Ha'aretz Wonders If Hamas is All That Bad - Turns Out, Yes
Does it ever seem like some Ha'aretz correspondents have never met a terrorist without a sould bent toward moderation? Hamas puts out their election platform (yes, apparently, they have election platforms now), and Ha'aretz excitedly announces that Hamas platform mentions armed struggle, but not Israel's destruction:
Hamas published its official platform for the upcoming Palestinian elections, which proved to be more moderate than either its 1988 charter or public statements made by its leaders throughout the ensuing years. The document makes no mention of the principle that has been Hamas' raison d'etre since its founding: the destruction of Israel and establishment of a Palestinian state on all territory west of the Jordan River in its place. However, the document's introduction comes out strongly in favor of armed struggle. "Our nation is currently at a stage of national liberation, and it has the right to act to regain its rights and end the occupation by using all means, including armed resistance," it states. "We must use all means in order to support our people and establish a state whose capital is Jerusalem."
The correspondent wonders out loud whether Hamas is committed to such a state being "confined to the West Bank and Gaza." Let's see if we can find an answer to that. Could it possibly be the case that by "end the occupation" they mean the presence of any Jew in any land east of the Jordan River? Might they possibly consider all of Israel to be "occupation territory"? We think they might!
"These attacks will continue in all the territories of 1948 and 1967, and we will not stop attacking the Zionist Jewish people as long as any of them remain in our land. The words come from a statement issued by the armed wing of the militant group Hamas... The reasons Hamas reject the roadmap are hinted at in the statement above. "1948" refers to the whole of Palestine as it was during the British mandate, before the State of Israel was established... Hamas considers all of Israel as occupied territory
[Cross-posted at IsraPundit]
UPDATE: This is beginning to wear thin. Guardian headline: Hamas drops call for destruction of Israel from manifesto. No, no they did not.
Hamas published its official platform for the upcoming Palestinian elections, which proved to be more moderate than either its 1988 charter or public statements made by its leaders throughout the ensuing years. The document makes no mention of the principle that has been Hamas' raison d'etre since its founding: the destruction of Israel and establishment of a Palestinian state on all territory west of the Jordan River in its place. However, the document's introduction comes out strongly in favor of armed struggle. "Our nation is currently at a stage of national liberation, and it has the right to act to regain its rights and end the occupation by using all means, including armed resistance," it states. "We must use all means in order to support our people and establish a state whose capital is Jerusalem."
The correspondent wonders out loud whether Hamas is committed to such a state being "confined to the West Bank and Gaza." Let's see if we can find an answer to that. Could it possibly be the case that by "end the occupation" they mean the presence of any Jew in any land east of the Jordan River? Might they possibly consider all of Israel to be "occupation territory"? We think they might!
"These attacks will continue in all the territories of 1948 and 1967, and we will not stop attacking the Zionist Jewish people as long as any of them remain in our land. The words come from a statement issued by the armed wing of the militant group Hamas... The reasons Hamas reject the roadmap are hinted at in the statement above. "1948" refers to the whole of Palestine as it was during the British mandate, before the State of Israel was established... Hamas considers all of Israel as occupied territory
[Cross-posted at IsraPundit]
UPDATE: This is beginning to wear thin. Guardian headline: Hamas drops call for destruction of Israel from manifesto. No, no they did not.
