Avneri To Face Police "Summons" For Attempts To Protect Arafat

[DuctapeFatwa]

Radical left-wing activists spent the day again today with Yasser Arafat in the Mukata. Long-time left-winger Uri Avneri and others from Gush Shalom were in his company on the holy day of Yom Kippur yesterday, as a means of protecting the PA chairman from an Israeli effort to "remove" him. "It's clear that the Haifa attack was designed to cause Sharon to kill Arafat," Avneri said today, "so without even thinking twice, I knew that I had to come here to prevent this from happening."

This is not the first time that Avneri has not been stopped from entering the Mukata, despite the standing orders banning Israelis from entering Area A . The Binyamin District police informed Arutz-7's Kobi Sela this morning that they plan to summon Avneri to explain his actions. Sela asked Avneri today if he feared being arrested, and Avneri said, "There's nothing that can stop me from working for peace. If they arrest me, there will be a trial, and we'll see what the judges of Israel say."

http://www.israelnn.com/news.php3?id=50761

[bluesoul]

1. Radicals

I love it how they put the "radical" left-wing activist. Seems that those that are for peace are radicals. I guess for the right-wing media and politics anything left to them is "radical". But then I guess one should be proud to be called a radical, especially considering the alternatives. Moderate is apparently silent support of extreme right wing politics. Uri Avnery, a great man! Love the stuff he writes on Counterpunch.org :toast:

Bluesoul, proud "radical" left-winger

[GabysPoppy]

2. This line says it all about Avneri and Gush Shalom

"It's clear that the Haifa attack was designed to cause Sharon to kill Arafat," Avneri said today, "so without even thinking twice, I knew that I had to come here to prevent this from happening."

[bluesoul]

3. Hmm?

What' so illogical about it? Sharon would use it as an excuse. He doesn't even hide the fact that some big attack would be needed to finally get rid of Arafat. Come on

[GabysPoppy]

4. I read it differently than you

Uri seems to be claiming it was "designed" (the attack) for the purpose of giving Sharon the opportunity to kill Arafat.

You try to picture terrorist leaders around the table discussing ideas on how they can get Sharon to kill Arafat. That theory begs understanding. I would think they might have ample means of their own if they want Arafat dead.

Despite all the rhetoric from Sharon and his saber rattling etc., he needs Arafat alive as his poster boy. So even that theory refutes the charges made by Uri.

If I read it incorrectly you may try to tell me what that means.

[bluesoul]

5. Hmm

Well you see it that way, I see it differently. To me it's a far stretch suggesting what you suggest. ;)

[GabysPoppy]

7. If you see it differently, fine

Please explain how.

[tinnypriv]

15. It is a perfectly reasonable interpretation

I'll help out.

Arguments for:

According to a senior member of Hamas (who spoke to a closed forum recently, cited by the centrist Nfc via JCPA):

"Arafats explusion would have positive aspects" (Hebrew, News First Class)

According to this Kassam operative, Hamas knows that the decision to remove Arafat was made in order to "pressure the PA to act against the Islamic resistance", but they couldn't care less. They expect him to die soon and regardless, he should have "retired years ago".

Other positive aspects to expelling Arafat listed by this senior leader:

1. All resistance groups would use this event (the explusion) to "respond harshly to the Zionists". They say they have "mega-terror" truck bombs planned.

2. Former PLO/PA supporters would join the Islamic groups after Arafat is removed, because that would bring the PA/PLO to an end.

3. On opportunity for a new leadership, "closer to the Islamic groups" would arise.

Arguments against:

This senior leader acknowledges that Arafat could be of more use "outside" the territories (point 2 in the article), suggesting that Hamas would prefer explusion rather than "liquidation".

But considering the other points made by him, I'm not sure if this is any more than a piece of standard boilerplate. Considering the current popularity of Arafat, it probably isn't a good idea to call for him being killed by Israel, even in a closed forum.

Conclusion:

All in all, it is very likely that the most recent suicide attack in Israel was undertaken with the clear understanding that Israel may respond by "removing" Arafat. In addition, such a development is seen as "positive" by (at the very least) a senior member of the premier Palestinian Islamic terrorist movement.

Therefore, given these facts, it is a reasonable interpretation to say that the latest bombing was carried out in order to get Sharon to kill Arafat.

Personally, I don't agree with that. But is it reasonable? Sure.

I believe that undercuts your curt dismissal of Uri's point of view, and (by extension) the conclusions you've drawn about him and Gush Shalom.

[Equinox]

16. Excellent post, tinnypriv....

But I doubt some would see the "logic" in that.

:toast:

[DuctapeFatwa]

8. All countries engage in covert operations from time to time

No one is saying Israel is the only nation to do so.

The government of Israel has quite a long relationship with Hamas especially, as well as other Palestinian groups.

Sharon is at his most popular when surrounded by fresh bodies and blood.

It is not uncommon for politicians to do what they feel will benefit them, in fact, I would say without hesitation that you can count on it.

Sadly, what benefite politicians is not necessarily what benefits families having supper in a restaurant.

Or low income people in Israel or elsewhere. However, that is that way things are.

[GabysPoppy]

10. You just stating the obvious which I will not argue about

We are specifically talking about Uri's theory that the terrorists planned this bombing with the intention of Sharon killing Arafat.

Nothing more and nothing less.

If you subscribe to that theory say so. I would be more than willing to listen to your arguments. I repeat what I said before. Sharon does not want to see his bogeyman in the person of Arafat dead.

Sharon, love him or hate him is an itelligent person. If it was to his benefit that Arafat be dead, you could bet your last dollar Arafat would have met his maker a long time ago, and it wouldn't have to be by a bullet either.

So please address the issue on hand.

[DuctapeFatwa]

11. I'm not at all sure abt Uri's theory. I don't know who planned the bombing

It could have been an authentic genuine action of an individual, it could have been a planned operation of a resistance group, or it could have been a sparkle.

Who benefits?

That's usually the key.

[Aidoneus]

12. I don't know if I'd stand by Uri's line

but it's not implausible.

PIJ & Hamas dislike Arafat a great deal, provoking Sharon into killing him would be 'two birds with one stone' to them.

[bemildred]

14. That was my take.

I am a bit skeptical about it.

I also agree with Mr. Poppy in #10.

[Darranar]

13. Perhaps it was translated wrong?

n/t

[drdon326]

6. "so without even thinking twice...." exactly Uri.

.

[DuctapeFatwa]

9. Yeah, there are people who would rather save lives than kill

Go figure. Don't worry, no chance any such person will be "elected" either in the US or in Israel.