Yasser Arafat

note:

the following excerpt is a quote from an article:

begin quote: When he was last in melbourne... to ...There will be no international security presence.” end quote

``His resolute inflexibility led to the current despair and plight of Palestinians: from a charismatic lovable pariah to a hated pariah to an insignificant pariah he became a symbol of Palestinian impotency. Confined to a devastated compound on the West Bank that he did not leave for three years. ``

I never bought this tripe, which is perpetuated by Western imperialist propaganda machinery on 24/7 basis. Lets not forget that Arafat was made a ``partner in peace`` by western thugs only in the hopes that he will reign in the fires for freedom that burn in the hearts of Palestinians. They bribed him with Nobel; from a terrorist he suddenly was put on a padestal and heaved praise upon him to flatter him into doing what they could not do themselves. They hoped to start a civil war among Palestinians by subcontracting their dirty work to Arafat. But Arafat was a true soldier, the son of the soil who accepted being incarcerated in house arrest for years and looked into the eyes of death everyday but refused to point his guns towards his own people. What do you expect from an administrator when you tie his hands on his back and demand that he walks on the tightrope of being true to his own people and at the same time work as stooge for others.

May Allah give him long life and make him well but death is an inevitability that no one can deny. He is the embodiment of the word ``resolute`` alright, but his resolve is either freedom or death. Let us pray for his health and hope that we do not have to say farewell to this soldier who will fall but only for the freedom of his land.


SALUTE!!!!!

........urstruly`s response signifies the suicidal and homicidal psyche of the palestinaian leadership and the ummah in general ......... it is typical of people who love death more than life and value martyrdom over the simple pleasures of living .......... yasser arafat is/was emblematic of this culture of death and destruction ...........

......... hopefully, once he is off cavorting with forty buxom houris, the new palestinian leadership (an oxymoron in the arab world) will lead their people out of misery to live in peace with their neighbors and, more importantly, among themselves ................

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Moses, he has led his people from slavery to the gates of the Promised Land. I hope that it will not be said about him that, like Moses, he saw the Promised Land from afar but did not enter it. The importance of being ‘irrelevant’ —Uri Avnery

despite above quote uri is more sympathetic to yasser

Without Yasser Arafat, palestine would have merely been an ancient land that was lost to the jews. Arafat will live on as the founder of modern palestinian state as it surely will come to be.

yasser is irrelevant .. i mean the arafat, not hamdani.

temporal:

What is wrong with you? Arafat is a hero. Gaddafi is a hero. The Sheikh who died a couple of days ago leaving behind 19 sons and 43 daughters was a hero. Musharraf is fateh-i-kargil. Osama is the king of all heroes.

later
-sac

Many people think that Arafat should have accepted the offer from Clinton and Barrack. How can one accept a country that is divided into 8 non-continous section. Thus if you want to go from one section to another than you need Israels permission. Also, lot of people argue that 90% was the best. But on the other hand many people say that is was not more than 60%. Look at the current scenario where Sharon is planning to return some parts to Palestian but Israel will control the sea.
The offer from Clinton and Barrack was an insult to Palestians.

Yasser Arafat was given Bharat Ratna by Indian government. A person branded as terrorist by US and Israel is accorded the highest civilian honour by India, is being treated in a French hospital with President Chirac making statements from time to time, is seen as a symbol of anti-imperialism in many third-world countries and is seen as a Ghazi/Jihadi/whatever is the appropriate term in Muslim world. A real bag of contradictions this man is...but I`ve always liked his flamboyant dressing style.

temporal sahib - with all due respect, i feel that you wrote this article by the way of accumulating sound bites from various sources, as well as, the popular propaganda manufactured by the zionists all around the world.

did arafat had his faults and shortcomings? absolutely yes! he was not a perfect leader, if there is any such thing. but he sure single handedly took the palestinian struggle from the ashes of six day war to an international stage. so much so that the palestinian cause became the closest to the hearts and minds of the 1.2 billion muslims, and millions of europeans, latin americans, and africans. if an evidence could be presented in this regard, it was the durban, south africa conference of world`s 3000 NGOs in august 2001. they unanimously declared israel an ``apartheid and outlaw state``.

before you meticulously pin point the wrong decisions he made, please keep in mind that he was up against a brutal occupation by a brutal enemy supported by a super power. he played with narrowest of the options. and he did fight back with what he had. you can be fashionable and call it ``terrorism`` today. but remember temporal, terrorism is the war of the poor, and war is the terrorism of the rich. in the grand scheme of things, his was a response that fit all the legal norms of the world - fight the occupation by all means necessary.

also, i think you are being too naive when you quote dennis ross to pass a verdict on arafats refusal to accept clinton`s peace plan. ross is a man of dual loyalties by the way of his jewish faith. he had always associated himself with causes near and dear to israel`s security until clinton tapped him as his ``peace envoy to middle east``.

as for this hoax that arafat refused the ``most unbelievably generous`` deal by clinton, this is a bunch of bull propagated by zionists, and bought and further propagated by naive writers like yourself. i will just present two examples of that ``generous`` deal for you here.

1 - this aspect that arafat was offered east jerusalem, is a lie. in fact, arafat was offered a small town near jerusalem, called abu dis. To create this smoke screen, israeli govt would include abu dis in the muncipality of jerusalem and then scede it arafat, giving this impression that arafat got part of east jerusalem. when in fact, really all he would get would be a small town already in palestinian hands.

2- the right of return. millions of palestinians lost their homes when israel annexed occupied lands after 1967. according to every law, treaty, UN resolutions, EU resolutions, palestinians have a right to return to their property from which they were dispossesed. Israel has as much right over the occupied lands as saddam had over kuwait.

I could right more, but i will stop. i suggest that you not let yourself taken in by the popular propaganda when writing these important articles. you owe it yourself and you owe it your readers.

ek shamma jul rahee thee so voh bhee khumosh hai....

“His resolute inflexibility led to the current despair and plight of Palestinians: from a charismatic lovable pariah to a hated pariah to an insignificant pariah he became a symbol of Palestinian impotency. Confined to a devastated compound on the West Bank that he did not leave for three years.”

So now Arafat is the villain of Palestine. Geobbels always spoke the truth. Influence of idiot box and unabashed lies by the western media can make people believe what Sharon is doing in Palestine is actually good for them.

Arafat was dead the day he walked in Palestine after a long exile in different Arab countries. The Camp David accord was the beginning of the sell out by the Arabs. Palestine struggle had no chance of surviving w/o Egypt’s military help and financial help from several Arab kings. Once Arabs agreed to the Camp David accord w/o PLO consent, the end of the road for the PLO was pretty evident. After that all Arafat did was one compromise after another. He tried to extract EVERY POSSIBLE benefit for his people and did a few here and there such as the formation of the Palestine authority. He failed in many other areas but is there any politician or leader who was not forced to take a step or two back? He made mistakes, often was not able to analyze the situation correctly, and on several occasion was persuaded by the bad advice from his own friends but that is the history of any struggle. Gandhi and Nehru made several mistakes even Nelson Mandela is guilty of some mistakes.

Finally now, people w/o any knowledge and appreciation of the history of one of the major struggle for self determination mounted in the second half of the last century, are claiming that he led Palestine to the current despair and plight. Obviously, Ariel Sharon is the new hope for Palestine. Palestinians are impotent because they are offering their kids, poor, elderly and women as Cannon fodder for the IDF Choppers that are cutting down innocent and poor in Palestinian shantytowns.
This is shameful.

This ignorance comes from the condescension after upstarts land in the land of the PWT.

Often people forget that Arafat was a politician first and foremost. He was not a Prophet nor was he a saint. Any Palestinian or for that matter any person who has a little regard for freedom, liberty and human dignity, would appreciate Arafat’s role in a struggle of epic proportions.

He did not join the struggle to become the leader of the movement. He joined the struggle because he felt the despair of his nation. He joined the struggle as an ordinary member and later became the chief of PLO. He was not the founder of the Palestinian struggle; he took over from an ineffective leadership and turned Palestinians into a major fighting force for freedom.

Contrary to the popular beliefs, Arafat was not an extremist. For a long time he was the one of the select few pragmatists in the PLO. He always had to juggle between the right and left extremist in the PLO and then he always had to fight off influences from Arab kings and Sheikhs who wanted to turn Palestinians as impotent as their own populations were and still are.
The Arab leadership under the brits influence had messed up the whole Palestinian issue. They accepted the mandate but never implemented it on their side of the border. The acceptance of the mandate was wrong and Arabs under the Brits influence never had any desire of giving up on the cash cow that Palestine was. King Hussein later let the control of the West bank pass on to Israel. The treachery of Arabs-Saudis, King Hussein, and later Sadaat- forced Palestinian to pick up the struggle. The PLO which was not a factor before the 1967 war became the voice of Palestinian; all because of one man who was determined to fight for his people and provide them leadership.
The Arab kings’ unleashed Muslim fanaticism in the guise of Hammas on PLO and then Hammas in the name of the religion turned a great struggle into a clash between two religions. Palestinians struggle was never a religious battle. The Palestinian struggle was for the dignity and liberation of Palestinian. Hammas and religious fanatics turned it into a fight of cowards and suicide bombers. PLO never participated in any terrorist acts against poor and unarmed civilians. Only blemish- the Munich massacre- was not PLO sponsored and later the leaders of the Munich massacre were accepted in the western world and some still live there but PLO leadership is still blamed for that.
Hammas and the religious fanatics old and new like OBL had destroyed a great struggle by killing and attacking innocents in Israel and the US. The followers of these fanatics after destroying and sabotaging the Palestinian struggle are now blaming the Palestinian despair on Yassar Arafat!

“charismatic lovable pariah to a hated pariah”

Who hates Arafat? The religious fanatics both Islamic and Jewish and the forces that wish to do away with the last symbol of modernity and liberty in the Arab world. He is the last man standing between total capitulation of Palestinians, which will be led by the new worriers of darkness like hammas and Al qaeeda.

Malik99 sahib:

…i do not work for zionist broadcasting corporaton and agree with you that i have not denied the importance of yasser arafat in the role he played for the recognition of the palestinians dreams, hopes, aspirations and dilemma worldwide…and it is for this reason alone that he shall be remembered as a foot note in history…history has always been a tough and cruel task master...

…just as in merely 34 years gamal abdul nasser (1918-1970) has become a foot note in arab and UAR…er…egypt history today…in his day he was just a big a symbol rallying arabs against the intransigencies of the west and israel…

…with clinton and ross* (do i detect just a little anti-semitism in you?) the point i wished to make was even with that truncated palestine he and the world we live in would have had a few years of peace in the region and the world…pragmatism demanded it…50, 100 years are a short times in any nation’s history…pause, build, regroup…fight another time…i take responsibility for not conveying this long term view…therefore guilty!...

…while noting that israel does not have an official map…(how can you capture dreams on paper?)…see the following maps:

1: Solomon’s Kingdom
2:Detailed Map of Palestine Showing Armistice Lines of Israel and Jordan – 1949
3: Palestinian loss of land 1946-1999 note the first map on the left and the last one at the bottom...

...this is why in my humble opinion acceptance of that offer…that flawed offer... would have been in the long term and strategic interests of the palestinians…rather than this course chartered out by yasser arafat…this course of despair, poverty and loss of respect that has made them Bantus in their own homeland…

sorry malik sahib yasser is no Tipu…(geedaR ki sO saal ki zindagi say shair ki aik din ki zindagi ….)

rgd,

t

---

excerpts from another interview April 21/2002

ROSS: The ideas were presented on December 23 by the president, and they basically said the following: On borders, there would be about a 5 percent annexation in the West Bank for the Israelis and a 2 percent swap. So there would be a net 97 percent of the territory that would go to the Palestinians.

On Jerusalem, the Arab neighborhoods of East Jerusalem would become the capitol of the Palestinian state.

On the issue of refugees, there would be a right of return for the refugees to their own state, not to Israel, but there would also be a fund of $30 billion internationally that would be put together for either compensation or to cover repatriation, resettlement, rehabilitation costs.

And when it came to security, there would be a international presence, in place of the Israelis, in the Jordan Valley.

These were ideas that were comprehensive, unprecedented, stretched very far, represented a culmination of an effort in our best judgment as to what each side could accept after thousands of hours of debate, discussion with each side.

BARNES: I have two other questions. One, the Palestinians point out that this was never put on paper, this offer. Why not?

ROSS: We presented this to them so that they could record it. When the president presented it, he went over it at dictation speed. He then left the cabinet room. I stayed behind. I sat with them to be sure, and checked to be sure that every single word.
The reason we did it this way was to be sure they had it and they could record it. But we told the Palestinians and Israelis, if you cannot accept these ideas, this is the culmination of the effort, we withdraw them. We did not want to formalize it. We wanted them to understand we meant what we said. You don’t accept it, it’s not for negotiation, this is the end of it, we withdraw it.

So that’s why they have it themselves recorded. And to this day, the Palestinians have not presented to their own people what was available.

1. No one will ever be a ``legitimate`` Palestinian leader to the Israelis.
2. Hamas apparently provides an infrastructure that the Israeli govt. has tried to destroy-by providing hospitals, schools, etc.
3. There is a schism between Palestinian intellectuals abroad and Palestinian leadership in Gaza/West Bank.
4. Arafat has apparently put away a lot of money-the whereabouts of he has not told anyone.