The Patriarch openly backing 14 March in Kesserwen

[Youchka]

Originally Posted by sailormoon

1st- I know that Amine Gemayel named Aoun as an interim minister , but remember that half of the Lebanese (namely the majority of the Muslims) considered this nomination as ilegal, thus the creation of the Hoss government. In 1989 after the Taef agreement Aoun was considered as a "rebel" while Hrawi, Lahoud, Berri, Hoss and the parliament (deputies who in fact were elected in 1972) were representing the "shar3ieh". It s not that I agree with it, but that is the official version.

Yeah the official version was also "daroure, char3e, mouakat" for 15 years. Was it the RIGHT version? Was it the PEOPLE's wish?

2nd- I went to tayyar.org and I read "bernemej el tayyar: na7wa el joumhouriya al thalitha" which was nothing but FPM s program of reforms , and contains points such as agricultural reforms , educational, economical etc... but in any place there is a clear explanation about the third republic.
What I want to know is what will be the constitutional change in the III republic its differences with the IInd and the Ist , its sectarian repartition , and its position towards main issues such as HA s weapons, the Palestinians etc...

This is our 3rd republic. A republic is how things are being done on all levels not only constitution wise.
Regarding changing the constitution, you mean the Taef, well nothing can be done if we do not have 2/3 of the parliament, therefore, both Chiite and Sunni MPs should agree with us to change anything. So since we are preaching to modify president's salahiyet and since Hariri have said he is with, then no problem there right? He will join us in doing that.
Regarding the sectarian repartition, no one talked about that and no one will dare touch it. Chiite are around 30% of the population, on their own they can do nothing. Christians charho. Sunnis as well, unless they naturalize Palestinians and thus become majority. Until then, no one cna do anything on his own, so rest assured.

3- HA has hit the streets the 7 of may 2007 ,the message of their mini civil war was : "we have the power to storm any place in this country if you mess with us , we ll hit the streets and use our weapons against you if you take any decision that doesn t please us" on the 7 of may it was the Beirut Sunnis , tomorrow, for a reason or another it may be you.

NO the thing that you DO NOT WANT to understand is that, HA did not hit the streets because "someone took a decision they did not like". Siniora was glued on his lousy chair despite all the manifestations, and HA did not do anything. The whole July 20006 war happened and the involvement of many of the so called neo patriots was clear to HA and they did not do anything about it. What the 14 feb were preparing was big, they were asking (as the idiot Marouni asked 2 days ago) to put HA int he face of the army, which will lead UNDOUBTEDLY to a war. HA in less than an hour saved the country from a war.
As for the mini civil war, whenever there is a war, it is between 2 factions, I do not think HA and Amal were fighting their shadows in Beirut. Walaw ma Joumblat bi 3admit lsseno said that Hariri had brought men from Akkar to fight. Why did he do that? 3a assess you guys preach of the dawleh, and kiwa el amen and whatever **** you talk about, why did you need mercenaries to defend you if you did not know that you were actually going to do something miserable as your stupid HA communication decision?

So flekouna bi May 7, the rats taht Hariri brought were kicked out. If HA and Amal wanted to really yfaz3o they could have done much much more, just take a look at what happened in Halba, and you can have an idea. But the difference is that HA was not in it to have a war, whereas Hariri thugs who have no brains actually did a massacre and if the opposition was not wise, a real war would have taken place in the country.

[Amirkani]

Leyk, when someone wants to argue, he'd better put together an argument that he understands before trying to convince others. Mannak fehmen shi min shi about the 1988-1990 Aoun era.

I will show you several misconceptions in 1 single sentence of yours.

Originally Posted by sailormoon

1st- I know that Amine Gemayel named Aoun as an interim minister

It's interim Prime Minister.

Originally Posted by sailormoon

, but remember that half of the Lebanese (namely the majority of the Muslims) considered this nomination as ilegal,

The majority of Muslims didn't consider his appointment as illegal. Only the Syrians and their Lebanese puppets, Muslims and Christians, considered it illegal.

There was nothing illegal about it. In those days, it was within the President's constitutional powers to dismiss any Cabinet and appoint any new Cabinet. It was perfectly constitutional... and later proved to be legitimate also.

Plus, let me enlighten you a little further on your constitution that you act as if you're so worried about and that you want respected so much.

Aoun was not chosen personally. There were accepted precedents that in case of a power vacuum, they appoint the whole Military Council as interim government. And the Military Council is headed by the Commander of the Army. Aoun was chosen constitutionally by default because he was the head of the Military Council. And all 6 officers of the Military Council formed the new government.

As for Muslims not accepting it, it's not true either. Both the Muslim people and Muslim ministers in Aoun's Cabinet were more more than happy to see the Army in charge. The Military Council is formed of 3 Christians officers and 3 Muslim officers. All 3 Muslim officers were more than happy to serve along with the 3 Christian officers. They started and did not resign on their own. They (the Syrians and their Lebanese puppets) made them resign by threatening them and their families. Aoun tells me, actually, that he was speaking on the phone with one of the Muslim Ministers discussing government issues when it was announced (by the Syrians) over the radio that the Muslim ministers resigned. The Muslim ministers (their families being in areas under Syrian control) couldn't withstand the Syrian pressure and threats and just stopped serving in the government.

Originally Posted by sailormoon

, thus the creation of the Hoss government.

The Hoss government was not created. It was revived from the dead to say Aoun's government was illegal. It was the previous government that had resigned months before Gemayel appointed Aoun. The President accepted its resignation and appointed a new government.

What was illegal is the Hoss acting as Prime Minister after Aoun was appointed PM. All of a sudden, he decided he didn't want to resign anymore after months of insisting on resigning.

Originally Posted by sailormoon

In 1989 after the Taef agreement Aoun was considered as a "rebel" while Hrawi, Lahoud, Berri, Hoss and the parliament (deputies who in fact were elected in 1972) were representing the "shar3ieh".

Berri? min weyn jibto? Berri was not the Speaker back then... he wasn't even a Member of the Parliament.

It was Hrawi, Lahoud, and Hoss who were illegal, unconstitutional and illegitimate. They were imposed by the Syrians through a dissolved Parliament.

Originally Posted by sailormoon

2nd- I went to tayyar.org and I read "bernemej el tayyar: na7wa el joumhouriya al thalitha" which was nothing but FPM s program of reforms , and contains points such as agricultural reforms , educational, economical etc... but in any place there is a clear explanation about the third republic.
What I want to know is what will be the constitutional change in the III republic its differences with the IInd and the Ist , its sectarian repartition , and its position towards main issues such as HA s weapons, the Palestinians etc...

3- HA has hit the streets the 7 of may 2007 ,the message of their mini civil war was : "we have the power to storm any place in this country if you mess with us , we ll hit the streets and use our weapons against you if you take any decision that doesn t please us" on the 7 of may it was the Beirut Sunnis , tomorrow, for a reason or another it may be you.

You contradict yourself in 2 and 3. If HA and Aoun wanted a coup, they wouldn't need to be elected to do it. You're saying that they have enough military power to do it by force.

Once you learn and accept the constitutional facts and basics about the 1998-1990 Aoun era, then we can discuss and we will answer you about the meaning of the 3rd Republic in terms of constitutional changes, reforms and the difference between it and the 1st and 2nd Republic that we seek.

Before then, it's useless to discuss these issues.

----------------------

[Danny Z]

Amirkani

Just a few corrections or let me say mises au point:

1-Hoss was not the prime minister he was the acting prime minister the government was headed by Karami who the LF killed a month after he resigned in 1987.

2-The government then was headed by the acting prime minister Hoss li tasrif el a3mel so it cannot take decisions, so even if we consider it had been legitimate it cannot appoint khatib as ka2ed jaysh, these decisions cannot be taken by 7oukoumet tasrif el a3mel.

3-Hoss was not the one who presented the resignation it was Karami, it is disputed that even if Amin had not accepted the resignation that Hoss can go back on the resignation of Karami.

[Revolution1989]

Amirkani and Danny Z,

I hope that, very soon after June 7th, FPM is going to work on this focused amnesia of what happened between 1988 and 1990...

Most neo-ex-collaborators, and especially the LF, are using and abusing this amnesia to write whatever history they would like...

And going back to the Patriarch, why are we surprised that he is backing M14 in Kesserwan?
1) His interest is only in maintaining his "representation" role over the Christians and a strong and popular Christian leader is not to his liking
2) Our agenda of outreach to all communities and modernization of the Lebanese society is in contradiction with his
3) He has proven multiple times to be a total failure in terms of strategic vision and tactical execution, being totally "played" by the Syrians, the Americans, the Saoudis, WJ, FM, LF, etc...

[Amirkani]

Originally Posted by Danny Z

Amirkani

Just a few corrections or let me say mises au point:

1-Hoss was not the prime minister he was the acting prime minister the government was headed by Karami who the LF killed a month after he resigned in 1987.

2-The government then was headed by the acting prime minister Hoss li tasrif el a3mel so it cannot take decisions, so even if we consider it had been legitimate it cannot appoint khatib as ka2ed jaysh, these decisions cannot be taken by 7oukoumet tasrif el a3mel.

3-Hoss was not the one who presented the resignation it was Karami, it is disputed that even if Amin had not accepted the resignation that Hoss can go back on the resignation of Karami.

Originally Posted by Revolution1989

Amirkani and Danny Z,

I hope that, very soon after June 7th, FPM is going to work on this focused amnesia of what happened between 1988 and 1990...

Most neo-ex-collaborators, and especially the LF, are using and abusing this amnesia to write whatever history they would like...

And going back to the Patriarch, why are we surprised that he is backing M14 in Kesserwan?
1) His interest is only in maintaining his "representation" role over the Christians and a strong and popular Christian leader is not to his liking
2) Our agenda of outreach to all communities and modernization of the Lebanese society is in contradiction with his
3) He has proven multiple times to be a total failure in terms of strategic vision and tactical execution, being totally "played" by the Syrians, the Americans, the Saoudis, WJ, FM, LF, etc...

If one goes into details, you could say that everything that happened and was imposed since 1989 is unconstitutional... Taef and all its ramifications included... every President, PM, Speaker and MP... they're all unconstitutional.

But, at the end, FPM is not trying "ne2tol el-natour... badna nekol 7osrom"... that's it... we're willing to forgive the trespasses of the past in order to build a better future for our people. But the least those frigging trespassers could do is to admit their trespasses and let us fix the wrong they have done... bass we27een to the extreme and they don't want to let go of the power they hijacked!

We will fix things though... bel mnee7 for those who accept it... and bel w7eesh for those who don't accept.

---------------------

[Boris]

i don't understand, if much more than half of the Maronite Christians don't want nor agree with the head of the Maronite Church and its them who feed him and wipe his a**, can't they just kick him out of duty and request a new patriarch instead ?!

If your religious leader is not doing his duties right for almost 30 years, i guess there is something wrong with the Maronites who won't force him out of office! Is he like a king or a cheikh and we're in the medieval ages so no one does anything to him ?!

[Ashrafieh_LF]

Originally Posted by Danny Z

Amirkani

Just a few corrections or let me say mises au point:

1-Hoss was not the prime minister he was the acting prime minister the government was headed by Karami who the LF killed a month after he resigned in 1987.

2-The government then was headed by the acting prime minister Hoss li tasrif el a3mel so it cannot take decisions, so even if we consider it had been legitimate it cannot appoint khatib as ka2ed jaysh, these decisions cannot be taken by 7oukoumet tasrif el a3mel.

and GMA was the head of a 7oukoume intikalieh. That did not give him the power to start wars. His sole job was to allow for presidential elections! So I guess they both messed up.

[Ignatius]

Originally Posted by Ashrafieh_LF

and GMA was the head of a 7oukoume intikalieh. That did not give him the power to start wars. His sole job was to allow for presidential elections! So I guess they both messed up.

He didn't start a war, he enforced law regarding illegal harbors

[Abotareq93]

Originally Posted by Ashrafieh_LF

and GMA was the head of a 7oukoume intikalieh. That did not give him the power to start wars. His sole job was to allow for presidential elections! So I guess they both messed up.

Michel Aoun's government was the only legal authority according to that time's Constitution. He had the power and the authority and the duty to start a war to liberate his country from occupation and to enforce the law and rid the poor citizens from militias.
Ba3dain since when Liberation wars and cleansing the country from militias and zo3ran need a permission from anybody or a special authority?
What power did Bachir Gemayel have when he started his war against Syrians in Ashrafieh in 1978? What power did he have when he decided to get rid by force of all the other armed factions in the Christian Area between 1979 and 1981?

[Jerry]

Originally Posted by Ashrafieh_LF

and GMA was the head of a 7oukoume intikalieh. That did not give him the power to start wars. His sole job was to allow for presidential elections! So I guess they both messed up.

being whatever, being a student, being a worker, being a whor*e, being a teacher, being Strida(2elneha hay i guess), or being the head of a 7oukoume intikalieh AND my country is occupied so i HAVE the RIGHT and this is not only my job but my duty to begin a war and to leberate my country ,,,, so which one bira2ey 7adertak: the who*re or the head of the government have more chance to liberate a country from an occupier ?

please do not answer that strida liberated lebanon ,,, ma 7ada bi sadd2ak ...