After Aoun, it's Jumblatt's turn, thank you Jouzo for the comedy show

[Danny Z]

Originally Posted by Saladin

Really? Does it explicitly say that? Or is it your personal analysis based on the fact that powers were stripped from the president and given to the cabinet?

If it is explicitly mentioned I would be thankful if show me where it says so. If it's a personal analysis keep it to yourself.

[]. You take majority you take the government, why didn't the Taef idiots decide to elect a president of their own instead of just changing the law?
[]

[Saladin]

Originally Posted by Danny Z

B[] You take majority you take the government, why didn't the Taef idiots decide to elect a president of their own instead of just changing the law?

Do you usually resort to personal bashing when you fail to answer a simple question? 5alas say it is your own personal individual private analysis w 5allesna, why are you insisting on making me convinced with your logic? Not all people see things eye to eye, and its normal.

[Danny Z]

Originally Posted by Saladin

Do you usually resort to personal bashing when you fail to answer a simple question? 5alas say it is your own personal individual private analysis w 5allesna, why are you insisting on making me convinced with your logic? Not all people see things eye to eye, and its normal.

It is you who are failiing to answer a simple question, if the interest in Taef was just to strip the president of his powers to give it to a majority government formed from the same factions (ie the majority) that could have elected him anyway before Taef, why would they move the powers of the president to the government, why did they explicitly say it has to be to the whole government in meeting instead?
Is it too hard on your brains to comprehend? Just say it, you don't want a Chrisitian President with power nor a government that has christians power in it.
If the only objective was to strip the president of its role just to give it to a sunni prime minister then to hell with you and Taef, we never accepted it anyway you imposed it on us with the powers of Saudi Arabia and Syria and now you want us to accept the interpretation of it 3ala zaw2ak, eh la2 fasharet. Logic and dialogue does not work with, you can cry foul about HA weapons as much as you like, that's the only thing you understand, you imposed Taef on us with weapons, so hush already about May 7 people like you deserve it if you want us to accept Taef stop interpreting it 3ala zaw2ak.

[Saladin]

Originally Posted by Danny Z

It is you who are failiing to answer a simple question, if the interest in Taef was just to strip the president of his powers to give it to a majority government formed from the same factions (ie the majority) that could have elected him anyway before Taef, why would they move the powers of the president to the government, why did they explicitly say it has to be to the whole government in meeting instead?
Is it too hard on your brains to comprehend? Just say it, you don't want a Chrisitian President with power nor a government that has christians power in it.
If the only objective was to strip the president of its role just to give it to a sunni prime minister then to hell with you and Taef, we never accepted it anyway you imposed it on us with the powers of Saudi Arabia and Syria and now you want us to accept the interpretation of it 3ala zaw2ak, eh la2 fasharet. Logic and dialogue does not work with, you can cry foul about HA weapons as much as you like, that's the only thing you understand, you imposed Taef on us with weapons, so hush already about May 7 people like you deserve it if you want us to accept Taef stop interpreting it 3ala zaw2ak.

The powers were in the hands of the maronites. Shifting them to the government allowed parliamentary majorities of all or many sects to rule the country.

Anyway, it's useless to proceed with such debate. Only those who carry weapons are the real decision makers in this country, everyone should shape his strategies and decisions based on this simple fact.

[Danny Z]

Originally Posted by Saladin

The powers were in the hands of the maronites. Shifting them to the government allowed parliamentary majorities of all or many sects to rule the country.

Oh really!? and then why not keep the president in his place and parliametary majority of all or many sects elect him and let him rule the country 3ala zaw2on?
But to prove that you really don't care about laws not just even the interpretation but all thelaws themselves, even all shi3a ministers resigned the government couldn't assume power on its own still your beloved Siniora clinched to illegal powers, because the Yankees backed him, no respect to laws whatsoever.

Originally Posted by Saladin

Anyway, it's useless to proceed with such debate. Only those who carry weapons are the real decision makers in this country, everyone shape his strategies and decision based on this simple fact.

For fifteen years you used weapons of the Syrians to pass your laws and whims, you don't like it get used to it, at least you are still fairly given your size, all what the weapons are doing is preventing from overstepping your limits and here you are complaining...

[ohyeah]

Originally Posted by Saladin

The powers were in the hands of the maronites. Shifting them to the government allowed parliamentary majorities of all or many sects to rule the country.

Anyway, it's useless to proceed with such debate. Only those who carry weapons are the real decision makers in this country, everyone should shape his strategies and decisions based on this simple fact.

1-they are shifted to PM position and minster of electricity is a good example of this.

2-Many committees follow directly PM position not whole government.

3- parliamentary majorities doesn't represent Lebanese.

[Robin Hood]

Originally Posted by Saladin

You are comparing Bassils wish and desire to enter the government to the biggest assassination in the history of lebanon or the region for that matter? What did you expect from SH to do? Be real.

Eza gharib sem3ak, bi fakkir enno Loubnen balad emin w enno ma sar fi 7arob.

[Saladin]

Originally Posted by Danny Z

Oh really!? and then why not keep the president in his place and parliametary majority of all or many sects elect him and let him rule the country 3ala zaw2on?
But to prove that you really don't care about laws not just even the interpretation but all thelaws themselves, even all shi3a ministers resigned the government couldn't assume power on its own still your beloved Siniora clinched to illegal powers, because the Yankees backed him, no respect to laws whatsoever.

For fifteen years you used weapons of the Syrians to pass your laws and whims, you don't like it get used to it, at least you are still fairly given your size, all what the weapons are doing is preventing from overstepping your limits and here you are complaining...

Yea because Hariri and lahoud were metel el samne 3al 3asal.

[CitizenOfTheRepublic]

Originally Posted by Saladin

The PM decided not to have anyone who has lost in the elections in his cabinet, he has the right to form a government as he sees fit. Why was this so hard for aoun to abide with? It wasnt personal ya3ne, this was to be applied on M14 as well.

So you said that Aoun came up with conditions that made any agreement impossible, and here you are saying that Hariri came up with the condition that seems to be at the root of this deadlock. But then again, it is Aoun paralyzing the country?

I am not sure you see the irony in this!

Tell me, these seasonal principles of Hariri, how fit are they do build a country, when he changes principles as he changes underwear?

Where was that condition when E. Marouni and N. Lahoud got cabinets post Doha, both losers?

More to the point, what is the logical basis of such a "fatwa" he came up with? If anything, the known principle since the age of enlightment is that parliamentary powers are separated from the executive, i.e. elected reps, not losers, are not allowed to hold cabinets.

Have to give it to Hariri, he's very creative, and IMHO, it is he too who is paralyzing the country because this seasonal "principle" he came up with was not for the good of the country, but only to earn some points against FPM.

[Diabolo_7]

Originally Posted by Saladin

Yea because Hariri and lahoud were metel el samne 3al 3asal.

but Hariri and the Syrians were