Hamas Rejects Support of al-Qaida No. 2

Are the terrorists growing up?

Definitely a good first step, although a no-brainer if I ever saw one.

"Um, no, No thanks, Osama, we're good."

Hamas is quite moderate compared to al-Qaida. Al-Qaida believes in going into major western cities to destroy civilizations that don't live according to their interpretation of Islam. Hamas merely believes in forcibly removing anyone who thinks a Jewish state is an acceptable idea out of the Middle East. As much as Hamas might not like New York or London, they're a bit more focused.

That's actually really good news for the Muslim/Arab world. Qaeda ideology uses the Palestinian situation in its propaganda, that rhetoric is now false.

This looks like a good sign to me. As controversial as Hamas may have been, it looks like they at least have a focus and is willing to use moderation and democratic process to gain power back to Palestine. Whether or not they will be able to create and maintain a positive image to the west, I don't know, but this at least looks like a step in the right direction.

al-Zawahri is a different story. It is good to see that other Islamic groups are at least rejecting some of the the radical ideas of groups like Al-Qaida.

I just hope that Israel and Hamas will be willing to be cooperative and TRY to figure some resolution besides the constant terrorist bombings and occupations that have been going on for years.

We're all nice and moderate, yes.

Until we nuke Israel.

I am pretty sure it would hurt palestine too if they nuked Israel.

I believe this is the first step to having peace in Israel. Although they have rejected the United States, they have rejected the real enemy, al-Qaida. I believe that they can mend the biggest issues without a US presence, however if they were to be connected with al-Qaida, peace will not be possible. Hamas has proved to me that they're not blind to their circumstances. This has given me hope that they will not make the same mistakes that Palestine has been making since 1948.

More then ever now, I hape hope for Israel and Palestine.

"Hamas believes that Islam is completely different to the ideology of Mr. al-Zawahri."

This position is an essential element of the fight against al-Qaeda: Muslims everywhere must continue to reject the version of Islam peddled by terrorists. Most do.

It would be much more encouraging if this quote represented an official, rather than unofficial, Hamas response to al-Zawahri, but it's still encouraging that a group as radical as Hamas would reject al-Qaeda's distortion of Islam. It would mean that moderation on the part of Hamas may be possible, and it is unequivocally positive to have influential groups in the Islamic world openly reject al-Qaeda's ideology.

The similarities between Hamas and Al Qaida exceed the differences. The ideology is not all that different. Hamas are local and Al Qaida are global.

Al Qaida clearly see Hamas as brothers in the great fight. Why not the other way around?

Well, now is a critical time when the West is hoping against hope to "rehabilitate" Hamas as a legitimate political negotiating power given that they won the election, and that the alternative does not look too rosy. Hamas not being fools are more than happy to use that "honeymoon period" to their advantage, to put pressure on Israel to make premature concessions.

They would be shooting themselves in the foot to accept unity of ideology with Al Qaida right now - they were bound to distance themselves from Al Qaida.

It doesn't mean a lot. Either they are committed to the destruction of Israel or they're not. They have stated repeatedly where they stand on this but the West isn't listening. For some reason the West cannot accept that Hamas will not give up on its fundamental principles. It's just wishful thinking.

It is time for all of us in the west to realise that there are always going to differences in ideology and while we believe in our system it may not be the best thing for everyone. Yes, Hamas has and possibly always will call for the removal of the Jewish state that is Israel, but does that mean we should not allow them to govern their people if they do so in a peaceable way? Does this mean we should cut all ties and funding for the "people of Palestine"?

If the general populous are accurately informed that the "west" has stopped believing in them as a nation, of course they will rally and fight against us.

Lets give Hamas an opportunity to prove they are going to actively govern. This does not mean we should not continue to press for a formal recognition of Israel, or we should simply throw open the borders and allow the extremists access to carry out the atrocities, but we do need to respect the wishes of the Palestinian populous who have democratically elected their Representatives

JJ

It was the Palestinians' idea to allow terrorists to participate in elections. It was their idea to vote for them.

Their choice.

It's no reason why the West should be expected to deal with or support terrorists.

Jess: Does this mean we should cut all ties and funding for the "people of Palestine"?

Well what about the comparison with Iraq then?

Sanctions caused untold misery and deprivation to the people of Iraq for years. Was that OK?

They didn't elect Saddam Hussein - but had to suffer for the fact that Saddam wasn't acceptable to the US. He was a tyrant but wasn't in reality the threat the US claimed.

Now look at the Palestinians. They did elect a group of terrorists who have been masterminding murders of civilians for years. Blowing up men, women and children in streets, buses and cafes - or have you forgotten?

Democracy comes with accountability. They did have a choice - and used it to choose the murderers. Why are they more deserving of specially favourable treatment than the Iraqi people who didn't?

In Iraq there was a case for making a distinction between the people and the rulers. Not so with the Palestinians.

It is better all round they learn quickly that voting for Hamas was a bad idea. If the Palestinian people genuinely want co-existence with Israel they need to form and vote for a party that will see through a policy of disarming terrorists, recognizing Israel and negotiating a settled peace.

The world does the Palestinians no favours if they appease their misguided choices.

Dennis,

Dennis M Wright writes: "Sanctions caused untold misery and deprivation to the people of Iraq for years. Was that OK?"

No, I do not believe that this form of pressure is OK, Historically it has never succeeded in forcing a change of government or of policies. As you have accurately pointed out sanctions only hurt the people and not the leaders (as can be seen through the current 'AWB Food for oil' scandal in Australia).

Dennis M Wright writes: "Now look at the Palestinians. They did elect a group of terrorists who have been masterminding murders of civilians for years. Blowing up men, women and children in streets, buses and cafes - or have you forgotten?"

I have not forgotten this, but lets objectively look at the election. Just like the USA there is a two party system currently in Palestine. Fatah (formerly the PLO a terrorist organisation) and Hamas (currently listed as a terrorist organisation). Fatah has been in power for a decade and are horribly corrupt with the majority of the people of Palestine in abject poverty without access to basic human requirements such as safe water and fresh food. The people are rightly disillusioned with them. Then we have Hamas. Yes, Thieu militant wing are and should be brought to heel over their atrocities against countless civilians. The majority of their activities over the past 5 years however has been in the construction of schools, wells and medical centres. If you were a Palestinian where would your vote go??

As I have said, why should we not allow Hamas an opportunity to govern, without increasing the risks from it's militant minority. Remembering that there will be a period where certain members of the party will be full of hot air.

JJ

Jess: As I have said, why should we not allow Hamas an opportunity to govern, without increasing the risks from it's militant minority

Sorry, Jess. Suggesting Hamas "has a militant minority" suggests you believe there is a larger part of Hamas which is moderate and reasonable.

Where on earth did you get that idea?

Even if not everyone in Hamas does the actual organizing of the terrorist attacks, that is just division of labour. It does not mean different levels of extremism.

Dennis,

If we ignore what sensationalist media is telling us and compare Hamas with say the IRA, than history will tell us that whilke there is a percentage that are violent and wish to harm others it is not the majority.

PS.

I am glad that we are able to debate without either relying on profanity or personal attacks

Yes, sanctions can cause all sorts of misery, but the Palestinians have lived with self-imposed sanctions since the Oslo Accords were signed back in 1993.

Under the accords, Israel, the US, and EU provided billions of dollars to the Palestinian Authority to provide basic services and infrastructure. Most of that money ended up being unaccounted for. By 2005, Gaza had a lack of sewers, schools, and other basic services not because of sanctions imposed from the outside, but because the population never asserted themselves in a meaningful enough way to force their leaders (Arafat being at the top) to account for the money. Meanwhile, al-Aqusa (the militant arm of Arafat's own party) openly conducted attacks on Israel with the justification that Israel was the source of all opression against Palestinians. Unfortunately, Arafat took full knowledge of the whereabouts of the money to his grave.

The press never held Arafat accountable, because the local press was state-controlled, and the foreign press would be denied access if they exposed the truth. There's no denying that many of the residents of Gaza live in horrible conditions, but their own leaders are to blame.

That said, there's no reason not to cut off funding to leaders who don't allow the money to be spent on basic services for their citizens. Ironically enough, one of the reasons Hamas got elected is that they spent money building schools while the PA didn't. I just worry about the doctrine taught in those schools...

Do the United States and the EU recognize this new Hamas government? I mean, how can you recognize as a government what you also claim to be a terrorist organization.

I mean, how can you recognize as a government what you also claim to be a terrorist organization.

How can the US afford not to recognize an organization that was elected democratically? Aren't we the ones pushing for democracy? We do not have to approve of what Hamas' policies, but to simply not recognize them would cause us to loose all credibility.

IMO, comparing Hamas to Al-Qaida is pretty far fetched. The IRA is a much better comparison I think. I certainly don't agree with Hamas' methods, but I can sympathize with the fact that their country was completely disrupted by the Israelis and that they believe part of their nation is under military occupation by Israel. Hopefully now that Hamas is empowered to actually make a difference in Palestine, they won't be resorting to violence - I feel like they should at least be given that chance.

John Riley: IMO, comparing Hamas to Al-Qaida is pretty far fetched

Why so?

(1) Both believe in an Islamic state.

(2) Both believe in liberating Arab soil of the infidel.

(3) Both are prepared to use suicide bombers to murder civilians indiscriminately in pursuit of their goals.

The only real difference is that Hamas focus on the local region only, and correspondingly focus their hatred on Israel. Al Qaida are more globalin outlook and thus spread their hate to Israel, the US and the non-Islamic world in general, and also the Islamic world which has the temerity to associate with the West (eg Saudi).

but I can sympathize with the fact that their country was completely disrupted by the Israelis and that they believe part of their nation is under military occupation by Israel

It's not "part" they're after. It's the lot. As for Israel disrupting "their" country, well it wasn't their country. There was no Palestinian state before Israel was born. It was a highly underpopulated region that had changed hands several times, had been part of the Turkish Ottoman empire and then came under British control. The UN came up with a partition plan that had broad support but that the Arabs tried to block. The Arabs invaded Israel immediately after Israel declared independence and started a war that led to the disruption you refer to. The Arabs in the area who sat tight are now enjoying a far higher standard of life as Israeli citizens than the vast majority of the Arab world.