NationStates Jolt Archive

It would seem that an anti-Israeli pro-Palestinian stance is not the hallmark of the moderate Left that the far-Left would like to portray. The US Senate approved a law in Senate unanimously that prohibits any money transfers to the Hamas lead government. This is conditional on the following factors: the PA can't be governed by a terrorist group, the PA must recognize Israel, the PA must begin to dismantle terrorist groups, the PA must stop inciting attacks against Israel, and true democracy and law must be established.

Now, for those who don't know, foreign aid makes up virtually all of the PA's economy. Lets see if the PA cares enough about its own Palestinian people to do a few simple things like recognize Israel to receive the aid that sustains it.

US passes law against money transfer to PA (http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3266571,00.html)


US passes law against money transfer to PA
New law unanimously approved in Senate Friday prevents American government from transferring money to Palestinian Authority
Yitzhak Benhorin

WASHINGTON - The US Senate unanimously approved the “Hamas law” Friday, which limits the United States government to transferring funds to the Palestinian Authority via routes that bypass the Hamas government.

The senate vote was the last stage in passing the bill, which was approved one month ago by the House of Representatives.

The new law enables humanitarian aid transfer to the Palestinians, but places strict limits on the money transfers. Likewise, the law limits the movement of Palestinian diplomats in the US.

The law rules that the PA will not be the recipient of any aid money until the president declares that the following conditions have been fulfilled by the Palestinians:



* No governmental office or agency in the PA is governed by a terror organization, and no representative of any terror organization serves in any governmental or non-governmental office.



* The Palestinian Authority under the leadership of the Hamas is demanded to recognize Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state, it must commit to all agreements signed between the sides thus far and the understandings reached in the framework of the road map.



* The PA has advanced moves proving that they are purifying the Palestinian security forces of terrorists, dismantling terror infrastructure and cooperating with Israel’s security establishment.



* Incitement against Israel has completely stopped.



* Democracy, rule of law and financial transparency are established.


The new law categorically forbids giving any direct aid to the Palestinian Authority, with the exception of aid money to help fund the
system of democratic elections, which will be given to the Election Committee, if the US president can prove to Congress that its members do not belong to or are funded by any terror organization. Another exception is financial aid to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas’ office and his personal security detail.

The new legislation obligates the president to sign a special concession every six months so the Palestinians can continues operating their representation in the United Nations in New York. Palestinian diplomats are limited to movement in a radius of 40 kilometers from the UN building in New York.

Meanwhile, the European Union announced last week that they would transfer emergency aid money to the Palestinians amounting to 100 million Euros. The money will reach the PA via a route that bypasses the Hamas and will reach the Welfare and Health ministries, and other humanitarian aid destinations.

(06.23.06, 21:59)

You know I heard this strange rumor about a government called democracy...
Not that, I'm a huge Hamas fan or anything bu we should at least respect the will of the people of there (no matter how strange it is to us)

Lets see if the PA cares enough about its own Palestinian people to do a few simple things like recognize Israel to receive the aid that sustains it.

They already did.

Climbdown as Hamas agrees to Israeli state

· Negotiator says group recognises right to exist
· Hope for end to crippling sanctions on Palestinians

Chris McGreal in Jerusalem
Thursday June 22, 2006
The Guardian

http://www.guardian.co.uk/frontpage/story/0,,1803184,00.html

You know I heard this strange rumor about a government called democracy...
Not that, I'm a huge Hamas fan or anything bu we should at least respect the will of the people of there (no matter how strange it is to us)

For democracy to work, the people have to actually be informed and educated. This was understood by the Greeks when it was developed as a political system, and this is one reason why Plato rejected it as a viable form of government in lieu of a republic. The Palestinians aren't educated enough for a democracy to actually work for them, unfortunantly, and the totality of their media and education consists of anti-Semitic propaganda. Textbooks given to children in schools even talk about how the Jews want to take over the world.

In addition, for democracy to work, the parties must also follow the Rule of Law. Illegal institutions aren't eligable to be parties to democracy. Electing Hamas is no more viable than electing al-Qaeda. Otherwise it will move from true democracy to a mob rule.

It would seem that an anti-Israeli pro-Palestinian stance is not the hallmark of the moderate Left that the far-Left would like to portray. The US Senate approved a law in Senate unanimously that prohibits any money transfers to the Hamas lead government. This is conditional on the following factors: the PA can't be governed by a terrorist group, the PA must recognize Israel, the PA must begin to dismantle terrorist groups, the PA must stop inciting attacks against Israel, and true democracy and law must be established.

Now, for those who don't know, foreign aid makes up virtually all of the PA's economy. Lets see if the PA cares enough about its own Palestinian people to do a few simple things like recognize Israel to receive the aid that sustains it.

US passes law against money transfer to PA (http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3266571,00.html)
What does it do for the rest of the world?
Is America gonna stop the EU giving the Palestinians money?

They already did.

Climbdown as Hamas agrees to Israeli state

· Negotiator says group recognises right to exist
· Hope for end to crippling sanctions on Palestinians

Chris McGreal in Jerusalem
Thursday June 22, 2006
The Guardian

http://www.guardian.co.uk/frontpage/story/0,,1803184,00.html

Actually, they didn't. The Guardian just spun the story with a pro-Palestinian slant, as they always do. Hamas is in the midst of agreeing to sections of the Prisoner's Plan which implictly recognize Israel. This is a step toward a real recognition, but even a full agreement to the Prisoner's Plan does not recognize Israel explictly, only implictly.

This is one of the reasons why the Guardian comes under constant scrutiny from media watch groups like Honest Reporting.

What does it do for the rest of the world?
Is America gonna stop the EU giving the Palestinians money?

Well, US aid has always made up the majority of the Palestinian economy. The EU can give them money, but if you look at the results from aid suspension right now it has been pretty drastic. The EU funding wont make up for US funding.

This is one of the reasons why the Guardian comes under constant scrutiny from media watch groups like Honest Reporting.

Honest Reporting can be called a "media watchgroup," but it would be more accurate to identify them as a pro-Israel group founded by Aish HaTorah that focuses on what it perceives to be anti-Israel reporting.

The Guardian, on the other hand, is one of the world's most respected newspapers, winning recognition as the British National Newspaper of the Year this year.

For democracy to work, the people have to actually be informed and educated. This was understood by the Greeks when it was developed as a political system, and this is one reason why Plato rejected it as a viable form of government in lieu of a republic. The Palestinians aren't educated enough for a democracy to actually work for them, unfortunantly, and the totality of their media and education consists of anti-Semitic propaganda. Textbooks given to children in schools even talk about how the Jews want to take over the world.

In addition, for democracy to work, the parties must also follow the Rule of Law. Illegal institutions aren't eligable to be parties to democracy. Electing Hamas is no more viable than electing al-Qaeda. Otherwise it will move from true democracy to a mob rule.
Informed and educated... Remember the 2000 elections in the USA, the average voter didn't care what the issues were (hell I know people who voted for bush back then when just because they thought he looked better)... you may be right about such things, but if that's the case It would take years for a true democracy, If it could survive the extremist groups.

I think the thing that really pisses me off about said law is that it seems like congress is trying to boil this down to a black and white argument(witch it's not!) further more I've heard of people STARVING because of the cut off to Palestine, because the US is angry at a government that's having staying in power because Fattah is mad about losing elections

Honest Reporting can be called a "media watchgroup," but it would be more accurate to identify them as a pro-Israel group founded by Aish HaTorah that focuses on what it perceives to be anti-Israel reporting.

The Guardian, on the other hand, is one of the world's most respected newspapers, winning the British National Newspaper of the Year this year.

Well, lets see how accurate the Guardian is here. I'll give you a link to the full text of the Prisoner's Plan, and you go ahead and show me where it says anything remotely similiar to what the Guardain claimed - "Hamas has made a major political climbdown by agreeing to sections of a document that recognise Israel's right to exist."

The fact is, you can't. Because there are no sections Prisoner's Plan that recognize Israel's right to exist. Its only being hailed as progress because of the way it refers to Israel has been interpreted to implictly recognize it. In reality, the document affirms continued resistance against Israel.

Prisoner's Plan here. (http://www.mideastweb.org/prisoners_letter.htm)

Well, US aid has always made up the majority of the Palestinian economy. The EU can give them money, but if you look at the results from aid suspension right now it has been pretty drastic. The EU funding wont make up for US funding.Oh, really? (http://www.palestinemonitor.org/nueva_web/infos_materials/reports/PA_Sources_of_Funding.pdf)

You know I heard this strange rumor about a government called democracy...
Not that, I'm a huge Hamas fan or anything bu we should at least respect the will of the people of there (no matter how strange it is to us)
Oh for God's sake! Will you get the fuck over that nonsense! Just because something is "strange" to us, doesn't mean we have to give it one iota of respect. Cannibalism is "strange" but that doesn't mean I have to give cannibals any respect! Jeeze! Get a fuckin' GRIP!

Informed and educated... Remember the 2000 elections in the USA, the average voter didn't care what the issues were (hell I know people who voted for bush back then when just because they thought he looked better)... you may be right about such things, but if that's the case It would take years for a true democracy, If it could survive the extremist groups.

I think the thing that really pisses me off about said law is that it seems like congress is trying to boil this down to a black and white argument(witch it's not!) further more I've heard of people STARVING because of the cut off to Palestine, because the US is angry at a government that's having staying in power because Fattah is mad about losing elections

Its true that it isn't black and white. Palestinian people shouldn't go hungry due to the Palestinian terror leadership. This is why the law is intended to block funding to the government, but not humanitarian aid. People aren't currently starving in the Occupied Territories in the scope of various African countries, which we virtually ignore when it comes to aid.

And you're also right that even voters in the US aren't informed enough to make democracy work well. Like I mentioned in the previous post, the Greeks acknowledged early on that to have a good democracy people had to be informed and interested in politics. People in most countries don't fit the criteria for either.

Oh, really? (http://www.palestinemonitor.org/nueva_web/infos_materials/reports/PA_Sources_of_Funding.pdf)
Whats more the EU said that Israel is the greatest threat to world peace.
So Tropical Sands what say you?

Well, lets see how accurate the Guardian is here. I'll give you a link to the full text of the Prisoner's Plan, and you go ahead and show me where it says anything remotely similiar to what the Guardain claimed - "Hamas has made a major political climbdown by agreeing to sections of a document that recognise Israel's right to exist."

The fact is, you can't. Because there are no sections Prisoner's Plan that recognize Israel's right to exist. Its only being hailed as progress because of the way it refers to Israel has been interpreted to implictly recognize it. In reality, the document affirms continued resistance against Israel.

Prisoner's Plan here. (http://www.mideastweb.org/prisoners_letter.htm)

Excerpts from the Guardian article. This seems like good, straight reporting to me.

Hamas has made a major political climbdown by agreeing to sections of a document that recognise Israel's right to exist and a negotiated two-state solution, according to Palestinian leaders....If it formally approves the entire document, it will represent a significant shift from its founding goal of replacing Israel with an Islamic state and its more recent position of agreeing a long-term ceasefire, over a generation or more, if a Palestinian state is formed on the occupied territories but without formally recognising the Jewish state....Israel has dismissed the prisoners' document as changing little because, among other things, it advocates continued resistance.

It reports that the Palestinians seems to think this is a major step toward recognizing Israel and states that Israel does not see it that way. I do not see bias in this reporting at all.

In terms of the content it may be something for the Palestinians and Israelis to build on, assuming that either side is interested in doing that.

Whats more the EU said that Israel is the greatest threat to world peace.
So Tropical Sands what say you?

In the sense that it has been a catalyst for Islamic extremism, it could be true. This doesn't make Israel at fault, however. Its just a part of the "he made me do it" syndrome. The fact is, it isn't Israelis blowing up buildings and subways. Nor is it Israel committing genocide in Africa or oppressing its own people via theocracy.

If we look at the practices of Islamic states in comparison to the questionable practices of Israel, its pretty easy to see that the former has a much larger history of human rights violations, violence, and other general threats to world peace.

Exerpts from the Guardian article. This seems like good, straight reporting to me.

*snip*

Yes, we've all read the article. You're avoiding my question by posting from it. Like I stated, if the Guardian article were true with its claim, you could show me that fact from the actual text of the Prisoner's Plan that I gave you. Yet, you've completely avoided that by posting the Guardian article again.

Can you show me where the Prisoner's Plan document recognizes an Israeli state or not?

In the sense that it has been a catalyst for Islamic extremism, it could be true. This doesn't make Israel at fault, however. Its just a part of the "he made me do it" syndrome. The fact is, it isn't Israelis blowing up buildings and subways. Nor is it Israel committing genocide in Africa or oppressing its own people via theocracy.True enough. The Israelis use bulldozers. Then again, my real beef with the Israelis is that they are in control of much of the water and aren't afraid to use it as pressure.
If we look at the practices of Islamic states in comparison to the questionable practices of Israel, its pretty easy to see that the former has a much larger history of human rights violations, violence, and other general threats to world peace.Which is why we hold Israel to such a high standard. We don't expect any of the regimes in that region to behave.

BTW: Do you concede that the US does not supply the bulk of Palestinian funding?

True enough. The Israelis use bulldozers. Then again, my real beef with the Israelis is that they are in control of much of the water and aren't afraid to use it as pressure.

Actually Israel doesn't use bulldozers anymore. That practice was stopped.

Which is why we hold Israel to such a high standard. We don't expect any of the regimes in that region to behave.

You hold Israel to a high standard because you don't expect the other regimes to behave? Perhaps since Israel has a better human rights record than its neighbors, which have laws that do things like punishing homosexuality by death or forbidding Jews citizenship, it would make more sense to focus on the nations that have poorer human rights records.

BTW: Do you concede that the US does not supply the bulk of Palestinian funding?

Yes, my mistake. It doesn't supply the bulk of funding, it is the largest state funder.

Actually Israel doesn't use bulldozers anymore. That practice was stopped.Thank goodness, that.
You hold Israel to a high standard because you don't expect the other regimes to behave? Perhaps since Israel has a better human rights record than its neighbors, which have laws that do things like punishing homosexuality by death or forbidding Jews citizenship, it would make more sense to focus on the nations that have poorer human rights records.I hold 'Israel to such a high standard because I feel that they are capable of changing themselves for the better. I hold no such illusions for the middle eastern regimes. Israel being better than the dictatorships in that area doesn't mean that Israel is good by default.
Yes, my mistake. It doesn't supply the bulk of funding, it is the largest state funder.Yup. That's a major difference there.

In the sense that it has been a catalyst for Islamic extremism, it could be true. This doesn't make Israel at fault, however. Its just a part of the "he made me do it" syndrome. The fact is, it isn't Israelis blowing up buildings and subways. Nor is it Israel committing genocide in Africa or oppressing its own people via theocracy.

If we look at the practices of Islamic states in comparison to the questionable practices of Israel, its pretty easy to see that the former has a much larger history of human rights violations, violence, and other general threats to world peace.
So Israel only started all of its Terrorist acts 50 odd years ago right?

If we look at it like that are you saying Israel is trying to catch up to these standards that the Arab nations set?
I also seem to remember blowing up buildings blowing them up knocking over compounds, breaking into prisons kidnapping people.

That isn't even a fair comparrison we have say 30 Muslim nations on this planet and 1 Jewish one so of course you could find a view that says Arab nations commit more crimes.

What about the fact that Israel and America have been saying the same old stuff about Palestine saying they need to change threatening them with aid being suspended Hamas wasn't democratically elected 6 years ago and now it is.

What about the land Isarel is stealing communities being cut up?
Hmmm what about them?

Yes, we've all read the article. You're avoiding my question by posting from it. Like I stated, if the Guardian article were true with its claim, you could show me that fact from the actual text of the Prisoner's Plan that I gave you. Yet, you've completely avoided that by posting the Guardian article again.

Can you show me where the Prisoner's Plan document recognizes an Israeli state or not?

The Guardian article never says the Prisoner's Plan recognizes Israel. The Guardian merely reports that Palestinian leaders seem to think that by adhering to the plan Hamas will be, de facto, recognizing Israel. As I quoted from the same article, the Israeli government doesn't appear to share that interpretation.

The point I am making is that The Guardian is a fair and honest newspaper that is internationally respected. Their article simply reports that Palestinian leaders see the signing of this paper as an important step toward recognition by Hamas, something alluded to in the introductory comments of the Prisoner's Plan you posted (The Hamas would implicitly give up its opposition to the existence of Israel and adopt the PLO plan of a two state solution).

So Israel only started all of its Terrorist acts 50 odd years ago right?

The only time that Jews in Palestine engaged in terror to any extent that you're implying is before Israeli statehood. After Israeli statehood, the questionable groups were immediately disbanded.

If we look at it like that are you saying Israel is trying to catch up to these standards that the Arab nations set?
I also seem to remember blowing up buildings blowing them up knocking over compounds, breaking into prisons kidnapping people.

Israel isn't even on the course that other Arab nations are. The fact that Israel gurantees equality and human rights by law whereas others don't is the starting point.

Blowing up buildings isn't terrorism by itself, either. Military strikes on buildings is perfectly legal. Nor was the forceful prisoner transfer from Palestinian jails once Hamas took over "kidnapping." You're using extremist speech and hyperboile rather than accurate terms. Thats a fallacy, in fact.

That isn't even a fair comparrison we have say 30 Muslim nations on this planet and 1 Jewish one so of course you could find a view that says Arab nations commit more crimes.

Why is it not a fair comparison? Who should we compare it to? Israel has as good a human rights record as the United States, probably much better. No slavery in its history. It has as good a human rights record as the UK too - no colonialism and runing the entire African continent.

What about the fact that Israel and America have been saying the same old stuff about Palestine saying they need to change threatening them with aid being suspended Hamas wasn't democratically elected 6 years ago and now it is.

The PLO was a terrorist group 6 years ago as well. Nothing has changed except the terrorist leadership. One terrorist group replacing another isn't that dramatic.

What about the land Isarel is stealing communities being cut up?
Hmmm what about them?

What land has Israel stolen, what communities have been cut up? You have to remember, there is no Palestinian state. There is no such thing as Palestinian land. Israel can't steal something that belongs to no one.

You know I heard this strange rumor about a government called democracy...
Not that, I'm a huge Hamas fan or anything bu we should at least respect the will of the people of there (no matter how strange it is to us)

Does that mean we should respect the will of the people when they vote for terrorism?
Does that mean we should respect the will of the people when they vote for shari'a?
Does that mean we should respect the will of the people when they vote for extermination camps?

To Hell with Hamas, and to hell with everything that is islamistic.

The Guardian article never says the Prisoner's Plan recognizes Israel. The Guardian merely reports that Palestinian leaders seem to think that by adhering to the plan Hamas will be, de facto, recognizing Israel. As I quoted from the same article, the Israeli government doesn't appear to share that interpretation.

The point I am making is that The Guardian is a fair and honest newspaper that is internationally respected. Their article simply reports that Palestinian leaders see the signing of this paper as an important step toward recognition by Hamas, something alluded to in the introductory comments of the Prisoner's Plan you posted (The Hamas would implicitly give up its opposition to the existence of Israel and adopt the PLO plan of a two state solution).

Alright, lets look at the title of the Guardian article you quoted - "Climbdown as Hamas agrees to Israeli state." Fair and honest you say, except for the fact that Hamas has not agreed to an Israeli state. The title is essentially a flat out lie.

Nor does it say that the Prisoner's Plan implictly recognizes Israel, or that it is interpreted as such. It actually states that the Prisoner's Plan has portions that do recognize the State of Israel. It doesn't. This is what was in the article - "Hamas has made a major political climbdown by agreeing to sections of a document that recognise Israel's right to exist and a negotiated two-state solution, according to Palestinian leaders." The fact is, there are no sections that recognize Israel's right to exist or that call for a negotiated two-state solution. The Guardian reported that there are, and that according to Palestinian sources Hamas agreed upon them.

In fact, if Palestinian sources told the Guardian that they agreed to all of these points in the document, when the points don't exist in the document, could a media source that reports that without pointing out the fact that the document does not say that be called fair or accurate? No, because it paints a misleading picture. Just like the title of the article.

Here is another excerpt from the Guardian article - "If it formally approves the entire document, it will represent a significant shift from its founding goal of replacing Israel with an Islamic state and its more recent position of agreeing a long-term ceasefire, over a generation or more, if a Palestinian state is formed on the occupied territories but without formally recognising the Jewish state." This isn't something that they qualified with "according to Palestinain sources." This is something the article is claiming. But where is this claim based in the document? What part of the document "represents a significant shift?" No part. It calls for continued resistance.

All you have to do is compare this Guardian article to the actual text of the document to see that it is spinning bullshit. Not to mention that it isn't only Honest Reporting that has condemned the Guardian (although you seem to reject it, because its funded by a Jewish source), but the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East reporting contains dozens of bad reports, in addition to the ADL running a few reports that include it as part of the anti-Jewish media. Far from being internationally respected, its under constant scrutiny for its anti-Israel and anti-Semitic bias.

Not to mention that it isn't only Honest Reporting that has condemned the Guardian (although you seem to reject it, because its funded by a Jewish source), but the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East reporting contains dozens of bad reports, in addition to the ADL running a few reports that include it as part of the anti-Jewish media. Far from being internationally respected, its under constant scrutiny for its anti-Israel and anti-Semitic bias.

So you have now brought in another pro-Israel media watchdog group, the Committee for Accuracy in Media (CAMERA), which the Boston Globe calls, a "vindictive special interest group trying to muscle its views into media coverage." CAMERA has even criticized National Geographic, Webster’s New World Encyclopedia, the Encyclopedia Britannica, Encarta, and National Public Radio as anti-Semetic.

What next? Are you going to quote from FLAME?

You are willing to trust these pro-Israel media groups without question, but parse words from a legitimate and respected newspaper article that simply says Palestinian leaders interpret (from your own source - "The Hamas would implicitly give up its opposition to the existence of Israel and adopt the PLO plan of a two state solution") the signing of this Prisoner Plan as a de facto recognition of Israel?

So you have now brought in another pro-Israel media watchdog group, the Committee for Accuracy in Media (CAMERA), which the Boston Globe calls, a "vindictive special interest group trying to muscle its views into media coverage." CAMERA has even criticized National Geographic, Webster’s New World Encyclopedia, the Encyclopedia Britannica, Encarta, and National Public Radio as anti-Semetic.

What next? Are you going to quote from FLAME?

You are willing to trust these pro-Israel media groups without question, but parse words from a legitimate and respected newspaper article that simply says Palestinian leaders interpret (from your own source - "The Hamas would implicitly give up its opposition to the existence of Israel and adopt the PLO plan of a two state solution") the signing of this Prisoner Plan as a de facto recognition of Israel?


The Guardian is mostly respected for its lovely lay-out.
Just as the Daily Sport is mostly respected for the naked dollies.
But neither is respected for its 'written' content.

So you have now brought in another pro-Israel media watchdog group, the Committee for Accuracy in Media (CAMERA), which the Boston Globe calls, a "vindictive special interest group trying to muscle its views into media coverage." CAMERA has even criticized National Geographic, Webster’s New World Encyclopedia, the Encyclopedia Britannica, and Encarta as anti-Semetic.

It isn't shocking that the Boston Globe would say that. Needless to say, most media sources don't like media watchdogs.

You are willing to trust both of these pro-Israel media groups without question, but parse words in a newspaper article that simply says Palestinian leaders interpret (from your own source) the signing of this Prisoner Plan as a de facto recognition of Israel?

You've avoided the fact that the ADL has condemned the Guardian on a number of occassions too. Nor do I trust them without question, considering that I've seen it myself. This article is a perfect example.

It doesn't simply say that Palestinian leaders interpret the signing of it to recognize de facto Israel. It says, in its very title, the Hamas has recognized Israel. Its a blatent lie. Hamas has not recognized Israel, nor does the Prisoner's Plan do any such thing. In addition, what I've quoted to you from the article is not strictly the interpretation of the Palestinian sources, nor does it claim that. The article claimed that accepting the document would change the stance of Hamas. Again, something unfounded. This is what the Guardian wrote, not what it claimed Palestinians said:

"If it formally approves the entire document, it will represent a significant shift from its founding goal of replacing Israel with an Islamic state and its more recent position of agreeing a long-term ceasefire, over a generation or more, if a Palestinian state is formed on the occupied territories but without formally recognising the Jewish state."

Now, show me which part of the document would make a significant shift? Like I said, there is none. Comparing the actual document with this Guardian article exposes the latter.

The Guardian article also stated, "Hamas has made a major political climbdown by agreeing to sections of a document that recognise Israel's right to exist and a negotiated two-state solution, according to Palestinian leaders." This doesn't claim that Palestinian leaders believe that the document recognizes Israel's right to exist. This claims that Palestinian leaders agreed to sections of the document. The Guardian is describing those sections as recognizing Israel's right to exist.

But, as I wrote, an article of this nature that fails to mention the fact that the document does not recognize Israel's right to exist while holding the title "Climbdown as Hamas agrees to Israeli state" can't be called fair or accurate at all.

The Guardian is mostly respected for its lovely lay-out.
Just as the Daily Sport is mostly respected for the naked dollies.
But neither is respected for its 'written' content.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion.

However, the Guardian is the 2006 British National Newspaper of the Year (as it was in 1999). It's web site beat out the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal for the last two years as the internet's best news web site, and it has been the winner for six years in a row of the British Newspaper Awards for Best Electronic Daily Newspaper.

I look forward to evidence that supports your low opinion of the Guardian concerning its written content.

The only time that Jews in Palestine engaged in terror to any extent that you're implying is before Israeli statehood. After Israeli statehood, the questionable groups were immediately disbanded.
And yet that is the argument you use below to support your case, Make the Palestinian State a reality.


Israel isn't even on the course that other Arab nations are. The fact that Israel gurantees equality and human rights by law whereas others don't is the starting point.
I'm sure there is an Arab state if not a Muslim one out there that conforms to some form of accepted standard of these human Rights.
If there were 30 Jewish states it would be fair to say some if not most may very well be Extreme in their views.

Blowing up buildings isn't terrorism by itself, either. Military strikes on buildings is perfectly legal. Nor was the forceful prisoner transfer from Palestinian jails once Hamas took over "kidnapping." You're using extremist speech and hyperboile rather than accurate terms. Thats a fallacy, in fact.
Thats is an untruth there i am not using gross exagerations!

The PLO was a terrorist group 6 years ago as well. Nothing has changed except the terrorist leadership. One terrorist group replacing another isn't that dramatic.


What land has Israel stolen, what communities have been cut up? You have to remember, there is no Palestinian state. There is no such thing as Palestinian land. Israel can't steal something that belongs to no one.
http://www.palestinemonitor.org/updates/Abu_Dis_and_Ras_al_Amud_divided_by_wall.htm
Construction of the wall began in June 2002. Sixteen villages have now been “annexed” to Israel, 50 villages have lost ancestral farmland, and 36 ground water wells have been seized. Communities have been split in half, separating owners from their shops, workers from factories, children from schools and the sick from clinics. Last week, 20 Palestinian school children were locked out of their village and had to wait four hours for the Israeli army to unlock the wall’s gate that allows re-entry to the divided village.
http://www.pww.org/article/articleview/4315/1/142/


Israeli Wall Threatens Peace Initiative: But Pelosi and Lantos Support $9 Billion in U.S. Aid
http://www.globalexchange.org/update/press/1144.html

If built in its entirety, the first, three-phase Wall alone will constitute the largest confiscation of Palestinian land since 1967, devastate the agricultural base of the West Bank, and destroy any possibility of a viable Palestinian state. If both walls are built, they will enclose the entire West Bank and run over 400 miles, four times the length of the Berlin Wall Not only will they take some of the most fertile land and richest water resources in the West Bank, they will partition the territory into three ghettos: one located around the cities of Nablus and Jenin in the north, a second in Ramallah in the north-center, and a third in Bethlehem/Hebron in the south. (These three urban areas are further subdivided into numerous enclaves by Israeli settlements, bypass roads, and military checkpoints.) In total, less than half of the West Bank will remain in Palestinian hands-just 12% of pre-1948 Palestine. (See "The Green Line," p. 28.) The Wall will completely separate East Jerusalem, which was illegally annexed by Israel in 1980, from the rest of the West Bank East Jerusalem is not only the intended capital of a future

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Israel/Backs_To_Wall.html

That only proves how much of a joke it is.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion.

However, the Guardian is the 2006 British National Newspaper of the Year (as it was in 1999). It's web site beat out the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal for the last two years as the internet's best news web site, and it has been the winner for six years in a row of the British Newspaper Awards for Best Electronic Daily Newspaper.

I look forward to evidence that supports your low opinion of the Guardian concerning its written content.

1. It supports the Labour Party.
2. It supports the Labour Party.
3. It supports the Labour Party.

This here is the North Riding, and not Tower Hamlets or Bethnal Green.


Meanwhile, I have the Times, the Yorkshire Post and the Evening Gazette to read.

I look forward to evidence that supports your low opinion of the Guardian concerning its written content.

You've already dismissed a lot of the evidence presented to you. You rejected Honest Reporting, because its funded by a Jewish group. This is a fallacy called poisoning the well. You rejected CAMERA. You avoided the ADL, I could show you some ADL reports on the Guardian if you like. Here is an ADL report on a Guardian article that excuses Palestinian terror:

ADL to Ted Turner: The Use of Terrorism Can Never Be Justified (http://www.adl.org/PresRele/TerrorismIntl_93/4114_62.htm)

New York, N.Y., June 18, 2002 ... In response to AOL-Time Warner Vice Chairman Ted Turner's comments justifying Palestinian suicide bombers, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) today said it was "tragically ironic," that he excused "the very violent acts that prevent a more secure future for Israelis and Palestinians," on a day when a Hamas suicide bomber took the lives of 19 innocent Israelis on their way to school and work.

In an interview published today in London's Guardian newspaper, Mr. Turner accused Israel of engaging in "terrorism" against the Palestinians and called suicide bombers "all they [the Palestinians] have."

In a letter to Mr. Turner, Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director, said:

It was tragically ironic that your statements in the Guardian justifying Palestinian terrorism and accusing Israel itself of engaging in terrorism, appeared on the same day that a Palestinian terrorist blew up a Jerusalem bus, killing at least 19 Israelis, many of them young students on their way to school.

Mr. Turner, the use of terrorism can never be justified. Indeed, by your equation, the September 11 attacks were legitimate since the nineteen perpetrators had no other tools at their disposal in their "battle" against the United States.

Palestinian terrorists willfully aim to kill as many people as possible, deliberately targeting busy intersections, shopping districts and bus routes in population centers. The goal of these wanton, premeditated acts of murder is to eradicate the State of Israel. To compare such acts to the Israeli army's defensive operations which target those engaged in violence and terrorism is offensive. While there have been tragic Palestinian civilian casualties during Israeli operations, these incidents were in no way deliberate.

Mr. Turner, we would have hoped that you would use your position and visibility to speak out against Palestinian terrorism and violence, and to urge the resumption of negotiations. Unfortunately, your comments served only to excuse the very violent acts that prevent a more secure future for Israelis and Palestinians.

Although, you may do a knee-jerk with this like you did with Honest Reporting. OMG, its a Jewish group! The ADL can't be trusted! Israeli bias!

Okay, Tropical Sands, you are chasing your own tail and this is pointless.

If you can't see that signing an agreement with a country is an implicit recognition of that country (as your Prisoner Plan says in the introductory remarks, which I have posted twice, but which you keep avoiding) then it is because you are willfully avoiding the point. Just as you have made up your mind about the Guardian.

You cite only sources that have a vested interest in the argument. This doesn't make them untrue, but I would have the same response if you cited al-Jazeera. They may print the truth, but a wise person takes into account that they have a point of view they are pushing.

As the saying goes, believing is seeing.

You are only going to see what you want to see (which pretty much sums up the major problem with both sides in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict).

Be well.

And yet that is the argument you use below to support your case, Make the Palestinian State a reality.

Palestine not having a state doesn't excuse Palestinian terror. Nor were the few, spurious Jewish acts of terror before the formation of the State of Israel anything remotely similiar to acts of terror by Palestinians. To begin, they were against military targets.

The King David Hotel, for example, was being used as a military base by the British. The Irgun phoned in an hour ahead of time and told them that there was a bomb, that they needed to evacuate the building. The phone call was ignored, and an hour later the building blew up. Compare this to Palestinian terror - how many phone calls do discos and shop owners get before they are attacked by qassam rockets and suicide bombers? Lets not even compare the terror engaged in by pre-Israeli groups to Palestinain groups today. The latter is far, far more vile.

I'm sure there is an Arab state if not a Muslim one out there that conforms to some form of accepted standard of these human Rights.
If there were 30 Jewish states it would be fair to say some if not most may very well be Extreme in their views.

But there aren't 30 Jewish states. In fact, if you compare Israel to its neighbors, it has a shorter list of human rights violations than any of the following. Jordan's citizenship law doesn't allow Jews to be citizens, Lebanon is still keeping Palestinians in refugee camps. Lets not get started on Egypt, Saudi Arabia, etc. The fact that Israel's neighbors are Arab states is incidental, but the fact that Israel is far better than them is significant.

You can compare Israel to non-Arab states, too. The old Soviet bloc states, for example. Israel has a far better human rights record than they do. How about non-Arab African states? We can even compare Israel to the United States. Less civilians have been killed in all of Israeli history as a result of Israeli military action than Iraqi citizens as a result of US occupation in Iraq.


Thats is an untruth there i am not using gross exagerations!

You are. Military operations don't become "terror" just because you don't like them.

http://www.palestinemonitor.org/updates/Abu_Dis_and_Ras_al_Amud_divided_by_wall.htm

http://www.pww.org/article/articleview/4315/1/142/



http://www.globalexchange.org/update/press/1144.html


http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Israel/Backs_To_Wall.html

That only proves how much of a joke it is.

And, none of those articles you listed demonstrate that Israel is actually stealing land. Yes, they claim that. However, the fact is that there is no Palestinian state. Thus, there is no such thing as Palestinian land. If Israel wants to annex the land necessary to secure its borders, that is fine. In fact, the potential of annexition isn't even questioned under international law. What is questioned is current settlement in unannexed territories.

Again, someone claiming "they stole" doesn't make it so any more than you throwing the word "terror" around incorrectly.

Okay, Tropical Sands, you are chasing your own tail and this is pointless.

If you can't see that signing an agreement with a country is an implicit recognition of that country (as your Prisoner Plan says in the introductory remarks, which I have posted twice, but which you keep avoiding) then it is because you are willfully avoiding the point. Just as you have made up your mind about the Guardian.

1. The Prisoner's Plan isn't an agreement with Israel.
2. You havn't posted anything from the introductory remarks, nor do they state that it recognizes Israel in any fashion.

TS, I'm curious. If one of the nations that doesn't recognise the state of Israel suddenly had the capability & desire to annex Israel, would they have the right to do it?

Is it a fair to conclude no one owns the occupied territories, because the state of Israel opposes the creation of a soverign Palestinian state?

It would seem that an anti-Israeli pro-Palestinian stance is not the hallmark of the moderate Left that the far-Left would like to portray. The US Senate approved a law in Senate unanimously that prohibits any money transfers to the Hamas lead government. This is conditional on the following factors: the PA can't be governed by a terrorist group, the PA must recognize Israel, the PA must begin to dismantle terrorist groups, the PA must stop inciting attacks against Israel, and true democracy and law must be established.

Now, for those who don't know, foreign aid makes up virtually all of the PA's economy. Lets see if the PA cares enough about its own Palestinian people to do a few simple things like recognize Israel to receive the aid that sustains it.

US passes law against money transfer to PA (http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3266571,00.html)

Well done, have a gold star. Perhaps you've finally stopped lopoking through your right-wing tinted glasses and realised that you can opppose terrorism and not be a member of the republican party!

Nevertheless, there has been mixed messages from Hamas. Despite searching the BBC site, I read awhile ago that several Hamas ranking members called for it to recognise Israel, and until Israel started shelling Gaza, offered a long term truce.

But it does seem odd that the Senate is calling for true democracy - the people of Palestine voted for Hamas in democratic elections, or as democratic as elections can be under any occupation.

Nevertheless, there should be no circumstance where the nations of the west should fund terriorist groups, or give them the opportunity to obtain our money. Perhaps next the Senate might (finally) stop funding Israel - who are no better than the people they seek to destroy.

1. It supports the Labour Party.
2. It supports the Labour Party.
3. It supports the Labour Party.

This here is the North Riding, and not Tower Hamlets or Bethnal Green.


Meanwhile, I have the Times, the Yorkshire Post and the Evening Gazette to read.

Hardly. They're far more green/lib dem these days.

For democracy to work, the people have to actually be informed and educated. This was understood by the Greeks when it was developed as a political system, and this is one reason why Plato rejected it as a viable form of government in lieu of a republic. The Palestinians aren't educated enough for a democracy to actually work for them, unfortunantly, and the totality of their media and education consists of anti-Semitic propaganda. Textbooks given to children in schools even talk about how the Jews want to take over the world.

In addition, for democracy to work, the parties must also follow the Rule of Law. Illegal institutions aren't eligable to be parties to democracy. Electing Hamas is no more viable than electing al-Qaeda. Otherwise it will move from true democracy to a mob rule.


Its far safer to say that the most dangerous piece of anti-semitism in the Palestinians education is dodging the IDF snipers on the way to school. A fact made all the more ironic given the fact that some of those soldiers are Druze.

Secondly, Israel refuses to recognise any laws treaties or practices that doesnt suit its expansionist agenda, relying on the Veto power of its ally the US to protect it from the consequences. Therefore its entire occupation is based on the hijack and subversion of legality.

1. It supports the Labour Party.
2. It supports the Labour Party.
3. It supports the Labour Party.

This here is the North Riding, and not Tower Hamlets or Bethnal Green.


Meanwhile, I have the Times, the Yorkshire Post and the Evening Gazette to read.

1. No it doesn't.
2. No it doesn't.
3. No it doesn't.

The Guardian is often very critical of the Labour Governments (and I don't mean stupid Daily Mail criticisms like 'Blair forces Immigrant Speed Camera to eat our Children whilst stealing our Jobs as Political Correctness goes Mad!' or whatever shit they print these days), I mean proper criticism that gets to the heart of the issue.

While it is true that the Guardian does have an Old Labour bias, (not completely though, Dave Cameron used to have a Grauniad column), but having a value-bias is very different from being a Party mouthpiece. Indeed, last election they supported the Liberal Democrats.

But speaking of deploring partisan bias in the press. What about The Times? It's hard to tell where the Conservative Party and the Times publishership ends, they blend into eachother so completely.

Palestine not having a state doesn't excuse Palestinian terror. Nor were the few, spurious Jewish acts of terror before the formation of the State of Israel anything remotely similiar to acts of terror by Palestinians. To begin, they were against military targets.

The King David Hotel, for example, was being used as a military base by the British. The Irgun phoned in an hour ahead of time and told them that there was a bomb, that they needed to evacuate the building. The phone call was ignored, and an hour later the building blew up. Compare this to Palestinian terror - how many phone calls do discos and shop owners get before they are attacked by qassam rockets and suicide bombers? Lets not even compare the terror engaged in by pre-Israeli groups to Palestinain groups today. The latter is far, far more vile.

But there aren't 30 Jewish states. In fact, if you compare Israel to its neighbors, it has a shorter list of human rights violations than any of the following. Jordan's citizenship law doesn't allow Jews to be citizens, Lebanon is still keeping Palestinians in refugee camps. Lets not get started on Egypt, Saudi Arabia, etc. The fact that Israel's neighbors are Arab states is incidental, but the fact that Israel is far better than them is significant.
And lets thank God for that, 1 is already enough.
You can compare Israel to non-Arab states, too. The old Soviet bloc states, for example. Israel has a far better human rights record than they do. How about non-Arab African states? We can even compare Israel to the United States. Less civilians have been killed in all of Israeli history as a result of Israeli military action than Iraqi citizens as a result of US occupation in Iraq.
That would be because the U.S is useless.
You are. Military operations don't become "terror" just because you don't like them.
Aren't
And, none of those articles you listed demonstrate that Israel is actually stealing land. Yes, they claim that. However, the fact is that there is no Palestinian state. Thus, there is no such thing as Palestinian land. If Israel wants to annex the land necessary to secure its borders, that is fine. In fact, the potential of annexition isn't even questioned under international law. What is questioned is current settlement in unannexed territories.
'Vanunu' is all i need to say to that.
Again, someone claiming "they stole" doesn't make it so any more than you throwing the word "terror" around incorrectly.
Me throwing terror around incorrectly?
Not even.

And on the issue of Tropical Sands favourable be-all-end-all argument - that you can't steal what does not belong to a state.

That's simply not the issue, the articles do not talk about annexing Palestinian land, as that, as you rightly point out, does not exist. What it is saying, a subtle semantic change which I suspect you ignored on purpose, is that lands that belong to Palestinian _individuals_ are being annexed. Now, unless you would deny Palestinian people the basic human right of ownership of private property, you have to admit that the land cut off by the wall is Palestinian (i.e. of private Palestinian ownership).

As for the explicit vs implicit recognition. I think you have to face the facts that an explicit recognition is not likely, nor is it desirable. Think about it, Hamas sole appeal is that it is seen as a body that stands for Palestinians, if it goes out in public and explicitly states that it will allow Israel to exist and wish it all the best of luck they will lose this appeal. And the Terrorists will splinter and form a new group that will be better hidden, and even angrier.

No, we have to accept that an implicit recognition is the most we can ask for. Look at the other Arab states, they all spout anti-Zionist rhetoric but behind closed doors they get along with Israel fine, if this changed they would face a revolution immediately. Forcing Hamas to repent their sins would serve no purpose other than to humiliate them, and while that may feel good in the short term, it will ultimately lead to further violence.

I think we should look at the Communist parties in post-war Western Europe. Their first manifestoes called for a destruction of the bourgeous states, and introduction of Communist systems. Eventually, they realised that being so crazed and angry did not do them well in terms of governing effectively, so they moderated themselves, indeed, many Communist parties have sat in governments west of Berlin and managed never to ship folk off to the Gulags. I think this gradual moderation will be repeated in Palestine. The people will learn that it is in their best interests to co-operate with Israel.

P.S. Your earlier representation of Palestinians as ignorant was unfounded and prejudiced. I have met a fair few Palestinians, and there is a culture of scholarship in Palestine (and Arabia in general), and although there is a definate lack of educational facilities the desire to learn is as strong as in any Western nation and people recognise that arguments have two sides far more than we do in our black-and-white worlds.

Honest Reporting can be called a "media watchgroup," but it would be more accurate to identify them as a pro-Israel group founded by Aish HaTorah that focuses on what it perceives to be anti-Israel reporting.

The Guardian, on the other hand, is one of the world's most respected newspapers, winning recognition as the British National Newspaper of the Year this year.

You'll find that most groups that TS says condemn various reports/organisations are founded by conservative American/Israeli groups. Hence for every NGO and UN division there are a group of apologists who essentially lie to give credence to other "official" apologists. And fanatics like TS.

[
You rejected Honest Reporting, because its funded by a Jewish group.
.

No, you lying dishonest little man, he said Honest Reporting can be called a "media watchgroup," but it would be more accurate to identify them as a pro-Israel group founded by Aish HaTorah that focuses on what it perceives to be anti-Israel reporting.

You should apologise unreservedly.

[
Oh for God's sake! Will you get the fuck over that nonsense! Just because something is "strange" to us, doesn't mean we have to give it one iota of respect.

Yes, they should get their hair cut and get a job.

[
This doesn't make Israel at fault, however. Its just a part of the "he made me do it" syndrome. The fact is, it isn't Israelis blowing up buildings and subways. Nor is it Israel committing genocide in Africa or oppressing its own people via theocracy..

No, its in the West Bank and Arab East Jerusalem building suburbs, turning a blind eye to settler violence and oppressing the Palestinians.

[
What land has Israel stolen, what communities have been cut up? You have to remember, there is no Palestinian state. There is no such thing as Palestinian land. Israel can't steal something that belongs to no one...

Aha. It most be semantics and double talk day. Legally, Israel has no right to be outside its 1967 borders occupying the West Bank and Arab East Jerusalem, let alone build settlements there. And by an act of the Knesset Israel has already, and in clear violation of international law, passed an act which says that it annexes Arab East Jerusalem. You've had this pointed out to you a number of times by a number of people yet still trot out your tired lies.


[
The King David Hotel, for example, was being used as a military base by the British. The Irgun phoned in an hour ahead of time and told them that there was a bomb, that they needed to evacuate the building. The phone call was ignored, and an hour later the building blew up....

"barrell bombs" into Arab markets, machine gunning officers at their resturaunt table, kidnapping and killing three soldiers and booby trapping the bodies....killing the UN representative..Most of it is just the way a "dirty" war is fought, .... but if you want to get on a high horse, I'll gladly see you explain these first.

You know I heard this strange rumor about a government called democracy...
Not that, I'm a huge Hamas fan or anything bu we should at least respect the will of the people of there (no matter how strange it is to us)
Yeah like how you respected Hitler's holocaust too.

1. No it doesn't.
2. No it doesn't.
3. No it doesn't.

The Guardian is often very critical of the Labour Governments (and I don't mean stupid Daily Mail criticisms like 'Blair forces Immigrant Speed Camera to eat our Children whilst stealing our Jobs as Political Correctness goes Mad!' or whatever shit they print these days), I mean proper criticism that gets to the heart of the issue.

While it is true that the Guardian does have an Old Labour bias, (not completely though, Dave Cameron used to have a Grauniad column), but having a value-bias is very different from being a Party mouthpiece. Indeed, last election they supported the Liberal Democrats.

But speaking of deploring partisan bias in the press. What about The Times? It's hard to tell where the Conservative Party and the Times publishership ends, they blend into eachother so completely.

The Daily Mail style of criticism is the one that counts. What IS the heart of the matter is that this Government is still 'engaged' in being nice to foreign rapists, rather than being 100% focussed on never ever missing an opportunity to chuck 'em out, punish 'em, deport 'em, etc etc. Ditto with knives. Ditto with Chavs. Less carrots, and lots lots and LOTS more stick! For that is the heart of the matter.

I'm not deploring bias, I am deploring failure to take a hardcore 'thou shalt NOT be leftwing'-stand.

Why give the Palestinians ANY funding. Ive yet to see any reason to justify giving the palestinians a penny in foreign aid. Let the wealthy Arab states, you know the ones that care SOOOO much for thier fellow Muslims, economically support them. Let them don ate land for thier brothers to live on. Let thier governments open thier doors for thier Arab bretheren to live with them since the evil Israelis wont let them move into Isreal and kill all the inhabitants. (imagine that) Let the Palestinains wither on the vine and lay the blame at every single one of its Arab neighbors. Why is Palestinain hooliganism ANYONE elses problem but the Arabs. The Palistinians want to act like animals, let thier fellow Arabs pick up the Vet bill.

The Daily Mail style of criticism is the one that counts. What IS the heart of the matter is that this Government is still 'engaged' in being nice to foreign rapists, rather than being 100% focussed on never ever missing an opportunity to chuck 'em out, punish 'em, deport 'em, etc etc. Ditto with knives. Ditto with Chavs. Less carrots, and lots lots and LOTS more stick! For that is the heart of the matter.

I'm not deploring bias, I am deploring failure to take a hardcore 'thou shalt NOT be leftwing'-stand.

Firstly, let me just say how scared your use of formatting has made me, I believe that was your intention?

Secondly, the Daily Mail is a fascist toe-rag, simple as that, it has nothing to add to sensible democratic discussion. The majority of its stories are downright lies, and what is not is deliberately inflated to cause panic and hatred in the populace. Criminals are much less likely to be foreign than domestic. The 'knife problem' is blown ridiculously out of proportion, as is 'chavdom', it is all part of a media scheme to demonise large swathes of the populace.

Finally, why the fuck should a free newspaper order people not to be left-wing!? Left-wingers have, and always have, and always will, have an important part in this country, whether you like it or not.

Anyway, I'm off to go rent a suit. Have fun stewing in your hatred.

Firstly, let me just say how scared your use of formatting has made me, I believe that was your intention?

Secondly, the Daily Mail is a fascist toe-rag, simple as that, it has nothing to add to sensible democratic discussion. The majority of its stories are downright lies, and what is not is deliberately inflated to cause panic and hatred in the populace. Criminals are much less likely to be foreign than domestic. The 'knife problem' is blown ridiculously out of proportion, as is 'chavdom', it is all part of a media scheme to demonise large swathes of the populace.

Finally, why the fuck should a free newspaper order people not to be left-wing!? Left-wingers have, and always have, and always will, have an important part in this country, whether you like it or not.

Anyway, I'm off to go rent a suit. Have fun stewing in your hatred.

I formatted to make it obvious to which part I was answering to.

You think that chavdom is no problem because there are only a few.
I think that even ONE SINGLE CHAV is one Chav too many!

Now, get your extreme-leftism out of Britain and into Massachussetts or something!

And while we're at it: maybe we will get a sensible Government one day, the kind of sensible that ASBOs people who use the F-word, and all other forms of foul and profane language.

You know I heard this strange rumor about a government called democracy...
Not that, I'm a huge Hamas fan or anything bu we should at least respect the will of the people of there (no matter how strange it is to us)
And we have respected the will of the people. We haven't waged a war of "regime change" against the Palestinians. Now does respecting democracy force us to fund terrorist organizations? No, it doesn't.

Good for the US Senate for finally doing something.


But, do you think that the Palestinians are going to miss US funding? What about funding from their arab bretheren?

Good for the US Senate for finally doing something.

But, do you think that the Palestinians are going to miss US funding? What about funding from their arab bretheren?

Contrary to popular American opinion, while the "Arab street" may support the Palestinian cause, most non-Palestinian Arabs aren't that fond of Palestinians. Most Arab nations do not contribute very much to "the cause".

It's more than the US cutting their funding. It affects their ability to borrow money from banks, for instance.

I'm not saying that this will do any good politically. But, if you know that any spare cash that Hamas has access to will be used to outfit suicide bombers, you don't really have a choice in whether or not you want to keep giving them money.

I formatted to make it obvious to which part I was answering to.

You think that chavdom is no problem because there are only a few.
I think that even ONE SINGLE CHAV is one Chav too many!

Now, get your extreme-leftism out of Britain and into Massachussetts or something!

And while we're at it: maybe we will get a sensible Government one day, the kind of sensible that ASBOs people who use the F-word, and all other forms of foul and profane language.

And perhaps we might resurrect Sir Oswald Mosley for PM while we're at it:rolleyes:

And perhaps we might resurrect Sir Oswald Mosley for PM while we're at it:rolleyes:

Heh, couldn't have put it better myself.

P.S. It's a pretty nice suit. :D