Good effing riddance to this POS.
It will be funny to watch the glowing eulogies from the more "tolerant" news agencies. It exposes them for what they really are.
Arafat dead
- Thread starter labman
- Start date
- Status
Thanks moribundman, but I really don't want to be lonely. Not 72 virgins mind you, but not lonely.
So how long will it be until I can pull up Fox news without having to look at his ugly face? Just wish there was much chance of somebody better replacing him. It is obsene that a hateful killer like him was given the Nobel Peace Prize.
Labman,
Keep in mind that they gave Jimmy Carter a Nobel also. It's strictly politics. They like to hand those out to worthless people.
Keep in mind that they gave Jimmy Carter a Nobel also. It's strictly politics. They like to hand those out to worthless people.
I was just looking at the site for one of my local channels. They had the most one-sided piece of trash report on him I've ever seen. The only people they talked with were local Palestinian expatriates. I'll bet the local Jewish community is fuming over that one. I'd like to see one of them quoted, like that'll ever happen.
You see those pathetic french pansies carrying his casket? The guy leading the casket looked a little light in the loafers. But, then again, that's the french military.
I am just shocked on the treatment the french are giving to this terrorist. They are treating him like a hero.
I am just shocked on the treatment the french are giving to this terrorist. They are treating him like a hero.
I think I hate the French more than terrorists. These miserable human beings have never stood up for anything they wanted or believed. They are just a bunch of ****ing appeasers!
Arafat was one of the oldest terrorists who oppressed the palestinian population, yet the French treat him like a fallen hero. I hope the french and arafat all burn in h3ll!
?!?!?!?!
eiron,
what are you confused about?
what are you confused about?
Hi Doug,
Are you placing Jimmy Carter in the same "worthless people" category as Yasser Arafat? Or have I mis-interpreted your comment?
Are you placing Jimmy Carter in the same "worthless people" category as Yasser Arafat? Or have I mis-interpreted your comment?
I wouldn't call Jimmy worthless but he is **** ineffective.
Jimmy never met a tyrant he didn't like. Worthless, useless and worthy of the Nobel Peace Prize.
Yup, Ron hit it on the head.
Eiron,
I was just showing the uselessness of the Nobel Peace Prize. The same morons who gave one to Arafat, also gave on to Carter. I was just comparing the similarities between the recipients.
Eiron,
I was just showing the uselessness of the Nobel Peace Prize. The same morons who gave one to Arafat, also gave on to Carter. I was just comparing the similarities between the recipients.
My heart is broken and I an in mourning at the loss of one of the worlds great terrorists.
I think it's just our Euro/Christian heritage that we have a respect for the dead and treat such things as is appropriate. His last rites and his family should have our respect and sympathy. This is not the time to do otherwise for the momement.
Had Arafat been at the Mayo Clinic or somewhere in the USA at the time, we would have done similar.
Question is, now that Saddam is gone will we have equal results now that Arafat is gone. I'm not sure if choas and anarchy is much better than a despot being in control.
Do any of you ever wonder why countless leaders in Israel, UK, and USA allowed Saddam and Arafat to exist??
"I think it's just our Euro/Christian heritage that we have a respect for the dead and treat such things as is appropriate. His last rites and his family should have our respect and sympathy. This is not the time to do otherwise for the momement.
Had Arafat been at the Mayo Clinic or somewhere in the USA at the time, we would have done similar.
Question is, now that Saddam is gone will we have equal results now that Arafat is gone. I'm not sure if choas and anarchy is much better than a despot being in control.
Do any of you ever wonder why countless leaders in Israel, UK, and USA allowed Saddam and Arafat to exist?? "
Huh? What about sympathy for the women and children that were killed by suicide bombers under Arafat's PLO? The American Military would have NEVER gave honors to Arafat like France did. He doesn't have my "Christian Respect" probably due to the fact that HE WASN'T A CHRISTIAN! He doesn't deserve sympathy, nor does his family. Geez, get out of la la land, quit singing Kumbaya, come back to reality. This man was a terrorist.
Will you give sympathy to Osama's family when we kill him?
Had Arafat been at the Mayo Clinic or somewhere in the USA at the time, we would have done similar.
Question is, now that Saddam is gone will we have equal results now that Arafat is gone. I'm not sure if choas and anarchy is much better than a despot being in control.
Do any of you ever wonder why countless leaders in Israel, UK, and USA allowed Saddam and Arafat to exist?? "
Huh? What about sympathy for the women and children that were killed by suicide bombers under Arafat's PLO? The American Military would have NEVER gave honors to Arafat like France did. He doesn't have my "Christian Respect" probably due to the fact that HE WASN'T A CHRISTIAN! He doesn't deserve sympathy, nor does his family. Geez, get out of la la land, quit singing Kumbaya, come back to reality. This man was a terrorist.
Will you give sympathy to Osama's family when we kill him?
"Always attacking France is not constructive. Ronald Reagan did not do that."
You're right. He was too busy with the USSR, I believe he verbally attacked them numerous times.
Attacking France might not be constructive, but it sure feels good. You're not going to lecture me about playing nice with others, now are you?
Again, come back to planet earth, back to reality.
You're right. He was too busy with the USSR, I believe he verbally attacked them numerous times.
Attacking France might not be constructive, but it sure feels good. You're not going to lecture me about playing nice with others, now are you?
Again, come back to planet earth, back to reality.
Arafat the monster
By Jeff Jacoby, Globe Columnist | November 11, 2004
YASSER ARAFAT died at age 75, lying in bed surrounded by familiar faces. He left this world peacefully, unlike the thousands of victims he sent to early graves.
In a better world, the PLO chief would have met his end on a gallows, hanged for mass murder much as the Nazi chiefs were hanged at Nuremberg. In a better world, the French president would not have paid a visit to the bedside of such a monster. In a better world, George Bush would not have said, on hearing the first reports that Arafat had died, "God bless his soul."
God bless his soul? What a grotesque idea! Bless the soul of the man who brought modern terrorism to the world? Who sent his agents to slaughter athletes at the Olympics, blow airliners out of the sky, bomb schools and pizzerias, machine-gun passengers in airline terminals? Who lied, cheated, and stole without compunction? Who inculcated the vilest culture of Jew-hatred since the Third Reich? Human beings might stoop to bless a creature so evil -- as indeed Arafat was blessed, with money, deference, even a Nobel Prize -- but God, I am quite sure, will **** him for eternity.
Arafat always inspired flights of nonsense from Western journalists, and his last two weeks were no exception.
Derek Brown wrote in The Guardian that Arafat's "undisputed courage as a guerrilla leader" was exceeded only "by his extraordinary courage" as a peace negotiator. But it is an odd kind of courage that expresses itself in shooting unarmed victims -- or in signing peace accords and then flagrantly violating their terms.
Another commentator, columnist Gwynne Dyer, asked, "So what did Arafat do right?" The answer: He drew worldwide attention to the Palestinian cause, "for the most part by successful acts of terror." In other words, butchering innocent human beings was "right," since it served an ulterior political motive. No doubt that thought brings daily comfort to all those who were forced to bury a child, parent, or spouse because of Arafat's "successful" terrorism.
Some journalists couldn't wait for Arafat's actual death to begin weeping for him. Take the BBC's Barbara Plett, who burst into tears on the day he was airlifted out of the West Bank. "When the helicopter carrying the frail old man rose above his ruined compound," Plett reported from Ramallah, "I started to cry." Normal people don't weep for brutal murderers, but Plett made it clear that her empathy for Arafat -- whom she praised as "a symbol of Palestinian unity, steadfastness, and resistance" -- was heartfelt:
"I remember well when the Israelis re-conquered the West Bank more than two years ago, how they drove their tanks and bulldozers into Mr. Arafat's headquarters, trapping him in a few rooms, and throwing a military curtain around Ramallah. I remember how Palestinians admired his refusal to flee under fire. They told me: `Our leader is sharing our pain, we are all under the same siege.' And so was I." Such is the state of journalism at the BBC, whose reporters do not seem to have any trouble reporting, dry-eyed, on the plight of Arafat's victims. (That is, when they mention them -- which Plett's teary bon voyage to Arafat did not.)
And what about those victims? Why were they scarcely remembered in this Arafat death watch?
How is it possible to reflect on Arafat's most enduring legacy -- the rise of modern terrorism -- without recalling the legions of men, women, and children whose lives he and his followers destroyed? If Osama bin Laden were on his deathbed, would we neglect to mention all those he murdered on 9/11?
It would take an encyclopedia to catalog all of the evil Arafat committed. But that is no excuse for not trying to recall at least some of it.
Perhaps his signal contribution to the practice of political terror was the introduction of warfare against children. On one black date in May 1974, three PLO terrorists slipped from Lebanon into the northern Israeli town of Ma'alot. They murdered two parents and a child whom they found at home, then seized a local school, taking more than 100 boys and girls hostage and threatening to kill them unless a number of imprisoned terrorists were released. When Israeli troops attempted a rescue, the terrorists exploded hand grenades and opened fire on the students. By the time the horror ended, 25 people were dead; 21 of them were children.
Thirty years later, no one speaks of Ma'alot anymore. The dead children have been forgotten. Everyone knows Arafat's name, but who ever recalls the names of his victims?
So let us recall them: Ilana Turgeman. Rachel Aputa. Yocheved Mazoz. Sarah Ben-Shim'on. Yona Sabag. Yafa Cohen. Shoshana Cohen. Michal Sitrok. Malka Amrosy. Aviva Saada. Yocheved Diyi. Yaakov Levi. Yaakov Kabla. Rina Cohen. Ilana Ne'eman. Sarah Madar. Tamar Dahan. Sarah Soper. Lili Morad. David Madar. Yehudit Madar. The 21 dead children of Ma'alot -- 21 of the thousands of who died at Arafat's command
By Jeff Jacoby, Globe Columnist | November 11, 2004
YASSER ARAFAT died at age 75, lying in bed surrounded by familiar faces. He left this world peacefully, unlike the thousands of victims he sent to early graves.
In a better world, the PLO chief would have met his end on a gallows, hanged for mass murder much as the Nazi chiefs were hanged at Nuremberg. In a better world, the French president would not have paid a visit to the bedside of such a monster. In a better world, George Bush would not have said, on hearing the first reports that Arafat had died, "God bless his soul."
God bless his soul? What a grotesque idea! Bless the soul of the man who brought modern terrorism to the world? Who sent his agents to slaughter athletes at the Olympics, blow airliners out of the sky, bomb schools and pizzerias, machine-gun passengers in airline terminals? Who lied, cheated, and stole without compunction? Who inculcated the vilest culture of Jew-hatred since the Third Reich? Human beings might stoop to bless a creature so evil -- as indeed Arafat was blessed, with money, deference, even a Nobel Prize -- but God, I am quite sure, will **** him for eternity.
Arafat always inspired flights of nonsense from Western journalists, and his last two weeks were no exception.
Derek Brown wrote in The Guardian that Arafat's "undisputed courage as a guerrilla leader" was exceeded only "by his extraordinary courage" as a peace negotiator. But it is an odd kind of courage that expresses itself in shooting unarmed victims -- or in signing peace accords and then flagrantly violating their terms.
Another commentator, columnist Gwynne Dyer, asked, "So what did Arafat do right?" The answer: He drew worldwide attention to the Palestinian cause, "for the most part by successful acts of terror." In other words, butchering innocent human beings was "right," since it served an ulterior political motive. No doubt that thought brings daily comfort to all those who were forced to bury a child, parent, or spouse because of Arafat's "successful" terrorism.
Some journalists couldn't wait for Arafat's actual death to begin weeping for him. Take the BBC's Barbara Plett, who burst into tears on the day he was airlifted out of the West Bank. "When the helicopter carrying the frail old man rose above his ruined compound," Plett reported from Ramallah, "I started to cry." Normal people don't weep for brutal murderers, but Plett made it clear that her empathy for Arafat -- whom she praised as "a symbol of Palestinian unity, steadfastness, and resistance" -- was heartfelt:
"I remember well when the Israelis re-conquered the West Bank more than two years ago, how they drove their tanks and bulldozers into Mr. Arafat's headquarters, trapping him in a few rooms, and throwing a military curtain around Ramallah. I remember how Palestinians admired his refusal to flee under fire. They told me: `Our leader is sharing our pain, we are all under the same siege.' And so was I." Such is the state of journalism at the BBC, whose reporters do not seem to have any trouble reporting, dry-eyed, on the plight of Arafat's victims. (That is, when they mention them -- which Plett's teary bon voyage to Arafat did not.)
And what about those victims? Why were they scarcely remembered in this Arafat death watch?
How is it possible to reflect on Arafat's most enduring legacy -- the rise of modern terrorism -- without recalling the legions of men, women, and children whose lives he and his followers destroyed? If Osama bin Laden were on his deathbed, would we neglect to mention all those he murdered on 9/11?
It would take an encyclopedia to catalog all of the evil Arafat committed. But that is no excuse for not trying to recall at least some of it.
Perhaps his signal contribution to the practice of political terror was the introduction of warfare against children. On one black date in May 1974, three PLO terrorists slipped from Lebanon into the northern Israeli town of Ma'alot. They murdered two parents and a child whom they found at home, then seized a local school, taking more than 100 boys and girls hostage and threatening to kill them unless a number of imprisoned terrorists were released. When Israeli troops attempted a rescue, the terrorists exploded hand grenades and opened fire on the students. By the time the horror ended, 25 people were dead; 21 of them were children.
Thirty years later, no one speaks of Ma'alot anymore. The dead children have been forgotten. Everyone knows Arafat's name, but who ever recalls the names of his victims?
So let us recall them: Ilana Turgeman. Rachel Aputa. Yocheved Mazoz. Sarah Ben-Shim'on. Yona Sabag. Yafa Cohen. Shoshana Cohen. Michal Sitrok. Malka Amrosy. Aviva Saada. Yocheved Diyi. Yaakov Levi. Yaakov Kabla. Rina Cohen. Ilana Ne'eman. Sarah Madar. Tamar Dahan. Sarah Soper. Lili Morad. David Madar. Yehudit Madar. The 21 dead children of Ma'alot -- 21 of the thousands of who died at Arafat's command
- Status
Similar threads
