<html>
<body>
<h2><b>Hamas – They’re not bad, they’re just drawn that
way</b></h2><font size=1>
<a href="http://palestinethinktank.com/2009/10/19/hamas-%E2%80%93-they%E2%80%99re-not-bad-they%E2%80%99re-just-drawn-that-way/" eudora="autourl">
http://palestinethinktank.com/2009/10/19/hamas-%E2%80%93-they%E2%80%99re-not-bad-they%E2%80%99re-just-drawn-that-way/<br>
</a></font><font size=2>By
<a href="http://palestinethinktank.com/author/mary-rizzo/">Mary Rizzo</a>
• Oct 19th, 2009 at 16:24 • <br>
</font><font size=3>WRITTEN BY MARY RIZZO<br><br>
In many parts of the West, certain political parties or movements are
treated as if they come from the Moon or are alien to any body politic.
Their existence among the people is always scrutinised as negative,
transitory and something created in a boardroom or a backroom, imposed
upon an unsophisticated public that is unable to differentiate a true
political programme from empty and simplistic rhetoric. These parties or
movements are depicted as if they only address the margins of society who
are disenfranchised from any “normal” democratic bodies, and thus, are
ramshackle bands that represent a minority constituency. Given their
oppositional nature to pre-existing parties, they are outfitted with the
label that will serve to keep them isolated from the structures that are
already in operation. All of this is to destroy the party or movement by
propaganda work rather than analysis of reality.<br><br>
An entire mythology has been built around the Palestinian resistance
movement (which morphed into a party) Hamas. This construct has actually
taken on more legitimacy as a factual interpretation of Hamas than the
facts themselves. In most of the Western media, no matter if it is on the
right or the left, and in some of the “moderate” media in Arab countries,
the very name of the party is coupled with terms such as
“fundamentalist”, “radical” or “terrorist”. Clearly, this serves to
create a
<a href="http://palestinethinktank.com/2009/10/02/the-first-word-war-palestine-think-tank-and-tlaxcala-declare-war-against-disinformation/">
fear trigger</a> that will remove the word from being critically and
honestly evaluated. The listener will immediately identify Hamas with a
negative connotation and is removed from responsibility for understanding
that this is a manipulation of reality. The listener is expected to
accept the claims that Hamas is “anti-democratic” and “fanatical”. It is
child’s play to then convince the listener that Hamas is Bad, that it is
the Enemy of all We represent (in our own eyes, tolerance, democracy,
Goodness itself). It is possible to then extend that reading to the
belief that action must be taken against them, that they are a
“<a href="http://palestinethinktank.com/2009/02/28/noa-the-hasbara-queen-and-islamphobe-prepares-for-battle/">
cancer that must be gotten rid of</a>”, as quoted by the institutional
peacenik,
<a href="http://palestinethinktank.com/2009/02/28/noa-the-hasbara-queen-and-islamphobe-prepares-for-battle/">
Noa</a>. How does one eradicate a cancer, once it has been diagnosed? By
extirpation or bombardment. With cancer treatment, one “bombards” even
the healthy parts of the body with toxic agents, waiting to see if after
the battle there were enough healthy parts remaining to allow the
organism to continue to exist. Once you have set into the minds of
millions of people the idea that destruction is good, because the enemy
is just so damaging and evil if allowed to exist, the risk of bringing
the entire organism to its grave by weakening it dramatically is taken as
a viable risk to run. This is a way to make them justify actions that
their own eyes don’t see as therapeutic, but are pure horror and
evil.<br><br>
How did it work that the world was so fooled and allowed Israel to
destroy Gaza to “get rid of Hamas”? It was quite simple, and it’s always
the same answer: Israel and its allies keep people disinformed. Those who
actually will go slightly below the screaming headlines of the newspapers
might find out a few facts buried that that will contradict the spin, but
not that many people will go that far, given that they are exposed to
something with an element of truth buried deep within. If that were not
problematic enough, even the “progressives” have done meritorious
services to rendering Hamas untouchable. They might accept them as a
“resistance movement” but they won’t allow their personal ideological
bias to see Hamas as a progressive force for their own people’s
advancement. This may be out of conviction, convenience or even lack of
research or a blindspot that does not allow variations on the theme of
the class struggle, where everything is “international” and the same type
of rules and ideals should be considered applicable and necessary for
all, going so far in some cases to “import democracy” under various more
or less aggressive forms.<br><br>
These people, many of whom are armed with good intentions, have chewed,
swallowed, and are spitting back quite a few of the outright lies and
distortions that are part of the mythology created by opponents of Hamas,
created in Israel and the West, primarily.<br><br>
<b>What are the components of that mythology?<br>
</b>1) Hamas was created by the Israeli Mossad.<br>
2) Hamas represents a marginal portion of the Palestinians.<br>
3) Hamas turned democratic enough just to be able to obtain some
legitimacy to later take over and turn the Palestinian Territories into
an Islamic State.<br>
4) Their victory in the polls was nothing more than a protest vote
against the corruption of Fatah.<br>
5) Hamas is comprised of a bunch of illiterates and their electors are
sucked in by their own ignorance.<br>
6) Hamas is a fundamentalist group and therefore inflexible and incapable
of any modification or evolution. The oft cited Charter is used against
them to stress that they are simply a radical, destructive group poised
for Holy War.<br>
7) Hamas does not seek any kind of compromise with other Palestinian
political parties or factions, and are therefore the divisionary element
that prohibits of the unity of the people.<br>
8 ) Hamas operates to indoctrinate their people with hate propaganda in
order to utilise them as cannon fodder.<br>
9) Hamas is a terrorist group that exists only thanks to financing by
“fundamentalist regimes”.<br><br>
That Hamas is merely a resistance movement has been thoroughly disproved
by the elections, but this seems to be the safe place that activists can
cluster in order to allow themselves to be able to tolerate Hamas, while
wishing for their quick demise. They are not viewed then as having a true
heritage as a political party that can be compared to those of
“democratic nations” of the “international community”, and thus, analysis
of them can remain at an elementary level, lending itself to hasty
generalisations.<br><br>
I ask my readers to kindly forgive all the inverted quotation marks, but
these words do become ironic and empty of true meaning when they are
applied to the objects indicated by the spin doctors, whose task it is to
do the bidding of the hegemonic powers. How can a minority of a handful
of nations that always pits itself against the will of the remainder of
the world community in the UN be considered as the “international
community”? It’s a boy’s club that excludes practically everyone. How can
a country that puts in office the candidate who obtains the lesser amount
of votes be called a “democracy”? It is when we start to question our own
foundations that we can detect that there is a lot of convenience in
presenting any opposition as being an enemy and outside of paradigms that
we consider to be core to our expectations of how to establish a just and
equitable world.<br><br>
<b>It’s time to debunk a few of these myths with facts.<br><br>
</b>1) <b>Hamas was not created by Mossad.</b> Although Israel does like
to claim credit for many things, this one is not their doing. Political
Islam in Palestine has had a presence since the early 40s in Mandate
Palestine, and Hamas was born as part of the Muslim Brotherhood
(<i>Ikhwan</i>), with many of its early leaders formally affiliated. It
was the experience of refugeehood that turned Hamas into a more
autonomous element with a particular nationalist basis to it, a natural
result of the urgent and real human situation of displacement and loss of
their cultural and national identity.<br><br>
There were close relations of this group with the Egyptian base, and the
first offices of the <i>Ikhwan</i> in Palestine were created in Gaza in
1945, led by a member of one of the most important families of the zone,
Sheykh Zafer al Shawwa. During the first Arab-Israeli war, Islamist
volunteers reinforced the ranks, coming primarily from Jordan and Syria,
and this support showed the refugees that the <i>Ikhwan</i> had the
courage to defend itself, even during the “Israeli War of Independence”.
The growing number of refugees gave a stronger identity and sense of
purpose to the Islamist movement in Palestine. Therefore, in the civil
society and in the population in general, a motivation from any other
source was not required to be able to pledge: “I promise to be a good
Muslim in defending Islam and the lost land of Palestine. I promise to be
a good example for the community and for others.” These were the words
spoken by those who swore their loyalty to the Ikhwan in Palestine
(source: Beverly Milton Edwards, “Islamic Politics in Palestine”, p. 43).
The local <i>Ikhwan</i> had its own agenda, defending its lost land. It
didn’t require fanaticism, outside influence or even propaganda. The
refugees themselves were living proof of the horrors of deportation and
suffering. The identification as part of an international movement was
concomitant with the recognition of the particularity of the Palestinian
experience. The official foundation, dating 9 December 1987, was only the
culmination of an organisation in the works for decades. Organised
Islamic resistance was further utilised when the situation precipitated
dramatically in 1967 and a new generation was born as refugees. For this
generation, a return to Islam was considered as a necessity for the moral
and political future of a people that was being literally destroyed. The
cause of the Nakba was seen by many as the result of the distancing from
a normal society, the Palestinian one, in which the ethical, religious,
cultural and traditional values had been devastated by the occupation,
and the descent into further degradation, poverty, disenfranchisement and
social instability was seen not only as the result of the occupation, but
part of its cause.<br><br>
The “international community” would not come to the rescue of these
people, the rest of the <i>Ummah </i>was not caught up in their national
struggle, largely because they were not directly involved or were even
prohibited from involvement. The extreme pain and disgrace of losing
one’s land at that time was a new element to the area, where previous
colonisation avoided expelling the indigenous inhabitants, and throwing
off the usurpers was not complicated with the total loss of roots and a
base. The basis for the formal dimension of Hamas was thus present for
decades prior to its official birth. In order to operate, being under the
thumb of the occupation, these organised groups that existed had
established charities and benefit organisations for their people. These
institutions were tolerated by Israel in the Occupied Territories. Israel
conceded some operating space through granting of licenses. As General
Yitzhak Sager said in an interview to the <i>International Herald
Tribune</i> in 1981, the Israeli government “…gave money that the
military governor allocated to the mosques […] the sums were used both by
the mosques and the religious schools, with the purpose of reinforcing a
subject that would contrast that of the Left that was in favour of the
PLO.” If there was some motivation for Israel to be involved, it was
really as an act of ‘divide and rule’, a bit of tolerance, a bit of
economic support to the various religious associations in order to see if
an opposition to the nationalists of the PLO could develop. They really
were only looking for a way to see the weakening of the PLO, which was
gaining some support in the West, and they did not found, provide major
financing or in any way influence a movement that they would in some way
infiltrate or control. That is pure mythology. Why give Israel credit
where none is due?<br><br>
2) <b>That Hamas represents only a marginal portion of Palestinians is
another myth to debunk.</b> It is indeed true that all Palestinians are
not refugees, and it is also true that virtually all of the leaders of
Hamas were born in exile or at some point were subjected to the
experience of expulsion and loss of their homes and possessions. This is
a core Palestinian experience, and it is true that even those (few)
Palestinians who were not uprooted can identify with the loss of their
cultural and national identity, and all of them know that their national
aspirations and cohesion as a group have been destroyed by Israel. Thus,
even a movement or party that has its own identity in the refugee camps
and in exile or in religious roots, is recognised as an intrinsic,
legitimate and natural representative of Palestinians as a whole. They
even obtained the majority vote in areas of the West Bank that were not
considered as Hamas strongholds, as well as obtaining votes from many
Christian areas.<br><br>
3) <b>The myth that Hamas turned “democratic enough” just to get its foot
in the door as the first step of forcing an Islamic State upon the
entirety of Palestine is a very widespread one</b>, especially in the
progressive circles that do not recognise the popularity of the movement
or who have an ideological prejudice against any religious movement.
There is much to be said in favour of separation of church and state, but
this of course is something that cannot be imposed from afar, and
furthermore, there are many levels of separation to take into
consideration. Those who subscribe to this position of “Hamas buying time
before introducing the Sharia” tend to deny that a democracy has certain
characteristics, and it is not necessarily a synonym of “secularism”.
When the word “democracy” is applied correctly, it has certain
characteristics, and Hamas meets these. Hamas has popular consensus. It
has an internal structure that is autonomous and recognised as legitimate
by its constituency. It follows the rules of elections, meeting the
requirements for participation. Once elected, it assumes its role within
the existing system, not having overthrown or staged coups against
established structures. It is a political movement with several factions
(some of them armed, as is true of many parties in areas under
occupation, Fatah included) with a history and an organisation. There is
widespread discussion among its constituencies, including those who are
political prisoners, prior to making decisions, and the majority decides
the actions to be undertaken. If one thing must be said about it to set
it apart from parties that Westerners are familiar with, highest level
leaders generally do not assume the governing roles. This is
understandable in a party where a great quantity of the leaders are
routinely assassinated by Israel. That the current political director,
Khaled Meshaal, must live in exile after having once been victim of an
attempted assassination says more about this anomalous situation than a
thousand words can.<br><br>
4) <b>That Hamas’s victory in the Legislative Council election was
nothing more than a protest vote (another pet theory of the left) was
brilliantly illustrated as false</b> by Paola Caridi in her very good
book (despite the sensationalist subtitle) “Hamas, What it is and what
the Radical Palestinian Movement Wants”, published by Feltrinelli and
only available in Italian at this time. I am translating a few paragraphs
that deal with this question.<br><br>
</font>
<dl>
<dd>“There is a precise political reason for which the majority of
Palestinians voted for Hamas. It is a reason that concerns the decision
made by the Islamist movement formally on 23 January 2005. (translator’s
note</i>, a year prior to the Legislative elections): a unilateral truce,
reached together with the Islamic Jihad (that had instead broken it on
several occasions), which had turned words into facts: that there would
be the end of the season of terrorist attacks made by Hamas inside Israel
as indicated within the confines of the 1949 armistice, the Israel within
the Green Line, in other words. The ending of suicide attacks in Israeli
cities, substantially bringing an end to the Intifada as well as
(Hamas’s) participative choice is interpreted by the Palestinian
population as a precise political proposal: an alternative to those who
had governed and controlled them, holding the hegemony up to that moment.
A proposal that poses at the same time new de facto limits to Hamas’s
resistance strategy. The Islamist movement has not been, therefore,
chosen only as a protest against the corruption, patronage and
inefficiency of Fatah, which as a party is often confused with the PA.
Corruption, patronage and inefficiency that are related, at least from a
temporal point of view, with the failure of the Oslo Accords and the
“facts on the ground” realised by the Israelis.<br><br>
<dd>“The people of Hamas were considered people who are serious, who did
not enrich themselves at the expense of the population, in fact, they
continued to live in normal neighbourhoods and in the refugee camps.”
(Caridi, p. 171).<br><br>
</dl>5) An extremely offensive smear, oft repeated, is that Hamas’s
followers and its leaders are a
“<a href="http://peacepalestine.wordpress.com/2005/10/17/jews-against-zionism-more-like-jews-against-the-palestinian-street">
bunch of illiterates</a>” or “religious fanatics”.</b> Almost all the
leaders are (or were, given the number of assassinations within their
ranks, the past tense is de rigueur) university graduates in fields
ranging from medicine and physics to jurisprudence, economics and
theology, is testament itself that this smear is merely to throw dirt on
them and paint them as having read only religious texts and therefore
“under-developed” when compared to other movements. Education has always
been one of the pillars of Hamas and its charity work. The people of
Palestine don’t need to be told this, it is a reality for them, where in
many cases without this foundation, Palestinians would be left wanting in
this area.<br><br>
6) The inflexibility of Hamas is another myth, especially yanked out when
speaking of the 1988 Charter (Mithaq</i>).</b> Shiekh Hamed Bitauri,
“religious authority of Nablus, president of the Union of the Palestinian
Ulemas</i>, known for his radical positions had no problem confirming
that ‘the Charter is not the Qu’ran</i>. We can change it. It is only the
synthesis of the positions of the Islamist movement in its relations with
the other factions, and its politics.’ Aziz Dweik, founder of the
Department of Geography of the University of Nablus, later to become the
spokesman of the Palestinian Parliament after the 2006 elections, and
imprisoned in Israeli jails since the summer of that year, went even
further, declaring the political and pragmatic necessity of distancing
from the Mithaq</i> of 1988 to Khalid Amayreh, Palestinian journalist
that is sensitive to Islamist positions, he said that ‘Hamas would not
remain as a hostage to rhetorical slogans of the past like those of the
‘destruction of Israel’.” (Khalid Amayreh, Hamas Debates the Future:
Palestine’s Islamic Resistance Movement Attempts to Reconcile Ideological
Purity and Political Realism</i>, in “Conflicts Forum”, Nov. 2007, p.4)
(Caridi p. 90).<br><br>
Haniyeh has mentioned on many occasions that the Charter has been
surpassed in its substance by the other official documents, the most
important of which, the Electoral Programme of the Reform and Change List
(the list in which Hamas ran for office). This programme is structured
like a document that goes far beyond the needs of a political campaign,
according to the leader of Hamas, and it indicates the policy of the
movement. It was not written in the heat of the revolution of the
Intifada, and reflects the evolution of the party. The changes present
are not ideological so much as ones of a strategic and political nature.
The positions have been reiterated so many times in interviews and public
interventions, it seems incredible that the complexity and maturity of
Hamas should by now not be apparent to everyone. It is clear that they
are still dedicated to the liberation of Palestine, but they are
attempting to achieve it through reaffirmation of the rights of the
people, knowing full well that as a party, Hamas is not equipped to
overthrow the occupation in any practical way or to destroy what they
recognise as a reality.<br><br>
Many of us who follow events in the Middle East hope that they do not
surrender to pragmatism so far as to recognise Israel not only as a
reality, but as a “Jewish State”, however, we must watch from the
sidelines and evaluate facts. The people of Palestine will be vigil about
what rights are being surrendered, if any, and many of us believe that
backs to the wall, they will not capitulate and lose what they know is
theirs for reasons of political expediency. Hamas too is aware of this
fact.<br><br>
7) Hamas has been far less divisionary than its principle counterpart,
Fatah.</b> The Gaza “coup” that shocked and saddened the world was
actually a preventive measure to the thwart the planned takeover by the
Fatah forces faithful to Dahlan (in collaboration with Israel). That
Hamas was the party that was awarded victory by its own people has never
been recognised by the “international community” that nevertheless pushed
for elections and insisted that this was the necessity for Palestinians,
because this would mean that the resistance had been granted legitimacy
and would become policy within the governing body, the rejection of
negotiations as sub-alternates with Israel, which was Fatah policy, had
been officially sanctioned by the populace and it would only be a matter
of time before the programme would become policy. So, any steps by the
Fatah “Security Forces” to overtake Gaza would actually have been the
coup. But in the backwards way of viewing events, fuelled by
disinformation, the tragic bloodbath between Palestinians prevented the
real overthrow of democracy that would have taken place had Dahlan had
the chance. Again and again, Hamas has sought to work together with the
opposition party, and this is something they would not tolerate in the
vain hope that their economic advantage and political nulla osta from the
boy’s club would allow them to command even in absence of the popular
mandate to do so.<br><br>
8 ) It’s not necessary to use propaganda to show to Palestinians in the
Occupied Territories and in exile, and even to many within Israel, the
ongoing destruction of the Palestinian civilisation and people.</b>
Blockades, bombardments, assassinations, war, checkpoint humiliations,
restrictions, separation of families, imprisonment and further abuses are
not isolated incidents, but they are the daily bread and water of
Palestinian life. No one needs to invent a rage over a phantasmagoric
enemy. There is a real one that is subjecting the people of all ages and
conditions to humiliation, deprivation and death. Showing a man in a
mouse costume to insist that children are being indoctrinated in hate
might go down well with the uninformed masses, but a glimpse into the
reality makes Farfur look like the sweetest kind of way for a child to
assimilate and tolerate that he or she is a prisoner doomed for life to
suffer in the most atrocious way for being born as a lesser being in the
oppressors’ eyes.<br><br>
9) The worst smear against Hamas is the one to keep them as the symbol of
evil: that they are a terrorist group, financed by “rogue States in the
axis of evil”.</b> Bearing in mind that their financing is abysmally
inferior to the gigantic economic and “military aid” package given to
Israel by America, Canada and many other nations in the “international
community” in an official way, why should the claim of foreign financing
be considered as unacceptable when it is simply the way the that Israel
keeps afloat through billions of dollars annually, up front, and heaven
only knows what other financing comes in through the thousands of
“charities” that are really little more than fronts for mass immigration
to Israel to curtail Arab growth? If Zionism and its charities are
considered as legitimate and noble, why are Islamic ones put on
blacklists and the donors treated as if they are financing terrorism?
There is a double standard here.<br><br>
That Hamas has rejected terror operations against civilians and did its
best to do so in the service of achieving a realistic improvement for the
life conditions of its people is an authenticated fact, corroborated by
none other than the USA Congressional Research Service</i>, a Think Tank
that basically presents its conservative and Israel-friendly positions to
the Congress so that they become policy. In fact, in the document
coordinated by Jim Zanotti
<a href="http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/R40101.pdf">
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/R40101.pdf</a> Israel and Hamas,
Conflict in Gaza (2008-2009)</i>, we see that the quoted “reason” for the
onslaught of Gaza to “cleanse it of Hamas”, the rockets fired into
Israeli territory, was nothing but an excuse that the West drank down
with gusto as if it were cherry juice. The extremely rudimentary rockets
were recognised as NOT having been launched by Hamas, and not only that,
Hamas was viewed as being able and willing to suppress the attacks. It is
significant that the first victims of the Israeli attacks in Gaza were
the regular police forces who had just been trained, perhaps also for
this purpose. Zanotti writes:<br><br>
<dl>
<dd>For the first five months, the cease-fire held relatively well. Some
rockets were fired into Israel, but most were attributed to non-Hamas
militant groups, and, progressively, Hamas appeared increasingly able and
willing to suppress even these attacks. No Israeli deaths were reported
(although there were injuries and property damage), and Israel refrained
from retaliation.<br><br>
<dd>Nevertheless, each party felt as though the other was violating the
terms of the unwritten ceasefire. Hamas demandedunsuccessfullythat
Israel lift its economic blockade of Gaza, while Israel demandedalso
unsuccessfullya full end to rocket fire and progress on the release of
Israeli corporal Gilad Shalit from Hamas’s captivity.<br><br>
<dd>Israel cited the sporadic rocket fire as justification for keeping
the border crossings and Gaza’s seaport closed to nearly everything but
basic humanitarian supplies. Hamas, other Arab leaders, and some
international and non-governmental organizations involved in aiding Gazan
civilians complained that Israel was reneging on its promises under the
unwritten cease-fire agreement.<br><br>
<dd>If that were not enough, the author, certainly not sympathetic in any
way to Hamas, makes statements about the aftermath of the war where even
Israel admits that Hamas was not responsible for the rockets:<br><br>
<dd>Since Israel’s unilateral ceasefire began on January 18, 2009, there
have been about 40 sporadic rocket launches into southern Israel, far
fewer than occurred on average per day just before Operation Cast Lead.
Moreover, Israeli officials believe that smaller militant groups, such as
Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the Al Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades, and not
Hamas, have fired the rockets, as they did during the cease-fire
(although it is possible that Hamas is enabling or acquiescing to these
attacks while preserving deniability).<br><br>
</dl>So, Israel used the excuse of Hamas rocket launches to justify the
elimination of Hamas (by means of destruction of the entirety of Gaza)
through what they call “military operations” but the rest of humanity
knows is war, while they were aware that Hamas was neither the author nor
the facilitator of the rockets, any kind of excuse they pull out of the
magic hat to justify their actions should fall on deaf ears. Complaints
about arms smuggling through the most rudimentary of tunnels should stink
to high heaven when we see the Defense Budget Appropriations for
US-Israeli Missile Defense Programs in that same Congressional Report.
Iron Dome, David’s Sling and other “military aid” costing the American
people billions of dollars are described briefly. For every five
ineffective bottle rockets that are smuggled through a tunnel, the USA is
flying in full cargoes of arms and cases of cash to be spent by Israel
for their military “needs”. The double standards here also draw innocent
blood in violation of international law at the expense of your
hard-earned money. Again, from the Congressional report:<br><br>
<dl>
<dd>Israel may have used weapons platforms and munitions purchased from
the United States in its military operations in Gaza, reportedly
including, among others, F-15 and F-16 aircraft, Apache helicopters, and,
according to Israeli press reports, GBU-39 small diameter guided bombs
approved for sale by the 110th Congress following notification in
September 2008.<br><br>
</dl>Additionally, all unilateral truces between Israel and Hamas (called
by Hamas, not by Israel) were broken in every case by Israel. In many
cases, making incursions into the Occupied Territories, which legally
they are prohibited from doing, as civilian populations under occupation
(even if the “settlers” have left, Gaza is kept under siege by Israel)
are required to be protected by the occupier, not attacked. Israel, using
weapons and planes supplied for them by the good graces of the people of
the United States, bombarded streets where their targets (politicians and
clerics that Israel terms as “militants” if not worse) were located,
killing in an indiscriminate way anyone in the range, children included.
If that’s not terrorism, the word has no meaning.<br><br>
These are only a few of the myths in circulation. They represent just a
portion of the lies, disinformation and hasbara that circulates about one
of the major Palestinian parties, born from within, developing as all
parties do, from below, and legitimised by fair and legal elections.
Debunking these lies is a duty. One doesn’t need to agree to the entire
programme of Hamas, but one is obligated to recognise that they are
entirely different from the image that they have been straightjacketed
into. What Jessica Rabbit said in the film, “Who Framed Roger Rabbit”
could very well apply to Hamas: “I’m not bad, they just draw me that
way.”<br><br>
This article is part of the Palestine Think Tank and Tlaxcala initiative
The First Word War against Disinformation.</i> If you would like to
contribute your own original articles to this initiative, send them to
<a href="mailto:contact@palestinethinktank.com">
contact@palestinethinktank.com</a> or to
<a href="mailto:tlaxcala@tlaxcala.es">tlaxcala@tlaxcala.es</a> <br><br>
visit <a href="http://www.tlaxcala.es">www.tlaxcala.es</a> and
<a href="http://www.palestinethinktank.com">www.palestinethinktank.com</a>
<br><br>
<br><br>
</b><x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
<font size=3 color="#FF0000">Freedom Archives<br>
522 Valencia Street<br>
San Francisco, CA 94110<br><br>
</font><font size=3 color="#008000">415 863-9977<br><br>
</font><font size=3 color="#0000FF">
<a href="http://www.freedomarchives.org/" eudora="autourl">
www.Freedomarchives.org</a></font><font size=3> </font></body>
</html>