Keresés

Részletes keresés

purplerain11 Creative Commons License 2000.10.19 0 0 13
Mégegy kérdés Melnyikov, írd már be, hogy Barak miben hazudott az interjúban, ahogy a topiccímben idézted, mivel ezzel még adós vagy.
purplerain11 Creative Commons License 2000.10.18 0 0 12
Tudjátok fiúk, azért van min elgondolkodni ezen az eseten.
Mert mit tehet azellen egy állam, hogy lakosságának nagy része folyamatosan azzal tölti az idejét, hogy köveket dobál ártatlanokra, katonákra, rendőrökre. NYílván az állami erőszakkal válaszol, ami palesztin oldalon 100 áldozatot jelent. Ez újabb olaj a tüzre, és csak növeli a palesztin ellenállást és elkeseredést.

Vagy nézzük a Templom hegy esetét.
A jeruzsálemről szóló tárgyalások már a megegyezés küszöbén voltak, ami szerint a Templom hegyet nem Izrael felügyelné, hanem egy vegyes vallási vezetőkből álló felügyelet. Ezt a hegyet a terv szerint bárki látogathatta volna.

Ha jól értem az utólagos sajtóközléseket, Sharon semmi mást nem csinált, csak sétált a hegyen, egyetlen mecsetbe sem ment be, semmilyen arab vallási érzületet sértő cselekményt nem tett. Mégis, pusztán ezt a sétát Arafat ürügyül tudja felhasználni arra, hogy itt az arab nemzet becsületébe gázoltak és a vallási szent helyüket úgymond meggyalázták.

Ez oda vezetett, hogy József sírját az arabok tényleg tönkreverték (ez senkinek nem fáj annyira, ugyanis leginkább keresztény emlék).

A jeruzsálemi helyszin egyébként olyan, hogy a zsidók siratófala maga a Templomhegy oldala és a Kék mecset mindössze 300 méterre van a Siratófaltól. Az világos, hogy Izrael nem mondhat le a legfontosabb vallási helye, a Siratófal ellenőrzéséről, de a Kék Mecset túl közel van ahhoz, hogy azt arab ellenőrzés alá engedhessék.
Ez a megoldhatatlan feladvány, és Arafat újabban megingott helyzetét erősítendő megint kijátszotta az intifáda kártyáját, és a rádióadóin, röplapokon szítja az arab ellenállást Izraelen belül.

Látni kell, hogy Barak helyzete egyszerüen reménytelen, Elment a végsőkig, de semmiképpen nem adhatja fel a Siratófalat, márpedig ez Kelet Jeruzsálemben van.

Ezek után jön egy újságírónő, aki állandóan a 100 palesztin áldozatot kéri számon Barakon és nem Arafaton, aki a kommunikációs csatornáin keresztül a feszültséget szítja.

Kérdezem Melnyikov, ha 100 ember felállna kövekkel a Budaörsi autópálya hídjára és az ott békésen autózókra köveket dobálna, mert úgy érzik, hogy a romaügyben a kormány nem tesz meg mindent, amit megtehetne, akkor a 100 embert szerintetek is joggal takaríthatná el a magyar rendőrség, azonnal és a leghatározottabban. Rendben.

Ha nem 100, hanem 100000 ember csinálná Budaörsnél ugyanezt és a rendőrség a sokszori felszólítás után fegyvert is kénytelen lenne használni és lenne 100 áldozat(plusz hatalmas strasburgi aláfestés), akkor szerinted Melnyikov
kinek lenne igaza, ha a 100 áldozatot OVI kérnék számon?

Elmondom még Neked azt is, hogy hogyan került oda a Kék Mecset, közvetlenül a Siratófal mellé, a történelmi időkben.

Tudnod kell, hogy Mohamed sosem mozdult ki Mekkából, de legalábbis sosem járt Jeruzsálemben. Egyszer azt álmodta, hogy egy repülő lovon Jeruzsálemben járt és a ló lába ahol a földet érte, oda építették a Kék Mecsetet.
Ez a vallási türelmetlenség és kiszorításra törekvés, a hit tüzzel vassal történő terjesztése, akárhogy is nézem Melnyikov, nem a zsidó vallásra jellemző, sokkal inkább a másik oldalra. Ilyen ürüggyel építettek a zsidó szent hely közelébe egy mecsetet, amire most már nyugodtan lehet hivatkozni és a békétlenséget szítani. Az 1967es háboru előtt a siratófal elé arab negyedet építettek és magát a falat eltakarták. Érted, a legszentebb zsidó helyet az arabok tudatosan elzárták (1947 -től). Nem tudom, érzed-e melyik részről van a nagyobb vallási türelmetlenség.

Amúgym, ami minket érint, Izraelben éppen a keresztény vallási helyek sinylik meg legjobban ezt a helyzetet, mert ez egyik félnek sem fáj annyira.
A Via Dolorosa (a keresztút) teljes hosszában egy arab zsibvásár, a szük sikátorban alig lehet elmenni, mert mindkét oldalon arab árusok a zsebtolvalyok törnek rád. A felérsz a Sírtemplomba, ott azzal szembesülsz, hogy több vallás közös templomában jársz, és hangerővel próbálják egymást túllicitálni az ortodox és a római keresztények.

Szóval én azt hiszem, Melnyikov, hogy itt nem lehet egyszerüen egy zsidómelleti vagy zsidóellenes alapállást felvenni.

Én azt látom, hogy Arafat szítja a tüzet, mert látja, hogy a Kelet Jeruzsálemet nem érheti el tágyalóasztal mellett. Nem a mostani lesz az első egyezmény, amit Arafat nem tart be. Jól jön neki politikai hivatkozásnak 100 ártatlan palesztin áldozat, továbbá a politikai konkurrensei (Habbasz stb)radikálisai vitorlájából is ki tudja fogni a szelet.
Előkészíti a terepet arra, hogy kikiálltsa a Palesztin Köztársaságot, amely ezek szerint vérben fog megszületni és igen bizonytalan jövőnek néz elébe.

Mi pedig biztosak lehetünk a magas olajárakban.

Tőled pedig csak azt kérem, hogy ne leegyszerüsítve, mi -ők szemüvegen nézd a világot, hanem próbáld mélységében is megérteni.
Ezesetben sosem fogsz ilyen szöveggel topicot nyitni egyoldalú elfogultságodban.

Gurg Creative Commons License 2000.10.18 0 0 10
:))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Előzmény: -- (3)
melnyikov Creative Commons License 2000.10.18 0 0 8
"gyrich válasz erre | adatok | e-mail 2000.10.16 22:11 (5)

Ehud Barak úgy nyilatkozott amint a helyzethey illö. Világosan megmondta hogy a bullshit az bullshit. A lószar az lószar és kész, még akkor is ha Arafat mondja. Egyébként mint vártok egy perzsa újságirónötöl, majd pont ö fogja korrekten kérdezni az izraeli miniszterelnököt. Gyengébbek kedvéért a perzsák Iránban laknak és nem tul nagy barátai a zsidóknak.
Egyébként igaza van a Baraknak a palesztinok csak bullshittet tudnak összehordani meg követ dobálni meg lincselni."

Kérném gyrichet eme rasszista megnyilvánulása miatt törölni. Parafrázis, kifigura, mi lenne ha mi azt mondanánk ".....mit vártok egy zsidó újságírónőtől, majd pont ő fogja korrekten kérdezni a palesztin/magyar miniszterelnököt. Gyengébbek kedvéért a zsidók Izraelben(is) laknak, és nem túl nagy barátai a palesztinoknak/magyaroknak, egyébként igaza van Arafatnak/Orbánnak, a zsidók csak bullshitet tudnak összehordani, meg lopni, gyilkolni."

MB

Előzmény: gyrich (5)
nevtelen Creative Commons License 2000.10.17 0 0 7
"Hajaj, lehet, hogy az szdsz ezentúl a cnn-t is szélsőségesnek és antiszemnitának fogja tartani a Vasárnapi Újság mellett?"

MN lapszemle:

"The Jerusalem Post

A CNN-t kemény bírálat érte az izraeli külügyminisztérium részéről, amiért az amerikai globális hírtelevízió a „palesztinoknak” kedvez adásaiban. Az izraeli lap arról is beszámol, hogy ugyanilyen okokért világszerte több száz zsidó tett panaszt az atlantai központú hálózatnál és a brit BBC-nél is, amelyben „antiszemita” tendenciákat fedeztek fel."

A követendő minta már megvan.

Előzmény: melnyikov (-)
nagydog Creative Commons License 2000.10.17 0 0 6
No, azert a masik oldalrol sem csokis fankkal probaltak meg szetoszlatni a palesztinokat.

Nagydög

Előzmény: gyrich (5)
gyrich Creative Commons License 2000.10.16 0 0 5
Ehud Barak úgy nyilatkozott amint a helyzethey illö. Világosan megmondta hogy a bullshit az bullshit. A lószar az lószar és kész, még akkor is ha Arafat mondja. Egyébként mint vártok egy perzsa újságirónötöl, majd pont ö fogja korrekten kérdezni az izraeli miniszterelnököt. Gyengébbek kedvéért a perzsák Iránban laknak és nem tul nagy barátai a zsidóknak.
Egyébként igaza van a Baraknak a palesztinok csak bullshittet tudnak összehordani meg követ dobálni meg lincselni.
Előzmény: melnyikov (4)
melnyikov Creative Commons License 2000.10.16 0 0 4
Bizony, hogy mindent megmutatat a CNN, olyannyira, hogy izrael tiltakozik, és egyoldalúnak nevezte a nyugati sajtót a BBC szerint!
Érdekes, az rtl kúpot nem basztatták, nem csoda, olyan mint a zsidó katonai propaganda adó radio of the israeli defence forces, van ám ilyen!
MB
-- Creative Commons License 2000.10.14 0 0 3
Akkor Izrael most nem a legvidámabb Barak.
micacska Creative Commons License 2000.10.14 0 0 2
Almuska, interpretációd ideológiai harcostársaid számára készült "vonzó" leegyszerűsítés- így SZVSZ egyáltalán nem igaz- de legalább megpróbálsz rúgni még egyet az SZDSZ-en, követve a topicnyitó példáját.
Hogy nektek mindenről "az jut eszetekbe"?!
mic.
micacska Creative Commons License 2000.10.14 0 0 1
Melnyikov, sajnálom, hogy nem láttam az interjút.
A "krisztinázás" vonatkozásában azonban nincs igazad.
Még Reagan elnöknél emlékszem, hogy sajtókonferenciáján keresztnevén aposztrofált egy prominens újságírónőt, aki ezt természetesnek vette.SZVSZ nincs ebben semmi sértő, lehet hogy Barak egyszerűen az amerikai gyakorlatot vette át.
A CNN a legobjektívebb hírforrás manapság, tegnap este dél-szíriai menekülttábort mutattak az ottaniak nyomorúságos életével.Tehették volna, hogy csak a romboló tragédiájával foglalkoznak, hiszen tegnap már 16 áldozat volt.
A konfliktus mindkét oldalát látni és láttatni:
ez a CNN üzenete.
Megszívlelendő, nem?
üdv. mic.
melnyikov Creative Commons License 2000.10.14 0 0 topiknyitó
Ötvenmillió néző előtt, a CNN csütörtöki adásában. Miniszterelnökhöz méltó viselkedés, pedig nem volt még ittas sem, mint a mi Djulánk. A CNN egyébként nagyot változott, mert korábban eléggé proizraeli volt, nem úgy, mint a BBC, amely régóta palesztin, vagy inkább ténypárti.

Christiane Ammanpour korrekt és kemény kérdéseivel úgy kihozta a sodrából a tömegbe lövető izraeli miszerintelnököt,, hogy a csávó kifakadt: "bullshit". meg: "nem igaz, ez nem igaz!"!A színjózan Jehud lekrisztinázta és ki akarta oktatni a hölgyet, de hiába, az nem engedett a tényekből. EB szánalmas volt. Hajaj, lehet, hogy az szdsz ezentúl a cnn-t is szélsőségesnek és antiszemnitának fogja tartani a Vasárnapi Újság mellett? Lehet, hogy haraszti nem nyilatkozik nekik többet, hiába küldenek faxot, Demszky meg azt válaszolja, mint nekünk két hetente sajtósa útján, hogy "főpolgármester úr nem kíván élni a felkínált lehetőséggel?

Íme, le lehet tölteni a videót is, nemsemmi:

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak talks with CNN's Senior International Correspondent
Christiane Amanpour

October 12, 2000
Web posted at: 6:21 p.m. EDT (2221 GMT)

AMANPOUR: Prime Minister Barak, you have just finished saying that this was a
limited action, that you did not target Palestinian Authority President Yasser
Arafat. But you have never -- Israel has never taken this extensive action against
the Palestinians. How do you expect them to react?

BARAK: I expect them to put an end to violence that they have initiated and are responsible for. We have this morning -- we had a lynch of three Israeli reservist soldiers; people came from the home and were lynched, then mutilated and burned. It's something that no government on
Earth could accept, and Israel is ready to look open- eyed at the situation. Understand that we are living in the Middle East, not in North America and not the Midwest, and this is a place where you cannot expect anyone to respect you, you cannot expect your own people to trust you if cannot respond to such an event. And we responded in a very focused manner, very clear
signal that we will not have this kind of violence continue forever.

AMANPOUR: Mr. Prime Minister, this looks like an argument that is spinning out of control, each side blaming the other for what's going on, each side saying that the other one has to stop. Isn't it time, Mr. Prime Minister, to how leadership, to stop this?
BARAK: We have stopped it some hundred times since it began 10 days ago or 12 days ago. We are ready all along the way to stop it. We are not creating the provocation, we are responding, and we will keep responding. Unfortunately, you cannot let your neck be kind of cut as a gesture for your neighbor, even if it's a good neighbor.

AMANPOUR: Would you acknowledge, Mr. Prime Minister, this kind of heavy weaponry, this kind of offensive action, simply plays into the hands of the extremists on both sides?

BARAK: I say, first of all, it's a necessity. We cannot avoid it. It's the role of a
government to defend its soldiers and its citizens. We did it in a way that did not
cause casualties. There are few people wounded. We made clear to announce in advance what kind of headquarters we are going to attack. We made clear that every place we approach, first of all, we signaled with few shots that something is happening so everyone can go out and then we hit it, so that there are very few wounded people, much less than in every daily demonstration where the Palestinians in their terrible way of sending people with weapons, innocent citizens, and kids, together. That's crazy.

AMANPOUR: Mr. Prime Minister, the Palestinian Authority president says in fact there were several people killed in attack, and there were dozens of people wounded. Nobody...

BARAK: I beg to kind of question the level of credibility that this authority, the Palestinian Authority, has in reporting effects.

AMANPOUR: Nobody would condone what you described as the lynching this morning. But the Palestinians and the rest of the world who are looking at the last two weeks know that the majority of the people who have been killed -- nearly 100 people -- are Palestinians.

BARAK: Christiane, try to imagine that you have a farm, it's attacked by rebels. You espond. Unfortunately, they are trying to kill you respond. You kill five of them and one of your family was killed. Is it fair to say that unless you will kill or let someone else kill another four of your family, it's not satisfactory? It makes him, not just the Hamas and Islamic Jihad,
responsible for the following terrorist attacks that might easily come. We have to be able to make it clear. It's ike you have lost today at the near Aden port four sailors and some, maybe 12, that disappeared. When you try to ask yourself, what's that, is it something offensive that the vessel had done? It's nonsense. Butchering is the intention of terrorists, to take the life of Americans since you are standing firm for freedom and against terror. And that's exactly what the world expects the leaders of the free world to do.

AMANPOUR: But don't you think what you've just done plays into the hands of that very activity? Don't you think that it just encourages the push toward the extremist side?

BARAK: I tell you, to bury more Israel does encourage them. There is no -- we are living in a neighborhood which is somewhat different from the neighborhood you are living in. It's not North America; it's not Western Europe. This is a place where there is no mercy for the weak -- you can see it in the lynched soldiers -- and no second opportunity for those who cannot defend
themselves.

BARAK: Israel is determined to defend itself. We have no hostile intention against anyone around us. We were ready to go further than any previous government in Israel, be it Netanyahu or Shamir or even Rabin and Peres, in contemplating ideas that will put an end to it. But if we won't find a partner with the same determination and clarity of objective, we will fight
to defend ourself and our right to live in freedom in this part of the world.

AMANPOUR: How can you talk about a partner, how can you talk about peace, after the kind of activities that we've seen over the last two weeks? Chairman Arafat and other negotiators have called today's action tantamount to a declaration of war.

BARAK: That's nonsense, bullshit and propaganda. It doesn't amount to anything. It was not one in millions in what we can do if we are really in war. But it was a signal deliberately planned to avoid even the loss of life of people in uniform of the Palestinian Authority, but to signal to them that we know where their headquarters are, we know which boat exactly are the kind of police boat of the Palestinians, we know exactly where everything is and we will hit them if
necessary. The Palestinian Authority cannot hold the stick at both ends, to incite
violence, to participate in it and to tell the world how -- what kind of underdog
they are.

AMANPOUR: You keep saying that nobody has ever offered such a great peace
agreement as you have. What have you offered them? Nobody has said it
publicly. We've heard leaks. We've heard things from the Americans.

BARAK: You are not Palestinian, you are not the negotiator. Arafat knows it. All
his group knows it. President Clinton knows it. And we know it. So we expect
that if Arafat fails to take the ideas raised by President Clinton, which are
far-reaching, beyond what we can follow, but we were ready to go there and
negotiate and contemplate them if Arafat will kind of will be unworthy, will
refuse to take them as basis. I would expect the American president, the
American administration to look in the eyes of the American people and tell them,
"We have tried our best. The Israelis were worthy. Arafat was not." It's
something that I believe we deserve after going together with United States seven
years, taking them as the honest brokers drafted by both sides. And we really
expect it to happen in the very near future. Whether he goes to the table or we
expect the American administration to tell loud and clear the American people and
the leadership of the world: Who failed to move forward in order to put an end to
the bloodshed in the Middle East?

AMANPOUR: You know, the leadership there says that, in fact, we are no better
off. There are more settlements built under Prime Minister Barak administration.
There's more stalling. Why is it that -- I know you say that I'm not the negotiator
-- but why is that you haven't taken your offer to the people, to the Palestinian
people?

BARAK: I suggest that CNN will take certain excerpts of the material that has
been broadcasted there and you will make your own judgment together with
your bureau.

AMANPOUR: Do you think in retrospect that going to Camp David and wanting
to make the grand gesture, that it was wrong to have brought up Jerusalem then,
that it simply touched too many emotional, religious, symbolic buttons?

BARAK: No, it was a necessity. We could not solve it without touching
Jerusalem. It was decided upon 22 years ago in the first Camp David under
Carter, and then it was decided in Oslo, that when the time comes to negotiate
permanent status agreement, Jerusalem would be put on the table. But we were
ready when Clinton, President Clinton, raised it, that we will take Jerusalem and
delay, to defer it, or maybe even the Old City or the Temple Mount, delay, defer
it under certain terms of negotiation for a certain mutually agreed period. We
were ready even to do it, but the Palestinian were not ready as they were not
ready for anything else. I cannot have an explanation for this, but I should tell
our people and I expect the Americans to tell the rest of the world the truth. We
were there together. We were ready to move. We were ready to make peace. But
with the same determination that we decided not to leave a stone unturned on the
way to peace, we will fight for our right of self-defense and the freedom and the
right of Israelis to live as normal human beings here in Israel.

AMANPOUR: There's so much anger. Do you really think there is room to
restart the peace negotiations?

BARAK: Yes. There will always be room. We will never lose hope of peace. The
Palestinian people is going to be our neighbor forever, we will make peace with
them. Leadership can change its mind, leadership can open its eye, leadership
can even be replaced. And we* might lose trust and hope of this present
leadership, but we will never lose the hope of having peace with our Palestinian
neighbor, the same people who are innocently pushed or incited to go into these
demonstrations.

AMANPOUR: If you call a national unity government, peace is dead, isn't it, this
peace process?

BARAK: The cause or the end result? If peace is dead, I can see no reason why
we shouldn't have a national unity government if a conflict is imposed upon us.
But let me tell you more than that. I don't think that Likud or right wing Israel is
against peace. They might have certaindifferences with us about emphasize how
to approach it, what's the right approach, how to reach it, not just to talk about
it, but they're not anti-peace. I hope that the Palestinian most devoted supporters
of peace will behave like our right wing or even the extreme right wing. Our
people want peace, be it right or wrong, they want peace and security for Israel.

BARAK: And in my judgment, they are a 100 percent OK, kosher, for a national
unity government in Israel to push peace if Arafat is ready. But if he's not ready,
let's face the reality, tell the truth and move forward.

AMANPOUR: A few days ago, a couple of days ago, your own forces -- and
certainly it looked as though the violence was decreasing. The Palestinians had
prevailed upon the police and militia to stop using their guns. The Israelis were
moving back a little bit. And then* came the settlers and started a whole new
round of violence.

BARAK: That's not true. Christiane, that's not true. There are two gentlemen in
the West Bank. One of the called Mawanba Gooti (ph), the other named Sena
Sheik (ph). I told Arafat in front of Madeleine Albright, I told Mubarak, I told
Clinton, the only thing that could immediately put end to violence is a clear-cut
order from Chairman Arafat to these two gentlemen to put an end to the
violence. You know, when I approached him and told him, "Mr. Chairman, in
order to put an end to violence, please call Mawanba Gooti (ph) and* Sena Sheik
(ph) and tell them to stop the violence." He looked at me as if I mentioned the
names of two polar bears in a zoo that he doesn't know. And it was until his own
people could not stand laughing at this kind of appearance that he said, "OK. I
will do it." And I don't know whether he has done it.

AMANPOUR: The settlers, though, are a threat to the Palestinian people, people
in the camps. Is it not your responsibility to rein them in?

BARAK: Of course. Of course it's my role to make sure, but it is not true that
the settlers is a real threat. They can become a threat. We try our best to control
them. I would not suggest to anyone to consider is their wife and little children
going back home from work and being attacked along the road by Palestinians,
who got their weapons under an agreement under -- signed by the nited States,
signed by Israel and the Palestinians, to be the weapons that would be used to
keep public order within the Palestinian Authority. What we are doing is a shame for public order of a legitimate leader who wants to be a head of state that will be accepted by the
world community as a normal member of this community.

AMANPOUR: I would just like to say that it is quite scary seeing these people with guns walking around in the streets. But beyond that, I want to ask you, do you underestimate the level of passion that exists amongst the Palestinian people, the level of frustration, emotion, anger, every single day going to funerals, every single day being confronted with
this -- with these killings?* The level of emotion that that -- the killing of that little 12-year- old boy...

(CROSSTALK)

BARAK: I never -- I never underestimated it.

BARAK: I called Chairman Arafat myself and I told him that we share, while of
course we mourn our own dead, we share the feelings of the Palestinian people
burying their own people. I mentioned deliberately this young boy that shocked
the whole world. I mentioned the son of Mahmoud Aloul, the governor of Nablus, a person that we all know, and we share his sorrow as human beings. But at the same time, we cannot deny the fact that we know the sources, we know who initiated it and why. And we believe that the Americans know it. We believe that certain other Western countries know it. And we expect the leadership of the world to be able to look at the eyes
of our own public and tell the truth loud and clear. Since it's important for us when we deploy our own people for quite a kind of a tough crossing of rough water, we deserve this kind of gesture. It's much more than gestures here, it has to do with moral leadership.
We deserve knowing the truth and knowing it from those who were intimately
involved in the process from day one.

AMANPOUR: Whatever you say about maximum restraint, about your necessity
to defend, nothing is going to change what the world sees here, and it sees a
well-armed military force against civilians, some of whom have guns, a lot of
whom have stones. There is no parity whatsoever, no matter what you say about
it.

BARAK: I know...

AMANPOUR: So the question is, the Security Council has condemned the excessive use of Israeli force. Even your friends doubt the wisdom of this course of action. Why do you not accept, for instance, an international commission of inquiry?

BARAK: Look, we accepted that the Americans will nominate a group of people,
Americans, under the American-Israeli-Palestinian Authority source of authority,
with even experts from the UN or from the EU, the European Union, and so on.
I believe there is no problem of objectivity once it comes to an American-led
fact-finding committee. I've seen American independent enough to criticize their
own institutions, even their own president. I have not seen a lack of firmness on
finding fact. Unfortunately, Israel experience in the last 52 years many times
where a direct, simple judgments about reality were distorted for political reasons
when it comes to the kind of forums in the international bodies like the UN where member states have kind of an alienation of blocs. Many of them are
Muslim or Arabs or in a kind of...

AMANPOUR: So you're saying it would be biased?
BARAK: It's totally biased.

AMANPOUR: Are you saying no?
BARAK: Of course we say no. We say that it should be an American source of authority, maybe with Israelis and Palestinians, of course, but not international body. And we believe that this is an understandable position bearing in mind our experience in this world in the last 52 years.
AMANPOUR: How are you going to get out of the situation that you're in right now, that the area is in right now? Are you going to stop. Is there anymore action today planned?

BARAK: I hope every moment, even now when we are sitting, you interview me, I hope that a way will be found to convince Chairman Arafat to put an end to violence. Believe me, immediately, on the spot, violence will cease.

AMANPOUR: They say exactly the same thing about you.

BARAK: Yes, but there are some gentlemen, the head of the CIA, or the head of
the British intelligence agency, or many of the world leaders and foreign ministers who are coming here, know the truth, that we are telling the truth. But of course they try to find a diplomatic way to manage with Arafat that made himself the kind of underdog of the world, this heartbreak, the whole Arab communities. There are many sensitivities on this
globe for the Arab interests and needs and these motivate certain sensitivity.

BARAK: But these people, as human beings and as leaders, know that we are telling the truth, period.

AMANPOUR: How is it possible, finally, that after seven years of work, this can unravel so quickly? I mean, is there really in your mind a chance that a fair peace can be achieved?

BARAK: You know, there is a chance, but there should be a will. You know, Chairman Arafat always say, "If there is a will, there is a way." So if we don't find now a way, maybe there is no will. The will on our side, there is plenty of it. It's the hope and prayer of almost every reason you can see. In the streets you can see it in the eyes of people. You can see it in every place. But, unfortunately, maybe it's not yet right on the minds of the
leadership on the other side. And we will never lose hope, as I've said, to make peace with
the Palestinian people. They are our neighbors forever. But if this leadership is unripe, we cannot impose it upon them. It takes two to make peace. It takes only one to lead to
confrontation. And if Arafat wants confrontation, we cannot avoid it. I only think we can hope is that the world leadership and Arab leadership and there are many other esponsible leaders around and will use their influence. They'll share kind of multiple set of values with Chairman Arafat, to convince him this is the time to reach the peace of the brave. The time is right, but he seems to be unright for the time.

AMANPOUR: On that note, thank you very much for joining us, Prime Minister
Barak.

BARAK: Thank you.

MB

Ha kedveled azért, ha nem azért nyomj egy lájkot a Fórumért!