Why All the STL Critics Have It Wrong.

Share:

By Ghassan Karam

Let us be clear, from the outset, that there is no institution, official or person anywhere in the world that is to be held immune from criticism especially when the subject has betrayed and/or violated the principles with which they have been charged. But to be accused of having committed an act that the subject has not done is the epitome of injustice and demagoguery.

It seems to have become fashionable among Lebanese individuals, politicians, the media and political parties to never let an opportunity go by without making a statement about how biased, politicized and Israeli the Special Tribunal for Lebanon,STL, has become. Usually the only supporting documents for such accusations are often limited to a rehash of the undocumented charges that the STL has leveled accusations that are based on false witnesses.

Any investigation of the record would reveal that there is no justification whatsoever for the above position. There is no basis in fact for any of these accusations. After the horrid planned explosion that killed Rafic Harir, the former Prime Minister of Lebanon and 22 other individuals a one month (Feb. 25 – March 24, 2005) fact finding mission was set up by the United Nation and headed by Peter Fitzgerald. This was later followed by the creation of the United Nations Independent International Investigation Commission, UNIIIC, whose function was to help the Lebanese authorities investigate the deadly explosion of February 14, 2005. The UNIIIC was established on Apr. 7, 2005 through Security Council resolution 1595. Mr. Detlev Mehlis was put in charge of this Commission that proceeded to issue two reports under his tenure ship that ended at the end of 2005. The first report by the UNIIIC, released on October 20, 2005, summarized the progress on the investigation by stating the belief that such a sophisticated operation was a few months in the planning and that it could not have conceivably been carried out without the knowledge of both the Syrian and the Lebanese security services who were known for their almost total and complete control on Lebanon at the time. Yet it is crucial to note that the report ended by stressing that all parties are entitled to the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. The UNIIIC did not indict anyone but merely reported what its investigations have uncovered. A second progress report was issued by the UNIIC ,still under the leadership of Mr. Mehlis on Dec. 20 2005 in which the commission stressed that it is continuing its line of inquiry and that it is also reassessing  in order to ”close out any lines of inquiry which no longer have a direct bearing on the case”.  This was the last report by Mr. Mehlis who resigned and was replaced by Serge Brammertz who issued the third progress report of the UNIIIC on March 16, 2006 in which he made it clear that the commission was investigating those who have deliberately misled the investigation.

The UNIIIC continued to issue its periodic reports under the leadership of Mr. Brammertz until he resigned effective January 1, 2008 when Daniel Bellemare was appointed as a replacement until the expiration of the UNIIIC mandate at the end of 2007.

Meanwhile the United Nations Security Council had established the Special Tribunal for Lebanon upon the request of the Lebanese state. The Security Council did so under chapter 7 of the United Nations Charter. The negotiations between Lebanon and the United Nations determined the structure that would become the STL:  a Registry, Chamber with a pretrial judge, and a Prosecutor. The selection committee had recommended that Mr. Bellemare be appointed as the prosecutor for his familiarity with the details of the investigations that had been carried so far both by the Lebanese authorities and by the now defunct UNIIIC. But it is important to note that when the STL was established the UNIIIC had ceased to exist.

The STL became operational on March 2009 and that was when the Pretrial judge, an independent international jurist who is not a member of the Chamber, exercised his authority to review the evidence upon which the Lebanese authorities had held individuals in this case in custody. The Pre trial judge determined, at the earliest period possible, that the 4 generals held in custody should be released for the lack of evidence against them. Up until this moment the STL has not issued any indictments of anyone and has not made any accusations or issued any other rulings on this matter.

Based on the above, admittedly condensed and brief reading of the developments it is clear that:

1.     There is a clear and distinct separation between the UNIIIC and the STL.

2.     The Lebanese public and the media have failed to make that distinction.

3.     UNIIIC was established to help investigate. It could not and did not issue indictments.

4.     The Prosecutor of the STL happens to be the same individual who led the UNIIIC as its mandate expired. This, however, does not make the UNIIIC an organ of the STL.

5.     The STL has developed a sophisticated set of rules under which to operate including a detailed account of the rights of the accused, and an independent Pretrial judge to review and approve indictments.

It should be obvious, based on the above that the barrage of daily accusations notwithstanding, there are no legal, rational or logical grounds to besmirch the integrity of an organization by constantly making allegations to which it is not  even peripherally connected. The common complaint that the STL anchored its case to the testimony of false witnesses is patently false as the STL did not exist when the issue of false witnesses surfaced and since it must be also emphasized that the UNIIIC was aware of the false witnesses and said so in its reports. The UNIIIC, just like any credible investigator had a duty to weigh the evidence as it appeared and consequently to decide whether to use the evidence or not.

In an effort to get as much clarity as possible on this case a question was submitted to the STL spokesperson, Ms. Issawi, whose response is very informative and revealing:

With regard to the relationship between the United Nations Independent Investigation Commission (UNIIIC) and the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (Tribunal), you are right to treat them as two distinct institutions.  UNIIIC is separate from the Tribunal, which only began operating on 1 March 2009. UNIIIC’s mandate, according to United Nations Security Council Resolution 1595 of 7 April, 2005, was to assist the Lebanese authorities in their investigations in collecting information and evidence, but not to conduct prosecutions.  Conversely, pursuant to Article 10 of the Tribunal’s Statute, the Prosecutor is responsible for the investigation and prosecution of persons responsible for the crimes falling within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal.  Following the Pre-Trial Judge’s deferral order of 27 March 2009, the Tribunal now has primacy over the case and thus the legal framework is completely different, since the Prosecutor now has lead over the investigation. As such, the Prosecutor can use information and evidence collected by UNIIIC, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence of the Tribunal.

Share:

Comments

80 responses to “Why All the STL Critics Have It Wrong.”

  1. Ghassan,

    Great job. Keep up the wonderful job.

    Tim

  2. Ghassan,

    Great job. Keep up the wonderful job.

    Tim

  3. Tarie Al Fanarie Avatar
    Tarie Al Fanarie

    Yes thank you Ghassan for the clarifications and we appreciate your detailed information. well written article.

  4. Tarie Al Fanarie Avatar
    Tarie Al Fanarie

    Yes thank you Ghassan for the clarifications and we appreciate your detailed information. well written article.

  5. 4. The Prosecutor of the STL happens to be the same individual who led the UNIIIC as its mandate expired. This, however, does not make the UNIIIC an organ of the STL

    i dont like the sound of the above statement my friend. when rumsfeld was on the board of a pharmaceutical company and he was also in charge of speaking fo rthe white house, he happened to at his tenure of both positions hype up the swine flu which scared people and vaccines flew off the shelves which brought the company hes on the boeard lots of money.

    i dont like the fact that the STL was all formed at the UN which is under USA and israeli auspices. i have always stated that it should have been set up in the hague where its completely neutral.

    i can ruly understand HAs cncern that the STL is israeli influenced i mean look at where it originated?

    since when has the UN ever been effective. its only effective against the defeated sides of all nations. i’ve never seen them sanction the US for wrongful invasion, israel for their amazing tract record, england for their outstanding empirical victories and other couuntries.

    the only countries that the UN cares to attempt to stand up to are in africa, south america, middle east and far east. even australia neve gets touched for their support in iraq and whatever.

    though i want the STL to get on with its constipated and stuck dingleberry, i totally dont trust it which is why i can understand HAs concern but i dont agree with their approach towards it.

    yelling too much becomes annoying. yo umade your points heard, you gave your evidence, so why not prove to the lebanese and let us decide for ourselves that the STL will not dare to face israel which will show its true colors.

    its true that syria and lebanon had a hand in hariris killings but when you unfold and reveal so many freaking spies, the intleligent ones among us can see why there was a leakage in our security system.

    israel doesnt care about anybody. they killed all the JFKs and jamal abdul nasser and yitzhak rabin and now hariri.

    if HA would just shut up and allow the STL to do its job now that they have new evidence and loads of spies to deal with, i’m very sure they will have inconclusinve evidence that points to spies who are ALL lebanese and are ALL from various parties and religions which will vindicate Syria HA and israel.

    this is in now way written in stone but just like my brother ghassan who i highly respect has an opinion, i would like to exercise my freedom of many rights to express my own.

    i am in no way favoring anybody as i’m only commenting on what i’m observing and deducing.

    1. Tony A,

      I don’t need to repeat the details of how the UNIIIC and the STL came about. They did so as a result of a request by the Lebanese government. You also seem to think that the ICJ at the Hague is not affiliated to the UN which is false. It is part and parcel of the United Nations.

      The fact that Bellemare who was the head of the UNIIIC became the Prosecutor does not prove any connection whatsoever between the two organizations. High level employees move from one firm to the other all the time.

      And please do not say that the United Nationa is controlled by Israel. That is laughable.

      1. sorry bro but the UN is under heavy control of the zionists cos they have forced the UN to reword its attacks on israel thru vetos from the US and if the US uses its vetos, who do you think is behind that.

        i’m not disagreeing with you habeebi. i loved your post but if you look at another angle, maybe the UN wasnt the right place whether the UNIIC and the STL are dependent or not.

        maybe the decision by the lebanese authority was done out of emotion instead of careful thinking.

        i love you bro and this has nothing to do with you and me. this whole STL is way above our heads. i can smell something wrong with its formation.

      2. sorry bro but the UN is under heavy control of the zionists cos they have forced the UN to reword its attacks on israel thru vetos from the US and if the US uses its vetos, who do you think is behind that.

        i’m not disagreeing with you habeebi. i loved your post but if you look at another angle, maybe the UN wasnt the right place whether the UNIIC and the STL are dependent or not.

        maybe the decision by the lebanese authority was done out of emotion instead of careful thinking.

        i love you bro and this has nothing to do with you and me. this whole STL is way above our heads. i can smell something wrong with its formation.

  6. 4. The Prosecutor of the STL happens to be the same individual who led the UNIIIC as its mandate expired. This, however, does not make the UNIIIC an organ of the STL

    i dont like the sound of the above statement my friend. when rumsfeld was on the board of a pharmaceutical company and he was also in charge of speaking fo rthe white house, he happened to at his tenure of both positions hype up the swine flu which scared people and vaccines flew off the shelves which brought the company hes on the boeard lots of money.

    i dont like the fact that the STL was all formed at the UN which is under USA and israeli auspices. i have always stated that it should have been set up in the hague where its completely neutral.

    i can ruly understand HAs cncern that the STL is israeli influenced i mean look at where it originated?

    since when has the UN ever been effective. its only effective against the defeated sides of all nations. i’ve never seen them sanction the US for wrongful invasion, israel for their amazing tract record, england for their outstanding empirical victories and other couuntries.

    the only countries that the UN cares to attempt to stand up to are in africa, south america, middle east and far east. even australia neve gets touched for their support in iraq and whatever.

    though i want the STL to get on with its constipated and stuck dingleberry, i totally dont trust it which is why i can understand HAs concern but i dont agree with their approach towards it.

    yelling too much becomes annoying. yo umade your points heard, you gave your evidence, so why not prove to the lebanese and let us decide for ourselves that the STL will not dare to face israel which will show its true colors.

    its true that syria and lebanon had a hand in hariris killings but when you unfold and reveal so many freaking spies, the intleligent ones among us can see why there was a leakage in our security system.

    israel doesnt care about anybody. they killed all the JFKs and jamal abdul nasser and yitzhak rabin and now hariri.

    if HA would just shut up and allow the STL to do its job now that they have new evidence and loads of spies to deal with, i’m very sure they will have inconclusinve evidence that points to spies who are ALL lebanese and are ALL from various parties and religions which will vindicate Syria HA and israel.

    this is in now way written in stone but just like my brother ghassan who i highly respect has an opinion, i would like to exercise my freedom of many rights to express my own.

    i am in no way favoring anybody as i’m only commenting on what i’m observing and deducing.

  7. Umm iDriss Avatar
    Umm iDriss

    Thank you for this clarifying article, Mr. Karam!

    BTW, the STL also has a fourth independent organ: the Defense Office – aside from the Registry, Chambers with a pre-trial judge, and a Prosecutor.

    1. Umm Idriss,

      Again I plead guilty for the failure to mention Defense as the fourth part of the STL. Thanks for mentioning it.

    2. Umm Idriss,

      Again I plead guilty for the failure to mention Defense as the fourth part of the STL. Thanks for mentioning it.

  8. Sebouh,

    The Lebanese media, politicians and individuals speak of one organization as if they are speaking of the other. I do not know what you mean by complement when they never existed simultaneously and never had the same charge. The UNIIIC ceased to exist a few months prior to the establishment of the STL.When the Lebanese press and politicians complain about the false witnesses, they always do so in the context of an effort to delegitimize the STL that has not looked into the matter. The false witnesses are witnesses who made false statements to the UNIIC under Melhis and whose statements were re investigated by Brammertz.

    The only tennous connection between the two institutions is the fact that the selection committee recommended to the Secretary General of the United Nations that the STL Prosecutor position be filled by Brammartz. He could have chosen somebody else but decided that it was more reasonable to choose a person who was familiar with the investigation.

    To say that the STL is the same as the UNIIIC based on the fact that the former used what had already been gathered by the latter is a major error. Are the critics then suggesting that the STL should have started from scratch? That is an impossibility, there was no crime scene left. Let us assume that a new organization is set up to act on this isue then are you suggesting that all the work that has been done by the Lebanese, UNIIC and the Prosecutor should be thrown away or should all of the investigations be used?

    There is a total failure to distinguish between the role of the two institutions who existed at separate times and to complain about one by using dissatisfaction with the other is pure folly.

  9. Sebouh,

    The UNIIIC was established on Apr7 2005 and ceased to exist at the end of 2009.

  10. Sebouh,

    The UNIIIC was established on Apr7 2005 and ceased to exist at the end of 2009.

  11. Berytus Avatar

    Very interesting article. I wonder why none of these distinctions have been mentioned in the media yet. Especially in the pro-majority media. It would help support their case against the critics right?

  12. Berytus Avatar

    Very interesting article. I wonder why none of these distinctions have been mentioned in the media yet. Especially in the pro-majority media. It would help support their case against the critics right?

  13. Berytus,

    I have often asked myself the same question . For one reason or another we never made a distinction between the two . Maybe it is an issue of translation?

  14. Berytus,

    I have often asked myself the same question . For one reason or another we never made a distinction between the two . Maybe it is an issue of translation?

  15. Sebouh,

    In my previous post 2009 should read 2008 i.e the UNIIIC was in existense for under 4 years. Its mandate was over around two years ago.

  16. Sebouh,

    In my previous post 2009 should read 2008 i.e the UNIIIC was in existense for under 4 years. Its mandate was over around two years ago.

  17. But Ghassan, why do you fail to mention when you say Mehlis “decide to remove himself” that he is being sued and was accused by european independant investigators of misleading the investigation?

    why do you fail to mention the connection between Mehlis, Brammertz and Mr. John Bolton, the former U.S. ambassador to the U.N. who everyone knows about his strong zionist/pro-israel stand and AIPAC relation? so you shouldn’t count the israel connection to the UN as laughable.

    I understand you say that they are 2 separate entities but they are not entirely separate.

    you mentionned the prosecutor of the STL was leading the UNIIC before its mandate expired.

    How can you say, with total certainty, that they are completley separate and independant then?

    Also, didn’t the UNIIC hand over any of the evidence to the STL for it to continue its inquiry and indictment?

    I am afraid to say, that even if your article is well written and sheds light on the differences, you are missing major points that completley change perspective.

    1. robert thats exactly what i was trying go say as i fogot to mention that mehlise was fired and didnt just simply step down.

      this whole STL is questionable as i’ve been saying and i’m very suprised that ghassan has faith in the UN.

    2. robert thats exactly what i was trying go say as i fogot to mention that mehlise was fired and didnt just simply step down.

      this whole STL is questionable as i’ve been saying and i’m very suprised that ghassan has faith in the UN.

  18. Gassan, everyone opposing and denouncing the STL knows the distinction between the UNIIC and the STL the thing is they will try to discredit any effort to find the truth, which means they have something to hide and that is the scary part, they have enough motives to discredit any effort to unveal the truth. We hope they will continue to fail in their persuit of injustice and truth prevails not for the sake of Rafic Hariri or his son alone, but for the sake of every free lebanese

  19. Gassan, everyone opposing and denouncing the STL knows the distinction between the UNIIC and the STL the thing is they will try to discredit any effort to find the truth, which means they have something to hide and that is the scary part, they have enough motives to discredit any effort to unveal the truth. We hope they will continue to fail in their persuit of injustice and truth prevails not for the sake of Rafic Hariri or his son alone, but for the sake of every free lebanese

  20. Ghassan good article, but when you say that the UNIIC didnt indicte anyone, they did allure that Syria was mainly behind it and it was no other than BUSH jr who asserted their innocence afterwards.

    who knows, maybe the syrians were behind it but concluded some pact with the US behind Lebanon’s back.

    honestly, I dont trust anyone, including the newly formed STL.

  21. Ghassan good article, but when you say that the UNIIC didnt indicte anyone, they did allure that Syria was mainly behind it and it was no other than BUSH jr who asserted their innocence afterwards.

    who knows, maybe the syrians were behind it but concluded some pact with the US behind Lebanon’s back.

    honestly, I dont trust anyone, including the newly formed STL.

  22. and I agree with Tony, the connection with Israel is actually quite known between Melhis and Brammetz. and even if the stl took over now, there are still connections, first the prosecutor that u mentionned and second the already accumulated “evidence” handed over when the uniic mandate ended.

    1. Cathy,

      It is quite common in investigations to follow one thread and then find out that it was wrong. It happens all the time. The 1st report by the UNIIIC alluded to potential Syrian involvement. That has not been denied by any of the other reports. We will have to wait and see who is to be indicted and for what. What is the connection between Mehlis, Brammertz and Israel? Please explain. As for the prosecutor using the evidence collected by UNIIIC , that is standatrd business all over the world and that is the way that it should be. Where did yoy expect the STL to get say pictures of the original crime scene? Obviously from those that have done the investigation earlier. Do not forget that a lot of the investigation was done by the Lebanese authorities and all of that is being used.

      1. ghassan you’re missing my point…you say its standard procedures everywhere, fine i dont dispute that, i am disputing the clain of “complete & total independance” between both bodies.

        Plus, for the syrian implication, actually bush did come out & deny their involvement. I will try to find a link for that.

        for the israel connection, John Bolton. dig a little deeper and u will see. thats not to say that they were working directly for israel, but they are definitley influenced and have close ties with strong allies of israel and its ardent defenders.

      2. ghassan you’re missing my point…you say its standard procedures everywhere, fine i dont dispute that, i am disputing the clain of “complete & total independance” between both bodies.

        Plus, for the syrian implication, actually bush did come out & deny their involvement. I will try to find a link for that.

        for the israel connection, John Bolton. dig a little deeper and u will see. thats not to say that they were working directly for israel, but they are definitley influenced and have close ties with strong allies of israel and its ardent defenders.

    2. Cathy,

      It is quite common in investigations to follow one thread and then find out that it was wrong. It happens all the time. The 1st report by the UNIIIC alluded to potential Syrian involvement. That has not been denied by any of the other reports. We will have to wait and see who is to be indicted and for what. What is the connection between Mehlis, Brammertz and Israel? Please explain. As for the prosecutor using the evidence collected by UNIIIC , that is standatrd business all over the world and that is the way that it should be. Where did yoy expect the STL to get say pictures of the original crime scene? Obviously from those that have done the investigation earlier. Do not forget that a lot of the investigation was done by the Lebanese authorities and all of that is being used.

  23. and I agree with Tony, the connection with Israel is actually quite known between Melhis and Brammetz. and even if the stl took over now, there are still connections, first the prosecutor that u mentionned and second the already accumulated “evidence” handed over when the uniic mandate ended.

  24. here is a little something about dear zionist john bolton.

    Bolton claimed that Iran and Syria were threatening the world with weapons of mass destruction, an allegation that was denied by the CIA. Bolton has also made threats against Iran. In a 2006 speech to AIPAC, Bolton threatened Iran with “painful consequences” if that country did not yield to Washington demands that it shut down all its nuclear programs. Bolton’s actions at the United Nations Security Council were controversial. During and after Israel’s invasion of Lebanon in 2006, he consistently blocked efforts to adopt a ceasefire. He rejected criticism of Israel’s bombing of Lebanon and claimed that there is “no moral equivalence” between Lebanese civilians killed accidentally by Israel retaliation attacks and Israelis killed by “malicious terrorist acts”.

    1. cathy i put thumbs up to your comments as someone was giving you a thumbs down.

    2. cathy i put thumbs up to your comments as someone was giving you a thumbs down.

  25. here is a little something about dear zionist john bolton.

    Bolton claimed that Iran and Syria were threatening the world with weapons of mass destruction, an allegation that was denied by the CIA. Bolton has also made threats against Iran. In a 2006 speech to AIPAC, Bolton threatened Iran with “painful consequences” if that country did not yield to Washington demands that it shut down all its nuclear programs. Bolton’s actions at the United Nations Security Council were controversial. During and after Israel’s invasion of Lebanon in 2006, he consistently blocked efforts to adopt a ceasefire. He rejected criticism of Israel’s bombing of Lebanon and claimed that there is “no moral equivalence” between Lebanese civilians killed accidentally by Israel retaliation attacks and Israelis killed by “malicious terrorist acts”.

  26. “US Ambassador John Bolton said today that a UN inquiry into the murder of former Lebanese Prime Minister had presented hard-hitting findings on Syrian involvement in the killing. ”

    yet we now know that many witnesses were false right. so what is this hard hitting findings that Mr. Bolton was sure about back then?

    its all related my friend U.S.,UN, ISRAEL….

  27. “US Ambassador John Bolton said today that a UN inquiry into the murder of former Lebanese Prime Minister had presented hard-hitting findings on Syrian involvement in the killing. ”

    yet we now know that many witnesses were false right. so what is this hard hitting findings that Mr. Bolton was sure about back then?

    its all related my friend U.S.,UN, ISRAEL….

  28. small article I found:

    The Secretary General of Lebanese Islamic Resistance, Hizbullah, in his July 22 speech had admitted that he doesn’t know the the verdict in the United Nations’ Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) – but was informed by Lebanese Prime Minister Sa’ad Hariri that STL indictment is going to name some of Hizbullah members behind the assassination of his father Rafik Hariri in February 2005.

    Although, the release date of the STL indictment is not set as yet – the Israeli military chief, Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi informed Israeli Knesset that it would be in the month of September and it will indict Hizbullah for the assassination of former Lebanese PM Rafik Hariri. Is Gabi the 51st Jewish Messiah or what?

    The Israeli Chief of staff told the Knesset’s Foreign Committee that “with lots of wishes and a little bit of information” the situation in Lebanon will probably deteriorate following the issuance of an indictment by the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) over the assassination of former PM martyr Rafiq Hariri.

    In September 2006, Swiss journalist Silvia Cattori interviewed German criminal investigator Jurgen Cain Kulbel. In this interview, he discusses the political role of the UN Commission and the unexploited leads pointing to Israeli responsibility.

    On July 23, 2010 – The Global Research published Rannie Amiri’s article, titled ‘The Hariri Assassination: Israel’s Fingerprints’, in which he wrote:

    A crackdown on Israeli spy rings operating in Lebanon has resulted in more than 70 arrests over the past 18 months. Included among them are four high-ranking Lebanese Army and General Security officers—one having spied for the Mossad since 1984.

    A significant breakthrough in the ongoing investigation occurred in late June and culminated in the arrest of Charbel Qazzi, head of transmission and broadcasting at Alfa, one of Lebanon ’s two state-owned mobile service providers.

    According to the Lebanese daily As-Safir, Qazzi confessed to installing computer programs and planting electronic chips in Alfa transmitters. These could then be used by Israeli intelligence to monitor communications, locate and target individuals for assassination, and potentially deploy viruses capable of erasing recorded information in the contact lines. Qazzi’s collaboration with Israel reportedly dates back 14 years.

    On July 12, a second arrest at Alfa was made. Tarek al-Raba’a, an engineer and partner of Qazzi, was apprehended on charges of spying for Israel and compromising national security. A few days later, a third Alfa employee was similarly detained.

    Israel has refused to comment on the arrests. Nevertheless, their apparent ability to have penetrated Lebanon ’s military and telecommunication sectors has rattled the country and urgently raised security concerns.

    What does any of this have to do with the Hariri assassination?

    Outside the obvious deleterious ramifications of high-ranking Lebanese military officers working for Israel , the very legitimacy of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) is now in question. The STL is the U.N.-sanctioned body tasked with prosecuting those responsible for the assassination of the late prime minister. On Feb. 14, 2005, 1,000 kg of explosives detonated near Hariri’s passing motorcade, killing him and 21 others.

    Nasrallah called the STL’s manipulation an “Israeli project” meant to “create an uproar in Lebanon .”

    Indeed, in May 2008 Lebanon experienced a taste of this. At the height of an 18-month stalemate over the formation of a national unity government under then Prime Minister Fouad Siniora, his cabinet’s decision to unilaterally declare Hezbollah’s fixed-line communication system illegal pushed the country to the brink of civil war.

    Recognizing the value their secure lines of communication had in combating the July 2006 Israeli invasion and suspecting that state-owned telecoms might be compromised, Hezbollah resisted Siniora’s plans to have its network dismantled. Their men swept through West Beirut and put a quick end to the government’s plan. Two years later, their suspicions appear to have been vindicated

    1. Cathy,

      “…..Their men swept through West Beirut and put a quick end to the government’s plan. Two years later, their suspicions appear to have been vindicated”

      They also put a quick end to many innocent lives – Thank you !

    2. Cathy,

      “…..Their men swept through West Beirut and put a quick end to the government’s plan. Two years later, their suspicions appear to have been vindicated”

      They also put a quick end to many innocent lives – Thank you !

  29. By Wayne Madsen

    10-26-6

    A senior French DGSE — Direction générale de la sécurité extérieure — intelligence officer has told WMR that Lebanon’s ex-Prime Minister Rafik Hariri was killed in a car bombing arranged by Israel’s Mossad. The revelation from French intelligence is significant as the French government of Jacques Chirac joined the Bush administration and the neo-con policy establishments in Washington and Israel in blaming Syria for the attack. According to the DGSE officer, Israel and its American backers wanted to blame Syria for the assassination of the popular Lebanese leader in order to blame Syria for the attack thus forcing the popular Lebanese revolt that saw the withdrawal of Syrian forces. That left Lebanon defenseless for the “Clean Break” attack launched by Israel, with US support, against Hezbollah and Lebanon’s infrastructure.

  30. By Wayne Madsen

    10-26-6

    A senior French DGSE — Direction générale de la sécurité extérieure — intelligence officer has told WMR that Lebanon’s ex-Prime Minister Rafik Hariri was killed in a car bombing arranged by Israel’s Mossad. The revelation from French intelligence is significant as the French government of Jacques Chirac joined the Bush administration and the neo-con policy establishments in Washington and Israel in blaming Syria for the attack. According to the DGSE officer, Israel and its American backers wanted to blame Syria for the assassination of the popular Lebanese leader in order to blame Syria for the attack thus forcing the popular Lebanese revolt that saw the withdrawal of Syrian forces. That left Lebanon defenseless for the “Clean Break” attack launched by Israel, with US support, against Hezbollah and Lebanon’s infrastructure.

  31. sorry for bombarding with articles, its just there are a lot of theories out there, & we cant know for sure that the STL is clean 150%

  32. sorry for bombarding with articles, its just there are a lot of theories out there, & we cant know for sure that the STL is clean 150%

  33. Prophet Avatar

    Ghassan

    I appreciate the hard work you put into this paper, and respect your opinions.

    However I have to disagree with you on few points:

    Your suggestions, though indirectly, that people shouldn’t ask questions is surprising to me. Having read many of your work , I had the impression that you always advocated and urged people to ask questions, and not take things for granted.

    The UN should not have been the right place to create the investigative body. The American influence on the Security Council is well known. People in our area have plenty of bad experiences with the UN and UN security council. We started off with enough suspicions right there.

    – The Detlev Mehlis experience added to all the suspicions many people already had of the UN , and the UNIIIC. Neither the UN Security Council, nor the succeeding Heads of the UNIIC took any responsibility of Mehlis actions.

    The fact that three different people headed the UNIIC does not relief the second or the third from the mistakes of the preceding one. The whole body of the UNIIC should be responsible, and accountable. In this case there was no accountability. If that was in the rules when they created the UNIIC, then that would be a major mistake if not an intentional one.

    -The distinctions between the UNIIIC and the STL may be true as far what the expiration of the first and the beginning of the other… Yet Appointing the same person who headed the first to become a prosecutor of the second adds to the confusion and the suspensions. How could a person who was doing the police work of investigations become an impartial prosecutor?

    The fact that three different people headed the UNIIC does not relief the second or the third from the mistakes of the first or the second. The whole body of the UNIIC should be responsible, and accountable.

    The same person responsible for investigating the crime will issue the indictment, and prosecute the suspect. Doesn’t a prosecutor need to examine all findings gathered by investigators before he determines whether there is enough evidence to issue an indictment? In this case, Bellmer will not impartial when he examines his own findings.

    – More than 8 STL officials has resigned so far with out any explanations, just adds to the suspicions in the minds of people that live in a country full of conspiracy theories anyway.

    This isn’t any different than Hafez Assad promoting his son to a General so He could qualify to become president. In either position He is not accountable.

    I still love your work though

    1. Prophet,

      I would never ever say that people should not ask questions? Where did I say that? If it did appear in print somewhere then it must be an error. Ultimately , and we have said this before, rule of law works by accepting the judgement of the highest authority in the land. Acceptance does not mean that yiou do not disagree but it means that someone has to at one point make a ruling. As you well know had it not been for this , all over the world, then chaos will prevail since no ruling by any court will ever be pleasing to everyone. A good example , which we have used before is the case of Gore. When the Supreme court of theUS stole the election from him he appeared in front of the TV cameras and said: I accept this ruling but I disagree with it. And that was that. Ultimately that is how this issue is to be resolved. Someone will not like the ruling but that is the way things work.

      1. Ghassan,

        You are injecting a good commun sens into this debate…

        Keep up the good work!

      2. Prophet Avatar

        Ghassan,

        Thank you, and my apology.

        I’ll clarify my statement. I said it suggests, though indirectly, that people should not ask questions. I should have said “ it’s the impression I got that people aren’t justified in questioning and criticizing the STL.

        I do agree that, in an ideal world preferably, the rule of law should be respected and accepted. My concern is, who sets the process and the laws, and how fair are these laws? Are we seeking justice or just a judgment? Are we seeking truth or an answer? Are we to accept any decision regardless of the process?

        The Supreme Court decision to give the presidency to Bush instead of Gore didn’t cause an American civil war. An Indictment or a judgment might cost us a civil war if it didn’t bring justice.

        I’m not a legal expert. I’d appreciated it if you can elaborate on the question I raised in regard to the accountability of the UNIIIC and the people who headed it? Who is accountable when it comes to mistakes done? Is there any right to justice for those who became victim of mistakes done throughout the investigation? Thank you.

      3. Prophet Avatar

        Ghassan,

        Thank you, and my apology.

        I’ll clarify my statement. I said it suggests, though indirectly, that people should not ask questions. I should have said “ it’s the impression I got that people aren’t justified in questioning and criticizing the STL.

        I do agree that, in an ideal world preferably, the rule of law should be respected and accepted. My concern is, who sets the process and the laws, and how fair are these laws? Are we seeking justice or just a judgment? Are we seeking truth or an answer? Are we to accept any decision regardless of the process?

        The Supreme Court decision to give the presidency to Bush instead of Gore didn’t cause an American civil war. An Indictment or a judgment might cost us a civil war if it didn’t bring justice.

        I’m not a legal expert. I’d appreciated it if you can elaborate on the question I raised in regard to the accountability of the UNIIIC and the people who headed it? Who is accountable when it comes to mistakes done? Is there any right to justice for those who became victim of mistakes done throughout the investigation? Thank you.

  34. Prophet Avatar

    Ghassan

    I appreciate the hard work you put into this paper, and respect your opinions.

    However I have to disagree with you on few points:

    Your suggestions, though indirectly, that people shouldn’t ask questions is surprising to me. Having read many of your work , I had the impression that you always advocated and urged people to ask questions, and not take things for granted.

    The UN should not have been the right place to create the investigative body. The American influence on the Security Council is well known. People in our area have plenty of bad experiences with the UN and UN security council. We started off with enough suspicions right there.

    – The Detlev Mehlis experience added to all the suspicions many people already had of the UN , and the UNIIIC. Neither the UN Security Council, nor the succeeding Heads of the UNIIC took any responsibility of Mehlis actions.

    The fact that three different people headed the UNIIC does not relief the second or the third from the mistakes of the preceding one. The whole body of the UNIIC should be responsible, and accountable. In this case there was no accountability. If that was in the rules when they created the UNIIC, then that would be a major mistake if not an intentional one.

    -The distinctions between the UNIIIC and the STL may be true as far what the expiration of the first and the beginning of the other… Yet Appointing the same person who headed the first to become a prosecutor of the second adds to the confusion and the suspensions. How could a person who was doing the police work of investigations become an impartial prosecutor?

    The fact that three different people headed the UNIIC does not relief the second or the third from the mistakes of the first or the second. The whole body of the UNIIC should be responsible, and accountable.

    The same person responsible for investigating the crime will issue the indictment, and prosecute the suspect. Doesn’t a prosecutor need to examine all findings gathered by investigators before he determines whether there is enough evidence to issue an indictment? In this case, Bellmer will not impartial when he examines his own findings.

    – More than 8 STL officials has resigned so far with out any explanations, just adds to the suspicions in the minds of people that live in a country full of conspiracy theories anyway.

    This isn’t any different than Hafez Assad promoting his son to a General so He could qualify to become president. In either position He is not accountable.

    I still love your work though

  35. thank you cathy and prophet.

    1. Prophet Avatar

      WY, TONY. I know gassan is very smart, I thought

    2. Prophet Avatar

      WY, TONY. I know gassan is very smart, I thought

  36. thank you cathy and prophet.

  37. one last thing I found on Hareetz:

    “Tel Aviv calculates that the expulsion of Syria from Lebanon or the toppling of the Baathist regime in Damascus could bring to power a Lebanese government more amenable to Israeli demands. In particular, both want Lebanon to grant citizenship to the estimated 400,000 Palestinian refugees inside that country, a move that would effectively abrogate their right—never recognized by Israel—to return to the homes from which they were expelled in the course of the creation and expansion of the Zionist state.”

    1. yislamli timmik cathy. thats why i was questioning jumblatts motive? it will definitely be a victory to israel and the government amenable to israel’s demands was festering with spies which is why i took the time to look closely at the mossad emblem in another article on this site and i think i deciphered its motto to whats going on in lebanon.

    2. yislamli timmik cathy. thats why i was questioning jumblatts motive? it will definitely be a victory to israel and the government amenable to israel’s demands was festering with spies which is why i took the time to look closely at the mossad emblem in another article on this site and i think i deciphered its motto to whats going on in lebanon.

  38. one last thing I found on Hareetz:

    “Tel Aviv calculates that the expulsion of Syria from Lebanon or the toppling of the Baathist regime in Damascus could bring to power a Lebanese government more amenable to Israeli demands. In particular, both want Lebanon to grant citizenship to the estimated 400,000 Palestinian refugees inside that country, a move that would effectively abrogate their right—never recognized by Israel—to return to the homes from which they were expelled in the course of the creation and expansion of the Zionist state.”

  39. Prophet Avatar

    Tony,I know Ghassan is very smart, I thought I’d give you a hand,and a thumb up.lol.You’re smart too.

    1. prophet awwwwwww shucks i’m blushing. i hate to think i’m smart. forgive me god for i am non smarter than the allowance of light tht you have breathed into me.

      i would prefer to think i’m knowledgable as i’m always eager to be enlightened as i dont know all the answers.

      but smart? i decline the title lol but i thank the academy and my family for raising me and i accept the secondary trophy lol 🙂

    2. prophet awwwwwww shucks i’m blushing. i hate to think i’m smart. forgive me god for i am non smarter than the allowance of light tht you have breathed into me.

      i would prefer to think i’m knowledgable as i’m always eager to be enlightened as i dont know all the answers.

      but smart? i decline the title lol but i thank the academy and my family for raising me and i accept the secondary trophy lol 🙂

      1. Prophet Avatar

        Tony, I like your modesty , When I grow up I want to be just like you .lol. PEACE

      2. Prophet Avatar

        Tony, I like your modesty , When I grow up I want to be just like you .lol. PEACE

  40. Prophet Avatar

    Tony,I know Ghassan is very smart, I thought I’d give you a hand,and a thumb up.lol.You’re smart too.

  41. Cathy,

    Since you have taken the time to post a few responses that are not truly uniform and do not speak to the issue directly let me make a few remarks:

    (1) So John Bolton thinks that Syria and Iran are a threat to the world. What does that say about the integrity of the STL? Absolutely nothin.

    (2)John Bolton was one among many all over the world and even in Lebanon that thought that the evidence provided by the Mehlis report was strong. Again what does that mean? Only one thing. John Bolton thought that the evidence was strong. That’s it, nothing else.

    (3) So Ashkenazi expects the indictments in September. The French, British and German press has been writing about this issue for over two years. And please note that Hariri denied the story as told by Nasrallah.

    (4) Lebanese counter intelligence was able to dismantle Israeli networks in Lebanon. That is good for Lebanon but unless it can be shown that one of these individuals was connected to the 2005 affair then no hard you spin it it will not stick. You cannot build a case by association. That is why investigators are needed.

  42. Cathy,

    Since you have taken the time to post a few responses that are not truly uniform and do not speak to the issue directly let me make a few remarks:

    (1) So John Bolton thinks that Syria and Iran are a threat to the world. What does that say about the integrity of the STL? Absolutely nothin.

    (2)John Bolton was one among many all over the world and even in Lebanon that thought that the evidence provided by the Mehlis report was strong. Again what does that mean? Only one thing. John Bolton thought that the evidence was strong. That’s it, nothing else.

    (3) So Ashkenazi expects the indictments in September. The French, British and German press has been writing about this issue for over two years. And please note that Hariri denied the story as told by Nasrallah.

    (4) Lebanese counter intelligence was able to dismantle Israeli networks in Lebanon. That is good for Lebanon but unless it can be shown that one of these individuals was connected to the 2005 affair then no hard you spin it it will not stick. You cannot build a case by association. That is why investigators are needed.

  43. Ghassan,

    1)the post about John Bolton was not about Iran and Syria, I ahd to add that part to keep the integral passage.

    did you not read the part about him repeateadly putting a veto on a ceasefire during the war in 2006 and saying that there is no moral equivalency between israel’s “accidental” 1000 victims and HA’s victims?

    If you do not understand the link I am trying to make, then let me make it clear for you. you say there is was influence from Israel on the UNIIC. yet, it is widely known that both mehlis and his successor have very close ties to John Bolton.

    this is enough to dimiss neutral judgement toward none other than a LEBANESE issue.

    2) fine i’ll give you that point but he actually stated that after it was determined that there was mishandling. but still i will give you this point.

    3)it seems you are not reading through the entire article, did you read what Achkenazi said about the situation in lebanon?

    #2 you say the press has been writing about it for 2 yrs…how can they be writing about an indictment when the STL itself was refusing to say when????

    and please provide me some sources.

    some press writing about it because they heard it from israeli press doesnt make it “meaningless”

    4) I never said that it was FOR SURE this or that that was culpable. but denying this infestation of spies could be very well linked to the assassination and not looking into it until HA decides to put forward evidence is a bit fishy an weird.

    Plus I am answering your article claiming that the STL is trustworthy and completley independant of the UNIIC.

    I mean no ill toward you Ghassan, I am just saying just like you say I cant claim that these spies are linked without hard evidence, then you also cant claim that the STL is 150% independant of any influences.

  44. Ghassan,

    1)the post about John Bolton was not about Iran and Syria, I ahd to add that part to keep the integral passage.

    did you not read the part about him repeateadly putting a veto on a ceasefire during the war in 2006 and saying that there is no moral equivalency between israel’s “accidental” 1000 victims and HA’s victims?

    If you do not understand the link I am trying to make, then let me make it clear for you. you say there is was influence from Israel on the UNIIC. yet, it is widely known that both mehlis and his successor have very close ties to John Bolton.

    this is enough to dimiss neutral judgement toward none other than a LEBANESE issue.

    2) fine i’ll give you that point but he actually stated that after it was determined that there was mishandling. but still i will give you this point.

    3)it seems you are not reading through the entire article, did you read what Achkenazi said about the situation in lebanon?

    #2 you say the press has been writing about it for 2 yrs…how can they be writing about an indictment when the STL itself was refusing to say when????

    and please provide me some sources.

    some press writing about it because they heard it from israeli press doesnt make it “meaningless”

    4) I never said that it was FOR SURE this or that that was culpable. but denying this infestation of spies could be very well linked to the assassination and not looking into it until HA decides to put forward evidence is a bit fishy an weird.

    Plus I am answering your article claiming that the STL is trustworthy and completley independant of the UNIIC.

    I mean no ill toward you Ghassan, I am just saying just like you say I cant claim that these spies are linked without hard evidence, then you also cant claim that the STL is 150% independant of any influences.

  45. sorry I was typing fast and made a lot of typos, basically my point about Bolton was to show his charater and his history and his constant siding with Israel no matter what to the point where U.N members were shocked when he made that heartless incompassionate statement towards the 1000 dead lebanese civilians.

    if those 2 have strong ties with him, then takes away of their credibility towards an investigation involving lebanon plus that touches the evidence that they have collected which is now handed over to the STL.

  46. sorry I was typing fast and made a lot of typos, basically my point about Bolton was to show his charater and his history and his constant siding with Israel no matter what to the point where U.N members were shocked when he made that heartless incompassionate statement towards the 1000 dead lebanese civilians.

    if those 2 have strong ties with him, then takes away of their credibility towards an investigation involving lebanon plus that touches the evidence that they have collected which is now handed over to the STL.

  47. Prophet,

    In a civilized society there is a high independent court whose judgments are accepted by all. This is not the stuff of an ideal world since that is the way it works currently in all countries of law and order whether it is the US, UK,Scandinavia etc… There comes a point where a judgment cannot be appealed. (The STL interestingly enough) does provide foe an appeal and has set up an appeals court within its Chambers).

    There was no civil war in Gore vs Bush only because Gore accepted the ruling although he seriouslt disagreed with it and thought that it was wrong. That is precisley my point, we should not be talking about this, not yet. The Courts have not said a word yet. All of this is speculation

    As for the culpability of the UNIIIC I would suggest that it will be very difficult to prove that they have not acted properly. They did not seek the false witnesses and they did not ask the witnesses to lie. They followed the investigation where it led them. If one can show that the UNIIIC acted with malice and misrepresented the facts on purpose then yes they can be held accountable for their action. Remember though that the UNIIIC did not have the power to indict. All what they could do was investigate and submit reports. Indictments come from the prosecutor who has not yet indicted anyone. But even the prosecutor is not free to do what he choses. His acts must be approved bt a Pretrial judge and it was this judge who decided that the prosecutor does not have enough evidence to hold indict the 4 generals and so demanded their release from custody. That is a proof of the impartiality of the STL.

    All this talk about the fact that Mehlis new John Bolton and John Bolton favoured Israel therefore Mehlis is an Israeli agent is just talk.

  48. Prophet,

    In a civilized society there is a high independent court whose judgments are accepted by all. This is not the stuff of an ideal world since that is the way it works currently in all countries of law and order whether it is the US, UK,Scandinavia etc… There comes a point where a judgment cannot be appealed. (The STL interestingly enough) does provide foe an appeal and has set up an appeals court within its Chambers).

    There was no civil war in Gore vs Bush only because Gore accepted the ruling although he seriouslt disagreed with it and thought that it was wrong. That is precisley my point, we should not be talking about this, not yet. The Courts have not said a word yet. All of this is speculation

    As for the culpability of the UNIIIC I would suggest that it will be very difficult to prove that they have not acted properly. They did not seek the false witnesses and they did not ask the witnesses to lie. They followed the investigation where it led them. If one can show that the UNIIIC acted with malice and misrepresented the facts on purpose then yes they can be held accountable for their action. Remember though that the UNIIIC did not have the power to indict. All what they could do was investigate and submit reports. Indictments come from the prosecutor who has not yet indicted anyone. But even the prosecutor is not free to do what he choses. His acts must be approved bt a Pretrial judge and it was this judge who decided that the prosecutor does not have enough evidence to hold indict the 4 generals and so demanded their release from custody. That is a proof of the impartiality of the STL.

    All this talk about the fact that Mehlis new John Bolton and John Bolton favoured Israel therefore Mehlis is an Israeli agent is just talk.

  49. Prophet Avatar

    Thank you, Ghassan,

    It wasn’t I who talked about the link between Bolton and Mehlis.

    No worry though, I understand you are responding to everyone.

  50. Berytus Avatar

    Cathy, I think Mr Karam’s articles addresses your concerns about Israeli involvement. The fact that there is a distinction between the UNIIIC and the STL gives more credibility to the STL than to the UNIIIC.

    I think out of all the information provided to critically analyse Mr Karam’s article, Prophet’s was more factual rather than speculative. He raises a good point that maybe the evidence inherited and used later by the STL may have been tampered with during the days of the UNIIIC, and has therefore blurred the judgements now. But also, to counter his point, the fact that the 4 generals have been released and the STL is now accepting new evidence supplied by Hezbollah shows that they are open to alternatives. And like Mr Karam said, trials are also believing one line of evidence to then suddenly stumble on to other evidence that leads them somewhere else.

    So, I don’t think anyone should be believing theories of Israeli involvement or any sort of involvement in manipulating the STL investigation until the verdict and evidence has been finalised. Only then can we decide to deem the STL as biased or unbiased.

  51. Bertyus, you said:

    “Prophet’s was more factual rather than speculative. He raises a good point that maybe the evidence inherited and used later by the STL may have been tampered with during the days of the UNIIIC, and has therefore blurred the judgements now”

    maybe you haven’t read my posts entirely, but that’s exactly the point I made about Mehlis and Brammetz’s collected evidence which is handed over to the STL.

    my analysis was based on facts not speculation.

  52. Bertyus, you said:

    “Prophet’s was more factual rather than speculative. He raises a good point that maybe the evidence inherited and used later by the STL may have been tampered with during the days of the UNIIIC, and has therefore blurred the judgements now”

    maybe you haven’t read my posts entirely, but that’s exactly the point I made about Mehlis and Brammetz’s collected evidence which is handed over to the STL.

    my analysis was based on facts not speculation.

  53. Prophet Avatar

    I find myself revisiting this topic again, and I can be sure we will revisit it in the future. Many of the questions I had raised and were answered by Ghassan and the others will be the topic of discussions again as the we await the indictment we’re told is on the way. It becomes more important to find answers to those questions if Bellemare decides to delay the indictment because of any new development due to his examination of the information HA leader presented.

    Nevertheless, few questions remain to be fully answered .Ghassan has a good point when he said in his response to my last comment that “it will be very difficult to prove that they (the UNIIIC) have not acted properly”. He may be right, given that there is a process to examine and hear testimony in order to prove such allegations. We have seen and heard some of people who were investigated early on by the UNIIC under the leadership of Mr. Detlev Mehlis claim that they were asked and then threatened to implicate others in order to be cleared and set free. I don’t know if those claims are true or not. Also the issue of False witnesses needs to be addressed even if ,and most likely won’t be, the indictment isn’t based on their testimony. My concern with False witnesses is very legitimate because the mere existence of such witnesses indicates that someone or some party intended to mislead investigators and tamper with evidence. Some one or some party knows information that didn’t want it to be known to investigators, so decided to tamper with evidence.

    I

    I go back to Ghassan’s statement, which “it will be very difficult to prove that they (the UNIIIC) have not acted properly”. Which legal body is responsible for examining this issue? Is there an independent legal body in place at this time to deal with this issue? If so, will it take some one bringing legal charges against the UNIIIC, like what Jamil Sayed has done? How important is it to examine this issue before an indictment is out? Shouldn’t the STL look into it for the purpose of finding out if someone or some body was trying to hide valuable information ? I know some of you might think I’m splitting hair here. I do so because I happened to agree with Ghassan that a judgment has to be accepted , but I insist that the process has fair and accountable. The issues at hand are too important for anything to be neglected…

Leave a Reply