![Photo [Fri, Apr 26]](/clarinews/xwd/bd/photo-cnt31088.jpg)
Posted on 04/26/2002 9:08:46 PM PDT by RCW2001
Copyright 2002 by Agence France-Presse (via ClariNet) / Fri, 26 Apr 2002 20:30:08 PDT
</CLARI-ITEM HEADER>
|
| BETHLEHEM, WEST BANK, 26-APR-2002: Israeli soldiers cover the entrance of the Church of the Nativity as a stretcher is unloaded in the West Bank town of Bethlehem April 26, 2002. Two injured Palestinians were evacuated from the church under a heavy smoke screen set off by the army. [Photo by Mike Nelson, copyright 2002 by AFP and ClariNet] </CLARI-ITEM CAPTION> |
CRAWFORD, Texas, April 26 (AFP) - An impatient President George W. Bush on Friday told Israel to halt its incursions into Palestinian areas "now", as UN Secretary General Kofi Annan delayed the arrival of a UN fact-finding mission to the refugee camp in Janin for one day.
"(The) Israelis understand my position. I've been very clear and there has been some progress, but it's now time to quit it altogether; it's time to end this," Bush said, making his second such appeal in two days.
The comments came one day after Bush's talks with Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz, in which the two leaders discussed the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and its implications for US relations with Arab countries.
Earlier Friday, Secretary of State Colin Powell spoke to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon by telephone, his spokesman Richard Boucher said.
The conversation centered on Israel's reluctance to let a United Nations fact-finding team enter Jenin refugee camp where the Palestinians claim a massacre took place.
The problem was resolved later in the day when Annan announced through his spokesman that the team would be in the region on Sunday.
Spokesman Fred Eckhard said "the Israeli Foreign Minister has requested that, due to the Israeli Sabbath, the team arrive on Sunday."
"Given these special circumstances, the secretary general has agreed to this request," he pointed out.
The breakthrough came after 24 hours of intermittent talks between senior UN officials and four Israeli envoys on the team's composition and its terms of reference.
Eckhard said the discussions took place in a "cordial and constructive atmosphere."
"Clarifications on the upcoming mission were provided by the UN," he added. The UN has been informed that the Israeli cabinet will make a formal decision on the matter on Sunday morning."
The team now comprises three full members: former Finnish president Martti Ahtisaari; Cornelio Sommaruga, the Swiss former head of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC); and Sadako Ogata of Japan, former UN High Commissioner for Refugees.
They have four advisers on military, police, legal and forensic questions; and the first military and police advisers each have two assistants.
Bush spoke amid signs of a rift within his foreign policy team, as several State Department officials admitted privately they were demoralized by administration infighting over the Middle East.
Pressure from the White House meanwhile, prompted Congress to delay legislation which branded Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat a "terrorist" after Bush aides it could hamper their peace efforts.
Bush first called for an end to the incursions, which Sharon's government says are targeting suicide bombers, on April 4, but later said he was satisfied with Israel's limited withdrawal.
The operation has besieged Arafat in his Ramallah compound and trapped armed Palestinians in Bethlehem's Church of the Nativity.
The White House said Friday that Crown Prince Abdullah had presented Bush with an eight point list of Middle East peace objectives.
The plan, which appears to be largely an amalgam of existing US and Saudi proposals for ending the bloody Israel-Palestinian conflict, recommends :
- An Israeli withdrawal from Palestinian-ruled areas taken over in recent incursions;
- A lifting of the Israeli siege of Ramallah;
- The creation of a multinational peace force for the territories;
- The reconstruction of Palestinian infrastructure devastated by the fighting;
- Talks on US security plans, including the Tenet work plan and the Mitchell plan;
- The halting of Israeli settlement building;
- A renunciation of violence by both sides;
- A concerted US attempt to implement UN resolution 242 passed in 1967, which called for an Israeli withdrawal from occupied Arab lands.
Late Friday, the Israeli army pulled its troops out from the northern West Bank city of Qalqilya, Israeli military sources said.
Israeli troops backed by 15 armored vehicles and two helicopters had entered the town before dawn, killing a local leader of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP).
Raed Nazel, accused by Israel of multiple attacks on Jewish settlers in the West Bank, was gunned down in the exchange of gunfire, Israeli officials said.
Up to 20 militants were picked up in Qalqilya and three villages between the towns of Nablus and Jenin, Israeli officials said.
The US House of Representatives meanwhile postponed a vote on a resolution branding Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat a terrorist, under pressure from the Bush administration which judged it could hamper its Middle East peace efforts.
The move was ordered by Majority whip Tom Delay on Friday after a call from the White House, his spokesman said.
The bill states support for Israel and castigates Arafat, accusing him of "ongoing support and coordination of terror, and doubts he is still a "partner for peace."
Whispers that the Bush administration is badly split on Middle East policy Friday burst into the open, as several State Department officials admitted to frustration.
"There is a feeling that we are directionless, and that has created a lot of resentment and some anger," said one official, referring to a "generally gloomy mood" at the State Department as it battles the White House and Pentagon for control of Middle East policy.
The crisis will top the agenda at a meeting of the Middle East "quartet," which the State Department said Friday would meet in Washington on May 2.
The panel is made up of the United States, the European Union, the United Nations and Russia.
Fortunately they've done nothing that quite gives away the store. And the Arab rulers are so clueless that every move they make gives the Bushies one more reason to attack Iraq. So hopefully little is lost ultimately.
He is going to follow the path of his own convictions and faith and I can almost guarantee that he finds Washington the cesspool of backstabbing whores that it really is (was there for 15 months so I witnessed THAT first hand).
Any true Texan would much rather be 'home on the range' versus having to deal with the tripe that comprises DC. My thoughts, and especially with Karen Hughes hoofing it back, is that he is already of that mindset. Do what has to be done 'in the interest of the USA'!
Of course, If the mandate is sooo strong come 2004, maybe he will reconsider, but other than that, his sights are set on doing 'whats right' for the USA. All others, be damned!
To the dismay of the DC whores...'there isn't a chapter in their 'playbook' for such a man'!
Bottom line...President Bush is NOT running for re-election, He is running the Country!
The issue is not whether it did me harm; the issue is whether you posted the article in a straightforward manner.
what harm did it cause? That somebody clicked on the link and actually read the story? That upsets you? Why?
I have no clue what this string of insinuations is supposed to contribute except to muddy the waters. I have no objection to anyone reading the story. It is a very informative story. But I think it is important that FReepers have the confidence that when someone posts an article, they are really "reading the story," as it actually appeared in print, not as the poster has chosen to modify it to spin his particular point of view. I shouldn't have to click on the link to read the story; what you post should be the story , nothing more, nothing less.
I believe, in fact, that if you post copyright material, but change anything in it, you are legally obligated to say up front that you have done so.
I saw your name and instantly knew there would be an anti Israeli twist to this somehow, someway. LOL
Bush looked pretty insincere to me, on his "withdrawal now" comments, just like he did when he said it the last time, only this time, even less convincing.
Israel will withdraw, when they are done. No big deal. Period.
Enough with you...if you feel you have a legit complaint, contact the moderator and get the thread killed. I'll post as I feel fit and 'within' FR regulations. If capitalization of '2' letters of a titles is a violations...let me be informed by the forum moderators...
Reuters Wire | April 26, 2002 11:07 PM ET | Dan Williams
Posted on 4/27/02 1:17 AM Eastern by infowars
The Washington Times | April 26, 2002 | Carter Dougherty
Posted on 4/26/02 5:59 PM Eastern by codebreaker
(AP) | AUDREY WOODS
Posted on 4/26/02 8:15 PM Eastern by Dallas
True is much more pro-Israel than his father. And of course he is working toward reelection. Every first term President does. And don't project your fantasies that he is anti-Israel onto GWB.
He is also planning our attack on Iraq. The visit of the 'Prince' was part of that. The main thing the Arabs want now is to use the situation in the Middle East to divert attention away from that goal, but they are running out of time. The overarching thing they want is to get the US to turn against Israel. Bush made it clear again today, that goal will never be reached. He 'appeases' the Arabs when he needs to. But he supports Israel when it counts, like over the last month, when Israel was able to begin to shut down the terrorist networks. If you think Bush is not aware that the American public supports that, that Congress supports that, you live in a dream world. Rove is already on record as saying he is going after the Jewish vote, partly to prevent another close election. And we know the GOP is strongly pro Israel now. Bush knows that too.
The fact that he is doing that shows no leadership. If he was leading, he would tell the arabs to put up or shut up. He made it very plain in his speech after 9-11. I repeat, watch what a politician does not what they say. Try to please everyone and you will please no one. In fact, that shows lack of leadership.
Which you define as what? Not supporting Israel? I assure you Bush is not of that mindset. Nor are most Conservatives. As Rush says, it is in America's interest to support it's democratic ally.
I will bet he said exactly that to the Saudi Prince, in private, of course. Especially today, when it came out the Saudis are paying blood money to the families of terrorists.
I've said my piece about this, and don't see any need to pursue it further.
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.