TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Who killed Rafik Hariri?
Pages (2): [1] 2 »

Who killed Rafik Hariri?

Syria was the first to have the finger pointed but then some Islamist group claimed responsibility. I think the Lebanese think Syria is to blame and maybe one good thing to come out of this is that people in Lebanon are beggining to voice their opposition to Syrian occupation.

This 'Islamist' group that has claimed responsibility seems a little sus to me as no-one has ever heard of them before, they claim to have done it cos of links with Saudi Arabia (not too sure but I dont think Syria and Saudi are on too good terms historically, the monarchy vs republican) and obviously if it is Syria, they cannot claim respobsibility and need someone else to blame

Also, what is Hizbollah's position on the Syrian occupation? I always here people from America or Israel saying Syria helps Hizbollah but from what I have read Syria merely 'allows' them to operate as they serve Syrian interests by attacking Israel. Hizbollah are Shia and I would have thought been very opposed to Syria, as Syria has not been too kind to Shia's in the past. Do you think Hizbollah would try and force the Syrians out like they forced the Israelis out?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mi...ast/4265329.stm

i definitely think this is the handywork of the CIA or the Mossad. why would they kill an enemy of their enemy? because this would cause preciselyu the reaction thats been reported in the media.

the lebanese are now angry with syria and guess whose standing by and enjoying this whole spectacle? you guessed it, the US and Israel.

quote:

Originally posted by Spacey Orange i definitely think this is the handywork of the CIA or the Mossad. why would they kill an enemy of their enemy? because this would cause preciselyu the reaction thats been reported in the media. the lebanese are now angry with syria and guess whose standing by and enjoying this whole spectacle? you guessed it, the US and Israel.

Right�Israel is defiantly the one who is responsible for every fucking assassination/terror act around the world, including the spetember 11th attack.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ-Kreing^^ Right�Israel is defiantly the one who is responsible for every fucking assassination/terror act around the world, including the spetember 11th attack.

relax, i never wrote that. i just suggested that it might be israel or the us behind this one act and i explained why.

you're trying to obfuscate. i won't let you get away with it. discuss the issue that i addressed.

moreover, if the us or israel is behind this, the hawks in both government now have cover for demanding a harder line on syria. suddenly, it seems more plausible that the mossad or cia are behind this.

if anyone mentions that an islamist organization claimed repsonibility, i ask of you. why is it unknown? can it not be a cia or mossad front anyway?

this definitely seems like the mossad or cia.

if this was an Israeli attack it was most likely down without the permission of the Prime Minister, as the timing is at conflict with negotiations with the Palestinians.

quote:

Originally posted by Yoepus if this was an Israeli attack it was most likely down without the permission of the Prime Minister, as the timing is at conflict with negotiations with the Palestinians.

actually it might be good timing, because he could argue (as you have done) that the timing is awful and he would not want to risk negotiations with the palestianians so the Israel wouldn't do it.

i don't think anyone wull ever know.

i've just listned to how the us congress is now demanding that syria remove their troops from lebanon, adn that the US adminsitration has recalled their ambass. bah, i think i'm right. the us will use this as cover for a harder line. something stinks about this whole affair. in due time, i may be proved right.


EDIT

on second thought, maybe it was iran. but why?

quote:

Originally posted by Spacey Orange i definitely think this is the handywork of the CIA or the Mossad. why would they kill an enemy of their enemy? because this would cause preciselyu the reaction thats been reported in the media. the lebanese are now angry with syria and guess whose standing by and enjoying this whole spectacle? you guessed it, the US and Israel.

Man, the first reply even.
My guess was at least 5 or 6.
YOu guys never let me down!

quote:

Originally posted by Spacey Orange i definitely think this is the handywork of the CIA or the Mossad. why would they kill an enemy of their enemy? because this would cause preciselyu the reaction thats been reported in the media. the lebanese are now angry with syria and guess whose standing by and enjoying this whole spectacle? you guessed it, the US and Israel.

So they would kill one of the only men who were aligned with them and who was fighting for precisely what the US is asking for and has been asking for, removal of Syrian troops from lebanon? It makes no sense to kill a man who's agenda was in line with your own.

The media only hypes an event for a little while and then moves on, they could never hope to get the coverage on the media from this event to force a revolution.

re

very good question

i would say syria, cause she did a lot of assasinations like that in the past
especially during the war.i definetely want them out

now she is totally fucked, there is a lot of pressure on her


for hariri , am shocked, cannot believe what happened
am worried about my beloved country
the next weeks will tell us

quote:

Originally posted by DJ-Kreing^^ Right�Israel is defiantly the one who is responsible for every fucking assassination/terror act around the world, including the spetember 11th attack.

Well I'm glad at least one of you is admiting it...

This whole thing smells a little funny to me too. I won't go so far as to say that there's possible CIA or Mossad involvement, at least not yet. There's no evidence to suggest as such yet.

Nevertheless, our immediate knee-jerk response in yanking out our Ambassador to Syria was unfounded and a bit strange. Let's keep in mind that, just as there's no hard evidence on CIA or Mossad involvement as of yet, there's equally very little evidence to point towards Syria at this time as well.

So why the knee-jerk reaction by us? What evidence do we seemingly hold of Syrian involvement that hasn't been shared amongst others? I think our reactions are a bit suspect and seemingly appearing almost deliberate. Steve Soto comments on this with links on his blog:

quote:

Why Is The Bush Administration Quickly Fingering Syria For Yesterday's Assassination In Lebanon? After the assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri yesterday in a suicide car bombing, the Bush Administration has managed to already tie the Syrians to the murder, even though there is already a claim of responsibility for the attack from an Al-Qaeda affiliated group, and the Lebanese themselves feel that there could have been any number of possible assailants. Yet the Bush Administration has already recalled its ambassador to Syria and used the killing to remind the Lebanese that they should break away from Syria. Why has seeing the Bush Administration jump to such a conclusion look a little bit premature and all too convenient? We are seemingly quick to infer that the Syrians were involved in this killing, and that plays nicely into the PNAC view that eliminating Israel�s enemies is our foreign policy. Yet the Bush Administration has not told us yet what evidence they have that Syria was involved, and why they would immediately recall our ambassador. I mean, how often has the Bush Administration recalled its ambassadors at all in any attack like this in the last four years? And yet, we are ready to pin this conveniently on the Syrians? I would like to know where the intelligence is coming from to support the �let�s blame Syria� theme? Is this coming from Rummy or the Mossad? The Syrians were quick to deny their involvement, and the Lebanese opposition to the current pro-Syrian government was conveniently quick to blame Syria for the attack, even though as this piece in the Daily Star points out, the Lebanese opposition was becoming more cohesive in recent months, and in no need of such a destabilizing event to further its case that the current government should go. In fact, it could be argued that Syria had little to gain from such a murder at this time, and only more grief would befall them by doing it. This piece in Bloomberg quotes a former American ambassador to Syria as stating it is a stretch to think that Syria did this. Yet the Bush Administration was quick to recall our ambassador from Damascus. Why? Were we blaming the Syrians for the killing? No. We just wanted to use this terrible killing as a prop to argue that Syria needs to leave Lebanon. So Condi is off to a hollow start in her Middle East diplomacy. Anyone who heard her unsteady and unconvincing comments today about the rationale behind our ambassadorial recall, and her claim that relations between the two countries were deteriorating would be convinced that the woman was in over her head. In fact the Syrians had been helping us out with backdoor intelligence for months on Al Qaeda, but Rummy and Cheney have blown up that relationship. So without knowing all the facts yet, we are making noises about imposing additional sanctions against Syria over this attack (gee, I thought this administration didn�t believe in sanctions), and we are talking openly about going across the Iraqi-Syrian border to chase down "insurgents." And if you think that this terrible killing is being manipulated very quickly by the US as a precursor to action against Syria, you are not alone. http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/003721.php

Iran

whoever is resposible is never gonna admit it since alot of parties may benefit from his dead.

anyway whoever did it may go to hell for disrupting peace in my beloved lebanon

how did the assasination happen

http://www.lfpm.org/asphalt.php

Re: how did the assasination happen

quote:

Originally posted by B018 http://www.lfpm.org/asphalt.php

interesting link.

everyone else: this link suggests, and the evidence shows, that the bomb was planted underground and was not a car bomb as has been suggested in the popular media. this has other implications such as who planted the bomb underground or hid it under inches of asphalt?

Re: Re: how did the assasination happen

quote:

Originally posted by Spacey Orange interesting link. everyone else: this link suggests, and the evidence shows, that the bomb was planted underground and was not a car bomb as has been suggested in the popular media. this has other implications such as who planted the bomb underground or hid it under inches of asphalt?

What link?

Re: Re: Re: how did the assasination happen

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley What link?

i was referring to the link posted by B018.

http://www.lfpm.org/asphalt.php

Re: Re: Re: Re: how did the assasination happen

quote:

Originally posted by Spacey Orange i was referring to the link posted by B018. http://www.lfpm.org/asphalt.php

Ah so you were!

They aren't experts on explosions tho are they? I doesn't say who decided those facts (police/military epert for example) for all I know they could have just made it all up and no one would be any wiser! Also, at the bottom, who do they blame? If they blame anyone

its Canada, trust me on this one!

It's easy to blame syria. The US would like to see a fight in the MO between arabs. I would not be suprised if the Mossad did it.

Has anyone mentioned the question of motive here for Syria? Why the hell would they want this ineviteable outcome that we see today? This obvious finger-pointing towards Syria and growing movement towards ousting them out of Lebanon is exactly what they wouldn't want.

So again, why would they do such a thing if the likely foreseen outcome is what we see today? I'm sorry but the deeper this goes the less likely it looks to me that Syria had anything to do with it.

quote:

Originally posted by MisterOpus1 Has anyone mentioned the question of motive here for Syria? Why the hell would they want this ineviteable outcome that we see today? This obvious finger-pointing towards Syria and growing movement towards ousting them out of Lebanon is exactly what they wouldn't want. So again, why would they do such a thing if the likely foreseen outcome is what we see today? I'm sorry but the deeper this goes the less likely it looks to me that Syria had anything to do with it.

I have no idea who did it. I have heard people blame America, Israel, Syria and Islamic fundies. Arguments can be found for all of those.

As for Syria, if it was them, Hariri was very popular and was opposed to Syrian occupation, maybe they believed he could lead a movement that would see Syria leave Lebanon? Perhaps they thought they could get away with it, or at least that this outcome was less likely to lead to Syrian withdrawal than if Hariri remained alive?

wow! what took you guys so long? I thought I would for sure see the blame on Israel much sooner! Why is it that Israel is blamed for every event on this planet? Even the Tsunami was Israels fault! The world, especially the Arab world need to start taking responsibility for their own actions. This blame game is so tiring and old already.

quote:

Originally posted by Philly the Tsunami was Israels fault!

really? that's what i suspected, but i was a little too embarrased to share that suspicion. now that you've done it, i feel good.


btw you're obsfucating like the other chap.

Actually, Harriri was the most moderate about the Syrian exit from Lebanon... he wasn't as extreme as others in the opposition...

so its really weir.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.