existence, have become soft. This is illustrated by the example of how former IDF soldiers responded to the flotilla massacre - in spite of the fact that no Israelis weer killed.

Flotilla evokes post-traumatic stress in former soldiers
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3906514,00.html

If Iran acquires deliverable nukes, Iran wouldn’t bother basing nukes in Gaza and Lebanon would never agree to it. As Ehud Barak said, the Iranians may be extreme but they are not mishugina.

1. Israel has withdrawn from Lebanon in the year 2000 after an 18 year long occupation where they killed 15-20 thousand people.
2. Israel attacked an tried to invade Lebanon again in 2006
3. Israel have wanted access to the Litani River since Ben Gurion. In fact, Israel installed a pipeline form the Litani during their occupation.
4. Hezbollah are part of the Lebanese government.
5. Hezbollah is also resistance group that has successfully driven the US, France and Israel out of Lebanon, which makes it entirely legitimate. You know, like how the Irgun and Stern Gang drove out the British from Palestine.
6. Israel is sponsored by the US the same way that Hezbollah is sponsored by Iran.
7. Hezbollah captured and killed Israeli soldiers who had captured and killed thousands of Lebanese.
8. According to Israel’s own Winograd Commission, Israel initiated the 2006 war.
“How come most of the commentators are supporting the terrorists and are yelling Aipac as if Israel wants something in Lebanon besides to take the terror out.”

Simple Buddah, because the author of this article is a former AIPACD employee and because Israel were attacking Lebanon long before Hezbollah ever existed. In fact, were it nor for Israel’s 18 year occupation of Lebanon, Hezbollah would never have been created.

We can understand why this discussion makes you sick Buddah. Confronting the truth is painful for Israel’s amen corner.

Yes Israel did invade lebanon in the 80's but why? maybe because there were terrorists there attacking civilians is that ok with you?
-Israel has killed 20,000 people or the tribal culture of the lebananese gangs and the PLO, syria had a little part in it.
- Israel attcked in 2006 because it was attacked what happened first, there was no reason to attck us we were not in lebanon for 6 years just want peace and quiet.
- yes that is what we want from lebanon the river , be serious.
-who exactly does hizbullah resist( terror organization) resist peace, Israel is not in lebanon. maybe the syrians, or the Iranian interests. Israel is not a threat to lebanon as long as we are not attacked.
- So we can go and kill germans now because they have killed jews great logic

It makes me sick because of people like you who probably are sitting in america enjoying all the west has to offer, but supporting all that is against it.
-

“Yes Israel did invade lebanon in the 80's but why?”

There continues to be a widespread fictional recollection that that invasion was launched in response to rocket fire from Lebanon (from the PLO). The truth is that a cease fire had been in place for nearly a year, and had been scrupulously honoured by the PLO while the Israelis occasionally tried to provoke a casus belli to justify a long-planned invasion. When Israel’s ambassador to the UK was shot in London, and not by the PLO, Israeli PM Begin proclaimed that the cease fire had been violated and ordered a massive invasion led by Defense Minister Sharon. I distinctly recall that historical revision started right away. Later that same month of June, 1982, I heard from two separate people, one a friend and one a rabbi, that the rockets had finally stopped threatening Israel.

Israel has killed 20,000 people or the tribal culture of the lebananese gangs and the PLO, syria had a little part in it.

Israel was not attacked in 2006. Similar cross border skirmished had been taking pace regularly since 2000 and Hebollah certainly weren’t attacking Israel. Israel didn’t have to go to war to defend themselves but chose to.

Winograd stated without a doubt that Israel initiated the war.

End of story.

As for peace and quiet, Israel had been routinely threatening Lebanon by violating it’s air space with it’s military planes.

Yes Israel does want the Litani. Israel is running out of water. Making the “desert bloom” and filling swimming pools comes at a cost and the aquifers in Israel/Palestine are being seriously depleted.

Hzebollah doesn’t resist peace, only invading armies, you know, like the the terrorist groups (aka IDF) in Israel did with the British.

Israel is not in Lebanon because they were driven out of Lebanon on both occasions.
“Israel is not a threat to lebanon as long as we are not attacked”

Israeli leaders are already stating that another war with Lebanon is inevitable, which coming from Israel is another way of saying that Israel is planning an attack and simply waiting for the right moment to blame on Hezbollah/Lebanon.

It makes me sick because of people like you who want to put Israel before the interests of the county you’re living in.

Some would say that makes you are traitor.

The Cedar Revolution was a Washington manufactured side show that ran out of steam in the same way that the Orange revolution did in the Ukraine. It was paid for by a $60 million cash injection from Washington, which would be considered illegal in this country.

The polls leading up to that election indicated success for Hezbollah. If elections were to be held today, the outcome would be reversed.

There were no arms involved in the Lebanese election. In spite of reports of vote rigging and fraud, Hezbollah accepted the outcome. There was no violence or intimidation.

The duty of the free democratic world is to leave Lebanon alone, not meddle and interfere with Lebanon’s internal affairs. That’s what is meant by sovereignty.

There are no foreign regimes supporting an armed terrorist camp inside Lebanon. Said Hariri, the leader of Lebanon has declared that Hezbollah is part of Lebanon’s military, therefore it’s “camps” are Lebanese military camps and entirely legitimate.

There are no UN resolutions or articles of the international law which relate to Lebanon’s internal affairs. The only UN Resolutions pertaining to Lebanon relate to a ceasefire, which according to UNIFIL, Israel has violated 2,500 times since 2006 and Hezbollah none.

There is no Iranian nuclear and demographic Chess Game. Iran is building a nuclear power industry, which it is perfectly entitled to.

You didn't raise any facts to require a response. Alluding vaguely to UN Resolutions and international law is not citing facts.

First of all, there are no UN Resolutions that apply to Lebanon's parliamentary elections, so you evidently have no idea what you are talking about.

Secondly, Hezbollah accepted the outcome of the last elections. You made up some ridiculous claim about Hezbollah using armed intimidation, but that is clearly false.

As for supplying weapons, perhaps you don't get news reports from the trailer camp you live in, but
after the cross border incident between the IDF and Lebanon's military, the US has cut off arms supplies to Lebanon. Hezbollah had no involvement whatsoever with that incident.

Washington then insisted that it would only supply arms to Lebanon if Lebanon agreed not to use those weapons against Israel, even if Israel attacked. Hariri told Washington to take their weapons and money and send them to Israel , and Iran and Russia have stepped in to provide weaponry to Lebanon.

If Lebanon's government was to obtain weapons from Iran, Russia and Syrian, that is their business and none of yours. So remind me who's meddling in Lebanon's affairs?

As for supporting terrorists, Israel was founded by terrorists gang and the leaders of those gangs were elected to the office of Prime Minister. 60 years after the bombing o the King David Hotel, Israel celebrated the anniversary of that attack. This was a huge insult to Britain.

What other state celebrates a terror attack 60- years after the fact?

Remind me again, TONYSAFA, who is defending terrorists?

You have clearly lost your mind, and seem to be reliving argument you and I have never had.

First of all, I did not ignore the election results. Even Hezbollah accepted the outcome of those results, and were welcomes by the coalition into the Lebanese government, so wherever you go that idea is anyone's guess.

Yes, the US and Saudi backed coalition won Lebanese parliamentary elections after the US injected over $60 million to help them win.

No one has disputed that.

The arrival of some 100,000 expatriate Lebanese in the days before the election also helped sway the result. What was most telling about the election result was that it was reports as being seen as a victory for the US and Israel, not Lebanon.

You keep inditing that I am ignoring UN resolutions, yet you have not cited a single one, let alone a UN Resolution that has anything to do with Lebanon's political affairs. Please explain how I can ignore something that hasn't been mentioned?

“Well through which borders terrorist Nassrallah is getting his arms into lebanon?? just answer to this question, through what borders other than the Syrian borders???”

Short answer: Any borders that belong to Lebanon.

As Saad Hariri said, Hezbollah is part of Lebanon;s government and part of Lebanon's defence force. It therefore follows that Hezbollah is perfectly entitled to bring in arms to Lebanon by any means it desires.

As for your facts, let's have a little bit of fun shall we? First of all, not a single one of these events is documented by your source. No links are provided and no sources cited, which is usually the tactics employed by those who don;t want their claim to be scrutinized.

June 14 2009: There is no mention of Hezbollah involvement in the burning of Nisreen Aql's vehicle.
January 11, 2009: LOG members made claims about being attacked, but no examples or sources are cited. More than likely,this was a rally for political reasons.
March 2, 2009: There is no mention or evidence provided of Hezbollah involvement.
•April 10, 2009: Again, accusations are made without any sources or evidence cited. Agin, nmo links provided.
•April 11, 2009: Hezbollah don't use sticks and stones when they attack. These might have been Hezbollah sympathises, but had Hezbollah attacked, there would have been no survivors.
•April 11, 2009: There is no mention or evidence provided of Hezbollah involvement.
April 13, There is no mention or evidence provided of Hezbollah involvement.
•April 20, 2009: Unsupported allegations. Hezbollah attacked, they wouldn't have stopped at breaking anyone's nose.
•May 7, 2009: If Hezbollah had attacked Riyad Al Assaad, he would probabyl not have been alive.
•May 25, 2009: There is no mention or evidence provided of Hezbollah involvement.
•May 26, 2009: There is no mention or evidence provided of Hezbollah involvement.

Now here are some real facts:

It was Hebollah that pushed for the elections to take place in the first place. The US backed Siniora government went into lock down and resisted calls for such elections.

On April 2007, after Hezbollah demonstrations. Nasrallah declared the situation deadlocked, but expressed an unwillingness to escalate the protests into a civil war. He suggested the status quo would continue until the regularly scheduled elections in 2009. A new wave of sectarian violence started in Lebanon due to the government's crackdown on Hezbollah's secured network the militants belonging to the organization. On May 8, 2008, gun battles erupted between Hezbollah supporters and pro-government loyalists, while the leader of the organization called the government's decision "a declaration of war".

Even though Hezbollah easily won, they signed the Doha Agreement, defusing the crisis.

When 6 Hezbollah demonstrators were shot by the Lebanese army during the January 2008 demonstrations, Nasrallah ordered his followers not to retaliate.

As for your insistence that everything to do with Hezbollah is terrorism, let's investigate that too:

1. The Bush administration admitted that covert actions inside Lebanon, which included support for Al Qaeda affiliated Sunni Jihadist groups like Fatah Al Islam.
2. Seymor Hersh exposed this plot in a story he wrote in 2007, where he documented how Saudi Arabia provided funding as well as covert support to Fatah Al Islam, in close consultation with the Bush administration  http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=5749
3. The Siniora governmment was complicit in this plan. And armed Fatah Al Islam
4. The plan went pear shaped when a dispute arose about payment to the group by the Siniora government, and resulting in the armed confrontation between Lebanese armed forces and Fatah Al Islam.

May I suggest that if you insist on mentioning UN Resolutions again, that you cite one you are referring to so that we can have a real debate?

1. i asked you to give straight answer if Syria is supporting hezbollah with weapon. you said "Short answer: Any borders that belong to Lebanon."
you are tooembarrassed to say yes to a fact. Supplying terrorist Hezbollah with weapon is a violation against UN resolutions 1559 & 1701.

2. in your 1st reply you said: "There are no UN resolutions or articles of the international law which relate to Lebanon’s internal affairs"
Facts:
- two weeks ago Iran Syria Hezbollah's camp attacked the International investigators set to investigate the 22 Cedar Revolutions assassinated martyrs. you probably consider 22 leaders from the Cedar revolutions were killed by accident
- UN resolutions 1559 & 1701 specifically call on Hezbollah to disarm and prohibit any country to supply weapon to other than Lebanese gov.
That is regardless of the Syrian accountability Act, because you don't sound as an American and you twisting facts to support terrorist groups..
if you are an American, than it is a bigger problem that terrorists in the middle east...

3. i gave you the date of each fact i listed but if you don't have Google :) but here are links you asked for
- Democracy under fire:
nowlebanon.com/NewsArchiveDetails.aspx?page=3&ID=53573&MID=0&PID=0&FParentID=0&FFParentID=0

4. You claimed that money spent during elections well here is excerpts from an interview with a Shiite leader and a Hezbollah opponent:
NOW: What makes you believe that the Shia would abandon Hezbollah?
Ahmad Assaad: Hezbollah's grip over the Shia depends on two issues: repression and money. In the Soviet Union, the Communist Party used to garner 99% of the vote. Today, after the downfall of the Soviet regime of fear, this party gets 12% of the vote.
The second issue is Iranian funding. We have numbers that show that Hezbollah has close to 37,000 families on its payrolls. But Iran does not feed all of the Shia of Lebanon. The Shia were hard hit after the 2006 July War, and Hezbollah reimbursed its cronies only, leaving a great majority of Shia to their fate.
www.nowlebanon.com/NewsArchiveDetails.aspx?ID=29482

5. you complained that 1000's of Lebanese voted !!! looool
yes only Hezbollah and Iranian Islamic terrorist mullahs should vote... why would Lebanese vote in Lebanon...
good one Neoleft. in fact you like it as Iran, all the Shiites must vote the Islamic supreme terrorist Mullah or they are fighters against Gog as what the terrorist supreme leader said.
important to Note: Hezbollah issued a statement asking the world to copy the Iranian "Just and democratic elections". i bet Neoleft you agree with this statement...

6. Here is your Neoleft democracy at its best:
you said: "Hezbollah don't use sticks and stones when they attack. These might have been Hezbollah sympathises, but had Hezbollah attacked, there would have been no survivors"
My answer to this is: Thank you terrorist hezbollah for attacking opponents during elections but not killing them all

7. You said: "Hezbollah is perfectly entitled to bring in arms to Lebanon by any means it desires"
You twisted the facts that UN resolutions 1701 and 1559 both call to disarm Hezbollah most important you tried to cover the fact that the main issue between Hezbollah and the cedar revolution is Hezbollah weapon outside the government control and that is why Hezbollah forced the ex cedar revolution majority gov down.

in conclusion, it is so obvious that you just wanna twist facts to protect the terrorist Iranian Islamic group in Lebanon.
that is why you are worst than Hezbollah terrorist members deluded by Khomeini's terrorist teachings. Like i said you are the same as the Syrian regime which supports & defends terrorist Sunni and Shiites groups and provides them with political cover under the pretext of the so called secular regime... you tow are more threat than terrorists themselves because terrorist feed on your sick propaganda...

and frothing at the mouth, because it makes deciphering your incoherent ramblings quite a challenge. The fact that you insist on punctuating your screeds with meaningless and hysterical references to terrorist this and terrorist that, doesn’t help matters.

Anyway, on to correcting your poor grasp of the facts:

1. Iran and Syrian offered to supply Lebanon's government with weapons after Congress voted to stop providing weapons to Lebanon unless Lebanon agreed to terms that forbade the use of those weapons to defend itself against an Israeli attack.

Of course Syrian and Iran are supplying Hezbollah with weapons, as does Russia. Hezbollah don't make weapons, so obviously they have to obtain them from somewhere.
Supplying Hezbollah with weapon is NOT a violation against UN resolutions 1559 or 1701, because neither makes mention of Hezbollah. They stipulate that Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias should be disbanded, but the democratically elected government of Lebanon (including the Cedar Revolutionaries that you salivate over) do not regard Hezbollah as a militia, hence no violation.

It does make me laugh hearing Israeli stooges waving 1559 and 1701 in the air as though they were the 10 Commandments, while Israel continues to violate over 60 UN Resolutions.

2. “Two weeks ago Iran Syria Hezbollah's camp attacked the International investigators set to investigate the 22 Cedar Revolutions assassinated martyrs.”

Martyrs you say? What are you, a Mulliah? Who talks like that?

Did you say the investigators were attacked? Wow, you really are desperate. 150 ladies turn up at a pregnancy clinic and you call that an attack?

I take it the murder of the 22 martyrs” is a reference to the assassination of Hariri, which had nothing to do with the fake, Washington produced, made for television, Cedar Revolution, which didn’t even exist at the time. Anyway, those investigations have turned out to be a farce. According to the The New York Times and the London Times, Syria were originally accused of the murder until the Syrians offered their assistance to the United States in Iraq, and they were taken off the suspect list. The US decided that they would then pin the blame on Iran/ Hezbollah (again as reported in the The New York Times and the London Times).

The US has a habbit of pulling these stunts. The Syrians and Iranians were blamed for Lockerbie and then, post-Syrian help in the liberation of Kuwait in 1991, the blame was handed to the Libyans, so it’s business as usual.

The cluless investigators wanted mobile telephone numbers of 15 or so wives of Hezbollah members to match them with calls made from the same numbers on the afternoon of Hariri's murder, perhaps by their husbands. 11 members of the Lebanese Alpha mobile company were arrested and charged with spying for Israel. It’s no secret that Israel inserted mobile calls into the record of the 14 February 2005 calls – in order to plant evidence. We know this because the women managed to get their hands on one of their briefcases.

Like I already explained to UNSCR 1559 does not apply to Hezbollah. As for UNSCR 1701, UNIFIL has reported that Israel has violated the ceasefire 2,500 times since 2006, and Hezbollah none.

In know how you hate to talk about Israel’s terrorism and violation of intentional law, but it thought I’d throw that one in.

3. Yes you gave me a cut and paste list of dates of events from a web site with no links. Reading your sources explains why you didn’t other the first time. This stuff is so ridiculous, it's little wonder that no credible news source bother to report it. All you petty stories are sourced come from the one partisan web site.

How typical and predictable?

“Democracy under fire”

Funny how all the gloom and doom predictions about Hezbollah threat of violence to try to either dominate the 2009 parliamentary elections never eventuated.

“You claimed that money spent during elections well here is excerpts from an interview with a Shiite leader and a Hezbollah opponent”

This is even more pathetic than the previous story. This is nothing more than a wannabe leader expressing sour grapes over the fact that Hezbollah control the money and wouldn’t share it with their enemies. You don’t hear Democrats Complaining about Republicans are not sharing their campaign contributions do you?

Yes, Hezbollah is perfectly entitled to bring in arms to Lebanon by any means it desires. Hezbollah is a member of the Lebanese government and as Saad Hariri declared, a member of Lebanon’s defence forces. That makes Hezbollah’s acquisition of weapons’ entirely legitimate.

UN resolutions 1701 and 1559 do not mention Hezbollah.

In conclusion, it is so obvious that you just wanna twist facts (and ignore anything to do with Israel’s war crimes and history of terrorism) to protect the terrorist Israeli state.

You have no problem with terrorism, only other people’s terrorism.

So please explain why you defend terrorism?

You’d know that no mention is made of Hezbollah, but stipulates that Lebanese and non Lebanese militias be disbanded. No Lebanese government has ever designated Hezbollah a militia and in fact, Hezbollah are not both a political party with the Lebanese government and a legitimate entity of the Lebanese defence forces.

Then again, seeing as English is not your first language, perhaps you missed that important detail.

The Lebanese government did enforce 1559 and 1701 against the Sunni and Washington backed Jihadist group, Fatah al Islam.

Yes, we agree that Russia, Iran and Syria are supplying arms to the Lebanese government and that Hezbollah, as a key part of the Lebanese defence force, also receives those weapons.

The Washington produced, made for television Cedar Revolution has sadly come to an end. As it turned out, there was nothing revolutionary about the Cedar Revolution. The Revolution didn’t even address the fact that the Lebanese political system is undemocratic, and Lebanon remains encumbered by the anachronistic confessional political system that designates power according to religious factions.

Hezbollah were invited by the March 14 coalition into the government in 2009, and Saad Hariri, the current Prime Minister of Lebanon, has declared that Hezbollah is a key component of Lebanon’s defense force.

Now lets turn to Banki Moon’s statements.

Oct 28 2010: Ban Ki-moon makes no mention of Hezbollah.

On Nov 9: Ban Ki-moon makes no mention of Hezbollah.

You are clearly not an American are you Tony? In fact, it’s quite obvious that English is not even your first language.

Are you ever going to explain why you support terrorism? What about Israel's 2,500 violations of UNSC 1701 or it's violations fo 100 UN Resolt8uons pertaining to the occupied territories?

Iran on it's border.

No, Russia has no interest in destabilizing Iran, nor does India, China or Asia. It's time to face reality. The world nolonger revolves aroudn the US and what the US wants, especially given it is headed towards econimic oblivion.

While the US remains obsessed with wars, the rest of the world has focussed on maintaining viable and strong economies and forging ties. Iran is now a memnber of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, along with Russia, India, Brazil and China. The US wasn't invited to be an observer.