Connecting Singles^® Forums 100% Free Online Dating

There appears to be a very definite link with the war in Iraq and Israel.

Since a couple of people have questioned my assertion that Israel funded and armed Hamas and actively helped it to seize leadership in Gaza, here is an articles to support that claim.


United Press International
February 24, 2001
NEW YORK,

Israel gave major to aid to Hamas.

Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, speaking of the Islamic Resistance Movement Hamas recently described it as "the deadliest terrorist group that we have ever had to face."

But Sharon had left something out.

Israel and Hamas may currently be locked in deadly combat, but,
according to several current and former U.S. intelligence officials, beginning in the late 1970s, Tel Aviv gave direct and indirect financial aid to Hamas over a period of years.

Israel "aided Hamas directly -- the Israelis wanted to use it as a counterbalance to the PLO," said Tony Cordesman, Middle East analyst for the Center for Strategic Studies.

Israel's support for Hamas "was a direct attempt to divide and dilute support for a strong, secular PLO by using a competing religious alternative," said a former senior CIA official.

After 1967, a great part of the success of the Hamas was due to their activities among the refugees of the Gaza Strip. The cornerstone of their success was an impressive social, religious, educational and cultural infrastructure, called Da'wah, that worked to ease the hardship of large numbers of Palestinian refugees, confined to camps, and many who were living on the edge.

"Social influence grew into political influence," first in the Gaza Strip, then on the West Bank, said an administration official who spoke on condition of anonymity.

According to ICT papers, Hamas was legally registered in Israel in 1978 by Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, the movement's spiritual leader, as an Islamic Association by the name Al-Mujamma al Islami, which widened its base of supporters and sympathizers by religious propaganda and social work.

According to U.S. administration officials, funds for the movement came from the oil states and directly and indirectly from Israel.

The PLO was secular and leftist and promoted Palestinian nationalism. Hamas wanted to set up a transnational state under the rule of Islam, much like Khomeini's Iran.

Another factor of Hamas' growth was that the PLO moved its base of operations to Beirut in the '80s, leaving Hamas to grow in influence in the Occupied Territories "as the court of last resort," he said.

With the triumph of the Khomeini revolution in Iran, with the birth of Iranian-backed Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas began to gain in strength in Gaza and then in the West Bank.

Israel was certainly funding the group at that time. One U.S. intelligence source who asked not to be named said that Hamas was being funded as a "counterweight" to the PLO.

Israeli aid had another purpose: "To help identify and channel towards Israeli agents Palestinians who were dangerous as terrorists or hard-liners."

As Hamas set up a comprehensive counterintelligence system,
collaborators with Israel were weeded out and shot.

But even then, some in Israel saw some benefits in trying to continue to give Hamas support: "The thinking of some in the right-wing Israeli establishment was that Hamas, if it gained control, would refuse to have any part of the peace process and would torpedo any agreements put in place," said a U.S. government official who asked not to be named.

"Thus, Israel would still be the only democracy in the region for the United States to deal with," he said.

---

So there you have it. According to UPI and a number of US officials, Israel had everything to do with the rise of Hamas.

Oh, and here's a better map showing the continuing seizure of Palestinian land by Israel.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_ucqG1RYIuUA/SWu_ts0QUqI/AAAAAAAAA4g/4QYcbtXeL8k/s1600/palestine_olmert_plan_maps.jpg

Here's that map link again.

It didn't seem to work the first time.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_ucqG1RYIuUA/SWu_ts0QUqI/AAAAAAAAA4g/4QYcbtXeL8k/s1600/palestine_olmert_plan_maps.jpg

Ray

Israel is concerned about one thing - their own security. Historically they have been attacked by terrorists from these areas and so, in light of recent activity and the official doctrine of Hamas to eradicate Israelis from Israel, to close the borders in order to provide for their security is logical. If Hamas does not like it they are completely free to be at peace with Israel and have them opened.

Patrick

Yes it does. It shows two things, that war, terrorism and denying Israel's right to exist results in loss of opportunity and living space for Palestinians. Each terrorist act sets the realization of a Palestinian homeland back years. It also shows that Israel, like it or not holds all the cards and, in light of what has recently occurred in Gaza, they don't give a shit about opinions or casualties of enemy fighters and place little value in collateral damage.

Patrick

We all feel for the oppressed Patrick. You once asked me for my solution, I gave it, you complained about it but never offered yours. So, how is Israel supposed to protect their children and people given that the successive governments of Palestine wish to eradicate them from the land?

Hugz

Israel - security

Palestine - homeland

Israel would trade land for peace but, since they have been attacked over and over from lands which Palestinians hold sway over, are reluctant to provide more territory for an enemy to do so with. Hence, unless security is assured they will not trade.

A hundred years from now there are three logical possibilities:

1. A completely Zionist Israel having given up on all attempts at peace and officially awarding all the territory to those who squat on it within it's present borders with a thrieving economy, rapid response force and healthy happy peoples alongside a UN welfare slum empire consisting of weaponless, curfew ruled Gaza and some of the West Bank with the world having forgotten about them.

2. A peaceful co existance and lose federation of Palestine and Israel where borders are almost fluid and viewed as counties within a nation or:

Hugz

A bit over the top I think Hugz. Over three days Saddam killed 12,000 people, all of them civilians using mustard, nerve and cyanide gas. None of those have any other purpose than to kill people. WP is used to hide or obscure military movements and, considering that over one third {400} of those killed in the Gaza operation were Hamas militants with only 13 Israeli soldiers killed, it worked.

The map shows the expansionist policy of Israel!





Move the boundaries back to 1949



I would have felt that before this recent conflict that the 1949 boundaries were good enough but after discussing this with you and other people like you, I am beginning to understand why the Palestinians believe that Israel should not be there at all.

One thing I am 100% sure of is that wherever the boundaries are, power-sharing is the only solution!

The Palestinians can and will agree to a boundary, as long as the superior force, Israel learn diplomacy and stop the use of superior Military might against them.

Now answer a question I asked you, when did this expansionist policy ever work in the world?

Patrick

Can you tell me which change did not occur until Israel was attacked from that particular area? Generally when attacked a victor confiscates the items used in the attack, in this case land is a support for the attacks such as the Golan and Sinai was used by Syria and Egypt as well as the West Bank by Transjordan.

Patrick

I disagree and actually take the Palestinian side against you here. Move them back to the 1947 UN approved boundaries which certainly Israel will when their security issues with six million people who wish them dead and attack their people pell mell is not a concern.

Patrick

Yes people like me who see that things are as they are and try to explain how they can be different are horrendous murderers while people like you who think there is absolutely nothing wrong with believing that an entire peoples might be better off not existing at all are good.

Wow.

Patrick

I agree however there is a small matter of Palestinian governments publicly denying Israel's right to exist. Just a minor stumbling block for Israel mind you.

Patrick

Let's see Patrick, Israel's policy is to not let them kill their civilians in random terrorist attacks and Palestinian's policy is to eradicate all Israelis from Israel. So much to learn for Israel, Maybe they can have 'lie down and die' drills in preparation for the 'Patrick Peace Plan' when your views become official policy.

Patrick

You have never asked me this question but, I will answer it quickly;

It has worked for Israel since 1948 by denying people who wish to destroy them from having a complete surrounding venue of attack positions to now only possessing one or two.

At the time of Israel's establishment in 1948, the Jewish population owned less than ten percent of the land. Today, these figures are almost precisely reversed, with Israel asserting effective military control throughout the entire territory of Mandate Palestine, and owning, using or controlling nearly 90% of the land within both Israel and the Occupied Territories.

COHRE's Executive Director, Scott Leckie said: "Our research reveals that Israeli law, far from providing impartial protection and equal treatment to all those that it affects, has been fundamental to the expropriation of Palestinian land and property since the State of Israel was unilaterally declared in 1948. Israeli laws designed to lay legal claim to the lands and property of 'absentees' - the Israeli euphemism for forcibly displaced Palestinian refugees - have permitted the confiscation of Palestinian lands, and their transfer to Israeli control, on a massive scale."

"In the period 1948-49, the formation of Israel was followed by more than 30 separate military operations by Jewish-Israeli forces, which led to the flight or expulsion of over 800,000 Palestinians and the destruction of 531 Palestinian towns and villages. The calculated theft of Palestinian lands through both legal means and military aggression, as well as widespread housing demolitions and the imposition of apartheid-like laws by Israel, are difficult to see as anything other than a cruel form of ethnic cleansing", Leckie said.

http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/israel-palestine/land/2005/0511seizure.htm

Patrick, it's 2009 now. Six million people are living in Israel and are Israeli citizens who are not going anywhere much less willing to die in order to make you or any Palestinian happy. they are willing to give land away that their parents and such confiscated when they were attack from there over the years but only if they don't have to risk their lives to do so.

Remember, 1948 was not last week just as Ireland of the 1800s was not yesterday. What is here is here and is what we have to work with. The mere fact that Israel is even willing to talk giving land up is a miracle in itself considering the animosity against them and, their ability to simply imprison those belligerents into such a small are and just leave them in squalor.

The only workable formula is;

Israel wants security and Palestine wants land.

Anything else ie; Palestine wants new positions to attack Israel from or all Israelis dead or gone is not a reality based attainable goal and is a useless and futile exercise in thought.

The peace Treaty in Ireland was signed on 10th April 1989. Not 1800.

A referendum held in May 1998 on both sides of the Irish border, returned a resounding "yes" vote for the Good Friday Agreement.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/april/10/newsid_2450000/2450823.stm
You do not know what you are talking about, all you have is empty rhetoric and misinformation.

But keep going.....It does show me how shallow the Israeli defence for what they do is...

Patrick

Yes but my point was nobody feels they it would be remotely realistic to go back to the way it was in 1801. Just as it is unrealistic to go back to the way it was in 200 AD or 1920 or 1947. It is the here and now that is reality and six million Israelis are not about to roll over and die or leave so, what is is what is. The fact they are willing to give up anything when they hold complete power and ability to gulag these people forever if they remain belligerent is amazing.

Nonsense, they have had an expansionist policy since 1949, back is the only way they are going.....get used to it!

Patrick

Seems they only expanded when attacked and then, when their right to exist was agreed on they gave back land. Unless of course your history of Arab Israeli wars is different and Sadat never made peace and got the Sinai back.

A little story
Hope your sitting comfortably, then I’ll begin

Once upon a time two boys played in an old fairly remote field, they liked it there and over a short time had made hideouts and places that they could invite their friends over to enjoy and play with, after a while the owner of the land saw these two boys playing and decided to give them the land, and as it was in such a poor state, he gave them each some money to help tidy the land up.

The two boys were at first overjoyed, but John became unhappy, he thought his land was not as nice as Sams, so Sam, being a good friend, said here you can have some of mine, so John had two thirds while Sam had his one third.

Some more time went by during which Sam used his money to clear rubbish away and plant seeds, he grew grass and had a nice lean-to built where he invited his friends.

John also spent his money, but mainly on entertaining his friends, he did a bit of tiding up but was more into playing with his mates.

Now Sams field was starting to create an interest to those from other neighbourhoods, so when large gang of boys said that they would help Sam protect his field he gratefully accepted. John however was now getting angry, he was still playing in a dirty old field and had now run out of money. So he told Sam that he wanted Sams patch of Land, Sam said no way, you have already got more than me, just go and make something of your patch, John went to his friends and said come on if we all get together we can push Sam off and we will have a better place to play, Johns friends said, well no cause its Sams field, but you do what you like.

John them tried several times to push Sam away, but now Sam had grown into a strong man, and he stood up to John’s attacks, retaliating when forced to. Sams Friends also helped, as they agreed that Sam had worked hard and deserved to keep his field.
When John complains to his friends that when he plays and falls dow he gets cut and brused from all the rocks and rubbish still lying about, his friends now turn there back on him, they are fed up with his constant complaining, but still pass over some bits and pieces to him as they feel sorry for John.

So, a few years pass, Johns anger has increased, so that when Sam offered to make peace and then help to tidy up Johns patch he refused, saying that he would now spend the rest of his life if necessary to push Sam out and take over Sams field.

So when you see pictures of John in squalor and desperate conditions, don’t blame Sam, he didn’t make Johns field, he was way to busy tidying up his own. He did offer to help and even gave money to John to see if that would help, but John just used that money to get bigger sticks to hit Sam with so Sam turned his back on John and walked sadly away.

More Sadly, its not the end, as John continues to this day to be jealous of Sam and tries every way he can to push Sam away so he can play in Sams old field.

What a complete load of crap!

You are welcome to your opinions, its your right Patrick, and I have mine.

By posting that simplistic story I was just putting my view on the events in a form that anyone can understand, of course there is more to it, but I think that by having a closed mind you would never see it.

It may be crap to you, but it is a pretty close facsimile to what took place.

Where? in your dreams?

Amazing how only those truly proficient with crap have any chance of recognizing or misconstruing truth as crap. Methinks the brainwashing is en vogue with those who take joy in death.
Allegory, metaphor and simile are common methods of extrapolating issues to remove personal ideals and allow the base to be recognized without prejudice.
I suppose if the boys were switched in your mind the story would have been fine.
How cheap the position of critic is as the world seems to be filled with blind servants of hatred like yourself.

Like I said,you have a closed mind, and any historical proof would not make an iota of difference to you.

I do have a open mind, but have yet to see anything posted here or elsewhere that shows that I am incorrect in my thought process.

You are advocating the total dispersion of Israel yet have not said why they should not be there, at least I have posted why I think they should remain.

Hi Rizla,

Sorry, maybe its just me... a bit thicj you know but I dont get it.

Am I correct in saying that Israel are occupying land completely illegaly in the West Bank and Gaza.........?
Am i correct in saying that the UN have condemned them for it ?
I personally am for Human Rights as you know but unfortunately I see in these threads so many Pro Israel posters, without acknowledgement of the fact that what they are doing to the Palestinian people is wrong........and the only concession these posters seem to make is for the Palestinian people to like it or lump it. I have yet to see someone from the pro Israel side actually say............Yes give them their land back by whatever treaty has been agreed in the past.........I have yet to see someone saying that Israel have commited war crimes....and should be brought to task for it.........

I think this can be a very emotive subject for people.........I fully understand that, but sometimes I think we need to apply more reason to the situation.........

JMO