Future Party leader Saad Hariri commented on Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah’s speech on Twitter, accusing the party of defining who is a terrorist according to its own interests.

Ibrahim al-Amin - al-Akhbar

Future Party leader Saad Hariri commented on Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah’s speech on Twitter, accusing the party of defining who is a terrorist according to its own interests.

Hariri appears to be calling for a national conference in order to designate what constitutes terrorism and to come to a consensus on the mechanism to fight it. In effect, he’s telling those who are being killed and those who are murdering them to wait a little longer in order for everyone to come to a common understanding.

More dangerously, Hariri is sending a message to the Lebanese authorities – and particularly those over which Future has influence, like some of the Internal Security Forces (ISF) – not to accede to calls for combating terrorism, for the matter requires national consensus.

Not only does Hariri provide radical Islamist groups with political cover, in addition to funding and arming them, he is now declaring that they cannot be touched. This is after Future’s MPs have established a record of incitement against the Lebanese army, going so far as to openly defend Ahmad al-Assir’s gang in Saida after they killed over a dozen soldiers.

Contrary to Hariri’s attempts to portray the jihadi terrorist attacks as a legitimate part of the Syrian conflict and against Hezbollah’s involvement it, such groups have been active in Lebanon for over a decade now and are benefitting from the daily dose of sectarian incitement that Hariri’s team feeds its supporters on a daily basis.

It’s clear that Hariri no longer has any connection with this country.On the point of national consensus, we have to ask Hariri the following:

– Based on what consensus was he able to rob property owners in downtown Beirut to create a real estate monster called Solidere?

– What about the privatization of the mobile phone sector and the embezzlement of millions in funds intended for national reconstruction after the civil war?

– And who was it that accused Syria – and then Hezbollah – of assassinating Rafik Hariri, then establishing an international tribunal partly funded from the national treasury? Did he have national consensus to do all this?

– Do Hariri’s current attempts to carry out Saudi wishes to form a government without Hezbollah and get an extension for President Michel Suleiman have the blessings of the Lebanese people?

It’s clear that Hariri no longer has any connection with this country. His extended presence outside Lebanon has turned him into little more than a subordinate, fulfilling the commands of the Kingdom of Darkness and the West.

The Resistance, for its part, is obligated to defend its people – particularly in those areas where the state is virtually absent. This is not a matter of choice for them.