All Hezbollah related subjects in this thread

[theMightyRedV]

Please stop fooling yourself and your friends. We all clearly know what Hizballah is, and who Hizballah depends of... hizballah without the backing of Iran is meaningless. You might also want to say that the Future Movement without the backing of Saoudi Arabia is also meaningless. I can only agree.

We're not waiting for you to tell us if we can survive with or without Iran. We survived 33 days of an onslaught of the entire world against us. Yeah, we were using weapons sent from Iran. What the f*% do you expect us to fight with, marshmallows? It was HezbAllah, Lebanese Muslim fighters, no Iranian or African or anyone else was standing defending Lebanons southern villages but these Lebanese fighters. We'll take on the whole world if they want to eliminate us - they tried, and they failed. You and Wolfowitz can dream about HezbAllah all you want.

The only left are, us, the Christians who still do not totally depend on foreigners. They might have ties but not dependance. Please stop deniying the survival of Hizballah because of iran. I beleive Lebaneses still have a minimum of IQ and intellligence but most of all a minimum of RESPECT. Lets stop fooling each other.

Stop fooling yourself. Due to the history and geographical location of Lebanon - it will always be subject to ties with neighbouring countries. Please don't throw general statements about dependence on foreigners - if you have a shred of knowledge on Lebanons history in the last 20 years, you'd take that comment back.

The iranian revolutionary guards are partially in control of Hizballah.

Again, throwing statements without proof is making your argument all the more lame. I challenge you to prove how who what where the Iranian revolutionary guards control HezbAllah.

Does Hizballah takes its ideological inspiration from the Iranian revolution and the teachings of Ayatollah Khomeini? YES

if you can't differentiate HezbAllah's religious ties to Iran, with their political/national decisions - then you got no clue on this topic. Prove to me how a Shiite's religious ties with a particular marja3 Shi3i in Iran compromises his patriotism in being Lebanese. Just like you have your vatican, we have our marja3iyi. If you can't differentiate - don't bother arguing.

Does Hizballah objective is dedicated to liberating Jerusalem and eliminating Israel? YES

That's the objective of every Muslim - if you have a problem with that, stiff sh*t - live with it. If your dear "israel" is at risk - go n join the IDF.

Does Hizballah formally advocated ultimate establishment of Islamic rule in Lebanon? YES

no it doesnt. But it awaits the coming of the Mahdi(atfs), where Islam will rule the world - hayda yalli baddak tesma3o mahak :D ?

Does Hizballah is strongly anti-Western party? YES

HezbAllah is anti anyone seeking to oppress and control - notably agendas like the "new middle east". We can live with anyone who is different, but we wont live with any foreigner imposing his views on us.

Did the establishment of the Islamic Revolution in Iran that was led by the Khomeini developed the party of Hizballah with the concept of Willayat Al-Faqih? YES

HezbAllah was created as a reaction to "israeli" occupation. It was inspired by the Islamic Shia revolution in Iran. Im still sure you don't know how to defy what a religious link is.

Hizballah is definetly depending on Iran and has rarely the capability and willingness to act independently even if it may have conducted operations that were not approved by Iran!

LOL. Please read this, and re-read it.

BUT again the only point that we CANNOT DENY is that Hizballah's status is Iran's front-line operative arm against Israel. NO MORE NO LESS. Their Lebanese agenda is inexistant.

We're not waiting for someone who has wolfowitz in his avatar to tell us how patriotic to be. Wolfowitz wants to destroy the Muslim people, so that says alot about where you stand. You've lost touch with the last few years in Lebanon. You're not going to get anywhere in Lebanon if you say HezbAllah Lebanese agenda is non existant.

As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice. A.H.

You dont speak for all Christians. If you're a true Christian, you wouldn't have an image of the zionist anti Arab anti Muslim scum called paul wolfowitz.

[chafic]

Originally Posted by vegojimbo

yes it certainly should. Either show me the transcript of the fatwa or it's safe to assume it's bogus.

Vego, I'm not looking to convince you or show you anything. You're free to take the info or leave it.

Originally Posted by vegojimbo

Sorry to break it for u but FM is an armed militia, and is not that much more liberal than HA, economically yes, but not much further than that.

FM is an armed militia as much as FPM is.
Regarding liberalism, FM is socially and politically more liberal and moderate than Hezbollah.

Originally Posted by vegojimbo

About the Islamic ideology part, FM doesn't advocate it but it certainly gives licenses to parties who do.

That's an argument totally devoid of any logic. Since many parties advocating Islamic ideologies already exist, the government can't just refuse that others join the club.
Are you against the creation of Islamic parties to begin with? If not, why are you criticizing "giving licenses" to such parties?

Originally Posted by vegojimbo

As for the last statement, a reply it doesn't deserve.

It's not a statement as much as it is a deduction. Although the Saudi regime is terrible, it's much less detrimental than the Iranian one is being to Lebanon.

[chafic]

Originally Posted by MindFree

مقتطفات من كتاب نعيم قاسم :

ص ٢٣ : القيادة الشرعية للولي الفقيه كخليفة للنبي والأئمة وهو الذي يرسم الخطوط العريضة للعمل في ألم وأمره ونهيه نافذان.

ص٢٧٣ : ثم جرى إستفتاء سماحة الولي الفقيه الامام الخامنئي حول المشروعية فالإنتخابات النيابية بعد تقديم إقتراح اللجنة فاجاز وايد . عندها حسمت المشاركة في الإنتخابات النيابية ودخل المشروع في برنامج والية الحزب .

as for me not knowing the scope of wilayat al fakih, i ll quote the one who was behind this theory that created salafism inside the shiite community, khomeini says in his book 'alhoukouma al islamiya' the following:

فتوهم أن صلاحيات النبي في الحكم كانت أكثر من صلاحيات أمير المؤمنين وصلاحيات أمير المؤمنين أكثر من صلاحيات الفقيه هو توهم خاطئ وباطل . نعم إن فضائل الرسول بالطبع هي أكثر من فضائل جميع البشر لكن كثرة الفضائل المعنوية لا تزيد في صلاحيات الحكم فالصلاحيات نفسها التي كانت للرسول ولائمة في تعبئة الجيوش وتعيين الولاة والمحافظين واستلام الضرائب وصرفها في مصالح المسلمين قد أعطاها الله للحكومة المفترضة هذه الأيام . غاية الأمر لم يعين شخصاً بالخصوص وانما أعطاه لعنوان العالم العادل.

[vegojimbo]

Originally Posted by chafic

Vego, I'm not looking to convince you or show you anything. You're free to take the info or leave it.

This is not how things go. When one makes an accusation, one is obliged to provide the proofs to back up his claims. Till now, apart from the author of the article, no one has caught sight of this fatwa. Strange, no? Otherwise, never again criticize any article which bases its entire arguments on "reliable sources".

FM is an armed militia as much as FPM is.
Regarding liberalism, FM is socially and politically more liberal and moderate than Hezbollah.

Hilarious!! I watched FM militiamen in May 7, and know about FM financial support (if not more) for the fighters in Tripoli against the Alawists.
As for FM being liberal politically, where does that show exactly? or is wearing ties and suits enough these days to be liberal?
About moderation, in the religious practices aspect, yes FM is more moderate than HA. But in the sectarian aspect, they're the same.

That's an argument totally devoid of any logic. Since many parties advocating Islamic ideologies already exist, the government can't just refuse that others join the club.
Are you against the creation of Islamic parties to begin with? If not, why are you criticizing "giving licenses" to such parties?

mmm, u kinda got a point there.

It's not a statement as much as it is a deduction. Although the Saudi regime is terrible, it's much less detrimental than the Iranian one is being to Lebanon.

That's by far a totally erroneous deduction. The saudi regime has been quite busy arming sunni factions against the evil HA, and telling FM's leadership what to do and how to behave. Not to forget the massive influx of saudi money today to defeat FPM electorally.

[Bejin]

Lebanon is for the christians the only country in Middle East they are not dhimmis. So I don't want the tutelage neither from Saudi Arabia nor from Iran. However, the dhimmitude in Lebanon is near if the christians don't pay attention. 5 february 2006, electoral law, powers of the presidency, etc.

[chafic]

Originally Posted by vegojimbo

This is not how things go. When one makes an accusation, one is obliged to provide the proofs to back up his claims. Till now, apart from the author of the article, no one has caught sight of this fatwa. Strange, no? Otherwise, never again criticize any article which bases its entire arguments on "reliable sources".

Dude, ask the Rai for proofs, why are you asking me?

Originally Posted by vegojimbo

Hilarious!! I watched FM militiamen in May 7, and know about FM financial support (if not more) for the fighters in Tripoli against the Alawists.

And I saw the pictures of FPM militiamen (you know those pictures once shown on the media) and know about the political support (if not more) for militias such as Hezbollah against um, Lebanon.

Originally Posted by vegojimbo

As for FM being liberal politically, where does that show exactly? or is wearing ties and suits enough these days to be liberal?

That's one side of being liberal, but of course, not the very relevant part. FM has shown more belief in democracy (let's say liberal), personal liberties and freedom of speech than Hezbollah could ever do; They (FM) are still well behind, but they're much closer; At the very least, FM is a secular party.

Originally Posted by vegojimbo

About moderation, in the religious practices aspect, yes FM is more moderate than HA. But in the sectarian aspect, they're the same.

We disagree on that, but let's put it aside for now.

Originally Posted by vegojimbo

mmm, u kinda got a point there.

Fine, but you didn't answer my questions. Are you with or against "giving licences" to Islamic parties?

Originally Posted by vegojimbo

That's by far a totally erroneous deduction. The saudi regime has been quite busy arming sunni factions against the evil HA, and telling FM's leadership what to do and how to behave. Not to forget the massive influx of saudi money today to defeat FPM electorally.

Please provide proofs.

[vegojimbo]

Originally Posted by chafic

Dude, ask the Rai for proofs, why are you asking me?

I don't want to. But it's nice to see u believe info without proof these days. U've come far.

And I saw the pictures of FPM militiamen (you know those pictures once shown on the media) and know about the political support (if not more) for militias such as Hezbollah against um, Lebanon.

Wow u got me! so HA was fighting with itself for 2 whole days in Beirut, right? and the clashes in the North were all child play, right?

That's one side of being liberal, but of course, not the very relevant part.

This has nothing to do with liberalism. In which book is "appearance" considered as a criterion for liberalism?

FM has shown more belief in democracy (let's say liberal), personal liberties and freedom of speech than Hezbollah could ever do; They (FM) are still well behind, but they're much closer; At the very least, FM is a secular party.

Calling entire cities as red lines is not that liberal. As for freedom of speech, I rather call it freedom of defamation.
Now about FM being a secular party, no comment.

Fine, but you didn't answer my questions. Are you with or against "giving licences" to Islamic parties?

I'm against. However, it will be very difficult to take away licenses from established islamic parties, however at least we can prevent the rise of new ones.
Personally, if a way can be found to remove licenses from existing islamic parties (HA included), I'm all for it. However,technically it's virtually impossible. Refusing to welcome new islamic entities into the lebanese scene is not though.

Please provide proofs.

why? it's obviously not required or important since u urself believed the fatwa thingy without any proof.

[chafic]

Originally Posted by vegojimbo

I don't want to. But it's nice to see u believe info without proof these days. U've come far.

Vego, disagreeing is one thing I do not mind at all, that's what discussion is about. But straw mans (and other intended fallacies) is something I do not cherish. As I made it clear quite many times already, I'm not trying to convince you of the info, and I'm not asserting that it's necessarily true, but I was simply noting the source of a member's post's.

Originally Posted by vegojimbo

Wow u got me!

No, I was serious. There simply is no significant difference, in terms of militiahood and violence, on your scales, between FM and FPM.

Originally Posted by vegojimbo

so HA was fighting with itself for 2 whole days in Beirut, right?

Yes, for a fight to last 2 days, Hezbollah must have been fighting itself. Noo7 Zaayter could have lasted longer in the fight, or the dudes in my village with their hunting rifles.

Originally Posted by vegojimbo

and the clashes in the North were all child play, right?

No, but how do they prove that FM is a militia?

Originally Posted by vegojimbo

This has nothing to do with liberalism. In which book is "appearance" considered as a criterion for liberalism?

It isn't but that wasn't exactly the point.

Originally Posted by vegojimbo

Calling entire cities as red lines is not that liberal.

What does that even mean?

Originally Posted by vegojimbo

As for freedom of speech, I rather call it freedom of defamation.

Freedom of speech includes all. FM did not show any attitude of violence or repression toward someone who has different opinions.

Originally Posted by vegojimbo

As for FM being a secular party, no comment.

I'm not sure why this should be a subject of discussion either; FM is clearly a secular party.

Originally Posted by vegojimbo

I'm against.

How could you support Hezbollah then? A clerical thecratic party?

Originally Posted by vegojimbo

why? it's obviously not required since u urself believed the fatwa thingy without any proof.

So again, do you have any proofs?

[Bejin]

Chafic,
Hezbollah represents the most important part of the shiites, can we ignore them?

[chafic]

Originally Posted by Bejin

Chafic,
Hezbollah represents the most important part of the Shiites, can we ignore them?

No, I would choose opposing Hezbollah and fighting its ideology. In simple non elaborate terms, people are not genetically Hezbollah, or FPM or LF or republicans or democrats, and further, it's not like they're born Shiites or Sunnis, or Maronites, or Bahaii, or Hindus. So the whole argument is a nonstarter in my opinion.