Berri and the pirate of March 14

According to pro-Assad daily al-Akhbar, Berri has three questions for Condoleeza Rice:

1-    What is the US position on the quorum needed to vote for a president, and will the US support the 50% plus 1 option (absolute majority)?
2-    What is the US position on amending article 49 of the constitution?
3-    Does the US support a consensus president or a president who supports a certain party?

In her free time, Rice has nothing better to do than to answer stupid questions by the man who calls himself the guardian of the Lebanese constitution. To his credit, it sounds like he is relaying questions that originated in Damascus, and not the halls of the parliament he keeps locked.

If I were Rice, I would ask Berri to convene parliament and get his answers from the deputies, who are the only ones with authority to decide on the identity of the next president, let alone how many deputies are needed to fill an electoral session.

But then, Berri won't have it. According to As-Safir, he has made it known during consultations with his "opposition" allies that he will be "the most intransigent in the history of the Lebanese republic, and maybe (the majority) will miss my tolerance of them in the past stage. If the information is correct that they will hold a session with a quorum of half plus 1, they will see a new Nabih Berri while they drag the country to a new political phase and I will let the events speak for themselves".

وعلم ان قيادات المعارضة باشرت في الأيام الأخيرة عقد سلسلة اجتماعات تشاورية، بدأت تدرس فيها كل الاحتمالات بالتشاور مع رئيس الجمهورية اميل لحود ورئيس المجلس النيابي نبيه بري، الذي أعطى تعليمات واضحة لممثليه في الاجتماعات مفادها "ليعلم الجميع أنني سأكون الأكثر تصلبا في تاريخ الجمهورية اللبنانية وربما سيترحمون (الأكثرية) على كل تسامحي معهم في المرحلة الماضية. اذا صحّت المعلومات بأنهم سيعقدون جلسة بنصاب النصف زائدا واحدا، سيتعرفون على نبيه بري جديد وهم يجرّون بذلك البلد الى مرحلة سياسية جديدة وسأترك الوقائع تتحدث عن نفسها لاحقا".

Al-Akhbar quoted Berri as saying that a president elected by an absolute majority would be a "pirate imposing his evil on others".

قال قطب معارض ل"الأخبار" إنّ الموالاة، من خلال ما يصدر عن أركانها من مواقف، تبدو متّجهة الى انتخاب رئيس بالأكثرية المطلقة، وسيكون هذا الرئيس "رئيساً قرصاناً يفرض شرّه على الآخرين"

Well then, why is Berri so concerned about the US position if he has plans to unleash his Dr. Jekyl (or shall we call him Mr. X) on his fellow deputies if they don't agree with his Syrian master's vision for the country?

Speaking of the master, and after weeks of killing security dogs belonging to March 14 figures, Assad's men are now reportedly jamming cell phone communications around the residences of certain March 14 figures, especially before planned meetings. The jamming is similar to what took place before the killing of Hariri and Eido.

كشف عضو كتلة نواب "القوات اللبنانية" أنطوان زهرا عن اجتماع كان سيعقد في منزله للجنة متابعة مصغرة لقوى 14 آذار، لكنه أُرجئ في اللحظة الأخيرة، بعدما تعرّض محيط منزله لتشويش على الاتصالات الهاتفية الخليوية، شبيه للتشويش الذي حصل في منطقة السان جورج عند اغتيال الرئيس الشهيد رفيق الحريري، وفي منطقة المنارة عند اغتيال النائب الشهيد وليد عيدو، الأمر الذي دفع بالمجتمعين الى إلغاء الاجتماع (al-Liwaa)

Berri won't be happy with today's meeting by March 14 Christian leaders, which ended with a declaration that March 14 will have a single candidate, to be revealed at the "right time". 

Hopefully by then, Berri will have received his answers.

Comments

[Bad Vilbel]

Hahaha! This would be laughable if it wasn't so damned tragic.

Maybe Mr. Berri should be asking those questions in the halls of parliament, where they are meant to be discussed. And then, he has the NERVE to complain about the "American project" and foreign interference in Lebanon.

Tell you what, Nabih buddy, how about you convene parliament and ask your questions to fellow Lebanese elected officials?

What a tool!

Are they really shooting their dogs?

[Shunkleash]

Wait BV!!! don't laugh yourself silly just yet!

I have one more for you...Mr. Berri is to put himself up for nomination/election as the speaker of the new parliament as a compromise to the impasse on the president. Speaker for life sort of thing. You know to sow and foster harmony among all the sects and avoid an ugly "phase" vis a vie Lahoud et al forgetting, of course, that he is the biggest chunk of shit in that parliament. In that way, the opposition can still control ie paralys the government.

OK so maybe i just made that up:-)...but then isn't any and every thing possible in lebanon these days?

Honestly though I do believe that something or someone is going to give at the 11th hour and his name rhymes with "Naoun". His position is becoming too tenuous, he no longer has the "street" (the Metn election showed him that) and there are rumblings that his internal party mobilisers and fundraisers are becoming increasingly vociferous in letting him know there true feelings about the HA/aoun memorandum of (mis)understanding. If he wants to continue to have a political life he nees to start listening otherwise he may lose plenty.

Things are certainly becoming interesting and I do not beleive all bad. Once Sfeir keeps his paranoid pie hole shut, there is still a posiblity that M8 will unravel since General Suleiman will need the Patriarchs continuous blessings otherwise he is a non player. A word of caution the members of M14 should obvioulsy avoid the BBQ's the syrians are planning and lay low for a while.

AH! THE NOOSE TIGHTENS! or something like that

Ayesh lubnan y'all

Regards

[ghassan karam]

The irony is that given all what Beri has done/failed to do the clueless jellyfish ; which might be one of the few brainless and spineless fish in the universe; and pretender Sa'ad will nominate the Istaz for a second term. What a crew.

Mr. Beri is a disgrace for all Lebanese and all democrats all over the world. What speaker , besides Mr. X himself, will boast that his solution for an internal crisis depends on the wishes of outsiders. I know that it is next to impossible to impeach a dog-catcher in Lebanon but there must be a way to stop these inanities.How about senility if traitor and incompetence will not do? No wonder that Lebanon will become the third most dysfunctional country in the world. (that is only a prediction).

[Bad Vilbel]

I advocated a long time ago that all these bozos be arrested for treason and some form of martial law imposed. I wish that were possible.

[uncroyable]

"when you are a hammer, all you do is miss the nails"
-- Mr. Nabih "the tool" Berri.

[JoseyWales]

Berri should go by the report of the Parliamentary Committee for the Modernization of Laws (hearty har har), headed by worthless MP Robert Ghanem.

Two weeks ago Ghanem and his committee opined that a 2/3 quorum is required for the first vote. For the second vote and subsequently 50%+1 quorum is fine. He is the only idiot whose interpretation of article 49 includes TWO different quorum numbers.

He's trying to prove that he is a "conciliator" by kissing butt all around (and damn the law).

Did I mention that besides being a worthless MP, Ghanem is a worthless candidate for prez?

[Jeha]

Berri may only acting true to form, asking what he takes are the new "masters of the realm" about the "secret word".

All the rest is window-dressing and bravado for the masses.

[ghassan karam]

Josey,
I have not seen the report by Ghanem but as we all know Article 49 of the constitution is very clear in stating that the presidential candidate has to get 2/3 of the vote in order to win during the first round. If 2/3 of the votes are required to win then it is implicit that 2/3 is the quorum. But things become ambiguous if no one gets the required 2/3 votes the first time around. During the second round it is also clear that to win the candidate needs the support of 50% +1, but it is not clear whether the quorum is to remain at 2/3 or whether it can be less than that. I believe that it is reasonable to keep the quorum at 2/3 and it is reasonable to accept a lower number in order to avoid handing a minority a veto power.

Given that Lebanon does not have a Presidential system but a Parliamentary one and keeping in mind that the effective responsibility for policies in this system belong to the cabinet then Lebanon will be best served through electing a President that is not a member of either political gatherings provided that the candidate is independent. committed to a free, sovereign , democratic and independent Lebanon. Such a candidate offers both camps the chance to save face and climb down

Unfortunately I do not think that HA will go along with the above proposal. They still insist on a "national unity" government prior to the presidential elections . That can be explained only by their fear that the new President will be obliged by the constitution to appoint a PM that represents March 14 and furthermore that this new PM will have the courage and strength of charachter to form a cabinet that excludes HA.

I do not see anything wrong in accepting the candidacy of a well qualified politically independent presidential candidate. If Ha accepts such a proposal then that would avoid the divisiveness that could result from a constitutional crisis regarding a post whose power has been diminished by the Taef accords. If on the other hand, and this is more likely, HA refuses to accept then that would be another proof, for whoever needs it, that the HA agenda is using the presidential elections as a means to an end. Their real purpose is to prevent any semblance of stability or prosperity. Their aim is ,just like Hamas, to hide their real military agenda (serve Iranian interests) and to deceive the electorate.

[Bad Vilbel]

Ghassan,

Why is it "implicit" that 2/3 of the votes mean 2/3 quorum?
I could very easily interpret it to mean that the election of a president requires 2/3 of the votes PRESENT (and that the quorum may be defined on an entirely different basis as 50%+1)

If we are to make the leap that a 2/3 votes requires a 2/3 quorum, then in round 2, i would assume, by the same logic that a 50%+1 vote requires a quorum of 50%+1.

Your 2 interpretations do not seem to match up, in my opinion.

[ghassan karam]

BV,
The 2/3 votes has to imply a quorum of 2/3 otherwise ,if it is 2/3 of those present, then it means that one can elct the president if say only 1/3 of the members attend. This interpretation does not make sense because the constitution spells it out that quorum for normal business in the Chamber of Deputies is 50%+1 but more importantly because the language implies 2/3 quorum although it does not spell it out.

" The President of the Republic shall be elected by secret ballot and by a two thirds majority of the Chamber of Deputies. After a first ballot, an absolute majority shall be sufficient"

[Bad Vilbel]

No. Ghassan, the quorum can be defined ELSEWHERE.

For instance:

"The president shall be elected by a 2/3 majority." "A quorum of 50%+1 is required for a presidential election to take place." (same as the Normal business quorum, for instance)

(not saying that's what it says, just that it COULD be written that way)

Furthermore, if I follow your logic, then you also need a 2/3 quorum for the second session, or for ANY Session to elect a president. Doesn't make sense.

[ghassan karam]

BV the following is Article 34 of the Lebanese constitution. It states that the quorum for the Chamber of Deputies is 50% + 1 . It is not uncommon to specify more restrictive conditions for the presidential elections. To suggest that Article 49 means 2/3 of whoever is presentis ludicrous. Why would the constitution specify a lower standard for arguably the Chamber's most important activity?

Article 34 [Quorum]
The Chamber is not validly constituted unless the majority of the total membership is present. Decisions are to be taken by a majority vote. Should the votes be equal, the question under consideration is deemed rejected.

[fadi]

The President of the Republic shall be elected by secret ballot and by a twothirds majority of the Chamber of Deputies. After a first ballot, an absolute majority shall be sufficient.

it states that 2/3 majority doesnt say anything about 2/3 qorum which is it

[JoseyWales]

I am with BV on the quorum and have written on it more than once ( here: "the 2/3 lie" ).

Thanks to Sfeir the point is now moot.

But Gus the previous versions of article 49 make it clear it's 2/3 of the votes, not of the total number of MPs absent and present.

Furthermore, Article 73, says if the new prez is not elected with 10 days to go in the old term, the Chamber is to meet automatically (without convocation by Berri) and elect. Obbviously such an article is meant as a last resort and (wisely) does not mention the quorum question again.

I can't find the 2/3 in the law anywhere. And if you go with it then like Ghanem, you are arguing TWO quora which is senseless (atop the fact that historically all elections took place in ONE session.)

Again, moot thanks to vacant supreme court and Sfeir.

[Bad Vilbel]

Ghassan, you just proved my point. There is no mention of quorum in article 49.

Article 49 simply states that 2/3 of the votes are needed to elect a president.

Instead of reading an implicit quorum in there, you simply need to look at article 34 for a definition of quorum: 50%+1

Let me put it to you this way, if you were reading a legal document that states points like this:

1. The defendant will face trial before a jury of his peers.
2. A jury is a legal body of exactly 12 citizens.

Would you infer some implicit number for the jury from statement (1)? Or would you simply look to statement (2) for a definition of a jury?

(1) basically does not address the jury makeup, it addresses a defendant's rights. For a definition of a jury, you simply go look for another statement, you don't infer stuff.

In our situation, the 2 completely separate statements are:
- A quorum is defined as 50%+1 (the implication here is that this is the quorum for EVERYTHING, UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED).
- A president is elected by 2/3 of the vote (nothing to do with quorum).

If the quorum for a presidential election was different, it would have been "OTHERWISE SPECIFIED". It wasn't.

[Bad Vilbel]

Michael Young has an excellent write-up on this whole Suleiman affair. (LINK)

Although his analysis is pretty good, I have to say it's starting to look more and more like people (be it M14, be it the US, be it the Lebanese blogosphere) are "accepting" Suleiman or at least giving him the benefit of the doubt.

I can't shake the feeling that Bashar and company are rubbing their hands in glee right now, relishing in how they pulled a fast one. 6 months ago, everyone was trumpeting M14, and the pro-West government being able to overcome the obstructionism. It is looking more and more to me like we've all been hoodwinked. I forget the traditional saying in arabic, but it's something about how you've been tricked into some crappy situation, but you're so hoodwinked, you've actually been convinced that it's a GOOD thing.

[Bad Vilbel]

And an excellent counterpoint to Michael Young's article, and why this whole Suleiman thing is nothing more than prolonging the status quo:

The Thinking Lebanese

[ghassan karam]

BV,
One more go at this and then I will not go back to this topic:-) Look at the following wording carefully and pass an objective judgment.

"two thirds majority of the Chamber of Deputies."

I really do not see for the life of me how you can get 2/3 of the attending members out of this.

BTW, I do not give a hoot whether Michael Young or the US want to appoint General Suleiman as a President of the republic or not. It is wrong to amend the constitution again in order to accommodate personal ambition disguised as a "general good". If we allow Suleiman to become a president then it shows that we have no respect for the process and we would have failed again in moving towards the formation of a respectable government.
As I have bored many of you so many times with this I will say it again. The system is the problem. Applying band aids in an effort to heal the wound will only result in a brief respite which will be followed by another major outbreak of troubles and instabilities. This might be the last chance to do something meaningful, something radical in order to reinvent our identity as Lebanese. Under the circumstances our only choice, if we wish to be a modern , prosperous and democratic state, is to elect a President as the constitution prescribes and then immediately launch a project to create once and for all a non sectarian electoral system as Taef prescribes. If we fail in this mission then I am afraid that our total marginalization would have become complete and our dysfunctionality would have reached an apex.

[ghassan karam]

BV,
One more go at this and then I will not go back to this topic:-) Look at the following wording carefully and pass an objective judgment.

"two thirds majority of the Chamber of Deputies."

I really do not see for the life of me how you can get 2/3 of the attending members out of this.

BTW, I do not give a hoot whether Michael Young or the US want to appoint General Suleiman as a President of the republic or not. It is wrong to amend the constitution again in order to accommodate personal ambition disguised as a "general good". If we allow Suleiman to become a president then it shows that we have no respect for the process and we would have failed again in moving towards the formation of a respectable government.
As I have bored many of you so many times with this I will say it again. The system is the problem. Applying band aids in an effort to heal the wound will only result in a brief respite which will be followed by another major outbreak of troubles and instabilities. This might be the last chance to do something meaningful, something radical in order to reinvent our identity as Lebanese. Under the circumstances our only choice, if we wish to be a modern , prosperous and democratic state, is to elect a President as the constitution prescribes and then immediately launch a project to create once and for all a non sectarian electoral system as Taef prescribes. If we fail in this mission then I am afraid that our total marginalization would have become complete and our dysfunctionality would have reached an apex.

[Bad Vilbel]

Fair enough, Gus.

And yes, I agree with you 100% about yet another amendment. I've been bitching about that for some time now. But I'm looking even past that here: Let's say it was ok to amend for Suleiman. The point I'm making is that it is simply prolonging the status quo. Suleiman is not going to FIX anything. The current chasm between Hezbollah and the rest of the country will remain as is.

As you said, it is the system that is broken. Band aids are not the answer. Getting approval for our bandaids from Damascus or Washington is also not the answer. The Lebanese people need to learn that THEY and THEY alone need to actually get off their asses and find a solution. A solution is not going to magically appear from thin air, which is what this "let's give Suleiman the benefit of the doubt" rhetoric of late is showing me. These same people will once again start complaining and whining in another year or two.
As far as I'm concerned, they are getting exactly what they deserve. Lebanese are so good at passing the buck, not lifting a finger, letting the "solutions" (which really aren't fixing anything) get dictated from abroad, the status quo gets prolonged, and we're back at this same routine in 2 years. And then they want to whine about it.

[JoseyWales]

Gus and BV,

The system needs some fixing but in a way it's not the problem.

The problem is deeper: it's the refusal of A system (or rules), mostly by one side.

I.e. M8 and Aoun refuse to play by the rules, BUT won't way so. So beyond the obvious and near-term nightmare of "no rules", even if the rules were changed to please them today who says they won't refuse the new rules again down the road whenever they please???

[Bad Vilbel]

I think it's beyond that, Josey.

It's the endemic refusal of the Lebanese people as a whole to stand up and dictate what it is that they want. They are lazy whiners, who are not willing to go by ANY set of rules (it's not just M8 that's guilty of that, it's a societal problem) and who simply want half-assed solutions (as long as someone else does the work), only to come back and complain about it.

Let's face it, this country is a joke.

[JoseyWales]

Agreed BV,

Which raises the old question: should we stop bothering (and blogging)?

[ghassan karam]

It is not often that you meet individuals/countries/institutions that are proud of their failure. If that is the case then welcome to the Middle East where denial and stagnation are the hallmark of what defines us. As many regular readers either know or suspect I am no fan of George Bush but I cannot stand reading another article written in an Arabic speaking country which extols the fact the the US plan to introduce democratic values and democratic principles into the region seems to be defeated. That is similar to the teen who is so proud that all efforts to teach him/her new things to improve their lives have failed. Bravo for us, we sure have frustrated the schemes of making us more responsible citizens living in societies that respect human rights and personal dignity. Let us instead of personal freedom and individual responsibility settle for hatred. discrimination and autocratic systems a la Syria and Iran.

[Bad Vilbel]

Indeed, Ghassan, indeed.

[ghassan karam]

Some things must not be taken for granted and so I am not going to assume that all the Arabic readers on this blog have seen the excellent two part article "Which Lebanon do we want?" . The essay was written by a Dr Phillip Salem and part 1 appeared in the Tuesday issue of An Nahar while part 2 is in todays (Wednesday) issue. The argument discussed by Dr. Salem is very well thought out and cogently presented. It does not have many new ideas but it has the luxury of being lengthy and therefore of presenting all/most of the issues that we have discussed over the past year in one package. I recommend reading it.

(I have no idea who is Dr. Salem. When I googled the name I learned that he is an active well known MD who became well known in his adopted home of the USA but I believe that he might have come back to Lebanon.)

[Jake]

ghassan karam,

You do realize that the US invaded a non-threatening country in order to teach them the virtues "democracy"?

With all do respect, reading many of your posts, it seems you an inferiority-complex involving your arab background which makes you very envious of western values.

[JAS]

Jake:

By “non-threatening” you reference one sovereign nation vs. another, forgetting that life and liberty is an individual reference. Freedom is a gift one gives to another.

Group think, Arab or whatever, tends to subjugate an individual as if he is nothing if not a part of some particular group. Only an individual free of group bondage can offer freedom to another and thus what is virtual in western democracies remains unknown to men enslaved by group think.

Ghassan seems to know exactly who he is — and also who he is not.

[Ace]

What does Berri want to know what the US position is? I agree that the questions 'could' be coming from Damascus, but does anyone really believe that Damascus really cares what the US thinks about anything?

Berri is concerned for his own skin and fortune. The recent Executive Order could have started with the words - "Dear President Berri", because they were aimed right at him and he knows it. Berri has extensive business holdings & family in the USA and the EO said (in effect) "make sure there is a Presidential election & on time". Rice should do just as suggested ... tell him to take it to Parliament.

[fadi]

can anyone tell me what did abbas hesham mean regarding the "black army" and who did he refer to in his press conference after meeting sfeir

[pseudo]

The constitution requires 50+1 for a normal legislative session. For the constitutional amendment (which requires 2/3 to pass) it requires 2/3 to be present as a quorum. It only logically follows that 2/3 quorum is what is implicitly necessitated by the constitution for the presidential election session. This has also been the accepted position in previous years going back to the 50s and Fuad Chehab's election. That being said, it would be undemocratic for the opposition to boycott the first round, and in fact it could be unconstitutional in it of itself, as the parliamentarians are required to convene (in a number of clauses) to vote on the president -- it is not a choice.

Judging by the venom unleashed on these pages, however,it seems unlikely that a March 14 President elected by just a majority will somehow be the answer to the country's problems. Like it or not, Hezbollah will not be disarmed by force. Love it or leave it, the Opposition will not simply acquiesce to whatever will the ruling majority imposes. This cannot be glossed over by over-simplified statements that "this is democracy." Only a person who has never been to Lebanon would use such an argument. Unfortunately, greater consensus than 50+1 will be needed to heal the country, or at least transition it to better times. Now is not the time for an apocalyptic battle.

[JoseyWales]

Pseudo,

An amendment requires:"...a majority of two thirds of the total members lawfully composing the Chamber".

Article 49 does NOT say that. So no, it does not "logically follow" like you say. If anything, you should note that article 49 DOES NOT say 2/3 of the members (again review the ORIGINS of the article, it says 2/3 of the votes). OK, again moot point.

Plus who's talking about disarming Hezbo by force?? Of course it's better to have 2/3 or 100% present at election but what if they don't come like you said??

Love it or leave it, the Opposition will not simply acquiesce to whatever will the ruling majority imposes

Even if it's LEGAL? This is what I said another post above: the rules don't apply to you guys?? OK, come out and say it.

Stop the charade and put Taef and the constitution etc on the table. Stop this stupid game: it's the tribunal, no it's the strike, no it's Feltman, wait it's the election, no it's the 2000 law.....

[Bad Vilbel]

Hah! I love how people make up their own "logically flows" and "implicit this and that".

Either it's written in the constitution, or it isn't.

On a separate note. What was the over-under on Aoun claiming he still represents the Christians, even after the Metn by-elections? I told you guys this would happen :)

From today's Naharnet:

General Michel Aoun hit back at Christian politicians from the anti-Syrian March 14 alliance, insisting that he represents the majority of the Christians.
"They have no right to speak on behalf of the Christian majority as they have no right to nominate (a candidate) for president while he does not represent the majority of the Christians," Aoun stressed.

"We declare stances ... We have the right to speak on behalf of the majority of the Christians," Aoun said after a meeting on Tuesday evening of Christian politicians from the Hizbullah-led opposition that tackled, among other issues, the upcoming Presidential elections.

First off, he's dellusional if he thinks he represents the christian majority.

But, that aside, the worst part of his comments is his claim that M14 has no right to nominate a candidate...WHAT??? Is this democracy, General? ANYONE has the right to nominate a candidate, and M14 does have that right just as much as you do.
What an ass.

[Charlie]

Unfortunately this joke of a Lebanese democracy allows the likes of Aoun to make dumb ass claims and get away with it. Democracy in Lebanon is limited to producing three strong leaders for the three clans (Sunni, Shia and Maronite) to occupy the 3 presidential seats. What it is not meant to do is produce a coherent government that rules the nation. In Aoun’s simple mind, if the Sunni Zaim (or his representative) is the PM and the Shia Zaim is the President of the Parliament, then he, as the Maronite Zaim, should be the President of the republic, after all it is the seat for the Maronite Zaim!!

[ghassan karam]

No democracy can ever function without a free and independent press whose function is to report, investigate, inform and hold the pol's feet to the fire. That seems to be very elementary but yet the press/media in Lebanon do not seem to perform their jobs seriously. For Example I have not seen any decent coverage regarding the alleged Syrian occupation of 4 % of the country, any stories the investigate the depth of the Irania/HA relationship, no one has even reported on the sayings attributed to Mr. Nasrallah about how proud he is to be a soldier in the service of Iran, what has happened to all the funds that have been donated to Lebanon as a result of the war and the list goes on and on. The latest dvelopment that has again gone uninvestigated is the statement by General Aoun on Monday that he has personal information that Washington is in the process of changing its previous position regarding constitutional ammendmants and Presidential elections. It took only 24 hours for Washington to confirm its previous position and leave Aoun with eggs all over his face except that no media organ has pressed him on this. Aoun as usual has acted irresponsibly by disseminating false information. This was not the first time that he does that. It seems that the FPM have become masters of deceit. But if a tree falls in the forest and there is no one to seeit fall does it make noise? Aoun will continue his practice of riding roughshod over the truth until someone decides to make an issue of this blemished record of his.

(Jas, thanks for the kind words).

[ghassan karam]

No democracy can ever function without a free and independent press whose function is to report, investigate, inform and hold the pol's feet to the fire. That seems to be very elementary but yet the press/media in Lebanon do not seem to perform their jobs seriously. For Example I have not seen any decent coverage regarding the alleged Syrian occupation of 4 % of the country, any stories the investigate the depth of the Irania/HA relationship, no one has even reported on the sayings attributed to Mr. Nasrallah about how proud he is to be a soldier in the service of Iran, what has happened to all the funds that have been donated to Lebanon as a result of the war and the list goes on and on. The latest dvelopment that has again gone uninvestigated is the statement by General Aoun on Monday that he has personal information that Washington is in the process of changing its previous position regarding constitutional ammendmants and Presidential elections. It took only 24 hours for Washington to confirm its previous position and leave Aoun with eggs all over his face except that no media organ has pressed him on this. Aoun as usual has acted irresponsibly by disseminating false information. This was not the first time that he does that. It seems that the FPM have become masters of deceit. But if a tree falls in the forest and there is no one to seeit fall does it make noise? Aoun will continue his practice of riding roughshod over the truth until someone decides to make an issue of this blemished record of his.

(Jas, thanks for the kind words).

[ghassan karam]

Sorry about the duplicate postings. Believe me when I say that I am very embarrassed but I have no idea what is causing this. Please bear up with me.

[Charlie]

And a transparent Judiciary to protect the rights of the citizens and keep the mafia lords, that call themselves politicians, from intimidating people who are keen on seeing the truth come out.

[Bad Vilbel]

Joke of the day: Amal MP Ali Hassan Khalil hit back at Jumblat, saying his "words mean a total coup against the constitution and the political institutions."

This in response to Jumblatt saying that M14 could and would elect a president by simple majority after October 14 (as stated in the constitution).

Funny, huh? Jumblatt follows the constitution, and then gets lectured about coups by the same folks who are looking to amend the constitution in 15 minutes (not to mention all their other attempts at circumventing the constitution and running their own coups).

[ghassan karam]

BV,
These declarations leave me scratching my head. I am speechless because I am flabbergasted (I know that I should be used to such behviour but I am not). Would this duplicity ever end ? I imagine that the answer is rather simple: yes it would stop once the electorate wakes up, demands accountability and show outrage. Unfortunately that day has not come yet and these prepostorous statements will continue.
Interestingly enough Jumblatt has been the only Lebanese politician who has openly spoken about the incongruity of a democratic Lebanon and an HA, the need to respect the constitution, the danger that the Syrian Ba'ath poses to Lebanon, the undemocratic practises of the IR and its attempt to "occupy" Lebanon . Unfortunately whenever these rational, democratic and patriotic stands by Jumblatt are mentioned so many demonise the man by avoiding addressing the existential issues that he raises but they choose instead to emphasize his sometime inconsistent positions in the past. Yes we are all burdened by our past behaviour and the choices that we made but this should not mean that we bias our judgement of the present by refusing to consider the current positions for what they are. To do so would be throwing away the baby with the dirty water. Judge Jumblatt for what he is saying and if he deviates from that then excoriate him.

I am deadly serious when i say that in my mind the best gift that Bkirki can offer Lebanon is to announce that the post of the Presidency belongs to the one who meirits it the most irrespective of ones personal faith. Bkirki should declare its intension to support Jumblatt for president. That will be a turning point in the history of Lebanon, if this will be allowed to happen. What about it patriach Sfeir, do you have the courage and the wisdom to admit the the most qualified person to occupy the Lebanese presidency need not be a Maronite. It just is not important.

[ghassan karam]

I have been reading regularly Al Mustaqbal for three years and I have never taken them very seriously. Actually very often I have referred to them as a rag that is more of a mouth piece of the royal Saudi family than an independent Lebanese newspaper. In the Friday issue of AlMustaqbal, Friday 24, 2007 , the editorial staff has finally taken a position that desereves the unqualified support of all those that value the freedom of expression. Al Mustaqbal, surprisingly enough, has decided to take a strong stand in support of the Lebanese play right R. Mroue whose latest play was denied the right to be produced in Lebanon by the Lebanese censors. The play will be produced in Paris, Rome, Tunis, Rabat and Cairo. Bravo Al Mustaqbal for supporting a position that does not reflect well on the ability of March !4 to govern. Now that is what journalism is meant to be.

[Bad Vilbel]

Agreed. I don't need to tell you I agree with you. You know that already.

I wouldn't hold my breath on Sfeir offering up the presidency to a non-maronite qualified candidate. Unfortunately, such an act would require rising above the petty sectarianism and self-interest that dogs Lebanon. Not gonna happen.

[fubar]

When Geagea tells the mailbox that Nas is a tool, that is the signal that M14 has agreed to consider the LEP candidate for Pirate during the Pirate conclave. The bad news is he wouldn't go for white smoke; the good news is that he is still considering whether any conversion which may be required can be for a term of years or must be for all eternity - seems it may end up a Papal, or at least a Patriarchal, call.

[ghassan karam]

The French president, Sarkozy, has called the ex French ambassador to Lebanon, Bernard Aimee, "an infamous cretin" according to a story in the NYT. No wonder that this French cretin, Aimee, felt so much at home amongst his Lebanese brethren. LOL.

[Bad Vilbel]

What was the background for that, Ghassan? I'm not familiar with Aimee and his actions.

[another_someone]

GK, can you link to that story? I searched for it everywhere but could not find it.

[ghassan karam]

another_someone/BV
You should be able to find the story on this link. The reference to Aimee is just a one liner towards the end of the article.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/24/world/europe/24france.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

[ghassan karam]

Since I have been calling for the total marginalization of the clergy in Lebanon for longer than I care to remember you can understand the feeling of elation that swept over me when I read that General Aoun announced that he will no longer pay any attention to the clergy in Lebanon. Unfortunately my euphoria was very short lived, actually it had the half life of a light moth. General Aoun has conveniently neglected to include the Shia Imams since they have issued one threat after the other and one statement after the other that are favourable to him. What a dunce, th man is incorrigible.

[Bad Vilbel]

I too was elated for about half a second when I read Aoun's comment. But it was clear that although the statement is a welcome one, the spirit of it had nothing to do with secularizing Lebanon at all, and had everything to do with the fact that Aoun doesn't like being criticized by Bkirki.