By Canadian Coalition for Democracies

Ottawa, Canada - Yesterday’s assassination of Lebanese Industry Minister Pierre Gemayel is another example of foreign state terror being used to destabilize Lebanon. Canada must not stand by and allow these vicious criminal actions to succeed.

“Prime Minister Harper understands the importance of democracy to the people of Lebanon,” said Francois Hachem, director of the Canadian Coalition for Democracies (CCD). “Today, we are calling on the Prime Minister to take strong action against Hezbollah and Palestinian terrorists within Lebanon as well as their sponsors in Syria and Iran. We must defeat those who use violence and murder, especially against the Christian minority, with the goal of making Lebanon yet another stage for global Islamist terror that threatens all nations including Canada.”

(more…)

By Andrew L. Jaffee

Just two weeks ago, “Syria and the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah … rejected US accusations that they are seeking to topple the Lebanese government with Iran’s help.” Hmmm… If that is so, then why have “All five Shia Muslim pro-Syrian ministers in the Lebanese government” just resigned? Here’s more, and check out the Hezbollah sophistry:

(more…)

By Andrew L. Jaffee

Lebanon’s prime minister Fouad Siniora and speaker of the parliament Nabih Berri have given mixed signals on Israel and Hezbollah. Berri said today that Hezbollah terrorists would remain armed, while Siniora last week spoke of disarming them. But both reiterated the hate-filled slogan, that Lebanon would be “the last of the last Arab nations to sign a peace treaty with Israel.” How nice — I mean, vile. So what is Lebanon’s position? From UK’s Guardian:

(more…)

By Andrew L. Jaffee

Is the universe now officially in balance? Amnesty International has come around to calling Hezbollah’s firing of thousands of missiles at Israeli civilian targets a war crime. Amnesty had previously accused Israel of the same — for trying to stop Hezbollah from unleashing its hell-fire. But Hezbollah remains viciously unrepentant, with its leader promising to never disarm. From the AP:

(more…)

by Asaf Romirowsky
FrontPageMagazine.com*
September 21, 2006
http://www.meforum.org/article/1024
* Cross-posted with permission

In a barefaced statement UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan expressed his dismay at Israel’s actions against Hezbollah that resulted in the accidental death of UN peacekeepers saying, “I am shocked and deeply distressed by the apparently deliberate targeting by Israeli Defense Forces of a UN Observer post in southern Lebanon.” This is merely one of the latest and most egregious examples of Anna’s and the UN’s massive and continuing bias against Israel. On paper the UN should be the one impartial force defending all democratic nations however, in practice it doesn’t even come close.

(more…)

by J. Peter Pham, Ph.D., THINK-ISRAEL

In his weekly radio address on Saturday, President George W. Bush thrice described Lebanon’s government as “democratic” and pledged that “we will stand with the democratic government in its efforts to rid the country of terrorists and foreign influence and bring about a better life for the Lebanese people.” Likewise the same day, en route to Jerusalem from Beirut, Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice spoke glowingly about “the democratic government of Lebanon.” The administration’s characterization of the Lebanese polity is, of course, technically correct insofar as the members of the government are, however indirectly, subject to electoral scrutiny.

(more…)

by Steven Plaut, THINK-ISRAEL

February 5, 2004: Before the withdrawal from Lebanon, the Intelligence Directorate also threatened us with Katyushas reaching Hadera and we see what actually happened. I estimate, and my estimate is just as valid as those that threaten us with horrors, that after we leave the Gaza Strip, terrorism will decrease, not increase. (Former Mossad Head, Labor MK Dani Yatom)

June 20, 2006: When asked about the nonstop barrage of Kassam rockets hitting Sderot every day, turning Sderot into the Negev’s Stalingrad, emptying it of its low-income population who flee as refugees, Shimon Peres replied: “Kassams? Shmassams!!” (Maariv headline)

July 12, 2006: Today’s murders and kidnappings of Israeli soldiers are a direct result of Ehud Barak’s cowardly abandonment of Israeli positions in southern Lebanon. But, even more so, they are the direct result of arguably the stupidest state decision Israel ever made, the decision two and a half years ago to release hundreds of terrorists and murderers in exchange for a single common criminal and bodies of three murdered soldiers, while never avenging the murders of those three soldiers (one of them a Bedouin by the way). (Steven Plaut)

(more…)

By Andrew L. Jaffee

While the mainstream media worries about Muslims being “beseiged,” it seems that Jews are the ones most in danger. This is a surprise? From the Sunday Times:

BRITISH Jews are facing a wave of anti-Semitic attacks prompted by Israel’s conflict with Hezbollah in Lebanon. Synagogues have been daubed with graffiti, Jewish leaders have had hate-mail and ordinary people have been subjected to insults and vandalism.

On Thursday an all-party parliamentary inquiry will state that anti-Semitic violence has become endemic in Britain, both on the streets and university campuses. The report will call for urgent action from the Government, the police and educational establishments.

Mark Gardner, of the Community Security Trust, said: “In July, when the conflict in Lebanon began, we received reports of 92 incidents, which was the third-worst month since records began in 1984.” In 2000 the monthly average was between 10 and 30 incidents.

The former minister Denis MacShane, who chaired the parliamentary inquiry, said: “These figures confirm the evidence given to us that anti-Semitic attacks are a very real problem.”

The Board of Deputies of British Jews submitted evidence to the inquiry that anti-Semitism in Britain was at its worst level.

The July incidents “were more dispersed than usual”, Mr Gardner said. “It is usually a small number responsible for a large number of attacks, but these were very widespread across the country and included graffiti attacks on synagogues in Edinburgh and Glasgow.”

The attackers, when visible, are from across society, he said. “When it’s verbal abuse, it’s just ordinary people in the street, from middle-class women to working-class men. All colours and backgrounds. We hardly ever see incidents involving the classic neo-Nazi skinhead. Muslims are over-represented.”

While the Times tries to spin this wave of hate (”prompted by Israel’s conflict with Hezbollah in Lebanon”), the facts are undeniable (”Muslims are over-represented.”).

(more…)

by Fern Sidman

In the aftermath of Israel’s worst military defeat since the beginning of the creation of the modern Jewish state, we stand humiliated and denigrated in the eyes of the world. On the home front, their are calls for commissions of inquiry into the mismanagement of the war.

The media, reservists, the left wing and right wing are demanding the resignation of the Olmert government. The defense ministry is under attack as is the foreign ministry.

There is no question that Israel gained nothing and lost much in this recent military conflict in Lebanon. Hezbollah and its Syrian and Iranian sponsors are basking in glory as is the entire Arab world. As they celebrate their victory and the defeat of the “invincible” Israeli army, the global criticism and condemnations of Israel’s actions in Lebanon keep mounting at a furious pace.

(more…)

By Andrew L. Jaffee

A headline on the BBC today: “Nasrallah sorry for scale of war.” Do readers really believe this stuff? If Nasrallah had any interest whatsoever in protecting Lebanese lives, he would have turned over the captured Israeli soldiers on the first day of the conflict. Shooting badly-aimed missiles at Israeli civilian targets did nothing to protect Lebanon or even Hezbollah fighters. Yet Nasrallah gets front-page treatment for lying:

“We did not think that there was a 1% chance that the kidnapping would lead to a war of this scale and magnitude,” Sheikh Nasrallah said.

“Now you ask me if this was 11 July and there was a 1% chance that the kidnapping would lead to a war like the one that has taken place, would you go ahead with the kidnapping?

“I would say no, definitely not, for humanitarian, moral, social, security, military and political reasons.

“Neither I, Hezbollah, prisoners in Israeli jails and nor the families of the prisoners would accept it.”

By Andrew L. Jaffee

Thank you Italy for pledging 3,000 troops to police Lebanon, and thank you Silvio Berlusconi for telling like it is regarding the proposed UN peacekeeping force:

What exactly they have to do must be clear: they must disarm Hezbollah. I don’t believe that without the disarming of the Hezbollah militias we can solve anything.

Hey, he’s not prime minister anymore, but Berlusconi still leads the Casa delle Libertà party.

(more…)

By Andrew L. Jaffee

I’d thought I’d heard it all before, but France’s President Jacques Chirac said today that “the deployment of 15,000 peacekeepers there [in Lebanon] would be excessive.” Anything to keep France from doing what it should do, not what it says it should do. More French hypocrisy. Here’s my translation of Chirac’s words, from the French language (mais naturellement!): “We don’t enforce resolutions; we just write them.”

France co-authored UN Resolution 1559, which “Call[ed] for the disbanding and disarmament of all Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias.” It also sponsored Resolution 1701, which calls for the “removal from southern Lebanon of Hezbollah as an armed force.” France initially offered 200 troops for a peacekeeping mission in Lebanon.

15,000 troops is excessive? Lebanon is a Wild West ruled by Hezbollah terrorists who respect nothing but the language of the gun.

So… call for disarming Hezbollah, condemn Israel for trying to disarm Hezbollah, but when push comes to shove, let Israel disarm Hezbollah. Make sense? But Chirac also called for the rearming of Hezbollah:

Chirac also criticised Israel’s continued blockade of Lebanon, saying it was “extremely prejudicial to the economy and life in Lebanon. And, in my view, quite unjustified.”

French life is sacred, but to hell with those pesky Jews.

(more…)

By Andrew L. Jaffee

Amnesty International is busy distributing a new report accusing Israel of “war crimes” — now featured on its website. But as to Hezbollah’s intentional targeting of Israeli civilians, hiding behind human shields, killing Arab children, hiding weapons in mosques, commitment to the destruction of Israel, and strong ties to Syria and Iran — well, they’ll get to that later:

The human rights organisation said it would look into Hezbollah’s attacks on Israel separately.

I’ll believe it when I see it.

By Andrew L. Jaffee

Was today’s decision by France to increase its contribution of peacekeepers to Lebanon due to clarified rules of engagement, or because the French can’t stand the thought that Italy had offered to lead the force? From Radio Free Europe:

But according to the basic details in an alleged UN draft document published today by the French newspaper “Le Monde,” the strengthened UN peacekeeping force in Lebanon will have the authority to shoot to defend themselves, to protect civilians, or to disarm Hizballah guerrillas in their way. …

Perhaps not coincidentally, just a few hours after “Le Monde” published its report on the draft, French officials said President Jacques Chirac would make an announcement at 8 p.m. today stating that Paris could send hundreds more peacekeepers — up to 2,000, in fact.

Originally, France had been expected to lead the new peacekeeping force, only later to spurn the idea.

[Italian defense analyst] Gasparini says France’s latest about-face is hardly coincidental. “France played the card of not giving troops in order to gain a stronger mandate and stronger rules of engagement,” he says. “It looks like they succeeded. Now that they got the outcome that they wanted, they are more willing to relinquish more troops, also because this has convinced the military of it, and they were a bit skeptical at the beginning.” …

If France does return to seek to lead the peacekeeping force, where would that leave Italy’s leadership offer?

A report in the Rome daily “La Repubblica” today says France has offered a dual command with Rome. France would continue to command the force on the ground in Lebanon through General Pellegrini, while Italy would take control of the UN Office of Peacekeeping Operations.

That means France would have operational command on the ground, with Italy given political control at the UN in New York.

(more…)

By Andrew L. Jaffee

Just last week, Syrian President Assad was talking of a “peace settlement in the Middle East.” Today, he showed his full (poker) hand, which divulged his true intentions. Assad has no desire to cut off arms shipments to Hezbollah. From the BBC:

In a meeting with the UN’s Mr Roed-Larsen on Tuesday, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said the stationing of UN troops along Lebanon’s border with Syria to stop the smuggling of arms to Hezbollah would allow it to lift the blockade.

But Syrian President Bashar al-Assad immediately rejected the idea, saying it would be interpreted as a “hostile act”.

So Assad is defying U.N. Resolution 1701, which welcomes:

the efforts of the Lebanese prime minister and the commitment of the government of Lebanon, in its seven-point plan, to extend its authority over its territory, through its own legitimate armed forces, such that there will be no weapons without the consent of the government of Lebanon and no authority other than that of the government of Lebanon, welcoming also its commitment to a UN force that is supplemented and enhanced in numbers, equipment, mandate and scope of operation, and bearing in mind its request in this plan for an immediate withdrawal of the Israeli forces from southern Lebanon…

So who now is the “obstacle” to peace? Will Italy et al — those contributing troops to a UN peacekeeping force — acquiesce to the Syrian border being off-limits?

(more…)