The Enemy Without

by Dorothy Gale Sat Jun 23, 2007 18:50

"In a landslide victory, they had incontrovertibly become the legitimately elected voice of the Palestinian people."

Hamas did not win a landslide victory. They got 42% of the votes cast. This gave them a majority in parliament but not a mandate to create an islamic state. Fatah, the PFLP & DFLP got more than 50% of the vote between them.Secular parties got 55% of the vote in total.

by David Manning - MediaBite Sat Jun 23, 2007 20:54 editors at mediabite dot org

The term 'landslide' is taken directly from an Irish Times report the day after the results were announced. The full quote was - “a spectacular landslide victory”. You can find it in the MediaShot this introduction links to.

http://www.mediabite.org/article_The-Enemy-Without--nda....html

The BBC reported a day earlier: "Hamas sweeps to election victory"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4650788.stm

"Hamas won the election, with 74 seats to the ruling-Fatah's 45, providing Hamas with the majority of seats and the ability to form a majority government on their own. "Hamas won 44 percent of the popular vote but 56 percent of the seats, while Fatah won 42 percent of the popular vote but only 34 percent of the seats" according to the New York Times [1]."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_legislative_el..._2006

by Miriam Cotton Sun Jun 24, 2007 07:30

A report from Green Left on 1 Feb 2006 sums up the reason for the victory - two brief excerpts here - full report at link below

"PALESTINE: Hamas wins election

Kim Bullimore

In a stunning victory, the Islamic Palestinian resistance group Hamas claimed 76 of the 132 seats in the second Palestinian Authority (PA) election on January 25. This was the first election for the Palestinian Legislative Assembly held in almost 10 years. Hamas decisively defeated the ruling Fatah party, which retained 43 seats. Hamas, which campaigned against corruption and for improved social services, was expected to do well in the election, but not to gain enough seats to take control of the PA in its own right. "

The election result was a direct message of defiance from the Palestinian people to the US and Israel. As Bullmore puts it later in the report:

"The continuing brutal military occupation of Palestine by Israel also contributed to the Hamas victory. Fatah’s inability to deliver promises of statehood and peace in the wake of the failed Oslo “peace” process has caused a decline in Fatah’s support. Oslo and subsequent “peace processes” strengthened the brutal 39-year-old Israeli occupation and led to an abysmal deterioration in Palestinian living conditions. In addition, even more land has been confiscated by Israel for the building of illegal Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) and Israel has continued to pursue its construction of the illegal apartheid wall. "

[Kim Bullimore is a member of the Socialist Alliance and lived in the Occupied Palestinian Territories in 2004, where she worked with the human-rights organisation International Women’s Peace Service. .]

http://www.greenleft.org.au/2006/654/7554

by Miriam Cotton Sun Jun 24, 2007 07:36 editors at mediabite dot org

An even handed assessment of Hamas from Jewish Voice for Peace:

http://www.jewishvoiceforpeace.org/publish/article_292....ml#q1

by computer expert Sun Jun 24, 2007 15:47

Go to the site you want to link to .Put the cursor arrow on the address (http.www.etc)of the site you want to link to- left click with your mouse ;the address will turn blue. Then go to ‘edit’ on the top bar ,click -a list will appear. On the list click on the word ‘copy’. Return to the comment you want the link to appear on . Go to edit again . Now click on the word ‘paste’. The link will appear .

Hope that helps .It took me about three years to work it out

by Miriam Cotton - MediaBite Sun Jun 24, 2007 17:13

From Schecter on Znet: 'The Foxification of Al Jazeera"

"You don't need to bomb Al Jazeera to change its direction," said my source. "There is a softer way to influence its direction by taking it over from within and it can happen quietly almost as if in slow motion. You 'broaden' some programs, announce new 'guidelines,' issue new edicts reinforcing top-down control, purge some professionals you don't like, and then give more positive unchallenged airtime to backers of US foreign policy. Washington would not be open about any behind the scenes role it is playing in all this for fear of triggering a very negative public reaction."

This has all been happening over the last month or so.

http://www.zmag.org/sustainers/content/2007-06/18schech...r.cfm

by Miriam Cotton - MediaBite Sun Jun 24, 2007 17:23 mcotton at mediabite dot org

http://www.zmag.org/sustainers/content/2007-06/21fletch...r.cfm

by Jim O'Sullivan Mon Jun 25, 2007 10:26

Rabbi Warren Goldstein also wrote the following,

"What if, in siding against Israel, the world is siding against the only beacon of freedom and democracy in the Middle East, thereby endangering us all because the fate of Jews is often a sign portending the future?"

How could anyone take seriously the author of such nonsense?

by Feyadeen Mon Jun 25, 2007 10:45

The good rabbi might care to explain - if Israel is the ANC of the Middle East, why was the Israeli state the most loyal and vociferous ally of the former apartheid regime in his home country? The Israeli elites clearly recognised the affinity between their treatment of the Palestinians and the SA regime's treatment of its own people. And why hasn't the ANC been so quick to recognise the parallel? Every prominent leader of the anti-apartheid struggle, from Mandela to Tutu, has spoken out in soldarity with the Palestinian cause.

Meanwhile, he turns to the Balfour declaration for proof of the legitimacy of Israel's conduct. A declaration issued by the then-greatest imperial power on earth, which held hundreds of millions of people in subjugation through brutal military occupation and exploitation. And issued by a man whose anti-Semitism was brazen and shameless, who introduced the first bill in the House of Commons to restrict immigation in response to the exodus of Jewish pogrom victims from Eastern Europe, and told the assembled MPs that Jews would be unable to integrate into British society and must be kept out.

Methinks Rabbi Goldstein might like to consider whether such folk are really true friends of the Jewish people, and wonder why those who stood full-square against fascism in Europe and defended the Jews in their darkest hour are now the same people defending the democratic rights of the Palestinians. Perhaps he's comfortable knowing that the most reliable defenders of Israel in the USA are the direct heirs of the Crusaders and the Inquisition, the people who believe that God will send the Jews to hell when the Rapture comes. If so, he really needs to get his head straight

by Miriam Cotton - MediaBite Tue Jun 26, 2007 13:51

Jonathan Steele exposes US action to destabilise Palestine and to break their democracy

http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,,2108926,00.html

by Miriam Cotton Tue Jun 26, 2007 17:18

http://www.irishexaminer.com/irishexaminer/pages/story....1.asp

by Feyadeen Wed Jun 27, 2007 14:07

Ah, a little visit from our old transparently racist friend "Observer". Sure, sure, South Africa was MUCH better off under apartheid - all the white people had nice swimming pools and all the servants they could want, the blacks lived in shacks and only spoke when they were spoken to, and there were nice death squads to torture and murder anyone who objected to this set-up. Equally, Mozambique and Angola were much happier when Portuguese colonists sucked them dry. It's terrible to see, isn't it, those uppity blacks in SA going on STRIKE and actually demanding HIGHER wages!?! Who do they think they are - human?

by Jolly Red Giant - Socialist Party/CWI Wed Jun 27, 2007 15:35

You said
'Remember the internet, Dorothy. I did - I carried out a google search and found an excellent article about Militant's position on the Falklands war.
Anyone who wishes can read it here, assuming I've managed to link successfully -

http://www.socialistreviewindex.org.uk/pubs/sr-js.htm

Now I'm not a supporter and/or member of the SWP (I live 12,00 km away, and don't have the health to be an activist) but it's obvious they've nailed you here.'

If you are going to criticise the position of the Militant/CWI on the Falklands War - at least do it with what we actually said not what the SWP pass off for analysis. The SWP were/are incapable of understanding Marxism and Marxist analysis and take a hop-skip and jump approach to critiquing political statements.

If you want to deal with the CWI attitude to the Falklands I suggest you don't just stop at the first item that comes up on a google search.

Try this

http://www.socialismtoday.org/108/falklands.html