Stand by Hariri: the New York Times hearts (Israel over) Lebanon

The New York Times today expressed strong support for mini-Hariri and the lousy tribunal for his lousy dead daddy.  Let me say this: it suffices for the New York Times to support the Hariri tribunal for me to fiercely oppose it.  The paper, like other Zionist outlets, does not take a stance that is not based on the interest of Zionist aggression.  Let me make it clear: I have been fiercely opposed to the tribunal from day one believing--let me use the classical wooden language that so upset rightists and Wahhabi columnists--that it is a US-Zionist plot aimed at defeating enemies of Israel in Lebanon.  Look at the language:  "Hassan Nasrallah, have bluntly warned the Lebanese government to halt cooperation with the investigation or risk violent reprisals."  Of course, this is a lie made up by the New York Times but the frequency of errors in the New York Times as of late tells me that they don't care anymore, especially when they correct mistakes on internet editions without warning readers.  In fact, Nasrallah made no such threat.  He did call on the Lebanese people to not cooperate.  And it is funny that the New York Times said that Nasrallah threatened the "Lebanese government" in which he is represented with two Hizbullah ministers and close to ten aligned ministers.  So the New York Times is saying that Nasrallah issued a threat to himself here.   And then it says something about Lebanon's sovereignty.  How sweet.  Israeli fighter jets Lebanese airspace daily and the New York Times does not notice, and just yesterday, people in my home city of Tyre were commemorating the fifth anniversary of the disappearance of a Lebanese fisherperson, Muhammad Farran, who was kidnapped by Israeli terrorists from Lebanese water.   Then the Middle East experts at the New York Times wrote this:  "Under President George W. Bush and now President Obama, Washington has spent $670 million trying to build up the Lebanese Army as a nonsectarian national institution. This money is supposed to help the army take full control of the southern regions bordering Israel, formerly dominated by Hezbollah."  This one was hilarious.  They say "formerly dominated by Hezbollah."  Yes, now that the US gives money to the Lebanese Army, the people of South Lebanon suddenly switched their allegiances to it from Hizbullah.  This is really funny.  They think that the Lebanese Army is the authority that has the allegiance of the people of South Lebanon and not Hizbullah.   The editorial then speaks of sudden increase of shipment of arms to Hizbullah, we dont have to ask for the sources of such information or disinformation.  When Israeli intelligence is the source for a US story on the Middle East, no source or evidence has to be provided.   It is also hilarious that those brilliant Zionists at the US congress don't know that the bulk of the Lebanese Army are Shi`ites and that their political allegiances are not--how to put it--to Sa`d Hariri.  Hilarious, really.