60 Comments

• 1. phil  |  March 1st, 2008 at 5:12 pm

  Deleted - mindless insults.

• 2. phil  |  March 1st, 2008 at 5:37 pm

  Deleted - off topic.

• 3. congressive  |  March 1st, 2008 at 5:55 pm

  Hamas always lies, while Israel never does.

  It’s so much simpler that way, n’est pas?

• 4. Michael  |  March 1st, 2008 at 5:57 pm

  The left made no complaints as Hamas pounded Israeli towns with rockets day after day injuring and killing nothing but civilians. But let the Palestinians suffer some casualties when Israel tries to stop the rocket attacks, and its all whining and cursing of the Jews. Israel tries to make its military actions for a purpose which is normally to stop rocket attacks. Seems like the Palis would get the message. But with the MSM and the left on their side, the Israelis don’t stand a chance at getting a fair shake. If the Palis keep it up, Israel will invade and there will be a major fight. Not many people doubt the outcome of that fight. The leadership in Israel says they would not like to see it happen but are not afraid to do it if they have to.

• 5. Mark Noonan  |  March 1st, 2008 at 6:09 pm

  congressive,

  Did anyone claim that? No - just pointing out that the headline makes it looks like Israel just went on in and killed a bunch of Palestinians for no identifiable reason…the truth of the matter is that Israel is responding to extreme provocation and the headline should have noted that.

• 6. Mark Noonan  |  March 1st, 2008 at 6:11 pm

  Michael,

  When American liberalsim hooked up with ANSWER at the start of the so-called “anti-war” movement, they took in a whole bunch of baleful things - including the far left’s rank anti-Semitism.

• 7. phil  |  March 1st, 2008 at 6:19 pm

  I guess if its OK for you to complain about the left’s rank anti Semitism it would be OK for me to complain about your rank anti-intellectualism. Will that get me in trouble again?

• 8. Arctic Fox  |  March 1st, 2008 at 7:08 pm

  It’s interesting that a blog that supports an administration that likes to ignore the will of its people, should fail to report that the majority of the Israeli people are sick of the fighting and would prefer a truce:

  The BBC’s Katya Adler in Jerusalem says Israel’s leaders have been under pressure from some quarters to launch a ground invasion.

  However, a recent opinion poll has indicated a majority of Israelis favour a truce with the Islamist movement Hamas, which controls Gaza.

  Very telling…

• 9. Kahn  |  March 1st, 2008 at 7:19 pm

  rank anti-intellectualism? You mean the lemming like group think you people offer as an excuse for thought these days? The ceaseless chants-of-the-day you all join in without any personal thought at all?

  I don’t even like Israel all that much. But purposely shooting rockets at a civilian area from a civilian area and dressed as civilians is a war crime. Thats IF you accept Hamas as legitimate armed forces. If you don’t , then its simply mass murder.

  Ever been there, when the rockets fall? Ever been anywhere?

  You may find that the conservative posters here are fairly well educated, fairly well traveled, and have often served in the military. We get sick of your ignorant rantings. Lose the prejudice and unjustified arrogance. Try communicating your positions and solutions to issues.

  Or, am I misunderstanding what rank intellectualism actually means?

• 10. Kahn  |  March 1st, 2008 at 7:21 pm

  Arctic, well yes they WOULD prefer a truce. They have offered deals to the Palestinians several times. The response has been murdered school children and random rockets.

  What would you suggest Israel do? Die? Go away (to where?)? Surrender (and die or go away)?

  What is your plan? Please, enlighten us with your enormous liberal brain.

• 11. Arctic Fox  |  March 1st, 2008 at 7:24 pm

  Hmm, do you want to talk war crimes, Kahn? From the same BBC report as before:

  On one occasion, a house east of the Jabaliya refugee camp was struck - two children, a brother and sister, were killed.

  Later, a 15-year-old girl and her 16-year-old sister were also killed.

  In another attack, a mother was killed as she was preparing breakfast for her children, medical workers said.

  And a resident of Jabaliya told the Associated Press news agency that one of his relatives had been killed.

  “His body is still lying on the ground,” he said. “Ambulances tried to come, but they came under fire.”

  Now nobody is saying that two wrongs make a right, but if you’re talking about war crimes then be fair. Don’t ignore one side in favour of the other, when they’re both as bad as one another.

• 12. Arctic Fox  |  March 1st, 2008 at 7:29 pm

  @Kahn: I know this is terribly controversial… but couldn’t they actually TALK to one another? You know, there IS something called peace, bad as that is for the weapons companies.

  We’re seeing the same “can’t surrender” rhetoric here that we’re seeing with talk about the Iraq war, but it’s not always that black and white. Why does ANYONE have to surrender, if you can find people on both sides who want peace? No one side needs to be defeated, if both can be pursuaded to call off the war.

  Might I remind you that Mr Bush’s middle eastern peace plan also involves Israel accepting a Palestinian state. The warmongers in Israel don’t want that in exactly the same way as the warmongers in Gaza would like to “defeat” Israel.

  There’s no need for an “enormous liberal brain” or an enormous anything brain. All that’s needed is the will to compromise.

• 13. Diana Powe  |  March 1st, 2008 at 7:46 pm

  There’s nothing like a lot of Americans expounding on what Israel ought to be doing or not doing with their own land and lives. So what do actual Israelis living in Israel think about negotiating with Hamas? Israel’s oldest newspaper, Haaretz, commissioned a poll this past Tuesday:
  

  Sixty-four percent of Israelis say the government must hold direct talks with the Hamas government in Gaza toward a cease-fire and the release of captive soldier Gilad Shalit. Less than one-third (28 percent) still opposes such talks.

  The figures were obtained in a Haaretz-Dialog poll conducted Tuesday under the supervision of Professor Camil Fuchs of Tel Aviv University.

  According to the findings, Israelis are fed up with seven years of Qassam rockets falling on Sderot and the communities near Gaza, as well as the fact that Shalit has been held captive for more than a year and a half.

  An increasing number of public figures, including senior officers in the Israel Defense Forces’ reserves, have expressed similar positions on talks with Hamas.
  __________
  Source: http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/958473.html

  I’m just guessing, but I have a feeling that such sentiments just won’t do for some Americans living in America who comment here.

• 14. Kahn  |  March 1st, 2008 at 7:49 pm

  Arctic - you offer no context for the above reports. Those sentnces as printed do not prove war crimes. They do prove war.

  If a Hamas Guerrilla is hiding in your house, then it is a valid target and HE committed the crime. Don’t you get that? Hamas PURPOSELY hides behind civilians. They PURPOSELY attack civilians. THOSE are crimes.

  And Israel HAS tried to talk to the Palestinians. They constantly try. But Hamas is in their charter dedicated to the destruction of Israel. Whats to talk about? Israel HAS offered deals. The ONLY deal the Palestinians offer is go away and/or die.

  Israel has also said they would welcome a Palestinian state. BUT, the Palestinians STILL have not said they would accept an Israeli state. Give me a break - OK? Israel has tried to make peace and their overtures have been rejected. The Palestinian “Peace” offer is and has consistently been the destruction of Isreael.

  You like to cut-n-paste, I see. Tell you what. You post the Hamas proposal for peace. Really, you post it and I’ll read it. Not their complainst. Not your rants. What actually is the Hamas Peace plan?

• 15. Arctic Fox  |  March 1st, 2008 at 7:58 pm

  From Kahn:

  “Arctic, well yes they WOULD prefer a truce. They have offered deals to the Palestinians several times. The response has been murdered school children and random rockets.”

  Followed by:

  “Arctic - you offer no context for the above reports.”

  Okay, so, where is your context for your comment?

  “Tell you what. You post the Hamas proposal for peace. Really, you post it and I’ll read it. Not their complainst. Not your rants. What actually is the Hamas Peace plan?”

  Well, guess what? Full circle. Back to “Media Bias” - what media organization has actually bothered to publish any? And if they go near that, then they’re “anti-Israel MSM that is biased in favour of those Palestinian terrorist.”

  The whole complaint this blog entry was about relates to bias, and yet we have bias in not reporting anything to do with Hamas wanting peace, because that would make it a lot harder for warmongers to dismiss them as terrorists.

  So now, I’m not going to post it, because I haven’t seen it - but that does not mean it does not exists. Just because I can’t read the papers in Gaza doesn’t mean that people writing there about peace automatically don’t exist.

  In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if Hamas’ plan for peace at least partly agreed with Mr Bush’s middle east peace plan. An independent state for Palestine that is accepted and acknowledged by Israel.

• 16. Michael  |  March 1st, 2008 at 9:02 pm

  Who is Hamas?

  Hamas was created in 1987 by Sheikh Ahmed Yassin of the Gaza wing of the Muslim Brotherhood at the beginning of the First Intifada. Best known in Israel and the rest of the world for its suicide bombings and other attacks directed against civilians and Israeli military and security forces targets, Hamas’ charter (written in 1988 and still in effect) calls for the destruction of the State of Israel and its replacement with a Palestinian Islamic state in the area that is now Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip. The organization is widely described as antisemitic.

  Hamas is listed as a terrorist organization by Canada, the European Union, Israel, Japan, and the United States.

  Source

  I’m sure they have plenty to discuss to get to a peace agreement.

• 17. Diana Powe  |  March 1st, 2008 at 9:18 pm

  As I said, not much interest among Americans living in America about what Israelis living in Israel might want their country to do about negotiating with Hamas. What do they know? They just live there.

• 18. js  |  March 1st, 2008 at 9:45 pm

  Its pretty mindless to negotiate with terrorists. Haratz is not really that good of a source. Just look at our own MSM, if everything they wrote and distributed were true, the US would have self destructed in the 60s. They are, pretty much, FOS.

  Isreal shows amazing restraint. Since the Hamas took over the Gaza Strip in mid-June 2007 until 26 February 2008, 838 rockets and 937 mortar bombs have been fired at Sderot and the western Negev. No other nation on earth would put up with that. It would be an all out war, and deportation of every non Israeli in the Gaza and West Bank. No nation on earth has “any” right to condemn Israel.

  Not even Haratz stopped the missles. Its pretty far fetched that most of Israel wants it to go on, DP. What an insult to intelligence. Congratulations, you get the booby award.

• 19. js  |  March 1st, 2008 at 9:50 pm

  From Israel’s disengagement from the Gaza Strip in mid-August 2005 until the Hamas takeover of the Gaza Strip 1,826 missiles were fired into Israeli territory from Gaza, as follows:

  15 August - 31 December 2005: 270
  1 January - 31 December 2006: 1020
  1 January - 14 June 2007: 536

  They want what? Sure isnt peace.

• 20. phnx  |  March 1st, 2008 at 9:52 pm

  “All that’s needed is the will to compromise.” AF

  The Isrealis have shown this will countless times. Hamas has not, and have said they never will But I guess that doesn’t count to leftists like you. its the fault of those evil Joooos.

• 21. js  |  March 1st, 2008 at 10:06 pm

  Thats 3400 separate, intentional attacks against Israel from 15 Aug 05 through 26 Feb 08, just over 30 months, averaging “over” 100 every Month. And you want every one to believe that Israeli’s think MORE negotiations will stop it? HAHAHAAAA!! thats stupid.

  If that happened in the USA, we would manage to outfit a 1 million man Armed force in no time at all and put a hard stop on it.

• 22. Diana Powe  |  March 1st, 2008 at 10:11 pm

  Not that I’m really surprised, but it’s almost reassuring in a perverse way to know that the conservative-as-victim complaint about purported media bias extends thousands of miles across the Atlantic and the length of the Mediterranean. “No need to pay any attention to that Israeli paper that’s 90 years old commissioning a public opinion poll by a professor of Tel Aviv University, it’s biased,” says the American conservative.

• 23. js  |  March 1st, 2008 at 10:18 pm

  US Congressional panel recognizes the “forgotten” Jewish refugees from Arab lands
  February 29, 2008, 10:55 AM (GMT+02:00)

  The resolution unanimously approved by the House Foreign Affairs Committee Thursday, Feb. 29, recognizes the “over 850,000 Jews put to flight from Arab countries” in 1948 as refugees, no less than their Palestinian counterparts, who they outnumber.

  The US president is urged to ensure that when the Middle refugee issue is discussed in international forums, any reference to Palestinian refugees be matched by a similarly explicit reference to expelled Jewish populations.

  Sometimes we forget the other half of the truth. Why should Arabs get justice, when the Jews are forgotten? Most of the Jews lost ton’s more, generations that had lived in those nations over hundreds, if not more than a thousand years, and all of thier belongings, bank accounts, and businesses, snatched right out from under them. In comparison, the majority of the Arabs in the Palestine territory were migratory labor, living from work they secured from Jews.

  What a concept, equal and just. Now why should anyone expect that?

• 24. js  |  March 1st, 2008 at 10:19 pm

  Oh cmon DP.

  Now you lips are flappin in the wind, they keep moving, an nothing but meaningless rhetoric comes out.

  Were you aware of that….

• 25. Kahn  |  March 1st, 2008 at 10:20 pm

  Arctic, so after that nice long rant - you can’t actually find a Hamas peace proposal can you?

  Thats really all that needs to be said AF.

  Diana, can YOU do your usual cut-n-paste job and show us the Hamas peace proposal? Can you?

  Look, just show it to us. We’ll read it, discuss it.

  (Derisive ending comment self-deleted)

• 26. Diana Powe  |  March 1st, 2008 at 10:26 pm

  Kahn,

  Do you live in Israel?

• 27. Gozer the Carpathian  |  March 1st, 2008 at 10:30 pm

  DP Does it matter?

• 28. Kahn  |  March 1st, 2008 at 11:10 pm

  Wow Diana, no I live in Virginia.

  Ummm, do you live is the Palestinian Territories?

  But that means you couldn’t find anything, could you Diana? Come on now, admit it. You are the cut-n-paste queen. You looked all around and could not find anything. Right? Come on now, stop stalling. Give it up….

• 29. Kahn  |  March 1st, 2008 at 11:20 pm

  tic tic tic tic, ding! Change subject NOW! Accuse the conservatives of something!

• 30. Freedom1  |  March 1st, 2008 at 11:37 pm

  Well said, Michael, JS, and Phnx!

  The rank anti-Semetism of the MSM is nauseating. The fact that, “Hamas…is sworn to Israel’s destruction” is completely ignored by the left. It’s the 1930’s all over again.

  Hey, Mark, I can’t believe you haven’t posted this already since this is yet another media bias story-

  “Survey Says: 64% Believe Mainstream Media Are Out of Touch: More Americans turning to Web for news”- Reuters

  NEW YORK (Reuters) - Nearly 70 percent of Americans believe traditional journalism is out of touch, and nearly half are turning to the Internet to get their news, according to a new survey.

  While most people think journalism is important to the quality of life, 64 percent are dissatisfied with the quality of journalism in their communities, a We Media/Zogby Interactive online poll showed.

  “That’s a really encouraging reflection of people who care A) about journalism and B) understand that it makes a difference to their lives,” said Andrew Nachison, of iFOCOS, a Virginia-based think tank which organized a forum in Miami where the findings were presented.

  Nearly half of the 1,979 people who responded to the survey said their primary source of news and information is the Internet, up from 40 percent just a year ago. Less than one third use television to get their news, while 11 percent turn to radio and 10 percent to newspapers.

• 31. Kahn  |  March 2nd, 2008 at 12:35 am

  Well, I was just checking up on this string before bed to see if Diana or Arctic Fox had posted that Hamas peace proposal. I was hoping to review it.

  Ah well. Maybe it’s still in translation…

• 32. Diana Powe  |  March 2nd, 2008 at 12:38 am

  Kahn,

  No, I didn’t look. The point which you adroitly missed is that what is genuinely relevant to the question of whether or not Israel should negotiate with Hamas is what Israelis want, not Americans. They live there. We don’t.

  So bloviate all you want about Hamas, but for the Israeli people, it matters.

• 33. Kahn  |  March 2nd, 2008 at 1:12 am

  Oh - is THAT what you meant when you asked me if I lived there? But then YOU must live in the Palestinian territories then? Maybe I didn’t miss your point, but thought it was stupid? Well yah, that is what I thought.

  You can’t find a Hamas peace proposal because there isn’t one and never has been one. Nor have they ever responded positively to ANY peace proposal. But when challenged you run and hide or change the subject. You also Arctic Fox… you couldn’t find that proposal either?

  Their idea of a peace proposal is ” Hey, hold still while I shoot you!”

  To suddenly say my opinion is irrelevant because I don’t live there, while you’re in the middle of talking total crap - and YOU don’t live there is intellectual cowardice. I’m trying my best here to not use derogatory language.

  Judging from your earlier posts then, you support Hamas, a criminal organization dedicated to the extermination of the Israeli nation. Just to clarify your position for you.

• 34. Diana Powe  |  March 2nd, 2008 at 1:40 am

  Kahn,

  No, I don’t support Hamas or not support Hamas because I don’t live in Israel. Your opinions about whether the state of Israel should negotiate with Hamas, which is in the position its in because it was elected by the Palestinians, don’t mean a thing because you aren’t affected by the question. For you it’s just an opportunity to opine as to what other people ought to do to suit your ideas about their country. For actual Israelis, who have to live with the consequences of their choices (unlike you living in Virginia), their apparent preference is for Israel to negotiate with Hamas. If you want to tell Israelis how to live their lives, I suggest you write a letter to the editor of Haaretz. Perhaps they’ll print it so that their readers will know what they need to do to please you.

• 35. Arctic Fox  |  March 2nd, 2008 at 1:42 am

  Thought I’d check in before bed, only to find Kahn running his mouth off again.

  So… Using “the google” under ‘Hamas peace plan’ turns up:

  If you want to understand the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in a nutshell, just look at the New York Times editorial pages of November 1, 2006. Amazingly enough, the Times ran a full op-ed column by a top official of the Hamas party, Ahmed Yousef, a senior adviser to Palestinian prime minister Ismail Haniyeh. Yousef repeated the same offer Hamas has been making for years. In Arabic it’s called a “hudna.”

  As Yousef explained, a hudna is “a period of nonwar but only partial resolution of a conflict.” It “extends beyond the Western concept of a cease-fire and obliges the parties to use the period to seek a permanent, nonviolent resolution to their differences.” A hudna “affords the opportunity to humanize one’s opponents and understand their position with the goal of resolving the intertribal or international dispute.”

  “This offer of hudna is no ruse, as some assert, to strengthen our military machine,” Yousef pleaded. And he offered several reasons to believe it: “A hudna is recognized in Islamic jurisprudence as a legitimate and binding contract. . It goes back to the Koran itself. . When Hamas gives its word to an international agreement, it does so in the name of God and will therefore keep its word. Hamas has honored its previous cease-fires, as Israelis grudgingly note with the oft-heard words, ‘At least with Hamas they mean what they say.’”

  But what do they say and mean? In Israel, opinions differ.

  To offset its radical move of giving op-ed space to Hamas, the Times published, on the very same day, a letter from the rising star of Israel’s far right, Minister of Strategic Affairs Avigdor Lieberman. He claimed to know what Hamas says and means: Their declared aim is “to eradicate all Jews from Tel Aviv, Haifa and Jerusalem” - in other words, to destroy the Jewish State - “and until they achieve that goal, they will not lay down their arms.”

  At the other end of Israel’s political spectrum, there are Israelis who have been urging their government for years to accept the long-standing Hamas offer of hudna. They are outraged to see a superhawk like Lieberman get the portfolio of Minister of Strategic Affairs. Zehava Galon, a leader of the left wing bloc in Israel’s parliament, called the appointment “a terrorist attack on democracy.”

  Did you get that? The only person calling for the destruction of Israel is a minister in Israel’s interpretation of what he thinks Hamas might think. But guess what? That’s what your “biased against Israel” press reported, not as what an Israeli minister said but as what Hamas said.

  Interestingly enough, the author goes on to report:

  So the Times gave space to both ends of the political spectrum. That seems balanced. But the next day, in its letters column, the Times ran four letters in response. Though one applauded the Hamas offered, three denounced it, following Lieberman’s lead, as bald-faced lying propaganda from a group dedicated to destroying Israel.

  For those who think actions speak louder than words, the Times also ran a news story about a major Israeli assault on Gaza that day, killing 8 and wounding over 40. And it reported on a cabinet meeting that would consider Lieberman’s plea much harsher measures against the Palestinians.

  For now, the Israeli cabinet has decided to hold off on harsher treatment, sticking to the present course, which has killed some 250 Gazans in the last four months (while losing only three of their own soldiers). But they can count on the present course scuttling any chance for hudna and peace talks.

  This whole scenario has been played out before. Back in June Hamas leaders offered a hudna. On the same day, the Israelis began the renewed military action in Gaza which continues to this very day. Israeli leaders surely understood then what they still know now. Their policy has an absolutely predictable outcome. The angry Palestinian public will reject its own leaders’ plans for peace.

  Indeed, the Hamas leaders have had to trim back their offer. In June, they offered a hudna that would automatically be renewed for an indefinite time. Now they are limiting it to 10 years. But in Middle Eastern politics, 10 years is close to an eternity.

  So it appears time and again it’s Hamas that’s wanted peace, and Israel that’s ignored it.

  A ceasefire, a “hudna”, is offered by Hamas. Israel promptly attacks them. Same picture over and over again.

  In fact, far from wanting to destroy Israel, a “hudna” actually recognizes Israel, as the author explains:

  And Hamas leaders cannot say publicly the most important fact: In Muslim law, a hudna is offered only to a non-Muslim party that controls its own non-Muslim land. In other words (as I have noted in a previous column) by using the word “hudna,” Hamas leaders are implicitly recognizing the permanent existence of Israel. Ahmed Yousef himself wrote that the hudna would involve “an immediate end to the occupation and to initiate a period of peaceful coexistence.” That sounds like a veiled promise of a two-state solution.

  So there you go, Kahn. Peace plans. From Hamas. Thwarted, by Israel.

  I bet THAT doesn’t fit into your comfortable view of things.

• 36. Mark Noonan  |  March 2nd, 2008 at 1:56 am

  AF,

  Not at all - Israel responds to attacks and cannot be held liable for Hamas hiding behind the skirts of women…Hamas, on the other hand, deliberately targets the unarmed.

• 37. Mark Noonan  |  March 2nd, 2008 at 2:03 am

  AF,

  And that Hamas peace plan? Well, it was for 10-15 years and was supposed to be modelled on Mohammed’s peace agreement with his Arab opponents…a period of time to gain strength for a final trial of arms.

  And, also, the agreement would require Israel to give up eastern Jerusalem, part of the Negev and control of most of Israel’s water supply…in other words, as long as Israel agreed to commit national suicide, Hamas will give them a temporary peace deal…

• 38. Arctic Fox  |  March 2nd, 2008 at 2:13 am

  Would you care to quote your sources for those rather sweeping comments, Mr Noonan?

• 39. Mark Noonan  |  March 2nd, 2008 at 2:56 am

  AF,

  Here’s a good source on the Hamas attitude towards a “peace” deal with Israel:

  http://www.fromoccupiedpalestine.org/node/1690

  You want to trust people who strap bombs on children and say this is morally superior to Israelis targeting Hamas leaders….well, that is your business…

• 40. js  |  March 2nd, 2008 at 7:57 am

  Would a hudna with Hamas really mark “the success of peacemaking,” a “major breakthrough” toward a nonviolent future?

  The answer lies in the historical meaning of the Muslim expression, Hamas’ track record, and the terms of the road map itself.

  Hudna has a distinct meaning to Islamic fundamentalists, well-versed in their history: The prophet Mohammad struck a legendary, ten-year hudna with the Quraysh tribe that controlled Mecca in the seventh century. Over the following two years, Mohammad rearmed and took advantage of a minor Quraysh infraction to break the hudna and launch the full conquest of Mecca, the holiest city in Islam.

  When Yassir Arafat infamously invoked Mohammad’s hudna in 1994 to describe his own Oslo commitments “on the road to Jerusalem,” the implication was clear. As Mideast expert Daniel Pipes explained, Arafat was asserting to his Islamic brethren that he will, “when his circumstances change for the better, take advantage of some technicality to tear up existing accords and launch a military assault on Israel.” Indeed, this is precisely what occurred in Sept. 2000 when Arafat & Co. launched a terror assault upon Israeli citizens.

  As for Hamas, they have proven time and again their commitment to a tactical hudna — replenishing their strength during the quiet periods, then returning with increased deadliness. As recently documented by The Washington Institute, Hamas agreed to no less than ten ceasefires in the past ten years, and after every single one returned freshly armed for terror. Hundreds of Israeli citizens have paid for these hudnas with their lives.

  http://www.honestreporting.com/articles/critiques/Hudna_With_Hamas.asp

• 41. js  |  March 2nd, 2008 at 7:59 am

  Expert: Dr. Hussein Labib
  Date: 4/2/2005
  Subject: “Hudna”

  Question
  I recently heard that the prophet mohammed was involved in shady peace dealings with other people apart from islam. Case in point ”

  THE PROPHET’S PRECEDENT

  http://en.allexperts.com/q/Islam-947/Hudna-2.htm

• 42. js  |  March 2nd, 2008 at 8:02 am

  This impression was left because two weeks ago, after Israel freed a Hamas cleric, Sheikh Hasan Yusef, from jail, the freed prisoner declared that Hamas would accept a long-term “hudna” in exchange for the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state on all lands that Israel acquired after the 1967 war. That would mean Israel’s withdrawal from the Old City of Jerusalem, the closure of the Jerusalem-Tel Aviv road, and the dismantling of Israel’s civilian and military presence in Judea, Samaria and Gaza (the West Bank).

  Sheikh Yusef stated to the Israeli media that the “hudna” that he suggested would last for ten years.

  Yet “hudna”, often mistranslated as a “ceasefire” or armistice, connotes no more than a temporary respite in the war between Islamic forces and non-Islamic forces.

  http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=1BC840B8-CDEC-4C7D-BF44-B68E85DC211F

• 43. phnx  |  March 2nd, 2008 at 10:24 am

  Arctic fox

  So you think that hamas wants peace. You are an ill informed moron!!! Read their charter. The following is a direct quote from their charter about how HAMAS views the peace process:

  Peaceful Solutions, [Peace] Initiatives and International Conferences

  Article Thirteen

  [Peace] initiatives, the so-called peaceful solutions, and the international conferences to resolve the Palestinian problem, are all contrary to the beliefs of the Islamic Resistance Movement. For renouncing any part of Palestine means renouncing part of the religion; the nationalism of the Islamic Resistance Movement is part of its faith, the movement educates its members to adhere to its principles and to raise the banner of Allah over their homeland as they fight their Jihad: “Allah is the all-powerful, but most people are not aware.”

  Peace is contrary to the beliefs of the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas). Can it be any more clear???!!!

  Just what is it about this that you don’t understand??!! Don’t you believe them when they say this??!!

• 44. phnx  |  March 2nd, 2008 at 10:29 am

  AF and other terrorist apologists, the following is the Charter of Hamas, in which is enshrined their stated goal of the destruction of Isreal:

  http://www.acpr.org.il/resources/hamascharter.html

  From the Preamble:

  “This is the Charter of the Islamic Resistance (Hamas) which will reveal its face, unveil its identity, state its position, clarify its purpose, discuss its hopes, call for support to its cause and reinforcement, and for joining its ranks. For our struggle against the Jews is extremely wide-ranging and grave, so much so that it will need all the loyal efforts we can wield, to be followed by further steps and reinforced by successive battalions from the multifarious Arab and Islamic world, until the enemies are defeated and Allah’s victory prevails.”

  “Israel will rise and will remain erect until Islam eliminates it as it had eliminated its predecessors.”

  From Article Seven:

  “Hamas is one of the links in the Chain of Jihad in the confrontation with the Zionist invasion. It links up with the setting out of the Martyr Izz a-din al-Qassam and his brothers in the Muslim Brotherhood who fought the Holy War in 1936; it further relates to another link of the Palestinian Jihad and the Jihad and efforts of the Muslim Brothers during the 1948 War, and to the Jihad operations of the Muslim Brothers in 1968 and thereafter.”

  “The prophet, prayer and peace be upon him, said:

  The time will not come until Muslims will fight the Jews (and kill them); until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, which will cry: O Muslim! there is a Jew hiding behind me, come on and kill him! This will not apply to the Gharqad, which is a Jewish tree (cited by Bukhari and Muslim).”

  “The Strategy of Hamas: Palestine is an Islamic Waqf

  Article Eleven

  The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine has been an Islamic Waqf throughout the generations and until the Day of Resurrection, no one can renounce it or part of it, or abandon it or part of it. ”

  In otherwords, all of what is known as Isreal belongs to them.

  Hamas in Palestine: Its Views on Homeland and Nationalism

  Article Twelve

  Hamas regards Nationalism (Wataniyya) as part and parcel of the religious faith. Nothing is loftier or deeper in Nationalism than waging Jihad against the enemy and confronting him when he sets foot on the land of the Muslims.

  There is more but it its a wast of bandwidth to past it. It is an complete screed against judiasm and peace. Only a fool like you wuold beleive Hamas wants peace.

• 45. Kahn  |  March 2nd, 2008 at 10:47 am

  Artic, ALL that text and you couldn’t actually find the Hamas peace proposal?

  “a hudna is “a period of nonwar but only partial resolution of a conflict.” It “extends beyond the Western concept of a cease-fire and obliges the parties to use the period to seek a permanent, nonviolent resolution to their differences.””

  But yet, while this is in effect they keep shooting rockets? This is ONLY an OFFER of a cease fire. They don’t even cease firing AND there are no suggestions of what an actual peace treaty would look like.

  ARCTIC, this is lame. What are the conditions under which Hamas will stop attacking Israel Where is the actual peace offer, not a cease fire offer?

  Oh, and the use of the phrase “once again” means you have to show more than one time. AND - nice source, a newspaper dedicated to news for progressives - who I’ve never heard of. neither had you apparently, as you had to google it.

• 46. Kahn  |  March 2nd, 2008 at 10:54 am

  Well, I searched also. I DO find offers of cease fires, and of truces. BUT no actual offers to end the conflict.

  Typically, when you look at the news surrounding an offer - Hamas escalates violence, Israel responds, and Hamas offers a truce while decrying the Israeli response. Note, during these “truces” and “cease fires” Hamas rebuilds their forces or often doesn’t even stop shooting.

  There is NEVER an actual offer of peace. Half hearted (or even full hearted, if you wish) cease fires are ALL thats EVER offered.

  ARCFTIC and DIANA - you ignorance is highlighted. You did NOT produce a peace offer - put up or shut up.

• 47. Diana Powe  |  March 2nd, 2008 at 12:28 pm

  Kahn,

  I’m not an Israeli. You’re not an Israeli. Your views and opinions on whether the Israelis should negotiate with the elected government of Hamas are utterly pointless most especially in the face of reported public opinion in that country. You don’t have to live with the results. If you want to persuade someone you need to persuade the people of Israel otherwise you’re just another American with an opinion from the safety of afar. Now, if you should care to immigrate to Israel, then that would be a completely different matter. Since you’re so anxious about the issue, perhaps you should consider it.

• 48. phnx  |  March 2nd, 2008 at 12:40 pm

  Kahn,

  Its pointless to discuss the middle east with these dhimmicrat surrender monkeys. Their mantra is peace at any cost. They would prefer to live peacefully as slaves subservient to their Islamofascist masters than to fight to defend the freedom they enjoy under democracy. God help us if they come to control all branches of government.

• 49. Diana Powe  |  March 2nd, 2008 at 12:53 pm

  phnx,

  Are you an Israeli?

• 50. phnx  |  March 2nd, 2008 at 1:54 pm

  Diana, Are you a human being?

• 51. Diana Powe  |  March 2nd, 2008 at 5:49 pm

  phnx,

  Are you a subroutine in a computer program designed to randomly type items from the approved list of Brainless Right-Wing Phrases ™?

  “dhimmicrat”
  “surrender monkeys”
  “Islamofascist masters”

  Of course, are you random or only pseudorandom? Hmm.

  In either case, as an Israeli would have immediately claimed their nation, I take you as yet another American who wants to tell Israelis how they should conduct their business, as if they cared. But, since a poll shows that the majority of Israelis want to negotiate with Hamas, it would be out of character for a George W. Bush supporter to advocate doing anything in conformity with what the majority of citizens of the affected country wanted.

• 52. phnx  |  March 2nd, 2008 at 6:47 pm

  Diana I do not presume to tell Isreal how to conduct their business. They are doing well enough despite the media bias which you seem to have forgotten is the topic under discussion.

  It was leftists such as Congressive, Arctic Fox, Phil and yourself who attempted (as usual) to hijack the topic at hand. Your Rodney King negotiating strategy fails miserably, as do your pleas of sympathy for the murderous terrorists of Hamas. You never bothered to address the merits of media bias when it comes to dealing with Isreal, but I suppose since you are not a journalist, in your mind you are nlot qualified to do so.

  Your question “are you an Isreali” sounds like some kind of juvenile retort to indicate that you’ve exhausted all your arguments but wish to close the discussion by introducing some specious point that has no relevance to silence your adversary.

  When you can’t win an argument your tactic like all of your leftist friends is deflect and change the subject. As I said to Kahn, its pointless to conduct any meaninglful discourse with you.

  I can only presume by your simplistic logic, that you either support, or at least condone the violence in Darfur, in as much as you are not from there either.

  Since you have established the ground rules, apply them to yourself, and please refrain from commenting on anything other than police matters in your own locality. According to your logic this is all that you are qualified to do.

• 53. Jones  |  March 2nd, 2008 at 7:51 pm

  Diana,

  It sounds like you have a new benchmark for everyone. In order to discuss any topic, you must either live in the place being discussed and/or must agree with a majority of people living there.

  With that in mind, since you are fond of pontificating about how Bush broke the law with “illegal” wiretaps, a Harris poll in February of 2006 said that a “majority of U.S. Adults Feel President is Justified in Authorizing Wiretaps Without Court Approval to Monitor Suspected Terrorists.”

  I also think Phnx brings up a great point by mentioning Darfur. Since we do not live in Darfur, Iraq, and Kosovo, we should not give our opinions on those topics unless we can cut and paste some poll showing that we have some majority agreeing with us.

• 54. Diana Powe  |  March 2nd, 2008 at 8:18 pm

  phnx and Jones,

  The point is that you can pontificate all you want on the subject. However, when the evidence points toward you’re being on the side opposite of the majority of those affected, it’s completely relevant to point out that fact. The supposed “media bias”, which is a pretty weak assertion on its face, is further weakened by the fact that the known evidence points toward Israelis wanting to negotiate with Hamas.

• 55. phnx  |  March 2nd, 2008 at 9:40 pm

  Diana please abide by your own rules and comment only on traffic stops, petty crime and police brutality in your own little burg. It is afterall what you are qualified to do.

• 56. phnx  |  March 2nd, 2008 at 9:52 pm

  As for Isreal, its a democracy. If the polls you reference are accurate, the next election should sweep into office a politician willing to negotiate and yield to the Hamas demands. Don’t bet a bag of donuts on it Diana, you might have to go on a diet.

• 57. Kahn  |  March 2nd, 2008 at 11:08 pm

  Diana, I thought you said we should stay out of this because we don’t liver ther? Move over the weekend?

  Find one, just one Hamas Peace proposal. Not a cease fire, a Peace Proposal.

  You can’t, and you make stupid remarks like above.

• 58. Kahn  |  March 2nd, 2008 at 11:12 pm

  Oh, the point is that yes, Israel wants to negotiate and HAS made proposals. BUT, Hamas does not want to negotiate and has steadily killed Israelis.

  Again, just one Hamas Peace proposal?

• 59. Kahn  |  March 2nd, 2008 at 11:59 pm

  Just looking at my post # 57 - I type bad. Just baaad.

• 60. Freedom1  |  March 3rd, 2008 at 3:11 am

  JS and Phnx,

  Excellent information on the terrorist group Hamas, and on the treacherous Islamic concept known as the “hudna”. Hamas is a vicious, genocidal terrorist organization dedicated to the eradication of the Jews of Israel and Israel itself.

  Kahn,

  We all suffer from the Dreaded Typo Disease™ from time to time! Don’t worry about it! Heh, heh! :)