Rahbani's Letter To Fouad
There have been quite a rage of discussions lately – starting with MJT’s completely innocuous (well, not exactly completely ...) post, ending up with another post by Lebanon.Profile - mainly centered around Bashir. Of course, in such things – a mention of Bashir (or of others) never fails to bring about defenders who say “Well, what about” … you can check the comments in MJT’s blog.
Personally, I don't care too much for these discussions – well, my comments on the second blog probably show that I do care, and I DO if they are going to impede Lebanon from at least moving forwards. I don’t mind this “two steps back and three steps forwards” theory– as long as we take those three steps.
So – due to a discussion I had with a friend (continued ...)
On a sidenote - I would like to extend my thanks to Eve and the rest of the forum for the invitation to join.
posted by Lazarus @ 10:32 AM
3 Comments:
Khaled,
I think it is vitally important for the health of the nation that we remember the war.
Now, I'm thinking of running a string of connected posts on this issue.
The discussion on my blog - much of it contributed by you and Lazarus - has brought on a number of thoughts about selective history and undefined icons.
Some things boil down to a very simple debate about what is or is not a national symbol. Bashir, Berri, and Jumblatt are all undeniably Lebanese and admit such today. However, they are not national symbols.
Berri does not represent the nation, and yet he does because he is one of our three presidents. Odd conundrum.
Khaled -
I explain why I did this in the rest of the entry on my blog.
Hello
Sorry to intrude on your conversation but could you add my blog to your directory
thx
Seth
http://sethdream.blogspot.com
Post a Comment
<< Home