Sunday, May 11, 2008

Snuffing the Future, Enabling AlQaeda?

The Future Movement is not a militia.

MP Shaykh Saad is not a militia leader.

His father was not either. Both are modern statesmen with visions of prosperity and development for the country of Lebanon.

The Future Movement is a political grouping that is multconfessional and led by the Sunni MP Saad Al Hariri.

There were vile rumors that the Future Movement has a militia being trained in Jordan and Egypt.

These were blatant lies.

The Movement has no militia. It has a number of security personnel that guard its institutions. These security personnel are armed with light personal weapons. The suppporters of the Movement have personal weapons that they used to defend themselves and their homes. No heavy wepaons- no military training. What happened in Beirut was a one sided conflict- Beiruti civilians being run over by a trained and armed- to- the teeth military force driven with fervent exclusionist ideological zeal.

The rapid invasion and conquest of Beirut by the Hizbullah and its lesser allies should put the myth of a Future Movement militia to rest once and all.

There is no blood on Shaykh Saad's hands.

Still though an 'Islamist "thinker"' (some think this is a contradiciton in terms) Egyptian Fahmi Howeidi still alleges that the Future Movement had a militia training in Jordan and Egypt!

The Globe and Mail had a good piece on the conflict in Lebanon and the Future Movement that captures the reality and the fears- here are excerpts:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080511.wlebanonsunni12/BNStory/International

"Despite its popularity, the Future Movement had no fighting wing that could stand up to Hezbollah or Amal. Even as the government became more deeply embroiled in the escalating political standoff with the heavily armed Hezbollah, it directed its efforts – and the funding it received from the United States and its allies in the Sunni Arab world – into building up the national army as a military counterweight."

Counting on the army and the security forces did not work for the civilians of Beirut:


"That strategy failed last week, as the army, afraid of splitting along sectarian lines, stood aside as Hezbollah captured West Beirut and briefly made Mr. Hariri a prisoner in his own home."

The Hizbullah and supporters attacked and burnt Future Movement institutions- offices, tv station, radio station, newspaper. They shut down all the media outlets for the Future Movement. They closed all their offices. They pursued their supporters.

Even the Hariri Foundation, which educated more than 34, 000 Lebanese of all sects, some say the biggest group educated was the Shia Lebanese, did not escape the tribal wrath. It was also attacked and destroyed.

Who benefits from attacking a moderate secular group supported by Sunni Lebanese?
Who benefits from an attack that has taken a sectarian coloring?
Who benefits from the Sunnis of Lebanon feeling wronged and defenseless?

The bad old AlQaeda that has wrecked major havoc in Iraq.

Is it Lebanon's turn?

The Globe and Mail writes:

"With Sunni rage rising and Mr. Hariri discredited in the eyes of many, some now worry that al-Qaeda-style radical Islamists could fill the void and give deadly direction to the anti-Shia sentiment, as in Iraq. Last year, an al-Qaeda-affiliated group seized control of a Palestinian refugee camp in northern Lebanon, prompting a 14-week battle with the Lebanese army that left 385 dead, nearly half of them soldiers."

2 comments:

Marion said...

Mr. Ihsan Alkhatib is claiming that the reports about Saad Hariri's militias were false. To give him the benefit of the doubt, further investigating is in order. Yet, I would like to ask him about all of the numerous reports concerning Iran, Syria, Hezbollah, and Hamas reported by Future TV and other news sources throughout the region and beyond, does he consider them as being all accurate and true? And if the Lebanese opposition supporters claimed that many of them are not true, would he be willing to do more investigating from different news sources than the usual ones that he is accustomed to reading, listening, or watching?

Concerning Mr. Alkhatib's prediction of what will happen, due to the recent events in Lebanon, tells me that he sees this as a Sunni/Shia conflict.
And that based on this he is also predicting the probability of Al Qaeda wanting to take revenge on behalf of Saad Hariri's Sunni followers in Lebanon. For me, I see this as a very good reason why the Future TV channel should not have been portraying the political differences in Lebanon as a Sunni/Shia conflict, when in fact it is a conflict which came about primarily due to the Neocon orchestrated U.S./Israeli plans and actions in the region.

If Mr. Saad Hariri is truly a secular leader, his Future TV should have stayed away from promoting the conflict in Lebanon as a Sunni/Shia divide.

Al Qaeda has never served the interests of the Arab/Muslim people, and neither does portraying the conflicts in the region as being Sunni/Shia based. Al Qaeda has been targeting and killing primarily Arab/Muslim civilians through suicide missions throughout the region and beyond while the U.S. is busy going after Israel's greatest enemies in the region. Al Qaeda is obviously not Israel's greatest enemy, therefore they are not a top U.S./Israel priority.

Taking the focus away from the 9/11 attacker Al Qaeda and putting it on Iran, Syria, Hezbollah, and Hamas is because Iran, Syria, Hezbollah, and Hamas are a strategic threat to Israel, as well as U.S. plans for the region. Al Qaeda has become a pretext for the U.S. to have an excuse to stay in Iraq and keep interfering in the region. Which means that in effect, Al Qaeda is serving the U.S./Israeli interests in the region and not the Arab or Muslim people of the region's interests.

Marion said...

In the following reports we can see how Al Qaeda is used as a pretext for U.S. interference in the region and how Al Qaeda is serving the U.S./Israeli interests in the region, not the Arab or Muslim people of the region's interests:

What Ayman al-Zawahri's Words Really Mean for Lebanon and the 'War on Terror'

http://www.brookings.edu/opinions/2008/0505_terrorism_saab.aspx?p=1

US terror report misses the point

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JE08Ak02.html