From: joedees@bellsouth.net
Date: Mon Aug 12 2002 - 15:57:56 MDT
On 12 Aug 2002 at 15:26, rhinoceros wrote:
>
> [rhinoceros 1]
> but I understand that we may have missed something. Is it the fact
> that rule of law is problematic in Palestine since the uprising, or is
> it some other conclusion we should draw?
>
> [Joe Dees 2]
> It is not problematic. The PA has been decimated as an enforcement
> vehicle by the Israeli response to its collusion with terror, and its
> pronouncements are openly and contemptuously flauted by Hamas and
> Islamic Jihad.
>
> [rhinoceros 3]
> I was just trying to be non-commital before a specific question was
> stated. It seems we have one now.
>
> I agree with your statement, except for the part about (PA's)
> "collusion with terror", which has not been demonstrated here yet.
>
> [Joe Dees 4]
> Imad Mugniyeh, one of the FBI's most-wanted terrorists, and the
> architect of the Marine Barracks and US Embassy Bombing in Beirut, as
> well as the hijacking of an aircraft and the execution of passenger US
> Navy diver Robert Stetham, arranged to have 50 tons of weapons, sealed
> in 83 waterproof tubes, transferred from Iran to the PA with the
> assistance of a PA ship captain; the shipment was intercepted by
> Israel. Documents seized in the raid on Arafat's office show approved
> disbursements of funds to the Al Aqsa Martyr's Brigade for the
> construction of suicide belt harness bombs. There's plenty of
> evidence, and it has appeared here before.
>
>
> [rhinoceros 5]
> The first one doesn't say much about terrorism. Just that the
> Palestinians allegedly do not buy their guns from authorized dealers.
> I found a BBC article and a Times article here
>
They included heavy weapons; missiles, mortars and explosives. They
weren't meant for rabbit hunting (well, maybe if you remove the ending
't').
>
> http://www.sierratimes.com/cgi-bin/warroom/topic.cgi?forum=11&topic=67
>
> but apparently we'll have to take Israel's word about something that
> happened during the Israeli invation. The involvement of Mugniyeh and
> Arafat seem to be Israeli allegations.
>
The connection is the Palestinian Authority officer who captained the
transporting craft; he stated that Arafat had both knowledge and
approval of the shipment. Mugniyeh worked through his long time
deputy.
>
> I don't know what you think of this excerpt from the BBC article; my
> first reaction was amusement.
>
> <quote from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1761836.stm >
> "Military experts say the weapons would have fundamentally altered the
> strategic balance in the region. They could have precipitated an
> all-out war between Israel and the Palestinian Authority." <end quote>
>
As if there isn't already all-out low-intensity conflict happening now!
>
> The second point seems more significant. I'll just list what the
> accused have to say, while they are not in Guantanamo.
>
> The PLO, in a legalese statement, essentially says that the documents
> are of questionable authenticity, the Israelis did not allow
> journalists or lawyers to examine them, and even if they are authentic
> they do not prove what they are supposed to.
>
> http://www.nad-plo.org/eye/news44.html
>
> The Electronic Intifada site says that the documents may be authentic,
> but they do not prove what they are supposed to.
>
> http://electronicintifada.net/actionitems/020404aamb.html
>
> Another article defending the position of PA, I found here:
>
> http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/apr2002/araf-a12.shtml
>
of course they'll try to weasel out by claiming that evidence is not
evidence and proof is not proof. It was substantial enough to convince
the US.
>
> ----
> This message was posted by rhinoceros to the Virus 2002 board on
> Church of Virus BBS.
> <http://virus.lucifer.com/bbs/index.php?board=51;action=display;thread
> id=26062>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:52 MDT