Posted on 05/09/2002 11:46:59 PM PDT by JohnHuang2
You read the news accounts of Israel's discovery of documents linking Yasser Arafat directly to terrorist acts and sponsorship of suicide bombings. Now read the report for yourself.
I have. And I find it beyond persuasive. I find it conclusive. But, of course, I did not need convincing. My own work over 20 years covering the Middle East long ago persuaded me that Arafat is an unrepentant killer of innocents a thug, a monster, an evil, manipulative terrorist, a murderer of dozens of Americans including diplomats, women, old handicapped men and children.
Yet, this report by Israel's Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs is worth reading beyond what it has to say regarding Arafat.
Check out how it indicts Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Abdullah that other great peacemaker. Find out about the other billionaire sheiks of the Middle East and the roles they play in murder and mayhem. This 85-page report connects all the dots, crosses all the Ts and dots all the Is.
It's not based on speculation. It's not based on conjecture. It's not based on hypothesis. It's not even based on investigative work piecing together the facts. Instead, it is based entirely on the Palestinian Authority's own paperwork documents captured by Israel during its recent raids of its headquarters in Ramallah.
Most news reports present the information as a mere allegation by Israelis. The New York Times, for instance, carried scarcely a sentence on the report, only mentioning that Israel "claimed" it had documents proving Arafat, the Saudis and other Middle East leaders were sponsoring suicide bombings.
Here's the real meat of the report:
After reviewing this evidence, is there any excuse to continue support of Arafat? Is there any justification for hoping he will truly emerge as a peacemaker? Is there any choice but to stop recognizing him as the only legitimate leader of the Palestinian people?
I wrote this yesterday and posted it as a reply on another thread:
Bush and Sharon -- on the same page
Shhhhh!
You won't read of it in the New York Times. You won't find it mentioned on the wires, nor published in any "news" magazine. Peter Jennings' lips are sealed. Dittos Tom and Dan.
What's the big secret, you ask?
The media mystery shrouding the Bush-Sharon Oval Office tete-a-tete this week, that's what. No, not the phony accounts, but the real deal -- what really happened behind closed doors last Tuesday.
From the torrent of grim press reports, the meeting ended in failure -- utter failure. The two leaders were at loggerheads, tussling and wrangling over Arafat; haggling and squabbling over Israel's incursion; bickering and brawling even over the meaning of the Bush doctrine. The 70-minute face-to-face was less a summit and more a donnybrook -- a full-fledge, free-for-all melee.
To hear the press tell it, Bush played the part of McGovern -- a groveling peacenik brimming with fondness and tenderness for Arafat, a suck-up for the PA, a bootlick for 'suicide' bombers. But Sharon stood firm. The Israeli Prime Minister was, in every sense, truly Reaganesque -- strongly reminding his wobbly host that peace, per the Gipper, comes only through strength.
If you can believe this phony media portrait, you can imagine the following exchange:
BUSH: Surrender to Arafat', Mr. Sharon -- I order you now! War is futile -- nothing good comes of it. Why not give peace a chance, man?
SHARON: But, Mr. President, what about the War on Terror, the Bush doctrine? Have you forgotten those? I more than believe in your doctrine, sir -- I'm applying it, everyday, throughout the West Bank, for crying out loud! Why have you turned into such a dove, so suddenly?
BUSH: See? That's your problem -- you see war as the only solution, always. Well, I'm here to tell you, buddy boy, it isn't. It never is. Never will be. War is never a cure. Only peace is the answer. You, Mr. Sharon, are a warmonger. You need an attitude adjustment, m' man.
SHARON: Get real, Mr. President. Have you been reading the news lately? Our Pizzarias, shopping malls, nightclubs, discotechs, buses, etc. are being blown to bits; so what are we to do about it, Mr. President? Stand around, twiddle our thumbs like a bunch of dunces and take it?
BUSH: C'mon, Sharon, think about it: What about the Palestinian people? You are brutally crushing them under the weight of your tanks -- it's time to stop! Stop this madness -- stop the warmongering!
SHARON: I take umbrage at that, Mr. President. Arafat is a terrorist, I've got reams of evidence to prove it. 'Either you're with us, or with the terrorists' -- those are your words, not mine, Mr. President.
BUSH: Don't be ridiculous, Sharon. Arafat -- a terrorist? Give me a break. He's a man of peace. Why else would they award him the Peace Prize? Or did you forget?
Kidding aside, the common thread among the plethora of media reports is this: Bush tried to pressure Sharon into negotiating with Arafat, but Sharon prevailed.
Bush, in essence, carried Arafat's brief. Gee, never mind that this President has yet to even meet with Arafat. Can't let niggling facts get in our way, now can we?
So what's the deal? What really happened during that crucial Bush-Sharon summit last Tuesday?
Forget the American news media -- it's too busy trying to drive a wedge among conservatives to give you the real lowdown.
According to Ha'aretz, a widely respected Israeli newspaper, a vastly different picture of that meeting emerges, one which flatly contradicts the clap-trap from media sources here.
Under the header, Bush agrees to neutralize Arafat, Aluf Benn writes that "sources in Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's entourage to Washington said Wednesday that..Bush has agreed that peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians must wait until internal reforms within the PA have brought about a governing body that 'would be headed by a different person or different people' than the current leader", Yasser Arafat.
Translation: Bush and Sharon agree to dump Arafat. Neither leader sees him as a viable negotiating partner. It's time to give the terrorist his walking papers, as it were.
Moreover, according to Ha'aretz, this was -- not Sharon's -- but Bush's plan all along.
Mr. Benn continues: "Bush and his advisors have proposed the establishment of a temporary government within the PA until a constitution is drawn up and elections are held."
No talks until a new leadership emerges.
Indeed, Mr. Benn quotes American officials as saying that "there is no one to talk to within the PA and it is a waste of effort."
Wait a sec: Bush in the catbird seat, the man with a plan, in total command of events? Not quite the portrait painted by the New York Times, is it?
Anyway, that's.....
My two cents....
"JohnHuang2"
My answer: Arafat, the PA, Hamas, all the terror organizations, are in harmony with the will of the Palis.
The overall goal: Destruction of Israel. This is the stated and unstated goal of the majority of arabs and muslims the world over.
I believe Bush knows all this. He is following a strategy of taking things one step at a time. The prospect of Israel (with US support) fighting a multi-front war against several arab nations is hopefully to be avoided.
Instead, let events develop in sequence, when they can be handled better. And hopefully some nations will avoid involvement, entirely.
Round II begins in Gaza. But Arafat or not, it won't end there. A novel idea was floated: Why don't the Israelis drive the all palis into the sea? Fair turnabout?
Powell says U.S. won't brand Arafat a terrorist because he's useful to peace process
Powell Shocker: Calls Palestinian Suicide Bombers 'Innocents'
Bin Laden joins Arafat: Saudi master of terror ready to strike Israel
Israelis Report Laden-Arafat Link
Terror report: Bin Laden has infiltrated Palestinian Authority
Israel Believes Arrested Palestinian Militant Is Bin Laden Agent
Saudi Money Aiding Terrorist Bin Laden
Saudi official admits 15 of 19 hijackers Saudi
Saudi Arabia Was The Center Of Hijack Planning
Saudis Admit Bankrolling Palestinian Intifada
"Terror Must Be stopped. No Nation can negotiate with terrorists. For there is no way to make peace with those whose only goal is death."
George W. Bush - Source
So Farah is guilty of false witness? So there is no probable cause for war? Of course, any cultist kook can believe and make others believe that social ills warrant the usage of cannon fodder and suicide bombers. Still, should we hope and be proud for the success of such entreprise made of utterly confused people?
Neither did I- I have known Arafat as a bloody-handed terrorist & killer for years... here's a small sample of his "work" with Black September:
Covering for Arafat the Killer
... it reached Khartoum, Cleo Noel and George Curtis Moore, our ambassador and charge
d'affaires, were murdered point blank by Black September, Arafat's hit men. ...
www.cdn-friends-icej.ca/isreport/janfeb01/killer.html - 6k - Cached -
MIDDLE EAST ACCORD: ANOTHER BID FOR PEACE
... PLO out after a bloody clash in what is known as Black September. Arafat moves his
headquarters to southern Lebanon, from where the PLO is strategically poised ...
www.cbc.ca/insidecbc/newsinreview/dec98/middle/homeland.htm - 20k - Cached - Similar pages
LET'S TALK WAR CRIMES
... in the Saudi Embassy in Khartoum. They were killed by Black September, Arafat's gunmen,
after President Nixon refused to release Sirhan Sirhan, the Palestinian ...
www.netanyahu.org/lettalwarcri.html - 8k - Cached - Similar pages
USCFL - Frequently Asked Questions
... to move against King Hussein. That bloody day was known as Black September. Arafat
fled to the unsuspecting and friendly arms of the Lebanese people. Lebanon ...
freelebanon.org/faqs.htm - 55k - Cached - Similar pages
November 6, 2001
... from their own Arab brethren. Do you remember the consequences of "Black September",
Arafat's failed attempt to seize power from Jordan's King Hussein in 1970 ...
www.law.mcgill.ca/students/quid/11-06-01/11-06.html - 78k - Cached - Similar pages
And just FYI--
BUMP
Bush policies toward Arafat, Hamas and the Saudis are pure appeasement of terrorists which in the end will lead to more terrorism than what would otherwise be if there was no appeasement. It is pay me now or pay me later. If Bush wants to delay paying now by avoiding confrontation with these terrorists, the price later when it has to be paid to stop the terrorists he is appeasing will be much, much higher in terms of bloodshed. This is a hard lesson of history.
Bush and the State Department are hypocritical to say that Arafat and Hamas and the Saudis are not terrorists and freedom fighters instead. Bush policies and hypocritical definitions, posturing and appeasement on terrorism with Arafat, the Saudis and Hamas is undercutiing his moral authority around the world (and even with Conservative Christian Republicans) to wage war against AlQaeda aand other state sponsored terrorist groups (Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, etc) who want to attack US interests.
There are Democrats that also back the Bush policies with Arafat and Hamas and the Saudis. These Democrats are hypoctical appeasers in my opinion as well. The US can be hurt badly in the long run by these hypocritical appeasement policies.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.