Doc's Talk: Hamas: Do Not Believe Abbas; We Want Jihad

Monday, May 05, 2014

Hamas: Do Not Believe Abbas; We Want Jihad

Khaled Abu Toameh
May 5, 2014

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/4298/hamas-abbas-jihad

Abbas's words might sound heart-warming to Westerners, but they must bear in mind that he is not a Hamas spokesman. Above all, the world needs to pay attention to what Hamas itself is saying.
Abbas knows that Hamas has not changed and will not change. Abbas is seeking to avoid a suspension of U.S. and European financial aid and potential Israeli economic sanctions. Abbas is now waiting to see if the Americans, Europeans and Israelis will buy his claim that the unity government will recognize Israel and reject violence. If they do, he will take credit for ensuring continued financial aid not only to the Palestinian Authority, but also to Hamas. If they do not, Abbas will be forced temporarily to suspend the deal with Hamas to avoid losing the aid.
Hamas signed the deal because it sees it and an opportunity to restore its relations with Egypt and other Arab countries, and to benefit from the Western financial aid that is provided to the Palestinian Authority.

Will Hamas change its ideology and recognize Israel's right to exist after signing the "reconciliation" agreement with Fatah?
According to the Palestinian Authority [PA], the answer is yes. But according to Hamas, the answer is a big no and a pledge to pursue terrorist attacks against Israel.

PA President Mahmoud Abbas announced last week that a Palestinian unity government that includes Hamas representatives would not only recognize Israel, but also renounce violence.
Abbas told PLO officials in Ramallah that the unity government would not deal with the peace process with Israel. Abbas stressed that the PLO leadership would be responsible for the peace process, while the unity government's responsibilities would be restricted to dealing with the day-to-day affairs of the Palestinian public.
"The negotiations are a PLO matter because it represents all Palestinians," Abbas said. "At the same time, I recognize Israel and it will recognize Israel. I reject violence and it will reject violence. I recognize the legitimacy of international agreements and it will recognize them. No one can call this a terrorist government."
Abbas's statements came as a surprise to Hamas, whose leaders rushed to deny any intention to renounce terrorism or recognize Israel's right to exist.
But while Abbas's statements about recognizing Israel and renouncing violence received wide coverage in the mainstream media in the West, journalists hardly noticed Hamas's assertion that it would continue to work toward achieving its goal of destroying Israel.
Less than 48 hours after Abbas made his statements, Hamas Political Bureau Chairman Khaled Mashaal declared that his movement has not abandoned jihad [holy war].
Addressing Hamas supporters in Ramallah by phone, Mashaal said, "Our path is the resistance and jihad is our choice. This is the original Palestinian strategy. We want to build our homeland and liberate our land and holy sites, bring back the refugees and release the prisoners. In the West Bank and Gaza Strip, inside and outside, our choice is resistance and the rifle is our way. There is no history or future without jihad and resistance."

Mahmoud Abbas (left) and Khaled Mashaal. (Image source: Abbas - European Union / Mashaal - Wikimedia Commons)

Mashaal was speaking during the funeral of two senior Hamas operatives who were killed by the Israel Defense Forces 16 years ago. The bodies of the two, brothers Emad and Adel Awadallah, were handed over to their families last week.
The funeral and a later rally commemorating the death of the Awadallah brothers turned into a massive show of force for Hamas in Ramallah -- also only two days after Abbas's announcement that Hamas would recognize Israel and renounce violence once it joins a unity government with his Fatah faction.
Palestinians said that the large turnout was an indication of Hamas's popularity among residents of the West Bank. At the two events, Hamas spokesman and supporters chanted slogans calling for revenge and more terrorist attacks against Israel.
Further evidence of Hamas's intention to stick to its ideology and terrorism was provided by another senior leader of the movement, Mahmoud al-Zahar.
In an interview with Reuters, al-Zahar, who is based in the Gaza Strip, strongly denied Abbas's claim that Hamas was about to change. He emphasized that a Palestinian unity government would not lead Hamas to recognize Israel's right to exist and will not result in any Hamas members coming under the control of Mahmoud Abbas's authority.
"Abbas is not telling the truth," al-Zahar said. "He [Abbas] says, 'This is my government.' But it is not his government. It is a government of national unity. He is marketing it in this way to minimize the pressure."
Even some leading PLO officials closely associated with Abbas, such as Hanan Ashrawi and Saeb Erekat, have contradicted their leader's statements.
The two officials have been quoted in the past few days as saying that Hamas was not required to recognize Israel or change its ideology as a result of the "reconciliation" pact with Fatah.
While Erekat was quoted as saying that Hamas is not a terrorist organization, Ashrawi, in an interview with CNN, made it clear that there was no need for Hamas to change. : "Hamas does not have to recognize Israel because Hamas is a movement and movements don't recognize states," she said. "Only states recognize each other."
The "reconciliation" accord does not make any reference to the issue of terrorism or recognition of Israel's right to exist. Hamas signed the deal not because it has decided to abandon violence and accept Israel, but because it sees it as an opportunity to restore its relations with Egypt and other Arab countries, and benefit from the Western financial aid that is provided to the Palestinian Authority.
Abbas knows very well that Hamas has not changed and will not change. But as Hamas's Mahmoud al-Zahar said, Abbas is trying to appease the US and Israel following the signing of the "reconciliation" pact. Abbas is seeking to avoid a suspension of U.S. and European financial aid and potential Israeli economic sanctions and that is why he's trying to downplay the significance of his rapprochement with Hamas.
After coming out with his "dramatic" statement, Abbas is now waiting to see if the Americans, Europeans and Israelis will buy his claim that the unity government will recognize Israel and reject violence. If they do, he will take credit for ensuring continued financial aid not only to the Palestinian Authority, but also to Hamas. If they do not, Abbas will be forced temporarily to suspend the deal with Hamas to avoid losing the aid.
In the past, Abbas made similar statements about Hamas's intentions, but the movement has never taken one step indicating its willingness to change.
Abbas's statements may sound nice and heart-warming to Westerners. But they must bear in mind that he is not a Hamas spokesman. Above all, the world needs to pay attention to what Hamas itself is saying.

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk