Arafat's guerrillas shot 7; world silent.

[Dinner]

Guerrillas loyal to Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat clashed with militants in Lebanon's largest Palestinian refugee camp Monday," the Associated Press reports. "Seven people were killed, witnesses and Palestinian officials said." As far as we know, this wanton killing of Palestinian Arabs met with complete silence from all those who denounce Israel every time it succeeds in killing a Hamas terrorist.


Here's an encouraging report, though, from the Jersalem Post:

In a rare demonstration Tuesday, about 600 residents of northern Gaza's Beit Hanoun blocked a main road with trash cans, rocks and burning tires in a burst of anger at gunmen who have prompted Israeli incursions by firing rockets at Israeli targets. . . .

"They claim they are heroes," said Mohammed Zaaneen, 30, a farmer, of the Palestiniain gunmen, as he carried rocks into the street. "They brought us only destruction and made us homeless. They used our farms, our houses and our children . . . to hide."

If the Palestinians were led by men like Mohammed Zaaneen, the "road map" might actually end up going somewhere. Incidentally, here's an astonishingly biased passage from an Associated Press report on that map:

Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon insists that the Palestinians make the first move. He was to have discussed his objections with Bush this week, but canceled his trip after Sunday's bus bombing. The Palestinians have accepted the plan as is.

The road map actually provides that the Palestinians are obliged to cease all terrorism by the end of this month, so Sharon is entirely within his rights to insist that they "make the first move." And if the Palestinians fail to meet their first obligation under the plan, how can the AP claim they "have accepted the plan as is"?

[Kidlicious]

In the paper this morning it said that Sharon had accepted it on the condition that the violence would end and that Arafat had not accepted it yet because he wants to cut out his PM from the decision making process.

[Spiffor]

I knew the Arafat regime was widely corrupt and devoid of all democratic legitimacy, but I didn't think he'd favor wanton murders on his population. This shows Arafat is yet another wanabee dictator who will do anything to keep the little power he has.

I still hope these guerillas have acted on their own initiative, and that they'll be harshly punished. If not, Arafat is worthy of political assassination

[Dinner]

Unfortunately, these sort of behavior has been becoming more and more common from the PA. Arafat want's to keep hiis strangle hold on power so he's resorting to intemidation and violence.

The real question is why does only a few papers like the Wall Street Journal bother to bring these attacks up? Occationally the BBC will publish an article about them but most of the rest stay silent. I really think there is a built in bias. Can anyone come up with a better argument for why there's wall to wall coverage of every Israeli event but next to none when Arafat's gunman shot political decenters?

[Master Zen]

Sharon isn't helping the peace process at all, but if there's someone who is an even greater burden it is Arafat.

Give it up Yassir, you were a fabulous revolutionary, now you're no better than Castro, sacrificing the well being of your homeland (which I begin to think you really don't give a crap about) just for a blind and childish stranglehold of power.

Do your people a favor, get the hell out of Palestine.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Oerdin
The real question is why does only a few papers like the Wall Street Journal bother to bring these attacks up?

The answer is simple : look at how heated this thread is. Nobody cares

[MichaeltheGreat]

Newsflash: Yassir Arafat and his buddies are murdering thugs. And in other breaking news, the sun rose this morning in the east for about the 1,643,589,900,000th day in a row.

[Dinner]

I guess this issue just doesn't matter to most readers. So the next question becomes why do they get all fired up about Israel's actions if they don't care? I find it very funny that certain politically left of center people go absolutely postal on Israel for every little thing yet ignore much worse offense when the culprit is someone else. Why?

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Oerdin
I find it very funny that certain politically left of center people go absolutely postal on Israel for every little thing yet ignore much worse offense when the culprit is someone else. Why?

Because Israel is a usual imperialistic invading evil culprit in the leftist lore (the description isn't that false though, when you look at the colonies policy for example ), while the Palestinians are the usual victims. And leftists tend to love victims and to be late when realizing that victims are no better than culprits.

But they can change. At the beginning of the Yugoslavian war, the Serbs had much sympathy and forgiveness from the west because of the past massacres the Croatians have done during WW2. For a very long time, the weeniness about the Jews and the Holocaust was defended by the left too.

If Arafat continues to be a ruthless thug for long, the left will come to realize his true nature. We are already very aware that he is a corrupt and undemocratic leader, and that he is an obstacle to the peace process (even though the true devil remains Sharon in our lore). The days of praising the freedom hero are over.

[cinch]

This is just like the "Arab Countries Treat Palestianians Worse Than Israel" thread from a few days back.

I think the reason most people make more of a deal about Israel killing people is the fact that Israel is a western-style democracy and as such is held to a higher standard than either Islamic militants or foolish dictators. And I believe that was the primary argument given in the aforementioned thread. Of course, the primary counterargument for that is: "But they are engaged in a fight for their lives", which is a valid point. I don't pretend to have all the answers, but I also don't think we should make overly wide accusations of bias against everyone because they see more of a problem with a democracy killing people than a dictatorship doing the same. Ahem.

I agree about what Oerdin said about that Zaaneen fellow, though. And it would be best for everyone if Arafat just up and skidaddled.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Oerdin
I guess this issue just doesn't matter to most readers. So the next question becomes why do they get all fired up about Israel's actions if they don't care? I find it very funny that certain politically left of center people go absolutely postal on Israel for every little thing yet ignore much worse offense when the culprit is someone else. Why?

Another thing (beyond Spiffor's post) is that what Israel does is more spectacular and visible. Bulldozers, Merkavas, uniformed troops and border police. It's all nice and organized and official, while the **** pulled by the Palestinian Authority is more nebulous and has the outward appearance of disorganization. I think Israel is expected to be relatively civilized and functional, while most of the world has no such expectations of the Palestinian side.

[Dinner]

Thanks Spiffor that anwser made sense. BTW the new Palestinian PM seems like a stand up guy. I just hope Arafat doesn't try to throw a monkey wrench into things just to prove he's still important.

[MichaeltheGreat]

There's only two ways Arafat will skedaddle. One is old age or some other "natural causes." The other is if someone skedaddles his brains all over the nearest wall.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
There's only two ways Arafat will skedaddle. One is old age or some other "natural causes." The other is if someone skedaddles his brains all over the nearest wall.

I wonder if he could be arrested and tried for something in a way that would discredit him.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Since you have to get past his bodyguards and cronies, that pretty much means option two.