Fahmi Huwaidi wrote an article for a Qatari publication criticizing a headline that was published in our newspaper. He considered the headline an indication of a new stage in the way that the media deals with the “resistance”. He stated that the headline did not come from the Israeli media trumpet, but from an Arab media forum.
The headline that upset Mr. Fahmi read ‘Brother of Accused Hezbollah Member: We all knew that he was supporting the resistance,’ printed in Asharq Al-Awsat on April 10, 2009. Mr. Huwaidi’s article concluded that he did not see any element of news in the headline and wondered: has the resistance become something suspicious?
From a journalistic standpoint, the man’s admission that his brother was supporting the “resistance” indicates that the Hezbollah suspect member was providing support or belonged to Hezbollah. This came at a time when there was controversy and doubt as to whether or not the accused suspect was a member of Hezbollah. Nasrallah had not yet delivered his televised speech in which he admitted that Sami Chehab was a member of his party.
Therefore, the headline was appropriate, especially as headlines are free of political identity, religion, or ideology in a press that is based on morality and knowledge and not one that is built on smugness and ideological affiliations. The press has the right to use exciting, direct, and meaningful headlines rather than deceiving people in the interest of the “resistance”!
But politically – and this is where the importance lies in the comments of Mr. Huwaidi and others who have made it their job to accuse people of treason – the question is what kind of resistance are we talking about? Where, when and how? Bin Nasrallah sending his cells to Egypt is not resistance. Rather, the precise description of this action is violation of the sovereignty of an independent state and its government, laws and systems. Or is it the case that some people do not believe in the Egyptian state or the Arab states as a whole?
Because the accusation of treason is a weapon used by those who lack logic or any real pretext [to cast such an accusation], let us present the facts that have been forgotten and ignored. Where was Mr. Huwaidi and co. on December 28, 2008 when Nasrallah came out to say that he knew nothing about the Katyusha rockets in south Lebanon and stated that some people want to embroil Hezbollah in a confrontation with Israel? Why wasn’t he told that “resistance” is not embroilment, especially considering that the Israelis were pounding Gaza from every direction at the time?
Where were the supporters of the “resistance” when the Iranian Supreme Guide banned his citizens from heading to Gaza to fight? Why didn’t anybody say at the time that this was weakness on the part of the support of the “resistance” and that the closure of the crossings was not a feasible excuse as there were also the [crossings in] south Lebanon and the Golan Heights?
There are countless examples; why were they silent the day that Hezbollah detained the French Socialist official in the southern suburbs based on the pretext of security, knowing that Hezbollah does not embody the Lebanese state. Why do they consider Cairo protecting its sovereignty and borders excessive?
And where are they today as an American journalist of Iranian origin is being detained in Iran accused of spying? She is just a single woman, not a sleeper cell, so why isn’t Tehran being accused of excessiveness? Moreover, why is the freedom of the press and freedom of journalists not being defended? Or does the right to sovereignty belong to Iran alone and not to our Arab states?
I don’t understand you Fahmi!