Israel's end is near, Ahmadinejad says

TEHRAN, Iran- Iran's hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad yesterday said the world would witness the destruction of Israel soon, the official Islamic Republic News Agency reported. Full Story
w wman uk

UK

#37758 Feb 9, 2013
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Ans.
What happened because of ignorance is past, my point is when you are told of the mistake, why still continue with the wrong wording?
After all so many old slang and phases are removed and new ones added, in the same way, now is the high time you change this misleading "Anti Semitism" and replace it with "Anti Jew" or "Anti Zionism" or "Anti Isreal".. or Anti Isreal / USA / Europe" etc.
Instead of justifying the stupidity of your grandfathers / great grandfathers for not understanding what is Semitism and who are Semites in the world… you should be taking corrective action.
Or may be you are "planning" to "remove all other Semites from the world so that only Jews / Zionists" are left in the world?
You would be planning to kill about 1.5 Billion people on this earth, just to support this "wrong definition" of your fathers/ grandfathers?
Does it looks OK to you?
Are you Devils advocate?
PS:
What I wrote about "drinks" "Drugs" "Gay" "Women Lib." Was not based on either left wing or right wing view point.
It was from a common man's point of view, who has seen these beautiful English world being misused and "forced" to convey meanings totally opposite to what they were designed for.
And it has been done purposely and careful and by people who gave lot of thoughts as to how to lessen the guilt.
The same people who devised such terms as "Islamic Terrorism"!!
Instead of justifying the stupidity of your grandfathers for the teachings of islam take a common sence veiw that extreem islam is toxic and the hadiths relating to women are archic and in some cases barbaric. Your pathetic attemepts to blame the Copts for being murdered raped and their churches burned is well so islamic.
Gary

Columbus, OH

#37759 Feb 9, 2013
The whole point here is not one of correct or incorrect verbiage or usage- it's one of whether or not Israel's end is nigh or not. In spite of being approximately the sixe of one of America's smaller states,namely, New Jersey, will survive the next two and final Middle East wars before the Second Coming of Yeshua, Jesus ) Israel's long awaited Messiah. Iran, aka Persia, will be one of the combatants pitted against Israel and will suffer both a catastrophic and tragic loss. So, the bottom line is whomever fights Israel, loses.
MUQ

Dammam, Saudi Arabia

#37760 Feb 9, 2013
-

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/arti...

Remembering Abu Jihad And Why, Really, The Israelis Killed Him
By Alan Hart

November 02, 2012 "Information Clearing House" - More than 24 years after the event, and to prevent a battle with the newspaper in the courts, Israeli military censors cleared for publication by Yediot Ahronot a truth - that it was Israeli commandoes who, on 16 April 1988, went all the way to Tunis to murder Abu Jihad, the co-founder with Arafat of Fatah and, at the time of his death, Arafat’s number two and most likely successor in the event of his assassination.

The short story as now told by Yediot Ahronot confirms the long and detailed account as set down in the 1994 edition of my book Arafat (which was an updated version of the 1984 first edition with the title Arafat - Terrorist or Peacemaker?)

In this article my purpose is to provide the context for the Israeli decision to terminate Abu Jihad, and there is no better way of doing it than by offering my internet readers, here and now, the text of a very short chapter in Volume Three of the American edition of my book Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews. It, Chapter 14, has the title Zionism as the Recruiting Sergeant for Violent Islamic Fundamentalism (Palestinian Style).
Here is the text.

December 1987 saw the start of the first intifada or Palestinian uprising in the occupied West Bank and Gaza. As it gathered momentum it captured and held the Western media’s attention, demonstrating once again that it was only when Palestinians resorted to violence, in this case stone-throwing, that their cry for a measure of justice was heard.

As part of its global propaganda effort to have the world believe that Arafat in faraway Tunis was an irrelevance, Zionism asserted that the uprising in the Occupied Territories had nothing to do with Arafat and his PLO, and that he was merely jumping onto the intifada bandwagon - to give his “discredited” organisation the appearance of life after death.(Two years earlier Israeli jets had gone all the way to Tunis to destroy Arafat’s headquarters and blow him to pieces! By chance, apparently, Arafat was not at his desk when the bombs fell.

The Israelis then were desperate to kill him because President Reagan’s new Secretary of State, George Shultz, had been trying, Vance-like, to involve the PLO in the peace process; and Britain’s Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher, was about to make history by inviting two senior PLO executives to London for official talks. For their own propaganda purposes Israeli and other gut-Zionists proclaimed that Arafat was irrelevant but their actions demonstrated that they knew he was not.)

The explosion of Palestinian anger which became the first uprising against Israeli occupation was spontaneous, but Arafat and his leadership colleagues had anticipated it and made plans to sustain it.

Even as he was sailing away from Beirut for Tunis in August of 1982, Arafat was thinking about how to play the “internal (Occupied Territories) card”, to prevent the PLO being cancelled as a factor in the Middle East peace equation.

(Contd.)
MUQ

Dammam, Saudi Arabia

#37761 Feb 9, 2013
Gary wrote:
1.

Actually, you are expressing your opinion from a Muslim standpoint with which I seriously disagree. Israel is THE chosen nation here on Earth and Zionism will be fulfilled in the coming times in the form of more land and "the apple" of God's eyes and limitless Grace. So the conclusion here is that what Ahmadinejad is saying is both meaningless and false.

2.

The whole point here is not one of correct or incorrect verbiage or usage- it's one of whether or not Israel's end is nigh or not. In spite of being approximately the sixe of one of America's smaller states, namely, New Jersey, will survive the next two and final Middle East wars before the Second Coming of Yeshua, Jesus ) Israel's long awaited Messiah. Iran, aka Persia, will be one of the combatants pitted against Israel and will suffer both a catastrophic and tragic loss. So, the bottom line is whomever fights Israel, loses.
Ans.

1. Why there should be a Muslim point of view or a Christian point of view or a Jewish point of view? Why not we should see from "Truth and Justice and Equity's point of view"?

2.What you wrote is very offensive and boastful and against Natural justice. Why should God pick one nation and support it, irrespective of whatever crimes and injustice and mischief they make on land.

03. And Jews whole 3000 years old history is before us. If they won some "minor wars" in 1948, 1956 and 1967, It does not mean that they are invincible.

They did not win anything in 1973 wars and they could not win against Hizbollah and hamas despite the whole world supporting them and giving them enough time to finish their job.

And the same mighty Isreal has been defeated so many times in past history, the Jerusalem has been destroyed and Jews punished most cruelly.

04. And the same Jews were treated as below the dust of their shoes by European Christians for the past 2000 years.

Why all of sudden you people are filled with "love of jews" and think they are invincible?

If God was always with Jews then what was happening in Past 2000 years?

05. It is you people who have false logic and false reasoning.

I am neither Pro jews or Anti Jews, I am pro justice and pro truth!!
The Advocate

Mexico, Mexico

#37762 Feb 9, 2013
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Ans.
What happened because of ignorance is past, my point is when you are told of the mistake, why still continue with the wrong wording?
After all so many old slang and phases are removed and new ones added, in the same way, now is the high time you change this misleading "Anti Semitism" and replace it with "Anti Jew" or "Anti Zionism" or "Anti Isreal".. or Anti Isreal / USA / Europe" etc.
Instead of justifying the stupidity of your grandfathers / great grandfathers for not understanding what is Semitism and who are Semites in the world… you should be taking corrective action.
Or may be you are "planning" to "remove all other Semites from the world so that only Jews / Zionists" are left in the world?
You would be planning to kill about 1.5 Billion people on this earth, just to support this "wrong definition" of your fathers/ grandfathers?
Does it looks OK to you?
Are you Devils advocate?
PS:
What I wrote about "drinks" "Drugs" "Gay" "Women Lib." Was not based on either left wing or right wing view point.
It was from a common man's point of view, who has seen these beautiful English world being misused and "forced" to convey meanings totally opposite to what they were designed for.
And it has been done purposely and careful and by people who gave lot of thoughts as to how to lessen the guilt.
The same people who devised such terms as "Islamic Terrorism"!!
Again, you are ignoring the etymological argument presented with an excuse of "ignorance." You haven't even presented any sort of evidence to support your points except conjecture.

It's not my problem if you want to replace the term with "Anti - Jew" AND want to make it synonymous with "Anti Zionism," therefor eliminating any sort of defense you might've had in saying that you're not racist. Clearly you are not only discriminatory against non Muslims, but also a misogynist, homophobic conservative sock puppet.

BTW -- it IS Islamic terrorism because organisations like Hezbollah, Hamas, al - Qaeda and such base themselve in a VERY LARGE PART on religion. Any organisation which professes religion to be one of their main aspects/defining aspect would be in fact a religious terrorist.

No further questions.
w wman uk

UK

#37763 Feb 10, 2013
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Ans.
1. Why there should be a Muslim point of view or a Christian point of view or a Jewish point of view? Why not we should see from "Truth and Justice and Equity's point of view"?
2.What you wrote is very offensive and boastful and against Natural justice. Why should God pick one nation and support it, irrespective of whatever crimes and injustice and mischief they make on land.
03. And Jews whole 3000 years old history is before us. If they won some "minor wars" in 1948, 1956 and 1967, It does not mean that they are invincible.
They did not win anything in 1973 wars and they could not win against Hizbollah and hamas despite the whole world supporting them and giving them enough time to finish their job.
And the same mighty Isreal has been defeated so many times in past history, the Jerusalem has been destroyed and Jews punished most cruelly.
04. And the same Jews were treated as below the dust of their shoes by European Christians for the past 2000 years.
Why all of sudden you people are filled with "love of jews" and think they are invincible?
If God was always with Jews then what was happening in Past 2000 years?
05. It is you people who have false logic and false reasoning.
I am neither Pro jews or Anti Jews, I am pro justice and pro truth!!
How can you say that you lie, you said that you wanted all Jews all Jews put on an island separate from civilisation. You chortled that in a post to the wee man thor did you not?
ARE YOU MAN ENOUGH TO ADMIT IT? ARE YOU MAN ENOUGH TO ADMIT THAT YOU SAID THAT THE COPTS WERE TO BLAME FOR BEING MURDERED AND RAPED AND THEIR CURCHES BURNED BY THEIR PEACEFULL MUSLIM NEIGHBOURS.
Gary

Columbus, OH

#37764 Feb 10, 2013
Gary wrote:
The whole point here is not one of correct or incorrect verbiage or usage- it's one of whether or not Israel's end is nigh or not. In spite of being approximately the sixe of one of America's smaller states,namely, New Jersey, will survive the next two and final Middle East wars before the Second Coming of Yeshua, Jesus ) Israel's long awaited Messiah. Iran, aka Persia, will be one of the combatants pitted against Israel and will suffer both a catastrophic and tragic loss. So, the bottom line is whomever fights Israel, loses.
Those wars you poinyed out like 1948,1956,1967,1973,etc. were not minor wars to say the least . They were actually definitive and gave the world a look at the power of Israel. 1948 was evtremely import [prophesy-wise in that it fulfilled the biblical prophesy that Israel would one day become a nation instead of a loose congregation of tribes. 1967's Six-Day War , was nother prophesy-fulfilling war in that the nation of Israel was "growing buds" in teh form of adding territory. You also srared incorrectly that Israel is not invincible. Sadly for you and people who think just like you, Israel is invincible. Both Saudi Arabia and Kuwait's largest oil fields have long passed their peak production in barrels of crude per day production withuot any new replaceable wells of similar capacity. Bottom line is that Israel is invincible because it is protected by God and the Arab nations decline is well under way.
Gary

Columbus, OH

#37765 Feb 10, 2013
Israel is the only nation of an assured future in the world of today and in the future . Is it invincible ? Yes it is ,to the chagrin of its detractors and persecutors. Israel will survive any kind of attacks : verbal,diplomatic, and military ,etc. God protects Israel, not logic,deductions, inferences,etc..
The Advocate

Mexico, Mexico

#37767 Feb 10, 2013
w wman uk wrote:
<quoted text> How can you say that you lie, you said that you wanted all Jews all Jews put on an island separate from civilisation. You chortled that in a post to the wee man thor did you not?
ARE YOU MAN ENOUGH TO ADMIT IT? ARE YOU MAN ENOUGH TO ADMIT THAT YOU SAID THAT THE COPTS WERE TO BLAME FOR BEING MURDERED AND RAPED AND THEIR CURCHES BURNED BY THEIR PEACEFULL MUSLIM NEIGHBOURS.
You're just as bad as he is, so I wouldn't complain if I were you. You two were made for each other!
w wman uk

UK

#37768 Feb 10, 2013
The Advocate wrote:
<quoted text>
You're just as bad as he is, so I wouldn't complain if I were you. You two were made for each other!
Thats your opinion and your entitled to it. You wont find me wanting to punish you as an unbeliever or talking down to you because your a woman and do not know your place.
Churchill was not complaining about muslims just stating th facts about islam.
Pat Condell is about right on the way most of us in the UK feel about extreem islam the religion of permenent offence.

HERE IS THE SPEECH:

"How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its
votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in
a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic
apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries, improvident
habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of
commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the
followers of the Prophet rule or live.

A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and
refinement, the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that
in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his
absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine,
must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of
Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.

Individual Muslims may show splendid qualities, but the
influence of the religion paralyses the social development of
those who follow it.

No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from
being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing
faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa,
raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that
Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the
science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization
of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient
Rome."

Sir Winston Churchill; (Source: The River War, first edition,
Vol. II, pages 248-50 London)

Churchill saw it coming.
w wman uk

UK

#37769 Feb 10, 2013
Pat Condell on rioting muslims
Well, once again we see multiple violent tantrums from the Religion of Permanent Offence. Some things never change, do they?
Once again we see Islam self-detonate (if you'll pardon the expression) and show once again why it's about as welcome on this planet as an asteroid. Once again we see thousands of Islamic nutcases take time out from beating up their wives to show their sensitive side. How? By smashing up the towns they live in, egged on by clerical ignoramuses whose motives are even lower than the literacy level of their followers. And once again we in the civilised world are being urged to censor ourselves out of respect for a religion that violates the human rights of half the people on the planet and that doubles as a political ideology indistinguishable from Nazism. It would be funny if it wasn't so obscene.
Or should that be the other way round? To call these riots infantile and imbecilic is to give them a dignity they don't deserve. They can only be described as Islamic. Let me get this straight. We're supposed to show tolerance and respect for a religion that doesn't know the meaning of either word and goes out of its way to prove it every day? We're supposed to amend our values to accommodate a religion that accommodates nothing and nobody? Dream on, people. It's not going to happen because with Islam it's always a one way street. We've learned that lesson the hard way. We can't afford any more tolerance and respect. We've been sucked dry.
And we've become weary of manufactured Islamic grievance. It's such a bore that now when we hear some bearded buffoon or some bag-headed bimbo telling us how offended they are we can't even be bothered to laugh any more. Not even when the Turkish prime minister hilariously demands that "Islamophobia" now be made a crime against humanity, when, given the evidence, there's a much stronger case for making Islam a crime against humanity. Besides, Turkey is already hypocritically guilty of one of the worst crimes against humanity in history, the Armenian Genocide, a crime it doesn't even have the balls to admit to.
When Muslims start showing the same level of outrage about things that are genuinely offensive, like the thousands of women and girls who are murdered, mutilated and raped every year in their countries then we might take them a bit more seriously. As it is, there is nothing on this planet less deserving of sympathy or respect than Muslim outrage. Indeed, there's something deeply comical about it. It's so contrived and so cringeingly un-self-aware it's impossible to take seriously, even if we wanted to, and nobody in their right mind wants to any more.
w wman uk

UK

#37770 Feb 10, 2013
Cont
There was a time when Islam was given the benefit of the doubt by many people in the West. Now we think it's poison and we wish we had never heard of it because twenty years of baseless grievance mongering and kneejerk offence have shown us this religion for what it really is, and now we don't like it, we don't trust it, and we are never going to respect it. And we don't care how Muslims feel about that. Everything is an insult to this religion. Everything causes offence. Well, nobody gives a damn any more, people. You've done it to death. You've killed the goose that laid the golden egg. So now, if you're an offended Muslim, go stick your head in the oven for all we care. And if you think that if you keep up the violence the West will eventually cave in, it's not going to happen. Even if the politicians want it to, the people won't allow it. We'll carry on speaking our minds openly and freely because it's our birthright, and it can't be taken away from us. It can only be given away. And we are giving Islam nothing, because Islam gives us nothing. It's a religion permanently on the take. Gimme gimme gimme is all we ever hear. Gimme respect, even though I haven't earned it. Gimme special treatment or I'll be offended and you'll be a racist. Well, we're sick and tired of hearing it, we're sick and tired of Islam, and we're sick and tired of the needless conflict and intimidation that comes from this religion at every turn.
All week we've heard Muslims telling us that we in the West need to understand how important the Prophet is to them. We do understand, and we don't care. That's the point. We don't care now, and we are never going to care. Get used to it. We don't give a damn about your feelings. Our feelings are more important, and our feelings tell us that we're sick to the back teeth of hearing about your religion, so stick a sock in it. And no amount of violence is going to change a thing. The more you riot and scream and shout, the less we're going to listen. It will simply stiffen our resolve not to be bullied and pushed around by people whose values we don't respect because you've given us no reason to respect them, and, more to the point, because you are incapable of giving us such a reason. In short, we will not be told what we can and cannot say, not by you, not by anybody, not now, not ever. No matter how many flags you burn, no matter how many embassies you attack, free speech will prevail, and you'll suck it up and like it.
w wman uk

UK

#37771 Feb 10, 2013
"I’d like to see a change in Western attitudes towards the situation in the Middle East. Right now, we patronize the Palestinians by holding them to a lower standard of behaviour because we are all racist. The West ignores the fact that Arabs deliberately target women and children while hiding behind their own women and children. This is a war crime which they commit all the time. We know there isn’t a chance in Hell that any of them will ever be tried in the Hague for these crimes because we have given them a free pass on indiscriminate barbarism.

"We don’t believe they are capable of civilized behaviour because we are racists. Being racist, we refuse to acknowledge the thousands of rockets that come out of Gaza; that is, we remain silent until Israel finally wakes up and retaliates to protect its people. Then, we start huffing and puffing and calling in Ambassadors. Israelis get no credit at all for avoiding civilian casualties. If the Palestinians ever did that, we would trumpet their virtues from every roof and shower them with Nobel Prizes. But they do not behave like that because we don’t expect them to—and they know that. They know they can blow up Israeli civilians all day long, and the free world’s racist double-standards will never hold them to account.

"We pretend that religion has absolutely zero influence on Arab behaviour, and that this is a political situation. We maintain the ludicrous fiction that the Arabs are fighting for justice and civil rights –even though we can see the kind of justice and civil rights that have been delivered to the people of Gaza under the jack-boot of Hamas.

We choose to ignore the fact that Arabs in Israel have more rights than they do in any Arab country, and that there are Arab Israelis in Israel’s government and Army. We ignore these facts because they are inconvenient to our liberal, racist prejudice. We ignore these facts because they shatter the carefully nurtured propaganda myth of the apartheid state.

Being racist, we choose to ignore the history of the region, and the fact that every time the Arabs feel strong enough, they attack Israel unprovoked with the intention of committing religious genocide. They make no secret about this. That is their agenda. It has never changed.

Nothing will change in the Middle East until we pay the Arabs the complement of holding them to the same standard as everyone else. If we don’t do this—if we carry on indulging their primitive, caveman hatred by treating this as a political problem and not a religious one—then we are, effectively, underwriting permanent war in the Middle East.

Israel is the front line between Islam and civilization. We should know by now that there is no compromise with Islam. You either win, or you lose—and if you lose, you lose everything, especially if you are Jewish. Palestinian leadership has made it crystal clear that, as long as there is any level of Jewish autonomy in the Middle East, nothing that Israel concedes will ever satisfy them. They don’t want peace. They want to drive the Jews into the sea. They never stop telling us that!
w wman uk

UK

#37772 Feb 10, 2013
Religious genocide is that not whats happening to the Copts in Eygypt??????????
Gary

Columbus, OH

#37773 Feb 10, 2013
The Arabs' behavior is going to get more and more desperate as time elapses. This will help speed their demise. unfortunately we have misguided politicians here in the West who are playing a game of appeasement . The Chinese have a good saying: He who feeds the tiger will be eaten by the tiger.
The Advocate

Mexico, Mexico

#37774 Feb 10, 2013
w wman uk wrote:
<quoted text> Thats your opinion and your entitled to it. You wont find me wanting to punish you as an unbeliever or talking down to you because your a woman and do not know your place.
Churchill was not complaining about muslims just stating th facts about islam.
Pat Condell is about right on the way most of us in the UK feel about extreem islam the religion of permenent offence.
HERE IS THE SPEECH:
"How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its
votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in
a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic
apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries, improvident
habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of
commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the
followers of the Prophet rule or live.
A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and
refinement, the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that
in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his
absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine,
must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of
Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.
Individual Muslims may show splendid qualities, but the
influence of the religion paralyses the social development of
those who follow it.
No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from
being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing
faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa,
raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that
Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the
science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization
of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient
Rome."
Sir Winston Churchill; (Source: The River War, first edition,
Vol. II, pages 248-50 London)
Churchill saw it coming.
Any kind of racism, regardless whether it's espoused by a drunk on the corner or a famous politician, will always be intrinsically wrong.

Your call.
Acadia

Hagerstown, MD

#37775 Feb 10, 2013
Gary wrote:
Israel is the only nation of an assured future in the world of today and in the future . Is it invincible ? Yes it is ,to the chagrin of its detractors and persecutors. Israel will survive any kind of attacks : verbal,diplomatic, and military ,etc. God protects Israel, not logic,deductions, inferences,etc..
And this infuriates atheists. Good job.
MUQ

Dammam, Saudi Arabia

#37776 Feb 10, 2013
Advocate wrote:
01. Again, you are ignoring the etymological argument presented with an excuse of "ignorance." You haven't even presented any sort of evidence to support your points except conjecture.

It's not my problem if you want to replace the term with "Anti - Jew" AND want to make it synonymous with "Anti Zionism," therefore eliminating any sort of defense you might've had in saying that you're not racist. Clearly you are not only discriminatory against non Muslims, but also a misogynist, homophobic conservative sock puppet.

02. BTW -- it IS Islamic terrorism because organizations like Hezbollah, Hamas, al - Qaeda and such base themselves in a VERY LARGE PART on religion. Any organisation which professes religion to be one of their main aspects/defining aspect would be in fact a religious terrorist.

No further questions.
Ans.

01. What is there to prove? Someone which even a child' mind can see that term Anti Smite is a misnomer. And to use it exclusive for Jews is mistake and nothing else. Arabs are as Semite as any blue blooded Jew of the finest genealogy. So to exclude Arabs from Ant Semite is neither logical nor reasonable.

What further proofs you need I do not know. But your insistence shows that have viruses of racism in you and not me.

02. Again linking Hizbollah and Hamas with Islamic terrorism is wrong. And if you insist, then you should also call Israeli actions as Jewish Terrorism and US actions in Iraq and Afghanistan as Christian terrorism.

Use common standard is my plea, nothing else.

It seems that you Devil's advocate after all.
MUQ

Jubail, Saudi Arabia

#37777 Feb 10, 2013
Acadia wrote:
<quoted text>
And this infuriates atheists. Good job.
Is your aim in life to infuriate atheists? I did not know that!!
MUQ

Dammam, Saudi Arabia

#37778 Feb 10, 2013
-

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/arti...

Remembering Abu Jihad And Why, Really, The Israelis Killed Him
By Alan Hart

(9Contd.)

The following year he ordered a “General Exercise” in and around Nablus.“General Exercise” was the code for a confrontation between the PLO’s supporters and the occupying Israeli army. It was Arafat’s way of testing the feelings and mood of Palestinians throughout the Occupied Territories. The response was exactly what Arafat and Abu Jihad had predicted it would be. The confrontation in Nablus took place, but there was no support for the idea that it should be sustained and extended. A popular uprising was still the stuff of dreams.

Arafat, Abu Jihad and Hani Hassan (Arafat’s chief adviser and trouble-shooter) then conducted a detailed investigation of why the “General Exercise” had failed to inspire even a token demonstration of widespread support for the PLO.“We came to a very dramatic conclusion”, Hani told me.“We discovered that the silent majority of our people in the Occupied Territories had given their hearts if not their minds to the Islamic fundamentalists.”

What explained this enormous shift of popular opinion, a change of heart which suggested, among other things, that Arafat’s moderate PLO was in danger of becoming an irrelevance in the Occupied Territories?
Short answer - despair.

There was first of all, and obviously, the despair born of 20 years of occupation and often-brutal Israeli repression. But in the wake of Israel’s invasion of Lebanon and its siege of Beirut there were, as Hani Hassan put it,“two new factors of despair.”

The first was the realisation that Arafat’s policy of politics and compromise with Israel was getting the Palestinians nowhere.

The second, a bitter lesson for a new generation of Palestinians, was that they were on their own when the crunch came. The proof was the way the Arab regimes had sat on their backsides and watched for weeks as Sharon tried to finish the PLO in Beirut.

Against that backdrop it was inevitable that more and more Palestinians in the Occupied Territories would begin to see Islamic fundamentalism as the only force capable of changing the status quo. But what surprised and shocked Arafat and his leadership colleagues was the number of Palestinians who had moved or who were moving in the direction of the fundamentalists. Hani said:“We discovered that not less than 60 percent of our young people in the Occupied Territories were thinking that Islamic fundamentalism had more to offer than the PLO.”

The violent Islamic fundamentalism (Palestinian style) that Arafat and his leadership colleagues saw coming as the inevitable product of continuing Israeli occupation and the new wave of Palestinian resistance would be institutionalised in 1988, when Hamas was founded in Gaza by Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, a paralysed, wheelchair-bound religious teacher. In Arabic Hamas means zeal. It is also an acronym for the Islamic Resistance Movement.

For Arafat the consequences of Islamic fundamentalists making the running in the Occupied Territories were terrifying.(As they ought to have been to rational Israelis). First there was the obvious danger that the PLO would become an irrelevance for a majority of Palestinians. But that was not the worst-case scenario. If there was a popular uprising, and if the Islamic fundamentalists could claim most of the credit for it, Arafat - even if the PLO did retain some credibility - might not be able to deliver the compromise that he had struggled for six years to sell to his people.

So what at the beginning of 1984 were Arafat and his leadership colleagues to do?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Iran Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
why Iranian guys are impulsive and sweet talker? (Jan '12) 15 hr ProudtobeTaken 80
Iranians Brave Floggings andEven Execution to E... Wed Jahid 2
cleaning all type of black and green money by p... Wed french man 6
Iran Captured a Foreign 'Enemy Drone' (Feb '13) Dec 23 Common Reactor 28
Iran-Kazakhstan relations are friendly: Salehi (Apr '13) Dec 21 true 11
Why are Persian Kurds & Persian Iranians not fr... Dec 21 Setar 4
an Iranian Opposition Group's Fight for Freedom Dec 21 Rudi 1
More from around the web