It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Ex-Carter Official: Israel Ignored Hamas Offer Before Attack

page: 1

log in


posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 02:49 PM


Ex-Carter Admin Official: Israel Ignored Hamas Offer Days Before Attacking Gaza; Violated Ceasefire with Attacks, Blockade

Robert Pastor is a senior adviser to the Carter Center and a professor at American University who met with exiled Hamas political leader Khaled Meshaal in Damascus on Dec. 14, along with former President Jimmy Carter. Pastor says Meshaal indicated Hamas was willing to go back to the ceasefire if Israel would lift the siege on Gaza. He says he passed along the statement to the Israeli military, but he never heard back. Two weeks later, Israel launched its three-week assault that left more than 1,300 Palestinians, most of them civilians, at least a third children, dead.
(visit the link for the full news article)

Mod Edit: All Caps Title.

[edit on 22-1-2009 by MemoryShock]

posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 02:49 PM
According to this article, Hamas was opting to go back to a ceasefire before Israel began it's invasion. They decided to do it anyway.

If this is true, it would not look good for Israel. They are already taking a beating from much of the world for attacking gaza.

First i've heard of this. Any other info?
(visit the link for the full news article)

posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 03:17 PM
Assuming this is true, it would be because Israels offensive against Hamas had nothing to do with Hamas at all, it was just the mere existence of the Palestinian people that offended the Israeli government.

Of course, that's assuming this isn't as much a lie as every other told by either side AND our own government (and others) regarding nearly any affairs in the ME.

posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 03:28 PM
Heres a good question...why was there a siege in place from the start? Did Hamas say something to offend Israel? Surely I hope not.

posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 03:36 PM
If this is true..I do also find it strange that the info came out AFTER Israel pulled out of Gaza.

Could that mean anything as well?

posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 03:42 PM
Perhaps he wanted to keep the info secret until after hostilities ended before coming out and said it.

posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 04:33 PM
link comments?

Or is this old news?

posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 06:23 PM
The 6months prior to the Invasion of Palestine, Hamas had been launching 5+ rockets a day into Israel.
This is why Israel ignored Hamas offer and attacked 3weeks later.

posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 06:25 PM
Any comments on the Israeli to Palestinian kill ratio?

Or is this not the place to discuss proportion?

posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 07:15 PM
reply to post by Maxmars

The higher the kill ratio on your side, the more efficient, and successful you are.

Never in history has one side suggested "you kill all you want of mine, and when you get done, we'll do a head count, and I'll kill the same number of yours."

Doesn't work that way, but from some of the posts I've read, some idiots seem to think that such a reciprocation is the only acceptable response.

I say, BS.

You may say, start, but then I say quit.

posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 10:50 AM
Yeah it was so unfair. But I think the war between the U.S. and Japan was far more unfair where no American civilians were killed while Japanese men, women, and children were being slaughter. It was a one sided fight. A fight that the Americans were not playing by the rules.

posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 11:02 AM
Of course if Israel totally agreed to Hamas will and disappeared no rockets and no Gaza war would be needed. If only, if only....
Those nasty Israelis, keep existing.
There are two sides to agreement. If Israel did not accept it then it is not an agreement, is it? Hamas refused to go on with conditions of truce.
Saying all this, Israeli incursion into Gaza was useless, and without any possible gain. In my opinion. Too many people died and result (that could be predicted) is non-existent. And in elections in February politicians that participated in starting two wars in few years will answer. I hope.

new topics

top topics


log in