I don't know. I'd like an answer to this question right here. Of course we shouldn't expect any answers, just do what we're told
WND: Page 1 of the Washington Times reports "U.S. reverses its position on Hamas. Powell says nonviolence key to new role." And my question: If this is done, despite Abbas' total violation of the road map's requirement that Hamas be disarmed, why should al-Qaida not be extended the same olive branch?
Hmmmm, now why would the administration change its position on a terrorist organization and especially Hamas?
More than 50 percent of Hamas's current funding comes from Saudi Arabia and is increasing despite US President George W. Bush's call to the kingdom to halt aid to Palestinian terrorist groups, Dore Gold, a former Israeli ambassador to the UN and a researcher of terrorist financing, said Tuesday in Washington.
"The Saudi share of Hamas funding is growing, not declining. We're getting no change in Saudi behavior," Gold said at a roundtable on Saudi terrorist financing and September 11 organized by Reps. Ileana Ros Lehtinen (R-Florida), chair of the House International Relations Subcommittee on the Middle East and Central Asia, and Gary Ackerman (D-New York), the ranking Democrat on the subcommittee
Oh, but I forgot, no one in the 'official' Saudi government knows anything. And the same official Saudi government refused last week to condemn Hamas. And Saudi Arabia is an 'ally' on the WOT.
Reminds me of the firefighter (Saudi Arabia) who start the fires just to call other fire departments (the Western World) in and appear as the hero