Shhhh, Don’t Tell Anyone: Hamas Won

hamas33-450x297By Andrew McCarthy:

(Excerpt)

With Obama on the phone egging him on, Netanyahu abased himself. Not only did he apologize to Turkey, he further capitulated to Erdogan’s demand that Israel pay compensation to the Mavi Marmara “victims.” After the apology, Erdogan briefed his Hamas confederates and announcedhe would be visiting them in Gaza next month. Predictably, he has since announced that Netanyahu’s humiliating act of contrition will not be sufficient to restore diplomatic relations between the two nations. Just as predictably, other Islamic states are now preparing demands for apologies and compensation for sundry exercises of Israeli self-defense against jihadist terror.

There has been no shortage of speculation about why Israel caved. Perhaps it was anxiety over Iranian nukes and Syrian tumult — the hope that rapprochement with Turkey would give Washington more maneuvering room to protect Israel’s interests. Perhaps there were financial considerations, including billions potentially to be made in the exportation of natural gas. None of these explanations is very satisfying. But that is beside the point. For Americans, what matters is not what this episode says about shifts in Israeli policy. It is the sea-change in U.S. counterterrorism that most concerns us.

We now know that Hamas has won.

In 2011, Erdogan made a startling pronouncement on Charlie Rose’s PBS program:

Let me give you a very clear message. I don’t see Hamas as a terror organization. Hamas is a political party. And it is an organization. It is a resistance movement trying to protect its country under occupation. So we should not mix terrorist organizations with such an organization.

Really? Is this what we now mean by regular politics: In the 1987 charter by which it proclaimed its existence, Hamas explained that it formed in order to “join its hands with those of all jihad fighters for the purpose of liberating Palestine.” Clarifying that Hamas is “one of the wings of the Muslim Brothers . . . the Muslim Brotherhood Movement … the largest Islamic movement in the modern era,” the charter elaborates:

Our struggle against the Jews is extremely wide-ranging and grave, so much so that it will need all the loyal efforts we can wield, to be followed by further steps and reinforced by successive battalions from the multifarious Arab and Islamic world, until the enemies are defeated and Allah’s victory prevails.

Invoking Islamic scripture, the charter further asserts:

Hamas has been looking forward to implement Allah’s promise whatever time it might take. The prophet, prayer and peace be upon him, said: The time will not come until Muslims will fight the Jews (and kill them); until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, which will cry: O Muslim! there is a Jew hiding behind me, come on and kill him! [Citing authoritative hadiths.]

In its 25 years, Hamas has made good on its promise to kill. Yet Erdogan has been telling Obama since early 2009 that the United States must “redefine” what it means by “terror and terrorist organizations.” It is increasingly obvious that portraying Hamas as a “political party” and a “resistance movement,” rather than a terrorist organization, is one among the “wide range of issues” on which the president finds himself in agreement with the Turkish prime minister.

Yes, nominally, it is still a crime in the United States to provide material support to Hamas. But these days you have a better chance of being prosecuted under those immigration statutes the administration declines to enforce.

Hamas prosecutions went out with the 2008 Holy Land Foundation trial. Since then, the investigation of outfits proved by the Bush Justice Department to be cogs in the Muslim Brotherhood conspiracy to fund and otherwise encourage Hamas’s jihad against Israel have been dropped. Worse, some of those outfits, such as the Islamic Society of North America, are regular guests at the Obama White House. They are consulted in the formulation of Obama foreign policy, which — lo and behold — just happens to favor lavish financial and military support for the Muslim Brotherhood regime in Egypt. As for Obama national-security policy, Islamic-supremacists have been invited to censor the materials used to train our law-enforcement and intelligence agents.

Realistically, how could anyone expect the Obama Justice Department to prosecute the financial support of Hamas when the Obama administration is actively engaged in the financial support of Hamas — sluicing hundreds of millions of dollars in aid to Gaza, fully aware that it is under Hamas’s totalitarian control. In this, too, Obama is in concord with Erdogan, whose regime has similarly backed Hamas with hundreds of millions of dollars — news that comes to us courtesy of Turkey’s grateful friends at the Union of Good.

Until 2009, U.S. policy was straightforward: Hamas was a terrorist organization and America would not deal with it unless and until it acknowledged Israel’s right to exist and convincingly renounced violence. All that has changed, though. Under Obama’s governance, Islamic-supremacists are bankrolled even as they act on their pledge to destroy Israel. Israel, in turn, is expected to apologize.

Our military’s killing of Osama bin Laden, complemented by the controversial drone campaign, has given President Obama cover. The occasional terrorist is taken out, the administration beats its chest, and few notice that al-Qaeda is resurgent, that the administration spends far more time appeasing Islamists than killing terrorists, and that Hamas has won.

Welcome to the next four years.

Read it all at Front Page

Umm Nidal Farhat: Israelis Are Not Civilians and There Are No Prohibition On Killing Them

FARHAT-obit-articleLarge

Palestinian Legislative Council Candidate and Bereaved Mother of Three Hamas Terrorists Umm Nidal Farhat: “Israelis Are Not Civilians and There Are No Prohibition on Killing them. I Am Willing to Sacrifice All My Sons”

Has Obama Gone Soft on Hamas?

obama-hamas-1024x769Front Page- By :

Before Obama’s trip to Israel, he met with two organizations that support Hamas. And one of those organizations provided him with pro-Hamas proposals.

During his trip, his language suggested that his administration was softening its line on Hamas, calling on it not to engage in violence, rather than condemning it.

Elder points out the difference between the way that Obama talked about Hamas and Hezbollah. When referring to Hamas, Obama said;

“That’s why we have made it clear, time and again, that Israel cannot accept rocket attacks from Gaza, and have stood up for Israel’s right to defend itself. And that’s why Israel has a right to expect Hamas to renounce violence and recognize Israel’s right to exist.”

Obama Inc. actually pressured Israel into calling off a ground assault, but let’s skip over the fact check. While Obama does say that Israel has the right to defend itself, he does not condemn Hamas.

Instead he makes a ‘peace process’ like statement that Israel has the right to expect Hamas to renounce violence. (This is not quite the same thing as Obama saying that he demands that Hamas do this.) The statement is meaningless except as a prelude to negotiations. Rather than rejecting Hamas’ existence, Obama is proposing terms on which Israel should negotiate with Hamas.

On the other hand when it comes to Hezbollah, Obama offered a strong condemnation;

I think about five Israelis who boarded a bus in Bulgaria, who were blown up because of where they came from; who were robbed of the ability to live, and love, and raise families. That’s why every country that values justice should call Hezbollah what it truly is – a terrorist organization. Because the world cannot tolerate an organization that murders innocent civilians, stockpiles rockets to shoot at cities, and supports the massacre of men, women and children in Syria.

Apparently the world can tolerate Hamas… but not Hezbollah.

What’s the difference? Focus on the last 10 words. Hamas is part of the Sunni coalition and linked to the Muslim Brotherhood. It’s on the “right side” of the Syrian Civil War. Hezbollah is part of the Shiite coalition. It’s on the “wrong side” of the Syrian Civil War.

And this isn’t a one off. Here is how Obama discussed Hamas in his Ramallah press conference with Abbas.

I would point out that all this stands in stark contrast to the misery and repression that so many Palestinians continue to confront in Gaza — because Hamas refuses to renounce violence; because Hamas cares more about enforcing its own rigid dogmas than allowing Palestinians to live freely; and because too often it focuses on tearing Israel down rather than building Palestine up.  We saw the continuing threat from Gaza again overnight, with the rockets that targeted Sderot.  We condemn this violation of the important cease-fire that protects both Israelis and Palestinians — a violation that Hamas has a responsibility to prevent.

This is being described as a condemnation, but really it’s Obama treating Hamas like a legitimate government that he expects to behave according to American standards.

It’s long way from treating Hamas like a terrorist group. This actually represents the growing legitimization of Hamas.

 

PA Continues to Advocate for Israel’s Destruction

Palestinians-rip-an-American-flag-during-a-protest-against-the-visit-of-the-U.S.-President-Barack-Obama-AP

Palestinians rip an American flag during a protest against the visit of President Barack Obama / AP

by IPT News  •  Mar 20, 2013 at 6:14 pm

Hamas: We are Not Terrorists; We Just Want to Destroy Israel

cmimg_32400by Khaled Abu Toameh:

Hamas wants be dropped from the U.S. State Department list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations not because it has changed, but because it feels that the world has changed, and that many naïve Westerners are now willing to tolerate its radical ideology and terrorism.

Hamas leaders are working hard these days to have their movement removed from the U.S. State Department list for Foreign Terrorist Organizations.

The Hamas leaders are hoping to persuade a number of European Union countries to support their bid.

Hamas wants to be removed from the list without changing its strategy or charter, which call for jihad [holy war] and which do not recognize Israel’s right to exist.

Hamas is also not prepared to dismantle its armed group, Izaddin al-Kassam, as part of its effort to persuade the US and EU to drop it from the list of terrorist groups.

Nor is Hamas prepared to stop smuggling weapons or give up thousands of rockets and mortars that it possesses in various parts of the Gaza Strip.

And of course Hamas is not prepared to renounce violence in the context of its effort to seek legitimacy in the international community.

The Hamas initiative comes at a time when senior officials of the movement, including Khaled Mashaal, continue to talk about their dream of replacing Israel with an Islamic state. In addition, they are continuing to call on Palestinians to abide by the “armed resistance” as the only option for achieving their goal.

Ironically, the Hamas request to be removed from the list of terrorist groups coincides with reports about the Islamist movement’s involvement in terror activities in neighboring Egypt.

According to these reports, Hamas was behind the August 2012 killing of 16 Egyptian border guards in Sinai. Hamas has also dispatched thousands of its men to Cairo to protect Muslim Brotherhood President Mohamed Morsi against his political opponents, the reports revealed.

Although Hamas has denied the reports, there are increased signs that the movement is cooperating with other Islamic fundamentalist groups in Sinai to turn the peninsula into a base for jihadists from different parts of the world. Some of these jihadists are believed to be linked to groups that are affiliated with Al-Qaeda.

Hamas claims that it has won the secret backing of a number of EU governments — a claim denied by the EU.

The Hamas demand was first raised by the movement’s prime minister, Ismail Haniyeh, during a meeting with European supporters in the Gaza Strip last month.

Read more at Gatestone Institute

Judge Clears Path for Trial Against French Bank’s Hamas Accounts

by Paul Alster
Special to IPT News
March 5, 2013:

What Hamas Means by ‘Peace’ and ‘Truce’

 

israel-explosion-apby John Guandolo at Breitbart:

If someone walked up to you and asked you if you would like a sandwich, and you replied in the affirmative, where would the disconnect be if he punched you in the nose?  The disconnect would be in your understanding of the word “sandwich.”  While the word is in English, your assailants understanding of the word is obviously quite different from yours.  Understanding Hamas’ use of terms (and the entire Islamic world’s understanding of certain terms) – in English – is much the same way.

The Western understanding of the words “Peace” and “Truce” are universally understood – in the West.  These terms are also understood in the Islamic world.  But the Western world and the Islamic world do not define these terms in ways that are even vaguely similar.

In the West, “Peace” is freedom from war or strife or an agreement to end war” (source:  Webster’s).  While some may argue true peace must be brought about by one side being defeated so hostilities do not immediately resume, the point is made.  A “Truce” on the other hand is a cessation of fighting by mutual agreement (also Webster’s).

All of Islam – from doctrinal books of Islamic Law to first grade Islamic school texts across the globe – define “Islam” as a complete way of life (social, cultural, military, religious, and political) governed by Islamic Law (Shariah).  One-hundred percent of all published Islamic Law obliges Jihad until the entire world is subordinated to Islamic Law.  One-hundred percent of all published Islamic Law defines Jihad as “warfare” against non-Muslims.  This in and of itself is disturbing, but let us focus on the topic at hand.

(Author’s note:  for those not clear on this, 100% means “All.”  There is no published Islamic law of any century which does not conform with the above facts.)

Islamic Law divides the entire world into two parts:  the dar al Islam (the house or abode of Peace), and the dar al harb (the house of war).  Those not living in Islamic controlled territories under Shariah (Islamic Law) live in the dar al harb – the abode of war – and are “harbi” or “enemy personnel.”  Islamic Law obliges Jihad until the dar al harb is obliterated and only the dar al Islam exists.  That is when, according to Islamic Law – which Hamas touts as its guide for all it does – there is PEACE.

Islamic Law states a “truce” means “a peace treaty with those hostile to Islam, involving a cessation of fighting for a specific period of time…Truces are permissible, not obligatory…There must be some interest served in making a truth other than mere preservation of the status quo…Interests that justify making a truce are such things as Muslim weakness because of lack of number or materiel, or the hope of an enemy becoming Muslim.” (Umdat al Salik, Islamic Sacred Law, (1368), Book O, Justice, 09.16 – published in Maryland, distributed nationwide by Islamic organizations).

In other words, the only reason for the truce by Hamas with Israel right now, is that they are getting their butts handed to them by the Israelis and need to regroup, rearm, and strategize.  Since that has also been what we have historically seen from them for the last 25 years, there is also a great deal of evidence to support Hamas’ thought process today.

Therefore, anyone advocating that Israel enter into a “cease fire” with Hamas either does not understand what they are talking about, or are looking to give Hamas an advantage over the Israelis.  And, since the form of “Peace” promoted by Hamas includes destroying all governments which are non-Islamic and the destruction of Israel, there can never be a valid peace between Hamas and Israel.  Never.  To argue that this is possible is to be divorced from reality.

 

The Truth About Hamas’ Smuggling Tunnels

by Paul Alster:

The Hamas-Egyptian Alliance

hamas morsiby Khaled Abu Toameh:

The collapse of the Mubarak regime has been a great blessing for Hamas, which has emerged as a major player. Now Hamas knows that it can always rely on Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood to stay in power and increase Hamas’s influence.

Did Hamas dispatch 7,000 militiamen from the Gaza Strip to Egypt to protect President Mohamed Morsi, who is currently facing a popular uprising?

Reports that appeared in a number of Egyptian opposition media outlets in the past few days claimed that the militiamen entered Egypt through the smuggling tunnels along the border with the Gaza Strip.

The reports quoted unidentified Egyptian security officials as saying that the Hamas militiamen had been spotted in the Egyptian border town of Rafah before they headed toward Cairo, to shore up the Muslim Brotherhood regime of Morsi, which Hamas may have feared was in danger of collapse.

The officials claimed that the Hamas militiamen had been deployed in a number of sensitive locations in the Egyptian capital, including the Al-Ittihadiyeh Presidential Palace, as part of a plan to protect the Muslim Brotherhood regime.

Hamas, an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood organization, is a staunch supporter of the Morsi regime.

This week, a Gulf newspaper Akhbar Al-Khaleej published what it described as “secret documents” proving that Hamas, with the financial backing of Qatar, had plans to send hundreds of militiamen to Egypt to help Morsi’s regime.

One of the classified documents, signed by Hamas’s armed wing, Izaddin al-Kassam, talks about the need to send “warriors to help our brothers in Egypt who are facing attempts by the former regime [of Hosni Mubarak] to return to power.”

Read more at Gatestone Institute

Related articles

The New ‘Silk Route;’ Weapons to Gaza and Beyond

by Paul Alster: