Posted on 01/27/2006 2:53:32 PM PST by sergey1973
A Hamas leader said late Thursday that the terrorist group's victory in the Palestinian legislative elections would "complete the liberation of other parts of Palestine."
Ismail Haniyeh, addressing a victory press conference, did not elaborate, but his pledge echoes the covenant adopted by Hamas at its founding in 1988.
"The day that enemies usurp part of Muslim land, jihad becomes the individual duty of every Muslim," reads article 15 of the Hamas Charter. "In face of the Jews' usurpation of Palestine, it is compulsory that the banner of jihad be raised."
Elsewhere, the document says Hamas will work "to raise the banner of Allah over every inch of Palestine."
Scholars say that in certain traditions of Islam, Muslims believe they have an obligation to win back any territory once held by Islam and subsequently lost to the faith.
Oops--make sure you click on the link above to read the full article.
I'm not sure Hamas realizes just how deeply they are in the excrement, now that they are the elected representatives of "Palestine". they need to be very careful about what they say and what violence they encourage, because now it will constitute State-Sponsored Terrorism, and that makes it much easier to deal effectively with them.
In the meantime, finish the wall.
If Israel continues its policy of decapitating Hamas, will the next Pale "Prime Minister" be tomorrow's Sheish Khabbab?
Well, the paliroaches and I agree on one more thing...
I think they can have all of "palestine" since it doesn't exist now nor has ever existed...
Really there is not much difference between Fatah and Hamas, as article noted. Fatah may pretend they work on "peace process", while Hamas states its goals openly.
In the end, they are the same Islamonazi terror nest that must be dealt with appropriately.
better go talk to King Hussein, then. He owns "Palestine", although there is no such place.
I think you are probably right, but the perception was since Fatah was somewhat willing to work with Israel they were more moderate. I have heard that after the international reaction that many Palestinians have started to realize that this probably wasn't the best path to go down (call me prejuciced, but I doubt the Palestinian intellect and doubt they realize what is good for them). Bottom line, if Israel swings back to the right and starts applying security through strength again, the average Palestinian that voted these rodents into office is going to suffer.
Reminds me of an old Arab proverb "be careful what you wish for......
If Hamas were smart they would simply renounce violence. Then traitor-in-training Olmert would give them the keys to Eretz Yisrael faster than they could ever have imagined.
Can we expect that the first suicide bomber in Israel will unleash pure he!! upon the Palestinians like they have never experienced before?
Palestine?
Okay, when they are considered a sovereign nation, then they will be worthy of recognition for consideration for liberation.
Smart post. Hussein's been dead for almost six years...
I heard a news cast today regarding US aid to these animals that I believe amounts to 234 million this year. If this is true I'd have to question how we can be such fools.
by Daniel Pipes
National Post
January 27, 2006
http://www.danielpipes.org/article/3321
Now that Hamas has apparently won the Palestinian elections, the West is hoist with its own petard.
On the one hand, Hamas is a terrorist group that unabashedly targets Israeli civilians and calls for the elimination of the Jewish state. On the other hand, it just won what observers deem to have been a reasonably fair election, and so enjoys the legitimacy that comes from the ballot box. Every foreign ministry now confronts a dilemma: Nudge it to moderation or give up on it as irredeemably extremist? Meet with Hamas members or avoid them? Continue to donate to the Palestinian Authority or starve it of funds?
This double bind is of our own making because, with Washington in the lead, virtually every Western government adopted a two-prong approach to solving the problems of the Middle East.
The negative prong consists of fighting terrorism. A "war on terror" is underway, involving military forces in the field, toughened financial laws, and an array of espionage tools.
The positive prong involves promoting democracy. The historical record shows that democratic countries almost never make war on each other, and tend to be prosperous. Therefore, elections appear to be what the doctor ordered for the maladies of the Middle East.
But that combination has failed this troubled region. The first functional election in the Palestinian Authority has thrown up Hamas. In December, 2005, the Egyptian electorate came out strongly for the Muslim Brotherhood, a radical Islamic party, and not for liberal elements. In Iraq, the post-Saddam electorate voted in a pro-Iranian Islamist as prime minister. In Lebanon, the voters celebrated the withdrawal of Syrian troops by voting Hezbollah into the government. Likewise, radical Islamic elements have prospered in elections in Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan.
In brief, elections are bringing to power the most deadly enemies of the West. What went wrong? Why has a democratic prescription that's proven successful in Germany, Japan and other formerly bellicose nations not worked in the Middle East?
It's not Islam or some cultural factor that accounts for this difference; rather, it is the fact that ideological enemies in the Middle East have not yet been defeated. Democratization took place in Germany, Japan, and the Soviet Union after their populations had endured the totalitarian crucible. By 1945 and 1991, they recognized what disasters fascism and communism had brought them, and were primed to try a different path.
That's not the case in the Middle East, where a totalitarian temptation remains powerfully in place. Muslims across the region – with the singular and important exception of Iran – are drawn to the Islamist program with its slogan that "Islam is the solution." That was the case from Iran in 1979 to Algeria in 1992 to Turkey in 2002 to the Palestinian Authority this week.
This pattern has several implications for Western governments:
• Slow down: Take heed that an impatience to move the Middle East to democracy is consistently backfiring by bringing our most deadly enemies to power.
• Settle in for the long run: However worthy the democratic goal, it will take decades to accomplish.
• Defeat radical Islam: Only when Muslims see that this is a route doomed to failure will they be open to alternatives.
• Appreciate stability: Stability must not be an end in itself, but its absence likely leads to anarchy and radicalization.
Returning to the dilemma posed by the Hamas victory, Western capitals need to show Palestinians that – like Germans electing Hitler in 1933 – they have made a decision gravely unacceptable to civilized opinion. The Hamas-led Palestinian Authority must be isolated and rejected at every turn, thereby encouraging Palestinians to see the error of their ways.
" Democratization took place in Germany, Japan, and the Soviet Union after their populations had endured the totalitarian crucible. By 1945 and 1991, they recognized what disasters fascism and communism had brought them, and were primed to try a different path. "
this is overly simplistic. Germany and Japan were bombed back to the stone age, with germany invaded by 3+ countries and divided, with an obvoius follow-up war set to start in the middle of their country, and Japan's emperor formally surrendering, a symbol of more signifigance to the japanese than we can easily appreciate. I am not sure what 'totalitarian crucible' the author thinks he is talking about in japan.
Russia's 'democracy' appears to have been declared prematurely, and Putin is busy repairing the 'crucible.'
Otherwise agree with the author generally. If you want to westernize an arab country, the only way I can see doing it is by inflicting total defeat upon them and rebuilding their social institutions in our image. Some advocate forced conversion to christianity but historically that has been a bigger fight than almost anything else.
"Returning to the dilemma posed by the Hamas victory, Western capitals need to show Palestinians that – like Germans electing Hitler in 1933 – they have made a decision gravely unacceptable to civilized opinion. The Hamas-led Palestinian Authority must be isolated and rejected at every turn, thereby encouraging Palestinians to see the error of their ways."
I expect this will actually increase Hamas' popularity. This is a huge mess.
It seems to me the US ought not to give another dollar to the Hamas government. They should also proselytize all other governments to do the same.
Since the Hamas government openly would wipe out Israel, Isreal should feel no compunction against going in and breaking their infrastructure. Break their banking system. Break their major roads. Disable shipping and trucking. Disrupt air traffic. There shouldn't be any focus on taking people's lives, only breaking everything major that the Hamas government now controls. Then let Hamas figure out how to fix it. Let them figure out how to pay for it all.
Let their citizenry contemplate what they've voted into office and the reasonable consequences of their actions.
HF
well the issue is that israel is not allowed to WIN, and never will be unless we are in a regional war with the attendant issues aleady.
also in fairness to something which i cannot prove but is almost certainly true, we have no idea WHAT media exposure the palest. get in their own territory, what their understaning o the two parties or western perception is. A good analogy is people in the US who believe the msm and thus support the democrats for that more than ideological or other reasons.
---------------------------
Smart post. He has a son, who assumed the throne. Oddly enough, his name is King Hussein.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.