Martyr Strikes At Israeli Terror Forces

by niall Tue Sep 09, 2003 19:55

This is really a pathetic comment. The reality is the person who carried this out cannot be a martyr and in fact Islam condemns these actions. The reality is many muslims do sympathise or support such actions. I have a question for Muslims : what rights would christians, jews and those of other faiths enjoy in an Islamic state where everyopne would be expected to adhere to Islamic law?

by Rapper Tandy Tue Sep 09, 2003 20:13

The Israelis have been murdering Palestinians non stop for weeks and when someone hits back Niall the knocker appears. Even in Saudi Arabia and Iran, Christians and Jews have full freedom of religious expression. Even the Taliban did not ban Judaisn or Christianity.

Personally I hate all religion and I thinkthe bomber was misguided. But at least he had courage,something which is lacking in the Israelis who mow down children fromthe safety of their tanks,copters and jets.

by Tiocfaidh Armani - Na Fianna Eireann Tue Sep 09, 2003 20:53 info at fiannaeireann dot com Dublin

Well done to them. It took bravery from this man and shows how desperate a state the Palestinian people are, when they only option left to them is this.
He did not go out and kill innocent civilians, he killed the aggressors to his people. It is his right and his peoples right to fight their enemy and do onto them, what the Israelis are very quick in doing to them.
Victory to the intifada!!

by niall Tue Sep 09, 2003 21:14

The situation for any Christians there are in Saudi Arabia and Iran is dire. The point is suicide actions are not condoned in Islam and many Muslims believe in creating a Muslim state, the Khilafah, in which everyone must adhere to Islamic law. Where do you think this leaves people of other faiths who disagree with Islam?If you think killing Israeli civilians is O.K then you are just scumbags.

by Jamey Tue Sep 09, 2003 21:17

I won't be crying for the occupation soldiers who were killed today.

by Tiocfaidh Armani - Na Fianna Eireann Tue Sep 09, 2003 21:28 info at fiannaeireann dot com Dublin

No civilians were killed? What are you talking about? The people killed were armed soldiers who occupy their land and slaughter innocent Palestinians with ease from behind their big tanks and American bought high powered weapons. They are the scum.
I condemn all suicide attacks carried out against the civilian population of Israel.

by niall Tue Sep 09, 2003 21:42

He WAS a suicide bomber. Suicide bombers have killed many innocent Israelis - do you think he would have turned down a suicide mission because Israeli civilians might be involved? Once again, where would we be under the khilafah? I can assure you that under that system many people in the West would enjoy few of the freedoms they take for granted today. Get real you sad little chucky!

by Tiocfaidh Armani - Na Fianna Eireann Tue Sep 09, 2003 21:48 info at fiannaeireann dot com Dublin

I'm sure he would also, and I would have condemned him if he did but the fact is that he didn't. I welcome the death of those oppressive murdering scumbags. I hope they liked a taste of their own medicine.

by Hey Tue Sep 09, 2003 22:03

I notice how you've avoided the demands that it's hyprocritical offering support to the families in Chile who are searching for justice when we're still digging up bodies of people murdered with out trial by the IRA and your scumbag mates.

Get ta fuck you reek of hypocracy and death

by No 6 Tue Sep 09, 2003 22:07

And the thirty injuried were all terrorist scum too eh Armaní? What about civilans maimed and mangled?

But they've never bothered your kind before.

by Drbinoche Tue Sep 09, 2003 22:26

So let me get this straight you people will bemoan when Israel kills ANY palestinians be they militants or not and yet when the Palestinians attack Israeli soldier you fucking cheer. Where is the logic there. Under the Geneva convention any 'soldier out of uniform and caught attacking another country is called a spy and under the international law, spies can be shot. So if the palestinian guys are out of uniform [which they don't have so therefore anything they wear can technically be out of uniform] they are spies, or you can claim they are soldiers, in which case you should not be cheering the death of one group of soldiers and mourning another. Please don't forget Gandhi, 'an eye for an eye, makes the whole world blind!'

You cannot defeat people who do not fear death, that is true, but you can also just bomb the shit out of them. I mean if they are all dead, then there is no longer a problem. I am not saying that this is right but you believe Israel to be complete murdering scum, and yet if that is the case why have they not just massacred every damn Palestinian. You might cry international condemnation, but they have never really shown any regard for it in the past. When they attacked the Iraqi Nuclear plant in 86, they did not ask for permission, they just did it in violation of international law. So why aren't they just gassing all of the palestinians!!!!

'Even the Taliban did not ban Judaisn or Christianity.'

So true, instead they just kicked em out of the country or arrested em. Shall we not forget the 8 international christians arrested in Afghanistan in early 2001 for teaching Christianity to their friends, of course you can claim they were spies or something ,but they were very unusual looking spies, maybe the CIA are getting really lax on who they recruit nowadays!! Of course the Taliban didn't hate other religions of ban em, thats why they destroyed the hundred year old statues of Buddha, despite international calls for them to at least remove em and send em out of the country rather than destroy em. Thats why the Taliban government was only officially recognised by THREE countries in the world as the true leaders of Afghnaistan. Pakistan, UAE, and Russia.

'he had courage' Thats not courage any idiot can strap a bomb to himself and blow a hole in the street, but a man with courage would learn to fight without violence, why on a predominantly anti-war and therefore anti-violence site, do stupid comments about how right suicide bombers are and how wrong Israeli fighter jets are. Surely you'd hate em both irrespective of who is killing, they are still killing. I hate the IRA and the British Army, coz they are both murdering bastards who are too intent on getting their fucking agendas across than listening to the people they are supposedly serving!

'I won't be crying for the occupation soldiers who were killed today' And I wouldn't expect you to, I will expect the Israelis to attack some Palestinians tonight and believe me they can kill 10 times the number of this suicide bomber if they want. They will probably strike back and then the cycle starts all over again and whose left standing in the end, Fucking no-one except America!!!! I mean do you honestly expect Israel to sit back and say, 'Fair enough, good strike, we better move out!' More likely they'll attack Palestine tonight and kill a couple of civilians and tomorrow morning you'll wake up and yell about how unjust Israel is and how right palestine is, when its obvious to most people that they are just as bad as each other. No-one is better than another in a war, and that is the sad truth.

So when a soldier goes home is he a soldier or a civilian. I mean when you go home are you still a student/accountant/doctor/whatever, no you are just you, you don't sit at home going over your companies taxes, do you think all soldiers go home and sit at home with their weapons in their hands going 'When will I get called out again, I wanna kill innocent Palis' No they are going home to see their families and their kids and their friends, so they are then civilians. Even if just for 12 hours, they are still civilians. So lets argue some more semantics. If a soldier is forever a soldier, then all of those palestinians who get murdered during cease fires and the like are really still terrorists and therefore are not innocent civilians. I mean I will condemn any attack Israel does in which an innocent civilian is killed, but I won't shed a tear when Mohammed the fucking Hamas leader is blown to pieces, coz he is scum and if he wanted to live by the sword then fucking die by the sword!

'I welcome the death of those oppressive murdering scumbags'

This has been going on for years, so its not like this is the first time Israel has gotten hit. And as you all know, they will strike back as they always do. I reiterate these points as I am seriously thinking I am the only one who thinks that maybe, just maybe if the palestinians stopped this attacks and pleaded for international help, they might be treated a bit better. I mean in East Timor, did the people go out and start blwoing the shit out of the indonesian occupiers, no they screamed for international help and it took its time to get to them, I will admit it should have been delt with years ago, but it did happen. They have freedom, why is it not possible for the palestinians to just stop. The internationl media and the people of the world might listen more, if it did not involve news reports every few days of some suicide bomber blowing up a bus or blowing up a disco, and killing many young Israelis. Are all Israeli lives meaningless to you or is it just soldiers and if it is meaningless, then how can you expect to be taken seriously if you claim to be pro-life [so to speak] and yet only pro-life for the people you support.

by Ger Tue Sep 09, 2003 22:51

People cheering at this atrocity are dangerous idiots. The Palestinians have plenty of opportunity to cut a deal with Israel, they are just too corrupt and deluded to take it. They are dumb, because if they go on like this, the Israelis will just wash their hands of the whole negotiation thing and wall them off for good. This is something they have already started to do, and I can see why.

by Lone gunman Tue Sep 09, 2003 23:49

About other religions under Islam. They are classified as sacrilige and hearsy[sic].

Witness the Buddah statues in Afghanistan,the fact that there are NO Christian churches in Saudi Arabia[Even in Gulf war 1 the services on the military bases had to be held under cover so as not to offend the Saudis].
Funnily enough Islam recognises Christ,as a prophet in the religion of Islam.But not his religion.

by niall Wed Sep 10, 2003 00:04

you're right. People don't seem to realise that under the khilafah the rights of other religious would be at the very least curtailed - christians and jews may be accorded some freedom , but what about hindus, buddhists, etc. What rights would gays, bi-sexual people enjoy under the khilafah- what freedoms would women be allowed- what rights would people have to speak against sharia law?

by Mordechai Wed Sep 10, 2003 01:12

Traditionally under Islam, Jews were/are regarded as unclean and inferior. They were not allowed to own land, ride a donkey, walk in the shadow of a Muslim, etc. etc.

by >>>>>Seáinín Wed Sep 10, 2003 02:13

Given the activites of the Israeli army and Mossad then I think these soldiers were legitimate targets as well.

I would condemn deliberate attacks on civilians but this seems to have been a good operation. I hope the palestinians refarin from bombing civilians and target only the military. If so, it's a win/win situation for them. The whole world is sick of hearing about Israel now.

by Makhnist Wed Sep 10, 2003 02:33

Did you know that in the state of Israel you have no right to refuse serving in the army?

And one more thing: the suicide bomber killed soldiers and not civilians because it`s easier.

Cheering suicide bombers. That`s sick.
The Palestinian leadership is so corrupt that it brings more harm to its own people than the Israelis, something most of you don`t understand but don`t worry, the leaders of the USA and EU and Arab countries understand it very well.

by crabadán linbh Wed Sep 10, 2003 02:34

"Ich habe Hitler gesehen, er schrie 'Shalom' und machte Holocaust in Lebanon"
trans. I saw Hitler, he cried 'Shalom' and did a Holocaust in Lebanon

It's the same donkey with a horse's saddle and bit. The world is starting to go numb from the daily bombings and back-bombings. It's also been going on for so long that even less people trust a ceasefire there than people trust a ceasefire in Belfast.

by kokomero Wed Sep 10, 2003 10:37

"Dropping a bomb on a Palestinian town is every bit as bad as suicide bombing" this quote comes from a former full-time major in the Israeli army, interviewed on RTE radio 1 this morning.

He is one of the leaders of the refuseniks in the IDF. I have forgotten his name but apparently he is in Dublin to speak at a conference. These people refuse to serve outside the Israeli border (the green line), ie in the occupied territories, and are courageous enough to go to jail to prove their point.

Unfortunately there are far more from those afraid of incarceration to galil-toting goons, for whom killing Palestinian civilians is simply part of the job, who have admitted to killing civilians on this site, who prefer to let the bullets do the talking and then cry when the Palestinians hit back at legitimate military targets in their war of independence.

by Makhnist Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:15

you`re really really sick.
you actually salute some asshole who is a total coward that explodes himself in a cafè and kills 7 innocents, and say that a good Israeli is a dead one. I`m surprised you didn`t say a good Jew is a dead one. you`re the one that should be in Palestinian refugee camps and curfewed cities, not innocents Palestinians.

by bewildered by it all Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:52

I fully support the Palestinian struggle, however suicide bombing is the tactic of the defeated and the broken. It is also morally indefenisble when employed against civilians. The people carrying out the attacks Hamas were funded by the Israelis for years through the Islamic University in Gaza as a counterweight to the PLO and don't represent an alternative for the Palestinians but a further defeat.

However, what really annoys me, is that Indymedia allow such drivel as the Only good Israeli is a Dead Israeli to be published. Apart from the legal problems about incitement to violence, it is also 100% racist. If the same comment were made about blacks imagine the reaction. Our reaction should be the same in this case and IMC should cop itself on and remove such material, or is the freedom to publish open to every racist crackpot?

by kokomero Wed Sep 10, 2003 19:01

Between an Israeli bomb or tank shell and a suicide bomber, in fact one is obviously the consequence of the other and vice versa in the continuing spiral of violence.

The only thing clear to me from our own experience is that terrorism does work in that it will force an arrogant government to the negotiating table.

The pivotal moment in our own struggle was the bombing of Canary Wharf when the IRA caused £800M of damage with a single bomb.

Previous to this there was a continued escalation by both sides along the lines of what we now see in Palestine.

Unfortunately the Israelis have not yet been brought to their senses, however that moment will come, let's hope it comes sooner rather than later.

by kokomero Wed Sep 10, 2003 19:20

They use hellfire missiles, F16s, tanks and snipers to kill from a distance and go home to their wives and families in the evening feeling proud of themselves.

If you blow yourself up there is no going back, it is a last resort which requires a huge amount of courage and conviction.

There is no comparision with the videogame view of death IDF soldiers have, that allows them to rationalise death into a job.

You can't order a guy to commit suicide and kill scores of others along with himself.

At least the suicide bomber knows why he is doing what he is doing and makes a concious decision to do it, it is not a conditioned response from a soldier or a guy who is "just following orders".

Similarly, if you starve yourself to death in a hunger strike your own death is your weapon of last resort and there is no going back, so we can understand the Palestinians in a way you never will.

by Makhnist Wed Sep 10, 2003 22:56

Hey kokomero, ever heard of the term "zombification"?

One that blows himself up is actally one who hasn`t got enough courage to fight.

by >>>>>Seáinín Thu Sep 11, 2003 01:44

When it comes to war, it's not a question of courage or fighting fair, it's an extension of politics.

The palestinians have no option but to fight with whatever means they can, since Israel is stealing their land and killing anyone who get's in their way.

It is, of course, wrong to target Israeli civilians but attacks on the military are justified. The Irish state was founded on such tactics, we should remember.

by kokomero Thu Sep 11, 2003 12:27

Yitzak Stern, former Israeli prime minister, was a terrorist whose nickname was "Michael", after Michael Collins on whose tactics he based the zionist terrorist campaign, against the British initially, and subsequently against the Palestinians.

It is ironic therefore the faux-surprise with which Palestinian terrorism is greeted by Israelis.

Obviously it is only legitimate for the Israeli master-race to use such tactics.

By the way they still use such terror tactics today except they are now called collateral damage, pre-emptive action or targeted killings, the label has changed but the facts remain the same.

Alongside these tactics Israeli terrorists are also allowed to bomb Palestinian schools.

by Justin Morahan Thu Sep 11, 2003 22:00

I want Israel out of Palestine, I want them to end the occupation and killing of Palestinians. I also want no suicide bombings or killings by Palestinians.
The defining moment will be not a Canary Wharf atrocity but whenever the realisation sinks in that violence is not an answer.
Soldiers in Israel and in every other army including guerrilla armies are indoctrinated to believe in blind obedience. Suicide bombers are also indoctrinated to believe in a reward after death.
Violence is not the way and has never been the way. Non-violent struggle is a better option.

by Lone gunman Thu Sep 11, 2003 22:32

Hmmm... i think the Buddhist monks tried that in Vietnam,by taking a petrol bath in a public then lighting up their zippos. Didnt stop the war.I think the Jeohavs witnesses tried that in the 3rd Reich.didnt stop them being gassed and massacared either.
Thanks but no thanks.
"
If there was no option but violence.I would advocate a armed uprising"
Ghandi

by Drbinoche Thu Sep 11, 2003 23:10

You quote Gandhi, yet obviously know nothing about what he stood for. That statement is valid, but at the same time you make it sound as if that is the only statement he made on the matter and I sincerely doubt Gandhi would advocate what the Palestinians and the Israelis are doing to each. Its not the only option between the two of them and yet at the same time neither side seems willing to make any concessions in any sort of an attempt to try to alter the current situation. I don't know maybe they are never gonna get along and eventually they'll wipe each other out.

by Mordechai Thu Sep 11, 2003 23:23

It's quite wrong to view these people as heroes. Their primary motivation is one of hatred. Also, it is quite clear that they are the victims of a cult mentality, in this case a very lethal one, and they are also victims of exploitation. For example, you will not find the children of the Palestinian leadership doing it. No, they are away in Europe or the US studying at top universities, supported by funds embezzled from EU donations.

It would be naive in the extreme to underestimate the corruption of Palestinian society.

by kokomero Fri Sep 12, 2003 10:53

What cult exactly are the suicide bombers part of exactly?

The last I heard of the suicide bombers are volunteers so what is to stop any Palestinian, including the children of the leaders from taking part?

Cults take people away from their families and society in order to programme them. There is no evidence of this among the Palestinian suicide bombers who continue to live in their own densely packed communities hemned in on all sides by the Israelis while they prepare for their ultimate desperate gesture.

The families of the suicide bombers have, in the main, been unaware that they were preparing for such action and have often said when interviewed that they would have prevented such action, had they been aware of it.

So again no evidence of a cult.

There is an attempt to discredit the Palestinian use of suicide bombing as something unique to Palestinians and Islam. In fact it is anything but unique. And the Palestinian campaign even in recent historical terms comes a distant second to the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka who carried out over 200 such suicide attacks!

http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/Terrorism/suicide.html

Finally, the Israelis could more easily be accused of running such a cult, the cult of racial and national superiority, and feeding their own assembly line of death, programming most of their adult population to kill their Palestinian and Arab neighbours with conventional as well as weapons of mass destruction.

The Israelis also feed the Palestinian assembly line of death by their continued repressive treatment of the Palestinians and the removal of their right to self determination including removing their leadership by murder or deportation.

Wake up Mordechai and Co.! You Israelis are the ones who can end this cycle of death by pulling the settlers out of the West Bank and giving Palestinians back their land and dignity.

You ordinary Israelis are being held to ransom by your own government and military who use the settlers who include such representative individuals as Patrick Groome, a convert from Finglas in Dublin to grab Palestinian land they have no right to.

by Mordechai Fri Sep 12, 2003 13:16

No evidence that suicide bombers are brain-washed cult members? Check out these links: Warning: some of the information is truly sickening.

http://www.usefulwork.com/shark/psychodeathalbum.html

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,619495,00.html?FACTNet

http://www.robertfulford.com/SuicideTerrorism2.html

http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/2002/06/brooks.htm

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/673702/posts

http://www.factnet.org/letters/FACTNewsOctober2001.html?FACTNet

Incidentally, Hamas is not out for the goals you suggest. Even if Israel were to adopt the 1967 ceasefire line as its borders, that would not stop them killing innocent Jews. They want to destroy the entire state of Israel and have said as much many, many times.

Try getting your facts stright, my friend.

by kokomero Fri Sep 12, 2003 14:07

Your "cult" accusations against the Palestinians make as much sense as worldwide zionist conspiracy theories!

The piece by Kevin Toolis simply calls what is happening in Gaza and the West Bank a "cult" of death. He does not provide evidence that a cult exists etc. etc., neither does he allege it in the Guardian piece. Is this really the best you can do?

Your "proof" is nothing of the sort and experience in Ireland and elsewhere is that funerals become highly politicised shows again that there is nothing unique about the Palestinians, they are like oppressed people everywhere.

They have white robes and bomb-belts, and we had black berets, boiler suits and dark glasses here at funerals as well as the common rounds of Ak47 fire.

So what?

by kokomero Fri Sep 12, 2003 14:14

As for the other crap about Hamas wanting to destroy Israel ......... PLLEEEEEEAAAAAASE!!!

I'm sure it keeps Sharon and his cronies up all night worrying about it ..... NOT!

Speaking in Jerusalem Dec. 20, U.S. Ambassador to Israel Daniel Kurtzer made the connection between the growth of the Islamic fundamentalist groups Hamas and Islamic Jihad, and Israel's promotion of the Islamic movement as a counter to the Palestinian nationalist movement.
Kurtzer's comments come very close to EIR's own presentation of the evidence of Israel's instrumental role in establishing Hamas, and its ongoing control of that organization.

Kurtzer said that the growth of the Islamic movement in the Palestinian territories in recent decades—"with the tacit support of Israel"—was "not totally unrelated" to the emergence of Hamas and Islamic Jihad and their terrorist attacks against Israel. Kurtzer explained that during the 1980s, when the Islamic movement began to flourish in the West Bank and Gaza, "Israel perceived it to be better to have people turning toward religion rather than toward a nationalistic cause [the Palestinian Liberation Organization—ed.]." It therefore did little to stop the flow of money to mosques and other religious institutions, rather than to schools.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/news_alert_hamas6.html

Highly placed U.S.-based sources have provided this news service with details of Ariel Sharon's plans for a new Mideast war, in the works within days of his taking office as Israel's Prime Minister earlier this year.
According to the sources, shortly after he was elected, Sharon met with a small group of trusted political and military allies, and spelled out, in confidential memos, a war plan targetting the Palestinian Authority, the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, and other Arab neighbors.

Two factors were identified by the sources as key to the "Sharon Plan":

http://www.larouchepub.com/pr/2001/010712_sharon_hamas.html

by Mordechai Fri Sep 12, 2003 14:14

You are obviously an expert at denial, as the evidence is quite obvious to any intelligent person. Further, you failed to provide any answer to my point that Hamas are not interested in 1967 borders but want to destroy all of Israel.

by Mordechai Fri Sep 12, 2003 14:16

Your last comment is quite irrelevant to the point.

by kokomero Fri Sep 12, 2003 14:29

What Sharon and his government are at is deliberately undermining Palestinian self-determination in all of its aspects as they do not want to give up any illegally occupied since the 1967 war.

All actions including Israeli sponsorship of Hamas, and by extension of suicide bombings etc. etc. flow from this basic tennet.

Not to realise this is to be in a state of denial.


Israeli Roots of Hamas are being exposed
by Dean Andromidas
Executive Intelligence Review (EIR), 18 January 2002
Centre for Research on Globalisation (CRG), globalresearch.ca , 12 April 2002
CRG's Global Outlook, premiere issue on "Stop the War" provides detailed documentation on the war and the "Post- September 11 Crisis." Order/subscribe. Consult Table of Contents

Speaking in Jerusalem Dec. 20, U.S. Ambassador to Israel Daniel Kurtzer made the connection between the growth of the Islamic fundamentalist groups Hamas and Islamic Jihad, and Israel's promotion of the Islamic movement as a counter to the Palestinian nationalist movement. Kurtzer's comments come very close to EIR's own presentation of the evidence of Israel's instrumental role in establishing Hamas, and its ongoing control of that organization.

Kurtzer said that the growth of the Islamic movement in the Palestinian territories in recent decades—"with the tacit support of Israel"—was "not totally unrelated" to the emergence of Hamas and Islamic Jihad and their terrorist attacks against Israel. Kurtzer explained that during the 1980s, when the Islamic movement began to flourish in the West Bank and Gaza, "Israel perceived it to be better to have people turning toward religion rather than toward a nationalistic cause [the Palestinian Liberation Organization—ed.]." It therefore did little to stop the flow of money to mosques and other religious institutions, rather than to schools.

According to the Dec. 21 Israeli daily Ha'aretz, Kurtzer made these extraordinary statements at a seminar on religion and politics sponsored by Oz V'Shalom-Netivot Shalom, a largely Anglo-American organization that promotes peace between Israelis and Palestinians. Rabbi Dr. Aharon Lichtenstein, the head of Har Etzion Yeshiva in Alon Shvut, who is an active advocate of a just regional peace, also spoke. Kurtzer said that as a result of the growth of Islam at the expense of education, there are now Palestinians who are "determined terrorists that use religious beliefs in a perverted way to appeal to the masses."

Kurtzer said that cultural and religious interaction is potentially a way to "build bridges." But instead, "the perverted use of religion in the region is today becoming one of the great challenges for the years ahead." He said that there is no "inherent component" in Islam that advocates violence. But one of the five principles of Islam, jihad—resistance—"in classic religious associations connotes religious belief and fervor, not violence." But extremists have distorted the meaning of jihad, so it now has a connotation of violence in the service of a religious purpose.

The Enemy of My Enemy Is My Friend This statement is extraordinary given the fact that Kurtzer is a very senior diplomat, having held the post of Ambassador to Egypt just prior to going on to Tel Aviv. He is also an Orthodox Jew who is not shy of criticizing the extreme anti-Israeli and anti-Semitic views held by certain Arab circles. But Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon rarely grants the United States' highest representative in Israel an official audience.

The ambassador's comments are an acknowledgment of what any serious Middle East observers knows: Hamas has always been seen as a tool by which Israel could undermine the nationalist movement led by Palestinian Authority President and Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Chairman Yasser Arafat. Similar statements by Arafat have been dismissed by Israel as "cranky" propaganda. In an interview with the Dec. 11 Italian daily Corriere della Sera, Arafat said,

"We are doing everything to stop the violence. But Hamas is a creature of Israel which at the time of Prime Minister [Yitzhak] Shamir [the late 1980s, when Hamas arose], gave them money and more than 700 institutions, among them schools, universities and mosques. Even [former Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak] Rabin ended up admitting it, when I charged him with it, in the presence of [Egpytian President Hosni] Mubarak."

To the Italian daily L'Espresso, Arafat laid out the reasons for this support. "Hamas was constituted with the support of Israel. The aim was to create an organization antagonistic to the PLO. They received financing and training from Israel. They have continued to benefit from permits and authorizations, while we have been limited, even to build a tomato factory. Rabin himself defined it as a fatal error. Some collaborationists of Israel are involved in these [terror] attacks," he said. "We have proof, and we are placing it at the disposal of the Italian government."

On one level the support for Hamas is simply the application of the old saying, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend." Indeed, in the minds of crude Israeli ultra-nationalists and fascists such as Sharon and his faction, this is indeed the case. Sharon is not interested in peace and therefore is not concerned that the violence and needless deaths of Israelis and Palestinians continue. In the Jan. 3 Ha'aretz, Yossi Sarid, chairman of the Meretz party, wrote, "What does frighten Sharon ... is any prospect or sign of calm or moderation. If the situation were to calm down and stabilize, Sharon would have to return to the negotiating table and, in the wake of pressure from within and without, he would have to raise serious proposals for an agreement. This moment terrifies Sharon and he wants to put it off for as long as he possibly can." In contrast, Sarid said that Sharon understands "that the terrorists and those who give them asylum are not the real enemies. Instead, the real enemies are the moderates.... You fight terrorists—a pretty simple operation—but you must talk with moderates, and this is a very tricky, if not dangerous, business."

More important for the survival of not only the Palestinian people, but especially Israel itself, is the dangerous role of the puppetmasters outside the region, who are manipulating both sides of this deadly game as part of their own demonic plans to spread the policy of a "clash of civilizations." In this regard, Sharon, and his "Greater Israel" policy, is just as much a puppet as the Palestinian, strapped with explosives, who blows himself up at an Israeli bus station.

Two Decades of Undermining Arafat Given the level of control that the Israeli intelligence services such as the Shin Bet and Mossad have been able to exert over the Palestinian territories during the last 35 years of Israeli occupation, the capability to manipulate militant and violent organizations, such as those associated with Hamas, should not surprise anyone familiar with intelligence and even routine police operations. This should be obvious, considering that Israel has routinely recruited thousands of collaborators and provocateurs among the tens of thousands of Palestinians who have passed through Israeli prisons in over 35 years of its occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Most convincing is a comparison of the development of Hamas, Islamic Jihad and their antecedents, and the growing national and international legitimacy of the PLO and its undisputed leader, Arafat.

Hamas is an acronym for Harafat al-Muqawama Al-Islamiyya, or Islamic Resistance Movement. Its spiritual leader is Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, who, despite his fiery anti-Israeli sermons, has had an unusual relationship with the Israeli authorities. In 1973, Yassin established the Islamic Association—at a time when it was Israeli policy to promote what Ambassador Kurtzer refers to as the "Islamic movement."

One might ask: Why should Israel promote an Islamic movement which later turns around and attacks it? How could the Israeli secret services be taken in by a Yassin? They weren't. The simple fact is, that the stated policy of Hamas is simply the flip side of Sharon's "Greater Israel" policy that refuses to seek a territorial compromise. The Hamas charter in 1988 stated, "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.... Peace initiatives, the so-called peace initiatives, are all contraray to the beliefs of Hamas, for renouncing any part of Palestine means renouncing part of the religion." In this rhetoric there is no room for a state of Israel—as there is none for a state of Palestine in Sharon's "Greater Israel."

Israel's Hamas relations intensified after the Arab League, in 1974, decided to recognize Arafat and the PLO as the representatives of the Palestinian people—in effect, a government in exile. By 1979, top Yassin acquired an official permit from the Israeli government of Prime Minister Menachem Begin. This coincided with the signing of the Camp David peace treaty between Israel and Egypt. That treaty embodied detailed clauses calling for the establishment of a Palestinian Authority in the Occupied Territories, which would be the precursor for the Israeli withdrawal and the establishment of a Palestinian state. Gen. Ariel Sharon has been the chief proponent since this treaty was signed, of the policy of ensuring that these clauses would never be implemented. His chosen alternatives were war in Lebanon and the expansion of the Jewish settlements in the Occupied Territories. Sharon was helped by the assassination of Egyptian President Anwar Sadat by Anglo-American-controlled, Egypt-based Islamic terrorists.

`Policy of Strengthening Islamic Bodies' Israeli toleration, if not initial sponsorship of the Islamic movement, has been acknowledged and well documented in Israeli sources. In 1997, the Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies, at Tel Aviv University, published a study, "Hamas: Radical Islam In A National Struggle," authored by Anat Kurz and Nahman Tal. It stated that the Islamic Association, "the platform of which contained no nationalist clauses, obtained a permit from the Israeli Civil Administration in 1979 to conduct its activities. The permit was apparently consistent with the Israeli policy of strengthening Islamic bodies as a counterweight to Palestinian nationalist groups."

The rapid expansion of the Islamic Association led to clashes on the Palestinian University campuses in the Occupied Territories in the 1980s, betwen PLO-affiliated students and those associated with the Islamists. This expansion was aided by the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon, where Sharon hoped to solve the "Palestinian problem" by militarily crushing the PLO—which was then based in Lebanon—and by carrying out genocide against the hundreds of thousands of Palestinians living in impoverished refugee camps in Lebanon. Despite his orchestration of the massacre of thousands of Palestinians, including women and children, at the Sabra and Chatila refugee camps, Sharon failed to eliminate Arafat. Nonetheless, Arafat and the PLO were exiled to Tunisia, their influence severely weakened.

Sheikh Yassin, along with other Hamas leaders, was arrested in 1984, after it was discovered that the Islamic Association had maintained arms caches. But the organization was not banned. In fact, Yassin was soon released as part of an unprecedented prisoner exchange between Israel and Ahmed Jabril's PFLP-General Command. This deal, made with one of the most violent of all anti-PLO Palestinian groups at the time, was made in a period when the Mossad was busy assassinating the most moderate of PLO leaders.

Then, in 1988, the Islamic Association created Hamas as a direct alternative to the PLO, which had launched the first Intifada the year before. 1988 was also important because the PLO, at the 19th Conference of the Palestinian National Council in Algeria in 1988, accepted the United Nations Security Council resolution of 1947 calling for two states in Palestine. They also called for convening an international peace conference based on UN Resolutions 242 and 338, which established the land-for-peace concept. This was a de facto recognition of Israel by the PLO and Arafat. By the end of 1988, the Reagan Administration extended official recognition to the PLO as the official representative of the Palestinian people.

When Palestinian leader Abu Jihad began negotiating with Hamas, in an attempt to win its mass base over to the new policy, he was promptly assassinated by the Mossad.

Yassin, as all senior leaders of Hamas, is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, the far-flung international Islamic organization with operations throughout the Islamic world. In the past, Anglo-American factions have not hesitated to manipulate the Brotherhood's various factions to destabilize secular Arab regimes. When Zbigniew Brzezinski launched the Afghan war against Russia in the 1980s, many of the Arab mujahideen fighters were recruited through Muslim Brotherhood-linked networks. The Muslim Brotherhood story fills volumes; the crucial point here is that Hamas, one of its branches, has traditionally stood in opposition to the secular nationalism of Arafat, the PLO, and its supporting governments.

Hamas has a peculiar organizational structure which contrasts sharply with that of the PLO. While within the West Bank and Gaza, Hamas exists as a broad political movement, its militant wings, the Izza-Din Al Qassam and Islamic Jihad, split-offs from the organization, are administered totally separately. These latter organizations, which are responsible for the attacks, are under the control of leaders who operate from abroad. Their offices are in London, where the group's magazine, Falatin Al Muslimah, is based; Jordan; Syria; and the United States, particularly in Virginia and Texas. Although Arafat has periodically tried to bring the popular base of Hamas into the Palestinian fold, the foreign-based military leadership has always opposed him.

This bifurcation dovetails with Sharon's strategy of launching brutal attacks against Hamas targets, in order to elicit the equally brutal response from Islamic Jihad and the Izza-Din Al Qassam. Thus Arafat, and diplomatic goals, are undermined, and the fires of civil war within the Occupied Territories are stoked.

The Anti-Oslo Terror Campaign Begins The Oslo Accords marked the first glimmer of hope for a resolution of the Middle East conflict. And, the first suicide terrorist attack aimed at destroying it was not launched by Hamas or Islamic Jihad or another Palestinian faction. The first suicide attack was launched on Feb. 25, 1994, by Israeli terrorist Baruch Goldstein, when he entered the Mosque of Hebron and killed 50 Muslim worshippers as well as himself. Goldstein was a member of Kach, the terrorist organization founded by the late Meir Kahane, who also founded the Jewish Defense League in the 1960s in the United States. Kach, which is well connected to Sharon, is on the official U.S. State Department list of terrorist organizations.

The unprecedented massacre was calculated to set the stage for a suicide bombing campaign by Hamas and its split-off, Islamic Jihad, over the next year. In fact, it set into motion the "cycle of violence" that has yet to end. The Goldstein attack came at precisely the point when Israeli Prime Minister Rabin and Arafat began the formal implementation of the Oslo agreement which envisioned the establishment of a Palestinian state by 1998. The first Hamas-linked suicide attacks did not start until two months later, in April 1994, when Rabin and Arafat signed the agreement for the establishment of the Palestinian National Authority. The agreement called for the conduct of free elections throughout the territories—which would eventually establish the international legitimacy of the Arafat-led government.

But despite this terror campaign, which lasted for months under a massive crackdown by Arafat's security forces, the Rabin-Arafat alliance, although seriously weakened, was not broken. This alliance was finally broken with Rabin's assassination by an Israeli, on Nov. 5, 1995.

The next phase of attacks followed the "targetted assassination" of Hamas bomb-maker Yahya Ayyash on Jan. 5, 1996. Although said to be "revenge attacks," they were in fact part of Hamas' campaign to get Benjamin Netanyahu elected Israeli prime minister. This was admitted by Ibraham Ghawshah, Hamas' official spokesman resident in Amman, Jordan. He said that it was part of their strategy to influence Israeli public opinon to bring down the entire Oslo process. The election of Netanyahu indeed fulfilled all their hopes, especially after he launched his own provocations, which not only brought about the pre-calculated Hamas response, but also brought the region several times to the brink of war.

This tit-for-tat campaign reached the height of insanity when Netanyahu, under the direction of Sharon, who was a member of his government at the time, launched a Mossad assassination attempt in 1997 against the Jordan-based Hamas official Khalid Mishaal. Not only did the attempt fail, but it led to Israel agreeing to release Hamas spiritual leader Sheikh Yassin from an Israeli jail, where he had been under arrest since 1989. Yassin was allowed to return to Gaza to rally Hamas against the Oslo process in general, and Arafat in particular.

This pattern has continued to this very day. Netanyahu's downfall in 1999 led to the short-lived government of Ehud Barak, who despite much talking and negotiating, furthered the Oslo process not one iota. By the end of the Summer of 2000, the stage was set for Sharon's ultimate provocation, his Sept. 28 march on to the Islamic holy site Al-Haram Al-Sharif/Temple Mount.

Since coming to power, Sharon has done everything to ensure the collapse of Arafat and the Palestinian Authority. If successful, it would either bring Hamas to power or lead to political chaos within the terrorities.

by Mordechai Fri Sep 12, 2003 14:45

This last comment is also irrelevant to the point.

by kokomero Fri Sep 12, 2003 14:50

According to former State Department counter-terrorism official Larry Johnson, "the Israelis are their own worst enemies when it comes to fighting terrorism."

"The Israelis are like a guy who sets fire to his hair and then tries to put it out by hitting it with a hammer."

"They do more to incite and sustain terrorism than curb it," he said.

by kokomero Fri Sep 12, 2003 14:57

There is no point in making threats unless you are in a position to carry them out. Therfore any threat to wipe out the state of Israel is frankly not credible and should not be treated seriously.

If it was the US, or Russia making the threat on the other hand .....

In this so-called "contest" who should be afraid the IDF with its high-tech weaponry, nuclear, chemical and biological weapons or a few hundred Hamas activists.

The "threat" is entirely spurious and is simply kept around to allow apologists for Israels appaling behaviour to have fig-leaf to hide behind.

In my opinion such justification for Israels actions and policies is no justification at all!

by Mordechai Fri Sep 12, 2003 15:19

Again you miss the essential point, which is not that Hamas will destroy the state of Israel, although one day it might obtain nuclear weapons if this is not prevented; but that there is no concession that Israel can make to Hamas that will stop it murdering Jews.

by Chekov Fri Sep 12, 2003 15:28

A just peace. It may not stop the Hamas organisation from killing jews, but it would stop the Hamas organisation from having any members - achieving pretty much the same result.

by Mordechai Fri Sep 12, 2003 15:36

You misunderstand the nature of Jew hatred.

by Yossarian Fri Sep 12, 2003 16:08

You misunderstand the nature (and results) of oppression

by kokomero Fri Sep 12, 2003 16:36

To irradiate the land they want for 250,000 years?

The only people with a Massada (suicide) complex are the Israelis!

The people who started the nuclear arms race in the middle east and are hell-bent on continually upping the ante in the arms race are the Israelis.

The latest move was to develop a sea-launched nuclear strike capability using submarines bought from the Germans.

This comes against a background where NONE of Israels neighbours have even one nuke as compared with Israels estimated 200-400 warheads, so Sharon and the looney right in Israel are spending massive amounts of swindled American money to finance it instead of developing their economy with the result it is in the toilet apart from the military sector.

If there is anybody hell-bent on destruction it is the Israelis!

by Itchie Feet Sat Sep 13, 2003 21:50

OK lads and lasses, I wanna address a few points on this subject. I apologize if some of my points are repeats of others but I am addressing each issue as I read down the comments.

"However, what really annoys me, is that Indymedia allow such drivel as the Only good Israeli is a Dead Israeli to be published. Apart from the legal problems about incitement to violence, it is also 100% racist"

Although I disagree with the statement you are referring to, I do not agree with you protest of it's printing on this site. This is an opinion share by a number of people and putting your hands your eyes will not make it go away. It should be printed to give people like you a chance to argue your opinion, our should we stop printing ANY opinions that you don't like or agree with. Wouldn't be a fair forum then would it?

"The only thing clear to me from our own experience is that terrorism does work in that it will force an arrogant government to the negotiating table"

Sorry kokomero but even though you are correct, it took ALOT of violence and a national weariness to bring about the semblence of peace "enjoyed" in NI. We are not much closer to peace because it is not wanted by all. Terrorism has just created man who believe they can attain whatever they want through violence and scare tactics. The idealism of terrorism dwindles with the continuation of violence until the terrorist justify violence as for "a just cause". Terrorism DOES NOT WORK!!!!

"Cowards don't blow themselves up or starve themselves to death"

This is BULLSHIT!!!!! Just because he takes a few people with him doesn't make it anything but suicide. The cowards way out. Nuff said

"Violence is not the way and has never been the way. Non-violent struggle is a better option"

Justin, Justin, Justin. I have read several postings from you over the last few days and I feel I need to say this. Get your head out from under the covers. Your belief in the benefits of peaceful solutions is admirable, but you could only sustain this belief if you ignore human nature. We are not as civilised as you seem to think and and that won't change by spouting "non-violence" We are way to deep in this shit to just say "well I bored of killing, let try something else" So, I don't mean to be rude but WAKE UP AND SMELL THE VIOLENT NATURE OF MAN"

"The last I heard of the suicide bombers are volunteers so what is to stop any Palestinian, including the children of the leaders from taking part?"

So does this mean that ANY attack on Palestinians, civilian or not, is an attack on a military target. Because if that's what you're saying then there is justification on both sides wouldn't you say?

"The piece by Kevin Toolis simply calls what is happening in Gaza and the West Bank a "cult" of death. He does not provide evidence that a cult exists etc. etc., neither does he allege it in the Guardian piece. Is this really the best you can do?"

What the fuck are you guys arguing about, cult or not, it's not an excuse. There is no excuse for either side.

Ok, now that I have made these points (and I don't mind if you don't agree with them) I will make my own comment. I have been on this site several time but refused to comment as it is evident to me that you are all much more knowledgable on these topics. Today, however, I feel the need to say this. Knowledge is obviously not helping. We have people with a baffling belief in the Non-violent solution and to obviously learned people arguing about cults. No help here so, and I thought to myself that my uneducated opinion is worth as much as theirs.

So here goes, You wanna stop this shit? That's simple. An all out carpet bombing attack on Israel AND Palistine. Horror you may say but consider this, you destroy most of these countries and the survivors would have to put away their differences or wipe out each others culture. Believe me when I say that this would be an easy choice. No need to use your (obvious) intellect to tell me of the holes in my plan as it would never really happen would it, I just wanted to post my 2 cents

by none - none Sun May 16, 2004 04:12 none at hlmpt dot uk kjhlkhlkjlkm 769767

ireland in the past had fought for freedom , i was a part of that fight , now there is another fight which the I R A has surendered to, islam has not condemed the death s of the beheading in iraq of one who was no harm to them . your time has come..............................................................................

by someperson Sun May 16, 2004 04:29

None, That is about as clear as mud. It might make sense to you, but most readers here will find your comment quite incoherent.
If you have a point to make, then please make it more clearly.

by Justin Morahan - Peace People Sat Jan 22, 2005 05:38

You wrote:
"Justin, Justin, Justin. I have read several postings from you over the last few days and I feel I need to say this. Get your head out from under the covers. Your belief in the benefits of peaceful solutions is admirable, but you could only sustain this belief if you ignore human nature. We are not as civilised as you seem to think and and that won't change by spouting "non-violence" We are way to deep in this shit to just say "well I bored of killing, let try something else" So, I don't mean to be rude but WAKE UP AND SMELL THE VIOLENT NATURE OF MAN"

Reply:
I'll ignore the patronising tone of your comment re what I wrote. It's precisely because I have my head "out from under the covers" that I know violence breeds violence and leads to an endless cycle of blood-letting, often in the pretence that only violence "achieves results". Nowhere did I write that I was "bored of killing, let's try something else" - as you put it.
Violence is one of the many horrors that stalk our globe - you believe this is so because of "the violent nature of man". What are you suggesting? - that because the human has a violent streak, he or she should do nothing to correct it? or maybe that it is an asset to be used when he or she believes there is a wrong to be righted?
Such as a homeland to be protected? a homeland to be regained?
An empire to be defended? Parity of esteem to be obtained?
Pre-emptive defence of a world power? A world power taught a lesson?
For all these causes, killing? and revenge killing? and revenge for revenge killing? and retaliatory killing? and justified killing? and justified killing of the justified killers?
But, you appear to suggest, don't annoy us by suggesting another way, let's accept all of this killing, let's not even mention the word peace, let's "wake up and smell the violent nature of man" as you put it., (in capitals)
So, after "waking up", you throw your hands up in the air and accept the stupid, utterly stupid, never-ending cycle of violence?
If one millionth of the money that has been spent on training in violence (e,g. on armies and their imitators) had been spent on training in non-violence do you not think the world might be a better place?
I'm not quite sure what you mean when you say I am "spouting" non-violence.
I thought I was just recommending it.

by Timekeeper Sat Jan 22, 2005 06:20

Only took you sixteen months to respond to that.
Always a good idea to check the date before replying.

by Justin Morahan - Peace People Sun Jan 23, 2005 04:07

Do I feel bad that I replied so late? No, but sorry to disappoint you.