Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : WAR on Terror. Will it engulf the Entire Middle East? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: michael97123 who wrote (11712)	1/23/2006 2:19:08 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 32591

Hamas, Al Qaeda, The Muslim Brotherhood - ideologically, they are all brethren. Hamas has just limited its theatre of action to Israel, that's all. You can't trust any of them to make a deal because Allah told them they have a right to conquer, and a right to lie, cheat, steal and kill in the struggle to conquer. A person who believes that will keep his word only in the face of an immediate threat. Even to turn aside from jihad for the sake of their own prosperity is sinful to them.

To: michael97123 who wrote (11712)	1/23/2006 5:44:11 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 32591

There are different stripes of fundamentalists. Do you consider Hamas al queda like or al quaeda like only as it applies to israel today???? It is a big distinction if holy war has more to do with land than wahabism. Do you honestly think virulent anti-semitism will disappear if "their" land is restored? I don't, not for a second. So long as the Holocaust can be denied without guffaws, and indeed believed by a very large part of the Muslim world, the land doesn't and won't matter. It's a pretext and a serious annoyance, but ultimately irrelevant to the goals of Islamic fundamentalism.

To: michael97123 who wrote (11712)	1/24/2006 1:06:43 PM
From: Peter Dierks	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 32591

Regime Change in Palestine? A vote for Hamas isn't necessarily a vote for genocide. BY KHALED ABU TOAMEH Tuesday, January 24, 2006 12:01 a.m. EST JERUSALEM--The departure of Ariel Sharon from the political scene has had no effect on the Palestinian Authority's plan to hold parliamentary elections. While some Palestinian leaders have expressed certain concern over the future of the peace process, others insist that Mr. Sharon's absence won't bring about major changes in the region because whoever succeeds him will have to follow in his footsteps. So barring last-minute disruptions, Palestinians are expected to vote tomorrow in the first parliamentary election since the death of Yasser Arafat. By all accounts, this election--the second of its kind--is different from the first one, held in 1996. Back then, the ruling Fatah party ran alone after Arafat and his inner circle handpicked loyalist candidates. Hamas and most of the Palestinian opposition groups boycotted the election for fear that their participation would be seen as recognition of the "treasonous" Oslo Accords. The result was a toothless parliament largely dominated by Arafat's buddies, another in a long list of impotent institutions run as private fiefdoms by Arafat and his cronies for four decades. Many Palestinians are convinced that Arafat's death has created a golden opportunity to get rid of the corrupt regime he left behind. That explains why most candidates who are running in the elections have focused on ethical, not political, issues. They have promised voters that they will fight financial corruption and lawlessness, and create a transparent government. Most importantly, the candidates promise to use international aid for the welfare of the people, and not plonk it in secret bank accounts. Aware of the Palestinians' growing disillusionment with the Palestinian Authority, Hamas has devoted much of its election campaign to explaining why there is a need for regime change in Ramallah and Gaza City. Its candidates are running under the banner of "Reform and Change"--a slogan that has attracted an increased number of supporters. Proof of growing support for Hamas was provided in the past year by the results of municipal elections held in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Over a million Palestinians now live in jurisdictions run by Hamas mayors and municipal councils. The results have been so damaging for the Palestinian Authority that it was forced to cancel local elections in Gaza City and Hebron, two cities where Hamas is also likely to score landslide victories. Hamas's decision to focus on financial corruption, nepotism and anarchy is regarded by many Palestinians as wise. Had the Islamic movement put the destruction of Israel and the continuation of suicide bombings at the top of its platform, it would not have attracted such support: The majority of Palestinians are either exhausted by the intifada or simply don't believe that the elimination of Israel is realistic. And many who cast their ballots for Hamas in the municipal elections were quick to explain that this should be seen as a vote of protest against the Palestinian Authority rather than affiliation with fundamentalists and suicide attacks. Even some Christians in Bethlehem and Ramallah are not afraid to admit that they voted for Hamas. The rampant corruption of Arafat and the top brass of the Palestinian Authority--the only ones who are accused of mishandling the billions that the international community, including the U.S., poured in after Oslo--has been a boon to Hamas, which has attended to the provision of services to a desperately impoverished public. True, Hamas is a terrorist movement responsible for gruesome killings of innocent civilians. However, the movement that was founded in 1988 also runs a vast network of social, educational, health and economic services, especially in Gaza. In other words, Hamas has been doing exactly what the Palestinian Authority should have been doing all along. Yet corruption is only part of the problem. The majority of the Palestinians (more than 65%) were prepared to give Abu Mazen a chance to bring about real change; that's why they voted for him in the last presidential election. He ran on a platform that called for ending corruption, and told the voters that he wanted to dismantle the armed gangs, including his own supporters in the Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, and create a democratic order. But ever since he took over, the situation has deteriorated to a point where even his top aides admit that they are no longer in control. The ruling Fatah is witnessing a bitter power struggle between two generations--the local grass-roots "Young Guard" and the "Old Guard," which consists of Arafat cronies. Many Palestinians don't see this conflict as a power struggle between reformists and corrupt old-timers, but as a plain fight between bad guys. Many communities are controlled by armed thugs. These gangs, which consist mostly of Fatah militiamen and dissident security officers, have discovered that in order to get a job or money, all you need do is kidnap a foreigner or occupy a ministry building. When a group of Fatah militiamen recently seized Bethlehem City Hall and kicked out all the workers, Abu Mazen personally phoned the group's leader and promised to recruit him and his cohorts as officers in the Palestinian security forces. Sources close to Abu Mazen say he'd have preferred to see the elections postponed to avoid a humiliating defeat. Yet he is under massive pressure from the U.S. to proceed, and does not want to be seen as having delayed the election out of fear that Hamas might win. U.S., Israeli and European threats to punish the Palestinians if Hamas takes over the authority have only boosted Hamas's appeal. Palestinians wonder why decision-makers elsewhere want them to vote for the same old regime that robs people of a decent, secure life. Why, they ask, must they vote for the very men they long to punish? Mr. Toameh is the Palestinian affairs writer for the Jerusalem Post. opinionjournal.com