Rafik Hariri: Could The U.S. Be Behind His Killing?

It wouldn’t be inconceivable that the assassination two days ago of the former Lebanese Prime Minister was the dastardly doing of U.S. covert operatives designed so that all would blame Syria and give the U.S. another excuse to meddle, or even worse, in the Middle East. Given that Hariri was about to ally himself with anti-Syrian opposition, it would make sense tio get rid of him and then blame Syria. This in turn would give the U.S. an excuse to focus its bullying tactics on a rather hapless Syria and possibly lay the groundwork for some further military adventurism in that part of the world. It is clear that the U.S. wants the world to think it is Syria as they yesterday withdrew their ambassador from Damascus.

Rafik Hariri’s assassination is way too convenient for the United States eager to blame a favourite middle-eastern bogeyman…way too convenient…


:bravo: hehe :laughing:

Well, you explained the motive, and I’m sure the CIA or whatever has the means, but unfortunately there’s no evidence, so it’s just (very) idle speculation. :snore:

Actually, I HOPE so. It would take the US about 2 days to run thorugh Syria, the baddies would scatter like roaches in the light. Then Lebanon would left in a complete power vacuum. The US could occupy that area, creating Western Iraq. Microsoft would feed the masses with free xboxes, and we could send the Queer Eye guys there to do SOMETHING about their clothes.

The Iraq would have a huge path to the sea for all the oil the regime change was about. Turkey wouldn’t mind Im sure, and the Kurds would then have a good bargaining chip for independence.

You see Broon? It’s ALL falling into place. I LUV this game.

There seldom is. If there was they wouldn’t be very proficient at covert operations. It may be speculation but cases such as these often are. The CIA isn’t going to pop up and say: “Oh stop speculating, here’s the evidence” are they?

This sort of thing has happened before and will continue to happen in the grimy world of middle-eastern politics so it may be something to consider.

Not outside the bounds of possibility IMO but watch the Bushists rabidly deny it.


Oh wow, you were serious?! Doh! :homer:

(I thought you were doing a parody/satire of the “you can’t kill a good conspiracy theory” thread… :laughing: )

Odd right?

It is also an attempt to NOT get immediately floundered and locked. It could work. :smiley:


I think Lee Harvey Oswald did it.

As sloppy as it was, it was certainly done to send a message.
To me it reeks of amatuers. Dangerous ones, but still amatuers.


I think you’re right…the US did it. We have always had designs on the ancient rocket pads found in Lebanon/Syria that were built by the same race of giants that built the Pyramids.

You aren’t by any chance getting that Innmouth’s look about you?

ITs going to be difficult to find out the perpetrators of this crime. Hariri, who made his fortune primarily in construction (in Saudi Arabia and Lebanon), made a lot of enemies in Lebanon. A lot of people thought he spent too much on rebuilding grand projects, while ignoring important social problems. While he had been pro-Syrian in the past, he was going to join with the Druze and Maronite coalitions is opposing Syrian domination.

In any event, one could not help looking at the news and remembering the 1970s and 80s — will Lebanon be moving forward or revisiting its past?

I think the time to deal with Syria is now. We know from documents captured in Fallujah that both the Syrian government and the Iranian government are funding the insurgency and offering support and that the Saudi government is not doing much to stop the flow of Saudi terrorists to Iraq. We realistically cannot do much about Iran right now but we can take out at least one side of the equation and reduce Iran’s sphere of influence and ability to operate even further. I say let’s do it now. It will actually have a ameliorating effect on the situation in Iraq and will help us capture those high-ranking government officials that fled Iraq during the invasion. Let’s just do it.

So the killing of Hariri suits your agenda just fine, does it? We know he made lots of enemies in Lebanon and wouldn’t that be a convenient little fact for the U.S. to hide behind and bump him off and then blame Syria, eh?

So Freddo, you haven’t outright denied that the U.S. could have done it, have you? Does that mean you think it is OK, if indeed the U.S. is behind it because it fits the basic tenets (haha) of Fredism?


Aye. Walid Jumblatt is looking a bit haggard nowadays too.

The U.S. is behind this, I am sure.

And TC, your avatar with the cross and the eagle and the U.S. flag is just one of those things that really pisses people off; even rational ones.

U.S. + God + Guns = Right?



The central tenets of Fredism in this case are that this is a regional war akin to what we fought in WWII. Taking out Iraq and Afghanistan and pushing reform in Saudi Arabia and Palestine are only part of the picture. We must remove Iran’s mullahcracy and Syria’s dysfunctional leadership. Your other remarks I will dismiss out of hand as the trolling that I know them to be. But as far as I am concerned, we should never have stopped at the borders of Syria back in March 2003. Taking out Syria puts and end to one side of this instability that is going on in Iraq and allows us to concentrate all our energy on containing Iran until such time as the democratic aspirations of the people boil over there. We don’t have too much time to get all these other places out of the way before our true challenge may drop in our lap. That is Pakistan. All of these other places need to be rolled up so we can be totally free if we have to in order to devote the number of troops that may be one day necessary to dealing with an unfriendly regime (and one with nukes).

Let’s see if I get this right:
The Shi’ite Mullahs in Iran are funding a Sunni/Baath insurgency whose current focus is to kill as many Shi’ites as possible in order to destabilize the country, bring the Sunni/Baathists back to power (you know, the guys who invaded Iran and killed hundreds of thousand of Iranians), and prevent the establishment of a democratic Shi’ite-dominated Iraqi government controlled by SCIRI and Dawa, the two Shia parties who were trained, funded and supported by Iran throughout the Saddam era.

Got it.

[quote=“BroonAle”]And TC, your avatar with the cross and the eagle and the U.S. flag is just one of those things that really pisses people off; even rational ones.

U.S. + God + Guns = Right?


Ahhh…the well-known voice of tolerance & diversity heard again.
If one was indeed rational such an avatar would be celebrated and loved for the beautiful expression of freedom and sentiment it so beautifully expresses.
Although its a ‘signature’ and there is no ‘gun’ present. Projecting a bit? Tsk tsk… [quote]Treat people with respect. Don’t be rude or bigoted. Discuss the message, not the messenger. –A FRIENDLY REMINDER[/quote]

Iran has its own agenda and that is to make sure that the US does not get too far with its diplomatic and security efforts in Iraq. No one in the area has a real interest in seeing democracy triumph. I think that Iran is probably cooperating with a number of different and sometimes mutually incompatible parties to further its aims. Surely that is not such a difficult prospect to wrap one’s mind around. Why after all did they take in Osama’s son and 400 other top al Qaeda leaders plus assist various terrorists groups in cooperation with Syria? I think the answer is that sometimes the enemy of their ememy becomes their friend at least for certain actions especially when they have bigger fish to fry like attacking the Saudi leadership of the region or weakening Egypt’s clout. If this is still too difficult for you to understand then I have an even greater challenge and seemingly more illogical option to present:

  1. Please explain French foreign policy to me or that of Schroeder and Fischer in rationalistic strategic/security interest and economic interest paradigms. Can you?

A very good synopsis from the Wall Street Journal Opinion Journal:
Death of a Businessman
Rafiq Hariri was also a Lebanese nationalist.
Thursday, February 17, 2005 12:01 a.m. EST
<-- a link to the article

"Rafiq Hariri, who was struck down on Monday by a huge car bomb on Beirut’s seafront, was the unlikeliest of martyrs for the cause of Lebanon’s independence. He had risen from the obscurity and poverty of Sidon–on Lebanon’s coast–to the upper reaches of Lebanese and Arab society, largely through the patronage of the House of Saud and the inner dealings of Arab rulers and courtiers. A former prime minister of Lebanon, he wasn’t particularly articulate, or given to the call of political causes. He believed in the power of wealth and of pragmatism, and saw Lebanon’s mission in the time-honored way of Sidon’s Phoenician heritage: commerce and trade, banking and tourism. Over two long decades in the political game, he had made his accommodation with Syrian power. He no doubt paid off Syrian intelligence operatives and officers, cut their sons and daughters and wives into business deals, did what he could for the restoration of his battered country, while staying on the safe side of Syria’s hegemony in Lebanon.

Hariri knew the risks of Syria’s wrath: how could he not? For three decades, bigger players than he had been struck down right when they had begun to agitate for their country’s sovereignty against the power of Damascus.

In 1977, it had been the turn of a Druze leader by the name of Kamal Jumblat; he was assassinated because he was a proud and difficult man of Mount Lebanon who had paid no heed to Syria’s claims of hegemony. Five years later, it had been a headstrong young Maronite, Basheer Gemayyel, who had risen through the civil war of Lebanon to the heights of power. Gemayyel had been elected president in a cruel summer of Lebanon, the summer of 1982. He was a Lebanese nationalist, eager to put together a state that had come apart. But he was never to assume office. A memorable deed of terror, a blast that shattered the three-story building of his political party’s headquarters, took his life. There would be other victims along the way–a president, a prime minister, lesser political figures. The regime in Damascus was hell-bent on erasing the border between Syria and Lebanon."(excert of article)