Hizbullah: The March 14 paper is an American Project Membership Card
15-03-2008
Hizbullah issued the following statement in which it commented on the document issued by the 'March 14' forces:
"The political document launched by the forces in political power on the 'March 14th Anniversary' calls for the careful consideration of its connotations which we had hoped would be positive, seeking what is commonly shared with the 'other' Lebanese and to work on reaching out to this 'other' from a position of national participation, rather than its denial of this 'other', its self-inflation, monopolization of virtues... claiming purity, and tailors the present and future of the nation to its measure, despite the fact that it exercises cancellation, distortion, and accusations to the 'other' while it has a refuting blind eye on those very characteristics on its own front.
The language that prevailed at all the key junctures of the document is tantamount to formal membership card to the American project in the region, which concludes to the bias of its loyal position in openly alignment with the American options.
In the detailed analysis of the document we can reflect on the following points:
1- The discourse that the conflict is at a deeper level than politics and state administration and its harsh nature, portrays the world as if it were divided into two realms, good and evil, deeming the 'other' as being the absolute evil whereas what they believe in is deemed good. Hence we fully understand all the following policies that appear below and how they are based on this logic:
A-The talk of equally respecting victims without discrimination, when in truth it is otherwise, pushes us to question their intentionally damaged memory, with what the martyrs suffered from them, especially those who were killed in the 'Israeli' aggressions as well as those killed inside Lebanon at more than one location.
B-Refining the memory requires honest confession and the request for the forgiveness of the Lebanese people for all and every massacre and mistake committed in their right by them, not the sustained persistence on rightness of the acts committed by those who attempts to portray themselves as heroes, on the basis of the perpetrator trying to wash his hands clean of the blood of Lebanon, the Lebanese and the Palestinian peoples', to clean his blood stained clothes over course of the duration of his presence in leadership, authority and administration.
C-Additionally, in the culture of reestablishing ties, how does the act of convincing your opposition or presenting your argument against theirs, or the search for common grounds with them... practically translate itself in the text by holding the opposition responsible for the accusation of murder and all that has happened in the past three years, and to link them [the opposition] to the outside? Is this not the very logic of charging as treasonous? Or does this particular criterion apply only to the 'other'...?
Regarding the symbolic and moral murder, let us bring back to mind the calls for revenge against the officers and their families, even if proven innocent! Or for calling for revenge from Damascus, and the viewing the Lebanese people as agents for the Iranian-Syrian axis...
2- The roundabout and explicit accusation of the resistance as working for foreign sides, to annul national decision making, branding its fighters as an army serving the authority of a foreign state; are these terms not accusations of treason and collaboration with the outside, and a disregard for all the blood that fell on home soil to defend and liberate the nation?
The logic of charging the other as treasonous and mercenary, is but a product the loyalists persist to employ in their speech without any scruples, they demand others to accept such logic, yet when the resistance practice its legitimate right of defending itself with evidence, it is accused of mistrust and of charging other with conspiring! Yes, the decisive criterion in the resistance's success and overcoming of your hang-ups, from the first moment of the liberation, comes in its diligent work on building the free and independent state, a state that can protect its people, that believes in their future in an integrated movement that leads the community, against a backdrop of national unity that builds the state, that does not exercise continued marginalization against it nor give away its last remaining resources.
3- To view 'Israel' as a regional power, strip off its description as 'enemy' and push it onto the ranks of Iran or any Arab or Islamic state, thus making them equal, is, in truth, going to excess in the affiliation with the American administration's project, as well as a naive disguise that wants to give justification for 'Israel'. Hence it concludes in other paragraphs to have found solutions with 'Israel' through the fictitious peace option, as part of an exit from the intellectual polarization, imposed by the cold war.
'Israel's' presence becomes inherent, reducing the suffering of Palestinian people in the cold war, thus deliberately dropping all other issues, hence the American occupation of Iraq, along with its implications, are cleared of having any influence on the crisis in the Arab world and regionally.
This group only considers Iran as the opponent and enemy 'wanted' by the Americans to substitute 'Israel' as the enemy, and in turn for 'Israel' to become meshed in the tolerance fabric, a loyal friend.
The statement concluded, that the endless accusations, the disregard or denial of the patriotism of the 'other', and placing that 'other' inside the scope of a culture of violence and segregation, to smear them with all the political vices, makes their claim to be reaching out to overcome disputes meaningless, because he who reaches out for unity, must first believe in recognizing and acknowledging the other, to listen to and to cooperate with that other, to co-build the state and society, to respect partnership, and the true nationalist requirements; furthermore, not to work on imposing the satellite-American options on an essential segment of the Lebanese society.
Hizbullah issued the following statement in which it commented on the document issued by the 'March 14' forces:
"The political document launched by the forces in political power on the 'March 14th Anniversary' calls for the careful consideration of its connotations which we had hoped would be positive, seeking what is commonly shared with the 'other' Lebanese and to work on reaching out to this 'other' from a position of national participation, rather than its denial of this 'other', its self-inflation, monopolization of virtues... claiming purity, and tailors the present and future of the nation to its measure, despite the fact that it exercises cancellation, distortion, and accusations to the 'other' while it has a refuting blind eye on those very characteristics on its own front.
The language that prevailed at all the key junctures of the document is tantamount to formal membership card to the American project in the region, which concludes to the bias of its loyal position in openly alignment with the American options.
In the detailed analysis of the document we can reflect on the following points:
1- The discourse that the conflict is at a deeper level than politics and state administration and its harsh nature, portrays the world as if it were divided into two realms, good and evil, deeming the 'other' as being the absolute evil whereas what they believe in is deemed good. Hence we fully understand all the following policies that appear below and how they are based on this logic:
A-The talk of equally respecting victims without discrimination, when in truth it is otherwise, pushes us to question their intentionally damaged memory, with what the martyrs suffered from them, especially those who were killed in the 'Israeli' aggressions as well as those killed inside Lebanon at more than one location.
B-Refining the memory requires honest confession and the request for the forgiveness of the Lebanese people for all and every massacre and mistake committed in their right by them, not the sustained persistence on rightness of the acts committed by those who attempts to portray themselves as heroes, on the basis of the perpetrator trying to wash his hands clean of the blood of Lebanon, the Lebanese and the Palestinian peoples', to clean his blood stained clothes over course of the duration of his presence in leadership, authority and administration.
C-Additionally, in the culture of reestablishing ties, how does the act of convincing your opposition or presenting your argument against theirs, or the search for common grounds with them... practically translate itself in the text by holding the opposition responsible for the accusation of murder and all that has happened in the past three years, and to link them [the opposition] to the outside? Is this not the very logic of charging as treasonous? Or does this particular criterion apply only to the 'other'...?
Regarding the symbolic and moral murder, let us bring back to mind the calls for revenge against the officers and their families, even if proven innocent! Or for calling for revenge from Damascus, and the viewing the Lebanese people as agents for the Iranian-Syrian axis...
2- The roundabout and explicit accusation of the resistance as working for foreign sides, to annul national decision making, branding its fighters as an army serving the authority of a foreign state; are these terms not accusations of treason and collaboration with the outside, and a disregard for all the blood that fell on home soil to defend and liberate the nation?
The logic of charging the other as treasonous and mercenary, is but a product the loyalists persist to employ in their speech without any scruples, they demand others to accept such logic, yet when the resistance practice its legitimate right of defending itself with evidence, it is accused of mistrust and of charging other with conspiring! Yes, the decisive criterion in the resistance's success and overcoming of your hang-ups, from the first moment of the liberation, comes in its diligent work on building the free and independent state, a state that can protect its people, that believes in their future in an integrated movement that leads the community, against a backdrop of national unity that builds the state, that does not exercise continued marginalization against it nor give away its last remaining resources.
3- To view 'Israel' as a regional power, strip off its description as 'enemy' and push it onto the ranks of Iran or any Arab or Islamic state, thus making them equal, is, in truth, going to excess in the affiliation with the American administration's project, as well as a naive disguise that wants to give justification for 'Israel'. Hence it concludes in other paragraphs to have found solutions with 'Israel' through the fictitious peace option, as part of an exit from the intellectual polarization, imposed by the cold war.
'Israel's' presence becomes inherent, reducing the suffering of Palestinian people in the cold war, thus deliberately dropping all other issues, hence the American occupation of Iraq, along with its implications, are cleared of having any influence on the crisis in the Arab world and regionally.
This group only considers Iran as the opponent and enemy 'wanted' by the Americans to substitute 'Israel' as the enemy, and in turn for 'Israel' to become meshed in the tolerance fabric, a loyal friend.
The statement concluded, that the endless accusations, the disregard or denial of the patriotism of the 'other', and placing that 'other' inside the scope of a culture of violence and segregation, to smear them with all the political vices, makes their claim to be reaching out to overcome disputes meaningless, because he who reaches out for unity, must first believe in recognizing and acknowledging the other, to listen to and to cooperate with that other, to co-build the state and society, to respect partnership, and the true nationalist requirements; furthermore, not to work on imposing the satellite-American options on an essential segment of the Lebanese society.
