More on Beirut bombing

I may have been too quick to put all the blaim Syria for a number of reasons, even though I still suspect their involvement in the assassination of former Lebanese PM Rafik Hariri. It makes enough sense that they would try to take out such an outspoken (not to mention, increasingly popular) Lebanese politician.

I heard today on NPR that the U.S. is recalling its ambassador from Syria. Yet, one expert that was invited made the point that Syria would be stupid to pull something off as gutsy as the recent assassination. It's already in the "crosshairs" of the U.S. over terrorism and its continued disregard for insurgents crossing over into Iraq.

In addition, CBC News made an interesting connection between Hariri and Saudi Arabia. Before I read this bit, I was unaware that there was already an Islamic group that was claiming responsibility for the attack.

"The 'Group for Victory and Holy War in the Levant' said it was behind Hariri's killing in a video shown on Al-Jazeera satellite television.

'For the sake of our mujahedeen brothers in Saudi Arabia... we decided to implement the just execution of those who support this regime,' a bearded man said on the tape.

The group was alluding to Hariri's strong links with Saudi Arabia and its ruling royal family. Those connections reportedly facilitated his early successes in earning an estimated $2-billion US fortune in construction."

Could run-of-the-mill Islamic terrorists be behind this attack? Was Syria involved in any way? It could seemingly swing in either direction. The presence of Syrian troops in Lebanon creates a "destabilizing" factor to begin with (at least, that's according to the Bush administration). Hariri not only spoke out against Syria, but he also made no secret of his contracts with the Saudi government, which we all know is despised by militants. So where does that leave us? Sometimes I wish I had Thomas Friedman's home number.