From cnn.com

Israel declares Arafat 'enemy'
March 29, 2002 Posted: 12:37 AM EST (0537 GMT)

Israelis set up blockades in the West Bank following the Passover bombing.    
 
JERUSALEM (CNN) -- Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said Friday that
the nation's Cabinet has declared Yasser Arafat an "enemy" and that Israel
will do everything in its power to "isolate" the Palestinian leader.
Sharon said Arafat is heading a "coalition of terror." 

As Sharon spoke, Israeli tanks and bulldozers were tearing down the fences
and walls surrounding Arafat's headquarters in Ramallah, while he was
inside. 

Israel's moves come after a Palestinian terror attack killed 21 people at
a Passover dinner Wednesday night in the Israeli coastal town of Netanya.
The militant wing of Hamas claimed responsibility for that attack, a
suicide bombing. Hamas also claimed responsibility for a shooting Thursday
in a Jewish settlement near Nablus that killed four Israeli settlers. 

Gunfire and tank fire was reported as Palestinians and Israeli forces
clashed Friday in Ramallah. Israeli snipers were poised on buildings
outside Arafat's complex and were shooting into the Palestinian
headquarters compound, Palestinian sources said. 

Sharon's remarks came at a news conference after an all-night Cabinet
meeting. 
 
Arafat held a news conference in Ramallah on Thursday, saying Palestinians
were ready to implement a U.S. cease-fire plan "without any conditions." 
(Full story)

But Israeli officials were skeptical. "We have a right to defend
ourselves," Ra'anan Gissin, spokesman for Israeli Prime Minister Ariel
Sharon, had said while the Cabinet met behind closed doors. 

His words did little to assuage Israeli officials. "We're quite fed up
with those declarations that Arafat makes every time he feels the pressure
is mounting on him," said Gissin. "He has to take real action.
Declarations won't do. They won't get him off the hook." 

Before Friday's move into Ramallah, the Israeli army had said it was
calling up reserve forces in response to recent Palestinian terrorist
attacks. The army did not say how many reservists were being called up. 

Palestinians have expected Israeli retaliation for a Hamas terror attack
Wednesday that killed 21 Jews celebrating Passover. 

"What is expected is an attack by Israel forces," Farouq Kaddoumi, the
Palestinian Liberation Organization's political chief, told delegates
Thursday at the Arab League summit in Beirut, Lebanon. "We are expecting
large-scale operation, retaliation in next few hours." 

Fresh violence erupted against Israelis earlier Thursday, even as Arafat
announced he was ready to implement the Tenet cease-fire proposal "without
conditions." 

Shortly after Arafat spoke, a Palestinian gunman opened fire Thursday at
the Alon Moreh Jewish settlement near Nablus, killing four settlers before
Israeli forces shot him dead, the Israeli army said. Another settler was
slightly wounded in the attack. 

Hamas, a Palestinian Islamic fundamentalist group that has been labeled by
the U.S. State Department as a terrorist organization, claimed
responsibility for the attack, saying the gunman was from the Askar
refugee camp near Nablus. 

Hamas has carried out other attacks on Israeli military and civilian
targets during the 18-month-old Al Aqsa Intifada, including Wednesday's
"Passover massacre." 

After that attack, a top Israeli official said the government would use
all "necessary measures" to stop further terrorist attacks. 

Wednesday's terror attack in Netanya came on the first night of the Jewish
religious celebration of Passover during a traditional Seder at a seaside
hotel. More than 170 people were wounded. (More on the bombing) 

A source at the Israeli Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem said Thursday that
Israel had not responded to Wednesday's terror attack because the
government continued to support U.S. Mideast envoy Anthony Zinni's efforts
to reach a cease-fire. He is still in the region, and U.S. officials said
Zinni will remain there to try to negotiate a cease-fire. 

"Israel will do the most it can," said the source, adding that Israel has
followed a policy of retaliatory restraint for the last 10 days. During
that period, the source said, Israeli authorities have intercepted 11
would-be suicide bombers. 

604 responses total.

Okay this sounds like its going from really bad to really REALLY bad before
long.  Sooner or later, somebody has to turn the other cheek.  This business
of retaliation being necessary in order to not look weak doesnt lead to
any kind of resolution.  Just more killing

The Israelis are focusing on Arafat, but how powerful is he anymore?  He's
surrounded in his headquarters by Israeli tanks and has called for peace.
Seems pretty clear the more militant palestinian factions arent listening
to him.  And is Sharon acting like a peacemaker or a bully?  I really
think both sides are not looking good here and that a mediator needs to
get Sharon and Arafat in a room and slap both of them around.  What a mess!

And its getting worse.  Current stories are that the IDF has in 
fact occupied Arafat's compound and that much of it is in flames.
Not a word about casualties in the apparent gunbattle at Arafat's office
door inside the compound.

Israel has a long-held policy of not allowing terrorists to get rewarded
for their actions by caving to demands.  If someone hijacks an Israeli
plane in demand for, say, release of Palestinian prisoners, the demands
will not be met.  No exceptions.  Sharron's daughter could be in seat 8B
and the plane will explode.  What this policy has done, over time, is
deter such activity.  But when it comes to the peace process Israel goes
the whole other direction.  They state quite clearly that all it will take
to end a ceasefire is for any violence against Israeli.  Wow.  They put
out an invitation to scuttle the process and there will always be those
willing to do so, *ON BOTH SIDES*.

I find that a telling statement that Israel isn't even close to wanting
the violence to end if Palestinians still exists.

Aarafat is a spokesperson.  I don't believe he has much real power over
the situation.  He is also wearing a bullseye on his forehead.

I think Arafat will be assassinated within a month, personally.

A Hamas spokesperson said last night, in so many words, that Arafat was 
powerless to control the suicide bombers.

An interesting thing I noticed is that the rhetoric used by both Hamas 
and Israel to justify their ATTACKS is "defending ourselves."  Hamas with 
their suicide bombers, and Israel with their tanks.  Each is engaged in a 
series of retaliatory strikes.  If we were to boil down all the reports 
and extract the probable truth, we would conclude that each renewed round 
of large-scale fighting begins with the actions of a few individuals on 
one side or the other who refuse to honor cease-fire proclamations.  

Since each action prompts a retaliatory action in an escalating cycle, 
throwing a single stone at some egotistical, gun-toting Israeli teenager 
who is then forced to defned his masculinity by shooting back, or some 
similarly small-minded inverse action can scuttle months of high-level 
diplomacy.  

There just is not either sufficient will or sufficient discipline on 
either side to end this conflict.

so if arafat is "powerless" he's got to be removed so that we
can identify the person who is, in fact in charge

If Arafat is assassinated, israel would face the wrath ofmuch of the
arab world.  There would be mass violence and the militant Hammas would not
accept peace until Sharon is assassinated in retaliation

i fear he's already dead.

i dont have CNN etc and general hospital isn't discussing it...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-1622973,00.html

thanks

Let's forget what can be done.  Let's talk about what SHOULD be done.

Fact:   The area set out by the United Nations for the original state
        of Israel encompassed the entire West Bank and Gaza strip.

Fact:   The Muslim Arabs have tried three times to annihilate Israel
        and commit genocide against the Jewish population.  Jews caught
        by Arab armies have been massacred wholesale.

Fact:   All "peace" negotiations thus far have been acknowledged by Arab
        Muslims to be a pretext for gaining position for another war of
        annihilation.  None of these negotiations are in good faith.

Conclusion 1:  The "Arab" West Bank, etc. is not legitimately Arab.  It
        was ill-gotten gains from a war of attempted genocide; the
        Israeli conquest in 1967 restored it to its proper control.
        The pre-1967 borders of Israel are merely a case-fire line, not
        the proper boundaries of that nation.

Conclusion 2:  Muslim Arabs should be punished for their past and
        on-going crimes with regard to Jews and the state of Israel.
        The entire Muslim population of the West Bank and Gaza strip
        should be moved to other Arab nations.  Those who are descended
        from post-1938 migrants (less than ten years) should expect no
        compensation.  The rest can take up residence in houses and farm
        lands abandoned by Jews who fled those nations in the last
        century.  Those who cannot find such housing should receive
        payments to purchase houses and lands; these payments should
        come in part from back rent and interest due on the abandoned
        Jewish homes and lands.  The rest should be paid 50/50 by
        Western nations and Arab oil states.

Anything less than this is an admission that trying to murder your
neighbor and take his lands is a legitimate response to having a
different religion than he does.

(Okay, let the fire-storm begin!)

        What do you suggest about that American problem, Russ?

Re #5:  If Arafat is unable to control the suicide bombers, why
is he able to arrest their leaders (albeit on a catch-and-release
program)?  And why are some of the bombers from his own Fatah group?

If what Hamas says is true, then Arafat is irrelevant.  Despite his
financing and his massive number of armed followers, he has no
influence.  If he can't lead and can't use his police powers to
stop the bombers, he is not a head of state in any sense of the
word.  He should have stepped down as soon as his best efforts
yielded nothing.  Since he won't, he has to be removed.  He should
probably be removed to the Hague to stand trial for crimes against
humanity, but we'll see.

The truth is that Arafat has plenty of influence, but he won't use
it to make peace despite the agreements he's signed.  Instead he
has maintained a state of war against a nation to which he has sworn
to make peace, while hiding behind claims of his own ineffectuality.
Having chosen to live by the sword, he deserves to die by it.

He only has influence if he can point to reasons why what he says is
credible.  Right now he has none -- no one on the Arab side seriously
believes Israel will cut a deal if they stop their attacks.  It all comes
down to a lack of trust.

Russ, could you please provide a citation for your first item, that the
original UN partition plan assigned the West Bank and Gaza to 
Jewish control?  I don't recall hearing that before, or seeing 
it in maps; my vague memory is of seeing a map of the proposed
partition which was a patchwork quilt of intermixed populations.
Thanks.

        Maybe the Isralies should go throughout Palestine and kill
every first born son of a family that does not do something to
show agreement is Isreal.

does arafat have the money for a proper army? is there another option for
defending his land and people?

Re #4:  I thought he had been assassinated when his plane went down in Egypt
a decade ago.  I was very surprised when he emerged alive.  Don't count him
out yet.  (I didn't hear on tonight's news that he was dead.)

Re #15:  Leeron posted links to maps some time ago, Ken.
I don't have the URLs ready to hand, but they're in the
last 6 months or so of Israel items.  Should be a cinch
to find. ;-)

Re #17:  Arafat doesn't need an army; he isn't running a
government, only an "authority".  He was given the money
and training for a very large and well-armed police force.
Some of his aid included US-made M16 rifles.  This should
have been more than sufficient for him to control the
likes of Hamas and Islamic Jihad so that he could prepare
for the next step in the peace process.

Those rifles have instead been used to shoot at Israelis,
including at least one terrorist shooting of civilians
inside Israel proper.

re:  "nincompoop (oval) : does arafat have the money for a proper army?"
Under the agreements Arafat signed, he is supposed to have a police
force, NOT an army, of much smaller size and with much reduced 
weaponry than he now has.
And let us not forget, Yasser Arafat won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1994.

Russ:  Note that it is not only Arab Muslims who assist and support
Nobel Peace Prize winner Yasser Arafat.  Take the Christian Hannan
Ashwari, for example.

Do you have a citation for your statement that Hanan Ashrawi is a Christian?
I've seen a film about Palestinian women that included an interview with her,
and given the context I really doubt it.

(Assuming that's who you're talking about)

I think you just got to let them fight it out.  Let it escalate.  Let them
solve it themselves.  

  re #21:  Hanan Ashrawi *is* a Christian.  Try a Google search on
  "Ashrawi Christian" for a plentitude of links from mainstream news
  sources..

I don't have a citation.  It is common knowledge.  And probably 
an important reason she has no real prospects of advancement in 
the PLO.

saw an interesting report that had Geraldo talking to several leaders of teh
4 major players sending in the suicide bombers.  There general attitude is
they don't care who is in chage where, they will continue to fight as long
as isreal exists.

The irony that a Christian woman is the main spokesperson for the
grossly Islamic Palestian movement has been the topic of entire
articles.  If you didn't know that, you haven't been trying very
hard to inform yourself about the issues.

Can we trade Geraldo for Daniel Pearl?

I said that ages ago!

I'll be damned.  I actually know quite a bit about the situation, but I've
managed to miss that.  And the movie I saw recently really did mislead on the
topic.

The Palestinian movement has included Christians from the beginning.  While
some segments of it are "grossly Islamic," not all of it is, and it's an
oversimplification to suggest otherwise.

but is this a war either side can win? As these suicide bombings are 
the acts of individuals, they will be almost impossible to forcibly 
stop. So Israel continues and escalates its military occupation of what 
was formerly palestinian territory. Which means the suicide bombings 
continue.
 
This ends up having a crippling effect on the Israel economy. The costs 
of such a military occupation combined with the near elimination of 
tourist dollars coming in (you think anybody anywhere is planning a 
vacation to Tel Aviv this summer?) will be devastating. And continued 
occupation of palestinian lands will anger the other islamic nations. 
Which is what Arafat and his people are counting on. They are counting 
on that sooner or later, Egypt and Jordan and the other neighboring 
countries will cease diplomatic relations with Israel and enter the 
fracas. 

The Palestinians feel they have nothing to lose and are willing to die. 
Given that, it is Israel who has the most to lose. Prolonged warfare 
like this will destablize not only Israel but the entire region. This 
isnt a situation where simply strongarming the enemy will work. 

At this point, i think that those in charge on both sides see more and
bloodier violence as being *far* better for their own self interests
than peace.  It would be nice if the larger powers behind the two sides
had the will & means to change this, but sadly i don't see anything to
suggest that such is the case.

Maybe the <gag> best we can hope for is that after much, much more 
violence, death, and distruction, the little people on both sides will
get most of the hate and bloodlust worked out their systems and start
asking their leaders "what kind of hell-on-Earth are you turning this
place into and why shouldn't we ditch you for somebody who's trying to
build a future worth living in?"

From today's New York Times:

"As night fell, Mr. Arafat gave a candlelight interview in his
headquarters with Reuters television.  "I appeal to the internaitonal
community to stop this aggression against our people, this military
escalation, this killing" he pleaded in english.

Then in Arabic, he added, "Together we willmarch until one of our children
raises the Palestinian flag over the churches and mosques of Jerusalem"

Clearly Arafat is playing political game, saying he wants the violence to
stop on one hand, and on the other more or less encouraging it to
continue.  

Oh, no, he's not "playing a game"; he really _does_ want the violence to end.
But only when he's gotten everything he wants.

Just like everybody else.

Arafat's wife is a christian.

Mary, re #3:

> They state quite clearly that all it will take  to end a ceasefire is for
> any violence against Israeli.  Wow.  They put  out an invitation to scuttle
> the process

Sharon clarified that what he wants prior to resuming peace negotiations is
a real effort on the part of Arafat to stem the violence (not empty words in
English while he continues to incite violence in Arabic). If Arafat were truly
working against the terrorists (not with them), a single incident would not
scuttle the process.

Last month Sharon rescinded his requirement (on the basis of the recommend-
ations of the Mitchell Report) for a period of quiet prior to the resumption
of negotiations. Guess what? Arafat found new excuses.

What is most absurd is that you refuse to recognize that the peace process
was scuttled when Arafat rejected the paradigm of compromise and ordered
violence following the Camp David summit. Instead you are caught up with
Sharon, saying that IF Arafat ordered a ceasefire and IF a major terrorist
attack happened despite Arafat's best efforts and IF Sharon then broke off
negotiations that this somehow proves that Sharon has scuttled the process.

The simple truth is that until Arafat renounces terrorism as a political
tool and until he stops harboring and consorting with terrorists, there is
no hope for the peace process.

> I don't believe he has much real power over the situation.

Arafat's "police" force numbers about 40,000 troops (per capita, it's about
4x the size of Detroit's police force). Hamas numbers about 1500 fighters and
Islamic Jihad is even smaller.  The excuse that Arafat can't act because
Israel has bombed some empty buildings rings rather hollow -- especially since
Israel only targeted these buildings months after the PA police was not
utilized to perform as required by the Oslo Agreements and when it becamse
clear that the PA police was participating in attacks on Israeli civilians
rather than working to prevent them.

Furthermore, roughly half of the terrorism attacks are committed by Arafat's
own militias (Fatah Hawks, Tanzim, Al Aqsa Brigade, Force 17), whose
commanders state that they are loyal to Arafat. Ergo, they have never received
an order to ceasefire and to the contrary have received orders to perpetrate
violence and terrorism.

Two weeks ago, the USA Today reported that:

        Terrorist says orders come from Arafat

        TULKARM, West Bank - A leader of the largest Palestinian terrorist
        group spearheading suicide bombings and other attacks against Israel
        says he is following the orders of Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat.
        "Our group is an integral part of Fatah," says Maslama Thabet, 33, a
        leader of the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade. Fatah, headed by Arafat, is
        the largest group in the Palestinian Authority, the government of
        the autonomous Palestinian territories.

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

Maybe we should start a pool on who dies first:

- Geraldo
- Arafat
- The Pope
- Dick Cheney
- Fidel Castro

The last three are obviously in poor health.  Geraldo keeps putting 
himself in a position where he's likely to get hit by a stray bullet.  
Arafat is likely to be assassinated by Israel (though for political 
reasons they'd want it to look accidental.)

I'm not entirely sure that killing Yassar Arafat would be what it took 
to stop the violence.  In fact, I think it would make him a martyr and 
make the situation worse.  That, I think, is why Sharon wants to catch 
him alive and ship him out.

leeron:  You said, "the peace process
 was scuttled when Arafat rejected the paradigm of compromise and ordered
 violence following the Camp David summit."

It made me think of an article I read recently speculating that the 
Clinton peace plan was taken by the Arabs as a sign of weakness.
As such, it actually emboldened them to ratchet up the violence
with the expectation they could get everything they wanted instead of
being reasonable and acceptinga a compromise.  Made sense to me in 
light of their behaviour since.

David, Israel has nothing to gain by killing Arafat and has no intention
of doing so. This would make Arafat relevant again, but not in a way which
would benefit Israel. Israel's goal is to pressure Arafat into choosing to
make himself relevant. If Arafat ended up being "accidentally" shot, I'd
suspect his bodygaurds, not Israel.

klg, Frankly, I think Arafat is delusional enough to have thought that
he could denounce Camp David, tour world capitals and gain support for
a unilateral declaration of independence (UDI), allowing him to deliver
a Palestinian Arab state on his own terms (well, not really since it
would have been restricted only to the territories Israel had already
given the PA). The important point, though, is that he would have a
state WITHOUT making peace with Israel.

Given that Arab apologists were belaboring the inadequacy of Clinton's
compromise (which would have given the PA a state on 100% of Gaza and a
CONTIGUOUS 91% of the West Bank), how could anyone possibly fault them
for not being happy with only a 43% of these territories in a discontiguous
patchwork? Surely terrorism and violence would be "understandable" and
Arafat could return to his old tactic, attempting to provoke a war so
that Israel could be destroyed.

Yet UDI fizzled precisely because the international community realized
the value of the offer Arafat had just rejected out of hand (and one
hopes it was also understood that UDI would be a flagrant violation of
the Oslo process, which was not perceived as dead at the time).

Unable to move forward and unwilling to crawl back to the negotiating
table in such a weakened position, Arafat's out was to initiate violence.
Since it served his purpose (boosted his ratings and got Barak to offer
additional unilateral concessions), he has stuck with the political violence
ever since, hoping that the world will pressure Israeli to unilaterally
withdraw from additional territories in an effort to appease the terrorists.

In yesterday's NY Times, Thomas Friedman makes a very strong case why this
would be disasterous.  See "Suicidal Lies" (3/31/02): http://www.nytimes.co
m/2002/03/31/opinion/31FRIE.html?ex=^P18559515&ei==1&en=_7a8a15e5722637

It is imperative that the international community pressure Arafat to (once
again) renounce terrorism and order a ceasefire (in Arabic, not just English),
abide by his committments at Oslo, and return to the negotiating table.

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss