LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
February 20/2010

Bible Of the Day
Matthew 7/18-27: "Corrupt tree produces evil fruit. 7:18 A good tree can’t produce evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree produce good fruit. 7:19 Every tree that doesn’t grow good fruit is cut down, and thrown into the fire. 7:20 Therefore by their fruits you will know them. 7:21 Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter into the Kingdom of Heaven; but he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 7:22 Many will tell me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, didn’t we prophesy in your name, in your name cast out demons, and in your name do many mighty works?’ 7:23 Then I will tell them, ‘I never knew you. Depart from me, you who work iniquity.’ 7:24 “Everyone therefore who hears these words of mine, and does them, I will liken him to a wise man, who built his house on a rock. 7:25 The rain came down, the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat on that house; and it didn’t fall, for it was founded on the rock. 7:26 Everyone who hears these words of mine, and doesn’t do them will be like a foolish man, who built his house on the sand. 7:27 The rain came down, the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat on that house; and it fell—and great was its fall.”

Free Opinions, Releases, letters & Special Reports
Iran’s war is not our war/By: Hanin Ghaddar/February 19, 10
Don't expect progress from talking to Syria/Washington Post/February 19/10
The errors in America's 'war on terror'/By Ammar Abdulhamid/February 19/10
Iran between dictatorship and a Hobbesian free-for-all/By Iason Athanasiadis/February 19/10
Destination Damascus/By: Omayma Abdel-Latif /Al-Ahram Weekly/February 19/10
Israel is back/By: Guy Bechor /Ynetnews/February 19/10
Don't expect progress from talking to Syria/Washington Post/February 19/10

Latest News Reports From Miscellaneous Sources for February 19/10
Human Error behind Ethiopian Plane Crash: Preliminary Report/Naharnet
Moussa: Israeli Attack on Lebanon is Always a Possibility/Naharnet
Report: Hizbullah Tries to Break Out of Militant Mold/Naharnet
85 Victims of Hizbullah Attacks Sue Iran's Top Banks/Naharnet
Suleiman to Moscow on March 24-26/Naharnet
Sfeir: Hariri's Visit to the Vatican Stresses that Lebanon is Message of Coexistence/Naharnet
March 25 National Holiday/Naharnet
Ahmadinejad Urges Nasrallah to Annihilate Israel if It Attacks Lebanon/Naharnet
Aoun: Municipal Electoral Law Content More Important Than Election Date, But We Don't Want Polls Cancelled/Naharnet
Czech FM in Beirut/Naharnet
Rafeh, Khattab Sentenced to Death for Majzoub Brothers Murder, Spying for Israel/Naharnet
Franjieh: Israel Doesn't Need Any Alibi to Wage War, Nasrallah's Speech 'Defensive'/Naharnet
Austrian FM Discusses Prospects for Mideast Peace, Joining UNIFIL/Naharnet
System would make strike against Tehran's nuclear reactors more difficult/WND.com
Syria site bombed by Israel in 2007 likely to have been a nuclear reactor/Haaretz
Iran tops terror financing watch list/The Associated Press
85 Victims of Hezbollah Terrorist Rocket Attacks File Unprecedented Civil Suit/PR Newswire
Lebanon, A Reason For Heartbreak/Forbes
Mossad blasted at home over killing in Dubai/The Australian
Arabs would back Lebanon if attacked by Israel: Mussa/AFP
US anti-terror official has 'productive talks' in Syria/AFP
Lebanon: Death sentence for killers of Islamic Jihad figure in 2006/Ynetnews
FPM, PSP to meet as part of Chouf reconciliation/Daily Star
NGO stresses 'major' need to hold municipal elections on time/Daily Star
Former ISF spy for Israel sentenced to death/AFP
Sleiman pleased with electoral reform/Daily Star
Cabinet orders search teams to keep looking for air crash victims/Daily Star
Tehran pledges 'full support' for Beirut after Israeli threats/Daily Star
Arabs will back Lebanon if Israel attacks: Moussa/AFP
Lebanon records 7 percent growth in 2009: Bank Audi/Daily Star
Lebanon boosts crackdown on money laundering/Daily Star
Moussa describes Lebanon as 'victim in waiting' of Israeli attack/Daily Star
AUB donations give old computers new lease on life/Daily Star
With new manifesto, Hizbullah tries to break out of militant mold/Daily Star
Interior Ministry stresses need for urban development/Daily Star

Arabs will back Lebanon if Israel attacks: Moussa
Beirut ‘to participate’ in Arab League summit in Libya
By Elias Sakr and Agence France Presse (AFP)
/Daily Star staff
Friday, February 19, 2010
BEIRUT: Arab League chief Amr Moussa said on Thursday that Arab countries would stand by Lebanon if it were attacked by Israel, adding that the situation between the two countries is tense. “If a new attack or aggression is in the process of being prepared, they [Israel] will not get away with it easily,” Moussa said after meeting with Foreign Minister Ali Shami. “We learned the lessons of 2006, and the Arab position is to stand by Lebanon.”Moussa did not elaborate on what he meant by the lessons of 2006 or what he meant by the assurance of support. Israel launched a devastating war on Lebanon in July 2006 after the Lebanese Hizbullah seized two Israeli soldiers in a cross-border raid.
The war killed more than 1,200 people in Lebanon, mainly civilians, and 160 Israelis, most of them soldiers. It also devastated much of the infrastructure in southern Lebanon, just across the border and a Hizbullah stronghold. Moussa, who was wrapping up a two-day visit to Beirut, was speaking amid growing fears in Lebanon that Israel might again attack the country.
“There are not just threats, but thousands of violations of the border zone and of south Lebanon, which demonstrate that the situation is complex and tense,” Moussa said.
He did not elaborate, but Israel warplanes frequently invade Lebanese airspace in violation of Resolution 1701, which ended the summer 2006 war.
Following talks with President Michel Sleiman on Thursday, Moussa said that Lebanon would participate in the Arab League summit scheduled to be held in Libya in March but added that it was up to Lebanese leaders to decide on the size and nature of the representing delegation. “Lebanon will participate in the Arab League summit to be held in Libya and this issue is not disputed,” he told reporters at Baabda Presidential Palace.
“We have plenty of time to discuss the issue,” Moussa added. Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri said Wednesday that Lebanon should not send a delegation to the summit in Libya.
He added that Libya could not host an Arab League Summit as it fueled numerous crises “from Chad to Darfur.” Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi has been implicated in the 1978 disappearance of Imam Moussa Sadr, the Iranian-born Shiite cleric who founded the Movement of the Deprived (Amal) in Lebanon, and disappeared along with two companions after departing for Tripoli to meet with government officials. Berri, who heads the Amal Movement, also called on Arab leaders to refrain from participating in the summit, “so as not to provide a political cover to Libya” but said earlier this month it was up to the president to decide on Lebanon’s participation. “I understand the positions and calculations of a major faction of the Lebanese people which should be taken into consideration,” Moussa said. When asked whether the issue of Sadr’s disappearance and revealing his fate would be discussed on the sideline of the summit, the Arab League secretary general warned against discussing the issue in the media. “Discussing the matter by putting it on top of the media talks’ agenda is not beneficial,” he said. During talks with Sleiman, Moussa underlined the importance of Lebanon’s participation in the Arab League summit given the dangerous challenges facing the region and since the summit would discuss issues relating to Lebanon.
“I discussed during the meeting with President Sleiman several issues regarding the regional situation and arrangements ahead of the Arab league summit and its agenda,” Moussa said.
Tackling the Mideast peace process, Moussa added that he discussed with Sleiman inter-Arab ties and ways to push the Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations forward.
“Lebanon is today a member of the UN Security Council and he has a responsibility to represent the Arab League before the international community,” Moussa added.
Moussa also called for dialogue among Arab states in light of regional tensions and upcoming challenges, particularly regarding Israeli threats against Lebanon.
“It is necessary to be cautious in the region because it stands on a hot plate; thus factors of Arab strength lie in dialogue and discussions to reach the needed conclusion and define our position against potential developments,” Moussa said. Israel and Hizbullah have been exchanging lately threats as Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu warned that all of Lebanon would be a target to Israeli attacks given the resistance’s participation in the government. Hizbullah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah warned earlier this week that any attacks on Lebanese infrastructure would be met with counterattacks on Israeli ones. – Elias Sakr, with AFP

FPM, PSP to meet as part of Chouf reconciliation
By The Daily Star /Friday, February 19, 2010
BEIRUT: A meeting between Free Patriotic Movement (FPM) and Progressive Socialist Party (PSP) is scheduled for next Saturday at the latter’s residence in the Chouf town of Mukhtara as part of reconciliation efforts among residents of Mount Lebanon to promote unity in the Chouf, the FPM announced Thursday.
Both FPM leader MP Michel Aoun and PSP head MP Walid Jumblatt will also pay a visit to Beiteddine’s Diocese following an invitation by Sidon Maronite Bishop Elias Nassar, the FPM statement said.
The Free Patriotic Movement (FPM) also called in its statements for massive participation in the meeting in order to promote coexistence and unity.
Thousands of Christian families fled their villages and have not yet returned after bloody clashes between the Druze and Christian communities in the Chouf during Lebanon’s bloody 15 year-Civil War.
“In light of the meeting that is going to unite Michel Aoun and Walid Jumblatt in Mukhtara to pursue the reconciliation among the Chouf’s residents started in 2001 by the Maronite Patriarch.
Sidon Maronite Bishop Elias Nassar calls on “friends” to receive both leaders in the Beiteddine Diocese on February 20, the statement said.
In remarks published on Thursday by several Qatari newspapers, Aoun said no agenda was planned ahead of his visit to Mukhtara.
He also stressed that his meeting with Jumblatt would be open to all discussions based on interaction with the PSP leader.
“Politics are governed by developments and conflicting interests would turn eventually to mutual ones,” Aoun added.
Aoun also stressed that his meeting with Jumblatt in Doha happened by coincidence since the Mukhtara and Beiteddine meetings were scheduled prior to his visit to Qatar.
When asked about the potential rise of a third political coalition in Lebanon embracing President Michel Sleiman, Speaker Nabih Berri and Jumblatt, Aoun denied such possibility.
“The political map is drawn and there is no new line as our coalition grows bigger while the opposite side shrinks with time,” Aoun said, in reference to the March 14 Forces.
Aoun also denied political enmity with Berri but rather added that differences in opinion should always be considered positively.
Jumblatt withdrew from the March 14 alliance following the June parliamentary elections last year, saying that it was driven by necessity and must come to an end. – The Daily Star

Destination Damascus
As the Cedar revolution marks its fifth anniversary, the political terrain in Lebanon remains fragile,
Omayma Abdel-Latif
Al-Ahram Weekly
For the past five years, the most common way for March 14 supporters to discredit their political rivals have been to portray them as Syrian allies or stooges in Lebanon. It was not much of a surprise, therefore, that when Prime Minister Saad Al-Hariri mentioned Syria in his speech commemorating the fifth anniversary of his father's assassination Sunday, he was booed by his own audience.
Al-Hariri had a lot of explaining to do regarding his visit to Damascus last December. The majority of Al-Hariri's Sunni supporters still cannot swallow his visit and the new page in relations with Syria it inaugurated. After all, for five years animosity towards Syria has been the sole mobilising factor of March 14 supporters. They were told over and over that it was Syria who killed Rafik Al-Hariri and that was behind a series of assassinations that took place in Lebanon from 2005 until 2008.
Lebanese analyst Nicola Nassif said it was not "easy for Al-Hariri to be booed by his audience while explaining his vision on Syrian-Lebanese relations. He also did not expect that this audience would applaud reconciliation with Syria overnight. Many did not hide their disappointment at the visit, but more importantly at the fact that their leader did not bother to prepare them for such a grand event."
Mohamed Shatah, Al-Hariri's foreign affairs advisor, explained the people's reaction by noting, "the Syrian question is a very sensitive one". "On a popular level, the relationship undoubtedly has been very difficult," said Shatah. He dismissed that improving relations with Syria was the result of Saudi- Syrian reconciliation alone. "This step was important, but most importantly the Lebanese-Syrian climates improved when Syria showed willingness to address a number of pending issues like opening up an embassy and establishing diplomatic ties, and also the fact that the international tribunal has become a fact of life."
The booing of Al-Hariri also reflects what could be called a leadership-people divide. Sectarian and political polarisation is still high among the popular bases. Resistance to the policy choices of Al-Hariri or Druze leader Walid Jumblatt is unlikely, however, to develop into a movement able to challenge their leadership. "Even if their supporters object to their policies, this does not mean they would abandon them," explained Jonney Munayer, political analyst of the daily Ad-Diyar newspaper.
Meanwhile, Lebanese newspapers are awash with reports about Jumblatt's imminent trip to Damascus. Leaks by Jumblatt's close circles reveal that preparations for the visit are in full swing. Although no date had been set, reports suggest it could be before the end of February. Jumblatt's meeting with Hizbullah Secretary- General Hassan Nasrallah on Sunday was said to have touched on his Damascus visit. Nasrallah is believed to be playing a mediating role between Jumblatt and Damascus.
As on previous occasions, Syria was at the heart of speeches commemorating the anniversary of Rafik Al-Hariri's killing -- an event that marked the onset of what became known as the cedar revolution. This time, however, the tone was different. The head of the Phalanges Party, one of two Christian parties that remain in the March 14 alliance, expressed support for "Al-Hariri in seeking to improve relations between Syria and Lebanon." "We believe that we should build bridges with Syria because it is our conviction that Lebanon's stability and security are a reflection of Syria's stability and security," leader Amin Gemayel told the audience. But he demanded that Syria takes "concrete and clear steps" towards addressing pending issues in the relationship.
Al-Hariri finally explained the reasons behind his visit. "It was a result of a window of opportunity for the larger Arab reconciliation efforts exerted by King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia." Having had a monopoly over the meaning of Lebanon's interests for the past five years, Al-Hariri now identified Lebanon's interest to be in "Arab solidarity" and not in the "the game of axes", referring to the divide between so-called "moderate" regional powers (Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia) and those engaged in "resistance" (Syria, Iran and Hizbullah).
Al-Hariri explained his recent policy shifts as part of the "Lebanon first" agenda.
Hizbullah's Nawaf Al-Musawi, an MP of the Loyalty to the Resistance bloc, hoped that Saudi-Iranian rapprochement would have a similar impact in Lebanon as Syrian-Saudi rapprochement. Hizbullah continues to fear a return to sectarian strife. " [Avoiding] this is our responsibility as much as it is Al-Hariri's responsibility," said Al-Musawi, adding that for Hizbullah "the US threat to Lebanon of planting the seeds of sectarian strife is greater than Israeli military threats."
© Copyright Al-Ahram Weekly. All rights reserved

Iran between dictatorship and a Hobbesian free-for-all
By Iason Athanasiadis
Commentary by
Friday, February 19, 2010
How many revolutions can one generation manage? With poetic precision, angry demonstrators are challenging Iran’s aging revolutionaries.
Paradoxically, many are their own children, disillusioned by Khomeinism and the system of the supreme guardian. Revolutions devour their own children. The Islamic Republic spat out its ideological offspring once in the bloody score-settling immediately after Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini’s return to Iran in 1979, and once again last summer when it instructed the security forces to kill, torture and sexually abuse rebellious youths, many of whom are the sons of khodis (insiders).
On February 11, thousands of Green protesters were violently suppressed when they sought to march alongside a government-sanctioned demonstration marking the 31st anniversary of the revolution. Hijacking a pro-regime protest to publicly condemn the Islamic Republic was until recently unthinkable. It suggests that a sea change in mentality is sweeping society. Is it too late for the current ruling system to defuse it?
The current incumbents of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi’s vacated palaces have demonstrated that rather than learning from history, they are repeating it. They smear their opponents with the same accusations leveled by the shah against his own challengers: they portray the protesters as an unrepresentative minority backed by foreign powers, call in the military to quell them, and summon regime loyalists for counter-rallies designed to underscore support for the status quo.
Iran’s unprecedented political crisis is transforming the core of the Islamic Republic beyond recognition. Its possible collapse and the absence of a coherent opposition conjure up a nightmare scenario of conflicting agendas fragmenting the country: disparate Khomeinist leftists struggling with returning exiles, communists, Marxists, religious nationalists, members of the Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization, royalists and ethnic secessionists, all grappling with each other in a power vacuum stretching across a country the size of western Europe and hemmed in by war zones on its eastern and western flanks.
Alternatively, were the Green movement to be quashed, the militarization of political life started by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad when he appointed former Revolutionary Guardsmen to ministries, ambassadorships and provincial governorships would accelerate. Supreme leader Ali Khamenei’s once-absolute authority will continue eroding until his position becomes honorary.
Much like the Turkic warrior castes that swept down from Central Asia from the 10th century on, first defending the Abbasid Empire as mercenaries but eventually amassing power and spawning a dynasty, so may Iran’s supreme leader become as irrelevant as the caliph then was. Valuable for the religious legitimacy vested in him as the defender of Islam, the lineage was retained to lend the state religious credibility.
Already, Khamenei lacks the religious authority of Khomeini, his predecessor and founder of the Islamic Republic. He seeks to retain a measure of control over the Islamic Revolutionary Guards through his son Mojtaba Khamenei, the product of a clerical-military environment. But the flood of current IRGC commanders suddenly making very public political statements tells another story.
Last summer, Ahmadinejad flexed new mu cles when he targeted then-Intelligence Minister Mohsen Ejheii, a Khamenei loyalist, and criticized his handling of the crisis. After the minister resigned in protest, Ahmadinejad appointed a stalwart to the same position with no prior experience in intelligence affairs. Along with forced resignations and the emergence of an IRGC-administered parallel intelligence body, the current ministry is reportedly a shell of its former self and packed with Revolutionary Guard veterans.
So these are two equally unappetizing visions of the future: a military dictatorship backed by China and Russia floating as an outpost of their influence in the twilight of the US empire; or a Hobbesian free-for-all in a country under dismemberment.
And amid the chaos, electricity blackouts, flourishing crime and insecurity, how much value will the reacquired ability of Iranian women to issue from their homes without a headscarf have?
Alternatively, the people of a country where one violent revolution gave rise to eight years of war and horrific human rights abuses may decide to push for gradual change and internal reform. The question then becomes, how prepared is the Islamic Republic to concede substantial change?
The events since this summer’s elections are an eloquent reminder of what happens when the opportunity of reform for the general benefit of society is passed up in favor of squabbling and power jostling.
Iason Athanasiadis is an Istanbul-based writer and photographer who lived in Iran from 2004 to 2007. This commentary first appeared at bitterlemons-international.org, an online newsletter.

The errors in America's 'war on terror'
By Ammar Abdulhamid
Commentary by
Friday, February 19, 2010
Despite two invasions and numerous air strikes against targets in other countries, and despite security cooperation with several states across the Middle East and North Africa, the United States still finds itself unable to make serious progress in its global “war on terror.” Even though the United States has imbued its policies with militarism and pragmatism, Al-Qaeda remains an elusive target as it continues to inspire surrogates and attract converts or wannabes even on American soil.
The US is failing to rise to the challenge. Worse, by focusing on certain countries and the capture of certain individuals, it has allowed itself to fall into the trap of fighting the kinds of war that play to the terrorists’ strong suits, both tactically and logistically, while providing them with enough ammunition for their propaganda and recruitment campaigns.
The US is directly bogged down in two countries, Iraq and Afghanistan, and tactically over-invested in two others, namely Yemen, where Washington has for years maintained security cooperation with the regime, and Somalia, where not long ago it supported a failed Ethiopian invasion. The US may not have introduced troops, but it invested its prestige and tactical support, and the fact that Al-Qaeda continues to thrive in Yemen and that the Islamic Courts Movement continues to dictate events in Somalia are blows to the US and victories for its enemies.
Moreover, as part of its war efforts, the US has built security alliances with states across the Middle East region, and has come to depend excessively on information provided by their security apparatuses. This has exposed the US to the same structural vulnerabilities affecting its partners, while exposing Washington to their deceptive practices.
Terrorists often serve as pawns and proxies used by ruling regimes to “manage” their perpetual rivalries, or as useful instruments of blackmail against the US and other developed countries. This is the case with Saudi Arabia and Egypt, where the regimes can always play on the terrorist threat to protect themselves. There are also those Middle Eastern regimes willing to strike deals with terrorists, allowing their countries to be used as staging grounds for operations elsewhere in exchange for the terrorists not conducting operations on their territory. This is the case with Syria.
There are even times when terrorists are allowed, even encouraged, to operate internally, so long as they target the enemies of the ruling regime or certain detested ethnic groups. This is the case with Yemen. And occasionally, factions within a ruling regime use terrorists in their jockeying for power and influence, as we’ve seen in the case of Pakistan.
This confusing intermingling of internal and regional power struggles, ethnic politics, corruption and terrorism often creates a black-hole that sucks in all and sundry, including the US. The current situation in Yemen is a case in point. The impoverished country is currently a theater for three different conflicts involving Iran, Saudi Arabia, the United States, Al-Qaeda, the rebellious Shiite Houthis, different factions within the ruling regime, and a few dozen warring tribes.
Another problem in the American approach to the war on terror is its over-investment of time and resources in the pyrrhic pursuit of certain key-individuals, such as Osama bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri and Anwar al-Awlaki. Indeed, these individuals should be captured when possible, but not under the assumption that their capture or demise would change very much. There are too many others who can step in and fill the gap they leave behind. For they are only a manifestation of the real problem, namely the lack of empowerment that comes from living in underdeveloped states ruled by corrupt and authoritarian regimes. This situation has created large pools of frustrated young people from all social backgrounds, into which radical Islamists tend to cast their nets.
When we consider that these radical groups include not only “operations-focused” groups such as Al-Qaeda, Islamic Jihad and Al-Jamaa al-Islamiyya, but also movements that have social dimensions like Hamas and Hizbullah, the picture becomes more elaborate. The challenge confronting the US is to create similar movements that are sympathetic to its interests and values, so that the “American promise” based on the free exchange of ideas, the rule of law, and representative governance can become internalized in their outlooks; and so that American security can become a reality that these movements identify with.
The “American promise” already has legions of adherents in the Middle East, but they tend to see the US as a fickle ally on account of its conflicting regional policies. Hizbullah stands for Iran, because Iran stands by Hizbullah. Al-Qaeda inspires surrogates because there are those willing to commit the resources and provide the conditions necessary for the emergence of such surrogates. Where is the US in all this?
The Clinton administration focused on a peace process that went nowhere. The Bush administration spoke of a “freedom agenda,” but never managed to flesh it out beyond a resort to war. Then came the Obama administration with its dismissal of democracy promotion and its inability to do anything of consequence in connection with the peace process. Thus, on the fronts that truly count in the war on terror, the US has from the outset been missing in action.
That is why a Nigerian with a bomb could horrify the US on Christmas Day and almost lure it into another campaign in Yemen. Osama bin Laden understood this perfectly, which is why he claimed responsibility for the failed attack. The cord it struck and the confusion it caused was victory enough. Even by failing the terrorists are winning, because they are fighting the war on the one front that counts: that of our minds.
Ammar Abdulhamid, the founder and director of the Tharwa Foundation, is a Washington-based Syrian author turned human rights and democracy activist. He enjoys a global reputation as an advocate for social and political change in the broader Middle East and North Africa. The current article, part of a series advocating the revamping of American foreign policy in the Middle East, was written for THE DAILY STAR.

85 Victims of Hezbollah Terrorist Rocket Attacks File Unprecedented Civil Suit Against Iran's Central Bank
and Iranian Commercial Banks in D.C. Court
WASHINGTON, Feb. 18 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Eighty five American, Israeli and Canadian victims of Hezbollah rocket attacks have filed an unprecedented lawsuit against the Central Bank of Iran ("CBI"), Bank Saderat Iran of Teheran and Bank Saderat, PLC of London. The suit, Kaplan v. Central Bank of Iran, was filed in federal court in Washington, D.C. and seeks $1 billion in compensatory damages and an unspecified sum of punitive damages.
The plaintiffs, whose family members were killed or who were themselves injured by rockets fired at Israel by Hezbollah between July 12 and August 14, 2006, allege that the banks, which are controlled by the Iranian government, provided Hezbollah with over $50 million in financial support in the years prior to the attacks with the specific intent of facilitating Hezbollah terrorist attacks against American and Israeli targets. The plaintiffs assert that Hezbollah used the funds transferred by the Iranian banks to prepare for and carry out the rocket barrage which it rained on Israeli cities.
The plaintiffs rest their claims in part on an explicit October 25, 2007 finding by the U.S. Treasury that between 2001 and 2006 Bank Saderat transferred funds from the CBI via Bank Saderat, PLC in London to Hezbollah to support acts of terrorism. See www.ustreas.gov/press/releases/hp644.htm.
This is the first lawsuit brought by terror victims against the Iranian banking system.
The plaintiffs are represented by attorneys Robert J. Tolchin Esq. of New York, and Nitsana Darshan-Leitner, Esq. of Israel.
Attorney Darshan-Leitner stated that: "CBI and Bank Saderat are major financial conduits between Iran and Hezbollah. Without the funds transferred by these banks, Hezbollah would have been unable to maintain its infrastructure, train its terrorist members or carry out the rocket attacks. These banks, which operate freely in Europe, intentionally aided and abetted Hezbollah terrorism and are responsible for the injuries suffered by the victims of these attacks. This is the first lawsuit to target the Iranian banks and prove they provide massive financing to Hezbollah."
Attorney Robert Tolchin: "In light of the explicit findings by the U.S. Treasury, we expect that proving liability in this case will present no difficulties."
A copy of the complaint is available here: http://www.israellawcenter.org/images/pdf2/Kaplan%20vs.%20Central%20Bank%20of%20Iran.pdf.
For more information please contact:
Nitsana Darshan-Leitner (US)(212) 591-0073, (Israel) +972-523837020
Email:  nitsanad@zahav.net.il
SOURCE Nitsana Darshan-Leitner

MP Samy Gemayel: we are convinced by our alliance with the Future Movement and PM Hariri given their moderation, however we are not a sheep and March 14 has to stop concessions
19 Feb. 2010
Coordinator of the central committee of Kataeb Party MP Samy Gemayel said in an interview with ‘Kalam el Nas’ on LBC: ‘ I am Kataeb Party’s central committee coordinator and my duty is to execute any decision the Party take.’ Gemayel added that Kataeb participation in February 14 was patent and stressed Kataeb Party’s loyalty to all who voted with them and to all who participated in the Cedar Revolution.
With regards to March 14 coalition MP Gemayel pointed out: ‘we consider that March 14 has committed several mistakes at the organizational and administration level, those mistakes should be firmly addressed.’ He added that the Kataeb Party is entitled to have a different point of view from the others concerning some matters considered as critical and ‘therefore we do not accept to be told what to say’: Gemayel said.
MP Gemayel underlined his support to PM Hariri’s visit to Syria if it was in the framework of relations between two states in order to resolve outstanding files, ‘but we do not accept to turn the page with Syria before resolving the pending outstanding issues,’ he added.
Gemayel emphasized that the Sunni and Druze and Christian public of March 14 is not satisfied with the ministerial statement and ‘I say: enough concessions’, he added.
Concerning Hezbullah celebration at Sagesse School MP Gemayel said: ‘this issue was an attempt to provoke us, otherwise they would not have adopted this approach to rent the theatre’. Gemayel explained: ‘They rented the theatre claiming that they are preparing for a Christian-Islamic dialogue and they alleged the same scenario to the mayor and the school director and Bishop Matar … thus there was a fraud in this context.’
MP Gemayel refused to compare President Bashir Gemayel with Hezbullah’s martyrs since he is a president of the Lebanese republic by the consent of the Lebanese state. ‘Hence, the comparison should be made between the martyrs of Hezbullah and the martyrs of Kataeb,’ he added.
MP Gemayel believed that the basic problem with Amal movement and Hezbollah is their distrust for the Lebanese resistance of Kamil Chamoun, Bashir Gemayel, Lebanese forces and Ahrar . He stressed: ‘we can’t build a state without the recognition of the other factions otherwise this country will remain divided.’
With reference to Lebanon’s Participation in the Arab summit in Libya MP Gemayel said that this matter concerns all the Lebanese. Gemayel highlighted: ‘we support any Lebanese against a stranger and we respect the Shiite feelings and value their position.’
MP Gemayel said: ‘our problem is with Hezbullah’s weapons and not with Hezbullah as a community. We do not wish for any massacres and destruction and the Lebanese have all the right to have another plan then Hezbollah’s plan.’
Gemayel hailed that the cabinet and the parliament represent the Lebanese people, ‘therefore no party is entitled to take a decision in seclusion from the other Lebanese’, he said. He also added: ‘no Party is allowed to take the decision of peace and war on behalf of Lebanon.’
MP Gemayel called for a national dialogue that combines all the Lebanese factions in order to resolve the internal problems, he also said that the Kataeb party insisted on the application of resolution 1559 since its endorsement.
With regards to the municipal elections, MP Gemayel underlined that the proportional representation is very important and is applicable in the entire world. He added that the printed lists help to control frauds and will prevent the pressure on the citizens.
MP Gemayel declared that ‘80% of the reforms Kataeb party proposed, were adopted. We aspire for public interest and not for the party’s interest.
On the other hand, MP Gemayel emphasized that the relationship with Taymour Jumblatt is excellent and the personal relation between President Gemayel and MP Jumblatt is excellent despite the political dispute.
Addressing the Ethiopian Plane crash, MP Gemayel said: ‘we will answer any request from the families of the victims and we support them in this tragedy and we are ready for any help.”
MP Gemayel unveiled that he has information regarding the assassination of Officer Samer Hanna. He raised concern over the difference between the investigation reports with the arrested person and the army reports. He added: ‘ten days after the Lebanese army’s trainings in that region the incident occurred, nobody mentioned this information and Hezbollah was aware of these exercises. It is worth to mention that the shooting occurred during the take-off of the helicopter and not during the landing.’ Gemayel raised concern: ‘we do not accept the fact that the killer of a Lebanese army officer was released just ten months after the incident, while those who unintentionally kill someone in a road accident are imprisoned for one year.’
Kataeb.org Team

2. U.S. Engaging Syria - a Terror State - on Anti-terror Concerns
by David Lev /Arutz Sheva
Reversing yet another policy of former President George W. Bush, current U.S. President Barack Obama announced this week that he would nominate career diplomat Robert Ford to become Washington's first ambassador to Syria since 2005, when the former ambassador was removed in the wake of the assassination of Lebanese President Rafik Hariri. As the U.S. seeks to get closer to the Arab world, Washington seems ready to re-engage Damascus, sharing with it American concerns over problems in the region – chief among them, of course, the Iranian threat, and terrorism.
Analysts believe that the U.S. is hoping to co-opt Syria, veering it away from terrorism; according to U.S. officials, Damascus has been seeking an opportunity to prove itself, and has, the officials say, proclaimed its willingness to negotiate with Israel over the Golan Heights. However, Syria continues to insist on on supporting Hizbullah and Hamas terrorists, and remains on the U.S. list of states that support terrorism.
The inherent contradiction in the U.S. position – which seeks to engage a state that supports terror in fighting terror – was highlighted in a press conference held in Washington Thursday. In a regularly scheduled press conference held by Assistant U.S. Secretary of State Philip J. Crowley, a perceptive reporter pointed out that attempts to engage Syria in anti-terror dialog seemed out of place.
The nomination of a new ambassador is just one of a recent flurry of U.S. diplomatic activity, which saw US undersecretary of state for political affairs William Burns meet with Syrian President Bashir Assad this week. That meeting was followed by another one, in which Daniel Benjamin, the US State Department's coordinator for counterterrorism, met with Syrian officials, with whom he held "productive and detailed" talks, the US embassy in Damascus said.
An embassy statement said that the two sides discussed "shared counterterrorism concerns and threats," adding that "we believe Syria can play a constructive role in mitigating these and other threats in cooperation with regional states and the United States."
In a press conference Thursday, Crowley was questioned on the Benjamin meeting by reporters. When asked about the content of that meeting, Crowley said that Benjamin and the Syrian officials "shared counterterrorism concerns" and reviewed threats to the region." Crowley said that the U.S. wants "to be able to have the kind of discussion and dialogue with Syria that we need, to encourage them where we think they’re taking steps that are positive, and also to continue very direct dialogue to continue to express to Syria our concerns about its relationships with various elements in the region as well. Syria has, in the past, been interested in engagement with a variety of countries. We clearly want to see comprehensive peace and that would involve progress on the Syrian-Israeli track as well as the other tracks."
Questioning Crowley on the Benjamin meeting, one reporter said that while he understood why Washington sought to engage Damascus, he did not understand why the Benjamin was discussing fighting terrorism with the Syrians. Asking whether the U.S. and Syria "have shared terrorism" information, the reporter was told by Crowley that "they do... we shared concerns about terrorism in the region, and we also have our concerns about Syria itself."
However, the reporter still sought clarification on the point. "I was about to get to the point of (Syria's) being on the terrorism list... Syria is what, now one of four countries (on the list of countries the U.S. says supports terrorism). It sort of sticks out when you do something like this."
Crowley eventually confirmed that there was a "disconnect" between Washington's expectations and the reality of Syria, "We do continue to have concerns about Syria, its ongoing support of terrorist elements in the region," Crowley said. "There are a variety of actors in Damascus that we think should not be there. And should Syria make progress in this area, then we will evaluate. But I’m not aware of any effort right now to consider removing Syria from the terrorism list," he concluded.

Don't expect progress from talking to Syria
Friday, February 19, 2010
THE NOTION that Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad can somehow be turned from his alliance with Iran and sponsorship of terrorism is one of the hardiest of the Middle East. No number of failed diplomatic initiatives, or outrages by Mr. Assad, seems to diminish its luster. The latest attempt to test it comes from the Obama administration, which this week nominated the first U.S. ambassador to Damascus since 2005 and dispatched a senior State Department official, William J. Burns, to meet with Mr. Assad. "I have no illusions," Mr. Burns said afterward, "but my meeting . . . made me hopeful we can make progress together."
We don't disagree with the administration's selection of an ambassador or Mr. Burns's visit; both represent a modest delivery on President Obama's campaign promise of "direct engagement" with regimes such as Syria. But it's worth noting that Mr. Burns has done this before: He met with Mr. Assad in 2004 on behalf of the Bush administration. Earlier, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell "engaged" Mr. Assad. So have House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman John F. Kerry, and numerous European notables, including French President Nicolas Sarkozy. When he was Israeli prime minister, Ehud Olmert negotiated extensively with Mr. Assad through Turkish intermediaries.
Not a few have come away hopeful, at first. Ms. Pelosi memorably declared that "the road to Damascus is a road to peace." Yet none so far has produced the slightest change in Mr. Assad's behavior or in his unacceptable ambitions. Having carried out a campaign of political murder in Lebanon, including the killing of a prime minister for which he has yet to be held accountable, Mr. Assad continues to insist on a veto over the Lebanese government. He continues to facilitate massive illegal shipments of Iranian arms to Hezbollah, dangerously setting the stage for another war with Israel, and to host the most hard-line elements of the Hamas leadership. He continues to harbor exiled leaders of Saddam Hussein's regime and to allow suicide bombers to flow into Iraq for use by al-Qaeda.
Mr. Assad wants the United States to lift sanctions; he wants the European Union to grant Syria trade privileges; he wants Israel to withdraw from the Golan Heights and grant Syria the eastern shore of the Sea of Galilee; and he wants Syria's check on Lebanese sovereignty accepted. In exchange for all this, he is offering -- well, not much, it always turns out. He told one group of Western visitors that he would no more break with Iran than the United States would break with Israel. He says that Syrian sponsorship of Hezbollah and Hamas is not on the table. He has promised to check suicide bombers bound for Iraq but has never done so.
The exercise of talking to Mr. Assad serves a certain purpose, since it allows a skilled diplomat such as Mr. Burns to lay out the administration's incentives for changed behavior as well as its red lines, and it might make Iran's paranoid leaders nervous. But anyone who thinks the Obama administration has come up with a way to change the Middle East through detente with Syria would do well to study the history of Mr. Assad's decade in power. That gambit has been tried, by more Western diplomats and politicians than can be counted, and the results are clear: It doesn't work.

Israel is back
By: Guy Bechor /Israeli Openion
Published: 02.19.10, 09:17
Our enemies scared of ‘crazy’ Israel, which finally learned rules of region
We are currently facing an odd situation the likes of which we have not seen for many years: Israel’s enemies are in panic, or is it paranoia, for fear that Israel will be attacking them. Hezbollah is convinced that it will suffer a blow at any moment, Hamas is still licking its wounds, Syria is concerned, and Iran’s foreign minister already declared that Israel is a “nation of crazy people” with “mad leaders” who may launch a strike.
Meanwhile, the frightened Lebanese turned to the UN, to UNIFIL, and to French President Sarkozy and asked for France’s protection against the “terrible” Israel. However, the French announced that as long as Hezbollah is armed, they will only ask Israel to refrain from destroying Lebanon’s civilian infrastructures and no more than that. All this was published by the Arab media.
On the other hand, our borders are quieter than they have been in many years.
So how do we explain this bizarre Middle Eastern paranoia? The IDF is training today as it has not done in dozens of years. Every day, from morning till night: Tanks, airplanes, helicopters, live-fire drills and soldiers running around. The Lebanese watch this from across the border, as do the Syrians, and they are becoming anxious: What are the Israelis plotting over there? Is there something we don’t know?
The Israeli restlessness prompts anxiety among our enemies, and this is good, of course. It’s called deterrence. Both Hezbollah and Syria know that the IDF made a leap since the last Lebanon War and it is now the first military in the world equipping its tanks with anti-missile systems, which are changing the rules of war. The IDF is also equipping itself with new APCs, advanced airplanes, and amazing technological systems, while Hezbollah and Syria are still stuck in the ‘80s and ‘90s.
Moreover, a series of daring assassinations attributed to Israel is prompting personal fears among axis of evil leaders. They suspect everyone around them and the confusion is great. We should recall that Hezbollah leader Nasrallah has been hiding for three and a half years now, and this is quite embarrassing for someone who rushed to declare a “divine victory,” no less.
Israel here to stay
According to terror groups, Israel can reach anywhere and has infiltrated every organization and each Arab state. The glory of Israel’s secret services had been restored and the fear of them has increased. So what are people in the region telling themselves? “Israel is back.” It disappeared for about a decade and a half of “peace,” where it was perceived as weak; yet now it is back at full force. Both the Lebanon War and the Gaza War are having an effect. If in the past Lebanon prompted the Palestinians to launch an Intifada or be daring in Gaza, based on Nasrallah’s “spider web” theory,” today the opposite is true. Hezbollah sees the destruction sowed by Israel in Gaza and it loses the urge to fight us. They look at Gaza and think about themselves.
The Goldstone Report, which claimed that Israel goes crazy when it is being attacked, caused us some damage (which should not be exaggerated) in the world, yet it was a blessing in our region. If Israel goes crazy and destroys everything in its way when it’s being attacked, one should be careful. No need to mess with crazy people.
Yet what concerns our enemies more than anything else? The insight that Israel, for the first time in its history, has learned the rules of the region. Our enemies realize that the days where Israel conducted itself as a state without honor willing to give in to the advances of those who deceive it are over. They realize that Israel has matured, learned the art of creating deterrence, and that it is here to stay.
Our enemies understand that Israel will no longer give in to their advances in exchange for illusions or words. They realize that it won’t be easy for them to control it from the outside or to deploy their supporters within it, because they lost the faith of the public. They are starting to understand that Israel is stronger than they thought or fantasized of, and this insight affects their own self-image – and to their great regret, this hurts.

Human Error behind Ethiopian Plane Crash: Preliminary Report
Naharnet/A preliminary report said "human error" was the cause of the deadly Ethiopian Airlines plane crash into the Mediterranean Sea last month and that the last words the pilot said to his co-pilot: "We're finished … God have mercy on us."Flight 409 bound for Addis Ababa crashed into sea off the coast of Naameh minutes after takeoff from Beirut airport early in the morning of Jan. 25, killing all 90 people on board. Pending the outcome of the official report, which is to be announced by the Lebanese government sometime next week, the daily As-Safir on Friday uncovered outlines of the preliminary report As-Safir said the investigation team probing the plane crash incident retuned to Beirut from Paris on Thursday and handed over the report to Prime Minister Saad Hariri.The plane's two black boxes -- data flight recorder and cockpit voice recorder – were separately retrieved among the wreckage and flown to France for analysis by BEA, a French agency that specializes in assisting with technical investigations of air crashes.
As-Safir quoted a reliable source at France's Aviation Accidents Investigation bureau as saying that the cockpit voice recorder has revealed that the last words the pilot said were: "We're finished … God have mercy on us." The pilot was speaking in Amharic, a Semitic language spoken in North Central Ethiopia. Audio recordings revealed that the pilot asked the co-pilot to follow instructions by Beirut airport control tower, only to find out that his assistance either did not heed to the orders or did the opposite. This prompted the pilot to take a move which made him gradually lose control of the plane, the voice recorder showed. The report said the jet remained intact until it hit water. Cabinet, furthermore, did not take any decision to close the file on the plane crash incident pending an official report from the Lebanese Army about the search for remains of the remaining victims.

Moussa: Israeli Attack on Lebanon is Always a Possibility
Naharnet/Arab League chief Amr Moussa said Friday there is always a possibility of an Israeli aggression on Lebanon and efforts should be made to protect the country. "The possibility of an Israeli aggression on Lebanon is always on. All possibilities should be taken into consideration and to protect Lebanon," Moussa said at Rafik Hariri international airport at the conclusion of his two-day visit to Beirut. Asked about Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's latest statement on Israel and Lebanon, Moussa told reporters: "There is no need to comment." Speaking by phone, Ahmadinejad urged Hizbullah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah and President Michel Suleiman on Thursday to be fully ready to retaliate strongly against any Israeli attack. The Arab League chief reiterated that the political situation in Lebanon is much better than it was three or four years ago. About his meetings with Lebanese officials, Moussa said: "All the talks were positive and very useful. I discussed with Lebanese officials specific issues linked to the (Arab) summit, Arab ties, Israeli threats and the Iranian situation." Beirut, 19 Feb 10, 13:58

Report: Hizbullah Tries to Break Out of Militant Mold
Naharnet/Hizbullah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah recently delivered an odd but deeply important political message to his followers: Heed traffic signs and pay your electric bills.
The call may not seem particularly significant, but it was widely seen as the latest sign that Hizbullah— is reinventing itself as a more conventional political movement in Lebanon.
The group remains fiercely anti-Israel and is highly unlikely to give up its extensive arsenal of rockets and other weapons. Nasrallah gave a fiery speech Tuesday vowing to rocket targets deep inside Israel, including Tel Aviv's Ben Gurion Airport, if Israel's military strikes Lebanese infrastructure. But despite the tough talk, Hizbullah seems more concerned these days with its position at home, trying to show it can work with Lebanon's many other factions, some of which oppose any military entanglement with Israel. That means moderating its actions and playing within the system. The shift was forced by the seismic events that had shaken Lebanon over the past few years, analysts say. In particular, Hizbullah's 2006 war with Israel and 2008 sectarian clashes with political rivals raised criticism among some Lebanese that the movement was dragging the country into violent conflicts. Moreover, Hizbullah now has a place in a fragile national unity government, putting further pressure on it to stay in line.
Notably, Hizbullah has not carried out a single rocket attack into Israel since the 2006 war. It has also yet to avenge the assassination of its top military commander, Imad Mughniyeh, who was killed in a 2008 car bombing in Damascus that was widely blamed on Israel. Nasrallah on Tuesday repeated pledges that revenge would eventually come.
Hizbullah "is emphasizing that it also has other roles to play besides the resistance," said Amal Saad-Ghorayeb, an analyst specializing in Hizbullah. The group is trying to highlight its "nationalist dimension" as opposed to its strictly Islamic or Arab identity. A key step was Nasrallah's announcement in November of the group's platform, only the second since Hizbullah was founded in 1982 following Israel's invasion. The new language was strikingly conciliatory. While the group's first platform, released in 1985, called for establishing an Islamic republic in Lebanon, the new manifesto does not mention an Islamic state and underscores the importance of coexistence among Lebanon's 18 religious sects.
It also speaks of a "consensual democracy" and says it seeks a "sovereign, free and independent" Lebanon with a strong state that preserves public liberties.
"Welcome to the Lebanese political club," the publisher of one leading Lebanese newspaper joked to Nasrallah when he presented the 30-page platform at a packed Nov. 30 news conference. "One of the major aims behind this manifesto is to firmly entrench Hizbullah as a Lebanese movement... to codify it as a Lebanese party par excellence," said Saad-Ghorayeb.
Hizbullah has "found it necessary to try and alter its image as an autonomous, self-sufficient group that is above the law," says Sahar Atrache, a security analyst for the Brussels-based International Crisis Group. In a Dec. 23 speech on a Shiite holy day, Nasrallah told supporters that heeding traffic laws and paying electric and water bills to the government was a religious duty. Many in its south Beirut stronghold of Dahiya have long been accused of simply stealing from electricity cables and water systems.
Hizbullah also enlisted the help of police and municipal authorities to take down illegally built shops, booths and apartments in Beirut's southern suburbs.
Nasrallah makes his support for the Iranian regime clear. But to boost its domestic legitimacy, Hizbullah "has recently taken great pains to publicly distance itself from Iranian patronage," a 2009 report by the U.S. think tank Rand Corp. said. Abdel-Halim Fadlallah, a Hizbullah member and head of Beirut's Hizbullah-affiliated Center for Studies and Documentation, said the movement's evolution was because "the party has become stronger politically, through its cross-sectarian alliances and popularity, and is therefore now more able to be a partner in decision making." Not everyone is impressed. Phalange MP Sami Gemayel accused the group of "waging a cultural war" on the Lebanese. In a TV interview, he pointed to recent incidents in which Hizbullah campaigned against the distribution in Lebanon of Anne Frank's diaries and another in which it forced the withdrawal from a festival of a French comedian of Jewish descent on grounds he served in the Israeli army. "Hizbullah today is imposing its view on all the Lebanese," he said.(AP) Beirut, 19 Feb 10, 08:34

Suleiman to Moscow on March 24-26
Naharnet/President Michel Suleiman will travel to Moscow on March 24-26 to meet with his Russian counterpart Dmitry Medvedev and top officials, the presidential office announced.
The visit comes upon the invitation of the Russian president, the statement said. It said Suleiman will hold a summit with Medvedev and meet several politicians and religious figures. He is also expected to hold talks with the Lebanese community in Russia. Beirut, 19 Feb 10, 13:03

Sfeir: Hariri's Visit to the Vatican Stresses that Lebanon is Message of Coexistence
Naharnet/Maronite Patriarch Nasrallah Sfeir said Friday that Premier Saad Hariri's visit to the Vatican shows that Lebanon cannot rise without its "Muslim and Christian wings."
Hariri's visit is a reiteration of Lebanon's status as a "message" of coexistence, Sfeir reportedly told his visitors.
During a visit to Lebanon in 1997, Pope John Paul II called Lebanon a "message" of religious coexistence, given its historic mix of faiths. Hariri is scheduled to meet with Pope Benedict XVI on Saturday. Beirut, 19 Feb 10, 11:44

March 25 National Holiday
Naharnet/Cabinet decided to make March 25 a national holiday to celebrate the Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary. The decision was taken during a Cabinet meeting on Thursday held under Prime Minister Saad Hariri at the Grand Serail. "Virgin Mary concerns both Muslims as Christians in the Qoran and the Bible, and this day must be on a joint holiday," Hariri told Cabinet ministers, who promptly agreed. Beirut, 19 Feb 10, 10:06

Aoun: Municipal Electoral Law Content More Important Than Election Date, But We Don't Want Polls Cancelled
Naharnet/Free Patriotic Movement leader MP Michel Aoun on Thursday stressed that the content of the municipal electoral law is more important than the elections date, but clarified that his party does not want to cancel the polls. "Our popularity is not declining at all like some are 'screaming'," Aoun told a news conference after the weekly meeting of Change and Reform bloc in Rabiyeh."My remarks were taken out of context last week, I said I don't agree on elections without reforms, but there is a parliamentary majority, and if they want the election, I don't have the ability to stop it on my own.""We will prepare a reform plan for every town and we invite everyone to cooperate with us. Whatever the reform plan, everyone must be cooperative in implementing it, and we will engage positively with all of those who want to cooperate with us," he added.Aoun said that proportionality may serve the principle of proper representation but not the issue of municipal services. "One municipality in Beirut can't offer services to all people equally, and it should be divided like Paris Municipality," he added.
As to the row of Hizbullah's Sagesse ceremony, Aoun said: "There is an administration that gave the permission for holding the lecture and we did not witness any attack on anyone." Beirut, 18 Feb 10, 19:44

Ahmadinejad Urges Nasrallah to Annihilate Israel if It Attacks Lebanon
Naharnet/Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Thursday said that if the Israelis launch a new war against Hizbullah, the latter should retaliate strong enough to "close their case once and for all." Ahmadinejad's comments, in a phone conversation with Hizbullah Secretary-General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah were the latest in a heated exchange of rhetoric between Israel and Lebanon and Syria this month in which all sides have been warning the other not to start a war. Ahmadinejad urged Nasrallah to prepare his fighters to be able to retaliate strongly against any Israeli attack. "The preparations should be of the level that, if they (the Israelis) want to repeat the mistakes of the past (by attacking Lebanon), then their case should be closed once and for all and the region delivered from their evil ways forever," the Iranian president said, according to the state news agency IRNA. "The people of Iran will stand by the peoples of Lebanon and the region in this," he said. For his part, Nasrallah dismissed any fears, saying Israeli "threats will lead to nothing." In a speech aired nationally in Lebanon this week, Nasrallah vowed that if Israel attacks again, his fighters would retaliate in kind, striking Tel Aviv or Israel's international airport on the city's outskirts. Earlier Thursday, Ahmadinejad also made a phone conversation with President Michel Suleiman to reiterate Iran's full support for Lebanon in the face of recent Israeli threats. For his part, Suleiman thanked Ahmadinejad for the call of support, stressing that "such threats are to be faced through fortifying national unity, military preparedness, and integration of national capabilities in order to deter any aggression."(Naharnet-AP) Beirut, 18 Feb 10, 20:11

Iran’s war is not our war
Hanin Ghaddar, February 19, 2010
Now Lebanon/
A phone call from Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah Thursday night sent a shudder down the backs of the Lebanese. Ahmadinejad reportedly told Nasrallah during the call to be ready to confront Israeli threats. “Israel should be dealt with once and for all for the sake of the region,” he said.
The now-infamous phone call – which came in the wake of escalating threats being exchanged among Syrian, Hezbollah, Hamas, Iranian and Israeli officials as of late – has increased fears of a new war breaking out on Lebanese soil between Israel and Iran’s proxies.
But though all sides have been stepping up the belligerent tone, the real chances of a war taking place are still low. Analysts do not see a new conflict breaking out in the region in the near future for many reasons, one of which is that the US prefers to maintain a certain level of stability in the Middle East in order to focus on sanctions against Iran. Also, Hezbollah chief Nasrallah prefers to avoid a war, knowing that the Shia in Lebanon, who accepted the “divine victory” of 2006, might react differently were a new wave of destruction and violence to take place above their homes. As for Israel, the IDF would have already attacked Hezbollah if it were certain of its chances of winning.
The most disturbing part for the Lebanese, then, is witnessing Nasrallah taking orders from the Iranian president and stepping up his war-like rhetoric while ignoring the people and institutions of the country he lives in. This at the same time Iran is facing sanctions and possibly even attack. All this leaves some in Lebanon wondering whether another round of national dialogue dedicated to putting together a national defense strategy would be at all worth it.
“What we want is a retaliation that is up to the level of [slain Hezbollah commander] Imad Mugniyah,” Nasrallah told a rapt crowd during the Resistance Martyrs Day celebration on Tuesday. “We do not want retaliation for the sake of retaliation, rather to protect all the leaders, cadres and the entire cause which was conveyed by Imad Mugniyah.”
The leaders, cadre and cause he was speaking of protecting all belong, obviously, to Hezbollah, not to Lebanon as a whole. Nasrallah then outlined a complete military plan to confront Israel, targets and techniques included. He did not mention at all the rest of the Lebanese, the state or its institutions.
Nasrallah was using the same rhetoric Iranian President Ahmadinejad used when he said in a press conference earlier that week that the Resistance in Lebanon and in neighboring countries would annihilate Israel if it launched a war. Ahmadinejad did not say that his country would be engaged in the fight against the Jewish State, as it is clearly Hezbollah and Hamas’ job to do so. Nasrallah got the message. He threatened Israel in a show of strength during his speech this week, saying that Hezbollah would retaliate by bombing the country’s infrastructure, factories, airports or oil refineries if the Israeli Defense Forces hit similar Lebanese targets.
Obviously, Iran is trying to protect itself from sanctions, and look after its nuclear program. Hezbollah is trying to “protect its leaders, cadres and the cause.” So who is going to protect Lebanon and the Lebanese? The Lebanese are stuck with what in effect amounts to a caretaker government, weakened by the compromises that led to the formation of a national-unity cabinet and tied down by MP Walid Jumblatt’s overtures toward reconciliation with the Assad regime.
War and peace decisions, among others, have been hijacked by Hezbollah and Iran, making the possibility of a meaningful national dialogue and the drafting of a substantial national defense strategy – as promised by President Michel Sleiman – unlikely.
Nasrallah made it very clear to us that he makes the big decisions, while the Lebanese government is left to struggle with mundane, everyday issues.
Parallel to all this, it looks like both regional and international powers are trying to shelter Damascus. International mediators have tried to calm the exchange of threats between Syria and Israel, while Riyadh opened up to Damascus. And though the US appointed an ambassador to Damascus for the first time in five years, the Syrian regime hasn’t fulfilled any of its promises to Lebanon, such as demarcating the borders and curbing arms smuggling to Palestinian groups operating outside the refugee camps.
In the absence of a real sovereign state in Lebanon, the Lebanese alone will be paying the price for the next war between Iran and its opponents. The July War took place after the first round of sanctions was imposed on Iran because of its burgeoning nuclear program, which Hezbollah was enlisted to defend. Today, with a round of more serious sanctions possibly on the way, Lebanon might be in line for another devastating war. If that were the case, who would protect Lebanon?
Not a new national defense strategy. It would be naïve to think our leaders could agree on one. And why even waste the energy coming up with a new defense strategy when we can already rely on the Armistice Agreement, signed by Israel and its neighboring countries in 1949. There are also the international treaties, mainly UN Security Council resolutions 1559, 1701 and 1757, which, if followed, could safeguard Lebanon from violence, conflicts and direct political interference. But committing to these resolutions requires action, not empty pledges of support. Both the Lebanese government and the international community should take concrete, practical steps to implement these resolutions, and pressure those who are impeding the process. The Syrian regime needs to be pressured, not pampered, and the Lebanese need to be assured that they will not be used as cannon fodder again if Iran decides it has a score to settle with Israel on Lebanese land.

Michel Aoun
February 19, 2010
On February 18, the Lebanese National News Agency carried the following statement delivered by the head of the Change and Reform Bloc, Deputy General Michel Aoun, following the bloc’s weekly meeting in Rabieh:
Today, we witnessed the weekly meeting of the bloc and, as usual, we looked into the current issues on the table at the Cabinet in regard to the municipal reforms. We also proposed the program for the visit to the Chouf and looked into the legal bills which will be addressed during the legislative session on Monday and Tuesday. In general, we agreed over the content and we hope that everything will work out and that we will see some acceptable reforms introduced to the municipal elections. This is due to the fact that whenever we talk about reforms, they talk to us about the date. They [therefore] reminded us of the 2005 elections, may they never be repeated again.
They talk about the date and the necessity to stage the elections, while we say that the content of the law is much more important than the date on which the elections will be held, so that their integrity is guaranteed. The result was that they extended the year 2000 law to 2005 and 2009. Therefore, the content of the law is much more important than the date and this does not mean we want to annul the elections. When the time comes, let those who are ready win them, and those who are not lose in them. Our popularity is not decreasing at all. We are hearing commotion from all sides as though some people have lost their directions and we hope that they will close the electoral law issue and that the parliament will ratify it on time so that we witness the staging of the municipal elections. In this context, I call on the entire Free Patriotic Movement to start preparing the required data for each person in their town, so that we are able to adopt the adequate decisions in regard to this issue.
Since you have called on the FPM to begin the preparations, what are the preparations for the municipal elections?
We have a reform program and that is central. In terms of its principles, we will be the ones to draw them up and we call on everyone to cooperate with us. Regardless of the reformatory and developmental program, whether it is related to a village or affects the entire country, whoever wants to adopt it and see it being implement should cooperate. We are calling for everyone’s cooperation regardless of their political belonging, since we are willing to overcome the differences in order to draw up a good program for each town. Therefore, we will deal positively will all those wishing to collaborate in this regard.
In regard to Beirut, will proportionality be sufficient or will the FPM continue to discuss the issue of division with proportionality as it was proposed by some in it?
Proportionality is enough at the level of the representation but not at the level of the services. Beirut contains a large number of people and one municipality cannot provide all the necessary services to all the people in an equal way. Big cities are usually divided into departments along with their services. In Paris for example, there is a police department, a civil status department, a residency department etc. That is how the people are contained. I defy in this context the greatest information apparatus to know the people in every neighborhood and know where they live. Who knows who are the inhabitants of Bourj Hammoud? Who knows who are the inhabitants of Achrafieh or Beirut? Why is that? Because there is no municipal mechanism whose job is to count the citizens to whom it is offering services or are paying taxes. There is no data in Lebanon. This is a country of estimates, of a quarter of an hour and half a centimeter... The services in Beirut cannot improve with one municipality, and so is the case of any other large city. There are measurements and bodies that should be working. Why not turn the entire universe into one state? Why do they draw a border? The police stations and the municipalities, they all have borders...
Some considered the agreement of all the sides over proportionality to be a legitimate reason to postpone the elections. How do you comment on this issue?
I cannot understand this logic. I have studied the schools of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle and never saw a logic saying that if we all agree on something it means we want to postpone it. Had this been the case, we would have agreed over the postponement from the first place.
In regard to culture, we have recently witnessed [two examples] in the universities. The first was related to Dr. Pascale Lahoud and the second related to clashes which erupted at Jdeideh School in regard to a lecture which featured a lot of misunderstanding. You were traveling at the time and a lot of things were said. How do you comment on what happened in Jdeideh?
The deputies of the Metn received an invitation to attend a lecture. The school is neither ours nor under our jurisdiction. There is an administrative authority which granted the authorization to organize the lecture. There was nothing to prompt problems. During the lecture, we did not see any attack against anyone because we are in favor of intellectual freedom everywhere. I remember on October 7, 2004 we found a gathering place in the Suburb which is affiliated with a property related to Hezbollah. I delivered a lecture over the phone and the people gathered from Hadath, the Suburbs and Chiyyah.
The lecture was political and you all know what the political reality was at the time. I do not know what those who do not share our political opinion have to say about what happened in Sagesse School?  What could they say? I believe that everything was announced and everyone knew the goal of the lecture. The misunderstanding which affected these issues and what we are seeing on the websites in terms of the organized lying, moral decadence and the falsification of the facts whether verbally or non-verbally, is unacceptable...