Palestinian infighting

Ping Chow Chi

Mairt wrote:

The Pals can't terrorise and bully their way into being a country, pure and simple.

Its worked for others in the past ..... including the Israelies themselves.

Akrasia wrote:

They could just do what they did in Lebanon and mandate that there has to always be a Jewish majority in Parliament and say that the President has to be Jewish (and then allocate a minor office to be exclusively muslim to pacify resistance)

then you can pretend you're inclusive and democratic while ensuring that your own faction always keeps a grip on power

ahhh, I forgot how sneaky people in power can be

Judt

Ohh can we please stop having the stupid old "Is it Israel or is it Palestine?" debate. Anyone can twist those facts whatever way they want, the fact of the matter is that the Israeli's are big dog and the Palestinians are not. After that all I give a f*** about is the heaps of shrapnel I got to bring home from the last sightseeing tour.

So, that issue aside - because really it just goes round and around - the Palestinians and their infighting, well it's normally the way - too many big fish in a small pond tend to have a go like that, forget who their uniting enemy is and simply fight one another. Then they're exhausted and their ultimate enemy can just trounce them.

For the Israeli's this is a welcome break I daresay. Better the Palestinians use their rockets on one another than Israel. The Palestinians have now screwed themselves back about twenty years. Tough luck, I guess. But nobody can blame this one on Israel, unless of course somebody can send us to liberialconspiracytheories.com and point out the Mossad in the crowds in Gaza.

arybvtcw0eolkf

So what are you guys saying, that its ok to launch suicide attacks against innocent Jew's in Israel, or fire Katyusha rockets accross the Lebanese border and Qassam rockets accross the Gaza into Jewish town's just because the Israeli's had the Hagnuk (sp'ing) underground movement fighting the British mandate?.

And no one has answered my question. If this land belongs to 'Palestinians' why wasn't there a Pal independent movement against the Jordanian's and the Eygptian's pre '67?.

Victor

Mairt wrote:

And no one has answered my question. If this land belongs to 'Palestinians' why wasn't there a Pal independent movement against the Jordanian's and the Eygptian's pre '67?.

Aside from your loaded question, the PLO was formed in, I think, 1963.

Ping Chow Chi

Mairt wrote:

And no one has answered my question. If this land belongs to 'Palestinians' why wasn't there a Pal independent movement against the Jordanian's and the Eygptian's pre '67?.

There where though....

We must defend Palestine". Similarly, the Second Congress of Muslim-Christian Associations (December 1920), passed a resolution calling for an independent Palestine; they then wrote a long letter to the League of Nations about "Palestine, land of Miracles and the supernatural, and the cradle of religions", demanding, amongst other things, that a "National Government be created which shall be responsible to a Parliament elected by the Palestinian People, who existed in Palestine before the war."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinians

Could I ask what do you think should happen to he people living in Gaza and the Westbank, seing as you do not think that they should have their own country?

Padraig Mor

Judt wrote:

Better the Palestinians use their rockets on one another than Israel. The Palestinians have now screwed themselves back about twenty years. Tough luck, I guess. But nobody can blame this one on Israel, unless of course somebody can send us to liberialconspiracytheories.com and point out the Mossad in the crowds in Gaza.

The ignorance being displayed about these events in the media and in internet posts is quite shocking. This 'infighting' is a coup BLATANTLY and OBVIOUSLY engineered in Washington and Tel Aviv. Quite how anyone can think otherwise is beyond me...

redspider

Whilst the Palestine state and the Israeli state are worthwhile debates/discussions in themselves, I think the focus of this thread should be kept to the infighting question, as in the struggle between Fatah and Hamas.

The recent developments:

A new emergency government was formed at the weekend, in which the militant Islamic group, Hamas, was excluded. Mr Abbas sacked the previous Government after Hamas took control of The Gaza Strip. The US and the European Union have already pledged to restore direct financial aid and normalise relations with the new administration.

I dont think its a good move for all the external powers, and I understand it's nearly everyone, as in the UN, Russia, China, EU, US, etc (and indeed Israel), opening up relations with the new Fatah-only government and releasing funds and aid as well, resources which have been cut-off since Hamas gained a majority.

What would seem to be fact is that Hamas won an election fair and square, from what I understand, it wasnt rigged, there were observers, etc, and democracies should respect that irregardless if the winning party is seen by many as militant or indeed a terrorist organisation, as the US, Israel and the EU have done.

So Hamas have a mandate of at least 1.5 million people (out of 4m) and perhaps as high as 2.5m. That is something that just cant be put down as a few mad terrorists - it is a people.

This recognition of the new Fatah-only 'rump' government by these external powers is an external influence on a strained democratic situation. Obviously Hamas have been a thorn in the side of many. They are prevalent in Lebanon as well, and it remains to be seen how things play out in the West Bank, if they have sufficient numbers (or desire) to cause mayhem there. But they just cant be ignored or excluded, no matter how unpalatable.

If there is anything that has been learned over the last 100's of years of conflict and human-self-killing, its that keeping talking and relations open is by far the better option, rather than bombing, using force, etc.

I think the EU, UN, US, etc should have tried to show more restraint and impartiality and should not have favoured one side or the other. For one thing, the blockage of aid and stoppage of funds in the first place after Hamas gained a majority shouldnt have happened. That blockage may have in fact triggered this latest bout of violence as desperate people with reduced resources do desperate things. Its one of my theorems, wealthy people (eg: Switzerland) seldom have a revolution, as the people are too much enjoying the good life and busy counting their money.

In a way, this 'put-down' by the external powers of Hamas is like what the British did in NI when SF started gaining against SDLP - the British Authorities did something similar and wrote them off as radicals. They werent even allowed to appera on TV. But over time SF garnered more support and the rest (including ceasfires and cessation of violence) is history.

In the Palestinian territories/'nation', we are seeing something similar happen, as in a swing of genunine support by the people from Fatah to Hamas. Some of this is as a result after the death of Arafat who held the sometimes ragbag of Palestinian factions together in very strained circumstances. That Arafat 'miracle' is now falling apart.

As unpalatable as that may be, even as dangerous it may be, it is beholden upon external powers to respect the democratic process and let it 'play out'. As long as all of the people are being represented fairly, then we have to respect that. And so far, the US, the EU (ie: us!), and even the UN are involved and influencing at a level which is closer to meddling than an active and interested and supportive observer.

Just some thoughts ....

redspider

Padraig Mor

Just to expand on the 'coup' before I get accused of subscribing to liberalconspiracytheories.com....

Short version….
1. Palestinians elect a government.
2. American and Israeli backed groups take over the government.

Long version…..
In January ’06, the Palestinians voted – in both the West Bank and Gaza – Hamas as their government. The general view is that they were not voting for an Islamic ‘Hamastan’ but for change from Fatah rule, who had become more and more corrupt and, well, useless over the decades.
The response from the ‘international community’ was amazing. Shock. Awe. How could the Palestinians vote for a bunch of ‘terrorists’? This ignored the fact that Hamas had been on ceasefire for some time at this stage. So it was decided that the people of Palestine would be punished for their choice. Reasons had to be found to camouflage the attack on Palestinian democracy. Four are generally given:
Hamas does not recognise the right of Israel to exist
A particularly insidious half truth. Firstly, Hamas made several noises, beginning shortly after its election, about recognising Israel in some format. Secondly, Israel has never defined her borders. How can you recognise a state that won’t tell you where it ends?

Hamas has not renounced violence
True – technically. However, at the time of election it had been on ceasefire for several months, despite continual Israeli provocation. Its ceasefire has largely held since then, save for a few occasions where they have responded to intense Israeli aggression. The ineffectual and generally injury-free rocket attacks across the border are usually claimed by Islamic Jihad IIRC, as have the few suicide bombers (2? 3?) in the last few years. While I’m sure there is some overlap in membership, Hamas is not Islamic Jihad.

Hamas refuses to abide by previous peace agreements.
The Oslo accords are widely recognised by all sides as dead in the water. This would explain the fact that Israel refuses to abide by them either.

Hamas is committed to the destruction Israel.
True – again technically. Their constitution calls for Israel’s destruction. So what? As mentioned, they have talked peace (only to be rebuffed). The best comparison I can think of is Articles 2 and 3 of the Irish constitution. Remember them? They claimed Northern Ireland for the Republic. But it was a poise – we didn’t really mean it. And we got rid of them as part of the peace process. Is it inconceivable that Hamas would do the same?

So using these excuses, the Palestinians were squeezed, particularly in Gaza. The Israelis refused to pass on tax revenues owed to the Palestinian government and ‘the West’ cut off aid and contacts. Due to decades of Fatah rule, the majority of local government employees were allied to the movement. Hamas now had no money to pay them. They could not buy food for their families. And so the ‘divide and rule’ tactic began…

Israel implemented an ever tightening blockade on Gaza, blocking food and medicine. They increased their attacks on ‘militants’ (i.e. Hamas members), civilians and civilian infrastructure (which had been ongoing all along), on the pretext of responding to rocket attacks. Around this time (a year or so ago) NGOs began warning of a ‘humanitarian crisis’ in Gaza – it’s only gotten worse since. Then, in August, Israel launched pretty much all out war on the people of Gaza (naturally in the guise of responding to attacks). They blew up the electricity generation station, which is still not repaired leading to only sporadic power in Gaza. They kidnapped several democratically elected Hamas parliament members. All along, Israel and the West refused to talk to Hamas (the legitimate government of the Palestinians, lest we forget).

And then, over a period, the issue faded from the headlines. The Palestinians, especially in Gaza, were suffering more and more. Nobody really wanted to know. Their parliament couldn’t rule effectively as a quorum was difficult to establish due to the number of Hamas deputies in Israeli jails. Fatah government employees became more and more resentful, blaming Hamas for their hardship. The US and Israel continue to ignore Hamas, while making noises in support of the ineffectual Abbas of Fatah. The Israelis turn a blind eye while the Saudis start to arm Fatah. The Americans arm and fund Fatah themselves. Emboldened, Fatah members begin to cause trouble in Gaza. It is not a stretch of the imagination to imply that the Americans and Israelis told Fatah that they would recognise them as the Palestinian government if they dethroned Hamas. This bubbles on for months, occasionally boiling over into bloodshed.

This brings us to last week - Hamas moves against Fatah, which is now essentially a tool of the US and Israel. They disrupt Fatah’s power in Gaza. This has been portrayed in the media as Hamas ‘taking over’ - rather bizarrely, as they were the leading government party anyway. Events proceed quickly. Abbas fires the parliament, despite apparently not actually having the power to do so. He installs a new Quisling government, despite apparently not actually having the power to do so. This is led by a man whose list got 2.4% in the elections – hardly a popular mandate. The PDs got roughly that percentage in our recent elections and got two seats – Salam Fayyad gets to be the boss! Also high up in the new ‘government’ is Mohammed Dahlan, the man widely credited with beginning the cycle of violence in Gaza. The US, the EU and Israel immediately recognize the new, non-elected, government (bear in mind that Hamas won the elections in the West Bank too). Embargoes are lifted; the Israelis promise to return some of the stolen tax revenues. The coup is complete…

That this has been portrayed as simple Palestinian ‘infighting’ is shameful, but unsurprising in that it relies upon the Western notion of ‘bloody Arabs’ fighting anyone they can. To quote Judt, “the Palestinians and their infighting, well it's normally the way”. That, with a few exceptions, no one in the Western media has mentioned ‘coup’ is also unsurprising. It probably won’t be long now before Israel launches an attack to crush Gaza – according to the Sunday Times it’s already planned. A rocket or bomb will be used as the excuse – whether it’s initiated by Hamas, Islamic Jihad or the Israelis themselves (let’s face it, they’ve got ‘form’ in this regard) won’t really matter; it’ll be portrayed as ‘poor Israel’ defending herself.

Akrasia

Padraig Mor wrote:

Just to expand on the 'coup' before I get accused of subscribing to liberalconspiracytheories.com....

Short version….
1. Palestinians elect a government.
2. American and Israeli backed groups take over the government.

Long version…..
In January ’06, the Palestinians voted – in both the West Bank and Gaza – Hamas as their government. The general view is that they were not voting for an Islamic ‘Hamastan’ but for change from Fatah rule, who had become more and more corrupt and, well, useless over the decades.
The response from the ‘international community’ was amazing. Shock. Awe. How could the Palestinians vote for a bunch of ‘terrorists’? This ignored the fact that Hamas had been on ceasefire for some time at this stage. So it was decided that the people of Palestine would be punished for their choice. Reasons had to be found to camouflage the attack on Palestinian democracy. Four are generally given:
Hamas does not recognise the right of Israel to exist
A particularly insidious half truth. Firstly, Hamas made several noises, beginning shortly after its election, about recognising Israel in some format. Secondly, Israel has never defined her borders. How can you recognise a state that won’t tell you where it ends?

Hamas has not renounced violence
True – technically. However, at the time of election it had been on ceasefire for several months, despite continual Israeli provocation. Its ceasefire has largely held since then, save for a few occasions where they have responded to intense Israeli aggression. The ineffectual and generally injury-free rocket attacks across the border are usually claimed by Islamic Jihad IIRC, as have the few suicide bombers (2? 3?) in the last few years. While I’m sure there is some overlap in membership, Hamas is not Islamic Jihad.

Hamas refuses to abide by previous peace agreements.
The Oslo accords are widely recognised by all sides as dead in the water. This would explain the fact that Israel refuses to abide by them either.

Hamas is committed to the destruction Israel.
True – again technically. Their constitution calls for Israel’s destruction. So what? As mentioned, they have talked peace (only to be rebuffed). The best comparison I can think of is Articles 2 and 3 of the Irish constitution. Remember them? They claimed Northern Ireland for the Republic. But it was a poise – we didn’t really mean it. And we got rid of them as part of the peace process. Is it inconceivable that Hamas would do the same?

So using these excuses, the Palestinians were squeezed, particularly in Gaza. The Israelis refused to pass on tax revenues owed to the Palestinian government and ‘the West’ cut off aid and contacts. Due to decades of Fatah rule, the majority of local government employees were allied to the movement. Hamas now had no money to pay them. They could not buy food for their families. And so the ‘divide and rule’ tactic began…

Israel implemented an ever tightening blockade on Gaza, blocking food and medicine. They increased their attacks on ‘militants’ (i.e. Hamas members), civilians and civilian infrastructure (which had been ongoing all along), on the pretext of responding to rocket attacks. Around this time (a year or so ago) NGOs began warning of a ‘humanitarian crisis’ in Gaza – it’s only gotten worse since. Then, in August, Israel launched pretty much all out war on the people of Gaza (naturally in the guise of responding to attacks). They blew up the electricity generation station, which is still not repaired leading to only sporadic power in Gaza. They kidnapped several democratically elected Hamas parliament members. All along, Israel and the West refused to talk to Hamas (the legitimate government of the Palestinians, lest we forget).

And then, over a period, the issue faded from the headlines. The Palestinians, especially in Gaza, were suffering more and more. Nobody really wanted to know. Their parliament couldn’t rule effectively as a quorum was difficult to establish due to the number of Hamas deputies in Israeli jails. Fatah government employees became more and more resentful, blaming Hamas for their hardship. The US and Israel continue to ignore Hamas, while making noises in support of the ineffectual Abbas of Fatah. The Israelis turn a blind eye while the Saudis start to arm Fatah. The Americans arm and fund Fatah themselves. Emboldened, Fatah members begin to cause trouble in Gaza. It is not a stretch of the imagination to imply that the Americans and Israelis told Fatah that they would recognise them as the Palestinian government if they dethroned Hamas. This bubbles on for months, occasionally boiling over into bloodshed.

This brings us to last week - Hamas moves against Fatah, which is now essentially a tool of the US and Israel. They disrupt Fatah’s power in Gaza. This has been portrayed in the media as Hamas ‘taking over’ - rather bizarrely, as they were the leading government party anyway. Events proceed quickly. Abbas fires the parliament, despite apparently not actually having the power to do so. He installs a new Quisling government, despite apparently not actually having the power to do so. This is led by a man whose list got 2.4% in the elections – hardly a popular mandate. The PDs got roughly that percentage in our recent elections and got two seats – Salam Fayyad gets to be the boss! Also high up in the new ‘government’ is Mohammed Dahlan, the man widely credited with beginning the cycle of violence in Gaza. The US, the EU and Israel immediately recognize the new, non-elected, government (bear in mind that Hamas won the elections in the West Bank too). Embargoes are lifted; the Israelis promise to return some of the stolen tax revenues. The coup is complete…

That this has been portrayed as simple Palestinian ‘infighting’ is shameful, but unsurprising in that it relies upon the Western notion of ‘bloody Arabs’ fighting anyone they can. To quote Judt, “the Palestinians and their infighting, well it's normally the way”. That, with a few exceptions, no one in the Western media has mentioned ‘coup’ is also unsurprising. It probably won’t be long now before Israel launches an attack to crush Gaza – according to the Sunday Times it’s already planned. A rocket or bomb will be used as the excuse – whether it’s initiated by Hamas, Islamic Jihad or the Israelis themselves (let’s face it, they’ve got ‘form’ in this regard) won’t really matter; it’ll be portrayed as ‘poor Israel’ defending herself.

Excellent post.

And to cap it off, The Israelis have already launched a ground invasion of Gaza. (according to newstalk) Of course the reason they're going to give for this is 'to support the new Fatah government' and the usual nonsense about Israeli self defence (In other words, consolidating the israeli coup)

Akrasia

Israeli tanks were today reported to have crossed into the Gaza Strip.

News reports said they moved in close to where 150 Palestinians trying to flee had been trapped at the Erez Crossing.

The Israeli Army had no comment on the operation.

http://breakingnews.ie/world/mhkfojojgbau/

El Stuntman

I find it interesting that no-one has mentioned Iran in this thread yet

1. Hamas are Iranian proxies

2. Hexbollah are Iranian proxies

3. Syria is arm in arm with Iran

Iran now has two heavily-armed, fanatical Islamist movements on the very borders of Israel and is sworn to destroy that country. Interesting?

I think this is more relevant than the boring old chestnut of Palestinian historical rights and wrongs....

Akrasia

El Stuntman wrote:

I find it interesting that no-one has mentioned Iran in this thread yet

1. Hamas are Iranian proxies

Where did you get this from?

2. Hexbollah are Iranian proxies

Hezbollah don't have much of a presence in Gaza

3. Syria is arm in arm with Iran

so what?

Iran now has two heavily-armed, fanatical Islamist movements on the very borders of Israel and is sworn to destroy that country. Interesting?

It might be interesting, but do you seriously think that Iran is attempting to destroy Israel? Do you think Israel is suffering an existential threat from Iran or Hamas or Hezbollah?
If anyone should be worried, it should be the Iranians seeing as they have 3 nuclear powers on their borders openly hostile to them and threatening to institute 'regime change'.

If Iran was so powerful in Gaza and if they're in control of Hamas, why didn't they provide money to Hamas so they could pay their bills, prevent civil discontent and buy weapons? If they can't even sneak in money, they can't be that much of a force can they?

El Stuntman

Akrasia wrote:

It might be interesting, but do you seriously think that Iran is attempting to destroy Israel?

going on the utterances of their democratically elected President, yes

sovtek

El Stuntman wrote:

going on the utterances of their democratically elected President, yes

I can't access that link...but would be another misquote of him quoting someone else?
Iran has not attacked anyone since it's war with Iraq in the 80's.

The Saint

sovtek wrote:

I can't access that link...but would be another misquote of him quoting someone else?
Iran has not attacked anyone since it's war with Iraq in the 80's.

Also the president doesn't have overall authority over the armed forces.

El Stuntman

sovtek wrote:

I can't access that link...but would be another misquote of him quoting someone else?
Iran has not attacked anyone directly since it's war with Iraq in the 80's.

I inserted an important word

that's the whole point of proxies, they do your dirty work for you

sovtek

El Stuntman wrote:

I inserted an important word

that's the whole point of proxies, they do your dirty work for you

I'm well aware of the accusations but not the evidence.

El Stuntman

The Saint wrote:

Also the president doesn't have overall authority over the armed forces.

ah so that would be Khameni then?

who said this about Israel

different leader, same words

sovtek

The Saint wrote:

Also the president doesn't have overall authority over the armed forces.

I believe thats the Ayatollahs IIRC

El Stuntman

sovtek wrote:

I'm well aware of the accusations but not the evidence.

Hezbollah is 100% an Iranian proxy

so is Islamic Jihad

the links are less direct in the case of Hamas but they exist, just google it

Sesshoumaru

Akrasia wrote:

If Iran was so powerful in Gaza and if they're in control of Hamas, why didn't they provide money to Hamas so they could pay their bills, prevent civil discontent and buy weapons? If they can't even sneak in money, they can't be that much of a force can they?

Why don't other Islamic countries pay to run Gaza and the West Bank? I find that a more interesting question. Why do European and American tax payers have to pay to keep these territories ticking over? The Palestinians Arab brothers won't pay because they don't give a damn about the Palestinians. They are just a convenient excuse for more Jew hating propaganda.

arybvtcw0eolkf

Padraig Mor wrote:

The ignorance being displayed about these events in the media and in internet posts is quite shocking. This 'infighting' is a coup BLATANTLY and OBVIOUSLY engineered in Washington and Tel Aviv. Quite how anyone can think otherwise is beyond me...

LOL, you forgot to finish that one off with ''Allah Akbar''.



Blaim it on the Jew on the grassy knoll :rolleyes:

Padraig Mor

Mairt wrote:

LOL, you forgot to finish that one off with ''Allah Akbar''.



Blaim it on the Jew on the grassy knoll :rolleyes:

Tell you what - try reading my post next time before you come out with uninformed nonsense...

Sesshoumaru

Padraig Mor wrote:

Tell you what - try reading my post next time before you come out with uninformed nonsense...

Saying it doesn't make it so. Where is your evidence the Jews were behind this civil war?

Padraig Mor

Sesshoumaru wrote:

Saying it doesn't make it so. Where is your evidence the Jews were behind this civil war?

1. I never said 'the Jews' were behind anything. Please do not ascribe your prejudices to me.

2. My evidence - and there is a LOT of it - is in the post near the end of page 2. Seeing as I spent over an hour writing it, you might do me the favour of reading it before criticising it.

3. It wasn't a civil war. it was a coup.

redspider

Padraig Mor wrote:

Just to expand on the 'coup'
Short version….
1. Palestinians elect a government.
2. American and Israeli backed groups take over the government.
...
That this has been portrayed as simple Palestinian ‘infighting’ is shameful, but unsurprising in that it relies upon the Western notion of ‘bloody Arabs’ fighting anyone they can. That, with a few exceptions, no one in the Western media has mentioned ‘coup’ is also unsurprising.

A good post overall, but I dont think we should get too hung up on the nomenclature or labelling of what is going on. Indeed, its very hard to know exactly what is going on on a daily basis in places like Gaza and the West Bank without actually being there and getting full unbiased and wide-ranging witness accounts.

But from the outside, a coup is probably too strong a word for it and in-fighting is probably too benign a term.

What we do know is that Gaza and the West Bank are areas where people are 'coralled' into a life that is far from free, as in free to trade and to live. The people are severly oppressed, and comparing the GNP-per-capita figures for the Palestinian territories and Israel is startling. There is a high level of violence and atrocities over many many decades, and the gun and 'freedom' factions are a way of life.

The best term is probably a mess!

Its not the first time nor it wont be the last that 'the west' favour a certain side in any Government. What is unusual in this casde is the overwhelming support of one side by all the major external parties, noyt only the US and Israel, but by China, the UN and the EU and Russia. All the key powers.

As I mentioned in my previous post, if the UN and other independent observers were satisfied that the elections which resulted in a Hamas majority were fair, then it was incumbent upon the UN and 'the west' powers to recognise it as legitimate, whether liking the outcome or not. I personally may not have liked to see George Bush re-elected, Tony Blair or indeed Bertie Ahern re-elected either, but I have to live with the result, if the elections were fair, whether the outcome is against my wishes or not.

The same applies in this situation. By not recognising the result, it is directly interfering in the democratic process, as fragile as that may be.

People in these territories need our help and assistance. The world is letting this area 'fester', and there are many many problems, such as in Gaza, West Bank, Golan Heights, etc, the arab countries, Lebanon, Iraq and Iran. It is for many an intractable problem, without solution, but there must be a better way than the current situation.

redspider

Akrasia

Sesshoumaru wrote:

Why don't other Islamic countries pay to run Gaza and the West Bank? I find that a more interesting question. Why do European and American tax payers have to pay to keep these territories ticking over? The Palestinians Arab brothers won't pay because they don't give a damn about the Palestinians. They are just a convenient excuse for more Jew hating propaganda.

1. Israel has legal obligations under international law as an occupying country. The fact of their occupation is absolutely devastating for any hopes of a self sufficient Palestinian economy.
2. Israel collect many taxes on behalf of the Palestinian authority and have been illegally withholding them

3. Other Arab countries are prevented from giving aid to Palestine (the only way to get any in is to send people over the border to come back with suitcases full of cash, and these people are routinely captured and arrested)


The borders are completely controlled by Israel and Egypt.
Egypt are just as antagonistic towards Iran and Syria as Israel are (because they've got their head up the U.S's ass) and they monitor all of the human traffic between Iran and Gaza making it logistically very difficult for the Iranians to have as much impact on this situation as they would perhaps like to.

There has been a very effective economic Blockade of the Occupied territories. Even you can't deny that can you?

Akrasia

Mairt wrote:

LOL, you forgot to finish that one off with ''Allah Akbar''.



Blaim it on the Jew on the grassy knoll :rolleyes:

yeah, don't bother addressing any of the substantial issues He has raised on this thread. Just attack the poster in a dishonest, childish and intellectually cowardly way

redspider

The points raised by Marwan Baghouti (former information minister of the unity government) contained in the links at the bottom of this webpage (www.rte.ie/news/2007/0620/mideast.html) are valid ones I think.

nacho libre

Akrasia wrote:

Actually I was being reserved in that statement, according to most reports, the car they were travelling in was rigged to explode. (ie, a car bomb)

Why? They did the exact same thing in El Salvador. The Americans and British would have a very strong motivation to get the Iraqis fighting each other, It means they are less likely to band together and fight the occupation. Divide and conquer. an ancient strategy.


The author of that article was John Pilger, and why do you think it's far fetched that America might want to control Iraqs oil?

They've already started attacking Iran on a small scale by the way (using a proxy force affiliated to al qaeda) They are trying to provoke Iran into responding so they can use that as a justification to attack.
The only barrier that is preventing Bush from striking Iran is a political one. He needs to find a justification.

You mean Jundullah? I was surprised the Daily Telegraph of all papers carried this story.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=UUAVXPRLGDJOHQFIQMGSFFWAVCBQWIV0?xml=/news/2007/02/25/wiran25.xml