Dear Mr. Nassib Lahoud,

I read about your warning in Sada al-Balad today and I would like to bring to your attention a number of points. First of all, let me tell you that I do not think you should be a presidential hopeful, let alone a candidate. I do not think that someone who was not popular enough to be elected as a MP would be popular enough to become the president of the republic. How did that saying go: Every Maronite is born with the dream of becoming the president of Lebanon? Anyhow, I find that statement funny to say the least, and, sadly and scarily true. Mr. Nassib Lahoud, you, Mr. Butros Harb – and heck, let me add – Mr. Michel Aoun, are all cases in point.

baladfeb11.jpgBack to the point: I have highlighted the points in your warning that I disagree with. Allow me to address those briefly. You warn against a return to the past situation where Lebanon was a field where external conflicts were fought. A return?? Mr. Lahoud, I am honestly beginning to think that you are living on another planet. A return???? Since when was Lebanon NOT a battlefield for external disagreements and power struggles? What, you think the current situation smells of “Lebanon is not a field for external conflicts”?? I congratulate you for being so naive, Mr. presidential-hopeful. I just hope that you would not be so naive – or shall I be brutally honest – stupid and totally out of touch with reality if you become a president. The second point that I would like to make – and I have not highlighted this one – is that I really wish you would be as fierce in your criticism of the government for failing to control the security situation in the country as you are in your accusations of continuing Syrian interference in Lebanese affairs. I wish you would call the government’s failure more than just an innocent التساهل في الامساك بالامن . I am as disappointed with your warning as I am with the racist wording used by Mr. Michel Aoun to describe those who torched the Danish embassy. And I am left wondering, is there a Maronite in this country who would not use just about any word or expression in order to sit on the presidential chair? I’m afraid my answer does not inspire hope.

The third, and final point that I would like to make is about the desire to build the state and revive the economy. Do you seriously think that the current sectarian set-up is really conducive of state-building and revival of the economy?? I wish you would elaborate more on your idea of state-building, Mr. Lahoud, because I am convinced that a system that glorifies zu’ama (tribal / sectarian elites) who have private parties (most of which used to be militias back in the good-old-days of “state-building”) and who rule and take decisions without consulting the people or caring much about their wishes, can ONLY ensure the welfare of these elites. I should also add that – and it pains me to admit this, Mr. Lahoud – the people of Lebanon are sheep. They only talk and talk about how they are a bastion of democracy in the Arab world without realizing that their mentality is not one of democracy but of reinforcing and consolidating the role of the undemocratic zu’ama who have not done anything to build the state or revive the economy and instead think about how to get rid of their rivals (by bombs or by incitement). 62 years and still going strong (and the Lebanese blame Syria, Palestinians, and Israel for destroying Lebanon!!! What a consolation!). I’ll tell you what, at the rate this is going (or not going, depends on whether I view it from my perspective or your disillusioned, feverish warnings and hopes) I am inclined to give the undemocratic Arab world the edge over the oh-so-democratic Lebanon, because at least the people there are not fooling themselves, whereas you, and I dare say 99% of the Lebanese are so deep into self-deception that they can no longer tell the difference between stupidity and democracy.

I thank you for your time, Mr. Lahoud, and I sincerely wish you the best in achieving your state-building and economy-reviving agenda.


19 responses to “Dear Mr. Nassib Lahoud,

  1. Stupid and untrue. You forget the fact that N.L is the only legislator to have voted against all constitutional amendments, that he is honest and principled and presides a truly secular party that is not family owned (unlike the FPM).

  2. You’re the Nadim I know from school or??????

    Umm, Nassib Lahoud is not sectarian????????????????? Well, anyone who accepts the current system (and wants to run for presidency in it) is sectarian. So yes, Nassib Lahoud is sectarian. And give me a break, the guy is a land owner by “profession”….

  3. I think Mr. Freedom has some reading to do:

    Maybe you could learn something.

    And what do you mean by “And give me a break, the guy is a land owner by “profession”….”?

  4. That’s Ms. Freedom. 🙂

    Thanks for the links, and of course I can always learn something new (I do not claim that I know everything), but you did not tell me anything I didn’t know, and I still stand by what I said. Nassib Lahoud is sectarian, as is everyone else in this country (believe it or not, even the LCP).

    I mean what I said: he is a land owner (and I do not mean owning one plot of land). In other words, he is a “land lord”.

  5. Pfff, your just obstinately repeating your opinion.

    “land lord”? What the hell do you mean by that? How does that describe N.L?

  6. Pfff, your just obstinately repeating your opinion.
    And that’s bad because? And you’re doing what?

    “land lord”? What the hell do you mean by that? How does that describe N.L?
    Nassib Lahoud owns large plots of land. That makes him a “land lord”. Land lords are known for their oppressive behaviour towards the poor and landless. This has been the case elsewhere. For example, the Sursocks (among other land-owning families) owned many plots of land in Palestine, on which many Palestinian peasants lived and worked, and they sold them to the zionists.

  7. Where did you learn that N.L is landlord who owns “large plots of land” and that has “an oppressive behaviour towards the poor and landless”?

    Or did you just make that up because you couldn’t find anything else to taint his reputation?

  8. The land owner bit is is on the official Lebanese Parliament website. All land owners are oppressive by default. And I am not willing to make an exception of Mr. Lahoud.

    Nah, I do not need to taint his reputation, I think he did that all by himself. Don’t forget that this guy was a collaborator of the Syrian occupation for the past 13 or so years.

  9. “The land owner bit is is on the official Lebanese Parliament website”
    Could you give me a URL on this?

    You can see if he was a collaborator by looking back at his behavior and actions in parliament. He voted against all three constitutional amendments and was the only legislator to do so (with Misbah El Ahdeb a member of Tajaddod), and while all of those other members of parliament were whining about the 2000 electoral law, he was the only one who came up with a plan to change it.

  10. My friend,
    I found the link myself, the information is faulty. Nassib Lahoud is an Engineer by profession, he co-owns a company “Lahoud Engineering” which ceased all operations in lebanon when N.L entered politics, another example of the incorruptibility of this man.

    So you’re claims are baseless. This man can only be liked or at least (in your case) respected.


  11. Could you give me a URL on this?

    Please don’t give me “the information is faulty” argument, because if it were, he’s supposed to ask that it be corrected, this is the official parliament website after all.

    And of course he was a collaborator, and please do not be selective about it. 1992 ring a bell?

  12. He’s an Engineer! In 1992 he was replacing a relative:

    You think you’re so smart but you don’t have a clue what you’re talking about.
    Here’s what I found about N.L on the internet: “Nassib Lahoud: Maronite from Ba’bdat in the Metn district. Appointed to parliament for the Metn in 1991, replacing his relative Fouad Lahoud. An electrical engineer trained in the U.K., he was appointed ambassador to Washington in 1990. He was considered one of the leading independent opposition candidates in the 1992 parliament.”

    I guess that blasts your point to smithereens! Anything else?

  13. appointed ambassador to Washington in 1990
    Exactly my point.

  14. What the hell is wrong with being ambassador to Washington?

    Is this really the only thing you have left against N.L ? Pitiful…

  15. What is it with you and N.L? Are you his spokesperson or what?

    No, I do not find anything wrong with being ambassador to Washington per se. I find something wrong with being appointed by occupation forces though. He was also instrumental by the way in “sealing” the deal between Syria and USA on giving Lebanon to Syria in return for Syrian support for the Iraqi war.

    You’re the only one who’s pitiful. Tribalism is pitiful. Sectarianism is pitiful. Having masters is pitiful. I have no gods and no masters.

  16. N.L was apointed ambassador to Washington by President Hrawi because of his strong washington ties to help improve the image of a post-war Lebanon.

    This “deal” you’re talking about can (and only can) take place between the government of Syria and the USA.

    I meen really, what’s the point in involving a Lebanese ambassador in talks?

    Am I his spokesperson? No but I hate seeing people falsly accusing others of stuff just because they feel threatened by them.

    I see that you have picked up the nasty habit of repeating Mister Aoun’s falsifications! I wonder why?

  17. N.L was apointed ambassador to Washington by President Hrawi
    President Hrawi the puppet, you mean. 🙂 The puppet of the puppet. 🙂

    And believe me, N.L. is the last person I would feel threatened by.

    You are again wrong in your assumptions. I am not a Aounist. And of course, Aoun (like all warlords and zu’ama) is a “falsifier” (I prefer using the word liar). As is N.L.

  18. I did not accuse you of being aounist that would be too big of an insult.

    “N.L was apointed ambassador to Washington by President Hrawi
    President Hrawi the puppet, you mean. 🙂 The puppet of the puppet. :)”
    Did you read the whole thing? Or only the parts that you could use against him?

    You accused him of being a tool in syrian hands, I proved you wrong.
    You accused him of being a “landlord” and of having “an oppressive behaviour towards the poor and landless”, I proved you wrong.
    You accused him of sealing a deal between Lebanon and syria (hilarious), I again proved you wrong.
    You accused him of being sectarian, I don’t need to prove that wrong the answer is in his reformist policies.

    I won this argument not just because I was up against a stubborn still-at-school misinformed gasbag, but also because N.L is such an easy person to defend.

    The Future Will Tell my friend,

    I appreciated this “discussion”,

    Cheers and farewell!

  19. I proved you wrong.
    I guess I missed something. 🙂

    I proved you wrong.
    I guess I missed something. 🙂 The official website of the Parliament (of which Mr. N.L is a member) says he’s a land owner.

    I again proved you wrong.
    Ooops, another miss. 🙂

    I don’t need to prove that wrong
    I am sure you don’t.

    I won this argument
    My child, you are too young and immature, you still think in terms of winning and losing.

    Anything wrong with attending school? It’s grad school, by the way. So I must be older than you. 🙂

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s