Interesting message re. the discontent of young, educated people at the end of the article:

It is easy to fault Hamas for everything, but what chance have they even had to better the lives of people in Gaza. I think we all know who is really to blame.

Tell us, who is REALLY to blame ?

Hamas' recent (and not so recent) diplomatic and economic problems are due to their backing the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and alienation in much of the Arab world due to their early support for Assad and Iran.

You also always conveniently ignore Gaza's significant border with their Arab brothers in Egypt, and the fact that these issues existed well before the recent Egyptian coup. It is a sad but undeniable fact that many Arabs openly discriminate against, or at the very least do not care for, the Palestinians (just look at the Palestinians in Lebanon), and that the Palestinian cause has often been promoted by Arab and Muslim regimes simply as a distraction to their own significant problems.

You might see an evil Israeli behind every bush, but Arabs and Muslims have been killing one another and acting against each others interests for centuries without any help from the Jews.

I bet AL's answer would have been the same as yours , ya think ?

Israel is a holy, blameless entity, with the whitest of hands, entirely unblemished by guilt of any kind. She exists only to bring goodness and light into a troubled World. High upon a hill, basking in the sunlight of God's eternal love she sits.

Speak not an ill of Israel. No, sir, never!

well, . . . I'm thinking that maybe you actually do see all-powerful Israelis behind every bush and under every rock, at least when you get good reception from a properly aligned tinfoil hat.

Look, Israel is not perfect, nor is any other country, particularly in that part of the world (how's that Arab Spring going?). However, I've been reading you posts for some time, and I'm convinced that if you stubbed you toe in the shower, you would blame it on the Zionists.

In this instance, as is amply demonstrated in the article cited in the OP, the problems that Hamas now faces are the result of their own political decisions. Their relationship and interconnection with Israel has been relatively steady form some time, due to the mutual interests of both Hamas and Israel.

If things are so bad in Gaza, may Hamas should schedule an election to ensure popular support . . .

The government of Israel is, however, standing on the neck every Palestinian residing in Gaza or in the occupied West Bank. I might add, that it is a guilt and a shame the nation of Israel as a whole will be hard pressed to every live down.

but your posts generally ignore the very real problems in the Arab and Muslim word, and the very real impact they've had on the Palestinians both historically and today, and that have absolutely nothing at all to do with Israel or the Jewish diaspora.

Your further attempts to excuse all Palestinians mistakes, faults and bad policy, by citing other purported misdeeds by Israel, also does the Palestinians no favors. These issues will not be corrected if they are excused or ignored.

The article referenced in the OP is a perfect example. Hamas decided to ally with the Shia Hezbollah and Iran as a means of demonizing Israel and procuring financial support. This alliance forced them to support Assad in Syria. Now that Assad is despised in the majority of the Arab world, Hamas has lost a great deal of legitimacy among their own people, and the Palestinians as a whole have lost significant support (and money) from their traditional Sunni allies and coreligionists. Hamas similarly backed the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, even while they were becoming increasingly unpopular. The MB was never liked by the Military, and the MB violence in the Sinai that was tolerated by Hamas, almost begged for reprisal by the new military regime. Additionally, in light of the troubles in Syria, Egypt and Libya, as well as reform and democracy movements in their own countries, many Arab leader now view the Palestinians are as little more than distraction or irritant that worsens their own troubles.

Yelling about the evils of Zionists will not help the Palestinians in this new political reality, nor assist in establishing a viable peace agreement. Simply, even a casual look around the region today demonstrates the lack of focus on the Palestinian issue, greater international concerns over sectarian Muslim divisions, and very little involvement in anything by the Israelis.

The victims are always by definition losers, right? Who gives a damn about all of those sorry-assed losers? Palestine would be a far better place without all of those loser Palestinians hanging around the place and causing trouble.

Here's to the ultimate establishment of "Greater Israel!"

Your implication is that the Palestinians are purportedly all victims all the time and therefore bear no responsibility or blame for anything they may choose or do. Even most Palestinians politicians do not take such hard-line view. What an infantile and demeaning view of an entire people.

Sicking you fingers in your proverbial ears and yelling about "Greater Israel" when in a discussion about the myriad of social, political, economic and religious issues facing the region does not pass substantive discussion or debate.

We obviously do not agree about these issues, and will likely never reach an accommodation. I just ask this, in light of two intifadas, a radical political and military schism between Hamas and Fatah, and the changing complexion and priorities in the Middle East (including the article referenced in the OP), how's you're strategy working-out for the Palestinians you claim to support?

You are very, very wrong, and time will provide you the proof. Pity the people of Israel when that day finally arrives.

"Pity the people of Israel when that day finally arrives."

I thought ideas wrong, but would never have thought you filled with such malice and hatred. It's really disturbing.

You've now played your hand. The implications and innuendo are gone. You don't want a peaceful settlement, you want to see the Jews in the region pushed into the sea.

It's no wonder that you were so enraged by not only my comments, but the OP's article critical of your friends in Hamas.

I considered altering on your post, but decided against it. It should remain forever for all to see. Wow!

You are using a horrible word, the meaning of which you must not even understand. Using that term in relation to the people of Israel just to try and slander me is beneath contempt. I deeply resent your implication. You should be ashamed of doing that to score points in a silly chat board discussion. My God man, what the hell are you thinking!

Before the people of Israel were ever faced with anything like "genocide," I would be standing in front of the likes of you to defend them.

Please tell me how I should interpret a phrase like "Pity the people of Israel when that day finally arrives," particularly in the context of our very heated discussion, and the purported end result of Israeli / Palestinian dispute.

No reasonable person would read it and assume, "Oh, another_liberal, only means Israel will be so sad." In a region where the phrase "From the river to the sea" is ingrained in the popular culture, and is routinely espoused by many leaders in Hamas, word choice is very meaningful.

If you reject that meaning, I will certainly take your word to that effect, particularly since our dealings this evening concerning Syria have been amicable.

We may vehemently disagree on the Israeli / Palestinian conflict, and that is fine and the very epitome of free speech and democracy. However, I ask that you think carefully about the implication of certain phrases when discussing this issue. I will certainly strive to return the courtesy.

Learn some manners, if you ever expect another response from me.

No pretense there.

I would love to know how you reached this place. If you want to pm me, I would love to know why you feel that way and I promise to delete it immediately and not c/p it.

You are posting huge blocks of "blah blah blah" where you put words into other poster's mouth and talk about what their pasts posts generally indicate.

Do you really think you are convincing anyone other than yourself with these diatribes that appear to be written to illustrate common logical fallacies?

A soapbox is not a good place to conduct a conversation.

Whether it is Fatah or Hamas they are funded by others who have competing agendas, and are also quite happy to maintain a state of uncertainty. Some of these powers also find the idea of a successful commercial Palestinian state an affront to more traditional Arab bloodlines.

Lie to a large extent on consistent and strong external support, at least, in the area of messaging and debate, as well as finance to sustain the movement. IMO, one of the lessons to take from the African fights against colonialism is that OAU (now African Union) was united in calling for the liberation of the African countries still under colonial rule at least from the 1960's to date.

On the other hand, the Arab League, unfortunately has not been that united, consistent nor persuasive when it comes to the Palestine issue. The league has been divided by self interests of different countries and groups like the GCC, etc - who do not see any benefits in truly helping the Palestinians emerge from under their yoke. And that is sad indeed; because the Palestinian situation will always be the smoldering anger that will always feed the world's smoldering and unending warfare for a long time as along as it remains unresolved.

And I doubt that a US led peace-negotiation will go anywhere towards resolving it because it is a case of two against one - which will not yield a truly acceptable agreement for all the parties involved.

India, China, Vietnam and so on were all the result of indigenous movements that relied on sustaining themselves primarily on internal support.

Indeed the fundamental problem of the South Vietnamese government was that by relying so much on external support they became corrupted and out of touch.

Malaysia, Thailand, and Indonesia, on the other hand are examples of where the 'liberation' movements were designed and funded outside the country and it forced the governments to sustain popular sovereignty by reforming their policies.

External support is generally a corrupting influence and the abysmal record of the Comintern is evidence of that.

Again Cuba sustained its revolution from exclusive internal sources and only became aligned with the Soviet Union after they achieved a popular result. When they tried to export support for liberation movements they were not successful.

They've shown that they cannot be trusted by anyone through their treatment of Syria.