Q: If I remember, your opposition, stated opposition at the targeted killings, has not been confined to instances where civilians were victims. I think, basically, it was a flat disapproval of targeted killings.

Boucher: We have explained our opposition for a number of reasons. Sometimes all apply and sometimes some apply, but they are particular to those circumstances and I don't want to talk about any speculation about other events. But I think we all understand that the situation with regard to Israeli-Palestinian issues and the prospects of peace and the prospects of negotiation and the prospects of the need to create an atmosphere for progress -- a lot of different things come into play there.

Q: And what's special about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that makes targeted killings inadvisable?

Boucher: All the things I just cited to your colleague.

Q: I didn't hear those.

Boucher: Well, you can look at the transcript.

November 10, 2002: Secretary of State Powell Explains Policy of Targeted Killings, on CNN Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer

Blitzer: The U.S. took an action this past week in firing Predator missiles at these al-Qaeda operatives in Yemen, including a U.S. citizen. What's the difference between that targeted killing and the targeted killings the Israelis engage in -- which the State Department has criticized?

Secretary Powell: We believe that there are significant differences. This was a case of clearly somebody engaged in a direct conflict with the United States. We believe that there are other ways to deal with the problems of the Middle East -- other ways that are not enhanced. The likelihood of these other ways working is not enhanced by those kinds of targeted assassinations. So we believe there are differences and distinctions between the two situations.

Blitzer: Is the U.S. going to continue this policy as part of the war on terror to go after these targets outside of Afghanistan?

Secretary Powell: I would not comment on what targets we might or might not go after anywhere in the world.

Blitzer: But what you're saying is the Israelis should stop doing what they did, but the U.S., theoretically, can continue to do--

Secretary Powell: Our policy with respect to the Middle East and targeted assassinations has not changed and we will do what we have to do to defend ourselves with respect to terrorist activities.

Of Arafat, and Other Humanitarians

Jack Engelhard

Here's my vote for Statesman of the Past Century -- Yasser Arafat. Wait...wait...don't hang up.

But really, outside of Adolf Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, and Idi Amin, has anyone killed more people? Please notice that these other five are in severe disrepute.

Arafat endures. Like the Energizer Bunny, he keeps going and going and going. If Idi Amin (he's still around) landed in Paris tomorrow, would he be kissed on both checks? No, but Yasser Arafat would.

Despite a rap sheet going back a generation, Arafat is still the world's darling. Including Ma'alot, Klinghoffer, and the Munich Olympics massacre, Arafat is a killing field all by himself.

But -- even from his bunker in Ramallah -- he still holds news conferences before compliant, starry-eyed journalists, and American Jewish "humanitarians" like Adam Shapiro bow at his feet. Documentation links him directly to terror, but the BBC and other media address him reverentially as "Chairman." All this comes to mind because the watchdog group Human Rights Watch has issued a report that calls suicide bombings "a crime against humanity." Yesss! Chalk one up for Israel.

But wait.

Arafat, however, remains blameless.

Here's how my local newspaper put it: "Human Rights Watch said it did not find evidence that Arafat or the Palestinian Authority ever had a hand in attacks against Israelis..."

So there he goes again, slipping through another opening. Is this a statesman or what? Who else can get away with murder on a global scale?

Or, how many Jews -- and Americans -- does Arafat have to kill before we can call him a murderer? Is there a number?

Obviously these things take time. Even when Hitler was more than halfway through his extermination of the Jewish people, there was still doubt that he was staging a Holocaust.

Finally, for Hitler, there was a number. Six million. For Arafat there still is no number, so he remains a statesman, and not a murderer.

Like Houdini, the guy can't be pinned.

In Biblical terms, Arafat's "portion" hasn't been filled. (Or is it Israel's?)

Still, the report from Human Rights Watch was welcome news for those who support Israel. But, fearing

Outpost               - 8 -               December 2002