Hamas, Sharia and Sudan

[tangentlama]

it shows simply that hamas will back sudan in the face of its disgusting aggression in darfur ..

This sounds like complete bullshit.

durruti02 said that it shows that hamas WILL BACK sudan, (noting that he used a future tense to make his conjecture, rather than the past tense or the present tense) but provided no actual proof (other than durruti02's conjecture supported by quoteless links to some very weird sites, esp. uruknet!)

Then durruti02 avoided discussing Chinese backing in Sudan
10 new oil wells (Jan 8, 2009)
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-01/08/content_10625865.htm
Sending peacekeeping force (Jan 12, 2009)
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-01/12/content_10643566.htm

And the only link we can find linking Hamas and Sudan is from a statement put out by Bin Laden, where Hamas rejects Bin Laden, favouring dialogue with the west (so don't sound like a Khartoumi-govt. favouring Hamas to me).

Then durruti02's other link was to the spurious Cruxifixion story (also untrue).

So why does durruti02 avoid talking about Chinese and US business involvement in Sudan and make several spurious threads about Hamas? There is enough to discuss about the Hamas without spreading stories with only a grain of truth in them, or fallacious exaggeration of links.

Among diplomats, there has been almost unanimous support (apart from Tony Blair) for talking to the Hamas, which has a range of political types in it's political ranks from moderate to entrenched raging nutjob, but certainly these entrenched raging nutjobs are no worse than the entrenched rightwing nutjobs on the Israeli far right, who even have political representation in the Knesset!

Time and time again, there have been references to the Ireland 'Troubles' and Peace Process. So we talk. We don't solve these problems with more isolation. On this matter, Greenstock is a man who understand the issues, whereas you, durruti02 are behaving like a kneejerk reactionary.

e2a: main and current discussion re. Hamas is here: http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=276436

 

[nino_savatte]

er cos one has been involved in what some call genocide ( i don't btw .. just ethnic cleanising etc)

What? Unlike the Israelis? You're off your head.

 

[nino_savatte]

1)er no? what a mad idea!

2) stranger and stranger!

3)you are wrong .. hamas is part of the Muslim Brotherhood .. who predate israel by a couple of decades

4)yes and that they have grown yes IS related to israels existance


you are so fucking dogmatic lol .. you are still stuck in this intelectual dead end that says you can NOT criticise those who are our enemies enemies .. it simply is daft but whatever ..

You're a liar.

You have repeatedly tried to paint critics of Israeli force on this forum of "supporting Hamas"

You demanded that 'we' denounce Hamas.

Your point about the Muslim Brotherhood is invalid.

So, you acknowledge that if Hamas never existed, Israel would still bomb and bulldoze, which leaves your current position in disarray.

 

[nino_savatte]

no not in the slightest .. i UTTERLY condemn israels attacks and their bullshit prop

and as i have already said b4 ALSO the whole basis for their existance ..

BUT equally i am arguing HAMAS are NOT part of a solution as they are fundamentalist ultra religio-nationalists

why when you are against zionism do you not attack its mirror in hamas?

More contradictions. But you're quite prepared to permit more innocent deaths because of Hamas.

I'm surprised that you haven't linked to this site yet.
http://www.aipac.org/index.asp

 

[nino_savatte]

I find it revealing the way in which you've included the word "sharia" in the title of this thread, durutti. It's almost as if the very mention of the word will have people running to you.

You keep saying how Hamas weren't the creation of Mossad, or how they didn't come about as a reaction to Israelis brutality.

Ahmed Yassin, the spiritual leader of the Islamist movement in Palestine, returning from Cairo in the seventies, established an Islamic charity association. Prime Minister Golda Meir, saw this as a an opportunity to counterbalance the rise of Arafat’s Fatah movement. .According to the Israeli weekly Koteret Rashit (October 1987), "The Islamic associations as well as the university had been supported and encouraged by the Israeli military authority" in charge of the (civilian) administration of the West Bank and Gaza. "They [the Islamic associations and the university] were authorized to receive money payments from abroad."

The Islamists set up orphanages and health clinics, as well as a network of schools, workshops which created employment for women as well as system of financial aid to the poor. And in 1978, they created an "Islamic University" in Gaza. "The military authority was convinced that these activities would weaken both the PLO and the leftist organizations in Gaza." At the end of 1992, there were six hundred mosques in Gaza. Thanks to Israel’s intelligence agency Mossad (Israel’s Institute for Intelligence and Special Tasks) , the Islamists were allowed to reinforce their presence in the occupied territories. Meanwhile, the members of Fatah (Movement for the National Liberation of Palestine) and the Palestinian Left were subjected to the most brutal form of repression.

In 1984, Ahmed Yassin was arrested and condemned to twelve years in prison, after the discovery of a hidden arms cache. But one year later, he was set free and resumed his activities. And when the Intifada (‘uprising’) began, in October 1987, which took the Islamists by surprise, Sheik Yassin responded by creating the Hamas (The Islamic Resistance Movement): "God is our beginning, the prophet our model, the Koran our constitution", proclaims article 7 of the charter of the organization.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/ZER403A.html

You're a cheap scaremonger.

 

[nino_savatte]

but spion, from leeds, you are NOT defending gaza physically .. so if you were in gaza ( or if i was) i suspect we would be in a tower block with an rpg or ak waiting for the israelis .. but we are not, we are in blighty

This has been one of your constant themes. If we unpack it, you are actually claiming that protesting does no good. If that is the case, then tell that to the thousands who want to tell their political leaders what they think of their support for Israel.

But you actually claimed to have gone on one of the protests. My question is why, if you think protesting does nothing, did you bother?

Do as I say, not as I do. That's you, durutti.

 

[chilango]

As someone who has had direct personal experience of the Muslim Brotherhood in Sudan can I just reiterate that it is CHINA who you should be concentrating on for Darfur not Hamas.

Thank you....

 

[durruti02]

As someone who has had direct personal experience of the Muslim Brotherhood in Sudan can I just reiterate that it is CHINA who you should be concentrating on for Darfur not Hamas.

Thank you....

^^^ yes i am sure china are causing problems .. you say you have experiance of MB .. tell us more

 

[durruti02]

This sounds like complete bullshit.

durruti02 said that it shows that hamas WILL BACK sudan, (noting that he used a future tense to make his conjecture, rather than the past tense or the present tense) but provided no actual proof (other than durruti02's conjecture supported by quoteless links to some very weird sites, esp. uruknet!)

Then durruti02 avoided discussing Chinese backing in Sudan
10 new oil wells (Jan 8, 2009)
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-01/08/content_10625865.htm
Sending peacekeeping force (Jan 12, 2009)
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-01/12/content_10643566.htm

And the only link we can find linking Hamas and Sudan is from a statement put out by Bin Laden, where Hamas rejects Bin Laden, favouring dialogue with the west (so don't sound like a Khartoumi-govt. favouring Hamas to me).

Then durruti02's other link was to the spurious Cruxifixion story (also untrue).

So why does durruti02 avoid talking about Chinese and US business involvement in Sudan and make several spurious threads about Hamas? There is enough to discuss about the Hamas without spreading stories with only a grain of truth in them, or fallacious exaggeration of links.

Among diplomats, there has been almost unanimous support (apart from Tony Blair) for talking to the Hamas, which has a range of political types in it's political ranks from moderate to entrenched raging nutjob, but certainly these entrenched raging nutjobs are no worse than the entrenched rightwing nutjobs on the Israeli far right, who even have political representation in the Knesset!

Time and time again, there have been references to the Ireland 'Troubles' and Peace Process. So we talk. We don't solve these problems with more isolation. On this matter, Greenstock is a man who understand the issues, whereas you, durruti02 are behaving like a kneejerk reactionary.

e2a: main and current discussion re. Hamas is here: http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=276436

what cruxification story?

anyway these are the links tl .. oh BTW yes international meddling in sudan is as always key but this thread is not about that


http://www.uruknet.info/?p=45723 "The Islamic Resistance Movement Hamas has strongly condemned the war crime charges submitted to the International Criminal Court against Sudanese president Omar Hassan Al-Bashir at the backdrop of Darfur conflict."

http://www.sudanvisiondaily.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=37474

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=C...dq=sudan+hamas

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=CG-AjU3rraQC&pg=PA184&dq=sudan+hamas

 

[nino_savatte]

http://www. hurryupharry.org/category/israelpalestine/

 

[durruti02]

I think its a link wherein hamas defends sudan on darfur. The SWP just defended Hamas, are they now Hamas' main allies?

the swp are liars and opportunists .. they also thank fuck do not run any states that give them the opportunity to carry out what many call a genocide ..

hamas and sudan are both key groups in the Muslim Brotherhood

 

[belboid]

but that's still all you've got in terms of them being main allies? which is where we were in the first post

 

[nino_savatte]

the swp are liars and opportunists .. they also thank fuck do not run any states that give them the opportunity to carry out what many call a genocide ..

hamas and sudan are both key groups in the Muslim Brotherhood

Scratch the surface and you find a sectarian.

 

[durruti02]

but that's still all you've got in terms of them being main allies? which is where we were in the first post

why do you discount the significance of the Muslim Brotherhood?

 

[belboid]

we've been through thaqt, and all you are saying is 'i'm right, i'm right i'm right'

ffs, have the common decency to admit there is not one single iota if actual evidence to back up your fallacious assertion.

You. Were. Wrong.

 

[durruti02]

we've been through thaqt, and all you are saying is 'i'm right, i'm right i'm right'

ffs, have the common decency to admit there is not one single iota if actual evidence to back up your fallacious assertion.

You. Were. Wrong.

mate, are they both key sections of the MB?

 

[ViolentPanda]

why do you discount the significance of the Muslim Brotherhood?

He isn't, IMHO.

I suspect that part of the point he's trying to get across is that while you appear to view the Muslim Brotherhood as a monolithic over-arching organisation with a particular philosophy, it's much more rag-bag than that. Yes, the various members share some principles, but the also don't share others. Sudan's MB-ites will have some different motivations and practices to MB-ites in Gaza, or MB-ites in Egypt.

 

[ViolentPanda]

mate, are they both key sections of the MB?

More "key" than Egypt, Saudi or Morocco?

 

[durruti02]

He isn't, IMHO.

I suspect that part of the point he's trying to get across is that while you appear to view the Muslim Brotherhood as a monolithic over-arching organisation with a particular philosophy, it's much more rag-bag than that. Yes, the various members share some principles, but the also don't share others. Sudan's MB-ites will have some different motivations and practices to MB-ites in Gaza, or MB-ites in Egypt.

yes fair play i accept that .. but key elements of hamas / or hamas have significant connections with the sudan MB

no, with the relevance of the 'genocide' ( do not know enough about the massacres to say if genocide) carried out by their 'brothers' in sudan it MUST be significant in how we LET ALONE israelis see hamas

 

[durruti02]

More "key" than Egypt, Saudi or Morocco?

they are as i understand the only two with any power .. in the countries you mention afaik they are persecuted .. in egypt they were always very strong .. i am not sure these days ..

 

[ViolentPanda]

yes fair play i accept that .. but key elements of hamas / or hamas have significant connections with the sudan MB

no, with the relevance of the 'genocide' ( do not know enough about the massacres to say if genocide) carried out by their 'brothers' in sudan it MUST be significant in how we LET ALONE israelis see hamas

What are the "significant connections"?
Cos nowt you've posted so far warrants the label "significant".

 

[ViolentPanda]

they are as i understand the only two with any power .. in the countries you mention afaik they are persecuted .. in egypt they were always very strong .. i am not sure these days ..

The Sudanese Muslim Brotherhood don't have "power", they have influence with certain sections of the government and establishment of Sudan, and have provided ideological justifications for the behaviour of the Sudanese p-t-b, and as far as HAMAS is concerned, I recommend you read Edward Platt's article about them in last week's New Statesman, as he gives a very concise breakdown of the main ideological constituencies within HAMAS, and the MB and MB-related political ideology doesn't get much of a look-in. Having members who support a particular ideology isn't the same as the entire membership supporting an ideology.

 

[durruti02]

What are the "significant connections"?
Cos nowt you've posted so far warrants the label "significant".

really .. ok so you accept they are both MB? yes? so you accept they are the only two MB groups in power> yes? ok so that they support each other e.g hamas res sudan and darfur and hamas attacking israel? yes? so what more do you think i need to show? give me an example please of level that you would accept

did you then read the mathew levitt google book stuff? this shows some practical links and actually ignores the ideologically link

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=CG-AjU3rraQC&pg=PA184&dq=sudan+hamas#PPA185,M1

 

[Spion]

What is the relevance of this?

 

[durruti02]

The Sudanese Muslim Brotherhood don't have "power", they have influence with certain sections of the government and establishment of Sudan, and have provided ideological justifications for the behaviour of the Sudanese p-t-b, and as far as HAMAS is concerned, I recommend you read Edward Platt's article about them in last week's New Statesman, as he gives a very concise breakdown of the main ideological constituencies within HAMAS, and the MB and MB-related political ideology doesn't get much of a look-in. Having members who support a particular ideology isn't the same as the entire membership supporting an ideology.

well i think that is kinda semantics .. MB does run sudan and no one has shown any differrent on here .. and hamas is a MB org .. and yet again i see nothing posted to contrdict this .. i will check that article though

 

[durruti02]

http://www.newstatesman.com/middle-east/2009/01/israel-hamas-gaza-palestinian

".. for Hamas is not a monolithic organisation with a simple agenda - it consists of many different wings and factions, with conflicting aims and philosophies. It was founded in 1987, at the beginning of the first intifada, by the leadership of the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood in Gaza, with the aim of directing resistance against the Israeli occupation (the name "Hamas" is an acronym of Harakat al-Muqa wama al-Islamiya - "Islamic Resistance Movement", though it also means "zeal").

The new organisation shared the Muslim Brothers' aim of Islamicising Palestinian society, but it differed from its philosophy in one crucial respect: it reserved the right to commit violence...

Dr Khaled Hroub, of the Cambridge Arab Media Project, believes that Hamas has long since outgrown the crude anti-Jewish sentiments of its founding charter, which was written by one member of the "Old Guard" of the Muslim Brotherhood in Gaza.

He says that we should judge it on the "government platform" delivered by the newly elected prime minister, Ismail Haniyeh, on 27 March 2006. "The entire thrust of the statement is confined directly and indirectly to the parameters of the concept of a two-state solution," he says.

"There is no mention or even the slightest hint of the destruction of Israel or the establishment of an Islamic state in Palestine. It reflects very little inclination to radical positions and religious overtones... Someone who read this document without knowing that it had been produced by Hamas could justifiably think that it had been written by any other secular Palestinian organisation."

to be honest i think this is rubbish .. pragmatism does not mean a change in ideology just a change on tactics .. for secular parties this might be real but when hamas is a relegious party basing its politics on the koran and hadiths .. this is fundamentally differrent

 

[tangentlama]

so you accept they are the only two MB groups in power> yes?

NO! Already you ignore the MB connection to Fateh! (As pointed out to you by me recently, and then ignored by you recently).


And then you avoid talking about Egypt http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/feb/15/egypt

2005: 88 seats out of 454 in Egyptian parliament

 

[durruti02]

NO! Already you ignore the MB connection to Fateh! (As pointed out to you by me recently, and then ignored by you recently).


And then you avoid talking about Egypt http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/feb/15/egypt

2005: 88 seats out of 454 in Egyptian parliament

since when does 88 seats give you power? egypt has persecuted MB

and afaik fatah links with MB are only historical ..

btw if i ignore you sometimes it is as you tend to insult me and talk shite about me ( ignorent of mid east / likud supporter / ultra nationalist / etc etc )

 

[Spion]

to be honest i think this is rubbish .. pragmatism does not mean a change in ideology just a change on tactics .. for secular parties this might be real but when hamas is a relegious party basing its politics on the koran and hadiths .. this is fundamentally differrent

You're just seeing what you want to see, and not taking into account all currents of thought evident and their actual policies as practiced.

The weird thing is that you're trying, as far as I can tell, to make them out to be a reactionary organisation, and yet I for one don't have any doubt about this - tho I still do not think the IDF is the one who should be defeating them. It should be Palestinian working people dealing with them and Fatah.

 

[tangentlama]

Since when did being in a coalition (until ruined by Bush Administration) with Fateh (Fateh, whose founders were MB), mean that MB are in power in PA? !