Hamas and the Jews

"Comment is Free" publishes an article by Bassem Naeem, of the Hamas administration in Gaza, entitled "Hamas condemns the Holocaust". I think not. Hamas believes the Holocaust is a hoax concocted by international Jewry.

This is a longstanding theme of Hamas's world view, and Naeem is being disingenuous in failing to acknowledge it. The organisation's leader Abdel Aziz Rantissi, whom Israeli forces assassinated in 2004, was not reticent on this point. A few months earlier, he had written in a Hamas publication:

Many thinkers and historians have exposed the lies of the Zionists, thus becoming a target of Zionist persecution. Some have been assassinated, some arrested, and some are prevented from making a living. For example, Jewish associations and organizations have filed lawsuits against famous French philosopher Roger Garaudy, who in 1995 published his book 'The Founding Myths of Israeli Politics' in which he disproves the myth of the 'gas chambers,' saying, 'This idea is not technically possible. So far, no one has clarified how these false gas chambers worked, and what proof there is of their existence. Anyone with proof of their existence must show it.'

A pacific and equitable resolution of the Israeli-Palestine conflict is not going to be advanced by overlooking or obscuring the character of one of the protagonists. Hamas is an antisemitic, theocratic organisation wedded to the annihilation of the Jewish state. It pursues its ends by attacking Israeli civilians. These are just the facts of the matter, unfortunately.

Comments

[Joe]

A pacific and equitable resolution of the Israeli-Palestine conflict is not going to be advanced by overlooking or obscuring the character of one of the protagonists. Hamas is an antisemitic, theocratic organisation wedded to the annihilation of the Jewish state. It pursues its ends by attacking Israeli civilians. These are just the facts of the matter, unfortunately.

I agree with you entirely, so this is not meant to be argumentative:

So, how do you see a pacific peace emerging, when at least one of the protagonist actually rejects the notion?

How do you answer the Carter's of this world who insist (not without logic) that the only way to make peace is with your enemies?

Joe

[Alex MacAskill]

I believe you are correct in saying that:

'Hamas is an antisemitic, theocratic organisation wedded to the annihilation of the Jewish state. It pursues its ends by attacking Israeli civilians.'

I would much rather a progressive, secular party would have come to power in 2006 but it wasn't to be. However, we shouldn't overlook how and why Hamas came to power in the first place. The people were clearly sick and tired of Fatah's corruption and incompetence and saw Hamas as a party that will at least stand up for their rights, albeit in an immoral way. The Palestinian people did not vote for Hamas because of their anti-semitism and Holocaust-denial, after all, Mahmood Abbas famously wrote a thesis (later turned into a book) claiming that the numbers of Jews killed had been exagerated.

Another reason for their election must surely be the growing frustration towards Israeli settlement building and land exppropriation, both of which have increased in the last 10 years. According to B'Tselem, the number of West Bank settlements increased from 140,000 in 1996 to about 250,000 in September 2005. Those statistics exclude the settlements in East Jeruselam, which Israel has illegally annexed. In the 9 months before September 2005, the Israeli settlements increased by 14,000. This puts the 'generous' Gaza 'pull-out' into perspective.

We shouldn't forget that, in all of this, Israel is the occupying force and therefore the onus is on them to offer a peace proposal that is fair. They also need to stop commiting crimes against the Palestinian people (all documented by B'tselem, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, etc) just like Hamas should refrain from murdering Israeli civilians.

[Barry Meislin]

We shouldn't forget that, in all of this, Israel is the occupying force and therefore the onus is on them to offer a peace proposal that is fair.

1. If the Palestinians believe that Israel is illegal and should therefore either agree to or else be made to disappear, what might possibly constitute, for the Palestinians, a "fair" peace proposal?

2. Might there be any good reason to believe that the onus is on the Palestinians to cease calling for (and acting towards) Israel's destruction?

3. If Israel's occupation of Palestinian territory is due to continued Palestinian calls for (and actions towards) Israel's destruction, which "onus" might possibly take priority?

[PhilR]

Just like Hamas should refrain from murdering Israeli civilians?, which is rather like saying paedophiles should refrain from killing and raping children, its a nice idea but thats about it, It is the 'nature of the beast' is it not?.

I for one do not believe the so called palestinians are serious about statehood, jewish annihilation is their collective aim , They dont want a state if there's a Jewish one too, its all or nothing with them.