• Before posting an article from a specific source, check this list here to see how much the Orange Room trust it. You can also vote/change your vote based on the source track record.

US Sanctions on Lebanese politicians - Magnitsky Act [updated list in OP]

oldschool

Active Member
For the 10000th time, it wasn’t agreed on in Taef and no one talked about this ever until berri imagined it recently. W we had 3-4 times more nonshiite ministers in finance after Taef than shiite.

Let Hussein hussseiny release the Taef minutes.

You already have the parliament speaker and that was what was agreed on.
 

NewLeb

Member
I watched the above @SeaAb

What caught my attention is the part whereby Schenker sarcastically said that a political party dont bear arms and therefore, he used that premise to discredit Hezballah's legitimacy as a democratically elected party that gets the most votes. He said because Hezballah bears weapons, that is not a level playing field. The question is: is there anything that is levelled or played in Lebanon on a level playing field? I will give a small example.

I hope or wish Mr Schenker is reading this forum. I would like to ask him if in the US the head of the US army is always ceded to a Protestant or to a Pentecostal American and if the land of another denomination is occupied by a foreign country, the US army would feel disconnected from the need to defend its territory. The Shiites in Lebanon have long faced marginalisation and survived in an unlevelled playing field designed to discriminate against them and at their disadvantage. Today, the system is no longer playing to the advantage of the bigots for whom it was designed to serve. This fact of historical marginalisation, and because we have an apartheid regime in Lebanon, created a vacuum whereby the state felt lack of concern to even diplomatically address the occupation of the South. That vacuum gave rise to Hezballah as an organized resistance movement. And Schenker should not feign ignorance because his own country did nothing for the South when Israehell occupied it. He needs to understand that the protection of South Lebanon, where my own village is located and all of Lebanon from Israehelli aggression is a national need and concern for every patriotic Lebanese. You cant just be biased and prejudiced against Hezballah because you are a Zionist mercenary and talk about level playing field, when the existence of Hezballah itself was as a result of an unlevelled playing field that obliged its emergence.

What you and other unprofessional analysts seem to not understand is that it isn’t sustainable to have an armed militant group based on a specific Muslim identity in the context of a modern and secular civil state, especially one that is perceived as being rogue and terroristic by most nations.

Shiites seem to live in their own world sometimes, oblivious to the reality that is around them....
 

The Bidenator

Legendary Member
Orange Room Supporter
Sanctions are always an act of war. The lobbying to get Bassil, Bou Saab, and Jreissati on sanctions lists is sustained. Don't be surprised if it happens. There is no message other than assertion of power. This is an administration without a policy. It's just a series of nkeyet.

He's still your President.
 

Rafidi

Legendary Member
What you and other unprofessional analysts seem to not understand is that it isn’t sustainable to have an armed militant group based on a specific Muslim identity in the context of a modern and secular civil state, especially one that is perceived as being rogue and terroristic by most nations.

Shiites seem to live in their own world sometimes, oblivious to the reality that is around them....

The reality of an unlevelled playing field that Mr Schenker was talking about did not start with the existence of Hezballah in the 80s. There is nothing like a level playing field when a community was abandoned by the state to cater to its needs, whether economic or military. The system works that way in Lebanon and was designed that way: in other words, not to be level playing field. In fact the rise or emergence of Hezballah was a reaction compelled by the nature of partiality and discrimination inherent in certain Lebanese quarters, right from independence.

So when we have in place a capable state that is secular or civil and without sectarian discrimination, whereby the master is the citizenry and with no foreign threats, then we can talk about secular and democratic values and principles. I really dont know who lied to Schenker that we are in fact a fully democratic state, with level playing field for all. We are not. Some are more equal than others in certain quarters and in certain ways. That was the faulty foundation Lebanon had from the start. You cant tell me it is a level playing field when the army commander, the central bank governor and the president are and must be from one sect. And it cant be a level playing field when my kid cant in the future be PM or deputy parliament speaker because he was born to Shiite parents. It makes no sense talking of level playing field in Lebanon.
 

The Bidenator

Legendary Member
Orange Room Supporter
So from all what I said , I see you retained only this sentence.

Yes, Christians are more resistant to corruption. It is a fact.
I did not say Christians are free from corruption. They can be corrupt, and at a high degree.

During the "maronite" era from 1943 to 1969, Lebanon was a pearl, especially during Fouad Chehab presidency.

During the Syrian (muslim) , Hariri (muslim) , HA (muslim) era, no need to tell. We are still enduring the leftovers .

Yes Christians are more resistant to corruption. Look at Switzerland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark.

Name me only one muslim country that is prosperous, adopting accountability , freedom, and judiciary independence , only one.

Iran.
 

Aegon

Active Member
They are not, thankfully. And that is the mistake Berri committed by agreeing to cede the MoF to Rafiq Hariri. Berri should apologize to his community for that mistake.
If you really think what you're saying is true (its not) then you have officially the worst leader in lebanese history. Why do you still defend a man that had given away "shiite rights" as you claim?
 

Rafidi

Legendary Member
If you really think what you're saying is true (its not) then you have officially the worst leader in lebanese history. Why do you still defend a man that had given away "shiite rights" as you claim?

Does asking him to apologize to his own community amount to defending him? Of course not. But it is never too late to correct a wrong.
 

NewLeb

Member
The reality of an unlevelled playing field that Mr Schenker was talking about did not start with the existence of Hezballah in the 80s. There is nothing like a level playing field when a community was abandoned by the state to cater to its needs, whether economic or military. The system works that way in Lebanon and was designed that way: in other words, not to be level playing field. In fact the rise or emergence of Hezballah was a reaction compelled by the nature of partiality and discrimination inherent in certain Lebanese quarters, right from independence.

So when we have in place a capable state that is secular or civil and without sectarian discrimination, whereby the master is the citizenry and with no foreign threats, then we can talk about secular and democratic values and principles. I really dont know who lied to Schenker that we are in fact a fully democratic state, with level playing field for all. We are not. Some are more equal than others in certain quarters and in certain ways. That was the faulty foundation Lebanon had from the start. You cant tell me it is a level playing field when the army commander, the central bank governor and the president are and must be from one sect. And it cant be a level playing field when my kid cant in the future be PM or deputy parliament speaker because he was born to Shiite parents. It makes no sense talking of level playing field in Lebanon.

The fact that the president, army commander, and central bank governors need to be Christian is simply a reflection of the greater economic and political sophistication that Christians have exhibited throughout the centuries. This is a result of all the values and knowledge that were promulgated throughout Christian history, from the Magna Carta to the Renaissance.

Now, does this mean that Muslims and Shiites should be barred from holding the presidency indefinitely? No, but until Muslims stop acting like backward, third-world, ak-47 wielding neanderthals, Christians should continue to keep the post.

In America, although Jews make a tiny percentage of the population, they hold vast political and economic influence. The problem with Shiites is that they think that they deserve all this power simply because of the fact that they’re Shiite, or because they outnumber all other sects, or because of their general persecution complex. It’s the same arguments that blacks and other minorities use when demanding more power in the West.
 

Rafidi

Legendary Member
The fact that the president, army commander, and central bank governors need to be Christian is simply a reflection of the greater economic and political sophistication that Christians have exhibited throughout the centuries. This is a result of all the values and knowledge that were promulgated throughout Christian history, from the Magna Carta to the Renaissance.

Now, does this mean that Muslims and Shiites should be barred from holding the presidency indefinitely? No, but until Muslims stop acting like backward, third-world, ak-47 wielding neanderthals, Christians should continue to keep the post.

You are mixing up Christians in Europe and Christians in the Middle East. The latter complain of persecution and marginalisation. Yet, after over 500 years of Ottoman rule and over 1000 years of Muslim rule, Christians claimed to be majority in the 1932 census conducted by the French. Sounds contradictory, right? And on that basis they claimed greater powers and under the cover of the colonial power, thereby imposing themselves on the rest and the system they thought would suit their dominance.

In America, although Jews make a tiny percentage of the population, they hold vast political and economic influence. The problem with Shiites is that they think that they deserve all this power simply because of the fact that they’re Shiite, or because they outnumber all other sects, or because of their general persecution complex. It’s the same arguments that blacks and other minorities use when demanding more power in the West.

So imagine Jews demanding on the above basis that only a Jew should be president in America. Funny, right?
 

JB81

Legendary Member
You are mixing up Christians in Europe and Christians in the Middle East. The latter complain of persecution and marginalisation. Yet, after over 500 years of Ottoman rule and over 1000 years of Muslim rule, Christians claimed to be majority in the 1932 census conducted by the French. Sounds contradictory, right? And on that basis they claimed greater powers and under the cover of the colonial power, thereby imposing themselves on the rest and the system they thought would suit their dominance.

As if you are talking about Iraqi Shiites
 

Rafidi

Legendary Member
Iraqi Shiites claim to be persecuted and marginalized by the Ottomans and Saddam; yet, they are a majority and rule in Iraq.

Contradiction?

It is not the same thing. Also, when did the Shia really become a majority in Iraq? Were they a sudden majority just after the fall of Saddam? Or were they always a majority? Also, Iraq is a holy land for Shiites. Also, a Shiite cant be easily differentiated from a Sunni. Unless they tell you what they are. Many times Shiites use Taqiyyah to hide their faith and later on reemerge as Shia after they regain freedom. We are of the same religion. That's not the case with Christianity.
 
Last edited:

Robin Hood

Legendary Member
Orange Room Supporter
For those who still say I am a racist bigot and that Christians are as corrupt as Muslims.

A simple test for you, as Experience from the past is the best way to give a fair jdgement

Which one of the three past MoF is the least corrupt:

1) Georges Corm
2) Fouad Siniora
3) Ali Hassan Khalil

I think that the answer is self-explanatory
Try Riad Salamé as MoF and you will see the results.

Sent from my SM-G973W using Tapatalk
 
Top