Blair declares a deep ideological motivation for opposing a ceasefire. He states: “If I had condemned Israel, it would have been more than dishonest; it would have undermined the world view I had come to hold passionately.”

It is this world view that is most alarming about Blair’s account. Through this lens, Blair believed: “Lebanon was embroiled in something far bigger and more portentous than a temporary fight with Israel.” Instead, he sees it as a “wider struggle between the strain of religious extremism in Islam and the rest of us”. He was thus willing to delay a ceasefire in order to win victory in this wider struggle, of which he saw Hezbollah as a key combatant, and Israel as one of “us”.

From Blair’s perspective this religious struggle defines the Middle East. He states: “To me, you can’t understand Hezbollah unless you understand the role of Iran; or understdand Lebanon unless you understand Syria … or understand either country in its present state unless you understand the history not just of the region but of the religion, how it saw itself, how it had developed its own narrative, how it saw its own predicament.”

Remember, this was very personal to Mr. Blair and not about the Labour’s party policy. David Miliband, his right hand at the time and now a hopeful to lead the party revealed recently that he regretted not being able to dissuade Mr. Blair from his Lebanon stance.

“Buenas tardes,” he would say as residents cracked open their doors, handing them a flier. Like his father and others in the Lebanese community, he learned Spanish assisting customers and instructing employees in the clothing stores and warehouses. Saleh was running on a campaign of public safety, fiscal prudence and quality-of-life issues like clean, safe parks and untangling traffic congestion.

No matter where they are, those pesky Lebanese just can’t leave politics alone can they?

You know I did try to qualify my position as much as possible to avoid precisely such dramatic headlines, but I guess nuance doesn’t good pageviews make.

One more thing: “Mustapha” with a quotations mark? I swear, that’s really my name..

But aren’t they effectively stealing from those artists by offering their music for free? Not at all they insist:

We’re actually promoting them by distributing their work and making everything more accessible. A direct link between the artist and the consumer is created and we’re confident that this will get more people to go to concerts and see live performances.

You got to give the guys credit for staying clear from the Ragheb Alamas and the Nancy Ajrams of Lebanese music, but by choosing to remain anonymous, they at least concede that what they’re doing lies squarely outside of the law.

The threat of a nuclear-armed Iran has given Israel, most of the Arab countries and the United States a common interest in working together against a regional power they all fear.

While it is true that the threat of Iran can unify minds, it won’t suddenly change Palestinian division, Arab weakness and Israeli impetuousness, so call me skeptical.

In fact, Iran and its acolytes love peace processes because they inevitably fail, causing more disillusion, radicalization and support for the mullahs’ world view.

there is nothing like living in the dark and 100 per cent humidity with no AC to create a sense of community spirit. No longer did one have to overcome the awkward silence in elevators (when they worked) by staring blankly at the cell phone. Now neighbours could complain about the state of the nation for a few seconds and then feel much better about pretending to send texts.

Looking at the bright side of a dark situation..

Gentries, 48, said he had absolutely no interest in exposing himself to further knowledge of Islamic civilization or putting his sweeping opinions into a broader context of any kind, and confirmed he was “perfectly happy” to make a handful of emotionally charged words the basis of his mistrust toward all members of the world’s second-largest religion.

Funny if it weren’t so common. Rarely have the fictional characters of the Onion sounded so real.

Mr. Bellemare clarified in an interview with NowLebanon some very important matters like political influence over the STL, the role of leaks, politics in Lebanon, phone tapping and how strong his case is. Read the whole thing.

Here’s one of my favorite passages where Mr. Bellemare explains the concept of “circumstantial evidence”:

You want to prove that it rained today. You prove that the pavement is wet, you prove that there was nobody who cleaned the street, etc. In itself each of these facts does not mean anything, but if you put them all together, you can conclude at the end of the day that it rained. This is what circumstantial evidence is. I am strongly of the view that circumstantial evidence is more powerful than direct evidence.

Bonus: Check out this great article in the Washington Post by By Edward E. Curtis IV: “5 myths About Mosques In America”