104 thoughts on “Arafat’s Death by Polonium, More on Israeli Pinkwashing – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.

  1. What would be the reason though, bearing in mind that Arafat was 75 and not in good health. Some were already saying he had AIDS, so depending on which version you believe, Arafat didn’t have long to live.

    Unless Israel wanted to use him as a guinea pig to test the polonium, but then one could ask, why a sick person?

    I don’t trust Suha, she’s an opportunist, in her own way, she exploits the cause for her own benefit. And Arafat was not a good leader, the Palestinians are cursed with bad leaders, first the PLO, then Hamas. But none of this means Israel has the right to murder him if indeed it is proven that he was poisoned by polonium and Israel was behind it.

    On the other hand, if the Lieberman is a Russian agent in Israel, he could have smuggled it in, assuming Israel did not make the polonium. This is just speculation, and a bit of conspiracy mongering on my part.

    I hope the tests are done ASAP.

    1. No one was saying he had AIDS except the Mossad and various pro-Israel scumbags like Lenny Ben David. In fact, a Tunisian AIDS specialist who treated Arafat said he DID NOT have AIDS. Stop spreading rumors that are not true & disseminated by people with a pro Israel agenda.

      Pls stop telling me the Palestinians are cursed with bad leaders. The good ones, Israel has killed. As for bad leaders, Israel has the market cornered in that business I’m afraid.

      1. Here you are claiming that only the Mossad and “various pro-Israel scumbags” were saying that Arafat had AIDS.

        But with all due respect, and to be fair to the commenter above, you yourself speculated on this blog that Arafat may have had AIDS at the time of his death.

        In your post on the subject at the time, you wrote:

        “So here’s my totally unsubstantiated conjecture based on what I’ve read: Arafat died of AIDS.”

        You then went on to elaborate on this conjecture, explaining why you considered the possibility that Arafat may have been a closeted homosexual.

        1. When it comes to finding old posts, you’re always around, aren’t you But when it comes to answering questions, you suddenly ‘disappear’. You never answered my question after your nit-picking on Shadi Khayr al-Din’s exact ethnic backgound: “why do you think Vinogradov killed Ziad Jilani ?”. You don’t have to answer, it’s not the topic on this file but your constant ‘disappearance’ when asked direct questions really tells us about your agenda here !

          1. Sometimes I don’t like to respond to your direct questions because I feel like you have taken a rude and nasty tone towards me over the course of our exchanges here in spite of my numerous attempts to be polite and courteous despite our disagreements.

            With respect to Vinogradov, I can only speculate as to his motivations based on what I’ve read. Maybe his explanation is true and he thought he was in danger. Maybe he just was looking for an excuse to kill an Arab. Maybe a little bit of both. In any case, as I asked initially, I wonder what the next step will be – such as an appeal to Israel’s Supreme Court. I would be interested to see if they take up the case.

            With respect to the post here, I just didn’t think it was right for the above commenter to be jumped on for mentioning AIDS in relation to Arafat’s death when the blog owner himself had made such speculations at the time.

          2. Strange. The question I particularly had in mind concerned the ROR. I simply posted a video as an answer to one of your questions to me, and asked you an honest answer. I would say there was absolutely no rudeness in that question, but it would probably have exposed your ethnic bias when it comes to who has the right to live in the land between the River and the Sea. At least we know by know that you think aliyah is a (God-given ?) right for every Jew in the diaspora (cf. your reaction to Davey’s “Shitface”) whereas Palestinians should not be allowed to return to their homeland. I don’t thnk I’m misrepresenting your ideas here, if so I apologize. This is not ‘rude’ of course, just plain ethnic supremacism ! I understand that you don’t want to expose it constantly….

          3. I tried to give you a reasonable response to your question. I said nothing about aliyah or who should have the right to live where or anything of that nature. Yet instead of responding in kind, you accuse me of ethnic supremacism, even though I said none of the things that you have written here. This is the sort of thing I was referencing when I wrote that you sometimes took a nasty or rude tone with me for no reason.

            If you want to talk about larger Israeli-Palestinian issues and are genuinely interested in learning more about my perspective and exchanging ideas, I would be happy to have those discussions. Please feel free to pass along your email address to me via Richard if you’d like to initiate such an exchange.

          4. Wow, you really didn’t understand what I wrote at all ? I clearly didn’t hint at your comment on this file. I tried to debunk your excuse for not answering questions by pretending this is due to some kind of rudeness. And I mentionned a former question of mine that I think you didn’t answer, not because of any rudeness in my question, but because you couldn’t spin a story as it was a yes-or-no-question on the ROR (a video showing Palestinians refugées of all ages with the names of their native villages written in their palms) and I asked you if these people didn’t have a right to go home, and by answering it honestly, you would have shown your bias: that you think Jews have a right to make aliyah while you’re against the ROR. Is this not true ? And is it not true than when questions are embarrassing, you drop out ? This doesn’t only concern my questions but others as well.

          5. I think the Israelis and Palestinians need to work out some kind of compromise on that issue otherwise there will never be peace. I don’t think that every Palestinian will be able to relocate to the village where they or their parents or grandparents or great-grandparents lived before 1948. I think that the only workable solution that has a chance for success is one by which an independent Palestinian state is established on the West Bank and Gaza. I support something along the lines of the Geneva Initiative. This is an initiative that has been embraced by many Israelis, Palestinians, and other peace-loving people around the world. Marwan Barghouti has expressed support for this proposal in the past, as has Yasser Arafat, Jimmy Carter, and others.

            In an ideal and just world, everyone would be able to live wherever they chose to do so. But we don’t live in that world. Countless people have been driven from their homes and forced to start lives elsewhere. If a Palestinian state were to be established, as outlined in the Geneva Initiative (and other similar proposals), then Palestinians everywhere could be welcomed to that state and be able to live as a free and independent people. Realistically, I don’t see another feasible means of achieving the, to my mind, essential and long overdo goal of bringing Palestinian national aspirations to fruition.

            I don’t argue that this is the most just solution, only that I believe it to be the only one that is realistic. If you think that there is a more just but also feasible solution that achieves the goals that you believe to be essential, I would be interested in hearing how you envision it coming true.

          6. Do you even know that the Geneva Initiative calls for the Right of Return? In modified form, it’s true. But it doesn’t agree with yr prescription that all Palestinians will have to live in Palestine & cannot return to what is now Israel. So you don’t appear to agree with Geneva, contrary to what you said. Or do you believe in ROR in any form?

          7. Wrong. They call for a “just” end of the refugee problem – compensation and perhaps a return of a symbolic amount of refugees. It certainly does not advocate the “right of return” as you present it.

          8. No, you are wrong. It doesn’t call for “perhaps a return of a symbolic amount of refugees” (whatever that means) unless you think 25,000 is symbolic. That’s the number that has been discussed at Geneva Initiative conferences. Frankly, the price of a settlment has gone up & no one, including those who negotiated Geneva, would settle for that number now. Israel might’ve gotten away with it when Geneva was first announced. But not now.

            I never said Geneva called for full, unfettered ROR. I said it called for recognition of ROR, which it does.

          9. I support the modified right of return outlined in the Geneva Initiative. I did not mean to be suggesting that all Palestinians will have to live in the new Palestinian state and cannot return to what is now Israel. I meant to suggest that it would not be possible for every single Palestinian to move to what is now Israel – and therefore some compromise must be reached on that issue. It is my belief that the Geneva Initiative presents just such a reasonable compromise. What’s your take?

          10. I know perfectly well what you think, Bob. You’ve stated so before: Palestinians should not be allowed back home, but every Jew in the diaspora – even the guy who converted last year – who feels the “call” has the right to make aliyah. Isn’t that sweet. That’s exactly what I call ethnic supremacism. Do you have another word for that ?

          1. Or that it just doesn’t meet your agenda to steer the truth to Israel’s benefit no matter how bad that benefit is for humanity.

          2. After repeating yr comment a third time, I’m going to moderate you. If you decide you want to respect the comment rules (read them again) I will remove moderation after a time.

        2. Even if he had AIDS, it does not mean it was necessarily the direct or even proximate cause of death. It is also a possibility that Arafat had engaged in closeted homosexual acts. That is how button-men are kept on a leash. It is even possible that he was purposely infected with a biological agent. Yet, as AIDS is not an immediate mode of delivering death, the presence of polonium would indicate that he died of an immediate radiation poisoning.

          As we know also, Hamas was raised and started by Israel as a counterweight to Arafat’s PLO (with the same exact charter, by the way). Israel liked to keep Arafat watching his Tom & Jerry while Palestinians were given nothing more than a dog and pony show about resistance and oppression.

          This is the truth about the Palestinians. They were long ago conquered, penned up, and now they have nowhere to go. It’s an unspeakable and INDEFENSIBLE tragedy to keep people under brutal occupation for 63 long years. It’s beyond vile to disparage them, ridicule them, treat them without humanity in their state of despair. And then it takes a special kind of human being to pretend all of a sudden that they never existed, and that Hamas, with it’s charter, is suddenly the reason why 1400 Gazans should be soul murdered with the inauguration of the Hope of America.

          Then again, as Caroline Glick of the Jerusalem Post demonstrated well, there exists that special kind of human. After Israel went 100 miles out to international water and brutally executed humanitarian activists from Turkey, then a supposed Israeli ally, who would have gone to Gaza without hurting Israel in any way to deliver food and medical supplies, she put on a song and dance over YouTube calling the victims, who were going to help a destitute people, savaged by Israeli brutality, terrorists and completely slandered them.

          There exists this special kind of human and they are not Jewish. They are Nazis. Sorry Godwin.

          1. You don’t need to apologize just to Godwin. You need to watch the comment rules. “Nazi” analogies are severely circumscribed in this blog. I don’t allow flinging the word around freely unless it’s done with extreme care & justification, which you haven’t offered.

          2. We don’t put the Nazis (or their atrocities) on a pedestal and don’t think you should either.

          3. I don’t put Nazis on “pedestals,” but they played a pivotal role in one of the greatest catastrophes of Jewish history. Therefore, yes, they are treated differently than other run of the mill skanky right wing racist movements.

          4. That’s not what we meant (to put you on your back feet and explain your position). We meant that we see the Nazis as despicable examples, so severely wrong that they illustrate what one should definitely strive NOT to be like. Speaking from a non-Jewish prism and one that is common culture: as children, we are universally taught who the “bad people” are and not to be like them. They are constantly spoken about. In adulthood, we seem to universally agree that the respectable is represented (or not) by the unspeakable; for instance, our Creator. Thus, the positive connotation correlates to that which is not mentioned rather than to that which is mentioned. It is hard to comprehend how human beings can learn from bad examples if they are not taught how they are acting like them and to reform their behavior in order to avoid being such.

            Hypothetically speaking, if Saudi Arabian (or let’s say, Iranian) intelligence decided to run a large false-flag operation pinning blame on Israel for the entire financial crisis, etc., and this caused a wave of anti-Semitism, and Europeans and Americans began rounding up the world Jewry, would you still tell us to stop using the term? We intend to use it as a stick, not a carrot. And one that we know, because of the depravity of the actions of the Nazis against, specifically, the Jewish people, it should resonate amongst Jews that they should not act like their former oppressors (and annihilators) in any fashion whatsoever. Apparently, the truth does not work, so what method of motivation towards morality and truth remain?

            It would be nice if the term “anti-Semite” also reserved for it some of that due respect. So as to give justice to the person actually feeling anti-Semitism against them rather than the cacophony of false race card cries used to avoid real criticism of Israel’s behavior, thereby diluting the term wholesale to the point of meaning nothing. The same goes for “terrorist”.

        3. Yes, & I wrote this in 2004, that is eight years ago, which you conveniently neglect to mention. I then called it “conjecture” and “speculation.” I don’t believe now what I thought then. People who now believe what I believed then are Palestine-hating scumbags.

          You also neglect to mention that in 2007 I posted Uri Dan’s speculation that Ariel Sharon ordered the murder of Arafat. In other words, just in the time between 2004 & 2007 I changed my mind.

          Further, you’ve dredged this quotation up from Israellycool, a disgusting smear site. If I liked you more I’d feel sorry for you. As it is, I’m pissed. You use Israellycool here in future as a source for anything & I’ll bounce you out on your you know what.

          1. I have never in my life used “Israellycool” as a source for anything and only even know what that site is because of your mentioning it in the past. I have no interest in “disgusting smear sites” or anything of that nature. I do sometimes have a look at posts in your archive when past topics are revisited (You put tags on your posts and store your old ones in an easily searchable archive so presumably this is not discouraged). As I’ve mentioned before, I’ve always felt something of an affinity to the 2003-2004 era Richard Silverstein and was curious to see what was written here at the time of Arafat’s death – that’s where I came across your post on the subject with the quotation I cited.

            I honestly do not understand why you would be pissed and threaten to bounce me for simply posting your own words from a past post. The only purpose in doing so was to make the point that even reasonable people, such as yourself, were speculating about Arafat having AIDS at the time of his death. Obviously, it soon became clear that this was not the case, and no reasonable person believes this now.

          2. So where did you hear about a post I wrote in 2004? Are you claiming the fact that David Lange dug this up & published it 12 hrs after you found the same 8 yr old post & published it here is a total coincidence? That strains credulity.

            I suppose it’s possible.

          3. Is Nahum514 Bob Mann ?
            In fact Richard, if someone wants to dick up old articles – which is a normal procedure I think – it’s really not necessary to go looking elsewhere. I just googled “Richard Silverstein Arafat 2004” and your old article popped up first. I didn’t even read it.
            Using an old article from back in 2004, a week after Arfat’s death, where none of us knew anything and were all speculating has absolutely no interest today, whereas people still clinging to the AIDS-myth, and the manipulated interview with Ashraf al-Kurdi, Arafat’s personal doctor, is totally different.
            Even hinting at that debunked myth today is a sign of what kind of media they are reading. Seeing dozens of hasbaristas – as on Maan – claiming in all seriousness that Arafat indeed died of AIDS and that the French medical report proved so, just tells us that these people have no room nor desire for truth, in whatever concerns this conflict.

          4. I read your post – was curious about what was discussed on this blog about Arafat at the time of his death, read a few posts from your archive at the time, then made the comment in defense of the other commenter. There is no nefarious intention whatsoever. In fact, I really thought you would just give a quick mea cupla for jumping on that other commenter and have a laugh about it. I really did not think it would lead to all of this. Reasonable (and not so reasonable) people speculated about AIDS with respect to Arafat at the time of his death, but since then, that idea has been discredited, and people who push it now are doing so to promote their own agenda (and ought to be called out for doing so). Can we just leave it there?

      2. Richard, i’m not spreading rumours.

        As for your comment about ‘pro Israel agenda’

        It’s not clear..

        Is this is an anti israel website? One does not immediately think that a site that purports to ‘promote Israeli democracy’ should not vocalise anything pro Israel. This is why you have pets like Deir Yassin, and why Bob Mann has to put up with so much crap here.

        So why not just say, this is an anti Israel website, this way, pests like me need not post here.
        My question remains unaswered.

        Why would Israel kill Arafat? I cannot think of a worse leader for the Palestinians than Arafat. Israeli crimes cannot and will not hide that fact.

        1. “I’m not spreading rumours”
          Of course you are ! Maybe you’re not aware of it but the AIDS-rumours have been debunked already back in 2004 by various French doctors, it is well-known where these rumours were fabricated. It’s not even open for questioning. Eight years after, and you still spew the “some [i.e. the Israelis and the hasbaristas] were already saying he had AIDS….not long to live ….”

          1. I have respect for you
            You are serving your purpose
            I made the assumption that you remember what you wrote
            I am sorely mistaken

          2. Strange, did “Chayma” just morph into “Farha Khaled” or is there a comment missing somewhere from this exchange?

          3. @ Farha Khaled
            That must be Chayma changing her pen name
            This a a blog. Everyone has the right to answer to every comment on a blog, that’s the whole principe of a blog ! If you want exclusive conversation with anyone, this mostly goes on via e-mails.
            Thank you for showing everyone here on this thread that you’re the cheerleader of “Muslims for Israel”.

          4. Indeed you are correct. Farha Khaled & Chayma are the same and both appear to be a pen name for Karen Amatullah. Karen, Chayma, Farha or whoever you are, multiple IDs are not permitted in this blog. You have ONE identity and that is all. If you do not stick to one, all of your identities will be banned.

          1. No snark in my comment, Richard, it was said in all earnestness.

            You did not answer a simple question, but put me on moderation instead. Why do you roll out the red carpet for anti Israel bigots, petty spiteful characters like Deir, who feel so threatened that their bigoted messages may not be swallowed hook line and sinker that they try desperately to censor and intimidate what they consider ‘pro Israel’ voices.

            The truth stands on it’s own merit. I never call for censorship of anti Israel voices, or even conspiracy mongers like Red Pill. I resent that you give free rein to your favourtie commenters to not only decide what ‘pro Israel’ means, but to deride and attempt to intimidate anyone who falls short of their self serving, self defined agenda.

            You play along merrily.

            This would not a be a problem if you made it clear in your site mission, that neutral and pro Israel people cannot post here. It was Deir who led the thread off topic above, by challenging Bob to state what his beliefs regarding the conflict are. Why did you not call her out for that, the way you do those who write what you deem to be anti Israel messages, even if they are not meant to be?

            Since your site claims to promote Israeli democracy, these are perfectly reasonable questions. Your infatuation with Deir should not intefere with business here. Which leads me to another question:

            Do you support the right of return for all Palestinian refugess to Israel?

          2. I told you to stick to your original identity, Chayma. Yet you’e returned here with your second identity. I told you his was a comment rule violation & asked you to use yr original identity. Now both will be moderated. If you continue disrespecting the rules your privileges will be further restricted.

            “Infatuation?” Ridiculous.

      3. That is a good one:
        “In fact, a Tunisian AIDS specialist who treated Arafat said he DID NOT have AIDS. ”

        Then why did an AIDS specialist treat him ?
        I have no idea whether he had one illness or another, but your argument is lacking and funny.

        1. He was called in to determine whether he had AIDS. That’s what AIDS specialists do. They determine whether someone has AIDS or not. If they do, they treat them. If not, they don’t. Arafat was so sick they didn’t know what he had. Therefore they called in the AIDS specialist. Not that you care, but you come across as a total shithead. Is that what you intend?

          1. I have no idea what you’re talking about. But if you’re complaining about my vile language I’ll save you the trouble of reading it in future by banning you if you like. Just give the word. In the meantime, on the off-chance that little jibe was directed at me, I’m moderating you. I’ll remove moderation if you explain what you meant and that it was directed elsewhere.

        2. No, but even more humorous is that Polonium-210 would have been planted under the frame of mind that no one would ever detect it. It’s not commonly tested for — well, had it not been for the Litvenko case.

          Even funnier are the misleading FAQs explaining that Polonium-210 could come from anywhere and it may have been planted. Lots of speculation, except for real questions in that vein, like, “Who would benefit from planting ‘fresh’ Polonium-210, associated with Kremlin hits because of Litvenko, on Arafat’s corpse at this juncture and make it look like Israel, the obvious suspect, did it?”

          L. O. L. 🙂

    2. “Some were already saying he had AIDS……Arafat didn’t have long to live”
      The only ones who said Arafat had AIDS was the Israeli hasbara and their assistants ! We know exactly from were this rumour was spread.
      Ali Abunimah deconstructs the lies on Arafat’s AIDS, spread by Israel. A bad translation of a manipulated interview with Arafat’s personal doctor, Ashraf al-Kurdi, on an Israeli television channel are among the theme in this article:
      It is also untrue that Arafat “didn’t have long to live”. Arafat was 75 years old but he was in perfect shape when he suddenly fell stongly ill on the night of Oct 12th.

      I wonder if we’re going to hear more about the samples of Arafat’s blood and urine that disappeared (‘were destroyed by accident’, I think the explanation was) from the military hospital of Percy where Arafat stayed here in Paris.

      I read somewhere, probably on Electronicintifada or al-Jazeera, that two unnamed Israelis working in the nuclear industry died of Polonium intoxication too.

        1. Yes, I remembered that later. Do you know anything about that ? Are these two men identified elsewhere ?

  2. RE: “Clayton Swisher’s Al Jazeera report that Arafat’s personal effects are riddled with high levels of polonium points to the possibility that the Mossad, under Meir Dagan, might’ve been responsible for murdering him.” ~ R.S.

    ALSO SEE: “If Arafat were still alive”, by Uri Avnery, Guardian.co.uk, 1/30/07

    [EXCERPT] . . . Just before he died last month, Uri Dan, Ariel Sharon’s loyal mouthpiece for almost 50 years, published a book in France. It includes a report of a conversation Sharon told him about, with President Bush. Sharon asked for permission to kill Arafat and Bush gave it to him, with the proviso that it must be done undetectably. When Dan asked Sharon whether it had been carried out, Sharon answered: “It’s better not to talk about that.” Dan took this as confirmation.
    The secret services of many countries have poisons that are all but undetectable. Ten years ago, Mossad tried to kill Khaled Mashal, the Hamas leader, in broad daylight on a thoroughfare in Amman. He was saved only when the Israeli government was compelled to provide the antidote to the poison it had used. Viktor Yushchenko, the president of Ukraine, was poisoned and saved only when the symptoms were identified by experts in time.
    Is there proof Arafat was murdered by Israeli or other agents? No, there is none. This week I again ran into Zahalka, and both of us concluded that the suspicion is growing stronger . . .

    ENTIRE COMMENTARY – http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2007/jan/31/israel.comment

    P.S. RE: “Uri Dan. . . published a book. . . It includes a report of a conversation Sharon told him about, with President Bush. Sharon asked for permission to kill Arafat and Bush gave it to him, with the proviso that it must be done undetectably.” ~ Uri Avnery (above)

    ALSO SEE: “Sharon won’t rule out attack on Arafat”, by The Associated Press, 4/23/04

    (excerpt) JERUSALEM (AP) — Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said Friday he is no longer bound by a promise to President Bush not to harm Yasser Arafat — the strongest sign yet that Israel could target the jittery Palestinian leader.
    In an interview with Israel TV’s Channel Two, Sharon said he told Bush about his change of position in a meeting in Washington last week.
    Sharon did not elaborate or say how Bush responded. . .

    ENTIRE ARTICLE – http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2004-04-23-israel-sharon-arafat_x.htm

    1. P.S. ALSO SEE: “Who Killed Yasser Arafat? Now we know he was poisoned – but by whom?”, by Justin Raimondo, Antiwar.com, 7/04/12

      [EXCERPT] Yasser Arafat died on November 11, 2004, of a mysterious ailment. His enemies spread the rumor he had AIDS: David Frum, with typical classiness, claimed he had contracted AIDS as a consequence of having sex with his bodyguards. Now, however, it has been revealed Arafat was poisoned: the cause of his death was exposure to very high levels of polonium-210, a rare radioactive substance. An investigation conducted by Al Jazeera showed Arafat’s personal items, released to the media organization by his widow, contained several times the normal level of polonium that would normally be detected on such items. The Palestinian leader’s terminal symptoms were similar to those experienced by victims of polonium poisoning: the substance targets the gastrointestinal tract and the subject wastes away.
      Arafat’s Ramallah compound had been bombed several times by the Israelis, and they had the place surrounded – yet still he persisted. They couldn’t get him out. Worse, his plight was becoming a metaphor for the condition of his people, who were – and still are – prisoners in their own land. A former adviser claimed he was poisoned by the Israelis, who detained the Palestinian ambulance used to deliver Arafat’s medications to the Ramallah compound. At the time, one tended to write this off as a purely polemical exercise: in light of the new evidence, however, the question has to be asked.
      Simply by continuing to exist in the face of such a sustained assault, Arafat was defeating the Israelis every day. They had to get rid of him. Did they? We’ll never know for sure, but it is worth noting that Israeli threats to kill him preceded his untimely death by less than a year. As is well-known, Israeli intelligence has carried out numerous assassinations: it is simply another tool in their international operations, one they have never hesitated to utilize. . .

      ENTIRE COMMENTARY – http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2012/07/03/who-killed-yasser-arafat/

    2. Doesn’t polonium have a very short half-life?
      Wouldn’t the traces on Arafat’s personal effects have disappeared by now?

      1. No, do you understand what “half life” means? It doesn’t mean that polonium disappears. It simply means half of it decays over 138 days & the process keeps going. As only 8 yrs have elapsed there are still traces of the material left. It doesn’t mean it disappears completely.

  3. Is Tikkun Olam an anti Israeli website? A simple yes or no would suffice.

    Why not just put a heading:

    Anti israel bigots are welcome, others need not post here.

    1. If by revealing startling revelations of Israeli wrongdoing, it makes this an anti-Israeli site in your view, then you do not love Israel as much as Richard. If you hide Israel’s wrongdoings so that it keeps continuing them in full transparent view of the non-stupid world (wake up, when you get caught red-handed, it’s not time to lie even more!), then you are a vile anti-Semite. In truth, you are rendering it such that one day people will find out the truth and generalize in such magnitude that you have a 1930s Germany all over again.

      Richard holds the black sheep accountable and enlightens his readers that they are akin to an AL QAEDA OF JUDAISM. He tells many non-Jews of the virtues of Judaism, and when it comes down to it, supports the Israeli mission statement and charter post-Holocaust for the popular notions.

      He, however, does not endorse and help hide criminality because he has intelligence and common sense to know the truth will set one free while lies will weave tangled webs for hanging.

    2. Hasbarists are such inveterate liars!* In this Al Jazeera video (50:38) it is said that Arafat was tested TWICE for HIV/Aids while hospitalized during his final illness and was found not to be suffering from HIV/Aids (shortly after the 22 minute mark).

      * SEE THE HASBARA HANDBOOK (pages 24-25):

      • Testimonial [one of the seven propaganda devices]
      Testimonial means enlisting the support of somebody admired or famous to endorse an ideal or campaign. Testimonial can be used reasonably – it makes sense for a footballer to endorse football boots – or manipulated, such as when a footballer is used to support a political campaign they have only a limited understanding of. Whilst everybody is entitled to an opinion, testimonial can lend weight to an argument that it doesn’t deserve: if U2’s Bono condemned Israel for something that it didn’t do, thousands would believe him, even thoughhe was wrong.
      Enlisting celebrity support for Israel can help to persuade people that Israel is a great country. Obviously some celebrities are more useful than others. Students are probably a little too sophisticated to be affected by Britney’s opinion on Israel, but those associated with intelligence like professors, actors, radio hosts, sports managers and so on can be asked to offer testimonial. A celebrity doesn’t have to fully support Israel to be useful. Quotes can work as testimonial, even when they might be old or out of context. . .

      SOURCE – “HASBARA HANDBOOK: Promoting Israel on Campus”, published by the World Union of Jewish Students, March 2002
      LINK – http://www.scribd.com/doc/53789685/Hasbara-Handbook-Promoting-Israel-on-Campus

      1. Quotes can work as testimonial, even when they might be old or out of context

        That’s just what Bob did dredging up my old comment about Arafat & AIDS. Bob, have you been reading the Hasbara Handbook & not telling us? Bob?? Anyone seen Bob?

        1. The only pace I’ve ever seen this handbook mentioned is on this website. I’ve never heard of it in any other context.

          In any case, the only reason I mentioned the old comment about Arafat and AIDS was to make the point that at the time of his death, even reasonable people such as yourself, made such speculations. That’s it. Nothing else.

      2. P.S. RE: “Hasbarists are such inveterate liars!” ~ me (above)

        ALSO SEE: “After polonium revelation, Israel’s PR hacks revive lies that Arafat was gay and died of AIDS”, by Ali Abunimah, Electronic Intifada, 7/04/12

        Following the Aljazeera report, Lenny Ben-David, former Deputy Chief of Mission at the Israeli Embassy in Washington and current public relations consultant to the Israeli government, posted a lurid article at The Times of Israel reviving rumors that Arafat died of AIDS and blaming his “sexual proclivities”:

        Yasser Arafat was a murderous, genocidal, diabolical, duplicitous sexual deviant who died at the age of 75. He was despised by Arab and Israeli alike.

        Ben-David dismisses the possibility that Arafat was poisoned and asserts:

        Less romantic and mythical, however, is the more likely cause of Arafat’s death – AIDS.
        Arafat’s sexual proclivities have been an open secret for years. The former head of Rumanian intelligence, Lt. Gen. Ion Mihai Pacepa, disclosed in his book “Red Horizons,” that one of his officers reported. . .

        . . . In addition to this “evidence,” Ben-David cites another piece of “proof” that has circulated widely on Zionist websites:

        After Arafat’s death, his personal physician admitted in a TV interview that his patient died of AIDS.

        Both of these pieces of “evidence” are junk.

        Notably, Ben-David’s article has been tweeted and amplified by influential former AIPAC operative Josh Block.

        Josh Block@JoshBlockDC
        Old story of #Arafat being poisoned is back again, but more likely the vile terrorist died of #AIDS blogs.timesofisrael.com/for-the-palest…
        4 Jul 12

        . . . In the 50-minute al-Jazeera documentary, reporter Clayton Swisher observes that “the most stubborn myth” surrounding Arafat “is that he died of AIDS.” But as Dr David Barclay, the forensic expert whom Aljazeera commissioned to examine Arafat’s medical records states:

        He didn’t have AIDS. They did two HIV tests, both of which were negative. These French tests confirm the results of Dr Tawfik bin Shaaban who was part of the Tunisian team treating Arafat in Ramallah.

        Bin Shaaban tells Aljazeera:

        HIV is my speciality. There is absolutely no way he had HIV.

        The lab results showing Arafat’s negative HIV test were published by Aljazeera. – http://transparency.aljazeera.net/en/projects/whatkilledarafat/201271184425444511.html

        As Aljazeera explained, the French doctors used pseudonyms Frederic Martipon and Etienne Louvet in order to maintain secrecy regarding Arafat’s condition. While some dismiss the evidence presented by Aljazeera as mere conspiracy theory, some Zionist propagandists continue to spread lies about Arafat based on no evidence at all. Ronny Naftaniel, for example, head of the Dutch Zionist organization CIDI, tweeted:

        It is said that there’s a Romanian video showing Arafat having sex with his bodyguards. So cause of death was indeed Aids?

        Naftaniel was citing an article in Ynet by Ronen Bergman that recycles and embellishes the noncredible claims from the Romanian memoir. . .

        ENTIRE ARTICLE – http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/after-polonium-revelation-israels-pr-hacks-revive-lies-arafat-was-gay-and-died

        P.P.S. “Sticks and stones may break our bones, but facts will never sway us!” ~ Hasbarist Creed

  4. First time commenting…is this nursery school finger pointing and screaming the norm for this site?

    ANYWAY, yes, polonium can be traced back to a source, but given that Russia has been rather slutty with their technology and hardware, I’m willing to bet all halflife trails will point back to Russia…Israeli wheeling and dealing would need to be exposed, and they’re pretty good at covering their tracks when they can be bothered to remember. I suggest Sam Kean’s “The Disappearing Spoon” for a layperson’s guide on how that all works.

    1. So, you spread disinformation and insulted the site in the same post to advance Bob’s agenda to disrupt the truthful dialogue here and destroy the good reputation of this site ultimately. Then you are guiding lay people to a book written by someone who literally discusses why the Japanese coated their missiles with Telerium to point at Godzilla?

      The suspects: Russia and Israel. The other dozen countries who can produce Polonium-210 do not have the logistical capacity to plant polonium, other than for the United States. In any case, measurable and biologically significant quantities of Polonium are extremely rare and produced only 100 grams at a time.

      No “reasonable doubts” exists here and you cannot create one by pretending like the Polonium could have come from anywhere, even a Russian proxy. There just isn’t that much to sell for distribution.

      1. Let’s present an Oscar to this OperationRedPill for Best Histrionic Commentor! Good god, you need a meds adjustment. If you donkeys braying at each other is “truthful dialogue”, you need a serious lesson in discourse.

        I fully support Richard’s agenda. Speak for yourself, dimwit.

  5. Polonium can be made in reactors or using accelerators to produce high-energy neutrons.
    It can also be isolated from Uranium or Radium ore, though inordinate amounts have to be processed to do this and no-one has apparently bothered since it was first made in a reactor.

    But someone who had RECENTLY (at the time Mr Arafat was allegedly poisoned) processed and enriched a lot of uranium might have some. The half life isn’t long so it isn’t really storable, which contributes to the non-viability, for commercial purposes, of extraction rather than synthesis.

    The lethal dose is very much less than that used to kill Alexander Litvinenko: the amount used on him was so great that a non-Russian source is quite implausible and sufficient to make his tea grow slightly hotter as it stood on the table. The commercial value of the dose administered to Mr Litvinenko was around $3M.

    Assuming that Arafat’s killers were cheapskates compared to the SVR, an old anti-static alpha particle source from a newspaper printing press would have been the frugal alternative.

    Such sources do not have to be ingested: Maurice Oldfield is believed to have been murdered by a radioactive source hidden in his desk, and removed once it was clear he was developing a very aggressive cancer.

    Almost any state or large criminal gang could get their hands on enough polonium from commercial sources to kill one person.

    It’s just that Litvinenko was given enough to kill a battalion. Probably in order to make sure that the Russian dissident community would know he had been murdered, horribly, and by the Russian state.

    I don’t want to perpetrate a stereotype here, but maybe if Arafat’s killers were Jewish a less extravagant dose might have been employed.

  6. Time taken for the forensic tests depends on who does them.

    The SVR appeared to have seriously underestimated the speed with which UK government scientists could not only detect polonium, but track where the container with it in had been. (Ie: Chelsea football club.) That’s the other reason for using a smaller amount: the poisoner and innocent bystanders are in much less danger.

  7. from wiki

    “At the same time, Litvinenko’s father, now residing in Italy, believes Boris Berezovsky and Alexander Goldfarb were behind the murder.[7][8]”

    Russian involvement never proven.

    1. I think that’s preposterous. In fact, Litvinenko had come to London to work for Berezovsky, who firmly believes, along with Litvinenko’s wife, that the equivalent of the KGB, Soviet state, or rogue intelligence elements were behind the killing. Given that Berezovsky was living in exile in London & was wanted by the Russian state, it’s highly unlikely he had access to polonium. Russia, on the other hand, is the world’s leading producer of polonium.

      1. Scientists from Harwell were able to prove which seat on a BA plane the polonium had travelled to London on, and which seat in the Chelsea football stadium the polonium container had apparently watched a match from, prior to the murder; hence the specific suspect named on the CPS’s arrest warrant.

        Polonium was used in the “activators” for early nuclear weapons, so the technology to urgently find it had been lying on the shelf, somewhere in Oxfordshire, since the fifties. (The movie, Seven Days Till Noon, depicts what the authorities would have to do if they had no technological means of finding a suitcase bomb in London, and it borders on impossibility. Necessity being the mother of invention, they can track the movements of polonium, once they know they have to, of course. It’s worth saying that the amount used to kill Litvinenko was a LOT nearer to the amount needed for a nuclear warhead activator than it was to a reasonable lethal dose for a single murder. That might have been meant as a threat to the British State as well as the dissidents living in London.)

        I’m not sure what the Russian for “Hasbara” is?

  8. Richard,

    You have just stumbled upon an iceberg of super-titanic proportion. The truth is that Israel has never viewed itself as a true ally of America. Jonathon Pollard was not a simple act of betrayal, it was a shot across the bow. Do you really think there would be this much fuss, including our Vice President telling a delegate of Rabbis in Florida explicitly, “over my dead body” regarding his release, if he really did nothing?

    Another major event you may want to look into: Netanyahu asked Putin to relay to Abbas his message that he was ready to speak, explicitly replacing America and dealing a severe blow to US interests in the region for the betterment of Russia.

    This will not be ignored.

    1. There is nothing in this article about Jonathan Pollard or Vladimir Putin. Why must you insert your own agenda with comments that are not about the posted topic?

      1. Bob Mann, who died and made you hall monitor? If you have nothing to contribute to the conversation then kindly STFU 🙂

          1. Sorry, Richard. The repeated behavior gets to be trolling and frustrating. This would be the Nth time that Bob has replied to a comment we’ve made in such a manner. Despite repeated requests for counterarguments, the ridiculous feigned stupidity and purposeful misdirection or character assassination through implication continues. Thus, we would appreciate Bob Mann simply no longer addressing us when we post here or rather that he proffer the requested counterargument instead of nonsense.

      2. And in fact, allow us to connect the dots for everyone since you are forcing the hand. Russia would be the source of polonium. A targeted assassination of an Israeli political opponent with a Russian borne, and highly guarded, resource would indicate a high degree of collusion by and between Russia and Israel in even 2004 in clandestine affairs.

        In 2004, Vladimir Putin was the head of Russia. Netanyahu was interrupted momentarily by Olmert, someone corrupted by a LI financier, but continued the agenda after re-installment.

        Israel has always been a Soviet tool and asset. The Bolsheviks are the Communists who are now the Putin regime. The same Chabad Lubavitch connections exist as they did then. Take a look at the oligarchs of Russia. Of course, Bob, you’re like a freakin ostrich with its head in the ground so we don’t expect much analysis from you.

        If you’re afraid of a little conversation and cannot even offer one counterargument, people will take it as a sign that you are a troll without anything to say (truth).

        1. Do you really mean the “Cult of the Third Rome?”

          The idea being that Constantinople was the Second Rome and Moscow (or Berlin, if you were Albert Speer) was/is the third.

          A sort of world cultural, political and financial capital as of mystic right.

          Since Protestants cannot see what was so special about the first Rome, this isn’t a cult that’s widely understood in the UK (A third Rome would be a poor substitute for London: a bit like Birmingham.) However, the late Alan Myers (writer and translator from South Shields, not the other one) said to me that the Cult of the Third Rome was what tied the secret police of all Russian regimes since Nicholas the First together, irrespective of the political colour of the day.

          Alan’s knowledge and understanding of what was going on in Russia was perhaps better than any other westerner save for Prof. John Ericson, with whom he was at school, incidentally. So, whether the political colour is Communism or the less definable thing we see at present, it’s all just a means to the end of making Moscow centre of the world. This is more important than how the world is run or whether it thrives: the best ideology is whatever shifts everything towards Moscow.

          Herod benefited from Israel’s ties to the Roman Empire, the people did not. If the current Israeli leadership has done a similar deal with the “Third Rome” the relationship may well run the same course. But they might all the while share the Macabean delusion that they were the tail wagging the Roman dog.

          You cannot have an equal partnership with anything that sees itself as the supreme global power in every aspect of human life. Which is something that David Cameron and William Hague need reminding of every time they get on a plane for Washington, or Brussels.

          Britain’s experience of actually being a global supreme power, is that there are almost no benefits or rewards in it. Not a message that’s got through to Washington yet, and one that will take even longer to get through in Moscow, Brussels and Jerusalem.

      1. Richard was himself interviewed by the Jerusalem Post.

        Also, NPR and other sources have raised similar questions with respect to the amount of Polonium discovered.

        1. We addressed in detail the lack of legitimacy in your argument below. You resorted to calling us “conspiracy theorists” and crying to teacher. What is the definition of a shmuck?

          1. We’ve modified our name to ensure no distraction from our message. Again, we welcome the most robust scrutiny of our arguments or post. If we are wrong, we would like your readers to prove that so that we can relay their truth instead. Additionally, we will modify our insults to disguise them like Bob does with his feigned stupidity and transparent questioning. Thus, Yiddish will now become Swahili.

            Yeye mapambano ukweli itakutana mechi yake. Hakuna kitu maadili kuhusu kulinda uhalifu wa yeyote ubinafsi taifa, au mtu binafsi.

        2. First three comments on this JPost article, which has a MODERATED comments section (they must be approved):
          iCry • 5 hours ago
          “Every single thing having to do with these Arabs is fraudulent.”
          46 thumbs up 9 thumbs down

          ichisonsarason • 4 hours ago
          “I am starting to believe there’s something wrong with their genes.
          16 thumbs up 7 thumbs down

          Paul • 3 hours ago
          “Inbreeding, that and having sex with farm animals over thousands of years tends to screw up an entire race of people.”
          14 thumbs up 3 thumbs down

          This is the caliber of people who read Jerusalem Post. Ironically, they sound like and advance the same exact arguments as scary KKK members, except they are racist towards non-Jews.

          This is what the type of outlet you also think has legitimacy.

    1. Polonium is a traceable source. The residue doesn’t just disappear. There is only one source for this polonium. Who would the beneficiaries be of a framing of Israel and Russian collusion?

      Richard, this hasbarist is just here to try to censor the dialogue of truth and plant his own agenda. The feigned stupidity is shmuckish.

      1. Richard, this conspiracy theorist is just here to promote his website, redirect the conversation, and plant his own agenda.

        The unwarranted, mean-spirited personal attacks and dismissal of any reasonable discord is pathetic.

        1. Our agenda is subject to counterargument, which you never seem to offer. Instead, you cry to teacher and try to moderate this forum as if it’s your business to do so.

          It is, in fact, your behavior that is transparent.

        1. Any country with a reactor cannot make Polonium-210, Richard. And even if they could, the production and transfer would be highly monitored and traced. In fact, only about 100 grams are produced every year. http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Factsheets/English/polonium210.html

          Another piece of disinformation akin to “all allies spy on each other” that was clearly accepted without scrutiny. but who was assassinated two years after Arafat’s death with it? Any other instances of Polonium-210 poisoning?

          Now, here’s a good twist for you: guess what depleted Uranium-238 turns into? Looks like someone’s radiation game has a double edged sword. (Said the blind leader, as he flew through the radiation clouds in a helicopter observing the Mt. Carmel wreckage.)

          1. It can be made in an accelerator:
            Normally when these are used to make fast neutrons, a beam of charged particles is collided with a dense mass (bucket of lead.) Since polonium is made by high energy neutrons being absorbed by Bismuth, replacing the bucket of lead with Bismuth would do it.

            Russia has a lot more industrial accelerators than anyone else.
            Getting it from U-238 decay raises the problem that polonium has a much shorter half life than U-238, so vast amounts of uranium have to be repeatedly processed to extract polonium which doesn’t stay around very long. If you want it in industrial quantities, the accelerator method is probably the one.

            The probable reason why Russia has a greater capacity to make polonium than anyone else, probably lies in Russia having built a much greater number of warheads with polonium activators than anyone else, and kept them in service longer. Since they need regular replacement, due to the short half-life, a polonium industry is required, which is why the USA developed an alternative at the earliest possible opportunity, because no-one sane really wants a polonium industry on their soil.

        2. btw, don’t ever expect an intelligence organization to get caught in the act without an immediate response. Did you raise at least a single eyebrow when you read all of the FAQs that came out overnight regarding Polonium-210 and what it was? That was a thoroughly misinforming fact sheet, published to the Washington Post, etc.

          “It could have been anyone”. Right…

    2. The supposed expert quoted has no scientific background or experience whatsoever. He is, however, an expert consultant used regularly by the defense ministry when it needs to put out spurious reports like this one. It indicates how Israel is trying to put out the fire started by Al Jazeera & failing miserably. Note that JPost hasn’t consulted with any Israeli expert on radiation poisoning, which is the only credible type of figure to consult in this matter.


      1. It doesn’t take any significant scientific background to understand the faults with the report. Po-210 levels would necessarily have dropped necessarily by a factor of about 10^6. Based on the fact that Arafat didn’t die acutely in the same way as Litvinenko, it’s quite clear that Arafat would have been given a dose less than Litvinenko, who was given ~10 micrograms of Po210 (some reports say possibly less). Arafat could not have been given more than a 1 microgram at most (still ~20x the lethal dose).

        At most, one expects to excrete via urine one in a thousand parts per day. And a single urine stain would not contain more than 1 part in a thousand of one’s total daily urine. [Again, an overestimate]. This means a single urine stain would contain no more than 10^-12 grams of Po-210.

        That stain would then have 10^-18 grams of Po210 right now, which corresponds to ~50 uBq of alpha decay radioactivity.

        The report suggested they found levels of ~50-200 mBq, which is about a thousand times more than expected after 8 years. [And I overestimated how much Po-210 would be left.]

        Occam’s Razor would suggest the report is unreliable or someone planted Po-210 on the articles more recently.

        1. Wrong. Litvinenko declined & died over a matter of weeks as did Arafat. If you can’t get such basic facts right, you can’t get anything right.

          Try for example watching the AJ TV documentary which shows the scientists graphing out dosages given Litvinenko & Arafat which show they were comparable.

          You throw around numbers which I fear is meant to conceal the fact that you have little or no background in the specific field in which these scientists specialize. If you did, you would’ve said so to establish your bona rides.

          1. Acuteness of symptoms and time aren’t the same thing, but for the sake of argument, let’s give you that and assume they were poisoned with the same amount of Polonium…
            It would only change my calculations by a factor of 10, which then puts it in-line with the actual swiss report on the expected Po-210 level. Those expected radioactivity levels are still a factor of 100 less than what was measured.

            The ‘graph’ you talk about on the AJ TV documentary was the type of media-gimmick that makes scientists laugh. It was designed as a TV prop for people who don’t understand science and was actually just wrong. It doesn’t match up with basic mathematics or the swiss reports, which go into more detail about expected Polonium traces in urine and blood (which match the assumptions I make above) and how much Po-210 would be in those samples. The actual report makes it clear that the expected amount of radioactivity should be a hundred times less than what they measured.

            I’m sorry that you fear numbers, but if you just follow the math, it works. I give numbers because they aren’t something one pontificates about; they work or they don’t work. I can’t imagine how my credentials effects the correctness of the math I present. The numbers aren’t “thrown around,” they are very simple calculations, which I assume you can do yourself. If you can’t do such basic math yourself correctly, you probably can’t get anything right.

          2. I asked for your credentials & you’ve refused to offer them. Till you do, I’m going to trust the scientists interviewed in the report over you. The numbers offered in the report and in your comment are not “basic math,” though you or anyone could cut, paste & copy such numbers from anywhere. My brother, who is a university chemistry professor sent me similar sorts of calculations & I assure you even he doesn’t consider them “basic math.” But the fact that you would claim that they are indicates you either very insecure or like to brag on yourself. Either way it’s not terribly flattering.

  9. This “blame Israel” story sounds fishy. If Arafat was poisoned, it very possible that his fellow Palestinians who were closest to him did it, as they were his natural rivals. Actually, it is just as likely that the Russians did it, so Israel could be blamed. The problem is this: Suha has waited 8 years to raise these claims. Why now? The rumors that Arafat was poisoned have been current since his death. Another problem: If there are “high levels” now, they were a million times higher 8 years ago, and if the stuff was on his clothes and body, how come no one else got sick? Besides, when he died Arafat was , old sick, and discredited, and the Israelis had him bottled up in his compound. They had no reason to kill him then. If they wanted him dead, they would have killed him years earlier.

    1. Suha did not approach Al Jazeera to do this investigation. AJ approached her. I presume no one until now has approached her in the same way. Besides, why does she need to defend or explain her decision to you or anyone else?

      As to the levels, you’re speculating about what the levels were then or now. If he was poisoned all they needed was enough to kill him, in which they succeeded. I gather that polonium, to be most effective, must be ingested, which is how Litvinenko died. It appears if Arafat was poisoned he too ingested it. Others were contaminated who came into contact with the polonium that killed Litvinenko, but they didn’t ingest it. Nor, I presume did other Palestinians with whom Arafat came into contact.

      The Israelis could not BE SEEN to have killed him. They needed plausible deniability which they gained from use of a hitherto unknown murder agent. Sharon wanted Arafat dead & said so many times as did Olmert, Mofaz and many others who were confidants of Sharon. It didn’t matter to them that he was 75. They wanted him dead & said so.

  10. actually i have never heard of israellycool
    i like to peruse vehemently anti jewish/israel sites such as 972mage, modoweiss and of course tikum olam
    i do not need to drudge up anything i have a photographic memory and after reading the post something registered
    i am fascinated by the erev rav(mixed multitude) such as yourself and even though you are serving your purpose careful with the insults lashon hara is no good for the soul
    shabbat shalom to you and yours
    when did i accuse you of lying

    1. You’re a liar. David Lange publishes a post dredging up something I wrote 8 yrs ago & you & Bob Mann just happen to have dredged up the same post all independent of each other & within 12 hrs of his publication? Please…

      As for accusing me of lying, you wrote:

      are you blatantly lying?

      Close enough for me. You’re moderated. Next offense is worth a ban to you.

  11. The world is going to hell and we’re fixated on Arafat’s eight year, pee-pee stained undies.

    We’re doomed, and maybe it’s for the best.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Share via
Copy link