POLITICS: Palestinian PM Steps Down- Gives Job to Hamas

Gee, grover, I have read what you have said. Seems we are having a bit of contradiction.
Yes, I can place my self in the shoes of the Palestinians. I also see what they are doing. For example, tyou see what happened to Gaza, right? I have mentioned this many times, and yet, the same dogma is repeated. Facts and reality seem not to make any difference, but a couple people come back, saying the same thing.
I have even pointed out what the very people said the turn of the last century, and it contradicts what you say, so, this be the case, who is following blind ideology, or maybe hate? I'm sorry, nudge-nudge.

Rather than really acknowledging reality, all some can say is, "Neither set of hands are clean, but the Isrealis should..."

Yeah. Ok.

I liked the first sentence in your post, though. Most sense I've seen.

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
Ok, ArchAngel. Here is the truth and fact that you can't seemto grasp. Of course, I am not surprised you missed it, it is in this same thread. Here is a copy of that part:

I would like to take the time to address one more lie that I have read, and that the 1967 War was a sneak attack. It is insinuated that the Israelis acted out of a land grab. This is absurd when one looks at some very revealing facts.

Even though the facts you stated say nothing about who launched the first military strike in the 1967 war, nor do they say anything about the disposition of land you still think that your post debunkes my statements?

Israel attacked first in a surpise down raid where they bombed the arab airforces as they sat on the ground, yet you say it was not a sneak attack.

Did Israel stand up and say 'hey guys, we're attacking now'?

So in your mind a sneak attack is not a sneak attack when Israel does it.

After the sneak attack, and up until this very day Israel still occupies land that they 'grabbed' in the 1967 sneak attack, yet you say it was not a land grab.

So in your mind if you grab land its not a land grab when Israel does it.

Back on your homeworld I'm sure that kind of logic must be the norm, but here on Earth we have a saying.

If it quacks like a duck.....

We have come a long way from the original post that kicked this thread off. Other than a few posts at the very beginning of this thread not one single idea, theory, proposal, proposition, etc. has been put forward dealing with the reality that is the so-called "Palestinian" portion of the Mid-East.

There has been much argument about the history of the area, but no proposals for the future of the area. Are we all so blinded by pent-up opinions, attitudes and beliefs that we can't think logically about the situation? Here are some leading questions/topics to get you started.

What becomes of the idea of a free "Palestinian" nation now that Hamas has won the election?

How should Israel now treat the government of the "Palestinians?"

Can Israel negotiate with a sworn enemy of Israel?--All countries do so during wars, what is different now?

Should humanitarian aid from the Western countries be curtailed because of the election results?

Should diplomatic recognition of "Palestine" by the countries of the world be witheld?

There are literally hundreds of other questions that need to be addressed, but we can't do that until such time as we can get over the past. It really doesn't matter now how, why, where, or when the area came to be called "Palestine"--that's simply what it's called now, so get over it and get on with the discussion of relevant things. Do not assume others are blinded by racism, or hate, or anti-Semitism, or something else just because they don't happen to agree with you. Put that aspect aside and examine the real points of agreement and work from there to try to get additional agreement.

This really is a topic of tremendous import to the entire world and it deserves better than we are giving it.

The War On Topicalism

Originally posted by Astronomer68
This really is a topic of tremendous import to the entire world and it deserves better than we are giving it.

Amen. Having just waded through this thread hoping to find some meaningful insights into what the rise of Hamas and the fall of Fatah may lead to, I'm feeling like I know less about that than before I read what's posted here.

There are some good insights in this thread, but they are overshadowed by finger-pointing, name-calling, misdirection, arguments over facts that can be independently corroborated or debunked elsewhere and, in general, a repeat of the same dysfunctional-family-style arguments that can be found in hundreds of other pointless threads.

I understand that it is necessary to understand the past to have any hope of understanding the present or the future, but I don't see the discussion so far leading to an understanding of anything.

I honestly don't care what members think about other members, at least in this context. What I care about is the topic.

This is BIG NEWS. This MATTERS. BIG THINGS are going to happen as a direct result of Hamas' political victory in these elections.

What happens next will affect every one of us, whether we want to admit it or not.

I ask my fellow members to offer their views on the topic, which pertains to what is happening RIGHT NOW, and reserve opinions on other topics for the many, many more appropriate threads that already exist or are sure to be created as they have been like clockwork since before I became a member.

I know it's not easy, especially once the eternal flames have been lit, but it's important, and I don't want to see this topic get buried like all the others. Not this time.

Please, let's focus on the topic.

It's a lot to ask, but it's not too much to ask.

And The Winner Is...

Originally posted by Souljah
If Hamas won the Election, that basicly means that ISREAL won the Palestinian Elections.

Makes you think - who BENEFITS with every Hamas Terrorist Attack?

While I'm skeptical of the sources, I also find the Hamas victory to be a little too convenient – not unlike the Ahmadinejad victory in Iran.

I suspect foreign intervention in both cases, possibly from multiple governments, and probably including the U.S. government.

After all, putting “hardliners” (an epithet which, though repeated parrot-like by the media to an irritating and suspicious degree is basically true of Ahmadinejad) or “terrorists” (which is true of Hamas in the literal, dictionary sense of the word) in charge of governments makes them fair game in the War on Terror, as per the Bush Doctrine.

Was Israel involved in ensuring a Hamas political victory last week?

I don't know, but looking at how this changes the political landscape for Israel in fundamental, practical terms, I can see why the Powers That Be would want precisely the outcome that has occurred.

Both events follow the Al Qaeda/Worldwide Islamic Jihad script to the letter by justifying stronger measures on the part of the U.S. in pursuing political, economic and military objectives in the Middle East more aggressively.

Viewed within the context of an ongoing world war being fought in the political, economic and military arenas, and the interests of America in Afghanistan, Iraq and Israel, this could well be considered a hat trick for the U.S.

Am I wrong to suspect a hidden hand in this?

Who does benefit from this Hamas victory?

Something tells me it won't be the Palestinians.

Originally posted by Majic
While I'm skeptical of the sources, I also find the Hamas victory to be a little too convenient – not unlike the Ahmadinejad victory in Iran.

Don't be Skeptical towards the PrisonPlanet - even if that is home of mister Alex Jones, he does not Make up News for his Site. This Article was based upon news stories from United Press Internationa, International Herald Tribune, Jerusalem Post, the Observer and so Forth. So I think you have no real basis for your Skepticism.

After all, putting “hardliners” (an epithet which, though repeated parrot-like by the media to an irritating and suspicious degree is basically true of Ahmadinejad) or “terrorists” (which is true of Hamas in the literal, dictionary sense of the word) in charge of governments makes them fair game in the War on Terror, as per the Bush Doctrine.

Well, to tell you the Truth I am surprised at your replay to my post, which was conveniently Ignored by the Hamas Haters, which try really hard to create yet again the Enviroment of Hate for their War on Terrorism. I thought that it will just be ignored and people will read it, but forget it in the second. I am glad there is another Soul on this Forum, that finds this Hamas Victory somehow too CONVENIENT. But then again, I understand that their selective memory, when releasing stories such as this, for they would have to agree, that Isreal actually IS a country that sponsors State Supported Terrorism.

Viewed within the context of an ongoing world war being fought in the political, economic and military arenas, and the interests of America in Afghanistan, Iraq and Israel, this could well be considered a hat trick for the U.S.

Agreed!
It certainly goes hand in hand with the current War on Terror Scenario and the increasing Temperataure of the Middle East Gunpowder Barrel, just waiting for Sparks to start the Chain reaction.

Skepticism From The Skeptical Skeptic

Originally posted by Souljah
This Article was based upon news stories from United Press Internationa, International Herald Tribune, Jerusalem Post, the Observer and so Forth. So I think you have no real basis for your Skepticism.

I'm skeptical of them, too.

Frankly, I'm skeptical of everything, and so far, it's been working out well.

In this case, it's impossible not to wonder just who worked hardest for Hamas.

Radicalizing the PA and being able to brand the PA as a "terrorist state" plays into the hands of both the Israelis and the U.S., who may now use "hardline" tactics with relative impunity -- as I suspect will indeed happen.

While I can't be sure Israel and the U.S. actively supported this Hamas victory, I can't be sure they didn't, either.

You could say I'm skeptical of this whole affair.



P.S. Above, I referred to "hundreds of other pointless threads".

For the record, some of those threads are actually excellent resources, particularly Valhall's TA-911/Flight to 911 series, which should be required reading for anyone serious about understanding not only the Arab-Israeli conflict, but the background for Al Qaeda, terrorism, Islamic fundamentalism, 9-11 and the War on Terror.

Read through those and it becomes obvious why Val is such a magnet for applause and WATS votes: she earns them.

Threads like those are pointless only if no one reads them.


[edit on 1/30/2006 by Majic]

Originally posted by Majic

While I'm skeptical of the sources, I also find the Hamas victory to be a little too convenient – not unlike the Ahmadinejad victory in Iran.

I suspect foreign intervention in both cases, possibly from multiple governments, and probably including the U.S. government.

You put no stock in the fact that the people were tired of the corruption inside Fatah and the weakness of Abbas? What type of foreign intervention occurred? Stuffing the ballot boxes? I'm not sure I understand how intervention could have occurred.

Was Israel involved in ensuring a Hamas political victory last week?

I don't know, but looking at how this changes the political landscape for Israel in fundamental, practical terms, I can see why the Powers That Be would want precisely the outcome that has occurred.

Both events follow the Al Qaeda/Worldwide Islamic Jihad script to the letter by justifying stronger measures on the part of the U.S. in pursuing political, economic and military objectives in the Middle East more aggressively.

It would be difficult to imagine stronger measures than assassinating the founders of Hamas, as Israel has done.

Viewed within the context of an ongoing world war being fought in the political, economic and military arenas, and the interests of America in Afghanistan, Iraq and Israel, this could well be considered a hat trick for the U.S.

What economic power does Palestine wield? That would be the only good reason to prop them up, imo. Other than that, they are merely a terrorist organization.

It's an interesting theory, but it's plausibility rests upon intervention by the US or Israel. And that hasn't even been alleged, much less proven.

Allegator Swamp

Originally posted by jsobecky
It's an interesting theory, but it's plausibility rests upon intervention by the US or Israel. And that hasn't even been alleged, much less proven.

True enough. I'm not even alleging, just suspecting.

Outside intervention may not have been necessary, but I'm quite certain both the U.S. and Israel are prepared for what comes next.

When the final outcome is determined, who benefits from this development will be clear enough for all to see.

Originally posted by Majic
Outside intervention may not have been necessary, but I'm quite certain both the U.S. and Israel are prepared for what comes next.

When the final outcome is determined, who benefits from this development will be clear enough for all to see.

I'm sure the US and Israel were prepared for either possible election outcome.

As I see it, it is entirely up to Hamas now. Either they renounce terrorism, and things in the region begin to improve, or they continue along the path they are on. Then things will ultimately deteriorate badly for them. But they have the opportunity to choose their future.

Originally posted by Majic
Frankly, I'm skeptical of everything, and so far, it's been working out well.

I Understand you Completly.

Radicalizing the PA and being able to brand the PA as a "terrorist state" plays into the hands of both the Israelis and the U.S., who may now use "hardline" tactics with relative impunity -- as I suspect will indeed happen.

Well, Judging by the News Today, we can see that the Palestinian people CERTAINLY will not Benefit from the Results of their Democrataic Elections:

Middle East conflict and the rise of New-Anti-Semitism?

Thomas, you are an intelligent man and to be spreading such things I myself find shocking - worse so is an administrator, allowing people to bait newer members. However, it wasn’t unexpected the fact Groover got a warn, when repeatedly he has been called names I myself find laughable. Last I checked, the staff were coming down on those who bait others - especially on the news forum…

However, let us try and keep this on topic.

Hamas, legally won an election in the Palestinian territories - this shift from Fatah is somewhat shocking to a lot of people, who live outside the region and who do not study it. However, the fact that claming Hamas are worse is laughable at best. First, you need to look at Fatah, then move on to Hamas and end with the reasons the people move to this group.

Fatah, is a reverse acronym from the Arabic name Harakat al-Tahrir al-Watani al-Filastini, the acronym actually means “Death” in Arabic and in the reverse means “Conquest”. Where did they intend to conquest? The same place that Hamas claimed - so the idea of opposing one and not the other is heavily hypocritical - a policy the United State’s, United Kingdom and many other Nation’s seem to be embarking upon. Fatah, shifted in 1993 away from terrorism and into the political process, with the signing of the Declaration of Principles by Arafat. This renounced terrorism, this moved them away from that fringe and back into the political spectrum so to deny Hamas the basis and deny them the same ability is wrong and shows peoples naivety on the subject.

There were still members of Fatah, who called for the destruction of Israel - take for example, Farouk Radium - however, they were marginalized and pushed to the fringe of the party. So, why did the people - who picked Hamas over Fatah - move back to the more extreme mindset?

The peace process has began to force people away and create a larger divide - it is alright to call for Peace in the Middle East, however many of them do not see it. The Israeli government still Policies much of the occupied territory and goes directly against what these people see as the customs and even though small portions of Land have been given back, it is not what they desire. Muslim’s from the occupied territories find it hard to visit many of their sacred sites and vice versa for Jewish people. However, it isn’t the Gaza-strip or the Westbank which hold a high level of importance, as I identified earlier it is Jerusalem.

Jerusalem, is heavily important to the Judeo-Christian branch of religion - so logically, every group does want to hold a level of control over it. For thousands of years, these terrorist actions have been taking lives - on both sides. On what to many outsiders, especially those who are not religion, as a scrap of land. However, historically this has happened all over the World - from the United State’s, to Australia to the Middle East to Europe. The only way that this will ever stop is for Israel and the “Jewish State” [as they have identified themselves] removes control but doesn’t relinquish it to the Islamic World or to the Christian World, but rather an elected group with members from all Religions involved or to an International Organisation, like the United Nation’s. The major problem many “Islamic Terrorists” have, is the fact “Jewish people” hold control over their “Holy Sites” - to silence these critics, they need an International Military in there - and agreements, need to be reached so both can use it as their capital City.

Hamas, itself is no worse than Fatah were in the passed. However, I do not deny they are terrorists and they have taken innocent lives. I just don’t differ between an Israeli Missile and a Palestinian suicide bomber - it both results in unneeded death and causes a cycle. One that is evident… Hamas, itself did agree to a ceasefire and has held it for 6months now - other militant groups, which they control hasn’t yet. However, they hold more sway than Fatah do - in fact, that is evident as is the true Nature of Fatah with the fact they attacked some Hamas members yesterday [or Saturday].

The problem is, Israel keeps on helping to boost Hamas membership. Every time Hamas preach how Israeli plans to kill all followers of Islam and they bomb that person - killing civilians, it validates his claim. It’s a cycle you see with many racist organisations in the “Western World”. They desire to make people hate one specific group and when that group targets them it helps to validate this.

Furthermore, many people on these forums seem to escape the noted history of terrorism in our own Nation’s. Take for example the United Kingdom, we have a long list of internal terrorism from more recently the I.R.A. who through political means, laid down their weapons to the suffragette movement further back to the Parliamentarian Revolt. Democracy exists in my Nation due to terrorism, women have the right to vote due to terrorism - the only difference is, we decide to judge now because we do not live in that era. Terrorism itself is a symptom of something else, in the cases above it was being governed by someone else - not controlling your own destiny and this is what is happening in the Middle East.

Fatah, have not overly changed a thing - Israel can invade the Palestinian territories whenever it desires and Hamas promised to stop this. Is that wrong? Remove yourself from your own society and begin to see it through the eyes of the people in that region. They had the land taken away from them [in their view] and given to another group [in their view]. They do not have the ability to self govern and are prejudiced against in Israel [covertly]. Their views and actions are heavily similar to that of groups like the Nation of Islam in the United State’s and the Irish Republican Army.

They fight for the right to self-govern and desire their own destiny. There was a point when the Nation of Islam and the Irish Republican Army called for the destruction of one group or another - however, when their members were drawn into debate and into the political process they began to fade into obscurity. That is evident, through society both contemporary and historically so to denounce Hamas and to remove the ability to talk is more likely to keep them as such an organisation.

You have to see it through their eyes, even if you do not agree with their views. They feel as though land was taken from them, land given to a group whose ideology directly clashes with their own and they are being stigmatised due to it. Israel treats many Arabs like terrorists, without proof, they go around targeting people for assassination and seem to be above International Law - the Palestinian people on the other hand feel criticised on every front.

The only way to resolve peace in the Middle East, is for them to begin to be self governed and to begin to allow them a political process. Israel has to renounce the use of assassinations, targeting attacks in foreign lands and themselves begin to engage in the Political process as well as the Palestinian Authority. One group is not better than the other, yet one group seems to be treated better than another - that will not help the situation.

As for the terms, Anti-Semite, it is laughable to call people who disagree with Israeli Policy an Anti-Semite. I see no problem with the Jewish people having a home-land, however I do have a problem when only one group are given this right. Native American’s desire to have their own land and did for hundreds of years - why do they not get their ancestral homelands back? The same can be said for Ireland - the simple reason is, we know it would cause one group to have even more hatred for the one being rewarded.

However, in the case of Israel it has happened and the only way we can stop the terrorism is for Israel to treat the Non-Jewish members equally, to stick to International Law and allow the Palestinian Government the right to self-Govern. No Nation has the right to attack another Nation on the basis of what one of its members does. If I was to attack the United State’s as a terrorist, can they bomb the United Kingdom? Of course not. It’s worse, that instead of holding a rational debate people result to personal attacks. If you are Pro-Israel does that suddenly make you Anti-Arab? No. If you are Anti-Israel does that suddenly make you Pro-Arab? No.

If this site is meant for rational debate, between adults in the spirit of denying ignorance allow it to happen and stop promoting the ignorant behaviour. Stop labelling people and alienating people in the desire to win a debate when there is strictly no right or wrong answer and do not use terms like Anti-Semite when they are talking about a Political entity. The fact is, not every Jewish Person desires to State of Israel to exist are those Jewish people also Anti-Semites?

Originally posted by Odium
The peace process has began to force people away and create a larger divide - it is alright to call for Peace in the Middle East, however many of them do not see it.

Well then, we may as well close the book right here, if peace is to be rejected outright.

The western world is not threatening Hamas. They are letting them know that violence and terrorism will not be tolerated, however. The price for continued terrorism? Loss of financial aid.

Now there are those who will condemn the west for cutting off aid. They will try to play the humanitarian card, and convince you that the poor Palestinian people will be the ones to suffer if aid is stopped. And they are right - the common man will suffer the most. But if they do, it is the fault of the leadership who refuse to renounce terrorism. Don't buy into their lies, because once you accept their premise that it is the fault of the west, then you give a blank check to Hamas to continue the violence. They will always be able to blame the west for the responsibilities that they refuse to undertake.

Besides, the Saudis have pledged to continue aid to Hamas.

You have to see it through their eyes, even if you do not agree with their views.

I see it, and I reject it. How can you condone a political organization whose political leader has renounced the peace process? You point to other cases as precedent for goals attained through violence. The mideast is different from Ireland, however. Violence has been given more than enough chance to succeed; it hasn't done so yet.

Originally posted by jsobecky
Violence has been given more than enough chance to succeed; it hasn't done so yet.

Which was my point.

Irish Republicanism was formed in the 1790's, it wasn't till we moved away from attacking them and containing them that they began to do the same. Israel needs to begin to talk to these terrorist groups, or they will continue it took us over 200 years before it stopped. I'd rather that we didn't have a repeat in the Middle East, but we will until both side stop violence.

Originally posted by ArchAngel
Not only are they building it all the way around they are locking out people from their land.

So? They went to War and lost. Such is the fate of those who go to war and loose.

The 'Green Line' and the path of the wall are two different things.

As they should be. The yehudis conquered the palestinian lands and control/own all of it.

The wall is a land grab.

Realistically, they already own the land.

Armed robbery if you will.

The palestinians don't seem bothered enough by it to actually resist the yehudi occupiers. Even in the recent supposed 'intafada' the general population didn't rise up. Its only ever been scattered paramilitaries.

If the palestinian people want 'their' homeland back they'll have to take it, armed robbery like. They don't seem to be willing to.

Believe it or not there are Israeli Jews that believe the Wall is wrong

I beleive it and I knew it before hand. Every group has a wide variety of opinions and parties within it.

Of course there is the other option of giving Palestinians full Israeli citizenship,

Why the heck should the yehudis do that? The palestinains went to war with them, the arabs in the region made a military league with the goal of destroying them on more than one occasion, and each time the yehudis fought them off and captured some of their land. Why should the now give anything back to them?

there was never a nation known as Palestine, and most modern Palestinians are not truly descendants of the early Philistines(Palestinians).

This is all irrelevant anyway. The land belonged to the Ottomans and then to the British. The british called part of it c.f. palestine. They also called part of their other territory at times 'trans-jordan', jordan, iraq, other european imperial powers called their parts syria, lebanon, etc etc.
As far as genetic descendancy, the native yehudis and native palestinians are probably more closely related to one another than either are to saudi arabs or european jews.

The point is, ancient history is a complex enough subject for archaeologists and historians and linguists. Politicians and generals have practically no understanding of any of it, and certainly the 'man on the street', whether its the infamous 'arab street' or a jewish street, have even less of a clue. None of the real claims to property here are based on any historical archaeology or classical linguistics anyway.

Its all based on power. International Politics is Power Politics. Especially in a time preceding the existence of international legal bodies like the League of Nations or the UN. If we resort to legalisms and distrust 'armed robbery', then jerusalem belongs to whosoever can claim the throne of Sultan Mohammed VI Vahideddin.

archangel
If it was not called Palestine in this period what was it called?

Who cares? Call it yehudi-stan or paelastra or the Emirate of Jerusalem of the Tel Aviv Confederacy. It was seized by the british from the ottomans and british dominion was recognized by the League of Nations. The british decided to let the native jews run the place, as is their right as colonial overlords and as they did in their other colonies. They picked a side that was favourable to them to run the place, and then they ended up giving soverign control to the yehudis. Therefore, its a yehudi state. Call it Palestine, call is Israel, call it 'Syria cis-jordania" and its still a Yehudi state.

Was the land was ever a Jewish majority, or Jewish controled in the last thousand years?

In the past thousand years no one who's a levantine majority has controlled the place. For the vast bulk of that time it was ruled as an imperial territory of the Turks, who were probably outnumbered by the druze or samaritans in country. Then it was ruled by englischers. For a very short while it was ruled by yehudis in one sliver and native arabs in a nearby sliver, and then the arabs cast the die and sent their armeis across the jordan. They lost. Now its all ran by yehudis. Good for the yehudis. If the arabs ever manage to assemble an army that can defeat the yehudis and then establish this 'fair and non-racist everyone is equal state' that everyone is talking about, well good for them too.

After the Roman Empire it was the assyrians, and later Persians that assimilated the land.

Strictly speaking, as I understand it, it rome 'ruled' it as an ally with its own independant king. Then the jews went to war, and stupidly, lost. Then it became a province within the empire. Then the western empire fell, it remained in the Byzantine empire, then the rising muslim armies took it, then the crusaders jumped in, and then eventually the persians seized it, and then the ottomans took it, and then eventually the british took it, then it was split into israel and palestine, and then the arabs went to war with israel and, stupidly, lost, after which point it became a provi...er, occupied territory.

TC
Historically, if one wants to get picky, the Israelites were the first to lay claim to the land, kicking the Caananites off it and claiming it as their God-Promised own.

Indeed, any none Caananite laying claim to the land has a baseless claim. The Caananites take precedence. Now we just need to find a group of people who worship bulls and pray before giant metal-clad phalluses.

Odium
Why only one group and not them all? Isn't that a bit unfair?

Yes. And?

grover
In short the Palestinians never had a chance, the deck was stacked against them by the very people dealing the hand...is it any wonder they feel they got a raw deal?

No. And?

Odium, make this clear in your mind. Your picking and choosing who you want to call down explains why you aren't a moderator and why others are. As I told you, leave it to those who can do it properly. While you feel the need to do the usual "Thomas, you are a staff member, how dare you?" BS, let me make this clear; I did not warn grover, and I do believe I made that clear.
If you think it makes you look like you are doing a fine job as a councilor, it makes it clear that you do not understand your job. Let me make this clear, you are not functioning in the color of that job at this time.
As far as members baiting others, I find this BS, and I find your attempts to champion certain members over orthers in such a manner is also a shocking bias. In short, I suggest you attempt to stay on topic, or stay clear. The attempts to create victims out of those who are ignoring facts because they prefer to ignore the same facts you obviously ignore is played into the ground. Leave it alone. That is to say, drop it. If you want to join in the fun, feel free, but don't try and preach to me being an admin, your reasoning is extremely flawed, biased and BS




[edit on 30-1-2006 by Thomas Crowne]

Now let's make some other things clear, and so that it is clear, nobody said that FATAH is a lovely bunch. What mioght be the difference in the two? Well, I think that it should be totally clear for anyone who can read and comprehend, but for those who can't I'll try my best to type with as few typos as possible, to make it easier to read.

HAMAS has made it perfectly clear that they have no desire to do anything but insure the destruction of Israel. They refuse to denounce violence, and refuse to recognize the right to exist of Israel.
See the difference? The one at least plays the game nad the other continues to demand destruction and death, and also takes an active part in it.

What did you say? Something about giving peace a chance? Couple that and what you defend, and you find what is laughable, if you were to be honest.

Furthermore, you might not want to see it, but now, the "Palestinian" people are represented by a terrorist organization, and what's more, they elected it into power. That says quite a bit, I'd say.

Where do I say this is a function of my “job”? Where did I say you warned him? Fact of the matter is, I called people on baiting long before I was a councillor and will do after. If I constantly called a member a bigot, racist or so on and so fourth and he snapped back at me - that is baiting and I would expect to get a slap on the wrist for it.

However, I’ll drop it and stick to the topic.

Fatah, were a terrorist organisation until they were brought into the fold and communications began. This is what moved them out of the “terrorist” fringe. They were allowed to take part in the peace process. If we lock Hamas out, it will only make them more determined. The Palestinian people have desired to choose Hamas to communicate on their behalf in the Peace Process, that was there democratic right. If we stop communicating with them, it will only help to divide the Nation and to empower Hamas.

If their desire is to destroy Israel, locking them out of the peace-process will only help that.

A life of an innocent person, is the same, be he Israeli or Arab and it is about time people begin to accept that terrorism exists be it by a missile or a suicide bomber. To the Arabs in Palestine, the Israeli’s are the terrorists and to the Israeli’s the Arabs are…you have to move away from judging one group and not the other. This is why they seem to be against the Western World.

Until both sides accept the actions they are committing are as bad as one another - however, I guess this is part of the problem. You have two groups of people who believe for an “Eye for an Eye” and clearly, they are going to be blind soon enough…

That will be your last chance to attack, odium. Understand this very clearly, you have not another chance.
I cannot type any slower for you.

Yup, that is some great logic. Bring people into a "peace" process that calls for the destruction of one side. That makes as much sense as saying that electing a terorist group into a political position a chance for peace.
What would such an organization bring to a "peace" table? Hmmm? Let's see. They bring the demand that Israel be destroyed. They bring the the refusal to accept Israel as a sovereign nation.
Nope, not bringing them in to a peace process speeds nothing up. It just keeps the circus from looking even more ridiculous.

How would we not speed up the ability of HAMAS? Simple. You either kill it or starve it. That is all. The intention, the strategy and their end-goals are clear and, furthermore, have been outlined in my rather lengthy post a page or so ago.
As a matter of fact, again, by reading that post, and reading the very words of the "Palestinians", one can see that they are not interested in peace. The HAMAS, the much more militant of the groups what have any power, exemplify the words. One thing I will give them, they are playing their cards open, rather than being covert. At least that is commendable.

[edit on 30-1-2006 by Thomas Crowne]