[dcmacdaddy]

Gaza Police in Parliament Protest

Interesting article about how members of the Palestinian police force stormed their Parliament building to protest the government not cracking down on Hamas. This is good news if you ask me. Now we need more and more groups in Gaza coming out against Hamas and hopefully the Palestinian Authority will start to deal with Hamas harshly and push them into the sea.

[BRussell]

And they just had an election in which Hamas won a minority of seats. It's too bad that they won any, but the fact that they won so few suggests that most Palestinians don't like their methods.

[Mark Larr]

The fact they won any at all shows there is major support for them.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by BRussell

And they just had an election in which Hamas won a minority of seats. It's too bad that they won any, but the fact that they won so few suggests that most Palestinians don't like their methods.

Originally Posted by Mark Larr

The fact they won any at all shows there is major support for them.

Marklar, minority and majority are antonyms, meaning they mean the opposite of each other.

So, if "Hamas won a minority of seats" in the most recent election then there CANNOT be "major support for them". Your logic is fault if you assume that any support for a political group somehow equates with a majority of citizens in favor of that group (whether or not they vote for said group).

[Mark Larr]

When they start exploding in their parlement, you'll see just how much power they don't have.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by BRussell

And they just had an election in which Hamas won a minority of seats. It's too bad that they won any, but the fact that they won so few suggests that most Palestinians don't like their methods.

About your sig, BRussell. Humans didn't evolve from monkeys, monkeys are a completely different evolutionary chain. While we are both primates, humans evolved separate from monkeys.

[BRussell]

Originally Posted by olePigeon

About your sig, BRussell. Humans didn't evolve from monkeys, monkeys are a completely different evolutionary chain. While we are both primates, humans evolved separate from monkeys.

You don't say? So, in other words, that was a really stupid question for Larry King to ask?

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by BRussell

You don't say? So, in other words, that was a really stupid question for Larry King to ask?

Oh, nevermind. I thought you were being serious.

Looked like an argument MacNStein would use.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by olePigeon

Oh, nevermind. I thought you were being serious.

Looked like an argument MacNStein would use.

??? WTF ???

Dumbass, I support the belief in evolution. (Well, maybe not in your case. )

[RIRedinPA]

Originally Posted by BRussell

You don't say? So, in other words, that was a really stupid question for Larry King to ask?

Please, there's the evolutionary chain of humans, the evolutionary chain of primates and then the evolutionary abnomally of Larry King.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy

Marklar, minority and majority are antonyms, meaning they mean the opposite of each other.

So, if "Hamas won a minority of seats" in the most recent election then there CANNOT be "major support for them". Your logic is fault if you assume that any support for a political group somehow equates with a majority of citizens in favor of that group (whether or not they vote for said group).

Huh? I thought he meant "major support" as in A LOT OF support, not as in a majority of.

And if so, I'd agree with him. The fact that Hamas would even get any seats at all clearly shows they have a large amount of support.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE

Huh? I thought he meant "major support" as in A LOT OF support, not as in a majority of.

And if so, I'd agree with him. The fact that Hamas would even get any seats at all clearly shows they have a large amount of support.

I'm working on the assumption that major support for Hamas by the Palestinian peoples would be reflected in their membership numbers in Parliament. That is, major support for Hamas by the Palestinian people would be seen by large number of Hamas members elected the Palestinian Parliament. Since there were only a small number of Hamas members elected I conclude that this equates with only a small number of the Palestinian people supporting Hamas.
What I am getting at is that you claim an example of a small group (Hamas members elected to Parliament) is reflective of a belief by a much larger group (the Palestinian people as a whole) and I don't buy that logic. It is not very frequent that a small part of something is reflective of the whole of it.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy

I'm working on the assumption that major support for Hamas by the Palestinian peoples would be reflected in their membership numbers in Parliament.

No, it's reflected by the fact that they HAVE membership in Parliament in the first place.

That doesn't mean that all or most of the Palestinian people support Hamas; it means enough obviously do that they can get elected to Parliament.

[vmarks]

Also worth noting, Hamas claims that the PA attempts to reduce the success of Hamas.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051001/...l_palestinians

"The election committee intentionally avoided announcing that Fatah, headed by Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas, ran unopposed in some areas to make it appear its candidates had trounced Hamas, said Sami Abu Zuhri, a Hamas spokesman in Gaza. He said, however, that Hamas would not officially challenge the results.

"The announcement by the local election committee was biased," Abu Zuhri said. "It was a maneuver on the part of the election committee to present the numbers in an indirect way to favor one faction, and we will tell our people the truth."

Fatah — under fire for its running a corruption-ridden government — was not expected to make a strong showing in the municipal voting. Hamas, by contrast, has been taking credit for
Israel's recent withdrawal from Gaza, and was expected to do well.

But the militant group's public standing suffered after some of its homemade rockets blew up at a rally last week, killing 21 people and wounding dozens of others. Hamas blamed Israel for the explosion, and fired barrages of rockets at an Israeli town that borders Gaza."

Also worth reading:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.../02/wmid02.xml

^^^ Women's lib in Hamas

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE

No, it's reflected by the fact that they HAVE membership in Parliament in the first place.

That doesn't mean that all or most of the Palestinian people support Hamas; it means enough obviously do that they can get elected to Parliament.

Again, enough support to get a few Hamas candidates elected does NOT equate with your statement that "clearly shows they have a large amount of support".
Enough support != Major support

[BRussell]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE

No, it's reflected by the fact that they HAVE membership in Parliament in the first place.

That doesn't mean that all or most of the Palestinian people support Hamas; it means enough obviously do that they can get elected to Parliament.

I think it's significant because Palestinians are often portrayed as overt supporters of terrorists. This election result suggests that the majority do not support them, despite their difficult situation. Hamas apparently does a lot of "domestic politicking" by supporting social programs and the like for the poor, and they still don't do very well.

Republicans often talk about how the Democratic party has been completely repudiated by the American people, despite the fact that, I believe only a fraction of 1% less people voted for Ds than Rs in the last Congressional election. Hamas won 13 of 104 seats in the Parliament, whereas Fatah won over half of the seats. That's not even close.

I bet some bad people could get a small fraction of the vote here in the US - David Duke won close to half of the vote (and something like 2/3 of the white vote) for governor of Louisiana. It seems pretty clear to me that the Palestinians have rejected Hamas pretty soundly.

[Mark Larr]

The fact they are there at all is a resounding show of support.

All of Hamas needed to be rounded up and publicly executed.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy

Again, enough support to get a few Hamas candidates elected does NOT equate with your statement that "clearly shows they have a large amount of support".
Enough support != Major support

Again, silly semantic arguments. Yes, Hamas has a large amount of support.

You people act like having seats in Parliment (!!!) held by members of a terrorist group is the some logical benchmark of 'support'! It's an insane indicator of just how much support they have that members of a terrorist org are able to secure seats in Parliment AT ALL!

Sorry it's proving so hard for you to grasp.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by Mark Larr

The fact they are there at all is a resounding show of support.

All of Hamas needed to be rounded up and publicly executed.

Or at least jailed. But hey, just having a few of them IN POWER in your government is no big shakes!

Sheesh! Time was when a terrorist group had to do a HECK of lot less than win 13 seats in Parliament (!!!) to be considered having "a lot of support" among the populace! Back in the 'good ol' days' before the new "How many seats of your national goverment must terrorists occupy before you can say they have a lot of support" benchmark!

[vmarks]

Originally Posted by BRussell

I think it's significant because Palestinians are often portrayed as overt supporters of terrorists. This election result suggests that the majority do not support them, despite their difficult situation. Hamas apparently does a lot of "domestic politicking" by supporting social programs and the like for the poor, and they still don't do very well.

Please.

Fatah is a party of terrorists too. It just depends on which batch of terrorists happen to have the most support at the moment.

Fatah regularly claims responsibility for bombings, and it's organization Al-Aqsa Martyr's Brigade which is directly under Fatah's control does too.

Claiming that because Fatah won more seats than Hamas somehow means Palestinians do not overtly support terrorists is hogwash, they just support different ones.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051003/...l_palestinians

"GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip - More than three dozen Palestinian police officers broke into the parliament building in Gaza City on Monday, firing in the air to protest a lack of bullets and equipment in what they said was a humiliating confrontation with Hamas."

EDIT: yahoo changed the story from their earlier text.

Fatah destroyed religious sites, killed Israeli voters at the polling stations, and when in 'ceasefire' had it's Al-Aqsa Martyr's branch commit murder and then bleat to the world that Israel breaks ceasefire.

Let's not kid ourselves, BRussell.

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by vmarks

Please.

Fatah is a party of terrorists too. It just depends on which batch of terrorists happen to have the most support at the moment.

Fatah regularly claims responsibility for bombings, and it's organization Al-Aqsa Martyr's Brigade which is directly under Fatah's control does too.

Claiming that because Fatah won more seats than Hamas somehow means Palestinians do not overtly support terrorists is hogwash, they just support different ones.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051003/...l_palestinians

"GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip - More than three dozen Palestinian police officers broke into the parliament building in Gaza City on Monday, firing in the air to protest a lack of bullets and equipment in what they said was a humiliating confrontation with Hamas."

EDIT: yahoo changed the story from their earlier text.

Fatah destroyed religious sites, killed Israeli voters at the polling stations, and when in 'ceasefire' had it's Al-Aqsa Martyr's branch commit murder and then bleat to the world that Israel breaks ceasefire.

Let's not kid ourselves, BRussell.

Also, along with their 'service' of using violence to "advance" the cause, they also try to mix in some good works for the people. But, the little they are doing good certainly does not make up for the horrors they bring about.

[vmarks]

Originally Posted by mojo2

Also, along with their 'service' of using violence to "advance" the cause, they also try to mix in some good works for the people. But, the little they are doing good certainly does not make up for the horrors they bring about.

The so-called 'good works' that gets them labeled a 'charitable organization' in some apologist EU circles is basically a recruiting method to boost their ranks.

Put it this way, you can't bomb and murder six days a week and then wipe it away with a good deed on the sabbath.

[Taliesin]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE

Again, silly semantic arguments. Yes, Hamas has a large amount of support.

You people act like having seats in Parliment (!!!) held by members of a terrorist group is the some logical benchmark of 'support'! It's an insane indicator of just how much support they have that members of a terrorist org are able to secure seats in Parliment AT ALL!

Sorry it's proving so hard for you to grasp.

For Israel both Fatah and Hamas are terrorist-organisations, the one is just a bit more extreme and seemingly less able to compromise than the other.

Taliesin

[vmarks]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20051005...eupalestinians

The EU is giving Fatah and Hamas an additional quarter billion dollars.

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by vmarks

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20051005...eupalestinians

The EU is giving Fatah and Hamas an additional quarter billion dollars.

I admit I'm not as aware as I should be of all the implications of every move re: Palestine and Israel, but here's a few thoughts...

- Of course this is a humanitarian act and can be applauded on one level...as long as there REALLY IS the necessary accountability for the use of those funds.

- But, on the other hand, it's also rewarding a people who have shown little inclination or ability to get along with Israel, greater means to become a greater threat to Israel.

- I get a funny, "Chamberlain-Hitler" or "Tiger by the Tail" feeling here. It's like Chamberlain, seeking to reach accord with Hitler, from a position of fear, only emboldened him. And when you grab a tiger by the tail you can either ride him or be eaten by him. The EU must think they can ride the state of Palestine, if they aren't actually appeasing them.

- What else CAN be done? To continue to have an impoverished state where there is NO hope for a better life and no other focus than aiming ones own life and time as well as succeeding generation's time and energies at the death and destruction of others is a terrible waste of EVERYONE'S time. efforts, resources and most importantly, LIVES!

If there is economic development in Gaza maybe there CAN be a break to this terrible cycle of violence and destruction, if not the hatred that spawns it.

- I wonder if anyone in the EU has prepared a, "B" "C" or "D" contingency. What IF the $$ goes to arms and not toward economic growth? What IF the economic growth doesn't stem the violence? What IF the Palestinian state makes use of these funds and simply becomes a more powerful, more prosperous but perpetually war-like state? (Think: Klingons)

- Are the funds tied to a cessation or a reduction in attacks on Israel? (I think they SHOULD be! So, if the Palestinians are getting so many hundreds of thousands of dollars a day, going into *hopefully* projects that the AVERAGE would-be terrorist can appreciate and some knuckle-head launches an attack on Israel, that the weight of the WHOLE PALESTINE NATION will come down on him because that stupid act disrupted the flow of $$.)

- But, how long does it take to break that cycle of violence? A few years? A generation? Two? Five? How long will the money continue to flow? Especially if there is no quick perception of results? (Think USA in Iraq)

- Horror of horrors! What if the EU and Palestine become so chummy with this deal, that Palestine becomes willing to do the EU's mercenary work? Can the "pure" motivations of religious hatred and systemic violence be BOUGHT??? Would the Palestinians become the EU's Luca Brassi?

- What would the Israelis reaction to ANY of this be?

- I wonder how ON TOP of this anyone in Washington is?