quote:
Originally posted by Dave:
Oh, no, that's not true. That's been repeated so many times everyone thinks its true. That's Israeli speculation. There is no solid evidence to link Arafat to Hamas or other extremist attacks.
TIME magazine, among other sources, would dispute that assertion that there is no evidence of Arafat's connection to Hamas terrorism. When the Israelis over-ran Arafat's Ramallah headquarters they seized documents that proved Arafat's direct authorization to suicide bombings and other terror. (TIME, April 8, 2002 issue, page 30 in a cover story on Arafat and the Israeli seige. )
www.time.com (you can do a search for it, I don't have a link right now
)

quote:
from TIME, April 8, 2002:


When the phone lines are up again [in Ramallah] Arafat need not worry about their being bugged --Israeli agents have been listening for years.

Israeli intelligence agents tell TIME they have had access to almost every phone call, fax or e-mail that has gone out of Arafat's West Bank headquarters, located in a military compound called Muqata'a in Ramallah, where he [Arafat] has been a virtual prisoner since December [2001].
They also claim to have human intelligence, "moles", working from the inside.
Israeli security sources say the phone and fax surveillance has supplied evidence that Arafat bankrolled groups that are part of his Fatah organization, even though he [Arafat] knew they would carry out terror attacks.

But the spying came up critically short in preventing attacks, because Arafat was never told precise details of any operation, say the sources.

Arafat was certainly aware that he was a surveillance target, and sometimes, according to the Israelis, he [Arafat] would say things over the phone with the intention of misdirecting them.
And Palestinian sources point out that all the globe-trotting Arafat used to do was necessary in part so he could hold face-to-face meetings and be assured the Israelis weren't listening. But Arafat wasn't always guarded. The Israeli spies not only heard the chairman's private phone conversations, but also were privy to some intense intramural squabbling. In one recent incident, Israeli agents listened in as an angry Arafat shoved his chief of preventive security in Gaza, Mohammad Dahlan.

The Israelis did get their hands on some interesting papers. Soldiers from the elite Egoz battalion located Arafat's personal files when they invaded the compound. Those documents are being analyzed by the Shin Bet domestic security service.
"Now we will be able to add what we knew about Arafat and his direct ties to terror, using what we'll find in the files", says a senior Israeli security official.


In addition to documents proving Arafat's complicity, Israelis intercepted his phone communications authorizing these things for months.

Sharon brought a file of the incriminating documents from the seige, and handed it to Bush in a visit to Washington DC, about a month after the seige ( The PLO and Hamas, of course, alleged that the documents were fabricated. Not that they can be expected to admit anything. )

~

I draw a HUGE line between Palestinian terror groups attacking Israel and randomly killing Israeli citizens, and Israel's targeting of specific terrorist leaders who are orchestrating terror attacks on Israel.
Palestinian attacks are offensive, and if not defended against with retaliation, would rise to threaten the very sovereignty of Israel.
Whereas Israel's attacks are defensive, and slaughter of innocent civilian bystanders are never intended, but these things occur in war.

And I don't buy the argument of "Well, this is the only way the Palestinians can fight against the vastly superior military force of Israel" that you've asserted in several prior discussions here of the Palestinian conflict. Israel has made several generous offers for peace and Palestinian independence (in 1993/1994, and 2000 ) and it is the fanatical Palestinian thirst for terrorism and violence that has undermined previous attempts to negotiate a peace settlement.
Israel has twice been willing to sign a peace agreement with the PLO that would guarantee Palestinian independence.
THROUGH PEACE.
The Palestinians have gained nothing by continuing to wage war.
quote:
Originally posted by Dave:

In fact, his very inability to stop such attacks at opportune times suggests he has no control over them.

One thing this says is that his leadership is weak and largely symbolic, querying why anyone should bother deal with him since he cannot effectively broker a deal which would bind all players. But it also explains why the Palestinian Authority is so incapable of trying to disarm militants as required under the "peace plan". First, no Pal. extremists are listening to them. Second, the Israelis have wrecked their ability to police, with the incursions.
I disagree with this too. Arafat simply does not request that the Palestinian violence should stop.
There have been several occasions when the violence DID stop, when Arafat requested it. One time, a Hamas leader would not listen to Abbas' requests to cease violence at the beginning of the "Roadmap for Peace", but after speaking to Arafat, the Hamas leader suspended violence after speaking to Arafat, and was quoted saying "We hear our master's voice and obey."

Clearly, Arafat has considerable power over terror groups, and can exercise it when and if he TRULY wants peace. But he doesn't.

quote:
Originally posted by Dave:

I see no one has mentioned the overwhelming vote in the emergency General Assembly session to try and compel Israel to withdraw its threat against Arafat. Only two votes against: Israel and the US. I think there were 30 odd abstentions, to be fair, but what does that tell you about world opinion on Arafat's symbolic importance?
I guess it's a vote for discouraging escalation from the Israeli side. But I find it very odd that the U.N. shot down a second simultaneous counter-proposal for Palestinian groups to cease hostility and fanatical violent rhetoric against Israel.
I find the U.N.'s ruling very one-sided, feuled by a combination of anti-Semitism (the Muslim world has great influence over the U.N.) and current Anti-Americanism.

quote:
Originally posted by Dave:


If Arafat is assassinated, it would be disastrous for Israel. People trying to broker a fair peace in Europe and Russia, and other countries who think both Israelis and Palestinians deserve a homeland, would be marginalised against the Israelis.

Don't forget, for all that the Israelis think of Arafat as being a terrorist and unhelpful (the latter of which he surely is), Sharon is considered a war criminal by even European countries for his massacres of Arabs in Lebanon as a military commander [in Lebanon, in 1982]. For every Hamas suicide attack, which kills civilians, Israeli rocket strikes kill their targets and innocent bystanders. Everyone is as bad as each other in this mess.
I don't advocate the killing of Arafat, but as destructive as he has been to peace for the last 10 years, I find it hard to believe his death could make things any worse. And Arafat's exit would open the door for a Palestinian leader who is more interested in cooperating in a mutually beneficial peace agreement. As long as Arafat is there, nothing will change.