Anne Barnard discusses Hizbullah

This was coming.  Anne Barnard discusses Hizbullah--the object of obsession by Zionists at the Times and elsewhere.  She discovered powder, as we say in Arabic: yes, Hizbullah maintained its alliance with Syria despite regime crimes just as March 14 movement maintained its alliance with Mubarak and Bin Ali until their fall, just as it maintains its alliance with GCC dictatorships.  This element of Lebanese politics is missing from Barnard's piece.  That all factions in Lebanon are ready to cling to regional and international sponsors as long as they serve their interests.  But look how the March 14 language of Anne Barnard (who you can guess only talks to March 14 in Lebanon but maybe she is scared of Shi`te men in beards):  "Saudi Arabia, a protector of Sunni interests in the Middle East."  Where does Saudi Arabia protect Sunni interests in the Middle East? In Egypt where it stood with Mubarak against his people? Or in Palestine where it does nothing to help Palestinians?  Where, Ms. Barnard?   Anne then says:  "Hezbollah rarely allows official interviews".  Oh, no, Anne.  Hizbullah allows plenty of interviews but clearly not with you, although in recent months they have been keeping a low profile.  But to suggest that Hizbullah rarely gives interviews is funny for a correspondent in Lebanon.  Na`im Qasim gave an interview just recently.  I did not understand this section by Anne:  "It relies on public support, yet sometimes behaves autocratically; it is a national group founded to fight Israel’s occupation of southern Lebanon, but owes its military might — and the funds that rebuilt the south after the 2006 war — to Iran’s desire to project power..." But that is only me.  Forget about the first part, what does she mean?  That those Lebanese who fought against Israel back in 2006 and even earlier did so because they wanted to project Iranian power in the region?  Those who died in South Lebanon in 2006, risked their lives because they wanted to project Iranian power in the region?  Do you know how silly that sounds to people in South Lebanon, even those who fought with Hizbullah?   She then said:  "Most of all, Hezbollah won respect by sticking to its principles, even among rival sects and the leftist cafe regulars in Beirut who are skeptical of its religious conservatism. Now it is paying a price for its politics of pragmatism in Syria." Pragmatism?  On the contrary.  As offensive as Hizbullah support for the Syrian regime is, it is seen as principled. Pragmatism is in breaking with the Syrian regime, it can be argued.  She then said that Hamas "angered" Mr. Asad.  How did you know that, Anne?  Did Bashshar confide in you that he was angry with Hamas? Because neither he or any of his officials ever said that.  That is another example with Anne making claims that are not supported by evidence.  And then Anne said:  "Some Hamas leaders from Gaza went further, praising the Syrian revolution to crowds that shout, “No, no, Hezbollah.”"  By some "Hamas leaders" you only mean Isma`il Haniyyah.  Why not say "one Hamas leader"?  Another example of very imprecise language and exaggerations by Anne.  And here is the typical ploy by Western reporters who could not find anyone in Hizbullah to talk to:  "Hezbollah’s supporters, none of whom wished to be identified because the party discourages interviews with reporters..." Those who speak off the record as Hizbullah members or cadres are not Hizbullah.  Often, they are Shi`ites that March 14 and Hariri press office supply to Western journalists to provide a propaganda line useful to March 14.  Lastly, I think that Hamas representative in Lebanon, Barakah, exaggerated his closeness to Nasrallah.