CNN- Yasser Arafat in serious condition may be unconscious

[SW FL Dem]

Doctors summoned to his compound to treat him. Link as soon as possible

[Cooley Hurd]

1. According to CNN, he's unconscious...

n/t

[saigon68]

69. HE IS ALIVE AND KICKING (PHOTO)

In this picture released by the Palestinian authority Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat (news - web sites), centre, holds hands with unidentified Tunisian, Jordaninan and Egyptian doctors at his compound Thursday Oct. 28, 2004. (AP Photo/Palestinian Authority (news - web sites), Hussein Hussein)

[geek tragedy]

2. Now this is an October surprise!

How does this play in the election?

[kokomo]

3. Plays more into the Israeli elections. Bush had ignored him anyway.

[Nicholas_J]

4. But the Palestinians hav'nt ignored him

Arafat dies, and the Palestinians will explode. None of the Bush approved choices have the power or support to keep the extremist organizations controlled. None of them have the support of the Palestinian people. Only Arafat was able to balance the extremists and moderates. Hamas will take control or be given it by the Palestinian people.

[krkaufman]

13. "explode" = gangsta battles for control/power

Yes, Arafat has been clinging to power for ages, and hasn't exactly helped to facilitate a smooth transition.

[Nicholas_J]

23. Arafat has been consumate at doing it though

He has been a balance between moderates and Hamas. Hamas holds enourmous popular support in Palestine, as contrary to both Israeli and U.S. contentions, they run a massive social service network that provides a great many social services to the unemployed, the sick, the elderly and many who have been placed in extreme economic hardship by the rather artificial situations and constraint placed upon them by Israel. He has not need tocling to power. It would be his regardless. Any attempts to replace him or place a client ruler over Palestine would meet with even greater resistance than exists in Iraq. If not for Arafat, it would be Hamas in charge, not the moderates.

[Gabysan]

33. We are all going to die

I have a news flash for you. We are all going to die someday. You, me, and Arafat. Are the Palestinians going to go crazy no matter what?

[Nicholas_J]

36. The battle for control of the Palestinian Authority will either be

explosive, or Hamas will take over immediately and the attacks on Israel will be explosive

[Julien Sorel]

37. Gaining power has a way of moderating "extremists."

However, a Hamas takeover of authority there would have interesting ramifications, as gaining power also has a way of lending credibility to previously "marginal" groups. For decades, Israel has been electing former terrorists to the PM spot (Sharon is hardly the first), and no one in the rest of the world cares, because these thugs wear suits and have the trappings of legitimacy.

[Nicholas_J]

62. Yes , One of the hypocrisies I get most angry at...

Is the massive complaining about terrorist we hear out of Israel, and then the United States complaining about Arafat having no credibility, when Israel was a natiopn forged out of the acts of terrorist, and the history of Israel's taking over of lands allocated to the Palestinians can also be coinsidered a result of terrorism. While much of the lands that became Israel were purchased from absentee landlords during the Ottoman period, a good number ot Palestinian peasants were terrorized off of their lands when they would not sell, and often extremist Zionist organizations would kill a few of those peasants who were most stubborn from the Israeli point of view about selling, in order to set an example to others in order to soften their decision making. When I was younger, I was completely pro Israel,but one you start reading some of the less biased histories, you realize that there is enouggh innocent blood on both sides to go around. It was an Israeli policy from before the creation of the state that eventually they would take over all of the lands that were historically and biblically part of Israel, and even a speech by David Ben Gurion in 1938 indicated this. He said that if aJewish state were granted to Israel that forever excluded any part of the historical Israel, they wouuld choose not to accept that state.
Ben Gurion did not definve tyhe outlies of this state, so you cn understand why some Arab Nations get skittish about it. There are some Israeli's who do beleive that this land should reach the extent of the Kingdom of Solomon. Which extended from the East Bank of the Nile to the West Bank of the Euphrates. While the Israeli Government does not ascribe to this policy, there are extreme groups in Israel who do, and many of them are closely aligned with Sharon.

Many the first generation of Israeli Prime ministers were terroists who's techniques did not differ much from that of Hamas. Menachem Begin was certainly one of those who engaged in a great deal of mass killings. Until the Palestinian issue is settled, on the terms set in the original U.N. decision that created two states, the world is going to have serious problems

[Julien Sorel]

63. Actually, IIRC,

about 5% of what is today Israel was actually bought by the Jews. The rest of it was taken via violence. But such issues are trivialities in the face of military reality...

I still can't understand why, as an American, I don't have the right to go to Iraq, pick out an oil well, and call it my own. Iraq was a mortal threat to the existence of the United States. Saddam Hussein used belligerent rhetoric towards the United States. Iraq has terrorists. We kicked their ass in war, fair and square; it was a preventive war -- no less a person than George W Bush tells me so. For the safety of this country, we need to start settling good, red-blooded Americans on Iraqi soil to act as a buffer against further potential outrages the Iraqis might commit against us. I even belong to a minority group that has a long history of suffering persecution, so I have it coming!

[Nicholas_J]

65. Actually, 41 percent of what was Palestine at the time

Was actually purchased by the Zionist Organizations or by individuals starting early in the 20th Century. This closely follows resembles the borders of the lands ceded to Israel by the United Nations. The United Nations decision was pretty much based on ceding lands that were already owne by Jews who had come from Europe. Most of the lands were purchaased for a song, from absentee landlords in Damascus or Baghdad. There were lands taken over through terrorism, but these were usually parcels of lands that made the state contiguous. There was a good deal of land gotten through terrorism, but it really did not exceed the percentage of land that is now problematic due to the Israeli Security fence.

[Julien Sorel]

67. Here:

In 1947, Jews (i.e., the JNF, the PICA and the private landowners) owned some 7% (i.e., 1.775 million dunums) of Palestine's total of 26.4 million dunums of land. The Partition resolution had earmarked some 60% of Palestine for the Jewish state; most of it was not Jewish-owned land. But war was war and, if won, as Ben-Gurion saw things, it would at last solve the Jewish State's land problem. (Morris, Birth Of the Palestinian Refugee Problem, p 170.)

"In the Negev we will not buy land. We will conquer it. You are forgetting that we are at war." -- David Ben-Gurion

BB, who is still waiting for his Iraqi oil well.

[Nicholas_J]

75. That 60 percent figure is incorrectly applied

60 percent of the land that was ceded to Israel consisted of the Negev.

Here is the crux. Zionists owned far more land that the Palestinians would accede to as:

In 1948, at the moment that Israel declared itself a state, it legally owned a little more than 6 percent of the land of Palestine. After 1940, when the mandatory authority restricted Jewish land ownership to specific zones inside Palestine, there continued to be illegal buying (and selling) within the 65 percent of the total area restricted to Arabs...

..It depends on how you define legal, and owned.


It aso depends on how you define Israel. Israel was ceded 41 percent of what was the British Mandate of Palestine. Palestinians were ceded. Arabs were ceded 59 percent of that. However all of that was not ceded to Palestinians to become a Palestinian State. Some of this land was ceded to other Arab States. Trans-Jordan was a part of the British Mandate of Palestine which becamew Jordan.


First Mandate assigned 55 percent of the Land to Israel.A second mandate which the U.N. started in 1947, reduced the amount of Land which was ceded to Israel to 41 percent, which due to oposition in the U.N. was about to be cut down to 17 percent when the Arab states broke off from the negitiations and started the Arab Israeli War.

Here is the actual breakdown under the Original Mandate and the Final Plan:

The Original British Mandate Plan:

Arab Portion (Transjordan) 77 percent of the Mandate

Israeli Portion 0 percent

Shared Portion (Joint Arab-Jewish State0 23 %

United Nations Partition Plan:

Trans Jordan (87 Percent 77%+ 10% for Separate Palestinian Staet)

Israel 13 percent.

Shared Portion less than 1%

It depends on how you define the Mandate and how you define Israel which was only a sub portion of the Mandate. The creation of Israel was not simply part of a two state partition, but a part of a larger plan for dividing the British Mandate of Palestine.

So out of the total, Israel got 13 percent.

Yes, Zionists only owned 7 percent of what was the British Mandate of Palestine, but of what became the separate state of Israel, it is a much larger percentage. When trying to define the ceding of land to Israel, then the figues used to define the area that was given to Israel is shanged to refer to only the portions being argued about today, subtracting the portion that became Jordan. The problem with this argument is that is compares apples and oranges. Zionists owned only 7 percent of the entire mandate, but they ownded a far larger portion of the lands that were being disputed were to become the two separate nations of Israel and Palestine.

This is not to indicate any support on my part for Israels claims that Palestinians forfeited the portio of the Mandate Ceded to them separate from the lands that became Jordan. The U.N. partition did not intend that there was to be one big state for Arabs andone for Jews. The change from the British Mandate Plan to the U.N. Partition Plan gave an additional ten percent to the Arab claims to create Two States. One called Jordan and one called Palestine.

It is all a matter of incorrect argument. Israeli claims that the partition created Jordan, and not a separate state of Palestine, which is incorrrect. But the Palestinian claims that Israel only owned 7 percent of the lands that are divided between the two are also incorrect, as they are using the figures that indicate the Zionist ownersip of the lands that defined the entire British mandate.

Bo9th sides are incorrectly using the figures in order to make the other side look like they got more than they were entitled to.

Israeli's only owned 7 percent of the mandate. but this was 41 percent of the land that was to become the area that would be the separate states of Israel and Palestine, excluding what would become Jordan. The eventual decision gave Israel 55 percent of the land that the combined two states covered in some maps. 53 percent in others.
41 percent in the final maps. It all becaqme moot when the arab states invaded. The state of Israel was declared when the U.N voted on Partion that gave Israel 13 percent of the total mandate.

There were two Mandate Plans. One Started By the British, who due to irreconsilable squabbling between the Jews and Arabs led to them turning it over to the U.N.

[Nicholas_J]

76. That 60 percent figure is incorrectly applied

60 percent of the land that was ceded to Israel consisted of the Negev.

Here is the crux. Zionists owned far more land that the Palestinians would accede to as:

In 1948, at the moment that Israel declared itself a state, it legally owned a little more than 6 percent of the land of Palestine. After 1940, when the mandatory authority restricted Jewish land ownership to specific zones inside Palestine, there continued to be illegal buying (and selling) within the 65 percent of the total area restricted to Arabs...

..It depends on how you define legal, and owned.


It aso depends on how you define Israel. Israel was ceded 41 percent of what was the British Mandate of Palestine. Palestinians were ceded. Arabs were ceded 59 percent of that. However all of that was not ceded to Palestinians to become a Palestinian State. Some of this land was ceded to other Arab States. Trans-Jordan was a part of the British Mandate of Palestine which becamew Jordan.


First Mandate assigned 55 percent of the Land to Israel.A second mandate which the U.N. started in 1947, reduced the amount of Land which was ceded to Israel to 41 percent, which due to oposition in the U.N. was about to be cut down to 17 percent when the Arab states broke off from the negitiations and started the Arab Israeli War.

Here is the actual breakdown under the Original Mandate and the Final Plan:

The Original British Mandate Plan:

Arab Portion (Transjordan) 77 percent of the Mandate

Israeli Portion 0 percent

Shared Portion (Joint Arab-Jewish State0 23 %

United Nations Partition Plan:

Trans Jordan (87 Percent 77%+ 10% for Separate Palestinian Staet)

Israel 13 percent.

Shared Portion less than 1%

It depends on how you define the Mandate and how you define Israel which was only a sub portion of the Mandate. The creation of Israel was not simply part of a two state partition, but a part of a larger plan for dividing the British Mandate of Palestine.

So out of the total, Israel got 13 percent.

Yes, Zionists only owned 7 percent of what was the British Mandate of Palestine, but of what became the separate state of Israel, it is a much larger percentage. When trying to define the ceding of land to Israel, then the figues used to define the area that was given to Israel is shanged to refer to only the portions being argued about today, subtracting the portion that became Jordan. The problem with this argument is that is compares apples and oranges. Zionists owned only 7 percent of the entire mandate, but they ownded a far larger portion of the lands that were being disputed were to become the two separate nations of Israel and Palestine.

This is not to indicate any support on my part for Israels claims that Palestinians forfeited the portio of the Mandate Ceded to them separate from the lands that became Jordan. The U.N. partition did not intend that there was to be one big state for Arabs andone for Jews. The change from the British Mandate Plan to the U.N. Partition Plan gave an additional ten percent to the Arab claims to create Two States. One called Jordan and one called Palestine.

It is all a matter of incorrect argument. Israeli claims that the partition created Jordan, and not a separate state of Palestine, which is incorrrect. But the Palestinian claims that Israel only owned 7 percent of the lands that are divided between the two are also incorrect, as they are using the figures that indicate the Zionist ownersip of the lands that defined the entire British mandate.

Bo9th sides are incorrectly using the figures in order to make the other side look like they got more than they were entitled to.

Israeli's only owned 7 percent of the mandate. but this was 41 percent of the land that was to become the area that would be the separate states of Israel and Palestine, excluding what would become Jordan. The eventual decision gave Israel 55 percent of the land that the combined two states covered in some maps. 53 percent in others.
41 percent in the final maps. It all becaqme moot when the arab states invaded. The state of Israel was declared when the U.N voted on Partion that gave Israel 13 percent of the total mandate.

There were two Mandate Plans. One Started By the British, who due to irreconsilable squabbling between the Jews and Arabs led to them turning it over to the U.N.

The squabbling still goes on. One side cadging togetther figures inclding Jordan for part of its arguments and other figures based on excluding Jordan.. The Israelis to so to deny the right of a Palestinian state to even exist, the Palestinians to so to intimate that Israel got more than they were entitled.

In order to be correct, it is neccesary to use one set of figures for the entire argument.


Myself. I belive that the Stat of Israel has not right to exist until the entire resolution that created it is fulfille in its entirety. And this was based on the fact that the U.N. had to take over from the Britis because the idea of a joint state compised of both Palestinians and Jews was inacceptable to either party, so the U.N. ceded the Arabs extra land to create a separate Palestinian state as well as Jordan.

[Julien Sorel]

79. As far as I can tell,

you are saying that the land the UN deemed what we will call "Israeli" via U.N. Resolution 181 became Jewish land. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that's what I got from your rather involved post. A country's borders and who actually owns the land within those borders are rather different things. Until I see some figures on actual Jewish ownership of Palestinian land, I'm going to stick with Morris' <= 7% figure, which I think I've seen elsewhere as well, perhaps Segev, but am too lazy to look it up.

By the way, Morris doesn't fool around by pretending "Palestine" is the whole of the British Mandate. His 7% figure is limited to what is today Israel plus the Occupied Territories.

[Nicholas_J]

80. If you want to go by that definition

There was virtually no Palestinian land, if by that you mean land owned by Palestinians. Prior to the British Mandate, almost the whole of the administrative district of Palestine (under the Ottomans, Palestine was first a part of the administrative District of Syria. Under the Mandate, privately owened land remained in the hands of those Arabs who still previously owned it. Most of the land was owned by residents of Damascus, Badhdad, and Amman. There were virtually no "Palestinian"owners of property in Palestine. Prior to the late 1880's were there many residents of Palestine at all, Jewish or Arab.

In 1880 the total population of Palestine was about one half of a million. Estimates from the Ottaom period indicate that about 80,000 of these were Jews. This was propr to the migrations that occured after the migrations of European Jews as well as of Arabs from nearby Arab areas after the start of the British Mandate. Most of the Palestinians in the 1880's were tenent farmers.

Depending on area, Jews and Arab owned varying degree of land. Under the Ottomans there was also somthing called miri, or whatwe would call public lands.This was continued by the British. The Negev, given to Israel in 1948, was in 1945 84 pecent public.

In various areas of the Mandate, Jews owned percentages of land, and Arabs owned others. And during the partition, Jews lost land to Palestin. In the 1945 Census, for example 13 percent of the land was owned by Jews. In the Haifa area 35 percent was owned by Jews. In Gaza, 4 percent. In Hebron 4 percent. Go North, in the Saffad ditrict you get around 14 percent. Tiberias, 28 percent.Nazareth, 28 percent Baysan 34 percent. The overall ownership in the areas even when averaged, than the averaqge figure of 7 percent cited. There were areas in which Jews had to give up considerable amounts of land that were not ceded to them in the partitiion. That was land directly owned by Jewish residents of Palestine. Sice Judea, Samaria and Hebron were not ceded to Israel, but Palestine, private owners lost a significant amount of their land when the Partition occurred.

Most of the dispossession opf Palestinians did not occur until afgter the 1948 war.

[funnymanpants]

71. No, completely incorrect

The Jews owned about 5 percent of the land. Look at the UN history on line to see. Even pro-settler sites like camera.org concede this point.

[maddezmom]

5. link:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=540&ncid=716&e=2&u=/ap/20041027/ap_on_re_mi_ea/arafat_s_health

[SW FL Dem]

7. Thank you , I was waiting for a CNN link

but they haven't posted one yet.

[Sinnerman]

6. Developing ....... Unconfirmed reports that Arafat is now DEAD

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=LWIH3ZODVI3JGCRBAEKSFEY?type=worldNews&storyID=6633371

Holy COW

[bluedonkey]

10. O my God

Hell will break loose!
But really there is no God or the Palestinians wouldn't have to suffer so much.

[hang a left]

15. Can someone say poison. n/t

[a_random_joel]

20. Can someone say "Reaching..."

[Career Prole]

22. So why's that reaching?

"Stomach ailment" that appears to be causing him to rapidly fail yet they have no idea what it could be? All they've done is rule things out...no one's reported a toxicology screen yet.
Say it was poison, just for grins...who'd profit?

[a_random_joel]

29. He's 75 years old... that stomach ailment could be any number of things..

Why would Israel do this now, when he has been almost completely marginalized?

You think the anger and outrage that would be expressed were this to be confirmed would be "profitable?"

At what point does the desire to villify Israel over-rule common sense?

[Career Prole]

30. Wouldn't it help shrub at all to hasten matters along?

Say, before the election rather than after?

[The Magistrate]

31. Not In Any Obvious Way, Sir

Arafat's death will result in a sort of civil war among Arab Palestinians, most likely, and that will bring no particular benefit to any party, but this will not break out immediately: there will be considerable jockey-ing and totting up of guns and men to bear them among the various factions.

Arafat has been very ill for a long time: cancer of the bowels seems the most likely diagnosis. Sooner or later, the crisis arives....

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Career Prole]

42. Thanks, yer honor! You're no doubt correct.

They've just gotten me on edge. In half an hour I'll be wondering what the heck those bush bastards did to the moon. :D

[a_random_joel]

32. By what logic?

[Career Prole]

39. The distraction factor, plus

the "We definitely can't change horses now" factor, with the added cachet of the "shrub hated Saddam most, but Arafat was running a close second" factor.
There wasn't much logic to invading Iraq either, remember. :)

[donheld]

54. Can someone say "reaching

for the poison?"

[HEyHEY]

78. No but I can say "Un-founded reports from an active imagination"

The guy's 75, has been around forever and if they were gonna kill him they woulda done it when he was in the mosque "waiting to die"

[mountainvue]

18. That link isn't working. n/t

[SW FL Dem]

8. Wolf says Arafat in Critical condition now

decision to be made in the morning whether to transport him out of the territory.

[killbotfactory]

9. powder keg

yikes. how the hell will this play out?

[dqueue]

11. yikes!

And I'm sure they're concerned to move him off-compound, because there's really no telling what Israel will do! Assassinate him in the hospital? Storm the vacant compound? Eek!

[krkaufman]

14. Would it be too much to ask that Israel offer to help...

... and aid in his recovery? Couldn't they get Arafat into an Israeli hospital? Wouldn't *that* be the best move?

(Eh, maybe not. Israel would be blamed for his death if efforts proved fruitless.)

[yellowjacket]

45. They have offered their help...

From Washington Post:

"Raanan Gissin, a spokesman for Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, said early Thursday that after being contacted by Egyptian authorities and by former Palestinian prime minister Mahmoud Abbas, Israel had agreed to provide any medical assistance or equipment necessary for Arafat's treatment. He said that the Israeli military would aid the arrival of any foreign doctors to visit Arafat and that Arafat had been given permission to travel "anywhere in the world" for medical treatment.

Gissin would not say whether Arafat would be allowed to return to his headquarters compound in Ramallah -- or to any other part of the West Bank or Gaza Strip -- if he went abroad for treatment. "That's not the issue right now," Gissin said. "We are dealing with a humanitarian, medical issue right now, and all the other issues can wait."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A2564-2004Oct27.html">http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A2564-2004Oct27.html

[samtob]

16. Sharon did say if he ventured outside the compound

it would be a one way trip.

[KittyWampus]

12. Lunar Eclipe- Astrologically, The Fall Of Kings

[gmoney]

17. First they trip Castro, now this!

Spooks have been busy working for the October Soooprize!

[CHICKEN CAPITOL USA]

38. now we just need some pretzels for the dim son

.

[LARED]

19. This can only mean

there might be an Palestinian election in the future.

Arafat is one guy I won't miss.

[Minstrel Boy]

21. Doctors and wife rush to side of 'unconscious' Arafat

Doctors and wife rush to side of 'unconscious' Arafat

Times of London (7 minutes ago)

YASSIR ARAFAT’s health deteriorated dramatically last night, despite days of reassurances by aides that the 75-year-old Palestinian leader was recovering after a persistent flu and stomach complaint that was not life-threatening.

Doctors and an ambulance were summoned to the bombed-out compound where Mr Arafat has been holed up for 41 months amid unconfirmed reports that he had fallen unconscious from his illness.

Last night, Ahmed Qureia, the Palestinian Prime Minister, and Mahmoud Abbas, the former Prime Minister, who visited Mr Arafat for the first time since the two fell out over his resignation a year ago, rushed to the leader’s headquarters, an old British fort known as the Muqataa.

Shortly afterwards, Nabil Abu Rudeineh, a key adviser to Mr Arafat, tried to allay the renewed fears by saying that the Palestinian leader’s condition had stabilised, although he declined to elaborate how ill he was. Mr Rudeineh said that Jordanian and Egyptian doctors, who had examined Mr Arafat after he first fell ill nearly two weeks ago, would return to carry out further tests.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-1333180,00.html

[MADem]

24. GUARDIAN update--flu? Stomach cancer? Sleeping? Coma?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-4579516,00.html

RAMALLAH, West Bank (AP) - Yasser Arafat collapsed Wednesday evening, was unconscious for about 10 minutes and remained in a ``very difficult situation,'' Palestinian officials said. A team of Jordanian doctors was urgently summoned to treat the ailing Palestinian leader.

Arafat was eating soup during a meeting with Prime Minister Ahmed Qureia, former Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas and another official between 8 p.m. and 9 p.m. (2 p.m. or 3 p.m. EDT) when he vomited, according to a bodyguard who was in the compound at the time.

The 75-year-old Arafat was brought to the clinic inside the compound, where he collapsed and was unconscious for about 10 minutes, the guard said. His doctors were urgently summoned.

On news that Arafat's health was worsening, scores of top Palestinian officials descended on the sandbagged, partially demolished Ramallah compound where he has been confined for 2 years. The officials milled around the courtyard, waiting for news outside Arafat's three-story building, bathed in spotlights.

[hippiechick]

25. Sonofabitch, I think they poisoned him !

:wow: "... Arafat was eating soup during a meeting ... when he vomited, according to a bodyguard who was in the compound at the time. The 75-year-old Arafat was brought to the clinic inside the compound, where he collapsed and was unconscious for about 10 minutes ..."




:hippie:

[Freddie Stubbs]

26. Which 'they' was it?

Mossad? CIA? KGB? Skull & Bones?

[hippiechick]

27. That, I don't know.

He seems to have an abundance of enemies.





:hippie:

[DrWeird]

28. yes.

Or MACK GIBBS for short.

[a_random_joel]

34. ATTENTION: To all "poison" conspiracy believers...

If one truly wants to go down this road, there is just as much reason to believe that he was poisoned by an ambitious Palestinian as by Israel.

Have at it...

[MattBaggins]

41. I would not rule out poison

I would suspect hamas or a political rival, which may have been what the other posters were thinking? Why do you automatically assume they wish to blame Israel.

[wordout]

47. Count Hans Kolvenbach ordered it done

[Gyre]

61. IF he is poisoned I guarantee that it's not Israel's doing.

He's been the best thing for Israel/American relations since America decided to fight their wars for them. He's been the public face for the Palestinians in America for the last 30 years and he's ugly and pathetic. A disgraceful figurehead that America and Israel have had no trouble demonizing, and by extension, the entire population of the occupied territories.

See ya Arafat! :)

Gyre

[Gabysan]

35. Huh?

Who's they?

[CelticWinter]

40. I got this link to work

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=6635066

[Matilda]

43. It's a great shame, for the Palestinians,

that he didn't agree long ago to remain as a figurehead, while
appointing someone else with greater diplomatic skills to lead
the Palestinians politically. I fear for the outcome if there's
a power vacuum for too long.

A link to the latest news from ABC Australia:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200410/s1229394.htm

[barb162]

46. ditto

[HEyHEY]

77. True - and while they live in poverty he sits in a Paris Hospital

[glocksters4kerry]

44. i kinda like him n/t

[Senator Lamb]

48. who needs him

finally, we can now have a chance at peace in the middle east without that creep ruining things. now we can put pressure on israel to work with the pals cause we couldnt do it with arafat.

[funnymanpants]

50. doubtful

The Israelis can no longer blame everything on Arafat.

But with or without him, 3.5 million Palestinians will still be living under occupation with no rights. Arafat's death won't change that.

[0007]

56. It won't change a thing.

[FlaGranny]

58. You know what ? I'm what is considered an

optomist, but that's just a plain crazy. If anything, Arafat was a moderating influence, which will be lost when he dies. Do you remember BEFORE Arafat?

[Longhorn79]

49. I'm not too thrilled with him

Palestinians could do a lot better. Start with someone who isn't an archterrorist and they're on the road to recovery.

[DemBones DemBones]

53. Ariel Sharon's no prize, either. Getting

moderate leaders in place on both sides would be helpful.

[davepc]

51. good riddance

world dosent need his terrorist scum.

maybe whoever replaces him will be serious about peace.

[Matilda]

55. Takes two to tango.

Arafat hasn't been the best advocate for the Palestinians in recent
years, but that leaves the question of Sharon. He is also far from
the best person to broker a genuine peace.

[davepc]

57. Clinton worked his damnedest to get a peace deal brokered

And Arafat walked away from the table and started his uprising even after Israel had made considerable concession offers.

All of Clinton's hard work flushed away by that pond scum Arafat.

[funnymanpants]

72. Completely false

Arafat continue to negotiate until Taba, at which point Sharon was elected and negotiations were called off.

[Gyre]

60. Well, I agree with the "good riddance" part.

But I believe he's much less of a "terrorist" than the shrub or Ariel Sharon; both of whom have killed many more innocent civilians than Arafat.

His death can be nothing but a benefit for the Palestinians, who've paid the price for his exquisitely lame image and lack of wisdom, which have only benefitted their enemies. Time for them to start over, just like us.

Gyre

[BUSHOUT]

52. Latest on this I heard: it's not as bad as reported. n/t

[hang a left]

59. Here is an update.

Arafat in Serious Condition, Foreign Medics Arrive


Email this Story

Oct 28, 6:11 AM (ET)


Palestinian President Yasser Arafat's health has worsened sharply and he is slipping in and out of...
Full Image


By Wafa Amr

RAMALLAH, West Bank (Reuters) - Foreign doctors rushed to Yasser Arafat's side on Thursday to tend to the seriously ill Palestinian leader, who for decades has symbolized his people's struggle for statehood.

The 75-year-old ex-guerrilla, loved by most of his people and reviled by many Israelis, has suffered stomach pains since last week.

His health took a dramatic turn for the worse on Wednesday and officials said he had been slipping in and out of consciousness, though on Thursday he had also been able to eat, talk and say prayers.


"He is still in a very serious condition and he is calling for his wife," one official said.



http://reuters.excite.com//article/20041028/2004-10-28T...

[carolinalady]

64. msnbc reporting "blood cancer"

flying to Paris

[SW FL Dem]

66. Update

Arafat to go to Paris for treatment according to CNN. Will leave tonight. He is conscious but unable to keep food down. Very weak.

[AngryOldDem]

68. If I'm Sharon....

...I ship Arafat out to wherever his aides want him to go. I wouldn't want the man dying on my watch.

This does not look good at all.

[RivetJoint]

70. His watch?

What doesn't look good? The man is 75. People die at 75 all the time.

[funnymanpants]

73. Because Arafat was convenient

Arafat was corrupt and bad for the Palestinains, but he has proved a perfect scapegoat for Sharon. Blame everything on Arafat. If we could just get rid of Arafat, we could negotiate--that was the mantra.

Well, now he may be gone. And do you think Sharon really wants to negotiate?

Of course, now he'll say "We have no partner for peace." And now a new scapegoate will be found.

[RivetJoint]

74. Yeah, I think Sharon does want to negotiate

I think he does want peace. Moving the settlers out of the West Bank is a good first start.

I think the Israeli people are tired of never knowing if the bus they are sitting on, or the restaurant they are sitting in, will be blown up my some poor 18-year old Palestinian youth strapped with bombs provided by his "elders". I think many Israelis cry when they see pictures of Palestinian children blown up by missiles from Israeli aircraft, knowing that their government has ordered a retalitory strike that harms innocents. I think they weep daily for the death and destruction this conflict has perpetuated.

Yeah, I think he really wants to negotiate.