Yesterday I was telling a few people how the opposition will never succeed with its pacifist attitudes and behaviour in toppling the government, and that if they want to achieve anything, they will have to shift onto a militant stance.
Well, it seems they finally heard me. And about time that they did something like this.
Blocking the roads in Beirut
Muhammad al-Amin Mosque
BEIRUT INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT (not Rafiq Hariri airport) road
Bon voyage!
Marja’youn (the famous tea-serving southern resort) against the government
(If they back down after today, they would be idiots).
Blogging the Middle East 
Pingback: Blogs of War
They can not become something they already are.
Hy,
This is the Internet Freedom desk at Reporters without borders in Paris. We have created a blog called “RSFblog.org” which included a news site called “The World seen through Blogs.” The site’s aim is simple: to publish the viewpoints of bloggers from different countries on the same event. Rsfblog will showcase content produced by Internet users of very different origins and cultures.
This week the topic is : the assassination of Hrant Dink
Check this out ! and forward this message !
http://www.rsfblog.org
Best regards,
Reporters without borders
anarchorev,
ignoring possible blowbacks from continuing along this path, the opposition (although honestly, “opposition” isn’t the right term for them) is constantly pushing itself into a corner with its actions. i doubt the government will be toppled (for better or for worse), so where will the opposition go from here?
Hello Lazarus,
For all practical purposes, the parties/groups that I referred to, DO form an opposition; what their intentions are (and whether or not you agree with them) is another thing altogether. Having said that, I think it all depends on the next course of action of the opposition; should they back off, it means they were only using today’s acts as a warning to the government, and I am not sure if this is such an appropriate action. However, if they do continue with this, I don’t see how long Siniora can actually survive. Whether you like to admit it or not, the country has come to a virtual standstill, and in my opinion, there should be NO going back on what happened today. Timid moves are NEVER successful in achieving objectives, and they almost always have the opposite effect. The opposition has moved, and it should continue moving, or else it will lose the momentum and possibly also the “moment”.
The other option is, should Siniora be stubborn enough to not even care about the state of the country (which he DOESN’T anyway), and if it lasts long enough that people can no longer cope with the situation, then the army can move in and stage a coup d’etat and oversee early elections. I think that is the best option; now there are those who say that the army will most definitely experience sectarian cracks, but I don’t think the situation AT THE MOMENT is sectarian (in the future it is highly probable that it would be as such), although some will disagree with me and argue that the whole thing is of sectarian nature (keep in mind that the fact that most Shi’ites are with the opposition and most Sunnis are with the government does not make the crisis sectarian in nature PER SE, but it COULD evolve into such a conflict – hopefully not, although many are agitating and inciting for that VERY end, and yes I will name, one of them is Walid Jumblatt, and the other is Samir Geagea, both of whom harbour dreams of cantonization).
By the way, why are you not blogging anymore?
Someone’s not happy at all. Boo hoo hoo.
Maybe that’s why he calls me ridiculous and calls my argument is “a waste of everyone’s time, patience, and intellect”.
I guess that’s all March 14 have got left now. No, you’re ugly. No, you SMELL. No, no, I’m going to tell daddy. Chiracccccccccccccc, give them some sweeties NOW.
Sasa, the Syria News Wire.
well, i agree with most of your points, which include 1) the country is at a standstill (and has been for some time) 2) the conflict could evolve into a mainly sectarian conflict. however, the actions of the past week or so, which includes today’s demonstrations (as opposed to the demonstrations for the past two months) due to its nature and commentaries by jumblatt et al., are setting up barriers to any form of conflict resolution, as these actions set a precedent that future moves are set by.
as to blogging, well … everything eventually comes to an end.
yalla, take care.
setting up barriers to any form of conflict resolution
That is the point; the situation has reached a point where it’s either “us” or “them”, although Nasrallah made sure to alleviate people’s fears in that regard, and said that in the end this does not mean that they would refuse to share power. In my opinion, this is another weak point of the opposition. From a purely analytical perspective (which does not necessarily have to coincide with my own opinions/views), these people not only should not have any say in how the country is run (and also arguably some of the ones who are part of the opposition), but should actually be put in JAIL, and should’ve been 15+ years ago.
Hey Sasa, indeed, it seems that the “March 14” is on a roll these days, and its supporters seem to be receiving much backing on the net from neo-cons and heck, even Israeli “hawks” (though I’m not sure how much they differ from… “doves”). Something to add to their list of achievements, I suppose. 😀
It’s the intellectual terrorism (to use a Hariri phrase) of March 14 that really annoys me.
If you look at my comment on the neo-con Lebanonese’s blog (he’s based in Washington, by the way) and his reply…he attacks me personally and refuses to argue. A sure sign of a hollow argument.
But, yes, Anarchorev, I guess that gives them something in common with the Republicans and Likud. As well as the shared bank accounts maybe?
I agree. It is a common trait of these people to evade discussions and debates. The few who actually venture into debates almost always come out of it red-faced (depending on how knowledgeable the “other” side is about his/her case). Their dogmatism and ego however prevents them from admitting that they are mistaken, and so even if proven wrong, they continue to charge, because they feel that the best defence is offence, and because they are too ignorant and dogmatic to accept that the other side is right for a change. Most of the time, any debate with these people ends up either going in circles (because they deliberately pretend to be not ‘getting it’, so that you would explain time and time again, and eventually get tired of it and say, “to hell with it”, after which they triumphantly announce that you have been defeated in the debate) or with insults and accusations (such as: you support terrorists, you are “March 8”, you are supportive of the “thugs” – which is what I was accused of today-, you are a Syrian/Iranian agent,etc.).
It is an interesting perspective that Siniora and friends “don’t care about the state of the country” – That must be why Hizbullah provoked an international incident just at the start of the summer tourist season, shut down the shopping district before the winter holidays, and has now called a strike at the time of a major international meeting that will decide on large sums of money to help the country. Now, whatever you think of the March 14 crew, it is kind of hard to paint Hizbullah and friends actions as “caring about the country.” Auon jumps ship because he wwasn’t welcomed with roses when he returned from France. This is the group “helping the country.” If only they’d given him a video link, it would be Amal and Hizbullah out there “caring about the country.”
Oh well. Two dead in the north. A couple of hundred injured. Here come the good old days again, I guess.
Well, now I have a dilemma.
Do I continue commenting on the Siniora-fundamentalist’s blog to challenge his claims, and show other readers how bankrupt his views are.
Or, will the ensuing argument make his blog more popular?
Sasa, the Syria News Wire.
Hi,
I’m from Germany, and a have a Question about the aims of the protestors and the supporters of the Government. Is it a conflict between pro-syrian and anti-syrian groups? Whant the protestors really Lebanon to be part of Syria again? Is it West against Iran? Or whats the point? Sorry, I don’t have much Information about the conflict, only that the Hizbullah wants to play a more important role in the government.
Thank you for answers. 🙂
greetings from a confused leftwing in Germany
Sasa – I would say, from my experience, that often it’s better not to pay much attention to these people, because it makes them feel “important”. But then again, I myself have been tempted to challenge such people however much I have convinced myself that it’s better not to. I think it would be worth demolishing the arguments of some of them, especially ones who are relied on as a “reliable source” on what’s been going on in Lebanon, by neo-con freelancer journalists. I won’t give names. 😀
Speaking of freelancer journalists, when I was down at the camping site of the opposition, I met this woman photographer/journalist from the USA, and she seemed rather amazed at the whole movement. We talked for a while (she was studying Arabic), and it seemed she understood it to be more than the usual arguments spewed by journalists about pro-Syrian/anti-Syrian crisis, more along the lines of the “orange revolution”. I found that ironic, especially coming from an American. Not that all American journalists have the same views, but hey, I have not had a great experience with the ones I have met. Anyway, it is rare to find journalists who immerse themselves in the local life and culture, and therefore gain a better understanding of the “street”; the scene is usually dominated by those who come to Lebanon (or elsewhere) with their preconceived notions and set up interviews and visits accordingly.
Tired – your philosophizing about the situation oceans away, is hilarious to say the least. I’m sure you were better off sticking to your obsession with Samir Quntar, who ironically turned out not to have actually bashed the skull of a 4-year-old girl (see April 23, 1979 issue of right-wing pro-Israeli Annahar newspaper reporting from Israeli sources).
However, allow me to make some corrections; Aoun has huge popular support, especially on the Christian street, but also on the Sunni and Shi’ite scenes. Many secular Sunnis and Shi’ites support his party, although they do not constitute the bulk of his supporters. Aoun was greeted by hundreds of thousands of his supporters upon his return from France. His arch-enemy and warlord Samir Geagea (still is a warlord by the way) could not gather more than 2,000 people in a mass at Harissa during the commemoration ceremony for the LF militiamen killed during the war. That’s Geagea, who is now the supposed “representative” of the Christians. Then there is Sleiman Frangieh (and his Tayyar Marada), who has a significant following also especially in certian areas, such as in Zgharta and Zahle. On the Sunni street there is Omar Karame with a significant following in Tripoli and Sidon, and Selim el Hoss, also with a significant following. And Druze leader Talal Erslen who has some following also.
Another correction: preliminary reports suggest that only one protestor (from the opposition) was killed, and not two in the north (or from the “loyalists”), as reported by Hariri’s propaganda media Future Television and Geagea’s propaganda media LBC. A great many serious injuries that required hospitalization, 53 is the unofficial count, and a few who are critically injured, including one 17-year-old protestor who was shot in the back and is paralyzed. These are the “thugs”, the ones who shot Mark Hoayek in the back, the same ones who shot Ahmed Mahmoud in the back. These are the militias. Not one instance was reported in which HezbAllah has used any weapons. Lebanese Forces militiamen/thugs attacked the offices of the Syrian Socialist Nationalist Party and fired shots, injuring 6, but the guards at the office of the SSNP shot back in defence. Following the end of the exchange of fire, SSNP handed over two of those involved in the return of fire, and called upon the Lebanese Forces to hand over those who opened fire on the SSNP offices. So who is civilized, and who is not? Who are the thugs? Who are the militiamen? I bet you will now divert the discussion and say, it was justified because the strike was a “provocation”. Well, you know what Suleiman Frangieh said a while ago on Manar TV about the argument that the opposition is not civilized? He said, well, you know, since we are now accused of being uncivilized, I remind you of what happened on May 6, 1992, the date riots, paid for by Rafiq Hariri, started and which toppled Omar Karame’s government, allowing Hariri to assume the PM post. He said, they taught us this method, I guess. Amazing, huh?
By the way, tourism? Lebanon cannot and does not survive on tourism. In the past 6 years since Israel withdrew, what has tourism done to the economy? What have the people benefited from it? It is only the rich, owners of resorts, hotels, restaurants who benefit from it, owners of the shops in the Solidere/BCD area, and very few small businesses benefit from the tourism income. Besides, the war cost, let us say, 6 billion. Or let us maximize it, say, 10 billion. Lebanon has an internal debt of $40 billion. That’s FOURTY BILLION DOLLARS. And this is not brought about neither by the destruction of the tourism industry, nor by the destruction of the Lebanese infrastructure by HezbAllah’s “adventures”, nor the strike just before Paris III. By the way, what did Paris I and II bring? Where did the money go? Who stole it? Why don’t they accept financial auditing? What about Siniora’s disastrous economic policies? Oh yeah, history started on July 12. OK.
Oh, another thing, HezbAllah has paid in cash to all those who have had their houses destroyed. The government has so far not paid one cent. Where did the money sent by the donor countries go? It is no wonder, then, that Iran sent its own team to oversee the reconstruction and did not go through the government.
Hello Katjusha,
To answer your question, the conflict is not between pro-Syrian and anti-Syrian groups, although some like to give it that colouring. In fact, the opposition comprises the most anti-Syrian (even racistly so) politician and ex-general Michel Aoun, who has the lead in popularity within the Christian community in Lebanon, and the government comprises the ex-collaborators of the Syrian presence in Lebanon, including two militia leaders, namely Walid Jumblatt and Samir Gea’gea.
The issues at stake are both political and economic, though the economic one is often a mobilizing factor. The opposition has demanded bigger participation in the government, which was elected based on an election law that gave a huge boost to the Hariri coalition and brought into power Christian politicians who were not representative of the Christian community and got elected thanks to non-Christian votes (to better understand this, you will have to read more on the consociational system in Lebanon). HezbAllah has said that it will give up on all its ministers and give Aoun’s FPM party all the ministerial posts in an expanded cabinet, so it is not doing this to gain more seats. The argument often put forward by the supporters of the government is that the opposition is demanding the 1/3 + veto power in the cabinet to be able to veto important decisions and stop the international tribunal. This is strongly denied by the opposition of course, which reiterates its support for the tribunal. The attempt by the government forces is to portray this as pro-Syrian/anti-Syrian crisis, and in fact many are engaging in incitement against the opposition and in particular the Shi’ites, and accusing them of towing the Syrian and Iranian line and working for Syrian and Iranian interests. The U.S of course is backing up Siniora, for many reasons; the most important is that, with the ongoing situation in Iraq, and the growing threat of Iran, and its inability to destabilize Syria, it cannot afford to lose Lebanon; it is also attempting to put into application its newly devised policy of “propping up moderates” which you can also see going on in Palestine with “Abu Mazen” (Mahmoud Abbas) versus Hamas. Then there is also the Sunni/Shi’ite aspect, although in my opinion the case of HezbAllah is looked at in a local rather than regional context by the American policy-makers, like the case of Hamas.
Now of course the discourse of the opposition has taken new dimensions, and more emphasis has been placed on economic issues; the issue of the debt is a huge one, and the weakest point of the government, going into Paris III, and especially having in mind the experiences of Paris I and Paris II…. In 1992, the debt stood at $3 billion. Thanks to Hariri’s and Siniora’s policies, it skyrocketed to more than $40 billion. Of course, the July war and all its implications on the people who suffered most from it, i.e. the Shi’ite population in the south and southern Beirut, make the economic argument more viable and urgent.
I respectfully disagree w. yr view of this Opposition escalation. It is terribly dangerous & brings an explosive situation even closer to the edge.
I just read this Haaretz lede & hope it’s true:
We all have constraints on our power. Those, like the IDF during the last war, who don’t recognize this are doomed to reap the whirlwind. I’m hoping that Hezbollah will step back fr. the brink.
So am I right in reading that you believe this is essentially an economic dispute Anarchorev. (I’d tend to disagree – I’ve always believed the next internal conflict in Lebanon would be over cash, not politics).
I can’t type this morning, I meant to say “I’d tend to agree”.
Hello Richard, actually, the media reports are NOT accurate in this regard. The strike was meant only for ONE day, and was not “cancelled”. The opposition met to decide the next step, and announced that they would not continue in the same fashion, but would escalate further after giving the government a few days to decide what to do. They said that this is the LAST warning.
Sasa, no, this is not an economic dispute. It is political in nature, but economic arguments are the biggest mobilizing factor. For HezbAllah this is not that big a problem, because it has a solid support base that will not switch to any other side; but for Michel Aoun and his FPM, there is always the danger of losing supporters, which means that the discourse has to be a little more than just political (so things of concern to the Christians have been highlighted, like the issue of economy and how it is leading to the emigration of people especially Christians). This is proven in that the opposition would not mind sharing power with these corrupt people, and is not saying that they want to get rid of them, but want to only increase their power share. This is where I am most critical of the opposition, and this is where it shows how they are NO different than the other side. Many people ARE aware of this, however, the economic issue is of special concern to many, and they believe that this government should be toppled, and so they support any action that may be able to topple it. When I referred to economics, I meant the state of the country and its economy, I did not mean the issue of who will get the lion’s share of money when he gets to power. I would say that for HezbAllah the money is not really an issue or a desire, and for FPM it is also not (though one can always argue that it is). I guess for FPM the issue is more about power, and the desires of General Aoun to snatch the presidency.
I’m glad you had a chuckle. Your defense of Aoun tickles my funny bone. He is allied with Hizbullah because he loves what they stand for – not becuause he felt jilted by March 14, sure.
Far as I can see Aoun would ally himself with Israel if it promised him the presidency.
But the situation is not so funny for everyone.
Yes, Hizbullah loves Lebanon so much it wants to strangle her. Ok.
It is interesting how everything started with the other side. Thuggery invented by “them.” Money stolen by “them.” Militias started by “them.”
Certainly. Hizbullah is a poor innocent misunderstood in this sad process. Ok. Amal, poor lambs. Aoun, principled patriot.
Well, now you’ll see where it leads. But from up here it does not look very positive.
I am not defending Aoun, did you read what I wrote?
Oh, and yes, militias were indeed started by THEM. One of the first Lebanese militias were the Phalangists, and later on the Lebanese Forces. In 1992 Hariri came to power based on riots by mercenaries and paid thugs. In 1992, the debt was $3 billion. Between 1992 and 2006, Hariri’s and Siniora’s economic policies and so-called “reconstruction” brought us $40 billion debt. And now some people talk about Hariri being “Mr. Lebanon” and naming the airport Rafiq Hariri Int’l Airport AS IF Hariri paid from his pocket for the reconstruction.
I am amazed that someone so ignorant of the situation in Lebanon chooses to side so visciously in favour of the Hariri THUGS – did you know that they even started a new official “security” unit that comprises mostly Sunnis (and some sympathetic Druze and Christians)? Most people call them Hariri militia (even many who are supportive of the LF often do).
I am impressed by your ability (sic) to put words into my mouth. Aoun is anything but principled, and patriotism is a term that can be manipulated however you want; that’s what makes the whole concept so laughable. Any reference to patriotism is outright standard right-wing trash rhetoric. Although come to think of it, the so-called left is guilty of adopting the discourse set by the right. Bottom line: don’t give me the patriotism trash. It does NOT work with me.
Speaking of words in mouth – where have I defended Harari at all? The point about Aoun is whether what he is doing is “for the good of the country” or “to make sure I’m President no matter what position I have to take.” Everything I’ve seen and read points to the later.
The point I was making is that while Hizbullah and Amal and Aoun and you and the rest of the opposition are claiming all this is being done “for the good of the country” and because Lebanon’s financial house is in such disorder etc. it appears that everything that Hizbullah and the opposition alliance does is determined to weaken Lebanon financially. (And Isreal sure helped the process a long with their murderous stupidity.)
At the end of the day from up here it looks likes, despite the cries against sectarianism, that Lebanon is falling into another sectarian conflict, with lines drawn more subtly perhaps than the Muslim/Christian divide that seemed to predominate previous conflicts, but nonetheless much of the reporting from yesterday suggested a level of soccer hooligan/street gang/sectarian brawling that I am really having trouble seeing as “for the good of the country.” (I guess “good of the country” would not be your personal concern, being an anti-national anarchists and all. But something like that.)
where have I defended Harari at all?
Are you kidding me? You have been defending Hariri, Inc. (Siniora, etc.) all through the summer, and you said: “It is an interesting perspective that Siniora and friends “don’t care about the state of the country””. This means that you believe that they DO care about the country, as you find the idea that they do NOT “interesting”. So, tell me, do they care about the country? $40 billion and growing, after PARIS I and II. What will Paris III bring, I wonder? Do they care about the country? Billions of dollars in pledges and donations, and not one cent has been spent yet, not one family has received the promised compensation. This is a la Egyptian democracy, giving billions of dollar in aid, whereas more than 80% of the population live under $2 / day. We are going down that road. Very quickly too. I guess this is Bush’s idea of propping up moderates. Where is the money given to Mubarak and his henchmen going? To protect the regime. Sound familiar? Oh, I see, we must protect from the threat of Islamists. Alright. I can see how that got them anywhere with the dictatorships they supported and funded. 98% of Egyptian women wear the hijab. The Muslim Brotherhood has become a force to be reckoned with. If free elections are held tomorrow, they would win in a clean sweep. Yeah, great job, those moderates.
I am not part of the opposition. Now who is putting words into whose mouth? I am against the government. This does not mean that I do not realize that H.A and Aoun will not bring much change either (though I’m inclined to say that they are preferable to Siniora & gang). Nor did I claim that this is being done for economic reasons; read what I wrote!!! Or do you not understand English?!
Yes, of course, the hooligans and paid mercenaries of Hariri, Inc. go down to the streets and kill several protestors, and critically injure several, and ironically this is taken by neo-con freelance journalists and their fans, as proof that the OPPOSITION is not “for the good of the country”. Impressive logic, there! Impressive. Yeah, I mean, since H.A and Aoun allegedly want Lebanon to fail economically (again, impressive logic again), we should not do anything to remove those who have destroyed the country’s economy and brought about $40 billion. That’s the “lesser evil” I suppose. Yeah. The lesser evil being, the ones who massacred tens of thousands of civilians during the civil war, including a great number of land-owners of the Syrian Socialist Nationalist Party in Mount Lebanon. That’s Geagea and his bloodthirsty predecessors for you. I can see how they are the “lesser evil”. I mean, they’ve CHANGED. Right. I believe you. That is why militiamen were caught on video shooting at civilians with M-16s yesterday. Or ones who came out of the Lebanese Broadcasting Corporation (LF propaganda TV) building in Adma and shot at protestors with M-16s and then went in again. Yeah, these are the angels, the followers of “politicians” who are presented in western media as civilized and moderate.
One last thing, do not even bring my personal beliefs into this. That I subscribe to an ideology does not mean I cannot analyze the situation, or even point out the lies of one side or the other. I realize that the latter upsets you and all my other fabulous neo-con / hardline right-wing anti-Muslim readers.
Pingback: Global Voices Online » Blog Archive » Lebanon: General Strike
My. Kind of worked up there. I understand English fairly well, thank you.
Here is the simple reality you wish to ignore. Without the attack on Israeli soldiers there is no July war, there is a tourist season (talk about putting words in mouths – where did I claim Lebanon “survived on tourism?” Physician and all that yada yada…) that was predicted to be the best in many years. There is no destruction to infrastructure on the massive level that the disproportionate and needlessly muderous Israeli response created. There is LESS debt.
Without the December sit in, there is not the economic damgage to Beirut businesses. Without yesterday’s strike, there is likely less resistance by donor nations.
That’s just reality. Hizbullah and Aoun and Amal want power enough that they are willing to put the country through that. That’s simply fact.
Is it justified? Obviously depends on where you sit in the sectarian/economic/social divide of Lebanon. But clearly Hiz/Amal/Aoun’s support is not universal – but it is also very, very strong.
And it seems neither side is able to find a suitable compromise.
So, what will it do to Lebanon long term? That is the question.
Oh dear.
Is this your next obsession, after Samir Quntar? The tourist season? Let us say the tourist season brought in 10 billion dollars. Or let us say miraculously, magically, TWENTY billion dollars. Then what? What does destruction have anything to do with debt? The reconstruction can be covered by the funds that were donated and pledged, but where are the funds, that is the question. Where did they go? That is the question. But noooo, you are obsessed with the tourism season. I am impressed. First it was Samir Quntar, now it’s the tourist season.
The “Beirut” (i.e. Solidere area) businesses are owned by Hariri, Inc and Saudis. I guess they can survive for another couple of months. The people have been hungry for years, decades even. But nooo, you care about the tourism season. OK.
HezbAllah has said it will give up its seats to Aoun’s FPM in case of a national unity government. Therefore, HezbAllah wants more power. Another impressive argument. Yup.
Justified?
Who decides what is justified?
You are asking if the strikes and protests are justified. Was the protest on March 14, 2005 justified? I donno, quite a lot of people would say it wasn’t. Was shooting protestors in the back (as was done a month ago,resulting in the murder of Ahmed Mahmoud, and also yesterday, resulting in death and critical injuries) justified? Not many people will agree, except the thugs and mercenaries of Samir Geagea, Hariri, and Jumblatt.
Who decides what is justified. My question exactly. I dunno. It does appear from up here, however, that the recent and current actions are not exactly pointing in the direction of some vast, or even minor, improvement.
By all accounts I’ve seen Aoun’s marriage of convenience was the result of such petty egomaniacal pomposity it is hard to take him seriously. Meanwhile, someone, or various someones are actually killing politicians at a fairly alarming rate. Are all the killings the work of March 14. Are any? Is Amal implicated at all?
You stated a militant stance is the only way for the opposition to topple the government. It appears from here the kinds of actions seen yesterday will result in fairly vicious domestic sectarian strife. It doesn’t look like everyone is ready to take an opposition coupe by force sitting down.
So, will there be a civil war? Is that a good thing? Or will the sectarian violence be short lived? Is the veto power worth it?
Pingback: Hariri Militia Strikes! « Blogging the Middle East
Bush is forever saying that democracies do not invade other countries and start wars. Well, he did just that. He invaded Iraq, started a war, and killed people. What do you think? How does that work in a democracy again? How does being more threatening make us more likeable?Isn’t the country with
the most weapons the biggest threat to the rest of the world? When one country is the biggest threat to the rest of the world, isn’t that likely to be the most hated country?
Are we safer today than we were before?
The more people that the government puts in jails, the safer we are told to think we are. The real terrorists are wherever they are, but they aren’t living in a country with bars on the windows. We are.