And the Real Face Has Been Unmasked (Episode 1)
Al-Intiqad, by Moussa Ali Moussa
(Daniel) Bellemare has been assigned for the international investigation into the assassination crime of PM Hariri upon a previously determined background:
Accusing Hizbullah
"The Head of the International Investigation Committee Daniel Bellemare has an excellent background," MP Marwan Hamedeh reiterated upon the Canadian ambassador's statement; this has recently been revealed by a secret cable exposed by "Al-Akhbar Newspaper", which has received the cable from "Wikileaks" (Cable: Beirut 54808 on April 22, 2008).
*Discharging Brammertz from the Investigation into Hariri's Assassination for Not Adopting the Presumption of Accusing Hizbullah
It's a brief expression that has made us look again for what it implies, attempting to understand and unveil that background for Bellemare's conduct and performance, in addition to his way of dealing with the international investigation into the assassination crime of PM Hariri. But the obvious question in the first place was: Why was Bellemare assigned for the international investigation into the assassination crime of Hariri?
The Head of "the National Struggle Frontier", MP Walid Junblatt provides a good answer for this question, whereby during his meeting with the American Ambassador in Beirut, Michelle Sisson (Revealed in cable: Beirut 49008 on April 8, 2008), he unveiled that the former Head of the Investigation Committee, Serge Brammertz, did not act upon the information discovered by the Information-Branch Officer, Wissam Eid (a year and a half ago) as the latter linked the so-called Abdul Majeed Qassem Ghamloush and a phone net of 17 cellular phones.
So the obvious conclusion for Jumblatt's words is that Brammertz was discharged from the international investigation into the assassination crime of Hariri since Brammertz was not conducting things towards the accusation of Hizbullah, and he didn't adopt what the Information-Branch Officer reached concerning the cellular-phones net; neither did he take this direction as a way for investigation.
This conclusion took us back in time to the first days when Bellemare was assigned Chief of the International Investigation Committee; we had a quick look on the evolvement of incidents upon sequential dates...The surprise was that we reiterated what was iterated...Bellemare was assigned for the investigation into the assassination crime of PM Hariri upon a previously defined background: the accusation of Hizbullah. Bellemare was rather a performer that learned his role by heart behind closed curtains and in black fabrication chambers. He just had to play this role in a previously composed play... But how??
Bellemare's "Excellent" Background = Accusing Hizbullah of Assassinating Hariri
A deep reading of the past three years' incidents reveals to us the similarities between the first Chief of the International Investigation Committee, Detlev Mehlis, and the third one, Danielle Bellemare; whereby Mehlis conducted things towards the direct accusation of Syria on the first days of the crime investigation, whereas Bellemare conducted things towards the accusation of Hizbullah on the first day of holding the post as Chief of the Investigation Committee. Going a bit counter clockwise, we find out what follows:
1- Bellemare held his post as Chief of the International Investigation Committee in the beginnings of January, 2008.
2- Two weeks after commencing his investigations, Bellemare met the Information Branch Officer Wissam Eid; this was confirmed by Jumblatt himself and the American Ambassador Michelle Sisson, whereby the first said, "After Bellemare became in charge of the investigation, he met Eid, who was killed a week later." Whereas Sisson reported that "the sources of the International Investigation Committee confirmed that Eid met Bellemare a week before he got killed."
3- Eid was killed in less than a week after he had met with Bellemare; this makes us recall the assassinations that would happen previously and get exploited politically so that the Lebanese government was pushed to make hurried decisions concerning the investigation and the International Tribunal.
4- A few days (six days) after Eid was assassinated, Bellemare accused Hizbullah of his assassination in front of officials of the American Embassy in Beirut on January 31st; hinting that Hizbullah was involved in the crime, Bellemare said, "Wissam Eid (the officer killed in January, 2008) was in charge of analyzing the telecommunications tied with the assassination of Hariri, the other assassinations, and Hizbullah's activities." Bellemare then continued, "The attack leads to two theories: the attempt to obstruct the Tribunal's work or the attempt to prevent the Lebanese government from investigating into Hizbullah's involvement. In both cases," Bellemare said, "the assassination of Eid showed that the assassins are making a shift, and the International Investigation Committee must react to this by adapting its way of work with this shift."
5- Bellemare's hint that he was heading to the theory of Hizbullah's involvement was welcomed and commended by the American Embassy of Beirut only four days later; having met with Bellemare after Bellemare's visit to Eid's assassination scene, the Head of the American Delegation to Beirut, William Grant, made a comment in a secret cable, which he then sent to his administration, and which has been revealed lately: "We give him a primary degree of excellence in evaluation of his effort and determination, and we encourage Washington to do the best it can and to respond to the Investigation Committee's requests regarding information and support." (Cable: Beirut 166.8 - February 4, 2008; classified as from the Head of the American Delegation to Beirut, William Grant.)
Well, the paradox here is that during the very meeting with Grant, Bellemare requested that he be provided with experts working on earth, particularly in the domain of analyzing telecommunications. In this context, Grant says in a remark he mentioned at the cable's end, "We're going to send Bellemare's full request concerning support and posts description regarding experts to the Bureau of the Near East Affairs/ the Bureau of Affairs of Egypt and the Arab East."
Hereupon, the relevant conclusion clearly points out that Bellemare was assigned for the investigation upon a previously determined background:
Accusing Hizbullah of assassinating Hariri; otherwise, how can we explain his hint on that to American officials only one month after holding his post?!
Yet, what is quite odd is that even though investigating into a crime similar to that of Hariri's assassination needs years of effort and work, Bellemare recognized the assassin and arranged responsibilities in a month. He had nothing left to do except for developing legal evidence, on which he could base his indictments that he would issue as soon as he would become "prosecutor general". (This is in accordance with what he said in cable: Beirut 35008, March 7, 2008; classified as from the Chargé d'Affaires Michelle Sisson.)
(In another episode, we shall expose Bellemare's development of legal evidence.)
*Enjoying Freedom... And Supporting Democracy
To make the issue clearer, we list another witness on Bellemare's background. This time it's someone not mentioned in the Wikileaks cables; instead, it's witness from the official website of the International Tribunal which has recently posted a series of video questionnaires of the persons in charge of the investigation and the International Tribunal so as to brighten its image and show its "benefits".
This has taken place after a series of coups the Tribunal received, whereby it was deprived of its legal and judicial context, and its basics, backgrounds, aims, and performance were exposed widely on the political level... Thus the Tribunal could no longer be described with honesty and "purity".
The kind of truth this witness provides becomes clear as we listen to Bellemare's answer in response to a question concerning the benefits which the STL will provide for the Lebanese people; Bellemare's answer says, "In addition to discovering the truth of the incidents of February, 2005, the purpose beyond the STL is to fill the Lebanese people with hope again; to help them trust the regime and enjoy their country's freedom; and to provide the governmental institutions in Lebanon the required authority so as to sustain supporting democracy. Therefore, I believe that our efforts refer to long-term purposes. Certainly, if we get to the mere launching of that process, then we'll have succeeded - I believe."
Enjoying freedom... And supporting democracy... Those are the long-term purposes of the STL Prosecutor General Bellemare, whereby if they are achieved, then he will have performed his tasks successfully... So the story isn't simple; it is the story of aching hearts apparently... Here we wonder: "Aren't these purposes the same as the slogans of (George) Bush and the New Conservatives in America - the slogans which we've been sick of all through the past years?! Didn't the United States occupy Afghanistan and invade Iraq on the basis of these slogans?! Didn't the US give the green light to "Israel" and support it during the "Israeli" Aggression of July, 2006 as an introduction to create "a new Middle East"?!
Don't Bellemare's words meet with what Bush's book, "Decision Points", entitles "The Plan to Spread Freedom", whereby Bush boasts about what he achieved in Lebanon after the issuance of Resolution 1559 and the assassination of PM Hariri, and whereby he says after retelling the incidents of that time, "The Cedars Revolution was one of the greatest successes in spreading freedom, for it happened in a multi-religion country with a Muslim majority. It happened upon the free world's strong diplomatic pressure and without American military interference..."?!
Hereupon, the real face of the STL Prosecutor General Danielle Bellemare is unmasked, and the background, which the Canadian ambassador pointed out, and upon which he was assigned for the investigation is revealed. It is quite obvious, and it doesn't need proof, especially when it suspiciously matches the slogans of freedom and democracy and the American concept of terrorism, which is adopted by Canada (Bellemare's home country); whereby the conclusion of this concept is discrediting the Resistance for "terrorism" and considering it an obstacle facing the American schemes for changing the regional map. This actually makes the Prosecutor General look like a judicial tool for a grand American scheme seeking to get rid of the Resistance...
What relates the American Embassy of Beirut to the International Investigation into PM Hariri's assassination crime? Why have the international investigators, specifically Bellemare and Brammertz, continued to inform the American Administration of every single detail of the investigation? What are the exchanged requests between both parties? What are the effects that this leaves on the politicization of the International Investigation Committee's work? Has this made the Committee lose its transparency, integrity, and independency, making it an incredible standard for the Tribunal, particularly when it comes to disrespecting the principle of the investigation secrecy??
These are questions we're going to answer in the next episode.
(Daniel) Bellemare has been assigned for the international investigation into the assassination crime of PM Hariri upon a previously determined background:
Accusing Hizbullah
"The Head of the International Investigation Committee Daniel Bellemare has an excellent background," MP Marwan Hamedeh reiterated upon the Canadian ambassador's statement; this has recently been revealed by a secret cable exposed by "Al-Akhbar Newspaper", which has received the cable from "Wikileaks" (Cable: Beirut 54808 on April 22, 2008).
*Discharging Brammertz from the Investigation into Hariri's Assassination for Not Adopting the Presumption of Accusing Hizbullah
It's a brief expression that has made us look again for what it implies, attempting to understand and unveil that background for Bellemare's conduct and performance, in addition to his way of dealing with the international investigation into the assassination crime of PM Hariri. But the obvious question in the first place was: Why was Bellemare assigned for the international investigation into the assassination crime of Hariri?
The Head of "the National Struggle Frontier", MP Walid Junblatt provides a good answer for this question, whereby during his meeting with the American Ambassador in Beirut, Michelle Sisson (Revealed in cable: Beirut 49008 on April 8, 2008), he unveiled that the former Head of the Investigation Committee, Serge Brammertz, did not act upon the information discovered by the Information-Branch Officer, Wissam Eid (a year and a half ago) as the latter linked the so-called Abdul Majeed Qassem Ghamloush and a phone net of 17 cellular phones.
So the obvious conclusion for Jumblatt's words is that Brammertz was discharged from the international investigation into the assassination crime of Hariri since Brammertz was not conducting things towards the accusation of Hizbullah, and he didn't adopt what the Information-Branch Officer reached concerning the cellular-phones net; neither did he take this direction as a way for investigation.This conclusion took us back in time to the first days when Bellemare was assigned Chief of the International Investigation Committee; we had a quick look on the evolvement of incidents upon sequential dates...The surprise was that we reiterated what was iterated...Bellemare was assigned for the investigation into the assassination crime of PM Hariri upon a previously defined background: the accusation of Hizbullah. Bellemare was rather a performer that learned his role by heart behind closed curtains and in black fabrication chambers. He just had to play this role in a previously composed play... But how??
Bellemare's "Excellent" Background = Accusing Hizbullah of Assassinating Hariri
A deep reading of the past three years' incidents reveals to us the similarities between the first Chief of the International Investigation Committee, Detlev Mehlis, and the third one, Danielle Bellemare; whereby Mehlis conducted things towards the direct accusation of Syria on the first days of the crime investigation, whereas Bellemare conducted things towards the accusation of Hizbullah on the first day of holding the post as Chief of the Investigation Committee. Going a bit counter clockwise, we find out what follows:
1- Bellemare held his post as Chief of the International Investigation Committee in the beginnings of January, 2008.
2- Two weeks after commencing his investigations, Bellemare met the Information Branch Officer Wissam Eid; this was confirmed by Jumblatt himself and the American Ambassador Michelle Sisson, whereby the first said, "After Bellemare became in charge of the investigation, he met Eid, who was killed a week later." Whereas Sisson reported that "the sources of the International Investigation Committee confirmed that Eid met Bellemare a week before he got killed."
3- Eid was killed in less than a week after he had met with Bellemare; this makes us recall the assassinations that would happen previously and get exploited politically so that the Lebanese government was pushed to make hurried decisions concerning the investigation and the International Tribunal.
4- A few days (six days) after Eid was assassinated, Bellemare accused Hizbullah of his assassination in front of officials of the American Embassy in Beirut on January 31st; hinting that Hizbullah was involved in the crime, Bellemare said, "Wissam Eid (the officer killed in January, 2008) was in charge of analyzing the telecommunications tied with the assassination of Hariri, the other assassinations, and Hizbullah's activities." Bellemare then continued, "The attack leads to two theories: the attempt to obstruct the Tribunal's work or the attempt to prevent the Lebanese government from investigating into Hizbullah's involvement. In both cases," Bellemare said, "the assassination of Eid showed that the assassins are making a shift, and the International Investigation Committee must react to this by adapting its way of work with this shift."
5- Bellemare's hint that he was heading to the theory of Hizbullah's involvement was welcomed and commended by the American Embassy of Beirut only four days later; having met with Bellemare after Bellemare's visit to Eid's assassination scene, the Head of the American Delegation to Beirut, William Grant, made a comment in a secret cable, which he then sent to his administration, and which has been revealed lately: "We give him a primary degree of excellence in evaluation of his effort and determination, and we encourage Washington to do the best it can and to respond to the Investigation Committee's requests regarding information and support." (Cable: Beirut 166.8 - February 4, 2008; classified as from the Head of the American Delegation to Beirut, William Grant.)
Well, the paradox here is that during the very meeting with Grant, Bellemare requested that he be provided with experts working on earth, particularly in the domain of analyzing telecommunications. In this context, Grant says in a remark he mentioned at the cable's end, "We're going to send Bellemare's full request concerning support and posts description regarding experts to the Bureau of the Near East Affairs/ the Bureau of Affairs of Egypt and the Arab East."
Hereupon, the relevant conclusion clearly points out that Bellemare was assigned for the investigation upon a previously determined background:
Accusing Hizbullah of assassinating Hariri; otherwise, how can we explain his hint on that to American officials only one month after holding his post?!
Yet, what is quite odd is that even though investigating into a crime similar to that of Hariri's assassination needs years of effort and work, Bellemare recognized the assassin and arranged responsibilities in a month. He had nothing left to do except for developing legal evidence, on which he could base his indictments that he would issue as soon as he would become "prosecutor general". (This is in accordance with what he said in cable: Beirut 35008, March 7, 2008; classified as from the Chargé d'Affaires Michelle Sisson.)
(In another episode, we shall expose Bellemare's development of legal evidence.)
*Enjoying Freedom... And Supporting Democracy
To make the issue clearer, we list another witness on Bellemare's background. This time it's someone not mentioned in the Wikileaks cables; instead, it's witness from the official website of the International Tribunal which has recently posted a series of video questionnaires of the persons in charge of the investigation and the International Tribunal so as to brighten its image and show its "benefits".
This has taken place after a series of coups the Tribunal received, whereby it was deprived of its legal and judicial context, and its basics, backgrounds, aims, and performance were exposed widely on the political level... Thus the Tribunal could no longer be described with honesty and "purity".
The kind of truth this witness provides becomes clear as we listen to Bellemare's answer in response to a question concerning the benefits which the STL will provide for the Lebanese people; Bellemare's answer says, "In addition to discovering the truth of the incidents of February, 2005, the purpose beyond the STL is to fill the Lebanese people with hope again; to help them trust the regime and enjoy their country's freedom; and to provide the governmental institutions in Lebanon the required authority so as to sustain supporting democracy. Therefore, I believe that our efforts refer to long-term purposes. Certainly, if we get to the mere launching of that process, then we'll have succeeded - I believe."
Enjoying freedom... And supporting democracy... Those are the long-term purposes of the STL Prosecutor General Bellemare, whereby if they are achieved, then he will have performed his tasks successfully... So the story isn't simple; it is the story of aching hearts apparently... Here we wonder: "Aren't these purposes the same as the slogans of (George) Bush and the New Conservatives in America - the slogans which we've been sick of all through the past years?! Didn't the United States occupy Afghanistan and invade Iraq on the basis of these slogans?! Didn't the US give the green light to "Israel" and support it during the "Israeli" Aggression of July, 2006 as an introduction to create "a new Middle East"?!
Don't Bellemare's words meet with what Bush's book, "Decision Points", entitles "The Plan to Spread Freedom", whereby Bush boasts about what he achieved in Lebanon after the issuance of Resolution 1559 and the assassination of PM Hariri, and whereby he says after retelling the incidents of that time, "The Cedars Revolution was one of the greatest successes in spreading freedom, for it happened in a multi-religion country with a Muslim majority. It happened upon the free world's strong diplomatic pressure and without American military interference..."?!
Hereupon, the real face of the STL Prosecutor General Danielle Bellemare is unmasked, and the background, which the Canadian ambassador pointed out, and upon which he was assigned for the investigation is revealed. It is quite obvious, and it doesn't need proof, especially when it suspiciously matches the slogans of freedom and democracy and the American concept of terrorism, which is adopted by Canada (Bellemare's home country); whereby the conclusion of this concept is discrediting the Resistance for "terrorism" and considering it an obstacle facing the American schemes for changing the regional map. This actually makes the Prosecutor General look like a judicial tool for a grand American scheme seeking to get rid of the Resistance...
What relates the American Embassy of Beirut to the International Investigation into PM Hariri's assassination crime? Why have the international investigators, specifically Bellemare and Brammertz, continued to inform the American Administration of every single detail of the investigation? What are the exchanged requests between both parties? What are the effects that this leaves on the politicization of the International Investigation Committee's work? Has this made the Committee lose its transparency, integrity, and independency, making it an incredible standard for the Tribunal, particularly when it comes to disrespecting the principle of the investigation secrecy??
These are questions we're going to answer in the next episode.
