30 thoughts on “Hamas, No Leopard, Seems to Be Changing Its Spots – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.

  1. How naive can you be ?

    Here is a list of few statements by Hamas from two days ago, so which Hamas official should we believe ?

    Hamas: Recognizing Israel jeopardizes rights
    “Hamas will accept a Palestinian state on the 1967 borders, but will maintain its refusal to recognize Israel, party leader Mahmoud Az-Zahhar said Wednesday”
    “Az-Zahhar also said, however, that a formal recognition of Israel would “cancel the right of the next generations to liberate the lands”
    the paragraph above means : even if Israel would withdraw from the west bank, and a Palestinian state is to be created, this is not the end of the conflict, and not the end of demands.
    “At the same time, the Hamas leader confirmed the decision reached with Fatah to maintain the truce with Israel, calling the move “part of the resistance, not a cancellation,” and noting that “truce is not peace.””
    So….Azahar said it itself, and under the current provisions and stipulations noted by Hamas, i wouldn’t even negotiate with them.
    Seems that the US congress is thinking in similar terms and puts pressure on the president to cu aid to the Palestinian authority.
    Az-Azahhar quotes were taken from Maan News, and i hope Richard, that you do not consider Maan as an Hasbara/ propaganda site.

    1. This has been posted by another commenter making virtually the same lame claim that you have. Please DO NOT duplicate material already posted. Go find what I wrote at that time about this article. I can’t repeat myself. It would drive me to distraction.

      1. Oh yes you are right, I did post that article on the 11.
        Since it was an interview conducted by Maan, you were unable to cry Your usual Hasbara, Hsbara, you were unable to discredit the source, so…. you just said nothing.

        1. Hala, Richard responded at length to my posting of the article
          from Ma’an.

          You owe him a small apology.

          Richard may never agree with what you believe, but he is consistent and he is honest. If he says that he discussed something, believe him.

          1. Fuster,
            i posted a comment which includes the exact above quote on the 11 in this thread https://www.richardsilverstein.com/2011/05/07/hamas-meshal-offers-new-pragmatism/

            never received an answer, he may have replied to you but it wasn’t in the same thread.

            let me tell you a small secret i don’t read all the threads, i read what Richard writes in response to mine and few other things in the same thread.

            If Richard would have executed civility instead of the “don’t bother me answer” and would have provided a link to the right thread this would have been avoided.

          2. I’ve said this many times before to other commenters: I simply don’t have the time or inclination to go back & find links for people who speak here in bad faith, presume bad faith on my part, & are generally hostile. Civility generally brings its own rewards around here. So many commenters demand so many times that I prove I’ve written something that I’d do nothing but archival research for them if I answered every query.

            But I do not that Hala feels no need to apologize for his false accusation, which is instructive. Derech eretz anyone?

        2. Oh grow up already! Move on! You have no understanding whatsoever of human nature, historical context and compromise.

          Yes, it’s hasbara, as seen and interpreted thru YOUR EYES! You would exploit the blather of a drunk on a street corner if it suited your selfish, narrow-minded, intentions!

          1. Nice, before it was Hasbara, no i have no understanding etc.

            Let me ask again who should i Believe, the statements coming from who ? There is a thick line connecting Dr. Al-Zahaar statements to his book published in 2008 in Algiers.
            the Book is titled “No Place {for Jews} among the nations”
            i will let you guess what is the nature of his book.

            i am not trying to score points, i am asking a serious question,as a Jew, statements like his – considering his publications – make me personally very nervous. keep in mind that Hamas doesn’t retract their previous statements or covenant, and most of their reps. denounced the USA for killing UBL (including Haniya, Mashel Al-Zahar & Others) which shows in my opinion a support to a very extreme line.
            they seems like an extreme organization to me, every time someone states something that may be interpreted as moderate another rep comes out with the same extreme rhetoric.
            so which Hamas voice should we adhere to ?

          2. @ Hala
            I can’t find any serious proofs of a book by Mahmoud al-Zahar with the title of “No Place (for Jews) among Nations”. It’s only mentioned on various Israeli sites such as ‘terrorism-info’ etc, and though there’s a ‘photo’ of the book, it looks like a fraud. The book isn’t mentioned on his wikipedia-entry either. What a strange title, with ‘the Jews’ in brackets in the middle.
            Don’t tell us you’re propagating hoaxes.

            For those who understand French: an interview on TV5 Monde from last week with a French medical professor and surgeon, Christophe Oberlin, who has been to Gaza more than 30 times to operate and to form Palestinian surgeons. In his book that coming out these days “Chroniques de Gaza”, Mahmoud al-Zahar writes the afterword, not as a member of Hamas but as a fellow doctor-surgeon, and as a friend. From min 3:10, the journalist and Oberlin discuss al-Zahar’s afterword where he’s mentioning the Jewish Holocaust, and Oberlin says earlier in the interview that he has never heard any words of hate towards the Jews, that Palestinians in Gaza might be opposed to Israel but nobody ever talked about expulsing the Jews. Al-Zahar lost two sons – his got a son and a daughter left – and a son-in-law who were all killed by the Israelis.

            PS. You’ve now written “Az-Zahar”, “Azahar”, “Az-Azahar”, “Al-Zahar” and “Al-Zahaar”. Couldn’t you just decide for one of them ? And there’s no “Mashel” either. Maybe if you try five different spellings, one of them might be correct.

          3. @ DY
            You are the Arabic native speaker around here, My Arabic is very limited, but with the help friends who work for google i was able to find a link to a discussion forum in Arabic that deala with the book

            the book was written and does contain exactly what ‘terrorism-info’ claims.

            nice try.

          4. Another comment rule: propaganda sources like Terrorism-Info are not credible & not acceptable as sources to prove anything. Don’t use such sources here, don’t link to them. And there are a number of left wing source I include in this group as well. If you tell me Terrorism-Info says something I’ll believe just the opposite is the case unless you can find a credible source that confirms it.

            And again, Mahmoud Zahar isn’t the leader of Hamas, not even the 2nd in command, not even a member of the Hamas Gaza gov’t. So why do we care what he says if he even says what you & Terrorism-Info claim he does?

          5. @ Hala)
            You think we’re idiots around here ?
            The name of the book is “Lâ mustaqbal bayna al-umam” (No future among the nations) and there is no mention of Jews but of Zionism. It’s your problem if you can’t distinguish between the two.
            And there’s absolutely no informations confirming your sayings in the link you posted. In fact there are no informations except the photos. If you don’t read Arabic, how come you know that the book contains what you say ? You better ask “your friends working at google” to find something else. What I do understand is that you have no other informations than what you picked up on some propaganda-site.
            Khalass, kamaltu ma’aki. Finished with you. Keep on spinning.

          6. @ Dy look at the second link i provided it’s a shame that you simple lying in such way, You know i may not speak arabic but i do know how to use google. translation is not that smooth, but clear enough to get the message.

            the second link i provided is a critique of the book by someone and from it i quote a paragraph with the original Arabic text below, i didn’t change a thing, and this is not from an Israeli related site.

            that the Jews were expelled from many centuries of all European countries because of their involvement in the assassination of Kiesrthm and their rulers, and Radio strife and hatred between the sects in the world’s peoples, noting that they were the first disease of the wounded anti-Semitism.
            وأشار النقاد إلى أن الكاتب–الزهار-سلك سلوك الباحث الذي حيد عواطفه ومشاعره وانبرى متسلحاً بالمنطق العقلي وبلسان التاريخ والمراجع الخاصة،مؤكدين أن قراء هذا الكتاب سيجدون كاتباً محايداً لم يلجأ للمبالغة في عرض الآراء والمواقف،ولا التعصب في فرض فكرة معينة”.ويوضح كتاب الزهار،أن اليهود طردوا منذ قرون طويلة من كافة الدول الأوروبية بسبب تورطهم في عمليات اغتيال قياصرتهم وحكامهم،وإذاعة الفتن والبغضاء بين الملل في شعوب العالم،مشيراً إلى أنهم كانوا أول من أصيب بداء معاداة السامية

          7. You’re quoting a review of a book written in a language you don’t understand by a reviewer you haven’t even named & based on what the reviewer says is in the book you’re arguing that Zahar in fact wrote these things? Really? Say it ain’t so.

            And btw, Google Translate is NOT an authoritative source for translations. I sometimes use it for Hebrew texts if I need help with words or phrases & I KNOW Hebrew & can see how badly it screws up. I can’t imagine using it as a trustworthy source for a language I don’t know.

          8. @ Hala)
            Maybe you should collect all your ‘informations’ before posting. When I answered I hadn’t seen your second link. In your first link that your pretend discusses the book, there is nothing.
            What I do understand, is that you know no Arabic, that you haven’t read this book,that you post links without any idea what it contains, but that you have “friends working with google” (sure it’s not Yuri Edelstein ?) feeding you with informations. You’ve discredited yourself. I don’t have to.

          1. C’mon Richard, go a little easy on the guests.

            I said that Hala was wrong, that’s not anywhere near the same as calling “liar”

            and it’s not something that I think should be said any too quickly.

          2. Don’t you think HE jumped “too quickly” to assume that when I said I’d addressed the article that I was lying? If someone accuses me of lying they better have the goods otherwise I will not be charitable.

          3. @ Richard)
            “Hala” is an Arabic female name (means ‘sweetness’), but we know that this Hala is neither Arab nor sweet, so maybe she isn’t a female …

          4. @ Richard
            1. I didn’t claim you were lying, my initial though was that you had nothing to say to my original comment, you assumed you replied but actually you didn’t.
            2. What would be the consequences if I would call you a liar ?
            3. are you going to allow this ad hominem Bull Crap from Deir Yassin ?

          5. I simply don’t have time to go back & find your original offensive comment. But you have no idea how many times commenters w. yr views in retrospect attempt to deny the meaning of what they’ve written earlier when I’ve called them on it. You presumed wrongly & offensively that I hadn’t actually commented on the Zahar interview when I had & told you I had. Do not make such presumptions in future & you won’t cross any red lines here.

            Call me a liar without proof & you’ll see what the consequences will be.

  2. Much rings hollow, to my ears, not about Hamas, but about Israel. Suppose (if you can) that Israel believes that Hamas will sign-on to a peace treaty if that treaty is to its liking and fundamentally based on the pre-1967 situation.

    To be clear, land (of Mandatory Palestine) that was occupied in 1966 by Egypt and Jordan will now become Palestine; land (of Mandatory Palestine) that was occupied by Israel in 1966 will become Israel.

    Adjustments will be made, to give Israel a path to its holy sites, to give Palestine a 4-lane highway to join Gaza and West Bank, maybe to adjust Latrun.

    OK, we get the proposal. Would Israel sign-on under any circumstances today? How about no “return” for 1948 refugees to their homeland (to be Israel)? sharing naturally occurring water 50-50?

    If the answer is “No, Israel will not possibly sign-on”, then what is all the fuss about?

    1. To my understanding, Israel will not sign a treaty giving the Palestinians an opportunity to return to Israel, nor to allow any Palestinian control over any Jewish holy site, which would include the vast majority of Jerusalem.

      When the Palestinians last controlled Jerusalem (1948-1967) they denied access to the Jews. You don’t get a second chance to screw Israelis.

      1. To my understanding

        Now that was yr first mistake: admitting a subject was limited to yr understanding of it. Since your understanding is minimal what is there left to talk about?

        You don’t get a second chance to screw Israelis.

        I’m sorely tempted not to give you a 2nd chance to mouth yr ianities & stupidities. But keep spewing & I’ll get sick enough of you that I’ll pull the chain.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Share via
Copy link