It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Israel won't allow Arafat burial on Mount !

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 10:52 PM
link   
Israel would not allow burial on Temple Mt.

Fri., October 29, 2004 Cheshvan 14, 5765
By Amos Harel and Arnon Regular

Israel will refuse a *request to bury Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat on the Temple Mount, security sources said yesterday. Arafat has previously expressed a desire to be buried on the Mount.

The issue came up briefly yesterday in a consultation between Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz and senior security personnel following the deterioration in Arafat's health. Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is also likely to reject such a request. As reported yesterday in Haaretz, defense officials are considering suggesting a burial plot in Abu Dis, with a view of the Temple Mount.

The security establishment is concerned that were Arafat to be buried on the Temple Mount, this would enhance Palestinian claims to the area, whose status is one of the central elements of the Israel-Palestinian conflict.

www.haaretz.com...




(in my opinion, he should not be buried there and no where in palestine. PERIOD. Maybe Egypt , his place of birth.




posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 11:25 PM
link   
If they refuse to permit Arafat's burial in Palestine at least, they will have a civil war and they will walk on a million bodies. Arafat is a symbol, and you don't attract the Palestinians to the negotiating table by spitting in their eye.



posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 11:36 PM
link   
Arafat is the perfect symbol of the palestinians. He is a foreign terrorist fighting to destroy the Israeli state. What a great choice for a symbol.




posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 11:45 PM
link   
Verfed - then the only choice you have, with that attitude, is to exterminate them all to the last.


edited to add smiley.

[edit on 29-10-2004 by Otts]



posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 11:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Otts
Arafat is a symbol, and you don't attract the Palestinians to the negotiating table by spitting in their eye.


If they do, then the symbol will be unacceptable to their own people.


Arafat is a muderer, ever heard of 1972 munich?


Look he has consistantly lied and decieved, he is no hero, hell if not for him they would have their state already!



posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 11:58 PM
link   
I always believe that if a percentage of people believe in a leader, it's for some reason, not merely because they're gullible. After Benjamin Netanyahu proceeded to tear down what Rabin and Arafat had done, the Palestinians were afraid that Arafat would accept a compromise at Wye that didn't meet the minimum set by the Oslo agreement. He knew that if he compromised too much, he'd lose any ability he still had to stop the violence.

That impulse came from the Palestinians, not Arafat. As I said, I believe there is a reason why a good percentage of Palestinians support him. Just like there must be a reason why a good percentage of Americans support Bush. In either case, I don't believe the people are gullible.



posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 11:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
Arafat is a muderer, ever heard of 1972 munich?
Look he has consistantly lied and decieved, he is no hero, hell if not for him they would have their state already!


Holy Crap Ed! We agree
He has stalled talks, pulled out of mediations, and given empty roles as governing heads for the Palistinians. Im not a big supporter of Isreal, but Palistine would definatly have had thier own state by now if Arafat had never risen to power.



posted on Oct, 30 2004 @ 12:03 AM
link   
Kidfinger - with respect, that's counting without the Palestinians themselves, and weighing the Israelis in too. From what Verfed has said, it seems that at least a minority of Israelis don't recognize the Palestinians as a valid nation. So the festival of non-recognitions, Palestine vs. Israel, has gone on for 40 years.

In my view, if one wants to judge objectively what part of that conflict belongs to Palestine and Arafat, and what part belongs to Israel, one must try to reconstitute the cycle of provocations and counter-provocations that have led to this mess. I think it'll show that both adversaries fed into it.



posted on Oct, 30 2004 @ 12:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Otts
I think it'll show that both adversaries fed into it.


I completly agree with this. They have been going back and forth for so long, I believe that both people have lost track of who started what. Both parties involved are at fault for thier current situation. My opinion of Arafat though still remains. I honestly believe that without his constant Bullying of his political party, and his less than tactfull military actions, Both people would be in a better place. And before I get jumped on, I just want to clear something up. When I said "his less than tactfull military actions", I am well aware that Isreal has little discrimination in thier military dealings with the Palistinian people as well.



posted on Oct, 30 2004 @ 12:17 AM
link   
Kidfinger - exactly! I may respect Arafat for what he believes in, I do recognize that he isn't a choir boy. I can't help but wonder what would've happened if Rabin had lived. Maybe both sides would've lived in peace? Or maybe Arafat would've spoiled it? We'll never know... I think that the events that took place afterwards murkied up the waters. Yigal Amir admitting that he assassinated Rabin for making peace with the Palestinians may have contributed to the wave of attacks on the Israelis in the spring of 1996, which in turn led to the election of Benjamin Netanyahu, which in turn led to a crackdown on the Palestinians and both Netanyahu and Arafat backing away from the Oslo agreement...

The Middle East is a festival of political faux-pas, as much from the Palestinians, the Israelis, the Americans and the Europeans.



posted on Oct, 30 2004 @ 12:25 AM
link   
Let Arafat be burried in any place! The overall peace of the middle east does not depend on the burial place of Arafat, but upon the sacrifices of religeous beliefs of both parties. Perhaps the proper burial of Arafat will provoke productive talks between both parties. God, Allah, we are all the same, let us all believe that we were not a product of the big bang!



posted on Oct, 30 2004 @ 12:25 AM
link   
With Arafat in the unhealthy disposition he is in now, Who is going to lead the Palistinian people? I know there is a governing body, but who could they get to head it? I also wonder how much influence Isreal, and America are have in the Palistinian choice?



posted on Oct, 30 2004 @ 06:51 AM
link   
Otts, your mistake is thinking of the Palestinians and Israelis as 2 similar factions. In fact, the whole reason they fight is very different, same goes for believes and actions.

The Palestinians fight because of systematic brainwashing and extreme religios society, while the Israelis act out of self defence. In fact the Palestinians could have had a state long ago - if their goal wasn't to capture every inch of Israel at all cost.

If you don't think so - you are free to give me at least one example which contradicts it. It will even be entertaining to see you try.

As for the burial place - burying arafat on Temple Mount will only make the situation worse. You can expect dozens of palestinians coming there, and since there are lots of jews there - it will only cause lead to more dead people.
Also Jordan (which has some power over that area) will never agree to it.



posted on Oct, 30 2004 @ 07:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Otts
If they refuse to permit Arafat's burial in Palestine at least, they will have a civil war and they will walk on a million bodies. Arafat is a symbol, and you don't attract the Palestinians to the negotiating table by spitting in their eye.



True, but the request wasn't by accident; it was to stir and agitate more even after his death. Pretty shrewd, if you ask me.



posted on Oct, 30 2004 @ 07:29 AM
link   
geez just let the guy be buried! i am not the biggest fan of arafat but I can understand that out of respect for the palestinian people and the symbol of the palestinian movement that arafat personifies that he should be buried there.

I am sick of all this fighting, the jews don't want to give up the land because they think god promised them israel for all time and the palestinians don't want to give up because they think it has been stolen from them by the jews.
It's just a vicious circle.

Both think they are right and both think the SAME god is on their side.

I hope the eventual death of Arafat will bring a peaceful end to a long and useless conflict where a lot of innocent jews and muslims have died over land.

I would rather just see one state there that is not an illegitimate jewish state like the one there or an islamic state but a secular, humanist state that has equal representation of both people's in the judicial, legislative and executive branches of society.


Ahh one can dream but it'll never happen


stupid fools

drfunk



posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 12:06 AM
link   
Drfunk, Allah is the pagan Arab god of the moon. Ever wondered where all of those crescent moons came from that are all over the Muslims flags and symbols. The Jews believe in the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob. The Jews and Muslims do not believe in the same God.

I know it gets kind of wierd when someone starts talking about gods because we live in a Godless society but lets stick to the facts please.



posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 12:11 AM
link   
I agree with drfunk - is it such a big thing if Arafat is buried in Palestine? Let's not talk about Temple Mount for now - that probably can't happen, as it would spark a civil war. But geez... let him be buried in the land he lived in, and be with the people he called his own, no matter what different people think on the matter...

Even the British, who hated Napoleon, relented when it was time for France to reclaim him and bury him in Paris.



posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 01:25 AM
link   
Why should he be buried there. If it was because he was an influential leader and that is where inflential Arab leader get buried then by all means. The only problem is that he wasn't a leader, but a terrorist who eventually conned the world.

If it is for religous reasons then definately not. He wasn't a religous person. I also do not believe that Islam should be allowed to use it. It is my understanding ( correct me if I am wrong ) that is somewhere near to Solomans Temple. If that is a historical fact then it should belong to the Jewish people. Muhammed having a "dream" where he visited it doesn't pass the laugh test. If that is the case then I own the world and nothing you say can change that.



posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 01:47 AM
link   
Interesting, then how a lot of governments are sending their well-wishes to a "terrorist", coalition members and non-coalition members alike...

news.bbc.co.uk...



posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 01:53 AM
link   
If I understand you it is only because of politcally correct hypocracy. IMO. God knows how wrong it is to say what you really want to else you might offend someone.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join