Adonis Diaries

Archive for the ‘political Artical’ Category

When the Devil in the details?

When the occupation forces are comfortable in the situation?

Israelis diverge on details of a Palestinian State

Would Israeli support for a Palestinian state (60%) be dramatically lower when they are presented with specific details rather than being asked to support the basic idea?
Right Wing think-tank jumped at the occasion with a biased poll to confirms the argument that Israelis who support theory of two-state solution recoil from concrete details.
 in Jerusalem in The Guardian, Monday 20 October
The Jordan Valley
The Jordan Valley, which Israel considers to be its eastern border. Photograph: Ahmad Gharabli/AFP/Getty Images

poll has found that 75% of Israeli Jews oppose the creation of a Palestinian state within the pre-1967 borders if it means withdrawing Israeli troops from the Jordan Valley.

The survey, conducted by a right wing think tank headed by a political ally of the Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, makes for stark reading, contradicting previous polls showing up to 60% of Israelis in favour of a two-state solution.

The Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, is making a concerted diplomatic push for a UN security council resolution seeking an end to the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories by November 2016.

Of the 60% of those polled who described themselves as right wing, opposition to a Palestinian state within the pre-1967 lines rose to almost 92%, while 72% of those who identified as left wing would support it.

That opposition rises further still if the issue of dividing Jerusalem is included, with 40% of left wingers opposing the division of Jerusalem.

The poll was commissioned by a think-tank run by a former policy advisor to Netanyahu and initially published in the free newspaper owned by the Las Vegas casino owner Sheldon Adelson, one of the Israeli prime minister’s biggest backers.

Left Wing commentators suggested the polling was likely to be an accurate reflection of Israeli public opinion.

“The poll published in Israel Hayom is obviously meant to serve Netanyahu’s agenda,” said Mairav Zonszeinwriting for the +972 website.

“And while it is dangerous to rely solely on a single poll to backup any claim, this specific poll – no matter how flawed or skewed – happens to be an accurate reflection of the Israeli government’s policies, much of its rhetoric, and the reality on the ground.”

Although historical polling has suggested solid Israeli support for a two-state solution, Zonszein argues that the latest poll more truly reflects both how Israelis vote for political parties – and those parties’ agendas – and how they talk about the peace process.

Even though many polls over the years have shown and still show that a majority of Jewish Israelis support a two-state solution based more or less along the 1967 border with land swaps, such sentiment is reflected less and less in the way Israelis vote and talk. This new poll seems to provide a much more honest assessment of the reality on the ground and the reality in the halls of government,” she said.

The latest poll reflects what appears to be an ever-diminishing appetite for a two-state solution on both sides. (Yes, right. And study done by a US think-tank?)

Two sets of polls earlier this year – one of Palestinians for the right-leaning US think tank Washington Institute for Near East Policy and a Pew Research poll in the spring – both identified growing pessimism that a peace deal could be done.

Note: But the details are known if you are interested, though we are under the belief that all the details are secrets because that’s what Israel wants you to believe. The two-State status is a preliminary condition for any sustainable and serious peace negotiation in the Middle-East

Jewish Dominance Of The African Slave Trade

lundi 15 juin 2020

La domination juive de la traite négrière africaine

Qui était vraiment derrière la traite négrière?

Indication: ce ne sont pas les Européens blancs qui sont blâmés pour l’esclavage aujourd’hui.

Et ce ne sont pas les soi-disant «suprémacistes blancs» qui dénoncent la domination juive de la traite négrière: ce sont les intellectuels noirs.

Who was really behind the slave trade?

Matthew Nolan: “Si une vente aux enchères d’esclaves est tombée sur un festival juif, elle a été reportée en raison du manque d’acheteurs et de vendeurs.”

Video Player

Qui a amené les esclaves en Amérique?

Professeur Tony Martin – Les métiers de l’esclave

Video Player

Marcus Garvey – “The African Slave Trade”
L’écrivain noir suivant s’excuse auprès des Blancs pour les avoir blâmés pour les crimes d’esclavage commis par les Juifs:

Dontell Jackson – We Thought They Were White Dontell Jackson – Nous pensions qu’ils étaient blancs
Website: We Thought They Were White Site Web: Nous pensions qu’ils étaient blancs

Video Player

Livres :

Who Brought The Slaves to America

The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews

Highlights and Key Points from The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews (29 pages)


Source : 

Jewish Dominance Of The African Slave Trade

February 3, 2020



–   Le livre «Les Juifs vendent des Noirs» suscite un mouvement de demandes de réparations

–   Le pillage de l’Afrique par les sionistes

–   Ministre de l’intérieur israélien : « Israël est le pays de l’Homme Blanc »


–   Les Juifs et la traite des Noirs

–   New York. Les indics sionistes fichent leurs voisins Noirs pour le compte de la police

–   USA. Assaut juif contre les intellectuels noirs

–   Le martyr et l’holocauste des Noirs par les Juifs trafiquants esclavagistes

And what kinds of courage? Other this faked “Moral Courage” or “Moral Entity”?

Edward Snowden, Hugh Thompson, Daniel Ellsberg, whistle-blowers…

Note: Re-edit of “Moral Courage? And what other kinds of courage? March 5, 2014

Last Thursday Chris Hedges opened a team debate at the Oxford Union at Oxford University with this speech arguing in favor of the proposition “This house would call Edward Snowden a hero.”

The others on the Hedges team, which won the debate by an audience vote of 212 to 171, were William E. Binney, a former National Security Agency official and a whistle-blower; Chris Huhne, a former member of the British Parliament; and Annie Machon, a former intelligence officer for the United Kingdom.

The opposing team was made up of Philip J. Crowley, a former U.S. State Department officer; Stewart A. Baker, a former chief counsel for the National Security Agency; Jeffrey Toobin, an American television and print commentator; and Oxford student Charles Vaughn.

Chris Hedges posted this Feb.23, 2014

Edward Snowden’s Moral Courage

I have been to war. I have seen physical courage.

But this kind of courage is not moral courage. Very few of even the bravest warriors have moral courage.

For moral courage means to defy the crowd, to stand up as a solitary individual, to shun the intoxicating embrace of comradeship, to be disobedient to authority, even at the risk of your life, for a higher principle.

And with moral courage comes persecution.

The American Army pilot Hugh Thompson had moral courage. He landed his helicopter between a platoon of U.S. soldiers and 10 terrified Vietnamese civilians during the My Lai massacre.

Thompson ordered his gunner to fire his M60 machine gun on the advancing U.S. soldiers if they began to shoot the villagers. And for this act of moral courage, Thompson, like Snowden, was hounded and reviled.

Moral courage always looks like this.

It is always defined by the state as treason—the Army attempted to cover up the massacre and court-martial Thompson. It is the courage to act and to speak the truth. Thompson had it.

Daniel Ellsberg had it. Martin Luther King had it.

What those in authority once said about them they say today about Snowden.

In this still image from video footage released by WikiLeaks on Oct. 11, 2013, former National Security Agency systems analyst Edward Snowden speaks in Moscow during a presentation ceremony for the Sam Adams Award. (AP photo)

“My country, right or wrong” is the moral equivalent of “my mother, drunk or sober,” G.K. Chesterton reminded us.

So let me speak to you about those drunk with the power to sweep up all your email correspondence, your tweets, your Web searches, your phone records, your file transfers, your live chats, your financial data, your medical data,

And your criminal and civil court records and your movements, those who are awash in billions upon billions of taxpayer dollars, those who have banks of sophisticated computer systems, along with biosensors, scanners, face recognition technologies and miniature drones, those who have obliterated your anonymity, your privacy and, yes, your liberty.

There is no free press without the ability of the reporters to protect the confidentiality of those who have the moral courage to make public the abuse of power.

Those few individuals inside government who dared to speak out about the system of mass surveillance have been charged as spies or hounded into exile.

An omnipresent surveillance state—and I covered the East German Stasi state—creates a climate of paranoia and fear. It makes democratic dissent impossible.

Any state that has the ability to inflict full-spectrum dominance on its citizens is Not a free state.

It does not matter if it does not use this capacity today; it will use it, history has shown, should it feel threatened or seek greater control.

The goal of wholesale surveillance, as Hannah Arendt wrote: ” is Not, in the end, to discover crimes, but to be on hand when the government decides to arrest a certain category of the population.”

The relationship between those who are constantly watched and tracked and those who watch and track them is the relationship between masters and slaves.

Those who wield this unchecked power become delusional.

Gen. Keith Alexander, the director of the National Security Agency, hired a Hollywood set designer to turn his command center at Fort Meade into a replica of the bridge of the starship Enterprise so he could sit in the captain’s chair and pretend he was Jean-Luc Picard.

James Clapper, the director of national intelligence, had the audacity to lie under oath to Congress.

This spectacle was a rare glimpse into the absurdist theater that now characterizes American political life.

A congressional oversight committee holds public hearings. It is lied to.

It knows it is being lied to.

The person who lies knows the committee members know he is lying.

And the committee, to protect their security clearances, says and does nothing.

1     NEXT PAGE >>>

Violent Extremism? Where is the challenge of defining what is violent?

Criminal Justice versus Human Rights analysts?

Note: Re-edit of “The Challenge of Defining Violent Extremism, January 12, 2019

Omar Nashabe, Criminal Justice and Human Rights analyst

January 2019

This article is part of a series published by LCPS with the support of the Embassy of Switzerland on Preventing Violent Extremism in Lebanon.
In this piece, Dr. Omar Nashabe examines and details concerns with defining violent extremism broadly and offers a definition best suited to the Lebanese context. 

In response to the United Nations’ call to member states to develop a Preventive Violent Extremism (PVE) strategy in 2016, the Lebanese government swiftly moved to do so. (Nothing in Lebanon is as swift as talking and armchair babbling)A key element of such a strategy is precisely defining violent extremism in order Not to conflate it with concepts like radicalization, fundamentalism, and intolerance, particularly as it could also be erroneously associated with a specific religion (Islam) or ideology (anarchy, white supremacy, the radical left, etc.).

While the Lebanese government definition seems promising, it needs to be elaborated on in order to avoid confusion and guide policy-making. (This is a first:  guide policy-making?)

Any serious and credible attempt to address VE requires a more sober definition, one which goes beyond reducing to terrorism that which is, in fact, the outcome of a participatory process and consultation.

There are two concerns regarding efforts to define VE:

The first concern centers on how the UN associated VE with terrorism by adding “as and when conducive to terrorism” to the concept of violent extremism in its Global Counter Terrorism Strategy.

This association is problematic in that Not all VE acts are conducive to terrorism.

For instance, while violent extremists may act collectively, be ideologically motivated, and have well-defined objectives and methods—hence in such cases extremist violence is probably conducive to terrorism—violent extremism may also be the product of individual acts driven by circumstantial facts and less affected by ideology.

In such cases, violent extremism may not be conducive to terrorism. This is an important distinction to make, namely, that actions associated with VE and terrorism may in some cases overlap but not in all cases.

The second concern centers on how the Lebanese government has defined VE in its strategy.

According to the National Strategy for the Prevention of Violent Extremism, “VE is the propagation of individual and social hatred that may lead to societal violence, namely the rejection of diversity and disobedience, the use of violence as a means of expression and influence, and behavior that threatens societal values that govern social stability.” (Does this include civil disobedience? And what social values should be retained after generation living under pseudo-governments?)

While this definition has sound elements, it requires further elaboration and clarity.

For example, it is not clear what “rejection of diversity and disobedience” means. More precisely, does “rejection” pertain to both “diversity” and “disobedience” and does the latter refer to civil disobedience as well?

Two, it should be noted that the use of violence as a means of expression may not always amount to violent extremism (for example using violence to express rejection of foreign occupation).

Third, there is a need to identify specific “Societal values that govern social stability”.

Although Lebanon developed its legal definition of terrorism in 1958, like most other UN member states, it has formulated a seemingly inadequate working definition of violent extremism.

The term inherently refers to the degree of a certain action but does not precisely qualify it.

This point is well illustrated by the fact that PVE measures in many states are poorly defined, often with the intent of using PVE measures to suppress political opposition or ideological dissent.

In many of these states, legislation against violent extremism has been used to target journalists, religious groups, or critics of state policy.

To this end, I suggest adopting the following definition of violent extremism in the Lebanese context:

Intolerant and aggressive persons or groups, thriving on conflicts and wars, and engaging, or planning to engage, in offenses involving brutal armed aggression aimed at hurting, degrading, or exterminating others and, in some cases, motivated by interpretations of religious or political ideology.”

(How this definition has Lebanon in context?)

This definition should be understood within the context of violent extremism existing along a spectrum, one which spans from encompassing individuals or groups of people engaging in the aforementioned behaviors to a range of motivations for these individuals or groups exhibiting violent extremist characteristics, spanning from circumstantial to ideological convictions.

Effective PVE strategies must be based on proper diagnosis and precise understandings of violent extremism that take into account cultural, political, and socio-economic contexts.

First, violent extremism seems to be motivated by hate; religious, social, and cultural intolerance; and in some cases, by an ideology that accepts or encourages extreme violence against others who do not share the same thoughts, identity, or culture.

Second, the connection between violence and extremism appears static, and violent extremists are radical in the sense that they are inflexible, non-negotiable, and do not accept peaceful conflict resolution.

(Is Lebanon political structure based on peaceful conflict resolution?)

Third, violent extremism is frequent in conflict zones, where it is heavily motivated by ideologies based on non-mainstream interpretations of religion and culture and where people have lost hope in the ability of democratic governments to provide basic needs.

Violent extremists are not necessarily members of an organization, however, they most likely have had direct or indirect contact with other extremists or with a specific extremist group that advocates for extreme violence.

Lastly, although violent extremist action may be conducive to encouraging or perpetuating acts of terrorism and may itself be a “terrorist” crime, this may not be the case for all violent extremists. (Come again?)

Based on the profile of violent extremists, they seem to share certain characteristics:

They are intolerant, aggressive, and thrive on conflicts and wars.

They are characterized by their willingness to engage in or plan actions entailing brutal armed aggression and are often motivated by religious or political ideology. (These are Not characteristics: they are consequences)

In fact, violent extremists can be classified into three types.

The first type is closely associated with ideology, comprising those connected to known terrorist organizations, making them easier to define on account of their objectives, ideology, and methods being apparent.

This type is more collective and encompasses violent extremists who, for instance, adhere to the ideology of Osama Bin Laden and Ayman Al Zawahiri, and rely on Al-Qaeda as a reference for “religious” guidance. (Does that include Zionism ideology and Wahhabi sect doctrine?)

Both the Abdullah Azzam Brigades and Osbat al-Ansar group’s objectives are based on the establishment of an Islamic state and the extermination of “disbelievers.”

Violent extremist groups of this type leave no room for moderate positions. Their radicalized narrative is centered on violent conflict with all those who disagree with their ideology, including state and religious institutions and supporters of secularism in the Arab region and in the West.

The second type of violent extremists in Lebanon is less associated with ideology as they are primarily members of offshoots of Lebanese militias and political parties.

They are not as clearly defined as the first type and do not strictly follow the instructions of their political leaders. Rather, they represent an extremist trend within their communities.

Offshoots of militias and political parties show signs of religious, social, and cultural intolerance, as well as aspirations to brutally exterminate rivals.

Supporters of such violent extremism are either former combatants who participated in the civil war and were pardoned by the 1990 Amnesty Law, or young individuals motivated by religious and political propaganda.

Recent examples of this type of violent extremism include violent attacks against Al-Jadeed television for criticizing a political leader; sectarian/religious tension in Jbeil (Lassa); and hate speech and vicious language used by supporters of political/sectarian groups on social media. (Particularly in university student elections?)

The third type of violent extremism is not connected to an ideology and is based on individual and circumstantial initiatives. It comprises sporadic perpetrators of violence and is the least well defined. In fact, the perpetrators seem unstable and do not refer to a specific political movement and may belong to any religious group.

The perpetrators of this type of violence are, however, instigators of social panic.

The influx of Syrian refugees to Lebanon six years ago led to the escalation of racist, xenophobic, and violent reactions in various parts of the country.

These violent reactions were mostly verbal and economic in nature, however, since the Lebanese Army began engaging militant groups on the border with Syria, incidents of violent extremism targeting Syrian refugees and Syrian workers have become more frequent, and some Lebanese have started to show support for such violent extremism.

Based on the types of VE, there is need to develop a more dynamic understanding of the causes and circumstances that exacerbate religious, social, and cultural intolerance as well as the use of brutal and violent means of expression.

These points highlight that clarity is vital when conceptualizing violent extremism in the Lebanese context, particularly as these definitions will be referenced when formulating or implementing future policies on matters involving the threat of extremism.

Note: I can understand that an individual terrorist enters a house and assassinate every member. When every Daesh member does this in every instance when occupying a town, it is far beyond brainwashing or religious zeal: it is colonial powers testing drugs that render an individual totally insensitive to human life.

War hardware: Timeline of insane mass destruction

Note: Re-edit of “Time line of war hardware inventions and applications October 8, 2010″

Dynamite (1867);

Explosion motor engine (1870);

iron battleship (1880);

machine gun (1884); (I think the French had the deadly machine guns in its war with Germany in 1869, but they were Not widely distributed in the army or ready to be used  in this war.)

wireless transmission (1905);

grenade and vehicle land mines (1914);

fighter airplane and fire launchers (1915);

tanks (1916);

bombers (1917);

drone (1930);

radar (1935);

anti-personal mines (1939);

missile (1942);

atomic bomb (1943);

reactor planes (1944);

bomb A (1945);

supersonic jets (1950);

helicopter (1950);

H-bomb (1952);

nuclear reactor submarines (1954);

laser (1958);

satellite ((1959);

nuclear aircraft carrier (1964);

Strategic Defense Initiative (1983);

precision guided missile (1990);

stealth bomber (2000);

robot killer (2005).

You realize that sophisticated war hardware invention accelerated its pace during WWI.

Your worries heighten when you discover that after WWII, the timeline from invention to application shortened drastically.

It is as if powerful States are very anxious to show off the potentials of mass destruction by creating arm conflicts for effective testing of the new arsenals.  

Actually, we witnessed 115 armed conflicts after 1945, twice the total number of conflicts in 150 years.

The US, France, England, and Russia annihilated entire islands and destroyed the ecosystem of vast lands just for testing H-bombs.

The effects of underground atomic testings are surfacing now with increased volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, and tidal waves. (And the weakening of earth magnetic field)

After testing on live hapless developing nations, the barons of military industries and Defense Department start exporting arms to so-called “friendly States”.  Most of these  “friendly States” produce oil and don’t know how to use what they purchased.

The military budgets of many States lack allocation to maintaining the sophisticated machines of death. Thus, the need to pay for “military experts” of the superpower State to keep the hardware combat ready.

The US government exports 50% of the total war hardware sold around the world.

Ten other States export the remaining 50%.

The US military budget is higher than the military budgets of all the UN recognized States.  Mind you that a single B2 bomber cost the military budget of 120 States; and what this bomber is used for?  Mainly if an armed conflict starts with China!

The UN banned the usage of many arms of mass destruction and especially chemical weapons that Germany started in 1916, Japan used in China in 1943, then US used in China in 1950,  in Vietnam for many years (orange gas), and also in Iraq in 2003.

Israel is still using all the banned arms on the Palestinians and the Lebanese such as cluster bombs, phosphorous bombs, Dense Inert Metal Explosive munitions

Tony Blair of England should be facing international court for crimes against humanity but he was recompensed with a peaceful resolution of Palestinian Israeli conflicts:  He delivered the cluster bombs to Israel in the 2006 war (33 days) against Lebanon, one day before the cease fire!   

Lebanon barely cleaned up half the clustered bomb in 5 years and more casualties are witnessed every week:  In Lebanon, hundred have died and thousand permanently injured.

This century witnessed 140 armed conflicts totaling more than 150 millions in direct casualties.

Three times that number suffered permanent disabilities and handicaps physically, mentally, or both.

Thus, one billion of mankind were wasted just in wars.

More than 20 conflicts produced over one million killed.

WWI generated about 9 million killed and WWII more than 60 millions.

Two dozen conflicts are still on going for decades and the toll is accumulating.

Mind that in every decade, one billion die of famine and curable diseases.

The UN estimated that currently there is one billion earning less than a dollar per day and have no shelters:  Which means, all the most downtrodden of the billion of mankind will invariably die within the decade of famine and curable diseases.

Note 1: Since 2010, we started the star wars where nations are testing the destruction of satellites in space and with accurate successes.

Note 2: Not a single conflict has been put to rest. All the hapless countries are still suffering the recurring pre-emptive wars, civil wars, and acute famine and economic sanctions.

How many UN resolutions for a State of Palestine is required for the US to bow down to the world community?

Note: Re-edit of “UN Passes Five Resolutions In Favor Of Palestine “December 5, 2015

And yet, the US does Not want to hear anything resembling fairness, equitable and rights for a displaced population by the colonial powers to Return Home.

Currently, the US of Trump want to offer All Palestinian Lands to Israel (West Bank), and including the Syrian Golan Heights and Jordanian lands in Ghour al Ordon

The resolutions endorse the return to peace talks, denouncing settlements in disputed East Jerusalem and in support of the work of the UN Committee fighting for the rights of the Palestinian people.
(What of the colony settlements in West Bank? Funded by US taxpayers)
A week ago, Mahmoud Abbas rescinded the Oslo agreement and banned all security intelligence services with Israel.
Jordan monarch has warned that Jordan will cancel parts of the Wadi Araba peace agreement with Israel during King Hussein.

New York, New York (IMEMC) – The overwhelming majority of General Assembly of the United Nations, Wednesday, voted on 5 draft resolutions in favor of Palestine.

The decision comes after the Assembly discussed the two articles, “the Palestinian Cause” and “the Conditions in the Middle East.”

According to Al Ray, the first resolution was entitled, “Using Amicable Methods to Resolve the Palestinian Cause”. The voting results were 148 in favor to 6 against, with 8 abstentions.

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas speaks during the 67th session of the United Nations General Assembly at U.N. headquarters in this Thursday, Sept. 27, 2012 file photo. (AP Photo/Seth Wenig)

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas speaks during the 67th session of the United Nations General Assembly at U.N. headquarters. (AP Photo/Seth Wenig)

The second resolution regarding “Jerusalem” passed with 144 votes in favor to 6 against, and 10 abstentions.

The third resolution was entitled, “The Informational Program about the Palestinian Cause”, which is being handled by the administration of media affairs in the Secretary-General of the United Nations, and passed with 147 votes in favor to 7 against, and 9 abstentions.

The fourth resolution was entitled “Committee for Palestinians Right to Exercise Ownership of Their Inalienable Rights.” The voting results were 94 in favor to 7 against, with 56 abstentions. (Those abstending States do Not consider Inalienable Rights should cover the Palestinian people?)

The last resolution, entitled, “The Section of Palestinians Rights in the Secretary-General of UN”, passed with 91 votes in favor to 7 against, with 59 abstentions.

After the voting process, Permanent Observer of Palestine to the United Nations, Riyad Mansour, gave a speech to show his gratitude and thanks to the member countries of the UN for their initial stand, and their votes in favor of the resolutions that show their support to the Palestinian cause.

Mansour added that the international community represented by the United Nations’ protection of international law is a source of comfort and support to the Palestinian people.

It will help them in their continuing journey of resisting and striving to maintain their inalienable rights, and bringing an end to the Israeli occupation, which will liberate the state of Palestine and its Capital of East Jerusalem, and fulfill the two-state solution.

The ambassador also affirmed the importance of the resolutions approved by the UN concerning Palestine, saying that what affects the credibility of the United Nations is not as some claim, the adoption of these resolutions but the nonexistence of a necessary political will to force Israel to show respect to these resolutions and apply it.

Note: A reminder that the UN also voted in 1948 for the right of return to the Palestinians to their homelands.Why it is Not reiterated and enforced?

Let me prove to you who are the Hooligans of Lebanon upheaval.

ما بستحي قول انو استيعابي بطيء ببعض الأحيان.

بتصير لما اسمع بخبر بيصدم، أو لما حدا من اللي بحبهم بينأذى.

من يومين صديقي Georges Azar انضرب بعنف قدام وزارة الطاقة، أخدوه شباب على غرفة جانبية وضربوه. مش أول مرة بينضربوا المتظاهرين بس ما بعرف لي هالمرة ما قدرت استوعب.

من أول ما بلشت تظاهرات ال ٢٠١٥، تعرفت عجورج من خلال صفحة بدنا نحاسب.

التقينا وقتها ب Le Mall وكنا عم نفكر ننظم عرض لفيلمي “عندما يأتي الظلام“، عن الكهربا بلبنان.
بعد ٥ سنين من هاللقاء، كتير اشيا تغيرت، بدنا نحاسب وقفت، Le Mall بسن الفيل سكر، نسينا موضوع عرض الفيلم، الكهربا بعدها وضعها لورا بس أنا وجورج صرنا أحلى أصدقاء.

لما حكيت جورج عالتلفون بنفس النهار قلي “مش زعلان الا انو شباب متل اخوتي ضربوني هالضرب كلو، وكرمال مين ودفاعا عن مين؟”.

أنا كمان انضربت مرة بساحة الثورة، كنت عم صوّر بكاميرتي مجموعة شباب نزلوا دفاعا عن زعيمهم.

ما تسألوني كيف لقيت حالي مندسة بيناتهم وبيطّلع فيي شب عشريني جميل وبقلي “نحنا وانتو واحد”.

اضحكتله من قلبي وبلشت اتحدث معه، وسألته سؤال يبدو استفز شب تاني، بقرّب، بيمسكلي ايدي وبيبرمها وبيكسر الكاميرا.

الكاميرا ضلت تشتغل وإيدي بعدها لليوم بتوجعني. وكل ما توجعني بسأل نفس السؤال اللي سأله جورج. مين اللي عم يضرب وكرمال مين.

ما بعرف شو هالصدفة إنو بنفس الأسبوع اللي انضرب فيه جورج، ينضرب Bachir Abou Zeid وبهالهمجية. وبيطلع مين يقلك ثورة سرقها الزعران.

خليني قلك مين هني هالزعران.

جورج إنسان راقي، مهذب، محترم، وما بيأذي نملة، محب، ومكرس أغلب وقته للقضايا المطلبية المحقة وليحاول يكون في بالبلد عدالة اجتماعية. حتى على صعيد شغله اللي بعيش منه، جورج مهندس وبيشتغل بالطاقة البديلة.

فيني أعطي مثل بسيط، جورج ركبلنا بالبيت طاقة شمسية، ومكنة بتكرر المي، وفلتر بحوّل مياه الاستعمال لمياه صالحة للشرب. وكلهم ماشيين وشغالين ووفروا علينا فاتورة كهربا وخففوا علينا شراية غالونات مية شرب.

أكيد انا بوثق بأخلاق وكفاءة جورج أكتر ما بوثق باللي إلهم ٣٠ سنة حاكمين البلد أو ١٥ سنة وما حاسبوا فيها ولا فاسد ومن أكبر إنجازاتهم لليوم سد مياه بيعبى التنين وبيفضى الخميس.

للأمانة بشير أبو زيد ما بعرفه شخصيا. بعرف إنو قضى إيام وليالي ليطلّع جريدة بتحكي نبض الثورة.

بشير ضوى شمعة بالوقت اللي البلد كله عايش عالعتمة. بس بشير قرر يلعن الظلام متل ما جورج نزل يلعن الظلام عوزارة الطاقة.

كل الوقت بقول غريبة قدرة الإنسان على التأقلم. كيف قدرنا نتأقلم مع وضعنا المزري، ونسكت عن كل الظلم اللي عايشينه. وبيطلع ناس يضربوا اللي قرر يقول لا للظلم ولا للظلام.

بفيلمي “عندما يأتي الظلام” بتخبرنا الحجة “نور الهدى” (اسمها نور وقصتها تراجيدية مع العتمة) كيف توفى زوجها بليلة كانت الكهربا عالموتور وما قلعت مكنة الأوكسيجين لانو مشتركة بأمبير واحد. بتقولها الحجة بكل بساطة وبكتير أسى: “ما قلعت المكنة، وإجته المنية… الكهربا بتلعب دور”.

كمان بهيدا الفيلم أخذني وقت لإستوعب انو الكهربا بلبنان مسؤولة عن أكتر من نصف الدين العام.

اليوم البلد مأفلس، ومحجوز عأموال العالم وشقى عمرها لأنو البنوك قررت تديّن مصريات الناس لدولة صرفت نصهم على صفقات فيول مغشوش وغيره… والنتيجة البلد بعده عالعتمة..

والنتيجة بيطلع مين يقول ثورة سرقها الزعران…

وبيطلع مين يضربك لأنو قلت “طفوا قدام بيت بري وضووا بيوت الناس

أو لأنو تظاهرت بوزارة الطاقة وطالبت بالتحقيق بملف الفساد بالكهرباء.

كل ما اتذكر الشاب اللي ضربني بالساحة، بغضب وبحزن، بس برجع بتذكر الشاب التاني اللي ضحكلي من قلبه وقلي “نحنا وانتو واحد”. صحيح نحنا وانتو واحد، أكيد… بس لأيمتى رح تخلي الزعيم بيني وبينك؟

أعيد وبتصرف: طفوا بيوت الزعما كلهم وضووا بيت نور
الهدى وبيوت كل الناس.

Note 1: My father was on Oxygen and bed ridden and we had 5 A from the private provider. Frequently, the electricity would go off and would have to go down at midnight to turn the Hawess on and shut off the eering sound of the machine.
Note 2: I have been telling everyone that the chief of the Parliament Berry, for the last 25 continuous years, is the Capone of all Capones of Lebanon militia/mafia “leaders”, and yet this Chief is under him about 6,000 public police officers, Not counting his own militia to order and activate.

Who handed over Syria land of Cilicia and Eskandaron to Turkey?

The French mandated power over Syria and Lebanon handed over to Turkey lands vaster than current Syria.

This land is called “Al Liwaa2” constituted of Antakia, Eskandaron, Bilan, Rihaniyat, Suwaydiyyat, Ksaab, Barkat, Bilyas. And in Cilicia: Diyar Baker, Aintab, Adana, Mardin, Ksaab, Barkat, Bilyas…

The main governments in France at that period were wholeheartedly in support of establishing a State for the Jews in Palestine. Thus, it was natural to divide this vast Syria, weaken it and strike a deal with Ataturk to support the creation of Israel.

This deal started with the SEVRES treaty and then Ankara Agreement where the borders were delimited by the train railway of the Orient.

This wide stretch of land is currently named Hatai province in Turkey

# كيليكيا ولواء اسكندرون.#
يطلان على البحر المتوسط ويقعان شمال سورية ،
بمساحة /187،804،9/كم مربع، ذو طبيعة جبلية ،أهم جبال اللواء/الأمانوس،الأقرع،موسى ،النفاخ../.
أهم أنهاره/نهر العاصي ،نهر الأسود،نهر عفرين../
-أهم مدنه /إنطاكيا،إسكندرونة ،بيلان،الريحانية،أرسوز،السويدية،
وفي كيليكيا مدن/ديار بكر ،عنتاب،أضنة ، ماردين /.
-في عام 1920 وفي إطار معاهدة “سيفر”  رسمت الحدود بين تركيا وسورية .
وفي اتفاقية “أنقرة الأولى “عام1921 أدخلت تعديلات على اتفاقية “سيفر”حيث اعتبرت سكة حديد (قطار الشرق السريع ) خطا حدوديا يفصل بين البلدين ،
وفي عام 1930 ألحقت فرنسا بتركيا 12 قرية عربية من اللواء
،وفي 29 أيار 1937 أصدرت عصبة الأمم قرارا بفصل اللواء عن سورية وعينت عليه حاكم فرنسيا ،
وفي 6 تموز 1938 دخلت القوات التركية مدن اللواء واحتلتها ،
وفي عام 1939 أشرفت الإدارة الفرنسية على استفتاء مزور النتائج  لإنضمام اللواء إلى تركيا .حيث تم فصله عن الدولة الأم سورية وأطلق عليه” إقليم هاتاي التركي “.
المتهمون بفصل اللواء عن سورية:
-فرنسا الاستعمارية حيث كانت تقايض أراضي غيرها من الدول بما يتفق مع مصالحها ،رغم أن صك الإنتداب يشترط عليها المحافظة على وحدة أراضي الدول المنتدبة عليها.
تاج الدين الحسيني:
هو من أصول مغربية،عرف بأنه رجل فرنسا الوفي ،ثالث رئيس لسورية بين عامي/1929 – 1931 /،ورئيس وزراء سورية بين عامي /1934 – 1936 / جاءت به فرنسا لرئاسة أخرى بين عامي / 1941 -1942 / .
ينتمي للتيار الإسلامي وقد سهل دخول الإخوان المسلمون إلى سورية بعد انطلاقهم من مصر  1928 .
للسوريين هتاف معروف في المظاهرات الوطنية ضده “يا تاج الدين يا عدو الله والدين
قيل أنه لم يمانع من تسليم لواء اسكندون لتركيا بداعي التخلص من الأكثرية العلوية في اللواء ،وكي لا يزاحموا الأغلبية السنية على الحكم في سورية ،وقد أرسل خفية ثلاث شخصيات معروفة الى تركيا تستجدي السلطات التركية لضم اللواء.
وهو جد الخائن أحمد معاذ الخطيب الذي ترأس ما سمي “الإئتلاف السوري المعارض “
– المتهم الثاني :أحمد نامي
من أصول شركسية ،صهر السلطان العثماني عبد الحميد الثاني ،معرف أنه مؤسس المحفل الماسوني في سورية .
حكم سورية ببن عامي /1926 – 1928 / ،كما تولى تشكيل أكثر من حكومة .
في عهده اعتقلت فرنسا كافة القيادات الوطنية السورية بتواطئه معها.
المتهم الثالث :جميل مردم بك
مم أصول تركية ،عضو في المحفل الماسوني السوري ،تعاقب على الرئاسة في سورية أكثر من مرة في الثلاثينات والأربعينات ،
أبن عم فؤاد مردم الذي أعدم بتهمة شراء سفينة أسلحة وتسليمها للعصابات الصهيونية في فلسطين ،
تنسب إلى جميل مردم بك العبارة المشهورة “تركيا أرض الإسلام وسورية أرض الإسلام فلا مشكلة أين ما ذهب لواء اسكندرون “
………….دمتم بخير ……………….

A National identity? Lacking this identity? Again, what is this new notion?

Note: Re-edit of “Lacking a National identity? Is it a big deal?”

We don’t need to unite under an identity:  All national identities everywhere were invariably built and sustained on myths, historical falsehood, and faked stories.

Any powerful colonial nation that gained an “identity” was forced upon its “citizens” by waging wars for fictitious claims and suffering millions of young soldiers fallen in battlefields.

What we need is to be unified under the banners of civil rights, human rights, sustainable environment, equitable and fair election laws and regulations, civil marriage, linked to fast communication technologies, access to social platforms, freedom of expression, laws not discriminating among genders, versatile opportunities to jobs and to applying our expertise, affordable education system, national health system…

What we need is to unite against any State invading our borders, bombing our infrastructure, humiliating us, destabilizing our society and economy.

What we need is to unify against any political current that has proven to work against democratic representations, racial demagoguery, sectarian political ideology.

What identity are we claiming?  

Are we to emulate other Nations that based their “identity” on myths and falsehood?

Youth was sacrificed to institute a Nation and were never taken seriously because they are viewed as just meat for the canon and a burden to a stable political system…

There are sections in Lebanon (mostly Christian Maronites) advancing the French mandatory alternative of a “Phoenician” ancestors.

Currently, there are Lebanese testing their blood for DNA evidences of any physical “Phoenician inheritance“.

A few are wary that they won’t be found to have any Phoenician stain/strain and be caste off as “strangers”.  What a load of crap.

The Phoenicians ruled the Mediterranean Sea in 1,200 BC and the string of their City-States extended from southern Turkey, Syria, Lebanon, up to Haifa in Palestine.

The Phoenicians were famous for maritime trade and commerce and established many trading centers around the Sea.  The written language has been around for 3,000 years, but the Phoenicians in the City-State of Byblos are credited for inventing the alphabet (currently in use with slight modifications.)

Before the Phoenicians and afterward, the Near East region of the Mediterranean (Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, and Palestine) has been invaded by a dozen warrior empires, many invaded us repeatedly.

For example, the empires in Iraq (Akkad, Babylon, Assyria), Egypt, Persia under various dynasties (at least four of them), Greece, Roman, Byzantium, Arabic, Ottoman, and finally the colonial powers of France and Britain.

All these warrior empires didn’t build anything worth showing as representative of civilization, until they invaded our region “The Land” and rounded off and hoarded the educated and master craftsmen to their capitals.

We are a region of multiple identities if we have to rely on occupation empires.

How about we identify with education and craftsmanship?  I love this identity.

Let us focus on affordable efficient schooling system; let us encourage technical and craftsmanship schooling system.

Let us focus on building commercial ships; let us invest in railways and fast communication facilities; let us open up to knowledge facilities all over the world.

I love this identity; let us get to work and planning.

Another sections of Lebanese, mostly Muslim-Sunnis, would like to have an Arabic identity and pushing it too far to claiming that we are from the Arabian Peninsula. Are we Arabs?  What that means?

The Islamic Arabic army that came from the Arabian Peninsula to fight the Byzantine Empire and later the Persian Empire barely numbered 7,000 men of war.  The other three-fourth of the army that backed and supplemented the “Arabic army” was constituted from people and tribes living in Syria, Iraq, and Jordan wanting to defeat the Byzantium unforgiving Orthodox Church and domination.

How can we be descendant of the sparsely populated Arabian Peninsula?

The “Arabic identity” group would claim that our culture and civilization is Islamic Arabic. How that?

The cultural development during the Arabic Empire was shouldered by the scholars in Syria, Iraq, and Iran and they were mostly Christians. They would like to rely on the Arabic language as basis for our identity.  Excellent idea.

Let us prove that the Arabic language is a viable foundation; let us infuse a new spirit in that dying language; let us translate the worthy manuscripts; let us invent new terms that have No religious connotation and spread the Arabic language as a universal language, valid to sustain modern civilization with fresh brains and advanced sciences and technologies.  I will be for it and will support it vehemently.

But first, let these “Arabic” scholars recognize that the Arabic language has roots in the slang of the Land: Aramaic, and Syriac languages…

There are other factions wanting to claim that we are Muslims.  How about the dozen minority religious sects?  Are we to agree on a theocratic identity?

Turkish Ataturk cancelled the caliphate in 1925 and there is no caliphate anymore, anywhere.  Tiny Lebanon has 19 “officially” recognized self-autonomous religious communities running our civil life.  Let us get real.

A theocratic State will never pass and will never find unity for identity.

Should we hide behind a reality of disparate communities to establish the concept of plurality community government?  Should 19 wrong sectarian identities constitute a valid identity?


What we need is to be unified under the banners of civil rights, human rights, sustainable environment, equitable and fair election laws and regulations, civil marriage, linked to fast communication technologies, access to social platforms, freedom of expression, laws not discriminating among genders, versatile opportunities to jobs and expertise, affordable education system, national health system…

What we need is to unify against any State invading our borders, bombing our infrastructure, humiliating us, destabilizing our society and economy.  

What we need is to unify against any political current that has proven to working against democratic representations, racial demagoguery, sectarian political ideology.

Lebanon trying to shed its militia/mafia Big Rodents from power

Note 1: Re-edit of “Aoun-Phobia versus Aoun-Idolatry”

Note 2: I received this e-mail in French and decided to translate it, and repost it, within context and clarify a few issues.

First, a few clarifications in context:

General Michel Aoun was ousted as Prime Minister in 1989 by the Syrian forces with a US green light.  Aoun became a political refugee in France till 2005 until late Rafic Hariri PM was assassinated.

As the Syrians troops were getting ready to leave Lebanon in 2005, Aoun was getting ready to return to Lebanon.  France did its best to discourage Aoun to return to Lebanon at the urge and strong pressures from all political parties in Lebanon, mostly the sectarian and feudal parties, that felt that Aoun might take center stage with Lebanese anxious of Syria withdrawal.

As Aoun landed he proclaimed: “Now that the Syrian army is out of Lebanon then I no longer has any qualms with Syria”  

All political parties refrained from allying with the Tayyar of Aoun during the Parliamentary election of 2005, both the March 8 and the March 14 alliances, respectively with the US or Syria interference in Lebanon.

And yet, Aoun’s party won hands down the election with a landslide majority of the Christian voters.

Now the e-mail.

“The current principal Lebanese cleavage seems to be between what separate the two political groups: Aoun-Phobia (or March 14 political alliances) versus Aoun-Idolatry (or March 8 alliances).

(That was before Aoun allied with Hezbollah in order to break this separation among the religious sects, specifically between the Sunni and Shia that Israel/USA has been inflaming for decades)

You are under the impression that we got over the old quarrels between Arabists and Phoenicians origins of the Lebanese; that we got over pro Bush Junior or Bashar Assad of Syria, and that March 8 or 14 alliances are old and insipid tales.

All the fracturing lines are AounDeluvian. (Especially when Aoun was elected President of the Republic in 2017 and currently when all the Big mafia/militia Rodents are out of the government after the mass upheaval in October 17 2019)

You can no longer sit for dinner without Aoun-Phobia group Aoun-Lambasts  Aoun-Idolaters.  The evening is thus ruined for the rare Aoun-Neutrals

The worst part is that the actual staunchest AounPhobias were the most AounIdolaters when General Michel Aoun was the designated Prime Minister in 1988 and fighting the Syrian troops in Lebanon as invaders. (No, not the leaders: they were the most ass-liking of Syrian mandated power)

AounPhobia people are irremediably Aoun-Psychaitrists: their diagnostics are AounChrist (antichrist), Aoun-Megalomania, and Aounarcisist. AounPhobia people are under AounDepressents and proud to be AountPhobia addicted….”

An Aoun-Anxieted citizen

In 2006, before Israel’ pre-preemptive war on Lebanon, Aoun had a rapprochement with Hezbollah that upset all alliances and made the alliances of the majority of Christians with the Muslim Shias during the 2005 parliamentary election an unbeatable political power pressure.

Syria then welcomed Aoun officially as a major State personality for an entire week.

It seems that Syria is trying currently to clip the advances of Aoun’s party by ordering political leaders who sided staunchly with Aoun to desist from total support rhetoric.

For example, the Maronite Suleiman Frangieh of Zgharta, the Druze Erslan of Aley, and Skaf of Zahle have been showing lukewarm enthusiasm for Aoun during the latest municipal election.

Even Hezbollah, through its alliance with AMAL of Nabih Berry, has been implicitly trying to weaken the Tayyar influence.

Still, the Tayyar of Aoun managed to win big time in both the Parliamentary and municipal elections.

Note 3: The Big Rodents have bankrupted Lebanon at all levels: economy, finance, government, Central Bank and most public institutions such as education, health, electricity..





September 2020

Blog Stats

  • 1,418,812 hits

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by

Join 771 other followers

%d bloggers like this: