What are our options?

I am against HA bearing arms in Lebanon, i am Against bearing personal arms at home, i will go to extreme length to defend my opinion and to fight for it, but i will go farther to defend the right to defend my country against any enemy, WHOEVER is the enemey.

I advocate for a strong Lebanese army who CAN defend Lebanon. the question is just a how.

HA did not win a conventional war against Israel, it fought a fight that it can win and this is intelligence, Lebanese Army in order to defend Lebanon against any Enemy needs a BIGGG Ally, but if our enemy has this BIGGG ally then we are in trouble since we would be at a disadvantage.

who needs arms when you have allies? when France our Pedophile mother will take care of us and pamper us with her perfumes and wine, i laughed when i read Sarkozy saying that what he will guarantee is that no infrastucture will be destroyed if Israel Bombs us, so sick and pathetic

When Clergy meddle with politics

Time after time after time we make the same mistakes. Confusing spiritual leadership with political leadership. Time has come to say NO, STOP, their are limits where you are allowed to intervene and to meddle in the political life of the society.

In the course of my life i have been close to many clergy and i have personal friendships with many, i have met priests who chose to be priests because it is their vocation and met others who chose this life for many other not so spiritual reasons.

This in mind, church public figures are no exception.They are portrayed as if they have no "personal agenda" they speak for the "welfare of all the community" they interfere in the "politics as a broad term not in specifics", i will discuss each term used and anayse it to see if this is true or they use these rhetorics for political reasons.

No personal agenda?

Well most of the church public figures are not maried and have no kids, but why they say that they have no "personal agendas" is it because it should be like that in theory or is it according to the teachings of our Lord Jesus. if this their reasoning then i have a very big reason to doubt what they say. I have never met closely with any high ranking public figure in the church but my experience in my parish and in University Parich that all have personal agendas (not always in the negative meaning of it) but they all have personal agendas, they have "political" fights over ideas, challenging how things should be done, either they pull to stay close to tradition or they push to try to make change.

The assumption that having no wife and kids decreases their personal factor is completely wrong, it just increases the personal level of everything.

welfare for all the community?

in simple words this is camouflage dictatorship, and if i want to be optimistic it is benevolent camouflaged dictatorship. All dictatoships should be challenged even though they themselves cannot change, at least they should be challenged to minimise their effect on us.

In theory their is no welfare for all the community, their is welfare for part on the cost of the other part of the same community. Historically the welfare has always been channeled to the wellbeing, the church has historically worked on improving its economical and finacial wellbeing in order to withstand the storms. I beleive it still works the same improving its economical and financial structure as well as trying to enhance its people conditions as a spillover from its condition.

When church officilas are asked why they dont do any real economical development they reply that this is the function of the government, and that their function is to manage their parish for the general welfare and not the specifics. In theory i strongly agree, but what if the government is ineffective, corrupt, biased in economical investment distribution? should the church stand and watch, is it allowed not to use its assets wisely for the general welfare? I am not saying tat the church should sell the land and to distribute the money over the people, but there are many many other ways for the church to help.

the church is very hirererical and it despises radical changes in society , they preffer the old system even if they know that it is not very good, to any change that they cannot control. they are afraid change, they are not accustomed to change. they repeat what others has done.

and they are repeating the same mistakes.

politics in broad terms not in specifics?

if we read the newspaper and we read what they say we wonder where is the border between the two terms. do we hear what they talk in private? do we hear what they talk with ambassadors politicians ? no special favours? nothing..?

Warlords and Church and Money a closed elite circle, whoever trespasses will be punished.

not in the Heavens but on earth