Power transferred to Israel's deputy prime minister

JERUSALEM (CNN) -- Power has been transferred from Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to Deputy Prime Minister Ehud Olmert after Sharon suffered a "significant stroke" Wednesday and was under anesthesia and on a respirator, officials said.

For the second time in less than three weeks, Sharon was taken to a Jerusalem hospital after suffering chest pain and weakness Wednesday night, a senior aide said.

"He felt slight pain to the chest and some weaknesses in the presence of his doctor and, upon his advice, the doctor said he should be taken to the hospital," said Ra'anan Gissin, Sharon's senior adviser.

Sharon was taken to the Hadassah Ein Kerem Hospital from his home in the south of Israel, Gissin said.

He arrived there shortly before 11 p.m. (4 p.m. ET) in an ambulance and entered the hospital's trauma unit via the emergency room, said Ron Krumer, a hospital spokesman.

Israeli Channel 2 reported he was taken in on a stretcher.

Sharon's illness came after a full day of meetings, though he has trimmed his workload since December 18, when he suffered a minor stroke, Gissin told CNN.

Sharon, 77, is scheduled for an operation Thursday to repair a small hole in his heart. The hole was discovered during tests after Sharon suffered a minor stroke December 18.

Although Sharon had difficulty speaking during the stroke, neurological testing found that he recalled everything from the night of his admission, Lotem said.

Doctors said Monday that Sharon suffered no lasting brain damage. He was released from the hospital two days after the stroke and has resumed his work load.

The health scare has raised concerns about the leader's ability to work as he runs for a third term. The elections will be held at the end of March.

Many Israelis feel he is the Israeli official best able to carry forward peace negotiations with the Palestinians.

This year Sharon orchestrated Israel's historic pullout from Gaza in hopes of jump-starting the peace process.

He recently broke with the conservative Likud bloc he helped found -- which did not support his pullout from Gaza and parts of the West Bank -- and is running for re-election as head of the moderate, newly formed Kadima Party.

Nicknamed "The Bulldozer" for his stamina during meetings and long working hours, he had not been in ill health prior to the stroke. The popular veteran military and political figure is widowed and lives alone.

Doctors have ordered the overweight prime minister to go on diet. Sharon's doctors said earlier this week that he weighed 118 kilograms (260.2 pounds) at the time of the stroke, and had lost 3 kilos (6.6 pounds) since then.

Sharon's doctors said then that his blood pressure and cholesterol levels were normal, though he has an underactive thyroid gland -- common in overweight people.
____

CNN.com

I'm sure there will be thousands of people, ranging from Palestinians to Hezbollah troops to Iranian government officials ( :p ) dancing in the streets and firing automatic weapons into the air upon hearing this news, probably attributing his death to the strident and noble work of Hamas. :rolleyes:

It looks like the old stand-byes of the Israeli-Palestine conflict might be fading away, with Arafat going last year and now, possibly, Sharon as well.

While it would be ludicrous to attribute Ariel Sharon's stroke to a terrorist group such as a Hamas or Islamic Jihad Double J, I suggest you do some real research on Sharon's background. His spearheading the pullout of Israeli settlers from illegal settlements in the Gaza Strip has been portrayed by the media as a giant step toward peace and a huge concession by the Israelis. The facts disagree. Aside from the fact that the Palestinians do not control Gazan airspace or the borders of the Gaza Strip, there were only 8 500 settlers there to begin with. The huge majority of Israeli settlers be they secular or religious are in the West Bank of the Jordan River and East Jerusalem. The number of Israeli settlers in the West Bank and East Jerusalem is close to 600 000. This is nearly 71 times the number of settlers who were in the Gaza Strip! Obviously the pullout from Gaza was a step towards peace and Sharon should receive credit for spearheading it, but it was not the gigantic concession that it was made out to be by the media. Contrary to the ultimate sacrifice that it was made out to be, the Gaza pullout was simply one of many necessary steps the Israelis must take to make peace a reality.

The Palestinians however, must not be left off the hook. As long as Israeli soldiers do not target Palestinian civilians and destroy the living atmosphere of Palestine (the Gaza Strip, the West Bank and E. Jerusalem) the Palestinian Government must work to stop all attacks against Israeli soldiers. And all forms of terrorism against unarmed civilians is absolutely unacceptable and the Palestinian Government must ensure that all suicide bombings and rocket attacks against Israeli civilians immediately cease. Any form of terrorism by the Palestinians or the Israelis is unacceptable and cannot be tolerated.

Sharon, contrary to what many may belive, did not want to leave the Gaza Strip and he does not want to leave any of the other Occupied Territories. Sharon was for many years the head of the settler movement and he is an Israeli expansionist at heart. Also the Butcher of Sabra and Shatila is responsible for thousands upon thousands of Palestinian deaths in Lebanon as a result of his actions as a military general. Contrary to what many on the far right believe, Sharon is not a great man worthy of respect. He has been an obstacle towards peace and the Israelis in my opinion would be much better off under a Labour Government.

Having said all this, Sharon is still a better choice for Israelis than the superhawk Benjamin Netanyahu. Netanyahu is the worst possible man Israelis could elect as their leader. If, God forbid, he is elected, he would create a situation in Palestine/Israel that would generate conflicts all over the Middle East and perhaps a full scale war with Iran. Hopefully Amir Peretz gets elected as Israeli Prime Minister and the two sides can begin the very hard work of reaching some common ground.

http://www.indictsharon.net
http://www.wrmea.com

I really hope he recovers. He was doing kind off good, with pulling back all Israëlies out of the Gaza strip. It's of course as normal as things can be that he did that, but at least it's a progress.

I think - and JJ, please correct me if I'm wrong - that JJ's comment about a Palestinian organization taking credit for Sharon's stroke was a sarcastic one, and not meant to be taken seriously.

Although it wouldn't surprise me if Hamas or another organization claimed that it was a result of their prayers .

I must confess to a somewhat embarassing ignorance of some of the facts and a deficiency in knowledge of some of the issues in the Israeli-Palestinian dispute.

As far as the numbers you present go, I'll assume that they are correct.

What I'm not familiar with is the concept to which you refer of the Israeli settlements on the Gaza Strip being "illegal".

Speaking in very general terms here, doesn't most of the Arab world consider all of the territory occupied by Israel that was added to their original borders as a result of their victories in wars to be "illegal"?

In fact, doesn't the Arab world in general, or at least a large portion of it, consider all of Israel to be basically "illegal"?

What I'm asking, I think, is "Are the Gaza settlements any different than those in any of the other areas that the Israelis occupy which are outside of Israel's original borders, and, if so, why?"

I think that it's almost fair to say that given the history of the conflict, any concession made by either side might justifiably be labeled as "huge" or "giant" or "gigantic".

Again, the following thought may be born of my ignorance of the subject, but aren't or weren't all of these Israeli attacks over the years retalitory in nature, rather than offensive?

You seem to suggest that Israel must or should stop their attacks first.

Which I don't necessarily think is a bad idea. I'm just wondering why that's what you think, if, in fact, it is what you think.

I absolutely agree.

Unfortunately, sometimes the best, and in fact only, way to fight fire is with fire.

While I certainly and absolutely do not condone it, I can understand, given the fact that Israel has enormous military superiority, the Palestinians use of terrorist tactics as a weapon.

They believe in their cause, and whether or not their cause is just or unjust in my eyes is, or should be, irrelevant.

Butif the Israeli attacks are retalitory, it becomes a kind of guerilla war - fought in the streets - and there aren't really very many options open to Israel other than to respond in kind.

This is all your opinion, of course, right?

Once again, I'm not all that familiar with the issues here, particularly the ones involving israeli political POVs.....

Is "The Butcher of Sabra and Shatila" an Arab nickname for Sharon?

If so, I find it interesting that you choose to employ it here, in the sense that it leads me to believe that your sympathies lie with the Palestinians.

Not that there's anything wrong with that. You are perfectly entitled to have your sympathies lies wherever you wish them to.

But if the Israeli military attacks that earned him this nickname were, as I suggest, retalitory in nature, then wasn't he doing his job as a general?

Was the U.S. attack of Afghanistan in the wake of 9/11 any different, and if so, how and/or why?


I don't really follow Israeli politics at all. What do you think it is about the Labour Party that would make Israel better off if they were in power?

Again, I don't follow the political situation in Israel.

But I would certainly agree that the conflict needs to end.

The thing is, though, and here yet again I must confess to a certain ignorance of some of the issues, quite frankly I can't see how Israel can be expected to abandon territory that they now occupy as a result of war(s) in which they were the country under attack, and which they now consider important, if not vital, to their defense.

Yes, my first comment was sarcasm. I thought the smilies would've given that away.

There was the initial Israeli terrorist group known as the "Irgun," but that was a long time ago.

While you have pointed out the flaws of Mr. Sharon, Don Jasani, you have seemingly neglected (aside from the comment that the Palestinians shouldn't be left off the hook) the fact that Yasser Arafat was likely worse than Sharon, considering his alliance with Hamas/PLO and other terrorist groups whose sole goal is the destruction of Israel.

We need to be paying attention to who will succeed Sharon. If it is Netanyahu (sp?) we could be in for some rought times. He could rescind the move Sharon made on the Gaza strip.

When I said that it would be ludicrous to suggest that a terrorist group was responsible for Sharon's ill health I knew that you were being sarcastic Double-J and I thought I had expressed that by saying that it was ludicrous. I knew you were being sarcastic and tried to convey that in my response but sometimes this is easier said than done on the internet as opposed to in person.

P.L., the numbers can be looked up without too much effort and the 600 000 figure I got from the bbc. This 600 000 figure however, includes East Jerusalem which has been annexed by Israel, and the Israeli Government does not consider the thousands of Israeli settlers living in E. Jerusalem to be settlers at all.

I say that the settlements in the Gaza Strip, the West Bank and E. Jerusalem are illegal because according to the fourth Geneva Convention it is illegal for an "Occupying Power" to "transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies." I am not too familiar with the perception of Israel in the Arab World other than it being mostly negative. As to whether most Arabs consider all of Israeli territory to be illegal, I think that it goes deeper than that for most Arabs. A huge portion of the Arab population, I believe, feels that that the existence of Israel is not only illegal but a threat to their honour, dignity and religion. However, most educated Arabs would not hold this opinion and realize that the Jews of Israel cannot simply be driven into the ocean. The state of Israel has existed for nearly 60 years now and millions of Israeli Jews are born, live and die in Israel. This is a fact and those who seek the elimination of the state of Israel (or the elimination of the Palestinians for that matter) are doing a disservice to peace and rational discourse. The Gaza Strip, the West Bank and E. Jerusalem are different from other Israeli territory in that they were obtained in the war of 1967 and were not part of the original U.N. decision separating Israel from Palestine. The Gaza Strip, The West Bank and E. Jerusalem are governed partially by the Palestinian Authority whereas Israel proper is governed by the Israeli Government.

You have a valid point in suggesting that given the nature of the conflict any concession on either side can be looked upon as gigantic, but what I was trying to say is that it wasn't as big as it was made out to be.

Although a portion of the Israeli attacks against the Palestinians have been retaliatory, there have also been unwarranted attacks on Palestinian civilians who were trying to live their lives as best they could under the occupation. In addition, in its zealotry in tracking down the terrorists who attacked Israel, the IDF has contributed to the deaths and injuries of thousands of Palestinians who have nothing to do with terrorism, politics, or anything besides quietly trying to live their lives. Also, the IDF has created an environment for the Palestinians that makes it near impossible for them to earn a living or to live even a half normal life. This in no way is an excuse for the Palestinian attacks against Israeli civilians. I find the suicide bombings targeting innocent Israelis just as disgusting and abhorrent as I do the attacks against the Palestinians by the Israelis. http://www.btselem.org/index.asp
http://www.phrmg.org/

When I said that Sharon is not a great man worthy of respect and that he has been an obstacle towards peace, yes, I was expressing my opinion. It is an opinion that is shared by a large group of people but is also an opinion that is opposed by a large group of people. However, when I said that Sharon did not really want to leave the Gaza Strip and that he is an Israeli expansionist at heart this was based on everything I've read about the man, and everything most political experts on the region have said about him.

Yes the "Butcher of Sabra and Shatila" is the nickname of Sharon most commonly used by Arabs. I must admit that I do sympathize with the Palestinians and am biased in their favour. However, I try not to let this bias get in the way of the facts and I try to maintain as much objectivity as I can. Palestinians are human beings. Israelis are human beings. Muslims/Christians are human beings, and Jews are human beings. As long as one side refrains from attempts to dehumanize the other, at least some sense of objectivity can be maintained.

Sharon was found guilty by an Israeli court to be responsible for the deaths of I believe at the very least a thousand and possibly many more Palestinians in the refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila. Sharon was Defence Minister of Israel at the time. I do not believe that equivalency between 9/11 and the Israeli campaign against Lebanon can be drawn here. As you know better than me, over 3 000 people died in the attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon. The United States was more than justified in seeking out the attackers and bringing them to justice. I only hope that the U.S. would have paid more attention to tracking down members of Al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups instead of shifting its focus to Iraq, however this is another discussion. For their to be any sort of equivalencey between 9/11 and the Israeli campaign against Lebanon there would have had to have been a Lebanese attack that killed close to 100 or more Israelis carried out by an identifiable Lebanese group. Those massacred by Sharon were civilians and so while the U.S. was justified in its response to 9/11 Sharon was to the say the least excessive in Lebanon.

The Israeli Labour party has traditionally been more receptive towards a peace deal with the Palestinians than Likud or any of the other Israeli parties. I believe that Mr. Amir Peretz, the first Sephardic (Middle Eastern) Jew to lead the Labour Party would be a better negotiator of Israeli interests than either Sharon or Netanyahu. This of course is my opinion and others may feel that I am in the wrong.

The Occupied Territories were obtained by Israel in war but they are not vital to its defence. The Israeli military is far superior to any other state in the region. It has a large stockpile of nuclear arms not too mention extremely sophisticated conventional weaponry. Holding on to the Gaza Strip, the West Bank and E. Jerusalem is not helping Israel maintain security but on the country is creating hatred against the country and endangering the lives of Israelis.

Finally, I want to say again that violence against either side is not the answer and will only lead to more violence. It is extremely shameful and tragic that Arabs and Jews, Israelis and Palestinians are fighting and killing each other as these two groups share many similarities. At the end of the day, all we can do is sincerely hope and pray for peace in Palestine and Israel.

Well, you certainly covered everything logically, and clearly you know a lot more about this than I do.

You've left me speechless, which, as I'm sure you know, ain't easy.

I would only add that you don't have to apply what seems to be a negative connotation to an "admission" that "(you) do sympathize with the Palestinians and (are) biased in their favour."

Use of the word "admission", to me, anyway, implies that it is something you would ordinarily ty to hide or be ashamed of or something.

I'm not explaining that very well, so I hope you know what I mean.

It probably isn't the most popular POV here on the BB, or in the Canadian-U.S. world, but you are certainly perfectly entitled to it without having any stigma attached to the way you feel.

Excellent post Don Jasani! Very well written, factual and informative. Great job.


Don Cardi

Thankyou for the compliments plaw and Don C.! This is what makes this forum (and by extension our countries) great. A free and open exchange of ideas and opinions without fear of personal attacks and below the belt cheap shots. This may sound weird to some, but this forum is kind of like a think tank. People share ideas, opinions, sentiments, facts etc. and through this exhchange new ideas, opinions, and sentiments are formed or existing ideas, opinions, and sentiments are reinforced. Thanks again for the compliments!

Oh, just to piss you guys off though, The Blue Jays are gonna kick the Yankees and Red Sox asses this season! The Maple Leafs are gonna finish with a better record than the Rangers, Islanders and Devils. And the Raptors are better than the Knicks and classier than the Nets. :p

I think in my last post I should have said "seemingly logical".

As I said, I am somewhat embarassed by my lack of anything more than the most rudimentary knowledge of this important world issue, so while I would agree that Don Jasani's post is well written, I am personally in no position to make a comment as to how factual or truly informative it really is.

And BTW, I don't care a wit about the Yanks, Red Sox, Knicks, Islanders, Rangers, or Devils, and you had the good sense not to say that the Raps were better than the Nets, so you didn't piss me off .

Lol! Lol! Maybe next year the Raptors will give the Nets a run for their money. Hey, it could be this year. Either way, our drafting position is not gonna be lower than 10th. I don't know why I mentioned the Red Sox, guess it was SC I was trying to piss off..

... or some Christian broadcaster (Pat Robertson) suggesting that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's stroke was divine punishment for "dividing God's land."

Oh wait, HE DID SAY that.

You know what, as you can tell by my previous posts in this thread I won't really shed any tears whenever Sharon dies. However, ever since that idiot Pat Robertson (sorry to any P.R. fans) made his ridiculous, moronic comments I've sort of started pulling for Sharon to survive. Jerry Falwell, Benny Hinn, Pat Robertson the whole lot of them are all hate filled threats to decent society imo.