Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 21:42, 1 November 2004

Older Talk: archived to Talk:Yasser Arafat/Archive 1

Illness of late October 2004

Arafat collapsed after vomiting during a meeting, and he lost consciousness for ten minutes. He remains in serious condition. Although confined to his Ramallah compound, he is free to leave for medical treatment but has refused to go because Israelis have not agreed to let him return.

Arafat's top adviser, Nabil Abu Rdeneh, said doctors examining the 75-year-old Palestinian leader Thursday were still deciding whether he needs to be hospitalized. Arafat has been confined by Israel to his compound in the West Bank city of Ramallah since 2002. Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, in a telephone conversation with his Palestinian counterpart, Ahmed Qureia, agreed to allow Arafat to be flown abroad for treatment if necessary. However, Israeli security officials said the Palestinians have only requested, for now, to take Arafat to a local hospital. (AP: )

Added the CurrentEvents template msg to the Recent Events section, to flag the rapidly-changing situation surrounding Arafat's health. -- Penta 19:15, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

More news: CNN is reporting that Yasser Arafat is going to be moved to Paris for treatment. -- Penta 19:21, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) is not an adequate explanation of his present symptoms, although some of the tougher medications used in this conditions may cause nausea & vomiting. None would explain loss of conciousness! JFW | T@lk 10:34, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

The claim that Arafat lost consciousness is disputed. I heard Nabil Shaath deny that it happened.--Alberuni 23:51, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)

The most likely diagnosis given his long history of ill health is probably one of the leukemias, nonetheless, ITP was the diagnosis offered by his physician (for public consumption, anyway). I agree with JFW that it's not an adequate diagnosis. - Nunh-huh 01:54, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC) - P.S. FOX news announced "a Palestinian diplomat" (unnamed) had said Arafat's doctor (unnamed) had ruled out leukemia, but no details. It would be nice if the doctors would say something instead of having it filtered through diplomats/newsmen, but I always think that when newsmen don't know enough to ask the pertinent questions. - Nunh-huh 02:57, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Arafat homosexusality charges?

I've recently been told by a right-wing Israelli that "everyone knows" that Arafat is a homosexsual. I've never heard of this charge before.

Looking into this matter, I found a claim by http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=34717

it refers to the book "Red Horizons" by Lt. Gen. Ion Mihai Pacepa, the former head of Romanian intelligence. I've found more sites (again, Israelli ring-wing associated), with similar references.

I've been unable to find anything else to either sustentiate or disprove this.

"Everyone knows" that Ariel Sharon eats fetuses too. Unsubstantiated allegations such as these are known as disinformation. --Alberuni 23:53, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)

They know Sharon eats fetuses? Who says that? Jayjg 00:33, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Ariel Sharon's bloodthirsty gluttony is widely known and was depicted in the UK's cartoon of the year 2003, (see bottom of the page).--Alberuni 01:06, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Are you unable to answer the question? Who says Sharon eats fetuses? A name, or a weblink would be nice. Jayjg 01:47, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Are you unable to read? Is the UK's political cartoon of the year 2003 not enough for you? --Alberuni 01:51, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Actually, the question is more appropriate for you; the cartoonist in question alleges that the cartoon is a parody of "Goya's painting Saturn Devouring One of His Sons" (not fetuses), and makes it clear that he does not believe, nor was he trying to suggest, that he actually thinks Sharon eats babies. Again, are you unable to answer the question? Who says Sharon eats fetuses? A name, or a weblink would be nice. Jayjg 03:08, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Haha, the cartoon is just a "parody of Goya's painting"? I see! It has nothing to do with the subject; "a ravenous Sharon — clad only in a "Vote Likud" ribbon covering his loins — biting the head off of a Palestinian child. The cartoon takes place in the desolate wasteland of a razed Palestinian city, with Israeli helicopters swooping overhead blaring, 'Sharon ... Vote Sharon ... Vote ...' over loudspeakers. Sharon, with the headless child in his arms, asks: 'What's wrong? ... You never seen a politician kissing babies before?'" That's why Ariel Sharon protested through the Israeli Embassy and the Israel Hasbara Committee protested this supposedly "anti-Semitic" depiction of the Butcher of Beirut? If it was just a parody, why were they so upset? They should have checked with you first. As for finding a source for my statement that "everyone knows" Sharon eats fetuses, too" I will paraphrase you: I stated my opinion, and I didn't state that this opinion is necessarily on the internet. I believe Ariel Sharon eats fetuses. (And so do the lowlife schmucks who support him). And look: "Ariel Sharon eats fetuses". Now any schmuck can find it on the Internet. --Alberuni 04:29, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Do you imagine you're "everybody"? Another false claim disproved. Jayjg 06:37, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I stated " 'Everyone knows' that Ariel Sharon eats fetuses too" in an attempt to compare with the "'everyone knows' that Arafat is a homosexsual." You are right though, the characterization is not that Sharon eats fetuses. It's that he consumes the flesh of babies. Good save. --Alberuni 20:50, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

oh come on guys! this is stupid. I've asked a serious question, and I've given an actual person and actual book where Arafat's gay practices is discussed. This is not just a "link" by some internet user, we're talking about a former head of Romanian intelligence. Yes, he might have written this book in order to spread disinformation. If so, I'd expect someone to show a link critical of the book and with some motives for it, not some BS about Sharon or the consumption of babies (didn't the depiction is of babies, not fetuses?)

Yes, the picture is of a baby, not a fetus. And you're right, you weren't given a response, but mis-direction instead. Jayjg 14:17, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I replied that the baseless accusations against Arafat are part of Israeli disinformation campaigns (like similar baseless allegations that Sharon consumes the flesh of Palestinian infants). That was a relevant resonse to your question. You even admitted that the accusations come from right-wing Israelis. What more do you want? Yes, as usual, Jayjg added nothing to the discussion except his trolling. --Alberuni 20:50, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I believe he's talking about a Romanian source, not an Israeli one. That said, I have reverted the anonymous speculations regarding Arafat's homosexuality which were recently inserted into the article, as we haven't seen any reasonable sources regarding them. Also, please note the Misplaced Pages:No personal attacks policy. Jayjg 21:20, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Zionist POV editor smearin Yasser Arafat article

The Zionist POV edits are largely a series of biased smears. I guess he wants to get his kicks in while Yasser Arafat is in the news. A rat gets excited when it smells blood.--Alberuni 06:27, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Try editing without the personal attacks. RickK 06:42, Oct 31, 2004 (UTC)

POV edits made to a stable article before bringing the suggested edits to Talk are rejected. --Alberuni 18:06, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Exactly; glad we agree. Jayjg 21:16, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Arafat biographer Aburish

The perviously stable introduction, which stated:

At birth, his name was Mohammed Abdel Rahman Abdel Raouf Arafat Al Qudua Al Husseini. As explained by Said K. Aburish, an Arab biographer (in Arafat: From Defender to Dictator, Bloomsbury Publishing, 1998, p. 7), "Mohammed Abdel Rahman was his first name; Abdel Raouf his father's name; Arafat his grandfather's; Al Qudua is the name of his family; and Al Husseini is the name of the clan to which the Al Quduas belonged."

Claims that he was related to the Jerusalem Husseini clan through his mother (an Abul Saoud) are untrue given that the Husseini clan designation comes from his father's side. Aburish further explains that Arafat was "unrelated to the real Husseini notables of Jerusalem" (Ibid, p. 9) and explains that "The young Arafat sought to establish his Palestinian credentials and promote his eventual claim to leadership... could not afford to admit any facts which might reduce his Palestinian identity. ...Arafat insistently perpetuated the legend that he had been born in Jerusalem and was related to the important Husseini clan of that city." (Ibid, p. 8)

Arafat lived most of his childhood in Cairo, except for four years (following the death of his mother, between the ages of five and nine) when he lived with his uncle in Jerusalem.

was changed to

Claims that Arafat was related to the Jerusalem Husseini clan through his mother have been disputed by Said Aburish, a Christian Lebanese journalist based in London (and holder of an American passport) who is highly critical of Arafat. In a biography written without Arafat's assistance (Arafat: From Defender to Dictator, Bloomsbury Publishing, 1998), Aburish claims that "Arafat insistently perpetuated the legend that he had been born in Jerusalem and was related to the important Husseini clan of that city."

Arafat spent his childhood in Cairo and Jerusalem.

Why was all this information from his biography removed? After the changes the opening section had almost as much information about Aburish as it did about Arafat! Jayjg 15:00, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

The long description of Arafat's origins by an aunauthorized bigrapher are unnecessary. The original version was sufficient to get the point across. Perhaps you should create an article about Arbush. --Alberuni 18:06, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Why are they unnecessary? Why is this information being censored? Jayjg 18:45, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

The current version describes Arafat's origins without delving into Israeli disinformation attempts to decertify Arafat's Palestinian identity. --Alberuni 19:34, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I'm not sure how your comments about "Israeli disinformation attempts to decertify Arafat's Palestinian identity". If you're referring to Said Aburish, he is an Arab; one of the editors here has claimed he is a Lebanese Christian. The original version has stood essentially unchanged in the page since mid January of 2004, over 9 months, an eternity in Wikitime; I really think some consensus is needed before removing something this well established in the page. Also, I've explicitly included the information from the Nobel Prize site about his parents both being Palestinians, with his mother coming from an "old Palestinian family in Jerusalem", which was not there before. If anything I've strengthened Arafat's claim to "Palestinian identity". Jayjg 21:16, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

That said, the quotes are a bit repetitive, and I think the point could be easily made without the middle quote. Would you agree to cutting this one out? Jayjg 21:22, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Hello Alberuni, Whoever wrote the disclaimer about Aburish "Said Aburish, a Christian Lebanese journalist based in London (and holder of an American passport)", besides being lifted word-for-word from a reader comment of Aburish's book at Amazon.com, seems like an attempt to decertify Aburish's Palestinian identity. What a renowned Palestinian political analyst, author, and scholar says about the controversial background of the leader of his countrymen is relevent to Arafat's biography. It's hardly neutral-POV to present only biographical history censured, whitewashed, and "authorized" by yes-men. I would expect that on a propaganda site, but an encyclopedia entry should be a more critical presentation and objectively present all sides of controversial elements. --Mperel

Excellent points. The actual book descriptions on Amazon describe Aburish a London-based journalist and American citizen who calls himself "a loyal Palestinian, and the internationally respected Palestinian political analyst and writer. Other common descriptions on the net include "Palestinian author" and "Palestinian writer". Apparently he is the grandson of the "flamboyant headman" of the "village of Bethany, outside Jerusalem, Khalil Aburish, guardian of the tomb of Lazarus". I wonder why someone would try to describe him as "a Christian Lebanese journalist based in London (and holder of an American passport)"; it couldn't possibly be part of an "anti-Israeli disinformation attempts to decertify Aburish's Palestinian identity", could it? Jayjg 00:06, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Hello Jayjg, Aburish documents his own experiences growing up as a Palestinian Arab in "Children of Bethany: The Story of a Palestinian Family". He is most certainly Palestinian, one of many who do not find Arafat to be a leader who represents the best interests of the Palestinian people. --Mperel

Thank you for finding this information. Jayjg 17:16, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

EU investigation

A sentence was inserted stating

An investigation by European Union of claims of financial improprieties also found no improprieties.

However, if you read the link provided, it is clear that the investigation was about misuse of EU funds to the PA for the purposes of terrorism, not an investigation of Arafat's personal finances, and their statement was restricted to that claim. Moreover, the report insisted that finances had to be reformed in the PA to avoid "misuse of funds and corruption", and that further funding was contingent on that. As it stood, the summary was not an accurate representation of the report and its conclusions. The accurate statement substituted is as follows:

An investigation by European Union of claims of misuse of EU funds by the Palestinian Authority has, until now, found no evidence EU funds being diverted to terrorist activities. However, the EU has insisted on "deepening reform in the PA and improving its financial management and audit capacities" as "the best preventive strategy against the misuse of funds and corruption in the PA", and has made further funding contingent on these reforms.

--Jayjg 15:14, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

The original version was sufficient to get the point across. The POV editor uses "yet" to imply that there are financial improprieties that have yet to be uncovered. Reverted. --Alberuni 18:06, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

The article itself uses the word "yet". The original version was misleading, as the investigation had nothing to do with Arafat's finances, but was actually about the PA misusing EU funds for terror. Jayjg 18:45, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

More Israeli accusations.--Alberuni 19:34, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I think we have a disconnect here; I'm talking about EU statements and investigations of PA misuse of EU funds for terrorist purposes, as listed in the article, not about Israeli accusations. Jayjg 21:16, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

"Pro-Israel" Forbes magazine?

Recent edits have described Forbes as a "pro-Israel" magazine. Are there any reasonable sources out there that described the magazine this way? Or is this merely the POV of the editor in question or original research? Jayjg 15:33, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

You are correct, this charge belongs on the Forbes page. Attribution of the charges should be available on Arafat page. --Alberuni 18:06, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

What do you mean "Attribution of the charges should be available on Arafat page"? Jayjg 18:45, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Forbes and article author should be mentioned as the source.--Alberuni 19:34, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Well, of course Forbes. Why the article author, though? I don't know who he or she is, but why is he or she important? Jayjg 21:16, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

CBS report on Arafat's finances

Recent edits summarized this article as follows:

However, as Arafat lives frugally and has no known major possessions, these claims appear to be based solely on Arafat's control over Palestinian public-funds.

From reading the article, it would seem to be a woefully adequate and highly misleading summary; one might might say a whitewash. In fact, the article discusses a team of investigators hired by the PA Finance Ministry to examine Arafat's finances, which has uncovered a number of secret portfolio worth hundreds of millions, and that the head investigator pointed out that the public funds were not used for the Palestinian people. Also, the article described other secret accounts, and pointed out that Arafat used his money to gain influence and prestige in a number of ways. It did also mention that he lived frugally, but this was hardly the thrust of the article. I've changed it to this:

In 2003 a team of American accountants - hired by Arafat's own finance ministry - began examing Arafat's finances. The team determined that part of the Palestinian leader's wealth was in a secret portfolio worth close to $1 billion -- with investments in companies like a Coca-Cola bottling plant in Ramallah, a Tunisian cell phone company and venture capital funds in the U.S. and the Cayman Islands. The head of the investigation stated that "although the money for the portfolio came from public funds like Palestinian taxes, virtually none of it was used for the Palestinian people; it was all controlled by Arafat. And none of these dealings were made public". Arafat appears to use his wealth to improve his standing and influence; he has always lived frugally, and continues to do so.

which I believe is far more representative of the article's contents. Jayjg 15:43, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

The original version was sufficient to get the point across that critics of Arafat accuse him of financial improprieties. Your depiction of the "American accounting team" (as if Americans are more reliable) findings are selective and biased. Reverted. --Alberuni 18:06, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

The article itself describes it as an "American accounting team"; this description is entirely neutral, and any other description rather bizarre. The sentence describing what the funds were used for, and in particular the statement that they did not go to the Palestinians, were important in the context of the charges. Also, the statement that he lived frugally alone was misleading, since no-one alleged he lived any other way, but rather used the money to increase his standing and influence. Jayjg 18:45, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Irrelevant investigations designed to defuse incessant and annoying Israeli disinformation and accusations. Deserves one line at most. --Alberuni 19:34, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Palestinian authorities themselves have expressed grave concerns about the lack of transparency in PA finances; it is the PA Finance Ministry which is conducting this investigation, not Israeli "disinformation and accusations"; when the PA investigates Arafat that surely is significant. Or are you alleging that Israel is running the PA Finance Ministry? Jayjg 21:16, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Occupation colonies?

A long stable line in the Lebanon section of the article stated

The Fatah movement continued to launch terrorist attacks against Israeli targets; moreover, in the late 1970s numerous leftist Palestinian organizations appeared which carried out further attacks both within Israel and outside of it.

This was changed to:

The Fatah movement continued to launch attacks against Israeli targets. In the late 1970s several new leftist organizations appeared and carried out attacks on Israel and Israel's occupation colonies.

The attacks by Fatah were against civilian targets; while I think any reasonable individual would agree that deliberate attacks on civilians for political purposes are terrorist, I've replaces the phrase "terrorist attacks" with the less contentious "attac on civilian targets" for the sake of compromise. However, does anyone really imagine that "occupation colonies" is a NPOV term for the Israeli communites in the West Bank and Gaza? Misplaced Pages, in line with most of the world, describes them as Israeli settlements); shouldn't we be using the standard and NPOV Misplaced Pages term? Moreover, these attack were not even against Israeli settlements, but rather against civilians in cities inside the "Green Line", such as Haifa, Tel Aviv, Avivim, Ma'alot, Kiryat Shemona, as well as against Israeli civilian targets in foreign countries such as Athens and Munich; I'm not aware of any against settlements. Thus it is inaccurate as well. I've changed it back to its original form, substituting "attacks against civilian targets" for "terrorist attacks". Jayjg 16:03, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Your depiction of Israeli occupation as civilian enterprise is inaccurate POV. Reverted. --Alberuni 18:06, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Your response does not deal with the salient points; the attacks were on civilian targets, and they were not on Israeli settlements, which in any event are neutrally described by Misplaced Pages as "Israeli settlements". Jayjg 18:45, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Israelis build colonies to occupy territory that is not Israeli. The settlements are on Arab land to expand Israeli hold on militarily occupied territory. They seized Lebanese territory to protect Jewish settlements and then seized more Lebanese territory to protect the previously seized territory. Israel's policy of expansionism is military aggression hiding behind defense of civilian settlements. Your depictions are the typical, "Israel is always the victim" POV. Hasbara. --Alberuni 19:34, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Your political views are interesting, but they fail to address the point; the attacks were not in the West Bank or Gaza, but were in Israel as defined by the 1949 Armistice agreements, within the so-called "Green Line", or in foreign countries altogether. How do the Israeli settlements in Gaza and the West Bank even come into it? We could return to the original text, which is even more negative about the PLO (in my view); those statements have been there little changed for over a year now, another eternity in Wikitime. Jayjg 21:16, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

PLO played an important part in the Lebanese Civil War?

In the Lebanon section of the original article it stated

The operations of the PLO within Lebanon did not receive much news coverage. It is certain, however, that the PLO had played an important part in the Lebanese Civil War.

This was changed to

There were claims that the PLO had played an important part in the Lebanese Civil War.

Aside from this being a grammatically incorrect sentence stub, who disputes that the PLO playes an important part in the war? The PLO was involved in a great deal of fighting, and accused of a number of massacres. I'm not aware of anyone thinks any different. I've changed it to

The PLO played an important part in the Lebanese Civil War

-- Jayjg 16:12, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

The PLO played an important part in the Lebanese Civil war because their presence attracted Israeli military pressure bent on perpetuating violence in Lebanon to further Israel's own expansionist interest and desire to control the Litanoi River. As usual, you blame the Palestinians and ignore the heavy involvement of Israel arming the Phalangists in perpetuating the violence. Reverted. --Alberuni 18:06, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Good, we agree that the PLO played an important part in the Lebanese Civil war. Jayjg 18:45, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Except that you ignore Israeli aggression and portray Israeli militarism in a defensive light. Your POV is showing. --Alberuni 19:34, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean; I'm just talking about this small section of text, which states that the PLO played an important part, as we both agree. That particular statement has been in the text for a year and a half (I guess that's two eternities in Wikitime), and I've actually watered it down to accomodate NPOV concerns. Jayjg 21:16, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Retaliatory strikes?

The article originally read

The PLO then began to use this territory to launch artillery strikes on and infiltrate into Israel, attacking and killing Israelis. These attacks occurred in the context of far more destructive Isreali attacks on Lebanon; sometimes retaliatory, often not.

This was changed to

The PLO then began launching artillery and guerilla strikes on Israel from there. These PLO attacks occurred at the time of far more destructive Isreali attacks on Lebanon, some of which were retaliatory, but most were offensive.

I've already discussed the absurdity of describing deliberate attacks on civilians as "guerilla strikes" rather than "terrorist attacks"; moreover, the edit removes the information that the terrorists were entering Israel from Lebanon. However, as stated earlier, I've change the wording from "guerilla strikes" to "attacks on Israeli civilians". Also, what is the source for the POV statement that the attackes were "sometimes retaliatory, often not"? I've excised it pending some reliable documentation. Thus the sentence now reads:

"the PLO began launching artillery strikes on Israel and attacks on Israeli civilians from there; Israel responded with far more destructive attacks on Lebanon.

-- Jayjg 16:26, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Your constant depiction of palestinians as attacking civilians is POV and incorrect. Israeli military were targets. You ignore Israeli brutality and slaughter of thousands of Lebanese and palestinian civilians, as usual. Your edits are POV, biased and unbalanced. Reverted. --Alberuni 18:06, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Please provide evidence of the military targets. Jayjg 18:45, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

You are making the revisions to a stable article so you have to prove that Palestinians only attacked civilians. It is absurd that you believe no Israeli military targets were attacked. It just shows the extent of your bias. According to : "Palestinian fighters mounted intermittent cross-border attacks against civilian and military targets in Israel." Another example is the 1987 Palestinian hang glider attack on the Israeli military base killed six IDF soldiers. The attacks on Israeli military bases, convoys and outposts were numerous but your pro-Israeli view just wants to delegitimize Palestinian resistance as terrorist. Your POV is showing. --Alberuni 19:34, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for providing evidence, I'll incorporate that into the article, using the exact wording you have provided. Please restrict your comments to discussion of article contents, not me. Jayjg 21:16, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Parents

I've added a little more information about Arafat's parents; specifically that

Arafat was one of seven children born to a textile merchant father who was a Palestinian with some Egyptian ancestry; his mother from an old Palestinian family in Jerusalem. According to Arafat and other sources, he was born in Jerusalem on August 4, 1929 . His date and place of birth have been disputed; according to other sources he was born in Cairo or even Gaza

This is in line with the information given in the second bio, which is from the Nobel prize website. Jayjg 16:30, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

This was in the original stable version of the article before you started editing it. You added nothing. --Alberuni 18:06, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Incorrect, I added all these facts. The original merely described his father as a merchant, nor did it list his parents origins. Please examine the histories next time. Jayjg 18:45, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

What does "some Egyptian ancestry" mean? --Alberuni 19:34, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

That's the exact phrase the Nobel prize site uses; I assume it means that his father's ancestors were primarily from the region of Palestine, but that some were from Egypt as well - that would be the logical way of understanding the sentence. Jayjg 21:16, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Wife and daughter.

I've added some more information about Suha Arafat, specifically that she had a maiden name (Tawil), that she was a Palestinian Catholic who worked for the PLO in Tunis, that she married him in 1990, that she was more than 30 years his junior when marrying, that she converted to Islam before marrying him, that they had a daughter Zawha in 1995, that they moved to Paris to be with her mother after the start of the second infitadeh. These statements are confirmed by many sources including this: . Jayjg 16:35, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

This information belongs in an article about Suha Arafat. Her age is irrelevant and simply reflects your POV attempts at describing Arafat in a negative light whenever possible. Reverted. --Alberuni 18:06, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

All information reverted because she was much younger than him? And why is this something negative about Arafat? It's a simple fact; is there a stigma against significant age differences in marriages? Jayjg 18:45, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

This information belongs in an article about Suha Arafat. Her age is irrelevant. --Alberuni 19:34, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Fine, I'll remove the statements about her age pending agreement here. On the point, I actually thought it might be considered a positive point; isn't having a younger wife actually often seen as a positive thing, a sign of virility, manliness etc.? Jayjg 21:16, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Report the basic facts on Suha Arafat: place of birth, age, maiden name, place of residence, citizenship, religion, education, offices held, etc. Its the standard. Lance6Wins 20:52, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

460 to 3,500 Palestinians killed

I've changed the numbers in the Sabra and Shatila section to "between 460 and 3,500" killed from "between 800 and 3,500" killed, to put it in line with the sources provided in the Sabra and Shatila massacre article. Jayjg 16:37, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

You changed the wording to reduce apparent complicity of Israeli forces. Reverted. --Alberuni 18:06, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

The edit reflects the existing facts in other articles; please deal with the edits and do not attribute motive. Jayjg 18:45, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Your changes to this section were carried over in the reversion. --Alberuni 19:34, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean. If you mean they "accidentally" got reverted in HistoryBuffEr's massive revert, I think it would be safer to go through each edit and examine it for validity; that's certainly what I've done with HistoryBuffEr's edits, regardless of the fact that he should have proposed them in Talk: first, and still should do so. Jayjg 21:16, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Chronological order

I've ordered Arafat's biographical section chronologically as far as possible. The new organization introduced last night led to facts being repeated in more than one section, and a chronological order gives a good overview of his life. Jayjg 16:39, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Bring changes to Talk before editing as you demand on other pages. Reverted. --Alberuni 18:06, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

They've been brought here; the original article was also differently ordered, it's rather hard to tell what the order was with the massive changes HistoryBuffEr wrought, but I believe the article now reflects the original ordering. Jayjg 18:45, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Bring your changes here first for discussion. --Alberuni 19:34, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I don't think there are any changes from the original order that I've made. Do you have an issue with chronological ordering? Jayjg 21:16, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Israeli campaigns to discredit him

The statement

As the leader of Palestinian resistance Arafat has been subject of Israeli campaigns to discredit him.

was inserted at the top of the Financial sections by last night's editor. Aside from being an unsourced claim, it's relevance was not readily apparent, since the information listed was the most part from the IMF, EU, PA Finance Ministry investigators, 60 Minutes, French government, etc. I've removed it pending discussion of relevance and sourcing. Jayjg 16:49, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

You may bring suggested changes to Talk before deleting sections from a stable article. Reverted. --Alberuni 18:06, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

The insertion of this statement was the change in question to the stable article; please propose why it is valuable here in Talk: Jayjg 18:45, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Arafat has been the subject of Israeli disinformation campaigns for the past 40 years. You are just a minor example. --Alberuni 19:34, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Please restrict comments to discussion of article content, not me, as this violates Misplaced Pages:No personal attacks. Jayjg 21:16, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Many changes made to the article

I've gone through the many changes made last night to what was for a while a fairly stable article, and kept a number that I could see were uncontroversial or NPOV. However, as the editor in question has been informed on numerous occasions, it is Misplaced Pages policy that significant changes to controversial articles be discussed in Talk:, as the NPOV text at the top of the article says. For the many controversial or NPOV edits and deletions, I've generally reverted to previous wordings, sourced from linked articles, or tried to NPOV them pending discussion here. Please bring any changes not listed above here for discussion first. Thanks. Jayjg 16:45, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

You have it backwards. You can bring your editing suggestions to Talk before editing a stable article. Your perception of what is NPOV is not acceptable to many other editors. You should try to reach a consensus with other editors before making your POV editing changes. Thanks. --Alberuni 18:06, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

The article was stable until 24 hours ago when HistoryBuffEr wrought massive changes without consulting other editors. Please desist from trying to revise history in Talk:. Serious discussion on yours or HistoryBuffEr's part would be appreciated. Jayjg 18:45, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Everyone should work to achieve consensus for changes to this article befre making edits. Read the NPOV notice at the head of the page. --Alberuni 19:34, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

That's exactly what we're doing here. Thanks for working with me on that. :-) Jayjg 21:16, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Arafat Youth Rewrite

This is an NPOV re-write of the section on Arafat's youth: Arafat was the fifth of seven children born to a Palestinian textile merchant. His father’s family included some Egyptian ancestry and his mother descended from a prominent Palestinian family in Jerusalem. According to Arafat and other sources, he was born in Jerusalem on August 4, 1929 . His date and place of birth have been disputed; some sources contend that he was born in Cairo or the Gaza Strip .

The useless material about Husseini clan affiliation from Aburish’s unauthorized 1998 biography of Arafat is irrelevant and should be deleted. (Arafat: From Defender to Dictator

Arafat’s childhood was divided between Cairo and Jerusalem, where he lived for four years with an uncle following the death of his mother when he was five. Arafat attended the University of King Faud I (later renamed Cairo University) and sought to understand Judaism and Zionism by engaging in discussions with Jews and reading publications by Theodor Herzl and other Zionists . During the 1948 Arab-Israeli war, Arafat left the university and, along with other Palestinians, he sought to enter Palestine to fight for Palestinian independence. He was disarmed and turned back by Egyptian military forces that refused to allow the poorly trained partisans to enter the war zone. After returning to the university, Arafat joined the Muslim Brotherhood and served as president of the Union of Palestinian Students from 1952 to 1956. By 1956, Arafat graduated with a bachelor’s degree in civil engineering and served as a second lieutenant in the Egyptian Army during the Suez Crisis.

(I did not find neutral sources to support the claim that Arafat was “close to Husseini, the Mufti of Jerusalem”)--Alberuni 00:21, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

The information about his birth certificate needs to be included, it's significant. And I don't think all the Aburish stuff is useless,; it's actually quite significant as well, though as I said above I'm willing to cut some out. I think his thoughts of studying in the U.S. should be mentioned as well. I'll look for sources on the Mufti stuff. Also, if you're going to include the "friend of the Jews" stuff, then you need to include the next sentence "But by 1946 he had become a Palestinian nationalist and was procuring weapons in Egypt to be smuggled into Palestine in the Arab cause." And here's the rest of the interesting information from that site "When the first Arab-Israeli war broke out in 1948, reports say that Arafat slipped into Palestine to fight the Israelis. He later claimed, however, that he and his compatriots were disarmed and turned back by other Arabs who did not want the help of Palestinian irregulars." Their presentation is slightly different from yours; what was the rationale for your changes? Jayjg 00:25, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I don't think it's outrageous to believe that Arafat discussed Zionism with Egyptian Jews and perhaps others particluarly in light of the rapid demographic changes and political ferment in Palestine during his youth. In any case, the claim is sourced. I skipped 1946 and went to 1948 for the sake of brevity but do not have any objections to including it. I believe my description of 1948 events is true to the original sources. I re-phrased the description to avoid copyright infringement. If we're going to NPOV section after section, we're going to have to be flexible. Of course, as soon as we're done with this excruciatingly tedious teeth-pulling exercise, some jingo will come along and edit everything to suit his/her POV. --Alberuni 00:58, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I have no objection to the Zionism information, and I'm fine with your formulation on the 1948 events. You haven't commented on the Aburish and birth certificate information yet, or studying in the U.S. And you're right, as soon as it's all NPOVd someone will come along and POV it; in fact, it just happened again a few hours ago. Jayjg 17:00, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Odd, the information about Aburish and the Birth Certificate disappeared in your latest edit, Alberuni, even though it had clearly not been agreed to in Talk: I'll assume that was an oversight and restore it for you. I did cut out a couple of the Aburish quotes for brevity, as was discussed above. I also changed "written without Arafat's help" to "unauthorized", which is the English was of saying "written without Arafat's help", but I'm perfectly willing to revert to the old version if you prefer. I also described Aburish as a Palestinian historian, as per the discussion above, but I'm willing to revert that as well pending agreement here. Jayjg 17:39, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Can anything be done about people like HistoryBuffEr who come in and make major edits without any discussion or consensus with other editors? At least you and Alberuni seem to be having some discussion in an attempt to create a NPOV article. --MPerel

Wouldn't that be nice? I'm not optimistic. Jayjg 17:39, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Arafat survived a plane crash in the Libyan desert in 1992

Why is that missing from this article? What about the Israeli air raid on Tunis that almost killed him in 1985? What about the 1968 Israeli attack on PLO in Jordan, the siege of Beirut, the Israelis assassinating his deputy Abu Jihad in Tunis in 1988, bombing his offices in Gaza and Ramallah 2001, 2002, de facto house arrest by Sharon since then, etc? Lots of important facts missing or glossed over but impressive detail from Aburish concerning irrelevant details about Husseini clan allegations, EU and US accountants review of PA financial dealings, and many other accusations made popular by Israeli propagandandists. This article needs more NPOV fact details and less National Enquirer Hebrew edition speculation. --Alberuni 04:43, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I don't think Aburish has ever written for the National Enquirer, and I don't think it has a Hebrew edition. As for the other details about Arafat's life, any significant details of his life should be included. I'm not sure information about his lieutenants belong in an article about Arafat, though certainly in an article about the lieutenant. Let's try to make sure that any information proposed to be inserted in the article is about Arafat himself, rather than another re-hash of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, of which far too many already exist on Misplaced Pages. Jayjg 17:06, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Lost information

So much information was lost from this article in recent edits. I have restored much of it. Added a section of See aslo which somehow was missing. Please bring additional information with citations. I would particularly like to see citations for the various Israeli attempts to kill Arafat that Alberuni mentions above. That and the Hebrew edition of the National Enquirer and how Israel propagandanists determine the results of US and EU financial audits which Alberuni mentions above. Lance6Wins 18:23, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Lance6Wins, I realize that you've done a more extensive revert than that. I've restored the version agreed to in Talk:, with some other small fixes. Please work with the process in Talk: here; HistoryBuffEr's continual reversions to his own new and unique version are bad enough. Jayjg 18:34, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Birth

Why do we prefer a version of his birth different from the birth certificate issued by the Government of Egypt and published by the Nobel Prize committee. What do we base our preference on? We should have citations for this unusual preference.

Mohammed Abdel-Raouf Arafat As Qudwa al-Hussaeini was born on 24 August 1929 in Cairo**, his father a textile merchant who was a Palestinian with some Egyptian ancestry, his mother from an old Palestinian family in Jerusalem.

Lance6Wins 20:44, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

There is some controversy over his birth; I think the current version reflects the version of the Nobel Prize organization and others as well as Arafat's, what do you think? Jayjg 20:48, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Latest changes by Alberuni

Alberuni, I thought we were working through a series of agreed to edits here. Why have you removed or changed many sections of the article that have been stable for months, and possibly years? Please bring proposed controversial changes to Talk: Jayjg 20:45, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

The edited sections contained the usual Israeli POV and they have been NPOVed. If you want to discuss returning POV material, like the following, start discussing. This is irrelevant and POV: "badly battered PLO" and "Claims that Arafat was related to the Jerusalem Husseini clan through his mother have been disputed by the Palestinian historian Said Aburish, given that the Husseini clan designation comes from his father's side. In a unauthorized biography (Arafat: From Defender to Dictator, Bloomsbury Publishing, 1998), Aburish claims that "The young Arafat sought to establish his Palestinian credentials and promote his eventual claim to leadership... could not afford to admit any facts which might reduce his Palestinian identity. ...Arafat insistently perpetuated the legend that he had been born in Jerusalem and was related to the important Husseini clan of that city." (Ibid, p. 8)" and "Black September which is generally believed (although not proved)to have been an operational cover for Fatah" and "Israel claimed that Arafat was in ultimate control over these organizations and hence had by no means abandoned terrorism as a means of policy, but Arafat has steadfastly denied responsibility for acts committed by these groups." etc --Alberuni 20:58, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Again, if you think these longstanding sections were POV, the place to discuss changing them is here; that is Misplaced Pages standard practice. Jayjg 21:03, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Why don't you start sections on "badly battered", Black September, "abandoned terrorism" and we'll work out something. The Aburish section already exists above. Jayjg 21:05, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Link to Black September

Lance6wins, your insertion created two links to Black September in the same sentence, and goes to a disambig page, rather than the actual article. I think it should be removed. Jayjg 21:36, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Pistol

Although the BBC link claims Arafat waved a pistol at the UNGA, most sources indicate that he merely had a gun holster on his hip, and some insist that the holster was empty. Please see this: . I recommend the statement be removed. Jayjg 21:42, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)