Hamas PM Offers to Resign to end the boycott

[magomago]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6136682.stm

Hamas is smart right here

====alestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniya of the ruling Hamas group has said he is willing to resign if this will end a Western aid boycott.

His comments came after talks on a unity government with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas.

Sanctions were imposed this year by Israel and Western countries, which see Hamas as a terrorist organisation.

"If we have to choose between the siege and myself, we must lift the siege and end the suffering," Mr Haniya said.

The US and Europe imposed crippling sanctions on the authority in March because Hamas refused to recognise Israel, renounce violence and respect previous Israeli-Palestinian agreements.

Speaking outside a Gaza mosque, Mr Haniya said the West had made it a condition that "the siege will not be lifted unless the prime minister is changed".

But Mr Haniya said the discussions on forming a unity government were yielding results and that he hoped a new cabinet could be in place within three weeks.

Correspondents say the statement could be a sign that the Hamas and Fatah factions could be inching closer towards a deal.

It was hoped that the formation of a unity government would lead to direct foreign aid being resumed.

But weeks of on-off negotiations punctuated by political and security crises have failed to achieve a breakthrough.

Hamas insists it will never join a government that recognises the State of Israel.
=====

This is something important -because it shows they are eventually willing to compromise. True I disagree that we need to depose an elected government like this...but the fact that they ARE willing to do this so that the boycott can stop and Palestinian workers can get paid is something GOOD.
As I was discussing with SamuzAchar - this is something that needs to be encouraged. Hamas made a move right now, and we need to make another one. We always talk about "making the Palestinians do something first" and they did.

Now lets hope the boycott stops. The best way to really destroy the potential of a Palestine is to destroy their economy.

 

[Martin]

Originally posted by: magomago
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6136682.stm

Hamas insists it will never join a government that recognises the State of Israel.
=====

This is something important -because it shows they are eventually willing to compromise. True I disagree that we need to depose an elected government like this...but the fact that they ARE willing to do this so that the boycott can stop and Palestinian workers can get paid is something GOOD.
As I was discussing with SamuzAchar - this is something that needs to be encouraged. Hamas made a move right now, and we need to make another one. We always talk about "making the Palestinians do something first" and they did.

Now lets hope the boycott stops. The best way to really destroy the potential of a Palestine is to destroy their economy.

As the last line shows, no, they're not willing to compromise at all. The west doesn't care which person is in charge, it cares about the policy. They want to appear as reasonable folks who want to compromise, but without actually changing anything and no western government should be fooled by this.

The best response would be the dual of this gesture: pay lip service, but don't actually do anything.

 

[Moonbeam]

That will teach them to vote for who they want instead of who we want.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
That will teach them to vote for who they want instead of who we want.

Or you get what you pay for.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
That will teach them to vote for who they want instead of who we want.

Or you get what you pay for.

You mean our reward for the billions we have put into democratizing the Middle East?

 

[EagleKeeper]

Any type of currency is worthless unless it can be backed up with something tangible.

 

[Craig234]

That's what democracy is about, a more powerful group bribing a less powerful group into not electing who they like.

I'm sure George Bush would have been elected if the rest of the US were less wealthy and the rest of the world bribed us on who to elect.

What do we stand for again, more than our own power and wealth?

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
That will teach them to vote for who they want instead of who we want.

They voted for a militant organization whose purpose is the death of Israel. It?s morally contemptuous that you?d give Palestinians more defense ?to vote for who they want? in wanting to kill another nation than you would your own country.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
That will teach them to vote for who they want instead of who we want.

They voted for a militant organization whose purpose is the death of Israel. It?s morally contemptuous that you?d give Palestinians more defense ?to vote for who they want? in wanting to kill another nation than you would your own country.

Nice distortion of the issue.

We *don't* treat our own nation worse; we make it illegal for other nations to use money to influence our elections, while we spend millions to interfer in others'.

The thing about democracy is that it has its own moral value apart from your opinion of who they elect. You point fingers at Hamas; the world points fingers at Bush.

The fact that you criticize placing the principle of 'voting for who you want' above who wins shows that you lack belief in the principles of democracy.

 

[magomago]

Originally posted by: Martin

Originally posted by: magomago
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6136682.stm

Hamas insists it will never join a government that recognises the State of Israel.
=====

This is something important -because it shows they are eventually willing to compromise. True I disagree that we need to depose an elected government like this...but the fact that they ARE willing to do this so that the boycott can stop and Palestinian workers can get paid is something GOOD.
As I was discussing with SamuzAchar - this is something that needs to be encouraged. Hamas made a move right now, and we need to make another one. We always talk about "making the Palestinians do something first" and they did.

Now lets hope the boycott stops. The best way to really destroy the potential of a Palestine is to destroy their economy.

As the last line shows, no, they're not willing to compromise at all. The west doesn't care which person is in charge, it cares about the policy. They want to appear as reasonable folks who want to compromise, but without actually changing anything and no western government should be fooled by this.

The best response would be the dual of this gesture: pay lip service, but don't actually do anything.

You have to start somewhere, no? Having the Hamas PM resign to get things going again certainly isn't "lip service" on their part...so shouldn't we start pushing now?
The issue of Israel is very dear to many Palestinians and you won't radically see a change overnight...but for the minor issues that can appear over night we need to capitalize so that 20 years down the road those majors changes will have taken.

Otherwise you are stuck with the past 60 years, and as we all know it totally sucks

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
That will teach them to vote for who they want instead of who we want.

They voted for a militant organization whose purpose is the death of Israel. It?s morally contemptuous that you?d give Palestinians more defense ?to vote for who they want? in wanting to kill another nation than you would your own country.

My dear Sir. You may have much more in common with the Palestinians than I do. I voted against that warmongering fool, Bush. Did you?

 

[JS80]

When the non-Jewish Arabs that live in Israel stop blowing up Jews in Israel then the West will stop the boycott.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: JS80
When the non-Jewish Arabs that live in Israel stop blowing up Jews in Israel then the West will stop the boycott.

When the West stops the boycott that will happen.

 

[Jaskalas]

You?re so very intertwined in the ideology of the terrorists. No wonder you place the double standard of protecting their electing a militant group, but condemn the West for any such action.

This is a gap between us that words do not settle. The mere thought that you side with Hamas is all that needs to be said.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas
You?re so very intertwined in the ideology of the terrorists. No wonder you place the double standard of protecting their electing a militant group, but condemn the West for any such action.

This is a gap between us that words do not settle. The mere thought that you side with Hamas is all that needs to be said.

Try not to have thoughts if you don't know how to think. What part of, you have more in common with Hamas than I do didn't you understand?

 

[imported_dna]

Poor moonstruck moonie -- must've been a full moon last night.

As for the news: this is nothing new, and there has been plenty of double-speak in the past by Hamas and others, and there is no reason to believe this isn't just more of the same. With rockets being fired on a regular basis, tunnels dug, and weapons smuggled from Egypt -- there is no reason to believe this is not simply a ploy to get some money from the Euro-suckers.

Originally posted by: Craig234
The fact that you criticize placing the principle of 'voting for who you want' above who wins shows that you lack belief in the principles of democracy.

If things were going Hamas's way, Democracy would've been supplanted by Sharia law, so don't fool yourself into believing that a democratic victory for Hamas, is a victory for democracy; if anything, it is the begining of the end for Democracy.

 

[dennilfloss]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
That will teach them to vote for who they want instead of who we want.

They can vote for who they want but choices have consequences. As someone else said, it's not about the persons, it's about the policies.

 

[flavio]

Originally posted by: dna
With rockets being fired on a regular basis, tunnels dug, and weapons smuggled from Egypt --

You're right. The US should just give the same weapons and military aiid to Palestine that they do Israel and then they wouldn't have to do these things. As it is now the Israeli terrorists get better technology to kill civilians with.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: dennilfloss

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
That will teach them to vote for who they want instead of who we want.

They can vote for who they want but choices have consequences. As someone else said, it's not about the persons, it's about the policies.

On choice, that is only true right now. It is never retroactive. All that has happened had to happen exactly as it did. It could not have been otherwise. Choice in the past is itself a consequence. The Jews insured how the Palestinians would vote. One might be tempted to say that Israeli actions also have consequences, no?

He is free only who is free of the past. The past is Palestinian and Israeli, an identification with what has been. Identification is the squandering of the now over what had to be.

 

[flavio]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: dennilfloss

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
That will teach them to vote for who they want instead of who we want.

They can vote for who they want but choices have consequences. As someone else said, it's not about the persons, it's about the policies.

On choice, that is only true right now. It is never retroactive. All that has happened had to happen exactly as it did. It could not have been otherwise. Choice in the past is itself a consequence. The Jews insured how the Palestinians would vote. One might be tempted to say that Israeli actions also have consequences, no?

He is free only who is free of the past. The past is Palestinian and Israeli, an identification with what has been. Identification is the squandering of the now over what had to be.

Hey, you ever read Krishnamurti?

 

[imported_dna]

Originally posted by: flavio
You're right. The US should just give the same weapons and military aiid to Palestine that they do Israel and then they wouldn't have to do these things. As it is now the Israeli terrorists get better technology to kill civilians with.

My heart bleeds for them.... perhaps if they didn't use their women as human shields :Q

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
The Jews insured how the Palestinians would vote. One might be tempted to say that Israeli actions also have consequences, no?

Hamas was voted into power because they were the only alternative to the corrupt Fatah, and not because they had a better game plan.
Isn't remarkable how your pursuit of pseudo-wit and sarcasm causes you to ignore facts?

 

[flavio]

Originally posted by: dna

Originally posted by: flavio
You're right. The US should just give the same weapons and military aiid to Palestine that they do Israel and then they wouldn't have to do these things. As it is now the Israeli terrorists get better technology to kill civilians with.

My heart bleeds for them.... perhaps if they didn't use their women as human shields :Q

They could just line up in rows and fight Israel if we gave them equal firepower eh?

 

[imported_dna]

You seem very keen on the "fighting" part.

Would you also use your women as shields?

 

[Moonbeam]

Googling Krisnamurti and freedom of the past I find this:

We are asking: is it possible to see without the image? Obviously it is one of the most complex issues, because we are storing up every conscious or unconscious experience. Every experience is leaving a mark, a conclusion, knowledge; and with this conclusion, this knowledge which becomes the tradition, the inheritance can I see anything new with that? Or when I see something new, I twist it to suit my own particular idiosyncrasy, my own particular conditioning. I don't know if you are following all this? Are we communicating with each other? Under these circumstances, which are facts, not ideas or something abstract, is it possible to see anything clearly? Obviously it is not. If I am very conservative and I happen to live in Paris, when there are student revolts I am horrified, because my conservatism rebels against all that. So I am incapable of seeing clearly what is taking place, what is justified, what is an excess and so on. My fear would prevent my seeing the activity of those students clearly right? So the question is: is it possible to be free from these thousands of experiences that are pouring in all the time free in the sense that they don't leave a mark? Can a scientist any kind of trained specialist see the whole existence of life, or only a special part of it? If I say `I know', won't that assertion, with all its aggression, fear, prestige, sense of power, authority, prevent me from looking? And can one know, or be aware that experiences do leave a mark, a scratch, an accumulation of knowledge, a tradition, and in the very observing see that they don't interfere? Is this possible specially when I am emotionally attached to something? If one is committed to the army, to the whole structure of armament and nationalism, obviously one can't see clearly what is implied in it, and one will resist, one will become the aggressor. Seeing all this, one asks oneself, what is the nature and the quality of seeing, that is not clouded by the past? Is this question clear? Can we go into it?
One has lived seventy, forty or thirty years and one has happily or unhappily gathered lots of words, concepts; one has many memories of youth, of the pleasures and the delights of sex, one has struggled, got a job, fought one's way through this culture and there it is, the past, from schooldays until now. That is the past, that is the `me'. The `me', the `I', is a word with great content, within a framework which is always reshaping itself. And through that frame I look and distort everything. I have been hurt, not only physically but psychologically, inwardly; they have flattered me, they have respected me, they have insulted me. Can I look at the movement of life without all those accumulations, which are actually the `me', the `I', the `ego', the self-centred entity. That is the question, isn't it? Can one die to yesterday and be new, fresh, innocent today? It is only innocence that can see very clearly, isn't it? Not the rich man, not the poor man, not the clever, cunning theologian, nor the man with a great accumulation of knowledge, but only the innocent mind can see very clearly. And it is innocent, not because it is naive, but because it has understood what it means to look clearly and therefore can die to everything that it has known. Please let's talk it over together.
Can one do that? If one doesn't, one is never free, one is doomed, one is caught in a rat-trap, going round and round in a circle. So can we do it? Can we discuss it?

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: dna

Originally posted by: flavio
You're right. The US should just give the same weapons and military aiid to Palestine that they do Israel and then they wouldn't have to do these things. As it is now the Israeli terrorists get better technology to kill civilians with.

My heart bleeds for them.... perhaps if they didn't use their women as human shields :Q

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
The Jews insured how the Palestinians would vote. One might be tempted to say that Israeli actions also have consequences, no?

Hamas was voted into power because they were the only alternative to the corrupt Fatah, and not because they had a better game plan.
Isn't remarkable how your pursuit of pseudo-wit and sarcasm causes you to ignore facts?

Have it your way then. The Israelis created the conditions that lead to the inevitable corruption of Fatah.