Archive through February 2, 2001
FAKE AMERICAN GROSS PIG COMPULSIVE LIAR FARIS HOMOUD:
i've been watching you get jiggy at USC. ooooh, what an intimidator you are. i guess you be bad, eh?
take me the f*ck off of any 'friends' list including FAKE and BACON.
and there never was any other 'informer' but you.
Bad, no. I'm the first to run away but don't run after me. He chose to run after me with fire. Now the same flame will barbeque his arsh.
Sidebar: When things don't concern or involve you, I suggest you stay out of it.. Maybe that's your true problem, your to much of a busy body.
ps: The list never existed
i wasnt trying to do something other than 'stay out of it', by virtue of reading it and commenting upon it here...[but not posting at USC on it, eh cap?]
actually, i _did_ get involved w/you and URN a few name changes ago pour toi; our inauspicious beginning....and you were right about URN not being in russia.
see? i'll give you that one.
i'm watching to see how this showdown w/URN turns out, or if it was just a wheeze...
and, if it would work on the FAKE...heh
UN condemns Israel's latest border violation with Lebanon
By Robert Fisk in the Wazzani river valley, southern Lebanon
2 February 2001
With the naked eye, you can see the yellow bulldozer and the long trail of dust as it pushes the foundations for a new frontier fence north into Lebanon. The Indian UN soldiers watch it through fieldglasses. "How can we tell how far it will go?" Major Chhahal asks. "They've been doing this work for three days, right on the edge of Gaghar."
It all looks innocent. But it is not. Just days before the elections that may turn Ariel Sharon into a prime minister, the Israeli army is building a new border fence on Lebanese territory and in clear violation of UN Security Council Resolution 425.
The UN has condemned the "violation of the Blue Line," the UN's own south Lebanon frontier beyond which the Israelis agreed not to go. The Hizbollah guerrillas who hounded the Israeli army out of Lebanon less than a year ago, and who have their men watching scarcely half a mile away, are well aware of what is happening in Gaghar – and of the excuse it gives them to strike once more at Israeli troops.
Like all Lebanese dramas, this one has a beautiful complexity all its own. For when the Israelis retreated last May, the UN drew its blue line through the middle of the Arab village of Gaghar. Two-thirds of the village is on Lebanese territory, the lower third is in occupied Syria; the town's few hundred inhabitants are Syrian Alawites – the same sect as Syria's President, Bashar al-Assad – who cling to their Syrian citizenship but hold Israeli identity papers. And since the Israelis could not build their frontier fence through the middle of the town – and since the residents refused to accept a frontier gate on the Israeli-occupied Syrian side – it looks as though the Israelis are willing to violate the UN's demarcation to mark a border at least 150 feet inside Lebanese territory.
Because they cannot run barbed wire through the village, the Israelis call Gaghar a "soft underbelly" on the Lebanese border, through which guerrillas could infiltrate into Lebanon. Already, Israel has violated the blue line by sending ambush patrols into the northern, Lebanese end of Gaghar at night.
But that is hardly the fault of the people of Gaghar. They did not ask Israel to occupy their village when it captured the Golan Heights from Syria in 1967 and then annexed the land against international law. The Israelis' security problem, they say, is of Israel's own making. If Israel left Syrian territory, it would not have to worry about this stretch of frontier between Syria and Lebanon.
The UN, many of whose soldiers are positioned only metres from Israeli bunkers, are well aware that they will be caught in a firefight if the Hizbollah decide to use this violation as a justification for attack; which is why Major General Seth Kofi Obeg, the UN's commander, went to complain to General Gaby Ashkenazi, the head of Israel's Northern Command, on Sunday. Not to worry, General Ashkenazi said, it is not an annexation of Lebanese territory. It is the people of Gaghar who are building the new fence, he went on, not the Israeli army.
This does not fool the UN. Indeed, there is as much chance that Israel would allow Syrians under occupation to decide the route of the border fence as there is that General Ashkenazi keeps a crocodile in his bathroom.
So, earlier this week, Major- General Obeg's adviser, Timur Goksel, took a helicopter along the blue line to look for himself. Flying over the gorge of the Wazzani river, he hovered over the construction. "They are putting in concrete foundations to 50 metres [inside Lebanon] in what looks like preparation to extend the line northward," he said. "The Israelis are creating another point of friction along the border."
Gaghar lies perilously close to Chebaa farms, Lebanese territory that was policed by Syria after 1947 and then captured and, in effect, annexed by Israel in 1967, with Golan. Already, three Israeli soldiers have been captured by Hizbollah on the farmlands and there have been two infiltration attempts in the past two months.
How far will the new fence stretch into Lebanon? In all, it might take in several square miles; big enough to cause a major crisis in southern Lebanon. Meanwhile, beyond the soft waters of the Wazzani, over the long grass and buried minefields north of the village, the bulldozers roar on. In three days, the UN says, it will have a better idea of where the fence is going. Until then, Major Chhahal and his men go on watching. So do the Hizbollah.
The Crimes of Ariel Sharon
The way things are now going, Ariel Sharon will be elected prime minister of Israel on Feb. 6. Some incorrigible optimists are suggesting that only a right-wing extremist of Sharon’s notoriety will have the credentials to broker lasting peace with the Palestinians.
Maybe so. History is not devoid of such examples. But Sharon’s record is not encouraging. His recent role in provoking the latest Palestinian uprising by his excursion under heavy military protection to holy sites in Jerusalem is well known. A little more faintly perhaps people recall the verdict of an Israeli commission of inquiry finding that Sharon bore some responsibility for the dreadful Phalangist massacres in Palestinian refugee camps outside Beirut.
But in fact Sharon’s history as a terrorist, with documented participation in what can be fairly stigmatized as war crimes, goes back to the early 1950s. Here is a brief resume, culled in part from a recent two-part series on Sharon in the well-respected Hebrew-language Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz.
Sharon was born in 1928 and as a young man joined the Haganah, the underground military organization of Israel in its pre-state days. In 1953 he was given command of Unit 101, whose mission is often described as that of retaliation against Arab attacks on Jewish villages. In fact, as can be seen from two terrible onslaughts, one of them very well known, Unit 101’s purpose was that of instilling terror by the infliction of discriminate, murderous violence not only on able-bodied fighters but on the young, the old, the helpless.
Sharon’s first documented sortie as a terrorist was in August of 1953 on the refugee camp of El-Bureig, south of Gaza. An Israeli history of the unit records 50 refugees as having been killed; other sources allege 15 or 20. Major-General Vagn Bennike, the UN commander, reported that "bombs were thrown" by Sharon’s men "through the windows of huts in which the refugees were sleeping and, as they fled, they were attacked by small arms and automatic weapons."
In October of 1953 came the attack by Sharon’s Unit 101 on the Jordanian village of Qibya, whose "stain" Israel’s foreign minister at the time, Moshe Sharett, confided to his diary, "would stick to us and not be washed away for many years." Israeli historian Avi Shlaim, cited in a petition demanding retribution against Sharon for war crimes, describes the massacre thus:
"Sharon’s order was to penetrate Qibya, blow up houses and inflict heavy casualties on its inhabitants. His success in carrying out the order surpassed all expectations. The full and macabre story of what happened at Qibya was revealed only during the morning after the attack. The village had been reduced to rubble: forty-five houses had been blown up, and sixty-nine civilians, two thirds of them women and children, had been killed. Sharon and his men claimed that they believed that all the inhabitants had run away and that they had no idea that anyone was hiding inside the houses.
"The UN observer who inspected the scene reached a different conclusion: ‘One story was repeated time after time: the bullet splintered door, the body sprawled across the threshold, indicating that the inhabitants had been forced by heavy fire to stay inside until their homes were blown up over them.’ The slaughter in Qibya was described contemporaneously in a letter to the president of the United Nations Security Council dated October 16, 1953...from the Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of Jordan to the United States. On 14 October 1953 at 9:30 at night, he wrote, Israeli troops launched a battalion-scale attack on the village of Qibya in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan (at the time the West Bank was annexed to Jordan).
"According to the diplomat’s account, Israeli forces had entered the village and systematically murdered all occupants of houses, using automatic weapons, grenades and incendiaries. On 14 October, the bodies of 42 Arab civilians had been recovered; several more bodies had been still under the wreckage. Forty houses, the village school and a reservoir had been destroyed. Quantities of unused explosives, bearing Israel army markings in Hebrew, had been found in the village. At about 3 a.m., to cover their withdrawal, Israeli support troops had begun shelling the neighboring villages of Budrus and Shuqba from positions in Israel. The U.S. Department of State issued a statement on 18 October 1953, expressing its ‘deepest sympathy for the families of those who lost their lives’ in the Qibya attack as well as the conviction that those responsible ‘should be brought to account and that effective measures should be taken to prevent such incidents in the future.’"
Let us move now to Sharon’s conduct when he was head of the Southern Command of Israel’s Defense Forces in the early 1970s. The Gaza "clearances" were vividly described by Phil Reeves in a piece in The London Independent on Jan. 21 of this year:
"Thirty years have elapsed since Ariel Sharon, favourite to win Israel’s forthcoming election, was the head of the Israel Defence Forces’ southern command, charged with the task of ‘pacifying’ the recalcitrant Gaza Strip after the 1967 war. But the old men still remember it well. Especially the old men on Wreckage Street. Until late 1970, Wreckage, or Had’d, Street wasn’t a street, just one of scores of narrow, nameless alleys weaving through Gaza City’s Beach Camp, a shantytown cluttered with low, two-roomed houses, built with UN aid for refugees from the 1948 war who then, as now, were waiting for the international community to settle their future. The street acquired its name after an unusually prolonged visit from Mr Sharon’s soldiers. Their orders were to bulldoze hundreds of homes to carve a wide, straight street. This would allow Israeli troops and their heavy armoured vehicles to move easily through the camp, to exert control and hunt down men from the Palestinian Liberation Army.
"‘They came at night and began marking the houses they wanted to demolish with red paint,’ said Ibrahim Ghanim, 70, a retired labourer. ‘In the morning they came back, and ordered everyone to leave. I remember all the soldiers shouting at people, Yalla, yalla, yalla, yalla! They threw everyone’s belongings into the street. Then Sharon brought in bulldozers and started flattening the street. He did the whole lot, almost in one day. And the soldiers would beat people, can you imagine? Soldiers with guns, beating little kids?’
"By the time the Israeli army’s work was done, hundreds of homes were destroyed, not only in Wreckage Street but through the camp, as Sharon ploughed out a grid of wide security roads. Many of the refugees took shelter in schools, or squeezed into the already badly over-crowded homes of relatives. Other families, usually those with a Palestinian political activist, were loaded into trucks and taken to exile in a town in the heart of the Sinai Desert, then controlled by Israel."
As Reeves reported, the devastation of Beach Camp was far from the exception. "In August 1971 alone, troops under Mr Sharon’s command destroyed some 2,000 homes in the Gaza Strip, uprooting 16,000 people for the second time in their lives. Hundreds of young Palestinian men were arrested and deported to Jordan and Lebanon. Six hundred relatives of suspected guerrillas were exiled to Sinai. In the second half of 1971, 104 guerrillas were assassinated. ‘The policy at that time was not to arrest suspects, but to assassinate them,’ said Raji Sourani, director of the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights in Gaza City."
As defense minister in Menachem Begin’s second government, Sharon was the commander who stunned his colleagues by instigating the full-dress 1982 assault on Lebanon, with the express design of dispatching all Palestinians to Jordan and making Lebanon a client state. From the vantage point of nearly 20 years we can see it was a war plan that cost untold suffering, many thousands of Palestinian and Lebanese lives, and also the deaths of over 1000 Israeli soldiers.
Sharon also engendered the infamous massacres at Sabra and Shatilla refugee camps. The slaughter in the two contiguous camps took place from 6 at night on Sept. 16, 1982 until 8 in the morning on Sept. 18, in an area until the control of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF). The perpetrators were members of the Phalange militia, the Lebanese force that was armed by and closely allied with Israel since the onset of Lebanon’s civil war in 1975. The victims during the 62-hour rampage included infants, children, women (including pregnant women) and the elderly, some of whom were mutilated or disemboweled before or after they were killed.
To cite only one post-massacre eyewitness account, that of U.S. journalist Thomas Friedman of The New York Times: "Mostly I saw groups of young men in their twenties and thirties who had been lined up against walls, tied by their hands and feet, and then mowed down gangland-style with fusillades of machine-gun fire."
An official Israeli commission of inquiry–chaired by Yitzhak Kahan, president of Israel’s Supreme Court–investigated the massacre, and in February 1983 publicly released its findings (without Appendix B, which remains secret). The Kahan Commission found that Ariel Sharon, among other Israelis, had responsibility for the massacre. The commission’s report stated: "It is our view that responsibility is to be imputed to the Minister of Defense for having disregarded the danger of acts of vengeance and bloodshed by the Phalangists against the population of the refugee camps, and having failed to take this danger into account when he decided to have the Phalangists enter the camps. In addition, responsibility is to be imputed to the Minister of Defense for not ordering appropriate measures for preventing or reducing the danger of massacre as a condition for the Phalangists’ entry into the camps. These blunders constitute the non-fulfillment of a duty with which the Defense Minister was charged."
Sharon refused to resign. Finally, on Feb. 14, 1983, he was relieved of his duties as defense minister, though he remained in the cabinet as minister without portfolio.
His career was in eclipse, but he continued to burnish his credentials as a Likud ultra. Sharon has always been against any sort of peace deal, unless on terms entirely impossible for Palestinians to accept. As Nehemia Strasler outlined in Ha’aretz on Jan. 18 of this year, in 1979, as a member of Begin’s cabinet, he voted against a peace treaty with Egypt. In 1985 he voted against the withdrawal of Israeli troops to the so-called security zone in Southern Lebanon. In 1991 he opposed Israel’s participation in the Madrid peace conference. In 1993 he voted no in the Knesset on the Oslo agreement. The following year he abstained in the Knesset on a vote over a peace treaty with Jordan. He voted against the Hebron agreement in 1997 and objected to the withdrawal from southern Lebanon.
Sharon believes in establishing "facts on the ground." As Begin’s minister of agriculture in the late 1970s he established many of the West Bank settlements that are now a major obstruction to any peace deal. His present position? Not another square inch of land for Palestinians on the West Bank. He will agree to a Palestinian state on the existing areas of either total or partial Palestinian control, 42 percent of the West Bank. Israel will retain control of the highways across the West Bank and the water sources. All settlements will stay in place with access by the IDF to them. Jerusalem will remain under Israeli sovereignty and he plans to continue building around the city. The Golan Heights would remain under Israel’s control.
It can be argued that Sharon represents the long-term policy of all Israeli governments, without any obscuring fluff or verbal embroidery. Ben-Gurion was complicit in the terror missions of Unit 101. Every Israeli government has condoned or overtly supported settlements and building around Jerusalem. But that doesn’t begin to confront Sharon’s sinister, violent shadow across the past half century.
That shadow is best evoked by a young Israeli woman, Ilil Komey, 16, who confronted Ariel Sharon last week when he visited her agricultural high school outside Beersheva. The scene was aired on Israeli television. The teenage girl whose father suffered shell shock during the Lebanon war stood and pointed her finger at the 72-year-old Sharon. "I think you sent my father into Lebanon," Ilil said. "Ariel Sharon, I accuse you of having made me suffer for 16 some odd years. I accuse you of having made my father suffer for over 16 years. I accuse you of a lot of things that made a lot of people suffer in this country. I don’t think that you can now be elected as prime minister."
Sadly, Ilil is probably wrong. Sharon can be elected. That’s the grim truth of the situation.
It looks like he should be heading to the WAR CRIMES tribunal instead.
His M.O. reads very similar to another Mass Murderer - who also happens to be a Jew - David Berkowitz better known as the "Son of Sam".
Great Article Chorny - thanks for the insight.
Excellent articles, Chorny
Raid led by Sharon left mark on village
By Dan Ephron, Globe Correspondent, 2/2/2001
IBYA, West Bank - Izzat Hassan Yousuf, a 47-year-old resident of this modest Palestinian village, would seem to have good reason to dread the election of Israeli right-winger Ariel Sharon next week.
On the night Yousuf was born, Israeli commandos stormed his village in a reprisal raid, blowing up 45 houses and killing 69 people. His mother, hearing the Israelis coming, wrapped Yousuf in a blanket and fled to a nearby field. She returned in the morning to a pile of rubble that was once her home.
The commander of the Israeli raid was a 25-year-old army officer named Ariel Scheinerman, who years later changed his last name to Sharon. The cross-border raid on Kibya would be Sharon's first brush with controversy in a military and political career that would be defined by it.
But Yousuf, a tile setter who makes his living in Israel, has no particular feeling for Tuesday's election and doesn't care whether Sharon defeats Prime Minister Ehud Barak, as polls predict.
''Sharon or Barak, it makes no difference. The men are different, but the policy is the same,'' he said, standing beneath the minaret that towers over Kibya's mosque.
While some Palestinian leaders quietly acknowledge that they will miss Barak if he loses the vote, many residents of the West Bank and Gaza Strip say, like Yousuf, that Barak and Sharon are two sides of the same coin.
The position might surprise many Israelis, given the tangible political differences between the two men. Barak, who says Israel and the Palestinians are closer than ever to an accord, is behind in the polls by as much as 18 percent.
But after four months of fighting in the West Bank and Gaza and the deaths of nearly 350 Palestinians - plus 52 Israelis - many Palestinians no longer believe peace is possible or even desirable, no matter who wins the vote.
Kibya was part of the tit-for-tat bloodletting that has frequently characterized violence in this region, an Israeli payback for a series of Palestinian attacks. A day before the 1953 raid, Palestinians slipped into Israel and killed an Israeli mother and her two children in their sleep.
Kibya was chosen because Israelis considered it a sanctuary for Palestinian terrorists and because several dozen Jordanian troops were stationed in the village.
One of them was Abdel Salam Zeidoun. Pressing a hand-rolled cigarette to his lips, Zeidoun says that on the night of the raid he saw Israelis approaching but had only 10 bullets in his British Army-issued gun.
''We fired everything we had and then we fled to the fields,'' said Zeidoun, now 72 and using a cane.
Sharon, who led one of the Israeli Army's first commando units, was told to enter the village and blow up several houses as a warning to villagers not to harbor terrorists. The young officer took 1,200 pounds of explosives on the mission.
''Kibya was to be a lesson,'' Sharon wrote decades later in an autobiography. ''I was to inflict as many casualties as I could on the Arab home guard and on whatever Jordanian army reinforcements showed up. I was to blow up every major building in the town,'' he wrote.
Residents old enough to remember the raid say Sharon and his men wrecked homes indiscriminately, demolishing stone structures while residents and livestock were still inside.
Sharon describes Kibya as a turning point in Israel's battle with Palestinian guerrillas, although he says the killing of civilians was a mistake.
''In those big stone houses where three generations of a family might live together, some could easily have hidden in the cellars and back rooms, keeping quiet when the paratroopers went in to check and yell out a warning,'' Sharon wrote in the autobiography. ''The result was this tragedy that had happened.''
To Zeidoun, Sharon's contrition rings false, but he doesn't mind if the Israeli general is elected. ''Things have to get worse before they get better,'' he said.
For decades, the Kibya massacre defined the village, which Israel captured from Jordan in 1967 and which became a hotbed of anti-Israel protests during the Palestinian uprising of the late 1980s.
Yousuf, who celebrates his birthday on the anniversary of the massacre, is a living example of the cyclical violence that has marked the region.
Two of his sons rebelled against Israeli rule during the first Palestinian uprising. One was jailed for preparing explosives, the other imprisoned for belonging to a ''hostile organization.''
One of the sons is now studying to be a doctor in Romania. ''It's better there,'' he said, ''away from this mess.''
George would never vote for such a poop head like Sharon. George finds good articles to. George is my friend and he is smarter than anybody in the world
Does George tell of a nice Rabbit story?
Take a bow, Chorny volk, but don't bend too far, LOL!
If Sharon is elected we will see soon the first JEWISH-NEO-FASHIST state in History.
It's gonna look nasty.
I'v asked my friends about ICBMs plants in Klaipéda.
It seems there was a ring of such a plants along throuhg the coast from Kaliningrad to Tallin.
Conscript, dressed up like civilians, dug them with shovels.
When I asked why they didn't use excavators theyr replied: "Noooo...It was Soviet Union!"
I carpetbombed Assmanlis site with fuel air bombs and the result is this http://network54.com/Forum/62568