Talk:Émile Lahoud
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] (If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
||
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Lebanon, an attempt to create a comprehensive, neutral, and accurate representation of Lebanon on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. |
I aint a supporter of Lahoud and i aint even lebanese and i know for a fact that this page is completely biased. As much as i dislike foreign influences i still think we should kepp this unbiased. Comon people...fix this shit up!
i think this page is biased. can any proof of syrian pressure be given? la gaie 18:08, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
“Whereas many Lebanese officers abandoned their personal lives during the war of liberation in the service of their country, Lahoud abandoned his professional responsibilities and spent his time philandering, playing poker, and swimming.” Even if true (I have no idea whether it is or not), this needs to be reworded. --Sesel 02:55, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- I'm going to delete it as it's not referenced. Feel free to restore it if a credible publication can be cited as the source. SlimVirgin 23:02, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)
- The following also needs references or will have to be removed. Can the editor(s) who inserted it provide references? SlimVirgin 23:36, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)
Lahoud served under General Michel Aoun during the final years of the Lebanese Civil War (1975-90). Most military officers under Aoun's command were fiercely loyal to their leader during the bloody fighting that continued intermittently for the next six months. Lahoud, however, earned a reputation for cowardice and dereliction of duty that alienated his fellow officers. According to one officer who knew him well, any time a shell would land in the vicinity of his office, Lahoud would scramble into a bomb shelter in the basement. During much of the heaviest fighting, Lahoud left the complex entirely and stayed in the basement of the Al-Manar Hotel in Jounieh. "He became the security barometer for many shop owners in Jounieh," the officer told a Lebanese newspaper. "Every time Lahoud used to come to Al-Manar Hotel, the shop owners and other Jounieh residents would realize that things were not normal and that fighting would start soon. Shops would close down and people used to evacuate the streets."
In September, after an Arab League-brokered cease-fire took effect, Aoun fired him and Lahoud crossed over into Syrian-occupied west Beirut several weeks later.
Meanwhile, the Syrians were looking for a Maronite military officer to assume the position of army commander for the pro-Syrian regime in west Beirut, which was endorsed by the 1989 Taif Agreement. Scores of Maronite army officers were offered the job, but they all turned the job down. Finally, Lahoud was offered the position. According to one source, Lahoud had connections to an influential Syria army officer, Ali Hammoud, who recommended him for the job.
As no one has responded, I've removed the first para above, which was the worst, and have left the other two, but I'll remove them tomorrow if no reference is forthcoming, so if anyone cares about this material, speak now. SlimVirgin 03:50, Feb 16, 2005 (UTC)
i just returned to this page, to find the above material deleted--while it certainly shows some bias, it also rings true with everything that i heard about Lahoud while visiting Lebanon last fall--as to the first post (dated much earlier), i think the Syrian influence is definitely attributable, if only for the fact that they changed the Lebanese constitution to allow Lahoud to remain in his position--a move that was roundly decried by Hariri, Jumblatt and many others...perhaps this needs to be noted in the piece, but in a more neutral tone ...i am currently reading 'Pity the Nation,' by Robert Fisk, and will look for more references to Lahoud DWittNYC
- Yes, it may be true, but that's not the point; the point is that it needs a reference. SlimVirgin 07:38, Feb 18, 2005 (UTC)
Much of the material removed was taken verbatim from the Middle East Intelligence Bulletin [1] and its "dossier" on Lahoud [2]. --Sesel 13:54, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Bias? =
I wonder if the following could be re-written, alternatively deleted: 'Hariri considered Lahoud to be a lightweight and a Syrian pawn who was undermining Lebanese institutions by backing the encroachment of secret police agencies that mirrored the ones running Syria: the role of the intelligence was no longer to keep up security, but to plant agents, generalize wiretapping, distribute newspaper articles, threaten judges, bind ministers and besiege members of Parliament.Lahoud and about 18 pro-Syrian ministers voted against any project Hariri proposed, from small items like buying land for new schools to economic reforms. At a 2002 meeting of international donors in Paris, the French president Chirac and Hariri managed to secure more than $4 billion in aid to Lebanon, which was heavily in debt, in exchange for economic reforms. Lahoud effectively blocked all the reforms.' What Rafik Hariri thought about Lahoud (to the extent this can be attributed to reputable sources) might not be that relevant. The remainder of the paragraph is highly controversial. To suggest that Lahoud and other 'pro-Syrian' ministers voted against 'any project Hariri proposed' seems like a statement if anything. I believe the allegation that 'Lahoud blocked all the reforms' need to be proved. Meanwhile, Hariri was one of the driving forces behind the Taif agreement, seems absurd to talk of the 'pro-Syrian' regime in West Beirut in this context as there was a broad consensus Syria would provide security. I will change this now. Tiller1 16:49, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Bias problems
This page is quite biassed in its tone, and also completely unsourced. The allegations of Lahoud's behaviour with regard to Hariri and the Syrians are not presented in a neutral way and the repetition of malicious gossip is not very neutral either. Palmiro | Talk 15:21, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Copyvio
I found a lot of plagiarism of material from the NYT, [3] which I've removed. If anyone wants to restore it, it has to be written up properly and attributed, or else quoted, but bear in mind that if you do that, you'll need to look for balancing material, because the article is so short that the NYT material and POV will overwhelm it. SlimVirgin (talk) 16:57, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
- the problem is that this individual is widely known for his unpopularity and lack of a popular mandate in Lebanon, and much of what has been written about him reflects that. to some extent, he is notable for his unpopularity. moreover, this is not outright bias because it consistently references the opinions of 3d parties (in line with wikipedia policies). let's get this clear, I have no stake in disparaging this guy, he just happens to be a widely disdained leader. although i agree that we need to source all of this, my experiences travelling in and reading about lebanon convince me that this article is very much in line with common knowledge about him. Interestingstuffadder 17:29, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
- If the only source is the NYT, then we've effectively handed the page to their reporter. SlimVirgin (talk) 18:07, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
- Umm...the NYT reporter is not stating an opinion. He is discussing incidents that occured and information that he has gathered. Are you accuising the NYT reporter of fabricating information? I have never, anywhere else on wikipedia, seen an article in a major newspaper struck down as an unreliable source for an assertion. Or are you implying that we need more than one source for this? Where else on wikipedia or in wikipedia policy is it required that more than one reliable source be provided for an assertion? Interestingstuffadder 18:16, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
- If the only source is the NYT, then we've effectively handed the page to their reporter. SlimVirgin (talk) 18:07, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Political life
Hello, all. It really doesn't make sense to restore material that is unsourced. The rule (often broken) in WikiP is to rely upon sources. I'm assuming everybody knows that, but I could be wrong in this particular case. I am again removing the unsourced sentences — well, because they lack sources! (really, I don't care a whit about Émile Lahoud one way or the other). This is the section I am referring to —
A Maronite military officer was needed to assume the position of army commander for the West Beirut-based Lebanese government endorsed by the 1989 Taif Agreement[citation needed]. Lahoud was offered the position. According to one source, Lahoud had connections to an influential Syrian army officer, Ali Hammoud, who recommended him for the job. [citation needed]
Sincerely, GeorgeLouis 13:32, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Life Style
This is just a cheapshot. Wikipedia is clearly being overrun by appologists for US government policy.
- Meets wikipedia standards for inclusion -- notable, in that it got a lot of attention in the aftermath of Hariri's death and is frequent fodder for Lahoud's critics within and outside of Lebanon. Verifiable in that it references one of the world's top newspapers. thus, the "personal life" section should remain. Interestingstuffadder 16:55, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
