October 10, 2003


Doubt it not!

Posted by Tim Blair at October 10, 2003 05:51 AM

Stern Group

I think someone said that every time you posted something about Arafat, they would post something about the Stern Group in return. Apparently he/she has lost interest. But I think some traditions should be preserved, even if I'm completely disinterested.

Posted by: Charles at October 10, 2003 at 07:24 AM


Why wont you just die Yasser, so we can hand out candy to our children and fire our rifles into the air !

Posted by: Jono at October 10, 2003 at 11:23 AM

Garnering 83% of the vote in a UN-monitored election not only makes Arafat the only genuinely elected leader in the Arab world, but one of the most popular amongst his people in the world. Shouldn't all y'all be directing your anger at the average palestinian man on the street rather than him? I imagine they're all pretty pissed off about this decades-long military occupation and theft of their rightful land too. Plus, you'd probably rather he be alive. Killed or exiled he becomes a martyr, and death by natural causes will make a hero of him anyhow. When he does kick on, be assured the next crop of leaders will likely be far more militant.

Posted by: Adam at October 10, 2003 at 11:57 AM

Ahh Adam, you sound a bit to sure of yourself and don't see the huge gaps in your arguments.

83% of the UN support him. Big deal. The UN is not some supreme authority or human rights group. They are, by definition, a political organisation.

One that is filled with representatives from the 22 Arab states - dictatorships and theocracies.

If 83% of the UN supported Bob Brown as the rightful Australian Prime Minister, even though he only won a single (rigged) election 8 years ago, would you support him ?

Its really clear to anyone who opens their eyes that the UN has always been anti-Israel, as they have never passed a resolution condemning Palestinian terror yet countless attempts have been made to condemn Israel for responding by targetting Islamic Jihad and Hamas leadership.

Any country is entitled to defend itself under Section 51 of the UN charter yet Israel is condemned for exercising that right.

As for your other argument, the answer is no. Arafat and the PA are entirely to blame for the failure of the peace process.

The disputed territories must be divided up based on negotiations, yet they have never held their end of the bargain, let alone abandoned their dream of destroying Israel.

The current Palestinian generation has been incited into a fervorous bloodlust due to the Palestinian Authority's control of media and education. An entire generation of Palestinians has been raised to believe that they must give their lives to reclaim every inch of land, and that the middle east should be Judenrein.

This year, Arafat spoke before a crowd of supporters and yelled that "a million martyrs shall march to Jerusalem". He never gave up any of his power - he has always had the ability to stop, or at least fight, terrorism. The recent Prime Minister (Arafat's puppet) never had the power to negotiate with Israel.

Arafat is the biggest obstacle to peace in the middle east.

Posted by: Jono at October 10, 2003 at 12:16 PM

What a kill joy.He's just annoyed the allahafart out of those drooling in anticipation of feasting on delicacies like eyes of newt, kidney of deadly reptile, heart of gall.Oh well, another few palestinians starve tonight.

Posted by: d at October 10, 2003 at 12:23 PM

A one time election with a 75 year old women in a male dominated society that ends up endorsing Arafat is a utopia to some and a nightmare to others.

Posted by: Lunch at October 10, 2003 at 12:34 PM

He hasnt annoyed me thes past few days. Actually I'm rather enjoying. He's suffering good and propper. I hope that stomachs twistying real bad. Its almost biblical.

LOVING IT (as long as he does croak at the end)

Posted by: DeadED at October 10, 2003 at 12:36 PM


If you bother to put forward an arguement then at least check your facts. The arabs which now choose to call themselves "palestinians" never had a right to the land. There has never been a Palestine before the 1900s. They have always been a nomadic group up until recently and Syria in the early 1900's included the area now known as Israel as a southern part of Syria.

This Palestinian identity every lefty wanks about is a modern creation used as a tool to fight the newly created Israel when the state came into being.

I apologise for not adding links but don't have access here at work. Feel free to check for yourself.

Posted by: Jake D at October 10, 2003 at 12:44 PM

Jake D,

Your comments are spot on. Palestinians have a state; it's called Jordan.

As for the stupid UN, it has caused so many problems in the Middle East that it is hard to know where to begin. For a start it has fostered the so-called refugee camps in Jordan where, instead of assimilating into Jordanian society, the "Palestinians" have been living in squalour for nigh on 50 years. Thus breeds the fanatical terrorism that fuels Yasser's power base.


The fact that Arafat got 83% of the vote only proves he is popular. But, considering that he and his like have spent years making sure that the "Palestinians" are dirt poor and stupid, it is no wonder that they support him. he is one of the great exponents of the left tactic of levelling everyone down so that they will vote for you, in the mistaken belief that you will somehow make their lives better.

Posted by: Toryhere at October 10, 2003 at 01:05 PM

Dear Jono
Forget the Middle East. Scientists the world over would agree your curious cranium probably holds the key to unlocking the mysteries of how normal-looking (rough guess) humans can be so twisted.

"83% of the UN support him. Big deal. The UN is not some supreme authority or human rights group."

Umm. Read again.

"Garnering 83% of the vote in a UN-monitored election not only makes Arafat the only genuinely elected leader in the Arab world, but one of the most popular amongst his people in the world."

Thanks for your screed. Pity you don't understand the post you responded to.

Posted by: a token lefty at October 10, 2003 at 01:13 PM

There are rumours around that Arafat has stomach cancer.

Currently they are trying to figure a way of getting rid of the malignant growth .... and the cancer as well of course :)

Posted by: Rob at October 10, 2003 at 01:24 PM

Now Qurie's gone.

Posted by: ilibcc at October 10, 2003 at 01:53 PM

Surely an old, sick and dying Arafat should now take his turn to strap explosives round his waist and get his martyrdom?

Posted by: TreeHuggingHippyCrap at October 10, 2003 at 02:18 PM

Deaded, perhaps a compromise: string out his death a few agonising months and just beofre death, his followers can have a nibble - that way the bits are still fresh, not much.Having feasted on the tasty morsels of their master, they can swiftly join him.

Posted by: d at October 10, 2003 at 02:35 PM

Latest reports indicate that Arafat was scheduled to have an arsehole transplant, but the arsehole rejected him.

Posted by: Habib Bickford at October 10, 2003 at 02:58 PM

It's a shame the teatowel doesn't reject him. By the way, can we have a new poll?

Posted by: ilibcc at October 10, 2003 at 03:09 PM

'Palestine' had an identity at the time of the crusades. The area has been continuously lived in for more than 2000 years by all sorts of people - including arabs and jews who historically got on quite well, much better than jews and europeans did.

To claim that because these palestinians didn't live in a nice US-funded house in a nice US-funded suburb with a dog (likely imported from the US) they never had a claim to the land is one of the most ridiculously childish, racist and pathetic things I've ever heard. They've been there since the time of Christ.

Oh yeah, and anyone who doesn't think that the apartheid, land-theft situation over there right now is just totally awesome is obviously an anti-semite, blinded by a burning hatred of jews. yeah... totally.

Posted by: Adam at October 10, 2003 at 03:14 PM

token lefty. Clearly you don't accept my refutation and you still accept Adam's initial argument. Answer me this:

* How does 83% UN support indicate popularity amongst Palestinians ?
* How does 83% UN support indicate popularity amongst people of all nations ?

You can see that Adam has arrogantly asserted that having UN support is necessary to be a legitimate leader of a country.

83% UN support would most likely indicate that 83% of ambassadors to the UN voted for his appointment as the head of the Palestinian Authority.

Adam, its nice you use loaded leftist language, like "land-stealing" and "apartheid". Since Israel won the disputed territories in a defensive war waged by hostile Arab states in 1967, wouldn't those lands belong to Israel ?

You do realise that Arabs and Jews most certainly did not live peacefully alongside each other for many centuries ? To claim such is astonishing ignorance. Jews and Christians have always lived as second class citizens, with no rights to own property or land, and they were forced to pay the Jizya - a tax for infidels.

Thats at the BEST of times. There were quite brutal massacres and pogroms against Jewish communities, although usually not as severe as Christian communities in Europe.

How come 700,000 Jewish refugees fled the Arab states to Israel in 1946-1948 when Israel was founded ? Israel didn't own one inch of the West Bank, Gaza or Golan Heights then - I thought everything was peachy pie with the neighbours ?

Why was the PLO, sworn to destroy Israel, founded in 1964 ?

And Adam, use a dictionary. Apartheid was a system that discriminated against South African blacks.

Posted by: Jono at October 10, 2003 at 03:40 PM

With the pope sick as well, two obsolete bigots might soon go.

Posted by: Skinny Hippo at October 10, 2003 at 03:41 PM


You have no idea what apartheid was like in South Africa if you diminish the meaning like that. The new PA-PM has stated that he will not crack down on the terrorist for fear of revolution. What does that do for you simplistic view?. Like a child screaming at its parents because will come to no harm, you have a go at Israel because the alternative is to scary.

Posted by: Gary at October 10, 2003 at 03:59 PM

Sorry Skinny, the Pope is no bigot. People who have been paying attention for the last 25 years would know that. I won't argue about "obsolete' for lack of space, not wishing to overload Spleenville's server. I'll just say you are wrong.

Arafat, on the other hand, is a political criminal, rather as Communist and Nazi rulers were.

Posted by: Michael Lonie at October 10, 2003 at 04:02 PM

Obsolete bigot?

Pope John Paul II supported Solidarity in Soviet-dominated Poland, meshing with President Ronald Reagan's political will to unravel communism's stranglehold on subjugated peoples from the Baltic states to Asia.

He helped free Europe and advanced freedom everywhere.

If the Pope's an obsolete bigot, you're an obsolete ignoramus.

Posted by: ilibcc at October 10, 2003 at 04:02 PM

Two points:
1. When talking about Arafat's "popularity" don't forget the billions he has siphoned off from EU and other grants, and used quite simply to buy support, and buy intimidation of those who don't support him.
2. The "Palestinian" identity: yes there was a country called Palestine in biblical times, but the people living there were Jews. Even in the 1930s the term referred to Jews living in Palestine, the Arabs indignantly denied they were Palestinians, insisted they were Arabs. And point 2(b), 150 years ago there were very few people of any identity living in what was mostly desert. the Jews came and built towns, and the Arabs came (from Syria etc.) attracted by the new jobs.

Posted by: ilana at October 10, 2003 at 04:54 PM

Jono, I agree Adam is a tool but you are being a bigger one.

Adam said "Garnering 83% of the vote in a UN-monitored election".

It wasn't a vote at the UN. The UN watched the "palestinians" vote, and declared the degree of irregularities, corruption, intimidation, assaults and murder acceptable.

Posted by: Australian Elvis at October 10, 2003 at 06:30 PM

Point taken Elvis.. I must have missed that word "monitored".

Well now thats even easier to debate Adam. The UN "monitors" lots of stuff. Like the way they were corruptly making money off the Iraqi food for oil program. And the way that UN offices in the West Bank sit idly by whilst Hamas rallies take place, and as mobs lynch collaborators.

Posted by: Jono at October 10, 2003 at 07:20 PM

"They've been there since the time of Christ"

correct me if I'm wrong but wasnt Jesusa Jew, and wasnt he born in Bethlehem.

Shit!! that must make him an 'Illegal Jewish Settler'

Posted by: DeadED at October 10, 2003 at 07:36 PM

Joan Peters wrote a book: "From Time Immemorial" that clarifies the history of the Palestine/Judea area. Very well written, very well documented. I didn't know that a)that historically Jews and Islam did NOT get along like brothers. That, in fact, Jews have been murdered, raped, kidnapped, etc. in various Islamic pogoms since pratically day one under Islamic rule. The second thing that I didn't know was that the UN created a special definition for the arab refugees: anyone living in the area for more that two years. The only refugee group that has this particular definition. (By the way, I learned a lot more than two things, but space is constrained. I suggest reading that book.)

Posted by: rabidfox at October 10, 2003 at 11:57 PM


You are hearing one of my favourite arguments in support of the Israeli occupation and annexation of parts of the West Bank and Gaza.

That the Palestinians are only recent inhabitants.

The absurdity is amazing.

Just how did the minority ruling class Arabs outbreed the original inhabitiants.

You will never get an answer, but then why should you when rhetoric should be enough?

Posted by: craig at October 11, 2003 at 03:12 AM

And again, why should anyone bother to deconstruct the 'myth' that Israel annexed these lands (and how dare they do so) even though they were sneak attacked by Arabs. Twice. when rhetoric should be enough...

Mean ole Israelis, taking the spoils of war.

Posted by: Drake at October 11, 2003 at 04:10 AM

Hi Ilibbc,

so the dear old pope is not a bigot? OK, just consider his views on contraception (preventing AIDS), premarital sex, celibacy for priests, ordination of women etc.
Sorry, the silly old flatulence is a harmful bigot.
I'm a Catholic so I can abuse the boss...
Also, I know a bit of his historical role; I'm from one of the liberated ex-Commie countries.

Posted by: Skinny Hippo at October 13, 2003 at 11:56 AM