What's this? Bush acting all surprised that Syrian secret police still control Lebanon? Everyone already knows that. I suppose he thought he liberated Lebanon with his democratic domino theory of the Middle East. Who will we attack next? Syria or Iran? Or both?
See? You don't have a clue what it means to "know" something! Try a dictionary, perhaps it'll help you with some of those highly legal terms. Baron Max
OK. Baron Max, (n., adj.) Intestinal tourist, sheepshagger, motherlicking sausage jockey. ...hmmm interesting.
That's good, Spider. When you have nothing intelligent to say, spit out anger, personal attacks and use lots of name-calling. Yeah, real good. Baron Max
Spider, I don't think I've EVER said anything intelligent ....but I also don't pretend that I did, like you do! ...LOL! Baron Max
By the way you always spout that same line of thought, basically nobody will ever know anything because nothing can be known as absolute truth unless one experiences something completely for themselves. All newspapers, all military reports, all scientific reports -- everything -- is all rubbish unless experienced by ones self. We cannot trust anyone. Even if we experience a situation for ourselves, even then we may not know the truth because hey, our minds could be playing tricks on us. Fun world you live in. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Now philosophically, I believe just that as well, but c'mon, sometimes you gotta draw the line and step into reality and have some sort of trust -- as minimal as it may be. Btw, Japan doesn't exist. All stories I hear of it existing are false. All satellite images I see are completely doctured. I wish someday I may be able to travel to that mythical place called Japan. Oh yeah, nor is the earth round. :bugeye: - N
Who was Hariri? He was a deal maker, Peace maker, out for him self, charming Kleptocrat thief, who's foreign backer was Saudi Arabia. He worked closely with the Syrians for many years but was rumored to be about to join with Syria's enemies. Lebanese History: http://www.nmhschool.org/tthornton/mehistorydatabase/civil_war_in_lebanon.htm without history the present can not be understood. Every faction was allied with Syria at some time. Lebanese Civil war may have had more shifting alliances than any other war in recorded history. The Afghan civil war is close though. At minimum the 1943 power sharing agreement and the 1989 Taif accords should be understood. Hariri was a Suni. From 1943 to the Civil war in 1975 the semi democracy gave the most power to Maronites and the second most power to Sunis. After Tiaf the new semi democracy devides power between Christians and Muslims more or less evenly but still reserves the two most powerfull positions to a Maronite and a Suni. Christians are 32% of the population so it is not democratic to give them half the power. Shia out number Sunis, It is not democratic that the Sunis get to hold the Muslim power position. Anyway post Tiaf is more democratic than pre Tiaf. The Lebanese Tiaf agreement never played out the way it was intended because most Maronites boycotted the first post Tiaf election and Syria used their absense to elect a slate of pro Syrian politicians who they made moves to ensure the continuance of pro-Syrian electoral victories. Hariri was one of those pro-Syrian politicians. Lebanon 1991 population estimate: Shia Muslim 38% Suni Muslim 23% Maronite Christian 20% Other Christian 12% Druze 7% There are more Palestinians born in Lebanon than there are Druze but Palestinians born in Lebanon are not citizens and can not vote. If your mother was Lebanese and your father Palestinian you are Palestinian and can not vote but if your mother was palestinian and your father Lebanese then you are Lebanese and can vote. Who benefitted from Hariri's death? It does not seem that that Syria does but they could have miscalculated. The Maronites Seemed prepped and ready to go with their protesets and accusations when Hariri died. It almost seemed that their leaders had advance knowledge of Hariri's impending death. Then again maybe everybody expected Syria to kill Hariri and Maybe the Maronites were getting ready for protests without any consideration for hariri's death when he happened to be killed. Hariri's son suspects Syria and is pleased with the UN report as a first step. That carry's a lot of weight with me. As for the UN on the other hand, I have lost what little trust I had in them becaue of their support for the USA/France coup against democracy in Haiti. The USA and France were also quick to blame the Syrians for Hariri's killing and also seemed to have advance knowledge of the killing. Don't believe accusations against Syria in Hariri's killing if the evidence is secret or not understandable. This is where to read the UN Mehlis Report Full transcript: http://www.champress.net/english/index.php?page=show_det&id=725 I have not read it yet.
Well, it's pretty much true, isn't it? I mean, if you find one article supporting some issue, you can also find an article opposed to it. And both claim to have the "facts". Trust??? How does one know which to trust? And more to the point, how does one trust enough to form a solid opinion when even the "experts" disagree? And if you DO form a solid opinion, does that mean that you think ye're more knowledgeable than some of the "experts"? ...isn't that pretty egotistical? I think one can form good, solid opinions on many/most things, but I don't think they can do it so quickly as most people seem to do!! And this forum is a good example of forming opinions too damned quickly to have any real meaning or expertise. And as such, those opinions are suspect from the very beginning. The "sensationalist" news agencies are mostly to blame, in my opinion ...they do it, so many people feel that THEY should follow suit! It's also a fact that there's a tremendous amount of news of the world, so the news agencies can't be "bothered" with full investigations of truth ...they have to get it on-line before the next guy or they lose. Ditto for getting THAT news out, because in just a minute, there'll be more, different news and they can't afford to hold one story while ten back up waiting for verification or true investigation. Hurry, hurry, hurry!! Why? Why does anyone have to "draw the line"? And more to the point, why do they have to "draw the line" BEFORE they have all of the facts? Why are we in such a hurry to make decisions or form opinions? Why can't we just wait to see where and how the dust will settle? Baron Max
Well I don't wanna have to make this post, but I will. Like I said, I agree with your train of thought. Heck, one of my mottos is not to trust others, too. The problem is that by you continuing to question every single post with every single question numerous times, it becomes annoying. And when something becomes annoying, people quit paying attention regardless if you're right or wrong. And even worse, due to the distaste of being annoying, people may just flat out call you wrong, even if you may be right (which, again, I agree with your hesitance) and that'll just cause more harm than the good you're trying to achieve by makin people remain open-minded and not blindly trusting others. You should have noticed that many weeks ago with the way people respond to your posts. So go ahead and keep your crusade going, just at least mix it up and try and do it a bit differently. Oh, and quit trying to displace the blame of the decisions Bush makes. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! - N
