The public image of Arafat, the godfather of modern terrorism, inspired by his Nazi-collaborating uncle Husseini, an unrepentant Jew-hater, pathological liar, and committed to the destruction of Israel right through his dying days from sexually-transmitted disease, is miraculously rehabilitated by Hammond with his fatuous review of the film by British director Richard Symons, just screened in -- where else? Dubai.
We have to run to an appointment but let's take a quick look at Hammond's account of the life of Arafat as seen through his eyes and reportedly, that of director Symons:
DUBAI, Dec 12 Reuters) - Associates of Yasser Arafat offer personal recollections in a documentary screened in Dubai this week on his search for an Israeli-Palestinian peace deal that descended into violence and failed to lead to a Palestinian state. [...]
There's that passive voice Reuters has mastered in its propaganda on the Middle East; the peace deal "descended into violence" -- no active agent required. And Arafat is merely "depicted" by his "detractors" as someone who "sought to take advantage" of Palestinian violence.Arafat was depicted by his Israeli and U.S. detractors as an obstacle to bringing the peace talks to a resolution and who sought to take advantage of the violence of the Palestinian uprising which followed the breakdown of critical talks in 2000.
Apparently, Hammond, who has years of experience working in the Middle East and has purportedly written two books on the Arabs, is unaware of the admission by a Palestinian official that the terror war launched against Israeli civilians in 2000 was masterminded by Arafat and his cronies.
Rather, Hammond wants us to see the cuddly side of Arafat:
And the Reuters correspondent is quite clear who he believes is responsible for there being no peace between Israel and the Palestinians:Nasser al-Kidwa, a nephew who is now Palestinian envoy to the United Nations, recounts Arafat's gloom after Rabin's death. Kidwa found a quiet, dejected figure when he visited Arafat in his office several days later.
"Before leaving I said something to the effect of 'why are you so upset? Okay Rabin was an important leader, but Peres is coming and Peres has an even better position than Rabin'," he remembers in one of the film's most poignant sections.
"He didn't answer me, but he gave me that look that obviously meant that I didn't understand anything. And I didn't, he was right, clearly."
Right... Israel elects a strong leader to fight a relentless Palestinian terror war which has taken the lives of over 1,000 Israeli men, women, and children; a Palestinian state is conceded; the Palestinians refuse to even negotiate on the contours of this state; but Netanyahu and rightist politics in Israel are to blame for the stagnation of the peace process.Shimon Peres lost the subsequent 1996 election to Likud leader Benyamin Netanyahu, signaling a shift to the right in Israeli politics and a stagnation in the peace process that has lasted to this day.
Finally, Hammond introduces a bit of levity into this tragedy:
Yeah, his widow, who would have liked to abscond with the billions of dollars in Western aid Arafat stole during his reign, is in tears.Shunned by Washington and besieged by Israel in his Ramallah compound, Arafat died as the uprising was winding down. His widow is in tears as she recalls those final days.
Must have missed the Gucci sale in Paris.