"Fraudulent" Nasrallah interview?

[PRC-UTE]

LINK (http://ww4report.com/node/2347)

Counterpunch prints "fraudulent" Nasrallah interview
Submitted by Bill Weinberg on Sat, 08/19/2006 - 02:38.
Lebanese scholar Gilbert Achcar writes via e-mail: "Many of you have certainly seen an interview allegedly done with [Hezbollah leader] Hassan Nasrallah by a Turkish radical left newpsaper... I have enquired about it, and a source in Beirut in close touch with Hezbollah has confirmed to me that it is a forgery." However, Counterpunch has seen fit to keep the evident forgery on its website, despite growing questions about its authenticity (albeit, with a note at the end acknowledging the controversy). The pseudo-interview is interesting because of what it reveals about the willful illusions the radical left cultivates about radical Islam. Here it is:

"Goodbye to the Unipolar World"
The Nasrallah Interview

By CounterPunch News Service

From an interview conducted shortly before the ceasefire by reporters from the Turkish Labor Party daily, Evrensel.

Q. What is the current state of your relations with the Socialist movement?

Hasan Nasrallah: The socialist movement, which has been away from international struggle for a considerable time, at last has begun to offer moral support for us once again. The most concrete example of this has been Hugo Chavez, the President of Venezuela. What most of the Muslim states could not do has been done by Chavez, by the withdrawal of Venezuela's ambassador to Israel. He furthermore communicated to us his support for our resistance. This has been an immense source of moral strength for us.

We can observe a similar reaction within the Turkish Revolutionary Movement. We had socialist brothers from Turkey who went to Palestine in 1960s to fight against Israel. And one of them still remains in my memory and my heart; Deniz Gezmis..!

[Deniz Gezmis, 1947-1972, was a Turkish revolutionary in the Marxist-Leninist tradition. He led major student actions in the late 1960s, went to a Fatah training camp in Lebanon in late 1969, returned to Turkey where his group seized four US army privates in Ankara. After their release of the soldiers, Gezmis was captured, tried for attempting to overthrow the Turkish state and, with two of his comrades, was hanged in the central prison in Ankara on May 6, 1972. Editors.]

Q. What is the importance of Denizs for you?

Hasan Nasrallah: We now want new Denizs. Our ranks are always open to new Denizs against the oppressors. Deniz will always live in the hearts of the peoples of Palestine and Lebanon. No-one should doubt this. Unfortunately, there is no longer a common fight and fraternity against the common enemy left over by the Denizs. What we would have liked is for our socialist brothers in Lebanon to fight against imperialism and Zionism shoulder to shoulder. This fight is not only our fight. It is the common fight of all those oppressed across the world. Don't forget that if the peoples of Palestine and Lebanon lose this war, this will mean the defeat of all the oppressed people of the world. In our fight against imperialism, the revolutionaries should also undertake a responsibility and should become, in the hearts of our people of Palestine and Lebanon, Denizs once again.

Q. It is possible to see the posters of Che, Chavez and Ahmadinejad side by side in the streets of Beirut. Are these the signs of a new polarization?

Hasan Nasrallah: We salute the leaders and the peoples of Latin America. They have resisted the American bandits heroically and have been a source of moral strength for us. They are guiding the way for the oppressed peoples. Go and wonder around our streets..! You will witness how our people have embraced Chavez and Ernesto Che Guevara. Nearly in every house, you will come across posters of Che or Chavez.

What we are saying to our socialist friends who want fight together with us for fraternity and freedom is: Do not come at all if you are going to say "Religion is an opiate". We do not agree with this analysis. Here is the biggest proof of this in our streets with the pictures of Chavez, Che, Sadr and Khamenei together. These leaders are saluting our people in unison. So long as we respect your beliefs, and you respect ours, there is no imperialist power we cannot defeat!

Q. Returning to threats in the region, western governments are intensifying their pressure on Damascus and Tehran, for which they are proposing a "change of regime." Some sources are of the view that the attack on Lebanon will be directed on Syria. According to your point of view, is a regional war possible?

Hasan Nasrallah: The centers of imperialist power want to make collaborators of our region as a whole. They expect us to kneel before them. Syria, Iran and Hezbollah are opposing this. The provocation concerning the former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri and the efforts to secure the withdrawal of the Syrian army from Lebanon and -- going even further -- their wish to attack callously on to Tehran and Damascus are all due to this reason.

Syria, with Iran and Hezbollah will certainly resist this. We are going to resist for our motherland and freedom. We are going to resist in order not kneel before them. The imperialists of the west are seeking to make a second Kosovo out of Lebanon and our region. They are seeking to create a clash in between sects. But we have spoiled this trick. In our streets, the whole of Lebanon, with its Christian, Sunnis and Shias, are flying the flags of Hezbollah. Again, "the unipolar world" has already been left behind in history. There is us, there is Iran, there is Syria, there is Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea. There are the resisting peoples of Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan! As long as there is imperialism and occupations, these people will continue resisting. They can forget about peace. If they want peace, they should now respect the freedom of peoples and should eliminate the collaborators. God willing, the victory will be ours.

They are not going to be able to turn our country and region into a Kosovo. Now our people are aware of everything and will not play into imperialist tricks. We will absolutely not permit them to attack Iran or Syria. We are going to fight for our freedom to the last drop of our blood. Let no one doubt this. They are claiming that Iran has nuclear weapons at its disposal. On the contrary, most of the nuclear weapons are in the hands of Israel and the US. Furthermore, nuclear weapons are nothing but excuses put forward in order to create collaborating regimes in the region.

Q. There are claims that Hezbollah is being directed by Tehran. What are your views on this issue?

Hasan Nasrallah: This is a great lie. We are an independent Lebanese organization. We do not take orders from anyone. But this does not mean that we are not going to form alliances. We are on the side of Iran and Syria. They are our brothers. We are going to oppose any attack directed at Tehran and Damascus to the last drop of our blood just as we do in Lebanon. We uphold global resistance against global imperial terrorism.

Q. Is there any other additional point you want to make?

Hasan Nasrallah: Peace cannot be unilateral. So long as there is imperialism in the world, a permanent peace is impossible. This war will not come to an end as long as there are occupations in Iraq, Afghanistan and Palestine.

Editors' Note: The authenticity of this interview has been challenged, maybe because Nasrallah doesn't speak entirely according to Orientalist expectations of what a Shi'a leader should be saying. CounterPunch has confirmed that the interview did appear in the Turkish socialist daily Evrensel on August 12 and 13, provoking comment in the Turkish corporate press because Nasrallah expressed his admiration for the 1960's generation of revolutionaries like Deniz Gezmis.

One of our more astute readers writes: "Psuedo-Nasrallah is talking like the fantasy of what a young Turkish anarcho-syndicalist stoner wants Nasrallah to represent. There's no way he would invoke Che, even tho his roots are in the left. There's no way he would talk about ending occupation, and then peace would follow."

Others, such as Peter Hudis of the Marxist-Humanist News & Letters have noted the unseemly phenomenon of leftists "tailending Islamic fundamentalism." This would appear to be a pretty egregious example.

[Severian]

A further comment on this off the "Marxism list":
>
>> The odd thing about the original web site is that it is only
>> in English. And there is no link to a Turkish (or any other
>> language) web site. Does Louis have an explanation for this?
>
> I showed it to my wife. She didn't study it exactly, but identified them
> as a Maoist party that in her words is "nuts". They do have a Turkish
> site actually: http://www.emep.org/giris.htm
>

The Turkish version of the interview exists. Do a Google search on
Nasrallah+Evrensel and you will get a lot of hits to the Turkish version.

As for EMEP (Evrensel is their daily) beeing "nuts": I would not put it in
these words. They certainly stand in the tradition of the Hoxhaist TDKP,
but they are certainly not a cult like the US RCP. In Germany they work
inside the Left Party and have through that a MP.

Evrensel is widely read and respected among the Turkish (Marxist-Leninist)
Left. I just talked to a Turkish comrade about it and he doubted Evrensel
itself could have invented such an interview. But you should note that the
interview was done by free-lancers of a left TV team who are currently in
Beirut. It seems they have sold it to Evrensel.

Certainly the AngryArab blog does not have any inside information about
the cicumstances of the interview, so the main point is that it does not
sound like Nasrallah, but more like a secular Marxist-Leninist.

The more I am thinking about it I come to the same conclusions like As'ad
Abukhalil. Usually Nasrallah is a quite sophisticated politician when you
read his interviews and speeches, but the Evrensel interview is really
showing a very raw anti-imperialism. OK, this might be explained by a
clumsy translation, first from Arabic to Turkish and than from Turkish to
English.

But there are other things that make me doubt the authenticy of the
interview: Why should Nasrallah give his sole interview to a non-Arabic
media to almost unknown Turkish left-wingers. As far as I know Nasrallah
gave only one single interview to Al-Jazeera during the war. All his other
statements were speeches on Al Manar TV.

OK, those Turkish journalists could have made contacts during their stay
in Beirut that won them the confidence of Hizbollah, possible, but highly
unlikely. Dont forget Nassrallah was a primary war target of the Zionists
and I really doubt Hizbollah security would have taken the risk of leading
foreign journalists to their leader.

Another thing that makes me doubt is the fact that the interview is not
mentioned on the Al Manar website. Since there was only a Al Jazeera
interview, I am quite sure they would have published such a rare interview.

Johannes
link (http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/marxism/2006-August/002535.html)

(I've seen
It's certainly true that this alleged interview is much more rhetorical than Nasrallah's usual style. For an example of that:
Nasrallah's interview with al-Jazeera. (http://www.islamicdigest.net/v61/content/view/1880/0/) He discusses all kinds of concrete military and political developments, apparently without demagogy or boasting. In some ways the usual Nasrallah comes off a lot better than the Evrensel Nasrallah.

The usual Nasrallah talks about God and the Koran a fair bit - and the Evrensel Nasrallah not at all.

Of course, it's possible that Nasrallah was catering and adapting to a leftist audience. But that eliminates all significance to the interview too - if it's not his usual line just pandering. And there too, the Evrensel Nasrallah comes off worse than the usual Nasrallah, who has a reputation for telling it like it is, not bending or pandering. Whether that reputation's entirely deserved I don't know, but that's his reputation.

In the end, it doesn't matter for the assessment of Hezbollah. So Nasrallah graciously consents to allow leftists to support him! Wow! (And of course, as always actions speak louder. See my comments in the thread where the alleged interview was originally posted. (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?act=ST&f=4&t=54533&hl=nasrallah&view=findpost&p=1292144343))

It does matter some for the assessment of Nasrallah's leftist fans: how far are they willing to go in order to create a Hezbollah in their own image? This interview has certainly been widely circulated and reprinted on the web - have many people fallen into a hoax because they wanted to believe it?

Evrensel's comment on this controversy is interesting in that respect: It proclaims that "Not only Hezbollah, but the Communist Party of Lebanon, three different communist parties of Syria, left resistance in Iraq and all the left progressive intellectuals in the Middle East also support similar views." (http://www.sendika.org/english/yazi.php?yazi_no=7273) Well, Hezbollah isn't adopting the left's views, but it may be that some leftists are adopting Hezbollah's.

As for Counterpunch - it's basically Alexander Cockburn's publication. Cockburn's not only an advocate of unity with Middle Eastern rightists like Hezbollah - he's an advocate of unity with U.S. ultrarightists like the "Michigan Militia" - who he's falsely compared to the Zapatistas.

[PRC-UTE]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27 2006, 11:17 PM
As for Counterpunch - it's basically Alexander Cockburn's publication. Cockburn's not only an advocate of unity with Middle Eastern rightists like Hezbollah - he's an advocate of unity with U.S. ultrarightists like the "Michigan Militia" - who he's falsely compared to the Zapatistas.
:o

wtf is the story with that?

[Severian]

Just another example of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" thinking from the middle-class left.

[Tekun]

I was skeptical about the interview as well in another thread, his position wasn't very Islamic, but more anti-imperialist or anti-US/Israel
Nor did he propose and bring up policies or points in Hezbollah's manifesto

I think this will shake some of the members here that support that reactionary Islamic organization
If they ever get to read this, seeing how very few ppl have entered or even posted in this thread

[Forward Union]

This is pretty classic. :lol:

[The Grinch]

Cockburn's admitted it's fake- http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn09012006.html

And, juvenile of me though this is, I thought this should be counterposed with that fact.


Originally posted by "Jamal"
Nasralla was great in this talk! All of you that are failing to admit you were wrong in the other threads, just admit it man!

[D_Bokk]

Knowing this, I wouldn't go as far as to defend Nasrallah - anymore; however, I still hold my support for Hizb'allah in their fight to destroy Israel.

Originally posted by The Grinch
And, juvenile of me though this is, I thought this should be counterposed with that fact.
Don't worry, all your posts are juvenile... we're getting used to it.

[The Grinch]

Originally posted by [email protected] 3 2006, 10:18 PM
Knowing this, I wouldn't go as far as to defend Nasrallah - anymore; however, I still hold my support for Hizb'allah in their fight to destroy Israel.

So you admit your entire political position on Nasrallah was based on a fictional interview?



Don't worry, all your posts are juvenile... we're getting used to it.Juvenile, but factual. So I'm still one up on you.

[D_Bokk]

Originally posted by The Grinch
So you admit your entire political position on Nasrallah was based on a fictional interview?
Nasrallah, the individual - specifically why he hated Jews so much. I was under the impression he was more politically conscious. This revelation doesn't make my opinion of Hizb'allah worse, in fact it instead strengthens it. Since Nasrallah and Hizb'allah make quite different statements regarding Jews and Israel being able to reject Nasrallah makes arguing for Hizb'allah a lot easier... because that's all you could possibly bank your crackpot position on.

Juvenile, but factual. So I'm still one up on you.
You speak so highly of yourself... might want to stop doing that. I've yet to see a factual, let alone intelligent, post come from "The Grinch." All I've seen was petty accusations about my opinion of Jews, an obvious indicator of you not having a valid argument.

[The Grinch]

Originally posted by "D Bokk"

Nasrallah, the individual - specifically why he hated Jews so much. I was under the impression he was more politically conscious. This revelation doesn't make my opinion of Hizb'allah worse, in fact it instead strengthens it. Since Nasrallah and Hizb'allah make quite different statements regarding Jews and Israel being able to reject Nasrallah makes arguing for Hizb'allah a lot easier... because that's all you could possibly bank your crackpot position on. So now Nasrallah has no political influence in Hizb'allah? :rolleyes:

And, to remind you, your position was based on an entirely made up interview. So I think attempting to take the moral highground here is somewhat amusing.

You speak so highly of yourself... might want to stop doing that. Actually, suggesting I'm less dumb than you isn't really a major compliment in my book. Damning with fake praise and all.
I've yet to see a factual, let alone intelligent, post come from "The Grinch." I take the scorn of middle class pseuds as a badge of pride.
All I've seen was petty accusations about my opinion of Jews, an obvious indicator of you not having a valid argument.No, quotes of your comments where you singled out Jewish capitalists above all others. And your argument about Nasrallah was based entirely on you being stupid enough to believe a fake interview, despite the fact that some people were questioning it. Because you desperately wanted to believe it. Do you not even have a little glimmer of shame about that?

Because while you might be claiming that it's irrelevant now, before you thought it was important enough to quote large swathes of it.

[D_Bokk]

Originally posted by The Grinch
So now Nasrallah has no political influence in Hizb'allah? rolleyes.gif

And, to remind you, your position was based on an entirely made up interview. So I think attempting to take the moral highground here is somewhat amusing.
I would assume not. If this was true, Hizb'allah's policy towards Jews would be quite different. And my position was entirely anti-imperialism without compromising my support for Hizb'allah to please the capitalists, ie "I support anti-imperialism but not the destruction of Israel." Only petty bourgeois sympathizers would take that line of argument.

Actually, suggesting I'm less dumb than you isn't really a major compliment in my book. Damning with fake praise and all.
Maybe you should post something even remotely intelligent before you make this claim?

I take the scorn of middle class pseuds as a badge of pride.
That's exactly what you are, although you'll never admit it. That's okay though, you're on the Internet - you pretend to be the poor proletarian all you want. I guess my honesty isn't good in a debate... lying is much easier, huh Grinch?

No, quotes of your comments where you singled out Jewish capitalists above all others. And your argument about Nasrallah was based entirely on you being stupid enough to believe a fake interview, despite the fact that some people were questioning it. Because you desperately wanted to believe it. Do you not even have a little glimmer of shame about that?

Because while you might be claiming that it's irrelevant now, before you thought it was important enough to quote large swathes of it.
Me? I believe everyone was nit-picking at Nasrallah's labeling certain people "Jewish Capitalists" and I pointed out how that's not anti-Semetic and only those who are misled by the media would believe something so incredibly stupid.

I didn't see you claiming that the interview was a fake before someone else investigated it. You're no smarter, by your logic. There's no shame in being misled, the proletariat is misled every single day... what's wrong with me being misled every once in a while? And I quoted the text once.

[( R )evolution]

Yea, I really didnt think it was true after Nasarlla went on about Denzi it just didnt seem right that a Isamic miliant would mention a leftist so much.

[Severian]

Originally posted by The Grinch+Sep 3 2006, 03:41 PM--> (The Grinch @ Sep 3 2006, 03:41 PM) Cockburn's admitted it's fake- http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn09012006.html

And, juvenile of me though this is, I thought this should be counterposed with that fact.


"Jamal"
Nasralla was great in this talk! All of you that are failing to admit you were wrong in the other threads, just admit it man! [/b]
Yeah, exactly.

It doesn't especially say much about Nasrallah and Hezbollah - whose politics are well-known.

But the widespread acceptance of the fake says a lot about the delusions of their cheerleading squad on the middle-class left.

[mauvaise foi]

Originally posted by Machiavelli [email protected] 4 2006, 03:04 AM
Yea, I really didnt think it was true after Nasarlla went on about Denzi it just didnt seem right that a Isamic miliant would mention a leftist so much.
That's because you can't get rid of your Orientalist prejudices. You insist on thinking of Muslims as the Other, and so you can't imagine that they might have similar views.

[SPK]

Workers World Party on this question:

Hezbollah denies interview
Published Sep 3, 2006 9:42 AM

Workers World newspaper's editors learned on Sept. 1 that Hussain Rahhal, Hezbollah's press liaison, while answering a question from a correspondent of the Anatolian Press Agency regarding an interview purported to be with Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and published Aug. 12 in the Turkish socialist newspaper Evrensel, said: "Our secretary general Nasrallah has not given any interviews to any Turkish or other non-Lebanese journalist during the month of August."

Soon after it had been published in Turkish, an English translation of the original purported interview was made available on the Internet. On Aug. 23, Workers World published excerpts from this text. It was also published in English by Counterpunch and as well as other publications, and translated and published in other languages.

At the time of publication, some had questioned the authenticity of the interview. Counterpunch's Alexander Cockburn wrote a reply defending the publication of the purported interview, citing, in part, the lack of any denial of the interview from Nasrallah or Hezbollah. When excerpts were published in Workers World on Aug. 23, some 11 days after the original Turkish publication, there still had been no public denial of the interview.

What Workers World knows of the story behind the interview comes mostly from the newspaper Evrensel, which has been publishing for 12 years and is a respected newspaper of the Turkish left. Two Turkish filmmakers associated with the "Sheikh Bedreddin Film Collective," Roza Cigdem Erdogan and Mutlu Sahin, were in Beirut making documentary films. The two had written other newspaper reports for Evrensel before they turned in the purported interview with Nasrallah.

Evrensel apologized to its readers and to those who republished the text for publishing the alleged interview and demanded an explanation from the film collective. The film collective has replied with a statement saying they are investigating the events. There was no immediate response from the two filmmakers who had claimed to have done the interview.

—WW editorial board, Sept. 2

This article is copyright under a Creative Commons License.
Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011
Email: [email protected]
Subscribe [email protected]
Support independent news http://www.workers.org/orders/donate.php

[Severian]

Oh dear God, Workers World can't be straight-up and admit it's fake and they were duped, even now. They're still calling it an "alleged interview" even after Evrensel says its a "forgery". Contrast WW's version of Evrensel's statement with the actual Evrensel statement given in full by Cochran (earlier link).

Workers World has to be the most dishonest political group on the U.S. left, and that's saying something.

****

Mauvoise foi, is that intentional satire or unintentional self-satire? Saying someone thought it was fake because of "Orientalist prejudices", even after it's been proven fake?

[( R )evolution]

Originally posted by mauvaise foi+Sep 4 2006, 03:12 AM--> (mauvaise foi @ Sep 4 2006, 03:12 AM)
Machiavelli [email protected] 4 2006, 03:04 AM
Yea, I really didnt think it was true after Nasarlla went on about Denzi it just didnt seem right that a Isamic miliant would mention a leftist so much.
That's because you can't get rid of your Orientalist prejudices. You insist on thinking of Muslims as the Other, and so you can't imagine that they might have similar views. [/b]
It is not that I thinking like that. I am simplying saying after listening, reading, and wacthing Nasarallah I found it very irregular for him to speak about Denzi like that, it just didnt seem his style.

[mauvaise foi]

Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2006, 05:54 AM

Mauvoise foi, is that intentional satire or unintentional self-satire? Saying someone thought it was fake because of "Orientalist prejudices", even after it's been proven fake?
I didn't say it wasn't fake. All I said was that it wasn't impossible for a Muslim to have leftist sympathies. Machiavelli X didn't say he thought it was fake because it was proven to be fake, he said that he thought it was fake upon first impression because "it just didn't seem right that an Islamic militant would mention a leftist so much." Why not?

[Severian]

Originally posted by mauvaise [email protected] 4 2006, 04:42 AM
All I said was that it wasn't impossible for a Muslim to have leftist sympathies.
True but irrelevant; Nasrallah isn't simply a "Muslim" but the leader of a rightist "Muslim fundamentalist" party.

So: unintentional self-satire, then!

[LebaneseCommunistParty]

Statement made by leader of hezbollah Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah after the july august israeli-hezbollah conflict:

"What we would have liked is for our socialist brothers in Lebanon to fight against imperialism and Zionism shoulder to shoulder. This fight is not only our fight. It is the common fight of all those oppressed across the world. Don't forget that if the peoples of Palestine and Lebanon lose this war, this will mean the defeat of all the oppressed people of the world. In our fight against imperialism, the revolutionaries should also undertake a responsibility and should become, in the hearts of our people of Palestine and Lebanon

We salute the leaders and the peoples of Latin America. They have resisted the American bandits heroically and have been a source of moral strength for us. They are guiding the way for the oppressed peoples. Go and wonder around our streets..! You will witness how our people have embraced Chavez and Ernesto Che Guevara. Nearly in every house, you will come across posters of Che or Chavez.

What we are saying to our socialist friends who want fight together with us for fraternity and freedom is: Do not come at all if you are going to say "Religion is an opiate". We do not agree with this analysis. Here is the biggest proof of this in our streets with the pictures of Chavez, Che, Sadr and Khamenei together. These leaders are saluting our people in unison. So long as we respect your beliefs, and you respect ours, there is no imperialist power we cannot defeat!"

Your thoughts?

[WP_Joel]

Any socilialist should give military support to any anti-imperialist campaign as long as it is only for anti-imperialist actions. However it should be in a united front and the serparate organisations should keep their political programmes separate at the risk of watering down important politcal views.

This would work as a basis for winning people over in the argument to socialism as afterall imperialism is the highest form of capitalism and therefore can only be defeated through socialist politics.

There's more to it than that, its just a short summary.

[Angry Young Man]

Hmm I was on the side of Hezbollah last summer cos what the Israelis were doing was brutal.
I'd still be a little cynical about the religion factor. I can't even remember if they were called muslim radicals, but if they have, there's always the chance that that's what the media wants you to believe.
I didn't know they were socialists.

[Bright Banana Beard]

For me in Hezbollah, I think they just wanted to stop Iseral from destroying the neighbor, however the network isn't well organized and some idiot proclaimed Hezbollah still doesn't understand what they doing, but I remember in some news that Hezbollah is helping their people in Lebanon, Palestine, & Syria, even donate money. I never see that they fight for religious, but they did fight for people. Zionist is the true problem for palestian and lebonanian.

[Sir_No_Sir]

I agree, 100% percent with Nasrallah and with Hezbollah. It's a religious force-not good, but I have been presented with no evidence that they are extremist wackos.

[bloody_capitalist_sham]

The left in the western countries need to learn extensively from groups like Hezbollah.

They have succeeded in winning mass support and representing the lebanese people.

No where in the left in Britain can say that. Writing Hezbollah off seems really foolish.

[Keyser]

The left in the western countries need to learn extensively from groups like Hezbollah.

What do you mean by that?

Hizbullah is a political organisation that openly works for the establishment of a Islamic theocratic system of government and society in Lebanon.

In what way can secularists, atheists and class struggle revolutionaries "learn" from Hizbullah?


They have succeeded in winning mass support and representing the lebanese people.

There have been, are and will be many political parties and organisations that win over huge levels of popular support, regardless of their class posistion and composition. Just because a political movement is popular does not mean that such a political movement is either progressive or that such a political movement represents or aims to liberate the working class. It is not uncommon for reactionary political movements, be they fascist or religious fundamentalist, to gain high levels of public support.

As for representing the people of Lebanon, which people exactly?

Any socialist, marxist, communist or anarchist should always support moves to gain the maximum level of representation for the working class.

In the past, Hizbullah have been known to use violence and coercion against poor and working class Lebanese who were unable to pay their rent and took part in a rent strike.

So please explain how Hizbullah using violence against poor and working class rent strikers in support of landowners and property developers is an example of Hizbullah "representing the Lebanese people"?


Writing Hezbollah off seems really foolish.

Who said anything about writing Hizbullah off?

I know that Hizbullah are a powerful force in Lebanese politics with a very large support base in Lebanese society. Hizbullah is not going to disappear from the Lebanese political scene anytime soon, but why do you confuse acknowledging that fact with having to support Hizbullah politically?

[Enragé]

Hizbullah is a political organisation that openly works for the establishment of a Islamic theocratic system of government and society in Lebanon.

no actually.
All they are doing is representing the shia in Lebanon, and they have always said they will not use undemocratic methods which leads to the conclusion that they cannot impose an islamic theocratic system since Lebanon is simply too divided (way too many religious groups).

I saw a picture about half a year ago, maybe less, in a newspaper here of a Hezbollah woman, clad in traditional islamic dress (veil and all), walking side by side with a western-looking like 20 year old girl with sunglasses, one of those t-shirts which show the bellybutton and shit (donno how you call it :blink:), tight jeans, pretty hot looking too...in a demo against the government of Siniora.
So at least it doesnt seem like they're too bad in that aspect.

Now, hezbollah still is a fundamentalist whackjob organisation, not worthy of our support, when they are not defending the lebanese people from an imperialist onslaught.
Leftist groups should be eating away at the base of this organisation, working together where it has common goals though (islam isnt all bad), and slowly work on bringing together a secular, leftist movement based on the lebanese working class.
easier said than done ^^

[Severian]

Originally posted by LebaneseCommunistParty+March 06, 2007 11:05 am--> (LebaneseCommunistParty @ March 06, 2007 11:05 am) Statement made by leader of hezbollah Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah after the july august israeli-hezbollah conflict: [/b]

This "statement" is a hoax. Nasrallah never made it.

If you were really Lebanese, wouldn't you know that?

It's a case of leftists creating the Hezbollah they want to believe in.

Originally it appeared in the Turkish leftist paper "Evrensel" - but that paper now admits it was fake, says they were hoodwinked by some Turkish "anarcho-communist video collective." Who claimed to have gotten a print interview.
Eventually, Hezbollah disavowed the interview, and Evrensel retracted it. (http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn09012006.html)

This episode - and how many leftists worldwide believed it - conveys nothing about Hezbollah.

But it does say something about those leftists who've fallen in love with this Islamist group, and how self-deluded they are.

***


NKOS
All they are doing is representing the shia in Lebanon,

And basing a party on a religious-sectarian divide is.....kinda reactionary, seems to me. Perpetuates the divisions within the Lebanese working class.


and they have always said they will not use undemocratic methods which leads to the conclusion that they cannot impose an islamic theocratic system since Lebanon is simply too divided (way too many religious groups).

Only if you assume that everything they say is the gospel truth.

But probably they will never take power; few Islamist groups ever have. That hasn't stopped Islamist groups from being a big obstacle to working-class politics and the emergence of a more effective revolutionary anti-imperialist approach.

[( R )evolution]

Originally posted by Anarchism [email protected] 07, 2007 12:24 am

The left in the western countries need to learn extensively from groups like Hezbollah.

What do you mean by that?

Hizbullah is a political organisation that openly works for the establishment of a Islamic theocratic system of government and society in Lebanon.

In what way can secularists, atheists and class struggle revolutionaries "learn" from Hizbullah?


They have succeeded in winning mass support and representing the lebanese people.

There have been, are and will be many political parties and organisations that win over huge levels of popular support, regardless of their class posistion and composition. Just because a political movement is popular does not mean that such a political movement is either progressive or that such a political movement represents or aims to liberate the working class. It is not uncommon for reactionary political movements, be they fascist or religious fundamentalist, to gain high levels of public support.

As for representing the people of Lebanon, which people exactly?

Any socialist, marxist, communist or anarchist should always support moves to gain the maximum level of representation for the working class.

In the past, Hizbullah have been known to use violence and coercion against poor and working class Lebanese who were unable to pay their rent and took part in a rent strike.

So please explain how Hizbullah using violence against poor and working class rent strikers in support of landowners and property developers is an example of Hizbullah "representing the Lebanese people"?


Writing Hezbollah off seems really foolish.

Who said anything about writing Hizbullah off?

I know that Hizbullah are a powerful force in Lebanese politics with a very large support base in Lebanese society. Hizbullah is not going to disappear from the Lebanese political scene anytime soon, but why do you confuse acknowledging that fact with having to support Hizbullah politically?
I think he is talking about how much support the Leabeonse and other Middle East countries give support to Hizbullah. Especially the working class. Hizbullah has alot of support and I think are comrade who you qoute was trying to say is that we should learn from them and try to gain a workers support as they have.

You are a fool if you do not think we can learn from the actions of Hizbullah. I went to Leabanon and Iraq to visit my family and ALL of them told me they support hizbullah 100%. Now what would happen if the workers in the west had this kind of love for the leftist? Can someone say fucking revolution. Revolution is what we are trying to achieve and without popular support that revolution aint going anywhere.

You have to understand that as socialist/communist/anarchist or whatever leftist you are, we can not be so fucking slecetive to who we ally with if we all try to follow Marixst theory and try to only ally with people who are atheist, communist, socialist than we wouldnt get anywhere. Muslims in the middle east are not going to support any movement, right now, that says we want to remove your religion from you. You would get killed. We must have a gradual system of removing the religion out of the people, as another comrade said it would probally take 2-3 generations of muslims to began to see why we should drop this religion.

Please show me some fucking ecidence that Hizbullah has been known to use violence against poor and the workers. Did you not see them handing out millions of dollars for working class people to rebuild there homes.

When in the hell has Hizbullah supported landowners? Please show me some evidence of this and dont let it be some bull shit israeli newspaper.

[( R )evolution]

Also, severian is correct this socalled interview was actual false.

[More Fire for the People]

The problem with Hezbollah is not that they want an anti-imperialist struggle but the fact their view of decolonisation — which is in fact collective catharsis — is the opposite of catharsis: a [ literally ] religious obedience to the conservative social norms.

[Severian]

New duplicate thread merged with older thread on subject. Hope this will discourage people from starting duplicative threads, especially threads on long-discredited hoaxes. See the Grinch's post on page one, or mine on page two.

[Guerrilla22]

The reason Hezbollah is so popular is that they stand up to Israeli aggression, when even the Lebanese government will not. Without Israeli aggression groups like Hezbollah would not exist. At anyrate, leftist supported the Lebanese people this summer while the Israeli air force bombed civillian neighborhoods at random, but as far as siding with them, these are the same type of religious fanatics that showed up to fight the Soviets in mass in Afghanistan. Real change can only come from leftist led movements, not religious movements.

[LebaneseCommunistParty]

Ok you know we are leftists, but we're adopting a very weird attitude. WE're supposed to fight for the oppressed people all over the world, not just with the actual leftists.

I live among many people from Hezbollah, and none of them are "religious wackos". Most of them are very political and don't even mention they're religion. They are fighting against the western backed governement and opposing indirect taxation, which taxes the rich and the poor equally.

You can be ignorant and say we don't want any rleigious fanatics, but then you're just listening to the Western media and their propaganda. Despite the interview being a counterfit, it is true, that people look up to Che and Chavez here. You should actually look around our streets and see the support for the socialist movement we have here. We even had a huge exhibition on Che here in Lebanon. Many people support the leftist movement, even religious individuals, and they all fight the right wing phalangists party and the moustakbal party which is backed by the USA and Saudi arabia. And it is true that nasrallah praised chavez and his remarks in a speech after the war.

[LebaneseCommunistParty]

Hizbullah is a political organisation that openly works for the establishment of a Islamic theocratic system of government and society in Lebanon.

That is completely not true. Hizbollah are democratic. Don't listen to what the media tells you. It is true that hizbollah probably started out with this goal in mind years ago, but it definintely isn't true anymore. They are even allied with the Christian Free Patriotic Movement, who is allied with the Lebanese Commmunist Party.

Syria controlled lebanon 3 years ago in the gov't, and if hezbollah wanted to establish an islamic state they would have done it then.

They represent the lebanese and the eternal struggle that all leftists should support.

[Spirit of Spartacus]

Full-stop! :D

[LebaneseCommunistParty]

Originally posted by [email protected] 07, 2007 02:00 am


This "statement" is a hoax. Nasrallah never made it.

If you were really Lebanese, wouldn't you know that?


What are you suggesting that i'm not lebanese and that i'm lying? Hah!

Sorry about the false interview i received in an email and directlyposted it here without checknig the sources.But the point is i am lebanese and i was not surprised that he saidthat. there was an anti gov't protest here last month and hezbollah which is supposedly an "islamic extremist group"marched alongside the lebanese communist party. That's it. Pointblank. I'm not a diehard supporter of hezbllah i am simply a supporter of the lebanese resistance.

[KC]

there was an anti gov't protest here last month and hezbollah which is supposedly an "islamic extremist group"marched alongside the lebanese communist party.

So what? You think that proves that they'll always be allied? They do stuff like that because it benefits them, just like how the Bolsheviks allied with the "progressive" bourgeois against Tsarism.

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 07, 2007 08:50 am
Sorry about the false interview i received in an email and directlyposted it here without checknig the sources.
Do you make a habit of that?


But the point is i am lebanese and i was not surprised that he saidthat.

Except, of course, he didn't. So your preconceptions were wrong. You should have been surprised, even incredulous. Many people said this was not how Nasrallah generally talks, and we were proved right.


there was an anti gov't protest here last month and hezbollah which is supposedly an "islamic extremist group"marched alongside the lebanese communist party.

Don't you mean the LCP marched along Hezbollah? If we're supposed to be impressed Hezbollah accepted the LCP's support, and didn't instantly chop their heads off with dull knives...

I'd say that's pretty low expectations.

[LebaneseCommunistParty]

OH GOD! the point i'm trying to make is it's nice to see different groups put aside their differences and work together for a common cause. ok? thank you.

[grove street]

Originally posted by Severian+September 06, 2006 07:09 am--> (Severian @ September 06, 2006 07:09 am)
mauvaise [email protected] 4 2006, 04:42 AM
All I said was that it wasn't impossible for a Muslim to have leftist sympathies.
True but irrelevant; Nasrallah isn't simply a "Muslim" but the leader of a rightist "Muslim fundamentalist" party.

So: unintentional self-satire, then! [/b]
Yes thats why Hizballah spends millions of dollars a year on building hospitals, schools and offering support/welfare to thousands of needy Lebanese who have been abondaned/over looked by the Lebanese Government (the real rightist leaders of Lebanon).

Contary to beleif the current Lebanese Government (Kateb party) is not the peace loving, democratic, freedom loving government that western media plays them out to be. The Kateb party are Phalangists (inspired by Franco, Mussolini and Hitler) the only truly Fascist movement to come of the Middle East even though western media loves to portray them as democratic and peaceful while calling groups like Hizballah who are the real champions of Lebanon's poor Islamofascists.

[Severian]

Originally posted by grove [email protected] 09, 2007 05:02 am
Yes thats why Hizballah spends millions of dollars a year on building hospitals, schools and offering support/welfare to thousands of needy Lebanese who have been abondaned/over looked by the Lebanese Government (the real rightist leaders of Lebanon).
It's remarkable how many leftists seem to think there's something revolutionary about religious charity.