Talk:Saad Hariri/Archives/2013

Weak Figurehead
A dubious line was added in the intro about him being a "weak figurehead" of March 14 referencing a largely outdated economist article. In truth, Harriri at the moment (as always) leads March 14 and leads the biggest parliamentary block in Lebanon. This line is just to make the man sound weak, which to anyone who has any knowledge about Lebanon, even Hariri's enemies, is just not true!! I will be changing this line again unless someone comes up with a stronger argument. --A Gooner (talk) 21:08, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
 * The publication cited, The Economist, is very influential, not outdated. Instead of deleting the sentence, you may consider to put counter arguments portraying Hariri as an efficient and influential leader of the 14 March alliance. On the other hand, thanks for opening a discussion on the issue.Egeymi (talk) 22:24, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Saad Hariri was born in Riyadh or Beirut?
In the beginning of the article it is written that Saad Hariri was born in Riyadh, but later, it was said that he was born and brought up in Beirut. Which one is correct? And again, in the beginning, it's said that he is part Lebanese and part Saudi, but no clarification or detail information has been given on that. All in all, the article seems to be incomplete and inconsistent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.49.40.140 (talk) 16:30, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

These edits contradict WP:Living policies
The Edits I removed were :


 * working for increased American intervention and isolation of the Lebanese resistance movement as part of the 14 March coalition. Unlike his father before him, he favors negotiations to disarm Hezbollah and opposes Syria's influence in Lebanon, although his father cooperated very closely with the Syrians during their 29-year presence.

Explanation: these Edits are not references they clearly state that Saad Hariri is working as an American Agent, and the other statement about his father is pretty much ambiguous.

Explanation:Not referenced contains POV language such as Sectarian Militias... while he is simply one of the leaders of the March 14 Alliance that contains many other political leaders and parties.
 * Saad Hariri returned to Lebanon and took up his father's political path rallying behind him former sectarian militias, the Progressive Socialist Party and the Lebanese Forces.


 * Hariri has been suspected of funding the Fatah al-Islam group to counter the Shi'a Muslim Hezbollah, immediately prior to its assault on the Lebanese Army. Investigative journalist Seymour Hersh said on CNN that Fatah al-Islam was being funded by Saudi Arabia through Bandar bin Sultan, as a result of an agreement among Dick Cheney, Elliott Abrams and Bandar "whereby the Saudis would covertly fund the Sunni Fatah al-Islam in Lebanon as a counterweight to the Shia Hezbollah". He also stated that the Lebanese government, led by the Sunni Future Movement, was providing support for the group.

Explanation: Accusing Saad Hariri of supporting the terrorist group Fatah Al-Islam is aimed to defame. Since no investigation had ever proved any connection between Saad Hariri and Fatah Al-Islam but on the contrary the leaders and members of this group had been smuggled from Syria

"Lebanese security officials said Fatah Islam split last year from the Syria-based Fatah Uprising, itself a 1980s splinter of the late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat's mainstream Fatah. But they say the alleged split from Fatah Uprising was only a cover and that they are part of the Syrian intelligence security.  Unconfirmed Lebanese security reports also have alleged that members of Fatah Islam were sent by Damascus to destabilize Lebanon following Syria's forced withdrawal from Lebanon in April 2005.Fatah Islam: Obscure group emerges as Lebanon's newest security threat The Associated Press

for more citations The mysterious Fatah al-Islam connection with Syria By Scott Macleod

''The Lebanese government has linked Fatah al-Islam to the Syrian intelligence services. Syrian officials and Fatah al-Islam deny the connection.

The Beirut government says four Syrian members of Fatah al-Islam were arrested and confessed to the twin bus bombings in February that killed three people in a Christian area near the capital.''

Actually only Seymour Hersh did such claims and he is known as relying on anonymous sources and as his campaign was related to his attitude towards the current American administration and it allies specially the Suadis so such citations is pretty much week considering the controversial theories found concerning the subject.


 * Saad Hariri is mainly criticised for having inherited his position in politics through no merit of his own, and thereby benefiting from Lebanon's heavy system of patronage. In addition, he has been severely criticised for having transformed the Future Movement, largely considered to have been an exception in the Lebanese political spectrum for its refusal to take up arms, into an armed militia'''.

Explanation: Such claims are weakly sourced "Gulfnews" and its simply part of the propaganda against the March 14 Alliance claiming that he formed a militia is part of the March 8 Alliance propaganda while Hizbollah fighters during 2008 conflict in Lebanon controlled west Beirut which is Saah Hariri strong hold with virtually no resistance from the Future movement because simply they didnt have a militia and that can be seen from the amount of casualties that occurred in Beirut. anyway such dangerous accusations are not suitable for a wikipedia article. Hiram111 (talk) 22:02, 6 July 2008 (UTC)


 * It isn't up to you to decide which sources are reliable. You've been more than disruptive on Wikipedia and it really stuns me that no one has moved to block you yet. So now, Hariri doesn't have a militia? And virtually no resistance? Almost every news agency that covered the fighting reported that Hariri's thugs abandoned their guns like cowards merely few hours into the fighting. But, again, I don't have to explain anything to you. It really disturbs me that people like you are allowed to edit on Wikipedia and admins just ignore your frequent violations of policies. GreenEcho (talk) 23:18, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

(ec) Are the following statements supported by the sources? The Edwards and Kane article (2nd footnote) doesn't mention Hariri. Because the above material doesn't seem to be supported by the references, Hiram111's statement that it violates WP:LIVING seems to be valid. I'm therefore reverting to Hiram111's version. Because of the importance of the WP:LIVING policy, before re-inserting this material, please find references that support it. GreenEcho, you said the material was "heavily sourced". I don't see that. Could you please explain which paragraphs of which references support each of the above parts of the article? Please don't re-insert the material until we agree that it's sourced. ☺ Coppertwig (talk) 22:17, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
 * "rallying behind him former sectarian militias, the Progressive Socialist Party and the Lebanese Forces." I don't see anything like this in the references.
 * "He ran for the Lebanese parliament on an anti-Syrian platform" I don't see this in the references.
 * "working for increased American intervention and isolation of the Lebanese resistance movement" I don't see this in the references.
 * ". Unlike his father before him, he favors negotiations to disarm Hezbollah " I don't see this in the references.
 * "and opposes Syria's influence in Lebanon," I don't see this in the references.
 * "although his father cooperated very closely with the Syrians during their 29-year presence" I don't see this in the references.
 * "Hariri has been suspected of funding the Fatah al-Islam group to counter the Shi'a Muslim Hezbollah, immediately prior to its assault on the Lebanese Army. " I don't see this in any of the references.
 * "Investigative journalist Seymour Hersh said on CNN that Fatah al-Islam was being funded by Saudi Arabia through Bandar bin Sultan, as a result of an agreement among Dick Cheney, Elliott Abrams and Bandar "whereby the Saudis would covertly fund the Sunni Fatah al-Islam in Lebanon as a counterweight to the Shia Hezbollah". " This seems to be supported by the reference. However, the reference is not talking about Hariri, so I'm not sure whether it's relevant to this article. (See WP:SYN.)
 * "He also stated that the Lebanese government, led by the Sunni Future Movement, was providing support for the group." This does not seem to be supported by the reference. It says "formerly", i.e. "the result of an attempt by the Lebanese government to crack down on a militant Sunni group, Fatah al-Islam, that it formerly supported." (Edwards and Kane)
 * "Saad Hariri is mainly criticised for having inherited his position in politics through no merit of his own," I don't see this in any of the references.
 * "In addition, he has been severely criticised for having transformed the Future Movement, largely considered to have been an exception in the Lebanese political spectrum for its refusal to take up arms, into an armed militia." The reference (Daragahi and Rafel) says "The fighters, aligned with the Future movement led by Parliament member Saad Hariri, were trained and armed to counter the heavily armed Hezbollah, protecting their turf in the face of a potential military confrontation." It doesn't say anything about Hariri being severely criticized.


 * The tone of your writing, Coppertwig, is very provoking. I don't need references to show that Hariri is allied to the Lebanese Forces and the Progressive Socialist Party nor do I need sources to show that Hariri is anti-Syrian, or that Hariri is pro-American or that his father, unlike him, didn't oppose Hezbollah. This is common knowledge. As for Hariri funding Fatah al-Islam, any idiot with the least required knowledge about Lebanon knows that the government is led by Hariri's Future Movement, and when Seymour Hersh talks about the Siniora government funding Fatah al-Islam, he also means Hariri's Future Movement. As for Hariri's militia, I'm not sure if you follow the news but Hariri's militia and Hezbollah fought a war in May, and it is pretty basic knowledge that Hariri has a militia. So please, be civil and, next time, don't argue the basic stuff. GreenEcho (talk) 23:07, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I apologize for my tone. I really didn't intend to be uncivil.  I found a reference for Hariri being anti-Syrian:  .  I'm sorry, but I don't see where in the references the various material is cited.  Could you help me by telling me which paragraph in which reference you're referring to?  For example, this sentence is supported by the 3rd paragraph of Edwards and Kane: "Investigative journalist Seymour Hersh said on CNN that Fatah al-Islam was being funded by Saudi Arabia through Bandar bin Sultan, as a result of an agreement among Dick Cheney, Elliott Abrams and Bandar "whereby the Saudis would covertly fund the Sunni Fatah al-Islam in Lebanon as a counterweight to the Shia Hezbollah"."  I think it would be helpful to have more people involved in this discussion, so I'm listing this article at WP:BLPN. ☺ Coppertwig (talk) 23:35, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
 * "I don't need references to show that Hariri is allied to the Lebanese Forces and the Progressive Socialist Party nor do I need sources to show that Hariri is anti-Syrian, or that Hariri is pro-American or that his father, unlike him, didn't oppose Hezbollah. This is common knowledge." - I would disagree that any of this is common knowledge. It may be "basic stuff", but it should still be referenced. If it is basic knowledge, it should be fairly easy to find a source for it. - DigitalC (talk) 01:40, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

not really former
I think the article is incorrect. The cabinet was dissolved, but the president asked Hariri to be the caretaker Prime Minister while negotiations for a new government go on. There's also a conflict, in that the article says he is "former" but the succession box at bottom says he's "incumbent". I haven't updated the article myself, but I'm not 100% clear on how things work. --Rob (talk) 11:05, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Saudi status
Can somebody add a source to say he is a Saudi. Given the strict limits on citizenship, I don't think it's an automatic thing to assume somebody born there (Saudi Arabia) is a citizen (even if the live and work there). I'm not contesting the point, but given the significance, it needs a source. --Rob (talk) 17:12, 5 March 2011 (UTC)