ARAFAT'S NEW SECRET SPEECH IN STOCKHOLM
ken
Algemeiner Journal.
ARAFAT'S NEW SECRET SPEECH IN STOCKHOLM: TOTAL COLLAPSE OF ISRAEL PENDING;
MILLIONS OF JEWS TO LEAVE
'We Plan to Eliminate Israel and Establish a Purely Palestinian State'
by Dr. M. R. Lehmann
Yasser Arafat has just delivered his most outrageous and revealing speech
before a secret meeting in Stockholm of all the Arab ambassadors. The
meeting took place on January 30, the birthday of the late Swedish Prime
Minister Olaf Palme, a friend of the PLO. A leaked report of the meeting
was sent to me from a reliable source.
The day was celebrated with a 250,000-crown prize handed to leftist Jewish
youngsters of the Peace Now and the Labor Young Leadership -- jointly with
the Fatah Youth -- for their promotion of "peace" between Jews and Arabs.
Eli Dayan, Israel's deputy foreign minister, took part in the ceremony, and
Yossi Beilin was also in Stockholm for the occasion.
Arafat spoke in a closed meeting to the Arab diplomats, but his speech was
leaked through secret channels. His topic was "The Impending Total Collapse
of Israel." He stated that at least half of the Russian immigrants to
Israel are Christians or Moslems. When the civil war, which can be
expected, will breakout in Israel, the Russian immigrants will fight for a
united Palestinian state. He stated that he has proof that the "so-called
Ethiopian Jews" really are Moslems. He announced that both Peres and Beilin
would support a Palestinian state as long as some degree of religious
freedom would be guaranteed to its Jewish inhabitants. However, the Jews are
expected to give up their dwellings and will immigrate to the United States.
"We Palestinians will take over everything, including all of Jerusalem,"
Arafat declared. "Peres and Beilin have already promised us half of
Jerusalem. The Golan Heights have already been given away -- subject to
just a few details."
Arafat said that as soon as the Golan Heights are returned, at least a
million rich Jews will leave Israel.
"All the rich Jews who will get compensation will trave to America," he
said.
Arafat then revealed his plan for the Palestinian takeover of Israel:
"We of the PLO will now concentrate all our efforts on splitting Israel
psychologically into two camps. Within five years we will have six to seven
million Arabs living on the West Bank and in Jerusalem. All Palestinian
Arabs will be welcomed back by us. If the Jews can import all kinds of
Ethiopians, Russians, Uzbekians and Ukrainians as Jews, then we can import
all kinds of Arabs to us! (Three and a half million Arabs will thus be
brought to Palestine.) You understand that we plan to eliminate the State
of Israel and establish a purely Palestinian State. We will make life
unbearable for Jews by psychological warfare and population explosion; Jews
will not want to live among us Arabs!
"I have no use for Jews; they are and remain Jews! We now need all the help
we can get from you in our battle for a united Palestine under total
Arab-Moslem domination!"
This horrendous revelation of true intentions flies in the face of Arafat's
repeated promises to abrogate the dreaded PLO covenant. It is now obvious
that he has no intention, but expects Peres and Beilin to cave in again and
surrender Israel to a Palestinian state, in fulfillment of the PLO Covenant.
Peres faces a national election: How can he survive the impact of Arafat's
-- his "peace partner's" -- double-cross? Will not Israelis rise and throw
out the party that opened the Pandora's box of PLO aggression? And will
American Jews continue to support this "peace process?"
Arafat also revealed in Stockholm that Swedish Prime Minister Ingvar Karlsson
has been approved as a mediator in the negotiations about the future of
Jerusalem. The Swedish prime minister also met with Yossi Beilin in
Stockholm, during Arafat's visit, and discussed Jerusalem's future.....
Meanwhile, the outcries of a vast number of Christian groups are clearly
growing, as they see their reliance on Jewish self-interest vanish. In
other words, while Christians took for granted that Israel would safeguard
its minimal and basic needs, they now find Israel is history's lone
exception: Without provocation or nee, Israel -- the strongest military
power in the Middle East and the victor in all wars against the Arabs -- is
acting like a meek, vanquished nation, surrendering its most basic
interests. Christians never thought this development possible; but with
this realization, the Christians have gathered in ever greater numbers to
protest what is going on and to demand a change in Israel's foreign policy
course. Will the leftists in Jerusalem turn a deaf ear to these millions of
Christians?
A few weeks ago, a large gathering, representing some 50 Christian human
rights groups and millions of Americans, met for several days in Washington
to plan action....
(re: Lebanon)
They are all united in the knowledge that the Arabs are the invaders, who
for the past 1,000 years, have robbed Christians of their land, property,
culture and indepence. They know that among peoples of the Middle East,
only the Jews have regained their ancient independence -- hence, their
admiration for Israel.
The resulting resolution of the Coalition contains the following passages:
1. The Coalition for the Defense of Human Rights under Islamization is
concerned about the fate of the Lebanese Christians in general, and the
Christian population in South Lebanon in particular.
2. The Coalition rejects any attempts to legitimize Syria's domination over
Lebanon and the political, military, legal and economic repression of its
Christian community as a reward for any political arrangement.......
--
"You've got to stick to one set of postulates. You can't play
Electro-magnetic Golf according to the rules of Centrifugal Bumble-puppy."
Brave New World by Aldous Huxley
Red Herring
>I was shocked to read this article which appears in last week's
>Algemeiner Journal.
>
>ARAFAT'S NEW SECRET SPEECH IN STOCKHOLM: TOTAL COLLAPSE OF ISRAEL PENDING;
>MILLIONS OF JEWS TO LEAVE
>
>'We Plan to Eliminate Israel and Establish a Purely Palestinian State'
I don't understand why you are so shocked. A few years ago
I saw Arafat being interviewed by (I think) CNN. He was asked
what the PLO was going to do to the Jews of the State of Palestine
(encompassing the WB, Gaza, and Israel) and he responded that those who
wanted to stay would be allowed to, and then quickly added that
he expected all Jews to emigrate....
>Peres faces a national election: How can he survive the impact of Arafat's
>-- his "peace partner's" -- double-cross?
What double-cross? Arafat just re-iterated a long-standing PLO
policy toward Israel.
Brendan McKay
>I was shocked to read this article which appears in last week's
>Algemeiner Journal.
>
>ARAFAT'S NEW SECRET SPEECH IN STOCKHOLM: TOTAL COLLAPSE OF ISRAEL PENDING;
>MILLIONS OF JEWS TO LEAVE
>
>'We Plan to Eliminate Israel and Establish a Purely Palestinian State'
>
>by Dr. M. R. Lehmann
>
>Yasser Arafat has just delivered his most outrageous and revealing speech
>before a secret meeting in Stockholm of all the Arab ambassadors. The
>meeting took place on January 30, the birthday of the late Swedish Prime
>Minister Olaf Palme, a friend of the PLO. A leaked report of the meeting
>was sent to me from a reliable source.
This "revelation" has all the signs of being a forgery.
It is simply too stupid to be an honest report.
Brendan.
The Hesh Inc.
(with regard to ARAFAT'S NEW SECRET SPEECH IN STOCKHOLM: TOTAL COLLAPSE OF ISRAEL
PENDING; MILLIONS OF JEWS TO LEAVE by Dr. M. R. Lehmann:
>>
>>Yasser Arafat has just delivered his most outrageous and revealing speech
>>before a secret meeting in Stockholm of all the Arab ambassadors. The
>>meeting took place on January 30, the birthday of the late Swedish Prime
>>Minister Olaf Palme, a friend of the PLO. A leaked report of the meeting
>>was sent to me from a reliable source. )
>
>This "revelation" has all the signs of being a forgery.
>It is simply too stupid to be an honest report.
>
>Brendan.
Yes, and all the reports leaked to the US about the widespread murder of Jews in
Europe during WWII were rejected by the overwhelming majority of American newspapers
and politicians because they were "too farfetched" or "too unbelievable" to be true.
Woe to all those who believe in so-called "rationality"!
Heshy.
Michael Berenstein
1) The person who posted this "report" does not have the source in hands and
trying to retell the story. Unfortunately this person does not posess any story
telling talant.(Or simply stupid, but sh-sh.)
2) He is putting words into other people's mouth. Otherwords it is a forgery.
Yassir Arafat is ........(you put words yourself), no need to set him up, he is
doing it himself.
A E Mail Journal
The so called secret speech by President Arafat is a fake story
fabricated with a bad intention to sabotage the peace process. The
Algemeiner Journal which published the alleged speech according to
your post under the heading:'' ARAFAT'S NEW SECRET SPEECH IN
STOCKHOLM: TOTAL COLLAPSE OF ISRAEL PENDING; MILLIONS OF JEWS TO
Palestinian State' in' the report written by Dr. M. R. Lehman
quoting A leaked report of the meeting which was sent to him from a
reliable source'.... is another fake story .
At the time the peace process is going through the most delicate and
difficult times such stories are counterproductive .
Arafat is representing a small powerless Palestinian entity which
need help not lies like these and Israel is a big power in the
Middle East , so wake up and stop spreading lies as all facts
confirm the good will towards peace from all parties concerned in
the peace process .
S Suwellam
London
-------------------------------------
A E Mail Journal.............Editor Mr S Suwellam.London.U.K
Middle East and International Affairs uncensored Journal
E-Mail address:ra...@sam.win-uk.net......Phone :0181 7158641
Live Uncensored Magazine:http://www.ibmpcug.co.uk/~ajournal/
Join Journal Mailing List For Mideast/International Affairs
Writers with Views--VIEWS EXPRESSED ARE OF THE AUTHORS ONLY
Murray Kastner
Herring) wrote:
> In article <4fldmt$5...@ionews.io.org>, spe...@ionews.io.org (ken) wrote:
> >I was shocked to read this article which appears in last week's
> >Algemeiner Journal.
> >ARAFAT'S NEW SECRET SPEECH IN STOCKHOLM: TOTAL COLLAPSE OF ISRAEL PENDING;
> >MILLIONS OF JEWS TO LEAVE
> >
> >'We Plan to Eliminate Israel and Establish a Purely Palestinian State'
>
> I don't understand why you are so shocked. A few years ago
> I saw Arafat being interviewed by (I think) CNN. He was asked
> what the PLO was going to do to the Jews of the State of Palestine
> (encompassing the WB, Gaza, and Israel) and he responded that those who
> wanted to stay would be allowed to, and then quickly added that
> he expected all Jews to emigrate....
> >Peres faces a national election: How can he survive the impact of Arafat's
> >-- his "peace partner's" -- double-cross?
> What double-cross? Arafat just re-iterated a long-standing PLO
> policy toward Israel.
Red Herring, you never disappoint me! Leave it to you to parlay an obvious
forgery to promote your own ends.
You really can't stand the fact that peace is inevitable, can you?
feigenbaum,benjamin
> In article <4fldmt$5...@ionews.io.org> spe...@ionews.io.org (ken) writes:
> >
> >MILLIONS OF JEWS TO LEAVE
> >
> >'We Plan to Eliminate Israel and Establish a Purely Palestinian State'
> >
> >by Dr. M. R. Lehmann
> >
> >Yasser Arafat has just delivered his most outrageous and revealing speech
> >before a secret meeting in Stockholm of all the Arab ambassadors. The
> >meeting took place on January 30, the birthday of the late Swedish Prime
> >Minister Olaf Palme, a friend of the PLO. A leaked report of the meeting
> >was sent to me from a reliable source.
>
> It is simply too stupid to be an honest report.
Since Herr McKay feels that Arafat is too bright to have said something
like this, I wonder if he would be kind enough to provide us with other
examples of Arafat's "brilliance".
Or is it merely that Arafat is brilliant in comparison to those Jews
who were stupid enough to think that this mass murderer is truly
interested in giving them peace? Other than the peace of the grave,
that is.
How is this "too stupid" to be an honest report, Herr McKay?
Brendan McKay
>b...@cs.rit.edu (Brendan McKay) wrote:
>
>PENDING; MILLIONS OF JEWS TO LEAVE by Dr. M. R. Lehmann:
>>>
>>>Yasser Arafat has just delivered his most outrageous and revealing speech
>>>before a secret meeting in Stockholm of all the Arab ambassadors. The
>>>meeting took place on January 30, the birthday of the late Swedish Prime
>>>Minister Olaf Palme, a friend of the PLO. A leaked report of the meeting
>>
>>This "revelation" has all the signs of being a forgery.
>>It is simply too stupid to be an honest report.
>>
>
>Yes, and all the reports leaked to the US about the widespread murder of Jews in
>Europe during WWII were rejected by the overwhelming majority of American newspapers
>and politicians because they were "too farfetched" or "too unbelievable" to be true.
>
>Woe to all those who believe in so-called "rationality"!
The great majority of hard-to-believe reports are in fact false.
Coming up with one counterexample doesn't change that.
The whole "secret meeting" scenario smacks of being a deliberate
parody of the supposed "secret meeting" of Zionists where the
"Protocols" were written. Even if there was some meeting where
Arafat made a speech, there is no way this is an accurate report
of it. It is a very poor amateurish fake.
Brendan.
Reuven Singer
However considering the inflammatory statements that Arafat has made in
the last year to Arab audiences -which have been videotaped- the
Stockholm story is not completely incredible.
Reuven
Murray Kahl
in Stockholm after dinner in Der Spiegal salon. He had 40 Arab diplomats
for his secret speech and it apparently is a plea for funds.I knew of
the story but wanted sources before I said anything.
Murray
Jonathan Korn
(feigenbaum,benjamin) wrote:
>
> Or is it merely that Arafat is brilliant in comparison to those Jews
> who were stupid enough to think that this mass murderer is truly
> interested in giving them peace? Other than the peace of the grave,
> that is.
The majority of the Israelis believe that Arafat is sincere. What you
have just done is you called several million people stupid. Perhaps you
could help me here: what would you call those that oppose the peace
process? Wise, open-minded, enlightened?
JK
Dr...@aol.com
>Murray, it's not a forgery. Arafat spoke on Jan. 30 at the Grand Hotel
>in Stockholm after dinner in Der Spiegal salon. He had 40 Arab diplomats
>for his secret speech and it apparently is a plea for funds.I knew of
>the story but wanted sources before I said anything.
I'm confused. Or maybe you're confused. Let's assume that it is in
fact correct that Arafat gave a speech at that time and place. How
does that in any way guarantee the authenticity of the 'report' of the
contents of that speech?
Most of this 'report' looks to me to be a clumsy forgery or fantasy--
not because it makes Arafat look evil, devious, and opposed to the
existence of Israel [all plausible], but because it makes him look
extraordinarily stupid, too. Do you really think that Arafat believes
the Ethiopian Jews are closet Muslims who will act as a Fifth Column?
A good guess as to the source of this rubbish comes from the snippet
>Will the leftists in Jerusalem turn a deaf ear to these millions of
>Christians?
which leads me to suspect eschatological Christians. Great. Here's
news, ken. These guys support Israel because that's where Armageddon
(=Megiddo) is, and they want to make sure all the Jews are waiting
there when You-Know-Who comes.
andy
me
>
>Murray Kahl <ka...@gate.net> wrote:
>
>>Murray, it's not a forgery. Arafat spoke on Jan. 30 at the Grand Hotel
>>in Stockholm after dinner in Der Spiegal salon. He had 40 Arab diplomats
>>for his secret speech and it apparently is a plea for funds.I knew of
>>the story but wanted sources before I said anything.
>
>I'm confused. Or maybe you're confused. Let's assume that it is in
>fact correct that Arafat gave a speech at that time and place. How
>does that in any way guarantee the authenticity of the 'report' of the
>contents of that speech?
>
Nazi aye? I feel so sorry for you.
>Most of this 'report' looks to me to be a clumsy forgery or fantasy--
>not because it makes Arafat look evil, devious, and opposed to the
>existence of Israel [all plausible], but because it makes him look
>extraordinarily stupid, too. Do you really think that Arafat believes
>the Ethiopian Jews are closet Muslims who will act as a Fifth Column?
>
you wake up and catch a bit of history.
>A good guess as to the source of this rubbish comes from the snippet
>>Christians?
>news, ken. These guys support Israel because that's where Armageddon
>(=Megiddo) is, and they want to make sure all the Jews are waiting
Ido Dubrawsky
A E Mail Journal <ra...@sam.win-uk.net> wrote:
>To the Algemeiner Journal
>The so called secret speech by President Arafat is a fake story
>fabricated with a bad intention to sabotage the peace process. The
>Algemeiner Journal which published the alleged speech according to
>STOCKHOLM: TOTAL COLLAPSE OF ISRAEL PENDING; MILLIONS OF JEWS TO
>Palestinian State' in' the report written by Dr. M. R. Lehman
>quoting A leaked report of the meeting which was sent to him from a
>reliable source'.... is another fake story .
>At the time the peace process is going through the most delicate and
>difficult times such stories are counterproductive .
>Arafat is representing a small powerless Palestinian entity which
>need help not lies like these and Israel is a big power in the
>Middle East , so wake up and stop spreading lies as all facts
>confirm the good will towards peace from all parties concerned in
>the peace process .
>
>S Suwellam
>London
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------
>A E Mail Journal.............Editor Mr S Suwellam.London.U.K
>Middle East and International Affairs uncensored Journal
>E-Mail address:ra...@sam.win-uk.net......Phone :0181 7158641
>Live Uncensored Magazine:http://www.ibmpcug.co.uk/~ajournal/
>Join Journal Mailing List For Mideast/International Affairs
>Writers with Views--VIEWS EXPRESSED ARE OF THE AUTHORS ONLY
>
>
That may well be true that this particular story is a lie. However, I would
caution people to look at the statements made by the Palestinian Authority
in the past (in particular Arafat and some of the higher echelon members). You
can find a compilation of their statements at the website:
http://www.rpi.edu/~mandes/PLO_Mosaic.html
I use it to remind myself that as an Israeli who does want to see his homeland
achieve true piece, I am not willing to trust these people to work towards that
peace.
With regards to the Israel government's position on Jerusalem, I am sorely
disappointed. How do I trust a government which publicly states that there
will be no negotiation regarding the status of Jerusalem and then turns around
and begins to negotiate in secret on the very same subject. All I have to ask
is "why?". The PLO has yet to completely meet its obligations with regards to
the Oslo accords and has even begun to violate some of the accords points (i.e.
the new airport being built in Gaza without the consultation of Israel, the
arresting of Israeli citizens traveling in Area B, and the bold declaration
that they will cancel the covenant sections calling for the destruction of
Israel on April 12...fully more than two months after elections for the PNC
were held as called for by the Oslo accords). And yet, the Israeli government
seems determined to please these people. To what end? Why are we doing this?
Let the PLO show us a track record of keeping the agreement and then we should
consider extending it. And as far as Jerusalem is concerned, I can see no
blacker day in the history of the Jewish people than when we give away our
beloved capitol. That will be the saddest day of my life. G-d help us all on
that day.
Ido
--
Ido Dubrawsky
Ph.D. Program in Molecular Biology E-Mail: i...@mail.utexas.edu
The University of Texas at Austin
Austin, TX
Red Herring
>Most of this 'report' looks to me to be a clumsy forgery or fantasy--
>not because it makes Arafat look evil, devious, and opposed to the
>existence of Israel [all plausible], but because it makes him look
>extraordinarily stupid, too. Do you really think that Arafat believes
>the Ethiopian Jews are closet Muslims who will act as a Fifth Column?
Do you really think Arafat believes that Jesus was a "Palestinian"?
The speech appears to be genuine precisely because it is full of idiotic
statements about Israel's internal affairs. Peres' political opponents would
have done a better job putting words in Arafat's mouth.
If someone wants to argue that Arafat's secret speech a forgery, please tell us
who may have done it and why.
Jody Eisenman
Why is it that some left wingers have such a hard time understanding the
truth, even when its in black and white? Anyone?
Dr...@aol.com wrote:
: Murray Kahl <ka...@gate.net> wrote:
: >Murray, it's not a forgery. Arafat spoke on Jan. 30 at the Grand Hotel
: >in Stockholm after dinner in Der Spiegal salon. He had 40 Arab diplomats
: >for his secret speech and it apparently is a plea for funds.I knew of
: >the story but wanted sources before I said anything.
: I'm confused. Or maybe you're confused. Let's assume that it is in
: fact correct that Arafat gave a speech at that time and place. How
: does that in any way guarantee the authenticity of the 'report' of the
: contents of that speech?
: Most of this 'report' looks to me to be a clumsy forgery or fantasy--
: not because it makes Arafat look evil, devious, and opposed to the
: existence of Israel [all plausible], but because it makes him look
: extraordinarily stupid, too. Do you really think that Arafat believes
: the Ethiopian Jews are closet Muslims who will act as a Fifth Column?
: A good guess as to the source of this rubbish comes from the snippet
: >Will the leftists in Jerusalem turn a deaf ear to these millions of
: >Christians?
: which leads me to suspect eschatological Christians. Great. Here's
: news, ken. These guys support Israel because that's where Armageddon
: (=Megiddo) is, and they want to make sure all the Jews are waiting
: there when You-Know-Who comes.
: andy
feigenbaum,benjamin
> In article <4fmfga$8...@spectator.cris.com>, Red_H...@alpha.c2.org (Red
> Herring) wrote:
>
> > policy toward Israel.
>
> Red Herring, you never disappoint me! Leave it to you to parlay an obvious
> forgery to promote your own ends.
Murray, forgive me but I don't understand how this was an "obvious"
forgery. Could you explain to me what was allegedly said by Arafat in
the "forgery" that wasn't said at some other point in time AFTER he signed
the treaty with Israel?
> You really can't stand the fact that peace is inevitable, can you?
I think Red Herring and myself are resigned to the fact that peace,
specifically the peace one finds in every Jewish cemetery, is
inevitable. It is a difficult fact to face, but it is inevitable.
The only question is how long this peace will take and how many Jews
will attain it.
Ben.
Israel Cidon
>Murray, forgive me but I don't understand how this was an "obvious"
It is not an obvious forgery. Since it has no trackable and reliable origin and it looks exactly as the image of Arafat in the fanatic Orthodox right wing camp
we assume it is a typical forgery. Similar to the "information" brought here
in the past about the events and "facts" in the Goldstein case, the "information"
about the two cases of suicides in the GSS one of Rabin body guard, the "information"
about the conspirancy theory which the Shamgar committee has already said has no
factual basis etc.. The same camp that brought us information about Rabin being drunk,
Peres holding control in Tadiran, the Arab mother of Peres, the Scud that hit
into a pork seller house and many more "facts". Similar "facts" were spreaded
about the "cooperation of labor Zionists with the Nazis", "the GSS murder of Kastner",
"shooting innocent people in the water" and many more filthy fairy tales and
conspirancy theories politically tuned and spreaded from one ear to another.
Such disinformation that is never part of any serious source or serious academic
study is frequently used by extreme groups everywhere. I think that it is a great
research topic to study and track the amount of disinformation used by fanatics
who have no trust in the normal western type media (either it is controlled by Jews,
by the goverment, by your political rivals or who knows). I believe
that part of the reason this is so effective is that circles of the
extreme orthodox community is that they basically boycot the main line broadcasted
and written media and are fed by either controlled newspapers, leaflets and rumors.
If you go in Meaa Shearim and read the information on the leaflet they post on walls
you can see that they contain alleged "facts" never heard off in other places.
>forgery. Could you explain to me what was allegedly said by Arafat in
>the "forgery" that wasn't said at some other point in time AFTER he signed
>the treaty with Israel?
The problem is not what in the "text" is believable or not but how come that no
reliable source has published that and only certain right wings fanatics were able
to come with this piece of "truth".
>
>
>> You really can't stand the fact that peace is inevitable, can you?
>
>I think Red Herring and myself are resigned to the fact that peace,
To fairly distinguish you and the anonymous Alex, I never heard you supporting
the murder of Rabin and other leaders in the left camp.
However, for both of you resigning to the full spectrum of facts is a very rare
event.
>specifically the peace one finds in every Jewish cemetery, is
>inevitable. It is a difficult fact to face, but it is inevitable.
Say who? Is this another of these undisputable "facts"?
>The only question is how long this peace will take and how many Jews
>will attain it.
You are asking this question since you started to post here and every year you need
to increase your estimate for the length of the peace and to lower the estimate
for the number of victims. Why wouldn't you ask yourself sometimes (just
for few seconds) and what happen if I Ben is deadly wrong and still able to stop
the peace and build permanent blocks for a similar future separation? Who will pay
the bill then? What will happen if much more Jews will die as a result?
Israel
>
>Ben.
>
Dr...@aol.com
>If someone wants to argue that Arafat's secret speech a forgery, please tell us
>who may have done it and why.
Well, you first. There's a notorious forgery claiming that Ben
Franklin criticized Jews. (He didn't.) Who may have done it and why?
In the case of the Arafat speech, I already posted my thoughts in the
very article you replied to. I don't think it was written by the
mainstream Israeli opponents of Peres; I think it's quite clear that
it originates with Christian pro-Israeli groups:
>Christians have gathered in ever greater numbers to
>protest what is going on and to demand a change in Israel's foreign policy
>course. Will the leftists in Jerusalem turn a deaf ear to these millions of
>Christians?
and in particular
>A few weeks ago, a large gathering, representing some 50 Christian human
>rights [sic] groups and millions of Americans, met for several days in Washington
>to plan action....
and as I wrote before, these groups want a strong Israel as part of a
grand plan to bring about the 'Second Coming'. I'll pass.
andy
ken
I am not Dr. Lehmann. I just posted his article from the Algemeiner Journal.
If you have any questions or comments, may I suggest contacting the Journal:
Algemeiner Journal
225 East Broadway
NY, NY 10002
(212) 267-5561
(FYI, I believe the Swedish PM's appointment as mediator on the future of
Jerusalem has been written about also in the Jerusalem Post in the last
week or so).
Red Herring
i...@nostromo.che.utexas.edu (Ido Dubrawsky) wrote:
> With regards to the Israel government's position on Jerusalem, I am sorely
>disappointed. How do I trust a government which publicly states that there
>will be no negotiation regarding the status of Jerusalem and then turns around
>and begins to negotiate in secret on the very same subject. All I have to ask
>is "why?". The PLO has yet to completely meet its obligations with regards to
>the Oslo accords and has even begun to violate some of the accords points
(i.e.
>the new airport being built in Gaza without the consultation of Israel, the
>arresting of Israeli citizens traveling in Area B, and the bold declaration
>that they will cancel the covenant sections calling for the destruction of
>Israel on April 12...fully more than two months after elections for the PNC
>were held as called for by the Oslo accords). And yet, the Israeli government
>seems determined to please these people. To what end? Why are we doing this?
We are not. Why are they doing this? Because these are a bunch of self-haters
(aka Jewish anti-semites) bent on destroying the Jewish state and headed by
Self-Hater of '95 Shimon Peres.
The status of _all_ Jerusalem is being negotiated (cf. the DOP). On the agenda
- a joint "Palestinian"/Israeli sovereignity over Jerusalem, and this is the
just beginning. The next step is going to be a merger of the Arab and Jewish
states and the creation of a bi-national State of Palestine (hey, don't the two
already share the capital?) For a description of the final step, see the
Arafat's "secret speech".
Red Herring
ci...@Eng.Sun.COM (Israel Cidon) wrote:
>In article o...@athos.cc.bellcore.com, bs...@pyuxe.cc.bellcore.com
(feigenbaum,benjamin) writes:
>>Murray, forgive me but I don't understand how this was an "obvious"
>
>It is not an obvious forgery. Since it has no trackable and reliable origin
and it looks exactly as the image of Arafat in the fanatic Orthodox right wing
camp
>we assume it is a typical forgery.
So, who do you assume forged the "secret speech" and for what purpose?
Sacha Zaidman
I'm happy to hear about Arafat's speach. I was sure of such allegations made secretely. I never
believed such a terrorist could ever mean peace. It's however unfortunate that i just learn now
about this; I attended a conference two hours ago on the peace process with Victor Harel,
ambassodor of Israel to Belgium(my home country), and Shawki Armali, Ambassador of "PALESTINE" to
Belgium as they give him this non-existent title, which was controversed at the conference. I don't
understand how Israel's ambassador agreed to talk with him, him taking the title of ambassador of
PALESTINE. Knowing about arafat's speech earlier would've made ther conference spicy, too late!!!
my best regards,
Sacha Zaidman
feigenbaum,benjamin
>
> Why is it that some left wingers have such a hard time understanding the
> truth, even when its in black and white? Anyone?
>
If you think left wingers have such a hard time with the truth now, wait
until, G-D forbid, the peace process reaches its inevitable conclusion -
the slaughter of untold numbers of Jews. At that point, the leftists
will, no doubt, blame the failure on the "extremists on both sides", or
on the fact that, because of the right, the former PM was not there to
lead them to the true peace, or some other horse manure. They will
blame everyone but their own lack of insight. Why? Because to do so
they will have to admit they were wrong. That everything they believed
in was wrong. And that the path of the Torah is right. I think they
would rather cut their own throats than admit that.
Have a Gut Shabbos,
Ben.
Israel Cidon
I have no further assumptions Alex, for me it is not true unless it comes from a
reliable source. I view information coming exclusively out of Hamas, the Red Army,
Davidians, Bader Meinhof, the KKK, Militian groups, Fundamental Christians, Kahane offsprings and anonymous posters or any of combination of the above to be by
definition a forgery unless proven the opposite.
Israel
Israel Cidon
>In article <4fu4o6$e...@uucp.intac.com>, ice...@intac.com (Jody Eisenman) writes:
>>
>> Why is it that some left wingers have such a hard time understanding the
>> truth, even when its in black and white? Anyone?
>>
>Because it goes against their "religious" beliefs.
You have a fundemental misconception in the understanding of people who have no
religious belief and base their opinions on their own judgements of facts and
information. Probably because you lack the ability to even imagine how one can
truely and honsetly share nothing with your religious preprogramming and consider
them as irrelevant material.
Israel
>Ben.
>
Murray Kastner
wrote:
> So I guess you believe that Arafat really wants peace and is a Peaceloving
> Nazi aye? I feel so sorry for you.
Well, well, look what returned: the guy who is afraid of owning up to his
name, but still spews out fascist garbage... and he talks about nazis...
> Arafat believes thaqt the state of Israel belongs to him, its about time
> you wake up and catch a bit of history.
Instead of continuing to throw rocks at the peace process, why don't you
do something constructive and suggest alternatives...
1. Would you expel all the Arabs, a la Kahane?
2. Would you absorb the Arab population into Israel proper?
3. Or, like Lisa Aaronson, would you place all the Arabs in the desert and
nuke them?
Tell me, coward who hides in the computer dept at CUNY, of what you would
do instead of just criticizing...
Murray Kastner
Herring) wrote:
> If someone wants to argue that Arafat's secret speech a forgery, please tell
> us who may have done it and why.
I cannot believe that you are this dense! Fundamentalists. Those who want
to destroy the peace process to further their own agendas... perhaps like
you?
,\\urray, the peace-loving Jew who has lost his taste for herring...
Jody Eisenman
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
And you think I have misconceptions? ROTFL. Thanks for a great joke to
start Shabbos with. Have a good shabbos!
Jody
P.S. Are you in any way related to any O.J. Simpson jurors?
: them as irrelevant material.
: Israel
: >Ben.
: >
Murray Kahl
>
> In article <4g034t$i...@engnews2.Eng.Sun.COM>,
> ci...@Eng.Sun.COM (Israel Cidon) wrote:
> >In article o...@athos.cc.bellcore.com, bs...@pyuxe.cc.bellcore.com
> (feigenbaum,benjamin) writes:
> >>Murray, forgive me but I don't understand how this was an "obvious"
> >
> >It is not an obvious forgery. Since it has no trackable and reliable origin
> and it looks exactly as the image of Arafat in the fanatic Orthodox right wing
> camp
> >we assume it is a typical forgery.
>
> So, who do you assume forged the "secret speech" and for what purpose?
>
right, when in fact it is completely consistent with past
Arafat speeches, and publisized by the Institute for Peace Education. I
have at least two of the video tapes, and there is Arafat praising
murderers and praising young girls for sporting a Kalishnikov. When
Peres said the speeches were a forgery, Arafat contradicted him and said
they were accurate. And all this happened well after Beit Lid.
As to sources, there are a number of them including Maariv, Haaretz,
Channel 7 and a number of wire services.
The shame is that this is not an opportunity to demean either the
right or left but to understand the nature of the enemy Israel faces,
To promulgate a doctrine of "peace at any price" is legitimate; however,
do it honestly and boldly. But to disguise a lethal threat to Israel's
existence is immoral.
Murray
Xander
On Tue, 13 Feb 1996, Jonathan Korn wrote:
> The majority of the Israelis believe that Arafat is sincere.
For what reason? And secondly I believe that Arafat *is* sincere. He has
never stopped being sincere to his original mission and he has absolutely
no reason to stop now. Of all the people involved in the "piece process"
- he has probably been the most sincere of the lot. Ok so he says one
thing to the Jews and another thing to his people. He tells his people
the truth and to the Jews he can lie. In fact he does not even to any
more. The Israeli government will make excuses for anything he says
anyway. But this does not explain why, if you what you say is true, the
majority of Israelis believe that Arafat wants peace with Jews *AND* will
allow Jews to have their own state in the Middle East.
> What you
> have just done is you called several million people stupid.
That's not the first time in History that several million people have
been called stupid, think of Germany, Russia, Cuba, etc.
> Perhaps you
> could help me here: what would you call those that oppose the peace
> process? Wise, open-minded, enlightened?
People that oppose a "PEACE PROCESS" are stupid and blind, people that
oppose a "PIECE PROCESS" with absolutly no avenue of true lasting peace
are wise, open-minded and enlightened amongst other things.
Xander
Jonathan Korn
<Pine.PMDF.3.91.9602172...@uctvms.uct.ac.za>, Xander
<xan...@uctvms.uct.ac.za> wrote:
>
> People that oppose a "PEACE PROCESS" are stupid and blind, people that
> oppose a "PIECE PROCESS" with absolutly no avenue of true lasting peace
> are wise, open-minded and enlightened amongst other things.
Forgive me, but somehow it is very hard for me to see you, or anyone like
you, as open-minded or enlightened.
JK
Murray Kastner
> This is just an attempt to excuse Arafat's motives and impugn the
> right, when in fact it is completely consistent with past
> Arafat speeches, and publisized by the Institute for Peace Education. I
> have at least two of the video tapes, and there is Arafat praising
> murderers and praising young girls for sporting a Kalishnikov. When
> Peres said the speeches were a forgery, Arafat contradicted him and said
> they were accurate. And all this happened well after Beit Lid.
> As to sources, there are a number of them including Maariv, Haaretz,
> Channel 7 and a number of wire services.
> The shame is that this is not an opportunity to demean either the
> right or left but to understand the nature of the enemy Israel faces,
> To promulgate a doctrine of "peace at any price" is legitimate; however,
> do it honestly and boldly. But to disguise a lethal threat to Israel's
> existence is immoral.
Murray, I understand your position completely; you probably do not
understand mine.
I don't give a tinker's damn about Arafat, and what he says. He acts as a
catalyst for change in the positions of previously irreconcilable enemies.
Arafat earned his position by achieving the role of THE leader of the
Palestinians. It gave us soemone to talk to. I believe things would be
wors if he werent there and we had to deal with dozens of different
entities. It would have been impossible.
Arafat will either be desposed or assassinated or fade into the
background, given time and the disposition of his administration. Already
many of his coalition are dissembling. We can then deal with whoever takes
his place. The important thing is that we have someone to deal with now.
Granted he makes wild statements; a leopard doesn't change its spots
overnight. But I rather deal with Arafat, who has increasingly more to
lose with passing month than I would Hamas, Islamic Jihad or sundry other
groups. We do have some suasion over Arafat, and the failure of the peace
process will do him in, and he knows it.
Therefore, my position is that economics are at the root of most conflict
and as the Palestinians have more to lose, they will have more trouble
finding suicide bombers and have more to lose. Peace is not ensured by men
or womern; rather peace is ensured by parties to peace that have something
to lose. And when people are able to see their sons and daughters with a
future, they'll do less and less to jeopardize that future.
That's the crux of the issue.
About the only people who can present me with an argument to the contrary
are those who harken back to the religious stance that ALL the land was
promised to the Jews and that modern Israelis are wrong to have
established a state before the Moshiach. I almost think that these people
would rather see the destruction of the modern state before they give an
inch. Such people are anathema to me as they live a world divorced from
reality.
We Jews pride ourselves and learning and intelligence. Therefore it
behooves us to use our heads rather than continuing to use our military to
make peace. Whatever Arafat is or isn't; whatever Arafat says or fails to
say, we must make the road to peace and prosperity irreversible. That is
the only way for Israel to survive. Iraq proved a few years ago how
vulnerable Tel Aviv can be. The Arab countries control much of the world's
oil so they will always have the means to bribe their way to gain control
of that wealth and use it for sinister motives. Only making peace and
forming alliances NOW with moderate regimes will serve as protection
against the crazies who may take control of their countries in the future.
That's the smart way to handle foreign policy.
The alternatives are too horrible to contemplate. Plus, we will have to
continue to devote an inordinate amount of meagre resources to military
defences and be a dependency on the USA, another shame.
Have I explained my position sufficiently? I hope so.
Kol tov v'Shalom,
,\\urray
Israel Cidon
>Israel Cidon (ci...@Eng.Sun.COM) wrote:
>: In article k...@athos.cc.bellcore.com, bs...@pyuxe.cc.bellcore.com (feigenbaum,benjamin) writes:
>: >In article <4fu4o6$e...@uucp.intac.com>, ice...@intac.com (Jody Eisenman) writes:
>: >>
>: >> Why is it that some left wingers have such a hard time understanding the
>: >> truth, even when its in black and white? Anyone?
>: >>
>: >Because it goes against their "religious" beliefs.
>
>: You have a fundemental misconception in the understanding of people who have no
>: religious belief and base their opinions on their own judgements of facts and
>: information. Probably because you lack the ability to even imagine how one can
>: truely and honsetly share nothing with your religious preprogramming and consider
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>
>And you think I have misconceptions? ROTFL. Thanks for a great joke to
>start Shabbos with. Have a good shabbos!
I did.
>
>
>
>Jody
>
>
>P.S. Are you in any way related to any O.J. Simpson jurors?
Very funny and uncalled for silliness. I have nothing with any type of bigoted people.
In any case my response was addressed not to you if you will follow the list of
posters.
Israel
Murray Kahl
Not really as if it were just empty words, I couldn't care less what he
says (words, words, words, lamented Hamlet); yet, his is not empty
rhetoric. His words carry meaning and possibly disaster for our people;
Disaster for both the right and the left!!! One example is his promise
to change the PNC covenent. Now word is arriving from Arab sources that
there are strings to his promises and if not changed this will impact
negatively on Peres. Today's Kol Yisrael quotes Arab sources as saying
that Arabs now say it is almost impossible to implement any changes in
the covenent; yet, Arafat promised Rabin, Peres, and Christopher that he
would. Words have little meaning if we are in a theater of words, but
this is not the case; concrete actions, most probably irreversable
events have taken place that present a clear cut danger to Israel. An
example is 30,000 armed soldiers (some call them policemen) that
military analyists postulate as an extreme danger to Israel if Israel
took any action based on the PLO's non-compliance with signed accords.
I agree fully that Israel must remain a fully, independent sovereign
state and not depend on the US for military support, but that is exactly
what Peres seeks. Clinton, Rabin, Perry, Ross, and Indyk made that very
clear and American troops on the Golan are in our future.
There is no dispute that Israel must learn to exist as a fully,
independent country with reliance on none. And that is why I am against
US foreign aid to Israel, as I prefer a cutoff with a few year advance,
notice clause. I also am against US troops on the Golan for the same
reasons and also as an American I feel that their lives will be in
jeopardy.
As to Israel advancing the peace cause, I feel that is wonderful;
however, I feel peace with security is the only route to ensure the
future of Israel. To accept the word of a liar and bare Israel's throat
to one who brags about implementing the 1974 phased plan for Israel's
destruction is worrisome at least.
Israel cannot use the nuclear option as it is impossible for an enemy
within. What insurance does Israel have that will force the Arabs to
implement its promises? Every clause is broken and examine the
consequences of material actions by Arabs:
** Arms, drugs, and other contraband are smuggled through tunnels from
Egypt into Gaza.
** An illegal PLO army of 30,000 is formed.
** Israel now has the highest rate of car thievery in the world, and no
one denies that it is the Palestinians stealing the autos.
** Arafat steals money destined to assist his own people; why give him
any more? (Congressional Report, Saxton, June 29, 1995)
** Arafat so despises his own people that he marries a blond Christian
who has her baby in a wealthy French hospital. Whom does he represent?
** He arrests a Palestinian editor for not placing a story about Arafat
on the front page.
** Arafat closed down a Palestinian newspaper as he didn't like what
they said.
** Up to 30% of Israel's water comes from the Judean hills down to the
coastal cities that now are suffering from salt water intrusion, and
Israelis are asked to trust this untrustworthy man for water.
** Many elements of the PLO openly state that they are against any peace
with Israel (George Chabash's group, for example) and we are asked to
make peace with only a fragment of the enemy.
** Arafat openly supports murderers such as Ayaash, the Engineer, and
calls them martyrs. They just finished their 40 day mourning period for
this assassin.
** Arafat ordered the murder of two American diplomats in Khartoum in
1973 (there is an audio tape of him) and according to American law,
there is no statute of limitation on 1st degree murder. He can be
prosecuted for murder and should be.
** Arab intellectuals such as Edwar Said despise Arafat.
Based on all this and much more, I feel it is perilous for Israel to
base its future on the word of a liar, assassin, and thief.
How can anyone trust such a slimy creature?
Kol Tuv,
Murray K.
Reuven Singer
>In article <312505...@gate.net>, Murray Kahl <ka...@gate.net> wrote:
>
>Murray, I understand your position completely; you probably do not
>understand mine.
>Palestinians. It gave us soemone to talk to. I believe things would be
>wors if he werent there and we had to deal with dozens of different
>entities. It would have been impossible.
>
>Arafat will either be desposed or assassinated or fade into the
>background, given time and the disposition of his administration. Already
>many of his coalition are dissembling. We can then deal with whoever takes
>his place. The important thing is that we have someone to deal with now.
>
>Granted he makes wild statements; a leopard doesn't change its spots
>overnight. But I rather deal with Arafat, who has increasingly more to
>lose with passing month than I would Hamas, Islamic Jihad or sundry other
>groups. We do have some suasion over Arafat, and the failure of the peace
>process will do him in, and he knows it.
>
the speech was a forgery. Now you seem to say that it doesnt matter if it
is true or not. Who are these moderate regimes we are supposed to "serve
as protection" for us- Syria? So we are supposed to give up our most
defensible positions, surrender our water supply, and allow an army of
terrorists safe sanctuary minutes away from our main population centers
in the hope that somehow peace will come out of this, and that this will
not turn out to be a tragic blunder which will lead to more wars and the
loss of thousands of Jewish lives under the most disadvantageous
strategic conditions. How is it that so many leaders of the IDF have
disputed Peres' suggestions that hotels on the Golan are more of a
defense than tanks. That so many military commanders have expressed
concern at the sloppy way Oslo 2 was drawn up. No matter how much the
Palestinians violate the agreements, this government would never risk
world condemnation by going in to clean out nests of terrorists. Can you
really trust Shimon Peres to have any kind of backbone when the
agreements start falling apart. If you do, I have a great deal on a
bridge over the East River in New York you might be interested in.....
Reuven
ken
>Two things:
>1) The person who posted this "report" does not have the source in hands and
>trying to retell the story. Unfortunately this person does not posess any story
>telling talant.(Or simply stupid, but sh-sh.)
>2) He is putting words into other people's mouth. Otherwords it is a forgery.
>
>Yassir Arafat is ........(you put words yourself), no need to set him up, he is
>doing it himself.
>
The person who posted this report took it word for word from the February 9,
1996 issue of the Algemeiner Journal Volume XXIV, No. 1254.
Sh-sh, with a moron like you at Pixar, no wonder the stock has plummeted.
Steven Jobs should can you, because Pixar has a wonderful future, it just
has to weed out the stupid people who aren't working hard enough, but are
spending their time giving their stupid opinions which make no sense (had
you read the first sentence of the original post). Maybe if you'd work
instead of wasting your and other people's time, the production schedule for
Pixar's next feature length film might be speeded up.
feigenbaum,benjamin
> In article o...@athos.cc.bellcore.com, bs...@pyuxe.cc.bellcore.com (feigenbaum,benjamin) writes:
> >Murray, forgive me but I don't understand how this was an "obvious"
>
> It is not an obvious forgery.
Thank you, Israel. I am glad to see there is something on which we
can agree.
> Since it has no trackable and reliable origin and it
> looks exactly as the image of Arafat in the fanatic Orthodox right wing camp
What image would that be, Israel? The image of a terrorist and murderer?
Gosh darn it. I wish those "fanatic Orthodox right wing camp" people
could see as clearly as you left-wingers do. :-)
> we assume it is a typical forgery.
Ah, you assume it is a "typical" forgery. I am not sure what the typical
forgery looks like, but since you probably have much more experience
with that than I do, I will bow to your learned opinion.
(Anti-right wing rantings - deleted)
Israel - you are entitled to your opinions of the media and the reactions
of the right wing to it. I wish you would afford me the same courtesy
without the disparaging remarks, but I suppose that would be too much
to ask for.
>
> >forgery. Could you explain to me what was allegedly said by Arafat in
> >the "forgery" that wasn't said at some other point in time AFTER he signed
> >the treaty with Israel?
>
> The problem is not what in the "text" is believable or not
Good.
> but how come that no
> reliable source has published that and only certain right wings fanatics were able
> to come with this piece of "truth".
My point, and you obviously missed it, had nothing whatsoever to do with
the article or it's contents. I merely wanted to know why Murray
considered it an "obvious" forgery.
>
> >
> >
> >> You really can't stand the fact that peace is inevitable, can you?
> >
> >I think Red Herring and myself are resigned to the fact that peace,
>
> To fairly distinguish you and the anonymous Alex, I never heard you supporting
> the murder of Rabin and other leaders in the left camp.
Did he do that? If so, and Mr. Herring is reading this, then I must ask
Mr. Herring to do tshuva and apologize for his remarks.
>
> However, for both of you resigning to the full spectrum of facts is a very rare
> event.
We'll see.
>
>
> >specifically the peace one finds in every Jewish cemetery, is
> >inevitable. It is a difficult fact to face, but it is inevitable.
>
> Say who? Is this another of these undisputable "facts"?
You might say so. Too many Jews (even one is too many) have been murdered
since the beginning of the peace process. I realize that it is too much
to ask for Arafat to stop all the murders. But at least he could condemn
them and not praise terrorists like the Engineer or that woman who threw
the Jewish baby back onto the burning bus. Or are these also part of the
"facts" concocted by the right-wing?
>
> >The only question is how long this peace will take and how many Jews
> >will attain it.
>
> You are asking this question since you started to post here and every year you need
> to increase your estimate for the length of the peace and to lower the estimate
> for the number of victims
When have I increased my estimate for the length of peace or the lowered
my estimate for the number of victims? Please stick to the truth of my
posts and not what you would like my posts to say.
>Why wouldn't you ask yourself sometimes (just
> for few seconds) and what happen if I Ben is deadly wrong
> and still able to stop
> the peace and build permanent blocks for a similar future separation?
I pray often, and have said so in this media, that I am wrong. I wish
there would be a genuine peace. I believe that the peace process will
not lead to it, and have stated many times what I think would lead to
a genuine peace. Since you are so adept at picking out what I say (as
evidenced by your comment above concerning my lowering of estimates, etc.)
why don't you go back and find those posts where I gave my "formula"
for a genuine peace? (Hint: It has something to do with not making
statesman out of murderers).
> Who will pay
> the bill then? What will happen if much more Jews will die as a result?
We all will pay the price no matter what Israel decides to do. If they
continue on the current path and achieve peace, then I will be much more
than happy to get on this forum and admit to all that I was wrong. If
they continue and peace doesn't result, then I will get on this forum to
mourn along with the rest of my brethren, G-D forbid.
You see, Israel, no matter what the government of Israel does, Jews all
over the world pay the price. That is why we on the right want the
government to do the right thing - or if they can't do that, then at least
do the things they promised to do before they got elected.
Is that too much to ask?
Regards,
Ben.
feigenbaum,benjamin
>>
>> Why is it that some left wingers have such a hard time understanding the
>> truth, even when its in black and white? Anyone?
>>
I responded:
>Because it goes against their "religious" beliefs.
And Israel Cidon responded:
You have a fundemental misconception in the understanding of people who have no
religious belief and base their opinions on their own judgements of facts and
information.
Well then, Israel, why don't you tell exactly what this "fundamental
misunderstanding" is?
Israel continued:
Probably because you lack the ability to even imagine how one can
truely and honsetly share nothing with your religious preprogramming
and consider
them as irrelevant material.
No, I do not lack this ability. My religious "preprogramming" values
Jewish life. I can understand how those who "truly and honestly" share
noting with my religious preprogramming consider Jewish life irrelevant
material. So you will have to come up with another guess as to why I
have this "misconception".
Regards,
Ben.
feigenbaum,benjamin
> In article <4fqi7v$s...@athos.cc.bellcore.com>, bs...@pyuxe.cc.bellcore.com
> (feigenbaum,benjamin) wrote:
>
> >
> > Or is it merely that Arafat is brilliant in comparison to those Jews
> > who were stupid enough to think that this mass murderer is truly
> > interested in giving them peace? Other than the peace of the grave,
> > that is.
>
> The majority of the Israelis believe that Arafat is sincere.
The question is, sincere at what? And I have to take exception with
your statement regarding the majority of Israelis. Unless, of course,
you have conducted a poll which encompasses the entire Israeli
population.
> What you
> have just done is you called several million people stupid.
Stupid is a harsh word, but it may fit in this case. Arafat
is a murderer and a terrorist. In my opinion, he is only
interested in money and power. I think that those who support
the peace process with Arafat want peace so desperately that they
overlook what kind of man it is that they are dealing with. Is
this stupidity? This desire for peace that outweighs their moral
belief that murder is a crime and those who commit it should be
punished rather than rewarded with a Nobel Peace Prize?
> Perhaps you
> could help me here: what would you call those that oppose the peace
> process? Wise, open-minded, enlightened?
I wouldn't want to classify an entire movement. I will speak only
for myself. And I am much too humble to call myself wise, open-
minded or enlightened. :-)
Ben.
Israel Cidon
>In article <4g034t$i...@engnews2.Eng.Sun.COM>, ci...@Eng.Sun.COM (Israel Cidon) writes:
>> In article o...@athos.cc.bellcore.com, bs...@pyuxe.cc.bellcore.com (feigenbaum,benjamin) writes:
>> >Murray, forgive me but I don't understand how this was an "obvious"
>>
>> It is not an obvious forgery.
>
>Thank you, Israel. I am glad to see there is something on which we
>can agree.
Very small indeed.
>
>
>> Since it has no trackable and reliable origin and it
>> looks exactly as the image of Arafat in the fanatic Orthodox right wing camp
>
>What image would that be, Israel? The image of a terrorist and murderer?
Yes. You missed the image of somebody who is engaged in conspirancy (highly popular
among fanatics of all colors and religions) and is making peace just in order to
coverup his real deadly intensions and bloody plans to wipe all Jews from the face
of the universe.
In any case, I am glad that you have no comment on the fact that the story was
never coming from any reliable source except the sources I mentioned.
>Gosh darn it. I wish those "fanatic Orthodox right wing camp" people
>could see as clearly as you left-wingers do. :-)
Actually they have a much clearer view. The mono-color view. We are white and pure
and they are terrorists and murderers. God is on our side and it is all ours.
>> we assume it is a typical forgery.
>
>
>Ah, you assume it is a "typical" forgery. I am not sure what the typical
>forgery looks like, but since you probably have much more experience
>with that than I do, I will bow to your learned opinion.
I gave you a long list of typical forgeries lies and disinformation that you rushed
to erase as ranting (see below). It is quite interesting that you ask again for
examples which are given to you. If I will post them again, you will erase them
call the rantings and ask for examples again. Pathethic.
>
>
>(Anti-right wing rantings - deleted)
No these were proven cases of lies and disinformation which you were even
personally posting about one of the worst (the Goldstein myth and lies).
>
>Israel - you are entitled to your opinions of the media and the reactions
>of the right wing to it. I wish you would afford me the same courtesy
>without the disparaging remarks, but I suppose that would be too much
>to ask for.
When somebody is talking about my "left wing religious beliefs" when we are
mostly atheists and he is a religious person who derives most of his views from
a religious axiomatic system this is not accepting my opinions as legitimate.
When somebody calls Kahane attempted legitlation which is almost a verbatim copy
of the Nuremberg laws not racist only discriminatory (what the hell this means) and at
the same token calls him a Jew with good intentions he deserves no sympathy from me.
When somebody is exclusively calling his enemies, terrorists and murderers and
cannot even look straight at the wrong dids of his side he is not having an
opinion that I respect. When somebody is complaining (rightly) about hate, lies and
conspirancies made against Jews and then turn to do the same against another
group of people (say the Arabs that were murdered by Goldstein or the Arab citizens
of Israel or all the 2 millions Arabs in the OTs) he will not get my respect.
When somebody is expecting to have full civil and political rights in the country
he lives and the workplace he is in in and at the same time tries to keep milions
of people in the country he supports as third class residents and at deprived social
status and even justifies people who like to transfer them out he will not get
my courtesy.
>
>
>>
>> >forgery. Could you explain to me what was allegedly said by Arafat in
>> >the "forgery" that wasn't said at some other point in time AFTER he signed
>> >the treaty with Israel?
>>
>> The problem is not what in the "text" is believable or not
>
>Good.
>
>> but how come that no
>> reliable source has published that and only certain right wings fanatics were able
>> to come with this piece of "truth".
>
>My point, and you obviously missed it, had nothing whatsoever to do with
>the article or it's contents. I merely wanted to know why Murray
>considered it an "obvious" forgery.
Because it was coming from groups known as to say at least unreliable with no
shade of support from others. How one can assume that Franklin "words" against Jews
that were posted here sometime ago are forged? When I see a piece of such nonsense
I assume it is a forgery unless proven otherwise.
>
>
>
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >> You really can't stand the fact that peace is inevitable, can you?
>> >
>> >I think Red Herring and myself are resigned to the fact that peace,
>>
>> To fairly distinguish you and the anonymous Alex, I never heard you supporting
>> the murder of Rabin and other leaders in the left camp.
>
>Did he do that? If so, and Mr. Herring is reading this, then I must ask
>Mr. Herring to do tshuva and apologize for his remarks.
I would subscribe him to a stronger medicine.
>
>
>
>>
>> However, for both of you resigning to the full spectrum of facts is a very rare
>> event.
>
>We'll see.
We were already discussing few past events. Your attempt to shade doubts about
the Goldsten case using the right wing disinformation about the prevention of hostile
action and the alleged stored weapons, your treatment of Kahane and attempt to hide
his racist written legistlation effort (you claimed he never wrote anything), your
use of the "Rabin Files" from a self claimed "historian" who is known as unreliable
and politically motivated. I think that there were other cases but I am not sure.
>
>
>>
>>
>> >specifically the peace one finds in every Jewish cemetery, is
>> >inevitable. It is a difficult fact to face, but it is inevitable.
>>
>> Say who? Is this another of these undisputable "facts"?
>
>You might say so. Too many Jews (even one is too many) have been murdered
>since the beginning of the peace process. I realize that it is too much
The numbers has been dropped considerably since Oslo II below that of the
Intifada days. Moreover, the number went up dramatically after the Goldstein
case.
>to ask for Arafat to stop all the murders. But at least he could condemn
He wtill does not control a lot of areas in which Hamas is presence. When he
got a better control the situation improves. In any case, realistically nobody
promised a magic solution. We are facing with a real and tough Palestinian Israeli
conflicts in which the Palestinian problem needs to be addressed and treated.
Going back to a military occupation and human rights depression will only increase
the suffering, the killings and will evantually destroy Israel by making it into
an Apartheid state.
>them and not praise terrorists like the Engineer or that woman who threw
>the Jewish baby back onto the burning bus. Or are these also part of the
I agree he should not. Btw, where the story about the baby came from (and why
you think that the fact that he was Jewish is relevant).
But if you want to look on some of our past fanatics.
We have in Ramat Aviv Gimel a street named after a Lehi terrorist who put bomb
in a civilian Arab bus. We have a street after Aba AchiMeir who used to publish a
colomn: From the diary of a fascist.
>"facts" concocted by the right-wing?
>
>
>
>>
>> >The only question is how long this peace will take and how many Jews
>> >will attain it.
>>
>> You are asking this question since you started to post here and every year you need
>> to increase your estimate for the length of the peace and to lower the estimate
>> for the number of victims
>
>
>When have I increased my estimate for the length of peace or the lowered
>my estimate for the number of victims? Please stick to the truth of my
>posts and not what you would like my posts to say.
Since the time is passing and the peace process is quite live and well and the
number of victims gradually decreases this is evident.
>
>
>>Why wouldn't you ask yourself sometimes (just
>> for few seconds) and what happen if I Ben is deadly wrong
>> and still able to stop
>> the peace and build permanent blocks for a similar future separation?
>
>I pray often, and have said so in this media, that I am wrong. I wish
>there would be a genuine peace. I believe that the peace process will
>not lead to it, and have stated many times what I think would lead to
And if it will indeed lead to it as so many expert claims. What if the other
falf of Israel is right?
>a genuine peace. Since you are so adept at picking out what I say (as
>evidenced by your comment above concerning my lowering of estimates, etc.)
I am not picking at all. All I was saying is that your claim how long the
process will last is time dependent. The claim that the rate of murders and victims
went up since the agreement is no longer valid since Oslo II. The claim that
the Palestinian police will routinely shoot Israelis proved wrongly.
>why don't you go back and find those posts where I gave my "formula"
>for a genuine peace? (Hint: It has something to do with not making
>statesman out of murderers).
I read no realistic formula that can address the real facts not your invented facts.
I only read rejection and negative reaction to the only process that exists.
In any case, there is no archive I know of for TPM or SCI. If you have something
positive and constructive to say about peace why don't you post it say every 10 or 20
negative posts of yours.
>
>> Who will pay
>> the bill then? What will happen if much more Jews will die as a result?
>
>We all will pay the price no matter what Israel decides to do. If they
>continue on the current path and achieve peace, then I will be much more
>than happy to get on this forum and admit to all that I was wrong. If
>they continue and peace doesn't result, then I will get on this forum to
>mourn along with the rest of my brethren, G-D forbid.
And what will happen if the peace will stopped, we will go back to the
good old days of occupation and Apartheid and this will destroy Israel.
You will come again and say something in this newsgroup?
>
>You see, Israel, no matter what the government of Israel does, Jews all
>over the world pay the price. That is why we on the right want the
What you are going to pay Ben? The 17% flat rate of Forbes?
>government to do the right thing - or if they can't do that, then at least
>do the things they promised to do before they got elected.
This is exactly what they did and this is why I gave them my vote. In the
last three years I couldn't find even a single individual on this newsgroup who
voted (really voted) for the lest and claimed that they betrayed him.
>
>
>Is that too much to ask?
This is exactly what is going on so I assume you should be happy.
Israel
>
>Regards,
>
>Ben.
>
Israel Cidon
>>>
>>> Why is it that some left wingers have such a hard time understanding the
>>> truth, even when its in black and white? Anyone?
>>>
>
>I responded:
>
>>Because it goes against their "religious" beliefs.
>
>And Israel Cidon responded:
>
>You have a fundemental misconception in the understanding of people who have no
>religious belief and base their opinions on their own judgements of facts and
>information.
>
>Well then, Israel, why don't you tell exactly what this "fundamental
>misunderstanding" is?
That most of the Jewish left has no religious or "religious" beliefs. As a religious
person yourself you don't seem to have a clue how a secular or atheist person
derives his position from or even think. In any case nothing related or similar to
your religious belief is involved here. If you do not understand something maybe
it is better not to classify it according to your own narrow set of definitions.
>
>
>Israel continued:
>
> Probably because you lack the ability to even imagine how one can
>truely and honsetly share nothing with your religious preprogramming
> and consider
>them as irrelevant material.
>
>
>No, I do not lack this ability. My religious "preprogramming" values
>Jewish life. I can understand how those who "truly and honestly" share
Yes you do. We secular and atheist left wingers have no reason to value Jewish life
higher than all human life. We do not consider racism directed toward non-Jews as
"discriminatory" Jewish values designed to help Jews. We view racism to
be bad for Jews and non-Jews alike. We cannot accept a world of double standards
in which on one hand you sit in Bellcore and enjoy (rightly) the open, equal standards
and PC values of the liberal US and on the other hand when it comes to Israel
you are demanding to have a "discriminatory" society based on political, social and
ecconomic opression of non-Jews, because you value Jewish life. Why you
seems to be resistent to taste in the US a society that value mainly Christian life.
>noting with my religious preprogramming consider Jewish life irrelevant
>material. So you will have to come up with another guess as to why I
Well your reprogramming seems to fit the title of a Jewish supremist who only
cares about his religious tribe. Since we do not have such a programming and
for us Judaism is our nationality and not some huge amount of arbitrary axioms we
must follow we have nothing to do with anything religious. So you claim above
discloses a basic misunderstanding.
Regads,
Israel
Israel Cidon
>In article <jkorn-13029...@jkorn.bbn.com>, jk...@bbn.com (Jonathan Korn) writes:
>>> The majority of the Israelis believe that Arafat is sincere.
>
>The question is, sincere at what? And I have to take exception with
I would put it this way. The majority of Israelis believe that Arafat has
no choice and he is the only alternative used by Israel to get out of the
occupation self destruction madness.
The majority of Israelis believe that Arafat has no practical ability to threat
the existence of the state of Israel no matter what is his hidden agenda if he
has one.
>your statement regarding the majority of Israelis. Unless, of course,
>you have conducted a poll which encompasses the entire Israeli
>population.
>
>> What you
>> have just done is you called several million people stupid.
>
>Stupid is a harsh word, but it may fit in this case. Arafat
>is a murderer and a terrorist. In my opinion, he is only
>interested in money and power. I think that those who support
Most Israelis believe that he does look after the interests of Palestinians just
as some of our previous leaders that were responsible to a large number of
Palestinians victims were looking after our interests.
>the peace process with Arafat want peace so desperately that they
Only a person that is ignorant about Israel and her residents can claim this
nonsense. From Ben-Gurion to Peres the political left in Israel was always driven
by practice and almost never by ideology, put the interests of Israel always first
and is very realistic. It always played real-politics when the right played ideology.
Not the peace is the driving force behind the left but the disgust of most
Israelis from the senseless occupation, opression, settlements and Jewish fanatism
as well as the lack of democratic future in the continuation of this.
>overlook what kind of man it is that they are dealing with. Is
>this stupidity? This desire for peace that outweighs their moral
Arafat plays a very restrictive role here. The power is absolutely at the side
of Israel in any realistic non-emotional (hysterical?) measure.
>belief that murder is a crime and those who commit it should be
>punished rather than rewarded with a Nobel Peace Prize?
I respect people who maybe changed their evil ways. There are also Jewish
terrorists who became peace seekers and I respect them for that (for example
the late Natan Yelin Mor)
<trimmed>
Israel
>Ben.
>
>
>
>
Jody Eisenman
: In article j...@athos.cc.bellcore.com, bs...@pyuxe.cc.bellcore.com (feigenbaum,benjamin) writes:
: > Jody Eisenman wrote:
: >>>
: >>> Why is it that some left wingers have such a hard time understanding the
: >>> truth, even when its in black and white? Anyone?
: >>>
: >
: >I responded:
: >
: >>Because it goes against their "religious" beliefs.
: >
: >And Israel Cidon responded:
: >
: >You have a fundemental misconception in the understanding of people who have no
: >religious belief and base their opinions on their own judgements of facts and
: >information.
: >
: >Well then, Israel, why don't you tell exactly what this "fundamental
: >misunderstanding" is?
: That most of the Jewish left has no religious or "religious" beliefs. As a religious
: person yourself you don't seem to have a clue how a secular or atheist person
: derives his position from or even think. In any case nothing related or similar to
: your religious belief is involved here. If you do not understand something maybe
: it is better not to classify it according to your own narrow set of definitions.
Israel, I find it truly sad that you think the way you do. I don't hate
you or look down upon you. I find it quite sad that you presume to know
how or what I think when you know little about me. For the record, I grew
up in a secular home. I don't understand how left wingers think when
presented with seemingly damning evidence of Arafat's duplicity. Instead
of explaining, you chose to flame me and other orthodox people.
(parts related to others comments omitted)
Isreal, now that you've finished your diatribe, perhaps you can attempt
to answer my original question.
Regards,
Jody
Roger Froikin
>
> In article k...@athos.cc.bellcore.com, bs...@pyuxe.cc.bellcore.com (feigenbaum,benjamin) writes:
> >> truth, even when its in black and white? Anyone?
> >>
>
> religious belief and base their opinions on their own judgements of facts and
> truely and honsetly share nothing with your religious preprogramming and consider
> them as irrelevant material.
>
I fail to see how "religious beliefs" have any function in attempting to
understand Arafat's behavior and aims. If anything, "religious",
ideological, or other bias' should be counterproductive in this regard.
Israel Cidon
>: In article j...@athos.cc.bellcore.com, bs...@pyuxe.cc.bellcore.com (feigenbaum,benjamin) writes:
>: > Jody Eisenman wrote:
>: >>>
>: >>> truth, even when its in black and white? Anyone?
>: >
>: >I responded:
>: >
>: >>Because it goes against their "religious" beliefs.
>: >
>: >And Israel Cidon responded:
>: >
>: >You have a fundemental misconception in the understanding of people who have no
>: >religious belief and base their opinions on their own judgements of facts and
>: >information.
>: >Well then, Israel, why don't you tell exactly what this "fundamental
>: >misunderstanding" is?
>
>: That most of the Jewish left has no religious or "religious" beliefs. As a religious
>: person yourself you don't seem to have a clue how a secular or atheist person
>: derives his position from or even think. In any case nothing related or similar to
>: your religious belief is involved here. If you do not understand something maybe
>: it is better not to classify it according to your own narrow set of definitions.
>
>
>Israel, I find it truly sad that you think the way you do. I don't hate
Jody, I must repeat again. This was written to Ben who has many time here
showed sympathy for people like Kahane (and at some time even toward Goldstein).
It was not written as a generality toward a group of posters.
I fail to understand as this obvious fact is again and again ignored by
you.
>you or look down upon you. I find it quite sad that you presume to know
I don't hate you or look down on you too and this was never addressing you.
>how or what I think when you know little about me. For the record, I grew
>up in a secular home. I don't understand how left wingers think when
>presented with seemingly damning evidence of Arafat's duplicity. Instead
>of explaining, you chose to flame me and other orthodox people.
I do not flame you as I responded to Ben. I have major problems with Ben's
view and total tribalism and I put them clearly in writing. I don't flame him.
He was the one who claimed the the left has "religious beliefs". That the
left is so blind of his peace seeking that he ignore some truth that only Ben sees.
He was the one who made generalizations. I responded to a single, Ben.
>(parts related to others comments omitted)
>
>
>Isreal, now that you've finished your diatribe, perhaps you can attempt
>to answer my original question.
I did not attempt to answer your original question as I responded to Ben.
I have responded this particular question dozens of times in this newsgroup.
Israel
>
>Regards,
>
>Jody
>
>
>
Murray Kastner
> In article <4fo1bi$o...@pixar.com>, Michael Berenstein <mi...@pixar.com>
wrote:
> >Two things:
> >1) The person who posted this "report" does not have the source in hands and
> >trying to retell the story. Unfortunately this person does not posess
any story
> >telling talant.(Or simply stupid, but sh-sh.)
> >2) He is putting words into other people's mouth. Otherwords it is a forgery.
> >
> >Yassir Arafat is ........(you put words yourself), no need to set him
up, he is
> >doing it himself.
> >
> The person who posted this report took it word for word from the February 9,
> 1996 issue of the Algemeiner Journal Volume XXIV, No. 1254.
> Sh-sh, with a moron like you at Pixar, no wonder the stock has plummeted.
> Steven Jobs should can you, because Pixar has a wonderful future, it just
> has to weed out the stupid people who aren't working hard enough, but are
> spending their time giving their stupid opinions which make no sense (had
> you read the first sentence of the original post). Maybe if you'd work
> instead of wasting your and other people's time, the production schedule for
> Pixar's next feature length film might be speeded up.
Great stuff! Bereft ot logical argument, you choose personal attack. Musta
cut those classes in logical argument, didn't you... All you accomplished
with the above paragraph is befoul yourself...
Israel Cidon
>Israel Cidon wrote:
>>
>> In article k...@athos.cc.bellcore.com, bs...@pyuxe.cc.bellcore.com (feigenbaum,benjamin) writes:
>> >In article <4fu4o6$e...@uucp.intac.com>, ice...@intac.com (Jody Eisenman) writes:
>> >>
>> >> truth, even when its in black and white? Anyone?
>> >>
>>
>> religious belief and base their opinions on their own judgements of facts and
>> truely and honsetly share nothing with your religious preprogramming and consider
>> them as irrelevant material.
>>
>> Israel
>
>I fail to see how "religious beliefs" have any function in attempting to
>understand Arafat's behavior and aims. If anything, "religious",
>ideological, or other bias' should be counterproductive in this regard.
Thanks for you support. I also fail to see what was the logic behind Ben's claim
that the left is driven by "religious belief". Since I know nothing about how
a religious belief is felt like I guess you should ask Ben how this belief
is relevant to him.
Israel
orie...@sable.ox.ac.uk
>No, I do not lack this ability. My religious "preprogramming" values
>Jewish life.
Great!
So why not try look for a compromise over the "jewish land" (ie the west
bank/Gaza) with the other inhabitants of it (ie the palestinians) rather
than have soldiers (ie jewish youths in the prime of their lives) risking
their life for-ever.
What is more important?
Real estate in "jewish land" or the jewish life you say you put above
everything?
"we shall not let you decide whether to send our sons into war or not"
Yossi Beilin, arguing with protesters from the french section of herut.
feigenbaum,benjamin
>
> I don't give a tinker's damn about Arafat, and what he says. He acts as a
> catalyst for change in the positions of previously irreconcilable enemies.
> Palestinians.
How did he EARN his position? Through terrorism and murder, right? And
how do you want to reward him?
I am curious, Murray. You rant and rave about Baruch Goldstein (OBM),
Rabbi Kahane (OBM), Yigal Amir, Arik Sharon, etc. They are all no good
by you. Why? Undoubtably because you object to things they did, murder
or hate-mongering, based on your view of morality. With Arafat, you
seem to have a different set of standards on which to pass judgement.
Could you explain this seemingly double set of standards?
> It gave us soemone to talk to. I believe things would be
> wors if he werent there and we had to deal with dozens of different
> entities. It would have been impossible.
I submit it would have been more difficult, but then adhering to one
set of moral standards usually is.
>
> Arafat will either be desposed or assassinated or fade into the
> background, given time and the disposition of his administration.
While this is likely, there are no guarantees. Look at Assad and
how long he has survived. Quadaffi, Sadam Huissein, the Arab world
seems to have a number of murderers who have long reigns.
> Already
> many of his coalition are dissembling. We can then deal with whoever takes
> his place. The important thing is that we have someone to deal with now.
Why is it so important that we have to do it now? Granted, if peace is
to happen, the sooner it happens the better. But why sacrifice our
moral standards by dealing with Arafat as a diplomat rather than a
murderer if the peace he brings is no better than the war we had?
>
> Granted he makes wild statements; a leopard doesn't change its spots
> overnight. But I rather deal with Arafat, who has increasingly more to
> lose with passing month than I would Hamas, Islamic Jihad or sundry other
> groups. We do have some suasion over Arafat, and the failure of the peace
> process will do him in, and he knows it.
And the possibility that this is part of Arafat's "phased plan" is
something which you choose to ignore? Yes, Arafat has more to lose if
the peace process is halted by Israel. But if Israel continues to make
concessions while all Arafat offers is promises and delivers nothing,
then who loses?
> Therefore, my position is that economics are at the root of most conflict
> and as the Palestinians have more to lose,
The "Palestinians" were better off economically while Israel controlled
the territories. Ask some of the merchants who now have to pay Backsheesh
to Arafat and his "police". Ask some of them who have been stopped from
going to work in Israel because of a border closing. It was not economics
that was at the root of the conflict; it was and is hatred of the Jews.
> they will have more trouble
> finding suicide bombers and have more to lose.
Hamas will never find a shortage of suicide bombers because the bombers
are not motivated by "economics"; they are motivated by hatred.
> Peace is not ensured by men
> or womern; rather peace is ensured by parties to peace that have something
> to lose. And when people are able to see their sons and daughters with a
> future, they'll do less and less to jeopardize that future.
That must be why "Palestinian" mothers sent their sons out with stones
to attack Israeli soldiers with guns.
> That's the crux of the issue.
You are wishing this was the crux of the issue. The Arabs are an honor-
oriented people. They have been convinced that there honor has been
stolen by the Jews. Does Arafat promise his people money or economic
prosperity in his speeches? Or does he talk about Jihad and praise
women who threw Jewish babies back into burning buses?
> About the only people who can present me with an argument to the contrary
> are those who harken back to the religious stance that ALL the land was
> promised to the Jews and that modern Israelis are wrong to have
> established a state before the Moshiach. I almost think that these people
> would rather see the destruction of the modern state before they give an
> inch. Such people are anathema to me as they live a world divorced from
> reality.
I have repeatedly presented you with the argument that Jewish lives are
valuable. I have never argued about the holiness of the land. You
believe economics are at the root of the problem and you talk about
people living in a world divorced from reality?
> We Jews pride ourselves and learning and intelligence. Therefore it
> behooves us to use our heads rather than continuing to use our military to
> make peace. Whatever Arafat is or isn't; whatever Arafat says or fails to
> say, we must make the road to peace and prosperity irreversible. That is
> the only way for Israel to survive. Iraq proved a few years ago how
> vulnerable Tel Aviv can be. The Arab countries control much of the world's
> oil so they will always have the means to bribe their way to gain control
> of that wealth and use it for sinister motives. Only making peace and
> forming alliances NOW with moderate regimes will serve as protection
> against the crazies who may take control of their countries in the future.
> That's the smart way to handle foreign policy.
The key in this paragraph is making peace and forming alliances with
MODERATE regimes - regimes which are democratic so that the people know
they have a voice in the future - regimes to which peace is valuable
not only for the economic benefits it brings, but for the sake of peace alone.
You say we Jews pride ourselves on learning and intelligence. I would
hope we also pride ourselves on our morality. In elevating the murderer
Arafat we have sold out our morality - we have failed to learn the lessons
of the Holocaust - and we have demonstrated our lack of intelligence.
> The alternatives are too horrible to contemplate.
I have an alternative in mind that I don't consider horrible at all.
Pity you can't think of a non-horrible alternative.
> Plus, we will have to
> continue to devote an inordinate amount of meagre resources to military
> defences and be a dependency on the USA, another shame.
In order to ensure peace, prepare for war. Ever hear of that?
>
> Have I explained my position sufficiently? I hope so.
Not to me, you haven't. Sorry.
>
> Kol tov v'Shalom,
Be well,
Ben.
feigenbaum,benjamin
> In article k...@athos.cc.bellcore.com, bs...@pyuxe.cc.bellcore.com (feigenbaum,benjamin) writes:
> >>> The majority of the Israelis believe that Arafat is sincere.
> >
> >The question is, sincere at what? And I have to take exception with
>
> I would put it this way. The majority of Israelis believe that Arafat has
> no choice and he is the only alternative used by Israel to get out of the
> occupation self destruction madness.
If the majority of Israelis (and let's be very clear we are talking about
Israelis and not Jews) believe that Arafat has no choice, how do they feel
about his speeches in which he claims this is part of his "phased plan"?
Do they feel that is a possibility? How do they feel about the continued
concessions by Israel while Arafat has yet to honor one part of the
agreement which he signed?
While I would agree that the majority of Israelis (including Jews) do not
want to have control over so many Arabs, I would hope that taking such
substantial risks would cause them to proceed slowly. It seems like a
good number of Israelis are unhappy with the way the peace process has
been going. Would you agree?
>
> The majority of Israelis believe that Arafat has no practical ability to threat
> the existence of the state of Israel no matter what is his hidden agenda if he
> has one.
Not now, but his power is growing. Once he has his own state, he will have
the economic and military power of the UN behind him as well as those Arab
states who continue to push for the destruction of Israel. When Peres
gives back the Golan to Syria, the danger not only from Arafat but from
Assad will be increased.
>
> >your statement regarding the majority of Israelis. Unless, of course,
> >you have conducted a poll which encompasses the entire Israeli
> >population.
> >
> >> What you
> >> have just done is you called several million people stupid.
> >
> >Stupid is a harsh word, but it may fit in this case. Arafat
> >is a murderer and a terrorist. In my opinion, he is only
> >interested in money and power. I think that those who support
>
> Most Israelis believe that he does look after the interests of Palestinians
I have read of "Palestinians" complaining that at least when they were under
the Jews, they could have their complaints heard in a court of law. Now
they are subject to the "justice" of Arafat's "police". His "democratic"
election and the numerous instances of fraud and coercion is a perfect
example.
> just
> as some of our previous leaders that were responsible to a large number of
> Palestinians victims were looking after our interests.
I'm not sure exactly what you are saying here.
>
> >the peace process with Arafat want peace so desperately that they
>
> Only a person that is ignorant about Israel and her residents can claim this
> nonsense. From Ben-Gurion to Peres the political left in Israel was always driven
> by practice and almost never by ideology, put the interests of Israel always first
> and is very realistic. It always played real-politics when the right played ideology.
Idealogies vary. My impression of the leftist ideology is not complimentary
so I will leave it unsaid. As to the "realistic" approach of the left, it
was "realistic" of the Kapos and the Judenrat to oppress and brutalize
their people - but history does not look kindly upon them. I am not
comparing the current or former governments of Israel with the Kapos and
Judenrat - but I am pointing out how sometimes dealing on the basis of
"realism" can not be the best way to go.
>
> Not the peace is the driving force behind the left but the disgust of most
> Israelis from the senseless occupation, opression, settlements and Jewish fanatism
> as well as the lack of democratic future in the continuation of this.
How do "most Israelis" feel about bus bombings? How do they feel when
their soldiers are chased away by stone throwing youths? How do they
feel when they have given Arabs control of a town, and the Arabs repay
this by burning the Israeli flag? How do they feel when the worst
murderer of Jews since Hitler is given a Nobel Peace Prize. These are
some of the results of the "realism" and "practicality" of the left.
> >overlook what kind of man it is that they are dealing with. Is
> >this stupidity? This desire for peace that outweighs their moral
>
> Arafat plays a very restrictive role here. The power is absolutely at the side
> of Israel in any realistic non-emotional (hysterical?) measure.
How about a realistic, non-emotional measure of saying that since Arafat is
not complying with the agreement he has signed, Israel will not give him
any more concessions? Or is that too hysterical a measure for you -
requiring someone to keep their word?
>
> >belief that murder is a crime and those who commit it should be
> >punished rather than rewarded with a Nobel Peace Prize?
>
> I respect people who maybe changed their evil ways.
And how has Arafat DEMONSTRATED that he has changed his evil ways? His
praise of the Engineer? His constant calls for "dividing" Jerusalem?
His constant reference to the "phased plan"?
Regards,
Ben.
Reuven Singer
>And what will happen if the peace will stopped, we will go back to the
>good old days of occupation and Apartheid and this will destroy Israel.
>You will come again and say something in this newsgroup?
And when Peres' "peace" finally collapses under increasingly gross PLO
violations and terrorism hits it big after we've given away our strategic
high ground and our water, then you will probably go merrily off to the
USA with all the chiloni Israelis there now.
Reuven
ken
Murray Kastner <mur...@jonction.NET> wrote:
>In article <4gb4p4$r...@zip.io.org>, spe...@zip.io.org (ken) wrote:
>
>> In article <4fo1bi$o...@pixar.com>, Michael Berenstein <mi...@pixar.com>
>wrote:
>> >Two things:
>> >1) The person who posted this "report" does not have the source in hands and
>> >trying to retell the story. Unfortunately this person does not posess
>any story
>> >telling talant.(Or simply stupid, but sh-sh.)
>> >2) He is putting words into other people's mouth. Otherwords it is a forgery.
>> >
>> >Yassir Arafat is ........(you put words yourself), no need to set him
>up, he is
>> >doing it himself.
>
>> The person who posted this report took it word for word from the February 9,
>> 1996 issue of the Algemeiner Journal Volume XXIV, No. 1254.
>
>> Sh-sh, with a moron like you at Pixar, no wonder the stock has plummeted.
>> Steven Jobs should can you, because Pixar has a wonderful future, it j
>> you read the first sentence of the original post). Maybe if you'd work
>> instead of wasting your and other people's time, the production schedule for
>> Pixar's next feature length film might be speeded up.
>
>Great stuff! Bereft ot logical argument, you choose personal attack. Musta
>cut those classes in logical argument, didn't you... All you accomplished
>with the above paragraph is befoul yourself...
The first sentence in my response answered both of
Berenstein's 'points'. Musta cut those classes in reading, didn't you...
The second paragraph was a response to being called a bad story teller :)
BTW, do you commonly use the word "befoul" (I've never really bothered to
read your posts, and I find your use of it amusing)?
FYI, a leading Norwegian paper confirmed much of the article (i.e. Arafat's
call for the destruction of Israel, and the planned flooding of Israel with
millions of Arab immigrants), in a front page article.
Israel Cidon
Given the repeated ugly smears and references to Nazis, Judenrat and Kapos
I lost my appetite for this thread. This is my last detailed response unless
there will be a change in the tactic.
>In article <4ge77a$r...@engnews2.Eng.Sun.COM>, ci...@Eng.Sun.COM (Israel Cidon) writes:
>> In article k...@athos.cc.bellcore.com, bs...@pyuxe.cc.bellcore.com (feigenbaum,benjamin) writes:
>> >In article <jkorn-13029...@jkorn.bbn.com>, jk...@bbn.com (Jonathan Korn) writes:
>> >>> The majority of the Israelis believe that Arafat is sincere.
>> >
>> >The question is, sincere at what? And I have to take exception with
>>
>> I would put it this way. The majority of Israelis believe that Arafat has
>> no choice and he is the only alternative used by Israel to get out of the
>> occupation self destruction madness.
>
>
>If the majority of Israelis (and let's be very clear we are talking about
>Israelis and not Jews) believe that Arafat has no choice, how do they feel
I am not sure where you derived your statistic about Jews and non-Jews but
I am not suprised that you with you known record here make this distinction.
>about his speeches in which he claims this is part of his "phased plan"?
I do not recall any speech about a phased plan in which the last phase is
the destruction of Israel. You brought some stupid fabrication here but
you cannot come with any reliable information. Arafat has recognised Israel
and 242 and agreed to stop be engaged in terrorism. So far so good.
The rest are the fruits of you hatred and your developped imagination.
If Arafat will make such a speech, he will be in troubles. However, this will
not change the fact that most Israelis want the IDF and theirs children out of
the population centers in the OTs, with or without peace.
>Do they feel that is a possibility? How do they feel about the continued
What possibility? Arafat has no military card to play, he has zero ability
to risk the existence of Israel. 10% of the IDF will take over back the OTs in
one day.
>concessions by Israel while Arafat has yet to honor one part of the
>agreement which he signed?
Arafat honored most of his agreements. One part of the PLO Palestinian Charter
should either be changed or Arafat should resign from being a chairman of the PLO
and focus on the PA. He needs to do it BEFORE the talks about the permanent
solution start.
In any case, you should recall that both Labor and the Likood has in their
platform a statement that they object a Palestinian state. If I would be
a Palestinian I think I would demand some balance at least from the rulling party.
You recognize us and we recognize you.
However, the agreement is an agreement and should be followed.
>
>While I would agree that the majority of Israelis (including Jews) do not
>want to have control over so many Arabs, I would hope that taking such
>substantial risks would cause them to proceed slowly. It seems like a
There are no substantial risk except for those Jews who want the land at any
means and see it given to others. Arafat power is limited to terrorist actions,
these actions would continue with or without Israeli control of Palestinians.
They will be with us as long as many Palestinians (within Israel, OTs, or outside)
have no proper solution and I am afraid that this will be the situation for many
years to come. In any case, Arafat has no sound military option and he is light years
of any. In fact, in this respect he had much better chance in Lebanon than within
the OT where the IDF is watching every truck, and every item that crosses the
Jordan River. The fear is only in you, no objective basis exist.
>good number of Israelis are unhappy with the way the peace process has
>been going. Would you agree?
No, but I accept opinions who criticize the peace process as legitimate. I do not
accept racist or mearly colonialists views as legitimate.
I think that the peace process moves much better than I ever believed. Actually,
I am suprised at how good the Palestinian police and the IDF coexists in the same
area. I was suprised how well the elections went. I was suprised to see how fast
Arafat who looked as politically dead gained control over Hamas.
>
>
>
>
>>
>> The majority of Israelis believe that Arafat has no practical ability to threat
>> the existence of the state of Israel no matter what is his hidden agenda if he
>> has one.
>
>Not now, but his power is growing. Once he has his own state, he will have
His power is not growing. He is under a tight military control. He has no tanks,
no artilery, no air-force, no infantry, no missiles. Nothing that make him able to
face a modern army like IDF. He had much more before he came to the OTs. All
his borders are tightly controlled and there is no way he can bring in a tank,
build a military air-port etc. He also does not have the means to do it.
Most Arab countries (like Jordan and Egypt) do not support it and control
the other side of the border.
>the economic and military power of the UN behind him as well as those Arab
>states who continue to push for the destruction of Israel. When Peres
You are playing paranoic. There is nothing in the UN force or the Palestinian force
that can fight with IDF. These are all soldiers armed with personal weapon
period. Arafat in the worst scenarion do not risk Israel more than Lybia risks
the existence of the US.
>gives back the Golan to Syria, the danger not only from Arafat but from
>Assad will be increased.
The Golan is a different issue. It is an order of magnitude more important and subtle
for the security of Israel. The whole Arafat paranoia is a mere propaganda
with no shade of military truth. Many people want to annex the West Bank no
matter what will be the tragic results for Israel's democracy, stability and
well being. The constant whining about Arafat threat to the existence of
Israel is baseless.
>>
>> Most Israelis believe that he does look after the interests of Palestinians
>
>I have read of "Palestinians" complaining that at least when they were under
around 80% of them supported him in elections which were true elections.
This speaks for itself. The fact that many Palestinians complain about him
is similar to the fact that you complain against the Israeli PM and Israel
justice.
>the Jews, they could have their complaints heard in a court of law. Now
>they are subject to the "justice" of Arafat's "police". His "democratic"
>election and the numerous instances of fraud and coercion is a perfect
>example.
It is not my business to police the moral and democracy of others. Still
an overwhelming majority of Palestinians will take Arafat as he is as
a replacement for Israel. All the criticism against Arafat democracy are
hypocritism. Israel did not give Palestinian a better deal and in particular
the right wing would only humiliate and opress them even stronger.
Arafat OTs are by all standards a third world area. In that respect he is not
doing worse than any comparable place.
>
>> just
>> as some of our previous leaders that were responsible to a large number of
>> Palestinians victims were looking after our interests.
>
>I'm not sure exactly what you are saying here.
Late PM Ben Gurion, Begin, Shamir and Rabin. Many other leaders as well.
>> >the peace process with Arafat want peace so desperately that they
>>
>> Only a person that is ignorant about Israel and her residents can claim this
>> nonsense. From Ben-Gurion to Peres the political left in Israel was always driven
>> by practice and almost never by ideology, put the interests of Israel always first
>> and is very realistic. It always played real-politics when the right played ideology.
>
>Idealogies vary. My impression of the leftist ideology is not complimentary
>so I will leave it unsaid. As to the "realistic" approach of the left, it
>was "realistic" of the Kapos and the Judenrat to oppress and brutalize
This is another filthy lie and smear coming from you toward the left. You are
one of the lowest lever posters I have ever debated with.
I can tell you somethings about Judenrat and Kapos directly from my survived
parents. Enough said.
>their people - but history does not look kindly upon them. I am not
>comparing the current or former governments of Israel with the Kapos and
No of course not. You are just so attached to Kapos and Judenrat that you must
raise them in any post. You say it and than you say you do not mean it. We have
read you enough Ben to know what you think and what you stand for.
>Judenrat - but I am pointing out how sometimes dealing on the basis of
>"realism" can not be the best way to go.
Yes, yes we know. Since you have zero facts in you favor and empty record
of saying anything realistic or practical you talk about Kapos and Judenrat.
Like your belove Kahane was talking about Nazis, Hitler, dogs and lemmings and than
in his confusion copied the Nuremberg laws.
>
>
>
>>
>> Not the peace is the driving force behind the left but the disgust of most
>> Israelis from the senseless occupation, opression, settlements and Jewish fanatism
>> as well as the lack of democratic future in the continuation of this.
>
>How do "most Israelis" feel about bus bombings? How do they feel when
>their soldiers are chased away by stone throwing youths? How do they
Not like you they do not cheer every time this happen as it "proves" their
racist thesis about Palestinian. They carry the pain and know that this is
a result of a long war between us and Palestinians. They carry this pain
for the last 100 years or so. They look for practical solutions that will stop
this mutual pain.
>feel when they have given Arabs control of a town, and the Arabs repay
>this by burning the Israeli flag? How do they feel when the worst
Frankly I do not think that they care about the flag. They are not so
coward and full of fear that they equal the burning of a flag with
their beloved death. Only idiots can do such a thing.
>murderer of Jews since Hitler is given a Nobel Peace Prize. These are
You maen Saadat? He made peace in the Begin's days and your desription
is correct. However, your ugly and baseless comparisons of everything to
Nazis leave us with a lot of questions about you and your mindset.
>some of the results of the "realism" and "practicality" of the left.
Well as it was done by the right I am not sure what are you talking about.
>
>
>
>> >overlook what kind of man it is that they are dealing with. Is
>> >this stupidity? This desire for peace that outweighs their moral
>>
>> Arafat plays a very restrictive role here. The power is absolutely at the side
>> of Israel in any realistic non-emotional (hysterical?) measure.
>
>How about a realistic, non-emotional measure of saying that since Arafat is
>not complying with the agreement he has signed, Israel will not give him
>any more concessions? Or is that too hysterical a measure for you -
>requiring someone to keep their word?
I think that you have a very small say in an agreement you were fiercely fighting
even before it was signed. To the best of my knowledge Arafat is complying
with the agreement sometimes better than Israel does. When the right will
go into power we will see his greatness and wisdom and the way no more Jew
will be killed, no soldier will chase any Palestinian and no Israeli flag
will be dented.
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>> >belief that murder is a crime and those who commit it should be
>> >punished rather than rewarded with a Nobel Peace Prize?
>>
>> I respect people who maybe changed their evil ways.
>
>And how has Arafat DEMONSTRATED that he has changed his evil ways? His
Yes. In practice he fully demonstrated it. Is it a permanent change?
I do not knwo. The peace process is built in such a way that he has
no option to demonstrate it.
>praise of the Engineer? His constant calls for "dividing" Jerusalem?
This is his position and the position of all Arab states. In fact this is
even the position of many Western countries. Arafat is not binded by what
we want or belief as long as he did not sign an agreement.
>His constant reference to the "phased plan"?
He never talked about the destruction of Israel. Of-course he does not see
Oslo II as the end of it (neither do I). This approach is indeed phased.
Israel
>
>
>Regards,
>
>Ben.
>
>
>
Murray Kastner
(feigenbaum,benjamin) wrote:
> Idealogies vary. My impression of the leftist ideology is not complimentary
> so I will leave it unsaid.
...better left unsaid? You say it all the time, Ben, in your shrewd,
misguided way.
> As to the "realistic" approach of the left, it
> was "realistic" of the Kapos and the Judenrat to oppress and brutalize
> their people - but history does not look kindly upon them.
...left unsaid?
>I am not
> comparing the current or former governments of Israel with the Kapos and
> Judenrat - but I am pointing out how sometimes dealing on the basis of
> "realism" can not be the best way to go.
Beautiful! First you say it and then say you're not saying it! Ben, you're
insulting our collective intelligence with transparent sallies like this.
> > Not the peace is the driving force behind the left but the disgust of most
> > Israelis from the senseless occupation, opression, settlements and
Jewish fanatism
> > as well as the lack of democratic future in the continuation of this.
> How do "most Israelis" feel about bus bombings?
Again, you're insulting our intelligence with these "Have you stopped
beating your wife" analogies.
> How do they feel when their soldiers are chased away by stone throwing youths?
...I'd say that most Israelis have had enough of occupation and policing
of a hostile population. The occupation has gone on too long and it is
time to resolve the issue contructively and rationally. That's what the
government is trying to do. Right-wing extremists make a lot of noise,
especially here on the 'net, but tachlis time is only a few months away...
> How do they feel when they have given Arabs control of a town, and the Arabs
> repay this by burning the Israeli flag?
...they see the pent-up frustration of a civilian population under
occupation for far too long and are happy to be easing their way out of an
untenable position.
> How do they feel when the worst
> murderer of Jews since Hitler is given a Nobel Peace Prize. These are
> some of the results of the "realism" and "practicality" of the left.
Hyperbole can't cloud over the fact that this "monster" is A) the
acknowledged leader of his people and B) that he is taking big risks to
effect a peace. He may not be much, but he's all we've got. Smarter people
than you recognize an opportunity to resolve a conflict far too long in
being.
> How about a realistic, non-emotional measure of saying that since Arafat is
> not complying with the agreement he has signed, Israel will not give him
> any more concessions? Or is that too hysterical a measure for you -
> requiring someone to keep their word?
Not too hysterical for you, as it would serve to destroy the peace process
and thereby advance those of your thinking. But real politics call for
much more understanding and handling. Your suggestion would throw the
fledgling administration into chaos and then we'd have to be dealing with
a fractured entity in which the extremists would hold sway. Then it would
be our extremists against theirs and the poor majorities of both would pay
the price.
> And how has Arafat DEMONSTRATED that he has changed his evil ways? His
> praise of the Engineer? His constant calls for "dividing" Jerusalem?
> His constant reference to the "phased plan"?
Yes, I know. You'd like him to kiss your feet and erode his fragile
coalition. Ben, you're usually a lot brighter than this. Your ignorance of
the situation, coupled with your bias, is dangerous.
,\\urray
PS: I may not see responses as I am leaving for Israel next week. The
backlog will be too much to catch up on. I am sure that Ben will render
forth his usually articulate, and shrewd, response. But it won't fool the
electorate in May. They want peace and prosperity, not pettifogging,
back-biting rhetoric.
Reuven Singer
I hereby confirm that Reuven has made an absolutely correct resume of
what was written in "Dagen".
I talked to Dagen's newsleader today and he confirmed that the article
with all it's content, was taken from articles in Dagen on Friday Feb.
16, 1996. They will send me this issue and also the later issues wich
contains follow-up articles on this theme.
He also confirmed that what Reuven brings in here - that Peres was
handed a copy, but refuses to admit it - also was written in this
newspaper.
Dagens newsleader says that other press have refferred to this
article: Associated Pres, some scandinavian papers, and Israeli
redio-stations.
He also said that the leader of the Swedish Jewish fellowship has all
the information, and so has also The International Christian Ambassy
in Jerusalem.
I have left Dagen's adress and phone#'s in an other article in this
thread. The other rescources I think you Israeli have better
possibilities to find.
With regards.
Arne
So now where are all those who claimed this was a total myth and
forgery. We have a prime minister who finds it inconvenient to
acknowledge any facts which might tarnish the rose-colored spectacles
with which he views the Middle East. The New Middle East now looks like a
world with hundreds of thousands of Arabs brought into the West Bank and
Gaza, without employment, using up limited water supplies, and engaging
in massive terrorism in Israel-goaded by Shimon's good friend Yasser
REuven
Avraham Hampel
> >> Since it has no trackable and reliable origin and it
> >> looks exactly as the image of Arafat in the fanatic Orthodox right wing camp
and
> I gave you a long list of typical forgeries lies and disinformation that you rushed
> to erase as ranting (see below). It is quite interesting that you ask again for
> examples which are given to you. If I will post them again, you will erase them
> call the rantings and ask for examples again. Pathethic.
and
> >> The problem is not what in the "text" is believable or not
> >> but how come that no
> >> reliable source has published that and only certain right wings fanatics were able
> >> to come with this piece of "truth".
not to mention
> Because it was coming from groups known as to say at least unreliable with no
> shade of support from others. How one can assume that Franklin "words" against Jews
> that were posted here sometime ago are forged? When I see a piece of such nonsense
> I assume it is a forgery unless proven otherwise.
Israel Cidon (amongst others) understands how paranoid the "extreme
Right-wing religious" crazies will go - they will even lie and invent
news in order to discredit a reformed Yasser Arafat.
The following is for the benefit of all who denied yet another plan
for our destruction on the part of our partner in peace, using the
opportunity to discredit those who reported the news weeks ago. The
last paragraph should be of special interest.
As I said last time I posted on the subject, it doesn't sound so
different from many of Arafat's other Arabic-language calls for
our destruction, but then again, some people will certainly deny
Arafat's intentions all the way to the chambers. Just ask Israel Cidon.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Arafat sees Israel's demise
by Jerusalem Post Staff
JERUSALEM (February 23) - Yasser Arafat told a closed meeting of Arab
ambassadors in Stockholm recently that he expects Israel to collapse
in the foreseeable future, according to the Norwegian daily Dagen of
February 16.
The PLO leader was in the Swedish capital on January 30 to celebrate a
peace prize shared by Peace Now, Labor Young Leadership, and Fatah
Youth.
According to Dagen, the report has been confirmed by Swedish sources,
which traced the information to one of the diplomats attending the
meeting with Arafat following a festive dinner in Stockholm's Grand
Hotel.
Assuring his audience that the establishment of a Palestinian state is
imminent, Arafat was quoted as declaring that both Prime Minister
Shimon Peres and Minister Yossi Beilin would support such a state, as
long as religious freedom is guaranteed its Jewish inhabitants.
But he predicted Jews would not want to live under Palestinian
sovereignty. "They will give up their dwellings and leave for the US,"
he said, adding, "We Palestinians will take over everything, including
all of Jerusalem. Peres and Beilin have already promised us half of
Jerusalem. The Golan Heights, too, have already been given away,
subject to just a few details. And when they are returned, at least a
million rich Jews will leave Israel."
Arafat said he expects civil war to erupt in Israel, in which Russian
immigrants, "half of whom are Christians or Moslems," will fight for
"a united Palestinian state." He also asserted that the "so-called
Ethiopian Jews" are Moslems.
Outlining his strategy, he said, "The PLO will now concentrate on
splitting Israel psychologically into two camps. Within five years we
will have six to seven million Arabs living on the West Bank and
Jerusalem. All Palestinian Arabs will be welcomed by us. If the Jews
can import all kinds of Ethiopians, Russians, Uzbekians, and
Ukrainians as Jews, we can import all kinds of Arabs. We plan to
eliminate the State of Israel and establish a Palestinian state. We
will make life unbearable for Jews by psychological warfare and
population explosion. Jews will not want to live among Arabs.
"I have no use for Jews. They are and remain Jews. We now need all the
help we can get from you in our battle for a united Palestine under
Arab rule," he concluded.
Responding to inquiries by Ma'ariv, Arafat's office in Gaza called the
report "false and inaccurate."
The contents of Arafat's talk were first reported in Israel by the
off-shore radio station Arutz 7 on February 7.
Red Herring
ci...@Eng.Sun.COM (Israel Cidon) wrote:
>What possibility? Arafat has no military card to play, he has zero ability
>to risk the existence of Israel. 10% of the IDF will take over back the OTs in
>one day.
What OT's? Once a "Palestinian" state is created and recognized by the
international community, it can not be destroyed (cf. Kuwait, Bosnia).
Murray Kastner
> FYI, a leading Norwegian paper confirmed much of the article (i.e. Arafat's
> call for the destruction of Israel, and the planned flooding of Israel with
> millions of Arab immigrants), in a front page article.
AFYI, leading newspapers are not necessarily accurate. Most of them judge
their content by its sensational value; they are interested primarily in
selling newspapers.
.\\urray
Roger Froikin
Given the newspaper it appeared in, and given the journalist who wroite
it - neither of which have any history of anti-Arab or pro-Israel
feelings to say the least, I believe the report.
I also believe the report because the fact is that what Arafat is
reported to have said is not new. He has been saying the same thing to
the Arab language press since the Oslo agreement.
He has, in no way, hidden his agenda or minced his words. Neither have
his associates who, in the past 6 months have openly and publically
announced their intentions. The PA Minister of Religion: "There are no
Jewish holy places in Palestine therefore there are no Jewish rights to
guarantee". The PA minister of interior adopted an official map of
Palestine which deletes any mention of anything Jewish other than to
label it as temporary. Arafat praised Ayash as a hero and martyr, and
in speech after speech has openly and honestly stated that his goals are
to include all of Jerusalem, Nazareth, Haifa, Jaffa, etc. in Arab
Palestine (note the Arab language version of his first big speech in
Gaza).
There is no problem understanding Arafat's goals.
The problem is getting the Jews to listen to what Arafat says.
I'm not comparing Arafat with anyone, but the fact is that too often in
Jewish history, we underestimated, discounted, or ignored the rhetoric
of our enemies because it was just too disturbing to listen to it and
ask why it was being said if not meant.
Roger Froikin
> Yes you do. We secular and atheist left wingers have no reason to value Jewish life
> higher than all human life.
Not to be insulting, Israel, but in a world where anti-Jewish violence
still seems to be more common than that against other groups, a Jew,
whatever his philosophical approach might be, who fails to value Jewish
survival more than that of those who threaten Jews, is a fool at best.
As a relatively religious Jew, I would, in principle, agree that no one
human life is more valuable, more sanctified than another - regardless
of ethnic identity or religious belief. At the same time, I would also
say that while that principle holds, we have to be realistic and
recognize that the lives of those that hate us, that threaten our lives,
cannot be placed on equal par with ours.
In Israeli Arab terms ----
Were there no one threatening Jews, one might question whether creatiung
a Jewish State was necessary, and one might say that doing so
unnecessarily created a problem in the Middle East. But that was not
reality. In the real world, Jews were being threatened and murdered
since the 1850's if not before. In the real world, Jews had to defend
themselves and their rights vs those who would take them away. In the
real world, Israel had to be born to facilitate defense. In the real
world, Arabs approached Jews to kill them and Jews had to kill in
return. So, yes, the life of one who wants to take my life, my rights,
my freedom, is worth less than mine.
I hope I'm misinterpretiung your terms and if so, I apologize in
advance.
Marcus Shadi Melko
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Marcus Shadi Melko
Worcester College
University of Oxford
Oxford
England
"You can't shag turtles, their heads are too small." - P P Craig,
Professor of Law at Oxford University
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
On Sun, 25 Feb 1996, Red Herring wrote:
> In article <4gl2dt$2...@engnews2.Eng.Sun.COM>,
> ci...@Eng.Sun.COM (Israel Cidon) wrote:
>
> >What possibility? Arafat has no military card to play, he has zero ability
> >to risk the existence of Israel. 10% of the IDF will take over back the OTs in
> >one day.
>
> What OT's? Once a "Palestinian" state is created and recognized by the
> international community, it can not be destroyed (cf. Kuwait, Bosnia).
Sadly, you are wrong: the "international community" regularly allows
states to be destroyed by aggression: Biafra, East Timor, even Bosnia
(which you cite) is presently being carved up into ethnic cantons linked
to Serbia and Croatia (i.e., destroyed) with the full approval of the
international community.
Also sadly, it is true what the other bloke says: Israel has created a
pathetic and disarmed little bantustan in th OTs, it can re-occupy it any
time it causes trouble for it.
Brendan McKay
>Arne wrote (e-mail)
>I hereby confirm that Reuven has made an absolutely correct resume of
>what was written in "Dagen".
>
>I talked to Dagen's newsleader today and he confirmed that the article
>with all it's content, was taken from articles in Dagen on Friday Feb.
>16, 1996. They will send me this issue and also the later issues wich
>contains follow-up articles on this theme.
>
>He also confirmed that what Reuven brings in here - that Peres was
>handed a copy, but refuses to admit it - also was written in this
>newspaper.
>
>Dagens newsleader says that other press have refferred to this
>article: Associated Pres, some scandinavian papers, and Israeli
>redio-stations.
>
>He also said that the leader of the Swedish Jewish fellowship has all
>the information, and so has also The International Christian Ambassy
>in Jerusalem.
>
>I have left Dagen's adress and phone#'s in an other article in this
>thread. The other rescources I think you Israeli have better
>possibilities to find.
>
>
>With regards.
>
>Arne
>
> So now where are all those who claimed this was a total myth and
>forgery.
Here is one, and I haven't changed my mind. So Daken sticks to
its story; what else could they do? Where is the evidence?
I can't tell if this is a straight fabrication or merely a malicious
exaggeration, but an honest report it sure as hell is not.
One more thing. One mark of a bigot is the willingness to accept
uncritically even the most stupid claims about ones enemies. We
saw it with the forged Benjamin Franklin "quote", we see it with
this "secret speech", and we see it with the hilarious "Israeli
pilots chained in their seats" claim.
Brendan.
Israel Cidon
>In article <4gl2dt$2...@engnews2.Eng.Sun.COM>,
> ci...@Eng.Sun.COM (Israel Cidon) wrote:
>
>>What possibility? Arafat has no military card to play, he has zero ability
>>to risk the existence of Israel. 10% of the IDF will take over back the OTs in
>>one day.
>
>What OT's? Once a "Palestinian" state is created and recognized by the
>international community, it can not be destroyed (cf. Kuwait, Bosnia).
We have no wish to detroy it. The same statement holds for such a state, Alex.
Israel
>
>
>
Sandra Rayes
feigenbaum,benjamin
> bs...@pyuxe.cc.bellcore.com (feigenbaum,benjamin) wrote:
>
> >No, I do not lack this ability. My religious "preprogramming" values
> >Jewish life.
>
> Great!
I'm glad you think so!
> So why not try look for a compromise over the "jewish land" (ie the west
> bank/Gaza) with the other inhabitants of it (ie the palestinians) rather
> than have soldiers (ie jewish youths in the prime of their lives) risking
> their life for-ever.
Because it would be useless. The issue isn't "Jewish" land - it is Jewish
lives. The so-called "Palestinians" and the rest of their Arab allies
don't just want ALL the land, they want Jewish blood as well. What
purpose did it serve, for example, to murder Leon Klinghoffer or shoot
at that van full of Lubavitcher children? Was it supposed to gain them
land?
Jewish soldiers can either risk their lives one time to obtain a truly
permanent solution, or they can risk their lives forever by giving in
to the murderers and terrorists which the Israeli government has decided
to pursue "peace" with.
> What is more important?
> Real estate in "jewish land" or the jewish life you say you put above
> everything?
There are those who will disagree with me and say the land is more
important because without land you cannot have life. However, if there
were a real chance for peace, I would have no problem giving up the land.
But there is no real chance for peace with these people when you give them
what they want and require absolutely nothing in return.
> "we shall not let you decide whether to send our sons into war or not"
>
> Yossi Beilin, arguing with protesters from the french section of herut.
I have no desire to send Yossi's "sons" into war. But I don't like to
see Jews being blown to bits either. Unfortunately, that appears to be
the type of peace brought by giving up "Jewish" land.
Ben.
Brendan McKay
>Murray Kastner wrote:
>>
>> > FYI, a leading Norwegian paper confirmed much of the article (i.e. Arafat's
>> > call for the destruction of Israel, and the planned flooding of Israel with
>> > millions of Arab immigrants), in a front page article.
>>
>> AFYI, leading newspapers are not necessarily accurate. Most of them judge
>> their content by its sensational value; they are interested primarily in
>> selling newspapers.
>
>Given the newspaper it appeared in, and given the journalist who wroite
>it - neither of which have any history of anti-Arab or pro-Israel
>feelings to say the least, I believe the report.
Typical Froikin bluster. Roger, everyone knows that you had
never heard of Dagen or their journalist before. But, since
you are such an expert, why don't you tell us about ICEJ and
what their agenda is? Having done that, go to see a doctor.
For someone who hates Christians as much as you do, there
must a serious reason you are puting so much faith in a
Christian organization.
Brendan.
Roger Froikin
>
> In article 71...@one.net, Roger Froikin <efr...@one.net> writes:
> >Israel Cidon wrote:
> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Why is it that some left wingers have such a hard time understanding the
> >> >> truth, even when its in black and white? Anyone?
> >> >>
> >> >Because it goes against their "religious" beliefs.
> >>
> >> You have a fundemental misconception in the understanding of people who have no
> >> religious belief and base their opinions on their own judgements of facts and
> >> information. Probably because you lack the ability to even imagine how one can
> >> truely and honsetly share nothing with your religious preprogramming and consider
> >> them as irrelevant material.
> >>
> >> Israel
> >
> >I fail to see how "religious beliefs" have any function in attempting to
> >understand Arafat's behavior and aims. If anything, "religious",
> >ideological, or other bias' should be counterproductive in this regard.
>
> Thanks for you support. I also fail to see what was the logic behind Ben's claim
> that the left is driven by "religious belief". Since I know nothing about how
> a religious belief is felt like I guess you should ask Ben how this belief
> is relevant to him.
It may "feel" relevant to Ben, Israel, but conducting a war or a policy
by "feeling" is a sure way to lose.
One can go to Jewish sources or one can quote Sun Tsu, the answer is the
same. Victory means understanding your enemy and developing policies
and tactics to deal with that enemy realistically. Anything that
interferes with that process is a liability. "Feelings", whether
religious in origen or not, are counter-productive.
ken
Murray Kastner <mur...@jonction.net> wrote:
>
>> FYI, a leading Norwegian paper confirmed much of the article (i.e. Arafat's
>> call for the destruction of Israel, and the planned flooding of Israel with
>> millions of Arab immigrants), in a front page article.
>
>AFYI, leading newspapers are not necessarily accurate. Most of them judge
>their content by its sensational value; they are interested primarily in
>selling newspapers.
>
Oh, thank you very much for that insightful advice. I'll just ignore all
the newspaper, radio, TV and internet reports on this disgraceful speech
and I'll listen to you to ignore it, all just because you say so.
Or maybe people should just ignore your posts because you are 'befouling'
yourself without any factual or logical ideas.
Ken
Israel Cidon
I never claimed anything else. You are arguing with the wrong person.
Israel
Israel Cidon
As usual, Mr. Hamplel adds no single bit of new information but is jumping
up and down to tell us the same story that everybody knows. That a single
fundemental Christian newspaper - Dagen - published this "secret speech" and
no reliable source ever reported it first hand (expect from quoting the Dagen source).
Mr. Hampel, relax, we all know where this was coming from it was part of the
original post. We are also all aware of your abilities to browse WWW pages
using the great help of brachot.
>On 20 Feb 1996, Israel Cidon wrote:
>> >> Since it has no trackable and reliable origin and it
>> >> looks exactly as the image of Arafat in the fanatic Orthodox right wing camp
>
>and
Why you feel that some mixing of irrelevant text of mine give your empty posts
more content?
>> I gave you a long list of typical forgeries lies and disinformation that you rushed
>> to erase as ranting (see below). It is quite interesting that you ask again for
>> examples which are given to you. If I will post them again, you will erase them
>> call the rantings and ask for examples again. Pathethic.
>
>and
>
>> >> The problem is not what in the "text" is believable or not
>> >> but how come that no
>> >> reliable source has published that and only certain right wings fanatics were able
>> >> to come with this piece of "truth".
>
>not to mention
>
>> Because it was coming from groups known as to say at least unreliable with no
>> shade of support from others. How one can assume that Franklin "words" against Jews
>> that were posted here sometime ago are forged? When I see a piece of such nonsense
>> I assume it is a forgery unless proven otherwise.
>
>Israel Cidon (amongst others) understands how paranoid the "extreme
>Right-wing religious" crazies will go - they will even lie and invent
>news in order to discredit a reformed Yasser Arafat.
> in the foreseeable future, according to the Norwegian daily Dagen of
--------------------
> February 16.
This is the same Christian newspaper reported by Arutz 7 and now recycled by JP.
What else, Mr. Hampel?
Israel
Brendan McKay
Or, to put it another way, the Jerusalem Post was unable to find
any confirmation of its own so they decided to just quote Dagen.
JP used to be a good newspaper, once.
Brendan.
Arne Kolstoe
>Or, to put it another way, the Jerusalem Post was unable to find
>any confirmation of its own so they decided to just quote Dagen.
>JP used to be a good newspaper, once.
I'll just refer from Dagen on just this point:
On Tuesday 27 Feb 1996 p 2:
Headings:
"Jerusalem Post -editor comment Arafat's Stockholm-speech:
- Not escpecially surprised"
Ingres:
"When Dagen's article 16. Feb about Arafats secret Stockholm-speech
about Israel's destroying was known in Israel, "Jerusalem Post"
omited to write about the case - in contradiction to other medias.
However now information has appeared which do that editor David
Bar-Illan in his editorial column refer to the speech as "not
unbelieveable at all"
The article contains Bar-Illans wiev and a resume form Ze'ev Schiffs
article in Ha'aretz.
Arne
Reuven Singer
> Or, to put it another way, the Jerusalem Post was unable to find
> any confirmation of its own so they decided to just quote Dagen.
> JP used to be a good newspaper, once.
>
similar sources quoting Dagen. It seems clear that a diplomat gave the
story to Dagen-so that is the source quoted. Arafat by the way did not
really deny the story- he said the "details were not precise"
reuven
ken
Brendan McKay <b...@cs.rit.edu> wrote:
>In article <Pine.SUN.3.91-heb-2.05.9...@avoda.jct.ac.il> Avraham Hampel <ham...@avoda.jct.ac.il> writes:
>>> I assume it is a forgery unless proven otherwise.
>>
>>Israel Cidon (amongst others) understands how paranoid the "extreme
>>Right-wing religious" crazies will go - they will even lie and invent
>>news in order to discredit a reformed Yasser Arafat.
>>
>
>Or, to put it another way, the Jerusalem Post was unable to find
>any confirmation of its own so they decided to just quote Dagen.
>JP used to be a good newspaper, once.
>
>Brendan.
Here we go again. On the one hand, we have McKay - a proven liar and
anti-Zionist (and with that I'm being lenient). On the other hand, we have
newspaper reports (beginning with the Algemeiner Journal report), radio, TV
and internet reports. Many mentioned that they confirmed the story for
themselves. That Mckay wants to deny Arafat's anti-Semitic speech is quite
predictable, given his penchant to twisting Jewish/Arab history (for the
Arabs' benefit).
What is laughable is that Mckay often uses obscure and unreliable
authors, books and magazines to try and prove some point, but yet he now
derides the multitude of reports from legitimate sources
as false (because he can't stand the truth). But in Mckay's twisted world,
Tikkun's contributors are more believable than the Jerusalem Post.
K. Sperry
ken
Israel Cidon <ci...@ee.technion.ac.il> wrote:
>In article 100...@avoda.jct.ac.il, Avraham Hampel <ham...@avoda.jct.ac.il> writes:
>
>As usual, Mr. Hamplel adds no single bit of new information but is jumping
>up and down to tell us the same story that everybody knows. That a single
>fundemental Christian newspaper - Dagen - published this "secret speech" and
>no reliable source ever reported it first hand (expect from quoting the Dagen source).
Sorry, this story was first published in the Algemeiner Journal, Feb 9,
1996. Dagen reported it on Feb 16, 1996 through its own sources.
>
>Mr. Hampel, relax, we all know where this was coming from it was part of the
>original post. We are also all aware of your abilities to browse WWW pages
>using the great help of brachot.
>
>
>>On 20 Feb 1996, Israel Cidon wrote:
>>> >> Since it has no trackable and reliable origin and it
>>> >> looks exactly as the image of Arafat in the fanatic Orthodox right wing camp
Talk about incitement. In today's Israel, the government should investigate
you for this statement, but unfortunately you're free to spout your Jewish
self-hate, while others are placed under house arrest simply for not
agreeing with Peres' views.
>
>Why you feel that some mixing of irrelevant text of mine give your empty posts
>more content?
>
>>> I gave you a long list of typical forgeries lies and disinformation that you rushed
>>> to erase as ranting (see below). It is quite interesting that you ask again for
>>> examples which are given to you. If I will post them again, you will erase them
>>> call the rantings and ask for examples again. Pathethic.
>>
>>and
>>
>>> >> The problem is not what in the "text" is believable or not
>>> >> but how come that no
>>> >> reliable source has published that and only certain right wings fanatics were able
>>> >> to come with this piece of "truth".
>>
>>not to mention
>>
>>Israel Cidon (amongst others) understands how paranoid the "extreme
>>Right-wing religious" crazies will go - they will even lie and invent
>>news in order to discredit a reformed Yasser Arafat.
>
>
>> in the foreseeable future, according to the Norwegian daily Dagen of
> --------------------
>> February 16.
>
>This is the same Christian newspaper reported by Arutz 7 and now recycled by JP.
>What else, Mr. Hampel?
>
>Israel
Ken
Alexandre Khalil
>b...@cs.rit.edu (Brendan McKay) wrote:
>>Or, to put it another way, the Jerusalem Post was unable to find
>>any confirmation of its own so they decided to just quote Dagen.
>>JP used to be a good newspaper, once.
>I'll just refer from Dagen on just this point:
Yes, please
>On Tuesday 27 Feb 1996 p 2:
>Headings:
>"Jerusalem Post -editor comment Arafat's Stockholm-speech:
>- Not escpecially surprised"
>Ingres:
>"When Dagen's article 16. Feb about Arafats secret Stockholm-speech
>about Israel's destroying was known in Israel, "Jerusalem Post"
>omited to write about the case - in contradiction to other medias.
>However now information has appeared which do that editor David
>Bar-Illan in his editorial column refer to the speech as "not
>unbelieveable at all"
So, Dagen writes something, JP picks it up without independent (until now)
confirmation, then Dagen comes back and quotes JP on it.
Garbage in, garbage out
alex
ps: I have no idea if Dagen is right or wrong on the original item, but
the rest of the story is pathetic.
feigenbaum,benjamin
> In article <4gf606$e...@athos.cc.bellcore.com>, bs...@pyuxe.cc.bellcore.com
> (feigenbaum,benjamin) wrote:
>
> > Idealogies vary. My impression of the leftist ideology is not complimentary
> > so I will leave it unsaid.
>
> misguided way.
Unfortunately, since Murray will not respond to this, we will have no
way of knowing what my "misguided" way consists of. As for my
shrewdness, I would like to express my appreciation to Murray for the
compliment.
>
> > As to the "realistic" approach of the left, it
> > was "realistic" of the Kapos and the Judenrat to oppress and brutalize
> > their people - but history does not look kindly upon them.
>
> ....left unsaid?
Again, Murray will not respond to this, but I would like to point out
that in another post I vigorously protested the use of the phrase "Israeli
Judenrat". I feel that there is no basis for comparison between the
Kapos and the Judenrat. The example I used was to illustrate what can
happen when one deals with a situation based on "realism".
> >I am not
> > comparing the current or former governments of Israel with the Kapos and
> > Judenrat - but I am pointing out how sometimes dealing on the basis of
> > "realism" can not be the best way to go.
>
> Beautiful! First you say it and then say you're not saying it! Ben, you're
> insulting our collective intelligence with transparent sallies like this.
Let me clear my position up once and for all. I feel there is no basis
for comparison between the Kapos and the Judenrat, and the former or
current Israeli governments. Hopefully, this is clear enough even for
those who deliberately choose to read things into my remarks.
>
> > > Not the peace is the driving force behind the left but the disgust of most
> > > Israelis from the senseless occupation, opression, settlements and
> Jewish fanatism
> > > as well as the lack of democratic future in the continuation of this.
>
> > How do "most Israelis" feel about bus bombings?
>
> Again, you're insulting our intelligence with these "Have you stopped
> beating your wife" analogies.
And Murray insults the intelligence of most readers with his apathetic
non-reaction to the murders of Jews.
>
> > How do they feel when their soldiers are chased away by stone throwing youths?
>
> ....I'd say that most Israelis have had enough of occupation and policing
> of a hostile population.
Murray once again fails to answer the question, but for the record I agree
that most Israelis have had enough of this. The question then becomes,
are they going to continue to allow murderers to end the situation, or
are they going to do something moral like fight murderers?
> The occupation has gone on too long and it is
> time to resolve the issue contructively and rationally.
No problem with this.
> That's what the
> government is trying to do.
Results are what counts, Murray.
> Right-wing extremists make a lot of noise,
> especially here on the 'net, but tachlis time is only a few months away...
I wonder what Murray was trying to accomplish with this.
>
> > How do they feel when they have given Arabs control of a town, and the Arabs
> > repay this by burning the Israeli flag?
>
> ....they see the pent-up frustration of a civilian population under
> occupation for far too long and are happy to be easing their way out of an
> untenable position.
Pity they don't see the rabid hatred which will not end with the end of
the "occupation".
>
> > How do they feel when the worst
> > murderer of Jews since Hitler is given a Nobel Peace Prize. These are
> > some of the results of the "realism" and "practicality" of the left.
>
> Hyperbole can't cloud over the fact that this "monster" is A) the
> acknowledged leader of his people
Hitler (Yemach Sh'mo) was the acknowledged leader of his people. Saddam
Hussein, Khadaffi, the list of murderers who are the acknowledged leaders
of their people is virtually endless. We can all see the tolerant
attitude Murray has towards murderers of Jews and the leader of these
murderers. The fact that he is the "acknowledged leader" speaks volumes,
Murray. Pity you refuse to hear what is being said.
> and B) that he is taking big risks to
> effect a peace.
What risks? The risks of a Nobel Prize? The risks of attaining more
power, money and honor than he has ever had in his life? Murray won't
be responding to this, but I hope he would not have used that tired old
argument that Arafat was risking his life for peace.
> He may not be much, but he's all we've got.
This speaks volumes as well. Murray's justification for Israel abandoning
it's moral position is pathetic. Funny how leftists are vehement about
Rabbi Kahane (OBM) and how his policies are racist, his followers are
terrorists, etc. But with Arafat, a man with Jewish blood on his hands,
all that morality goes down the toilet.
> Smarter people
> than you recognize an opportunity to resolve a conflict far too long in
> being.
Don't kid yourself. Abandonment of moral principles doesn't make for
smart people in the long run.
>
> > How about a realistic, non-emotional measure of saying that since Arafat is
> > not complying with the agreement he has signed, Israel will not give him
> > any more concessions? Or is that too hysterical a measure for you -
> > requiring someone to keep their word?
>
> Not too hysterical for you, as it would serve to destroy the peace process
> and thereby advance those of your thinking. But real politics call for
> much more understanding and handling. Your suggestion would throw the
> fledgling administration into chaos and then we'd have to be dealing with
> a fractured entity in which the extremists would hold sway. Then it would
> be our extremists against theirs and the poor majorities of both would pay
> the price.
Murray, I would like to enter into business with you. There is this bridge
in Brooklyn I have for sale ....
>
> > And how has Arafat DEMONSTRATED that he has changed his evil ways? His
> > praise of the Engineer? His constant calls for "dividing" Jerusalem?
> > His constant reference to the "phased plan"?
>
> Yes, I know. You'd like him to kiss your feet and erode his fragile
> coalition. Ben, you're usually a lot brighter than this. Your ignorance of
> the situation, coupled with your bias, is dangerous.
Isn't this pathetic? Murray has no answer to Arafat's revolting and
disgusting praise of the Engineer so Murray makes things up. Since
when is refraining from praising a mass murderer a request to "kiss my
feet"?
As to Murray's insults and fear that I am "dangerous", what can I say.
Murray, I am sorry for you.
>
> ,\\urray
>
> PS: I may not see responses as I am leaving for Israel next week.
I genuinely wish you a safe and enjoyable trip.
> The
> backlog will be too much to catch up on. I am sure that Ben will render
> forth his usually articulate, and shrewd, response. But it won't fool the
> electorate in May. They want peace and prosperity, not pettifogging,
> back-biting rhetoric.
Whatever the electorate gets will, I'm afraid, not be enough. Israel
and the Jewish people have promoted a mass murderer. Whether it is Peres
or Bibi, we will all have to pay the price. I only wonder what Murray
will say when the body count becomes so great that even he must
acknowledge the failure of the peace process.
Ben.
Dani Zilberstein
I am afraid only after his own body is included in the count. But I
sincerely
wish him this will not happen.
Dani Zilberstein
Dani Zilberstein
> sincerely
> wish him this will not happen.
>
> Dani Zilberstein
will happen soon. Bimhera beyameinu.
Dani Zilberstein
Murray Kastner
> >AFYI, leading newspapers are not necessarily accurate. Most of them judge
> >their content by its sensational value; they are interested primarily in
> >selling newspapers.
> Oh, thank you very much for that insightful advice. I'll just ignore all
> the newspaper, radio, TV and internet reports on this disgraceful speech
> and I'll listen to you to ignore it, all just because you say so.
> Or maybe people should just ignore your posts because you are 'befouling'
> yourself without any factual or logical ideas.
And, you, dear friend, go on reading everything you read. Since you read
what you want to and believe what you want to, it'll suit you and your
philosophies just fine.
But the plain facts here are that the only single source for this report
happens to be a minor right-wing Christian fundamentalist newspaper with
an office in Jerusalem. The other reports you quote merely source their
information from the same minor journal. Seems like a set-up to me, but
you go on believing everything you read...
One of these days, you guys on the right might wake up and smell the
coffee rather than grab on to every whiff of scandal that surfaces through
clever manipulation of sensation-seeking rags...
,\\urray
Brendan McKay
>b...@cs.rit.edu (Brendan McKay) wrote:
>
>>Or, to put it another way, the Jerusalem Post was unable to find
>>any confirmation of its own so they decided to just quote Dagen.
>>JP used to be a good newspaper, once.
>
>I'll just refer from Dagen on just this point:
>
>Headings:
>"Jerusalem Post -editor comment Arafat's Stockholm-speech:
>- Not escpecially surprised"
Of course. JP editor Bar-Ilan is an outspoken opponent of the
peace process and makes no secret of it. JP editorials are
often right wing rubbish rhetoric.
>Ingres:
>"When Dagen's article 16. Feb about Arafats secret Stockholm-speech
>about Israel's destroying was known in Israel, "Jerusalem Post"
>omited to write about the case - in contradiction to other medias.
>However now information has appeared which do that editor David
>Bar-Illan in his editorial column refer to the speech as "not
>unbelieveable at all"
Someone posted the JP editorial here, and there was no mention
in it of any new information. If the JP really had verified
the speech, they would hardly call it "not unbelievable", they
would call it "confirmed".
>The article contains Bar-Illans wiev and a resume form Ze'ev Schiffs
>article in Ha'aretz.
Schiff is a respectable reporter, so I would like to see his
article (but I would not trust an indirect report of it via Dagen).
Incidentally, I found quite a lot of the reported speech believable.
Some of the rest is unlikely, but feasible. The problem is the parts
that are silly nonsense. That's why I distrust it.
Brendan.
Brendan McKay
>[burp]
I was hoping your brain transplant would help. You should
demand a refund. Your trash is not worth a reply.
Brendan.
Brendan McKay
>Brendan McKay wrote:
>
>> Or, to put it another way, the Jerusalem Post was unable to find
>> any confirmation of its own so they decided to just quote Dagen.
>> JP used to be a good newspaper, once.
>Sorry, but all the Hebrew media (including pro-goverment papers) have
>similar sources quoting Dagen. It seems clear that a diplomat gave the
>story to Dagen-so that is the source quoted. Arafat by the way did not
>really deny the story- he said the "details were not precise"
A couple of things I wish to clarify. Firstly, my criticism of
the JP is not just on the basis of this incident, but has been my
opinion for some time. Secondly, there is nothing wrong with
reporting the story about Arafat's supposed speech. Just the
fact that the claim was made is enough reason; the issue is of
_how_ it is reported. An honest newspaper will report it as an
unconfirmed story from an unknown source, which is all it is.
As for Arafat's denial, how many language translations has that
gone through before coming to us as "not precise"? Meaning is
not preserved accurately enough to distinguish this expression
from "wrong" after even one translation, and there has been at
least two. Anyway, a stronger denial was mentioned in the JP
editorial; I can't find it, alas.
Brendan.
ken
Deja vu. I'm glad you've truncated your normal pattern of replies and
counter-replies to my posts, and gone directly to the last post i.e. after
you can't reply anyomore since you were caught in your normal lying ways,
you run away and say you're too busy and won't reply. I hope you've started
a pattern.
BTW, wasn't I supposed to be in your kill file? You'd do both of us a
favour if you did.
K. Sperry
ken
February 26, 1996 -Arutz 7 News service
Arafat's "Destruction of Israel" Speech Circulated in Army
The Investigative Division of the IDF Intelligence Branch has circulated
among its personnel a transcript of Arafat's speech in Stockholm regarding
his plan for the destruction of Israel. The official memorandum of the
Branch contains the entire speech, which was first reported on Arutz-7 two
weeks ago. The Swedish weekly "Magazinet" also published excerpts yesterday
from the speech.
ken
I'll repeat again, the first published report of this disgraceful speech
came from the Algemeiner Journal (Feb 9), hardly a minor right-wing
Christian fundamentalist newspaper. I wonder what fantasy world you live
in. Talk about projection, when you are the one believing what you want
to believe in the face of all the evidence.
K. Sperry
Moritz Rothschild
>sincerely
>wish him this will not happen.
>
>Dani Zilberstein
peacenicks believe Arafat's actions rather than his platitudes. Hilda
Moritz Rothschild
writes:
>>
>>>Or, to put it another way, the Jerusalem Post was unable to find
>>>any confirmation of its own so they decided to just quote Dagen.
>>>JP used to be a good newspaper, once.
>>
How nmany bombings need there be before you believe it? Hilda