Netanyahu declares 'victory' in Gaza

[up-country_sinclair]

If you are genuinely trying to show evidence to support your position, why do you repeatedly need to be asked to post a link to the source you are citing?

OK, thank you for editing your post and adding a link. Unfortunately it doesn't work.

I was hoping for a citation for the quote you repeatedly claim was said by Pappe: "Facts are irrelevant". Your quotation marks, not mine.

[Ulysses G.]

I have provided THREE links to the original INTERVIEW and it still says exactly the same thing. I did not "add a link". It was there already there.

[CBR250]

UG,

re your Pappe quote...taken out of context.

The old Zionist trick ..find one school, one mosque, one ambulance..one out of context quote.. and use it to obfuscate the rest.

Typical behaviour by UG. I suspect that the original article he refers to as criticising Pappe is the one by Morris - a Jewish "historian" who couldn't find yesterday with a calendar.

[dexterm]

Anyone can read the interview and see that you are telling another of many whoppers, but that never stops you guys. This is the entire question and answer:

Q: Did you first become communist or "new historian"?

A: I have to correct something: I like life too much to be communist! I am socialist. True I am member of Hadash which is a front where you find the communist party to which I don't belong. You also find the non-Zionist Arab-Jewish group to which I belong. I think both my political commitment and historian known position developed simultaneously. And one supported the other. Because of my ideology I understood documents I saw in the archives the way I understood them, and because of the documents in the archives I became more convinced in the ideological way I took. A complicated process! Some colleague told me I ruined our cause by admitting my ideological platform. Why? Everybody in Israel and Palestine has an ideological platform. Indeed the struggle is about ideology, not about facts. Who knows what facts are? We try to convince as many people as we can that our interpretation of the facts is the correct one, and we do it because of ideological reasons, not because we are truthseekers.

http://www.ee.bgu.ac.il/~censor/katz-directory/$99-11-29loos-pappe-interview.htm

The political party this hypocrite belongs to:

Hadash (Hebrew acronym for “The Democratic Front for Peace and Equality”) is an Israeli political party with roots in Communism largely supported by Israeli Arabs.

Hadash is a left-wing party that, when formed in March 1977, was rooted in Israel's Communist party, the Black Panthers, and other left-wing non-communist groups.

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Politics/Hadash.html.

He is simply saying the same as many historians have said before. We cannot help but bring all our previous experiences and perceptions to bear when we write history....every word is our history. It doesn't mean that events or facts are deliberately distorted. The truth is still there.

It's the same principle as 2 people witnessing a car accident or robbery ...their accounts will differ.

Your own extreme Zionist background, UG, colors your understanding even when truth is staring you in the face.

[Ulysses G.]

Anyone can read the interview and see that you are telling another of many whoppers, but that never stops you guys. This is the entire question and answer:

Q: Did you first become communist or "new historian"?

A: I have to correct something: I like life too much to be communist! I am socialist. True I am member of Hadash which is a front where you find the communist party to which I don't belong. You also find the non-Zionist Arab-Jewish group to which I belong. I think both my political commitment and historian known position developed simultaneously. And one supported the other. Because of my ideology I understood documents I saw in the archives the way I understood them, and because of the documents in the archives I became more convinced in the ideological way I took. A complicated process! Some colleague told me I ruined our cause by admitting my ideological platform. Why? Everybody in Israel and Palestine has an ideological platform. Indeed the struggle is about ideology, not about facts. Who knows what facts are? We try to convince as many people as we can that our interpretation of the facts is the correct one, and we do it because of ideological reasons, not because we are truthseekers.

http://www.ee.bgu.ac.il/~censor/katz-directory/$99-11-29loos-pappe-interview.htm

The political party this hypocrite belongs to:

Hadash (Hebrew acronym for The Democratic Front for Peace and Equality) is an Israeli political party with roots in Communism largely supported by Israeli Arabs.

Hadash is a left-wing party that, when formed in March 1977, was rooted in Israel's Communist party, the Black Panthers, and other left-wing non-communist groups.

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Politics/Hadash.html.

He is simply saying the same as many historians have said before.

What malarkey. Only historians that ignore the facts, in favor of ideology. The same ones that you quote here every day. Most people want historians who want to tell the TRUTH and he freely admits that he is not one of them.

"Indeed the struggle is about ideology, not about facts. Who knows what facts are? We try to convince as many people as we can that our interpretation of the facts is the correct one, and we do it because of ideological reasons, not because we are truthseekers."

[up-country_sinclair]

Most people want historians who want to tell the TRUTH

Stop being naive. There will often be as many different truths about history as there are historians. If not then there would only need to be one book for every historical topic. There have probably been thousands of books written on the US Civil War. Perhaps even more on the Vietnam War. Many written by highly respected historians from all parts of the ideological spectrum. But as your quote of Pappe says, "Who knows what facts are? We try to convince as many people as we can that our interpretation of the facts is the correct one".

[dexterm]

Anyone can read the interview and see that you are telling another of many whoppers, but that never stops you guys. This is the entire question and answer:

Q: Did you first become communist or "new historian"?

A: I have to correct something: I like life too much to be communist! I am socialist. True I am member of Hadash which is a front where you find the communist party to which I don't belong. You also find the non-Zionist Arab-Jewish group to which I belong. I think both my political commitment and historian known position developed simultaneously. And one supported the other. Because of my ideology I understood documents I saw in the archives the way I understood them, and because of the documents in the archives I became more convinced in the ideological way I took. A complicated process! Some colleague told me I ruined our cause by admitting my ideological platform. Why? Everybody in Israel and Palestine has an ideological platform. Indeed the struggle is about ideology, not about facts. Who knows what facts are? We try to convince as many people as we can that our interpretation of the facts is the correct one, and we do it because of ideological reasons, not because we are truthseekers.

http://www.ee.bgu.ac.il/~censor/katz-directory/$99-11-29loos-pappe-interview.htm

The political party this hypocrite belongs to:

Hadash (Hebrew acronym for The Democratic Front for Peace and Equality) is an Israeli political party with roots in Communism largely supported by Israeli Arabs.

Hadash is a left-wing party that, when formed in March 1977, was rooted in Israel's Communist party, the Black Panthers, and other left-wing non-communist groups.

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Politics/Hadash.html.

He is simply saying the same as many historians have said before.

What malarkey. Only historians that ignore the facts, in favor of ideology. The same ones that you quote here every day. Most people want historians who want to tell the TRUTH and he freely admits that he is not one of them.

"Indeed the struggle is about ideology, not about facts. Who knows what facts are? We try to convince as many people as we can that our interpretation of the facts is the correct one, and we do it because of ideological reasons, not because we are truthseekers."

When the IDF shred an innocent Palestinian baby to pieces with a missile, I see it as cold blooded murder, you see it as collateral damage unfortunate only because it exposes the IDF as not quite the "most moral army in the world".

The truth is the baby is still dead.

[Ulysses G.]

"

Most people want historians who want to tell the TRUTH

Stop being naive. There will often be as many different truths about history as there are historians.

So you agree with Pappe that historians should lie about what happened to fit their own agenda. I'm not surprised that you folks feel that way, but I am rather shocked that you are admitting it. It does explain all the blatantly dishonest posts coming from the Israel-bashers though.

"We do it because of ideological reasons, not because we are truthseekers"

-Ilan Pappe

[Seastallion]

What an odd thing to say, "Hamas never started a genocide." Though they consistently declare they want the death of all Jews they're not having accomplished this yet you thus gloss over their stayed goals and declare Hamas never started genocide. Because something is simply not possible you cannot therefore conclude, irrespective of their repeated stated intention, that Hamas doesn't seek genocide.

Hamas argues, very effectively, in their opinion, that furthermore it's the duty of the citizens of gaza to all die in martyrdom, if necessary, in pursuit if their aims. Therefore, it's not really just the Jews this wretched outfit seeks to harm. (Links posted earlier).

Why do people keep insisting that Hamas want all Jews dead? It is glaringly obvious from their charter that they don't. Article 31 states unambiguously :the people of all 3 religions, Christian, Islam, and Judaism can live together in peace and security"

To keep up this slanderous meme is a transparent attempt to demonise Hamas so as to defend Israel's aggression.

The word is libel, not slander. Watch your mouth/post. Accuse me of this again and we will have problems! Slander is a crime. How dare you assert calling murderous terrorists out on their diabolical aims "slanderous." You should never enter an intellectual gun fight with your trusty slingshot- it's clearly failing you.

Be cautious employing your emotions as the vanguard of your interactions with others; it's decidedly incorrect in this instance and your view is utterly radical, devoid of facts.

http://pamelageller.com/islamic-antisemitism/

http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/4376.htm

Lastly, do you really think the ingredients in any item contain "just that," and no more? Of course not. The ingredients, like wholesome fructose, are actually high fructose corn syrup, (a very dangerous item) as an example. Likewise, Hamas' proffering to live in harmony with others is likely something you have read in English- I am 100% certain because Hamas would be eaten alive otherwise. Living together, in peace, with others, ALWAYS take place within the parameters of Sharia! This is not suggestive, it's already taken for grants by Hamas' audience this is what it means. This is overwhelming fact. It cannot be otherwise in Islam. The ingredients you are reading into Hamas are intentionally or willfully misleading by Hamas- Under Sharia people of the book may live together if they pay the jiyza, and are made to feel humiliated doing so, convert, or die! There is simply no other way. You may have a point, but this does not constitute fact.

On massacre of Jews: http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vFDX_cdwbB0

I'm shaking in my boots.

I think you should consider your own words; "Be cautious employing your emotions as the vanguard of your interactions with others; it's decidedly incorrect in this instance and your view is utterly radical, devoid of facts. "., although in suggesting you take heed of your own words, I am not saying your post was devoid of facts....although it was rather odd. In defence of you claim that it is not libelous to say, " they consistently declare they want the death of all Jews ", You offer two videos from 2009, an article from the President of Stop Islamization of America, and another video from an American organisation whose motives I'm not sure of. So 3 videoed instances, over 5 years is not "consistently". Libelous:" a false statement that harms the reputation of an individual, business, product, group,government, religion, or nation. ". Your wild (perhaps libelous?) claim that daily crucifictions eviscerations, burnings, beheadings etc occur remains undefended. You're coming across as quite "utterly radical" yourself.

By your words "devoid of facts" you are saying that Article 31 of the Hamas charter does not say what I posted it says. You are wrong. But then you know that because you went on to qualify what Article 31 means, giving tacit agreement that that indeed it does say what I posted. Very odd.

Ok libelous. I often make spelling mistakes to. Please point them out so I can correct myself.

[Ulysses G.]

Anyone can read the interview and see that you are telling another of many whoppers, but that never stops you guys. This is the entire question and answer:

Q: Did you first become communist or "new historian"?

A: I have to correct something: I like life too much to be communist! I am socialist. True I am member of Hadash which is a front where you find the communist party to which I don't belong. You also find the non-Zionist Arab-Jewish group to which I belong. I think both my political commitment and historian known position developed simultaneously. And one supported the other. Because of my ideology I understood documents I saw in the archives the way I understood them, and because of the documents in the archives I became more convinced in the ideological way I took. A complicated process! Some colleague told me I ruined our cause by admitting my ideological platform. Why? Everybody in Israel and Palestine has an ideological platform. Indeed the struggle is about ideology, not about facts. Who knows what facts are? We try to convince as many people as we can that our interpretation of the facts is the correct one, and we do it because of ideological reasons, not because we are truthseekers.

http://www.ee.bgu.ac.il/~censor/katz-directory/$99-11-29loos-pappe-interview.htm

The political party this hypocrite belongs to:

Hadash (Hebrew acronym for The Democratic Front for Peace and Equality) is an Israeli political party with roots in Communism largely supported by Israeli Arabs.

Hadash is a left-wing party that, when formed in March 1977, was rooted in Israel's Communist party, the Black Panthers, and other left-wing non-communist groups.

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Politics/Hadash.html.

He is simply saying the same as many historians have said before.

What malarkey. Only historians that ignore the facts, in favor of ideology. The same ones that you quote here every day. Most people want historians who want to tell the TRUTH and he freely admits that he is not one of them.

"Indeed the struggle is about ideology, not about facts. Who knows what facts are? We try to convince as many people as we can that our interpretation of the facts is the correct one, and we do it because of ideological reasons, not because we are truthseekers."

When the IDF shred an innocent Palestinian baby to pieces with a missile, I see it as cold blooded murder

I can't really blame you for changing the subject. Defending an admitted liar who is supposed to be a "historian", is a real struggle - even for you.

[Steely Dan]

You look closely at the history of ANY country in the Middle East, and you'll see a long littany of switched alliances and allegiances which go back several thousand years.

And continue to this day, it seems. This article suggests that common interests bind Israel-Egypt-Saudi Arabia (anti-Hamas and Islamic State), and that they are opposed by Qatar and Turkey.

The article is interesting -- whether it is accurate I leave to those better qualified to discuss.

http://carolineglick.com/understanding-the-israeli-egyptian-saudi-alliance/

I could cite a wealth of supporting evidence for this summary of affairs. I will not post here as it would likely be off topic, suffice to say when talking about ISIS the blundering confused sounding Obama makes Cameron sound decisive, and that's saying something. Having failed to get Hamas any of It's key demands it's anyone's guess what the MB sympathetic advisors in Washington will devise, but I suspect it won't be to the advantage of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Egypt or Jordan. My money would be on inciting internal rebellion in Jordan.

[Morch]

Post edited to indicate points of contention:

1. .... FEAR of being mass murdered based on actual evidence of Palestinian desire to do exactly that.

2. A powerful Palestinian state with intentions to win all of Jewish Israel could potentially do that. ...

3. So Palestinian recognition of Israel's right to exist in words and actions is something that actually could move things forward ... easier said than done though of course.

But Netanyahu isn't Israel and Israel still IS a Jewish state. People on both sides shouldn't stop working for a two state solution .....

1. Where is the evidence that Palestinians want to mass murder Jews? Just to help you along - Hamas is not Palestine. Fatah is not even Palestine.

2. You are, honestly, worried about a "powerful Palestinian state"? Fat chance of that while Israel has crushed Palestine economically for decades. And I will have to conclude that your paranoia is taking over again unless you can direct me to a statement from the Palestine Authority - or Fatah - that they aim to "win all of Jewish Israel".

3. Palestine has offered and still offers recognition of a right to exist of Israel. As recently as June this year. Wake up.

4. Netanyahu is the leader of Israel. More importantly, there are fellow sociopathic politicians just as nefarious as he who are ready to take his place should he fall under bus. And I am impressed that you are one of the minority of Israelis who is "working for a 2 state solution". All you have to do is to convince the land thieves to take the option seriously, and not keep using it as a diversion for ever more colonial activities.

So, by your logic, if both the Fatah and the Hamas do not represent the Palestinians (or as you put it "is not Palestine"), who

is Israel supposed to negotiate with? Can't have it both ways. Hamas and Fatah do represent, between then, most of the

Palestinian public. Over the years there were numerous incidents of terrorist attacks, massacres and rockets attacks on Jews.

These were inspired and orchestrated, in turn, by both the Fatah and the Hamas (not to mention earlier days, before the two

existed). The accompanying rhetoric to these attacks is almost without change. So just to help you along, the Jewish

apprehensions are well grounded.

As far as I understand the claim is not that there will instantly be a "powerful Palestinian state" but weariness it should become

so in the future. It can be noticed that even Hamas by itself, and operating solely from the Gaza Strip can pose a hardship for

Israel. Having to deal with an extended version of the same would be much more difficult, and effectively mean all of Israel's

territory would be exposed to attacks. The Fatah currently head the PA, and their claim is far from solid. New elections might

very well see Hamas gain the upper hand. Regardless, some elements in the Fatah are pretty close to Hamas views when it

comes to armed struggle against Israel. Certain representatives of this approach remain quite out-spoken and some are in a

ringside position to play a major role once Abbas steps down.

As you claim neither the Fatah nor the Hamas are "Palestine", which "Palestine" was it that offered recognition of Israel's right

to exist? If this was meant to imply the PA, then the PA is effectively run by Fatah (and both do not need to offer recognition of

Israel's right to exist, as they already did this - sort of the basis of current agreements in place). If you meant Hamas, then this

is of course not a real proposition, but a re-hash of some misguided claims.

So while Palestinian political leadership is not "Palestine", Netanyahu and other right wing politicians are somehow "Israel".

Great logic at work. Again. Could you possibly name any accepted right wing leader in Israel able to unify and lead all the

relevant parties into a semblance of a coalition? Or, for that matter, to be able to strike an essential coalition deal with non-

right wing parties. Also, as far as I am aware JT is not Israeli, although with the way some people mix Israelis/Jews/Zionists

the confusion is understandable.

[CBR250]

Someone mentioned earlier how Israel would be gobsmacked without arms shipments from the US. Not so. Israel is one of the top arms producers in the world.

So, by your admission Israel is as much, or perhaps even more, of a military power than the USA.

Yet this major, advanced military power starts a war that kills almost 2,000 civilians - because, the Israelis claim, al-Qassam (Hamas military wing) fired some home made rockets that lack even primitive guidance systems.

Now, do you see something wrong with this picture?

[Morch]

Funny how Bibi is taking a chapter from the western media playbook... Just because you claim "victory" doesn't make it so, no matter how many times you repeat the lie...

Like most similar deceleration it is intended for domestic consumption. Not much more.

The same goes for Hamas "victory" celebrations and decelerations.

[Morch]

With Egypt and Jordan, the conflict was over the occupied territories of 1967. With the Palestinians it is still over 1948. The Palestinians need to recognize Israel as it truly is, before there can be permanent peace.

The PA and all Arab countries have agreed to recognize Israel within its 1967 borders.

More of your usual dishonesty. Hamas refuses to and it can not be done without them. The other parties can pretend all they want as there is no deal without Hamas and everyone knows it.

So when countries and the PA say yes to recognition of Israel within 67 borders you say but they don’t really mean it...which at least is an improvement on your previous dishonest statements that no Arab country has said it will recognize Israel. Well, hopefully you have not chosen a career in the diplomatic service.

You beg the question “there is no deal without Hamas and everyone knows it.” Says who?...says only you. Israel did separate deals with Egypt and Jordan.

Hamas has agreed an indefinite truce with Israel provided it recognizes a Palestinian state within the 67 borders. When peace takes hold, extremists on both sides will be sidelined.

The PA is led by the Fatah, and it is questionable just how many of the Palestinians is represented. The Hamas did win the

last general elections, and receives wide spread support from the Palestinian public. The Hamas rejected the Saudi Peace

Initiative and contested Fatah's leadership of the Palestinians. Lebanon, due to its domestic issues cannot uphold any sort

of agreement with Israel (this currently applies to Syria and Iraq as well).

Egypt and Jordan are both undivided countries with which treaties can be signed. Worth reflecting on the peace agreement

between Israel and Egypt not being canceled even when Morsi was in power, and even through previous rocky relationship

between the two countries. Israel did not sign a deal with one party or another in Egypt or Jordan, but with the government

as an official representative of the country. On the other hand, the Palestinians are deeply divided among themselves, and

the Fatah's authority to assure a treaty with Israel would be honored by Hamas is in doubt. With the Hamas official stand

being what it is toward Israel, the possibility of signing any comprehensive peace deals is indeed under question.

Hamas did not agree to an indefinite truce with Israel under the conditions you mentioned. There was the small issue of the

Right of Return and the clearing off all illegal settlements. There was also no recognition of Israel's right to exist, nor saying

that the 1967 borders would represent the ultimate Palestinian objective as far as territory goes. There was no mention of

peace agreements, by the way.

[CBR250]

Post edited to indicate points of contention:

1. .... FEAR of being mass murdered based on actual evidence of Palestinian desire to do exactly that.

2. A powerful Palestinian state with intentions to win all of Jewish Israel could potentially do that. ...

3. So Palestinian recognition of Israel's right to exist in words and actions is something that actually could move things forward ... easier said than done though of course.

But Netanyahu isn't Israel and Israel still IS a Jewish state. People on both sides shouldn't stop working for a two state solution .....

1. Where is the evidence that Palestinians want to mass murder Jews? Just to help you along - Hamas is not Palestine. Fatah is not even Palestine.

2. You are, honestly, worried about a "powerful Palestinian state"? Fat chance of that while Israel has crushed Palestine economically for decades. And I will have to conclude that your paranoia is taking over again unless you can direct me to a statement from the Palestine Authority - or Fatah - that they aim to "win all of Jewish Israel".

3. Palestine has offered and still offers recognition of a right to exist of Israel. As recently as June this year. Wake up.

4. Netanyahu is the leader of Israel. More importantly, there are fellow sociopathic politicians just as nefarious as he who are ready to take his place should he fall under bus. And I am impressed that you are one of the minority of Israelis who is "working for a 2 state solution". All you have to do is to convince the land thieves to take the option seriously, and not keep using it as a diversion for ever more colonial activities.

So, by your logic, if both the Fatah and the Hamas do not represent the Palestinians (or as you put it "is not Palestine"), who

is Israel supposed to negotiate with? Can't have it both ways. Hamas and Fatah do represent, between then, most of the

Palestinian public. Over the years there were numerous incidents of terrorist attacks, massacres and rockets attacks on Jews.

These were inspired and orchestrated, in turn, by both the Fatah and the Hamas (not to mention earlier days, before the two

existed). The accompanying rhetoric to these attacks is almost without change. So just to help you along, the Jewish

apprehensions are well grounded.

As far as I understand the claim is not that there will instantly be a "powerful Palestinian state" but weariness it should become

so in the future. It can be noticed that even Hamas by itself, and operating solely from the Gaza Strip can pose a hardship for

Israel. Having to deal with an extended version of the same would be much more difficult, and effectively mean all of Israel's

territory would be exposed to attacks. The Fatah currently head the PA, and their claim is far from solid. New elections might

very well see Hamas gain the upper hand. Regardless, some elements in the Fatah are pretty close to Hamas views when it

comes to armed struggle against Israel. Certain representatives of this approach remain quite out-spoken and some are in a

ringside position to play a major role once Abbas steps down.

As you claim neither the Fatah nor the Hamas are "Palestine", which "Palestine" was it that offered recognition of Israel's right

to exist? If this was meant to imply the PA, then the PA is effectively run by Fatah (and both do not need to offer recognition of

Israel's right to exist, as they already did this - sort of the basis of current agreements in place). If you meant Hamas, then this

is of course not a real proposition, but a re-hash of some misguided claims.

So while Palestinian political leadership is not "Palestine", Netanyahu and other right wing politicians are somehow "Israel".

Great logic at work. Again. Could you possibly name any accepted right wing leader in Israel able to unify and lead all the

relevant parties into a semblance of a coalition? Or, for that matter, to be able to strike an essential coalition deal with non-

right wing parties. Also, as far as I am aware JT is not Israeli, although with the way some people mix Israelis/Jews/Zionists

the confusion is understandable.

Quote: Who is Israel supposed to negotiate with? Well, if Netanyahu hadn't been such a war-mongerer, he could have been negotiating with the Palestinian Unity Government that was formed in April 2014 - and recognised Israel's right to exist. Sure, this was a temporary government, but that meant an even better opportunity to hold out an olive branch to influence the planned Palestinian elections. But it isn't that relevant who Israel can negotiate with - we know that Israel does not want peace. It sue is happy to have a long lasting truce - but a long lasting peace? Nope. Can't steal land anymore.

BTW, Fatah and Hamas may be the major Palestinian parties, but there are about a dozen or so that contested the last elections. My personal favourite, as you already know, is the Palestinian National Initiative - a pro-peace 2 state solution party. Led by an intelligent and compassionate man of high integrity. He is the one who actually brokered the deal that led to the formation of the Palestinian Unity Government in April 2014. So, no. Fatah and Hamas may be major parties, but do not represent all Palestinians.

Sure, there is not just the possibility, but the certainty that the Palestinian political scene will change over time. And this could lead to continuing, or even greater, threats to Israel. UNLESS, Israel seeks a sincere solution, and does so sooner rather than later. A just negotiated peace would weaken the militants in Palestine, and strengthen the pro-democracy forces. It's as plain as the nose on your face that Israel must choose between future security or stealing more land. While the land theft proponents rule the Israeli position, the future threats grow. Its up to Israelis - either they want their children to live in peace, or they want to attain the insane visions of obsolete religious sects.

Quote: As you claim neither the Fatah nor the Hamas are "Palestine".

Yes, that's right, I did. Just in case you didn't quite grab what I said above, there are over a dozen political parties in Palestine. Some - such as the PNI - should be nurtured by those in Israel who hope for a Palestine that is a good neighbour who shares the aims of peaceful coexistence. I don't deny that Hamas and Fatah are the largest parties, but it is not that simple. All the more reason why the failure to deal with the Unity Government was such a stupid move for peace-lovers in Israel.

Quote: Great logic at work. Again.

Thankyou for your kind and honest recognition of my talent.

[Ulysses G.]

What an odd thing to say, "Hamas never started a genocide." Though they consistently declare they want the death of all Jews they're not having accomplished this yet you thus gloss over their stayed goals and declare Hamas never started genocide. Because something is simply not possible you cannot therefore conclude, irrespective of their repeated stated intention, that Hamas doesn't seek genocide.

Hamas argues, very effectively, in their opinion, that furthermore it's the duty of the citizens of gaza to all die in martyrdom, if necessary, in pursuit if their aims. Therefore, it's not really just the Jews this wretched outfit seeks to harm. (Links posted earlier).

I believe that some early charter of Hamas called for the destruction of Israel.

The usual discredited BS. It still calls for the destruction of Israel and it has NOT been rejected. The document calls for the elimination of the Jewish state, and the establishment of an Islamist society in its place. Their aim is to eliminate not only Israel, but all Jews as well and the charter makes that plain.

In the years since it adopted its charter, Hamas leaders and spokesmen have reinforced its message again and again. Mahmoud Zahar said in 2006 that the group "will not change a single word in its covenant." To reinforce the point, in 2010 Zahhar said, "Our ultimate plan is [to have] Palestine in its entirety. I say this loud and clear so that nobody will accuse me of employing political tactics. We will not recognize the Israeli enemy."

The Prime Minister of Hamas, Ismail Haniyeh, gave a rabid speech in front of thousands of supporters at Saraya Square in the Gaza Strip in March 2014. The message was that Palestinians should not and will not stop fighting through terrorist acts against the State of Israel. Haniyeh encourages Palestinians to attack innocent Israelis and says repeatedly that Hamas will NEVER recognize Israel.

Hamas Spokesman Abu Zuhri: Our War Is for Liberation of Jerusalem, Not for Lifting of Blockade. August 2014

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NbRUXIXZOI

[arjunadawn]

I believe that some early charter of Hamas called for the destruction of Israel. I believe that this Charter dates from the 1980s. If we are to rely on this time period to assess modern Hamas, we should do the same with Israel.

Here is a quote from Rafael Eitan, Chief of Staff of the Israeli Defense Forces from 1983: "We declare openly that the Arabs have no right to settle on even one centimeter of Eretz Israel... Force is all they do or ever will understand. We shall use the ultimate force until the Palestinians come crawling to us on all fours." (New York Times 14 April 1983).

But let’s look at more recent times and see what Hamas has to say. Asked about Hamas’ charter that calls for the destruction of Israel, Khaled Meshaal, Hamas’ political leader said this month (August, 2014): " This is a historical document that was drafted in 1988. Now we are in 2014. Hamas has its literature, historical literature, and documents. But we also have our agreements with the Palestinian Authority, which seeks a just solution based on the 1967 borders." (http://news.yahoo.com/in-personal-plea--top-hamas-leader-calls-on-obama-to-stop--holocaust--in-gaza-180315615.html)

And for further evidence that this casting blame on Hamas is a discredited tactic used by the desperate or the ignorant. Hamas in April this year signed up to an agreement with Fatah to establish a Palestinian Unity Government to prepare for elections. This Agreement – signed up to by Hamas – recognised the existence of the State of Israel. To appease the inevitable Israeli anger at daring to initiate a move toward peace, Hamas did not have any members in this Unity Government. In fact, the destruction of this Unity government was a major factor in Netanyahu seeking an excuse for the recent Gaza war. The Israelis hate this agreement because they prefer a divided opposition. Negotiations between Israel and Palestine would far more likely to lead to progress if the Palestinians speak with a single voice, and this is a major problem for Israel, not a blessing. It will be far easier for the international community to spot the nefarious machinations of the Israelis – because, many of us recognise, Israel wants to prolong the Palestinian conflict. If there were no conflict, there would be no more opportunities to steal more Palestinian land.

But if, despite so much evidence to the contrary, you wish to persist in this tactic of blaming Hamas for Israel’s actions, can you direct me to any recent statements by Hamas that still call for the destruction of Israel? And perhaps you could also explain why Hamas agreed to accept the Palestinian Unity government in April 2014 that recognised the right to existence of Israel.

And if Hamas is so intent on martyrdom for Gazans, why did they agree to a cease fire? Just when the world is turning against the Israelis, surely it makes sense to ratchet up the pressure by allowing the Isaelis to “martyr” even more than the 2,000+ dead? Your conjecture just doesn’t accord with the facts of the situation.

I have strong opinions but please, take a chance and presume I am an honest person. I don't employ tactics to avoid unsettling facts. When you present such a cogent and earnest post as above you really do make a difference, in me anyway- and we both know how unwavering I am in condemning Hamas. I asked myself a question while reading your above post: "What if I actually am not seeing, and they are equally as culpable, and equally to blame in thwarting events on the ground?" (I realize your point is not shared blame, but for me, reaching you half way across the mental table and considering this was a big step). So, what do i find?

Well, I can overall speak with great conviction that the aim of Hamas is the death of all Jews, irrespective of whether a State of Israel is or not. There is simply no amount of data or dissembling that can mitigate Hamas' consistent, declared, and scripturally cited authority in seeking the annihilation of Jews- period! What folks tend to miss is Hamas could not have any legitimacy without that core theme- killing Jews. If Hamas ever notes a possibility of shared existence with Jews it must be probed because the only conditions in which Jews can live beside Muslims are as Dhimmis- period! (It is simply not possible to envision from Hamas the motives you asign to them; they would be eaten alive in the muslim world. Near history will prove me right, I fear). So, yes, there may be snippets of possible coexistence coming from Hamas (See for example recent Hamas leadership interview with Charlie Rose where this point was basically conceded; Jews must live as dhimmis to coexist).

However, when you toss hand grenades of comparable "facts" at me exposing, perhaps, Israel in a light I had not considered, it does have an effect- the effect you desired. It will cause me to look more deeply. Perhaps at this point in my life, with my strong opinions formed, I can take a break from constantly reinforcing my opinion with endless points that confirm what I already believe, and perhaps look more closely at the things you say above. I suspect there is more than just smoke with regard to those on this forum who insist Israel is not without significant blame. To what extent I am unsure. But as regards to thwarting peace efforts, or the desire toward a two state solution, etc., I will look more closely at your point.

It is overwhelmingly apparent, irrespective of interpretation of the Hamas charter, etc., that Hamas seeks total oblivion of the Jews. This is such a demonstrable fact that I no longer turn to western media niches to pick up on this rather I just turn to the various MidEast news/translation services online that give me HamasTV and related Palestinian TV in real time. When one listens to the actual words of the spokesmen and leaders of Hamas it is beyond interpretation their aims. Listen to what they say to each other. It is to whom they speak their relative authority comes. (I have posted ample and relevant links previously regarding this- these links are Hamas in their own voice, NOW).

[arjunadawn]

I believe that some early charter of Hamas called for the destruction of Israel.

The usual discredited BS. It still calls for the destruction of Israel and it has NOT been rejected. The document calls for the elimination of the Jewish state, and the establishment of an Islamist society in its place. Their aim is to eliminate not only Israel, but all Jews as well and the charter makes that plain.

In the years since it adopted its charter, Hamas leaders and spokesmen have reinforced its message again and again. Mahmoud Zahar said in 2006 that the group "will not change a single word in its covenant." To reinforce the point, in 2010 Zahhar said, "Our ultimate plan is [to have] Palestine in its entirety. I say this loud and clear so that nobody will accuse me of employing political tactics. We will not recognize the Israeli enemy."

The Prime Minister of Hamas, Ismail Haniyeh, gave a rabid speech in front of thousands of supporters at Saraya Square in the Gaza Strip in March 2014. The message was that Palestinians should not and will not stop fighting through terrorist acts against the State of Israel. Haniyeh encourages Palestinians to attack innocent Israelis and says repeatedly that Hamas will NEVER recognize Israel.

Hamas Spokesman Abu Zuhri: Our War Is for Liberation of Jerusalem, Not for Lifting of Blockade. August 2014

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NbRUXIXZOI

Gosh, you really said it well and to the point. Thank you.

[arjunadawn]

Post edited to indicate points of contention:

1. .... FEAR of being mass murdered based on actual evidence of Palestinian desire to do exactly that.

2. A powerful Palestinian state with intentions to win all of Jewish Israel could potentially do that. ...

3. So Palestinian recognition of Israel's right to exist in words and actions is something that actually could move things forward ... easier said than done though of course.

But Netanyahu isn't Israel and Israel still IS a Jewish state. People on both sides shouldn't stop working for a two state solution .....

1. Where is the evidence that Palestinians want to mass murder Jews? Just to help you along - Hamas is not Palestine. Fatah is not even Palestine.

2. You are, honestly, worried about a "powerful Palestinian state"? Fat chance of that while Israel has crushed Palestine economically for decades. And I will have to conclude that your paranoia is taking over again unless you can direct me to a statement from the Palestine Authority - or Fatah - that they aim to "win all of Jewish Israel".

3. Palestine has offered and still offers recognition of a right to exist of Israel. As recently as June this year. Wake up.

4. Netanyahu is the leader of Israel. More importantly, there are fellow sociopathic politicians just as nefarious as he who are ready to take his place should he fall under bus. And I am impressed that you are one of the minority of Israelis who is "working for a 2 state solution". All you have to do is to convince the land thieves to take the option seriously, and not keep using it as a diversion for ever more colonial activities.

So, by your logic, if both the Fatah and the Hamas do not represent the Palestinians (or as you put it "is not Palestine"), who

is Israel supposed to negotiate with? Can't have it both ways. Hamas and Fatah do represent, between then, most of the

Palestinian public. Over the years there were numerous incidents of terrorist attacks, massacres and rockets attacks on Jews.

These were inspired and orchestrated, in turn, by both the Fatah and the Hamas (not to mention earlier days, before the two

existed). The accompanying rhetoric to these attacks is almost without change. So just to help you along, the Jewish

apprehensions are well grounded.

As far as I understand the claim is not that there will instantly be a "powerful Palestinian state" but weariness it should become

so in the future. It can be noticed that even Hamas by itself, and operating solely from the Gaza Strip can pose a hardship for

Israel. Having to deal with an extended version of the same would be much more difficult, and effectively mean all of Israel's

territory would be exposed to attacks. The Fatah currently head the PA, and their claim is far from solid. New elections might

very well see Hamas gain the upper hand. Regardless, some elements in the Fatah are pretty close to Hamas views when it

comes to armed struggle against Israel. Certain representatives of this approach remain quite out-spoken and some are in a

ringside position to play a major role once Abbas steps down.

As you claim neither the Fatah nor the Hamas are "Palestine", which "Palestine" was it that offered recognition of Israel's right

to exist? If this was meant to imply the PA, then the PA is effectively run by Fatah (and both do not need to offer recognition of

Israel's right to exist, as they already did this - sort of the basis of current agreements in place). If you meant Hamas, then this

is of course not a real proposition, but a re-hash of some misguided claims.

So while Palestinian political leadership is not "Palestine", Netanyahu and other right wing politicians are somehow "Israel".

Great logic at work. Again. Could you possibly name any accepted right wing leader in Israel able to unify and lead all the

relevant parties into a semblance of a coalition? Or, for that matter, to be able to strike an essential coalition deal with non-

right wing parties. Also, as far as I am aware JT is not Israeli, although with the way some people mix Israelis/Jews/Zionists

the confusion is understandable.

Quote: Who is Israel supposed to negotiate with? Well, if Netanyahu hadn't been such a war-mongerer, he could have been negotiating with the Palestinian Unity Government that was formed in April 2014 - and recognised Israel's right to exist. Sure, this was a temporary government, but that meant an even better opportunity to hold out an olive branch to influence the planned Palestinian elections. But it isn't that relevant who Israel can negotiate with - we know that Israel does not want peace. It sue is happy to have a long lasting truce - but a long lasting peace? Nope. Can't steal land anymore.

BTW, Fatah and Hamas may be the major Palestinian parties, but there are about a dozen or so that contested the last elections. My personal favourite, as you already know, is the Palestinian National Initiative - a pro-peace 2 state solution party. Led by an intelligent and compassionate man of high integrity. He is the one who actually brokered the deal that led to the formation of the Palestinian Unity Government in April 2014. So, no. Fatah and Hamas may be major parties, but do not represent all Palestinians.

Sure, there is not just the possibility, but the certainty that the Palestinian political scene will change over time. And this could lead to continuing, or even greater, threats to Israel. UNLESS, Israel seeks a sincere solution, and does so sooner rather than later. A just negotiated peace would weaken the militants in Palestine, and strengthen the pro-democracy forces. It's as plain as the nose on your face that Israel must choose between future security or stealing more land. While the land theft proponents rule the Israeli position, the future threats grow. Its up to Israelis - either they want their children to live in peace, or they want to attain the insane visions of obsolete religious sects.

Quote: As you claim neither the Fatah nor the Hamas are "Palestine".

Yes, that's right, I did. Just in case you didn't quite grab what I said above, there are over a dozen political parties in Palestine. Some - such as the PNI - should be nurtured by those in Israel who hope for a Palestine that is a good neighbour who shares the aims of peaceful coexistence. I don't deny that Hamas and Fatah are the largest parties, but it is not that simple. All the more reason why the failure to deal with the Unity Government was such a stupid move for peace-lovers in Israel.

Quote: Great logic at work. Again.

Thankyou for your kind and honest recognition of my talent.

I don't agree with you but I do admire your thoughts and delivery. Actually, I don't agree with your conclusions. You might be surprised how many things I could get to the half way point regarding. Yet the conclusion is actually all the matters. In light of my deep seated knowledge (yes, I am sure I possess) regarding Islam I just cant see how any of this is but re arranging furniture on the titanic. Yes, it must be done if there is even a sliver of hope for peace. But if Israel realizes what I realize I would not be surprised the well is being poisoned; perhaps. You evidence considerable depth of knowledge in making your points. This is always refreshing.

[joepublic]

What an odd thing to say, "Hamas never started a genocide." Though they consistently declare they want the death of all Jews they're not having accomplished this yet you thus gloss over their stayed goals and declare Hamas never started genocide. Because something is simply not possible you cannot therefore conclude, irrespective of their repeated stated intention, that Hamas doesn't seek genocide.

Hamas argues, very effectively, in their opinion, that furthermore it's the duty of the citizens of gaza to all die in martyrdom, if necessary, in pursuit if their aims. Therefore, it's not really just the Jews this wretched outfit seeks to harm. (Links posted earlier).

I believe that some early charter of Hamas called for the destruction of Israel.

The usual discredited BS. It still calls for the destruction of Israel and it has NOT been rejected. The document calls for the elimination of the Jewish state, and the establishment of an Islamist society in its place. Their aim is to eliminate not only Israel, but all Jews as well and the charter makes that plain.

In the years since it adopted its charter, Hamas leaders and spokesmen have reinforced its message again and again. Mahmoud Zahar said in 2006 that the group "will not change a single word in its covenant." To reinforce the point, in 2010 Zahhar said, "Our ultimate plan is [to have] Palestine in its entirety. I say this loud and clear so that nobody will accuse me of employing political tactics. We will not recognize the Israeli enemy."

The Prime Minister of Hamas, Ismail Haniyeh, gave a rabid speech in front of thousands of supporters at Saraya Square in the Gaza Strip in March 2014. The message was that Palestinians should not and will not stop fighting through terrorist acts against the State of Israel. Haniyeh encourages Palestinians to attack innocent Israelis and says repeatedly that Hamas will NEVER recognize Israel.

Hamas Spokesman Abu Zuhri: Our War Is for Liberation of Jerusalem, Not for Lifting of Blockade. August 2014

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NbRUXIXZOI

UC is being disingenuous, as usual, because he does not want peace.

1.Recognize that the Zionists want to INCREASE their land grab.

2.Recognize that after decades of Israeli terror against the Palestinians, it is natural that there will be extreme voices. None of us can even begin to imagine what the collective punishment of generations of people will create.

3. Notice that anytime a moderate Arab voice gains prominence, the Zionists undermine them. Look at how they continually humiliate Abbas.

So, UC can continue to use the Saturation technique of propaganda , but everyone knows that the Zionists cannot accept peace. It is diametrically opposed to their end vision of a greater Judea.

Hence the myopic focus on the semantics of the more extreme parts of Arab opinion.

If Israel really wanted peace, they could easily have it - but they want land that they believe is their by divine right,

[Morch]

We probably agree Netanyahu doesn't really want a two state solution. He's a politician and he's reflecting his voters. On the other side ... big problems too, Gaza ruled by a Hamas that is transparently interested in winning ALL of Israel away from the Jews. WHY are most Israelis OK with a status quo and no real two state solution? Before the usual greedy Zionists / land grabber memes consider a more fundamental reason ... yes most Israelis are already comfortable enough with the status quo but also FEAR of being mass murdered based on actual evidence of Palestinian desire to do exactly that.

A powerful Palestinian state with intentions to win all of Jewish Israel could potentially do that. So if Israelis are afraid of that and want to prevent that, don't be too surprised or judgmental. Unless you think national suicide is an admirable trait. So Palestinian recognition of Israel's right to exist in words and actions is something that actually could move things forward ... easier said than done though of course.

But Netanyahu isn't Israel and Israel still IS a Jewish state. People on both sides shouldn't stop working for a two state solution because that's probably the best or even only hope. Being a supporter of Israel's right to exist and defend itself is not the same thing as supporting every Israeli government policy or politician.

Does the current conflict in Gaza just sort of put on hold move things closer to a two state solution? It doesn't appear so but some hope is being expressed that Israel now has more (though closeted) allies in the Arab world in opposition to terrorist Hamas, there might just be an opportunity from this.

Most of your post is spot on.

The part were we differ is the Israeli fear aspect. Most Israelis do not exactly fear a Palestinian state being able to do destroy

Israel, at least not for quite a while (probably under the assumption that a Palestinian state would be, in one way or another

at least partially demilitarized). The security apprehension is more to do with having more of the same (rocket/mortar fire and

suicide bombers), with more parts of Israel open wide to attack, and as an additional element - possible easier access for

outside elements (such as Iran, AQ, IS). I think it is therefore easier to solve, relative to other issues which will certainly come

up.

There are, of course, Israelis which would resist any compromise, either due to excessive fears, distrust of Palestinians, and

religious world view. Some of these issues can be addressed given satisfactory assurances and time, some cannot. While I'm

doubtful that Netanyahu got it in himself to make such a bold move, he will not be around forever (and even the last elections

were a close thing). A peace agreement does not require a unanimous decision, just a sizable enough of a majority to carry it

through and sustain it. After something is done, unless there are serious complications, things tend to sort themselves out.

You make a really good point and I agree with it.

Most Israelis are probably not AFRAID of the neighboring Arabs in that way because they know Israel is so much stronger for now.

But I do think that Israelis would naturally want to be sure any peace agreement does not create a situation where they would need to realistically live in such fear.

So a Palestinian state is one thing, a Palestinian state with the real potential to beat Israel at war is another.

That's why security concerns would be so important and the demilitarization that Israel would demand of Palestinians for a peace deal is likely not something Palestinians would agree to. Not to mention the impossibility of Israel agreeing to unconditional right of return for Arabs.

Thus my extreme pessimism.

I think perhaps diaspora Jews are often more fearful than Israeli Jews about the potential for Israel falling.

Something in the hummus perhaps?

As far as I am aware, the Fatah stance is (or was, with Abbas's rumored new initiative, things might be different) that the PA

could live with a relatively demilitarized conditions for "now" (note that the "now" in question was a while back, though). The

reasons for this are both a realization that some things are deal breakers as far as Israel goes, and that Fatah is being less

secure when it comes to its hold on the West Bank (limiting the number of weapons and their quality lowers chances for a

coup, and/or of some unbidden provocation against Israel).

The Right of Return, in its full sense, will not be a technical possibility no matter what. I think that as far as Abbas goes, he's

not deluded on that score (different when talking about Hamas), but Keeps it as a bargaining chip. There will be a relatively

small number of Palestinians allowed to return to Israel, a larger (though not overwhelmingly huge) number of Palestinian

back in Palestine, with most issues dealt via monetary compensation and, to some extent naturalization of Palestinians in

host lands. The Right of Return is a real issue only in as much it is interpreted in its full scope. I believe that this is one area

of negotiation where creative solutions are not hard to imagine.

Wouldn't say I'm optimistic as for the near future chances of peace becoming a reality. The main things that stand in the way

are trust (or rather, lack of), and extreme ideologies (represented on both sides) which reject the notion of of truly accepting

compromises. While, essentially, most of the issues are workable, given time, patience, proper assurances and an effective

apparatus for ironing out difficulties - this deals with the former hurdle. The latter is much harder to solve, especially with the

way regional events are rolling on. Then again, it was inconceivable, at the time that Egypt would have a long term peace

treaty with Israel, that Arafat would be shaking hands with an Israeli PM - so shouldn't lose all hope.

Tend to agree that diaspora Jews have heightened sense of alert for the possibility of Israel "falling". Living in the diaspora

also makes for a certain lack of quality hummus...

[dexterm]

UG,

Neither Pappe nor I said that he was lying..only you. Nothing new there then.

He said and I said every single word a historian writes [or a forum member posts] is a value judgment borne of his past experiences and perceptions.

Take for example your response to Pappe's quote...no mention of lying, but your Zionist tinted spectacles saw it there.

Try using your finger to underscore every word from the quote you provided, or use spell check if you are still struggling.

[Jingthing]

However, Israel came into being, it DID come into being.

What is vicious and yes clearly Jew hating about the international Israel demonization movement is that they don't just want to change the regime in Israel (as during the South African struggle to end apartheid) they want Israel to END as a nation.

To various degrees of course -- the more radical Islamists openly want to commit genocide of Jews.

Western neo-Nazis ... same thing.

More liberal "progressives" would just be happy to see Jews flee back to their imaginary other homelands, which the vast majority DO NOT HAVE. In my view these progressives are in some ways the most insidious enemies of Jews.

They pose as tolerant liberals but in effect are using themselves as fellow travelers to radical Islamists and Nazis.

The progressives are entirely acceptable in polite society so their message is spreading.

[Ulysses G.]

If Israel really wanted peace, they could easily have it

If you say so. What an informed, persuasive argument.

[CBR250]

I believe that some early charter of Hamas called for the destruction of Israel. I believe that this Charter dates from the 1980s. If we are to rely on this time period to assess modern Hamas, we should do the same with Israel.

Here is a quote from Rafael Eitan, Chief of Staff of the Israeli Defense Forces from 1983: "We declare openly that the Arabs have no right to settle on even one centimeter of Eretz Israel... Force is all they do or ever will understand. We shall use the ultimate force until the Palestinians come crawling to us on all fours." (New York Times 14 April 1983).

But let’s look at more recent times and see what Hamas has to say. Asked about Hamas’ charter that calls for the destruction of Israel, Khaled Meshaal, Hamas’ political leader said this month (August, 2014): " This is a historical document that was drafted in 1988. Now we are in 2014. Hamas has its literature, historical literature, and documents. But we also have our agreements with the Palestinian Authority, which seeks a just solution based on the 1967 borders." (http://news.yahoo.com/in-personal-plea--top-hamas-leader-calls-on-obama-to-stop--holocaust--in-gaza-180315615.html)

And for further evidence that this casting blame on Hamas is a discredited tactic used by the desperate or the ignorant. Hamas in April this year signed up to an agreement with Fatah to establish a Palestinian Unity Government to prepare for elections. This Agreement – signed up to by Hamas – recognised the existence of the State of Israel. To appease the inevitable Israeli anger at daring to initiate a move toward peace, Hamas did not have any members in this Unity Government. In fact, the destruction of this Unity government was a major factor in Netanyahu seeking an excuse for the recent Gaza war. The Israelis hate this agreement because they prefer a divided opposition. Negotiations between Israel and Palestine would far more likely to lead to progress if the Palestinians speak with a single voice, and this is a major problem for Israel, not a blessing. It will be far easier for the international community to spot the nefarious machinations of the Israelis – because, many of us recognise, Israel wants to prolong the Palestinian conflict. If there were no conflict, there would be no more opportunities to steal more Palestinian land.

But if, despite so much evidence to the contrary, you wish to persist in this tactic of blaming Hamas for Israel’s actions, can you direct me to any recent statements by Hamas that still call for the destruction of Israel? And perhaps you could also explain why Hamas agreed to accept the Palestinian Unity government in April 2014 that recognised the right to existence of Israel.

And if Hamas is so intent on martyrdom for Gazans, why did they agree to a cease fire? Just when the world is turning against the Israelis, surely it makes sense to ratchet up the pressure by allowing the Isaelis to “martyr” even more than the 2,000+ dead? Your conjecture just doesn’t accord with the facts of the situation.

I have strong opinions but please, take a chance and presume I am an honest person. I don't employ tactics to avoid unsettling facts. When you present such a cogent and earnest post as above you really do make a difference, in me anyway- and we both know how unwavering I am in condemning Hamas. I asked myself a question while reading your above post: "What if I actually am not seeing, and they are equally as culpable, and equally to blame in thwarting events on the ground?" (I realize your point is not shared blame, but for me, reaching you half way across the mental table and considering this was a big step). So, what do i find?

Well, I can overall speak with great conviction that the aim of Hamas is the death of all Jews, irrespective of whether a State of Israel is or not. There is simply no amount of data or dissembling that can mitigate Hamas' consistent, declared, and scripturally cited authority in seeking the annihilation of Jews- period! What folks tend to miss is Hamas could not have any legitimacy without that core theme- killing Jews. If Hamas ever notes a possibility of shared existence with Jews it must be probed because the only conditions in which Jews can live beside Muslims are as Dhimmis- period! (It is simply not possible to envision from Hamas the motives you asign to them; they would be eaten alive in the muslim world. Near history will prove me right, I fear). So, yes, there may be snippets of possible coexistence coming from Hamas (See for example recent Hamas leadership interview with Charlie Rose where this point was basically conceded; Jews must live as dhimmis to coexist).

However, when you toss hand grenades of comparable "facts" at me exposing, perhaps, Israel in a light I had not considered, it does have an effect- the effect you desired. It will cause me to look more deeply. Perhaps at this point in my life, with my strong opinions formed, I can take a break from constantly reinforcing my opinion with endless points that confirm what I already believe, and perhaps look more closely at the things you say above. I suspect there is more than just smoke with regard to those on this forum who insist Israel is not without significant blame. To what extent I am unsure. But as regards to thwarting peace efforts, or the desire toward a two state solution, etc., I will look more closely at your point.

It is overwhelmingly apparent, irrespective of interpretation of the Hamas charter, etc., that Hamas seeks total oblivion of the Jews. This is such a demonstrable fact that I no longer turn to western media niches to pick up on this rather I just turn to the various MidEast news/translation services online that give me HamasTV and related Palestinian TV in real time. When one listens to the actual words of the spokesmen and leaders of Hamas it is beyond interpretation their aims. Listen to what they say to each other. It is to whom they speak their relative authority comes. (I have posted ample and relevant links previously regarding this- these links are Hamas in their own voice, NOW).

I recognise and acknowledge your sincerity - and your valued contributions to questions of scripture and history. So if I have come across as too impolite I am indeed sorry.

I agree with you in the most important part - there are no doubt elements in Hamas who want to see the death of all Jews. Who do not want to see the State of Israel. This mindset may be understandable for those who have suffered severe loss as many have, but it cannot be tolerated when the cost is the lives of other innocents in Israel and Palestine.

But I think you are incorrect to attribute Hamas' popularity in Gaza with the aim of destroying Israel. Hamas gained credibility and popularity as a provider of social and health services when these were decimated by the 2001-2005 Gaza blockade (I know it isn't called a blockade, but for all intents and purposes, it was). During a time when Gaza ws being economically strangled, and poverty was increasing in Gaza, Hamas provided health clinics, schools, sporting clubs, soup kitchens etc . So of course Hamas became popular - ironically because of the actions of Israel in strangling Gaza.

My hope - and this is the key point I want to make in this particular discussion - is that there were some recent actions and statements from Hamas that gave some hope that it may have moderated its views. Well, at least prior to the most recent invasion of Gaza. I don't know now. I am still stunned by Netanyahu's angry rejection of the Palestinian Unity government in April this year. That was when Hamas indicated a more moderate view - Hamas had agreed to support the Unity government that recognised Israel's right to exist, and the need for a negotiated peace based on 1967 borders. This government was temporary, until elections could be held. But even so, to have Hamas agreeing to these conditions re Israel was a very large and welcome step forward.

Instead, what a wasted opportunity to build some bridges that became. Instead of using this opportunity for peace, Netanyahu used it for war. He not only refused to build bridges, he forced Hamas back into the role of bad guys. I suspect most rational human beings would want to marginalise Hamas by promoting less radical, more secular and peace oriented Palestinian groups. Not Netanyahu - he turned Hamas into heroes of resistance. So incredinly short-sighted and stupid - unless, of course, he didn't really want peace. This latest destruction of a potential for peace follows many other similar derailings engineered by Israel. Which is why I have been force to conclude that Israel is controlled by fanatic Zionists who will never be satisfied until there is no such thing as Palestine. That the West Bank and East Jerusalem will be part of Israel. And given the previous episode of ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in 1948, there is no reason to assume that any Palestinians left behind by future land grabs will not suffer a similar fate.

[Ulysses G.]

More liberal "progressives" would just be happy to see Jews flee back to their imaginary other homelands, which the vast majority DO NOT HAVE. In my view these progressives are in some ways the most insidious enemies of Jews.

They pose as tolerant liberals but in effect are using themselves as fellow travelers to radical Islamists and Nazis.

The progressives are entirely acceptable in polite society so their message is spreading.

Also known as useful idiots.

[Morch]

UG,

re your Pappe quote...taken out of context.

The old Zionist trick ..find one school, one mosque, one ambulance..one out of context quote.. and use it to obfuscate the rest.

Typical behaviour by UG. I suspect that the original article he refers to as criticising Pappe is the one by Morris - a Jewish "historian" who couldn't find yesterday with a calendar.

So Benny Morris is a Jewish historian, whereas Ilan Pappe is...?

Just to make it clear for those unfamiliar with the persons in question - both are Jews, both are Israelis, both essentialy

proscribe to the same group (usually referred to as The New Historians).

The differences between them has to do more with the level of criticism against the actions of Israel during its formative

era, and as to the level of malice attributed to Jewish and Israeli authorities at the time.

Both have their supporters and critics - the assertion that Morris is somehow a historian who couldn't find yesterday with

a calendar does not strike me as carrying all that much weight seeing the amount of relevant errors and level of debate

prevalent on there topics. Just to be clear on another matter - it is hardly the case that Benny Morris is considered a main

stream historian - politically he is still viewed as left wing, albeit not as radical as Pappe.

Someone who endured both, once put the difference between them thus: While both are full of themselves, Pappe is way

more annoying, while Morris is way more obnoxious.

[Morch]

Most people want historians who want to tell the TRUTH

Stop being naive. There will often be as many different truths about history as there are historians. If not then there would only need to be one book for every historical topic. There have probably been thousands of books written on the US Civil War. Perhaps even more on the Vietnam War. Many written by highly respected historians from all parts of the ideological spectrum. But as your quote of Pappe says, "Who knows what facts are? We try to convince as many people as we can that our interpretation of the facts is the correct one".

In reference to Pappe, the issue is that the lines between his political activism and his academic research are sometimes

blurred. It is not that he even denies this outright, but rather justifies this sort of thing (not sure if this particular bit is on the

links provided, and it does have to do with more than the topic at hand or, indeed, even the relevant conflict).

[dexterm]

However, Israel came into being, it DID come into being.

What is vicious and yes clearly Jew hating about the international Israel demonization movement is that they don't just want to change the regime in Israel (as during the South African struggle to end apartheid) they want Israel to END as a nation.

To various degrees of course -- the more radical Islamists openly want to commit genocide of Jews.

Western neo-Nazis ... same thing.

More liberal "progressives" would just be happy to see Jews flee back to their imaginary other homelands, which the vast majority DO NOT HAVE. In my view these progressives are in some ways the most insidious enemies of Jews.

They pose as tolerant liberals but in effect are using themselves as fellow travelers to radical Islamists and Nazis.

The progressives are entirely acceptable in polite society so their message is spreading.

You Zionists are just peeing in the wind. The sands of demographic change will eventually sweep across Israel.

Even in a 2 state solution the present day Israel has its own demographic Trojan Horse

According to Israel’s Central Bureau of Statistics, Jews made up 75.3 percent of Israel’s population in 2013 against 77.8 percent in 2000, 81.8 percent in 1990 and 83.7 percent in 1980.

Over that same period, Israel’s mainly Muslim Arab population increased from 12.7 percent to 20.7 percent.

Read more: http://forward.com/articles/193862/israels-new-jewish-state-threatens-to-derail-peace/?p=all#ixzz3Bs97yYUq

Time is on the side of the Palestinians.

If Israel tries for a one state solution, Israel will be Palestine within 10 years. Unless they indulged in massive ethnic cleansing on the scale of 1948 again. The world would not tolerate that in the 21st century.

Any smart Israeli politician should be beating a path to the negotiating table to give back the West Bank and achieve a 2 state solution asap.