After the explosions in (Christian) Ashrafieh and (Sunni) Verdun,  Aley, a popular Druze summer destination was hit. Can Walid Jumblat calm his constituents this time?

This time though, the smoke is not natural..

If one was to choose the single event which contributed most to sparking a Sunni-Shiaa strife in Iraq, one would chose the bombing of the Al-askari Mosque in Samarra. The bombing of a historic Shiaa mosque was seen by many as the straw that broke the Shiaa camel’s back, and initiated the cycle of revenge killings.

What does this have to do with Walid Jumblat, the leader of the Lebanese Druze?

To understand, one has to go back a bit to the ziad & ziad murder incident, where two partisans of Walid Jumblat were publicly kidnapped, killed, and maimed to the shock of the Lebanese. Back then, the Druze were seeing red and screaming for revenge, but their leader disappointed them by calling for calm.

The killers turned out to be, as everyone suspected, members of the Shamas family, who are Hezbollah sympathizers and who are now hiding from justice in one of their security zones. By calling for calm, Walid Jumblat had averted a potential bloodbath between the Shiaas and the Druze.

Fast forward to today, an explosion rocks a prosperous Druze Mountain village, and Hezbollah’s condemnation will probably be lukewarm as usual. There are no guarantees that the overzealous Druze will listen to their leader this time.

What this explosion clearly shows, is that March14 is the Target.

It is obvious is that the explosions targeted Druze, Christian and Sunni locations (those religious groups being the chore constituents of March 14). What is less obvious is that all those targets are also touristic hotspots (The Aley explosion was in a shopping area). Businessmen, another March14 constituency, are now lamenting the fatal blow that hit the Summer season (Aley being the favorite mountain destination of Wealthy Gulf tourists).

Whoever is doing this knows this country very well..

The coverage of the recent fights between the Lebanese army and Fateh Al Islam has resulted in a mass exodus of Lebanese audiences away from Aljazeera.

The latest wave of Lebanese to shun Aljazeera didn’t do so because of distaste of free media. They have simply had it with their biases.

“I used to be upset with Aljazeera for giving as much air-time to Syrian regime apologists as to pro-independence Lebanese law-makers”, said Mr. Azzam, a Lebanese Sunni trader in this African country. “I was okay with it and thought it’s a good source of information about the other side’s point of view. But the way it covered the Nahr el bared fighting is simply outrageous. I don’t want to watch it anymore”

What Mr. Azzam -and many like him in my non-scientific sample of around 50 people- was referring to is Aljazeera’s portrayal of the Lebanese army as a ruthless aggressor, and its insinuation that it’s acting like the Americans and Israelis. Aljazeera gave high exposure to civilian casualties, and minimized coverage of the cause of the fighting, namely, the unprovoked and deliberate attack by the terrorists on the Lebanese army.

To add insult to injury, Aljazeera refers to the shelling targets as “what the Lebanese Army says are militant hideouts,” casting doubt on our military’s judgment the same way it does when it says “Israel bombed what is says are hamas weapon factories”

Their coverage was obviously very far from the mood of the country, and some watchers might tune back in when things get calm again. But for many, the move is permanent.

“Al-Arabiya was way more balanced, I even preferred watching (the American funded) Al-Hurra” Mr. Azzam concluded. And so far, they all seem to agree.

PS: After reading the comments below and responding if you want, don’t forget to watch the video of Walid Jumblat castigating Aljazeera or read Elie ferzli’s piece and Diana Mukalled’s piece