Read the full translated text of the leaked Hamas charter

Israel/Palestine
and on 49 Comments

The Lebanese al-Mayadeen news channel published on Monday a leaked new charter for the Hamas movement in the Gaza Strip. The charter was allegedly planned to be officially released by Khalid Mashaal, the president of the political office of Hamas, at his last press conference before leaving office. The leak has since been confirmed by Hamas official Ahmad Yousif.

Toufic Haddad, the author of the book Palestine Ltd: Neoliberalism and National Liberation in the Occupied Territory, offered his analysis of the document and said it illustrates the movement’s maturation as a major domestic political actor. Haddad pointed out that it responds to broader regional and international trends of sectarianism and the “war on terror” by repeatedly emphasizing Islam and Hamas’ tolerance, moderation and opposition to all forms of oppression, including making a clear distinction between Zionism and Judaism, a distinction that has been noted elsewhere.

Mondoweiss obtained the details of the charter released by al-Mayadeen and translated the full text. This translation was provided by a resident of Aida refugee camp who would rather not have their name published out of fear of reprisals from Israeli authorities. 

In the name of God the merciful

The Islamic resistance movement Hamas (IRMH)

The Political Charter

Thank Allah, the god of people, our prayers and peace be upon our Prophet Mohammed the master of missionaries and the imam of the mujahideen, and peace to his family and partners, all of them.

The IRMH published since its establishment, and during its jihad journey, considering it one of the items of the Palestinian national movements, different charters clarifying their point of view and their political vision.

And in this charter, the movement shows its principals and destinations in which it depends on to build its vision, its speech and to determine its behavior and political performance.

The definition of the movement:

  1. The IRMH is a liberation, Islamic and Palestinian national resistance movement. It aims to liberate Palestine and to fight against the Zionist Project, its reference is Islam in its principles and goals.

Palestine’s Land:

  1. Palestine, with its historical known borders from Jordan’s river in the east to the mediterranean sea in the west, from Ras Al Nakora in the north to Om Al Rashrash in the south, this land is Palestinian and a united regional unit. Displacing Palestinians and creating a Zionist entity does not cancel the right of Palestinians to their entire land, and does not validate the Zionist entity to violate this land.
  1. Palestine is an Arab and Islamic land, it is holy and blessed and it has a special place in the heart of all Arabs and Muslims.

Palestine’s People:

  1. The Palestinians are the Arab citizens who lived in Palestine before 1947. Anyone who was displaced or stayed in Palestine, anyone who was born from an Arab Palestinian father after 1947, inside or outside the country is Palestinian.
  1. The Palestinian personality is an original quality, does not disappear, and it is transmitted from a father to children. The displacement that happened to Palestinians from the Zionist occupation does not make them lose their personality and belonging, as well as, having another nationality does not make them lose their identification or national rights.
  1. Palestinians make up one nation, with all Palestinians inside the country and abroad, and with all its items religious, cultural or political.

Islam and Palestine:

  1. Palestine is in the center of the Islamic and Arab world and it retains a special importance. In Palestine is the al-Aqsa Mosque, which Allah blesses, and it is the holy land that god blesses as well. It is the first destinations for Muslims, and Prophet Mohammed’s place where he started his journey to the sky and heaven and the Nativity of Jesus. It is the land of thousands and thousand of all prophets and messenger who passed in history and it is the land of the people who have the right to stay until Allah finishes this existence.
  1. Hamas understands Islam in all its details, and it is appropriate for all places and times in its neutral spirituality, and Hamas believes that it is the religion of peace and forgiveness, and under its shadow all different religious followers live safe and in safety. As well as it believes that Palestine was and will stay as an example of coexistence, forgiveness and civilian innovation.
  1. Hamas believes that the message of Islam came with morals of justice, truth, dignity and freedom, and is against injustice in all its shapes, and criminalizes the criminals whatever their sex, color, religion or nationality are. Islam is against all shapes of religious extremism, sectarian extremism and ethnic extremism, and it is the religion that teaches its followers to fight against the tyranny and help weak people and it teaches its followers to sacrifice their time, money and themselves in the defense of their dignity, land, people and holy places.

Jerusalem:

  1. Jerusalem city is the capital of Palestine, it has its religious, historical and civilian place in an Arab, Islamic and human way, and all its Islamic and Christian holy places headed by Al Aqsa mosque is a non-negotiable right for Palestine, Arab and the Islamic nations. We do not surrender it or give any part of it, and all the occupation’s procedures in Jerusalem such as Judaization, settlement of the city as well as the forgery of the truth, are illegal.

Refugees and the Right of Return:

  1. The Palestinian cause is basically a cause of an occupied land and displaced people, and the right of return for all Palestinians who were displaced from the 1948 or 1967 lands, which means from the whole of Palestine. Palestinians have the natural right to go back to their land, which is a personal and general right for all Palestinians. Confirming this right is all the religions, human rights and international law, and it is non-negotiable for anyone, whether Palestinian, Arab or foreign.
  1. Hamas refuses all projects that aim to destroy the refugees’ cause, including all attempts to naturalize them as citizens in other countries and alternative home projects. Hamas considers the compensation for Palestinians after displacing them and occupying their land as an essential right, established after their return, and it does not cancel or reduce their [physical] right of return.  

The Zionist Project:

  1. The Zionist Project is a racist, aggressive and separatist project based on violating others’ rights and is against Palestine’s people and its vision for freedom, liberation, sovereignty and the return of the refugees. And the Israeli state is the tool of this project and its foundation.
  1. The Zionist Project does not just attack the Palestinian people, it attacks the Arab and Islamic nations as well, and it establishes a real danger and gravelly threatens its security and interest. At the same time, the project is against the future of the union, development and liberation of that nation. The Zionist Project threatens international peace and security, as well as the interests of humanity and stabilization.
  1. Hamas differentiates between Jews as people of the holy book, and Judaism as a religion and the occupation and the Zionist Project as something separate, and it sees that the conflict is with the Zionist Project not with the Jewish people because of their religion. And Hamas does not have a conflict with the Jews because they are Jews, but Hamas has a conflict with the Zionists, occupiers and aggressors, and will fight anyone who tries to attack the Palestinian people or occupy their land whatever their religion, nationality or identity may be.
  1. Hamas refuses the persecution of any human being or violation of any human right because of religion, ethnicity, sector or nationality. Hamas sees that the Jewish problem and the “anti-semitism” and the injustice against the Jewish people is a phenomenon related to European history, not to the history of Arabs and Muslims or their heritage. The basic cause of the formation of the Zionist movement was the phenomenon of anti-semitism. The Zionist movement was able to occupy Palestine with the help of the western colony, and this movement is the most dangerous model of settler occupation, which was removed whole world and should be removed from Palestine.

The Position on the Occupation and the Political Arrangement:

  1. The Balfour Declaration and the British mandate convention on Palestine is illegal, and the UN decision for Palestine’s division, and all its consequences and other conventions similar to it and the creation of Israel was illegal from the beginning, and it is against the Palestinian’s rights, its determination, human rights, international law and the right of sovereignty.
  1. We do not recognize the Zionist state. All shapes of occupation, settlements, Judaization and the forgery of truth are illegal. These rights do not dissolve with time.
  1. We do not leave any part of the Palestinian’s land, under any circumstances, conditions or pressure, as long as the occupation remains. Hamas refuses any alternative which is not the whole liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea. And the creation of the Palestinian independent state with its sovereignty, with Jerusalem as its capital, on the borders of the 4th of June 1967, with the return of the refugees to their homes from where they were displaced is a common national consensual formula, and it does not mean the recognition of the Zionist state or the surrendering of Palestinian rights.
  1. Hamas refuses all conventions or initiatives and any projects that aim to destroy the Palestinian cause or take away the rights of the Palestinian people.
  1. Hamas confirms that no peace in Palestine should be agreed on, based on injustice to the Palestinians or their land. Any arrangements based on that will not lead to peace, and the resistance and Jihad will remain as a legal right, a project and an honor for all our nations’ people.

The Resistance and the Liberation:

  1. The liberation of Palestine is the Palestinians’ duty in the first place, and the Arab and Islamic nation’s duty in general, and it is a human responsibility according to human justice and rights. And all the organizations and institutes such as: Palestinian, Arab, Islamic or human are all integrated organizations with no problems or disharmony.
  1. The resistance against the occupation, with all different tool or instruments, is a legal right legalized by religious, traditional or international law, and especially the armed resistance that is the strategic option to protect our principles and get back our rights.
  2. Hamas refuses to hinder the resistance or its weapons, and confirms the right of our people to develop resistance tools and equipments. Hamas confirms that the resistance leadership can decide the level of resistance and can utilize a variety of the different tools and way to administrate the conflict, without compromising the resistance.

The Political System:

  1. The real state is the fruit of the liberation, and there is no alternative to the creation of the Palestinian state, with its sovereignty on the entire Palestinian land with Jerusalem as its capital.
  1. Hamas believes in administering of the Palestinian relations under the belief of pluralism, democracy, bilateral conversations and partnerships, which makes stronger the union of the Palestinian line to achieve our national goals and the aspirations of our people.
  2. The PLO is a national diagram for Palestinian people inside the country and abroad, which we should keep, with the importance of its development and reconstruction on a democratic basis, including the participation of all the parts and organizations of the Palestinian people, which conserve Palestinian rights.
  1. Hamas confirms the importance of building Palestinian national organizations and references, using a democratic basis, starting with free and fair elections, and on the basis of resistance and national partnership, with a program and a clear strategy, confirming our rights and to achieve the aspirations of our people.
  1. The Hamas movement confirms its total rejection of Oslo’s conventions, its consequences and its results, which made contradictory compromises of the benefits of the Palestinians.
  1. The Hamas movement confirms that the role of the Palestinian Authority must be in the service of the Palestinian people, and its security in order to protect the people’s rights and the national project.
  1. Hamas confirms the importance of the independence of the Palestinian decision, and not to relate it to any external issues, and confirms at the same time, the responsibility of Arabs and Muslims and their duty to liberate Palestine from the Zionist occupation.
  1. The different parts of the Palestinian community: personalities, idols and civilian social institutes, the youth, students, women and workers unions, who work to achieve the national goals, are an important resource for the social construction and for the resistance and liberation project.
  1. The role of the Palestinian woman is a basis for the construction of today and the future, as it was always in the making of Palestinian history, and it is a central role in the resistance, liberation project and the construction of the political system.

The Arab and Islamic Nation:

  1. Hamas believes in the union of the nation with all its items such as religious, ethnic and sectarian, and it sees the importance in avoiding anything which may destroy this union.
  1. Hamas believes that the Palestinian cause is the central cause for the Arab and Islamic nation.
  1. Hamas believes in cooperation with all the countries that support the Palestinian people’s rights, and refuses to be involved the internal issues of other countries, or their conflicts and problems. Hamas adopts the policy of opening relations with different countries of the world, especially Arab and Islamic nations, and it aims to build stable relations, which aim to unify the needs of the Palestinian cause, the interests of the Palestinian people and the interest, development and security of the nation.

The Human and International Side:

  1. The Palestinian cause is a cause with an international and human dimension, and it is a civilian and human mission to be in solidarity and to support it, which reflects human morals, justice and equality.
  1. The liberation of Palestine from a legal and human regard is a project that encompasses the needs of self-defense, and it is the natural right of the people to achieve sovereignty.
  1. Hamas believes in the morals of cooperation, justice, freedom, respect and people’s determination in its relations with the world’s countries and people.
  1. Hamas welcomes the positions of the commissions and countries that recognize the rights of Palestinian people, and condemns any side or organizations that support the Zionist state, or help in covering their crimes and aggressions against the Palestinians.
  1. Hamas refuses any attempts of dominance over Arab and Islamic nations, as well as any attempts of dominance over other nations and people of the world, and condemns any type of colonization, occupation, injustice and aggression in the world.
About Adam Horowitz

Adam Horowitz is Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.

Other posts by .


About Sheren Khalel

Sheren Khalel is a freelance multimedia journalist who works out of Israel, Palestine and Jordan. She focuses on human rights, women's issues and the Palestine/Israel conflict. Khalel formerly worked for Ma'an News Agency in Bethlehem, and is currently based in Ramallah and Jerusalem. You can follow her on Twitter at @Sherenk.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

49 Responses

  1. lyn117
    April 5, 2017, 4:20 pm

    I sort of quibble over only allowing “Palestinian” ethnicity to be passed through the father.

    The cynical side of me notes that the Zionists, at the same time they were conducting a campaign of mass murder on ethnic grounds, promised the “State of Israel would be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel; it will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex;” I would trust Hamas more than the Zionists in maintaining equality regardless of creed, although, they do have a religious agenda.

    The phrases regarding forgiveness speak a lot. Despite my quibbles, I think it’s a pretty positive document.

  2. jon s
    April 5, 2017, 4:30 pm

    1. If Hamas has moved beyond the vile Anti-Semitism of its present charter it’s a positive development. On the other hand the new charter in article 10 mentions only Muslim and Christian holy places, ignoring Jewish ones. The text , in general , denies the Jewish presence.

    2. There’s a clear contradiction in article 19. Establishing a Palestinian state on the pre-67 lines implies accepting partition and two states. However in the very same article there’s the “from the river to the sea” formulation. If the pragmatic line gains the upper hand it may be possible for Hamas to become part of the solution.

    • Misterioso
      April 6, 2017, 10:54 am

      For the record:

      Haaretz, December 1, 2010 – Reuters

      “Hamas Vows to Honor Palestinian Referendum on Peace With Israel”

      EXCERPTS:

      “Ismail Haniyeh, addressing a rare news conference in the Israeli-blockaded enclave, signaled a softening of Hamas’s long-standing position prohibiting the ceding of any part of the land of what was British-mandated Palestine until 1948.”

      ” ‘ We accept a Palestinian state on the borders of 1967, with Jerusalem as its capital, the release of Palestinian prisoners, and the resolution of the issue of refugees,’ Haniyeh said, referring to the year of Middle East war in which Israel captured East Jerusalem and the Palestinian territories. ”

      • eljay
        April 6, 2017, 12:02 pm

        || Misterioso: For the record:

        Haaretz, December 1, 2010 … ||

        Unfortunately, the new charter reclaims what Haniyeh “ceded” in 2010:

        … Hamas refuses any alternative which is not the whole liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea. …

      • Misterioso
        April 6, 2017, 12:43 pm

        eljay

        From the revised charter:
        “And the creation of the Palestinian independent state with its sovereignty, with Jerusalem as its capital, on the borders of the 4th of June 1967, with the return of the refugees to their homes from where they were displaced is a common national consensual formula, and it does not mean the recognition of the Zionist state or the surrendering of Palestinian rights.”

        I recommend you watch this just released video featuring an interview with Dr. Imad Alsoos, an expert on Hamas. He states: “they accept a two state solution based on the ’67 borders.”

      • eljay
        April 6, 2017, 1:11 pm

        || Misterioso: eljay From the revised charter: “And the creation of the Palestinian independent state with its sovereignty, with Jerusalem as its capital, on the borders of the 4th of June 1967, with the return of the refugees to their homes from where they were displaced is a common national consensual formula, and it does not mean the recognition of the Zionist state or the surrendering of Palestinian rights.” ||

        Exactly. The creation of a ’67-borders state does not mean the surrendering of Palestinian rights. And what is one of those rights? ” … the right of Palestinians to their entire land … ”

        And how will that right be enforced? ” … the whole liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea. … ”

        || … I recommend you watch this just released video featuring an interview with Dr. Imad Alsoos, an expert on Hamas. He states: “they accept a two state solution based on the ’67 borders.” … ||

        I’d buy the sincerity of Hamas’ acceptance of a two-state solution if it weren’t for the massive disclaimer stating that their acceptance doesn’t preclude them from reclaiming all of geographic Palestine.

      • Misterioso
        April 6, 2017, 3:00 pm

        eljay

        To cut to the chase:
        As you surely know, Israel has always feared that Hamas would accept the two state solution based on the June 4/67 borders because the ball would then be in Israel’s court and needless to say, Israel has no intention of withdrawing from those belligerently/illegally/brutally occupied Palestinian lands (and other occupied Arab lands, i.e., Syria’s Golan Heights and Lebanon’s Shebaa Farms) it seized during the war it launched on 5 June 1967.

        The ball is now in Israel’s court and the world is watching.
        Enough said. Bye, bye.

      • eljay
        April 6, 2017, 3:11 pm

        || Misterioso: eljay To cut to the chase: … The ball is now in Israel’s court and the world is watching. … ||

        Yup, and Hamas has made it far too easy for Israel to show the world – and for the world to see – that Hamas intends to reclaim all of geographic Palestine from the Jews Zionists, dismantle Israel and set up an Islamic state.

        || … Enough said. Bye, bye. ||

        See ya!  :-)

      • echinococcus
        April 6, 2017, 9:04 pm

        Eljay,

        I’d buy the sincerity of Hamas’ acceptance of a two-state solution if it weren’t for the massive disclaimer stating that their acceptance doesn’t preclude them from reclaiming all of geographic Palestine.

        Looks like you still have trouble understanding the difference between a forced compromise and a basic, inalienable right.

        It even exists in daily, individual-level law: agreeing to a deal with an armed squatter when there’s no recourse to law enforcement does not mean you give up forever your right to your family house.

        Is the definitive, irreversible conquest of Palestine by the Ashkenazi crusaders your primary goal?

      • eljay
        April 7, 2017, 10:19 am

        || echinococcus: Eljay … Looks like you still have trouble understanding the difference between a forced compromise and a basic, inalienable right. … ||

        No trouble on my part, but you still seem to be having issues with comprehension. Hamas’ acceptance of a two-state solution means nothing if its clearly-stated ultimate goal is to reclaim all of geographic Palestine.

        || … Is the definitive, irreversible conquest of Palestine by the Ashkenazi crusaders your primary goal? ||

        It is in the same way that your primary goal is the definitive mass slaughter of every Jew in Palestine.

      • Sibiriak
        April 7, 2017, 11:52 am

        eljay: Hamas’ acceptance of a two-state solution means nothing if its clearly-stated ultimate goal is to reclaim all of geographic Palestine.
        —————-

        Alternately, an “ultimate goal” to reclaim all of Palestine means nothing if a two-state solution is agreed to and implemented.

      • eljay
        April 7, 2017, 2:36 pm

        || Sibiriak: … Alternately, an “ultimate goal” to reclaim all of Palestine means nothing if a two-state solution is agreed to and implemented. ||

        Sure. But until a two-state solution is agreed to and implemented and Hamas forswears its aim of reclaiming all of Palestine, the record – much to the convenience of Zionists in Israel and elsewhere – clearly shows that Hamas intends to reclaim all of Palestine regardless of any two-state solution.

        If they really have no intention of reclaiming all of Palestine, they were beyond stupid to state that intention in their updated charter. The additional intention of turning Palestine into an Islamic state is the lovely ribbon on the gift to (pro-)Zionists.

        But that’s just me and my humble opinion. :-)

      • echinococcus
        April 8, 2017, 12:27 am

        Eljay,

        Hamas’ acceptance of a two-state solution means nothing if its clearly-stated ultimate goal is to reclaim all of geographic Palestine.

        You confirm what I was just saying, viz.

        you still have trouble understanding the difference between a forced compromise and a basic, inalienable right

        worse, in fact: you just seem to be totally alien to a very elementary concept. I do not believe that comedy, by the way, and start to strongly suspect that it’s serving a propaganda goal.

        Your totally ridiculous smear, by the way:

        It is in the same way that your primary goal is the definitive mass slaughter of every Jew in Palestine.

        , is not compatible with anything I have ever written here. I have underlined that the Zionist invaders have no right to be in Palestine without a permission by the owners of the land, i.e. the Palestinian people as of the date of declaration of hostile takeover intent by the Zionist. Period. No mass slaughter or anything regarding the Jewish religion was recommended, suggested or proposed. In fact, the only thing proposed is a valid plebiscite of the Palestinian people. Of course, suicidal war and violence may achieve their end, but that’s another question.

        Let’s hear it clearly, now. Does Eljay propose that the Zionist invaders of Palestine (DBA “Israel” now) have a right to be on Palestinian “mandate” territory at all without a fully representative authorization of the Palestinian people? (I didn’t say authorization by colonial powers or their politician puppets.) Yes, no, or maybe.

        Does Eljay consider that the Zionist propaganda slogan about mass slaughter of the Jews if the Palestinian people are free to decide is true? Yes, no or maybe.

      • eljay
        April 8, 2017, 11:05 am

        || echinococcus: … [blahblahblah] … ||

        Whatever you say.

        || … Your totally ridiculous smear, by the way … ||

        …echoes your totally ridiculous smear. What’s the matter – you can dish it out but you can’t take it? Poor baby… :-(

        || … Let’s hear it clearly, now. … ||

        I’ve been clear on numerous occasions. If you need to hear it again, read my Comment archive. But, first, work on your comprehension skills.

      • echinococcus
        April 9, 2017, 12:43 am

        Eljay,

        That you pretend not to get the first thing about the concept of compromise versus abandonment of inalienable rights is a blatant fact –in your own rating. Not to be compared with your revolting smear.

        Anyway, it would be very interesting to see you answer those simple yes/no questions, as you have never been clear.

        As for my comprehension skills, they tell me that an insistent request by some American liberals, for Palestinian resistance to give away its people’s essential inalienable rights to illegal intruders, goes in the category “with friends like these who needs enemies?”

      • eljay
        April 9, 2017, 9:12 am

        || echinococcus: … it would be very interesting to see you answer those simple yes/no questions, as you have never been clear. … ||

        I’ve been very clear numerous times. If you are able to comprehend, then perhaps you’re simply choosing not to. Either way, that’s your problem to deal with. Thanks for the amusing chat. :-)

      • Mooser
        April 9, 2017, 12:54 pm

        In the end, the Zionists will probably get away with something. Some kind of Jewish Rump State.
        But acknowledging that in advance and trying to make it fit the principles involved is no help. It will only help them more in the end.

        The position that Zionists shouldn’t be there at all is the best place to start, the position they should have to bargain from.

      • eljay
        April 9, 2017, 2:42 pm

        || Mooser: In the end, the Zionists will probably get away with something. Some kind of Jewish Rump State. But acknowledging that in advance and trying to make it fit the principles involved is no help. It will only help them more in the end. … ||

        I don’t acknowledge that Zionist are entitled to any kind of religion-supremacist “Jewish State”.

        || … The position that Zionists shouldn’t be there at all is the best place to start, the position they should have to bargain from. ||

        You may be right but, IMO, it’s too late to bargain from that position. I prefer to see:
        – reform (from religion-supremacist state to secular and democratic state);
        – respect for international law (incl. RoR and an end to colonialism); and
        – accountability for past (and on-going) crimes committed.

        But, again, that’s just little ol’ me and my humble opinion. :-)

      • Mooser
        April 9, 2017, 4:46 pm

        “I don’t acknowledge that Zionist are entitled to any kind of religion-supremacist “Jewish State”.”

        That’s the way to go!

        “You may be right but, IMO, it’s too late to bargain from that position.”

        What happened? You just gave it all away. Just like I warned.
        Look, why not let the Zionists tell me how it’s “too late to bargain from that position”. That’s their job. Don’t do it for them.

      • eljay
        April 9, 2017, 6:19 pm

        || Mooser: … What happened? You just gave it all away. Just like I warned. … ||

        I haven’t given anything away. Don’t make echinococcus’ mistake of attributing to me powers of influence I don’t possess. ;-)

        || … Look, why not let the Zionists tell me how it’s “too late to bargain from that position”. … ||

        They already have.

      • echinococcus
        April 10, 2017, 4:13 am

        Mooser,

        Look, why not let the Zionists tell me how it’s “too late to bargain from that position”. That’s their job. Don’t do it for them.

        I don’t pay much attention to labels because what defines one is his specific position on determined topics. If one is doing X’s job –no, no, sorry, make that Z. Restart: if one is doing Z’s job, why, he is working for Z, no matter what he calls himself.

        Especially when most of one’s output consists of repeating the same point. Already in 37 a David Gruen, aka Ben Something, was saying it was too late for that same discussion.

      • eljay
        April 10, 2017, 9:14 am

        || echinococcus: … Restart: if one is doing Z’s job, why, he is working for Z, no matter what he calls himself. … ||

        I totally agree: If one is doing Z’s job of conflating anti-Zionism with a desire to see Israel destroyed and all Jews driven out of Palestine, why, he is working for Z, no matter what he calls himself.

      • Mooser
        April 10, 2017, 10:58 am

        “Already in 37 a David Gruen, aka Ben Something, was saying it was too late for that same discussion”

        Exactly. I want to have that discussion about how much it’s too late to take back from the Zionists after Israel has shrunk to something closer to its natural size.

      • Mooser
        April 10, 2017, 11:47 am

        :” If one is doing Z’s job of conflating anti-Zionism with a desire to see Israel destroyed and all Jews driven out of Palestine, why, he is working for Z, no matter what he calls himself.”

        “Eljay” “Don’t make echinococcus’ mistake of attributing to me powers of influence I don’t possess”. So he “desires” it.

        What’s the principle at work here, that Zionism will grow stronger the more extreme its critics or opponents are? I don’t think it works that way.

      • eljay
        April 10, 2017, 1:48 pm

        || Mooser: … What’s the principle at work here … ? ||

        I think it’s this: He incorrectly accuses me of being a Zionist stooge, so I incorrectly point out that he’s just as much of a Zionist stooge as I am.

        But I could be mistaken and maybe some other principle is at work here. :-)

      • echinococcus
        April 10, 2017, 9:46 pm

        Eljay,

        Now you are adventuring into total absence of logic.
        Anti-Zionism by definition means advocating the destruction of the Zionist entity. No amount of pill-pulling will change that in what is street logic based on simple syllogisms.

        Also, in the pedestrian, linear logic which is the only one I understand, insistently trying to justify an initial Zionist conquest means helping Zionism. No amount of argument around that can make me change my mind. But enough already. I suppose we now have the answers to the questions I asked.

      • echinococcus
        April 10, 2017, 9:52 pm

        Eljay,

        Also try not to weasel away every time:

        I don’t acknowledge that Zionist are entitled to any kind of religion-supremacist “Jewish State”.

        Meaning that you agree with some other kind of state the Zionist invaders would be entitled to or entitled to stay in, in contravention of all international law.

        By the way, that “religion-supremacist” expression is pure BS –even if some Zionists are religious nowadays, Zionism is not religious but purely racial and racist.

      • eljay
        April 11, 2017, 7:30 am

        || echinococcus: … Now you are adventuring into total absence of logic. … ||

        Coming from you, that’s funny. :-)

        || … Anti-Zionism by definition means advocating the destruction of the Zionist entity. … ||

        The Zionist entity – religion-supremacist “Jewish State” – sure. You take it a step further and, in doing so, succour Zionists.

        || … I suppose we now have the answers to the questions I asked. … ||

        Yes, I know exactly where you stand.

        || … you agree with some other kind of state the Zionist invaders would be entitled to … ||

        No, I agree with a secular and democratic, Partition-borders Israel of and for all of its Israeli citizens, immigrants, expats and refugees, equally.

        || … in contravention of all international law. ||

        You’d better get on the phone with the U.N. double-quick and tell them that Partition-borders Israel’s existence contravenes international law.

        || … By the way, that “religion-supremacist” expression is pure BS –even if some Zionists are religious nowadays, Zionism is not religious but purely racial and racist. ||

        Jewish is fundamentally a religion-based identity. A “Jewish State” – a state primarily of and for people who choose to hold the religion-based identity of Jewish – is a religion-supremacist construct. I don’t see anything BS about that.

      • echinococcus
        April 11, 2017, 11:19 am

        Eljay,

        Funnier and funnier. Now “no” means exactly “yes”:

        | … you agree with some other kind of state the Zionist invaders would be entitled to … ||

        No, I agree with a secular and democratic, Partition-borders Israel of and for all of its Israeli citizens, immigrants, expats and refugees, equally.

        Including all invaders, without having produced a permission by the Palestinians. Just like colonial bastards of the UN did. Which means yes, you agree to “some other kind of state the Zionist invaders would be entitled to or entitled to stay in, in contravention of all international law”, ie you are trying to impose Zionist invasion by the back door.

        That you, some liberaloid do-gooder from the States, agree with “secular and democratic… Israel of and for all of its Israeli citizens, immigrants, expats and refugees, equally” blah blah is worth exactly zilch, nada. You still didn’t bring a valid permission from the owners of the place.
        (Don’t get me wrong, I personally tend to agree that your equality stuff is good stuff, but my agreement is as unauthorized by the owners as is yours.)

        What if the owners want something else for their property?

        Well, if the owners of the place want something else, then Mr. Eljay, and Messrs the other Western or Eastern do-gooders, will join the Obamas and Clintons and Bushes of this world in occupying and bombing these retrograde Ayrabs into submission, until they agree with Mr. Eljay that living with one’s invader in a secular democratic equal paradise is the best of the worlds and must be obligatory for all, to the applause of some UN committee.

        Not worth talking any longer.

      • echinococcus
        April 11, 2017, 11:26 am

        Eljay

        You’d better get on the phone with the U.N. double-quick and tell them that Partition-borders Israel’s existence contravenes international law.

        No need to call them. It still does, no matter if you call. As a certain Galileo Galilei, who by the way had no powers to change the course of the planets, is supposed to have said.

      • echinococcus
        April 11, 2017, 11:33 am

        Jewish is fundamentally a religion-based identity

        So all those atheists who consider themselves “Jewish” because they were born to a Jewish woman surely consider their respected mother’s womb to be “religion”.

      • eljay
        April 11, 2017, 11:54 am

        || echinococcus: … [blahblahblah] … Not worth talking any longer. … ||

        No kidding! You manage to babble an awful but say very little.

        || … No need to call them. It still does, no matter if you call. As a certain Galileo Galilei … is supposed to have said. ||

        I wasn’t aware that Galileo had anything to say about the U.N., the Partition of Palestine or the State of Israel. Interesting.

        || … So all those atheists who consider themselves “Jewish” because they were born to a Jewish woman surely consider their respected mother’s womb to be “religion”. ||

        If you say so. I didn’t.

    • helen4yemen
      April 6, 2017, 4:40 pm

      Iraq was under British Mandate and the land in its entirety went back to its natives. Syria was under the French Mandate and the land went back to its people 100%. Palestine under the British Mandate was transferred to Europeans instead of to its own people. Nothing justifies the outright theft of Arab land by outsiders. Nothing!

      • jon s
        April 8, 2017, 1:45 am

        Helen4yemen,
        Jews in the Jewish historic homeland are not outsiders.

      • eljay
        April 8, 2017, 11:01 am

        || jon s: … Jews in the Jewish historic homeland are not outsiders. ||

        Geographic Palestine was not and is not the historic homeland of all people who choose to be/come Jewish. It was and is the historic homeland of its indigenous population and of all people up to n-generations removed from it.

      • Mooser
        April 8, 2017, 12:36 pm

        “Jews in the Jewish historic homeland are not outsiders.”

        Funny, Uri Avnery does not agree with you. He is sure the Zionists intended to be outsiders from the start.

        BTW, “Jon s” your pedantic and bossy tone sounds very much like that of an ‘outsider’.

      • Maghlawatan
        April 8, 2017, 4:04 pm

        Only Zionists talk about the historic homeland. Such a crock.
        Israelis have rights based on now but not based on violence. Israel has to give up the violence for the rights to have continued validity. Israel looks more and more like Prussia as time passes. And Prussia was lost.

      • Talkback
        April 9, 2017, 5:44 am

        jon s: “Jews in the Jewish historic homeland are not outsiders.”

        If that means Ottoman Jews and their descendants you are right. The rest are outsiders whose immigration was illegaly enforced on the People of Palestine.

      • MHughes976
        April 9, 2017, 11:21 am

        No one is an outsider anywhere, in any morally valid sense, by being Jewish. No one has, by being Jewish or anything else, the right to deprive others of the normal right to be, on normal terms, an enfranchised member of a sovereign state.

      • Mooser
        April 9, 2017, 12:57 pm

        “Jews in the Jewish historic homeland are not outsiders.”

        Really? Then act like it.

  3. eljay
    April 5, 2017, 8:33 pm

    IMO, there’s too much “Arab” and WAY too much “Islamic” in this new charter. Hamas and “Jewish State” are both nuts – they’re just different flavours of nuts.

    • catalan
      April 7, 2017, 5:27 pm

      “IMO, there’s too much “Arab” and WAY too much “Islamic” in this new charter”. -eljay
      You and I do not get to define what the Palestinian state will eventually look like. I like the honesty of Hamas – they clearly state their goals, including an Islamic state in the whole of historic Palestine (the former British mandate). This clarity will eventually make some type of negotiations easier. There seems to be a fair amount of clarity on the Israeli side – they want a state within the 67 borders including the four large settlements with some type of territorial exchanges, preferably of the Arab towns. It seems that at this point these opposing goals are just not compatible. Until there is some major change in context, statusquo prevails.

      • eljay
        April 7, 2017, 6:20 pm

        || catalan: … You and I do not get to define what the Palestinian state will eventually look like. … ||

        Well, duh.

      • talknic
        April 7, 2017, 8:20 pm

        @ catalan April 7, 2017, 5:27 pm

        “You and I do not get to define what the Palestinian state will eventually look like.”

        That’s right. Palestine was defined by default of Israel’s only recognized borders, those it proclaimed effective at 00:01 May 15th 1948. Under International Law and the UN Charter the Palestinians have no legal obligation nor do they have any moral, ethical or logical obligation to forgo any of their legal rights to all of their territories

        Under the same laws and Charter, Israel has no legal ethical moral to logical right to any territories outside of its self proclaimed and only Internationally recognized borders.

        Israel is in fact obliged to withdraw from ALL non-Israeli territories , allow all refugees RoR and pay full compensation before the two states start negotiating what further territories the Palestinians are willing to cede to Israel.

        ” … on the Israeli side – they want a state within the 67 borders including the four large settlements with some type of territorial exchanges, preferably of the Arab towns.”

        I see . The criminal state you cheer for does get to define what the Palestinian state will eventually look like, including swapping non-Israeli land for non- Israeli land in non-Israeli territories.

        Thanks again for showing folk the kind of vile little hypocritical immoral creeps are attracted to the Zionist cause

        Keep up th’ good work

  4. Kay24
    April 5, 2017, 9:45 pm

    Unlike the zionistis, at least they acknowledge and recognize Jews as people, which most Muslims do, because of their religion, it is zionism that they don’t have to recognize. It is zionist policies that keep them occupied, make the lose their lands, and live under siege. Not Judaism.
    On the other hand, no people will want to recognize those who have kept them in limbo for the past 60 years, or have warm feelings for those who bomb them, and kill their children. That is too much to ask and expect.

  5. Talkback
    April 7, 2017, 4:59 am

    “The Palestinians are the Arab citizens who lived in Palestine before 1947”

    As racist as JSIL which only considers Jews to be nationals.

Leave a Reply