Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah unveils Hezbollah's candidates for the elections

[Anny]

Originally Posted by hhhh23

First, I thank you for the highlighted part, I asked you a question for debate, you attacked me personally, thank you very much for that, I appreciate it.

Second, I am against the Palestinians keeping their weapons, I ask for theri disarmament right now. That answers your question (which is unrelated to the topic I discussed with you).

Second, I know that "you are stating such things", hence my question. My question is quite clear Anny, you said that you want HA to keep their weapons until the "Palestinians have a state in Israel" (which is not related to the refugees IN LEBANON keeping their arms or not). Hence, you tied the weapons of HA to the Palestinian vs. Israeli war (not just the Lebanese vs Israeli war). This relation that YOU (Anny) endorse, is contradicting with the MoU which states that the arms of HA should stay until Shebaa is freed and the Palestinians INSIDE Lebanon are disarmed. Hence, you disagree with the MoU in some sort. Can you elaborate why ? (the Kissinger story is out of context here, we are discussing YOUR own opinion of tying HA's arms to a Palestinian state). If you want to attack me, dont reply, Thank you.

You dont understand AGAIN my point of view. I haven't been more clearer than I am. Where do you see that I am against the MoU?

Second, everything is related, open your eyes and see that. From the Kessinger story to the weapons of Palestinians in Lebanon to the number of Palestinians in Lebanon to everything related to their cause and how they are affecting the Lebanese state by their huge amount and number. I dont know where you see I am disagreeing with the MoU, I am adding more things to the MoU but they cant be really written because like I said we will be attacked again and not only from Israel but from the USA as well. A little question to you, who do you think is giving the weapons to the Palistinians in Lebanon? Have you ever taught about that?

I am not gonna repeat myself a 4th time, we are begining to be very out of context and to be back to the context, HA are a big party in Lebanon, probably the bigiest party in Lebanon and certainly if no one is defending them and every now and then attacking the army, they are aloud to have such weapons, a voice in the parlement and helping the army like they have been doing so far.

[Souss]

Originally Posted by Abou Sandal

The Jade,

Being religious and being a religious Party,does not contradict with asking for a secular state.You're confusing things altogether.

Now whether you believe it or not is your personal choice,but you can still prove your doubts by bringing only 1 statement from Hezbollah,either asking for a non-secular state,or opposing the idea of a secular state.It's not complicated.

While it is true that Hezbollah is asking for abolishing sectarianism, it is also quite clear about its desire for an Islamic state. That's actually very well documented. HA cultivates the ambiguity by adding to that "it would require a majority of Lebanese to approve it, and hence is not realisable at this time". See Adam Shatz' interview with Nasrallah where he states:

"We believe the requirement for an Islamic state is to have an overwhelming popular desire, and we're not talking about fifty percent plus one, but a large majority. And this is not available in Lebanon and probably never will be" (In Search of Hezbollah - The New York Review of Books)

You can also look at Mats Wärn's (from Stockholm University) study "Staying the Course: the "Lebanonization" of Hizbullah" (http://almashriq.hiof.no/lebanon/300/320/324/324.2/hizballah/warn2/index.html):

"Hizbollah M.P., Husayn Hajj Hassan, did not deny the movement's commitment to Islam or desire of establishing an Islamic state." Again, he adds the caveat: "He claimed, however, that this was not a top priority of the movement, let alone a concrete one."

Finally, you don't need to look at statements. Just look at actions, like for example the Hezbollah-organized demonstration against banning the hijab in French public schools, in front of the French embassy in Beirut (2004 I believe). Whether you agree or not with this ban, clearly organizing a demo against it does not add to your secular credentials.

[KingNothing]

Originally Posted by Souss

While it is true that Hezbollah is asking for abolishing sectarianism, it is also quite clear about its desire for an Islamic state. That's actually very well documented. HA cultivates the ambiguity by adding to that "it would require a majority of Lebanese to approve it, and hence is not realisable at this time". See Adam Shatz' interview with Nasrallah where he states:

"We believe the requirement for an Islamic state is to have an overwhelming popular desire, and we're not talking about fifty percent plus one, but a large majority. And this is not available in Lebanon and probably never will be" (In Search of Hezbollah - The New York Review of Books)

You can also look at Mats Wärn's (from Stockholm University) study "Staying the Course: the "Lebanonization" of Hizbullah" (http://almashriq.hiof.no/lebanon/300/320/324/324.2/hizballah/warn2/index.html):

"Hizbollah M.P., Husayn Hajj Hassan, did not deny the movement's commitment to Islam or desire of establishing an Islamic state." Again, he adds the caveat: "He claimed, however, that this was not a top priority of the movement, let alone a concrete one."

Finally, you don't need to look at statements. Just look at actions, like for example the Hezbollah-organized demonstration against banning the hijab in French public schools, in front of the French embassy in Beirut (2004 I believe). Whether you agree or not with this ban, clearly organizing a demo against it does not add to your secular credentials.

Fellow pastafarian,

Hezbollah's commitment to an islamic state is no secret. I grew up in bekaa and I still remember that they always had a sentence on it: " althawra al islamiya fi loubnan" which was recently changed to al moukawama al islamiya.

I also still remember clearly Iranian flags in rayak, haret el fikani and all other shia towns. Personally this doesn't bother me that much since many other lebanese are also loyal to other countries and since I don't believe in nationalism.

I just find it hypocrite that they have the right to ask for an islamic state while they deny all others ideas like federalism/partition......(not that I agree with any of those ideas)

[KingNothing]

Originally Posted by Abou Sandal

Being religious and being a religious Party,does not contradict with asking for a secular state.You're confusing things altogether.

Now whether you believe it or not is your personal choice,but you can still prove your doubts by bringing only 1 statement from Hezbollah,either asking for a non-secular state,or opposing the idea of a secular state.It's not complicated.

Islam is both din and dunia. When you believe in the quranic text as the source of your ideology you also commit to Islamic law.

[Abou Sandal]

Originally Posted by Souss

While it is true that Hezbollah is asking for abolishing sectarianism, it is also quite clear about its desire for an Islamic state. That's actually very well documented. HA cultivates the ambiguity by adding to that "it would require a majority of Lebanese to approve it, and hence is not realisable at this time". See Adam Shatz' interview with Nasrallah where he states:

Every Muslim in the whole world believes in the ideal of being governed by an Islamic state.It's part of the religious belief.

That's way different than what we're discussing here...Way way different.

Originally Posted by Souss

Finally, you don't need to look at statements. Just look at actions, like for example the Hezbollah-organized demonstration against banning the hijab in French public schools, in front of the French embassy in Beirut (2004 I believe). Whether you agree or not with this ban, clearly organizing a demo against it does not add to your secular credentials.

Totally irrelevant as example.

And wrong.I do not agree at all...not one bit with what you said here.You're confusing things.

Wrong insight,wrong interpretation and wrong conclusion.

I won't go too much off-topic,and I,who am not a religious person, consider that the voted law is totally against human rights and legally unjustified and illegitimate.Not to mention that the real considerations had everything to do with "Islamophobia" rather than "secularism".

Anyway...you can review the long debates over it...There were pros and there were Cons...And there were both religious and non-religious,secular and non-secular people...on both sides.

So your labeling of those who were against this law of being sectarian driven,or motivated by the will to establish a religious state, is totally wrong and misplaced,thus rejected.

Now let's stick to Hezbollah's demands:Being against this system of distribution of executive,legislative and administrative seats,according to sects,and asking for a system of distribution based on merits...etc...etc...

Is that a direction you take,to reach a secular state,or a sectarian one?

[Abou Sandal]

Originally Posted by KingNothing

Islam is both din and dunia. When you believe in the quranic text as the source of your ideology you also commit to Islamic law.

Never said the opposite,and even confirmed it in my post above,yet doesn't necessarily get you to the conclusion you seem to be implying.

[taifoon]

Originally Posted by Souss

While it is true that Hezbollah is asking for abolishing sectarianism, it is also quite clear about its desire for an Islamic state. That's actually very well documented. HA cultivates the ambiguity by adding to that "it would require a majority of Lebanese to approve it, and hence is not realisable at this time". See Adam Shatz' interview with Nasrallah where he states:

"We believe the requirement for an Islamic state is to have an overwhelming popular desire, and we're not talking about fifty percent plus one, but a large majority. And this is not available in Lebanon and probably never will be" (In Search of Hezbollah - The New York Review of Books)

You can also look at Mats Wärn's (from Stockholm University) study "Staying the Course: the "Lebanonization" of Hizbullah" (http://almashriq.hiof.no/lebanon/300/320/324/324.2/hizballah/warn2/index.html):

"Hizbollah M.P., Husayn Hajj Hassan, did not deny the movement's commitment to Islam or desire of establishing an Islamic state." Again, he adds the caveat: "He claimed, however, that this was not a top priority of the movement, let alone a concrete one."

Finally, you don't need to look at statements. Just look at actions, like for example the Hezbollah-organized demonstration against banning the hijab in French public schools, in front of the French embassy in Beirut (2004 I believe). Whether you agree or not with this ban, clearly organizing a demo against it does not add to your secular credentials.

Souss,

Yes, we were all teens, once upon a time in our early days, and we all had hormone storms (some still raging ;). In the early eighties, when Hizbullah as organization and party saw the light, it was obvious it had the freshly blooming Islamic revolution in Iran as model to imitate, admire and try to follow. Remember also that this was in the midst of our sectarian civil war. Heck, Nasrallah's famous words from that era still kick adrenaline floods in the brains of some die hard LFers everytime thay are evoked ( when he declared Jbeil and Jounieh for being Muslim lands that should be snatched back to their owners from the occupying "crusaders"..)

I personally believe that Nasrallah, and also Hizbullah as entity, like we all do, have de facto grown wiser since then and come to another insight. They have also publicly admitted that those statements were, more or less, plain Bull. Now, we can debate until the next Big Bang if we can trust or not trust this their revision and redefinition of end goals in life to be genuine or not. What we can however rely on when reflecting over this issue is the fact that times are "a'changing" and that wise people have the ability to observe those changes and try to adapt accordingly.

I dare to claim that Hizbullah's Islamic State project was dropped dead the day Hizbullah's brainstorming strategists realized the following two facts:

1- Their popular support among the Lebanese Shia builds mostly on them representing a resisting force to the Israelis and not so much for their strife to establish an Islamic State. Bring peace between Iran, Hizbullah and Israel and Hizbullah's popularity will start melting like wax in the sun (if they'd still insist on advancing the Wilayat al Faqih enterprise as their mission)

2- The "terror balance of sects", here maintained by the mere existence of two other major communities, Christian and Sunni, makes it IMPOSSIBLE within the next couple of centuries to impose anything that resembles own religious reign.

I can still add few more factors, like regional geography and ethnic demography. Squeezed between a Sunni majority in Syria and an Israeli entity in the south, I think someone smarter than average me is also able to conclude that a Lebanese Wilayat Faqih will never live ever happily, if it gets to see the light in the first place that is. This, and I haven't yet considered one innate factor, however illusive this may sound to some, namely what we call "Lebanese culture of freedom".

[Learned]

Originally Posted by Souss

Finally, you don't need to look at statements. Just look at actions, like for example the Hezbollah-organized demonstration against banning the hijab in French public schools, in front of the French embassy in Beirut (2004 I believe). Whether you agree or not with this ban, clearly organizing a demo against it does not add to your secular credentials.

Clearly? I don't think you understand what the function of a secular state is. It is supposed to protect individual rights, identities, and freedoms of all people - not discriminate on some arbitrary ideological basis. Ensuring freedom of religion, belief, and expression for all citizens should be a cornerstone of any secular state.

Are you saying that a secular state in Lebanon should ban the hijab in Lebanese public schools and that every party supportive of the idea of a secular state should support such a ban, otherwise their secular credentials are called into question?

Get real.

[elhorr]

Originally Posted by taifoon

souss,



1- their popular support among the lebanese shia builds mostly on them representing a resisting force to the israelis and not so much for their strife to establish an islamic state. Bring peace between iran, hizbullah and israel and hizbullah's popularity will start melting like wax in the sun (if they'd still insist on advancing the wilayat al faqih enterprise as their mission)

صحيح و كلام سليم مئة بالمئة
اساسا مسألة ولاية الفقيه اجتهادية محضة و بغض النظر عن ان ليس غالبية الشيعة لا يؤمنون بها فان الدولة الاسلامية لا تكون الا في ظل الامام المعصوم و في هذا الزمان هو الامام المهدي
مهما بلغ التقوى بعالم الدين و درجة علمه لا يستطيع ان يدعي معرفة الاحكام الحقيقية و القوانين الصحيحة في الاسلام
كله اجتهاد
لا احد يعرف التأويل الصحيح للقرآن الا الله لانه كلامه و الراسخون في العلم و هم الائمة المعصومين ال14 ورثة علم الرسول

و الى ان يظهر المهدي عليه السلام كل حادث الو حديث