Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Hizbollah Warns Against Withdrawal of Syrian Troops From Lebanon
As the the presidents of Syria and Lebanon meet to approve a withdrawal of Syrian troops from Lebanon, Hizbollah calls for mass protests and warns of mayhem if Syrian troops leave. We speak with Lebanese activist Afami Kaddour about the current situation in Lebanon.
The presidents of Syria and Lebanon are meeting today to give formal approval to a two-phase pullback of Syrian troops stationed on Lebanese territory.
The pullback was announced on Saturday by Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad after weeks of international pressure and demonstrations in Lebanon.
The first phase is expected to begin after the meeting, with troops moving east into the Bekaa Valley. Up to 5,000 of Syria's 14,000 troops in Lebanon are deployed outside the Bekaa.
The U.S. has demanded that all the troops leave Lebanon by May, in time for elections. But Lebanon's most powerful and only armed party - Hizbollah - called for peaceful protests on Tuesday in support of Syria and warned of mayhem if Syrian troops were to leave.
Hizbollah leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah told a news conference Sunday -- "The aim of America and Israel is to spread chaos in Lebanon and -- to find excuses for foreign intervention."
LISTEN ONLINE
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/03/07/1449238
AMY GOODMAN: Joining us in our studio today is filmmaker, Afamia Kaddour. She made the film Leaded, Unleaded about a May 2004 military assault on a poor slum area around Beirut. We welcome you to Democracy Now!
AFAMIA KADDOUR: Thank you.
AMY GOODMAN: Can you describe the situation right now in Beirut and after the killing of the former prime minister?
AFAMIA KADDOUR: Well, it's kind of very messy the situation, because people are mobilized in the streets. People are very anxious about what's going to happen next after the assassination and, you know, people -- there are all these propaganda that the Lebanese want the Syrians out of Lebanon at this point, and we witnessed this sort of bourgeois revolution last week that -- and people believe, truly, the people who went to the streets, they genuinely believe that they are letting the Syrians out. But I think the situation is more complex than that, because there are foreign interests in the country who are -- who want to replace the Syrian presence, and their interference in the internal politics with either French or American interference. This very dangerous.
AMY GOODMAN: Can you explain what you mean? What are the sides in Lebanon right now? For and against Syria being there? Is that the way it breaks down?
AFAMIA KADDOUR: Actually, I would say that all Lebanese people want the Syrians outside the country.
AMY GOODMAN: They want them out.
AFAMIA KADDOUR: Yes. They want them out. But the difference in how things are getting revealed now to the international press is that people who don't -- who are allying with Syria at this point, they are aware that if the Syrians pull out now and under the terms of the Americans and the French and, of course, the Israelis, this means that Syria will become isolated. This means that Hizbollah, the only force that defeated the Israelis in Lebanon, will be disarmed, and this means that the sectarian system in Lebanon will be kept. This is not a fight to change the political system in Lebanon. So this in no means reflects the wills of the Lebanese people. And so, yeah, I would say the Syrians have a violent history in Lebanon. Everybody, I would say, every person in the country suffered from their presence and their interference, but what is happening is that we are treating Syria as if it is one body, as if it is -- we treat the people and the state the same way. There are Syrian workers that, you know, they are very poor workers who work in very poor conditions in the country. Eleven of them got killed after the assassination of Hariri, and nobody mentioned this. There is an upsurge of fascism and racism against those people, and I think this ought to be known. I would say also that the Syrians want the troops out, because they don't want to interfere in this way in the politics. But the positive thing about, not their presence in the country, but about their alliance with the Lebanese is that they were supporting Hizbollah, and what's more important, actually, is that they are facing Israel. They hindered for a long time the signing of a peace treaty, according to the terms of the Israelis and the Americans. This is what's more important.
AMY GOODMAN: How is Hizbollah seen in Lebanon?
AFAMIA KADDOUR: Hizbollah is a very well organized political party. It's very well respected, because it has no corruption, but at the same time it is a totalitarian political party. There's no white or black. There is no evil political party and a good political party. They have done a great job by defending the borders of Lebanon by defeating the Israelis and all of the Lebanese people, they thank them for this, they were the only power. Even our army did not interfere in all the attacks of the Israelis against Lebanon. It was always Hizbollah who was trying to defend the country.
AMY GOODMAN: Of course, Israel calls it a terrorist organization.
AFAMIA KADDOUR: Of course, but this is -- it's a guerrilla organization. It's not a state organization. And there is a difference between terrorism of a state and terrorism of people. I would call the Israeli state or the International Defense Forces of Israel as a terrorist organization.
AMY GOODMAN: Will Hizbollah lose its power if Syrian troops pull out?
AFAMIA KADDOUR: It's very hard to tell, because I think Hizbollah have the power to mobilize many people in the country, especially now. Because before the assassination of Hariri, the talk about the withdrawal of the Syrians was people were more for this, because it didn't have all of these implications about the foreign interference and the replacement of their presence with other international forces. But I think at this point many people are reconsidering their positions, and yeah, I don't know. I would be very hesitant to say that I know what will happen if the Syrian troops got out, but I think Hizbollah would resist very much, and I think they will get the support of many people inside Lebanon, even the secular people.
AMY GOODMAN: Afamia Kaddour, I want to thank you very much for being with us. Lebanese filmmaker, who did the film Leaded, Unleaded.
LISTEN ONLINE
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/03/07/1449238
The pullback was announced on Saturday by Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad after weeks of international pressure and demonstrations in Lebanon.
The first phase is expected to begin after the meeting, with troops moving east into the Bekaa Valley. Up to 5,000 of Syria's 14,000 troops in Lebanon are deployed outside the Bekaa.
The U.S. has demanded that all the troops leave Lebanon by May, in time for elections. But Lebanon's most powerful and only armed party - Hizbollah - called for peaceful protests on Tuesday in support of Syria and warned of mayhem if Syrian troops were to leave.
Hizbollah leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah told a news conference Sunday -- "The aim of America and Israel is to spread chaos in Lebanon and -- to find excuses for foreign intervention."
LISTEN ONLINE
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/03/07/1449238
AMY GOODMAN: Joining us in our studio today is filmmaker, Afamia Kaddour. She made the film Leaded, Unleaded about a May 2004 military assault on a poor slum area around Beirut. We welcome you to Democracy Now!
AFAMIA KADDOUR: Thank you.
AMY GOODMAN: Can you describe the situation right now in Beirut and after the killing of the former prime minister?
AFAMIA KADDOUR: Well, it's kind of very messy the situation, because people are mobilized in the streets. People are very anxious about what's going to happen next after the assassination and, you know, people -- there are all these propaganda that the Lebanese want the Syrians out of Lebanon at this point, and we witnessed this sort of bourgeois revolution last week that -- and people believe, truly, the people who went to the streets, they genuinely believe that they are letting the Syrians out. But I think the situation is more complex than that, because there are foreign interests in the country who are -- who want to replace the Syrian presence, and their interference in the internal politics with either French or American interference. This very dangerous.
AMY GOODMAN: Can you explain what you mean? What are the sides in Lebanon right now? For and against Syria being there? Is that the way it breaks down?
AFAMIA KADDOUR: Actually, I would say that all Lebanese people want the Syrians outside the country.
AMY GOODMAN: They want them out.
AFAMIA KADDOUR: Yes. They want them out. But the difference in how things are getting revealed now to the international press is that people who don't -- who are allying with Syria at this point, they are aware that if the Syrians pull out now and under the terms of the Americans and the French and, of course, the Israelis, this means that Syria will become isolated. This means that Hizbollah, the only force that defeated the Israelis in Lebanon, will be disarmed, and this means that the sectarian system in Lebanon will be kept. This is not a fight to change the political system in Lebanon. So this in no means reflects the wills of the Lebanese people. And so, yeah, I would say the Syrians have a violent history in Lebanon. Everybody, I would say, every person in the country suffered from their presence and their interference, but what is happening is that we are treating Syria as if it is one body, as if it is -- we treat the people and the state the same way. There are Syrian workers that, you know, they are very poor workers who work in very poor conditions in the country. Eleven of them got killed after the assassination of Hariri, and nobody mentioned this. There is an upsurge of fascism and racism against those people, and I think this ought to be known. I would say also that the Syrians want the troops out, because they don't want to interfere in this way in the politics. But the positive thing about, not their presence in the country, but about their alliance with the Lebanese is that they were supporting Hizbollah, and what's more important, actually, is that they are facing Israel. They hindered for a long time the signing of a peace treaty, according to the terms of the Israelis and the Americans. This is what's more important.
AMY GOODMAN: How is Hizbollah seen in Lebanon?
AFAMIA KADDOUR: Hizbollah is a very well organized political party. It's very well respected, because it has no corruption, but at the same time it is a totalitarian political party. There's no white or black. There is no evil political party and a good political party. They have done a great job by defending the borders of Lebanon by defeating the Israelis and all of the Lebanese people, they thank them for this, they were the only power. Even our army did not interfere in all the attacks of the Israelis against Lebanon. It was always Hizbollah who was trying to defend the country.
AMY GOODMAN: Of course, Israel calls it a terrorist organization.
AFAMIA KADDOUR: Of course, but this is -- it's a guerrilla organization. It's not a state organization. And there is a difference between terrorism of a state and terrorism of people. I would call the Israeli state or the International Defense Forces of Israel as a terrorist organization.
AMY GOODMAN: Will Hizbollah lose its power if Syrian troops pull out?
AFAMIA KADDOUR: It's very hard to tell, because I think Hizbollah have the power to mobilize many people in the country, especially now. Because before the assassination of Hariri, the talk about the withdrawal of the Syrians was people were more for this, because it didn't have all of these implications about the foreign interference and the replacement of their presence with other international forces. But I think at this point many people are reconsidering their positions, and yeah, I don't know. I would be very hesitant to say that I know what will happen if the Syrian troops got out, but I think Hizbollah would resist very much, and I think they will get the support of many people inside Lebanon, even the secular people.
AMY GOODMAN: Afamia Kaddour, I want to thank you very much for being with us. Lebanese filmmaker, who did the film Leaded, Unleaded.
LISTEN ONLINE
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/03/07/1449238
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
Abiotic oil theory contributes to statist & imperialist US consumption by luna moth
Written in response to abiotic oil theorists who claim peak oil is a Zionist conspiracy designed to suppress nationalist socialist desire 4 equal oil for everyone. Recognizes Israel's role as US colonial nuclear/military outpost in securing easily accessible Saudi/Iraqi petroleum reserves, benefitting corporate oil barons Bush/Cheney..
Petroleum consumption
Statist socialist vs. corporate capitalist
Nobody wins, the Earth loses
The debate over biotic vs. abiotic petroleum production leaves out the fact that petroleum dependence is bad for human health and the environment, regardless of who holds the reigns. The worker statists put forth their claim that petroleum rations should be available to all the people, regardless of income. While this may sound nice in, "we're all happy and equal", we can all be happy and breathing equal state rations of smog and now we can only blame our statist selves, not the wealthy CEOs of Ford/GM/daimler-Chrysler who stubbornly persist on marketing gas guzzling SUVs to US consumers..
Even China, the long standing bastion of Communism has reverted to state owned corporate consumerism by outlawing bicycles and promoting driving as economic improvement. That and flooding thousands of people with the industrialist megalomaniac dam on the Yangtze river show China's role in WTO neoliberalism is a slave workhorse for corporate industry..
Syria and Iran are now the top two contenders for the next US military invasion because these two sovereign nations neighbor Iraq and Saudi Arabia location of the most concentrated and easily accesible oil. Marxist intellect and statist solutions apply concepts of fair use to something we need to really give a rest; petroleum consumption..
Abiotic theory applies a questionable scientific theory to a political debate. The wishfullness of unlimited petroleum reserve sounds great to a US consumer ready to purchase that nice shiny SUV. "Peak oil, Bwahahahaha, that's a conspiracy theory coming from the environmentalist nutcases. Abiotic oil ensures your new SUV will never run out of gas." Smiling statist socialist chimes in, "Just make sure u share your unlimeted abiotic oil with everyone equally.". Corporate developer yells out, "OK comrades, we need to equally and fairly cut down all those trees for the new SUV dealership that will ensure same sized vehicles available to everyone at the same state regulated price."
Wendy Campbell believes peak oil theory is the brainchild of Israeli Zionists who are encouraging a boycott of Arab/Muslim oil. While US military support 4 Zionist Israel is a thorn in the side of US/Arab relations, would it be worthwhile 4 US military interests to give up Israel as a colonial state outpost in possession of nuclear weaponry?
Israel may be the only leverage the US has against Arab nationalist control of petroleum supplies (Nor does this justify genocide and massacre of indigenous Palestinians by Israel, this is an unwanted byproduct of US corporate petroleum's demand for lower export price. Columbus and his imperialist Spanish gold diggers probably would have avoided the massacre of indigenous people in Haiti also. They stood in the way of imperialism and were murdered because of the Spanish Empire's desire for gold.) Once again working class Jews and Palestinians are sacraficial puppets of the religious Bush/Sharon leadership, Zionism vs. Islam, capitalism vs. nationalist state socialism, etc..
Wendy's concept leaves out the fact that the Saudi Royalty and the Bush family oil dynasty can trace their mutual business partnership back to the onset of WW2. US oil consumption benefits the Saudi royalty and the Bush/Cheney cabal, encouraging the presence of US troops in Saudi Arabia to protect the Saudi Royalty from a worker revolt. Saddam's nationalist socialism showed how duplicitous behavior of CIA/Rumsfeld covert ops could result in massacre of the Kurds and indigenous Shia "marsh" Arabs in the delta of the Tigris/Euphrates..
(SHH! Don't talk about Kurdish genocide yet because Saddam is still our ally. We only bring genocide up when we're good and ready to invade Iraq and secure their oil with Halliburton!)
During the early years Saddam's regime was being supplied with US made weapons to fight the Ayatollah Khomeini in Iran, public enemy # 1 during the Carter/Reagan admin..
National socialism under Nazi Hitler didn't appear very different to state socialism under Stalin to the millions of people murdered in the labor to death camps that supported industrial militarism in both Germany and Russia. Even though the Nazi party recieved campaign contributions from industrial elite like Rockefeller, Prescott Bush, Ford, etc., the genocide under Stalin showed responding to a dictator like Hitler with an equally brutal dictator like Stalin only kills working people on both sides of the nationalist fence..
Would advise people not to become stuck in the oil dependency quagmire and end up like the mastadon elephants discovered in the La Brea tarpits of LA. Abiotic oil theorists would love to use La Brea as ammo in their debate,
"Look what will happen if u don't drill 4 all that buried abiotic oil, one day it'll just come to the surface and drown you like the mastadons."
Abiotic petroleum formation at the current rate of consumption would most likely have drowned the dinosaurs long before the mammals could even breath. Most bodies of agua would be layered thick with abiotic petroleum rising from below ground. Either way the amount of oil that could be produced abiotically would never match consumption to save us from economic collapse predicted by peak oil theory..
The increase of biomass and river sedimentation, marsh and wetland decomposition of biomass during warmer climates all contribute to the current biotic petroleum reserves of today. Dams on rivers slow oil formation in the future, so even the nationalized becoming privatized (by Vincentes Fox) Pemex is at future loss because of the dams on Rio Colorado and lack of delta sedimentation in the Baja Sea.
In that sense biotic petroleum formation could be viewed as renewable, we just need to give it time and lower our current rate of consumption..
See also:
http://www.culturechange.org/
http://www.greenanarchy.org/
Written in response to abiotic oil theorists who claim peak oil is a Zionist conspiracy designed to suppress nationalist socialist desire 4 equal oil for everyone. Recognizes Israel's role as US colonial nuclear/military outpost in securing easily accessible Saudi/Iraqi petroleum reserves, benefitting corporate oil barons Bush/Cheney..
Petroleum consumption
Statist socialist vs. corporate capitalist
Nobody wins, the Earth loses
The debate over biotic vs. abiotic petroleum production leaves out the fact that petroleum dependence is bad for human health and the environment, regardless of who holds the reigns. The worker statists put forth their claim that petroleum rations should be available to all the people, regardless of income. While this may sound nice in, "we're all happy and equal", we can all be happy and breathing equal state rations of smog and now we can only blame our statist selves, not the wealthy CEOs of Ford/GM/daimler-Chrysler who stubbornly persist on marketing gas guzzling SUVs to US consumers..
Even China, the long standing bastion of Communism has reverted to state owned corporate consumerism by outlawing bicycles and promoting driving as economic improvement. That and flooding thousands of people with the industrialist megalomaniac dam on the Yangtze river show China's role in WTO neoliberalism is a slave workhorse for corporate industry..
Syria and Iran are now the top two contenders for the next US military invasion because these two sovereign nations neighbor Iraq and Saudi Arabia location of the most concentrated and easily accesible oil. Marxist intellect and statist solutions apply concepts of fair use to something we need to really give a rest; petroleum consumption..
Abiotic theory applies a questionable scientific theory to a political debate. The wishfullness of unlimited petroleum reserve sounds great to a US consumer ready to purchase that nice shiny SUV. "Peak oil, Bwahahahaha, that's a conspiracy theory coming from the environmentalist nutcases. Abiotic oil ensures your new SUV will never run out of gas." Smiling statist socialist chimes in, "Just make sure u share your unlimeted abiotic oil with everyone equally.". Corporate developer yells out, "OK comrades, we need to equally and fairly cut down all those trees for the new SUV dealership that will ensure same sized vehicles available to everyone at the same state regulated price."
Wendy Campbell believes peak oil theory is the brainchild of Israeli Zionists who are encouraging a boycott of Arab/Muslim oil. While US military support 4 Zionist Israel is a thorn in the side of US/Arab relations, would it be worthwhile 4 US military interests to give up Israel as a colonial state outpost in possession of nuclear weaponry?
Israel may be the only leverage the US has against Arab nationalist control of petroleum supplies (Nor does this justify genocide and massacre of indigenous Palestinians by Israel, this is an unwanted byproduct of US corporate petroleum's demand for lower export price. Columbus and his imperialist Spanish gold diggers probably would have avoided the massacre of indigenous people in Haiti also. They stood in the way of imperialism and were murdered because of the Spanish Empire's desire for gold.) Once again working class Jews and Palestinians are sacraficial puppets of the religious Bush/Sharon leadership, Zionism vs. Islam, capitalism vs. nationalist state socialism, etc..
Wendy's concept leaves out the fact that the Saudi Royalty and the Bush family oil dynasty can trace their mutual business partnership back to the onset of WW2. US oil consumption benefits the Saudi royalty and the Bush/Cheney cabal, encouraging the presence of US troops in Saudi Arabia to protect the Saudi Royalty from a worker revolt. Saddam's nationalist socialism showed how duplicitous behavior of CIA/Rumsfeld covert ops could result in massacre of the Kurds and indigenous Shia "marsh" Arabs in the delta of the Tigris/Euphrates..
(SHH! Don't talk about Kurdish genocide yet because Saddam is still our ally. We only bring genocide up when we're good and ready to invade Iraq and secure their oil with Halliburton!)
During the early years Saddam's regime was being supplied with US made weapons to fight the Ayatollah Khomeini in Iran, public enemy # 1 during the Carter/Reagan admin..
National socialism under Nazi Hitler didn't appear very different to state socialism under Stalin to the millions of people murdered in the labor to death camps that supported industrial militarism in both Germany and Russia. Even though the Nazi party recieved campaign contributions from industrial elite like Rockefeller, Prescott Bush, Ford, etc., the genocide under Stalin showed responding to a dictator like Hitler with an equally brutal dictator like Stalin only kills working people on both sides of the nationalist fence..
Would advise people not to become stuck in the oil dependency quagmire and end up like the mastadon elephants discovered in the La Brea tarpits of LA. Abiotic oil theorists would love to use La Brea as ammo in their debate,
"Look what will happen if u don't drill 4 all that buried abiotic oil, one day it'll just come to the surface and drown you like the mastadons."
Abiotic petroleum formation at the current rate of consumption would most likely have drowned the dinosaurs long before the mammals could even breath. Most bodies of agua would be layered thick with abiotic petroleum rising from below ground. Either way the amount of oil that could be produced abiotically would never match consumption to save us from economic collapse predicted by peak oil theory..
The increase of biomass and river sedimentation, marsh and wetland decomposition of biomass during warmer climates all contribute to the current biotic petroleum reserves of today. Dams on rivers slow oil formation in the future, so even the nationalized becoming privatized (by Vincentes Fox) Pemex is at future loss because of the dams on Rio Colorado and lack of delta sedimentation in the Baja Sea.
In that sense biotic petroleum formation could be viewed as renewable, we just need to give it time and lower our current rate of consumption..
See also:
http://www.culturechange.org/
http://www.greenanarchy.org/
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$110.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network