Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk

Pretty fascinating stuff.


http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast/03/ ... index.html

Some interesting confession:

"Every day, there was screaming; every night, torture. Hamas was torturing its own people!"

(...)

As a spy, Mr. Yousef wasn't fully activated until the outbreak of the second Intifada in September 2000. A few months before at Camp David, the late PLO chief Yasser Arafat had turned down the Israeli offer of statehood on 90% of the West Bank with East Jerusalem as the capital. According to Mr. Yousef, Arafat decided he needed another uprising to win back international attention. So he sought out Hamas's support through Sheikh Yousef, writes his son, who accompanied him to Arafat's compound. Those meetings took place before the Palestinian authorities found a pretext for the second Intifada. It came when future Prime Minister Ariel Sharon visited the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, site of the Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock. Mr. Yousef's account helps to set straight the historical record that the uprising was premeditated by Arafat.

Herve should take notes - to makr the big bucks you have to 'exagerate' your importance and tell the yanks what they believe already!


If you change your religion to boot you'll be on a great winner!


(And don't worry about contradicting historical facts or even basic logoc - the bigger the exageration the better)

Indeed, one should start off by claiming that the Israeli military was superior to the Egyptians and Syrians at the time of the six-day war. I mean, Israel's military is superior nowadays, so anyone not keen on middle eastern history will probably believe the spin that the Israelis were always the powerhouse of the Middle East - and that the Arabs were the poor, downtrodden underdogs.

shafique wrote:tell the yanks what they believe already!:)

And, do you believe Hamas militants torture other Pali´s?

event horizon wrote:Indeed, one should start off by claiming that the Israeli military was superior to the Egyptians and Syrians at the time of the six-day war. I mean, Israel's military is superior nowadays, so anyone not keen on middle eastern history will probably believe the spin that the Israelis were always the powerhouse of the Middle East - and that the Arabs were the poor, downtrodden underdogs.

The 'Son of Hamas' story is one that tells me Israel is having a PR campaign. Dubai assassination seemed like a bad publicity stunt from Mossad right? This gives Israel the upperhand again. They gave up an agent to show how strong they are in intelligence gathering. This gives the Dubai story another twist. Smart move in my opinion.

@EH: Interesting to add to the military overweight of Egypt.
In 1971, President Sadat of Egypt offered a peace treaty to Israel for withdrawal from the Sinai region in accordance with US foreign policy back then. It was Kissinger who opted to back Israel in rejecting the peace treaty with a policy of 'stalemate', no negotiations, only force. This rejection of diplomacy from Egypt led to the war in 1973, when Israel was close to defeat and the US even declared a nuclear alert. The US had miscalculated the Egyptian forces and returned to diplomacy that led to the Camp David accords of 1979. Shows you how strong Egypt really was.

The cnn article ends by stating the Israelis are saying this guy is 'exagerating' - so why would I trust the juicier parts of his story?

Suffice to say if anyone is torturing like Israel did (with judicial approval until it was revoked), then they too are condemned by me.

As for 1973, there the Israelis did believe they were superior (even in public) and initially got their arses handed to them. But to giv them credit they and their suppliers didn't let it happen again. (And we still have to read what the interal israeli miltary assessment was in 1967 - but for the purposes of the Liberty war crime - we're assuming eh is right.

Cheers
Shafique

shafique wrote:As for 1973, there the Israelis did believe they were superior (even in public) and got their arses handed to them. But to giv them credit they and their suppliers didn't let it happen again. (And we still have to read what the interal israeli miltary assessment was in 1967 - but for the purposes of the Liberty war crime - we're assuming eh is right.

Shafique,

You have to distinguish one important aspect in my opinion, which is that official statements are to give perception of a stance. This works as a deterrent, not always based on reality in case of overstating your alleged power, in this case merely having an ally in the US, back in the '70.

An example I just mentioned in my former post, the American's made a crucial mistake in rejecting Egypt's diplomacy effort regarding the occupied territories in 1971. If you look in the official statements of the US historic records, it is seen as a victory, however in reality it was a diplomatic disaster that brought the world close to nuclear war. Chomsky mentions this in Failed States.

FYI.

I agree about official statements. My comment above was really just to contrast the official line before the 67 war and the feeling in73. All accounts I've read say israel was shocked at the initial gains by Egypt.

I've found one article about declassified docs in 2006 relating to 67..I'll start a thread

shafique wrote:I agree about official statements. My comment above was really just to contrast the official line before the 67 war and the feeling in73. All accounts I've read say israel was shocked at the initial gains by Egypt.

I've found one article about declassified docs in 2006 relating to 67..I'll start a thread

Ok.

Back to Son of Hamas here.