Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : America Under Siege: The End of Innocence -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: calgal who wrote (23177)	6/8/2003 12:25:36 AM
From: calgal	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27748

Can Arafat torpedo the peace process? URL:http://www.washingtontimes.com/commentary/20030606-075948-7850r.htm By Claude Salhani At first glance, it would appear President George W. Bush and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon got their way and were successful in marginalizing Yasser Arafat, president of the Palestinian Authority, and a long-time icon of Palestinian resistance to Israeli occupation. Mr. Arafat, they argued, was tainted by terrorism and could not be trusted, nor engaged, as a viable business partner in the delicate Middle East peace-making process. He was accused — often with just cause — of playing a double game when it came to talking peace and dealing with terrorism. Both the U.S. and Israel believe he maintained a "revolving door" policy when it came to implementing security agreements established between the Palestinians and Israel. For example, no sooner were suspected perpetrators of terrorist operations jailed by one of his numerous security organizations, than they would be back on the streets, planning further attacks against Israel and threatening to scuttle the peace process. Last spring, Israel claimed to have uncovered documents from Mr. Arafat's compound — which were made public — that allegedly showed his authority funding some terrorist cells while simultaneously pledging to find and arrest others. Insisting that the Palestinians name someone other than himself before the peace process could resume, reluctantly, and under great pressure, Mr. Arafat appointed Mahmoud Abbas — a k a Abu Mazen — as the first-ever prime minister. This week's U.S.-Arab summit in the Egyptian Red Sea resort of Sharm el-Sheikh was meant to place the proverbial stake in Mr. Arafat's heart. By bringing together Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah, Jordanian King Abdullah, and Bahrain King Hamad Bin Issa al-Khalifa to meet with Abu Mazen, Mr. Bush sought to emphasize and legitimize in the eyes of the world — and particularly the Arab world — that Abu Mazen, and not Mr. Arafat, is the rightful leader — and interlocutor — of the Palestinians. This is Mr. Bush's way of stressing the point and of making certain Mr. Arafat does not come back to haunt the process in which the American president is now firmly engaged. And Wednesday's Aqaba summit in the Jordanian Red Sea resort town involving Mr. Bush, Mr. Sharon and Abu Mazen closes the coffin — at least politically speaking — on Mr. Arafat. Or does it, now? While Mr. Bush and Mr. Sharon have successfully managed to distance Mr. Arafat and exclude him from negotiations, prestigious international summits and visits to the White House, the bigger question now is: Realistically, how much can Abu Mazen marginalize Mr. Arafat? "Abbas is a figurehead with future potential," said Fawaz Gerges, a professor of Middle East affairs in a report to National Public Radio. Indeed, the new Palestinian prime minister is a ruler, who for the moment at least, remains without much over which to rule. Mr. Arafat, on the other hand, is far from dead. Although sidelined, he still commands far more power that Abu Mazen, both with the myriad of security forces he has established in Gaza and the West Bank, as well as among the "street." If Mr. Bush and Mr. Sharon favor Abu Mazen as an interlocutor with whom they have engaged in negotiating, it might be worth noting he commands no popular support among the majority of Palestinians living in the occupied territories. Eighteen of the 25 members of Mr. Abbas' Cabinet ministers serving in his government — 72 percent — are members of Fatah, Mr. Arafat's mainline organization within the Palestine Liberation Organization. Unfortunately, whatever decisions Abu Mazen reaches in these meetings, he wields no real authority to implement any major policy changes unless approved by Mr. Arafat first. And herein lies the conundrum. Mr. Arafat, sidelined as he may be, continues to exercise the power to torpedo any peace deal that may not be entirely to his liking. Mr. Arafat may not be sitting at the peace table, but he still has his piece to say. Claude Salhani is a senior editor with United Press International.

To: calgal who wrote (23177)	6/8/2003 3:07:24 PM
From: calgal	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27748

Powell, Rice Defend U.S. Iraq Intelligence By Vicki Allen WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Senior Bush administration officials on Sunday rejected accusations they exaggerated threats posed by Iraq (news - web sites)'s weapons, calling the charges "outrageous" and the results of "revisionist history." Reuters Photo Latest news: · Powell, Rice Defend U.S. Iraq Intelligence Reuters - 34 minutes ago · U.S. Soldiers' Iraq Duties Contradictory AP - 1 hour, 6 minutes ago · Faster Removal of Bodies Urged in Iraq AP - 1 hour, 11 minutes ago Special Coverage Appearing on morning news programs, Secretary of State Colin Powell (news - web sites) and national security adviser Condoleezza Rice (news - web sites) said there was broad consensus in the intelligence community that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, and they believe that intelligence was sound. "We have no doubt whatsoever that over the last several years, they have retained such weapons or retained the capability to start up production of such weapons," Powell said on CNN's Late Edition. "We also know they are masters of deceit and masters of hiding these things, and so a little patience is required," he said. Powell called it "really somewhat outrageous on the part of some critics to say that this was all bogus." Concerns have been rising worldwide that the banned arsenal the administration described had not been found in the weeks after the war that ousted former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein (news - web sites). Critics questioning whether the White House used flawed or manipulated intelligence as grounds for war point to a Defense Intelligence Agency report from September of 2002, disclosed last week, that said the agency did not have enough "reliable information" on Iraq's alleged chemical weapons. MISLEADING IMPRESSION Powell and Rice said that quote was taken out of context, giving a misleading impression of the report. A line "talked about not having the evidence of current facilities and current stockpiling. The very next sentence says that it had information that (chemical) weapons had been dispersed to units," Powell said on Fox News Sunday. The Washington Post's Saturday editions cited the report's declassified summary page that said "although we lack any direct information, Iraq probably possesses chemical agent in chemical munitions" and "probably possesses bulk chemical stockpiles, primarily containing precursors, but that also could consist of some mustard agent and VX," a nerve agent. Rice, on ABC's This Week, said the national intelligence estimate in October -- which the DIA signed -- said Iraq likely had as much as 100 to 500 metric tons of chemical agents. Several times Rice said critics were using "revisionist history" to question whether Iraq had banned weapons. But Sen. Carl Levin (news, bio, voting record) of Michigan, top Armed Services Committee Democrat, told NBC's Meet the Press there was "too much evidence that intelligence was shaded, that called something which was possible, such as the presence of weapons of mass destruction, or even probable, was turned into certainty over and over and over again by the administration." Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Pat Roberts, a Kansas Republican, on CNN's Late Edition countered that he had seen no evidence of bad intelligence and called Democrats' calls for congressional probes of the matter "sort of a feeding frenzy with a tad bit of politics mixed in." Powell, on CNN, also defended the pace of work to stabilize Iraq, saying the top U.S. civilian administrator there, L. Paul Bremer, has decided to "put together a more broad-based council of advisers and ministers to help him begin to get the institutions of the government running" instead of moving to form an interim government. Powell said Bremer was "absolutely correct in moving a little more slowly ... to make sure that all the various groups in Iraq are represented, and that we focus on institution building and put responsible leaders into institution." URL:http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=564&ncid=716...