Israeli intelligence reveals new disco bombing planned at Arafat's HQ

Israel Insider ^ | 7/28/2003 | Israel Insider

[Israel Insider]

Israeli security forces say they arrested a member of PA Chairman Yasser Arafat's Fatah terror group for involvement in a cell that was to attack a crowded disco in one of Israel's coastal cities. The attack was reportedly planned and directed from Arafat's Muqata compound in Ramallah. The Israelis say the PA refused to act on the intelligence, but senior PA security sources deny it.

The arrested militant, Issim Farukh from Ramallah, confessed to his interrogators that he was expected on one of the next weekends to send two bomb-strapped young women to carry out suicide attacks in Tel Aviv or Netanya nighclubs. The two women, from the West Bank city of Nablus, were to arrive in Ramallah, and from there cross into Israel.

Click here to read about this plot

[Alouette]

I'm all confused. Is this what Yitzchak Pass was tortured into confessing to the Shin Bet interrogators? That the "terrorist settlers" were planning to attack a disco in Arafat's HQ? I didn't even know Arafat HAD a disco at his HQ. Would have to be a gay bar, wouldn't it?

[truthandlife]

Surprise, surprise and Abbas goes home with $20 million in his pocket while Sharon comes over here and will get scolded on not releasing terrorists and building a wall to protect Israel.

Some things make absolutely no sense.

[adam_az]

Shhh, or you'll have Bushbots asking questions like "Don't you support the President?" (as if he posessed divine inerrancy) and telling us that we are just too stupid to understand the "simplicity" of Bush's plan without ever actually explaining what that plan is.

Bush said you are either 'with us or with the them,' I guess he decided now to ally himself with "them".

[truthandlife]

Adam, I don't know if you are a liberal lurker or not but if you are a conservative, I have seen a lot more disgruntled conservatives on FR lately. If Bush gets a luke-warm or cold reception from his base, he will be guaranteed to lose in 2004.

[Mr. K]

And just what intelligence did you add to the debate?

[yonif]

bump

[adam_az]

Take a look at my post history, I am not a liberal lurker.

On the other hand, I'm starting to think that Bush is the liberal lurker in the White House.

He has caved to the 'rats on many spending and public policy issues, and now is coddling Palestinian terrorists. I don't know what to make of the guy.

First it was the 'rats fault - we all thought that if Bush could get the majority in both houses during the last election, we would see some real tax and regulatory rollback. Instead, we have a growing federal bureaucracy, more PC language about the nature of our enemy, support for Arafat through his agent, terrorist financier abu Mazen, billions wasted on worthless AIDS drugs for Africa, jobs are still going overseas to communist China, we are being invaded by illegal immigrants, we now have nationalized perscription Hillarycare for seniors, and general co-option of the Liberal agenda.

The vast number of issues on which Bush has wavered and finally come down on the wrong side of is staggering.

I've said it before and I'll say it again - I wish Bush had a credible threat who would run against him in the Republican primary.

None of the 'rats are even an option, but Bush isn't such a great choice, either.

[adam_az]

What a stupid question.

[EGPWS]

He has caved to the 'rats on many spending and public policy issues, and now is coddling Palestinian terrorists. I don't know what to make of the guy.

The same dispute was railed against Ronald Reagan in the early '80's. "Reaganomics" as it was implemented was a good thing for the economy as history dictates.

[af_vet_1981]

while Sharon comes over here and will get scolded on not releasing terrorists

What is your source for this ? Who is going to scold them ? The Israeli cabinet voted 14-9 to release some prisoners. I assume they were all terrorists.

[Courier]

Why do you think the Cabinet votes on releasing prisoners?

If prisoners are innocent or have served their time they are let go with a simple administrative procedure and certainly no Cabinet involvement.

Probably happens many times every day.

The Cabinet votes because these are extraordinary releases of terrorists due to pressure from Washington. Those that vote yes buy the argument that if they say no to Bush the ramifications would be unbearable.

Why is Bush pressuring Israel to release terrorists? Not only is he sacrificing Israeli lives but the lives of Americans fighting the sham anti-terrorist wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

[af_vet_1981]

Asked about the limited release, which the Palestinians said is not sufficient, McClellan said, "No one should want anyone released that had blood on their hands."

You claim those released have blood on their hands while the WH statement indicates they do not.

[Courier]

Does Zacarias Moussaoui have "blood on his hands"?

What do you say we let him go to show good will to psychopathic Islamics everywhere.

[af_vet_1981]

Does Zacarias Moussaoui have "blood on his hands"?

Yes

What do you say we let him go to show good will to psychopathic Islamics everywhere.

I am not in favor of releasing any terrorists with blood on their hands but it is difficult for me to persuade the Israeli Cabinet to adopt a particular course of action. I will however insist that the US not release any terrorists with blood on their hands and I hope the Israeli public will do the same with their government.

[Courier]

He has the same amount of "blood" on his hands- membership in a terrorist organization - that all members of Hamas and Jihad have.

Bush wants release of such terrorists by Israel.

[af_vet_1981]

Bush wants release of such terrorists by Israel.

I think your principal argument is with the Israeli government. The Cabinet voted 14-9 to release those prisoners. I doubt that they had blood on their hands in the eyes of the Israeli Cabinet.

[Courier]

What the Israelis think and do is an Israeli problem.

My concern is my hypocrite President.

[adam_az]

Reagan SHRUNK government, Bush is GROWING it.

Reagan SHRUNK regulation, they've GROWN under Bush's watch.

Reagan would have never gone for Hillarycare for perscription drugs for senior citizens.

Reagan would not have wasted $15B on useless AIDS drugs for Africa.

Reagan would NOT NEGOTIATE WITH TERRORISTS.

George Bush is no Ronald Reagan.