Lebanese Nostradamus:
Al-Manar, the Hizbullah television network and web site, has an interesting, and of course self-serving, take on the series of events in Lebanon these past two years- especially the political assassinations. The al-Manar speculations revolve around Sameer G'ag'a (J'aj'a), warlord of the Lebanese Forces militias and an ally of the March 14 pro-cabinet forces. The web site notes that Mr. G'ag'a seems to have supernatural powers for predicting events:

It notes that he predicted early in 2006 that about 15,000 foreign forces will enter Lebanon. And boom, within months Israel invaded and fifteen thousand international forces were stationed in Lebanon. (I have not verified this one yet)

It notes that G'ag'a predicted, after the Shi'a ministers and their allies withdrew from the cabinet, that ministers will be assassinated (he actually did say that, I mentioned it here). Sure enough, soon young Pierre Gemayel was assassinated. Al-Manar notes that a Maronite Christian legislator, S. Farangieh, has revealed that Tony 'Obied, a leader in the Lebanese Forces of G'ag'a was behind the killing.

It notes that he predicted to a French magazine attacks on UNIFIL forces in Lebanon. And sure enough, soon they came under attack.

It notes that he predicted in 2007 that members of parliament from a certain Maronite district will become targets. Sure enough, a member was killed within a short time after that.

Al-Manar notes that the same Mr Sameer G'ag'a is now predicting an assassination attempt against Mr. Fouad Saniora, prime minister of the rump cabinet. Ohoh....

So, do you really think there is something to this Hizbullah insinuation/accusation? I am not sure, I find Lebanon confusing and complex even as I find the Lebanese simple and predictable.

The Lebanese Forces of Mr. G'ag'a, modeled after the pre-war European Fascist militias, was implicated in the Sabra and Shatila massacres of perhaps over 1,000 Palestinians in the refugee camps in 1982.
Mr. G'ag'a is scheduled to visit Washington, DC, soon for discussions. He follows in the footsteps of other warlords who have already made the pilgrimage.

So, does this mean that if you are a Lebanese you have to choose between a side dominated by Shi'a fundamentalists allied with Iran and a side dominated by quasi-Fascists suspected of mass genocide allied with Saudi Arabia?

Hearts and Minds:
Rivalry for hearts and minds of Americans has been going on for some time between Arabs and Israelis. Mostly it has been a no contest situation. American perceptions of the Judio-Christian heritage is one main factor. Another, perhaps as important a factor, is the repulsive nature of many Arab governments: either tribal absolute monarchies or one-party military police states- all kleptocracies to some degree. That is not to say that Israeli politicians are clean: they have gone a long way down in the Holy Land since the days of their founders- greed is now entrenched on both sides of the divide, especially since the Likud and its heirs became dominant.

Still, there is an interesting debate going on in some American and Arab media about the roles of Israel and Saudi Arabia (the money-bags and new center of power of the Arab world), or is it Jews and Wahhabis as some in US media call them, in U. S. Academia:

A Frong Page article extensively covers the fact that Prince al-Waleed Bin Tala has donated $ 20 million to Gerorgetown University in 2005, in exchange for naming a center after him: the Prince al-Waleed Bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding- I know, it is a mouthful. The Front Page report lists claims of ties between the Center's director and what it hints are apologists and friends of Islamic extremism.

I find the name of the "Center" interesting. How can there be any Muslim-Christian understanding without bringing in the Jews? They are the elephant, nay the gorilla if you will, in the room- can't be ignored. How can one discuss Christian or Muslim (Moslem) doctrine without referring to 'the source'? Maybe they wanted to keep the name short.

Besides, Georgetown is largely secular now, no? By restricting the Center to Muslim-Christian relations, it denies the secular and multi-faith nature of American society- at least as it is potentially possible to be.
Perhaps the center should be renamed The Prince al-Waleed Bin Talal Center for Understanding Islam- well, a tribal absolute monarchy version of Islam.

On the other hand, the Saudi-owned daily al-hayat has published (Feb. 20) a column titled "American Schools and Universities or Israeli Kubutzim?" The author starts by distinguishing between Jews and Zionists- then asserts that it is natural for Jews who are spread within sensitive and influential sectors across the world to form a normal medium for the spread of Zionism and the support of that movement and Israel. He does note that other, non-Jewish, groups are sometimes more pro-Israeli than some Jewish groups. Those include Marxists and left-wingers (this is debatable, at least), extreme right wingers (mostly true), as well as fundamentalists (non-Islamic variety, of course).

The author notes that the Zionist Lobby has been worried lately, and has redoubled its efforts to keep and spread its influence in American institutions, especially universities and colleges. Now the efforts have spread to high schools where students are picked for special courses and "fact-finding" visits to Israel. The author quotes "The Washington Report" as a source.

The Caliph of Egypt:
Speaking o faith and all that, interesting news from Egypt. A leading Salafi shaikh there has issued a fatwa that it is OK for president Mubarak to pass on power to his son Gamal. He notes that Mu'awiyya, the first Umayyad monarch (he called himself Khalifa) appointed his son as heir and nobody objected. Of course nobody objected: nobody wanted their heads chopped off. Besides, this is not exactly true, al-Hassan, son of Ali, objected because Mu'awiyya had promised not to make it a hereditary rule. But al-Hassan was poisoned- guess by whom. His brother al-Hussein and others rebelled and they were massacred at Karbalaa in today's Iraq. Abdullah ibn al-Zubeir rebelled at Mecca and he was beseiged and killed along with many others...
In any case, at some point this man even compares the president of Egypt to the early four Caliphs, as most of you heathen kaffirs call them, the Rightly Guided Four Khalifas: Abu Bakr, Omar, Othman, and Ali.
The shaikh refers to what he and other salafis call 'Islamic Shari'a rules' that call for blind obedience to the ruler, no matter how he came to power, no matter how opperssive he is, provided he continues building houses of worship.Perhaps the Salafis of Egypt see an opening to break the Moslem Brotherhood's monoploy of fun-dementa-list opposition.
Cheers
Mohammed