This report remarks that "the zigzag reflects the Islamic militants' conflicting objectives," but Hamas has only one objective: destroying Israel in order to impose Islamic rule. It is only the tactics that vary. "Hamas backtracks on missile apology," from the Associated Press, February 6:
GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip - The Hamas government in Gaza distanced itself Saturday from a statement it made earlier this week in which it expressed regret for harming Israeli civilians in rocket attacks.
The zigzag reflects the Islamic militants' conflicting objectives.
Hamas, which seized Gaza by force in 2007, is trying to reach out to the West in hopes of winning recognition and getting Israel to lift its blockade of Gaza. However, Hamas is also reluctant to discard its violent ideology for fear of losing credibility at home.
The apology for the rockets was part of the Hamas government's response to a U.N. report that alleged both Hamas and Israel committed war crimes during Israel's three-week Gaza offensive last winter.
The U.N. investigators, headed by jurist Richard Goldstone, accused Hamas of firing rockets indiscriminately at Israeli civilians. The U.N. report also said Israel used disproportionate force and deliberately targeted civilians. Some 1,400 Gazans were killed, among them hundreds of civilians, as well as 13 Israelis.
During the war, Gaza militants fired some 800 rockets and mortar shells into Israel, killing three Israeli civilians and wounding about 80. The attacks forced hundreds of thousands of Israelis to seek protection in bomb shelters.
Hamas wrote to the U.N. that its primitive rockets were not intended to hit civilians, but often strayed from their course. Hamas said the rockets were meant to defend Gazans against Israeli military strikes, but also maintained that the Palestinians have a right to resist Israeli occupation.
"We apologize for any harm that might have come to Israeli civilians," the Hamas government wrote.
On Saturday, the government claimed the response to the U.N. was misinterpreted.
"The report that was submitted regarding the Goldstone report does not include any apologies and what took place was an incorrect interpretation of some of its wording," the government said in a statement.
The government did not attempt to explain the contradiction and Hamas officials declined comment.
Hamas likely came under domestic pressure after news of the apology became public, said Gaza analyst Naji Sharrab. "They are addressing two different audiences," Sharrab said of Hamas.
Hamas militants have maintained an informal truce with Israel since the war ended in January 2009, but smaller Palestinian groups continue to sporadically fire salvos.
Israel rejected Hamas' initial apology. Human rights researchers said most of the rockets fired from Gaza hit civilian areas in Israel, suggesting Hamas deliberately targeted civilians....
1400-13 - good score, but next time Israeli has to go for a shutout.
As for this:
"Hamas wrote to the U.N. that its primitive rockets were not intended to hit civilians, but often strayed from their course."
The solution is obvious - the UN has to get Hamas reliable, accurate, high-tech rockets with GPS guidance systems so that these unfortunate accidents can be avoided in the future.
"It offered no explanation for the contradiction."
OOOHHH! OOOHHH! I got one! There is in actuality no contradiction. Yeah, that's right, none. For in the mindset of Hamas (and Islam in general), there are no 'civilians' amongst the non-Islamic population. All Israeli Jews are considered legitimate targets (as are all Gentiles), and therefore are not considered 'innocent.' I even came across a reference that to Hamas infants are a legitimate target because they could grow up and become soldiers in the IDF and may kill a muslim (sorry, but I don't have the source for that). But to apologise in any way would be a violation of the Hamas charter in which death to Israel is a key goal. Any apology would be about something that does not exist in the Hamas mindset.
So, no, no real contradiction here, folks. None at all.
There is only one way for the Middle East to get peace - Abolish Islam.
"They are addressing two different audiences"= Talking out of both sides of their butt.
Disproportional force????? Sense when was War supposed to be fair???
Does the UN really have a law against the disproportional use of force on the books? Or is this just a convoluted mess of B.S. they like to pass around? Like your Neighbor who always "walk their Dog" in YOUR yard.
Hamas would not exist if it were not for the Collective Anti-Semitic nature of Europe. The Islamic Block in the UN is understandable given the nature of the Beast. But Europe, with all this supposed guilt over the Holocaust, shows a big disconnect. If the Guilt is as deep as we are lead to believe by all the play the subject receives. Then one should expect, by logic, that preventing anything like it happening again would be of paramount importance. Only that does not appear to be the case.
The Europeans have made their bed and covered them with sheets from paradise.
My most recent take on what we can do to minimize "civilian casuslties".
http://freemendo.typepad.com/undaunted/2010/02/but-whos-counting.html
A beautiful sentiment, darcy. Would that someday it come true. The "but for" cause of a lack of peace in the Middle East is the continued existence of Islam in that tragic region of the world. Take Islam out of the Middle East and peace will break out all over. Does anyone really think that if 99% of the Arabs were Christian that we'd have the damn mess in the Middle East we've had now seemingly forever? Islam is the root cause of almost all the strife and tragedy that prevails in the Middle East. Anyone who asserts otherwise is either culpable of mendacity or ignorance.
The hamas spokesman, Hammi TuFaci Al-Cyclopi, issued bi-lingual statements utilizing simultaneous translation with embedding hypnotic suggestions so that the listeners could only hear the message in their own language:
http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/01_04/pigEUROPICS_468x448.jpg
The hypno-vision activating photo can also be used as a detection device: it is variously seen as either as an eloquent and handsome noble spokesman for peace and glory, or as a an omen of a brave new world where we will be able to breed pigs with extra pork chops and bacon.
Hear, hear!
Why again are we so hell-bent on giving these people their own country?
Hamas likely came under domestic pressure after news of the apology became public, said Gaza analyst Naji Sharrab.
...............
"Hamas likely came under domestic pressure"? But aren't we always hearing that Gazans don't really support Hamas' "extremist" positions, but only voted them in in protest of Fatah's corruption?
Wellington and champ - glad you enjoyed.
I'm always amazed when world "leaders" speak about the hope of "Middle East peace" - as though that's a possibility with Islam in the equation.
Memo to: World Leaders
Due to the Jihad doctrine in Islam, and due to the rabid, insane hatred of Jews and Christians in Islam, there can NEVER be "peace" in the Middle East. Abolish Islam, have the Middle East become Judeo-Christian again, and peace will naturally follow. End Memo.
People, we are smarter than World Leaders - but, of course you already know that.
Lol I thought that's exactly what Iran were trying to do??
I don't mean to highjack this thread, but I would like to share the following with you readers.
When I clicked on the link to the original source of this story, the Khaleej Times Online (AP) - published in the UAE no less (who is this brave dhimmi?), I became curious about another article carried in the same publication. I clicked on the link to the "Petraeus slams barbaric Al Qaeda attacks" article and read of Petreaus' comment on the moral bankruptcy of the Al Qaeda ideology.
I suspect many of those on my mailing list already believe I have gone loony since I've begun to disseminate articles from Jihadwatch. I don't blog, but I do routinely mail out what I think others should read. No doubt some think I'm nuts to condemn Islam so persistently. Nevertheless, I could not resist distributing not only this piece on the duplicity of Hamas, but also the Petraeus article with a covering note that I would like to share here. I invite anyone to correct anyting I may have misstated. I am open to teaching and criticism if I have gotten something wrong. At the same time I encourage all of you to do similar acts of forced education. I'm pretty sure Robert, Hugh and the others at this site would agree we all should do our part to change things. Here's my note.
" http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticleNew.asp?col=§ion=middleeast&xfile=data/middleeast/2010/February/middleeast_February190.xml
The Al Qaeda ideology of which Petraeus speaks is Islam. But he is incorrect to infer that the Islam of Al Qaeda is an extremist form of Islam practiced only by Al Qaeda. There is no such thing as extremist Islam, nor radical Islam, nor some fanatical sect or sects of Islam. There is only one correct Islam based upon the content of the Koran and related guiding religious principles. What is the ideology of Islam ?
It is an ideology that has as its core principle the creation, by jihad and forced conversion, of a worldwide, supremacist, faith based, totalitarian caliphate governed by Koranic Sharia law. No ifs, no ands, no buts. The sooner this immutable truth becomes appreciated the better off the world will be assuming free socities have the will to act.
Muslims of good will born into the faith, those who reject the classic Islamic principles and who share in humanist values, need to act responsibly. Reformist movements need to be undertaken immediately and forcefully.
p.s. Among other things Sharia law proscribes:
1. Death for homosexuality.
2. Death for leaving the Islamic faith (apostasy) . No freedom of thought or religion.
3. Death for publicly criticizing Islam. No freedom of speech.
4. Treats women as second class chattel
5. Requires conversion by force if necessary of any non-Jew or non-Christian to Islam. Those Jews and Christians who want to continue to practice their religion may be permitted to do so only if they pay a tax, acknowledge their inferiority, and remain subject to the overriding imposition of Sharia law.
I invite anyone who thinks I exaggerate to reply."
darmanad
there's a slip which needs to be corrected.
For "Among other things, Sharia law proscribes', it should be "Among other things, Sharia law prescribes".
To PROscribe something is to forbid it (that's what the dictionary tells me).
To PREscribe something is to enjoin or command it (hence the doctor's 'prescription').
Thanks.