The Palestinians: Ten Points The U.S. Needs To Consider

by Khaled Abu Toameh
March 14, 2013 at 5:00 am

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3621/palestinians-obama-visit

Send

Comment

RSS

Be the first of your friends to like this.

Even if a Palestinian State were established, Hamas and other groups would work to take control of it, and, with the help of Iran and Al-Qaeda, turn it into a launching pad for attacking Israel and other neighbors.

It is hard to find one Palestinian who believes that US President Barack Obama's upcoming visit to the region will lead to a breakthrough in the Middle East "peace process."
Palestinian Authority officials in Ramallah said they too are not pinning any hopes on Obama's visit. "The situation is much more complicated than Obama thinks," remarked a top PA official in a briefing ahead of the US president's visit. "We do not believe we will see any changes on the ground."
But as Obama prepares to visit the region, he would do well to take the following facts into consideration:
1. Any agreement reached between Israel and the Palestinian Authority would be rejected by a large number of Palestinians, especially Palestinian refugees who continue to insist on the "right of return" to their former villages inside Israel.
2. A majority of Arabs and Muslims would also reject a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, especially in wake of the "Arab Spring," which has seen the rise of Islamists to power in a number of Arab countries. It is hard to see how the ruling Muslim Brotherhood organization in Egypt, for example, would welcome any peace agreement with the "Zionist entity."
3. Even if a Palestinian state were established in the West Bank, Hamas and other groups would work to take control of it and, with the help of Iran and Al-Qaeda, turn it into a launching pad for attacking Israel and other neighbors. The Palestinian Authority is in power thanks to the presence of the Israel Defense Force in the West Bank. Ironically, ending Israeli "occupation" would also bring an end to Abbas's rule.
4. Most Palestinians do not see the US as an honest broker. Any agreement reached under the auspices of the US Administration would be received with utmost suspicion. Already, many Palestinian activists are waging a campaign on Facebook and Twitter to "prevent Obama from desecrating the land of Palestine." The activists have called for "huge demonstrations" in the West Bank to protest against Obama's visit; they are even preparing shoes to throw at his motorcade.
5. With the exception of Fatah, all Palestinian organizations -- primarily Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine -- would automatically reject any peace agreement with Israel for various reasons. Some of these groups want to see Israel wiped off the face of the earth, while others believe that Israel would never accept all their demands, such as a full withdrawal to the pre-1967 lines and the release of all Palestinian prisoners.
6. The Palestinians are divided into two camps not only geographically, but also ideologically. The first is a radical camp that does not want to deliver on any front: it believes that Israel has no right to exist. The second is the less-radical camp, or the "moderates." This second camp is also not able to deliver: it does not have enough control over the Palestinian territories, let alone a mandate from the Palestinians.
7. Abbas is opposed to the idea of reaching an interim agreement with Israel that would lead to the establishment of a temporary Palestinian state on the parts of the West Bank that are controlled by the Palestinian Authority.
8. Even the Palestinian Authority appears to be divided into two camps, one headed by Prime Minister Salam Fayyad and the second led by Abbas. Tensions between the two have been mounting in wake of the resignation of Palestinian Finance Minister Nabil Qassis. While Abbas has rejected the resignation, Fayyad has accepted it, triggering a crisis with the Palestinian Authority president.
9. Many Palestinians, including Abbas and the Palestinian Authority leadership, are opposed to the resumption of peace talks unless Israel releases a significant number of Palestinian prisoners, halts all construction in settlements, as well as east Jerusalem, and accepts the pre-1967 lines as the future borders of a Palestinian state.
10. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas does not have a mandate from his people to reach any agreement with Israel: his term in office expired in January 2009.

Related Topics: Khaled Abu Toameh

Extreme Islamist Group Denies "Hate Preaching"

by Samuel Westrop
March 14, 2013 at 4:00 am

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3620/islamist-group-hate-preaching

Send

Comment

RSS

Be the first of your friends to like this.

If this is not enough to constitute "hate preaching," what is?

The Islamic Education and Research Academy (iERA) has threatened the Gatestone Institute with legal action over an article detailing its speakers' expressed support for terror and hatred towards Jews, homosexuals and women. The iERA claims it is neither "pro-terror," nor are their speakers "hate preachers."
A letter from Saleem Chagtai, Head of Media at the iERA, reads:
I am writing to you after coming across the following article posted on your website by Samuel Westrop:
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3481/britain-nhs-ramadan-tv
In this article are some outrageous allegations made against the Islamic Education & Research Academy (iERA) such as labeling us as "pro-terror" and calling some of our staff members "hate preachers."
We condemn terrorist acts and have actively spoken against them. Our work is about dialogue with the wider community and that is very clear from the activities we conduct. We do not advocate "hate" as this goes against the very nature of our work which is "dawah" or inviting people to Islam.
The letter goes on to claim that comments about one iERA speaker, Abdurraheem Green, has been taken out of context.
Unfortunately, this denial flies in the face of the evidence.
He recommends that death is a "suitable" punishment for adultery and homosexuality:
"Such crimes thus need suitable and effective punishments that act as a sever [sic] warning to others. A public crime deserves a public punishment. Adultery is punishable by death, and a slow and painful death by stoning. All of this also goes some way to help understand way acts of homosexuality are similarly treated so harshly."
According to Green, beating women, in order to "bring them to goodness," is permissible:
The husband is allowed, to prevent her from evil, to apply some type of physical force … It is not allowed to break the skin, does not allow to break a bone or even leave a mark on the skin. A beating that is that severe is forbidden and this is a type of assault, and is haram, and a crime in Islam to treat your wife like that. But a type of physical reprimand in order to bring her to goodness is allowed.
Green is particularly disparaging about non-Muslims, describing them as "evil" and their schools as "sewers":
"If we leave (Muslims) in these (non-Muslim Australian) schools they will be destroyed … You know very well what takes place in these schools ... it is all about evolution, Christmas, Easter, St Valentine's Day - a barrage. And you expect your children to survive? You think you live in a sewer and you come up smelling of roses? … Merely living in the company of evil people will inevitably begin to rub off on us and we will begin to acquire their characteristics."
He condemns criticism of the Taliban:
"Supporting the disbelievers against the Muslims is in fact kufr, it is disbelief. This is something that has been clearly stated by Allah in the Quran, that to aid the unbelievers against the believers is an act of kufr, of disbelief.
"Brothers and sisters you can support the kuffar [disbeliever, infidel] against the Muslims even by a word...For example, slandering and attacking the Muslims unjustly, such as you find many Muslims have done this about the Taliban. Slandering them and attacking them and reviling them based upon news that has come from the disbelieving media, helping the kuffar against the Muslims."
Green does not attempt to hide his distaste for Jews. In one video, Green has said, "Why don't you take the Yahudi [Jew] over there, far away, so his stench doesn't disturb us, okay?"
Green also claims that Turkish leader Ataturk was "an extremely, thoroughly unpleasant, nasty kafir [unbeliever of Islam]. He was a Jew, he was a Jew. And not only was he a Jew, he belonged to a sect of the Jews that even the Jews think are far astray."
In 2005, Green gave a speech at University College London, uncovered by the Daily Telegraph, in which he said that a "permanent state of war exists between the people of Islam and the people who opposed Islam." Referring to Bin Laden, he added, "His rational [sic] is … we are going to keep on killing your women and children until you stop killing our women and children. How do you argue with that?" Citing the Irish Republican Army, he added: "The other thing is that it seems that terrorism works. We certainly have precedent." Green initially objected to the Telegraph's report but later withdrew his complaint.
Other iERA speakers include Bilal Philips, described by the US an "unindicted co-conspirator" in the 1993 al-Qaeda attack on the World Trade Center; Zakir Naik, banned from the UK for saying that "every Muslim should be a terrorist;" and Shady Sulieman, who has said that for those who commit adultery, "their punishment is stoning to death."
Green has hinted a few times that these views are no longer his. The continued presence of other unrepentant pro-terror speakers in the iERA, however, indicates that this is not true. In 2009, Green told the BBC, "I surely have said some pretty radical things and maybe even written some radical things in the past. But one thing I have been very consistent on is terrorism, participating in terrorist activities, violent revolution – is not something that I have ever thought was part of the religion of Islam."
Since then, Green has failed to put his words into action.
Several months after speaking to the BBC, he invited two supporters of terrorism -- and fellow iERA speakers -- Bilal Philips and Hussein Ye, on a speaking tour. He has called on his website for the release of Ali al Timimi, whom he describes as "a treasure of this ummah [nation of Islam], but a treasure purposely buried by the opposer's [sic] of divine guidance." Timimi has been convicted of terrorism offenses in the United States and sentenced to life in prison. Green has also testified in defence of Yassin Nassari, another Islamist convicted of terrorism offenses.
The iERA's letter states that "labeling us as 'pro-terror' and calling some of our staff members 'hate preachers'" is "outrageous."
Three of the iERA's "advisors" have been banned from entering the UK, because of their extremist statements and support for terror. It is noteworthy, however, that the iERA does not consider stoning women and homosexuals to death extremism. But if this is not enough to constitute hate preaching, what is?

Related Topics: Samuel Westrop

To subscribe to the this mailing list, go to http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/list_subscribe.php

Gatestone Institute