we must adjust our distorted view of hamas

[sherazade]

www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article5420584.ece

Thanks for linking. Northern Ireland was resolved by keeping lines of communication open.

Thanks for that. Its interesting reading.
It answered some questions I had.

bump

Better check this one too, though. Maybe not so distorted?? www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article5477420.ece

a better one!

Good links. Thanks.

www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/30/hamas-reprisal-attacks

www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/30/hamas-reprisal-attacks

Absolutely Bubble99. It amazes me how they can attack their own people like this and then expect everyone else to believe that they don't use human shields.

I don't need to change my view of Hamas thanks. They're thugs.

YEs - is good to get a balanced view. Just goes to show that for every person saying hamas should not be blamed, then there are plenty of others saying the exact opposite.

What Grim said.

I "must adjust" my "distorted view of Hamas"?

I don't like being told I "must".

Luckily here in Britain, my legs won't get shot up or my family threatened by Hamas if I don't comply.

It was the same in NI. The IRA acted as unofficial "police" within the Catholic community, dishing out knee cappings etc and generally behaving thuggishly with their own people, the actual politics being an excuse and sideline. I knew one girl (when I went on holiday out there) whose father had been murdered because he worked as a building contractor on an RUC police station. In the end it worked against them of course, and it will likely be the same with Hamas.

lol, winkywhatever it is, you have obviously taken the pronoun 'we' with the imperative 'must', very very personally. How strange.

This is a collective 'we', meaning the world at large, and namely, the authority responsible for the forging of peace and stability in that area. It is also 'we' , the audience that is susceptible to distortion in the media, and those who have an interest in the news of this area. If you insist on seeing things one- sidedly, then no need to read the article at all really, let alone take deep offence , and begin to envisage the kinds of punishment that hamas officials would love to inflict on you personally, lest you refuse to adjust your views. The use of 'must' is in the same context- the quest for peace, not war. the quest for a genuine reconciliation that involves BOTH parties and communication between them.

i found this line, sickeningly hilarious:

'me legs wont get shot up (?) or my family threatened by hamas'.

See, this is the emotive 'them and us, good vs evil', inflammatory language of idiots that people are just no longe buying anymore.
this kind of rhetoric may work in the illterate slums of, say, america, for example, where people still believe that Gaza is a terrorist organisation, and that ehud barak and co, are rooting out baddies in schools and hospitals.

so when you simply don't have an intelligent argument, simply start talking about terrorists blowing things up. works a treat every time, eh?

Why is there no uproar about this particular outrage against the Palestinian people? Interesting.

I feel so sorry for those poor b*stards. They were screwed by Arafat who stole millions from them and now they're under the cosh of Hamas who will keep attacking Israel.

That was a nasty post, Sherazade.

I fear you're becoming a bit of a one-trick-pony on this issue.

and you, desiderata, are one of the nice people on mumsnet , i presume?

Sherezade - I think you will find that it is not just in the slums of america (?) that people believe that Hamas is a terrorist organisation.

It really is quite a commonly held opinion - and exists regardless of how the person feels about the two sides in the gaza conflict.

Re-read my post, i did not say that people believe 'hamas' is a terorist organisation, people believe THAT GAZA is a terrorist organisation, Recently saw people randomly being interviewed in some states asking them what they thought of the conflict. when asked what gaza was, one man said 'gaza, isn't that a terrorist group?'. you know, the same place that produces people who didn't know that tony blair was our pm..

It ain't about being nice, Sherazade. I have never claimed to be that!

But it's a topic that seems to set your vitriol levels rising to a point where, if anyone disagrees with you, you are incapable of being rational.

I didn't know that anything I wrote was particularly irrational. I'd be more inclined to believe it was nasty than irrational. I thought Winkywolas offence taken at the title of the article I posted - not my words/article btw-was a bit tantrum-like ('don't tell me i must do anything! thank god you can't shoot my leg off!, that type of thing). I do think this type of rhetoric is irrational and emotive. I also think it is nasty.

Well that makes no sense

Gaza is an area of land. Of course it's not a terrorist organisation. It is soil.

And what has someone in the slums of america (?) thinking that gaza was a terrorist organisation got to do with your OP link which is about Hamas.

I've not seen people tarring all who live in gaza with the same brush. I've seen plenty of people saying how bloody sorry they feel for the ordinary folk caught up in the conflict, while at the same time apportioning at least some blame for the situation to israel and hamas.

this is my point pooka:

the post i was opposing, insinuated that gaza is a land where the gov. hamas are so evil, they would shoot your leg off for disagreeing with them about petty issues 9or anything for that matter).

i went on to say that, this kind of rhetoric, of extreme good (israel for e.g) versus extreme evil (hamas for e.g), is only believed by people , for example, in the more destitute , less educated areas of the states where ignorance is SO rife that people do not even know the basics of the conflict, for example that gaza is a land, not an organisation. these are the same people who barely know anything about anything, but are ready to brandish their guns in aid of fighting terrorism. this is 'george bush' style politics. Using emotion and binary opposites, to provoke the mob.
oh dear, i have blabbed on a bit..

www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/30/hamas-reprisal-attacks Read it sherazade]]

This