Syria diverts blame onto Israel after 'odious' Hariri killing

[drdon326]

Syria went on the defensive after the killing of former Lebanese prime minister Rafiq Hariri, who resigned just four months ago in protest at the dominant role of Damascus in his country.

The official press condemned the murder as an "odious crime," saying Hariri was a "welcome son" for Syria and accused arch-foe Israel of seeking to sabotage Lebanon's achievements since the 1975-1990 war.

"What happened was an attempt to shatter national unity in Lebanon, to sow anarchy and divisions which lead to a climate of civil war," said government newspaper Tishrin.


snip.


Israel "continues to work to sabotage Lebanon's achievements to try to bring anarchy to the country and to be able to continue its occupation of the Shebaa Farms", a disputed strip of land along the Israeli border, said Tishrin.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1515&ncid=1515&e=4&u=/afp/20050215/wl_mideast_afp/lebanonblastsyria_050215194649

.................................................................

'those jews did it'........juuuuuust lovely.

[liberal N proud]

1. As I said yesterday, I bet we attack Syria before Iran

That is what Isreal wants so bu$h will do it.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=3119608&mesg_id=3119608

[Colorado Blue]

4. Oh, puhleeze. PLEASE do not conflate Eretz Israel or the

Jewish people with Bush and his interests. You have no evidence! And it doesn't make SENSE. Bush could attack Syria RIGHT NOW for no greater reason than suspecting them of helping the Iraqi insurgency. There are plenty of people who would believe him. And there are plenty of others who hate the Assad regime including plenty of Syrians and other Arabs.

Moreover, please do not pretend to be innocent in this matter. If you are a customer of Big Oil you are no innocent.

I've said this before and I will say it again: when you are ready to stop using oil, talk to me about Israel, Bush and the Middle East. Until then please get a grip, take a nice long look in the mirror and THEN assess blame for the oil wars. If you are willing to start drastically reducing your own consumption of oil I will take you seriously as a critic of US foreign policy. If you are willing to work vigorously to lobby for renewable energy sources, talk to me.

Until then you are hiding from reality while accusing others of doing YOUR dirty work.

I do NOT APPROVE of Bushco tactics in the Middle East. Neither do I excuse myself from participating in the profit structure of Big Oil. As a citizen of the US, benefitting from its infrastructure and accustomed to the ease with which a person heats his home, communicates and travels, I am party to the ongoing efforts of Big Oil to produce fuel for the behemoth of which I am a citizen. I say this sorrowfully since personally I do everything I can NOT to use oil, having given up my car many many years ago and so forth; but being honest with myself I do use heat, electricity and take the bus and even fly periodically. Et tu, Brute?

I am beginning to understand why conservatives find many liberals naive about foreign policy! Right or wrong, conversatives and other business-oriented people are thinking in terms of the ebb and flow of resources which are vital to the sustenance of our economy, while many liberals sit on the sidelines and moan.

PLEASE, folks - GET A GRIP.

Meanwhile, since it is highly unlikely that you will trouble yourself with thinking about YOUR role in the oil war, I hope you have a good day reading Syrian propaganda.

They, OF COURSE, had nothing to do with this latest disaster. And it is a disaster. For the Lebanese, who incidentally are demonstrating in HUGE numbers and have no problem blaming Syria for this disaster and demanding the withdrawal of Syrian troops from Lebanon. For Israel it is a disaster too, and for the Jewish people who once again have to accept the blame - from fellow liberals yet - for taking a life - with absolutely NO EVIDENCE that they had ANYTHING TO DO WITH IT - with an Arab group having claimed responsibility already - it really is getting to be too much.

Tragically, whatever happens in the Middle East from here on out there will be plenty of people who will be all too happy to blame Israel whether she has anything to do with it or not, whether they have any evidence that she did it - or not.

Shalom.

[Darranar]

9. How does that follow? n/t

[UL_Approved]

2. Well, who knows as of yet?

Israel is running a pretty dirty campaign of imperialism against neighboring states, but the neighbors are not free from blame either.

This needs to be sorted out, but the timing is horrible. This comes right at the time of the cease-fire agreement between Israel and Palestine.

[Coastie for Truth]

38. Please elaborate

What, exactly, do you mean by

"Israel is running a pretty dirty campaign of imperialism against neighboring states, but the neighbors are not free from blame either.

What, specifically, is the "campaign of imperialism" against Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt?

I can be convinced - by a reasoned, good faith presentation.

[Jack Rabbit]

3. I just posted this on another thread

I seems to fit here, too.

Please click here.

[Colorado Blue]

5. I pasted my note onto the other thread as well. nt

[thebigidea]

6. without evidence, why is "those Syrians did it" any lovelier?

[Colorado Blue]

7. Syria is no monolith...

so blaming anything on "those Syrians" is BS too. All kinds of people live in Syria.

However, some of the people who live in Syria are enemies of Assad, a dictator. Is it so unlikely that a disaffected group, based in Syria, would set off a bomb in Lebanon to discredit Assad?

Other groups, based in Syria, have been terrorists for years. By "terrorist" I mean they are people who wish to effect political change - or stop it - by violent and anonymous, even suicidal, means. Bombs are a favorite technique whether attached to humans or otherwise, and civilians are the primary targets. Nation-states are therefore not terrorists by that definition even though they sometimes behave like them.

There is another possibility: in an attempt to destablize Assad on ideological grounds, Buscho, who has avowedly declared War On Tyranny, might have fomented this assault by firing up a dissaffected group within Syria to do the deed. This would be Step One in an attempt to bring down Assad and jump start a democratic movement within Syria. Ideologically this works but I think it is a longshot due to our poor resources on the ground in Arab lands. Also I think destabilizing Lebanon works AGAINST U.S. (and Israeli, also European) interests. But, it is not impossible. The US has fomented juntas before, in Greece.

Finally, there is the Iraq connection. Before the Iraq invasion, Bushco was warned - by the Mossad - that whatever potent weapons Iraq may have had were in Syria. Many of us were doubly freaked out by the Iraq war: first, we hate war and don't want to see innocents massacred; second, going after WMD's in Iraq was utterly pointless in view of this information. However, as we know Bushco went ahead. That still leaves the problem of people in Syria possessing sophisticated explosives. So that is a possibility, as a source for high-end bomb-making materials - and what of the vast stores of explosives that were ripped off in Iraq under the US nose? It doesn't seem unlikely that, as the Mossad said, some of the originals plus some new ones, liberated after the fall of Saddam, are in Syria.

Assad is a dictator who has made MANY enemies within Syria. I do not think it is a stretch to suspect a Syrian-based group of this action. Again, as you point out there isn't much evidence although I believe an Arab group has taken credit.

Finally, there is the fact that Syria has troups in Lebanon and the Lebanese firmly believe they are behind the dark deed. As evidence I admit it is anecdotal at best.

So please understand I am not accusing "the Syrians" of anything. I do, however, think it is highly probable that, as claimed, this was an action by an Arab group attempting to destablize Lebanon and possibly Assad. On the other hand, they do not have to have a rational - or what WE would understand as "rational" - reason. This could be a political or a religious action or the action of a small group of disturbed individuals. It could be a purely personal think against the victim. We just don't know.

I think we should withhold judgement.

[thebigidea]

8. good lord, a reasonable, well-thought out argument...

I don't know how to deal with this - someone asking to withold judgement until all the facts are in... on I/P? Good lord, if everyone did that... I shudder to think how civilized conversations could be here.

As a footnote, I think the WMD-went-to-Syria thing is just as insane as any evils-Jews-are-behind-it conspiracy theory.

I mean, where's the evidence? Satellite photos? Not even a single Chalabi to tell us all about it.

... and nobody ever tries to offer an explanation as to WHY Hussein would ship all of his weapons to Syria. It just doesn't make any sense.

Was he planning on using them after his country was invaded and decimated?

I sure wish our beloved liberal media was tougher on this crazy AEI-type theory a year or two ago, when many Dems were scared off talking about the WMD conjob due to malarky like this.

[Colorado Blue]

43. Me too re WMD. Media has been asleep since 2000. nt

[newsguyatl]

10. U.S. behind Hariri Assassination?

call me tinfoilish, paranoid, whatever...

but i believe bushco.'s behind this, to put pressure on syria and urge others that they support terrorism.

this is all part of the master plan.


iraq, iran, syria.............


pnac......

welcome to bushworld.


ok, i'm going to bed.

[Nite Owl]

11. This is the atmosphere that

they have created. They lie so much who knows when something is real or not.

[mattclearing]

12. Can Fox News be far behind? But seriously...

Nothing surprises me anymore.

What kind of post is this?

Here's a huge batch of flamebait! I'm going to bed.

:thumbsdown:

[newsguyatl]

13. flamebait?

who the fuck am i baiting? bush supporters?

gimme a break.


you can have your opinion and i can have mine... just look for lots of talk about syria and their support for terrorism in the coming weeks and months. you make of it what you will.

[mattclearing]

14. My opinion is that lobbing a huge tinfoil bomb and going to bed is lame.

But yeah, anytime anything happens lately, I'm likely to look at it both ways. Sad, but that's the way it is.

Still, it would be helpful if you had something in the way of evidence or even reasonable suspicion other than, "Wouldn't it be a bitch if...ZZZZZzzzzz..."

I understand where you're coming from, but man...

[Lexingtonian]

15. it's really sad

Yesterday I was reading through some stuff about 'NATO's secret war', the point of which was essentially terrorism that claimed to be committed by Communists to force the common people in Italy and iirc Greece to beg their governments for 'security' and backing NATO.

And when I heard about this assassination on BBC, I listened to the commentary and couldn't figure out why anyone would expect the Syrians to have perpetrated it. About the only winners from it seemed to be the Bushies and, if you figure they considered Hariri too weak to achieve a push-out of the Syrians, the Israelis could have pulled it off to falsely implicate Assad Jr. What speaks against that is the indiscriminate nature of the bombing, the gross waste of life, which is not generally a Mossad or American intelligence agent m.o. because it could mean jail sentences on murder charges in either country.

A realer possibility is people who simply want to destroy elites and docile secular establishments in the Middle East- that would be the likes of Al Qaeda. Perhaps even Hezbollah, if they thought Hariri succeeding might be the end of them. But it might just be some disgruntled minor domestic faction in Lebanon with some relatively obscure grudge. The m.o. is a lot like what killed one of the Gemayel brothers at the near-end of the Lebanese civil war.

[DenverDem]

19. Jail sentences for Mossad or CIA ops?!?!?!? Surely you jest.

When has that ever happened and how do you think that could possibly happen given the dictatorial control over both USA and Israel?

Anyway, a false flag op needs to look like someone else's MO by definition. Otherwise it would be a pretty poor FFO.

[aquart]

20. How did the Mossad get dragged into this?

Agenda much? Oh, those clever, devious Jews.

[Lexingtonian]

21. hey, it's the Middle East

And anti-Semitism hankering will get you nowhere.

I'll post Eric Alterman's letter on anti-Semitism hankering for you if you like.

Btw, who founded and funded Hamas at the beginning of that organization's life?
Just wondering if you knew. Sounds clever and devious to me. And, at the same
time, pennywise and poundfoolish....

[thebigidea]

22. as opposed to those clever, devious Syrians, I suppose.

There's just as much evidence for both of 'em - that is to say, no evidence. So let the conspiracymongering flourish!

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Coastie for Truth]

40. Sort of a Nihilist - Anarchist Theory

which - in Lebanon - is always plausible.

[jmatthan]

16. Every serious Anti War group

believes that this is the fact!!

Jacob Matthan
http://koti.netplaza.fi/~findians/AntiWar/USEducated/educated.html

[Coastie for Truth]

41. Oxymoron

" Every serious Anti War group" is like "a good, undergraduate liberal arts education at UC Berkeley" (engineering is very good, science is very good)

[DenverDem]

17. Cui bono?

Who benefits?

Certainly not Syria, so why would they do it?

[Igel]

32. Again, the insane "cui bono" argument.

Pick your assumptions, and you pick who "must have done it".

1) US. To set up Syria for an invasion. Go for the booty.

2) Whoever was running against Hariri. Kill the competition, make winning easier.

3) Syria. Hariri would exacerbate the fuss over Syria's violating the treaty they signed for a full withdrawal. The furor over Hariri's death is trivial to the PR problems if Hariri won. Avoid the pain.

4) People that don't like how Lebanon was rebuilt after the civil war. Who? Maybe 1 person, maybe thousands. Revenge for society's not being perfect, and the resulting feeling of satisfaction or Paradise.

5) Some Islamofascist thinks that Hariri, as a friend to the Sa'udis is keeping True Islam from sprouting in Lebanon. Martyrdom's not an empty goal. Well, it is, but don't let the word out. Oh, but this is just a variant of (4). (But rules out Xians.)

6) The Mossad ... since those descendents of apes and pigs are responsible for all the sins of the world ... or like the idea of rockets falling from time to time in N. Israel. The "bonum"? Bloodsport.

7) Palestinian. After all, Hariri kept them confined to the camps.

And let's not even discuss the possibility of someone out to lunch on reality, who's "bonum" is getting the Crackerjack prize for killing the Easter Bunny dressed up in Hariri-garb.

[Djinn]

35. exactly

there are plnety of erasons for various people/organisations to kill him INCLUDING the secret services of about 5 different nations, assasinations being one of their skills.

Those services are so riddled with paranoia and double dealing that probably half of them don't know who killed Hariri.

Could have been "the" Syrians or "the" Israelis we don't know so getting uppity about how it "couldn't" be one side or another is just stupid

[Coastie for Truth]

42. By the same Cui Bono argument

why would Israel do it --- they are just now getting their act together with PA/Abbas --- and given the outside (private investor) economic pressure on them - they would not benefit.

Syria would benefit more because Hariri could have been a rallying point for opposition.

Never disregard Nihilists/Anarchists or (in Lebanon) organized crime figures.

[clem_c_rock]

18. Ditto - Who else would benefit?

They want Syria or Iran next. They (PNAC) posts it in plain site ("Rebuilding Americas Defenses") what the agenda is, follow that agenda TO A TEE, and there's still people who will believe all this spin.

I'm completely amazed at all the DU'ers (In past posts) who still believe Iran's an enemy, Syria's an enemy, the Iraq elections are real, ect, and will probably fight tooth and nail saying the idea of this having Bush finger prints is a CT.

[flordehinojos]

23. i wouldn't put it past them to do something like what you are suggesting.

they are very capable of doing such a thing. it would not be the first time they've done it.

In their minds, "the ends justify the means".

[Old and In the Way]

24. Sure, if they LIHOPed 9/11 to jumpstart the war in Iraq, why would this

be a stetch?

They need some reason to invade Syria. We don't know who did it, but we apparently know enough to remove the Ambassador. We know's it's in the PNAC script....just waiting for their turn. Timing is good, things are heating up on the home front and the Iraqi elections are a disaster. So it's time to distract the Homeland once again.

But I am confused; I thought Iran was being set-up for the next acquisition. Of course, next week we could start bombing North Korea.

[fooj]

25. With all the bullshit they have pulled...

you can't help but wonder!

[Behind the Aegis]

26. Why?

Why was this banished to the I/P room? Doesn't it violate the I/P room rules?

[thebigidea]

27. yeah, kind of a roundabout way of locking the thread

shrug.

[bowens43]

28. The US is the only country to profit from the assassination.

It certainly won't help Syria but will do much to aid the bushies in their propaganda war against the Syrians.

They allowed 911 to happen and they murdered 100, innocent Iraqis, this is small stuff.

[Jack Rabbit]

29. A few responses

The claim of responsibly for the assassination of Rafik Hiriri by some fly-by-night jihadist group that nobody's heard of before is suspicious, to say the least. This appears too well planned and executed for a bunch of kids in capes to have pulled it off. If some better-established terrorist group had claimed responsibility, it would have at least some credibility. However, such a group would be thumping its chest about having done it, not letting some unheard-of gang take the credit.

Israel, who gets a few votes in the above discussion, can be eliminated. There are two reasons for this. First, Israel wants Syria out of Lebanon; Hiriri wanted Syria out of Lebanon. Why would the Israelis want to assassinate a popular political leader whose goals happen to converge with theirs? Second, although some may argue against this for no good reason, Israel has an interest in regional stability. She wants to survive. That is best done in a sea of stable Arab regimes that have better things to do than make war against Israel or each other. Destabilizing Lebanon doesn't work for them right now.

The only argument in favor of pointing to Israel as a suspect that is consistent with this analysis is that the Assad regime in Syria isn't really a stable one. Nevertheless, no regime that is likely to topple his is likely to be any better. That would include any regime that the US would impose after direct intervention in Syria, if that is in the cards. If Iraq is any indicator of how well a US-imposed regime change strategy works, it's something the Israelis would not want to encourage.

The United States, under most circumstances, would be an even less likely suspect that Israel, but not these days. The US has been taken over by a clique that believes military force alone is sufficient to promote US interests overseas. One could point to the fact that the US already has its hand full occupying Iraq and doesn't need another war; this makes sense, but making sense is not a good indicator of what Bush and his neoconservative aides are thinking. After all, being tied down in a quagmire in Iraq doesn't keep them from saber-rattling elsewhere, particularly Iran.

However, these people are not embarrassed by their failure in Iraq. On the contrary, they think it is a success and that anybody who calls it failure is a fool and anybody who presents evidence or makes a sound case that it is a failure is a traitor. Bush and the neoconservatives are deluded and dangerous.

Along with Iran, the Bushies blame Syria for their problems in Iraq. Never mind any reality-based analysis; we have to analyze this as if what they desperately want to believe is true is, in fact, true, even when we know better. Consequently, they would want to solve their problems in Iraq by taking out Assad, who (they think or just want to believe) is either unwilling or unable to stop foreign insurgents from crossing back and forth over Syria's border with Iraq. Of course, it could be the case that Assad is unable or unwilling to do anything about insurgents using the Syrian frontier, but closing it would do little to help the Bushies in Iraq and regime change in Syria would probalby do more harm than good. But there we go again with very kind of rational, emperical argument that we can't use as a gauge to neoconservative behavior.

On the other hand, the US desires to see Syria leave Lebanon, just as do the Israelis. Once again, it would seem strage that the US, any more than Israel, would want to assassinate the most powerful political leader in Lebanon whose goals converge with their own.

Bedises, this isn't the Bushies' MO. The Bushies are much more like the terrorists that they think they are fighting (if one assume their just fools), or want us to believe they are fighting (if one assume that they aren't really fools, but liars), or whatever (if one assumes that they are so foolish that they've come to believe their own lies, which is beginning to look like the case). In any event, the Bushies like to claim responsibility, just like terrorists. They are much more direct than this. They would not have assassinated a Lebanese politician in order to blame Syria and then invade. They would be more likely to assassinate Assad and proclaim it to the world.

If this wasn't an Israeli or a US operation, that leaves either Syria or pro-Syrian elements in Lebanon. Syria, in this case, wouldn't necessarily mean Assad. Like Kim Jong-il and somebody else we can name, Bashir Assad is the spoiled son of a powerful leader who only thinks he's in control. It is possible that somebody in his military or intelligence apparatus acted on his own with fear of Assad.

We would do better to look for a Syrian or pro-Syrian Lebanese connection.

[Colorado Blue]

30. Amen. Attached is response also in I/P forum, to those...

who are blaming Israel for this and also I might add blaming Israel for anything that might happen in the future in Iran:

Oh, puhleeze. PLEASE do not conflate Eretz Israel or the
Jewish people with Bush and his interests. You have no evidence! And it doesn't make SENSE. Bush could attack Syria RIGHT NOW for no greater reason than suspecting them of helping the Iraqi insurgency. There are plenty of people who would believe him. And there are plenty of others who hate the Assad regime including plenty of Syrians and other Arabs.

Moreover, please do not pretend to be innocent in this matter. If you are a customer of Big Oil you are no innocent.

I've said this before and I will say it again: when you are ready to stop using oil, talk to me about Israel, Bush and the Middle East. Until then please get a grip, take a nice long look in the mirror and THEN assess blame for the oil wars. If you are willing to start drastically reducing your own consumption of oil I will take you seriously as a critic of US foreign policy. If you are willing to work vigorously to lobby for renewable energy sources, talk to me.

Until then you are hiding from reality while accusing others of doing YOUR dirty work.

I do NOT APPROVE of Bushco tactics in the Middle East. Neither do I excuse myself from participating in the profit structure of Big Oil. As a citizen of the US, benefitting from its infrastructure and accustomed to the ease with which a person heats his home, communicates and travels, I am party to the ongoing efforts of Big Oil to produce fuel for the behemoth of which I am a citizen. I say this sorrowfully since personally I do everything I can NOT to use oil, having given up my car many many years ago and so forth; but being honest with myself I do use heat, electricity and take the bus and even fly periodically. Et tu, Brute?

I am beginning to understand why conservatives find many liberals naive about foreign policy! Right or wrong, conversatives and other business-oriented people are thinking in terms of the ebb and flow of resources which are vital to the sustenance of our economy, while many liberals sit on the sidelines and moan.

PLEASE, folks - GET A GRIP.

Meanwhile, since it is highly unlikely that you will trouble yourself with thinking about YOUR role in the oil war, I hope you have a good day reading Syrian propaganda.

They, OF COURSE, had nothing to do with this latest disaster. And it is a disaster. For the Lebanese, who incidentally are demonstrating in HUGE numbers and have no problem blaming Syria for this disaster and demanding the withdrawal of Syrian troops from Lebanon. For Israel it is a disaster too, and for the Jewish people who once again have to accept the blame - from fellow liberals yet - for taking a life - with absolutely NO EVIDENCE that they had ANYTHING TO DO WITH IT - with an Arab group having claimed responsibility already - it really is getting to be too much.

Tragically, whatever happens in the Middle East from here on out there will be plenty of people who will be all too happy to blame Israel whether she has anything to do with it or not, whether they have any evidence that she did it - or not.

Shalom.

[Behind the Aegis]

33. Mostly agree, but I have another thought.

Lebanon wants Syria out, Israel wants Syria out, the US 'seems' to want Syria out, so a murder like this would seem to have the makings of a Syrian plot. HOWEVER, due to the mis-administration, here is what I could see as a reason the US might have done this...

"Syria did this! The US says so!! The Lebanese government invites the US military into Lebanon to protect them from further Syrian attacks!" Since we now have a "beef" with Syria, what better way to get a foot hold, then to have our troops at their border?! To place our troops in Israel would invite all the Arab worlds to side against us and Israel. BUT, to place our troops in an Arab country that invited us in to protect them, well, that wouldn't raise too many eyebrows.

Just my opinion.

[Jack Rabbit]

36. That doesn't work

Lebanon's pro-Syrian President, Emile Lahoud, isn't going to invite the Yanks in or the ask the Syrians to leave.

As this is playing out, teh US is using this as an excuse to put pressure on Syria, although there is no conclusive proof that Syria is responsible. There is a good chance that the Syrians are responsible, but then again, it could have been pro-Syrian Lebanese acting independently.

There is some speculation that a Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon could be an event that would lead to Assad's downfall. However, as I said in the other post, what replaces him may not please the west, either.

[eyl]

37. Two more possibilities

1) Hizbullah - Hariri was in favor of curbing Hizbullah's "extra-parliamentary" power; also, a Syrian withdrawal could be detrimental to their military operations.

2) Another possibility I've seen floating around is that the assassination wasn't a political one - apparently, Hariri had some shady business contacts which might be behind this.

[Coastie for Truth]

39. I think the US's CIA and MI types

are too incompetent to pull it off.

They missed on the economic collapse of the old USSR - and haven't hit anything right since then.

And the interrogation of the alleged Al Qaida in Iraq --- they picked up street people who had the misfortune to be at the wrong place at the wrong time and turned the interrogations into some kind of Jeff Gannon wet dream.

[chlamor]

34. A Few Thoughts on the Hariri Murder

This smacks of the traditional counterinsurgency tactic known as 'strategy of tension'. I do not believe the operation carried out as meticulously and powerfully as it was could have possibly been done by any group other than an "intelligence" outfit from some nation. The jury is still out but let us consider a few things, here is what Sam Hamod writes and the link to the entire article:
"We must do as they do in other criminal cases, look at who had the most to gain from the assassination of Prime Minister Harriri. The Lebanese had a lot to lose, as did the Syrians (he was close to Bashir Al Assad, the leader of Syria), as did the other Arab countries in the region who saw him as a strong leader and a stabilizing force in Lebanese politics. On the other hand, Israel has wanted chaos in Lebanon, as has America, and both countries have been agitating to get Hezbollah outlawed and both America and Israel have wanted the Lebanese to oust Syria. In both cases, the Lebanese government has said, “NO,” that Hezbollah is a respected part of Lebanese life and that Syria is there to protect Lebanon from Israeli aggression. Harriri’s killing, like so many of those in Iraq, is the work of either the Israeli dark ops or American mercenaries who have been hired out to kill people who are progressive in the Arab and Muslim worlds. That is why in Lebanon today, people know that it was not some dissident “Islamist group” (that no one has heard of, nor does anyone believe actually exists) who allegedly took credit for the deed, and in Iraq, where the religious leaders among the Sunni and Shi’a are telling their people not to revenge themselves on one another, because they know the killings are professional jobs being done by people from outside Iraq, namely, Israel and America. The parallels are evident to experts, but these experts will not be allowed on American media. But, Professor Rime Allaf, of the Royal Institute in England is correct, this was the work of an intelligence agency—and we damn well know who the only two would be—because they are the only two to gain by this deed, Israel or America."
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article8060.htm
And here is an excerpt from an article written in 2003 by Chris Floyd of The Moscow Times on the role of Lebanon:
A few months before PNAC's prophetic 2000 report, an allied group with an overlapping membership published a similar document outlining steps to be taken against Syria --first "tightening the screws" with denunciations and economic sanctions, then escalating to military action, as Jim Lobe of Inter-Press Agency reports. The architects of this document included Elliot Abrams, the convicted perjurer now running Bush's Middle East policy; Douglas Feith, one of Rumsfeld.s top aides; Paula Dobriansky, undersecretary to Colin Powell, and influential Pentagon advisors such as David Wurmser, Michael Leeden and everyone's sweetheart, Richard "Influence-Peddler" Perle.
Here, the proto-Bushist group demands that six "rogue nations" -- Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya and Sudan --  "turn over their governments to the United States" on pain of massive military response. The United States will then "occupy these territories until proper governments" -- ones that allow "long-term access" to major military bases, no doubt -- "can be established." And just how massive should that threatened US military response be? The USCFL is, as always, admirably -- and brutally --- forthright:


"America must set a clear example-identical to that of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. If you tread on me, I will wipe you off the face of the earth." Link to the article at:
/www.globalresearch.ca/articles/FLO502A.html

And lastly a summary of article entitled:
"The Syrian MIG Planes Downed by Israel, the Assassination of Hariri, and All-out War" ,

Columnist Ibrahim Karagul suggests links between the assassination of Former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri and the withdrawal of Syrian troops from Lebanon, the recent defeat of the pro-Syrian Lebanese government, and "the plan to fuel divisive sentiments in Lebanon. " He claims that the killing of Hariri might touch off a civil war in Lebanon and that rather than being independent developments, the division of Iraq, the growing tension in Syrian-Lebanese relations, the Israeli preparations to "wage war" on HAMAS and Hezbollah, the accession to power of Mahmoud Abbas in "Palestine" and the US plan to hit strategic targets in Iran are all interrelated parts of the US-Israeli plan detailed in the policy paper entitled "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm."
www.globalresearch.ca/articles/SHA502A.html

These are two very reliable sources but we certainly must continue investigating and place it in context with the picture of what is transpiring in the Middle East. My personal view is that numerous tactics are being used to 'Balkanize' and destabilize the region to facilitate the entry of Western capital.

[IndianaGreen]

44. Sidney Morning Herald: Australians hunted over Hariri death

It was probably Al-Qaeda anyway... so the anti-Arab faction and the anti-Israel factions should cool their jets. This is posted in LBN.

Australians hunted over Hariri death
February 18, 2005 - 10:00PM

Twelve people wanted over the assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Rafiq Hariri are believed to be in Australia.

Lebanon's Justice Minister Adnan Addoum said authorities had contacted Interpol in Sydney over the departure from Beirut to Australia of 12 men - most bearded - on Monday, the day of the bombing that killed Hariri and 16 others.

Addoum said the 12 were among 14 men with Australian citizenship who tried to leave Lebanon, but two missed the flight for unknown reasons. Their whereabouts are unknown.

Interpol has agreed to interrogate the 12 in relation to the killing, Addoum said, adding that three have agreed to come forward.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/Breaking-News/Australians-hunted-over-Hariri-death/2005/02/18/1108709436870.html?oneclick=true