| Submit your comments on this article |
| Middle East |
| Palestinians list conditions for assuming security |
| 2003-06-23 |
| JPost - Reg Req'd At a meeting between Maj. Gen. Amos Gilad, Israel's policy coordinator for the territories, and Palestinian Security Minister Mohammad Dahlan held Monday afternoon at Erez Checkpoint, the Palestinians presented their conditions for assuming security responsibility in Gaza and Bethlehem. "Demands"? "Conditions"? Bwahahahah Dahlan requested that Israel stop targeted killings, allow freedom of movement through the main thoroughfare between northern and southern Gaza, cease military operations within the territory, open the Rafiah checkpoint 24 hours a day, and refurbish Gaza Airport. Refurbish the airport? Right.... how about a nice berber carpet throughout and new drapes in the Hamas Lounge? Happy? Gilad is expected to respond to the requests on Tuesday. How about "No" Earlier Monday, Gilad said that Israel does not want to see a merely temporary cease-fire, known in Arabic as a hudna, because rather than preventing further attacks, such a deal would only give Hamas time to regroup. "They are not speaking about a cessation of terror, but a temporary cease-fire, a conditional one which they can violate at any time," Gilad said in an interview with Israel Radio. Dahlan said that by rejecting a hudna Israel is inviting more Hamas attacks. the bicycle of violence The dispute arose as the Palestinian Authority appeared near a deal with Hamas and other terror groups to halt their attacks against Israelis, as part of the Palestinian commitment to the road map process. Israel demands a complete dismantling of terrorist groups—as Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas pledged at the Aqaba Summit that he would do, Gilad said. Gilad said Israel would agree to give the Palestinians three or four weeks if necessary to work out a more viable deal. He indicated that Israel would accept a deal reached by agreement with Hamas, but only one that would eradicate the terror threat to Israel. "Demands...ok, how about we aim a little-bit better on the targetted killings? Less 'civilians' hurt? Is that enough for you?" |
| Posted by:Frank G |
| #3 Anon, i'm posting this too late for probably anyone to read this, but here goes: Were the amount of scrolling necessary to get through your well known list of "grievances" from the heavily biased and largely counterproductive U.N. to be on a appropriate medium, say like a roll of toilet paper, they wouldn't be worth the crap I'd wipe on it. where is one, just one U.n. censure of this quasi-entity called the palestinian nation in their hideously successful attempts at spreading chaos and murder, not just upon Israel, but the world in general. where is the resolution reprimanding them for the virtually complete lack of adherance to the Oslo accords (the anti jewish, anti Israeli school books, pitching nothing but hatred to a generation of children who are supposed to grow up as friendly neighbors -just for starters) and as for the U.N. -if they really gave half a sh!t about the situation there, they would have found a better solution than cooperating with the surrounding Arab nations in keeping those "temporary" U.N. refugee camps in existance to this day. |
| Posted by: Dripping Sarcasm 6/24/03 2:26:04 AM |
| #2 Don't forget Resolution 7254 condeming Israel for having as many vowels in its name as consonants. |
| Posted by: Thane of Cawdor 6/24/03 1:38:04 AM |
| #1 Anon, if the UN were not such a puppet and blatant forum for every oppressive regime on God's green earth, you might warrant a look. But as it is, don't bother us with 'UN resolutions'. Their moral force is as empty as their military force. |
| Posted by: Scott 6/24/03 12:02:40 AM |