Walid Jumblat was on LBC-TV. Could not believe that this man is considered “intelligent” and “intellectually sophisticated” by the standards of Lebanonese culture. He always brags that he subscribes to the Nation magazine and to NRB. Wow. Now, he also “finds” important documents on “the internet.” He now always mentions finding “documents” on the internet. He also thinks that he sounds quite profound when he mentions the internet. Only by Lebanonese standards would a war criminal, somebody who is responsible for the 2^nd worst campaign of sectarian cleansing and mass expulsions (after the campaigns of the Lebanese Forces militia during the war), and who is responsible for the assassination of his critics during the war, and somebody who called all critics of the Syrian regime “traitors” over the 30 year period in which he was aligned with the Syrian regime, be considered a voice of democracy and "freedom." I watched him yesterday on Kalam An-Nas: and when he appears on that show, no call-ins are allowed, and the host asks him only Larry King-style soft ball questions that mostly pre-arranged. I also hate that in the superficial Lebanonese culture Jumblat is considered somebody who “understands” regional and international developments, and somebody who can predict future political developments (Hannah Arends used to say that politics is no more politics if we can predict). The intellectual limitations of Jumblat are such that he expresses himself always in the same words, and repeats them over and over again. But then again: my sources tell me that Hariri Inc, under the supervision of Saatchi and Saatchi, now produces talking points, that all the March 14^th clowns are supposed to strictly adhere to. This explains why they all use the same words, just as Democratic and Republican operatives adhere to the RNC and DNC talking points. Jumblat yesterday made it impossible for Syrians, even those who fiercely oppose the Syrian regime, to accept him and his “movement.” He was quite unabashedly racist; at one point he stated that the Syrian problem with Lebanon is beyond the Syrian regime, and that it also applied to all Syrian governments since independence. At one point, he stated: “They [Syrians] have no civilization, no culture.” He then qualified that by adding: “except for the Sunni Syrian bourgeoisie.” (Jumblat’s current wife is from the Syrian bourgeoisie--Jumblat did not divorce his 2nd wife although Druzism prohibits polygamy.) There is no accountability so that somebody can ask the leader of the “socialist” and “progressive” party to explain this classism and racism in light of the “ideology” of this party—a mere sectarian/feudal tool for this man. It is ironic that this man calls for democracy while he does not exercises that in this silly party of his. Jumblat then talked about his trip to the US—a trip that required his escalation of his attacks on resistance-against-Israel in Lebanon. This petty man insisted that he wanted to meet with Rice (even for the 20 minutes in which she received him in) and he was told in no uncertain terms that he had to distance himself from his alliance with Hizbullah, and that he has to refrain from attacking Israeli occupation and American occupation—that is how it all started. He talked about some of his apologies here in the US; he did conceded that US “made some mistakes” in the past, but then added: “But there, they have dialectics. They engage you in dialogue, they don’t kill you.” How true. This explains the pacifist nature of successive US administrations. This also explains how and why the US government pursued pacifist policies in Afghanistan and Iraq, and it also explains how the US drops tons of bombs and missiles infused with love, affection, and pacifism. Only Jumblat can explain US policies in the Middle East now. His references to Iran were borrowed from the playbook of Saddam Husayn: it is never Iran or Iranians anymore. It is only “Persia” and “Persians”—usages intended, as they were by Saddam, to reinforce nationalist and chauvinist tensions between Arabs and Iranians, and between Sunnis and Shi`ites. Jumblat’s leadership in his community and in Lebanese sectarian politics is merely due to his 1) inheritance of the leadership of a medieval dynasty; 2 his management of sectarian killings and mass expulsions during the War of the Mountain; 3) his “elimination” of his rival within the community, and within the party that he heads, which he inherited along with the leadership of the community. It is amazing that the Socialist International—an empty and silly outfit that sent a delegation to visit Hariri tomb—do I need to say more—takes this man seriously. But it is less amazing that the Socialist International, with its checkered past regarding the Arab-Israeli conflict, likes Jumblat now more after he aligned himself with US/France/Israel. The history of this organization is quite clear regarding the Arab-Israeli conflict; just look at Michael Harrington’s role in defending Israeli wars when he represented the US, and lobbied for US role during the Cold War. Jumblat also attacked by name Joseph Samahah and Ibrahim Al-Amin several times. Hariri Inc owns ALL the newspapers in Lebanon (except Ad-Diyar which used to receive money from Hariri in the past), and they own most of the TV or have influence over them, but they are going crazy over one newspaper that will be launched to break Hariri monopoly in Lebanon. Jumblat said that Samahah, an avowed Marxist is “an ally of the Persian regime.” I would leave it to Joseph to respond to him, and will leave it to him to report on the contents of Jumblat’s phone calls to him in the past. This is a man (Jumblat) who still tells people that Maronites are better kept “taht as-Sirmayah” (under the shoe or under the sandal or slipper). And just as Israel was founded on the premise that Jews are superior to non-Jews, Lebanon was founded on the premise that Christians are superior to Muslims. And Jumblat, among other non-Christians in Lebanon, totally internalizes that. It explains why he said yesterday that Lebanon would not be Lebanon if Christians did not, presumably, contributed to his “civilization.” Was it not ironic that a Lebanese, of all places, would mock a country like Iran, which has a real (not imagined) long civilization and culture? It is interesting that when Jumblat talked about “the good face” of Iran, he would not name one poet or artist or thinker except `Umar Khayyam, and later had him confused with the former president of Iran. But he is an “inetelletual” by the standards of Lebanonese culture. Jumblat kept talking dismissively about the PFLP-GC. I never liked PFLP-GC, and they (and Ahmad Jibril in particular) served as a loyal tool of the Syrian regime. That is true: but this tool of Syria also saved his…neck, so many times, and fought his wars. And for that, I also blame PFLP-GC, and for that they deserve the kind of attacks on them from this former ally. Jumblat spoke about human rights violations of the Syrian regime, and yet conceded that he was aligned with them for 28 years. That requires not an “awakening of conscience” but resignation and withdrawal from political life. All those who aligned themselves and served as tool of the Syrian intelligence service in Lebanon should give full account of their services to the Lebanese people and then resign. But a country that does not ask war lords to stand trial, and reward them for their war crimes, is not going to ask for any accountability on any matter. It was most ironic to hear him address the Shi`ites in Lebanon, who genuinely detest him, and wanted to offer opinions about sectarian motives. To hear Jumblat speak against sectarian motives (always about another sect that is not his) is like listening to Bush speak about the virtues of pacifism.