The Enigma of Yasser Arafat


VIPS MemCon on Meeting With Arafat, March 19, 2003
Kathleen and Bill Christison

http://consortiumnews.com/2012/07/08/the-enigma-of-yasser-arafat/

With the new evidence that Arafat was assassinated, perhaps by exposure to polonium, we thought there would be interest in the Christisons’ account of their hour with Arafat in March 2003 — a very historic time, two days after the murder of Rachel Corrie in Gaza; just hours before the U.S. launched “shock and awe” on Iraq; and just a year and a half before Arafat died. So we pulled the Christisons’ memorandum of conversation out of the VIPS archive (see URL immediately above).

(In the process, we updated the listing of VIPS issuances, which now number 21 — from the same-day assessment of Powell’s UN speech on February 5, 2003 to the latest [on Iran] on January 4, 2012. The listing and links to the memos, etc., can be accessed at warisacrime.org/vips. It has been suggested we publish them in a booklet. Would welcome any thought that any of your readers might have on this —   raylmcgovern@gmail.com)

Back to Arafat, the circumstances of his death were/remain highly suspicious. He was, of course, bête noire for Sharon, Bush, and Cheney. A few months before Arafat’s death, George W. Bush arbitrarily withdrew U.S. recognition of Arafat and the PLO as the “sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people.”

On July 18, 2004, in an interview in Le Figaro, Bush dismissed Arafat as a negotiating partner, saying, “The real problem is that there is no leadership that is able to say ‘help us establish a state and we will fight terror and answer the needs of the Palestinians.'” That departure by Bush was criticized by the European Union and Russia, who were part of the quartet leading negotiations between Israel and the PLO. Sharon had already said what Bush said.

On October 14, 2004, the usually taciturn Brent Scowcroft, former national security adviser to George H. W. Bush (and, up till that time, chair of the George W. Bush’s President’s Foreign Intelligence and Advisory Board), told the Financial Times: “Sharon just has him wrapped around his little finger; I think the president is mesmerized.” It was well known that Bush agreed with Sharon that Arafat had to be replaced. How much the Bush White House was aware of the circumstances of his demise is not known — yet.

On October 25, 2004, Arafat fell seriously ill from as yet unknown causes. He died on November 11, 2004 of (the identical! unknown causes). Shortly thereafter, Arafat’s nephew — and countless others — speculated that he died an “unnatural” death. It is well known that Israel’s Mossad has a section of experts in lethal poisons, etc. (shades of the Soviet KGB’s “mokryie dela” [wet affairs] department).

On January 11, 2012, Israeli armed forces chief Benny Gantz warned Parliament that “2012 is expected to be a critical year for Iran. Mentioning the nuclear issue and “continued international pressure” on Iran, Gantz added “things that happen to it unnaturally.”

Less than a day after Gantz’s warning, a 32 year-old Iranian scientist, father of two, was killed by motorcycle-riding bombers, an attack that the Associated Press called “almost certainly the work of Israel.”

As for Iranian Revolutionary Guards General Hassan Moghadam, one of the driving forces behind Iran’s advanced ballistic missile program, killed in a large explosion on November 12, 2011, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak said the next day that he would like to see more such explosions in Iran.

Time magazine cited a Western intelligence source as saying Israel’s Mossad was behind the explosion at the Iranian military base. “Don’t believe the Iranians that it was an accident,” the official said. The source added that additional acts of sabotage were in the works as part of an effort to stop Iran’s nuclear program. “There are more bullets in the magazine,” he added.

Bullets, polonium, Hellfire missiles — whatever. Some life, apparently, is cheap. And assassinations are us.

 

Asylum for Julian Assange, Awardee for Integrity

Ray notes that Assange was 2010 winner of annual Integrity Award granted by Sam Adams Associates for Integrity in Intelligence. On behalf of SAAII, Ray on June 24 delivered a letter to the Ecuadorian embassy in Washington requesting that Ecuador grant Assange political asylum. A brief commentary, the letter, and its three enclosures appear in:

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Asylum-for-Julian-Assange-by-Ray-McGovern-120625-997.html


 

Ray further on L’Affaire Assange

The Real News Network (video interview; 12 minutes)

Ray comments on likelihood that Ecuador will grant WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange, political asylum and, if so, possible physical dangers, as well as legal obstacles that may lie in wait for Assange between the Ecuadorian embassy and a London airport. Ray draws attention to a very long lead editorial in the Washington Post on June 21, which ends with an open threat of U.S. economic retaliation against Ecuador: “If Mr.[Ecuadorian President] Correa seeks to appoint himself America’s chief Latin American enemy and Julian Assange’s protector…” (Who needs a State Department, when the U.S. administration can depend on the stenographers at the Post?)


http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=8511

ASSANGE’S ECUADOR EMBASSY EXCURSION: HACKING OR SLACKING?
’Five O’Clock Shadow’: UPDATE (from June 21, 5:00 PM, ET)


http://www.radio4all.net/index.php/program/60926

-Robert Knight, Senior National Correspondent, WBAI 99.5FM . wbai.org

Robert Knight: Wikileaks publisher JULIAN ASSANGE remains under sanctuary at the Ecuadorian embassy in London, as he awaits a decision on his plea for political asylum in Ecuador. Former CIA analyst Ray McGovern discusses whether Assange’s abrupt escape from house arrest with surveillance and electronic “tracking” was the product of “hacking” by Assange, or “slacking” by British officials secretly amenable to a back-door solution for a diplomatic crisis. McGovern, the author of “Julian Assange’s Artful Dodge” [ http://consortiumnews.com ] also contemplates potential clandestine hazards to Assange’s life and freedom.