The Murder of Arafat

The Murder of Arafat


In this well presented documentary with Suha Arafat the search for the truth to this complex mystery and who poison/murdered Arafat

In 2004 the Israel/Palestine peace process headed for a total impasse when Yasser Arafat suddenly fell mysteriously ill.

Nearly 50 doctors from around the world rushed to try and save Arafat, testing for every known disease know to man.
He never had a postmortem/autopsy examination.


In this documentary it show that Arafat had high levels of Polonium on his tooth brush and aswell as 3 samples from his clothes with similarities to Alexander Litvinenko the Russian spy murdered in london 2 years after Arafat death.

And all the doctors in france who treated Arafat refuse to talk about his death, and say the blood and urine samples were destroyed.




The French have finally opened a murder inquiry into Arafat's death, and French magistrates are due to travel to the Israeli-occupied West Bank to remove Arafta body to try and detect any traces of the deadly radioactive substance.

Arafat exhumation set for November 26 2012 over poison report

Two senior Swiss forensic experts are already in the West Bank to discuss plans for the exhumation, which is complicated on a technical, legal and political level. A French court in August opened a murder inquiry into Arafat's death after a Swiss institute said it had discovered high levels of radioactive polonium on the Palestinian leader's clothing, which was supplied by his widow, Suha.

Now who benefited from Arafat death ? Israel.
If it turns out that Arafat was infact Poisoned it will be another stain on Israel, as love or hate Arafat, he was one of those people that only come about every 50 or 100 years, a great freedom fighter.

I wonder why his widow requested that there be no autopsy? That is strange enough in itself. Is it due to Muslim beliefs? Autopsy can be performed on decedents in keeping with their religious beliefs with modern technology. I would think that the widow would want an answer either way.

Now who benefited from Arafat death ? Israel.

Are they really the only ones who benefited?

Look a little bit closer... quite a few people benefited from the power vacuum left behind.

I wonder why his widow requested that there be no autopsy?

Interesting point... she does live quite well these days with the money he spirited away from Palestinian relief organizations doesn't she... hmm...

reply to post by TheOtter

Well if you watch the documentary, you see his wife explain's why he never had a autopsy, she says she was so broken at the time over his death it never crossed her mind, as there had been over 50 of the worlds top doctors helping him, and all the test's at the time showed nothing, it was only when the Alexander Litvinenko case came about, she started to ask questions.

reply to post by Djarums

he does live quite well these days with the money he spirited away from Palestinian relief organizations doesn't she... hmm.

This has crossed my mind, but then she the one pushing for this new inquiry into Arafat's death, and if it was her, she be shooting herself really.

But remember Arafat was basically imprisoned by the Israelis in ramallah, only a select few had access to him, if they prove he was poisoned with Polonium (which i personally think he was) it will be very interesting to watch the case unfold.

reply to post by TheMaverick


Your link is broken. I can't watch the video.

reply to post by TheOtter


I think that link is banned in certain countries, try this one.

Well, you know what they (or somebody) say: Those that live by the sword..die by the sword (or poison). Lots of

room for problems when you try and change the world or even little cities (see TV show " Vegas"). Being out front

in things regarding "power" have there degrees of risk.

Originally posted by TheMaverick
reply to post by TheOtter

 

Well if you watch the documentary, you see his wife explain's why he never had a autopsy, she says she was so broken at the time over his death it never crossed her mind, as there had been over 50 of the worlds top doctors helping him, and all the test's at the time showed nothing, it was only when the Alexander Litvinenko case came about, she started to ask questions.

edit on 7-11-2012 by TheMaverick because: Grammer

Thanks, I am watching it now. Just from what you've posted
1) sadness makes her not even think of autopsy - of course, it is never a family's first thought. This is why medical professionals are trained to ask and to ask in such a way as to promote the benefit of the exam.
2) all of the tests showed tooting - if it we're my loved one ths would make me want to know more about the circumstances regarding his death, rather than brush it off.
Just my thoughts, I am still watching. Thanks for fixing that link.

Originally posted by TheOtter
I wonder why his widow requested that there be no autopsy? That is strange enough in itself. Is it due to Muslim beliefs? Autopsy can be performed on decedents in keeping with their religious beliefs with modern technology. I would think that the widow would want an answer either way.

As Madame Arafat states in the Documentary, she was distressed and overwhelmed at the time. Just imagine all the attention on the poor woman, all the political and medical pushing and shoving that must have been going on.

I watched this the other night on Al Jezerra, and was amazed. And this was two, three years before the London case came to light.

A new use for nuclear waste - can't let any of the poison go to waste.

The stuff is horrendously toxic and contaminates everything it comes into contact with. Great silent weapon. Anyone who can into contact with him, or anything with his body fluids, is contaminated as well.

Ugly, ugly business all around.

Well, Israel admitted to killing Arafat's deputy not to long ago...

Whille I wouldn't put it past Israeli Intelligence to take him out using a very sneaky technique, I doubt they will ever accept or admit blame.

I wonder what the geopolitical landscape would look like today if he were to have lived?

Well, I did finally get to watch the video. It got held up a few times, but I plugged through it patiently. I completely agree that the widow would be too distraught to consider autopsy a possibility. She went through a lot in her life married to him and especially in those final weeks. I am still baffled that medical personnel didn't offer the option to her. As the documentary states, it would have been almost mandatory in a case such as this. Hopefully we can find out some more once the body is exhumed.

Interesting thread, thanks!

Quick question...

Does anyone know if a standard autopsy would have even shown these radioactive particles?

It might be a moot point if a normal post-mortem wouldn't have detected them anway.

reply to post by MystikMushroom

Does anyone know if a standard autopsy would have even shown these radioactive particles?

Well this is the thing, they would not of been looking for any radioactive substances, it wasn't till the Alexander Litvinenko (Russian spy)case unfolded in london, and british doctors detected Polonium in Litvinenko, and the media hype about it, that it brought the Arafats suddenly illness and death into question.

reply to post by MystikMushroom


A standard autopsy may not have revealed these findings. However, when autopsy is performed, all tissues are sampled and saved forever. At the hospital I worked at they had blocks (of histologcically preserved) tissues dating back to the 1930s. Pathologists are pack rats!

reply to post by TheOtter

However, when autopsy is performed, all tissues are sampled and saved forever. At the hospital I worked at they had blocks (of histologcically preserved) tissues dating back to the 1930s. Pathologists are pack rats!

The french Hospital Arafat was in, destroyed arafats blood and urine samples after only 4 years right about when Arafat wife started making real inquiries about her husbands death, when in france its standard practice to save all samples for min 10 years, now this puts suspicion of a cover up over the destruction of these samples, and its not as if it was some unknown homeless guy, if you know what i mean.

reply to post by TheMaverick


Yes, I understand that. I am talking about the preserved tissues from organs like liver, brain etc. Rather convenient that they happened to destroy those blood samples etc.