Let Hassan Nasrallah and his resistance associates understand that the road to Jerusalem is in a south easterly direction, while the road to Kesrouan is to the north. Jerusalem is visibly closer for him to liberate than is the defiant Kesrouan which will remain a thorn in the side of Iran and the resistance club.
Hezbollah’s approach to governing does not accept equality in citizenship, for it organizationally adopts a pyramid at the top of which is the Moussawi Sayyids, then the Husseini Sayyids, then the Jurisprudents, followed by the common Shiite people then the remaining Muslims of this world, and we, the Christians, those tolerated “Dhimmis”, are at the very bottom. By the same token, this article makes a distinction between the various Shiites and is not addressed against the honorable Lebanese Sayyids and Jurisprudents. Neither is it against the people of the Shiite community whom I respect. Rather, it is against the Sayyids (Lords) of the resistance in the Iranian rejectionist camp and their jurisprudents followers and their mouthpieces that continue to pollute the intellectual debate in Lebanon.
They lie, they lie and then lie some more, and more dangerous than their lying is the fact that they believe their own lies and imagine that their speech is the truth. They thus fall victim to feeble idiotic principles that hold ground only in the realm of the salacious and the burlesque.
This is the case of their Sayyid Hassan Nasrallah: While Jerusalem has been Judaized, his illusory lies such as “Jerusalem is ours”, “We shall pray in Jerusalem”, and “On the road to Jerusalem”, have been utterly sterile.
This is the case of their slanderer par-excellence Mufti, Ahmad Kabalan: “The coexistence formula is finished”, “Topple the constitution and the regime”, “No voice is above that of the resistance”, “we will turn Israel 70 years back”. He imagines borders, transfers people and manufactures scarecrows, just as he is a usurper of the post he occupies, his “unofficial” appointment having not been published in the Official Gazette for the past 17 years! Still, he gets paid a salary by the same Lebanese State he wants toppled, he is corrupt while preaching virtue, and the judiciary has done nothing to indict him of high treason.
Their historians of modern contemporary history seem to selectively “know” whatever they wish to know, especially if it serves their project of “Islamizing Lebanon” and annex it to Khomeini’s realm. They, of course, ignore everything else. They constantly remind us of Tal Zaatar and make up stories about massacres that occurred there. They exaggerate what happened in Sabra -Shatila following the assassination of President Bashir Gemayel. They blame the Christians for internecine battles and assassinations before the unification of the Christian fighters in 1980, and falsely accuse them of killing or kidnapping thousands of Lebanese!!
Meanwhile, they do not mention the massacres perpetrated by the Palestinians and their leftist allies against the Christians in Damour, Shekka, Ayshieh, and Ashash, and they deliberately ignore the wars the Shiites themselves waged against the Palestinian camps, the internecine wars between the Shiite sisters Amal and Hezbollah, and the human losses they sustained as a result.
They mention the election of Bashir Gemayel under the Israeli “occupation”, but it somehow escapes them that without the Shiite then-Speaker of parliament Kamel Al-Assaad, parliament would not have assembled to elect Bashir. And without the twelve Shiite MPs, there would not have been a quorum. They portray Bashir ascending to the presidency atop an Israeli tank, but forget that the nation’s representatives abided by the constitutional deadlines and elected a President of the Republic under three foreign occupations.
As for their historians of the less than recent periods, they feel free to describe Lebanon as a Shiite country from north to south, without any sense of ridicule at the quantum of lies and distortions they proffer. They went so far as shed light on some documents and correspondences that (occasionally) referred to Lebanon as the “Land of Serhal”, or the “Sirhan District”, or to Byblos and Batroun as the “Metuali Country” or “Hamadi Country”.
Assuming there is some truth to the occasional names attributed to these regions, why raise them now at this precise moment? And what could be gained from that? Is it, again, Hassan Nasrallah’s fantasy to “recover” Muslim lands in Kesrouan and Byblos? Is he implying that, since these regions had long forgotten names other than their current ones, it is permissible for him to claim them now?
Hasn’t Hassan heard that Constantinople, for example, has become Istanbul and nothing has changed? Or that Kristiania has become Oslo, and life in Norway continues without problems? And the change of the name of the French capital from Lutèce to Paris did not prevent it from becoming the most celebrated city around the world? Just as New York was once known as New Amsterdam?
We do not know if Hassan is an ignorant or a feeble falsifier of history when he claims that “Kesrouan and Byblos are Muslim regions conquered by the Christians whom the Byzantines brought to be a thorn in the side of the Muslims”! We do not know if some Christians, and some of their spiritual and secular leaders, were simple-minded or hirelings to propagate such a lie that is very easy to disprove!
The Byzantine Empire (Eastern Roman) was a Christian state that rose on the ruins of paganism in 395 AD. Its territory stretched from southwestern Europe to North Africa and well into the eastern shores of the Mediterranean. This means that the Byzantine Christians lived in Kesrouan and Byblos some two hundred years before the advent of Islam. Pagan archaeological ruins that were converted to Christian sites testify to this period. For example, the monastery of Our Lady of Qib’il in Ghinyeh in Kesrouan, the church of Saint George “the Blue” in Yanouh, in Byblos District, and the shrine of Saint George “Al-Batiyeh” in Jounieh, and the archeological church in Faqra.
In the first half of the seventh century, in the aftermath of Khalid bin Walid’s victory at the battle of Yarmuk (636 AD), the Byzantines were dislodged from Roman Syria and Palestine, then from Jerusalem, to make way for the Muslim conquest. It is a known fact that the Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem handed the city over after a long and arduous siege.
Therefore, Sayyid Hassan, it is the Muslims who conquered Christian lands and not the other way around, and let us put to rest this charlatanism that you use to justify your forced and fraudulent seizure of Christian possessions in Lassa and the southern suburbs of Beirut, the State’s public lands in Mount Lebanon, as you lay the ground for your hypothetical Islamization of the region.
Shiite traitors and stupid Christians build upon their Sayyid’s fabrications, which can only lead to confusion and the sowing of hatred whose object is the “intellectual Shiitization” of the Christians of Lebanon, first in Kesrouan and Byblos, then across all of Lebanon.
As of late, a decrepit senile “Orientalizing” woman by the name of Bushra Khalil told us tales from fabricated history in support of Hassan Nasrallah’s lies. With her pirouetting intellect and her botoxed lips, and with her meager knowledge, she said, “All of Lebanon was Shiite”, adding that the Shiite state of Bani Ammar extended from Tripoli to Nahr El-Kalb, while the Shiite Fatimid State controlled the rest from Nahr El-Kalb to Egypt. She went on to say that after the Mamluks attacked the Shiites in Kesrouan and Byblos the Maronites exploited the opportunity to seize the territory!!!
We ask the prancing orientalist, “If indeed all of Lebanon was Shiite, which Shiites are you talking about?” The Ismailis? The Druze? The Alawites? Or the Jaafiris (twelvers) to whom you belong, you and your Sayyid Nasrallah?
If you are suggesting that you ruled Lebanon as Jaafaris, you are simply hallucinating because there is not one shred of documented evidence that Bani Ammar had converted to Jaafaris as they ruled Tripoli because they were Maghrebi Ismailis to begin with. The Fatimids too are Ismailis and not Jaafaris, which means that the Shiites of Lebanon never ruled Lebanon during that period of history. In addition, Kesrouan’s borders extended all the way to the Beirut River, and its southern district (now known as the Matn) belonged to the Druze Abillamah lords. So, you have some gall to claim the lands of Kesrouan and Byblos!!
Moreover, the three Mamluk campaigns against Kesrouan decimated the Maronites and the Shiites for reasons whose details are too many to fit here. But Patriarch Douaihi and Ibn Qalaei, and in particular the Maronite Bishop Tadros, a contemporaneous of the period, do confirm those events. Tadros says, “Not a church or fort was spared destruction, except Mar Challita Church.” He described the leaders of the rebels as belonging to the famous Abillamah Druze family. Many other historians, like Abul-Fidaa and Qalqashandi and others, do corroborate the preceding.
As for the Shiites whom you claim were the target of these campaigns, and thus suggesting they were against you, it is not known what Shiites were living in Kesrouan! Ibn Tamima, whose fatwa ordered the extermination of the Kesrouanis, directed his campaigns against those he called “the rejectionists” who in fact are the Nassiri Alawites, the Ismailis, the Qaramita, the Druze and all the esoteric cryptic sects, including the Jaafari sect.
Hence, if we cumulate all these facts, taking into account the extension of Kesrouan all the way to the Beirut River, and that the region was inhabited by more than one Shiite party, we conclude that the Jaafaris (to which Lebanon’s Shiites today belong) were numerically a very limited sect and had no roots in Kesrouan and Byblos, and the only right they have in this land is to leave it for better pastures if they do not like their Maronite neighbors.
I still have one quizzical question: How is it that, when the Maronites returned to Kesrouan after their expulsion by the Mamluks, they found the Jaafari Shiites living there in their stead, which forced them to buy their lands and their religious sites from them? One well-known example of this fact is the Lady of Louaizi Church in Hrajel.
Were the Jaafari Shiites in collusion with the Mamluks against Kesrouan?
No matter. But Hassan Nasrallah and his resistance associates should by now have learned that the road to Jerusalem goes southeast, while the road to Kesrouan goes north, and that Jerusalem and its liberation should be closer to him in distance than is the defiant Kesrouan that will remain a thorn in the side of Iran and its resistance shills.
