tv The Stream 2018 Ep 102 Al Jazeera June 27, 2018 7:32am-8:01am +03
the christina was. the camp's principal among which was teller saturday were overrun and the residents expelled or massacred. two arab summits were quickly convened they established what became known as the out of deterrent forces made up principally of the same syrian forces that had entered lebanon with only token representation from several other arab states syria had prevailed that fellow at the it had not. been president assad's view was that syria and its ability to achieve strategic parity with israel had to be supported by two strong wings a lebanese wing and a palestinian wing that is if syria was to have influence on the political scene it had to become the sole legitimate representative of syria lebanon and the palestinians while lebanon was in the throes of conflict on another front there were moves towards peace. in one thousand nine hundred eighty seven egyptian
president anwar sadat a longstanding ally of out of fat made the groundbreaking visit to israel to sue for peace in exchange for land artifact was stunned but out of fact had been making his own peace moves his representative in london cited how many had been promoting the palestinian vision of a two state solution at the artifacts behest. of. out of fatah in the palestinian leadership were convinced that the most important thing was achieving palestinian aspirations not the method employed to achieve them and if the method to achieve them was a civilized and peaceful one then that would be better than a violent one. and the p.l.o. leadership firmly believe this kind of a side effect of. chairman arafat's know very well that the one nine hundred seventy three war demonstrated the limits of collective action and what the
international community could accept that forward the leadership of fact that was convinced that the palestinians could never achieve anything more than a state always done the lands occupied the nine hundred sixty seven. but some palestinians took a very different view palestinian guerrilla leader abu nidal believed the two state solution was tantamount to capitulation he split from the p.l.o. and formed his own group calling it the revolutionary council and based it in fact that. the iraqi regime once again hostile to artifacts leadership of the p.l.o. provided backing to abu nidal splinter. in january of one hundred seventy eight gunmen loyal to abu nidal assassinated sight hamami at the p.l.o. office and. it was to be the first of many killings of federal palestinians that a little area. despite its talk of a two state solution the mainstream thought the hundred artifacts did not
relinquish its arms struggle in march one thousand seven hundred eight a fetter unit led by a female commando element to be commandeered an israeli bus near the city of haifa . in the ensuing firefight thirty six israelis were killed or israel responded by invading southern lebanon and setting up what it termed as a security zone to drive p.l.o. forces out of rocketry which. almost a year later israel struck a massive blow against the p.l.o. by assassinating. salam he was in charge of arafat's personal security. over the years he had been developing contacts with the cia and was seen as a point man for interaction with the air. that we had through the cia some kind of a liaison or larsen ship without a house and salama. and that had to do ostensibly with security issues. and it worked embassy was never attacked in those days. now people still argue
whether that relationship led to our house and salama becoming an agent of the cia or not. i personally think that he did it but i can't prove it i was in government during that period and we were in fact receiving remarkably sensitive intelligence from inside the p.l.o. at the highest levels and i if it wasn't our house and saw it was somebody very much like him. i felt could do little to parry such blows being delivered by his but it was a different matter went up on a dog resumed his assassination a fact that representatives of broke. into nine hundred seventy eight from his base in baghdad abu nidal ordered the killing of us bureau chief. for the explicitly accused iraqi intelligence of complicity in the s.s. . two months later the abu nidal group killed at the hospital as representative.
retaliated by attacking the iraqi embassy in paris and targeting iraqi diplomats in london paris and karachi. abu nidal struck yet again on june first one nine hundred eighty one killing the p.l.o. brussels representative but only does most significant operation was to come pick a year later. on june third one nine hundred eighty two and other in the doll gunmen opened fire on israel's ambassador to london critically wounded him. israel responded by launching the military operation more massive than its nineteen seventy three war effort against the combined forces of egypt and syria. and nine hundred eighty two israeli invasion of lebanon had been an open secret for some time the lebanon israel border had been a constant point of tension as palestinians and israelis dreda drop it and artillery fire on a fact had realized that it was only a matter of time before israel launched an all out attack go ahead.
italy. better yet they had the man who at our arafat's was the only one who believe that an israeli invasion which would reach beirut was inevitable he complied appeal always military council and it won't a committee headed by the p.l.o. his chief of staff start to plan the defense of beirut. many palestinians expected a repeat of the one nine hundred seventy eight invasion and assault with limited object years. said that when there yeah. the belief was that the israeli operation would not extend beyond forty kilometers from the international border this effected palestinian preparations for the invasion as well as syrian and lebanese preparations therefore resistance to the invasion in southern lebanon was ineffective.
on june sixth month after two days of airstrikes israel its land invasion of lebanon. with the exception of stiff resistance put up by the defenders of the palestinian refugee camps in southern lebanon palestinian forces in general quickly collapsed commanders abandoned their fighters in the field and fled for safety and a fact was living. in the edge out of it was incredulous kept on saying in all possible he couldn't believe the israelis were advancing so far so quickly he orders to for assistance later on i learned that he was very angry that there was no real resistance such i want to have sort of the the operational headquarters in the south seriously mess calculated the commanders believed that all was lost and left i went to arafat's headquarters in beirut and told him what happened he became agitated and started swearing. syrian forces in lebanon were drawn into the
fighting an epic three day air battle left the syrian air force virtually decimated . unable to sustain such losses. syria agreed a cease fire with israel within the first week of the invasion the palestinians were now left on their own. about our modern man my magill half annoyed and out of i did not just accept that the syrians had been defeated he made it seem like this she didn't fight the whole but the syrians did fight in the back of alley and the mountains around beirut and lost lots of men and equipment but they fought to defend themselves and love the palestinians the syrian army had not orders the check that is raid advance of the israelis had left the syrians alone. by now the israelis had arrived at the gates of the lebanese capital but the closer they do to beirut the tougher the fighting became they fought and they fought very brave. very brave and the siege of beirut had begun. the p.l.o. was encircled some palestinian leaders advised the p.l.o.
should surrender but i've had had other ideas the audition. and the jury had gotten off. at one early meeting the leader of the p.f. lp general command homage agreeable suggested accepting israeli towns of withdrawal under the banner of the red cross this armed i mean red cross provided over all i've had said he would say a prayer to help them arrive at the decision and he went away and returned and said i sense the winds of heaven blowing god has ordered me to fight. the winds of heaven as i have had described them meant holding out for better conditions in a bid to raise more out out a fact and his office feels toward the streets of the besieged lebanese capital. massive israeli bombardment caused civilian casualties but also strengthened the palestinians resolve. finally in august after two months of siege and
bombardment u.s. envoy philip heavy been announced that an agreement had been. their grievances. gave safe passage for the p.l.o. fighters to leave lebanon on the understanding that israeli forces would not enter west bank. the evacuation of the p.l.o. marked the end of an error. after more than ten years in the oven on the p.l.o. was finally leave. it was a dramatic moment. for the fighters. for the lebanese. and for the palestinian refugees left behind. most p.l.o. leaders nuff to damascus. but out of fact signaling his displeasure with syria chose to build to its. within days of the departure of the last palestinian fighters lebanese president elect bashir gemayel was assassinated. breaking the
american brokered agreement israeli forces moved into west beirut under the pretext of keeping the peace. the israelis accuse the p.l.o. of leaving two thousand of its fighters in beirut's refugee camps the charge was a fabrication. the israelis quickly encircled the refugee camps and brought in their allies from the christian lebanese forces militia. on september sixteenth one thousand nine hundred two dozens of lebanese forces militia men entered the subbranch at the refugee camps. we knew of course that israeli had surrounded the camp and we also knew that in the night that flares was there that the cab horse was lighted up we saw it from distance and after i remembered that night it was very strange it was so quiet it was like a ghost town. and we didn't realize that inside this ghost town was the killing and
the shooting. under the watchful eyes of their israeli allies the lebanese militiamen embarked on one of the most horrific massacres of modern times. skies were lit by israeli flares as the militia men continued their ugly work. and then we started it came in the same way and we saw the bodies and i went around with my tape recorder i had no crew and had no television crew in the beginning to count bodies throwing up throwing up counting bodies. like that this hunger. right. at your house and then fires you. and then more bodies we found out was there in las women killed children killed and we also saw that had used all those years to to take their upas
over that dead bodies we couldn't believe our eyes. by the time it was finished the subbranch attilla massacre had claimed the lives of some eight hundred palestinian and lebanese civilians. the israelis set up a tribunal to investigate the massacre. in its final report the kahan commission found that israeli defense minister ariel sharon bore personal responsibility for the massacre. the p.l.o. in exile and no longer the force it once was could only watch impotently stripped of his base in lebanon out of fact was in the political wilderness. israel and its american benefactors had the stablished a foothold in lebanon one that syria backed by the soviet union sought to overthrow
in the eyes of the masochist the much weakened p.l.o. was ripe for the taking and the defeat of the acid artifact was of no political consequence but for the master of palestinian politics who had just emerged from doing battle with the israelis the fight for survival was about to enter a new and bloodier phase. african heads of state in government will gather in mauritania for the thirty first assembly of the african union ongoing conflicts in the fight against corruption will take center stage al-jazeera will bring you extensive coverage of a summit and its outcomes the african union summit on al-jazeera. every year in pakistan hundreds of women are victims of so-called honor killings
one on one east searches for the truth in a case that exposes the growing clash between old beliefs and modern life on al-jazeera. when the news is restricted and censored the press is not free and is external interference and influence and the is used to exploit not explained . when doing the least access to information is prevented. them but i want us. and them out of the closet. and just as never sees the light of day no i only meant that i've been in. the team of. what the show will hold. and the stories that matter go untold and the press does not see. neither are we.
getting to the heart of the matter if. the bill calls you today. would you accept facing new realities what do you think reunification would look like there are two people. for prosperity you. hear their story on talk to al-jazeera. this is. you know and welcome to the al-jazeera news hour live from my headquarters and. elizabeth coming up in the next sixty minutes. the u.s. supreme court upholds donald trump's travel ban covering people from predominantly
muslim countries. at a minimum we have to make sure that we vet people coming into the country coming in . you know where they're coming from. you just have to go he's coming here. pro-slavery and government forces advance on that as thousands fleeing the area denied entry into georgia. divers enter the flooded cave complex in northern thailand searching for a football team missing for three days. and another fine messi argentina survived a real scare to beat nigeria two one and advance to the last sixteen of the world cup. the u.s. supreme court has upheld donald trump's travel ban on people from five muslim
majority countries the job. mally voted to accept that the us president was acting legally when he bought people from every yemen somalia and syria from entering the united states she have autonomy has more from washington d.c. . the five four ruling was not on the expected but protesters were still incensed. but a majority of justices how degreed with the trumpet ministration this was not a muslim this policy was the result of a careful global interagency analysis of vetting procedures for travelers to the u.s. from libya syria somalia yemen and iran a. and it was the president's right to impose a ban because national security is his responsibility donald trump was clearly delighted this is a great victory for our constitution we have to be tough and we have to be safe and we have to be secure but in what was described as
a furious dissent from the bench of liberal justice sonia sotomayor referred to cannes that trumps only comparison of the travel ban to the decision that mandated the detention of japanese americans during world war two sort of my all said taking all the relevant evidence together a reasonable observer would conclude that the proclamation was driven primarily by anti muslim animus rather than by the government's asserted national security justifications. politicians and activists are now expressing concern that the supreme court is a dog. that he and he alone is in control of the country's national security and that he can without oversight in deciding who comes into this country with this. we want. that donald trump. by muslim majority countries that are in the current version to not only target more countries but should we even go after us and lawful permanent residents i say who's going to be in. is the president
going to issue an executive order. is he going to issue an executive orders against people coming from. what's next and now that the supreme court has ruled the tricks on. immigration policy himself have been weakened considerably. washington. well with me to discuss this we have learned he was the former deputy assistant attorney general in charge of immigration at the u.s. justice department under president obama he's joining us from washington d.c. and from jersey we're joined by steven rogers as he was a member of the triumph for president advisory board and a former member of the f.b.i. national joint terrorism task force a very warm welcome to both of you mr prescott i'm going to start with you was the highest court in america acting not just legally bought independently or was it reflecting the political divisions in the country and given the victory to president trump and his supporters do you think. well i mean the decision certainly
fellow along partisan lines in terms of the five republican appointed justices ruled in favor of the president and the four democratic justices ruled against the president but you know where i would have a beef with this decision is even if you thought that this version three point zero of the travel ban was narrow enough and i actually do sit in that courtroom of that group of people the fact that the majority went to great pains to expand the ability of the president to basically institute any version of this is problematic because they didn't have to do that they could have just said under these facts in this specific situation we will allow this particular proclamation to continue. mr rogers do you think that the supreme court's has a real national security justification for this ban. yes i do keep in mind that it was president barack obama in two thousand and fifteen that
the picked out some of these nations rightfully so president obama actually called them countries of interest during his time and so the president didn't just randomly pick these countries out that's number one number two in your opening. perth there was an analysis there was studies this was research with regard to the chances of someone coming from these countries would be greater. than any other country to harm the united states and number three this is not and there was a ban on muslims if a european american was in one of those countries and tried to come here without proper id without any. knowing where he or she is strong they would be banned so the supreme court did in fact make that decision based on national security reasons mr fresco do you think that even if they did base this on national security reasons
that they should have taken into consideration donald trump's many of our mosques about wanting to ban muslims from entering america or his intention and to consideration here. i think the remarks are important that they can do account i think complicated is you have to ask a question and this is a hard one for anyone to address in good faith which is are these the testable remarks that the president has made in the bios do they forever ban him from doing anything that actually is in the national security interests of the country and where do you draw the line and how do you draw that line and that way or the court was wrestling with that but that's why i would have limited this opinion to the very narrow facts of this proclamation and if there's a future proclamation made citing the statutory authority we will idolise it again because that because i think it's dangerous to allow this authority given that we've already seen the president use national security as
a basis to impose tire of saying that that threatens our national security and so what are the chances then that you think the ban. expanded to include other countries i think in the short term very high but in the immediate in the medium to long term i think if there's an issue where the president feels it's to his political advantage or his advantage to say to a country look if you don't want to do something with us on trade or on foreign policy or on something else and your people from coming in i could see that happening and mr rogers you know donald trump is facing a lot of criticism at the moment for separating families of migrants from the u.s. and mexico this is a victory for him will he use this against what's happening at that point i think. well i don't think he will mr fresco brings up a very reasonable concern i would agree with him on this we don't want to see any
president expand on what was ruled today and i don't think president trump will do that which goes to your point president trump again has kept the scenario national security very very concerned about criminals coming into the country very concerned about drug cartel people or human trafficking so the president has been very consistent on the reason why he wants to protect these borders and look no one including the president likes to see children separated from their parents the president puts in forcing the law and now he's corrected that and how separate saying families and separation very young children from their parents often criminals and drug cartels well to begin with once again he's enforcing the law a lot of their children came unaccompanied a lot of the adults had no id we don't know if a baby was taken from someone in
a nother country and cross the border here so what they did was they they had no choice but to separate them they're processing everyone to make sure a child is matched with a parent or a relative that they came with and in addition to that these children are being taken care of pretty well even the democrats are agreeing that well you know what this is these are not they're trick pony and detention facilities to psychologist sociologist doctors etc i honestly think they'll be a lot of people that disagree with you on that last point mr raja's unfortunately we don't have a lot of time left and i'd like to give the last word to mr fisk we're looking at pictures now from new york of people protesting the supreme court's ruling mr prescott how much do you think that this ruling and what we're saying now just once again is highlighting the divisions in the country. well it's a difficult time because honestly a lot of these issues can be solved by people of good faith coming together and
doing sensible immigration reform i mean for instance this issue of drug smuggling we can say all we want about policies in five years this will be a technological problem which is that drones will be smuggling all the drugs into the united states and these are not these are the kind of things we're not thinking about at all because we don't have policymakers of good faith coming together to come to solutions we have both sides saying you have to pick my solution and if you're not doing that you're not being bipartisan and that's not true we can have a lot of robust in force by him and have compassionate immigration laws and that's what we should be focusing on that is joining us from washington d.c. and stephen. thank you both very much for your time. well let's move on to other news now and the u.n. says forty five thousand people are fleeing the fighting around the city of that in southern syria they heading for the border with the children but its government
says it won't let their men mohamed jump in the polls. as the battle for intensifies government forces say they've taken control of the two towns of how dear and. in the eastern country some videos like this one purport to show troops many of whom are believed to be iranian backed militia members entering sort of how do you on tuesday the town has come under heavy bombardment and it's captured is the first major government advance in this offensive that will allow the syrian army to advance more southwards though of. the city of that i take it i think that connecting. with that and occupying the valleys of the which were full of. groups from the guy that forget that the group that will allow. me to advise.