SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Zeev Hed who wrote (185403)3/23/2004 7:17:26 PM
From: tejek  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1572102
 


Get your facts right, Sharon was never before a military tribunal, a group of supreme court justices formed a committee to investigate the massacre and did not find Sharon Guilty of any crime, they found that he should have known that a massacre of Arabs by Arabs could have occurred.


I just tells it like I sees it.

"Sharon was also looking for a post-military career and towards politics. In the mid 1970s, Sharon was Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin's special security adviser. Of special significance was his involvement with Camp David and the Peace talks with Egypt. After that, Sharon was given the Agriculture portfolio. Prime Minister Mencahem Begin made him his defence minister which was from 1981 to 1983. Without explicitly telling Begin, Sharon sent the Israeli army all the way to Beirut, a strike which ended in the expulsion of Yasser Arafat's Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) from Lebanon, but also in the massacre of hundreds of Palestinians in Sabra and Shatila, two Beirut refugee camps under Israeli control. Mr Sharon was removed from office in 1983 by an Israeli tribunal investigating the 1982 Lebanon invasion, finding him indirectly responsible for the killings. For most politicians, an indictment of that kind would have meant the end of a political career. But Sharon remained a popular figure among the Israeli right. Sharon once again found controversy when he was made Minister Construction and Housing from 1990 to 1996. He pursued a protectionist policy. In Prime Minister Benjamin Netanayhu's cabinet, he was made Minister of National Infrastructure. He held this for two years and then became Foreign Minister from 1998 to 1999.



To: Zeev Hed who wrote (185403)3/23/2004 7:26:09 PM
From: tejek  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1572102
 
Get your facts right, Sharon was never before a military tribunal, a group of supreme court justices formed a committee to investigate the massacre and did not find Sharon Guilty of any crime, they found that he should have known that a massacre of Arabs by Arabs could have occurred. Because of that lapse in judgment (not the commission of a crime) he was fired from his post in the government at the time.

You're playing semantics........turning your back and not doing anything to stop a crime that you know is about to happen is considered an accomplice to that crime in this country . If Israelis see it differently [and it doesn't sound that way] then so be it but a crime is a crime under God.

you know Big difference between committing crimes and not anticipating such crimes could be committed by others. That is like saying that the Bush administration "should have known" of an impending 9/11 disaster, because there were a lot of "warnings". That is non sense, Sharon had a lot of "warnings", and before the engagement of the Christian Lebanese militzia with the PLO, he warned the Christian leader that Israel would not allow a massacre of innocent civilians (and indeed, it was IDF that stopped the massacre from continuing, under the order of the then Defense Minister Sharon.

Bull. This is your version of the 'facts'.........many would disagree. Sharon knew that the Lebanese Christians were out for blood. His men stood guard as the Lebanese invaded the Palestinian camp and raped and killed. Even the Israelis admitted that much. Mr. Sharon is not a very nice man. This is just one example of his malevolent behavior.

The information that a massacre was going on was, unfortunately, delayed from reaching Sharon by a low level agent at military intelligence, that held the information till the next morning, when Sharon acted at once).

Yeah, right.......were you there?

The Judges found that despite this stern warning, he still should have known that they will disobey him. After all, they claimed, these people were not under your command and you should assume that your request will not be viewed as an order, since you had no authority to order anything.

There seems to be a dispute whether it was judges or a tribunal..........see my prior post to you.

Sharon politically lost a lot by ordering this action, but Israeli civilians know that one of the main instigators of massacres amongst them has paid the price for their acts, and others will follow. What do we gain by incarcerating or for that matter, executing a murderer in our country?

I don't understand your question?