LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
ِApril 09/2011

Biblical Event Of The Day
Luke 04/31-44: " He came down to Capernaum, a city of Galilee. He was teaching them on the Sabbath day, 4:32 and they were astonished at his teaching, for his word was with authority. 4:33 In the synagogue there was a man who had a spirit of an unclean demon, and he cried out with a loud voice, 4:34 saying, “Ah! what have we to do with you, Jesus of Nazareth? Have you come to destroy us? I know you who you are: the Holy One of God!” 4:35 Jesus rebuked him, saying, “Be silent, and come out of him!” When the demon had thrown him down in their midst, he came out of him, having done him no harm. 4:36 Amazement came on all, and they spoke together, one with another, saying, “What is this word? For with authority and power he commands the unclean spirits, and they come out!” 4:37 News about him went out into every place of the surrounding region.  4:38 He rose up from the synagogue, and entered into Simon’s house. Simon’s mother-in-law was afflicted with a great fever, and they begged him for her. 4:39 He stood over her, and rebuked the fever; and it left her. Immediately she rose up and served them. 4:40 When the sun was setting, all those who had any sick with various diseases brought them to him; and he laid his hands on every one of them, and healed them. 4:41 Demons also came out from many, crying out, and saying, “You are the Christ, the Son of God!” Rebuking them, he didn’t allow them to speak, because they knew that he was the Christ. 4:42 When it was day, he departed and went into an uninhabited place, and the multitudes looked for him, and came to him, and held on to him, so that he wouldn’t go away from them. 4:43 But he said to them, “I must preach the good news of the Kingdom of God to the other cities also. For this reason I have been sent.” 4:44 He was preaching in the synagogues of Galilee.

Latest analysis, editorials, studies, reports, letters & Releases from miscellaneous sources
Iran backs the regime at the expense of the Syrian people/By Tariq Alhomayed/April 08/11
The Middle East Channel: The Arab awakening and Syrian exceptionalism/Foreign Policy/April 08/11
Destroying One Koran vs. Destroying Many Christians, Which is Worse?/By: Raymond Ibrahim/April 08/11
The shadow of April 13/By: Michael Young/April 08/11
The million-dollar question on Syria/By: Tony Badra/April 08/11

Latest News Reports From Miscellaneous Sources for April 08/11
Violence Reported in Syrian Protests/New York Times
HRW calls for independent investigation of Lebanon prison deaths/Canadian Press
Hariri contacts Bahrain King, discusses bilateral relations/iloubnan.info
Haaretz WikiLeaks exclusive / 'Hezbollah expected to launch 100 missiles a day/Haaretz
Political turmoil in Syria resonates in Golan/AP
Turkey helps Iran avoid sanctions -Israel tells US: cables/Reuters
Lebanese Ambassador to Bahrain: Bahraini Authorities Asked 10 Lebanese to Leave/Nahatnet
Deadly Clashes Camp Ashraf base of the People's Mujahedeen of Iran/Naharnet
Hariri slams Iran interference/Daily Star
Lebanon's Hariri, Hezbollah lock horns over Iran/AFP
Syrian Regime: Safe for Now/Right Side News
Assad’s decision on Kurds is not enough, says Kurdish figure/Now Lebanon
Syria's protest hub draws security services, witness says/Now Lebanon
Syrian scholar, activist arrested/CNN
US embassy cables: Arms smuggling into Lebanon and the Gaza Strip/The Guardian
NB farmer detained in Lebanon while delivering shipment of potatoes/Winnipeg Free Press
America's Enemies Are Sensing Obama's Weakness, Irresolution/NewsMax.com
How Next War In Mideast Will Shape Up And When/Investor's Business Daily
Hariri: Hezbollah and Iran are meddling in Arabic Affairs/Washington Post
Al Qaeda in Brazil?/The Weekly Standard
Conflicting US information on assistance to Lebanese Army/Daily Star
NLP calls for obstructing effects of March 8’s coup/Now Lebanon
Assange: We Will Release 6,000 Documents on Israel Including Some on Mughniyeh's Assassination/Naharnet
Eleven Individuals Charged with Estonians' Kidnapping/Naharnet
Jumblat Urges Politicians to Engage in Dialogue, Steer Clear of Regional Conflicts/Naharnet
Aridi: No Convincing Justification for Delay in Government Formation/Naharnet
More Lebanese Arrive from Abidjan as Berri Asks for Help from Qatar/Naharnet
WikiLeaks: Murr Says MiG Fighetr Jets Can Be Used against Hizbullah/Naharnet
WikiLeaks: Geagea Said Lebanese Army in Need of Hundreds of MiGs to Threaten Israel/Naharnet
WikiLeaks: Hariri Said MiG Deal Would Prevent Hizbullah from Repeating May 7/Naharnet
Hizbullah Hits Back at Hariri: His Stances are in Line with U.S. Plot to Sow Discord among Region States/Naharnet
Hariri: Iranian Intervention Biggest Challenge Facing Arabs/Naharnet
Security Forces Liberate Hostages after New Roumieh Mutiny/Naharnet
Qassem: March 14 Wants Lebanon a 'Farm', Not a State/Naharnet
U.S. Embassy Convoy Attacked Again in Sidon/Naharnet


France Sets Up Air Bridge for Lebanese Fleeing I. Coast
Naharnet/Lebanon has set up an air bridge to ferry its citizens out of war-torn Ivory Coast and on to Beirut, the French foreign ministry said Friday, announcing the creation of a crisis coordination cell. A fleet of medium-sized planes will fly Lebanese citizens from Abidjan airport, which is now controlled by French troops, to neighboring Ghana's capital Accra, where they will be transferred to Lebanese airliners. "It's going to begin in the next few moments," said French foreign ministry spokesman Bernard Valero, briefing reporters in Paris on the latest measures to secure foreign citizens living in Ivory Coast. Valero did not say how many Lebanese citizens were expected to make use of the air bridge, but 80,000 are thought to live in Ivory Coast, many of them long-term expatriates and some of them born in West Africa. Several hundred have taken refuge in a French military base in Abidjan during the latest round of clashes between forces loyal to strongman Laurent Gbagbo and internationally-recognized leader Alassane Ouattara.(AFP) Beirut, 08 Apr 11, 14:43

Lebanese Ambassador to Bahrain: Bahraini Authorities Asked 10 Lebanese to Leave
Naharnet/Lebanon's Ambassador to Bahrain Aziz al-Qazzi revealed on Friday that the Bahraini authorities requested ten Lebanese to leave the Gulf state. He told Free Lebanon radio that the situation in Bahrain is stable. "Lebanese-Bahraini ties have witnessed some tension, but they are fraternal and they have returned to normal," he stated. "There are no dangers facing the Lebanese expatriates in Bahrain," Qazzi stressed. Beirut, 08 Apr 11, 14:44

Eleven Individuals Charged with Estonians' Kidnapping
Naharnet/Military Prosecutor Saqr Saqr charged on Friday 11 individuals for conspiring and participating in the kidnapping of the seven Estonian cyclists two weeks ago. The accused abducted the cyclists through the use of force and their whereabouts are still unknown. They were also charged with firing at an army intelligence patrol with unregistered weapons during a chase that resulted in the injury of officer Mohammad Fawwaz.  The seven were abducted at gunpoint in the eastern Bekaa town of Zahle on March 23 after entering Lebanon through Syria on their bicycles. Several people have been arrested so far in connection with the kidnapping, amid an intensive hunt for the abductors in the mountainous region beyond the Bekaa town of Majdal Anjar. "We cannot tell whether they are still in Lebanon or across the border," caretaker Interior Minister Ziad Baroud told a press conference on Tuesday. "The army and the Internal Security Forces are doing their best to reach a happy end to this kidnapping."Recently, an obscure group, the Movement for Renewal and Reform, claimed responsibility for the kidnapping, asking for ransom to set the men free. Beirut, 08 Apr 11, 14:35

Three Tens Cabinet Formula Awaits Aoun's Consent
Naharnet/Negotiations on the formation of the new cabinet haven't yet reached the stage of distribution of portfolios amid reports that Premier-designate Najib Miqati is suggesting that Free Patriotic Movement leader Michel Aoun get 10 ministers. "Negotiations haven't yet overcome the obstacle of distribution of shares," An Nahar daily quoted sources as saying in remarks published Friday. They said the division of shares would most probably be as follows: 10 ministers for Aoun, including the Tashnag and Marada, excluding Talal Arslan, 10 other ministers for his remaining allies within the March 8 forces and another 10 for President Michel Suleiman, the prime minister-designate and MP Walid Jumblat. According to the sources, the FPM chief is still studying this formula, which means "we are still far from the formation" of the government. However, a March 8 source told The Daily Star that Aoun has accepted the 10 portfolio offer. An Nahar's sources stressed that the formula keeps the controversial interior ministry portfolio within the president's share. As Safir daily also said that the confessional distribution hasn't been settled yet. Aoun insists on getting five Maronite ministers while Suleiman wants to name two Maronites. Such differences will most probably further delay the formation of the government. But political sources told An Nahar that some March 8 parties could press ahead with the efforts to form the cabinet in an attempt to confront Caretaker Premier Saad Hariri and his campaign against Hizbullah's arms. Beirut, 08 Apr 11, 09:03

Mirza Allows Committee of Journalists and Inmates' Families to Enter Roumieh Prison
Naharnet/Prosecutor General Saeed Mirza allowed on Friday a committee of journalists and inmates' families to enter Roumieh prison to inspect the prisoners' conditions. He granted them permission after a committee from the families met with him to inquire about the prisoners. Earlier on Friday, the families staged a protest in front of the Justice Palace amid heavy security presence. The prosecutor general also called for a meeting on Monday for the head of criminal courts in the Mount Lebanon province to address the issue of speeding up trials.
Beirut, 08 Apr 11, 13:36

Assad’s decision on Kurds is not enough, says Kurdish figure
April 8, 2011 /Opposition Kurdish Yekiti Party Secretary General Sheikh Aali said in an interview published on Friday that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s decision to naturalize Kurds in Syria is not enough. Naturalization is one of the Kurds’ demands, Aali told As-Sharq al-Awsat newspaper. He added, however, that not totally resolving the Kurds’ problems in Syria will not lead to trust in the Syrian leadership. “Even though we have not called on any of the party’s members to demonstrate, we consider demonstration a legitimate right for everyone who has been deprived of national rights.” Aali added that the party supports popular protests in Syria. Assad on March 30 blamed conspirators for the deadly unrest that broke out in Syria earlier that month, but failed to lift the emergency rule or offer other concessions in his first speech since protests began. On Thursday, the Syrian president granted citizenship to Syria's Kurds, the majority in the northeast who have been denied nationality for nearly half a century. -NOW Lebanon

Syria's protest hub draws security services, witness says
April 8, 2011 /Syrian security forces deployed in the southern protest hub of Daraa on Friday as thousands streamed in ready to demonstrate after traditional Muslim prayers, activists told AFP. "Hundreds of members of security forces in civilian clothes armed with batons and electric batons are deployed on the streets of the city," an activist said on condition anonymity.
Daraa's Al-Omari mosque has been the focal point of anti-government protests marred by deadly violence which human rights activists blame on the notorious security services and the government has attributed to an "armed" group. President Bashar al-Assad, under popular pressure to introduce major political reforms and end emergency powers which give security services great leeway to crush dissent, has ordered a probe into Daraa's protest casualties. -AFP/NOW Lebanon

NLP calls for obstructing effects of March 8’s coup
April 8, 2011 /“The only way out of the crisis [in Lebanon] is to obstruct the effects of the [March 8’s] coup,” the National Liberal Party said in a statement issued on Friday. March 8, “led by Hezbollah,” is struggling to resolve the crisis of cabinet formation, the NLP said following its weekly meeting. The party also said that the aim of March 8’s coup is to cut Lebanon’s ties with the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL), and protect the state within the state. “The [March 8] parties’ announcement of their aim deepened the rift between the Lebanese people, and placed Lebanon in a confrontation with the international community.” The STL is a UN-backed tribunal investigating the 2005 assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. It will reportedly indict Hezbollah members. Prime Minister-designate Najib Mikati, who was appointed to the premiership on January 25 with the Hezbollah-led March 8 coalition’s backing, is working to form a cabinet amid March 14’s decision to boycott the government. -NOW Lebanon

The million-dollar question on Syria
Tony Badran, April 7, 2011
Understanding the behavior and decision-making of the Syrian regime has long eluded policymakers and analysts. A year ago, one US official lamented this inability to comprehend why Syrian President Bashar al-Assad behaves the way he does, dubbing it “the million-dollar question.”
The ongoing upheaval in Syria has once again placed this problem under the spotlight, as observers struggle to make sense of the regime’s domestic policies, having equally failed to grasp the rationale behind its regional posture. In fact, the misunderstanding of the regime’s foreign policy is directly linked to the incomprehension of its internal stance.
Accompanying Assad’s response to the popular demonstrations against his rule has been the expert and journalistic commentary that ostensibly set out to explain the Syrian president’s actions. Instead, the analysis has been a mixture of befuddlement and specious arguments, highlighting why general understanding of the Assad regime’s behavior has been so lacking.
While Assad’s aides issued vague pronouncements to the media, the coterie of professional Syria watchers wrung their hands waiting to hear how Assad himself would respond to the protesters’ demands. Leading the pack was self-styled Assad confidant academic David Lesch, who penned a concerned op-ed in the New York Times, which he led with the distressed question: “Where has President Bashar al-Asad … been this week?” “He has to LEAD,” he emphatically cried elsewhere.
When the Syrian president finally addressed the situation in a speech before parliament, the experts expressed their deep disappointment with and shock at its dismissive style and substance. Moreover, concomitant with his smug speech was Assad’s continuing brutal crackdown on the peaceful demonstrators.
The simultaneous hints about promises of potential reform, along with the use of violence and rejectionist rhetoric, perplexed analysts, leading one of them, academic Joshua Landis, to conclude that the regime’s posture “shows there is real confusion in the government” on how to deal with the situation. Lesch expressed similar views.
However, this argument fails to recognize that the regime’s domestic response is the mirror image of its standard pattern of behavior in its foreign policy. There too analysts and policymakers have grappled with the regime’s position, attempting to reconcile its alleged desire for “peace” with its unrelenting support for and use of violence.
But this decades-long approach hardly reflects “confusion” on the part of the Assad regime. Rather, it is clearly a calculated strategy, and one that has served the regime well for decades, as evident from the infamous legacy of the peace process. In fact, it is so premeditated that Assad has even coined a catchy little line to express it: “Peace and resistance form a single axis.”
Most analysts, especially those whose worldview is filtered through the peace process, continue to misinterpret that maxim and its repercussions. And the fallacies that hinder a sober assessment of Assad’s foreign policy similarly muddle domestic policy analysis.
For instance, Syria experts typically try to resolve the apparent paradox of Syria’s foreign policy posture by positing speculative and unverifiable divisions in the decision-making circles between supposed “hardliners” and “pragmatic reformers” representing an alleged “peace camp” that longs to be allied with the West. For years, some even questioned whether Assad was actually in control of Syria, just as today some are wondering whether the violence against protesters is the work of “rogue” security apparatuses. After all, Assad’s top aide told the press that the president had specifically ordered that no Syrian blood be shed!
These starry-eyed, bewildered justifications of the regime’s current response are due to the fact that the majority of observers hold the belief that Assad is indeed a “reformer.” Seen through this lens, Assad’s actions would indeed appear baffling. Why wouldn’t this “reformist” president simply reform? This question drove the analysts to speculate feverishly about hypothetical centers of power that may have prevented him from acting on his repressed reformist impulse. In its more laughable forms, this line of thinking led some analysts to “advise” Assad to “split” with his own regime.
The common denominator here is the analysts’ penchant to insulate Assad and justify his actions, always preferring to give him a pass, so as not to cause the collapse of their own intellectual house of cards. Needless to say, Assad dispelled this nonsense in his speech, specifically ridiculing how Westerners always relay their concerns to him about the negative impact of his entourage on the “reform” process. So taken by this logic, David Ignatius even anticipated that Assad would stage a “coup” against his own family’s regime.
But analysts chose to ignore that part of the speech, preferring to stick to their own categories and misconceptions, much to Assad’s delight. After all, Assad's peculiar genius is in sitting back and letting his Western interpreters read whatever they wished into his intentions regarding peace and the relationship with the US, especially as it didn’t imply any actual commitment on his part. Meanwhile, for anyone who bothers to look closely, Assad has been rather clear that his conceptions and those of his interlocutors or of the analysts are two wildly different things.
In brief, it should now be crystal clear that the prevailing analytical paradigm is deeply flawed. This is precisely what led that anonymous US official last year to bemoan how not only does the Obama administration “not understand Syrian intentions,” but, in fact, “[n]o one does, and until we get to that question we can never get to the root of the problem.”
In reality, the Assad regime’s behavior and intentions are not at all perplexing, but are rather plain to see. However, that requires identifying the patterns and methods this regime has employed for decades.
**Tony Badran is a research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.

Assange: We Will Release 6,000 Documents on Israel Including Some on Mughniyeh's Assassination
Naharnet/WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange revealed that 6,000 documents on Israel will be released soon, saying that they will shed some light on its confrontation of Iran's nuclear program and its role in the assassination of prominent Hizbullah official Imad Mughniyeh. He told Israel's Yediot Ahronot: "The documents we released in the past few months were the fuel that ignited the Arab revolts." He explained that WikiLeaks began publishing the secret U.S. Embassy cables on November 29, 2010, in Arab newspapers, including Lebanon's Al-Akhbar, which eventually made their way to North Africa, Saudi Arabia, and Lebanon, which led to the eruption of the popular revolts.
The documents expected to be released on Israel, he said, will reveal details and evidence on issues that were only the subject of speculation.
Regarding Mughniyeh's 2008 assassination, Assange said that an October 18, 2006, cable stated that the United States got word of top secret intelligence that Iran appointed Mughniyeh as Hizbullah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah's deputy. The Israeli newspaper wondered whether this intelligence paved the way to the speeding up of the decision to assassinate him, which the Americans believed Israel executed. Beirut, 08 Apr 11, 12:37

Qassem: March 14 Wants Lebanon a 'Farm', Not a State
Naharnet/Hizbullah deputy chief Sheikh Naim Qassem on Thursday noted that his party has achieved "great, significant accomplishments" through the "army-people-Resistance equation."
These accomplishments are "the humiliating Israeli pullout (from South Lebanon) in 2000, the grand victory in July 2006 in the face of the Israeli war on Lebanon … and the participation in a national unity cabinet that aims to prevent civil strife," said Qassem. He questioned whether the rival March 14 forces have achieved any accomplishments, saying "they are willing to destroy the country, create chaos, freeze Lebanon's international ties and incite Arab and foreign states against Lebanon only because they are not in power."
"This indicates that they don't want a State," Qassem added. "This indicates that the March 14 forces want Lebanon to be their own ranch."
Qassem accused the rival camp of "corruption and violation of laws and regulations," noting that WikiLeaks cables published recently by Lebanese daily Al-Akhbar "have showed that some March 14 leaders had worked as informants for the U.S. embassy" in Beirut. "They sought to obtain financial and military aid in order to build militias aimed at combating Hizbullah and the Opposition. They wanted to end Lebanon's defiance for the sake of the U.S.-Israeli scheme. Yes, they have been exposed by WikiLeaks," Hizbullah number two added.
"Who is receiving foreign funds? Who is calling for U.S. hegemony over Lebanon? Who is working night and day to harm the Resistance? Who is serving the U.S.-Israeli scheme? Qassem wondered. Beirut, 07 Apr 11, 20:37

Hizbullah Hits Back at Hariri: His Stances are in Line with U.S. Plot to Sow Discord among Region States
Naharnet/Hizbullah snapped back Thursday at caretaker premier Saad Hariri, who earlier in the day accused Tehran of trying to turn Lebanon and Gulf states into Iranian protectorates.
Hariri's "provocative stances sincerely echoed U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates' latest remarks about the Iranian role in the region," read a statement released by Hizbullah's media relations department.  "His statement is an open attempt to mask U.S. interference in the region and the confiscation of the will of the people, who seek freedom and the end of American hegemony," it added.
It also aims to "deviate attention from the (Israeli) enemy's practices against the Palestinian people in the Gaza Sector and the West Bank and its frenzied efforts to Judaize Jerusalem."
Hizbullah stressed that Hariri's stances "have nothing to do with Lebanon's posture, role or interests, but they are rather in line with the goals of the U.S. scheme to sow discord among the countries and peoples of the region."
This American scheme "has started to crumple since the defeat of the Israeli army in July 2006," Hizbullah added, noting that WikiLeaks cables published recently by Lebanese daily Al-Akhbar "have unveiled how much Hariri counted on that war to make Lebanon a U.S.-Israeli protectorate."
On a separate note, the party described "Hariri's claim that the policy adopted since the beginning of Ivory Coast's crisis is a foolish policy" as "an unfortunate attempt to evade his responsibilities as a caretaker premier."
Hizbullah accused Hariri of "turning his back on this national issue," wondering "where was the premier throughout the crisis, what has he done to tackle it and why has he turned a deaf ear to the appeals and demands of the (Lebanese) community" in civil war-torn Ivory Coast.
"His recent poor response aims to save face after things deteriorated and popular protests grew," the party went on to say in its statement.
Hariri and Hizbullah, allied with rival regional power-houses Saudi Arabia and Syria respectively, have been locked in a standoff for months over the U.N.-backed Special Tribunal for Lebanon, which is investigating the 2005 murder of Hariri's father, Rafik.
The Netherlands-based court is expected to be readying to implicate Hizbullah in the murder, an accusation the armed group has warned against.(naharnet-AFP) Beirut, 07 Apr 11, 21:56

Deadly Clashes Camp Ashraf base of the People's Mujahedeen of Iran, PMOI
Naharnet/At least three people were killed Friday when Iraqi forces clashed with an Iranian opposition group, a security official said, but the rebels claimed 25 of its members died in a full military assault. Major Hassan al-Tamimi of the Iraqi army in Baquba, capital of central Diyala province, said the armed forces clashed with stone-hurling crowds at the Camp Ashraf base of the People's Mujahedeen of Iran, or PMOI. "The clashes started at around 4:40 am (0140 GMT) as the army was taking positions inside a cemetery in Ashraf," Tamimi said. "Three people were killed and 20 wounded, among them six soldiers." The People's Mujahedeen of Iran said at least 25 of its members were killed and 325 wounded in a full-fledged military assault on its base about 80 kilometers north of Baghdad. Video footage sent by the rebel group to AFP showed soldiers in riot gear rushing on foot and in vehicles into the camp, and some wounded Mujahedeen members being carried away. A source at Baquba's main hospital confirmed three dead bodies had been received and 20 wounded, including six from the Iraqi security forces. The PMOI has about 3,500 members housed at Camp Ashraf. A left-wing and Islamic movement, it was founded in 1965 in opposition to the shah of Iran and has subsequently fought to oust the clerical regime that took power in Tehran after Iran's 1979 Islamic revolution. The group set up Camp Ashraf in the 1980s -- when Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein's regime was at war with the Islamic republic -- as a base to operate against Tehran. It was disarmed following the US-led invasion of 2003.(AFP)
Beirut, 08 Apr 11, 12:13

Hariri slams Iran interference
Hezbollah hits back at caretaker prime minister, accusing him of parroting U.S. stances on region
By Hussein Dakroub /Daily Star staff
Friday, April 08, 2011
BEIRUT: A war of words erupted between caretaker Prime Minister Saad Hariri and Hezbollah Thursday after Hariri accused Iran of “a flagrant interference” in the internal affairs of Lebanon and Arab Gulf states.
The verbal exchanges shattered Hezbollah’s silence on Hariri’s fierce campaign against the party’s arsenal. Since the collapse of his government in January, Hariri and his March 14 allies have launched scathing attacks on Hezbollah, accusing it of using its weapons to influence political life in Lebanon. They have demanded Hezbollah put its weapons under state control.
Addressing a Lebanese-Saudi economic forum in Beirut, Hariri vowed not to let Lebanon become an Iranian protectorate, saying Tehran’s policy in the region was no longer acceptable. Hariri’s speech drew a swift response from Hezbollah, which accused Hariri of serving the U.S. policy in the region.
Rejecting growing Iranian influence in Lebanon, Hariri said: “We in Lebanon do not accept to be an Iranian protectorate, just as we don’t accept for our brothers in Bahrain, Kuwait or any other country to be an Iranian protectorate. We are part of an integrated Arab society.”
Hariri said that while Saudi Arabia helped maintain stability in Lebanon, other regional powers and states, namely Israel and Iran, were spreading chaos and turmoil in the region.
“Saudi Arabia is the biggest and first investor in Lebanon’s stability. This investment is priceless. It is the basis for Lebanon’s progress and its economic growth,” Hariri said.
Saudi Arabia and Syria, which back rival factions, coordinated their efforts in the past to defuse political and sectarian tensions in Lebanon.
“On the other hand, there are regional states, powers and parties that invest in chaos by exporting various means of political, civil and security turmoil with the aim of undermining the unity of our Arab societies,” Hariri said.
“It is well known that Israel is the largest investor in regional chaos and in causing violence and unrest in different directions. It is also known that Lebanon has paid heavily for such policies, which resulted in devastating wars,” he added.
Hariri, whose Cabinet was brought down in January by the Hezbollah-led March 8 alliance in a dispute over the U.N.-backed Special Tribunal for Lebanon, accused Iran of meddling in the internal affairs of Lebanon and Gulf states in an attempt to expand its influence in the region.
“At this stage, we are all witnessing the exploitation of sectarian instincts which want to make Lebanon or Bahrain or the Gulf an arena for spreading political and security influence. In this regard, frankness requires us to say things as they are: Lebanon and several Arab countries, in the Gulf and probably outside the Gulf, are suffering from a flagrant Iranian interference at the political, economic and security levels,” he said. “One of the biggest challenges facing the Arab societies, including Lebanon, is Iran’s mounting violations of the social fabric in the Arab region.”
Responding to Hariri’s speech, Hezbollah said in a statement: “Hariri’s provocative attitudes against the Islamic Republic of Iran honestly reflected the latest attitudes of U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates in Riyadh about Iran’s role in the region.”
“Hariri’s stances … were in conformity with the objectives of the U.S. design to spread dissension and strife among the region’s states and peoples and deflect the struggle from its original direction with the Israeli enemy to serve the American design which has begun to fall apart since the defeat of the [Israeli] enemy’s army in July 2006,” the statement said.
It added that WikiLeaks documents detailing private meetings between Lebanese politicians and U.S. Embassy officials have revealed “the size of Hariri’s bets on [the 2006 Israeli] war in order to make Lebanon an American-Israeli protectorate.”
Gates sharply criticized Iran while in Saudi Arabia Wednesday. “We already have evidence that the Iranians are trying to exploit the situation in Bahrain and we also have evidence that they’re talking about what they can do to create problems elsewhere,” Gates said, referring to Shiite-led protests that were crushed by Bahrain’s Sunni monarchy.
Later Thursday night, Hariri’s Future Movement issued a statement hitting back at Hezbollah, saying the party’s statement has proved to all Lebanese that it is Iran’s official spokesperson in Lebanon. The statement said that while the party was not surprised by Hezbollah’s treason charges, it was strange that the party, which is hostile to America, based its charges on “leaked American documents.”
Hariri’s remarks came as tension was rising between Iran and Gulf states after Tehran objected to the Saudi dispatch of troops to Bahrain to quell the protests there and a spying row with Kuwait raised tension.
In a statement after their meeting in Riyadh last week, the foreign ministers of the six-nation Gulf Cooperation Council condemned Iran’s “continuing interference” in GCC states’ affairs. The GCC comprises Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Oman, Qatar and Bahrain.
The GCC’s position came a few days after the Iranian Parliament’s national security committee had said in a statement that Saudi Arabia was “playing with fire” by sending troops to Bahrain to quell weeks of public protests by the majority Shiites demanding political reforms. The GCC ministers also condemned “the blatant Iranian interference in Kuwait through planting spy cells on its territory.” Iran has denied the allegations.
Hariri said Arab countries did not address the issue of the growing Iranian influence in a hostile manner because they considered Iran a brotherly and friendly state.
“But it seems, with great regret, that the Iranian leadership understood this responsible Arab attitude and the successive invitations for openness as signs of weakness and surrender, so it decided to go to the extreme in infiltrating the Arab societies one after the other, starting with Lebanon, Bahrain and other countries,” he said.
“We say with all sincerity and responsibility that this Iranian policy is not acceptable anymore and that the gradual abduction of Arab societies under any slogan will not be in the interest of Iran or Arab-Iranian relations,” Hariri added.

Al Qaeda in Brazil?
10:00 AM, Apr 7, 2011
By JAIME DAREMBLUM
The Weekly Standard weekly newsletter. The Brazilian magazine Veja is reporting that al Qaeda members have established an active presence in South America’s largest country, as have militants associated with Hezbollah, Hamas, and other terrorist groups. They are apparently engaged in fundraising, recruitment, and strategic planning. Earlier this week, Aldo Donzis, a leading figure in the Argentine Jewish community, spoke to the JTA news agency and voiced alarm about the revelations.
“We have high concern about fundamentalist movements in Latin America and about recruitment activities of fundamentalist movements,” Donzis said. “We shared this information with Latin American parliamentarians last July and they agreed with our information. But the situation is getting worse. In Argentina, we have seen graffiti written in Arabic calling for jihad which coincided with the visit of Iranians here. Also, this graffiti was seen in Bolivia. We understand that Brazil needs to feel worried and act.”
Terrorists have long found haven in South America’s so-called Triple Frontier, which encompasses the intersection of Brazil, Argentina, and Paraguay. This area is known for being a Wild West of lawlessness, drug trafficking, and organized crime. Argentina is especially sensitive to increased terrorist activity in the region. During the 1990s, it suffered two deadly bombings orchestrated by Hezbollah and Iran. The first (in 1992) destroyed the Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires; the second (in 1994) demolished a Jewish community center in the same city.

Iran backs the regime at the expense of the Syrian people
07/04/2011/By Tariq Alhomayed/asharqalawsat
The Iranian Ambassador in Damascus, Ahmed al Moussawi, has announced his country's support for the Syrian regime, which is normal. However, what was not normal was his attack on the Syrian people, who came out to demonstrate in several Syrian cities, demanding reform and the ending of the longest-standing emergency law in the region.
The Iranian Ambassador, speaking at a conference entitled "The Islamic Awakening and Confronting Strife in Syria", which was being held in Damascus, said that "the events taking place in Syria have been prepared and planned by enemies to replicate the civil strife experienced by Iran, especially the slogans echoed by protestors in Daraa, such as "No Hezbollah and No Iran". This means that the source stems from the enemy, where external agents are receiving orders from enemies and Zionists!"
Here we must stop to examine several points. Firstly, the title of the conference itself is contradictory, for what is this "Islamic awakening" in a secular state, ruled by the Baath party? Secondly, the Syrian authorities came out in the media to do the impossible, and deny that the people in Daraa shouted "No Hezbollah and No Iran". Yet here is the Iranian Ambassador himself confirming the opposite! This slogan is highly significant, especially in the game of majority and minority, and the sectarian dimension in Syria. The other matter of course is the Iranian Ambassador attacking the demonstrators and branding them as agents of enemies and Zionists, whilst we find that the Syrian President himself has begun to receive delegations from the troubled areas, including social activists from Hasaka province. The Syrian regime has also began talking about reforms, and a Syrian official told AFP yesterday that "There will be an extraordinary (parliament) session from May 2 to 6 in which social and political laws will be adopted in line with the reforms desired by the head of state".
Is it conceivable that Damascus would respond to the demands of the "agents of enemies and Zionists", and declare its intention to abolish the emergency law, for example? Let us consider that Turkey, a friend of Syria, has urged Damascus to enact reforms, and quickly. The day before yesterday, a senior Turkish source told our newspaper, when commenting on[Turkey's Foreign Minister Ahmet] Davutoğlu's visit to Damascus, saying that Ankara "wants reforms to be put in place in accordance with the desires of the people", expressing "disappointment" that the measures promised by the Syrian President had not been accelerated. The Turkish official revealed that the message Davutoğlu carried to Damascus was that "leaders must act with greater courage than the people", calling on "leaders to listen to the voices of the masses, and not take the demonstrations lightly and resist change, but rather move towards this change". Is it conceivable that Turkey has done all this, despite its interests in Syria, and the sensitivity of the Kurdish issue, only to serve the agents of the enemy and Zionists?
It is a sad state of affairs for Iranian diplomacy to descend to this level, but the magnitude of Iranian hypocrisy with regards to our region is astonishing. How can it explain its attacks on the Syrian people, compared to what it says and does in Bahrain for example? When the all sects of the Syrian community come out to demonstrate, they become traitors and foreign agents, yet when Bahrain's Shia population comes out in protest, they are freedom fighters?
It's clear that sedation follows Iran where ever it goes, and this is evident in Tehran's dealings with Syria under the principle: support the regime and attack the people.

Lebanese premier ousted by militant Hezbollah group says Iran is meddling in Arab affairs
By Associated Press, Thursday, April 7, BEIRUT — Outgoing Lebanese prime minister has slammed what he calls Iran’s “flagrant intervention” in internal Lebanese and Arab affairs.
Saad Hariri says Iran is meddling in Lebanon, Bahrain and Kuwait and adds this is “not acceptable anymore.”Hariri, a Sunni Muslim, spoke in Beirut on Thursday, delivering his harshest criticism yet of Shiite powerhouse Iran. Iran backs Hariri’s rival, the Shiite militant Hezbollah group. Hezbollah and its allies toppled Hariri’s Western-backed government in January when their ministers walked out. They then gained enough support in parliament to name their own candidate as prime minister-designate. Hariri, who acts as a caretaker until a new government is formed, says Lebanon will not be an Iranian protectorate.Copyright 2011 The Associated Press

Destroying One Koran vs. Destroying Many Christians, Which is Worse?
by Raymond Ibrahim
FrontPageMagazine.com
April 8, 2011
http://www.meforum.org/2872/koran-christian-persecution
The now infamous Koran burning by Florida pastor Terry Jones has created hysteria in the Muslim world. In Afghanistan alone, some twenty people, including U.N. workers, have been killed and beheaded to screams of "Allahu Akbar!" Western leaders around the globe—including Obama and members of Congress—have unequivocally condemned Jones' actions (without bothering to point out that freedom of expression is a prized American liberty). Many are even blaming the deaths in Afghanistan directly on Jones; Bill O'Reilley says he has "blood on his hands."
Yet, as Western leaders rush to profess their abhorrence at what one American did to one inanimate book, let's take a quick look at what many Muslims are doing to many living and breathing Christians around the Islamic world—to virtually no media coverage or Western condemnation:
Afghanistan: A Muslim convert to Christianity was seized and, according to sharia's apostasy laws, awaits execution.
Bangladesh: A Christian man was arrested for distributing Bibles near Muslims. Since Wednesday, thousands of Muslims have been rioting, injuring dozens—not because of Jones, but in protestation of women's rights.
Egypt: A Muslim mob burned down another Coptic church and dozens of Christian homes; when Christians protested, the military opened fire on them while crying "Allahu Akbar," killing nine. Another mob cut a Christian man's ear off "according to sharia."
Ethiopia: Muslims went on a rampage burning down nearly 70 churches, killing at least one Christian, and dislocating as many as 10,000. Christians living in Muslim majority regions are being warned to either convert to Islam, abandon their homes, or die.
Malaysia: Authorities detained and desecrated thousands of Bibles.
Pakistan: Two Christians were shot to death as they exited church; a Christian serving life in prison for "blasphemy" died in his cell under suspicions of murder.
Saudi Arabia: An Eritrean Christian has been arrested for sharing his faith with Muslims and is facing the death penalty; other missionaries continue to languish in Saudi prisons.
Somalia and Sudan: Christian girls—including a mother of four—were recently abducted, raped, and killed for embracing Christianity.
It should be borne in mind that none of these atrocities were performed in retaliation to Jones' Koran burning; they're just business as usual in the Muslim world. Moreover, the above list is but a quick and cursory sampling of the very latest in Christian suffering under Islam. Were one to include persecution from just a few months back, one could also mention the jihadist attack on a Baghdad church, killing 52 Christians; the New Year's eve Coptic church explosion, killing 21; Muslim rampages that destroyed several churches in Indonesia, Nigeria, and the Philippines; Iran's "round up" of some 70 home-worshipping Christians; and Kuwait's—a nation that owes its very existence to U.S. war sacrifices—rejection to build a church.
Then there are the countless atrocities that never make it to any media—the stories of persistent, quiet misery that only the victims and local Christians know.
One would have thought that all this was at least equally deserving of media attention and Western condemnation as the burning of a Koran. This is especially so considering that, whereas only Jones is responsible for his actions, many of the aforementioned savageries—arresting and executing Christian missionaries and Muslim apostates, destroying or outlawing churches, seizing and desecrating not one but thousands of Bibles—are carried out at the hands of Muslim authorities and governments deemed U.S. "friends-and-allies."
Such is the surreal and increasingly irrational world we live in, where irate Muslims and groveling Westerners obsess over the destruction of one book while ignoring the destruction of many human lives; where a guaranteed and hard-earned American right—freedom of expression—receives a lot of condemnatory huffing and puffing from those charged with protecting it, while murderous and barbarous—in a word, evil—behavior is devoutly ignored.
**Raymond Ibrahim is associate director of the Middle East Forum

The shadow of April 13
Michael Young, April 8, 2011
Next week Lebanon will commemorate, doubtless in vapors of indifference, the 36th anniversary of the start of its civil war. Indifference is not necessarily a bad thing, but given the polarization in the country today, particularly between the Sunni and Shia communities, a look back is necessary.
In 1975 Lebanon did not seem like a country on the verge of a 15-year conflict. There were those who saw through the glitz of the era, the nights at the Caves du Roy and the imperishable cliché that one could swim in the sea and ski on the same day. Toufiq Youssef Awwad’s novel Tawaheen Beirut, like Ziad al-Rahbani’s brilliant, caustic plays, offered literary glimpses into the often impossible social contradictions the Lebanese had to juggle. Political life was, like today, deadlocked, the Lebanese divided over the role of the state, their social contract and the armed Palestinian groups in their midst.
The situation appears to be different today, but the contradictions are still there. There is still no consensus over a Lebanese social contract, still no broad accord when it comes to the state, and still a highly volatile quarrel over weapons not under the authority of the state, in this case those of Hezbollah. And you can still ski and swim on the same day.
But one thing we do have that we didn’t three-and-a-half decades ago is a memory of our civil war. Back then, the Lebanese perhaps still recalled the 1958 conflict, but what a mild walk in the park this was compared to the butchery between 1975 and 1990. And while Lebanon moved perilously close to the precipice in the six years since the Syrian army withdrew from the country, it never went over the edge. Even Hezbollah’s assault on western Beirut and the Aley district in May 2008 was designed to achieve swift, blunt political success, not initiate a full-scale confrontation, though the party played with fire.
How might the memory of war help us today? The priority for the political class in the foreseeable future, on all sides of the Lebanese divide, is to avert a conflict between Sunnis and Shia and create a framework for serious dialogue between the two communities. This may sound terribly trite, and it is illusory today to expect that the factions will find substantial common ground. The projects advanced by the March 14 coalition and by Hezbollah are largely incompatible, at least in the forms expressed by representatives on both sides.
Then there is the fact that dialogue is sometimes only useful in creating an impression of amity, until the clashes break out. That is why something a bit more serious must be attempted. While the political class may resurrect the national dialogue sessions, as cover for a broader exchange of ideas between the politicians, Saad Hariri and Hassan Nasrallah must establish their own mechanism to remain in regular contact, secretly, whatever their public stances and regardless of the personal animus they have for each other. Why secret? To shield such contacts from political one-upmanship on either side.
It is doubtless necessary for Nasrallah to climb down from his high perch, one from where he believes that he can intimidate his political adversaries to change their views on a host of crucial national issues, ranging from their support for the Special Tribunal for Lebanon to their disapproval of Hezbollah’s weapons. But it is also vital that Hariri take more steps of his own, for example reestablishing a relationship with Nabih Berri. From Hariri’s perspective, the parliament speaker has a lot going against him. Yet March 14 twice elected him to his post after the Independence Intifada of 2005, even though Berri had done everything to undermine the then-parliamentary majority.
Above all, Lebanon needs a government. That March 14 has chosen to remain in the opposition is constitutionally legitimate. However, at this stage, with so much uncertainty in the country and in the Arab world, it really makes more sense for it to join the government, on condition that it receive veto power. The former majority would thus place itself in a position to defend its stakes, including the Special Tribunal, and build useful coalitions with President Michel Sleiman, Prime Minister Najib Mikati, and even Walid Jumblatt on myriad issues. None of the three relishes the thought of seeing the government turned into a battering ram for Hezbollah and Michel Aoun.
Mikati may well agree to grant March 14 veto power, as it would allow him, finally, to form a governing team. More importantly, a new government would allow for politics within the confines of national institutions. Better in the cabinet than in the streets.
As Michel Chiha, an essential ideologue of the Lebanese system, wrote in 1936 that Lebanon’s diversities can only be brought nearer to one another “by allowing them to live politically together, by allowing them to make laws together in an Assembly and to control the implementation of these laws.” The government is one such assembly, but there are, potentially, many others. As the April 13 anniversary looms, let’s remember that Lebanon is condemned to manage its differences in consensual ways; otherwise the shadow of war will never be far enough away.
**Michael Young is opinion editor of the Daily Star newspaper in Beirut and author of The Ghosts of Martyrs Square: An Eyewitness Account of Lebanon’s Life Struggle, which the Wall Street Journal listed as one of its 10 standout books for 2010.