Israel Says Arafat May Face Expulsion

[Herschel]

Yasser Arafat should "disappear" from the Palestinian leadership, and Israel may have to decide by year's end whether to expel him if he continues to get in the way of a U.S.-backed peace plan, Israel's defense minister said Tuesday.


Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz issued the warning as Arafat and his prime minister, Mahmoud Abbas, remained locked in a bitter power struggle. Abbas, backed by the United States and Israel, is increasingly unpopular at home and could be ousted — possibly in a parliament vote next week.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030902/ap_on_re_mi_ea/israel_palestinians_472

Any way this weasel is made to diappear is acceptable.

[molly]

1. From your lips - GREAT NEWS!!!

the homicidal bastard! Even stole from his own.

[Wetzelbill]

2. I think they mean

"expulsion" as in eradicating him off the face of the planet. I'm not a big Arafat fan by any means, yet assasinating him would effectively kill any hope of peace (what little there is) for generations to come. Not sure how to go about this problem. It's dicey for sure. My take is if Israel could back off of these preemptive assassinations it would limit any effectiveness that Arafat of Hamas would have. As of now, Ariel Sharon brought Arafat and Hamas back into the picture during the current intifadeh. The best way to stop political violence is to to be big enough to not participate in it yourself, unfortunately men like Bush and Sharon don't get that concept. Much to the chagrin and suffering of their own people, too.

[drewb]

3. "if he continues to get in the way of a U.S.-backed peace plan"

LOL...

Yeah, I think if we get him out of the way the "peace-plan" should get right back on track...

:crazy: :dunce: :shrug:

[Forkboy]

4. Your continued acceptance of using tools outside the rule of law

to enforce your beliefs is troubling to say the least.

[Herschel]

5. So the rule of law

Would forbid removing a terrorist from power! Oh, my.

[Forkboy]

6. Oh my

the rule of law would require taking him into custody and there being a trial.Your method bypasses all that.Don't even pretend to respect law...you've shown already in your short time here (though not short enough) that you consider the Isrealis to use whatever methods you see fit to dispose of people you and they have a problem with.You're certainly no progressive,and your disrespect for laws and your obvious bigotry make that perfectly clear.

I expect if someone were to assasinate Sharon you'd understand,right?

Maybe they can hire you to sniff Arafat out,eh Hercsh ole buddy?

Oh my indeed :puke:

[Karmadillo]

7. I like your posts. You have an excellent scent of humor.

n/t

[Forkboy]

8. Thanks Karmadillo!

I think it's safe to say you do as well,but I bet you nose that already :)

[Herschel]

11. Custody?

Would he come alive and willingly? I think you know the answer. Not one brave IDF soldier should be risked to secure this murderer some kind of trial.

[tinnypriv]

18. LOL

You're saving me a lot of bother researching old Maariv articles. Thanks! ;-)

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[rini]

12. Actually

I like the idea of putting him on trial and then when he is convicted of murder, larceny, grand theft, etc. he should be forced to sell his various villas in Europe, liquidate all assets, reparation should be made to the Palestinians people and to the people of Israel. Then he should be put in a zoo to be on display as the animal he is (pardon to all decent animals).

Murder, no, that could have been done years ago if the Israelis wanted him dead. He can't be made a martyr, just a common criminal.

[Darranar]

13. Arafat?

A terrorist? Prove it.

[rini]

15. do

you also need prove that the sun rises in the east?

[Darranar]

20. Sorry...

my post was an imitation of drdon.

Seriously, I have watched the Arafat debate without participating much in it, and it seems that all who say that Arafat is a terrorist cannot bring up any evidence to support it. I ask you to provide some.

[tinnypriv]

21. Dude

This guy ran/runs the PLO. You know, ordering the killing of men, women and children? Kidnapping? Hijacking?

Arafat is obviously a terrorist.

To be fair, I'd be willing to wager that he has killed less innocent people with his own hands than Sharon or Begin though. Certainly even Peres' record of terrorism vastly outshines anything that can be remotely attributed to Arafat.

Arafat being a bad guy is a bit of a slam-dunk. It isn't him that is being demonised though - if he was gone tomorrow it would be the next guy. The target is any form of Palestinian nationalism.

Seriously, hang around the I/P thing for a while. When Arafat gets liquidated, see how long it takes for somebody else to be the "hub of terror" and watch the huge number of threads posted about said person. All from the Jpost, I'd expect.

This Arafat obsession is getting really old, IMO.

[StandWatie]

22. where did Peres get a body count from?

Unit 101 purposely killed far more innocent people than Arafat even ordered I'm sure, and Begin of course probably even managed to kill more Jews than Arafat but I wasn't aware that Peres ever killed anyone himself, missed something in his bio maybe.

[tinnypriv]

24. Whoops

That section should be paragraphed, sorry.

The text is correct: "Peres' record of terrorism", but I was specifically referring to the "Iron Fist" operations in Lebanon.

I didn't mean to suggest Peres was anything like Sharon, i.e. in something like unit 101. I have no idea whether he has personally killed anyone in "combat". I doubt it.

However, if Arafat bringing in weapons makes him a terrorist, Peres could be held to the same standard - i.e. his procurement of weapons during the 1948 war, a lot of which were used for explusion, murder etc (surely the expected consequence).

[Darranar]

23. Undoubtebly...

he is a horrible, cruel, and oppresive leader. There I agree with you completely.

The question remains, however: When has he ordered the killing of innocent Israelis during his term as head of the PA? I am not saying that he has not, because I do not know. My question is whether you have evidence that he did.

[The Magistrate]

25. Something To Remember, Sir

Is his record of killing Arab Palestinians. His rule in Gaza after the '67 war was marked by many killings and kidnappings directed against "collaborators", meaning persons seeking employment in Israel.

[Darranar]

26. A brutal, cruel, heartless ruler...

he is. But so was Saddam, and yet I do not support the Iraq war.

The question I have is whether he has planned attacks on Israelis during his leadership of the PA. That is clearly what israel and her ardent supporters are suggesting.

[Cassandra]

28. Does this count?

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/09/05/world/main520865.shtml
"
Israel, which had observers on the scene in Munich, has never wavered in its insistence that Arafat was behind the killings. Arafat, who is now the Palestinian President, has similarly never wavered in his denial of that accusation.

Former Palestine Liberation Organization guerrilla Mohammed Oudeh, better known by the code name Abu Daoud, wrote in a book in 1999 that Arafat was briefed on plans for the Munich hostage-taking but added that the intent was never to kill the Israeli athletes. Israeli and American intelligence experts have long implicated Oudeh and the PLO in planning the attack that ultimately left 17 dead. "

BTW, I'm wondering if we should insist on Arafat's right of return...to Cairo.

[Darranar]

33. His involvement...

in terrorist acts before he became president of the PA is another matter, in which I think there is far mroe evidence against him. The question is whether he has planned terrorist attacks on Israelis after he became President of the PA.

[tinnypriv]

35. Which is why I said PLO

i.e. the forerunner to the PA.

I chose the language carefully - when I said he "runs" the PLO now, I said that because the PLO formally still exists as a diplomatic component of the Palestinian Authority. The old PLO that he "ran" doesn't exist however. It was that which carried out bombings, hijackings, guerilla attacks etc.

Moving on to the present, I personally do not believe Arafat has planned terrorist attacks while head of the PA. The most in-depth investigation into this that I know of (HRW, 'Erased In A Moment'), says that he has political culpability for those attacks, but not direct involvement. I would pretty much agree with that.

[The Magistrate]

30. Your Question, Mr. Darranar

By referencing the Palestine Authority, would seem to be restricted to the period after the Oslo talks. That is more difficult to answer; an answer must depend on the relation between Arafat's Fatah and the Al Aksa Martyrs Brigade. The latter is commonly refered to as an off-shoot of the former, but the precise relation is understandably obscure. Al Aksa has certainly been seen as a bid by Fatah for support among the radicalized people of Arab Palestine against the claim of the fundamentalist organizations only they are carrying the fight to the enemy. My own view is that a degree of control is exercised over the activities of Al Aksa by Fatah.

A more important point is that of a governing authority's responsibility for actions carried out in the area of its authority: in broad summary, what such an authority does not take energetic steps to halt, it may be considered responsible for. The efforts at prevention need not be wholly successful, but must be serious. While it is true that, after some months of the current outbreak of hostilities, Israeli action seriously degraded the capabilities of Arafat's security organs, it is also true that during the early months, when these did retain some effectiveness, they made no real attempts to halt the attacks by Hamas and Islamic Jihad, though these acts certainly contstituted crimes of war. It is precisely such tolerance of criminal organizations that is at the basis of some charges currently lodged against Milosevic at The Hague. Certainly by the same argument, the government of Israel could be held responsible for some outrages by settlers.

[Darranar]

31. Okay...

the trouble I have with considering Arafat a terrorist is my view of him of closer to a Saddam Hussein sort of guy; cruel, despicable, cold-hearted, but always concerned with his own survival. With big, powerful Israel lurking over him, I doubt he would directly plan acts of terrorism.

[StandWatie]

32. Arafat is a passive-agressive

He isn't really cruel, he just lets Palestinians do whatever they want and provides himself as a living figurehead of whatever it is they are doing. He's not much of a leader at all.

[Gimel]

36. Arafat's career

As a terrorist, Arafat has a longer career than anyone on the planet. Israel is not interested in assassinating him, nor is he fit for a trial. He'll be one who just gradually fades away.

No doubt he murdered more in his first three years as a terrorist than all than Sharon, Begin and Peres combined.

[tinnypriv]

37. That isn't actually true

Like I said, Sharon has personally killed more innocent people than Arafat has. That is just a fact.

[Gimel]

47. Many so-called

"facts" are hard-line lies.

[Darranar]

48. Indeed...

such as "the wall is for Israel's security," and "Sharon is a man of peace."

[tinnypriv]

52. True

That however, isn't.

[StandWatie]

49. Sharon swears up and down Qibya was an accident

I find that incredibly doubtful given the orders they recieved and blowing up a villiage as a vengence excersise is still pretty low on morality but if you take him at his word then maybe he "accidently" killed more people than Arafat.

[Gimel]

51. Where is Arafat's record? n/t

[tinnypriv]

53. LOL

You'd be hard pressed to find even some Likud fans who believe that.

[rini]

29. http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/Terrorism/paltertoc.html

Check and see how many are run by Arafat.

[Darranar]

34. www.us-israel.org!

What a fair and balanced website!

[rini]

40. http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2002/03/14/usat-brigades.htm

I know it's pointless, but maybe this one will meet your criteria, sorry it's not an intafafa site or the BBC

[Darranar]

41. It's a news site...

and as long as its not Fox News, the Wall Street Journal, or Israeli National News, I'm not too concerned about bias.

First of all, people will say anything if enough pressure is put one them. He could have been forced to say such things about Arafat.

Second, if what this person says is sincere, it is no proof that Arafat leads this group. Pat Robertson can claim that he follows God's commands; does that mean that God is an intolerant, greedy fool similar to Pat Robertson?

I was looking for something more substantial then statements from a captured terrorist of Al-Aqsa Martyr's Brigade. Perhaps you have some real evidence?

[StandWatie]

42. McPaper sucks to..

but it's intentionally misleading. Nowhere did it say that his orders came from Arafat, it said that he considers himself part of Fatah (which isn't exactly breathtaking news).

[jos]

14. How about a joint trial?

Sharon can be tried for his rampant corruption (you could put his son on trial as well), as well as for his responsiblities in massacres in 1982 and 1953.

[rini]

16. The Israeli

courts are already looking into this. A heck of a lot harder than Bush pere's son Neil was looked at.

[tinnypriv]

17. Belgium is on it

I don't know how Arafat's run-in turned out over there, but Sharon's is looking a little sticky.

I don't know what is taking so much time - open and shut case really. One is guilty of terrorism, the other of terrorism and war crimes. How much prima facie do you need?

Oh darn, isn't Rummy opposed to all this? My god, he's objectively pro-Arafat! :D

[Gimel]

38. That Belgium Court

has been shut down. You'll have an eternity to wait for your answer. It was a complete farce from the beginning.

[tinnypriv]

39. Oh I don't know about that

Even Britain had Mofaz running out of our country before he could get a warrant put out on him. Sooner or later the ICC will catch up with the likes of Arafat, Sharon and Rantisi.

BTW, Mofaz got away. :cry:

[Jim Sagle]

44. Hey forkie, this ain't no island and you can't vote him off.

Too bad, so sad.

[Herschel]

45. Mind yourself

I am a Democrat and support Israel. Perhaps you prefer I be a flaming leftist as some are. I am not.

[Darranar]

46. I am a "flaming leftist"

and boy am I proud of it.

NO WAR NO SANCTIONS NO OCCUPATION NO UNFAIR TRADE!

[Karmadillo]

9. Back to the Field of Thorns. Like a dog to its vomit,

the extremists return to the Arafat diversion. One doesn't have to be a fan of Arafat to recognize those most avidly seeking his removal are those least likely to embrace any version of a just peace. The Magistrate's suggestion of a settlement negotiated by a randomly selected group of people from both sides looks better every day.

http://www.nthposition.com/politics_fieldofthorns.html

In mainstream political discourse, Israel's recent atrocities are described as 'retaliatory acts' answering the previous wave of terror attacks on Israeli civilians. But, in fact, this 'retaliation' had been carefully prepared long before. In October 2000, at the outset of the Palestinian uprising, military circles already had detailed operative plans to topple Arafat and the Palestinian Authority. This was before the Palestinian terror attacks started: the first attack on Israeli civilians was on November 3, 2000, in a market in Jerusalem. A document prepared by the security services, at the request of then PM Barak, stated on October 15, 2000, that "Arafat, the person, is a severe threat to the security of the state and the damage which will result from his disappearance is less than the damage caused by his existence". (Details of the document were published in Ma'ariv on July 6, 2001.) The operative plan, known as 'Fields of Thorns', had been prepared back in 1996, and was then updated during the Intifada. (Amir Oren, Ha'aretz, November 23, 2001). The plan includes everything that Israel has been executing lately, and more. <1>

The political echelon (Barak's circles), for its part, worked on preparing public opinion for the toppling of Arafat. On November 20, 2000, Nahman Shai, then the Barak Government's public-affairs co-ordinator, met the press and released a 60-page document titled "Palestinian Authority non-compliance... A record of bad faith and misconduct". The document, informally referred to as the 'White Book', was prepared by Barak's aid, Danny Yatom.<2> According to the 'White Book', Arafat's present crime - "orchestrating the Intifada", is just the last in a long chain of proofs that he has never deserted the "option of violence and 'struggle'": "As early as Arafat's own speech on the White House lawn, on September 13, 1993, there were indications that for him, the D.O.P. did not necessarily signify an end to the conflict. He did not, at any point, relinquish his uniform, symbolic of his status as a revolutionary commander" (Section 2). This uniform, incidentally, is the only 'indication' the report cites of Arafat's hidden intentions on that occasion.

A large section of the document is devoted to establishing Arafat's "ambivalence and compliance" regarding terror: "In March 1997 there was once again more than a hint of a 'Green Light' from Arafat to the Hamas, prior to the bombing in Tel Aviv... This is implicit in the statement made by a Hamas-affiliated member of Arafat's Cabinet, Imad Faluji, to an American paper (Miami Herald, April 5, 1997)." No further hints are provided regarding how this links Arafat to that bombing, but this is the "green light to terror" theme which the Military Intelligence (Ama'n) has been promoting since 1997, when its anti-Oslo line was consolidated. This theme has since been repeated again and again by military circles, and eventually became the mantra of Israeli propaganda: Arafat is still a terrorist and is personally responsible for the acts of all groups, from Hamas and the Islamic Jihad to Hizbollah.

The 'Foreign Report' (Jane's Information) of July 12, 2001, disclosed that the Israeli army (under Sharon's government) has updated its plans for an "all-out assault to smash the Palestinian authority, force out leader Yasser Arafat and kill or detain its army". The blueprint, entitled 'The Destruction of the Palestinian Authority and Disarmament of All Armed Forces', was presented to the Israeli government by chief of staff Shaul Mofaz, on July 8. The assault would be launched, at the government's discretion, after a big suicide bomb attack in Israel, causing widespread deaths and injuries, citing the bloodshed as justification.

more...

[Wetzelbill]

10. Thanks for this

This is interesting I'm going to print this out and discuss it in my Arab-Israeli conflict class.

[tinnypriv]

19. You have a class?

That's great!

I had the English Freaking Civil War to study. 10 years later I still have no clue what happened.

[rini]

43. one

side won, one side lost. Lots of rape and pillage. Very little changed for the average guy.

[TheYellowDog]

50. I think Arafat should definitely go

I would be "dancing in the streets" when that happened.

[sushi]

54. Expelling Arafat

would be the wrong thing to do. Life must be stressful enough in Israel and the occupied territories already. Why make it worse?