Yasser Arafat officially Dead

billy the squid

BBC news and CNN are reporting this.

first link from SKY news

http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-1159363,00.html

either they type at 350 wpm at the BBC or else they had this written yesterday in anticipation

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3984841.stm

ARGINITE

What will happen to the palestinians now?

billy the squid

Power struggle i guess

they were helping themselves to the spoils before he had even died.

BBC five live audio link

http://www.bbc.co.uk/fivelive/live/live_int.asx

BBC World Service

http://stream.servstream.com/ViewWeb/BBCTechnology/Event/BBC_World_Service.asx

Tiriel

yeah it's on euronews /rte 1 now... says he died at 3.30am

billy the squid

live video link now availible

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsa/n5ctrl/live/nb/wm/video/now1_nb.asx

bonkey

ARGINITE wrote:

What will happen to the palestinians now?

A bitter internal power-struggle, which will culminate in teh selection of a new leader whom the Israeli's will have dismissed as someone they cannot and will not work with within 3 months.

Hobbes

Whats annoying is the spin that has already started happening. Apprantly Arafat built the wall around palistine.

Villain

The Israeli's aren't wasting any time:

'I hated him': Israeli justice minister
Blaming Yasser Arafat for global terrorism and the failure to achieve Middle East peace, an Israeli Cabinet minister expressed hope today that a new Palestinian leadership would put down militant groups and negotiate with Israel.

The comments by Justice Minister Yosef Lapid marked the first reaction by a top Israeli official to Arafat’s death at a French hospital before dawn Thursday. Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s aides declined comment.

Lapid focused on Arafat’s image in Israel as a terrorist.

“I hated him for the deaths of Israelis … I hated him for not allowing the peace process … to move forward,” Lapid told Israel Radio.

“It is one of the tragedies of the world that he didn’t understand that the terror that began here would spread to the entire world,” he added.

Taken from BreakingNews.ie

Hagar

Arafat Dead - China People's News
and in a related story "300 laid off at Beijing tea towel factory"

ionapaul

I think Arafat's inability or reluctance to halt or disuade (assuming he had the power to do so that many attributed him with) the second Intifada will reflect badly on him when his impact on the Palestinian issue is finally assessed in future years. The second Intifada has been a disaster for both the Palestinian people and for the Israeli people, with both sides losing international support and goodwill because of their actions.

On a related (slightly off-topic I admit) note, does anyone have access to statistics on the number of suicide bombing and other attacks inside Israel before and after the building of the wall? Human rights violation or no, has it been seen as a success at preventing attacks?

Blub2k4

ionapaul wrote:

I think Arafat's inability or reluctance to halt or disuade (assuming he had the power to do so that many attributed him with) the second Intifada will reflect badly on him when his impact on the Palestinian issue is finally assessed in future years. The second Intifada has been a disaster for both the Palestinian people and for the Israeli people, with both sides losing international support and goodwill because of their actions.

On a related (slightly off-topic I admit) note, does anyone have access to statistics on the number of suicide bombing and other attacks inside Israel before and after the building of the wall? Human rights violation or no, has it been seen as a success at preventing attacks?

Why should Arafat have halted the second Intifada? The Israelis did not pull out of the occupied territories. Resistance continued. Quite simple really.
The wall is not the solution no matter how many lives it saves, the solution is a negotiated peace, this will never take place while the wall is being built.

Stabshauptmann

Arafat was a dictator. One might argue that that was the only practical way to lead the Palestinian ppl. You can say that his own persona experience and expertise enabled him to run the entire show effectively and even that he at all times acted selflessly for the Palestinian ppl (although some would say that the power corrupted him). One thing though that I think most will agree is that the Palestinian Authority needs a major shake up and redesign. So much power cannot be concentrated in one man, and even if Arafat was able to unite the various factions there doesn’t seem to be another person who can.

As for the wall, it’s far too early to say weather or not its effective, tunnels and smuggling routes take time...
Personally I don’t believe that peace can be forced, the only lasting security measure that would protect Israel is an equitable deal negotiated with Palestine and with the approval of its neighbours.

RuggieBear

.....and unofficially!?

Borzoi

RuggieBear wrote:

.....and unofficially!?

He's living in Argentina with a bunch of immortal Nazis

But if you thought things were bad with him, wait till you see the bloodbath that's about to unfold as all sides vie for power in the classic middle eastern way - by killing each other

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Blub2k4

Necromancer wrote:

Arafat was a dictator. One might argue that that was the only practical way to lead the Palestinian ppl. You can say that his own persona experience and expertise enabled him to run the entire show effectively and even that he at all times acted selflessly for the Palestinian ppl (although some would say that the power corrupted him).

The dictator statement is a load of rubbish.
What do you understand as a dictator? Someone who commands popular support?

Arafat was the only one who the Palestinians trusted to represent them, he was the only one they knew would not sell them out, he proved that by not accepting the scraps from the table offered to him by Oslo.

He commanded popular support, moreso than any other palestinian public figure, he united all the disparate groups under the PLO banner.

Blub2k4

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

I know it was when Sharon went to the Al-Aqsa mosque, the whole crux of the problem, without the synagogue there rapture cant take place :rolleyes: fairy tale BS anyway.

Intifada means resistance however and that never really stopped.

Stabshauptmann

A dictator in the sense that he controlled all the major posts himself directly or indirectly through cronies. That he led the Palestinian ppl through what would appear to outsiders like a president with emergency powers.

Don’t get me wrong, I approved of the man in many aspects and when I say dictator I DO NOT mean that in the same way as Hitler or Saddam, I realise the word has some negative connotations but that’s not what it always means or what I meant by it here.

Blub2k4

Necromancer wrote:

A dictator in the sense that he controlled all the major posts himself directly or indirectly through cronies. That he led the Palestinian ppl through what would appear to outsiders like a president with emergency powers.

Don’t get me wrong, I approved of the man in many aspects and when I say dictator I DO NOT mean that in the same way as Hitler or Saddam, I realise the word has some negative connotations but that’s not what it always means or what I meant by it here.

In the sense of centralised power perhaps, but then the term dictator is way off the mark.

Stabshauptmann

Blub2k4 wrote:

In the sense of centralised power perhaps, but then the term dictator is way off the mark.

*sigh*
dictator

\Dic*ta"tor\, n. [L.] 1. One who dictates; one who prescribes rules and maxims authoritatively for the direction of others. --Locke.

2. One invested with absolute authority; especially, a magistrate created in times of exigence and distress, and invested with unlimited power

*thumps head off wall*
I made a post which i thought was clear, it confused you and I was sorry so I explained it.

You can argue :
1) That he didnt have as much power as I imply he did. You could point out is failure to stop violence etc.
2) That the relatives he appointed (or tried to appoint) to posts were (or would have been) objective.
3) That the institutions in place safe guarded against him forcing his will on the populace

Any of these arguements would do for a debate, you might convince me of something, its quite possible. Something one of us didnt know might be mentioned by the other. Great, thats what the forum is for.....
but if you are trying to debate the meaning of a word the debate will go nowhere. One because I used the correct word and because I dont believe syntax is the defining characteristic of a debate, substance is.

Blub2k4

Necromancer wrote:

*sigh*
dictator

\Dic*ta"tor\, n. [L.] 1. One who dictates; one who prescribes rules and maxims authoritatively for the direction of others. --Locke.

2. One invested with absolute authority; especially, a magistrate created in times of exigence and distress, and invested with unlimited power

*thumps head off wall*
I made a post which i thought was clear, it confused you and I was sorry so I explained it.

You can argue :
1) That he didnt have as much power as I imply he did. You could point out is failure to stop violence etc.
2) That the relatives he appointed (or tried to appoint) to posts were (or would have been) objective.
3) That the institutions in place safe guarded against him forcing his will on the populace

Any of these arguements would do for a debate, you might convince me of something, its quite possible. Something one of us didnt know might be mentioned by the other. Great, thats what the forum is for.....
but if you are trying to debate the meaning of a word the debate will go nowhere. One because I used the correct word and because I dont believe syntax is the defining characteristic of a debate, substance is.

Attempting to be patronising in your reply does not help a lot, if you are talking about substance and debate.
In any case I apologise for thinking of the more popular term of despot or tyrant, my bad.

quarryman

did Arafat die of leukemia or another blood related disease? Just wondering after seeing this.

Essey

So old Affie is up there doing the coochie coo with his 72 virgins - not bad for a life of crime.

Stabshauptmann

what type of reply do you expect to get for a post like that?

Hagar

Nobody has yet mentioned his Nobel Peace Prize.

Blub2k4

As if they mean anything since Kissinger got one.

Hagar

What about his great acting in "Auf Wiedersehen Pet" ? "Gizza job like, I can do that"

Ah poor Yosser Hughes, he'll be missed.

sovtek

Necromancer wrote:

*sigh*
dictator

\Dic*ta"tor\, n. [L.] 1. One who dictates; one who prescribes rules and maxims authoritatively for the direction of others. --Locke.

2. One invested with absolute authority; especially, a magistrate created in times of exigence and distress, and invested with unlimited power

*thumps head off wall*
I made a post which i thought was clear, it confused you and I was sorry so I explained it.

I'm confused...does that mean that I can automatically call GWB a dictator now?
George W Bush....dictator...I like that
I think it might even stick

ionapaul

Well, he doesn't have absolute authority or unlimited power, unfortunately for everyone who loves comparing him to the fella with the small 'tashe.

bonkey

Could we please drop the pedantry and get back to the topic at hand?

jc