Skip to main content

Worth reading: interview with a Hamas spokesman

I'm waiting to see if any of the MSM pickes this up from Al Jazeera.

I suspect the heavy pro-Israel spin would be, Why dignify terrorists by listening to them? We've said what they need to do to re-establish a cease-fire.

And I'm certainly not enamored with Hamas or any other Islamist organization.

But the process of negotiating a cease-fire rather than dictating surrender terms begins with--as they say--a frank exchange of views.

So here are two snippets from an interview with Hamas spokesman Abu Marzouq, the first on a cease-fire, the second on Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton:

excerpt one

Al Jazeera: Under what conditions will Hamas agree a ceasefire with Israel?

Abu Marzouq: We have three conditions for any peace initiative coming from any state.

First, the aggression of the Israelis should stop. All of the gates should be opened, including the gate of Rafah between the Gaza Strip and Egypt. Finally, Israel has to withdraw from the Gaza Strip.

We are not saying we will stop firing rockets from the Gaza Strip to Israel - we are only talking about stopping the aggression from the Israelis against the civilian population in the Gaza Strip.

When others talk about a ceasefire, they are saying all military operations should stop.

But we are sending a message [by firing rockets]: "We will not surrender. We have to fight the Israelis and we will win this battle."

We know we are going to lose a lot of people from our side, but we are going to win, inshallah.


excerpt two:

Has Hamas had any contact with the administration of Barack Obama, the US president-elect?

No, we haven't had any direct contact.

Do you have any expectations regarding the approach of Hillary Clinton, the US nominee-designate for the post of US secretary of state?

We cannot evaluate something that lies in the future.

We know that in the US senate, Hillary Clinton's vote was always with Israel, but maybe there will be some differences when she becomes secretary of state.


The rest of the interview is worth reading, even if only in a know-your-enemy way.

[I do have to admit that I'm waiting for somebody to parse that we haven't had any direct contact with Obama line. I suspect it is either a translation artifact, or Marzouq trying to send signals that Hamas would love such contact. Yet what's interesting is that, unlike recent comments from Al Qaeda's number two, the Hamas spokesman seems to be going out of his way to come across as neutral on the new administration.]

Comments

Delaware Watch said…
"We are not saying we will stop firing rockets from the Gaza Strip to Israel - we are only talking about stopping the aggression from the Israelis against the civilian population in the Gaza Strip."

Unless I'm reading this wrong, that's hypocritical since the rockets fired from Gaza tend to effect the Israeli civilian population the most. It sounds like he's saying, "Israel should stop firing on our non-combatants, but we'll continue to fire on theirs."
Dana
I don't disagree with you. But in some ways it is almost the mirror image of the Israeli position.

I posted this primarily because I'm tired of the otherwise complete embargo on primary source news on Hamas.

Popular posts from this blog

The Obligatory Libertarian Tax Day Post

The most disturbing factoid that I learned on Tax Day was that the average American must now spend a full twenty-four hours filling out tax forms. That's three work days. Or, think of it this way: if you had to put in two hours per night after dinner to finish your taxes, that's two weeks (with Sundays off). I saw a talking head economics professor on some Philly TV channel pontificating about how Americans procrastinate. He was laughing. The IRS guy they interviewed actually said, "Tick, tick, tick." You have to wonder if Governor Ruth Ann Minner and her cohorts put in twenty-four hours pondering whether or not to give Kraft Foods $708,000 of our State taxes while demanding that school districts return $8-10 million each?

New Warfare: I started my posts with a discussion.....

.....on Unrestricted warfare . The US Air force Institute for National Security Studies have developed a reasonable systems approach to deter non-state violent actors who they label as NSVA's. It is an exceptionally important report if we want to deter violent extremism and other potential violent actors that could threaten this nation and its security. It is THE report our political officials should be listening to to shape policy so that we do not become excessive in using force against those who do not agree with policy and dispute it with reason and normal non-violent civil disobedience. This report, should be carefully read by everyone really concerned with protecting civil liberties while deterring violent terrorism and I recommend if you are a professional you send your recommendations via e-mail at the link above so that either 1.) additional safeguards to civil liberties are included, or 2.) additional viable strategies can be used. Finally, one can only hope that politici

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba