LCCC NEWS BULLETIN
May 5/2006

Below news from the Daily Star for 5/05/06
Nasrallah slams March 14 Forces for 'provoking Damascus'
Parliament snubs Lahoud by passing critical laws
Taiwanese president's plane denied Beirut pit stop
Economy Ministry denies plan to liberalize bread prices
Siniora denies any dispute with Maronite patriarch
Soueid accuses FPM of war-era tactics in dividing confessions
Hariri, Hamade, Jumblatt immune from Syrian prosecutors... for now
March 14 Forces set to strike back in dialogue
Rice seeks meeting with French FM to discuss Lebanese course
European parliamentary delegation aims to help Lebanon reform
U.S.-Israel 'may have hand' in Hariri murder
Lebanon needs reform, not reform talk
Sfeir backs riot victims demanding compensation
Turn up the heat on Egyptian repression-By Gordon Robison
Ahmadinejad seeks regional support as pressure mounts on Iran

Below news from miscellaneous sources for 5/05/06
FT Interview: Sayyed Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah-Financial Times
Beirut bombshell-CNNMoney.com
Syria denies State Department terror label-UPI
Hezbollah lambastes US for listing it as terrorist group-People's Daily Online
The Axis of Terror-Australia-Israel Jewish Affairs Council
Only by author-American Thinker
FEATURE-Where gunmen once roamed, Lebanese now make wine-Reuters
The devil is in the details-Al-Ahram
Parliament Receives Official Notice of Syrian Summonses Against Jumblat, Hariri, Hamadeh
Lebanon Prevents Taiwanese President from Landing in Beirut
Rice to Discuss Lebanon with Douste-Blazy as U.N. Plans to Increase Pressure on Syria
Lebanese Relief Expert Named U.N. Humanitarian Envoy to Iraq
Tension escalates again between Damascus and Beirut-AsiaNews.it
Iraq-Iran: Exchanging Accusations of Terrorism-Dar Al-Hayat
The Syrian-Lebanese War of Barriers!-Dar Al-Hayat
Lebanese-American delegation in Beirut criticizes US interference-Al-Manar

Parliament Receives Official Notice of Syrian Summonses Against Jumblat, Hariri, Hamadeh
Naharnet: Parliament has received an official notification for the appearance of MP Walid Jumblat, parliamentary majority leader Saad Hariri and Telecommunications Minister Marwan Hamadeh before a Syrian military court.
Speaker Nabih Berri said during a parliamentary session Wednesday that he had been notified by the justice ministry and that the legislative body would examine the matter, but refused further comment.
The summonses against the three MPs and journalist Fares Khashan, who are all known for their anti-Syrian views, were received by the Lebanese judiciary in April. Justice Minister Charles Rizk notified parliament Wednesday.
A judicial source in Damascus earlier told AFP that Jumblat had been summoned by a Syrian military court to appear within seven days on charges of "inciting against Syria."
The presiding military judge "preferred not to issue a warrant for his arrest, but to notify him of the court date to give him an opportunity to defend himself against the charges," the source close to the case said.
"According to Syrian law, the accused is asked to appear within seven days from the date of his notification if he is outside Syrian territory," said the source.
The Syrian action drew angry reaction from legislators at the parliamentary session in Beirut. Many demanded an immediate rejection of the Syrian subpoenas arguing that under the Lebanese constitution, MPs enjoy immunity and cannot be prosecuted for political views.
MP Akram Shehayyeb of Jumblat's Progressive Socialist Party blasted the summonses and accused Syria of "treating Lebanon as though it were ... one of the suburbs of Damascus."
"This is complete insolence…It's as if they (the Syrians) cancelled the parliamentary immunity that the Lebanese people gave (MPs) with an order from a Syrian officer with the rank of military judge," Shehayyeb said.
MP Boutros Harb, called on his country to reject the notifications.
Berri said parliament has not taken an action yet as it has just received official notification of the Syrian request.
Druze leader Jumblat is a key member of Lebanon's anti-Syrian parliament majority which has accused Syria of involvement in a series of bombings, including the 2005 murder of former premier Rafik Hariri.
Jumblat, who has called for regime change in Syria, has also accused Damascus of being responsible for the 1977 assassination of his father, Kamal Jumblat, of former President Rene Mouawad in 1989 and of several other Lebanese leaders.
He has recently met with members of the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood, the most powerful rival to President Bashar Assad's regime. Jumblat received a delegation of the group at his palace in the Chouf mountain town of Moukhtara on Sunday.
Hariri and Hamadeh are Jumblat's close allies in the anti-Syrian alliance. Relations between the young legislator and Damascus have been tense since his father's murder. Hamadeh has been one of Syria's most vocal critics in Lebanon since the Oct 2004 attempt on his life that was blamed on the Syrian regime. U.S. ambassador Jeffrey Feltman has described the Syrian legal action as "interference" and part of Syria's "crude attempts to intimidate the Lebanese people and their political leaders."
A Syrian military court had filed a lawsuit against Jumblat on charges of "inciting the U.S. administration to occupy Syria" as well as "defaming" Damascus.(AFP-Naharnet) Beirut, 04 May 06, 08:13

Nasrallah slams March 14 Forces for 'provoking Damascus'
By Raed El Rafei -Daily Star staff
Friday, May 05, 2006
BEIRUT: Hizbullah's chief lashed out at the March 14 Forces Thursday, saying they did not really want to demarcate Lebanon's borders with Syria "but are just looking to disarm Hizbullah." Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, who has headed Hizbullah since 1992, criticized the Parliament majority for refusing to postpone the demarcation of the Shebaa Farms border until after its liberation and rejecting Syria's request to start the demarcation in the North and the Bekaa.
Delivering a speech at the opening of an international book fair in Beirut's southern suburbs Thursday, he said that the issue of the sand-berms, which were erected by Syria in Ras Baalbek and Ersal, was an old issue "totally made up" by the March 14 Forces to cause tension with the Syrians. "I object that problems with Syria over border issues be qualified as a new Shebaa Farms," he said, adding that this comparison was "shameful."Nasrallah was referring to statements made by acting Interior Minister Ahmad Fatfat, who said Tuesday following a central security meeting with Premier Fouad Siniora that Syria had erected military posts and sand barricades inside Lebanese territory.
Hizbullah's leader said the March 14 Forces were "provoking Damascus and creating silly problems daily," accusing them of failing to abide by the decisions of the national dialogue, which called for good relations with Syria.
The leaders of the country have agreed over the past few months to demarcate borders and establish diplomatic relations with Syria. The next national dialogue session, which will be held on May 16, will discuss the more controversial issues of the presidency and Hizbullah's arms. Nasrallah also voiced his support for the country's unions and syndicates and added that Hizbullah would participate in the demonstrations that the unions have called for on May 10, if the government failed to meet their demands. He criticized the economic reform plan, presented recently by Siniora's team to the Cabinet, for reducing cultural and educational matters to figures.
He said that education should be a priority in the government's policies. A five-year economic reform plan was put to the government by Siniora for discussion before endorsement. Commenting on regional issues, Hizbullah defended Iran's right to acquire and export nuclear power for peaceful purposes and accused the United States, Britain and France of "monopolizing knowledge" in the world.
"The knowledge of dancing ... and singing ... is acceptable ... but acquiring the knowledge or technology of enriching uranium for peaceful energy purposes is banned for Arabs, Persians and Turks," he said.
"It is only allowed for Anglo-Saxons, and I do not know why the French are joining them," he said.

Parliament snubs Lahoud by passing critical laws
By Nada Bakri -Daily Star staff
Friday, May 05, 2006
BEIRUT: Lebanon's parliamentary majority scored a victory against pro-Syrian President Emile Lahoud Thursday after it passed two critical decrees he and several other politicians had opposed and returned unapproved. The general legislative session witnessed heated debates between the March 14 Forces and Free Patriotic Movement MPs over passing a draft law to amend the Constitutional Council while the second decree to organize the Druze sect was passed relatively smoothly.
The Constitutional Council supervises the constitutionality of laws and arbitrates conflicts that arise over parliamentary and presidential elections. Its members are elected by Parliament and the Cabinet.
The president, the speaker, the premier, along with any 10 MPs, have the right to consult the council on matters that relate to the constitutionality of laws.
The officially recognized religious leaders have the right to consult this Council only on laws relating to personal status, the freedom of belief and religious practice, and the freedom of religious education.
The parliamentary majority had presented a draft law to Parliament requesting the council's members be changed as they had been assigned to their posts by the former regime. The council members are elected every six years and their term ended three years ago but the judges remained in post. However, Lahoud returned the law unapproved.
The majority criticized Lahoud for returning the draft law, saying this turned him into a biased party rather than the country's referee. They also said parties who oppose "are doing so for political reasons aimed at disabling Parliament."
"President Lahoud has sided with them, which violates his jurisdiction and his role as a referee," anti-Syrian MP Butros Harb said.Lahoud said he returned both decrees out of national, legal and constitutional motives and not "out of political considerations or desires to side with one party against the other."
The FPM MPs - who voted against the law - accused the parliamentary majority of seeking to amend the law in order to appoint new judges who will rule in their favor when it comes to challenges put forward against the results of the June 2005 parliamentary elections. "They want to change the Constitutional Council to bring in one which conforms to their political line," said MP Yacoub Hassan from the FPM's Reform and Change bloc.
The March 14 Forces strongly rejected the FPM allegations, saying that they want to elect a new, politically invulner-able council. "The current council has been submissive to political will and to the former tutelage authority and is no longer acceptable ... that is why we are seeking to change it," said Telecommunications Minister Marwan Hamade.
Parliamentary majority leader Saad Hariri said, following the session, that it would be a "scandal" if the current council stays in duty. Hariri added that the current judges were appointed by Syrian officials. Druze leader Walid Jumblatt, attending a Parliament session for the first time in several months, said the decree was a "very important step."
The second decree passed in relation to organizing the Druze sect includes a proposal to replace acting Druze spiritual leader Bahjat Ghaith, a key opponent of Jumblatt.
Opponents of Jumblatt have been warning against adopting this law saying it will create division among their sect.
But Jumblatt said that "the decree will not create any division" adding that "organizing the sect will be done through discussions and votes." Former pro-Syrian MP Faysal Daoud said the decree will not be implemented because Ghaith will challenge it before the Constitutional Council, and added that the spiritual leader will not step down.
Amal movement MPs voted against the first decree and withdrew from the session before voting on the second. Hizbullah MPs did not attend the session.

FT Interview: Sayyed Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah
Published: May 4 2006 18:54 | Last updated: May 4 2006 18:54
Excerpts from an FT interview with Sayyed Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah, Lebanon's top Shia cleric.
On Lebanon's Shia community:
When we study the situation from a realistic viewpoint we find that the shia in Lebanon have been outside the political spectrum, and society in general. They lived deprived of rights on all fronts: services, education, and on the political front. There was some leadership in the south, family leaderships, and in the Bekaa [eastern Lebanon]. ...
Then matters progressed and the Shia managed to enter into political life and the fabric of Lebanese society, and government also started to gradually improve. The Shia as a community were able to enter the Lebanese state and to move away from injustice. But there were regional differences: in the south their situation was better than in the Bekaa – in particular they were able to get services and projects going because of immigration, to Africa mostly and to America. Shia of the Bekaa are still living in deprivation.
The Shia are Lebanese, a minority that is sometimes portrayed as a majority, but their nationalism is strong and they don't think of replacing Lebanon with any other country. Their political role is represented through participation in parliament and they participate like others. Their role is not bigger than that of the Sunni or the Christians.
And their participation in government is not as effective – many of the important ministries are in the hands of other sects. The Shia, however, are the resistance [i.e. Hizbollah, which fought Israel’s occupation of southern Lebanon], which doesn't represent a normal political role. So the Shia don't play a bigger role in the political sphere, rather they take less than their share, if we consider their demographic weight.
I think the Shia represent a community that has very normal relations with other sects. The problem that is raised sometimes by March 14 forces [a coalition of anti-Syrian groups] is that they count the Shia as Syrian forces. But the alliance [with Syria] is not that of one group answering to another – it emerges out of Syria's political stance, which is one of resistance to Israel, and it comes because Syria adopted a good policy with regard to the [Lebanese] resistance, a policy to protect the resistance.
Lebanon's Shia, whether in Amal or Hizbollah [the two main parties], will not replace any other country for Lebanon and they will not accept that they be governed by Iran or Syria. They coordinate with Syria and Iran on issues that they believe in, exactly in the same way that others coordinate with America or France. The intervention of the US, through the American ambassador, and of the French – why is this considered ‘independence’ while help from other countries is considered ‘occupation’?
On Iraq and Iran:
From a political viewpoint, there is no relationship between [regime] change in Iraq and the situation in Lebanon. Yes, there is a psychological change: the Shia used to feel oppressed by the previous regime in Iraq, and when this regime fell all the Shia in the world breathed a sigh of relief, of happiness, because of religious and spiritual kinship. But in Lebanon the Shia were not affected.
So I think the Shia did not win anything big in the change in Iraq. It is very possible that the Arab world, where there are difficulties for the Shia, doesn't want the Shia to have an effective role, particularly because some Arab sides connect the Shia to Iran, for example, and are afraid that the Shia could open the way for Iran to control the Arab world.
But this is born out of a complex against the Shia, which is historic. Secondly there it is a big political mistake to suggest that the Shia have an allegiance to Iran – a mistake made by Hosni Mubarak, or when King Abdallah II of Jordan spoke of the “Shia crescent”, which doesn't correspond to reality. Syria will not be merging with Iran, Iraq, or with Lebanon's Shia – this is only in the imagination of those who have a complex against the Shia, but it has no basis in reality.
On tensions between Shia and Sunni communities:
There is a Sunni world within the Arab world, and elsewhere, with a history of bloody and complicated relations with the Shia, particularly in the Islamic world, and this survived even when the region moved from being an Islamic region to an Arab region.
There is also similar talk in Iraq about how the Shia are controlling everything, but the Shia in Iraq only want to be citizens like others and take their democratic rights. On political and religious alliances in the Middle East
Political “crescents” are to be found everywhere in the world. Arab countries, with the exception of Syria, now represent states that answer to America and follow American policy. Why are relations with the US justified and important, while political relations with Iran are considered threatening? We know that every political axis, whether Iranian, Turkish or European, tries to serve its interests through political and economic ties with others. So the fear of an Iranian threat is an imaginary fear, especially given that Iran has no absolute control over the Shia of the world.
When we look at Iraq, not all the Shia are with Iran, some factions could coordinate with Iran but others don't... The Shia in Iraq generally do not believe in velayat el faqih [the foundation of the Iranian theocracy].
On the impact in Lebanon of Sunni-Shia strife in Iraq:
Some could try to provoke sectarian tensions between Shia and Sunni, but they won't succeed in Lebanon. There are guarantees in Lebanon and immunity against a Sunni-Shia conflict.
Every Sunni family has Shia member, and we find that the political leaderships meet and coordinate with each other. The economic and social reality also prevents this. When we had a civil war, we noticed that Christians and Muslims didn't fight each other in West Beirut, for example.
On reactions of pro-Iranian groups in the region to any US attack on Iran's nuclear facilities:
I don't think there will be a military response. There will be political reactions, as used to happen when there was a problem against a Arab country, for instance when the Arab and Islamic world rallied to support Egypt. Conditions don’t allow for military responses against the American side.
[But] when we study any US attack on Iran, we think its negative impact will set light to the Gulf, and in Iraq, where the Iranians have 130,000 [US] troops as hostages. So in attacking Iran, especially if it's a [full-fledged] war, it will affect the world. What if Iran closes the straights of Hormuz, by how much will oil prices rise?
And Iran could target, perhaps, American forces in the Gulf, and this would badly affect the Gulf. This is why we see the US and Europe being cautious about any military move against Iran. They know the price on the economic and military fronts.
It’s not that Iran is stronger than America – America is stronger. But Iran is different from Iraq. There are 70m Iranians and there is a vast state, a big state in the region, and Iranians are different too, they will be united when faced with outside aggression. There is also the mukhabarat [Iranian intelligence]. Iran has a mukhabarat presence in more than one place, and they will play perhaps the main role after the military.

Beirut bombshell
The assassination of a former Prime Minister may have been linked to the collapse of Lebanon's Bank al-Madina.
By Mitchell Prothero, FORTUNE
May 4, 2006: 11:30 AM EDT
(FORTUNE Magazine) - Last year, when Syrian intelligence operatives were implicated in the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, their motive seemed clear: to neutralize a political opponent of Syria's three-decade occupation of Lebanon.
But United Nations investigators and other sources have told FORTUNE there may have been an additional reason for the hit. The February 2005 car bombing in Beirut, the sources say, may have been partly intended to cover up a corruption and bank fraud scandal that siphoned hundreds of millions of dollars to top Syrian and Lebanese officials.
Bank documents, court filings, and interviews with investigators and other sources show that some of the officials were deeply involved from the late 1990s until early 2003 in a kickback scheme that supplied them with cash, real estate, cars, and jewelry in exchange for protecting and facilitating a multibillion-dollar money laundering operation at Lebanon's Bank al-Madina that allowed terrorist organizations, peddlers of West African "blood diamonds," Saddam Hussein, and Russian gangsters to hide income and convert hot money into legitimate bank accounts around the world.
Despite efforts to cover up the details surrounding the bank's collapse in early 2003, these sources say, the Syrian and Lebanese officials allegedly involved in the fraud feared that Hariri could return to power and reveal their role in one of the biggest illegal banking operations in the Middle East since the Bank of Credit & Commerce International scandal in the early 1990s.
"Was the scandal part of the reason Hariri was killed?" asks Marwan Hamade, Lebanon's Minister of Telecommunications and a Hariri confidant who was himself the target of a car-bomb assassination attempt. "Absolutely. It was certainly one of the cumulative reasons. If he had been reelected, Hariri would have reopened the file, which we know goes directly to [Syrian President Bashar] Assad through the [Lebanese] presidential palace in Baabda."
UN investigators looking into Hariri's death, led by German prosecutor Detlev Mehlis, became interested in the link to al-Madina on the suspicion that money stolen from the bank helped fund the plot, says a Lebanese security source who helped investigate the bank's collapse and later worked with the UN team. After reviewing some of the banking records of suspects in both Syria and Lebanon, says the source, who asked not to be identified as he isn't authorized to talk about the matter, the UN team started looking into whether at least some of the plotters were motivated by a desire to obscure their roles in the al- Madina affair.
"It goes all the way to the top people in Syria," the source says. Mehlis's reports on the assassination make reference to financial fraud as a possible motive.
"Fraud, corruption, and money laundering could have been motives for individuals to participate in the operation that ended with the assassination of Mr. Hariri," Mehlis wrote last December in his second report, referring specifically to the collapse of al-Madina.
Mehlis, who would not be interviewed, also mentioned in his report a taped conversation in which General Rustom Ghazali, Syria's top military official in Lebanon, accused Hariri of discussing Syrian corruption in a newspaper interview, apparently in violation of an agreement to remain quiet on the matter.
In late April, noting UN findings, President George W. Bush ordered a freeze on assets held in the U.S. by anyone involved in the assassination, though the order did not cite names.
As part of the power struggle that ensued after Assad extended the term of Lebanese President and Syrian ally Émile Lahoud in 2004, Hariri resigned as Prime Minister with the intention of running for Parliament on an anti-Syrian platform. Hariri confidants say that, once returned to power, he planned to reopen the investigation into the bank's collapse. The case file and a trove of supporting documents were sealed in the vault of Lebanon's Central Bank in 2003 after threats by Ghazali, who appears to have made millions of dollars from the scheme himself.
The Syrian occupation of Lebanon from 1976 to 2005 has long been viewed as a geopolitical move designed to stabilize its smaller neighbor after decades of civil war and create a bargaining chip in the Arab-Israeli conflict. But over time, the occupation turned into a moneymaking operation for Syrian elites and their Lebanese allies.
"When the Syrians came to Lebanon," says Adnan Araki, a former Lebanese member of Parliament and Syrian loyalist, "they wanted the Golan Heights back and considered Lebanon and Hezbollah something to bargain with. We had to teach them how to steal."
Investigators looking into the looting at Bank al-Madina got a break in March, when Brazilian police arrested Rana Koleilat, al-Madina's former executive secretary. Koleilat, who jumped bail in Lebanon last year and eluded an international manhunt, is believed to have played a key role in the bank scandal.
She is alleged in lawsuits brought by the bank's owners to have used false withdrawals and bogus loans to enrich her family and pay off authorities. Even as al-Madina failed, she is said by investigators to have extracted millions of dollars from owner Adnan Abou Ayyash, a construction magnate who lives in Saudi Arabia, through a series of wire transfers and check exchanges.
Koleilat denied the charges after her capture and said that the bank's owners had authorized all withdrawals and that Ghazali had blackmailed her into paying him for protection.
When the dust settled in the summer of 2003, after depositors were paid and assets liquidated, the Abou Ayyash family found itself about $1.5 billion poorer, a stunning turn of events for a Lebanese family that controlled a vast business empire.
But as Koleilat and the Abou Ayyash brothers sued and countersued, and the Central Bank grabbed whatever money was left to pay depositors, it became clear that no investigation would be forthcoming. The money was gone, and only questions remained, questions whose answers were locked away in a vault in the Central Bank.
In an interview last year, Central Bank governor Riad Salameh didn't deny reports that Ghazali had threatened him into closing the investigation. The general's family, records produced by the bank appear to show, got more than $32 million from al-Madina via transfers approved by Koleilat. But with a pro-Syrian Parliament and Justice Minister in place, then-Prime Minister Hariri was unable to force an investigation beyond the initial 2003 fraud claims.
It is only recently, a year after the departure of Syrian troops, that the bank files have been transferred to the Ministry of Justice for a proper investigation into how the money was stolen and who benefited from the bribes. Just a handful of bank documents have emerged, but they detail an impressive pattern of corruption and fraud on the part of Syrian political and security officials and their Lebanese allies.
Critical evidence of the extent of the money-laundering operation was unintentionally revealed during an investigation by the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation to ensnare an arms dealer with ties to the Islamic resistance movement Hezbollah, based in Lebanon, which the U.S. and several other governments consider a terrorist organization.
In 2004, U.S. prosecutors charged Naji Antoine Abi Khalil with attempting to purchase and ship night-vision goggles and other military equipment from the U.S. to Hezbollah. Khalil's ties to al-Madina's money-laundering operations came to light when he bragged to agents and informants that he traveled the world picking up cash to be delivered to the bank on behalf of Hezbollah and Russian mobsters.
According to court papers, Khalil, who has since pleaded guilty, accepted $100,000 to launder from agents as part of a sting and told them the single biggest delivery he had made to the bank was $160 million in cash.
But those amounts pale when compared to the piles of cash laundered by Iraqi officials and their partners in illegally gaming the UN's oil-for-food program. Designed for humanitarian reasons to allow Iraq to sell oil through vouchers that could be used to purchase food and medicine, the program became a hotbed of corruption that Saddam and his loyalists used to earn illegal money. By the late 1990s, proceeds flooded the Middle East as favored allies of the regime received coupons good for oil purchases at lower-than-market prices.
Investigations into the program found rampant corruption on the part of UN officials, Middle Eastern government officials, and oil companies. The son of Lebanese President Lahoud was implicated, as were other prominent Lebanese and Syrian officials and businessmen. And al-Madina served as a place for them to hide the proceeds.
Several sources, including one alleged conspirator in the oil-for-food scandal, who refuses to let his name be used for legal and safety reasons, put the amount transferred and laundered through al-Madina at more than $1 billion, with a 25 percent commission going to Syrian officials and their Lebanese allies. The source says that among the recipients of this money were Bashar Assad's brother Maher and the head of military intelligence in Lebanon at the time, Ghazi Kanaan. (Kanaan committed suicide last October after Mehlis questioned him about the plot to kill Hariri.)
To protect this operation, Koleilat had developed a network of graft that shocked even a Lebanese society comfortable with questionable business dealings. She threw dinners where guests received Rolex watches, and she gave luxury cars to friends and officials. The graft was so widespread that one security official described the parking lot of his office during that era as a "Mercedes dealership."
Some bank records point to 155 pieces of real estate - villas, apartments, hotels, and condos - purchased or distributed by Koleilat and her brothers. The Koleilats also had five luxury yachts and as many as 194 cars and motorcycles, not including the gifts to friends, associates, and greedy officials.
Koleilat and the al-Madina plotters needed protection and sought out high-level officials who could help them, says a former employee of the Koleilat family who witnessed many of their dealings.
The source, who requested anonymity because the matter is still considered dangerous to discuss in Lebanon, says one of those was Jamil Sayeed, a former director of Lebanese internal security, since arrested on suspicion of plotting Hariri's murder. (Sayeed refused to comment.)
"Rustom Ghazali would receive money, cars, jewels, and hunting trips," the source says. "People used to come and wait in the office. The big shots would get checks; the lower people, like generals and officers, would get cash. This situation went much higher than Ghazali. It was a way for Maher Assad and others to profit from Lebanon and from the Iraq factor."
Several Syrian officials mentioned in the Mehlis reports can be tied to money from al-Madina by documents supplied to FORTUNE by the bank's owners. Ghazali's three brothers were issued four ATM cards linked to a fake account with a $2,000 daily limit for withdrawals, which they made each day from December 2002 to January 2003, according to one document. One of the four cards had a total yearly cash withdrawal of $8 million.
Ghazali's brother Mohammed also received a money transfer for $1,091,000 from the bank on Jan. 20, 2003. Investigators and lawyers for the bank's owners say that during these final months, Ghazali and other top officials decided that the bank's failure was inevitable and acted quickly to drain the remaining monies. One bank employee says that he witnessed Rustom Ghazali demanding a $300,000 payment just after the bank had been put under Central Bank management, a payment approved by regulators.
Among the 155 suspicious real estate transactions flagged by investigators is the transfer of an apartment valued at $2.5 million from the Koleilat family to a friend of Maher Assad's office manager - a transfer the bank's lawyers say they believe was intended to put it under Maher Assad's control. Lebanese political and security officials say that the sealed documents show far more money and property transferred to Maher.
"The entire file on Madina is now at the Ministry of Justice, except for the key parts that implicate Maher Assad, which are still being held in the Central Bank, because people are afraid of being killed over it," says Hamade, the Telecommunications Minister. "While there is not the same level of threats, the Syrian presence remains, and judges are very cautious about this case." (Efforts to reach Maher Assad and the Ghazalis for comment through several Syrian government agencies were unsuccessful.)
Other documents show transfers or transactions made by the bank to the benefit of Lahoud's son - allegations he refused to comment on - and to Lebanese security officials, including the four generals arrested last year on suspicion of participating in the plot to kill Hariri. Current Finance Minister Jihad Azour, a friend of Hariri's, insists that only today, with Syrian troops out of the country, can Lebanon commit to a full investigation. And he believes fear of such an investigation drove some of the murderers. "The risk of reopening the file could have led to this murder," Azour says. "Al-Madina reached the biggest people in Lebanon and Syria."Azour says Hariri wanted to pursue an investigation into al-Madina and other cases of corruption and would have gone forward, even knowing the danger.
"Hariri wanted this file to reach its conclusion," Azour says. "He was concerned about the scandal's ramifications. It has a very negative impact on the status of the Lebanese banking system. And it's important that the case be treated in an extreme way to fix this perception."FEEDBACK fortunemail_letters@fortunemail.com

Sfeir backs riot victims demanding compensation
By Maroun Khoury -Daily Star correspondent
Friday, May 05, 2006
BKIRKI: Maronite Patriarch Nasrallah Butros Sfeir expressed his support of a delegation from the advertising agency Team Holding Group (THG) in its request to be compensated by the government for damages incurred to its property during the Black Sunday Achrafieh Riots on February 5. THG's offices occupied the floors below the Danish Consulate, and were severely damaged when demonstrators sacked and burned the building during the anti-cartoon riots.
"Three months after the Achrafieh attacks, the Lebanese state has still not compensated us for the damage done to our property, although it publicly declared its readiness to deploy the necessary efforts in this regard," said THG chairman Talal Makdessi. "We came to the prelate since we do not belong to any party, militia or political side and after we had enough of the state's promises and the policy of discrimination," he added.Makdessi went on to say that government officials told him that the state is waiting for the report from a British expert who was contracted to evaluate the amount of damages, despite the fact that a committee from the Lebanese Army already submitted a report at the government's request. The prelate criticized the government for depending on the results of a non-Lebanese committee, "as if the Lebanese are no more reliable."
In addition to the state's failure to compensate THG, Makdessi also informed the prelate that he and his employees have to vacate their temporary offices by the end of May.
"Do we work from the street or add to the number of 100 new unemployed families?" he asked. "Is the government trying to force us to leave our country again after we returned to it and invested the money we've earned while working in foreign counties? Does the government want to make us pay the price of its failure in protecting the citizens' properties?"
The prelate expressed his sympathy for the delegation and his willingness to approach the government on its behalf.
"We certainly have to claim our rights, but at the same time we have to support the state and urge those who are capable of supporting it to do so," he said.

Hariri, Hamade, Jumblatt immune from Syrian prosecutors... for now
By Leila Hatoum -Daily Star staff
Friday, May 05, 2006
BEIRUT: MP Walid Jumblatt, who has been charged in Syria with incitement against the government there, offered Thursday to help the Syrian opposition to establish a democratic regime. "I tell the opposition that if it sees I could serve its objectives in order to establish a democratic and free Syria, I am ready," he told reporters. Jumblatt was referring to the controversy raised by pro-Syrian groups in Lebanon after he received a delegation Monday headed by the London-based spiritual guide of Syria's banned Muslim Brotherhood, Ali Sadr Eddin el-Bayanuni.
Jumblatt said he signed a petition presented to him by the delegation for the revocation of Law 49 in Syria. Adopted after the regime crushed Islamists in the 1980s, it stipulates the death sentence for those convicted of membership in the Brotherhood.
"When I signed this petition ... I think I was serving a Syrian Arab citizen seeking freedom."
Meanwhile, MP Boutros Harb said that it was "impossible for Parliament to revoke the immunity of three of its MPs so that they can be prosecuted in Syria." Harb was commenting on warrants issued by the Syrian judiciary last month against MPs Saad Hariri, Jumblatt and Telecommunications Minister Marwan Hamade. Another warrant was also issued against anti-Syrian journalist Fares Khashan.Speaking to The Daily Star, Harb said that the Lebanese Parliament is the "only rightful authority to revoke the immunity of any MP."He said: "I expect Berri to reject the warrants as it is impossible that Parliament agrees to revoke the MPs' immunity."Harb said that according to "articles 39 and 40 of the Lebanese Constitution, an MP has immunity ... and should not be legally pursued for his political ideas."
He also mentioned a judicial agreement with Syria which states that litigations should not contradict public order in either county. "In this case it breaches the Lebanese Constitution regarding an MP's right to express his political thoughts without being prosecuted," Harb said.
As for Khashan, who is not an MP and thus enjoys no parliamentary immunity, Harb said he should be protected by "the Constitution's guarantee of freedom of speech."Contacted by The Daily Star, Hamade described the subpoenas as "stupid."
He said: "We demand that Berri's reply comes in accordance with the Constitution not only because we have immunity as MPs, but also because we are Lebanese citizens and our Constitution guarantees us freedom of speech."
Hamade added: "I believe that Berri will take the right decision and the natural answer would be that the warrants are null and void. After that we will demand the Parliament to adopt a recommendation of strong words against this Syrian attempt." - With agencies.

Soueid accuses FPM of war-era tactics in dividing confessions
Daily Star staff-Friday, May 05, 2006
BEIRUT: Former MP Fares Soueid said Thursday that the Free Patriotic Movement was "acting like the Lebanese Forces did during the war by treating Lebanon like a federal state where confessions choose their representatives." In an interview with Magazine to be published on Friday, Soueid said that the basic problem of Christians does not lie in knowing the identity of the future president, "but in securing the Christian presence in Lebanon through a state of law whereby both Christians and Muslims live in peace and harmony."
MP Nabil Nicholas, a member of the parliamentary Change and Reform bloc headed by MP Michel Aoun, said Thursday that participants in the Cedars' March 14 Forces meeting on Sunday "do not speak on behalf of all Christians in Lebanon."
He added that the deadline for the government "is over and it is time for the people to demand their rights."
In an interview with the Central News Agency, Nicholas said "curtailing Aoun's rise to the presidency is difficult because he represents 70 percent of the Lebanese," and accused the March 14 forces of failing to fulfill their promises "to anyone."
Meanwhile, Ali Faisal, a politburo member of the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, said Thursday that Aoun "supported the Palestinian people's struggle to determine their fate," calling for keeping human rights issues for the refugees "away from internal bickering." - The Daily Star

Siniora denies any dispute with Maronite patriarch
'I will pay him a visit soon'
By Nafez Qawas - Daily Star staff
Friday, May 05, 2006
BEIRUT: Prime Minster Fouad Siniora said Thursday there were no disputes between him and the Maronite Patriarch, adding that he is expecting to see the prelate "soon." Speaking after Thursday's Cabinet session, Siniora said: "I have a continuous contact with Maronite Patriarch Nasrallah Butros Sfeir and I will pay him a visit as soon as possible."
Siniora's comments came a day after the Maronite Bishops' Council complained that a certain sect has been monopolizing power and providing employment to groups of that sect, neglecting more qualified candidates.
Siniora also responded to Hizbullah's Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah's declarations of earlier Thursday that the issue of the sand-berms, which were erected by Syria in Ras Baalbek and Ersal, was an old issue "totally made up" by the March 14 Forces to cause tension with the Syrians.
However, Siniora said: "The sand-berms issue is new."
When asked if the May 10 demonstrations, called for by unions here, will be able to topple the government, Siniora said: "Never, never. The Lebanese people are mature and know how to put their economy on the right track. If they do not want to, I do not have any problem."
Although President Emile Lahoud presided over the Cabinet session, there was no confrontation between him and the March 14 ministers. The session focused on administrative appointments in the National Social Security Fund as well as the judicial dispute between the state and the former telecommunications company LibanCell.
Energy and Water Minister Mohammed Fneish said: "Before making any appointment, ministers should submit a thorough timetable of all the appointments. In turn, Justice Minister Charles Rizk agreed with Fneish, saying that it would be "the best way to eliminate the doubts of the Council of Maronite Bishops expressed in Wednesday's statement that followed their monthly meeting with Patriarch Nasrallah Butros Sfeir." Following Tuesday's extraordinary session, the Council of Ministers convened at the Social and Economic Council in Downtown Beirut.
Ministers Joe Sarkis, Yacoub Sarraf, Ahmad Fatfat and Tareq Mitri refrained from attending.
Addressing the journalists before the beginning of the session, Aridi said regarding the draft law to organize the Druze sect: "Why are you highlighting the law this much while many other laws were passed by Parliament and caused more disputes?"
Aridi hoped it would not lead to any "perturbation among the Druze."Concerning the issue of sand-berms, Aridi said: "Who saw the sand-berms on television, found out that they were new, otherwise, why has the issue been raised today?"
In turn, Telecommunications Minister Marwan Hamade said when asked if there was an agreement over the draft law to organize the Druze sect: "MPs representing the Druze have voted on the law, how can there not be agreement?"
Labor Minister Tarrad Hamade said that there wasn't any problem with the National Social Security Fund appointments. "We will hold an extraordinary session next Monday to discuss the issue," he said.

Lebanon needs reform, not reform talk
Commentary by - Daily Star
Thursday, May 04, 2006
Commentary by World Bank
The quarterly update released by the World Bank's Lebanon office last month analyzed the progress of the much-needed economic and social reforms taking place in the country. While the report praised the commitments demonstrated by both the private and public sectors in 2006, the bank urged the political elite to transform the dialogue of the past three months into action. The introductory editorial argues that a concrete reform strategy is imperative both for the good of Lebanon and in preparation for the upcoming Beirut I Donor Conference. The state of Lebanon's electricity sector is but one example of the obstacles impeding the countries' economic growth and must be remedied immediately by the state.
While the national political dialogue moves forward, the political elite of Lebanon should also focus on long-awaited social and economic reforms. The demands of the private commercial and financial sectors, and the attempts of the Minister of Finance to introduce the economic reform agenda into the dialogue, are laudable efforts to remind the country's political elite of their responsibility to jumpstart the economy and address neglected social needs.
Some observers have said that the social and economic reform dialogue is only aimed at the expectations of a proposed Donors' Conference. But Lebanon needs to undergo a reform process not for the sake of the international community, but for its own sake, especially for the young generation. Indeed, the ultimate challenge for Lebanon is to keep its young, talented and entrepreneurial workforce at home rather than export it in return for remittances used for consumption. The challenge is to give its young workforce hope and provide them with opportunities to build and propel Lebanon into one of the strongest emerging economies with its unique Lebanese branding - something hard to beat.
This will all require reform. "Reform talk" sometimes can get too esoteric, too removed, too couched in technical jargon: debt to GDP, primary surpluses or deficits, levels of reserve, etc. All of these are very important measures of inherent strengths or weaknesses in the economy, which signal deferred costs to society and short- to medium-term risks. But behind these esoteric terms are real problems experienced by ordinary citizens every day. Solving practical problems would demystify what is meant by "reform" and help build national support for constructive economic programs for modernization and development.
An example is the power sector. This sector is responsible for many of Lebanon's economic, fiscal, environmental and social woes, and it has also become a symbol of the inability of successive governments to address a glaring example of public sector failure. ElectricitŽ du Liban (EDL) is costing the country over $2 million per day in subsidies, while charging the highest tariffs in the region. A recent World Bank survey of businesses (still unpublished) reveals that 94 percent of businesses with over ten employees have parallel power generators to supplement the EdL supply (which was interrupted 220 times last year by EDL's own estimate).
The necessary steps for reforming the power sector are obvious. Indeed, the last three governments came up with very similar solutions, differing only in minor details. There is agreement that EDL needs to be run efficiently - like a business. It should be corporatized under the Commercial Code; a new board of directors should be appointed, composed of members of high caliber and integrity; and management capacity needs to be enhanced through management or service contracts for specific operation and maintenance functions (including bill collection and loss reduction). As these measures go forward, ways and means of privatization can be considered. There might be legitimate questions remaining as to the scope and speed with which private-sector participation can take place. These are not ideological questions, but rather empirical ones requiring immediate work on EDL's operations, and the testing of market appetite for various forms of private participation.
Launching this process should not be delayed either for further breakthroughs in the political dialogue or the convening of a Donors' Conference. The Lebanese people are paying daily for the cost of these delays, through added national debt, power outages, less competitive exports, lost jobs and a worsening environment. The power sector is perhaps the most egregious, but not the only sector in dire need of reform. The state of national health, education, solid waste, social security, tax, business procedures and justice are all far from what Lebanon aspires to, is capable of achieving and deserves. Individual ministries' efforts can be heroic, but frequently lack the needed authorizing environment (new laws), reforming procedures, selecting qualified personnel and efficient implementation.
Now that important breakthroughs have been achieved on the political dialogue front, we urge the leaders to bring social and economic dialogue in from the cold and move to tangible actions which would bring hope to young Lebanese men and women that they have a future in their beloved country.

European parliamentary delegation aims to help Lebanon reform
By Daniella Matar -Special to The Daily Star
Friday, May 05, 2006
BEIRUT: The head of the European parliamentary delegation currently visiting Lebanon, EU MP Beatrice Patri said Thursday that the group comes as friends and partners to exchange ideas on how Lebanon can bring about internal changes.
Following a news conference held at the Movenpick Hotel in Beirut, Patri said that discussions with the various factions have enabled them to reach a consensus on "the necessity for reform, the necessity for new institutions and above all the necessity to normalize Syrian relations and find a solution to disarming the resistance."
The group of parliamentarians is here on a five-day visit and has already visited high-ranking political and religious figures, acting Interior Ahmad Fatfat, head of the Loyalty to the Resistance parliamentary bloc Mohammad Raad, president of the Free Patriotic Movement MP Michel Aoun, Economy and Trade Minister Sami Haddad, Progressive Socialist Party leader Walid Jumblatt, president of the Democratic Renewal Nassib Lahoud, Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea and Social Affairs Minister Nayla Mouawad. They are scheduled to meet with Speaker Nabih Berri Friday.
The delegation said they "were impressed by the frankness and extremely open nature of discussions and were certain a number of action programs for reform have been set up in both the economic and social sectors."
Patri said these programs have long been awaited by the Lebanese population because there is an intense need for reform. She was here on March 14 and realized the passionate desire of the population "to turn a new page in Lebanon's history."
Patri said she recognizes Lebanon is taking steps toward reform and applauds the national dialogue.
She said that the delegation's interest in Lebanon stems from the Association Agreement between Lebanon and the EU, which came into force on April 1, 2006, as well as from other partnerships such as the European Mediterranean Partnership Agreement. Also Thursday, the European delegation visited Mouawad at her residence in Hazmieh in the presence of EU Ambassador Patrick Renauld. Speaking after the meeting, Patri said the visit aimed at "evaluating the development of the Lebanese democratic situation." She added the EU and Parliament "support the ongoing national dialogue as well as issues of social and economic reform."In turn, Mouawad said: "The government fully respects the European partnership accord and is trying to set a neighborhood accord with Europe."

Hezbollah lambastes U.S. for listing it as terrorist group
The Hezbollah (Party of God) group of Lebanon on Saturday criticized the United States for putting it in the list of foreign terrorist organizations, saying that the list was made in accordance with unjust standards set by Washington.
The decision by the U.S. State Department just proves the correctness of Hezbollah's stance and policy on fighting Israeli aggression and U.S. hegemony, said Hezbollah in a statement issued on Saturday.
The statement said the one who deserves most to be put in the list of terrorist organizations is the countries who support Israel's "terror acts," aggression and occupation of Arab territories, and they should be put on top of the list.
It added the U.S. pressure on Hezbollah would have no effect on its stance on fighting aggression and occupation, as well as on liberating the occupied territories and safeguarding Lebanon.
Hezbollah has 14 seats in the 128-member Lebanese National Assembly, and two government ministers are from the group.
In a recent annual report, the U.S. State Department listed Hezbollah, along with al-Qaida and militant Palestinian groups Hamas and Islamic Jihad, as "active extremist and terrorist groups" in the Middle East.
Source: Xinhua

Syria denies State Department terror label
WASHINGTON, May 3 (UPI) -- The U.S. State Department has released its annual "Country Reports on Terrorism" in which Syria figures as a State sponsor of terrorism since Dec. 29, 1979.
A press release from the Syrian Embassy in Washington, D.C., however, points out that the State Department's report "fails to recognize two major facts that have induced the increase of terrorism in the Middle-East and worldwide."
The communiqué from the Syrian Embassy cites:
1. The invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq, which has fueled anti-Western sentiments in the region.
2. The Israeli occupation of Arab lands, and continuous suffering and humiliation of Palestinians and Syrians living under occupation. The Syrian communiqué goes on to say that "The only way to eradicate terrorism lies in dealing with the root causes of this phenomenon; simply put, ending all occupations in our region. In the past, United States administrations realized this fact and saved no efforts in trying to broker peace in the Middle-East. Today, the United States is widely regarded as a major factor of instability in this region." Syria furthermore denies charges that it has allowed infiltration of jihadi fighters into Iraq across its borders. The Syrian Embassy blames the United States for its "policies that are fomenting

Rice to Discuss Lebanon with Douste-Blazy as U.N. Plans to Increase Pressure on Syria
U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice hopes to meet with her French counterpart next week in New York to discuss the situation in Lebanon, the State Department spokesman has said.
"We're trying to arrange a meeting between the two of them," Sean McCormack told reporters Wednesday.
Rice and French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy are scheduled to attend a meeting in New York on Monday of top diplomats from Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia to weigh a response to Iran's disputed nuclear program.
A separate meeting on the Middle East with envoys from the European Union, Russia, the United States and the United Nations is set for Tuesday. That session may be followed by a possible dinner meeting between Rice and Douste-Blazy, according to a State Department official.
A report by U.N. special envoy Terje Roed-Larsen has prompted interest in fresh measures by the U.N. Security Council, McCormack said. "Certainly in the wake of Terje Larsen's report, we think that some other measure through the Security Council might be merited," he said. "We're going to talk to the French government about that. We've worked very well together on this issue, and we look forward to doing so in the future."France said last week that it was preparing a draft resolution that would urge Syria to respond to Lebanon's call for establishment of formal diplomatic ties between the two neighbors and for a demarcation of their common border. An Nahar's Washington correspondent Hisham Milhem reported Thursday that U.S., French and British envoys are discussing a "strongly worded" U.N. Security Council draft resolution against Syria to press it to implement Resolution 1559.
He quoted sources as saying that the draft resolution would "urge Syria to cooperate with the council and the Lebanese government to implement 1559 in full including demarcating the border, establishing diplomatic ties, and facilitating the disarmament of armed militia." The sources said that the Lebanese government is concerned about the possible inclusion or harsh language against Hizbullah in the resolution which may increase tensions between the group and authorities.
Resolution 1559 among other things calls for the disarmament of all Lebanese militias including Hizbullah. Top rival political leaders will discuss the issue during the next national dialogue session, hoping to solve the matter internally without any further international pressure.(AFP-Naharnet) Beirut, 04 May 06, 09:46

Lebanese Relief Expert Named U.N. Humanitarian Envoy to Iraq
A long-serving Lebanese official with the U.N. refugee agency UNHCR has been named Secretary-General Kofi Annan's Deputy Special Representative for Iraq. Jean-Marie Fakhouri, whose new assignment will focus on humanitarian relief, reconstruction and development in war-ravaged Iraq, was named to the post after serving in the world's worst humanitarian crisis in Sudan. Fakhouri served as UNHCR's Director of Operations, a position which required him to direct activities of 840 agency staff in the region addressing the needs of Sudanese refugees, returnees and internally displaced persons.
During his 25-year tenure at UNHCR, Fakhouri has managed other humanitarian operations and complex emergencies, serving in various capacities both at the Geneva Headquarters and in field locations such as Iraq.  The 55-year old envoy is fluent in English, French and Arabic. He succeeds Staffan de Mistura, who held the post since January 2005. Beirut, 04 May 06, 11:28

Tension escalates again between Damascus and Beirut
by Youssef Hourany
Syrian roadblocks on Lebanese territory, arrest warrants issued by Damascus against Beirut politicians, continued postponements of a meeting between the President Bachar al-Assad and the Lebanese premier Fouad Siniora… all these factors escalate tension between the two countries.
Beirut (AsiaNews) – Tension is on the rise again between Syria and Lebanon, while the UN prepares to examine a report on execution of Resolution 1559, in which the USA and France should present a plan that further hardens international feelings towards Damascus. Syrian roadblocks in Lebanese territory, arrest warrants issued by Damascus against politicians in Beirut, continued postponements of the meeting between President Bachar al-Assad and the Lebanese premier Fouad Siniora… these are all factors contributing to tension in links between the two countries.
Officially prompted by the struggle against smuggling, Syrian roadblocks in Lebanon are making trade between the two countries and towards other Arab countries, like Iraq, very difficult, if not downright preventing it. In the face of declared anticipation by the Lebanese prime minister Fouad Siniora to meet Assad, the secretary of the Higher Council of Lebanese-Syrian Coordination, Nasri Khoury, said the meeting was being prepared “with caution, prudence and profound study, without any haste on the Syrian part.” Then there is the court summons of three Lebanese leaders, with a seven-day ultimatum, by the highest Syrian tribunal: Druze leader Walid Joumblatt, the minister Marwan Hamade and the journalist Fares Khachan. And there are persistent attacks of the Syrian press against the policies of the Lebanese government and the prime minister Fouad Siniora, held to be “responsible for the deterioration in ties between the two neighbouring countries and a mercenary of the American market.” The press, strictly controlled, indicates “the path of sincere dialogue as the only way of making Lebanon come out of its current crisis”, but it also talks about the “risk facing Lebanon if its pursues this mistaken policy”.
The Maronite bishops also tackled ties between Syria and Lebanon in a statement published at the end of their monthly meeting, held yesterday, under the chairmanship of the patriarch Nasrallah Sfeir. The bishops called on the international community to find a “just and lasting” solution to the Palestinian problem, and expressed hope for the resumption of ties between Lebanon and Syria, that should be based on “mutual respect and the sovereignty and independence of both countries”. The statement criticized the latest measures taken by the Syrian army on the Lebanese borders, a means of pressure that “should not be implemented in this manner and that could be the cause of new tension that could lead to further deterioration of ties.”
As for Lebanon’s domestic situation, the bishops launched a fresh appeal to all leaders to respect Lebanon’s noble tradition and to resume the path of dialogue, started on 2 March last.
The statement emphasises the urgency of finding a solution to all social crises, owing to the gravity of the economic situation, calling on the government to draw up a “project able to help the Lebanese people to emerge from the crisis and to tackle the many challenges facing Lebanon”. The bishops also exhorted leaders to respect the “social tissue of the country, to involve all Lebanese in the reconstruction process” and they expressed hope of “respect of rights of all religious communities in Lebanon in a harmonious and just way.”
The Maronite bishops also implored for the intercession of Our Lady of Lebanon in this month of May, urging all Lebanese to look to this mother, “the only protector of Lebanon, of its history and its religious communities.”

The Syrian-Lebanese War of Barriers!
Zouheir Kseibati Al-Hayat - 04/05/06//
Is it appropriate for brethren, who used to be more brotherly, to be dragged into a war over soil, rather soil barriers? Guerillas and special units, who are willing to fall as martyrs to shield the Lebanese or Syrian sovereignty are involved in this war.
This question, which may be raised by the Syrians and Lebanese, may give rise to another: which party first damaged the structure of fraternity; which, it is said, Resolution 1559 sowed enough mines to blow it apart.
Is it right for two brethren, bound by Arabism (even if there are some who doubt the possibility that Arabism could bind them forever), to have the US-dominated Security Council act as arbitrator? The authority of this Council is granted by the White House. It defends sovereignties and independencies that were, for decades, easy targets for US interests around the world. But is it not Lebanon's right to enjoy sovereignty - even though unable to defend it?
Does the "ethics" of those who outlined the Treaty of Brotherhood, Cooperation and Coordination encompass giving the Judiciary a free hand to issue a subpoena addressed to 'brotherly' minister or leader? The reference here is to Marwan Hamadeh and Walid Jumblatt. Damascus preferred to associate their names with acts of the past, an attitude which changed as if by magic. As the Syrian brethren say: is it right for a leader to "conspire"? How else can you describe the meeting of brethren? He prefers to ask: who started first?
Some examples may recall guerilla warfare; other examples highlight, perhaps in the literal sense, a battle of the trenches! Would it come as a surprise if, one day, such a battle flared up in many points of the undefined Lebanese-Syrian border?
Undoubtedly, questions will be endless as long as the brethren's mistakes continue to yield new ones. Damascus is forced into a tight corner by US-French pressure. The response is directed towards Lebanon, which the parliamentary majority in Beirut sees as one and complete entity, while the minority seeks nothing more than to jump into the trenches dug by the Security Council under daily US sponsorship; neither for the sake of the Lebanese, nor to uphold their aspiration to a certain sovereignty.
Damascus is mistaken in refusing to receive Terje Roed-Larsen. It is as if it were deliberately offering to the Americans and to the Security Council a golden opportunity to give UN Resolution 1559 some sharp fangs, following a long grace period for Lebanon and a trial period for Syria, from a US-French viewpoint. The fangs may revive the battle to overthrow President Emile Lahoud, after the Lebanese have failed to persuade him to step down; especially since a large number of Lebanese are neither convinced of the reasons for removing him from power, nor persuaded of the pretexts for a Security Council intervention and what may be described as the composure of the Christian side.
The 1559 sharp fangs would also mean forcing Syria, which is infuriated with its younger brother who enjoys US backing, to defy the United Nations (UN). In this case, any UN resolution would bring the borders demarcation issue under the auspices and supervision of the international organization; a situation which would put an end to the 'guerilla' and 'trench' warfare!
Further fangs to bite into the Lebanese-Syrian brotherhood body. To make things worse, more mistakes have been committed by Lebanon and Syria in 'good will'. These mistakes took the form of hasty reactions, or seizing prematurely on what they thought were ripe opportunities. However, it is absolutely understandable for PM Fouad Siniora's government, or the parliamentary majority, to ask about what may force Syria to accept demarcating the borders since it is actually refusing the idea… Instead of demonstrating mutual good will, i.e. one step for another, the gap is surprisingly widening.
Damascus has the right to question the Lebanese about their change of heart, their 'compromises', turnabouts, and even their division over the resistance movement that liberated South Lebanon from Israel; a movement that has become the enemy of some of the Lebanese. What hurts the 'elder Syrian brother' is that he cannot bring himself, after 30 years, to accept the notion that brotherhood and sovereignty are not incompatible. Hence, Syria attempts to block what it considers is an American roadmap for Lebanon. It has only one way to do it: It must convince many Lebanese that it will give willingly what it would otherwise have to relinquish under international pressure and resolutions; and it should do this without fear of a conspiracy against it.
In Lebanon, it would be right to remember that it is a long way from Beirut to Damascus. The distance will definitely not be reduced after demarcation, with or without barriers. However, the question remains: how many sins will be committed before mistakes are corrected?

Iraq-Iran: Exchanging Accusations of Terrorism
Hani Fahs Al-Hayat - 04/05/06//
Exchanging accusations is a resilient human nature displayed by both the individual and the community. It was expected that political movements and parties - being part of civil institutions - would care more to mitigate such a destructive behavior. This behavior distorts facts through the overwhelming tendency to demonize the other and glorify the self. However, these parties worsened the situation and incurred all of us considerable losses. This exchange of negative behavior is most dangerous when it has ideological, religious or sectarian motives. This leads to 'Takfir' [claiming the right of declaring fellow Muslims apostates] which usually ends with murder based on extremist premises and ideologies that manage extremism with more extremism. Religious ideology originates from, and moves toward, the absolute. Thus, many religious people confuse the absolute with the relative, or raise the relative to the status of the absolute. They see themselves as absolutely good and see the other as absolutely evil. They are innocent; the other, guilty. This logic justifies harming the other. They invoke fanaticism among their people in order to provoke more evil and harm, and to drag the other into a similar or even more detrimental behavior. What is even worse is that each party alleges that its eliminatory and purgatory creed is a call to God. As a result, innocent blood is shed under religious pretexts. We noticed earlier that the European Union was established on the ideology of putting an end to religious wars that had lasted for 500 years. However, we Arabs and Muslims still renew these wars amongst us.
This means that instead of being destroyed by the greedy, we are now to be destroyed by the ambitious. The best example and indicator of the dangers we face, is this daily exchange of accusations between the Sunnis and Shiites in Iraq. These groups feel that they can only exist in an atmosphere of imbalance and struggle. However, they cannot prevent moderation and transparency on the two sides from striving to alter seditions. Yet, the sectarian discourse is the most strident, nourished by daily bloodshed. Such discourse is doomed since it incurs great losses that could banish moderation on the short term. The propagator of this discourse is, and will always be, available as long as there are narrow-minded people whose practical minds do not match their level of scientific understanding.
The direct initiator of what I am writing here is something I heard from a Muslim Iraqi leader whose faith and knowledge are beyond any suspicion. This man, who is most eminent among the scholars of his doctrine, discussed the Iraqi situation in a founding conference by the moderation trend, in an Arab capital. He said a lot; most of his talk can be accepted and a great deal debated. Consequently, he arrived at a minefield when he said: 80% of what is happening in Iraq is a fierce resistance against the occupier, while 20% is military actions against the Sunnis, few of which are against the Shiites. He then generally alluded to the origins of terrorism, only mentioning Iran as a main source of direct and indirect terrorism, either in a form that is purely Iranian or that which is supported by Iran.
Here, some of the attendees started a sensible and peaceful discussion. They believed that if this were true, then it needs a clear condemnation and an effective treatment. This means that there should be detailed documents that include incidents. One incident supported by modern authentication methods, which can be controlled by using the rules and principles of the Hadith [Prophet Muhammad's traditions], would be enough. One incident would be enough for a condemnation that would be acknowledged by all but the arrogant and the hypocrite.
Thus, everyone is required to stand firmly in the face of the flagrant contradiction that most Iraqi and Arab Shiites are offended by the manner the events in Iraq are handled by the two satellite channels: Al Aalam (The World), and Al Manar (The Beacon). They believe that sometimes the channels' performances show ambiguousness in their stance against the occupier, where they ignore the Shiite position and flatter the Sunni one. One of the two channels is purely Iranian, while the other is Iranian to a great extent.
Such a contradiction needs to be fully understood, because everyone knows without a shadow of doubt that - although some disagree - Hezbollah, which is considered by everyone an affiliate of Iran, is the fiercest opponent of the US plan - the strongest opposition to Hezbollah.
The most salient part of the US plan for the region was confronted by armed resistance which culminated in the liberation of South Lebanon. The result was that Hezbollah became a US target. This in turn has led to ever-increasing and serious debates in Lebanon, the region, and the world.
Perhaps it became known to everyone that the last months uncovered the strong Iranian sway in Iraq. Some Shiites, or the majority of them, might express reservations regarding this influence; however, there is an Arab and Islamic consensus that the Iranian sway counters the US influence in Iraq and the region as a whole.
Does this correspond to Iran's terrorism in Iraq, which is ultimately in the interest of the occupation? We should note that a percentage of Iraqi Shiites and others are angry with Iran in Iraq. They accuse Iran of encouraging resistance without distinguishing between Sunni and Shiite resistance, and that its support sometimes extends to Sunni parties accused by some Shiites of practicing terrorism. Such accusations lack evidence.
Some Iraqi leaders insist on this issue, even though they have sensed that the largely moderate and theologian Shiite wave in Arab countries does not asses its relation with the Iraqi issue in this manner which only exists among extremists that strike with remarkable severity in all the Arab countries, from the Atlantic Ocean to the Persian Gulf.
*Mr. Hani Fahs is a Lebanese Writer

Lebanon Refuses Taiwan Leader's Plane
By BASSEM MROUE- Associated Press Writer
May 4, 2006, 9:08 AM EDT
BEIRUT, Lebanon -- Lebanon prevented the Taiwanese president's plane from making a refueling stop in Beirut after China's ambassador complained to authorities, a Lebanese official said Thursday.
China's envoy to Lebanon called an urgent meeting with Prime Minister Fuad Saniora and asked him not to allow President Chen Shui-bian's plane to land, the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak with the press. . "Lebanon in this case had to respond positively to the Chinese demand because of the good relations and agreements signed between the two countries," the official said.
Lebanon does not have diplomatic ties with Taiwan, and it is eager to maintain a good relationship with China because it wants the support of the veto-wielding country on the U.N. Security Council, especially in disputes with Syria.
Officials at Rafik Hariri International Airport said "concerned security authorities" told air traffic controllers to "inform the plane's captain...that the plane is not allowed to land in Beirut for refueling." The officials, who also spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the press, did not elaborate.
Chen, on his way to Latin America, landed in the United Arab Emirates. It was not clear if that decision was made after the Lebanese ban.

The Axis of Terror
Those still arguing that Iran poses no danger to the outside world should take note of an article that ran on April 23 in London’s Sunday Times. The paper reported that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad took a breather from uttering verbal threats against Israel to go on a trip to see what he could do about putting those words into action.
Ahmedinejad visited Syria where he met one of the world’s most wanted terrorist leaders — Imad Mugniyeh, the chief of overseas operations for Hezbollah. Mugniyeh has an international rap sheet as long as your arm. He is wanted in Argentina for the 1994 bombing of the AMIA Jewish community centre in Buenos Aires. And the Americans have a US$5 million bounty on Mugniyeh’s head for his role in the suicide attack against the US Marine barracks in Beirut, plus the torture and mutilation of the CIA’s Lebanon station chief William Buckley.
Analysts believe that the tete-à-tete in Damascus was a coordination meeting to plan a global terrorism backlash if Iran’s nuclear facilities are attacked by the US or Israel. After all, Teheran is the major source of Hezbollah’s financial and military support. The mullahs have the right to expect a return on their investment.
Just as worrisome is the headway that Iran is making in its quest to purchase influence and power amongst Palestinians. Security analysts have long since concluded that Palestinian Islamic Jihad is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards. And there is growing evidence that Hamas and the Fatah al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades have found Iranian largesse too much of a temptation to resist.
Intelligence also indicates that al-Qaeda has set its sights on getting its own slice of the Palestinian terrorist pie. There are increasing reports of al-Qaeda elements making their presence known in Gaza. And a substantial part of Osama bin Laden’s latest audio tape decried Western opposition to the new Palestinian Hamas government as evidence of a crusade against Muslims.
Ironically, Hamas displayed remarkable ingratitude for bin Laden’s supportive statement, criticising the bombings in the Egyptian resort of Dahab, which most analysts have attributed to al-Qaeda, as a crime. Perhaps this has more to do with internal turf wars over political influence in the Palestinian community than anything related to real principle. But it was ironic to see Hamas representatives criticise the bombing of a restaurant tourist precinct as if they hadn’t done precisely the same things themselves, and publicly supported a similar attack in a Tel Aviv restaurant less than two weeks previously.
And throughout all this, direct Palestinian terrorism against Israel proceeds apace. On literally a daily basis, gunmen are killed trying to cross into Israel, and Qassam rocket launches, and even Katyushas, have become a matter of grim routine. The Israeli army responds with artillery counter-battery fire against the rocket launching sites, and the Palestinian residents of Gaza continue their self-inflicted decline into the abyss of penury and societal disintegration.
Meanwhile, Syria plays a key role connecting Iran, Hezbollah, and the Palestinian terror groups. Israeli intelligence believes that it was the Damascus office of Islamic Jihad that ordered the Tel Aviv bombing. Hamas too, has its external headquarters in Damascus. And Hezbollah has acted as almost a Syrian client militia, highly dependent on Syrian willingness to act as an agent for transferring arms, expertise, and funds supplied by Teheran.
While none of these alignments are exactly new, the ascension of Hamas and Iran’s growing regional belligerence create a new and much more dangerous situation. Hamas is on record that it will never arrest members of any other terror groups for attacking Israel, nor will it stop rocket attacks. Essentially, the Hamas controlled PA is planning on turning the Palestinian territories into a base for this axis of terror — Iran, Syrian Hamas, Hezbollah, and Islamic Jihad, with possible assistance from al-Qaeda — to wage a constant war on Israel.
Back in Israel, it’s coalition construction time, with all the untidy political machinations that entails. New PM Ehud Olmert’s task is doubly sensitive, as he seeks to construct a government that can implement his convergence plan to pull back from most of the West Bank. He will need all the solidarity and expertise he can muster, because he must implement convergence in such a way as to preserve Israel’s freedom to control and respond to the ongoing efforts at mass murder from Hamas and its "axis of terror" allies.
There is no reason to expect that Labor leader Amir Peretz will not be an effective defence minister, as is currently being proposed, despite his lack of military background. Many of his most succesful predecessors in the post, from Levi Eshkol through Shimon Peres to Moshe Arens, were similarly purely civilian leaders. But whoever is defence minister will need considerable help from the prime minister and the many talented people in the leadership of both Labor and Kadima.
Convergence and separating from the Palestinian population remains a good idea. But it is time for friends of Israel abroad to recognise how much of a risk it entails and find new ways to help. Hamas must either change its policies in the ways the Quartet is demanding, or be cut off from the funding and arms needed to turn their territories into a perpetual terror base. This is also just one more reason that Iran must absolutely not be allowed to obtain nuclear weapons, which would allow the Revolutionary Guards and radical mullahs to support terror with absolute impunity. And international apologetics for Palestinian terror must be fought with as much vehemence as possible.
Convergence needs international support against the new "axis of terror" if it is to lead, ultimately, to the stable two state resolution that both Israelis and Palestinians deserve

Hezbollah from Sea to Shining Sea?
If the United States attacks Iran’s bomb factories in Natanz and Isfahan, will Iran’s fanatics sic their terrorist proxies on us? Ahmadinejad has promised to do so. And he has the track record to make it sound real. Hezbollah would be his terrorist attack dog.
Frontpage Magazine has an excellent article by LTC Joseph Myers and Patrick Poole called “Hezbollah, Illegal Immigration, and the Next 9/11”
In September 2002, Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage described the danger of the organization: “Hezbollah may be the A team of terrorists and maybe al-Qaeda is actually the B team.” Hezbollah has been an Iranian terrorist arm for twenty-five years, specializing in terror attacks in Lebanon, Israel, Argentina. American military and CIA personnel have been targeted, and Jewish civilians.
Now Hezbollah has infiltrated the United States mainland, according to FBI Director Robert Mueller. The US has a large Lebanese Shiite community, and terrorist moles can fit right in. Through his control of Hezbollah, Ahmadinejad could set off some nasty terrorist strikes in this country. A few weeks ago Ahmadinejad held a personal meeting in Damascus with the biggest terrror master of them all, Imad Mughniyeh. We can guess what they talked about.
Myers and Poole quote NewsMax:
FBI Director Robert Mueller said this week that his agency busted a smuggling ring organized by the terrorist group Hezbollah that had operatives cross the Mexican border to carry out possible terrorist attacks inside the U.S. This was an occasion in which Hezbollah operatives were assisting others with some association with Hezbollah in coming to the United States,” Mueller told a House Appropriations subcommittee during a Tuesday hearing on the FBI’s budget.
In a stunning revelation, Mueller admitted that Hezbollah had succeeded in smuggling some of its operatives across the border, telling the House committee: “That was an organization that we dismantled and identified those persons who had been smuggled in. And they have been addressed as well.”
Hezbollah was responsible for the single most deadly terrorist attack against the U.S. before 9/11 – the Oct. 1983 bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut, which killed 243 U.S. troops.
In November, an al-Qaida operative who was on the FBI’s terrorist watch list was captured near the Mexican border, housed in a Texas jail and turned over to federal agents, according to Rep. John Culberson, R-Texas.
A confirmed al-Qaida terrorist, an Iraqi national, was held in the Brewster County jail,” Rep. Culberson told ABC Radio host Sean Hannity. “He was captured in Mexico. This was within the last six weeks. He was turned over to the FBI.”
The Frontpage Magazine article cites Tom Diaz and Barbara Newman in their recent book Lightning Out of Lebanon: Hezbollah Terrorists on American Soil (Presidio Press, 2005).
Diaz was the lead Democrat Congressional counsel on terrorism issues, and Newman is an NPR/ABC News Producer—- not exactly fire-breathing Republicans, we can guess. Yet they write flatly that
“active Hezbollah cells have been identified in Boston, New York, Newark, Atlanta, Miami, Tampa, Charlotte, Louisville, Detroit, Chicago, Houston, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Portland.”
You might call it Hezbollah from sea to shining sea.
So the next time you hear some demagogue rant against “Americans being wire-tapped without warrants,” you might want to remind yourself of Hezbollah’s crop of US moles, and say a little prayer:
I sure hope somebody on our side is wiretapping them.
James Lewis 5 02 06

The devil is in the details
Al Ahram. Serene Assir assesses the challenges facing the restart of the Lebanese National Dialogue
Following a three-week interlude, the Lebanese National Dialogue was resumed on 28 April with the aim of coming to a consensus on the future of the presidency. This time round, leaders had said early in April, if there was no agreement on the issue, then the talks would move swiftly on to their final phase, in which the armaments of Hizbullah would be discussed. Days on, the presidency controversy continues to be far from solved, but there are strong indications that even if President Emile Lahoud -- who is described by the anti- Syrian bloc as constituting the last vestige of the Syrian occupation, which ended with the withdrawal of 14,000 Syrian troops in spring 2005 -- were to remain at the helm for now, the name-list for new potential presidents is near complete.
And there seems to be no shortage of names in the offing. In fact, a total of 12 Christian Maronites, in accordance with an unwritten code established ever since French rule over Lebanon by mandate ended, are now being considered. Considered, that is, following a Christians-only meeting held at the residence of Samir Geagea, who heads the Lebanese Forces Party (LF) and who was released from prison last year, having been absolved of his sentence for war crimes. Geagea was reported as saying that the intentions behind holding such a meeting, from which non-Christian leaders had been excluded, were not indicative of any form of sectarianism, and that he remained above all faithful to the 14 March alliance in the Lebanese political process, which includes prominent leaders from other sects too. However, given that the president will ultimately be a Maronite, Christian leaders thought it would be best to come up with a shortlist internally first, in order to minimise the immediate danger of further disputes.
Not present at the meeting was former General Michel Aoun, who returned to Lebanon last year following the Syrian withdrawal, after 15 years of self-imposed exile in France. Commenting on the fact that the prominent Maronite Christian leader, who in a surprise move allied himself with Hizbullah following last year's parliamentary elections and thus broke away from the 14 March coalition, had not been invited to the gathering, participants said that he would not be welcome among them unless he abandoned Hizbullah and returned to the anti-Syrian camp.
Nevertheless, Aoun's chances of making it to the top post in Lebanese politics have by no means been dimmed -- or at least, not yet. For his name was included in a list of candidates discussed with influential religious leader Cardinal Nasrallah Sfeir and announced at the National Dialogue meeting Friday, alongside 11 others. Geagea was not, however, on that list.
It appears that even without Lahoud resigning, the anti- Syrian bloc is fast moving towards achieving some kind of consensus of its own, in a sense to get ahead. Pressure on the president -- whose term was extended under Syrian pressure in 2004, some say unconstitutionally -- has all the while been building up ever since the assassination of former prime minister Rafik Al-Hariri in February 2005. He has so far, however, insisted that he would only resign if new parliamentary elections were called first, adding that if his presidency is to be deemed unconstitutional, then so should parliament.
Meanwhile, following what appeared to be an unbreakable deadlock for weeks on end, the pace in Lebanese politics has been significantly sped up over recent days. The key to get things going again, it seems, lay not so much in concentrating on the dialogue process, but in politicians finding alternative, more classical means to settle crises. The National Dialogue has now become little more than a showcase for the media -- while real political decisions are made elsewhere.
Among the factors contributing to the build-up has been the imposition of ever-clearer pressure on Damascus by the United Nations, thus leaving the anti-Syrian bloc with the option to discuss and create the future of Lebanese politics at its own pace. Among the factors perceived by some to have added to such pressure was the recent visit by Prime Minister Fouad Al-Siniora to Washington.
While United States officials have openly supported the National Dialogue process, Al-Siniora insisted that he went to Washington only to discuss means to liberate the Shebaa Farms, an area whose identity is still controversial. A peculiar development is that Walid Jumblatt, Druze leader and prominent ally of the Saad Al-Hariri-led movement -- of which Al-Siniora is also a member -- has insisted regularly that the Shebaa Farms are not Lebanese. But then again, Jumblatt has been noticeably quiet over recent days, in comparison to moments when his anti-Syrian statements were so inflamed that some feared he was simply going too far. And in Syria, UN envoy Terje Roed-Larsen's call for an immediate final demarcation of Syrian-Lebanese borders was rejected on the grounds of the ongoing Israeli occupation of Shebaa.
Still on the cards is perhaps the most controversial subject of all, namely UN Resolution 1559's demand that Hizbullah disarm. The National Dialogue seems to be saving this issue for last, not least because it will no doubt cause major splinters harboured by different groups in Lebanon against each other to resurface. For Hizbullah, the suggestion that it should disarm is tantamount to paving the way for Lebanon to be vulnerable to renewed Israeli aggression. For the anti-Syrian bloc, Hizbullah's military capacity grants the Shia group unnecessary powers. Leaders of the 14 March coalition have instead called for an integration of Hizbullah fighters into the Lebanese army. New violations of Lebanese airspace by Israeli jets this week caused uproar among various political groups. Al-Siniora's plea in Washington for assistance in dealing with Israel, where at least 2,000 Lebanese prisoners remain, included a request for the US to put more pressure on its ally. Given that it increasingly appears that the anti-Syrian bloc will be calling most shots in Lebanon, at least for some time to come, one would hope that it recognises that a naïve relationship with Washington is as good as a bad one.

MOUSSAOUI: WRONG COURT, WRONG DEBATE..
By Walid Phares
Should we be surprised by the watershed debate following Zacarias Moussaoui's trial ending? Not really. The jury rendering of its recommendation is not unusual throughout the American legal war with Terrorism: For the five years court struggle to try al Qaida members and other terrorists in the US legal structure hasn't been working. After the classroom, America's court room is too alien to the conflict. In short Moussaoui's case is not the only one to display a systemic crisis, all other cases did and will continue to do. My take on it, as an analyst of past and future terror wars, can be simplified: The terrorists are processed in the wrong courts and our debate on this legal process is the wrong debate.
Let me be clear from the beginning: The issue I am raising is not about the death sentence or life in prison sentencing. That part should have been the last stage in the debate: The one that seals the sentencing logic, not the discussion that makes the debate. The Moussaoui trial is not about the principle of common criminal sentencing per se; it is about criminalizing Terrorism and its root ideologies. Here are few points that make my analytical case:
1. Zacarias Moussaoui's personal life is not a main factor in determining this particular mass crime, but one of the factors that could lower the punishment, if incriminated. If he had a bad childhood or other negative factors that affected his clarity of thinking, it should be considered as elements of clemency in the case of extreme sentencing, but not the foundations of the case evaluation. For 9/11 and the war it was part of, was not a personal vendetta by M. Moussaoui against the US Government, but an al Qaida genocidal war against the American people. This and other similar cases aren't a private affair between individuals with some bad luck- and US policies with consequences on national security. By his own admitting, M Moussaoui is a member, call him Jihadist or not, of a Terrorist organization. He shouldn't be tried in a US Court system designed to process common crimes instead of war crimes.
2. The victims of September 11, 2001 weren't selected by al Qaida, or even by the perpetrators including Moussaoui- personally. The men, women and children massacred throughout that day of infamy are the targets of a Terror war on America not vandalism on two towers in New York and a large building in Washington. Terrorism could have targeted other high rises and objectives in different cities. The matter is not an individual vendetta between Moussaoui and the 3,000 persons Mohammed Atta and his Jihadists have killed. America was targeted as a nation for the purpose of genocide. As a massacred collectivity, the victims of 9/11 belong to the nation not to their relatives. As individuals the victims are profoundly mourned by all Americans and above all by their survivors. So who tried al Qaida on behalf of the nation?
3. Moussaoui is part of machinery larger than himself. In the 9/11 planning process, he is not a sole mechanism acting individually. He was executing orders by al Qaida and had the intention of carrying them out. He is a nucleus that fell behind, in a wider cell that moved forward. His relation to the massacre is not pragmatic but mechanical. Hence the judicial process of finding out if he caused or not, the process of specific deaths of 9/11 is not the issue: For he has openly admitted, and it was proven, that he was part of the machinery put in place to perpetrate the massacre. That he slipped, failed or missed his opportunity is only one fact within a greater reality: his commitment to achieve the mass-killing and his participation in a chain of event that led to it, even if he didn't walk through the last part of the horror.
4. More seriously is the current system ability to process the Terror cases: Per my own experience and open documents available, most of the players in a current court room setting are often unable to absorb the density of the confrontation. The Jury, made of ordinary citizens, generally do not comprehend the ideology of the Jihadists, hence can't make a strategically educated decision, not on the sentencing process but on the essence of the war crime at hand. US Judges are highly capable of controlling the procedure in their court rooms but haven't been enabled by the system to try a war with Jihadi terror, if not specialized in Salafism, Khumeinism and other movement's strategies, thinking process or even tactics. Prosecutors as well are thrown into battles of ideas beyond their basic training. In the Moussaoui case, the jury asked for a dictionary, refused by the judge. The question deserves an answer.
5. As for the defense lawyers, and I was one in the past, in the absence of specialized courts, they would twist history and geopolitics to achieve a legitimate goal: win their case. But instead of focusing on proving the innocence of their clients and distancing him/her from the enemy, they tend to defend the ideology of their client, putting themselves in the wrong side of the war their nation is victim of.
These above five facts and many more to develop in the future constitute the basis of US failure in the courts processing of Jihadism-related Terror cases. What is needed for future successes is the following:
a. That Congress identifies the ideologies of the Terrorists. In the heels of many congressional hearings which already produced significant bipartisan consensus, as well as in several speeches by the President since last September, the country not so far from identifying the missing link. Simply speaking: educate the jury, the judges, the prosecutors and the defense attorneys, as to who is the enemy and what is its ideology. The rest should flow as American justice at its best, impartial and fair.
b. As in France and Spain, train Counter-Terrorism Judges. From Paris to Madrid, these bright specialized men and women have all the tools they need to decide on procedures deemed appropriate to prosecute and ultimately try the Terrorists at war with democracies. A similar training could provide the Justice Department with Counter Terrorism Prosecutors. In a sum, all players in the court room must at some point be acquainted with what they will have to reflect on, in Terrorism cases.
The debate on the Moussaoui case won't stop nationwide and beyond in view of the progressive realization by most Americans and many citizens of other democracies that this case will be a benchmark in the history of the judicial front with Terror. Therefore, it is important to avoid Byzantine debates and reserve the energies to the center of the crisis not its peripheries. Consider for example how the martyrdom affair plays in the Salafist chat rooms: These Kuffars (infidels) are easy to dupe, said a cadre in the al-Ansar Paltalk room few months ago. All you have to do is to play their akhlaq (ethics) or lead them to believe that we are busata (simple minded).
That's what Zacarias was able to achieve, alone against the whole American political culture: First, he dramatized his personal life to the extreme, leading some to believe that his past was the root cause for his violent choices. While in fact the ideology that recruited him was responsible for the Jihad he chose to practice. Second, he dramatized his stance to the limits by threatening to throw himself into the death row and force the jury to retreat into psychological guilt. Indeed, one al Qaida man, initial member of the 9/11 Ghazwa (terror-raid) single handedly outmaneuvered the jury, the court and potentially the public. By transforming the judicial challenge into a debate about death penalty and all the American psychological consequences that follows, Zacharias Moussaoui deflected the attention from the real mammoth in the courtroom: The ideology of Salafi Jihadism. Instead of trying the criminal ideology he acted on behalf, America fell into the trap of struggling with itself as a merciful or revengeful society.
Moussaoui feels he won all the way, even if he got life in prison. He played the martyrdom card till his audience nauseated. He then played his personal life card till he obtained the mitigating factor. He played it tight, close, and smartly. His colleagues brought down towers five years ago, but Moussaoui administered another type of strikes against his foes: Defeating them through their own system.
What the court room in Virginia missed in its trial of the decade was the factory that produced Moussaoui's mind. A life sentence is not necessarily a bad choice in democracies, or the wrong message to send when needed, if the nation the jury came from is enabled to cast a death sentence on the ideologies of hatred.
**Dr Walid Phares is a Senior Fellow with the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies in Washington and a Professor of Comparative Politics. He is the author of Future Jihad. Dr Phares practiced as a defense lawyer in the 1980s and served as an Islamic Fundamentalism Expert in terrorism cases in the US and Europe after 2001.

Lebanese-American delegation in Beirut criticizes U.S. interference in Lebanon's affairs
Thursday, May 04, 2006 - 03:30 PM [Kods Time]
Lebanese Prime Minister Foaud Saniora met with the heads of Lebanese- American communities in Michigan at the Grand Serail during which he informed them of the political situation and of the economic plans.
The delegation met several Lebanese showing their support to the resistance and expressed the community's relief following the understanding document that was forged between Hezbollah and the Free Patriotic movement. The delegation told the US ambassador to Lebanon Jeffrey Feltman of their opposition to the US intervention in Lebanon's affairs.
Americans of Lebanese origin came all the way from the United States to Lebanon to express their dissatisfaction with Washington's policy. The Lebanese-American institutions in Michigan one of the biggest gathering of Lebanese and Arabs in the United States oppose the US policy, saying it not just harmful to Americans of Lebanese origin but to US citizens as well. The delegation met President Emile Lahoud, parliament speaker Nabih Berri and Labor minister Trad Hmade, during which they defended the Lebanese resistance and its weapons.
OSAMA SIBLANI, Lebanese-American Community said "We are with the Lebanese resistance. Its' weapons is for the sake of liberating the Lebanese land and defending Lebanon. The United States as a sole superpower should not put its heavyweight behind a certain side against the other."
ABED HAMMOUD, Lebanese-American Community said "We stand with the resistance, the side that protects Lebanon because we come from here, and we know what the Israeli attacks are. I was not born in America, I lived here under the Israeli shelling and I told that to the US ambassador. I told him you don't need to explain to me and reassure me because you cannot do that."
The delegation was not just supportive of the resistance but also of the understanding document forged between Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah and head of the Free Patriotic movement MP Michel Aoun. Besides labaling this document as a launchpad for a nationwide dialogue, they say it left the Lebanese-American community at great ease.
OSAMA SIBLANI added "Lebanon was going through a crisis. It was aggravating, and it could have taken the country into a civil war if it weren't for the awareness of the officials mainly his eminence Sayed Hasan Nasrallah and General Michel Aoun. Their meeting on February 6th which produced the understanding document cast a sense of great relief among the Lebanese immigrants."
ABED HAMMOUD also said "Of course we went through the Understanding document and we told its opponents if you want dialogue then why were you bothered from this document. They said it is about Hezbollah and being put on the terrorist list. Just like Mr. Osama said: your viewpoint of Hezbollah differs from ours."
The visit comes as the US warned its citizens from traveling to Lebanon for security reasons. But the delegation had informed the US state department of their visit and told the officials there and the US ambassador to Lebanon Jeffrey Feltman of their position from the US policy.