The darkness of the west

Howard

Why are you always right and everybody else in the wrong? Perhaps if Hamas was given a role in some sort of peace making this would make a difference? Remind me they were elected were they not?

Bo Stenberg

In re: Comment No. 1, above. I am reminded of the line from Blazing Saddles: "Blow it out your ass, Howard."

Al Ramy

Very true! In the history of conflicts, seldom the attacked did not retaliate in a big way to endless bombardments and rockets aimed at civilians. To demand restoration of services is the height of Chutzpah! Israel contends that Gaza has sufficient supplies to continue and it is dragged into another media shananigan, promoted by the BBC and the Arab media.

Lee Jakeman

What did we do in response to German attacks on our civilians during World War II? Ah, yes, I remember. Churchill said: "We shall bomb Germany by day as well as by night, in ever-increasing measure, casting upon them month by month a heavier discharge of bombs and making the German people taste and gulp each month a sharper dose of the miseries they have showered upon mankind." I believe that three million (yes that's THREE MILLION) Germans died in these retaliatory raids. And here we are, lecturing the Israelis.

Thomas Midgette

Howard, Hamas is where it is by its own choice. It has specifically refused to engage Israel in any form of peace talks, and has expressly stated it never will. Are you even remotely aware of the lunacy of your statement?

Hugh

It's pointless explaining the situation to Howard and his ilk. They get their up-to-the-minute news from the BBC and al Jazeera. Thus, they're in command of all the "facts".

Brian O'Connor

Howard wrote:

Why are you always right and everybody else in the wrong? Perhaps if Hamas was given a role in some sort of peace making this would make a difference? Remind me they were elected were they not?

Well, Howard, Hamas has a role in "some sort of peace making process."

It is their non-negotiable position that peace can come when Israel no longer exists!

So there is reason for you to take hope, right?

Brett Cunningham

Add the Telegraph to the list of publishers of the Hamas press release. See item "Israel forced into U-turn over Gaza" By Tim Butcher in Gaza City Last Updated: 2:12am GMT 22/01/2008

Nathan Potaznik

Sure the BBC and western media generally continue to malign Israel most unfairly – and why not, it’s so much fun and it is entirely cost free.

But the real villain in the piece is Israel itself and especially the Israeli government. That Israel continues to provide ANY material aid to a foreign entity Gaza that is daily attacking its (Israel’s) citizens is an absolute disgrace. The moral vanity – or worse – of an Israeli government that places the welfare of those who seek Israel's destruction ahead of the lives and welfare of its own citizens is obscene and deeply immoral.

Howard

Thomas. What rubbish. Do really think that nobody talks to Hamas? Peace in NI is a direct derivative of the Government talking to the IRA. It is not lunacy it is common sense. As for Stenberg, you do wonders for sensible debate.

Mladen Andrijasevic

“Perhaps if Hamas was given a role in some sort of peace making this would make a difference? Remind me they were elected were they not?” Perhaps if Howard would read the Hamas Charter things would become clearer? Article 7: The Prophet, Allah bless him and grant him salvation, has said: "The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, (evidently a certain kind of tree) would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews." (related by al-Bukhari and Moslem). Article 13: There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Article 32: The Zionist plan is limitless. After Palestine, the Zionists aspire to expand from the Nile to the Euphrates. When they will have digested the region they overtook, they will aspire to further expansion, and so on. Their plan is embodied in the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion", and their present conduct is the best proof of what we are saying. http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/mideast/hamas.htm

Mladen Andrijasevic

Now that thanks to Melanie Phillips British readers have for the first time found out that there have been 220 rocket attacks on Israel from Gaza in four days, will they ask The Guardian, The Independent, The Times and The Telegraph a simple question: " Why are you not reporting the facts?" Hamas's dupes: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=

Austin Barry

UK Media formula: Hamas/Palestine/Fatah = Good Israel= Very Bad America = Bad Islamic terror = Don't mention Result= errant nonsense.

Geoff Miller

Last night Jeremy Paxman interviewed an Israeli ambassador and made the same accusations. As I watched I thought the same as you. Gaza has a border with Egypt and a sea coast. The Ambassador said nothing of this - perhaps she needs to buy an Atlas. Why is it that every time an Israeli is questioned they never seem to stand up for their right to live in peace and expose Palestinian lies. They only help to perpetuate the lies when they soft peddle. How can any measures by Israel be "collective punishment" when Gaza can easily function through the Egyptian border? How is it that Palestinians who voted for Hamas should not have to take responsibility for the actions of Hamas? Why is it that the media keeps falling for the palestinian policy of "I'll scream and scream until I'm sick"? There has never been an arabic palestinian state. Those who are there can only trace themselves back to the early 1900's whereas Jews have been there for millenia. Any reader of the situation can only conclude that it is anti-semitism that drives the liberals and their media - the same people who cannot "recognise" the Islamic -go areas of the UK.

Brian

Well I agree with Howard. Both sides act like spoilt little children and to be honest I don't know why we even bother with either of them. I would get a UN force in to confiscate Israels illegal nuclear weapons and then forget about all of them. They are both as bad as each other.

Michael Medved

Howard, why don't you take your statement one logical and historical step forward? Perhaps if Hitler was given a role in some sort of peace making, like he always demanded in his statements from September and October 1939, this would've made a difference? Remind me, he was elected, was he not? Not even to mention the fact that he in a way recognized the British right to exist...

Leo Solomon

Mr.Howard reminds us that the Palestinians did vote Hamas into power knowing full well what the Hamas agenda was.The German people ,similarly ,elected the Nazis who made no secret of what they wanted to do.The Palestinians are just as culpable as the Germans were.Fotunately,for the Palestinians, they have the Israelis to deal with and not the British.

Alan Stoddart

What would Howard negotiate away to Hamas? As Hamas wants the complete destruction of Israel and the death of all Jews perhaps some compromise? How about Hamas being allowed to annex part of Israel, and how many Jews should they be allowed to kill? How about 6 million? Nice round figure. Always try something once, twice if you like it. And as for elected...George Bush was elected, twice, Blair three times, but I'll bet you don't think they are good guys, eh Howard?

David

The Times reporting was particularly worrying. Was it just me or did it seem that it was much more critical than usual? So much for the Jewish lobby... you'd never have guessed the paper's new editor is Jewish.

Adam B.

Howard, Hamas advocates the genocide of the Jews, period. (Read its charter). The IRA, despite its terrible atrocities, had a defined, narrow political goal, i.e. a united Ireland. Hamas regards Jews as "apes and pigs" who should be put to death. The IRA did not aim to destroy the UK, or commit genocide against the British people. The comparison is ill-judged and ignorant. I also think that telling the Jews to talk to people who want to annihilate them is morally disgusting, in light of the near successful attempt to annihilate them sixty years ago. I don't see Hamas spokesmen calling for talks, only western liberals. Don't you get it, Hamas doesn't want to talk!

Adam B.

I heard an interview yesterday on Radio 4 with an Israeli spokesperson. The BBC interviewer asked around six questions, each one an implied criticism of Israel. A Palestinian spokesman was then given free rein to say how it was all the fault of Israel - nothing to do with rockets at all, you see? In response to the Israeli's observation that the rocket attacks were a daily part of life for the people of Sderot, the BBC interviewer said "but how many people have been killed by these rockets?" That's right, not enough Jews had been killed to warrant a response to the rockets raining down on the snall working class town of Sderot. More Jews needed to die before any response was warranted. Hamas fires rockets aimed at killing civilians, Israel responds with a non lethal means to try to stop the attacks, and who does the BBC blame? The Jews of course. Typical of the sick, twisted, hateful stance of the BBC towards the Jewish state. It's a disgrace, and we pay for this propaganda.

Adam B.

Howard, re your comment "Why are you always right and everybody else is wrong?", as Mahatma Gandhi said, "You can be in a minority of one and still be right." And in any case, it might surprise you to learn that not "everyone" thinks like you either.

Howard

Adam B, "The IRA did not aim to destroy the UK, or commit genocide against the British people." I never said they did. I do not know how old you are or where you were living in the 70's when the IRA was bombing London, Guildford and Birmingham not to mention the Royal Family. This was at the same time as secret talks were being held with the IRA. Talks with Humas will happen if they have not started already. Another point. How do you think peace in Iraq and Afghanistan will be achieved if not by talking and doing deals. Why is Israel such a special case?

Dr. Irene Lancaster FRSA

To those who think the Times report was especially worrying, I have just contacted their journalist in the region, James Hider, to discuss his article and also today's, which puts the Israeli point of view. When I phoned the Times Jerusalem office just now, James was extremely open with me (unlike many media outlets one could mention). He says that The Times will be publishing more articles on events in the region and will also be taking account of the crisis in Sderot. I actually think that his reporting was as unbiased as it could be, given Israeli PR skills. James Hider

Scott B.

"almost certainly the only country on the planet which continues to provide fuel and other supplies to people who use them to continue to wage war upon it." And this is supposed to reflect well on Israel?? That after decades they still won't face the true supremacist nature of their opponents. You might have thought the Jewish people would have learnt that lesson from the last lot of supremacists who wished their destruction but apparently not. Extremely sad, and not something to take pride in.

Andy Gill

Of course it would never occur to the EU and the UN to call on Hamas to stop the rocket attacks - even though by accusing Israel of "collective punishment", they are admitting Hamas has done something wrong. Israel should never have caved in to this media frenzy. As long as Hamas continues with its odious rocket attacks, I fully support Israel's right to withold supplies.

Maven

Howard: "Remind me they were elected were they not?" OK then let's take your point. They were elected by The Palestinians to rule them - like the UK Govt rules us in the UK. So, if Hamas do something that Israel objects to then Israel has the right to impose sanctions (just like any other country does) and if the people suffer then its the fault of the Government they support and the fault of the Palestinians who democratically elected them. Here Israel punishes Hamas for firing rockets while ensuring that the people don't suffer to much. I hope they get the message.

Ahad Ha'amoratzim

Howard, as to your question "Why is Israel such a special case?" The answer is because Israel's enemies have candidly stated that their goal is not to regain one territory or another or to redress on grievance or another, but to wipe Israel off the map and kill every last one of Israel's citizens. The actions of Israel's enemies have borne this out, and so-called world community has seen fit to cooperate by pretending that the goals of these enemies is something else entirely, and by vilifying Israel for taking actions in self-defense that would be a given if conducted by any other nation under similar attack. All of which makes your comparisons to Iraq, Afghanistan and particular the IRA absurdly and obscenley obtuse.

ThothAL

1. Words are important: it is the government of Gaza - not Hamas - who sends the rockets. (Such usage would make clear the risibility of the talk from 'collectve punishment'.) 2. To Howard (January 22nd, 2008 11:55am)It is difficult to negotiate with sombody whose only aim to annihilate you. That makes not Israel but Hamas 'special'. (A friendly advice: you should try to recognize an argument when you see one.) 3. By the way, there is something what makes IRA special too: without the presence of the british army they would have been annihilated in short time by the unionist.

libaX

The Israelis & Arabs should stop exporting their land-related wars to other nations. Israelis want to make their land problems with the Arabs as a problem of the entire Western World; while the Arabs are trying to make their problem with the Israelis as a Muslim problem. Over the years, these two brothers & sisters have historically fought over everything & I think it’s time to ignore both of them. The Arab-Israeli conflict has become a vicious circle, therefore there’s no point of taking sides. Frankly, the Arabs & Israelis are behaving like little kids & those of you in this blog who are arguing for either side are not behaving any differently. Those in the West, who are defending either side, should pack their bags & go to live in the Middle East, put your money where your mouths are!

wonderer

Howard: "Remind me they were elected were they not?" Does that mean they have an automatic right to renegue on everything conceded by their predecessors, eg Arafat who represented to the world that the Palestinians had accepted the existence of Israel? By the same token, any new Israeli government can tear up any previous concessions. And Bo Stenberg, remember that we weren't prepared to negotiate with the IRA while they continued the bloodshed. (There was a misconceived attempt by the Major gov't to ask them to disarm prior to negotiations, but that's not exactly the same). And Libax, "I think it’s time to ignore both of them" was the initial position of Bush until 9/11.

Clive

Tim Butcher worked for the BBC before The Telegraph. Most of his articles show a familiar bias.

Justme

For more balanced reporting on Gaza's fuel crises read the 'Independent', to-day Jan 22: http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article3360043.ece

Stray Dingo

Howard, Howard, Howard...if I follow your reasoning I would then have had to recognize the Nazi Party and Mussolinis (had I been alive at the time) who from memory were also elected to power. No one ever said that democracy was perfect as it like most things in life are open to abuse from all that is evil...However, until you are able to show me another form of rule that gives me the same freedoms I have enjoyed whilst living here in the UK and my home land of Australia I'm happy to see it stay.

Lynne T

Brian and libaX: Immediately after the 1967 war that saw Israel capture lands from neighbouring countries that sent invading armies, Israel offered to return those lands in exchange for peace. The answer from the infamous Khartoum conference was "No, No, No". After a few years, Egypt and Jordan both managed to negotiate treaties with Israel, regain lost territories and enjoy a certain amount of trade and cooperation with Israel. Syria, which really does have significant territorial ambitions, chose instead to play games at the UN over the Golan Heights and Shabaa Farms, and uses its proxies in Lebanon to both hurl rockets at Israel at a safe distance from Damascus, and also to try to impose a Shia minority rule on a country with many religious/ethnic groups. The PA has had over 10 years to establish peace, order and good government on Gaza, the West Bank and Jerusalem, but instead continues to indoctrinate its children to become suicide bombers and operate like thugs, intimidating the civilian population generally, but the non-Muslim population in particular. There is no moral equivalency here between Israel, which accepted the 1948 borders which were greatly reduced from the original Palestine Mandate, and Hamas, which tolerates none except those who follow the particular Muslim Brotherhood ideology that they cleave to. On the other hand Arab citizens of Israel complain of being second class citizens, but have no desire to live under any Arab rule, PA, Egyptian or whatever, because they know they have a far, far better overall quality of life in Israel, than they could hope to enjoy if they turned in their Israeli citizenship.

Brian O'Connor

Howard wrote:

Talks with Humas will happen if they have not started already.

You seem to be quite a fan of the profoundly western way of doing business: achieving a workable solution through "talks" (presumably depending on compromise by both sides to achieve a mutually satisfactory end-point).

What makes you think Hamas views talks the same way you do? Is it possible -- just possible, mind you -- that Hamas looks at "talks" differently than we westerners are accustomed to?

Could it be that Hamas views "talks" more as an opportunity to buy time to incrementally wear down Israel and her friends to achieve Israel's destruction than as an honest attempt by a peace-loving people to reach a peaceful solution that would leave Israel intact and the Jews who live there, well, un-blown up?

Also -- what is the argument against Hamas, as an act of good faith, stipulating at the get-go of "talks" that Israel has a right to exist?

I mean, if Hamas won't stipulate that, what is there to talk about?

Just askin'.

Grahame Priest

The strange thing is that because the BBC believe this bunch of racist thugs without criticism, one can only conclude there is a deep antipathy to Israel running through the psyche of many in our media. But why? A country without it's people is merely an inky mark on a map and is hardly worthy of such antipathy. Perhaps something dark, murky and reminiscent of the middle of the last century lies buried deep in the collective subconscious of the soft-left? Sympathy and empathy for Palestinians has its place, but not at the cost of common sense. There's only so much sympathy and empathy I have for a culture that repeatedly shoots itself in the foot and then says “look at me. What a victim I am!” The fact that others are so ready to rush over with a first-aid kit and soft words of condolence only encourages them.

Maven

Disgusting BBC 5Live!! On teh 5Live-Drive program Peter Allen asked the BBC Jerusalem reporter what Hamas would say about the rocket firing. Quote: "They would say that it was legitimate resistance to the occupation of Gaza". WILL SOMEONE PLEASE COMPLAIN TO THE BBC THAT GAZA IS NOT UNDER OCCUPATION!!!! Sheesh!!

Hereford

Good point Brian. A tactic the North Vietnamese deployed to great effect. Engage in talks, with no intention whatsoever of making any concessions. Simply a strategy for diversion and delay while you quietly, or noisily prosecute and win the war.

libaX

Lynne T, thanks for your history lesson on Arab-Israeli conflict—I didn’t know about the three noes (No, No, No). But on further research, according to rightwing Israeli historian, Benny Morris, “… in part the Arab stand to the 3 noes was a response to Israel's unwillingness or inability to consider withdrawal from the West Bank and Gaza as part of any peace settlement”.—especially after annexing East Jerusalem in 1967 & making it the capital of the state of Israel.

Joe Strummer

The comments on here about the IRA and the legitimising of their "struggle" are as disgusting as Hamas. Let's get one thing straight, the Provos IRA attempted to overthrow democracy in Ulster by bomb and gun. Terrorism, indiscriminate sectarian murder, ethnic cleansing of Protestants on the Irish border was the IRA's methods for the "Prods " to start swimming to Britain. To even attempt to equate this as "legitimate" is appalling.

Brian O'Connor

Hereford wrote:

Good point Brian. A tactic the North Vietnamese deployed to great effect. Engage in talks, with no intention whatsoever of making any concessions. Simply a strategy for diversion and delay while you quietly, or noisily prosecute and win the war.

Thank you. Yes -- the North Vietnamese are a good example, as are the North Koreans, who tried (albeit somewhat less successfully) the same tactic (in both cases, the conscious strategy was the same: to drag things on until US public support failed).

It seems to me that it is the height of western ethnocentrism -- arrogance, really -- to believe that all other traditions value as we do the virtues of negotiation, materialism, compromise, fair-play etc. (I include materialism because there are traditions out there which are animated by the spirit world -- radical Islam being one -- and which don't give a rip about the primarily material world that most of us westerners inhabit.)

There's also, lurking in discussions such as this, the weird western conceit that we can reason our adversaries out of their hard line positions. Well, you can't reason someone out of a position he didn't reason himself into (how would you have persuaded the late Rev. Jerry Fallwell that adultery is not a sin?).

And then, there's the potentially fatal foolishness of the postmodern mind-set which holds that there's no such thing as an enemy, only a friend who doesn't understand.

Kotzabasis

It's fashionable in our age to support the underdog even if the latter leaves behind all his dirty marks, and in the case of Hamas all its deadly actions. And the media by supporting the underdog it props up its own ratings.

Jo

In Israel failed suicide bombers are treated and look after in Israeli hospitals, they are even allowed to speak from their hospital bed, telling the world they will doing it again, when recovered. Under Hamas any suspect of collaborating with Israel, dragged onto the street and shot in public, no questions asked. Then the body is throdden by womem in muslim dress. So much for Hamas civilisation against Israeli civilisation. Hamas glorifies death.

Hereford

By the way. An indication of the arrogance of the BBC. I made an official complaint about the bias of their reporting. Got an answer which referenced Honest Reporting and effectively accused me of being a representative of a pressure group. In other words, if it's critical, it must be from a vested interest and not from a concerned licence payer. And they have a wonderful strategy to stop a rebuttal of their excuses. Guess what? Any comments you make about their response bounce with a "please do not answer" email. Of course this forces the complainant to either give up, or as I did, post another complaint which references the first through their website. The thing that frightens me though is, what is really at the heart of this agenda of bias. Is it an unholy alliance, and if so, is it conscious or unconscious? Is it a form of nihilism an urge to self destruct. Or is it the universe re-balancing itself by easing an overburdening species into extinction so it can get on with the next experiment in evolution?

Maven

More on BBC. On Wednesday morning programme Katya Adler (I think) emphasised twice that Gaza was a prison, that it was the most densely populated place on Earth and that the the bombing of the border with Gaza to go on shopping expeditions was effectively a nose thumb at Israel to the effect "you can't keep us in". I then realised that Katya Adler, is a BBC employee and not the local representative of Hamas. I guess if you want to avoid kidnap you wear the badge "We are ALL Hamas now". Note that the language used by the BBC is often "... which Israel SAYS is in response to rockets" instead of "Which is in response to rockets". Melanie is 100% right about the disease that affects the BBC

Stanislav Koblinski

Howard; what kind of role can Hamas have in peace making in the light of this declaration by their chief? http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3497819,00.html Mashaal: Battle will continue even if Gaza drowns in fuel Hamas politburo chief says Palestinians' struggle must continue 'until the entire siege over the Gaza Strip is lifted and until the liberation of Palestine – all of Palestine'

Joe Strummer

I commented on this BBC Gaza lie yesterday and deliberately used a comparison with the IRA /Hamas due to the uncanny similarity in which the Unionist community of Ulster and the Israeli people are unfairly depicted, demonised and marginalised and are the victims of relentless politically biased reporting by the BBC and others in a simplistic good guy / bad guy scenario for their soundbite led viewers. Both Ulster and Israel are tiny democratic states which since their inceptions have been surrounded by enemies and threatened with annihilation by terrorists funded by abroad. The BBC especially distorted and lied about very serious incidents during The Troubles which only poured oil onto the fire, both the Holy Cross Primary and Garvaghy Road situations were glaring examples of this disgrace, but which did make their job look easier,ie, to portray the Unionist community as "bigots" to the rest of the watching world for their crime of simply refusing to cow to IRA terror. Since The Troubles began in 1969, thousand upon thousand of Protestant Orange Halls, meeting places for both Christian Worship and for both sides of the community to use as recreational facilities have been razed to the ground in deliberate arson attacks by the IRA. The BBC will not make one documentary on this appalling statistic never mind comment on it. The USA,Israel and Ulster are the natural "enemies" of the BBC and until its collective mind set is challenged by the threat of the licence fee abolition things will not change.

Ahad Ha'amoratzim

lbax, Benny Morris is not generally considered a reliable source for these matters. I was 17 at the time of the Khartoum conference (the three noes). Is rael had offered to return every square inch except Jeruslaem. And Israel has consistently offered to return territory. What Israel DID refuse was this: the Arabs demanded that Israel immediately return every square inch BEFORE the Arabs would even agree to talk. The Arabs said that AFTER Israel withdrew from all of the land captured during the war, the Arabs would decide whether to recognize Israel and whether to negotiate, but that they would not promise to do so in advance -- in other words, they reserved the right to launch further wars of extermination against Israel even after full withdrawal. Only a lunatic would have withdrawn under those circumstances.

S,J,

http://www.biased-bbc.blogspot.com/

Fun and games over at the Biased BBC site. Check out the honest reporting thread as well as the current one.

Puneet Madaan

I never knew the fact that three quarters of Gaza's electricity comes from electric grid, instead of generators.. things were more strange in BBC, which is rant fuel blockade in Gaza quarterly, yet never expressed his "Global warming" fumes concerning the high amount of fuel need to run a city like Gaza... this time i decided to look at oil consumption of the tiny radical area of Gaza, from BBC article's itself, which were describing that fuel blockade as a catastrophe's... I was keen at fuel consumption figures.... BBC added the info I needed, which i want to share here... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7203458.stm

If the promised 2.2 million litres of fuel is allowed in, it will mean that Gaza will only have enough fuel to keep hospital generators and some water pumps going for three days.

sebastian

Hamas is not getting everything it deserves from Israel. It's not being punished enough. I doubt if Hamas leaders, though, are "suffering" as their people are. Indeed, their people's public misery - mostly inflicted by their elected representatives' foolish and cynical behaviour - is their greatest asset. It's what earns them money and sympathy from the gullible. Hamas leaders are little more than the peddlers of their constituents' tears and the selfish beneficiaries of their anti-Israel, proxy war's financiers. And of course, all this profitable income would cease if the rockets stopped and there was peace and growing, self-created wealth as there could be. Sadly, conflict pays and I guess that certain Hamas bank accounts somewhere are looking, like Yasser Arafat's was, unusually healthy. That aside, which country anywhere would tolerate a daily rain of missiles aimed deliberately at its civilian population? Launched by an Islamist group sworn to destroy it. Can you imagine Belgium, or Kuwait, or the UAE, or Switzerland being passive over something like that for even a minute? Actually, I think Hamas is fortunate it hasn't been wiped out entirely. They are, after all, the intractable, sworn enemies of Israel so can't expect to be treated as honest brokers in any future peace negotiations. If Hamas wants war, then it can expect war. For the time being however, their own people are learning some of the uncomfortable consequences of voting fanatics into power. These consequences will not improve whilst the Islamists remain.

kevin

Very true, I've seen nothing on the 220 rocket attacks. Why do we continue to pay for Gaza to exist? It's only cash crop is human misery. It's only purpose is to focus the anger of the Arab Street away from the despotic, incompetent rulers of the Arab world.

Nisse R

Hamas loose it's power (!) if Gaza is in peace & democracy. So Hamas will continue to destry the Palestina until the bitter end.

John

When someone claims that 'Israel annexed East Jerusalem in 1967 and made it the capital of Israel', you really have to start wondering whether British schools are teaching their students to read, or to look up recent history in easily accessible public-domain resources. Every part of that quoted 'statement' is factually 100% wrong.

leo solomon

Liba x BENNY MORRIS RIGHT WING?-If he were any more left he'd fall over!!He was,until his recent epiphany,the chief purveyor of revisionist history to the left and islamo fascist media.