“Lejiņam ļauj kandidēt Vienotībā un palikt LSDSP”

[Oops—that belongs in the other thread…]

/P

“Post-postpadomju Latvijas sākums?”

Roberts’ false accusation has already drawn some attention.

Vysu lobu,
/P

tom - 29 July 2010 10:03 AM

Nicely played. But, what I asked was not whether you have met any and are they loyal, but would you consider them loyal?

And not to forget Pēteris question- Where and when has Dr. Hosams Abu Meri spoken in support of either Hezbollah or Hamas?

Very clumsy of you, Tom.

I repeat, I have not met any LV-born who have attained dual citizenship.  It’s like asking someone who has never met a black person what their opinion is of african-americans.  Your question only invites bigotry.

I have not forgotten Pēteris’ question.  It has been asked and answered, and now you are attempting to ask a new question.  I am still awaiting a reply from Pēteris to show where Dr. Hosams Abu Meri specifically has condemned Hamas and Hezbollah.  To date, he has not done so.  I’ll give him this, he is a clever man.  He condemns all who do violence, and claims for the record that he is not a member of either terrorist organization.  But in all of his rhetoric, he takes the sovereign government of Israel to task—but never once, as far as anyone can find, has anyone been able to point out where exactly Dr. Hosams Abu Meri specifically criticizes Hamas or Hezbollah.

Dr. Hosams Abu Meri mis-identified Hamas militants killed in Operation Cast Lead as “civilians.”  To date, he has not condemned either Hamas or Hezbollah for their attacks on Israel.  In fact, his silence on Hamas coupled with his public statements about Hezbollah leave the impression that he is an apologist.

Case in point, from this article on the Second Lebanon war:

“Internetā ir tik šausminošas fotogrāfijas, kuras, no vienas puses, nedrīkst rādīt ne presē, ne televīzijā, jo cilvēki var gūt psiholoģiskas traumas, tomēr, no otras puses – tās ir jārāda, lai pasaule redz! Lai redz un reāli saprot, kas tur notiek!!! Nogalināti un sakropļoti cilvēki, sabombardēta infrastruktūra… Valsts tiek iznīcināta,” saka Hosams Abu Meri, kas 13 gadu dzīvo Latvijā.

To date, he has never acknowledged that these “šausminošas fotogrāfijas,” were in fact doctored and altered, most notably by his “tautasbrālis” Adnan Hajj.  Dr. Hosams Abu Meri has never acknowledged this.

Most telling is this:

“12. jūlijā, kad sākās karadarbība, es biju Beirūtā. Vecpilsēta, kas trīsreiz lielāka par Vecrīgu ar trīsreiz vairāk kafejnīcām, bija pilna ar ārzemniekiem un nevarēja atrast vietas, kur apsēsties. Viss normāli – pilns ar tūristiem… Dzirdējām, ka pie robežas bija notikusi kaut kāda Hezbollāh akcija, kaut kāda nolaupīšana… Bet tas nešķita nekas īpašs, jo mēs, libānieši, esam pie tā pieraduši – Hezbollāh eksistē jau 25 gadus, un tikpat ilgi viņi veic dažādas militāras operācijas. Bet – un to es gribu uzsvērt – viņu akcijas ir militāras, līdz šim tās nebija vērstas pret civiliedzīvotājiem.

He calls a mortar attack on civilian targets and the ambush of a border patrol on the Israel side of the Israel/Lebanon border “some kind of robbery.”  Dr. Hosams Abu Meri considers a crime against humanity, on the order of the Masļenku incident, a mere robbery.  That, my friend, is being an apologist.

The very fact that Dr. Hosams Abu Meri denies that Hezbollah had never, prior to 12 July 2006, committed any acts of violence against civilians flies in the face of decency.  The 1983 bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Beirut killed over 60 people; 100 kidnappings during the Lebanon Hostage crisis; the hijacking of TWA flight 847; the 1992 attack on the Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aires, where 29 people were slaughtered; the 1994 bombing of Asociación Mutual Israelita Argentina that killed 85 people and left hundreds more wounded was the worst bombing in Argentina’s history.  Yet Dr. Hosams Abu Meri would have you believe that none of these things were the doing of Hezbollah.

On homicide bombers:

Arī Latvijā ir daudz pašnāvību – kad cilvēki vairs nevar izturēt sāpes un bezcerību vai netiek pāri zaudējumam. Atšķirība ir tā, ka libānietis, kas zaudējis ģimeni un dzīves jēgu, zina, kas pie tā vainīgs. Un arī viņš taisa pašnāvību… Nu nevajag viņu saukt par teroristu.

Just don’t call the mad bombers terrorists, says Dr. Hosams Abu Meri.

Although I may needle you about the right to vote, Tom… the point is I have the right to vote, and I would like to support Vienotība—but this man, Dr, Hosams Abu Meri, can in no way, shape or form represent me in Saeima.  I know I have the option to cross his name off the ballot, but I am worried that not enough people will know to do that.

I hope that this sufficiently asnswers your/Pēteris’ question regarding why Dr. Hosams Abu Meri ought to be considered a Hezbollah apologist.  Perhaps you can give Pēteris a hand in finding anything where Dr. Hosams Abu Meri specifically acknowledges Hamas and Hezbollah crimes and specifically condemns them, instead of cleverly issuing non-denial denials.

/V a.k.a. Der Übersturmführer von nicely played

Hosams Abu Meri:

Es saprotu – karš ir karš, es saprotu, ka gan izraēliešiem, gan libāniešiem ir sava taisnība, es saprotu, ka ir cietuši gan izraēlieši, gan libānieši, es zinu, ka libāniešu un izraēliešu tautas negrib karu, bet grib dzīvot kaimiņos un normāli. Bet es nesaprotu – kāpēc politiķi nespēj sanākt pie viena galda un izbeigt to murgu!!! Jo tas jau nav tikai Libānas un Izraēlas jautājums. Mūsu valstī ir apmēram 400 000 palestīniešu bēgļu… Arī tā ir problēma, un lai Izraēla atrisina savas problēmas ar Palestīnu. Vienīgais risinājums – uguns pārtraukšana. Un jo ilgāk šis murgs turpināsies, jo sliktāk vēl būs,” ir pārliecināts Hosams. Tomēr uz vienu jautājumu – kā zeme un ticības jautājums pārvēršas par fanātismu – viņam atbildes neesot. “Es zinu, ka Dievs ir viens. Tā ir tava darīšana, kā tu lūdz dievu – kā kristietis, kā musulmanis, kā ebrejs… Tu tici Dievam, es ticu Dievam. Un viss. Un es arī neesmu pret kādu tautu, es esmu pret barbarismu, kas nogalina nevainīgus cilvēkus – vienalga, vai to dara izraēļi vai Hezbollāh. Kad es redzu fanātiskus cilvēkus, es domāju – ko viņi grib atgūt? Viņi nevar neko atgūt, viņi var iegūt tikai asinis un nāvi.

“Neesmu pret kādu tautu, es esmu pret barbarismu”

Yep Pēter, Dr. Hosams Abu Meri is certainly right up your alley—Hezbollah are not terrorists, never harmed a hair on a civilian’s head… “you-know-who” is responsible for all the ills of the world, so if some arab blows up a bus full of Tel-Aviv schoolchildren he is not a terrorist.  A shame he doesn’t plan on representing Latgale, I’m sure you would happily cross out all the names ahead of him and put Hossams at the top of your list.

Have a good look at your friend.  From the same article, Pēter:

mēs, libānieši, esam pie tā pieraduši – Hezbollāh eksistē jau 25 gadus, un tikpat ilgi viņi veic dažādas militāras operācijas. Bet – un to es gribu uzsvērt – viņu akcijas ir militāras, līdz šim tās nebija vērstas pret civiliedzīvotājiem.

and

Atšķirība ir tā, ka libānietis, kas zaudējis ģimeni un dzīves jēgu, zina, kas pie tā vainīgs. Un arī viņš taisa pašnāvību… Nu nevajag viņu saukt par teroristu.

Do you actually read the stuff that you quote here?

Perhaps your Latvian has atrophied whilst you try to translate Urbanovičs’s Russian, Varonīt, but “nolaupīšana” also translates to “abduction, kidnapping.” What the Doctor is referring to is what he had heard at the time about the Zar’it-Shtula incident, which was indeed a kidnapping (that also involved rocket attacks on border villages and the killing of Israeli soldiers). The main point of the Hezbollah operation was indeed the abduction of IDF soldiers, however, and their capture was the immediate cause of the war. A comparison to Masļenki does not seem apt at all; that was a border incident (also involving murder and abduction) that was followed by the invasion and occupation of Latvia. The Zar’it-Shtula incident was followed by Israel’s attempt “to turn Lebanon’s clock back 20 years” if the two soldiers were not returned, to quote Israel’s chief of staff. 44 Israeli civilians died in the conflict. 1191 Lebanese civilians died, nearly a third of them children, and about a million Lebanese were displaced. [1]

/P

Peteris Cedrins - 29 July 2010 12:10 PM

Perhaps your Latvian has atrophied whilst you try to translate Urbanovičs’s Russian, Varonīt, but “nolaupīšana” also translates to “abduction, kidnapping.” What the Doctor is referring to is what he had heard at the time about the Zar’it-Shtula incident, which was indeed a kidnapping (that also involved rocket attacks on border villages and the killing of Israeli soldiers). The main point of the Hezbollah operation was indeed the abduction of IDF soldiers, however, and their capture was the immediate cause of the war. A comparison to Masļenki does not seem apt at all; that was a border incident (also involving murder and abduction) that was followed by the invasion and occupation of Latvia. The Zar’it-Shtula incident was followed by Israel’s attempt “to turn Lebanon’s clock back 20 years” if the two soldiers were not returned, to quote Israel’s chief of staff. 44 Israeli civilians died in the conflict. 1191 Lebanese civilians died, nearly a third of them children, and about a million Lebanese were displaced. [1]

/P

A comparison to Masļenieki is most appropriate, Pēterīt.  Both involved lethal attacks across a recognized international border.  In both cases, the aggressors indiscriminately murdered civilians and took hostages.  In Latvia’s case, the response was what folks like you would call “proportionate,” which only encouraged the aggressors to full-on invasion.  The Israeli response (which folks like you consider disproportionate) kicked the living daylights out of the aggressors, reduced their ability to make war and, as a result, Israel maintained its sovereignty.

The Lebanese civilian death toll should be placed in Hezbollah’s column.  When the Hezbollah arms children and uses civilians as human shields, what do you think is going to be the result?

But dang, Pēter, are you sure that Dr. Hosams Abu Meri is right that prior to July 2006 Hezbollah never attacked civilians, and that depressed lebanese that strap on bombs and kill people in kafejnīcas are not to be considered terrorists?

/V a.k.a. Der Übersturmführer von turn Lebanon’s clock back 20 years

Varonītis writes:

A comparison to Masļenieki is most appropriate, Pēterīt.  Both involved lethal attacks across a recognized international border.  In both cases, the aggressors indiscriminately murdered civilians and took hostages.  In Latvia’s case, the response was what folks like you would call “proportionate,” which only encouraged the aggressors to full-on invasion.  The Israeli response (which folks like you consider disproportionate) kicked the living daylights out of the aggressors, reduced their ability to make war and, as a result, Israel maintained its sovereignty.

I don’t know of a single civilian murdered in the Zar’it-Shtula incident; eight Israeli soldiers were killed, and two were abducted. Further, Latvia and the USSR had concluded a peace treaty and demarcated the border; there is no comparison to the Blue Line. Lebanon and Israel have technically been at war since 1948 and remain at war today. As to kicking the living daylights out of the aggressors (that would include the kids?)—have you read the Winograd Report, Israel’s own examination of what happened?

...in making the decision to go to war, the government
did not consider the whole range of options, including that of
continuing the policy of ‘containment’, or combining political and
diplomatic moves with military strikes below the ‘escalation level’, or
military preparations without immediate military action—so as to
maintain for Israel the full range of responses to the abduction. [1]

I know you love bellicose play with your joystick, but Israel’s “success” in a war devastating countless lives for the sake of two captured soldiers is debatable, if not dubious.

It is also obscene for you to try to compare the response of neutral Latvia and Israel; Israel is vastly superior to all of its neighbors militarily (and even possesses nuclear weapons). It has invaded Lebanon repeatedly.

The USSR had decided to invade the Baltic states; no “encouragement” was necessary and no “discouragement” was possible; resistance would have meant slaughter.

You can keep hoping that Israel can keep kicking the living daylights out of everybody—but I don’t see a future in it. Israel is increasingly isolated, and even US support is weakening.

Hezbollah did indeed attack civilians—or, rather, units of Hezbollah did—but I would like you to note that it is not on the EU list of terrorist groups. The United States, Canada and the Netherlands consider Hezbollah a terrorist organization, and Australia and the UK list its military wing only. Led by France, the EU has resisted American pressure to list Hezbollah.

Stephen Zunes, writing in 2006:

The Bush administration and an overwhelming bipartisan majority of Congress have gone on record defending Israel’s assault on Lebanon’s civilian infrastructure as a means of attacking Hezbollah terrorists. However, unlike the major Palestinian Islamist groups, Hamas and Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah forces haven’t killed any Israeli civilians for more than a decade. Indeed, a 2002 Congressional Research Service report noted, in its analysis of Hezbollah, that no major terrorist attacks have been attributed to it since 1994. The most recent State Department report [2005—/P] on international terrorism also fails to note any acts of terrorism by Hezbollah since that time except for unsubstantiated claims that a Hezbollah member was a participant in a June 1996 attack on the U.S. Air Force dormitory at Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia.

[...]

Just as Washington’s concerns about the threat from Iraq grew in inverse correlation to its military capability culminating in the 2003 invasion long after that country had disarmed and dismantled its chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons programs the U.S. focus on Hezbollah has grown as that party had largely put its terrorist past behind it. In recent years, the administration and Congress in apparent anticipation of the long-planned Israeli assault began to become more and more obsessed with Hezbollah. For example, not a single Congressional resolution mentioned Hezbollah during the 1980s when they were kidnapping and murdering American citizens and engaging in other terrorist activities. In fact, no Congressional resolution mentioned Hezbollah by name until 1998, years after the group’s last act of terrorism noted by the State Department.

“Jihad Against Hezbollah”

I’ll add a little paragraph from an article by Isabel Hilton that I posted here six years ago, after the Beslan tragedy:

In asymmetrical warfare everyone is involved and anyone is a potential victim. To promise that security in such conflicts will result from the deployment of large military machines is a sham. To fight asymmetrical war with tanks makes as much sense as trying to shoot mosquitoes with a machine gun. The result is counter-productive.

That’s what Dr. Abu Meri made me think of with his succinct phrase:

Un es arī neesmu pret kādu tautu, es esmu pret barbarismu, kas nogalina nevainīgus cilvēkus – vienalga, vai to dara izraēļi vai Hezbollāh. Kad es redzu fanātiskus cilvēkus, es domāju – ko viņi grib atgūt? Viņi nevar neko atgūt, viņi var iegūt tikai asinis un nāvi.

For you—an ersatz fanatical ultra-Zionist in Joizey, for whom Israel can do no wrong—such a statement is obviously insufficient. 

Vysu lobu,
/P

Sorosieši lems par privatizāciju

I would like to support Vienotība—but this man, Dr, Hosams Abu Meri, can in no way, shape or form represent me in Saeima.

Gee, what can we do to alleviate your concerns?

My concern is that you are a concern troll.  Seems funny that someone who seriously considers voting for a particular party mocks their candidates (Elerte for example) and links to parodies of their site.

I harbour absolutely no illusions that you would vote for Vienotības. You are a straight up SC kinda guy. Or am I wrong?

You are a straight up SC kinda guy.

If it were a latvian nationalist party that was implying civil unrest, a “third republic”, radical transformations of political and cultural structures, then I think Roberts would not be alone on this forum marching along with their Sturm und Drang.
Personally, I agree with the Abu Meri quote P posted about fanaticism regardless of ethnicity or nationality.

tom - 29 July 2010 11:30 PM

I would like to support Vienotība—but this man, Dr, Hosams Abu Meri, can in no way, shape or form represent me in Saeima.

Gee, what can we do to alleviate your concerns?

My concern is that you are a concern troll.  Seems funny that someone who seriously considers voting for a particular party mocks their candidates (Elerte for example) and links to parodies of their site.

I harbour absolutely no illusions that you would vote for Vienotības. You are a straight up SC kinda guy. Or am I wrong?

Tell me, Tom, who am I exactly supposed to vote for?  The SC, who will riot if they do not get their way?  The Šleseristas?  The extreme socialists of Visu Latvijai!?  My only reasonable alternative seems to be “Vienotība.”  However having a rabid “beheadista” in the mix alarms me.  If pointing out the flaws in your favored political movement offends you, then you better abandon this game.  I, for one, will continue to ask questions about those who purport to represent me.

/V a.k.a. Der Übersturmführer von seriously considers voting for a particular party mocks their candidates (Elerte for example)

But you’re not asking questions, Bobčik. You began this thread by calling Dr. Hossan Abu Meri a “noted Hamas apologist.” Challenged and unable to find a single quote in which the Doctor exhibits the slightest sympathy for Hamas, let alone a “notable” one, you switched to demanding that he condemn Hamas within earshot in order not to be a “noted Hamas apologist.”

You then found what he said about Hezbollah and cherry-picked the article. The one plump cherry you picked is that he said Hezbollah had never acted against civilians, which is indeed untrue. But I prefer to give the Doctor the benefit of the doubt based on what else he has said—in context, your contraption won’t fly; between your mistranslation and what he was describing, on site, lies the shadow.

And now he be a rabid beheadista? I won’t ask you to justify that.

Enfin, you come off as somebody who thinks all Arabs have to condemn anything any Arab ever did, which is the same sort of racist pose that not a few persons strike against Russkies here (or, for that matter, against anybody not condemning Russkies out of hand).

As to questioning—oh, come off it. You’ve railed at those diabolical Sorosites and most anybody into an open society for years here. What disturbs you about VL-TB/LNNK is its socialism? By which you mean certain populist proposals like state loan guarantees for housing, or concern for the elderly?

Boring, Bobčik. Your knowledge of Latvia and its politics is shallow at best, not to mention retarded (I mentioned Urbanovičs’ by now notorious Bishkek quote here quite a while ago, by the way). All of your views seem to be strained through the increasingly moronic partisan rhetoric in the US of A, somewhere between birthers and truthers, reeking of xenophobia, American exceptionalism, Islamophobia, and just plain vanilla ostrichdom.

Pace Nietzsche—the pond widens; woe to him who harbors stagnant pools full of poo.

Vysu lobu,
/P

Peteris Cedrins - 30 July 2010 10:13 AM

But you’re not asking questions, Bobčik. You began this thread by calling Dr. Hossan Abu Meri a “noted Hamas apologist.” Challenged and unable to find a single quote in which the Doctor exhibits the slightest sympathy for Hamas, let alone a “notable” one, you switched to demanding that he condemn Hamas within earshot in order not to be a “noted Hamas apologist.”

You then found what he said about Hezbollah and cherry-picked the article. The one plump cherry you picked is that he said Hezbollah had never acted against civilians, which is indeed untrue. But I prefer to give the Doctor the benefit of the doubt based on what else he has said—in context, your contraption won’t fly; between your mistranslation and what he was describing, on site, lies the shadow.

Po lil Pete,

Dr. Hosams Abu Meri has proffered nothing but excuses for Arab terrorism versus the Jews.  He denies Hezbollah has ever attacked civilians before this millennium. He has never once condemned Hamas.  He won’t even acknowledge Hamas’ belligerence as a causal factor in the ongoing conflict.  He constantly blames Israel first. 

If you are such a real big fan of “Honesty” and “Open Society,”  pray, do tell what Dr. Hosams Abu Meri thinks of the “Gay Pride” movement in Rīga, what, exactly are his thoughts on gay, lesbian, and “transpersonu” rights?

Tell me, what has Dr. Hosams Abu Meri done for tolerance lately?

/V a.k.a. Der Übersturmführer von vastly superior to all of its neighbors militarily