Hamas leader greeted in Tunisia by crowd chanting "Kill the Jews!"

Ismail Haniyeh was greeted at Tunis-Carthage Airport yesterday by several hundred supporters chanting, among other things, "Kill the Jews!"


(Hat-tip: Point of no return.)

Hamas says it will never recognize Israel

from Reuters via Haaretz:

Two top Hamas leaders made their first appearances at public events since Israel's Gaza war on Friday, signaling defiance of rival Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas as he discussed peace prospects with a U.S. envoy.

"We cannot, we will not, and we will never recognize the enemy in any way, shape or form," Mahmoud Zahar, one of the two leaders, said in a mosque sermon broadcast on the Islamist movement's radio station.

Ismail Haniyeh, who heads the Hamas administration in Gaza, spoke at another mosque. As a precaution against assassination, both men had gone underground during a 22-day offensive Israel launched on Dec. 27 to counter Palestinian rocket fire. Their rare statements since have been mostly in pre-recorded speeches.


In the Israeli-occupied West Bank, where Abbas's secular Fatah faction holds sway, the Palestinian president met U.S President Barack Obama's Middle East envoy George Mitchell.

Mitchell is sounding out Abbas and Israel on the possibilities for Palestinian statehood despite long-running Fatah-Hamas tensions and a new right-leaning Israeli government that has shown little appetite for ceding West Bank land.

In meetings with Israeli leaders on Thursday, Mitchell stressed Obama's commitment to the goal of a two-state solution, "in which a Palestinian state is living in peace alongside the Jewish state of Israel", ending the decades-old conflict.

"That is our objective. That is what we will pursue vigorously in the coming months," Mitchell said

Mitchell's talk in Ramallah come after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu -- who opposed Israel's unilateral 2005 withdrawal from Gaza, arguing that it would stoke Hamas hostility - stated he wants talks with the Palestinians to focus on security and economic matters for now, not sovereignty.

An Israeli official said Netanyahu also told Mitchell that any negotiations on a two-state accord should be conditioned on the Palestinians recognizing Israel as a Jewish state.

Senior Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat dismissed that demand as part of an effort by the two-week-old Israeli government to dodge commitments made by its predecessor to negotiate thorny issues such as statehood borders, and the future of Jerusalem and Palestinian refugees.

The Palestinians are themselves unable to present a united front as Hamas refuses to accept permanent coexistence with Israel and is shunned by Western powers as a terrorist group.

Hamas won a Palestinian legislative election in 2006, forming a unity government with Fatah that was dissolved by Abbas after the Islamists seized control of Gaza in 2007.

Egypt has been trying to arrange a new factional alliance after brokering an end to the Gaza war, which killed hundreds of Palestinian civilians and 13 Israelis, most of them troops.

Haniyeh, who was formerly prime minister under Abbas, hailed the conflict as a "big victory".

"Hamas is a big movement, the Palestinian resistance factions are deeply rooted among the people," he told reporters.

Juan Cole's libels against Israel continue

Juan Cole, on his blog, the humorously misnamed Informed Comment, has baselessly claimed that Israel has suspended the right to free speech.  He writes here of what he calls "(d)raconian, almost martial-law repressive measures taken by the Israeli state to curb freedom of speech at this moment".  Would someone tell me exactly what free speech restrictions Israelis allegedly suffer under?   Israelis are free to debate, protest, publish opposing viewpoints and exercise all the freedoms any resident of a democracy should expect to have. They exercise these rights all the time, as anyone with any knowledge of the situation knows.  Why does Cole feel the need to invent this sort of charge?

And where is Cole's outrage over the lack of free speech under Hamas?  Does he believe that Gazans have been free to exercise free speech under Hamas, or does he simply not care about their rights?  Was he outraged when Hamas assassinated those who expressed support for Fatah?  Why did that merit not a single mention on "Informed Comment"?

Where was Cole's outrage over Hamas' summary expulsion of Amira Hass, a pro-Palestinian Israel journalist who had been reporting from Gaza (albeit under Hamas censorship and with 24-hour-a-day Hamas handlers overseeing her activities and restricting her access to interview Palestinians)?  (Read here and here.)  Hass had been in Gaza for only two weeks operating under truly draconian, martial-law restrictions before mildly critical articles (read an example here) led Hamas to kick her out.  Please note that Hamas was upset with Hass precisely because she reported on their violations against Palestinians' basic human rights to freedom of speech and freedom of religion.

Cole would rather invent charges about Israel's violations of civil rights than report the real offenses committed by Hamas.  Cole apparently does not consider those offenses noteworthy.

The funny part is, after making his absurd charge concerning Israel's "draconian martial-law" crackdown, Cole goes on to site several examples of anti-war demonstrations in Israel, including demonstrations by Muslims and Druze.  Now that he has informed us of these exceptions to the alleged rule, can he site a single example of a Israeli demonstration that was prevented?  Can Cole cite a single Israeli anti-war column that was censored? He seems to have a much easier time finding examples of exceptions than evidence of the rule. 

Sabeel Founder Ateek: Hamas preaches "liberation theology"

Rev. Dr. Naim Ateek, the founder and head of the purported Christian peace group called Sabeel, has reportedly given his blessing to Hamas. According to Michelle J. Kinnucan, Ateek made a pro-Hamas statement at a Friends of Sabeel conference in Birmingham, Michigan. (Read here. WARNING: the linked website may contain hate speech. Links in the blockquote were preserved from the original post.)

During the course of his introductory remarks, Ateek ... noted that Hamas and Sabeel came into being in Palestine at roughly the same time in response to the First Intifada. While taking pains to distance himself from Hamas on the issue of violence, the Rev. Dr. Ateek characterized Hamas as an Islamic "liberation theology movement," drawing applause from some in the crowd of about 250...

(Ateek) called upon the mostly Christian lay people and clergy present to "stand in solidarity with us." He also declared that the "all" of the 4-7 million Palestinian refugees "have the right to return" to Palestine ... (and) said he supported "divestments, boycotts, anything that is nonviolent" as means to exert pressure on Israel...

Ateek also referred to himself as the leader of the movement which he called "The Palestinian Theology of Liberation." (His leadership role in a movement which includes Hamas will undoubtedly come as news to Hamas.)

Ateek was the keynote speaker at the pro-Palestinian conference which took place in September at the First Presbyterian Church in Birmingham, Michigan, a suburb of Detroit. Other speakers included Anna Baltzer, Ilan Pappe, Don Wagner, Joel Kovel, Chris Hedges and Phyllis Bennis. (Read here and here.)

Several of these speakers are Jews who have made careers out of anti-Israel activism. For example, according to her website, Anna Baltzer has given more than 500 anti-Israel speeches or radio interviews between May, 2005 and the present. That works out to more than 12 presentations per month on average. (Read here.) She is invariably billed for these events as representing a Jewish perspective.

Grain of salt alert: the author of the blog post which reported on Ateek's statement concerning Hamas, Michalle J. Kinnucan, has a history of publishing anti-Semitic innuendo, as discussed here. The website on which her piece was posted, called "Zionists Out of the Peace Movement", has a long record of anti-Jewish polemics, including promoting demonstrations outside a local synagogue during services (read here). The blog's motto reads: "The main purpose of this blog is to expose Zionists subverting the peace movement, especially in Michigan. 'Progressive Zionism' is to Zionism what 'progressive Nazism' would have been to Nazism."

Hamas blames "Jewish lobby" for financial crisis

from AFP: Hamas blames US 'Jewish lobby' for financial crisis

The Palestinian Islamist movement Hamas which rules the Gaza Strip on Tuesday blamed what it called a "Jewish lobby" in the United States for the global financial crisis.

Hamas spokesman Fawzi Barhum said in a statement that the crisis was due to "bad administrative and financial management and a bad banking system put into place and controlled by the Jewish lobby."

While pumping hundreds of billions of dollars into a rescue package, US President George W. Bush has remained silent about "the Jewish lobby that put the US banking and financial sector into place," he said.

He said the lobby "controls the US elections and defines the foreign policy of any new administration in a manner that allows it to retain control of the American government and economy."

Ed Koch backs Obama, calls Palin "scary'"

from Politico.com: Ben Smith's Blog: Koch backs Obama, calls Palin 'scary'

Former New York Mayor Ed Koch, who endorsed and worked for George W. Bush in 2004, is endorsing Obama today, NY1 first reported.

I asked Koch just now what prompted the move.

"The designation of Palin to be vice president," he said. "She's scary."

He said he was alarmed by the report that she'd triggered a conflict with the local librarian in Wasilla, Alaska by inquiring about the possibility of banning books.

"Any time someone goes to the library and says, 'I want to ban books,' and the librarian says 'no,' and she threatens to fire them -- that's scary," he said.

(Palin at the time said she was just inquiring about the library's policy on banning books, with no aim of actually banning any. "It was a rhetorical quesiton -- nothing more," the McCain-Palin campaign said in a memo yesterday. And no books were banned, the town says.)

In an endorsement statement, Koch wrote that "the issue for me is who will best protect and defend America" and that both parties were strong on terrorism.

I have concluded that the country is safer in the hands of Barack Obama, leader of the Democratic Party and protector of the philosophy of that party. Protecting and defending the U.S. means more than defending us from foreign attacks. It includes defending the public with respect to their civil rights, civil liberties and other needs, e.g., national health insurance, the right of abortion, the continuation of Social Security, gay rights, other rights of privacy, fair progressive taxation and a host of other needs and rights.

If the vice president were ever called on to lead the country, there is no question in my mind that the experience and demonstrated judgment of Joe Biden is superior to that of Sarah Palin. Sarah Palin is a plucky, exciting candidate, but when her record is examined, she fails miserably with respect to her views on the domestic issues that are so important to the people of the U.S., and to me. Frankly, it would scare me if she were to succeed John McCain in the presidency.

Koch said he'd visited six states for Bush in 2004, primarily Florida, but also several others. ("Why they sent me to Iowa, I don't know.") He said he'd be happy to campaign for Obama "if they ask me to."

Koch also said:

One foreign policy issue that particularly concerned me in 2004 was the security of Israel. I thought in 2004 that issue was better left to President George W. Bush, and I believe I was right. President Bush understood the need to support the security of Israel and did so. I did not feel that way about Senator John Kerry.

That is not an issue in this election. Both parties and their candidates have made clear, before and during this election campaign their understanding of the need to support Israel and oppose acts of terrorism waged against it by Hamas and other Muslim supporters of terrorism.

Housekeeping, Hamas style...

What's it like to wait for a bus in Sderot?

If you wonder what it's like to wait for a bus knowing that, at any moment, a Hamas missile may get "lucky", take a look at this:

from ISRAEL WITHOUT IFS OR BUTS: "The new fortified bus stops in rocket-plagued Sderot"


The Defense Ministry deployed 120 fortified bus stops in Sderot Wednesday, built to protect citizens from Qassam rocket fire. The decision to safeguard the bus stops was made by Defense Minister Ehud Barak, following his visit to Sderot last week.

The bus stops, which are made of a think layer of cement, were placed all over the rocket-plagued city.

"We have discovered that most of the injuries and fatalities involving Qassam rockets were caused by shrapnel wounds while the victims were out on the street," a Defense Ministry official said.

"These bus stops will protect not only people who are waiting for the bus but also those who are caught outside when the 'Color Red' alert goes off."

The ministry is also examining the possible fortification of farmers' packing houses in the communities surrounding Ashkelon as well as bolstering the amount of security forces in the area. (Haaretz)

"We eagerly welcome the Operation LifeShield initiative, a viable solution that has come at such a critical time for Sderot," stated Sderot's mayor, Eli Moyal.

Norway says it has severed Hamas ties | Jerusalem Post

from the Jerusalem Post:

President Shimon Peres had planned to lambaste the Norwegian Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr-Store over Norway's contacts with Hamas and Hizbullah when the two men met in Jerusalem on Monday.

But he was stopped in his tracks when Gahr-Store told him that Norway had now severed the contacts it had opened with Hamas during the period of the Palestinian unity government.

Nonetheless, Peres did make the point that it was important to clarify to Hamas that no nation (in the free world) would finance terror or the firing of rockets into Sderot and the other residential areas close to Gaza.

It was essential to emphasize that the international community would not condone terror or the violation of democracy through the use of violence as practiced by Hamas, said Peres, who also noted the Hamas connection with the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Hizbullah in Lebanon. There are also indications, he added, that Hamas is affiliated with al-Qaida.

Peres specified that this message needed to be stressed by Socialist International - which encompasses 190 parties from around the world, and where Gahr-Store is co-chairman of the Middle East Committee. Also visiting was Gahr-Store's fellow co-chairman, Piero Fasimo, of Italy's Democrats of the Left party. Peres is himself a former vice president and former honorary chairman of Socialist International, and was an active member for 30 years.

In contrast to his comments on Islamic extremist groups, Peres took an extremely positive stance with regard to Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas and Prime Minister Salam Fayyad, who he said desire true peace and have developed sound social, political and economic policies.

The real threat to world peace, said Peres, is nuclear terror, and therefore everything possible must be done to stop the Iranian nuclear program. The most effective tool, in his view, would be a worldwide application of economic sanctions. If the free world took a strong united stance, he said, "We can achieve the goal of safeguarding world peace."

At the outset of the meeting, Gahr-Store said that Socialist International was strongly committed to supporting the peace process and contributing to Middle East peace.

His colleagues were interested in meeting with Peres, he said, "because you always give us an enlightened perspective."

Peres responded that, as president, he was no longer a member of any party or any organization. "But that does not mean that we cannot continue the dialogue."

Alan Johnston and Hamas

A major defeat in the war to defend the free world, Melanie Phillips in The Spectator.co.uk

Shortly after the release of Alan Johnston from Gaza the website of Conflicts Forum, a group advocating engagement with Islamists and which is run by the former MI6 officer Alastair Crooke, posted a fascinating transcript. Under the title ‘Hamas briefing’, it was a conversation between Michael Ancram, the former Tory Northern Ireland minister, and Osama Hamdan, a senior representative of Hamas, which took place secretly in Beirut in June while Johnston was still in captivity.

Hamdan suggested Fatah was behind the kidnap — in particular, Fatah’s security minister Mohammed Dahlan — and said it had three times thwarted Hamas attempts to rescue Johnston. ‘The most important thing,’ he said, ‘is that our people know him [Johnston] well, they know him well. I’ve talked yesterday to our [person there in Gaza], he saw him dozens of times, not in public, he visited him in his office ...they respect him.’

Mr Ancram, who says this was his third meeting with Hamas since last autumn, claims he was acting purely from his personal belief in talking to them. He had approached the controversial Crooke to facilitate these meetings simply because he had the necessary contacts in Beirut.

Nevertheless, his encounter with Hamdan has been used by Conflicts Forum to promote the cause of Hamas, which has been enormously boosted by its role in getting Johnston freed.

According to Hamas — an account uncritically swallowed by the Western media — Johnston was kidnapped by a criminal Gaza gang, the Dagmoush family, also known as the Army of Islam, which was said to be at odds with Hamas and to have possible links to al-Qa’eda.

Hamas eventually made a deal with the Army of Islam’s principal protagonist Mumtaz Dagmoush and Johnston was escorted out of captivity by jubilant Hamas officials, with the British Foreign Secretary’s praise ringing in their ears and the Western media now falling over itself to promote their cause.

But this account is highly improbable. The claim that Hamas was unconnected with Johnston’s kidnappers is wrong. The evidence points instead to an elaborate piece of manipulation, with Hamas using the kidnap to open a line of communication with Britain (as its Gaza leader, Ismail Haniyeh, boasted last week).

The government not only sanctioned an informal visit to Britain by a senior Hamas official, Ghazi Hamad, but the UK Consul-General in Jerusalem, Richard Makepeace, met Ismail Haniyeh in Gaza to ask for his help in freeing Johnston.

In doing so, the Western embargo on contact with Hamas was broken — an important step in Hamas’s strategy of gaining international legitimacy, and integral to its plan to undermine Mahmoud Abbas, take over the West Bank and further its goal of Islamising the region.

The Hamas claim that Dagmoush conspired with Dahlan and Fatah elements to kidnap Johnston is highly implausible. Instead, it is much more likely that Dagmoush operated with the knowledge and at least tacit approval of Hamas.

To understand how this may have worked requires some grasp of the byzantine Palestinian terror networks, of their tactic of operating through front organisations, and of the fact that they may be feuding and allying with each other simultaneously.

Dagmoush is a commander in a Palestinian umbrella terrorist group called the Popular Resistance Committees (PRC), at whose core are Gaza’s criminal clans.

Although its early attacks were sponsored by Yasser Arafat and the ‘Fatah Tanzim’, the PRC has traditionally hired itself out to the highest bidder. After Arafat’s death in 2005 it forged a strategic alliance with Hamas which provides it with funding, training, arms and ammunition. The PRC has often served as a front for Hamas, which has outsourced to it numerous terror operations against both Israel and Fatah. As with the kidnapping of Alan Johnston, these operations have afforded Hamas several levels of plausible deniability.

The PRC was established in 2000 by various ideologues including a terrorist called Abu Samhadana. Its armed wing was behind the October 2003 bombing of an American convoy in Gaza. Before the Israelis killed him last year, Hamas offered Samhadana the position of security minister. After he was killed Dagmoush took over the PRC’s armed wing, rebranded it the ‘Army of Islam’ and identified it with Sunni extremist factions. Last year a PRC leader, Abu Yussuf al Qoqa, admitted that his organisation was ‘fully co-ordinated’ with Hamas, aided it in practical and political matters and identified with its Islamic ideology.

Since 2005 the PRC/Army of Islam has been attacking Fatah on behalf of Hamas. On 7 September 2005, under the leadership of Dagmoush — with assistance from senior Hamas operatives — the PRC murdered Moussa Arafat, Fatah’s former commander of military intelligence in Gaza and Mahmoud Abbas’s special adviser.

When al Qoqa was killed last year, the PRC blamed Fatah and Dahlan. Last year, it announced the establishment of a special unit to assassinate Dahlan; and recently Dagmoush claimed that he and Hamas had planned to assassinate Dahlan on at least five occasions.

The PRC, Army of Islam and Hamas also acted together in kidnapping the Fox News television crew last year and the Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, who has now been handed over to the sole keeping of Hamas.

Since the PRC has acted as Hamas’s hit-squad against Fatah and Dahlan, Dagmoush would hardly have kidnapped Johnston at their behest. That event seems instead to be but the most spectacular in the series of co-ordinated PRC/Hamas operations carried out under the aegis of the Army of Islam.

A Hamas spokesman, Ayman Taha, has acknowledged its past co-operation with the Army of Islam, but claims that ended after Shalit’s kidnapping. There are certainly tensions between them — Dagmoush himself has claimed that Hamas failed to deliver on its promises to him.

But since Johnston was so close to Hamas it is naive to think that Dagmoush would have kidnapped him without receiving at least tacit approval from his powerful patron. And although Hamas said immediately it knew who was holding him, it did nothing for many weeks — although its closeness to the Army of Islam enabled it to stop them killing him.

Read the rest at the Spectator... or at Melanie Phillips' blog