And what are you, you smelly fuucking aaaaarab.you bang your donkey a few times its horny

And what are you, you smelly fuucking aaaaarab.go bang your donkey a few times its horny

Militants hold gun to Arafat's head

Special report: Israel and the Middle East

Ewen MacAskill in Ramallah, West Bank
Wednesday January 3, 2001
The Guardian

The Islamic militant group, Hamas, issued a deadly threat yesterday to the Palestinian leader, Yasser Arafat, warning that it would turn its campaign of terror against him should he agree to a peace deal with President Bill Clinton.

The leader of Hamas on the West Bank, Hassan Youssof, in an interview with the Guardian, accompanied the chilling warning with a prediction that Mr Arafat would be forced to reject the proposed settlement.

Until now, Hamas, the most feared of the Palestinian guerrilla groups, has struck only against Israeli targets. Although it has long opposed Mr Arafat's peace negotiations, it is now threatening to extend its campaign of violence to the Palestinian Authority leadership.

Mr Youssof said the political danger for Mr Arafat was that he could end up being confronted not only by Hamas but also a breakaway from his own organisation, Fatah, which he claimed had established strong links with Hamas since the uprising began in September.

The Hamas warning adds to the already enormous pressure on Mr Arafat, who met Mr Clinton in Washington last night to discuss the US peace plan.

Mr Youssof said all three key elements of the proposed peace settlement - the fate of the Palestinian refugees, the future of the Jerusalem holy site and the territorial division - were unacceptable.

He added: "As a Palestinian organisation, we refuse any agreement that does not give the Palestinian people three things: the right of its refugees to return to their homes; all of Jerusalem; and gets all settlers out of the West Bank and Gaza." The US proposals offer none of those.

Mr Youssof, 49, who has been jailed by Israel and the Palestinian Authority, hinted strongly that Israel could expect a return to suicide bombings, a campaign that created terror in Israel between 1994 and 1996. "Hamas will not stop fighting and bombing until the occupation is over," he said.

Israel has suffered two big bomb explosions in the last week, one in Tel Aviv and the other, on Monday night, in the coastal town of Netanya in which more than 30 people were wounded. Israeli police said that one of those it believed to be responsible for planting the bomb was in a critical condition.

Hamas described the bombing as the "holy right" of the Palestinian people but did not accept responsibility, which was claimed by a previously unknown group, the Vanguard of the Popular Army. Hamas often denies responsibility in order to avoid retaliation or a crackdown.

Hamas, which was partly financed by the Islamic terrorist Osama bin Laden until he had to flee from Sudan in 1996, was founded in 1987, during the first intifada.

The first Hamas suicide bomber killed eight Israelis when he rammed a car filled with explosives into a crowd in northern Israel in April 1994. The casualty rate over the next two years was high, as was the psychological toll on Israelis because the willingness of the bombers to die meant they could strike almost anywhere.

The campaign was brought to an end when Mr Arafat, under pressure from Israel, jailed about 900 members of Hamas, most of them since released. Mr Arafat worked against Hamas with the CIA and Israeli intelligence, Mossad.

Mr Youssof said he could not predict what individual cells of the Izzedine al-Qassem, the armed wing of Hamas, were plotting but he regarded suicide bombings as a justifiable Palestinian response to Israel's use of all the weapons in its arsenal other than nuclear and chemical weapons.

"We have a rule from the Koran and Mohammed that we should not kill any animal or people. [But] we use this kind of bombing to frighten them into stopping killing our people and children."

If, as Mr Youssof expects, Mr Arafat has no choice but to reject the deal because of the division it would create among Palestinians, he predicted that Hamas would join forces with Fatah - the biggest grouping within Mr Arafat's Palestinian Liberation Organisation - and other Palestinians in a united and bigger effort against Israel.

"Fatah is now with Hamas," he said.

Confronted by Israelis killing Palestinians, Mr Youssof said the Palestinians had no choice: "If people go to your home to kill one or two of your kids or throw you out on to the streets, will we give them roses or will we fight?"

Hamas had been increasingly isolated within Palestinian society because of its opposition to the peace process that led to the Israeli-Palestinian agreement at Oslo in 1993. But support for Hamas has increased since the latest intifada began in September, especially in universities.

Mr Youssof said the strength of feeling against the peace negotiations would be underlined in huge demonstrations planned for tomorrow in the West Bank.

"Seven years of negotiation with Israel did not give us anything of our rights but it has doubled the number of [Israeli] settlements, closed down our economy, destroyed homes, and given them control of the whole of Jerusalem."

Israel blames Mr Arafat for the resurgence of Hamas violence because he released many of the group's members from jail soon after the latest intifada began.

Palestinian Authority leaders claim that, although they did release them from jails because they were under threat from Israeli helicopter attacks, almost all of them have been rearrested. Part of the reason Mr Arafat threw open the jails was because of demonstrations in favour of the release of Hamas in places such as Nablus.

However, Mr Youssof said that of the 120 held in Palestinian Authority jails before the intifada, only 25 had been rearrested. More than 1,200 Hamas members are held in Israel.

He admitted that the alliance of the Palestinian, Israeli and US intelligence agencies had weakened Hamas. Its bomb-makers and others with technical experience had been singled out and assassinated. But Mr Youssof said Hamas would emerge stronger from the intifada

no such thing as a "holy right" to blow people up.


evenin', mum!
====

{+1sk@2k+1}

Well maybe there is if Israel claims it is their holy right to be there.If it's holy for one why can't it be holy for the other L"Menexe?

just wondering

Well it certainly seems they think they have a holy right to pump bullets into kids!

No doubt L'menexe bangs his drums with joy, everytime a kid gets killed

I don't think he rejoices in that kids get killed

IGOR:
do you see? how f*cking DERANGED this fellow BACON is?
you sick son of a b*tch.
==
no. i dont rejoice over dead kids.
as if i had to say that.

they dont rejoice over dead kids in israel either.
as if i had to say that.
========
once again.
the "holy right" i quoted a few inches above you involved hamas terrorist bombing. didnt it?

let's make it _real_ simple.
NO SUCH THING AS A 'HOLY RIGHT'.
=
but dont use that to suck me into this rap.
=====
you _suck_, BACON.
big time.

Sharon used to look unelectable. Now he is leading in the polls

By Phil Reeves in Jerusalem

4 January 2001

The Israeli Prime Minister, Ehud Barak, has embarked on his campaign for re-election by vowing to crack down still harder on the Palestinians, as the prospect of defeat by the old warhorse of the right, Ariel Sharon, moves from his worst nightmare towards reality.

Mr Barak is now admitting that there is almost no chance that he will extract a peace agreement from Yasser Arafat before the Israeli prime ministerial election on 6 February – seen by many analysts as his only chance of victory.

His attention has switched to trying to save himself by moving to the right, setting aside talk of peace in favour of rhetoric about tougher measures to counteract violence by Palestinians, several hundred of whom have been shot dead by the Israeli army in the last three months.

To the irritation of the United States, Mr Barak has again begun threatening unilateral separation from the Palestinians – a move that Palestinian officials say is tantamount to war, not least because Israel would, without any bilateral agreement, annex chunks of the occupied territories.

Mr Sharon has shot ahead in the polls following the withdrawal from the fray of the former premier Benjamin Netanyahu a fortnight ago. As the aging ex-general and former defence minister who led Israel into the disastrous war in Lebanon in 1982 – and who was later censured by an Israeli inquiry for his role in the events that led to the Sabra and Chatilla massacres – he looked unelectable until recently.

No one seemed less suited to promote the image of an enlightened, peace-loving pluralist democracy that Israel is keen to present to the outside world. His profile as an unreconstructed hardliner only deepened when he paid his trip to the Haram al-Sharif, or the Temple Mount, in September, lighting the touchpaper that detonated the latest intifada. And yet now – as the Israeli electorate veers to the right – he is the frontrunner to become the next Prime Minister. Eighteen months ago, a buoyant Mr Barak – the darling of the Clinton and Blair administrations – would have brushed Mr Sharon aside as an unreconstructed has-been and a liability in the peace dealing game – not least because much of the Arab world sees him as a war criminal. But they can no longer dismiss him so easily.

On Tuesday night, Mr Barak unveiled his campaign team. The contrast with his first run for the premiership less than two years ago could hardly have been greater. Gone was the super-confident Israeli commando hero, the flawless Mr Fixit who knew how finally to crack the Palestinian problem, and who lead his excited troops into a heady battle that culminated with a landslide victory in May 1999.

Instead there was a weary, deflated figure presiding over a down-beat event held in a former primary school gym in south Tel Aviv. Several of his senior ministers were not present. Those who did attend, including a stoney-faced Shimon Peres - still a potential rival in the election - looked lacklustre and glum. Even the slogan – "Don't Concede the Future" – seemed to lack any bite. "A heavy sense of defeat hung in the air," reported Yossi Verter, political correspondent for the Ha'aretz newspaper.

Polls place Mr Sharon at least a dozen percentage points ahead of Mr Barak. One, in the Ma'ariv newspaper on Friday, gave him a lead of 20 per cent.

Surveys suggest that Mr Sharon would win, though by a narrower margin, even if Mr Barak can somehow spirit up a peace accord to present to the Israeli electorate. The Prime Minister has lost the support of several large and vital constituencies – notably immigrants from the former Soviet Union, and Palestinians with Israeli citizenship, who remain angry and sickened by the police killing of a dozen Israeli Arabs at the start of the uprising. He is in trouble. His current strategy appears to be to blame Mr Arafat for the failure of his promise to bring peace, and to attack Mr Sharon as the author of Israel's problems with the Palestinians.

Mr Barak portrays his rival as the man responsible for building political settlements in the occupied territories – an allegation that will seem rich to the left-week peace camp which has watched in alarm as Mr Barak avidly built away on the West Bank. So far, though, there is precious little evidence that this will work

lmx since ur such dimwitted knucklehead, let me put it to u this way;

There is a clear separtion here; an occupying force and a resistence force. u try to figure out which one is which.

Do u blame the French resistence for underground military operations against the Nazi's during WWII? Do you...

FAKE AMERICAN GROSS PIG FARIS HOMOUD:

since you are the relentless IDIOT that you are,
let me put it to you this way:

comparing the palestinians to the french
resistance of WWII is more than slightly
ridiculous.

what does it mean to you anyway? you're safe with
papa and his money,correct?

Honestly, I'm unsure about Bush Jr.. But, even if he flip-flops on subjects of the school material, he has quite a clever (and powerful) "cabinet". May be a minimum "democracy" blah-blah and no crusades against evils-of-the-day. Powell is a "friend" of "stars & stripes" and, I think, knows, where the balance here lies. Rice seems hawkish and straightforward, not quite good for a politico, but effective, when backed up by big money. Eh?
Sharon is the only person now to fill the place, but not for long - the Knesset is obscenely divided. Netanyahu would have been the best fit.
BTH, Kim, why not? NATO should change itself into something else. Russia invading Europe sounds a silly idea for me. Instead of exchanging BS there might be some joint enterprise, but old lords of the European Council "die" hard;o)

* Well maybe there is if Israel claims it is their holy right to be there.
Volk, holy, or not-so-holy, or not holy - open for blah, if You are as anti-Jewish as Conrad.
There is a League of Nations res. on the establishment of Israel, and that's it. As I said earlier, this fact Arabs hate to and prefer not to remember.
But the UN is BS. It contains here a sizeable amount of Arab contingent, so, they write exactly what they did in Bosnia.
But Palestinians exploit it freely - once CNN pictured a "wounded" "innocent" civilian being loaded into an ambulance with Arab writings and a big "UN" (no right for it) on it. Another provocation.
If parents are stupid enough to send their offsprings for payment to attack military installations, and Palestinian Police did nothing to stop them - they get what they get. Arafat learned a lot from the "innocent" Balkan PR.
Dumb West still thinks, that a bunch of Pal policemen, "martyred" recently by a tank shell, a Fatah cell of 14 terrorists rounded up (a great op. - not a single shot fired), a group of bomb-makers together with their Israeli Arab counterparts, busted in the North, etc., etc., etc., are just "innocent" children. LOL And bus-riders of Tel-Aviv are "legitimate" targets.
A BBC crew at Tzomet Netzarim outpost never reported on how they were protected by flak jackets (given to them by our guys), after the patio of the outpost was sprayed by the Palestinian "children" AK bullets (and soldiers dragged their damn cameraman under safety cover, - they have "second thoughts" about that now.), and happily perverted the whole story. Almost around that time the Army issued video cameras to soldiers to film everything that was going on since.
* If it's holy for one why can't it be holy for the other
To some it's so holy, that they want it whole.;o))
* Mr Barak has again begun threatening unilateral separation from the Palestinians - a move that Palestinian officials say is tantamount to war
Funny, they forget that puppy Arafat booing us (and the World) with unilateral separation earlier. Pity, that opportunity was missed.

* His profile as an unreconstructed hardliner only deepened when he paid his trip to the Haram al-Sharif, or the Temple Mount, in September, lighting the touchpaper that detonated the latest intifada.
BS-s-s-s, as usual. One of our soldiers was killed and an officer wounded in an ambush several days earlier. As far as we know, these acts of terror were done by people [working for] Mohammed Dahlan, the head of the Palestinian Authority's security services in Gaza. Later, the violence continued. It really started as an initiative taken by Arafat ... every time Arafat wants to put some more pressure on [Israel], he turns to violence. For him, terror is a tool in the negotiating process.
Before Sharon went to the Temple Mount, he discussed it with the police and the security services. They said there would be no problem ... Shlomo Ben-Ami, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, said that he talked with Jibril Rajoub, the head of Palestinian security, and he was promised there would be no problem with the visit.
Palestinian Waqh council of East Jerusalem was informed and gave no objections.

"
There is a League of Nations res. on the establishment of Israel, and that's it. "

NO THAT'S NOT IT! LOL...

Does that include the West Bank?

NO IT DOES NOT INCLUDE THE WEST BANK (which includes Jerusalem). The West Bank was militarily occopuied by the Jew in 1967 - a full 19 years after the creation of the state of Israel and the resoultion u talk about. Making the West Bank - all of it - OCCUPIED LAND!

Since the "illegal occupation" of the West Bank as United Natoins resolution 242 calls it, the Jew Government has taken this time to build Housing projects to populate there newly aquired land by facilitating mass migration of jews around the world. Since no country wants jews on their respective soil - they were happy to leave their homes and come live in these "settlements". These Settlments are a major road block in any peace initiative with the Palestinians because the Jew uses these superficially built settlements as pawns in the negotiations. It’s like stealing something and then selling it back to the same person!

The ratio of Jews to Palestinians in the West Bank is so minute. The population is OVERWHELMINGLY Palestinian - as is the norm when any foreign occupation occures.

This is not disputed by anyone - except ofcourse by Bagel Girl and Lmx who simply does not know! Lol…

So Lmx why is the West Bank any different than France in WWII?

Lets all wait and see how lmx dodges another question... lol.