NationStates Jolt Archive

Here's something else you won't see much in the news. Apparently, there are ongoing, very massive pro democracy demonstrations in Lebanon. Here's a photo I just got from a friend who was there:

http://ParadigmAssociates.org/DemostrationsLebanon.jpg

lets hope they get it

lets hope they get it
Agreed, although I do like Syria (but I don't like their Lebanese occupation).

Agreed, although I do like Syria (but I don't like their Lebanese occupation).
So what's to like about Syria? They're occupying Lebanon, and the fund Hezbollah.

Here's something else you won't see much in the news. Apparently, there are ongoing, very massive pro democracy demonstrations in Lebanon. Here's a photo I just got from a friend who was there:

http://ParadigmAssociates.org/DemostrationsLebanon.jpg
Let Freedom Ring!

"Let freedom ring
Let the white dove sing
Let the whole world know that today is the day of a reckoning
Let the weak be strong
Let the right be wrong
Roll the stone away
Let the guilty pay
It's Independence Day"

From the song - Independence Day

Proof that the Bush doctrine is working. (Boy am I going to get slammed for saying that, but the truth can hurt.)

Ok, so what do I mean? If Afghanistan and Iraq had not held free and open elections, the uprising in Lebanon, the call for new elections in Egypt, and local elections in Saudi Arabia would never have taken place

I'm glad they are ongoing. Of course, the important time is not to cover them now, but during the parliamentary elections. As much of the world knows, this will form Lebanon's government. Let's hope that it is fair, and that a liberal will get elected.

According to the CIA's world factbook, Lebanon's government is a:

mixture of Ottoman law, canon law, Napoleonic code, and civil law; no judicial review of legislative acts; has not accepted compulsory ICJ jurisdiction.

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/fields/2100.html

their consitution was put forward on:

23 May 1926, amended a number of times, most recently Charter of Lebanese National Reconciliation (Ta'if Accord) of October 1989

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/fields/2063.html

and according to the CIA, the executive branch consists of:

chief of state: President Emile LAHUD (since 24 November 1998)
head of government: Prime Minister Omar KARAMI (since 21 October 2004); Deputy Prime Minister Issam FARES (since 23 October 2000)
cabinet: Cabinet chosen by the prime minister in consultation with the president and members of the National Assembly

the CIA also notes this about their electoral process:

elections: president elected by the National Assembly for a six-year term; election last held 15 October 1998 (next election date NA); note - on 3 September 2004 the National Assembly voted 96 to 29 to extend Emile LAHUD's six-year term by three years; the prime minister and deputy prime minister appointed by the president in consultation with the National Assembly; by agreement, the president is a Maronite Christian, the prime minister is a Sunni Muslim, and the speaker of the legislature is a Shia Muslim
election results: For 15 October 1998 election: Emile LAHUD elected president; National Assembly vote - 118 votes in favor, 0 against, 10 abstentions

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/le.html#Govt




I CHALLENGE even one of you to prove to us all that Lebanon is NOT, in fact, a democracy. And yes, that means links. From "credible" sources. 'Til then, stow the mouth-noises about the success of the so-called "Bush doctrine".

I'm glad they are ongoing. Of course, the important time is not to cover them now, but during the parliamentary elections. As much of the world knows, this will form Lebanon's government. Let's hope that it is fair, and that a liberal will get elected.

Now, now, a sturdy democracy may be able to withstand those radical socialist ideals, but a foundling democracy would likely slip into a communist dictatorship with that kind of leadership.

Now, now, a sturdy democracy may be able to withstand those radical socialist ideals, but a foundling democracy would likely slip into a communist dictatorship with that kind of leadership.
By liberal, I was using a lower case "l". I use it in the classical sense when reffering to foreign governments.

Now, now, a sturdy democracy may be able to withstand those radical socialist ideals, but a foundling democracy would likely slip into a communist dictatorship with that kind of leadership.

What unabashed drivel.

According to the CIA's world factbook, Lebanon's government is a:

mixture of Ottoman law, canon law, Napoleonic code, and civil law; no judicial review of legislative acts; has not accepted compulsory ICJ jurisdiction.

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/fields/2100.html

their consitution was put forward on:

23 May 1926, amended a number of times, most recently Charter of Lebanese National Reconciliation (Ta'if Accord) of October 1989

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/fields/2063.html

and according to the CIA, the executive branch consists of:

chief of state: President Emile LAHUD (since 24 November 1998)
head of government: Prime Minister Omar KARAMI (since 21 October 2004); Deputy Prime Minister Issam FARES (since 23 October 2000)
cabinet: Cabinet chosen by the prime minister in consultation with the president and members of the National Assembly

the CIA also notes this about their electoral process:

elections: president elected by the National Assembly for a six-year term; election last held 15 October 1998 (next election date NA); note - on 3 September 2004 the National Assembly voted 96 to 29 to extend Emile LAHUD's six-year term by three years; the prime minister and deputy prime minister appointed by the president in consultation with the National Assembly; by agreement, the president is a Maronite Christian, the prime minister is a Sunni Muslim, and the speaker of the legislature is a Shia Muslim
election results: For 15 October 1998 election: Emile LAHUD elected president; National Assembly vote - 118 votes in favor, 0 against, 10 abstentions

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/le.html#Govt




I CHALLENGE even one of you to prove to us all that Lebanon is NOT, in fact, a democracy. And yes, that means links. From "credible" sources. 'Til then, stow the mouth-noises about the success of the so-called "Bush doctrine".

Now, I may be too lazy to actually go around looking up crap, but I can still point out holes in your argument. If the national assembly is a fair representation of the people, you need to mention some evidence of that fact along with the rest. Otherwise, all you're saying is that government leaders are voted for by other government leaders, which isn't a democracy at all.

bump

Go Lebanese democrats!

*snip*... I CHALLENGE even one of you to prove to us all that Lebanon is NOT, in fact, a democracy. And yes, that means links. From "credible" sources. 'Til then, stow the mouth-noises about the success of the so-called "Bush doctrine". Ok, how about we ask a few people demonstrating in the picture why they are demonstrating?

Or perhaps the CIA got this wrong too? They supposedly got Iraq wrong, right!?!?

Funny how some like to believe CIA Reports when it suits their cause, but won't hesitate to call the President a Liar for listening to CIA Reports...

Why is that you suppose?

Regards,
Gaar

Proof that the Bush doctrine is working. (Boy am I going to get slammed for saying that, but the truth can hurt.)
Come on, isn't going a but far to give him credit for things he didn't even do? I doubt these Lebanese democrats came out just because Bush encouraged Syria to pull out.

Now, now, a sturdy democracy may be able to withstand those radical socialist ideals, but a foundling democracy would likely slip into a communist dictatorship with that kind of leadership.
Except that liberalism is the opposite of communist dictatorship. Next!

Come on, isn't going a but far to give him credit for things he didn't even do? I doubt these Lebanese democrats came out just because Bush encouraged Syria to pull out. Yeah, just like the Berlin Wall would have fallen, no matter what Reagan said just 2 years prior...

Regards,
Gaar

Except that liberalism is the opposite of communist dictatorship. Next! Funny...

Both of the people in the discussion you quote were using the term "Social" not "liberalism"...

Why would you need to change the subject to make some point that wasn't being discussed?

Next what?

Regards,
Gaar

Come on, isn't going a but far to give him credit for things he didn't even do? I doubt these Lebanese democrats came out just because Bush encouraged Syria to pull out. Doubt it all you like, you won't mind if some of us doubt YOU, since the person offering the picture explained what they were doing...

We shouldn't take your word for what is happening just because you say it, should we?

I believe I will wait until I can hear from someone who was there or knows someone who was...

Wait a minute, we already have that! The ORIGINAL poster... :rolleyes:

Regards,
Gaar

Except that liberalism is the opposite of communist dictatorship. Next!
Just because you say it doesn't make it true. Placing the power to redistribute wealth in the hands of the government is closer to a dictatorship than otherwise... and that is part of liberalism.

Ok, how about we ask a few people demonstrating in the picture why they are demonstrating?

Or perhaps the CIA got this wrong too? They supposedly got Iraq wrong, right!?!?

Funny how some like to believe CIA Reports when it suits their cause, but won't hesitate to call the President a Liar for listening to CIA Reports...

Why is that you suppose?

Regards,
Gaar

How about providing a link to the article the photo is associated with that states unequivocally that this demonstration is about the "democratization" of Lebanon, and not some other issue?

And while the CIA may have provided poor information to Misters Bush and Cheney, that does not invalidate their entire store of information. Not by a long shot.

Would you throw out an entire set of encyclopedias because the publishers got an entry wrong in the volume for the letter 'Q'?

Just because you say it doesn't make it true. Placing the power to redistribute wealth in the hands of the government is closer to a dictatorship than otherwise... and that is part of liberalism.
Not necessarily...

For Socialism yes, not necessarily for Liberalism. They are very different things... That's why I pointed out that you guys were using the term "Social" in the discussion.

I am quite Liberal in some of my leanings, but I am still predominately a Conservative Republican.

You will find that most people do not fit into just one "category" and hence the reason it is just plain stupid to generalize about such things with people.

Regards,
Gaar

How about providing a link to the article the photo is associated with that states unequivocally that this demonstration is about the "democratization" of Lebanon, and not some other issue? He said it was a picture from a friend who was there, so what Article might you be talking about?

Or did you not read the Thread before you decided to give your opinion?

And while the CIA may have provided poor information to Misters Bush and Cheney, that does not invalidate their entire store of information. Not by a long shot.

Would you throw out an entire set of encyclopedias because the publishers got an entry wrong in the volume for the letter 'Q'? I see, so if the information backs something YOU assert, it IS a reliable Source but if it backs what 3 other Intelligence Reports from different Countries and the President uses that information then it IS Lies and shouldn't be trusted!?!?!?

I'm glad you cleared that up for me... :confused:

Regards,
Gaar

Not necessarily...

For Socialism yes, not necessarily for Liberalism. They are very different things... That's why I pointed out that you guys were using the term "Social" in the discussion.

I am quite Liberal in some of my leanings, but I am still predominately a Conservative Republican.

You will find that most people do not fit into just one "category" and hence the reason it is just plain stupid to generalize about such things with people.

Regards,
Gaar
Ok, granted. But liberalism does tend to lean towars socialism, from an economic standpoint. If the government were socially liberal but not economically liberal, I'm sure the issue would be avoided. Of course, there aren't many countries in that political state in that part of the world that would be socially liberal...

Ok, granted. But liberalism does tend to lean towars socialism, from an economic standpoint. If the government were socially liberal but not economically liberal, I'm sure the issue would be avoided. Of course, there aren't many countries in that political state in that part of the world that would be socially liberal... That's why I wanted it to be noted that you were discussing "Social" in the posts he responded to...

Just trying to keep the discussion from being *blurred* and falling into some argument about the definition of words rather than ideals... :D

Trying to be helpful is all.

Regards,
Gaar

I think also that a lot people confuse liberalism with liberatarianism. to put it simply in america they are:

liberal = BIG government
conservative = SMALL government
liberatarian = ITSY-BITSY-TEENY-WEENY-YELLOW-POLKA-DOT government

People demonstrated against the Republican Government of the United States, shut down entire cities in protest.

Maybe that means the congress isn't a true democratic representation? According to your logic. It is you who needs to produce evidence, he already did. (The CIA factbook.)

People demonstrated against the Republican Government of the United States, shut down entire cities in protest.

Maybe that means the congress isn't a true democratic representation? According to your logic. It is you who needs to produce evidence, he already did. (The CIA factbook.)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1362403/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1362629/posts
http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2005/s1319860.htm
http://quickstart.clari.net/voa/art/hn/2005-03-31-voa73.html
http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/0,1518,344402,00.html
http://www.brookings.edu/views/op-ed/fellows/wittes20050331.htm
http://csmonitor.com/2005/0317/p09s01-coop.htm

Anything else I can do for you?

Regards,
Gaar

http://workingforchange.speedera.net/www.workingforchange.com/webgraphics/wfc/TMW08-13-03.gif

No, I read what he wrote, but I have no reason whatsoever to blindly take him at his word. Eutrusca should be the one backing up his contention that Lebanon is non-democratic.

I CHALLENGE even one of you to prove to us all that Lebanon is NOT, in fact, a democracy. And yes, that means links. From "credible" sources. 'Til then, stow the mouth-noises about the success of the so-called "Bush doctrine".
Oh for crying out loud. All you anti-Bushites scream and shout about how Iraq is not sovreign and not a democracy because we are occupying it temporarily. Well, Syria has been occupying Lebanon for about 30 years. I detest such double standards.

Oh for crying out loud. All you anti-Bushites scream and shout about how Iraq is not sovreign and not a democracy because we are occupying it temporarily. Well, Syria has been occupying Lebanon for about 30 years. I detest such double standards.
Syria was encouraged to move into syria by the international community including the US in the 1970s to prevent the country from collapsing durring the Lebanese Civil War. Many perhaps most Lebanese support the Syrian presence as protection from Israel which if you recall went on quite a rampage through lebanon in the 80s and only recently withdrew. The Lebanese Prime Minster supports Syria.

Furthermore, for the all the blame Syria what about you pro Bushites not whispering a word about the Israeli occupation of party of Syria for the last 40 years? How is this not an example of the double standards you so detest?

Syria was encouraged to move into syria by the international community including the US in the 1970s to prevent the country from collapsing durring the Lebanese Civil War. Many perhaps most Lebanese support the Syrian presence as protection from Israel which if you recall went on quite a rampage through lebanon in the 80s and only recently withdrew. The Lebanese Prime Minster supports Syria.

Furthermore, for the all the blame Syria what about you pro Bushites not whispering a word about the Israeli occupation of party of Syria for the last 40 years? How is this not an example of the double standards you so detest?
You seem to have an entirely different view of history than I do, and I lived through most of what you talk about.

Israel invaded Lebanon because of repeated rocket attacks against Israel from Southern Leganon.

Israel occupied a small part of Syria for much the same reasons, after one of the several conflicts between them.

You seem to have an entirely different view of history than I do, and I lived through most of what you talk about.

Israel invaded Lebanon because of repeated rocket attacks against Israel from Southern Leganon.

Israel occupied a small part of Syria for much the same reasons, after one of the several conflicts between them.

You not only have an entirely different view of history than I do, but an entirely different view of politics as well. Whatever possessed you to to indicate in your sig that you are 'politically centrist'? You're so far to the right that even the pedestrians pass you on the left-hand side, dude.

Syria was encouraged to move into syria by the international community including the US in the 1970s to prevent the country from collapsing durring the Lebanese Civil War. Many perhaps most Lebanese support the Syrian presence as protection from Israel which if you recall went on quite a rampage through lebanon in the 80s and only recently withdrew. The Lebanese Prime Minster supports Syria.

Furthermore, for the all the blame Syria what about you pro Bushites not whispering a word about the Israeli occupation of party of Syria for the last 40 years? How is this not an example of the double standards you so detest?
The Lebanese Prime Minister supports Syria because Syria nudged him into power, and until recently has kept him there.

Granted, there was one pro-Syria rally in Lebanon,organized by Hezbollah. Shortly afterward, about 1,000,000 people thronged the streets demanding Syrian withdrawl and democracy.
Nearly one million people gathered for an opposition rally in Beirut, officials say - a month after the death of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.
The demonstration surpassed recent pro-Syrian rallies and is thought to be the biggest in Lebanese history.

The BBC's Kim Ghattas in Beirut says the crowds turned the city centre into a sea of red, white and green - the colours of Lebanon's national flag.

They were protesting against the presence of Syrian forces in Lebanon.
From http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4346613.stm

Israel is gone. Syria was not, but is hopefully leaving now. The Lebanese want their sovreignty back.