Palestinians condemn US reward for info on Gaza bombing

[jdbjdb]

The Palestinian Authority on Sunday condemned the US for offering a reward of up to $5 million for people providing information about the attack on American convoy in the Gaza Strip on October 15. Three US security guards were killed when a remote-controlled roadside bomb was detonated near their convoy in the northern Gaza Strip.

The offer, on the State Department's Web site http://www.rewardsforjustice.net, is for information leading to the arrest or conviction of the people responsible for the attack.

Col. Rashid Abu Shabak, commander of the Palestinian Authority's Preventive Security Service in the Gaza Strip, lashed out at the US for making the offer, saying the PA was continuing its investigation into the case. "We strongly condemn this decision," he said. "This is an insulting announcement because it deals with a people whose mouth does not water in the face of financial temptations."

Abu Shabak, whose force has been entrusted with investigating the attack on the US convoy, said the Palestinians and their security forces refuse to play the role of mercenaries for the US or any other party. "We don't work as mercenaries for anyone," he added. "We operate according to our own security vision, which is to serve the interests of the Palestinian people and to provide them with security and calm."

He said the PA was continuing to investigate the incident, but declined to say whether any progress has been made. It's also not clear what happened to the eight Palestinians who were detained shortly after the attack. Sources in Gaza City said most of the detainees have been released.

The suspects belong to the Popular Resistance Committees, an alliance of different militias, including Fatah, and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. The Popular Resistance Committees intitially claimed responsibility for the killing of the three Americans, but backtracked after the PA strongly condemned the attack.

A senior PA official in Ramallah described the US offer as "imprudent" and a "flagrant intervention in Palestinian affairs." He added: "The offer is a stab in the back of the Palestinians, who are doing their utmost to capture the culprits."

An FBI delegation dispatched to investigate the incident met twice with members of the PA investigation team near the Erez checkpoint. Gen. Abdel Razak Majaydeh, the highest-ranking security official in the Gaza Strip who heads the PA investigation team, claimed on Sunday that the FBI delegation was satisfied with the cooperation of the PA security forces in the investigation.

The PA media has accused Israel of standing behind the attack on the American convoy with the aim of driving a wedge between the Palestinian Authority and the US. Senior PA officials have also accused Israel in private of being responsible for the attack.

[Seoulstriker]

hmmmm...

could the PA have been involved in such an attack?


hmmmm...

[jdbjdb]

Yes! Palestinian Autoirty knows who carried out the attacks just as they know about suicide bombers before they strike at Israel. The Palestinian Authority has already said they will not disarm the militants, and they tell Israel and The United States that they are moving against the militants when actually they are doing nothing! They are worthless!

[StarvingStudent47]

What's the source for this article? I'm not saying it's false, I'd just like to know what you're quoting from.

[jdbjdb]

Jerusalem Post
www.jpost.com

[usa320]

if its true, then i say

BLOW THE EVER LOVING **** OUTTA ARAFART AND HIS GANG OF THUGS.

[Seoulstriker]

i'm still waiting for arafat to get his 45 virgins and pelican in the afterlife. :lol:

http://www.worth1000.com/view.asp?entry=63014&display=photoshop

[jdbjdb]

That or 72 hookers from Amsterdam.

[Argyll]

You guys just crease me up!
One minute you say that the media are so full of lies that they offer lack of credibility,and that how it's always just a pile of liberal lies...........and here you are quoting from the same fuc*ing media..........make your minds up!

[Guttorm]

Hmmm.. Is there a post somewhere here where someone summs up the whole Israeli/palistinian conflict?

Of course, it would have to be a post not coloured by the writer, i.e the writer being palistinian and just claming it to be a case of we're right they're wrong.

Does it exist here? Or on any other forum? I'd like to get some facts on that case.

[jdbjdb]

Palestinians were offered a state, but they said "no"

[Guttorm]

Well... IDFM, thats sort of the picture I've seen as well... Even though the media in Norway seems hold with the palestinians... Every case is shown in a light thats makes people feel compassion for the palestinian cause.

Anyway, I would still like to see a site with an explanation...

[jdbjdb]

Anyway, I would still like to see a site with an explanation
Do you want to see the American/Israeli view or the EU UN Arab view?

[Argyll]

Would that be the State of "Atlantis"? rofl

[California Joe]

No, it was actually the State of North Dakota. But the Sioux Indians got pissed. ;)

[IDFM203]

Well... IDFM, thats sort of the picture I've seen as well...
Anyway, I would still like to see a site with an explanation...well there are a few good ones but this one right HERE (http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/myths/mftoc.html)is indeed one of the best!!!

shalom :D

[waize]

This verbal fighting is/are making me nuts

Doesn't the Israeli's has a jet and a bunkerbusting bomb they can miss on Arafat's HQ or shall you wait until he dies by himself. There is no action, just complaining.

Riots and suicidebombing will there be anyway.

[Guttorm]

Anyway, I would still like to see a site with an explanation
Do you want to see the American/Israeli view or the EU UN Arab view?

Hehee, Thats just it... I don't want VIEWS... I want the cold hard FACTS!...
:D

[StarvingStudent47]

Hehee, Thats just it... I don't want VIEWS... I want the cold hard FACTS!...
:D

Well, that'd be easy, if God operated a website called http://www.GodsHonestTruth.com, now wouldn't it? There is huge disagreement over the solid facts of the conflict, as well as to how those facts should be interpreted.

Examples of factual disagreements:

*Supporters of Israel argue that Arab hatred of Jews flared up after the fall of the Ottoman Empire (end of WWI). Opponents of Israel argue that Arab hatred of Jews didn't occur until the creation of Israel in 1948.

*Supporters of Israel argue that Jewish violence toward Arab populations before and during the creation of Israel was rare and isolated. Opponents of Israel argue that it was continual and systematic.

*Likewise, supporters of Israel argue that Arab violence toward Jews before and during the creation of Israel was continual and systematic. Opponents of Israel argue that it was rare and isolated.

*Supporters of Israel argue that most Palestinians support suicide bombings and oppose any peace deal that allows Israel to exist in any way, shape, or form. Opponents of Israel argue that most Palestinians only want Israel to retreat to pre-1967 borders, and support suicide bombings only after losing someone close to them.

*Supporters of Israel argue that the Palestinian Authority is in cahoots with Palestinian terrorist groups like Hamas. Opponents of Israel argue that there is no link between those organizations.

*Supporters of Israel argue that the IDF follows extremely stirct Rules of Engagement during counter-terror operations. Opponents of Israel argue that the IDF fires weapons indiscriminately and even deliberately targets civilians.

*Supporters of Israel argue that Palestinian terrorists use stone-throwing children as "human shields" for their gunmen to hide behind. Opponents of Israel deny that this occurs.

Examples of disagreements over basic interpretation of facts:

*The 1967 War: It is undisputed that in 1967, the Egyptian President Nasser assembled a large military force on the Egyptian-Israeli border. It is undisputed that Nasser made many public statements declaring his intent to invade Israel. It is undisputed that Israel fired the first shot, sparking the Six-Day War, which Israel won by a landslide. Supporters of Israel say that this was "legitimate pre-emption"; opponents of Israel say that this was "unwarranted aggression" and "a Zionist land-grab."

*Sabra and Shatila Massacres: It is undisputed that the PLO was operating out of the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps, located in Lebanon (near Beirut). Most sources guess that there were roughly 200 PLO combatants operating out of the camps, though an exact headcount is unknown. It is indisputed that Israel had secured temporary perimeter around those camps as part of the Lebanese Civil War. It is undisputed that a Lebanese Christian militia approached Israeli officials and asked permission to conduct "counter-terror" operations in those camps after the assassination of a prominent Lebanese Christian leader by a PLO assassin. It is undisputed that Israeli officials, notably Minister of Defense Ariel Sharon, granted permission. It is undisputed that the Lebanese Christian militia entered the camps on September 16, 1982; it is undisputed that they stayed in the camps for roughly three days. It is undisputed that after they left, roughly 600-1000 Palestinian bodies were discovered. Supporters of Israel say that Sharon's approval of the raid was an honest mistake; that he thought the Lebanese Christians were planning a legitimate counter-terror operation and not a massacre; and that the guilt for the massacre should lay with the Lebanese Christian militia who carried it out. Opponents of Israel claim that Sharon knew a massacre was in the works; that he even encouraged or ordered the massacre; and that blame for the massacre lies on the shoulders of the Israeli government.

----------------------------------

I hope these examples show why one post cannot "give the facts" of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

[Argyll]

If the IDF wanted to take out Arafat they could,at the drop of a hat!
Why they don't .......good question,but inmy view doing this would turn Israel into a bloodbath on both sides,and sometimes it better to live with the devil you know!

[StarvingStudent47]

If the IDF wanted to take out Arafat they could,at the drop of a hat!
Why they don't .......good question,but inmy view doing this would turn Israel into a bloodbath on both sides,and sometimes it better to live with the devil you know!

The problem with assassinating Arafat is who would replace him. Everything I've read suggests that the Palestinian people actually want someone more radical as their leader, like Sheik Yassin, not less radical, like Mahmoud Abbas. If the likely sucessor was Mahmoud Abbas or Hanan Ashrawi, I'd say "get rid of Arafat by any means necessary." But that isn't the case.

As for "turning it into a bloodbath," I believe that Hamas and pals are already attacking full strength. So I do not believe that assassinating Arafat would cause any more of a bloodbath than the bloodbath that has been happening for the past three years. To reference Spinal Tap, Hamas' amps are already at 11. Israel is certainly not attacking full-strength (if they did, Gaza would look like Grozny), but I don't see how assassinating Arafat would increase IDF actions.

[Argyll]

Damned if you do,damned if you don't?