Church in Lassa

[chafic]

Originally Posted by sanfour

at least, the problem is settled.
let the state put back Camille Chamoun's and Pierre Gemayel's names on
the Sport City ya chafic. walaw, antom al arzatou wa nahnou khattouha al ahmar.

Sanfour, don't you see yourself guys stressing too much on sectarian rabble rousing to get away from what is most important? The name of a sports city is not really a prime interest for me; Social justice matters much more; I think the state can provide such justice. Please, if you do have other alternatives do propose them.

Originally Posted by Arze

Which state??
a 100 year old problem,, law bada tchati kenit ghayamit.

Do you have more concrete information about the problem?

Originally Posted by Arze

Instead of thanking GMA for what he did,, you shower us with you comments

Why should I thank him when I think he did something wrong?

Originally Posted by Venom

Arze they will not....GMA will remain shawkeh b3aynon.....whatever he did!

Ever heard of difference of opinions?

[fidelio]

Originally Posted by chafic

1- Why would politicians be able to settle things the judicature wasn't able to settle? Is it because conflicting parties would abide by political leaders decisions but not by the court's decisions? And are these politicians investing on this fact to malignantly increase their influence?

Because, let's face it, the judicial system is corrupt and people tend to notice these things chafic when they are being dragged year after year in court and their rights are far from reclaimed just because they are not lubricating the right tubes. This is why politicians are taking on their behalf the task of settling these kinds of cases and it was especially urgent in this case because of the delicate context and the urgency of the matter since there are many instigators on full throttle mode.
As for the "malignant" part, another term could also be coined to describe this or any other situation, it all depends on the perspective.

Originally Posted by chafic

2- Do you have any concrete information about this specific case?

All i know is what transpired from the media on matters of legality and historical disagreement. But this is not important, the fact is, that at the end of the day, one party (not in the political sense) conceded to another and the dispute was settled.

Originally Posted by chafic

3- What if in cases that are of public or general interest, conflicting parties or groups (a minority or a majority of them) do not all agree on a settlement concluded by non official parties? What if it's the case now?

I don't see anyone filing a lawsuit. If anyone disagrees with tribal justice and the fact that one party conceded its right, they can always resort to the judicial system.

Originally Posted by chafic

So you're basically judging all his behavior based on the NTV issue. Now regarding this case, I agree that no verdict against any media station should reach closure or even suspension. But actually, the whole procedures of the court of publications should probably be reviewed and amended to set a top limit for measures that could be taken against media stations. Why are you putting the blame on the minister?

The minister has a responsibility to ensure that the judicial system is running smoothly by at least providing the political atmosphere that allows that kind of reform. I'm not asking for miracles, just a fair stance by someone who knows what "fair" and "just" means.
All i heard from Najjar, and he's apparently not stingy when it comes to media time, are political and biased stances not very different from his biased political "mecenes" during this judicial frenzy on the media whether it is with the Orient le Jour, Mustaqbal, Shiraa or NTV.

[sanfour]

Originally Posted by chafic

Sanfour, don't you see yourself guys stressing too much on sectarian rabble rousing to get away from what is most important? The name of a sports city is not really a prime interest for me; Social justice matters much more; I think the state can provide such justice. Please, if you do have other alternatives do propose them.

in order for the state's justice department to interfere,
there should be a lawsuit, don't you think?
why the Patriarch didn't file a lawsuit against the Shiite cleric?
the alternative lays before us : the problem is solved.

don't worry about the names on the Sports City, when the opposition
becomes majority, the names will return as they were when it was built.

[sanfour]

Originally Posted by chafic

Do you have more concrete information about the problem?

أفتتحت هذه الكنيسة عام 1918 واعتمدت لسنوات عدة من سبع قرى جبيلية ككنيسة للرعية. وكانت تعود ملكيتها آنذاك لأبرشية بعلبك المارونية التي اصبحت معروفة اليوم بأبرشية جونية المارونية التي تملك حوالى 11 مليون متراً من الأراضي في المنطقة من ضمنها مبنى تابع للمطرانية إضافة الى الكنيسة الأثرية. وبأمر من المطران يوحنا مراد ومن بعده المطران الياس ريشا بقيت هذه الكنيسة مفتوحة أمام عامة الشعب حتى عام 1936 يوم شُيّدت كنيسة أخرى لتتسع لكل أبناء الرعية. وفي العام 2001 سيطر عليها شيخ شيعي من لاسا يدعى محمد العيتاوي مدعياً أنها كانت مُصلى لنساء آل حماده العائلة الإقطاعية التي باعت أملاكها للمطرانية وحولها الى مُصلى.

أما القداس الذي كان يجب أن يقام أمس في 14 أيلول في الكنيسة والذي تمّ تأجيله بعد العثور على قنبلتين على بعد 40 متراً من الكنيسة سيقام في القريب العاجل وسيحضره رسميون وسياسيون وحزبيون إضافة الى ممثليْن عن العماد عون والسيد حسن نصرالله.

source : tayyar.org

[chafic]

[]

Originally Posted by fidelio

Because, let's face it, the judicial system is corrupt and people tend to notice these things chafic when they are being dragged year after year in court and their rights are far from reclaimed just because they are not lubricating the right tubes. This is why politicians are taking on their behalf the task of settling these kinds of cases and it was especially urgent in this case because of the delicate context and the urgency of the matter since there are many instigators on full throttle mode.

Let me get it straight fidelio. We're talking about 2 political parties, both of whom are significantly involved in the political life, whether in the parliament or in the government. Instead of working on reforming the judicial system, they absolve themselves from this responsibility and try to do the court's job.
On the other hand fidelio, shall we adopt the same criteria for settling issues everywhere? Like give the right of conflict solving to dominant political parties?

Originally Posted by fidelio

As for the "malignant" part, another term could also be coined to describe this or any other situation, it all depends on the perspective.

True.

Originally Posted by fidelio

All i know is what transpired from the media on matters of legality and historical disagreement. But this is not important, the fact is, that at the end of the day, one party (not in the political sense) conceded to another and the dispute was settled.

What transpired from the media is too little to tell why it was necessary for 2 political parties to solve the issue, or how they actually did so.

Originally Posted by fidelio

I don't see anyone filing a lawsuit. If anyone disagrees with tribal justice and the fact that one party conceded its right, they can always resort to the judicial system.

They could very much be afraid, or that they prefer conceding rather than undermining their tribal leaders' legitimacy.

Originally Posted by fidelio

The minister has a responsibility to ensure that the judicial system is running smoothly by at least providing the political atmosphere that allows that kind of reform. I'm not asking for miracles, just a fair stance by someone who knows what "fair" and "just" means.

What would have been a fair stance within what his prerogatives allow?

Originally Posted by fidelio

All i heard from Najjar, and he's apparently not stingy when it comes to media time, are political and biased stances not very different from his biased political "mecenes" during this judicial frenzy on the media whether it is with the Orient le Jour, Mustaqbal, Shiraa or NTV.

He's biased like most of the other ministers, but I'm more interested in an evaluation of his professional behavior, like as a minister.

[Youchka]

Originally Posted by chafic

1- Why would politicians be able to settle things the judicature wasn't able to settle? Is it because conflicting parties would abide by political leaders decisions but not by the court's decisions? And are these politicians investing on this fact to malignantly increase their influence?
2- Do you have any concrete information about this specific case?
2- What if in cases that are of public or general interest, conflicting parties or groups (a minority or a majority of them) do not all agree on a settlement concluded by non official parties? What if it's the case now?

I did not know that there was a court decision in this matter for conflicting parties to abide by in the first place.

[Youchka]

Originally Posted by fidelio

Because, let's face it, the judicial system is corrupt and people tend to notice these things chafic when they are being dragged year after year in court and their rights are far from reclaimed just because they are not lubricating the right tubes.

it is funny to see what you wrote here, and only yesterday I was with my cousin, he is a lawyer, he is 36 year old, he took over his dad's law office after his dad passed away few years ago, and he was telling me about this case, some land case, which was opened when he was 1 year old. Guess what, nothing happened with it yet. He told me all the details, and it seems we have many many flaws in our laws themselves. I guess his son should become a lawyer, so that he takes after his father and maybe settle the case with their great grandchildren's opponents. This is our honorable judiciary system.

[Youchka]

Originally Posted by chafic

Let me get it straight fidelio. We're talking about 2 political parties, both of whom are significantly involved in the political life, whether in the parliament or in the government. Instead of working on reforming the judicial system, they absolve themselves from this responsibility and try to do the court's job.

Again, you leave the job to someone when you know he will do it. In my business place, the concierge supposedly responsible of the cleaning is lazy. I left him the responsibility of the cleaning since it is his job and responsibility for one, 2, 3 months, then I warned him that if he doesn'd do his job, I will do it myself, then eventually, I stopped paying him and got my own people to do the cleaning. Was I wrong there? Maybe I should have left my concierge unclean the building, and not interefre since it is his job, ma3leich better nek3od 3al wassakh than interfere ourselves.

You are asking to leave the court do its job, did it actually do it in this matter? As we heard from the media and from locals, this issue has been dragging sine before your grandfather and mine were born, what has anyone, including the court, the church and the rest do about it? Maybe you would have liked to see the court handling it for another 100 years, and meanwhile have people kill themselves over it?

[chafic]

Originally Posted by sanfour

in order for the state's justice department to interfere, there should be a lawsuit, don't you think?
why the Patriarch didn't file a lawsuit against the Shiite cleric? the alternative lays before us : the problem is solved.

Originally Posted by Youchka

I did not know that there was a court decision in this matter for conflicting parties to abide by in the first place.

So legally it is a settled matter but still it remained a matter of conflict?
In other words, it could either be the responsibility of the judicature, the ISF, or there was no problem to begin with.

[chafic]

Originally Posted by Youchka

You are asking to leave the court do its job, did it actually do it in this matter? As we heard from the media and from locals, this issue has been dragging sine before your grandfather and mine were born, what has anyone, including the court, the church and the rest do about it? Maybe you would have liked to see the court handling it for another 100 years, and meanwhile have people kill themselves over it?

I already answered that in my replies to fidelio.