The following addresses the post on the Fearless History blog, entitled, "."
I've read elsewhere too all the things you've mentioned in your post and your comments on your post to-date.
Hamas is, as you've said, different from the other Arab and Muslim groups you mentioned. Hamas though holds out those differences as positive evidence that they are not radical-fundamentalist Muslims to be feared and dreaded as such, contrary to false stereotyping that goes on about them in the U.S.
Hamas protests loudly (but is censored in that part of the West that is pro-Zionist Project) that they, Hamas, don't want al Qaeda in Gaza or Palestine, because they, Hamas, don't want sharia law or the outcome of the Islamic revolution of Iran in Palestine or Israel. This is the flipside way of looking at it, which the neoconservatives do not want put before the public at large especially in the U.S.
Looking at Palestinian women, it is clear that Hamas doesn't enforce either Iranian or Wahhabi interpretations of Islamic law. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Palestinian women are not whipped by Hamas in the streets for not wearing burkas. They are not driven from the schools. Hamas is not the Taliban or anything close to it.
In addition, the Islamic Brotherhood in Egypt has hugely moderated since the days of al Zawahiri in Egypt and the assassination of Anwar Sadat. Qutubism has been seen through by many there as having been misguided even by the strictest Islamic standards (Mohammed's teachings).
Anyway, I'm not trying to make Hamas's case here in total, as I don't agree with it in total. No Christian can.
From my experience, another thing to bear in mind is that many Muslims in leadership positions are, from the Western perspective, want to make empty threats in the extreme. Calling their bluff is routine to the point of ignoring their bluff. The issue as the Zionists would have us believe is that Hamas and the others want to position themselves such that their threats will not only no longer be empty but rather the opposite and that all the enemies of the Zionist Project are hell-bent to repeat and finish the Final Solution of the Nazis. It is only true if Israel continues with its evil. The wrath will come upon them. The way for Israel to end the threats, real or imagined, is by adopting peace first, foremost, and always.
Now, did or didn't Israel suffer a defeat in their 2006 invasion of Lebanon? Well, by what standard is this being said in the affirmative? Lebanon suffered billions and billions of dollars in destruction and many more deaths and injuries than did Israel. Israel did lose though its aura of invincibility it tried in vain to revive. The Ark of the Covenant is still lost. They lost it long ago. They aren't going to get it back by continued land grabbing and putting their heels on the backs of the necks of tiny children grinding their faces into the dirt until they are dead. Those days are gone forever. Our knowledge and understanding of God has evolved way beyond that thanks to Jesus.
The part in your post I really don't buy at all is "Hamas goads" as in being the prime instigator, which is how I take your drift. I believe you believe that — that if only Hamas would not fight back, Israel would stop being evil of its own accord. I believe Hamas must stop all violence but that Israel will not stop until Israel renounces the false-Zionist Project, which project was, is, and will forever be anti-God. That Zionist Project is loaded with half-truths that never get it.
It always appears (and appearances here aren't deceiving) that when there is a relative calm, Israel is the anti-peace culprit stirring the hornet's nest for the sake of more ill-gotten gain for itself. The U.S. mainstream media just echoes the Israel line (false propaganda) that the bad-acting always starts with Hamas or Hezbollah, etc.
For instance, in the lead-up to the 2006 war with Lebanon, was it Israel that sent soldiers into Lebanon who were captured and killed and not that the Lebanese had entered Israel and kidnapped them? Some reports at the time suggest that that is what actually happened. That other version was literally censored in the U.S. MSM. It is disputed. I remember the conflicting reports at the time. One version is that Israel sent in spies who were caught and then Israel claimed Lebanon's Hezbollah started the conflict? Regardless, Israel was holding Lebanese people and Hezbollah wanted Israelis to trade for them. Israel had done the same — taken people to trade for Israelis. Well, Israel attacked and ended up showering Lebanon with destruction and cluster bombs indiscriminately killing men, women, and children on a much larger scale, not that taking one innocent life is acceptable or taking any life is acceptable to God.
Am I speaking lies here? Is my father or theirs the liar from the beginning? The answer is plain to see.
Who stole whose land in Palestine? Who used terrorism to do it? The false-Zionists stole the land and they used terrorism to do it. They still are stealing land and using terrorism to do it. Theirs is the greater sin. Theirs is the greater damnation, per Jesus Christ.
It doesn't mean that Hezbollah and Hamas are not sinning. They are sinning and risk damnation as well.
Furthermore, there was a ceasefire in place from June 17, 2008. Hamas was abiding by it. That is something the Zionists could not abide. They can't abide peace. Therefore, they, the false-hearted, fatally flawed Zionists, attacked on November 4, 2008, without provocation killing Palestinians who had been militants before the ceasefire. Well, what is a ceasefire if not to stop killing each other's militants and others, that is to also say if not to stop being militant? Of course, the Zionists broke the peace on purpose for clearly evil reasons. It wasn't ulterior. It was overt. Only those mesmerized by Israel's public-relations propagandists fall for it: Dupes.
Furthermore, Hamas was, and remains, the mundanely legal representatives of the people of Palestine, the whole of Palestine. By all mundane standards, they were elected in a free and fair election. That is something Israel and the American neocons cannot abide. They can not abide such free and fair elections. Therefore, Israel and the American neocons conspired with Fatah's leader Mahmoud Abbas to overthrow the duly elected government of Palestine. Israel and the U.S. funded Abbas and supplied weapons and did everything possible to drive wedges between Fatah and Hamas via bribery. It worked, if one can rightly call it workable. In the long run, the only run that matters, it is not workable.
Divide and conquer is the means, and Abbas's selfishness allowed it to work. Hamas and Fatah had worked out on paper details of a settlement and merging of the two. Israel was mortified and willing to do anything, continuing to sell their souls, to prevent it.
The Zionists are carrying out the plan that was laid by Abraham and before. The Zionists are the spiritual descendants of those who stole by means of trickery the blessings of their brothers. Jesus came to straighten out all of this, and has, for those of us willing to receive it. Abraham erred by lesser light, and we forgive him, as we need forgiveness for our own sins, former and otherwise.
Ariel Sharon pulled out of Gaza to attack it without Jewish "settlers" in the way. How do I know this? He was simply being true to his form. The Israelis gathered around their highest tables.
They know I speak truth here. They just refuse to be convicted by their consciences.
They gather and lay their secret plans well out in advance all consistent with the misguided plan of Abraham the inheritance from whom they've usurped regardless.
I don't say Hamas doesn't fire rockets back on purpose knowing that it's militarily futile in the sense school boys mean "military" but rather designed to gain attention to their plight. It's one step removed from the anarchist in the U.S. smashing department store windows, with which I don't hold either.
Hamas rationalizes its lesser evil. Israel obfuscates its greater evil. It is the Israelis who are the occupiers, and I don't mean of Gaza until recently but rather all the post-1967 so-called settlements and even the whole of Palestine before the Zionist Project was even conceived as just the most recent false iteration of taking the Promised Land by force. You don't break into Heaven. The Israelis don't know and never have known what the Promised Land is. They didn't get it under Moses, and they don't get it now because they still reject Jesus.
You know, it was reported that even Hamas agreed to a two-state solution based upon the Green Line (June 1967 border) but that it was Israel that rejected it. However, Israeli/neocon false propaganda works to fill the mind of the American public with the utter nonsense that it was the failure of the Palestinians to compromise that caused, and always causes, the breakdown in peace negotiations. Don't take that as my statement that all Palestinians and other Muslims are guileless negotiators. I'm not forwarding that. I am saying though that the Zionist Project is pure guile. It is inherently evil in ways that no one is excused by reason of ignorance. They see and know.
Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth. (John 9:41 KJVR)
They are self-delusional that their actions don't say We see every bit as much as when someone says it from his mouth. God knows their hearts are not with him. Every real Christian knows this.
The U.S. media though played it that the Palestinians were the ones who were unreasonable for not giving into all of the Israelis' demands for further, deep concessions, concessions deliberately designed to cause Palestinian rejection so Israel could continue land grabbing.
History professor Norman Finkelstein states the following:
Palestinians were willing to make concessions. They were willing to allow Israel to keep 60 percent of the settlements, 80 percent of the settlers. They were willing to compromise on Jerusalem. They were willing to give up basically on the right of return. They made all the concessions. Israel didn't make any concessions. (Source: Democracy Now)
The right of return is right there under international law to which both Israel and the U.S. are signatory. In fact, the U.S. Constitution makes the right of return the supreme law of the U.S. The Palestinians have a constitutional right under the Empire to return to their homes pre-1967 and pre all wars in fact that were waged after that right of return became the mundane law of the world, which it is.
I don't agree with all things Norman Finkelstein. Norman is an atheist. How can I agree with him on all things? I do say that when it comes to the recitation of the historical record, I do start from the premise that he's right until the false-Zionist can show me otherwise. I have good reason for that. They've never shown me where he's been mundanely wrong in any of his verbal and written recitations. I've only seen them shamefully and cowardly duck, resort to unsubstantiated terms, and attempt to change the subject. Now if he will just carry all of it out to its logical conclusion, he'll find God; but that's another matter in his eyes.
Remember, it was Ariel Sharon who said grab the top of every hill you can and just as quickly as possible to create "facts on the ground." You know that I hold that the false-hearted Zionists are literally land thieves and definitely want it all, as in Greater Israel. If you will recall that May 22, 1989, James Baker, as the U.S. Secretary of State, told Israel to give up such notions. Baker was speaking in the mundane of course. The real Greater Israel is fine with God and with me. It's the fraud that's the problem.
Hamas is called a terrorist organization, but you've documented on your own site the Zionist clearly documented, irrefutable history of engaging in terrorist acts — Menachem Begin and Irgun, et al. You also know that there are many, many ethnic bigots and racists in Israel. Public surveys have consistently borne this out. If Israel is now legitimate, why can't Hamas be allowed to move to legitimate? Is the "terror" still continuing in Belfast? Where are the peacemakers from within Zionism? It isn't possible to be a Zionist of the stripe of any in main leadership in Israel right now and also be a peacemaker. One must renounce that wrong brand of Zionism before being a true peacemaker. The Zionists are war makers. Who can't see that? So are the Americans in the main.
Anyway, both sides are terribly wrong; but I openly state that Israel has the greater sin in the matter just as Jesus said the one(s) who turned him over to Pontius Pilate had the greater sin than did Pilate in the matter. Non-violence is the only way for the Gazans and for Israelis and for everyone frankly. Hamas and the Zionists are flesh cousins for crying out loud. You'd pray they could grow up on both sides and just have some real family values once and for all.
I'm no Marxist, but I found this an interesting read.
I usually take hardcore Marxist literature with a block of salt (I've read some things Marx and Engels wrote about Christianity that are just ridiculously shoddy; very poor historical scholarship), but this person, Tony Cliff (deceased) wrote this in the first person about his own immediate, flesh-family members. I believe what he wrote, with few qualifications – I reserve some judgment.
Michael, Hamas is being held up to a much higher standard in America than is Israel; and the American people aren't being shown that. It's being concealed. The truth is being censored. Hamas is resisting. Hamas is the resistance. This is not to say that Hamas is not erring. However, consider the following, which I use here in a way that anyone may regardless of religious persuasion:
Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; (Matthew 5:43-44 KJVR)
This idea was not new at the time Jesus spoke it. Jesus didn't invent it. He just read the verses without the hypocrisy. He used it consistently and took it as public as possible all for the right reasons. That was new in history.
Now here is Hamas loving neighbor in a very mundane sense, as you've pointed out with all of its social-services work (giving and sharing), although not consistently loving even those neighbors if we are to believe Mosab Hassan Yousef, who is reportedly the son of a leader of Hamas and who says Hamas tortured its own. Yousef says he's a convert to Jesus. I have no reason at this point to disbelieve his story. Of course, under Islam versus Christianity, the neighbor is only those who side with Hamas. The enemies of Hamas are the enemies of righteousness and are, therefore, worthy of, and condemned to, torture. They bring it upon themselves. Jesus though has a much higher (highest) standard of what constitutes enlightenment. Jesus doesn't torture. Satan does. Who belongs in the judgment seat? Which ideology (system of thought; emotional state) is the best?
What Hamas is doing, by Jesus's and my lights, is hating its enemy in the wrong way. It is not also loving its enemy in the right way/right reason.
However, in the case of Israel, Israel is not the resistance. It is not resisting evil (the greater evil). It started evil via its Zionist Project. Some say that the enmity goes back to Isaac and Ishmael; however, it goes back to before Adam and the serpent.
Thanks for taking the time to give a detailed answer.
Of course, there is only circumstantial evidence about the money flowing from Iran to Hamas and Hezbollah, although I believe it.
What I don't believe is that Israel "knows" Iran is building nuclear weapons, although with Israel in the neighborhood armed to the teeth, including with nuclear weapons, and being willing to lie repeatedly about many things, I certainly won't say that Iran is positively not building such weapons. It sure would ruin the top cleric's veracity though if they were to be found building such weapons.
Would they really gamble their souls that way? All false-Christians and false-Orthodox Jews lie. Do they really want such weapons? It would just draw a bigger bull's eye on their country. People in high places are stupid that way though.
Regardless, why would Israel want to attack Iran any more than I want to attack Russia or America for their nuclear weapons caches, which I don't want to do but rather simply call upon all to disarm?
The following should appear at the end of every post:
According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":
Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.
Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.
Political Campaign Intervention
Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.
Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.
Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:
- Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
- Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
- Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
- Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
- Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office
Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:
- The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
- Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
- We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
- When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
- It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
- We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
- We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
- When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
- We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
- It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.
And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)