From Beirut to the Beltway

Nasrallah puts himself on trial without promised "irrefutable evidence"

Last week, we were promised "irrefutable evidence" implicating Israel in the assassination of Rafik Hariri in 2005. Today, Nasrallah gave us "qara'in", loosely translated to mean "indications" or to be more blunt, inconclusive and circumstantial evidence.

For someone who says he didn't trust the Special Tribunal, he sure did not provide any solid evidence proving the theory that Israel killed Hariri to weaken and destroy the resistance.

Lebanese sadly watched Nasrallah for two and a half hours as he defamed espionage suspects and shared a hodgepodge of footage dating back to 1997 when Israeli spy planes allegedly filmed the routes used by Rafik Hariri in 2005.

He claimed an Israeli agent was present at the scene of the crime the day of the assassination and showed footage of Israeli war planes flying over Beirut hours before the explosion.

Nasrallah also claimed that as early as 1993, Israel sent an agent called Ahmad Nasrallah to plant the idea in Rafik Hariri's mind that Hizbullah's Imad Mughnieh was trying to assassinate him.  Hariri, according to the secretary-general, complained to Syrian intelligence and his friends in France and Saudi Arabia.

Nasrallah tried to support his conspiracy theory by presenting a compilation of statements by Israeli officials linking Hizbullah to the assassination. And in a sign of absolute desperation, he profiled a number of individuals suspected of spying for Israel, by listing their alleged charged and basing his information on "confessions" and depositions.

It is tragic that no one in the media realized that Nasrallah was defaming individuals who have not had their day in court yet. The man is so concerned about being framed that he went ahead with naming and shaming many individuals who, like Nasrallah wants to be, are innocent until proven guilty. 

But then, when you believe that the world's conspiracies revolve around Hizbullah, that pure and infallible entity, you don't hesitate defaming others to exonerate yourself before you are even accused of anything.

For no one that matters has accused Hizbullah of anything yet. These pre-emptive shows that Nasrallah is orchestrating are doing more to incriminate his party than any talk of impending indictment.

Nasrallah said he would not submit any of this information to the tribunal because he doesn't trust the investigation.

Actually, it's probably the other way around. No commission or court would accept or trust this hodgepodge of selective footage and defamation as "evidence". Are we to believe that in one week, Nasrallah unearthed what 5 years of investigations could not find? And even if the UN team maliciously chose to overlook Nasrallah's evidence, why not do this research five years ago? Or last year? 

Here’s what Nasrallah had to say when asked this very question:

Nasrallah: If I presented the evidence in 2005, 2006 or 2007 they would have asked us [at the time], ‘Why are you talking about it? You are not accused.’ As for the videos, they show surveillance efforts focusing on certain points at certain times, which is evidence that something is being prepared. Investigators can prove it.

So presenting this information five years ago would have incriminated Hizbullah? Come again?

The Special Tribunal for Lebanon and fitna

So the Special Tribunal for Lebanon is now a recipe for "fitna".

Five years after millions demanded justice, and after many lost their lives writing or speaking about it, Walid Jumblatt is now warning against "using the tribunal to take the country to fitna".

Jumblatt, who has just come back from a visit with Bashar, said that the investigators resorted to accusing Hizbullah after failing to come up with evidence against Syria in 2007. So the plot dates back to 2007, according to Jumblatt.

2007.

We know where Jumblatt stood in 2007. But what was Hizbullah doing? Was it hiding in caves, afraid of the sharp March 14 claws as they built their Israeli spy networks and killed their own people?

Hizbullah in 2007 was occupying downtown Beirut, preventing parliament from convening to discuss anything, including the tribunal. Jumblatt himself in 2007 warned that Hizbullah was planning a military coup of sorts, and an invasion of downtown Beirut if a March 14 president assumed power (and he was right).

In 2007, Hizbullah was arming pro-Syrian militias in Lebanon, to, you know, defend the country against fitna brought upon by courts of law.

In 2007, Nasrallah gave Lebanon a choice: go with Syria's choice for president, or let Hizbullah pick a president through direct elections.

In 2007, Nasrallah said the assassinations of Tueni, Ghanem and Gemayel, which took place before important UN meetings discussing the tribunal, were committed by Israel because the assassinations took place in "areas where Israeli networks have a distinguished security presence".

In 2007, as more March 14 leaders were getting killed, Assad flirted with Ehud Olmert.

In 2007, the Lebanese army battled Fateh al-Islam, and they were not exactly a product of Israel.

In 2007, Hassan Nssrallah, a year after bringing destruction to Lebanon,  said this:

We are ready to become dismembered limbs to keep Iran strong and dignified, for we are strong if Iran is strong.  I am but a small soldier for Imam Khamenei. In Maroun al-Ras, 40 members from the Hizbullah forces stood against a contingent from the Zionist entity, and only 13 of them were martyred. The youth of Hizbullah acted in the name of Imam Khomeini and invoked Imam Hussein, and saluted the Iranian people.

In 2007, reports emerged about Hizbullah's own private telecommunication network.

In 2007, March 14 leaders were AFRAID to be in Lebanon, while Iranian and Syrian agents roamed free.

And what did March 14 do that was so awful in 2007? They asked the United Nations for justice.

In 2007, the Special Tribunal for Lebanon was born, and immediately after its establishment, the Zionists did not raise a victory flag in downtown Beirut. More March 14 MPs were killed, and Hizbullah continued its occupation of the country. Bombs were planted all over, or at least in those parts identified by Nasrallah as hotbeds for Israeli networks.

What happened after 2007? In 2008, Wissam Eid, the ISF officer who we later learned was instrumental in the Hariri invstigation was assassinated.

Did the Zionists kill him?

Did the Zionists twist March 14's arms to elect Michel Suleiman as President?

No. March 14 compromised. And in May 2008, they saw Hizbullah's guns anyway.

And in 2010, the year after Jumblatt confessed his anti-Syrian sins, the "Israeli networks" turned out to be a property of Hizbullah's own allies, and spies were found roaming in their own backyard.

And Iran's spies, Syria's agents. Iran's proxy-army. They roam free. Those do not cause fitna, right Abu Taymour?  

Nasrallah's convenient resistance

It's been a hysteric day in Lebanon.

The Lebanese army enters into an uneven confrontation with the Israeli army, and Nasrallah goes on TV to bark some, and plunge the country into more paranoia.

The poor Lebanese army was apparently ordered to shoot at Israelis trying to uproot a tree blocking their surveillance cameras, and the result was tragic.

If it weren't for the loss of life, it would have seemed refreshing to see the Lebanese army taking charge, regardless of what one thinks of their decision to fire warning shots. Their move temporarily made Hizbullah seem useless, despite the limited capabilities. (Update: UN says the tree was in Israeli territory contested by Lebanon.)

Nasrallah today said his fighters watched in painful silence as Lebanese soldiers were being bombed. And he made his usual threat: the resistance will cut off the hands of anybody trying to attack the Lebanese army, etc.

I don't know about your memory, but I recall a certain helicopter incident, and I wondered whether the Hizbullah member who shot and killed the Lebanese soldier was party to this painful watching.

Nasrallah, who in the past said the resistance would follow nobody's orders, showed up on TV today on the anniversary of his alleged divine victory, to claim that, while the Lebanese army was getting beat up, he called and put the resistance at the disposal of the Lebanese army.

Gee, thanks. Hizbullah now waits for marching orders from the Lebanese army? That's new.  Will they be allowed to fly over or enter their security zones?

Let's not fool ourselves into believing that Hizbullah is suddenly recognizing the authority of the Lebanese government. Had that been true, they would have at least shared the "top secret" evidence they allegedly unearthed about the Hariri assassination with the Lebanese authorities, if they didn't trust the international tribunal.

For instead of rushing his soldiers to help the Lebanese army (by, say, sharing some weapons), he turned them into paper-pushers, sending them to the "Israeli-resistance struggle archives" to produce "irrefutable evidence" that "Israel and its agents used political rivalry between Hizbullah and Rafik Hariri in 2005 to convince [Hariri's] friends at home and abroad that Hizbullah wanted to assassinate him".

In his speech today, Nasrallah vowed to reveal all on August 9th at 8:30 PM and called on the government to "appoint a responsible [authority on the issue] if it finds what I say to be noteworthy…We are ready to collaborate with the government."

This is how investigations work in Nasrallah land. Evidence is based on historical research conducted in Hizbullah's archives, is aired on TV, and is not shared with judges or investigators (or tribunals).  Only Hizbullah possesses the truth, and it's predetermined as conspiracy against the resistance. And only the resistance picks the timing for war and peace. And only they decide when it's convenient to help the nation they allegedly defend.

If you ask me, Nasrallah today came across as a coward. Not for not fighting, for this blogger will never wish for that kind of help. But for going on the anniversary of his foolish and deadly adventure, on the day Lebanese soldiers burned defending a damn tree, to shield himself against the rule of law.