Arafat shows his "coourage"

A Palestinian suicide attack on a cafe said to be filled with many women and children killed a baby girl and her grandmother and wounded 40 others.

Perhaps you could supply the evidence indicating that Arafat masterminded, underwrote or is otherwise responsible for this attack, particularly in light of the recent report by the U.S. State Department that “found ‘no conclusive evidence’ that Yasir Arafat or other senior Palestinian leaders planned or approved specific terrorist attacks on Israel in the six months that ended in December.” T. Purdum, “State Dept. Report Investigating Arafat's Links to Terror Is at Odds With Israeli Claims,” New York Times, March 17, 2002.


Or must we simply assume that you know something that the world’s largest diplomatic corps and intelligence services do not?

What month is this? Oh silly me, it's December in Palestine all over again!!


The Iranian arms delivery didn't happen? And green plaid towel-headed dribbling Arafat is not a terrorist. Well I'll be danged.


Please continue to delude yourself - and continue posting your pathetic support of Palestine. They were the people who cheered as the WTC towers came tumbling down killing thousands of Americans inside. I guess that never happened either - right Chris??? What else - the Holocaust is a myth as well??? Isn't it ironic that those who are anti-Israeli NEVER see any terrorists??? Just pathetic Chris. Pathetic.

It would be refreshing if you sought other news services than the NYT for your Anti-Israel stories. It's too easy with them.

This is more of a reponse that anyone who refuses to answer a simple question deserves, but the quote fromt the State Dept. report also appeared in the 5/16/02 Jerusalem Post, "State Department Report Chides PLO for Failure to Prevent Violence," and many other organs.


The idea that the Times is biased against Israel is considered a bad joke among people who read the press closely. For example, even the U.S. has now joined the rest of the world in denouning the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza as "unlawful." You would therefore think it odd that the leader of an occupied country would be responsible for ensuring the security of an occupying military force that has killed some 1,500 of his countrymen. Yet this is the editorial position of the Times (Arafat must stop the "violence," not just the suicide bombings), and virtually the entire mainstream media. Another example: the recent puff piece in the NY Times Magazine about the humanity, discipline and restraint shown by one elite unit during the April incursion that ignored IDF soldier reports of orders to terrorize civilians ("put a bullet through every window," one IDF soldier described it, accoridng the Human Rights Watch, which included a point-by-point analysis of IDF "war crimes"). A third: the recent report concerning the "200,000" setters on the West Bank that ignored the additional 200,000 Israelis that have moved into occupied East Jerusalem. The Times also has a habit of keeping alive the most punctured historic propaganda myths -- such as the one where the Palestinians, in 1948, leave Israel on orders from other Arab countries, or the intransigent refusal of Arabs to negotiate with Israel for years -- through its letters column.


Apart from a vocal group of chauvinists who tolerate no moral criticism or negative publicity regarding Israel, I'm not aware of anyone who thinks the Times is anti-Israel. I mean, just look at Safire's columns, it's ridiculous.