hamas rejects new palestinian prime minister, page-11

Alan,

You posted

"Tell me Snooker is Israel and Palestine a better place for having Sharon visit the Temple Mount as Likud opposition leader in September 2000? What exactly was the purpose of his visit if not to serve his own interests? Who else benefited from that visit which threw petrol in the fire of mid East politics?"

Fair question.

It was clear from documents discovered in the Muquata that there were going to be "planned incidents and pretexts" anyway.

If it wouldn't have been that, it would have been something else.

The Intifadah was NOT a spontaenous outburst. It was well orchestrated and planned.

Furthermore, Sharon's visit was discussed and approved (not that one would need an approval to go wherever they wish in their own country) of the Wakif.

He was not going do did he intend to go right near their mosque.

Yes, it served the interests of the people of Israel.

Arafat exposed his hand....earlier than what he had intended to.

Just as Barak exposed Arafat when he made the best offer that any Israeli had ever made, which resulted in him losing office, the irony was that in the process the true Arafat emerged.

Blame the current woes on Arafat, the Nobel Peace Prize winner.

He could have had something, maybe not 100% of what he wanted, maybe 90%, maybe 80% maybe even 70%.

He wanted 110% and because of that he has passed on this legacy to the Palestinians.

When he's gone, he won't even be remembered other than the way Mubarek, current President of Egypt refers to him as a.........dog!

Sharon, when his time comes will be remembered as a hero.