"Book of Terror" (Arafat) 'Riddled With Omissions and Falsehoods'

[Paschall]

Published on Thursday, May 9, 2002 in the lndependent/UK
{Headline shortened by necessity. Posted with permission of the DU Mods :thumbsup:}

Israel's "Book of Terror" Purporting to Show Arafat's Role in Suicide Attacks is 'Riddled With Omissions and Falsehoods'

by Robert Fisk in Ramallah

Israel's so-called Book of Terror - designed to prove that Yasser Arafat is a master of terror involved in suicide attacks on Israel - is riddled with errors, omissions and deliberate misinformation.

The dossier, which was presented to President George Bush by the Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, characterizes Mr Arafat as an evil, scheming warlord funded by Iran and Saudi Arabia.

But in some cases, translations of Palestinian documents allegedly seized by Israeli troops in the West Bank have been doctored to "prove" Arafat's responsibility for anti-Israeli attacks. At least one "translation" of a Palestinian document posted on the Israeli army's website is a palpable falsehood.

In reality the documents portray Mr Arafat's military impotence. The papers the Israeli intelligence service have so far produced - assuming that most of them are genuine - paint a vivid, pathetic picture of his loss of power within the Palestinian community over the past 12 months, the suborning of his lieutenants and the gradual recruitment of his men by Hamas and Islamic Jihad opponents. <snip>

The documents do provide a rare glimpse into the powerlessness of Mr Arafat, the infiltration of his subordinates, the attempts to suborn his own intelligence officers - one of them loyally tells Mr Arafat's spooks that he has refused advances from Islamic Jihad. The last thing they prove is that Mr Arafat is behind the wave of suicide bombings that continued in Israel even yesterday. But that is not what Mr Sharon wanted. He wants Mr Arafat removed from power.

So one of the most impotent men in Palestine had to be portrayed as one of the most all-powerful "terrorists" in the world.

http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0509-03.htm

[Paschall]

1. Is it obvious to people here...

...that Arafat is the victim of "black propaganda" at the hands of Sharon's government, or is Robert Fisk alone in supporting this proposition? :shrug:

[bluesoul]

2. I am sure

that some things said about him are true as I am sure that many things are mere propaganda to make him look bad...

[newyorican]

3. This is the same "Book of Terror"

that was so poorly conceived that even Bushco called it crap. Goes to show even the dumbest sonofabitch can be right occasionally.

[Paschall]

4. Didn't hear about that. Gotta link? (eom)

[newyorican]

6. You're kidding right?

This so-called "Book of Terror" was said to have been culled from the raids on Arafats compounds.

Enjoy:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=Israel%27s+%22Book+of+Terror%22&btnG=Google+Search

[drewb]

5. Kind of like a latter day "Protocols..."

:think:

[newyorican]

7. Even Tony "Dodgy Dossier" Blair and...

George "Yellow-Cake" Bush disavowed this garbage. Anyone who was paying attention at the time the IDF blew up Arafats HQ and 'confiscated' documents, would have seen Sharon and Bibi touting the "Book of Terror". It was big news when it was released, with much discussion, however after it was rejected by the State Dept as little more than toilet tissue, it recieved little coverage. SOP, Lie on the front page, retract on page 38 (in 10pt print).

And you are quite right. It reads like a bastardized version of "The Protocols", which is why it has fallen off of the radar, it was embarrassing. What's even more embarrassing is 1 or 2 posters here that will try to selectively revive passages from this dreck while either ignorant of, or attempting to mask the source.

[Paschall]

8. Sorry, I did actually miss this

But perhaps that's because I'm in Europe and Sharon didn't give us a copy?

I was paying more attention to the destruction of EU funded infrastructure in the Territories.

Thanks for the info. Unfortunately every entry in the Google link you provided seems to point to this Fisk article. Maybe White House/US reactions have already vanished into cybervoid.