Palestinians cheering

“Hamas wins Palestinain elections. Nice going W. Nice going Condi. Nice going Sharon. Just another Arab terrorist state.

History of Hamas...


Hamas has set the destruction of Israel as its goal. Between September 2000 and April 2004, Hamas perpetrated 425 terrorist attacks against Israel and murdered 377 Israelis - nine every month.
Hamas was founded by Islamic militant extremists in the Gaza Strip in 1988, shortly after the first intifada broke out. The word Hamas is an acronym for the Arabic words for "Islamic Resistance Movement."

Though it is also involved in social and welfare programs, the organization is devoted chiefly to the obliteration of Israel. Its charter states, "Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it."

The charter further states, "There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors.

Hamas is responsible for 24 murders before the Oslo Accords, 156 more before the Oslo War began in September 2000, and at least another 377 since then - a total of at least 557.

The organization's first mass attack was a car bomb that blew up at a bus stop in Afula in April 1994, murdering 8 and wounding 51. Among the most horrific Hamas attacks were the following:

* 22 people killed and 56 wounded in a suicide bombing attack on the No. 5 bus on
Dizengoff St. in Tel Aviv, Oct. 1994

* 26 killed by suicide bomber on a #18 bus near the Jerusalem Central Bus Station, Feb. 1996

* 16 killed in the Mahane Yehuda open market in Jerusalem in a double suicide attack, July 1997

* 23 dead and 115 wounded when a Hamas suicide bomber blew himself up on a No. 2 bus line coming from the Western Wall in Jerusalem, August 2003

* 45 murdered within the space of five days in March 2002: a suicide Hamas terrorist blew himself up in a Haifa restaurant, killing 15, and another one did the same in the Park Hotel in in Netanya during a Passover Seder, murdering some 30 and wounding 144.

The ten worst Oslo War Hamas attacks, in which a total of 186 were murdered, also included the following:
* June 1, 2001 - Dolphinarium in Tel Aviv, 21 killed - mostly new-immigrant teenagers from the former Soviet Union

* Aug. 9, 2001 - Sbarro's Pizzeria in Jerusalem, 15 killed, including the parents and three children of the Schijveschuurder family

* Dec. 2, 2001 - Haifa bus, 15 killed

* May 7, 2002 - Rishon Letzion hall, 16 killed

* June 18, 2002 - #32 bus from Gilo, Jerusalem, 19 killed

* March 5, 2003 - #37 bus in Haifa, 15 dead

* June 11, 2003 - #14 bus, Jerusalem, 17 murdered

A full list of attacks since 2000 can be seen on the IMRA website.”

“But Nigal... democracies don't do terrorism.”

“Well, if Hamas is going to be taken seriously on the global stage, then it will come under extreme pressure to disarm and become more moderate. Of course, disarming and moving to a more moderate position will alienate their base.

The whole situation is a mess right now.”

“There is some speculation that the day-to-day responsibilities of governing will force Hamas to moderate.

We'll see about that.”

“Exactly, there's hardly any choice for them, but yet to do so will alienate the majority of Palis who want them to continue to target innocent women and children.

What a great bunch of people!”

“Nice neighbors for 6 1/2 million theocratic nuclear wielding transplants.”

“Ah, the ol' moral equation again. Is that you, Tilt?”

“Stratfor weighs in:

Geopolitical Diary: Implications of a Hamas Victory
January 27, 2006 07 30 GMT

The road to an Israeli-Palestinian peace hit a sharp curve on
Thursday, when Hamas scored a significant election victory -- taking
76 seats over Fatah's 43 in the 132-seat Palestinian legislature. The
announcement sent shockwaves through the United States and Israel.
Hamas had not been expected -- even by itself -- to win a majority,
let alone by a landslide. For several reasons, it had been our
forecast that Hamas would make a strong showing but Fatah would
retain a slight edge. This, obviously, was wrong.

So why did the pendulum swing so strongly toward Hamas? A variety of
factors were in play: Hamas' aggressive campaigning was coupled with
the endemic corruption and infighting that have plagued Fatah. Though
Hamas is an Islamist group, its campaign was based on promises of
improved living conditions for the Palestinians rather than on
ideological goals of implementing Sharia law. The decision for voters
was perceived as being between two groups: One with a history of
mismanagement, corruption and cronyism while in power, the other with
a record of providing social services to the masses -- without having
attained a position in government.

With Hamas now in power, the world faces several more critical
questions, many of which cannot be answered for some time.

First, what will the group do with its unexpected -- unasked-for --
majority?

Hamas clearly had sought to make a significant showing in the
elections but to fall shy of a majority. As a junior partner in
government, Hamas would be able to force Fatah out front in direct
negotiations with Israel, while also avoiding pressures to disarm.
The group's long-term agendas could have been pursued through
domination of the social and security portfolios.

Instead, Hamas now must form a new government, without Fatah.
Unprepared for this, leading members are now meeting to figure out
their next steps. While we would love to be a fly on the wall in
Hamas headquarters, we could bet the main question being asked is
whether to try to work out a compromise with Fatah and somehow stick
to the original plan of coalition, or seize the opportunity and
dominate the Palestinian government.

If a coalition was formed, the Palestinian government could keep
foreign aid flowing and maintain a dialogue with the Israelis and
Americans with relative ease -- whereas a Hamas government would find
it difficult to engage them in negotiations. Moreover, any violence
by Hamas militants would be construed as a state-sponsored attack,
opening the door for Israel or the United States to strike at the
Palestinian regime itself the moment another explosion occurred.

On the other hand, Hamas recognizes the value of having a political
majority, and it would be more capable of folding its militant wing
into the official Palestinian security apparatus -- thus evading
pressure to disarm -- if it dominates the government. This calculus
assumes, of course, that Hamas will be able to control not only its
own members, but also the significant numbers of militants from
Palestinian Islamic Jihad and disgruntled Fatah factions who have
been sidelined -- an extremely messy, if not impossible, task. Thus,
in the end, Hamas likely will opt for gradual moderation, and engage
in some heavy negotiations to form a coalition with Fatah.

The questions are at least as difficult to grapple with in other
parts of the world.

The United States and Israel, certainly, will have trouble dealing
with a political party whose founding charter calls for the
destruction of Israel -- but they also cannot simply ignore it. U.S.
President George W. Bush acknowledged in a press conference that the
election results signify the spread of democracy in the Middle East.
The United States, of course, has been pushing for democratization in
the region -- which forces Washington's hand in the case of the
Palestinians -- and it has moved away from relying on authoritarian
regimes as allies. If Washington is able to work with Hamas, the
Islamist group could serve as a bulwark against al Qaeda and other
jihadists. And under any circumstances, any deal cut with Hamas would
be more credible than with Fatah, which simply cannot deliver.

In Israel, acting Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and the new Kadima party
face significant internal challenges already. Olmert cannot escape
the shadow of Ariel Sharon, and he will find it necessary to convince
Israeli voters that -- despite his lack of a military background --
he also can be ruthlessly effective in executing policy. How Olmert
deals with a Hamas-led Palestinian government will be an important
litmus test.

The uncertainties extend throughout the region. In Egypt, there are
connections between the Muslim Brotherhood -- which gave rise to the
Hamas movement in Gaza in 1987 -- and its growing political influence
to be considered, as well as President Hosni Mubarak's role between
the two groups. Iran and Syria will be emboldened by the Hamas
victory, but can anticipate that Hamas will begin to behave more
independently as it moves from militancy toward moderation.

In short, the election results have forced recalculations on all
sides. The issues, we expect, will be sorted out in varieties of
negotiations and violent clashes. The action will be closely watched,
with one deep question lingering in the background: Is growing
political influence among Islamists a side effect or a natural
outgrowth as democracy takes root in the Middle East?”

“This is all very good. It will likely present an opportunity for us to go wipe them out and end this charade once and for all.”

“It's also an opportunity, hardliners can also often get more achieved than those perceived as moderates. Sharon was a man with a history of extremist, and in the end was probably able to actually do more than a more moderate man, as the people trusted him not to give the house away, maybe the same could happen with Hamas. In the short-term it could all go to hell though.”

“Sometimes you have to go through hell to get to heaven.”

“Some disconnected reactions:

Stratfor's analysis ends with a really critical question, which I might rephrase as: To what extent does Democratization in the Middle East necessarily entail growing power for the Islamo-facists. My belief is that in the short term it does. My hope is that in the long term it won't. One reason for optimism: popular opinion in Iran moved in a liberal and pro-Western direction once it became clear that that Iranians were now laying in the bed the fundamentalists had made. Radical Islam seems to be more attractive in the Middle East as an opposition movement, than as a governing ideology.

I wonder how much of the Hamas vote was by people who assumed Hamas could not win and hoped that a strong minority showing for Hamas would leave a much chastened Fatah in power.

As one who laughed at the hubris involved in the drive to create capitalist pro-Western Democracies in the Middle East - this is some confirmation. You cannot liberate and Democratize and at the same time determine the foreign policy (let alone the economic policies)of nations. As has been known since the Roman empire, it is easier for an international power to control individual despots than foreign masses.”

“Also, Hamas has an unbelievably ugly covenant. It's not just their methods that are abhorent. Israel is in a tough spot - if Hamas is willing to maintain the cease fire, Israel risks being the international bad guy if they take too tough a line. They risk allowing ugly things to grow if they do not. Will they wait for an outrage and then unload both barrels? Will they allow Hamas to develop into a state like entity and figure that a people with much to lose can be dealt with more easily than one with little to move. Will they look for an opportunity to acheive massive expulsions of Palestinians from the West Bank?

Hamas covenant lowlight:

Moreover, if the links have been distant from each other and if obstacles, placed by those who are the lackeys of Zionism in the way of the fighters obstructed the continuation of the struggle, the Islamic Resistance Movement aspires to the realisation of Allah's promise, no matter how long that should take. The Prophet, Allah bless him and grant him salvation, has said:

"The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, (evidently a certain kind of tree) would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews." (related by al-Bukhari and Moslem).
”

“I think that ultimately, this victory will be a good thing.

First, I agree with the idea that the hardliners can make peace better than moderates.

I also find it quite ironic that we spend all of our effort in Iraq trying to get the insurgents to join the political process, and then we have the exact opposite policy in regards to Hamas. It is much better to have them involved in elections than the alternative.

They will now also be responsible for the government. They are, apparently, seen as effective in delivering aid like health care in certain regions. Perhaps they will be able to deliver a functioning Palestinian government, unlike Fatah.

Also, they will be held responsible if the government fails. This is a natural moderating influence.

Also, perhaps Fatah will begin to reform itself. The party out of power can get lean and hungry and effective if it really wants to return to power.

So, I think that the Hamas victory CAN be a very good thing. It's just too bad that Sharon didn't stick around long enough to cut a deal with them.”

“Since TV was a teen ager it has almost daily told of the Israel-Palestinian peace talks.I guess I shouldn't worry for my life
expectancy could allow me to see it, but I'm not betting my 'Geritol' on it.”

“Also, they will be held responsible if the government fails. This is a natural moderating influence.

They'll fail if they don't moderate (which appeases their constituency but alienates the international community), and they'll fail if they moderate (alienating the majority of palis who want them to continue to blow up schoolkids and women).

Hope I'm wrong...”

“I agree Hamas is in a bind. If life gets better for Palestinians there will be more wiggle room to slip out of it. One unknown (to me at least) is what percentage of the population voted for them because of their domestic presence and what percentage voted for them because of their hard line on Israel and their terror campaign.”

“First the Saturday People; then the Sunday People…

PA Religious Group Says Christian Zionists Worship Satan
21:33 May 08, '06 / 10 Iyar 5766
by Hana Levi Julian

A senior Palestinian Authority religious leader said Monday on a PA-affiliated website that Christian Zionists worship “Satan as G-d”, according to an article on the Palestinian Media Watch website…

…The PMW quotes a PA TV religious leader who announced a prayer for the murder of “infidels” – a term that includes the Christian West, it notes. “Destroy the Infidels and the Polytheists!” the prayer exhorts viewers. “Count them and kill them to the last one, and don’t leave even one.”

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=103273

This is, of course the SAME Hamas that you and I had money taken out of our pay checks to help fund to the tune of $10 million so far…

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/05/09/us.palestinians/”

“Yeah but the good thing is we have managed to get the HAMAS to start Killing the Fatah...or whatever....my idea is back off and let them kill each other. If we can make some money off these Little Sheet Heads by selling arms and ammunition so much the better.”

“Yeah but they are still firing rockets into Israel from their new found lands in Judea and Samaria and Olmerts is keeping the kibosh on the release of this information to the media. The government is also threatening to take away government press rights to media outlets who report these rockets from Judea and Samaria. That’s called censorship. Only middle east democracy my ass.”

“Our adopted orphan isn't a democracy??”