http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4650788.stm

Last Updated: Thursday, 26 January 2006, 15:07 GMT


E-mail this to a friend Printable version
Hamas 'secures stunning victory'



Hamas' strong showing has caused consternation in Israel and the US

There are strong indications that the Islamic militant group Hamas has won a stunning victory in Wednesday's Palestinian parliamentary elections.

Final results are to be announced at around 1900 local time (1700 GMT).

But Prime Minister Ahmed Qurei announced his resignation, as the ruling Fatah party admitted defeat.

Meanwhile Hamas and Fatah supporters clashed in the West Bank town of Ramallah. Shots were fired in the air and some injuries were reported.

A Hamas victory will pose a great dilemma for the international community as it tries to restart peace talks with Israel, correspondents say.

********

Have these people learned nothing, i can just see world leaders lining up to offer financial aid to a government of terroists, hamas the terroist arm of iran now leading palestine, well hamas can not pick a suicide bomber for prime minister, as its a 3 year job, and a suicide bomber can blow up at any given time, will there prime minister be allowed to take his machine gun to the whitehouse, in any future peace talks with israel.

2006 & people vote for a terroist group to lead them, lead them where for a frenzy of new suicide bombings, with there hands on the purse strings, there will no end to there bombings.

As if israel has ever taken notice of suicide bombers, they will just keep building longer & bigger walls to keep these maniacs out.

I thought after ara-fuckup died palestine, may have had a future, now they have just put the nails in there coffins.

I was wondering when somebody would post this...

Maybe Hamas will be forced to find an alternative to terrorism, now that they have some legitimacy. Such situations have occured before in other parts of the world.

Georgie, you're doin' a heck of a job.

Maybe Hamas will be forced to find an alternative to terrorism, now that they have some legitimacy. Such situations have occured before in other parts of the world.


"Maybe Hamas will be forced to find an alternative to terrorism"

What knitting, monopoly, or maybe a taste for opera, or broadway musicals, i can just see it now, like the sydney opera house, but this one will be called the palestine opera house, opening soon in the westbank, & rumalla can become the new broadway of palestine, andrew Lloyd webbers The Phantom of the Opera playing nightly too thousands off happy hamas terroists.

yes Zephyr you are right, these could be exciting times for palestine, there is no need to be downbeat about terroists forming a government, we must think positive, new art museums van goghs paintings hanging next to arafuckup.

these are indeed exciting times, i am booking my hotel now in palestine, before the millions of opera & musical buffs beat me to it.

I guess running around with a machine gun and a mask over your head beats working for a living. Regardless these people deserve a chance soooo.

Regardless these people deserve a chance soooo.


"Chance"

games of chance, palestine the new las vegas, casino strips up & down the west bank, will you win, will you loose, will they be blowing you up before you leave with your winnings.

[QUOTE=vincent28uk]"Maybe Hamas will be forced to find an alternative to terrorism"

What knitting, monopoly, or maybe a taste for opera, or broadway musicals, i can just see it now, like the sydney opera house, but this one will be called the palestine opera house, opening soon in the westbank, & rumalla can become the new broadway of palestine, andrew Lloyd webbers The Phantom of the Opera playing nightly too thousands off happy hamas terroists.
===============================================

Hamas won a Democratic Election...thats called DEMOCRACY so the palestinians have democracy and now made there choice... theres no point on harping about lack of democracy in the middle east if we can't accept the results.

If George bush could call Sharon, a well known war criminal, a man who had the blood of innocent palestinian men women and children a man of peace, then anything is possible.
And remember the ANC and Nelson mandela were labeled terrorists once by the american administration.

Hamas won a Democratic Election...thats called DEMOCRACY so the palestinians have democracy and now made there choice... theres no point on harping about lack of democracy in the middle east if we can't accept the results.
So true. They have made their choice. Now, we all deal with it. One way or the other, or the other. There are many options here. Hopefully everyone will think for a change. Think of what a unique opportunity this is. Especially after the fiasco in Iraq.
And remember the ANC and Nelson mandela were labeled terrorists once by the american administration.Good example. Maybe some day some leader of Hamas will be a Nobel candidate.

There are many options here. Hopefully everyone will think for a change. Think of what a unique opportunity this is.

Good example. Maybe some day some leader of Hamas will be a Nobel candidate.


"Good example. Maybe some day some leader of Hamas will be a Nobel candidate."

Yeah i can see it now cotton & the nobel prize for terroism goes to hamas.


"There are many options here."

Yes the options & futures markets, lets relocate the new york stock exchange to palestine, just think of all the trading in military hardware.


"Think of what a unique opportunity this is."

unique opportunity for what, to see if they can set the record for suicide bombers in a year, in israel.

To see if hamas can start taking sports serious, and form a palestine olympic team, i am sure they would win the gold in the shooting category.

Hamas won a Democratic Election...thats called DEMOCRACY

Hamas is nothing but a group of terrorists. they take the law to their hands and the men carry weapons in the streets. democracy says they can't participate in democratic elections.


so the palestinians have democracy and now made there choice...
theres no point on harping about lack of democracy in the middle east if we can't accept the results.


sure, but then you must realize something: if the palestinians chose Hamas, they do accept the act of terrorism. infact, that would make most of the palestinians agree with Hamas which do not belive in something called "peace process". no peace making = no hope for the palestinians.

on the upside...now if hamas commits violence against ANYONE, there will be a government to blame, and appropriate international action can be taken.
this gives EVERYONE a say in what happens in that area of the world. not just the usa and israel.

on the upside...now if hamas commits violence against ANYONE, there will be a government to blame, and appropriate international action can be taken.
this gives EVERYONE a say in what happens in that area of the world. not just the usa and israel.
No nice thought, but to get around that they will suddenly have breakaway faction of hamas, it will be a jekyl & hyde government, on one side the peace loving hamas, the otherside the suicide bombing loving hamas, and they will claim they can not control the breakaway faction.

do you honestly think anyone would believe that?
not in the western world.
i believe that the u.n. will see alot more action and leverage in the area, now.

Hamas is nothing but a group of terrorists. they take the law to their hands and the men carry weapons in the streets. democracy says they can't participate in democratic elections.So said the Brits to the Revolutionary Americans. Get a god-damned grip on yourself, fool.

sure, but then you must realize something: if the palestinians chose Hamas, they do accept the act of terrorism. infact, that would make most of the palestinians agree with Hamas which do not belive in something called "peace process". no peace making = no hope for the palestinians.Yeah, let's exterminate them. They don't deserve to breath the same Aryan air as the rest of us. Double fool. Let me ask you something. If you were enslaved, oppressed, abused, relegated to a lesser status based on your beliefs, background, skin color, whatever, what would you do? Try to talk your fucking way out of the pit? Flatter them with your beautiful green eyes? Shake your ass? Think any of those would work, when your oppressors despise, hate or relegate you to a lesser status?

If you try those peaceful ways, and they fail, over and over again, what would you try next? Getting all the slaves together for a rebellion with clubs, rocks, and whatever guns you can steal? Think that would work? Against an organized, well-funded modern Army, Air Force and Navy, not to mention Massad? Say it doesn't work, which it won't. What else could you do? Continue to suffer lifelong misery, pain and suffering? Condemn your children to the same fate? Or try the last fucking option on the table? Taking out as many of the ENEMY as possible, as efficiently as possible, with a bomb strapped to your chest, while hoping to wake up the brainwashed, disinterested, overworked Western masses to the abuses of power their governments are perpetrating in their name, and in the name of absolute power, greed and corruption.

You tell me what you would do. What could you fucking do? Nothing but.

So said the Brits to the Revolutionary Americans. Get a god-damned grip on yourself, fool.
Double fool. Try to talk your fucking way out of the pit? Or try the last fucking option on the table? What could you fucking do? but.

Sounds like cottons meds are wearing off, he started pretty tranquil easygoing, now he is getting all hyped up again, ready to explode with some high octane colourful language, and to think this guy is in the american army.
You did not say cotton is it the salvation army, or real army, because that language is not allowed in the salvation army.

Yeah, let's exterminate them. They don't deserve to breath the same Aryan air as the rest of us. Double fool. Let me ask you something. If you were enslaved, oppressed, abused, relegated to a lesser status based on your beliefs, background, skin color, whatever, what would you do? Try to talk your fucking way out of the pit? Flatter them with your beautiful green eyes? Shake your ass? Think any of those would work, when your oppressors despise, hate or relegate you to a lesser status?

If these low life crap filled sub-human palestine beings had there chance they would love to be able to exterminate, oppress, abuse, relegulate the beutiful green eyed Aryan people.

If these low life crap filled sub-human palestine beings had there chance they would love to be able to exterminate, oppress, abuse, relegulate the beutiful green eyed Aryan people.

You make my case for me. You are no different than them. Who's right?

You make my case for me. You are no different than them. Who's right?The beutiful white American people are only on the defence against the sub- human mud people of palestine.

The beutiful white American people are only on the defence against the sub- human mud people of palestine.
Hey be careful what you say to cotton, he is in the salvation army, and he is known to give out directions to his home, if you dont agree with him for a good ol' punch up.

The beutiful white American people are only on the defence against the sub- human mud people of palestine.
Shhhh, the grown-ups are talking now.

Shhhh, the grown-ups are talking now.
Lets listen to the children:

http://www.riotvideo.com/Palestinian_Jihad_Kids.html

I've heard enough from the child today, Jeb. Suck on your pacifier and go to sleep now.

Lets listen to the children:

http://www.riotvideo.com/Palestinian_Jihad_Kids.html
Kids say the darndest things... :p

Shake your ass?

yuch

Kids say the darndest things... :p

Family Guy?

Hello

I heard that on Family Guy too..

:rolleyes:

That's a common phrase, you've never heard "kids say the darndest things" except on that cartoon?

And yes, I find this democractic election very ironic. What excuse is going to be used this time for the Middle East since "democracy" isn't going the way we want?

- N

I heard that on Family Guy too..

:rolleyes:

That's a common phrase, you've never heard "kids say the darndest things" except on that cartoon?

- N

No, I associate it with the TV show with Bill Cosby entitled "Kids Say the Darndest Things." That's where Family Guy took it from. Before Bill Cosby, there was another host, though I am too young to have ever seen it. Before that, who knows. I just hadn't thought of the show in a long time until I saw that Family Guy episode the other night and wondered if that was what made Hapsburg think of it. Little Stewie cracks me up.

And yes, I find this democractic election very ironic. What excuse is going to be used this time for the Middle East since "democracy" isn't going the way we want? - NYou take the good with the bad, just like we do here in the USA. So the neo-cons in Palestine (Hamas) won this go round. Maybe in 3 years, they'll shift back left, back to the Palestinian Authority. From militant to peace-seeking. Neo-con to liberal. Then back again. Just like here in the USA.

Yeah, that, and the actual...show....
Whatever. Crazy mideast whippersnappers...

If these low life crap filled sub-human palestine beings had there chance they would love to be able to exterminate, oppress, abuse, relegulate the beutiful green eyed Aryan people.

The beutiful white American people are only on the defence against the sub- human mud people of palestine.

J.B has been banned for 7 days for racism.

J.B has been banned for 7 days for racism.


Thank you, sir.

I'm quite optimistic about this. Hamas resorted to violence because they felt that was the only way they can be heard. Now they run the Palestinian parliment, they now have a means to speak without the use of violence. I think this will lead to better peace talks, but only if Israel will agree to talk to them.

It all comes down to how Israel wants to proceed. Israel is the main antagonist in the Middle East, they are not wanted. So, I believe the responsibility falls on them to persue any peace talks open to them.

So, you think it's a good thing that the middle east is going to explode into all-out war? You think it's a good thing that millions will die? You think it's a good thing that hundreds of thousands of jews in belligerent nations will be massacred? That is what'll happen in Hamas gets complete control over the Palestinian parliament...they will declare war on Israel, along with Iran, Egypt, Syria, and Jordan, and invade.

No, I associate it with the TV show with Bill Cosby entitled "Kids Say the Darndest Things." That's where Family Guy took it from. Before Bill Cosby, there was another host, though I am too young to have ever seen it. Before that, who knows. I just hadn't thought of the show in a long time until I saw that Family Guy episode the other night and wondered if that was what made Hapsburg think of it. Little Stewie cracks me up.

The guy who originated the show and made that line famous was Arthur (Art) Linkletter. :)

So, you think it's a good thing that the middle east is going to explode into all-out war? You think it's a good thing that millions will die? You think it's a good thing that hundreds of thousands of jews in belligerent nations will be massacred? That is what'll happen in Hamas gets complete control over the Palestinian parliament...they will declare war on Israel, along with Iran, Egypt, Syria, and Jordan, and invade.


Wow, we're talking about Palestine, not Russia or something, you give them too much credit. Hamas wants a sovereign Palestine and they want Israel to pull out of occupied territory. Before they resorted to violence because that was all they had, now they have political power, they will be more inclined to handle things in a civilized manner.

now they have political power, they will be more inclined to handle things in a civilized manner.

So now that hamas are civilized terroists, does that mean they will aplogise to people just before they blow them up, or does it mean they will sit around fires eating girl guides cookies singing carols.

So now that hamas are civilized terroists, does that mean they will aplogise to people just before they blow them up, or does it mean they will sit around fires eating girl guides cookies singing carols.


No, they will realize that the only way they will get a legitimate and recognized Palestinian state is through politics and diplomacy. I highly doubt they will continue to suicide bomb when they now control the Palestinian parliment, there is no reason for them to continue that kind of violence.

No, they will realize that the only way they will get a legitimate and recognized Palestinian state is through politics and diplomacy. I highly doubt they will continue to suicide bomb when they now control the Palestinian parliment, there is no reason for them to continue that kind of violence.

Quack i dont know if you know this, hamas is funded entirely by iran, do you think iran wants peace with israel, hamas is the terroist arm of iran & syria, hamas does not give a damn about the hopes of palestine people, there only cause is the destruction of israel, at any or all costs.

Quack i dont know if you know this, hamas is funded entirely by iran, do you think iran wants peace with israel, hamas is the terroist arm of iran & syria, hamas does not give a damn about the hopes of palestine people, there only cause is the destruction of israel, at any or all costs.

There is a difference between funding and controlling. Hamas is a seperate entity from Iran, Iran was just taking advantage of them. They now control Palestine, they no longer need the funding.

Yeah, let's exterminate them. They don't deserve to breath the same Aryan air as the rest of us. Double fool.

im the fool?

i said the palestinians should leave the way of terrorism and turn to the peace process. but since Hamas is in the government that would make it now even more difficult to accomplish, because Hamas does not recognize israel's right to exist.

now who said anything about exterminating them?
go find something positive to do.

Originally posted by QuarkMoon:
There is a difference between funding and controlling. Hamas is a seperate entity from Iran, Iran was just taking advantage of them. They now control Palestine, they no longer need the funding.

I think it is naive to believe that Iran and Syria would lose control over leaders that they helped to build up. Democracy has been good to Iran recently, in both Iraq and now in Palestine.

Now it will get interesting to see the pressure on the Hamas leaders..... pressure from the two nations that have been funding your organization and will prevent peace at all costs since it does not serve their own purpose, and now pressure from the people you serve to make peace.

Unfortunately, I know who will probably win that fight.

I think it is naive to believe that Iran and Syria would lose control over leaders that they helped to build up. Democracy has been good to Iran recently, in both Iraq and now in Palestine.

Now it will get interesting to see the pressure on the Hamas leaders..... pressure from the two nations that have been funding your organization and will prevent peace at all costs since it does not serve their own purpose, and now pressure from the people you serve to make peace.

Unfortunately, I know who will probably win that fight.
At last someone not wearing horse blinkers, and is seeing this hamas terroist government for what it is.
You must have a A level in basic common sense, unlike most posters.

The US, the EU and the UN have all made statements to the effect that Hamas must give up their violent tactics. Pressure indeed.

J.B has been banned for 7 days for racism.

I know there is a good person in there. I admire you for handling that in the calm way you did.

You know what I find interesting? Every headline in every zionist controlled country in the world is calling Hamas terrorists.

Only one of them bother to print what Israel does.

"Israeli soldiers shot dead a nine-year-old girl in the Gaza Strip last night. The army said that a Palestinian had been seen carrying a large bag near the border and ignored warnings to stop."


Who is the terrorisit organization? I would think it would be the people murdering 9 year old girls.

http://www.ifa-usapray.org/Understanding_Palestinian_Terrorism/Israeli Embassy/SeedsofHatred/SeedsOfHatredPhotos/Palestinian_TV7_Children_guns.jpg


http://www.ifa-usapray.org/Understanding_Palestinian_Terrorism/Israeli Embassy/SeedsofHatred/SeedsOfHatredPhotos/You_are_the_target_in_front_of_my_eyes.jpg


http://www.guardian.co.uk/gallery/image/0,8543,-13605244297,00.html



Palestines new government hamas, marches off for peace talks.

You know what I find interesting? Every headline in every zionist controlled country in the world is calling Hamas terrorists.

Only one of them bother to print what Israel does.

"Israeli soldiers shot dead a nine-year-old girl in the Gaza Strip last night. The army said that a Palestinian had been seen carrying a large bag near the border and ignored warnings to stop."


Who is the terrorisit organization? I would think it would be the people murdering 9 year old girls.
You can't discount the nature of the situation there. With 20/20 hindsight you may well say that this girl (if it's true) should not have been shot, but the only reason they did is that soldiers confronted with similar situations have been blown up by suicide bombers. Palestinians have nothing against using a small girl to carry bombs.

You know what I find interesting? Every headline in every zionist controlled country in the world is calling Hamas terrorists.

Only one of them bother to print what Israel does.

"Israeli soldiers shot dead a nine-year-old girl in the Gaza Strip last night. The army said that a Palestinian had been seen carrying a large bag near the border and ignored warnings to stop."


Who is the terrorisit organization? I would think it would be the people murdering 9 year old girls.
well i would think the terroists, are the ones who use kids as shields, and give kids guns & military training, or do you think thats normal, because if you do, then you must be abnormal.

Who is the terrorisit organization? I would think it would be the people murdering 9 year old girls.

the truth is the soldiers did fire some warning shots before they killed that poor girl. you can't murder someone when you give him a chance to turn around. also, it was the girl who got close to them. as bad as it sounds, those soldiers acted correctly. i mean, they can't let people get close to the border and children should not get near there. what would you do?

girl guides.
:confused:
I think you mean "Girl Scouts".

:confused:
I think you mean "Girl Scouts".

Is this the extent of your imput, we are talking about live & death issues, and you dare to trivialise it with a flimsy comment like that, is my shirt undone,or my fly down too, for gods sake get a grip of yourself, before someone beats you to it.

I already made my point earlier in the thread. I've moved on, and so should you.

I already made my point earlier in the thread. I've moved on, and so should you.
"I've moved on"

What does this mean, you were in the red light district with your laptop, and the police moved you on.

vital decisions need to be made soon in palestine, hamas i am sure you have noticed has many posters here in this forum, brian foley amonst others, we need to influence the hamas members, so the right decisions are made for our brothers in palestine.

Hapsburg stop being so bloody self absorbed for once.

Y Palestinians have nothing against using a small girl to carry bombs.

Israelis have nothing against shooting small girls.

Palestinians have nothing against using a small girl to carry bombs

Israelis have nothing against shooting small girls.

Both statements equally correct. If Palestine wants to send small children to blow up Israelis, Israel isn't going to take Palestine's shit. Envision this scenario, Happeh: Your standing in a large group of your family. A small child walks up to you with a bomb. Standing mere feet from the child, there isn't enough time for you and your family to get far enough away from the blast that safety will be ensured. The child has the bomb detenator in his/her hands, and you have a few precious seconds before the child sets off the explosive. Your armed with a gun. What do you do?








That's what I thought.

AmishRakeFight

I'm very disappoined but not surprised at the Hamas victory in Palestinian Parliament. Although Hamas has surpassed Fateh in fundraising and the building of Palestinian infrastructure, and although they have evolved far beyond a militia, they will do a lot of harm as legislators. And they will not be incorruptible.

Palestinian society is more liberal and diverse than the Hamas philosophy will compel it to be. I am worried that Hamas is going to far overstep its mandate in Palestinian life, and the sad result will be that division and fighting between Palestinians will rise to levels we have not seen before. Obviously this will severely harm the ability of Palestinians to speak with one coherent voice in forging a better future for themselves.

Palestinians are struggling for international legitimacy and Hamas' penchant for the incendiary will certainly damage the Palestinian cause. I am worried that overconfidence is going to cause Hamas leadership to back Palestine into some tricky diplomatic corners, where it will be impossible to rectify the mistakes made for years.

In the coming Israeli elections, I expect a swing to the right and a hardening of attitudes toward the PA. This new political rise of Hamas will be making horrific new confrontations more likely.

The victory of the neoconservatives in US government has caused American interests much enduring harm, and I believe it was a result of being guided by too-simple world views, with a fundamentalist and evangelical core base. The Hamas victory is going to have a far more profound effect than did the neoconservative derailment of the Republican Party. An American analogy would be quite a stretch to make, something like a Baptist Party taking over Congress, with an expressed agenda to forthwith insert fundamentalist Chistianity into American law and American lifestyles. In such a case there would certainly be a fight. I'm afraid there is going to be premature fight in Palestine, occuring long before things are sorted with Israel, about the nature of their society.

The political rise of Hamas, or a resurgence of political Islam, is now stretching internal Palestinian divisions to the breaking point. This is not a trend toward stability for Palestinians- Not internally, not with Israel, and not internationally.

This goes for Islam as political force in the entire region. It has always been the case that political organizing begins in the Mosque, especially under repression. The question is, what will moderate Arabs do when democracy does take hold, and they step out of the Mosque in a new day?

It would be better at that point for the Mullahs to stay in the Mosque, or build schools and hospitals, but for secular democratic government to be born- as was the vision of Arafat and the PLO. Theocracy is a government of the past, that cannot coexist well with the modern world.

Palestinians deserve stability and prosperity. In Iran, they are tired of sharia, and ready for change. But the feed-back loop of confrontationalism caused by the fundamentalist nature of leadership has that country only slowly emerging from international and economic seclusion.

Palestinians have waited so long for a normal, progrressive, contemporary life, but with fundamentalist leadership, they are choosing the hardest and longest road and I feel sorry for them. But ultimately, it is their choice to make.

Well said, hypewaders.

I agree. Excellent analysis. I've also been watching the current situation in the Middle East with growing concern. The Hamas government publically stated that they have one main goal: Wipe Israel and the Great Satan off the map. Also, now that Ariel Shanon is unavailable and will die fairly soon, his successor will definitely not be any better. He has one goal as well: Elimination of Palestine. Anybody else see the problem here?

Has Hamas stated that recently, though?

You know I'm not sure. Let me research up a little bit, and I'll try and post a link if they did.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060126/ap_on_re_mi_ea/palestinians_election_hamas

I stand corrected. You're right, Hamas' last comment threatening Israel's anaihilation was in 2003 (I believe). They are, however, not doing anything to make peace with Israel.

An article I read today said that the goal of destroying Israel is still in Hamas' charter, which I suppose is enough reason to ask them to reform it before attempting negotiations.

What article was it, because this may be the one I was referencing to earlier.

AmishRakeFight

Amish:

Happeh: Your standing in a large group of your family. A small child walks up to you with a bomb. Standing mere feet from the child, there isn't enough time for you and your family to get far enough away from the blast that safety will be ensured. The child has the bomb detenator in his/her hands, and you have a few precious seconds before the child sets off the explosive. Your armed with a gun. What do you do?

And your analogy is fucked, because very rarely are Palestinian children victims of Israeli gunfire/bombs because they were themselves carrying bombs. The truth is that the IDF is trigger happy, and knows that they won't be punished if they happen to speed up the process of ethnic cleansing by shooting an Arab child or two.

And your analogy is fucked, because very rarely are Palestinian children victims of Israeli gunfire/bombs because they were themselves carrying bombs. The truth is that the IDF is trigger happy, and knows that they won't be punished if they happen to speed up the process of ethnic cleansing by shooting an Arab child or two.

That doesn't disprove my analogy at all. Child comes to you with bomb. You know he has bomb. You have gun. You shoot child to protect yourself. End of story. Maybe you took the wrong idea from my analogy; my point was merely that if he (happeh) was in the situation of the Israeli soldier who shot the kid, he would have done the same thing out of man's natural instinct to survive.

AmishRakeFight

Amish:

That doesn't disprove my analogy at all. Child comes to you with bomb. You know he has bomb. You have gun. You shoot child to protect yourself. End of story.

No, it's not the end of the story. The story hasn't begun, because your analogy is FUCKED. The 9 year old girl who was shot dead DIDN'T have a bomb, you retard.

Carrying a large bag =/= having a bomb.

What I find especially disgusting is that the girl's body was found HOURS LATER by Palestinian medics. The Israeli soldiers just left her body there to rot, like an animal. They didn't bother to inform anyone that they had just gunned down a 9 year old who didn't have a bomb. I wonder why?

This shit happens time and time again. Back in 2002, and 2004, IDF soldiers shot innocent young girls who were playing near their homes. Worse yet, these soldiers were not punished for their brutality! In one of those cases, the Israeli officer's OWN SOLDIERS testified against, but he got off unpunished! How the fuck can Israel claim the moral highground, when it engages in shit like this?

Israel occupies land which doesn't belong to it. It bulldozes, annexs, burns crops, poisons livestocks, and then shoots children.

And then dumb shits demand that Hamas to disarm.

"WAAAA, HAMAS WON'T DISARM SO THAT WE CAN BULLDOZE THEIR HOMES AND SHOOT THEIR CHILDREN. BOO HOO HOO!!!"

Yeah, fancy that. Hamas won't disarm while Palestine remains occupied by imperialistic Zionist dumbfucks. "Waaa, Poland won't disarm so that the Prussians, Russians and Austrians can ream them up the ass. Boo hoo hoo!"

I completely sympathize with the Iranian Prime Minister. There will only be peace when the Jewish-only apartheid state of Israel is completely wiped off the map.

You didn't do your research, mountainhare. Spidergoat originally said:

You can't discount the nature of the situation there. With 20/20 hindsight you may well say that this girl (if it's true) should not have been shot, but the only reason they did is that soldiers confronted with similar situations have been blown up by suicide bombers. Palestinians have nothing against using a small girl to carry bombs.

and Happeh said:

Israelis have nothing against shooting small girls.

Happeh's train of logic was that "Maybe so, Palestinians might not think twice about using a child as a bomb, but Israel is just as morally decayed; they don't have anything against shooting small girls."

Equally true statements, as I said earlier:

Both statements equally correct.

My analogy's point to Happeh is that Palestine and Israel will both do despicable things and that if he was in the situation that the Israeli soldiers might have thought they were in, then he would have done the same thing. Whether Israel wants to shoot children or not is their perogative (sp?), I hold no power and don't approve of Palestine NOR Israel's tactics.

AmishRakeFight

As the votes were counted in the Palestinian election and the scale of Hamas's landslide became apparent to the world, Aya al-Astal drifted away from her home and wandered towards the fence along the border between the Gaza strip and Israel.

The nine-year-old girl's parents realised she was gone as they watched the election results on television. They do not know precisely what happened, but the Israeli army later said Aya was behaving in a suspicious manner reminiscent of a terrorist - she got too close to the border fence - and so a soldier fired several bullets into the child, hitting her in the neck and blowing open her stomach.

Aya was the second child killed by the Israeli army last week. Soldiers near Ramallah shot 13-year-old Munadel Abu Aaalia in the back as he walked along a road reserved for Jewish settlers with two friends.

The army said the boys planned to throw rocks at Israeli cars, which the military defines as terrorism.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,,1697825,00.html

"Aya was shot in the neck and stomach. Her stomach was hanging out," said the child's mother, Aisha. "We have no idea why she went there but she was a child. She was so small. She was nine years old. She didn't wear a hijab. It was clear she was just a young girl. This is hatred."

Hamas is responsible for the murder of more than 400 Israelis. But since it declared a ceasefire a year ago the group has killed one Israeli, according to the Israeli government's own figures.

"The Americans always give excuses for Israel," said Samir. "Israel is like a spoilt son. They never pressure them. They kill our children and no one says anything. If there is a reaction by Palestinians to these incidents they call us terrorists."

Amish:

My analogy's point to Happeh is that blah blah blah

Your analogy's 'point' is irrelevant, because it assumed that the girl was carrying a bomb. The girl in the scenario we are discussing was NOT carrying a bomb.

The shooting of children might be justified if they are carrying a bomb, and are an immediate threat. The problem is that children shot by the IDF RARELY fulfill both of these requirements.
More like: "Oh, she has a bag. It must be a bomb. Pump 20 bullets into her!"

The US, the EU and the UN have all made statements to the effect that Hamas must give up their violent tactics. Pressure indeed.

Yeah how dare they fight back against the bulldozers, tanks and missles of the IDF...

Amish:

And your analogy is fucked, because very rarely are Palestinian children victims of Israeli gunfire/bombs because they were themselves carrying bombs. The truth is that the IDF is trigger happy, and knows that they won't be punished if they happen to speed up the process of ethnic cleansing by shooting an Arab child or two.

Don't want those pesky non-jews trying to take away the 'jewish majority' from the 'jewish state'...

Don't want those pesky non-jews trying to take away the 'jewish majority' from the 'jewish state'...

Hamas plans to implement Sharia law. Would you like to live under that as a non-Muslim?

at least it is better than having your home bulldozed for being a 'non-jew'...

So two wrongs make a right?

What article was it, because this may be the one I was referencing to earlier.

AmishRakeFight

It was a local newspaper. I found this site though: http://www.mideastweb.org/hamas.htm

The principles of the Hamas are stated in their Covenant or Charter, given in full below. Following are highlights.

"Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it."

"The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgement Day. It, or any part of it, should not be squandered: it, or any part of it, should not be given up. "

"There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors."

"After Palestine, the Zionists aspire to expand from the Nile to the Euphrates. When they will have digested the region they overtook, they will aspire to further expansion, and so on. Their plan is embodied in the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion", and their present conduct is the best proof of what we are saying."

It's rather scary that they refer to the Protocols when it's well known that those were faked for propoganda purposes.

Zephyr:

Hamas plans to implement Sharia law. Would you like to live under that as a non-Muslim?

A fucking irrelevant question, given that I wouldn't go to a country which implemented Sharia law. If you don't like a country run by Muslim law, then don't go there. Simple.

What government the Palestinians choose to implement in their country is their own damn business. You don't like it? Stiff shit! They were elected democratically, so your opinion is less than worthless.

Lovely swearing, but out of context.

I replied to angry's statement that Israelis don't want to live in a Muslim majority state. While a Muslim majority state isn't necessarily discriminatory, one under Sharia law is. And Hamas seems to want to implement that. I think this reveals a downside of any one-state solution.

Zephyr:
And Hamas seems to want to implement that. I think this reveals a downside of any one-state solution.

Because a one-state solution would result in a Muslim state. Duhhh, you're a moron! But hey, what's new?

...could result in a Sharia state. Big difference.

(This is like spoo... nevermind)

The shooting of children might be justified if they are carrying a bomb, and are an immediate threat. The problem is that children shot by the IDF RARELY fulfill both of these requirements.
More like: "Oh, she has a bag. It must be a bomb. Pump 20 bullets into her!"

You ass spelunker, I agree with you! And whether or not the Israeli's knew that there was no bomb (more likely than not they knew that it was just a bag), there is still the variable that strung out, on-edge, high pressure soldiers will make bad decisions. My analogy is perfectly sound, and honestly the only thing I've been debating with you about for a page and a half.

And of course my analogy makes the "assumption" that the child had a bomb. I even took it a step farther and spent three sentences detailing the bomb carrying child. If you think for just three seconds, you will realize that the point of me including the bomb-toting child in the equation is that the Israeli soldiers, regardless of hate motivation, shot the child that was coming near him with a large bag. I don't know how much more I can debate about this! It's elementary analysis of my analogy.

AmishRakeFight

Someone seems to think that under Sharia that you must slaughter all the 'non-muslims', yet that clearly isn't the case once you look at most other countries that practice Sharia.

Meanwhile the zionists simply wish to kill you for being a 'non-jew'.

Of course not. There are plenty of non-Muslims living under Sharia (living being the operative word - a bit difficult to do that if you've been slaughtered). However they are treated as second-class citizens.

And if you think Zionists kill all non-Jews, again there are non-Jews living in Israel. (Living being the operative word, yada yada...)

As I've stated, there's nothing intrinsically wrong with a one-state solution. The moment it's one state with second-class citizens, though, something is very wrong.

A shame on all so called "palestinian" people.

A shame on all so called "palestinian" people.

Why?

Why do some people live in these little black and white worlds, their heads filled with crowds chanting "Israelis good, Palestinians bad" or "Palestinians good, Israelis bad"? :confused:

The Sejulk Turks ran under Sharia and there were no problems. Actually they didn't force Sharia on the Christians or Jews, but allowed them to create their own laws for a lot of things...

...until 1912-21, when they started massacring them all in the Armenian Genocide.

I note that Hamas' first domestic political goal is sharia and the re-institution of the jizya on non-muslims.

Geoff

Someone seems to think that under Sharia that you must slaughter all the 'non-muslims', yet that clearly isn't the case once you look at most other countries that practice Sharia.

'Course you don't have to slaugher all the kufr! Where would your tax base come from?

You only have to slaughter the ones that i) refuse to pay the oppressive jizya, ii) try to marry muslim women, iii) insult Mohammed, iv) leave islam, v) rake leaves accidentally against a mosque, vi) argue or debate religion with a muslim in public, vii) accuse muslims of crimes, viii) openly display religious symbols, ix) try to convert muslims, x) refuse to convert after insulting Mohammed, xi) try to rebuild churches without the permission of the religious authorities, xii) try to build new churches, xiii) ring bells - ever...

The list goes on and on. But no, you'd don't have to slaugher all the filthy kufr.

Just the ones that don't act like slaves.

Geoff

Zephyr:

...could result in a Sharia state. Big difference.

Duhhh, could. That's the key word. It's unlikely, however.
Most likely, a one-state solution would involve a secular government.

Amish:

you will realize that the point of me including the bomb-toting child in the equation is that the Israeli soldiers, regardless of hate motivation, shot the child that was coming near him with a large bag.
But the child DIDN'T have a bomb, and WASN'T coming near them. So why the fuck do you keep factoring that into your equation? It's IRRELEVANT, because only in a tiny minority of cases are children who are shot were...

1. Carrying a bomb.

2. Going near the soldiers.

Geoff:

...until 1912-21, when they started massacring them all in the Armenian Genocide.

The Ottoman Empire existed since the late 12th century. For five hundred+ years, they implemented Sharia law, and there were no massacres. A bigoted nutcase Sultan came into power, and he committed a genocide or two. Sharia law was not to blame... the Sultan was.

But the child DIDN'T have a bomb, and WASN'T coming near them. So why the fuck do you keep factoring that into your equation? It's IRRELEVANT, because only in a tiny minority of cases are children who are shot were...

1. Carrying a bomb.

2. Going near the soldiers.

Please follow my logic carefully. There is a child playing close enough to the soldiers that the soldiers can accurately shoot several bullets into the child. The child has a bag. The Israelis don't know for sure whether or not there is a bomb. So, motivated by their Palestinian hatred, they shoot the child and use the fact that they thought there was a bomb to excuse the childs death. If we can agree with this much, than our whole redundent debate is over. My analogy was simply that the soldiers did not know for sure or not if the child had a bomb. It was a merely possibility. The child COULD HAVE been holding a bomb in the bag. The child was obviously close enough to fire
20 bullets into her

AmishRakeFight

Zephyr:

Most likely, a one-state solution would involve a secular government.

The good folks at Hamas would care to disagree with you.

THE STERN FACE OF THE NEW PALESTINE
By MARK MACKINNON
Globe & Mail
Saturday, January 28, 2006

JERUSALEM -- The incoming Hamas government will move quickly to make Islamic sharia "a source" of law in the West Bank and Gaza Strip and will overhaul the Palestinian education system to separate boys and girls and introduce a more Islamic curriculum, a senior official in the movement said yesterday...

Mr. Abu Teir, who was No. 2 on the Hamas list of candidates for Wednesday's election, said introducing sharia -- a controversial moral and legal code based on the Koran -- would be the first act of the new Hamas-controlled Palestinian Legislative Council.

"The No. 1 thing we will do is take sharia as a source for legislation. Sharia has a soul in it and is good for all occasions," Mr. Abu Teir said.

That's as clear as clear can be. One-state, two-state, red-state, blue-state: sharia for everyone.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20060128/HAMASMAIN28/TPInternational/Africa

However, the Hamas victory may turn out to be a victory over terrorism after all - because people will finally get the message about them.

From Jeff Jacoby:

"If Palestinians turned out en masse to elect a party that unapologetically stands for hatred and mass murder, it's a safe bet that hatred and mass murder had something to do with the turnout...

Yet that is why the Hamas landslide is good news. It will now be much harder to wish away the unpleasant fact that after a dozen years of PLO misrule, Palestinian society is deeply dysfunctional, steeped in hatred and violence. All but the willfully blind can now see that the Palestinian Authority is no ''partner in peace." Until it is decisively defeated and thoroughly detoxified, the Palestinian people will never enjoy the blessings of liberty and decent governance. Ironically, the ascendancy of Hamas may have brought that day a little closer."

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/01/29/hamas_victory_is_good_news/?p1=MEWell_Pos1

"Willfully blind"? Brian, are you there? He's talking about you.


The Ottoman Empire existed since the late 12th century. For five hundred+ years, they implemented Sharia law, and there were no massacres. A bigoted nutcase Sultan came into power, and he committed a genocide or two. Sharia law was not to blame... the Sultan was.

But sharia was to blame for segretating muslim and Christian subjects of the Ottoman Empire, and the massacre occurred along religious lines. I wouldn't call 2 million people "a genocide or two", either.

Nor, moreover, is genocide unique to this period, and the hatred did not begin there:

************************************************** ***********

The wartime reports from German and Austro-Hungarian officials also confirm independent evidence that the origins and evolution of the genocide had little to do with World War I "Armenian provocations". Emphasis is placed, instead, on the larger pre-war context dating from the failure of the mid-19th century Ottoman Tanzimat reform efforts.11 These reforms, initiated by the declining Ottoman Empire (i.e., in 1839 and 1856) under intense pressure from the European powers, were designed to abrogate the repressive laws of dhimmitude, to which non-Muslim (primarily Christian) minorities, including the Armenians, had been subjected for centuries, following the Turkish jihad conquests of their indigenous homelands. 12

Led by their patriarch, the Armenians felt encouraged by the Tanzimat reform scheme, and began to deluge the Porte (Ottoman seat of government) with pleas and requests, primarily seeking governmental protection against a host of mistreatments, particularly in the remote provinces. Between 1850 and 1870, alone, 537 notes were sent to the Porte by the Armenian patriarch characterizing numerous occurrences of theft, abduction, murder, confiscatory taxes, and fraud by government officials.13 These entreaties were largely ignored, and ominously, were even considered as signs of rebelliousness. For example, British Consul (to Erzurum) Clifford Lloyd reported in 1890,

"Discontent, or any description of protest is regarded by the local Turkish Local Government as seditious"14

He went on to note that this Turkish reaction occurred irrespective of the fact that "..the idea of revolution.." was not being entertained by the Armenian peasants involved in these protests.15

The renowned Ottomanist, Roderick Davison, has observed that under the Shari'a (Islamic Holy Law) the "..infidel gavours ["dhimmis", "rayas"]" were permanently relegated to a status of "inferiority" and subjected to a "contemptuous half-toleration". Davison further maintained that this contempt emanated from "an innate attitude of superiority", and was driven by an "innate Muslim feeling", prone to paroxysms of "open fanaticism". 16 Sustained, vehement reactions to the 1839 and 1856 Tanzimat reform acts by large segments of the Muslim population, led by Muslim spiritual leaders and the military, illustrate Davison's point.17 Perhaps the most candid and telling assessment of the doomed Tanzimat reforms, in particular the 1856 Act, was provided by Mustafa Resid, Ottoman Grand Vizier at six different times between 1846-58. In his denunciation of the reforms, Resid argued the proposed "complete emancipation" of the non-Muslim subjects, appropriately destined to be subjugated and ruled, was "entirely contradictory" to "the 600 year traditions of the Ottoman Empire". He openly proclaimed the "complete emancipation" segment of the initiative as disingenuous, enacted deliberately to mislead the Europeans, who had insisted upon this provision. Sadly prescient, Resid then made the ominous prediction of a "great massacre" if equality was in fact granted to non-Muslims. 18

Despite their "revolutionary" advent, and accompanying comparisons to the ideals of the French Revolution, the CUP's "Young Turk" regime eventually adopted a discriminatory, anti-reform attitude toward non-Muslims within the Ottoman Empire. During an August 6, 1910 speech in Saloniki, Mehmed Talat, pre-eminent leader of the Young Turks disdainfully rejected the notion of equality with "gavours" , arguing that it "…is an unrecognizable ideal since it is inimical with Sheriat [Shari'a] and the sentiments of hundreds of thousands of Muslims…".19 Roderick Davison notes that in fact "..no genuine equality was ever attained..", re-enacting the failure of the prior Tanzimat reform period. As a consequence, he observes, the CUP leadership "…soon turned from equality…to Turkification…"20

During the reign of Sultan Abdul Hamid, the Ottoman Turks massacred over 200,000 Armenians between 1894-96. This was followed, under the Young Turk regime, by the Adana massacres of 25,000 Armenians in 1909, and the first formal genocide of the 20th century, when in 1915 alone, an additional 600,000 to 800,000 Armenians were slaughtered.21 The massacres of the 1890s had an "organic" connection to the Adana massacres of 1909, and more importantly, the events of 1915. As Vahakn Dadrian argues, they facilitated the genocidal acts of 1915 by providing the Young Turks with "a predictable impunity." The absence of adverse consequences for the Abdul Hamid massacres in the 1890s allowed the Young Turks to move forward without constraint.22

Contemporary accounts from European diplomats make clear that these brutal massacres were perpetrated in the context of a formal jihad against the Armenians who had attempted to throw off the yoke of dhimmitude by seeking equal rights and autonomy. For example, the Chief Dragoman (Turkish-speaking interpreter) of the British embassy reported regarding the 1894-96 massacres:

…[The perpetrators] are guided in their general action by the prescriptions of the Sheri [Sharia] Law. That law prescribes that if the "rayah" [dhimmi] Christian attempts, by having recourse to foreign powers, to overstep the limits of privileges allowed them by their Mussulman [Muslim] masters, and free themselves from their bondage, their lives and property are to be forfeited, and are at the mercy of the Mussulmans. To the Turkish mind the Armenians had tried to overstep those limits by appealing to foreign powers, especially England. They therefore considered it their religious duty and a righteous thing to destroy and seize the lives and properties of the Armenians…"23

12. Bat Ye'or, The Decline of Eastern Christianity Under Islam, (Cranbury, NJ: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 1996) 522 Pp.

13. Dadrian V., Warrant for Genocide: Key Elements of Turko-Armenian Conflict, (New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 1999), p. 39.

14. Dadrian V., “The Armenian Question and the Wartime Fate of the Armenians”, p.61, with specific primary source documentation p.79, n.11

15. Dadrian V., “The Armenian Question and the Wartime Fate of the Armenians”, p.61, with specific primary source documentation p.79, n.11

16. Davison R., "Turkish Attitudes Concerning Christian-Muslim Equality in the Nineteenth Century", p.855.

17. Bat Ye'or, The Decline of Eastern Christianity Under Islam, Reports by British Diplomats [1850-1876], Pp. 395-433.

18. Dadrian V., “The Armenian Question and the Wartime Fate of the Armenians”, Pp.61-62, with specific primary source documentation, p.79 n.14.

19. Dadrian V., “The Armenian Question and the Wartime Fate of the Armenians”, Pp.61-62, with specific primary source documentation, p.79 n.15.

20. Davison R, "The Armenian Crisis, 1912-1914", The American Historical Review, (1948) Vol. 53, Pp. 482-483.

21. Dadrian V., The History of the Armenian Genocide, (Providence, RI: Bergahn Books, 1997), Pp. 155, 182, 225, 233 n.44; Auron Y., The Banality of Indifference, (New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 2000), p. 44.

22. Dadrian V., The History of the Armenian Genocide, Pp. 113-184.

23. Dadrian V., The History of the Armenian Genocide, p. 147, with primary source documentation p. 168 n.199.

http://www.secularislam.org/articles/genocide.htm

************************************************** ***********



Geoff