Mere Rhetoric: US State Department: "Money And Weapons To Palestinians Won't Benefit Hamas"

Do these people have any shame at all:

The United States State Department said Monday full funding of a proposed $86 million in security assistance for the Palestinian authority hinges on whether U.S. officials receive assurances that none of the funds can benefit Hamas. Spokesman Sean McCormack commented after four House Foreign Affairs Committee members, including chairman Tom Lantos, called on Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to reconsider the plan in light of the recent agreement between Fatah and Hamas to form a national unity government. McCormack said the administration is asking the same questions as are the members of Congress about whether Hamas would benefit from the program... The intention is to assist with the training of forces under the control of Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas.

This again? Really? Let's go over this, all in one place. First, the US shouldn't support Abbas. He's either unable to stop terrorism, a terrorist supporter, or a terrorist leader. In any case, he has repeatedly declared that he's opposed to US policy:

(1) In the best case, just kind of pathetically weak and prone to reflexive anti-Semitic Holocaust denial. He denies Israel's right to self-defense. This is a problem because he also denies that Hamas has to recognize Israel. That puts him functionally and definitionally at odds with US policy. And so they're supporting him why?

(2) In anything less than the best case, this guy is a slightly less repressed, slightly less powerful version of Yasser Arafat. No one's under any illusions any more that the terrorist Al Aksa Brigades answer to him. Which makes sense, since he has encouraged the Palestinians to turn their guns on the Israelis. Doesn't seem like a good guy to give guns to, under those circumstances.

(3) In the worst case - and here he has been unfortunately explicit - he actually endorses the de facto destruction of Israel. Which makes him functionally different from Hamas in absolutely no way. If the US rejects Hamas, it doesn't seem reasonable for them to support Abbas.

(4) Oh, and then there's that little part where he agreed to a unity government with Hamas, siding with them against the US. Making him, you know, a bad ally.

Now let's pretend that Abbas was someone the US would like, in the abstract, to support. They still shouldn't give him weapons because those weapons will end up in Hamas's hands. The US can't even keep their own F-14 parts from getting to Iran. They can't keep their own Iraqi weapons and salaries from getting to terrorists. How are they going to prevent Terrorist A from hoisting body armor over a backyard fence in Ramallah at 1am, and giving it to Terrorist B?

Oh, and just for good measure: every street that Abbas secures for Hamas is a street's worth of Hamas weapons that get turned on Israeli civilians.

The US State Department should stop with this fetishistic game, where they arm and train Palestinian thugs as if they were peacemakers - and then expect them to actually become peacemakers.

References:
* U.S.: Aid package to PA depends on funds not benefiting Hamas
* Palestinian Civil Society Watch - Abbas Sulks A Lot, Fails to Stop Terrorism [MR]
* Abbas: Recognizing Israel Not Required [MR]
* Oh, So The Al-Aqsa Terrorist Brigade Is Loyal To Abbas After All? [MR]
* The Oh-So-Moderate Abbas Urges Palestinians To Unite, Target Israelis
* Bonus Outrage: Abbas Rejects Two-State Solution, Eilat Bombing Happened After Israel Released Money To Him Anyway
* Done and Done: Abbas Takes US Money and Cutting Edge Weapons, Tells the US That He's Siding With Hamas Anyway
* US Government To Give Palestinian Terrorists Cutting-Edge Weapons [MR]
* US Officials Couldn't Keep Track Of Their Own Weapons If They Were Buried Up Their Collective... [MR]
* Why "Humanitarian Aid" is a Myth (Or: the Definition of the Word Fungible)