Preface: A Touch of History

With turmoil and upheaval rising in the Middle East and in particular between Israel and Gaza, I find it important to write and share a few thoughts to consider. It is of everyone’s interest to understand some of the dynamics that govern the reciprocal relationship between Hamas and Terrorism, especially in light of the uprising of the Muslim Brotherhood and the “In the name of God” (or alternatively “in the name of Allah”). One must consider, on the balance of reasonableness, whether or not Hamas’ actions and justifications make sense. For it takes one quick and sound look at the facts to understand what every layman can understand – it makes no sense. How are Hamas’ action any different than the “Dear Leader” in Korea, Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda and other terrorist organisations? Is shooting rockets at Jerusalem, a Holy city to Christians, Jewish and Muslim alike justified? Does it sound reasonable to say it’s “In the name of God”. Is it? I hope you read more and do the math – it’s quite simple.

abc News Video: watch throughout and follow this article further, and in specific Colonel Richard Kemp, to question the testament of Hamas in the video

You Must be Wondering: Whether Israel Actions are Reasonable or Unreasonable?

“More than anything, the civilian casualties were a consequence of Hamas’ way of fighting. Hamas deliberately tried to sacrifice its own civilians.” “and I say this again, the IDF did more to safeguard the  rights of civilians in a combat zone than any other army in the history of warfare.”

Is Hamas a Terrorists Organization?

The following excerpt from Wikipedia provides every person who is keen to know the following:

“Since June 2007 Hamas has governed the Gaza portion of the Palestinian Territories, after it won a majority of seats in the Palestinian Parliament in the January 2006 Palestinian parliamentary elections and then defeated the Fatah political organization in a series of violent clashes. Israel, the United States, the European Union, Canada and Japan classify Hamas as a terrorist organization, while Arab nations, Russia, and Turkey do not.”

It continues to describe a few of Hamas’ actions as Political Violence and Terrorism and further reads:

“… the Hamas Political Bureau operates as the highest ranking leadership body determining the policy of the Hamas organization and has responsibility for directing and coordinating terrorist acts. Hamas’ founder, Sheikh Ahmad Yassin, stated in 1998: “We can not separate the wing from the body. If we do so, the body will not be able to fly. Hamas is one body.”

Although it’s only Wikipedia, I invite you to read more and investigate on your own accord.

Can You Define Terrorism?

Nevertheless, You may still wonder what is Terrorism? How can we define it?

The Characteristics of Terrorism

Terrorist activity is characterised with a number players[1]:

1. First is the team that threatens to carry out a violent act or has actually carried it out, in order to humiliate the authority or to achieve a different political or ideological achievement.
2. The second is the team targeted by terrorists who wish to inflict harm upon them; normally these are innocent civilians. The terrorists choose their victims randomly, so long and provided that harming their victims will materially influence the third player.
3. The third is the government or other authority, which terrorist wish to humiliate or alternatively to coerce influence upon whilst exploiting its responsibilities, concerns, and accountability to the safety and security of the target the terrorist wish to harm or have already harmed.
4. The fourth player relates to a specific population which the terrorist organisation pretends to act on behalf of it. The support of such a group is vital in feeding terrorists with logistic, financial and manpower resources.

Those who watch the “show”, where drama occurs in front of their eyes and are such to hold different approaches which may affect the course and outcomes of such a “show” can be divided into three major categories[2]:

1. The people, which are controlled by the designated government (the government in which terrorists wish to harm).
2. Other governments, which share similar interests and / or similar responsibilities and accountabilities.
3. Other terrorist organisations that hold similar strategic, ideological, and political interest in respect of the conflict or in its outcome.

Terrorism presents the targeted government with a basic dilemma, in which it has to assert how can it defends its citizens, institutions, and interests from the threats of terrorism, while at the same time preserve the state’s basic institutional traits, public support and willingness to follow the state’s policy.[3]

Terrorism Definition in Legislations

The United States of America (“US”)

Following the Oklahoma City bombing[4], the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (“AEDPA”), an Act of Congress, passed with broad bipartisan support by Congress (91-8-1 in the US Senate, 293-133-7 in the House of Representatives) and asserted a number of Federal amendments in the US legislation.[5] AEDPA, inter alia, seeks “to provide the Federal Government the fullest possible basis, consistent with the Constitution, to prevent persons within the US, or subject to the jurisdiction of the US, from providing material support or resources to foreign organisations that engage in terrorist activities.”[6]

The AEDPA therefore authorizes the Secretary of State to designate an organisation as a “foreign terrorist organisation” (“FTO”), meaning that it is a non-U.S. organisation that engages in terrorist activity that threatens U.S. nationals or national security.[7]

To engage in terrorist activity is, under the Act, to commit “in an individual capacity or as a member of an organisation, an act of terrorist activity or an act which the actor knows, or reasonably should know, affords material support to any individual, organisation, or government in conducting a terrorist activity at any time.”[8]

Terrorist activity includes such acts as hijacking, kidnapping, assassination, and the use of any explosive or firearm, “with the intent to endanger, directly or indirectly, the safety of one or more individuals or to cause substantial damage to property.” Threats, attempts, and conspiracies to commit the above acts also come within the definition.[9]

“Acts of terrorism transcending national boundaries” is defined in Cap. VII as one of different offences, which are carried out in order to efficiently affect governance behavior through deterrence, coercion or vengeance. This legislation deals with broad treatment to unconventional terrorist threat as well as the obligations of ISPs to maintain and provide information upon demand by the US government.

The United Kingdom

In the midst of 1998, the UK government published a consultation paper[10], which expressed the view that, the then, existing definition to ‘terrorism’ was too restrictive[11], and which proposed to redefine it in such way that ‘terrorism’ will be defined similarly to  US Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”)’s definition:

 ”the use of serious violence against persons or property, or the threat to use such violence, to intimidate or coerce a government, the public or any section of the public for political, religious or ideological ends”.

The term “serious violence” would be defined so as to include “serious disruption” resulting, for example, from attacks on computer installations, electronic data or public utilities. Domestic terrorism, that is, terrorism by indigenous groups prepared to engage in serious violence to further their cause, as well as Irish and international terrorism, would be included. Following the recommendation of the committee the UK legislated the Terrorism Act 2000, which defines the term ‘terrorism’ in a broad approach that included, inter alia, the use or threat which is designed to influence the government or an international governmental organisation, or to intimidate the public or a section of the public; whether the threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, racial, or ideological cause; involves serious violence against a person, serious damage to property, creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public or is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.[12]

Views are invited on whether this definition strikes the right balance between being too narrow and too wide. Arguably, this definition is too vague and too broad and may not facilitate a correct balance, for it may be exploited to advance inadequate coercion or measures not in context with a terrorism act. Nevertheless, it can also be argued that such vagueness and broadness strikes the right balance for it allows the state with flexibility and preparedness to answer a terrorism act efficiently and effectively.  Thus, the Terrorism Act 2000 expands the definition of terrorism to such extent that it may include actions considered to be criminal offences. This legislation has an extraterritorial capacity whereas its definition was also adopted by the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005.[13]

The State of Israel (“Israel”)

The Israeli Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance[14] (“PTO”), reads as follows:

“Terrorist organisation” means a body of persons resorting in its activities to acts of violence calculated to cause death or injury to a person or to threats of such acts of violence;”

A new definition was recently enacted under the Prohibition on Terrorist Financing Law[15], and which delimits terrorism in the following way:

An act of terrorism” –

(a)        an act that constitutes an offence or a threat to commit an act that constitutes an offence that was committed or was planned to be committed in order to influence a matter of policy, ideology or religion if all of the following conditions are fulfilled:

 

(1)       it was committed or was planned to be committed with the goal of causing fear or panic among the public or with the goal of coercing a government or another governing authority, including the government or governing authority of a foreign country to take action or to refrain from taking action; for the purposes of this paragraph – foreseeing, as a nearly certain possibility, that the act or the threat will cause fear or panic among the public is equivalent to having a goal to cause fear or panic among the public;

 

(2)       the act that was committed or that was planned or the threat included:

(a)        actual injury to a person’s body or his freedom , or placing a person in danger of death or danger of grievous bodily injury;

(b)       the creation of actual danger to the health or security of the public;

(c)            serious damage to property;

(d)           serious disruption of vital infrastructures, systems or services;

Accordingly, the Israeli legislative definition is inherently similar to the UK legislation.[16] Apart from the Israeli legislation’s part, which deals with the protection of infrastructures versus the UK legislation that deals with electronic systems, these legislations are virtually identical.

Key to Have in Mind: Striking Civil Liberties and Protection Against the Constant Threat of Terrorist Attacks

Anti-terrorist legislation tests the balance of the rights and freedoms of citizens against the restrictive measures necessary for protection.  Democracy seeks to protect citizen rights while also ensuring security.  In approaching that struggle, the UK, US, and Israel all enacted legislation that strikes a balance between liberal civil liberties and protection against the constant threat of terrorist attacks. By providing confidence and reducing fear in society these enactments support democracy.

All in all, it is in everyone’s interest to have peace in the Middle East. However, having in mind Hamas is a terrorist organization (evidently self testified as such), could there be peace with such an organization? What would you have done should your citizens, friends and family be constantly bombed “in the name of God”? Do you have the right to protect your civilians? Your family?

Think about it.

Dear Mr. Mahmoud Abbas, better if you will take going from your eyes who missed and continues to miss, so to remind you that I will appoint a few misses here and sorry if I forgot a thing or two.

1) 1948 was a golden opportunity for the Palestinian to establish a state alongside Israel, but they preferred to aid Arab states, particularly Egypt and including an Iraqi force led by one called Qawukji try to delete the Jews and Israel off the map, so our Independence Day as Nakba has become your since you continue to whine.

2) In 1990-1 the rais, RIP, the one which is now in heaven with 70 virgins in with Suha (angry about him as I’ll explain below), supported the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, which was planned and executed by the “Rights advocate man “Saddam Hussein, the same one who dropped mustard gas on the Kurds. Well, he moved up in the sky, after his friends put him on a tight neck tie in recognition of his work. Regardless, after Saddam’s coup d’etat and your avid support to your loved one, you were surprised why Kuwaitis kicked you away.

3) By the way, do you remember how the people of Gaza sat on the roof and clapped for each missile that flew over Israel? You may have forgotten – I didn’t!

4) In 1993 we signed with you, despite all, the Oslo Accords, for which you sit as chairman of Ramallah. In 2000 you had a golden opportunity to establish a Palestinian state on most of Judea and Samaria and Gaza, but your Rais, former Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat, preferred to reject what he suggested then-prime minister and defense minister Ehud Barak today, and instead we got the second intifada accompanied with murderous suicide bombers who killed children, women, young and old. Israel could not and will not tolerate. After Operation Defensive Shield, the attacks stopped and you return to square one without a country, but with a wall that prevents you from freely enter Israel to continue attacks.

5) The wall remained despite the protest, despite appeals (United Nations) and despite the Advisory Opinion of the International Court in The Hague.

6) Later in 2006 parliamentary elections, and it turned out that your election is who won the Hamas organization – so it reads its Charter to eliminate the State of Israel and slaughter of Jews, then maybe you’re surprised we do not just cooperate with this desire, but there it is.

7) Even Ehud Olmert, when he was a prime minister, offered suggestions you have declined. Instead, you m

anaged to proof of how pathetic you really are. In”Oferet Yezuka” operation in Gaza, Israel was fighting Hamas, the same organization that threw you out of Gaza, and there you initiate complaints to the UN on alleged war crimes of Israel and its leaders, including Ms Livni, who so wishfully wanted to talk to you about peace.

8) By the way, the guy sitting next to you – Dahlan, who escaped from Gaza because Hamas “likes”him so much, the first thing that came to his mind was to join hands with Hamas against the Israelis. Not surprising he also became pathetic. But then again, it only comes to indicate your secret desires.

9) while you kissed Hamas prime minster Haniya Hamas prime minister declared that bin Laden (the most hated criminal in the USA, from which you require assistance), is a Muslim saint, martyr, and it does not bother you at all? what does it mean to you? And what more appropriate to say about you that “who sleeps with dogs should not be surprised if he gets up with ticks,.

Regards to your bureau chief who likes the good life. How is he? Rumour has it you ordered to destroy the tapes of his fiery tapes, and the scant evidence relating to the corruption in connection with his brothel. Not too bad, really. As you seen worse things in the Fatah organization from which you came.

The number of cheaters and corrupted thieves who came out from there is certainly your own achievement. By the way, as I told you above, Suha is furious that some of the money Arafat had left her so she could live pleasantly with her daughter in Paris was taken. Poor thing had to run away and live in Morocco. She was angrier even more after the French sought to talk to her about the money which comes from theft and embezzlement of Arafat before.

9) In short, dear Abu Mazen, I think you missed the point. Israel wants to make peace with you, but you continue to dwell on the right of return and the ’67 borders, which really means Israel’s destruction. And every time we extend our hand and you spit into it you wonder why we do not wipe your hand in a towel but instead put a slap just to wake you up.

10) And until the next time, ciao.

תוכנית הפספוסים של אבו מאזן- בעקבות דבריו כי ישראל פספסה הזדמנות לשלום

מר אבו מאזן יקר , כדאי שתיטול קורה מבין עיניך מי פספס וממשיך לפספס, אז כדי להזכיר לך אני אמנה כאן כמה פספוסים וסליחה אם שכחתי משהו:

1) ב- 1948 הייתה לפלסטינים הזדמנות פז להקים מדינה לצדה של מדינת ישראל, אך הם העדיפו בסיוע מדינות ערב ובראשן מצרים וכולל כוח בפיקוד של עירקי אחד שקראו לו קאוקג’י לנסות ולמחוק את היהודים וישראל מהמפה , אז יום העצמאות שלנו הפך ליום הנכבה שלכם ומאז אתם ממשיכים לילל.

2) בשנת 1990-1 הראיס שלך זצ”ל, אללה ירחמו , זה שנמצא עכשיו בשמיים עם 70 בתולות במקום עם סוהא (שכועסת עליו כמו שאסביר לך למטה) , תמך בפלישה העיראקית לכווית, אותה פלישה שתוכננה ובוצעה על ידי “חסיד זכויות האדם ” סאדם חוסיין, זה שהטיל גז חרדל על הכורדים וטבח בבני עמו שלו. גם הוא עבר לגור למעלה בשמיים , אחרי שידידיו שמו לו על הצוואר עניבה קטנה והדוקה כאות הוקרה על פועלו.  בכל מקרה אחרי התמיכה בסאדם יקירכם, עוד התפלאתם למה הכוויתים בעטו אתכם משם.

3) דרך אגב אתה זוכר איך תושבי עזה ישבו להם על הגג ומחאו כפיים על כל טיל שעף על ישראל? אתה אולי שכחת – אני לא!

4) בשנת 1993 ולמרות הכל חתמנו עימכם על הסכמי אוסלו, שבזכותם אתה יושב כיו”ר הרשת הפלסטינית ברמאללה, *בשנת 2000* הייתה לכם הזדמנות פז להקים מדינה פלסטינית על מרבית שטחי יהודה שומרון ועזה, אך הראיס שלך  יו”ר הרשות דאז יאסר ערפאת, העדיף לדחות את מה שהציע לו ראש הממשלה אז ושר הביטחון היום מר אהוד ברק , ובמקום זאת קיבלנו את האינתיפאדה השנייה שלוותה בפיגועיים רצחניים של מחבלים מתאבדים שהרגו ילדים, נשים זקנים וטף. זה דבר שמדינת ישראל לא יכלה ואינה מוכנה לסבול וכך לאחר מבצע “חומת מגן ” הפסיקו הפיגועים ואתם חזרתם לנקודת ההתחלה בלי מדינה , אבל עם חומה, שמונעת ממכם להיכנס באופן חופשי לישראל ולהמשיך בפיגועים.

5) החומה נשארה למרות המחאה, ולמרות הפנייה (לאו”ם) ולמרות חוות הדעת המייעצת של בית הדין הבינלאומי בהאג.

6) מאוחר יותר בשנת 2006  התקיימו בחירות לפרלמנט שלכם והסתבר כי מי שזכה בבחירות הוא ארגון החמאס- כן זה שקורא באמנה שלו לחסל את מדינת ישראל ולשחוט יהודים, אז אולי אתה מתפלא שאנחנו לא  בדיוק משתפים  פעולה עם רצון זה, אבל זה המצב.

7) גם אהוד אולמרט כשהיה ראש ממשלה, הציע לך הצעות שלא קיבלת. במקום זאת הוכחת עד כמה אתה פתטי. במבצע “עופרת יצוקה” ישראל נלחמה באותו ארגון חמאס שהעיף אותך מעזה, והנה אתה יוזם תלונות לאו”ם על פשעי מלחמה כביכול של  ישראל ומנהיגיה ובכללם גב’ ציפי לבני שרוצה כל כך לדבר איתך על שלום.

8) אגב יושב אצלך אחד בשם דחלאן שברח בעור שיניו מעזה מכיוון שהחמאס כל כך “אוהבים ” אותו, ברגע שישראל פתחה במבצע בעזה הדבר הראשון שעלה לו בראש היה = בואו נצטרף לחמאס ונשלב עימם ידיים  כנגד הישראלים, אלא שגם הוא הפך לפתטי אבל זה מעיד על המאווים הנסתרים שלכם.

9) עכשיו לאחר שהתנשקת  עם החמאס בא אחד הניה כן כן זה המכהן כראש ממשלת החמאס והכריז כי בין לאדן שנוא נפשם של האמריקאים, שמהם אתה מבקש סיוע,  הוא קדוש מוסלמי, שאהיד, וזה לא מפריע לך בכלל,  ומה זה אומר עליך ? ומה מתאים לך יותר אם נאמר כי “מי שישן עם כלבים שלא יתפלא אם הוא קם עם קרציות”, בקיצור עוד פיספוס שלך.

10.  אז ככה אבו מאזן  יקר שלנו, והנה מהמכבש פספוס  טרי,  החלטת שדי לך מדיבורים ואתה רוצה מעשים , שהאום יכיר במדינה פלשתינית, אז זהו ? אולי כך יותר טוב, שהרי עכשיו אתה מגלה קצת יותר מהכוונות שלך, כמו פעם כשכל הערבים התכנסו בוועידת חרטום (זוכר? ועידת הלאווים?של הערבים) לא להכרה בישראל כמדינה יהודית, לא למו”מ (עכשיו אתה צ’ילבה של BB? ) לא לוותר על זכות השיבה, אבל כן לחמאס שעם האמנה שלהם והרצון שלהם לזרוק את ישראל לים אתה מבקש לחיות , בקיצור אתה רוצה ללכת בלי ולהרגיש עם , אז הנה עוד פספוס שלך, בסוף תמצא את עצמך באותו מקום בדיוק כמו הראיס לשעבר חברך עליו השלום זה שנח כרגע עם 70בתולות . וסתם שאלה יקירנו קראת פעם את האגדה על בגדי המלך החדשים? מומלץ בחום.

ד”ש לראש הלשכה שלך שאוהב את החיים הטובים . מה שלומו? שמענו כאן שהורית להשמיד את הקלטות הלוהטת שלו והראיות הנוגעות לשחיתות הקטנה בקשר לבורדל שלו, באמת לא נורא, שהרי ראית כבר דברים קצת יותר גרועים, בארגון הפתח ממנו אתה בא. מספר הרמאים והגנבים והמושחתים שיצאו משם הוא שם דבר ברשות שאתה עומד בראשה. אגב כמו שאמרתי לך למעלה , סוהא כועסת  שלקחו לה חלק מהכסף שהראיס השאיר בשבילה ובמקום לחיות בנעימים  עם בתה בפריס, היא הייתה צריכה לברוח ולחיות במרוקו.

במיוחד אחרי שהצרפתים ביקשו לשוחח עימה על הכסף שלפי השמועה מקורו בגניבות ומעילות של הראיס  הקודם.

בקיצור אבו מאזן יקר נראה לי שאתה ממשיך לפספס את הפואנטה, ישראל רוצה לעשות עימכם שלום, אך אתם ממשיכים לעמוד על זכות השיבה שמשמעותה האמיתית היא חיסולה של ישראל, וגבולות 67 וכו’ , ובכל פעם שאנחנו מושיטים לכם יד אתם יורקים לתוכה ומתפלאים למה אנחנו לא מנגבים את היד במגבת אלא מכניסים לכם סטירה, רק כדי שתתעשתו.

10)  צ’ או עד הפעם הבאה.