Hamas pours scorn on Fatah call for unity

GAZA CITY, Palestinian Territories — Gaza's Islamist Hamas rulers on Monday shrugged off calls for reconciliation with Fatah, saying its secular rival must prove its seriousness by freeing prisoners.

"These declarations lack seriousness and credibility, they make no sense in light of the continued arrests and torture (of Hamas members) in Fatah prisons in the West Bank," said Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri, in response to an appeal by Fatah for the two factions to start talking.

"The only real way towards reconciliation is to stop the arrests, free the detainees and allow the movement's charities to start helping the Palestinian people again," he told AFP.

Hamas and Fatah are bitter opponents which have carried out periodic arrests of each other's members, often holding detainees without charge or trial and routinely trading allegations of prisoner abuse.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hTISPNvs6rZdc8H-fu7hMg4Dduqw?docId=CNG.d5279d4645145772cb4f2ed6de93e61f.141

It is quite reasonable for them to to say "nice words, now back it up and we'll think about it"

Fayyad trying to cut a deal with Hamas is akin to Obama trying to cut a deal with Republicans. Stay strong and don't make deals with the devil (so to speak).

I am confident that Hamas will be removed from their leadership via Palestinian elections - should any actually be allowed to take place.

Fayyad is the leader of Third Way, of course you never implicitly said Fayyad was Fatah but the juxtaposition could lead an unknowing reader to that conclusion

However why would wish that Hamas does not agree, Abbas has said no elections without Gaza(a move I think he is hoping will allow him to cancel elections) are you in favor of the status quo in the WB and Gaza?

RAMALLAH, Palestinian Territories — Palestinian prime minister Salam Fayyad has proposed forming a unity government with Hamas, under which the Islamist group would have responsibility for security in Gaza.

Speaking to Palestinian journalists late on Monday, Fayyad said the "security concept" applied by Hamas in Gaza, where the group has sought to enforce a ceasefire with Israel, could provide common ground.

"The security concept practised by Hamas in the Gaza Strip should be brought under an official framework because it is not different from what is practised by the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank," Fayyad said.

"After a national unity government is formed, it can take on the task of supervising a security agreement based on the institutions in place in the West Bank and Gaza."

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gZJ_WlnDsx6vMxN6faDuiCMcG4WQ?docId=CNG.fe923605159ddf42b506b51390842eaa.21

of my post, as Isaid Hamas not agreeing to unity is an opportunity for Abbas to weasel out of elections, which at this point he may well lose, however I doubt he would lose them to Hamas

Another party?

run someone other than Abbas

Do you really see them having a chance?

if elections actually occur

"The security concept practised by Hamas in the Gaza Strip should be brought under an official framework because it is not different from what is practised by the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank," Fayyad said.

just to clarify, the hamas concept of security involves almost daily attempts to kills israelis within israel via, kassasm mortars, roadside bombs and ambushes......Glad to know that the "third way" endorses trying to kill israelis .....

and of course killing Palestinians that don't agree with the policies of hamas as well, in the name of security.

so who endorses this guy again and his policies?

Why Salam Fayyad is Israel's public enemy number one
The Palestinian PM is gradually undermining and invalidating Israel's traditional arguments: He has brought security, but there is still no peace. He will kill us with moderation.

Salam Fayyad is public enemy number one in Israel these days. We proscribe him, because the world finds him praiseworthy. Fayyad is not corrupt, and that's a problem. He's not even a hedonist, apparently. He is pleasant, his cheeks stubble-free - altogether nicer and less threatening than Yasser, say.

<snip>

With wise counsel shall Fayyad wage his war against us: He is building the Palestinian state from its foundations, stone by stone. His security forces are imposing law and order, suppressing terror, weakening Hamas. Monies sent to the Palestinian Authority no longer get lost on their way to their destination. Donors trust him because they see the results of their contributions.

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/why-salam-fayyad-is-israel-s-public-enemy-number-one-1.322552

But apparently in your panic about Fayyad you missed this part of the article

Speaking to Palestinian journalists late on Monday, Fayyad said the "security concept" applied by Hamas in Gaza, where the group has sought to enforce a ceasefire with Israel, could provide common ground.

i just simply read his own words compared them to the actions of hamas in gaza, which he endorses and came to a conclusion


the difference is your reading not HIS words but someone elses (sarids-whom i like),.....hence i understand your confusion, i always believe its far more realistic to listen to the person himself.
------------------

any cease fire in gaza is a very simple concept, as its been since israel left: all they have to do is stop trying to kill israelis, maybe he also has a problem with that concept. (seems to be a difficult thing for many to grasp-trying to kill us almost daily makes us suspicious of their motivations and real agenda)
-------

as far as his building a State, thats fine with me, more power to him, and he might want to include some basic freedoms, those that arafat and abbas took away from the Palestinians, but thats just a suggestion, given the latest unrest in the arab world.

now as to your constantly referring to Hamas when ever anything happens in Gaza is a bit like saying IDF or Israeli's any time the settlers pull some crap, which they have been quite busy doing lately.What I noticed in at least the Israeli press including Haaretz settlers are referred to as settlers until they get killed by a Palestinian like late last summer, then they're Israeli's

eta the first snip I posted was from Oberliner's link

but here is an interview Fayyad did with Tom Segev a couple of months back

http://www.newsweek.com/2010/12/22/salam-fayyad-palestine-s-pm-on-building-a-state.html

and i like him in general, i hope he succeeds, (hes far better than the other options)..but that doesn't mean i ignore his endorsement of hamas "security policy." (as you seem to)....and despite all of his good words, until the attacks stop from gaza, hes going to get no traction from us israelis. (missiles landed in Beershave today-hamas responsible)

perhaps if he implements a real working democracy in the westbank (as per what israel did during the british occupation, he might get us to actually take a second look....but until then, as in all politicians, words are cheap, without comparing the actions along side.


as far as gaza goes:
in case you missed it...(this seems to be a problem) hamas owns gaza, kills those who disagree with their policies, and releases press releases when they succeed/fail in their attacks. The old arafat trick of saying " its not us..wink wink wink, its those other guys...) was exposed so long ago, and no longer even used by hamas...... i can't believe your still trying to use it.-thats so 1970

and right now that means Hamas too. Without that it would develop into an East/West Pakistan sort of thing, which did not work out too well if you remember

it may be preferably but its hardly necessary. Presently gaza and the westbank have different economies, different foreign policies, different political structures, different security forces, even different accents and cultures.......

and of course you might want to add that hamas and the PA are not to excited about working with each other...and they are growing further apart. It may not be good for them, but that has little to do with the political reality.
-------------------
Basically as time goes on, it only gets worse and worse for the Palestinians, the sad unintended consequence of the israeli withdrawal has only made it worse for typical gazan achmed in terms of getting a democratic state. Its a shame, because the initial opportunity was there for them.

Conflict could have been avoided if they were two separate independent entities from the start of independence.

unless of course you were imply making a point, is that it? However I was of course quite aware of the history of Bangladesh and Pakistan, however it should be noted that albeit both area's are and were predominately Islamic by religion there were lingual, ethnic, and cultural differences between the 2 Pakistani States not to mention physical distance that do not exist between the West Bank and Gaza to any where near the degree that they existed between the ethnically Punjab majority West and the Bengali majority East

I defer to your superior knowledge of the subject.

The E/W Pakistan thing is what we have now... two separate areas which are considered a single nation. Besides, the split worked out fine regarding Pakistan. It was trying to stay unified that started the war.

I always thought there were some apt parallels between Indian partition and Israeli independence/nakba, settlements/kashmir, etc. With the caveat that far less blood was spilled in the case of Israel and the Palestinians.

and for the comparison I was making I was speaking of that period prior to 1971, as to your parallels I have that same thing opined here before by another poster, must be a theme of some sort

the only possibly disputed area left would be Kashmir and Jammu that has been subdivided between Pakistan, India, and China

My point was that the situation NOW resembles pre-71 bangladesh/pakistan. For your argument to make sense you would have to be arguing in FAVOR of Palistine splitting into two distinct entities.

the only possibly disputed area left would be Kashmir and Jammu that has been subdivided between Pakistan, India, and China

Right, that's what I said.

I mentioned kashmir as a parallel to the land dispute re: OPT in the I/P conflict. The other parallel would be the population transfer that happened during partition resembling the same thing in Israel.

my point was that Gaza and the OPT are actually one unit as they lack the ethnic, language, and cultural difference not to mention the physical distance between the Pakistan and Bangladesh or West and East Pakistan if you prefer for this discussion

and yes I mentioned remembering another poster because I also understood where you wanted to go with that part of your comment

• They are currently still parts of a single, national unit, Palestine. Just as pre-71 Pakistan was. It was post civil war that the two pakistans split.

• While Palestine lacks the more severe differences faced by Pakistan I wouldn't discount the influential political, religious and cultural differences between gaza and the WB.

• POST-71 to me would represent a Palestine split into two distinct national entities, just like Pakistan and Bangladesh got.

and yes I mentioned remembering another poster because I also understood where you wanted to go with that part of your comment

Not sure what you mean by that.

But the Islamist movement Hamas, a sworn enemy of Abbas's secular Fatah faction which dominates the Palestinian Authority, has rejected the call for elections.

It says Hamas will not participate without a reconciliation deal between the two warring factions.

"Abbas's declaration that there would be no elections without Gaza, despite the fact that several days ago they said the elections would take place in any event, proves that they are in a state of confusion," said Sami Abu Zuhri, a spokesman for the movement.

http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=360860