Samy, you're right, but it doesnt mean anything you think it means

Submitted by Bos (United Kingdom), Jun 19, 2007 at 06:38

Hamas was a legal government, then they voluntarily formed a government of national unity as a supposed solution to national difficulties, that was also legal. They then channelled world bank and IMF aid £370,000,000.00 into arms purchases and religious institutions (make the people poor, blame the enemy and then feed, medically treat and educate the people from hamas mosques, with the enemies money! Pure genius!! its also called corruption and illegal arms trading. That wasnt legal.

Then Hamas used a private army to bomb and shoot the official security forces into oblivion even using bombs in tunnels that must have been prepared at least weeks in advance. THAT WAS ILLEGAL. They fired weapons from Ambulances, THAT WAS ILLEGAL, they pulled injured men from ambulances and shot them, on one occasion 41 times, THAT WAS ILLEGAL, they shot unarmed and entirely peaceful 'peace' protesters, THAT WAS ILLEGAL, they bombed and burnt state buildings as 'pol pot esque' symbolic acts, THAT WAS ILLEGAL, they rejected the constitutionally legitimate dissmisal of the government and call for fresh elections, THAT WAS ILLEGAL, and all along they continued to broadcast childrens programmes designed to encourage suicide bombing, THAT WAS ........G-D KNOWS WHAT THAT WAS.

Ask yourself how you would view the situation if George Bush utilised a texan christian Militia to burrow under the pentagon and murder his own army, because he found congress and the senate difficult.

AMERICAN AND ISRAELI NON ACCEPTANCE OF HAMAS GOVERNMENT:-

Both the American and Israeli governments accepted the democratically elected Hamas government. Furthermore they accepted its own descriptions of its nature and aims and decided they wanted nothing to do with it.

It has never before been claimed as a principal of democracy that once a government has been fairly elected, other governments must give it free money, When you consider the actions and intentions of Hamas towards America and Israel it is not only not a democratic requirement to give it Money, but it would also be an insanity and a failure of there duty to there democratic electorate.

No Government is obliged to adopt any particular policy or diplomatic stance by Virtue of a foreign election no matter how democratic, and in reality no one thinks it does. The European media is damn sure that its governments should not cooperate with American foreign policy, and those demanding no government boycott Hamas are unlikely to have previously demanded that rejectionist Islamic and Communist countries end there economic, cultural, academic, diplomatic and political boycots of Israel.

Those who called for an acceptance of the democratically elected Hamas government were in fact asking for the money of American and European tax payers to be given to an organisation that is trying to groom an entire generation for suicidal and racist mass murder, they are also likely to be those who call most loudly for a boycott of Israel.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".