5 ms·

For example, 2017 Hamas charter [1], page 6: The establishment of “Israel” is entirely illegal and contravenes the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people

For example, 2017 Hamas charter [1], page 6: The establishment of “Israel” is entirely illegal and contravenes the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and goes against their will and the will of the Ummah ... There shall be no recognition of the legitimacy of the Zionist entity. ... Hamas rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea. However, without compromising its rejection of the Zionist entity and without relinquishing any Palestinian rights, Hamas considers the establishment of a fully sovereign and independent Palestinian state, with Jerusalem as its capital along the lines of the 4th of June 1967. Again, people may use it trying to say something else, but slogans do not exist in a vacuum. Saying "from the river to the sea" means that all people should be free is akin to saying "arbeit macht frei" is a call for the financial independence of working people. As for your second question, calls for ceasefire appeared while Hamas terrorists weree still in Israel, by no less than U.S. representatives [2]. [1] https://irp.fas.org/world/para/docs/hamas-2017.pdf https://irp.fas.org/world/para/docs/hamas-2017.pdf [2] https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-ceasefire-in-gaza-mirage-israel-self-defense-hamas-3f530205 https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-ceasefire-in-gaza-mirage-is...

dralley 3y ago
>Again, people may use it trying to say something else, but slogans do not exist in a vacuum. Saying "from the river to the sea" means that all people should be free is akin to saying "arbeit macht frei" is a call for the financial independence of working people. Their "2017 charter" rather dramatically toned down the language. The original version makes no attempt to be politically correct.
- waffleiron 3y ago
  [flagged]
- wolverine876 3y ago
  > their "2017 charter" rather dramatically toned down the language. Go look up the original version which makes no attempt to be politically correct. Do you happen to know where to find it? Is there an English translation (not an English version published by them, but a translation by someone reliable)? Often all sides in Israel speak differently in English and local languages, afaik.
  - wk_end 3y ago
    https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/hamas.asp https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/hamas.asp I'm not sure the source of the English, if it's an official English version or was translated by a third party. Among other things, it calls for the "obliteration" of Israel by Islam, asserts that "death for the sake of Allah is the loftiest of [the Islamic Resistance's] wishes", and cites noted anti-semitic text "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" among other conspiracy theories. It also says: "The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him."
    - wolverine876 3y ago
      Awesome, thanks. Already this HN page is more informative than 99% of other discussions combined. I don't have time to read the whole thing right now, but a few observations: * Dated 1988. * It is The Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement, which goes on to say, The Islamic Resistance Movement is one of the wings of Moslem Brotherhood in Palestine. Moslem Brotherhood Movement is a universal organization which constitutes the largest Islamic movement in modern times. Is that the same as Hamas? The added page title (which doesn't seem part of the document), Hamas Covenant 1988, clearly says so. * Just one thing I noticed, skimming it: Under the wing of Islam, it is possible for the followers of the three religions - Islam, Christianity and Judaism - to coexist in peace and quiet with each other. Peace and quiet would not be possible except under the wing of Islam.
      - wk_end 3y ago
        "Hamas" and the "Islamic Resistance Movement" are the same. Per Wikipedia [0], > Hamas [...] an acronym of its official name, the Islamic Resistance Movement [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas
- scelerat 3y ago
  It would seem whatever they "toned down" in 2017 has been toned back up in recent months.
wolverine876 3y ago
Thank you for some actual evidence. First, to add some detail from reading it, first the cut off part: However, without compromising its rejection of the Zionist entity and without relinquishing any Palestinian rights, Hamas considers the establishment of a fully sovereign and independent Palestinian state, with Jerusalem as its capital along the lines of the 4th of June 1967, with the return of the refugees and the displaced to their homes from which they were expelled, to be a formula of national consensus. And from p.2, where 'Palestine' is defined geographically, which seems to include much or all of Israel (including Israel in a two-state solution). However, a quick search did not turn up Ras Al-Naqurah or Umm Al-Rashrash. The Land of Palestine: 2. Palestine, which extends from the River Jordan in the east to the Mediterranean in the west and from Ras Al-Naqurah in the north to Umm Al-Rashrash in the south, is an integral territorial unit. It is the land and the home of the Palestinian people. The expulsion and banishment of the Palestinian people from their land and the establishment of the Zionist entity therein do not annul the right of the Palestinian people to their entire land and do not entrench any rights therein for the usurping Zionist entity. ------------- Second, though I think it obviously weighs significantly on the question, I'll point out some considerations: * Hamas doesn't speak for Palestinians generally. What does the Palestinian Authority say? Optimally, we'd need information on the Palestinian public now or before Oct 7, when the issue was less politicized and information more reliable. * Again, the document is significant, but generally, something in a document doesn't reliably tell us the beliefs of the public. Even scripture won't tell you what people are doing or thinking (even the leaders - compare some of their ideas with scripture). * It's from 2017; I wonder how old the phrase is. Anyway, hardly criticism; thanks for contributing. It's not an easy question. > calls for ceasefire appeared while Hamas terrorists weree still in Israel, by no less than U.S. representatives Warfare, including as currently conducted by Israel, is not the only means of Israel defending itself. IMHO elliding the two seems like an obviously disingenous attack, and it undermines all supporters of Israel by making their other claims equally suspect.
- EvgeniyZh 3y ago
  > did not turn up Ras Al-Naqurah or Umm Al-Rashrash. Ras Al-Naqurah, I think, is Rosh HaNikra [1], the current northern border of Israel. Umm Al-Rashrash is now Eilat [2], the southernmost Israeli city. For me, both were the first google links. > Optimally, we'd need information on the Palestinian public now or before Oct 7, when the issue was less politicized and information more reliable. You can check the polls from July 2023 [3]. For example, 50% thought that Hamas should stop calling for Israel’s destruction. > Again, the document is significant, but generally, something in a document doesn't reliably tell us the beliefs of the public. Would you use a slogan actively used by some racist organization to call for white supremacy because it also meant something else you believe in? > Warfare, including as currently conducted by Israel, is not the only means of Israel defending itself. I don't see how else you can possibly defend yourself from armed people killing your citizens in their homes. Again, this specific call happened while Hamas was still killing Israelis in Israel. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosh_HaNikra_Crossing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosh_HaNikra_Crossing [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eilat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eilat [3] https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/polls-show-majority-gazans-were-against-breaking-ceasefire-hamas-and-hezbollah https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/polls-sh...
pydry 3y ago
>Again, people may use it trying to say something else, but slogans do not exist in a vacuum. "From the river to the sea, palestine will be free" implies a desire to see freedom not genocide. If you're looking for slogans that genuinely impute racist genocidal intent look no further than the Israeli Prime Minister's references to Amalek. People who say that they support Israel may not believe this imputed genocidal intent is what they support that in a practical sense it is.
- wolverine876 3y ago
  > "From the river to the sea, palestine will be free" implies a desire to see freedom not genocide. To read it literally (and choose one of many possible literal interpretations), doesn't work in this situation, if it ever works. It's not a statement someone just now made up on the spot in an isolated context; it's a slogan in an extremely politicized situation, with many years of history and meaning upon it.
  - pydry 3y ago
    It absolutely works. If you want to play join the dots from slogan to genocidal racism, Netanyahu's references to Amalak is what you are looking for.
- EvgeniyZh 3y ago
  "Arbeit macht frei" implies a desire to see freedom not genocide.
  - wolverine876 3y ago
    One of my favorites is the Democratic People's Republic of Korea - North Korea. See, they're a democracy - for the people! :) Words, by themselves, are so easy to lie with.
    - bentley 3y ago
      Or the Antifaschistischer Schutzwall—“Anti-Fascist Protection Rampart”—better known as the Berlin Wall.

dralley 3y ago

>Again, people may use it trying to say something else, but slogans do not exist in a vacuum. Saying "from the river to the sea" means that all people should be free is akin to saying "arbeit macht frei" is a call for the financial independence of working people. Their "2017 charter" rather dramatically toned down the language. The original version makes no attempt to be politically correct.

waffleiron 3y ago
[flagged]
wolverine876 3y ago
> their "2017 charter" rather dramatically toned down the language. Go look up the original version which makes no attempt to be politically correct. Do you happen to know where to find it? Is there an English translation (not an English version published by them, but a translation by someone reliable)? Often all sides in Israel speak differently in English and local languages, afaik.
- wk_end 3y ago
  https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/hamas.asp https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/hamas.asp I'm not sure the source of the English, if it's an official English version or was translated by a third party. Among other things, it calls for the "obliteration" of Israel by Islam, asserts that "death for the sake of Allah is the loftiest of [the Islamic Resistance's] wishes", and cites noted anti-semitic text "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" among other conspiracy theories. It also says: "The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him."
  - wolverine876 3y ago
    Awesome, thanks. Already this HN page is more informative than 99% of other discussions combined. I don't have time to read the whole thing right now, but a few observations: * Dated 1988. * It is The Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement, which goes on to say, The Islamic Resistance Movement is one of the wings of Moslem Brotherhood in Palestine. Moslem Brotherhood Movement is a universal organization which constitutes the largest Islamic movement in modern times. Is that the same as Hamas? The added page title (which doesn't seem part of the document), Hamas Covenant 1988, clearly says so. * Just one thing I noticed, skimming it: Under the wing of Islam, it is possible for the followers of the three religions - Islam, Christianity and Judaism - to coexist in peace and quiet with each other. Peace and quiet would not be possible except under the wing of Islam.
    - wk_end 3y ago
      "Hamas" and the "Islamic Resistance Movement" are the same. Per Wikipedia [0], > Hamas [...] an acronym of its official name, the Islamic Resistance Movement [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas
scelerat 3y ago
It would seem whatever they "toned down" in 2017 has been toned back up in recent months.

wolverine876 3y ago

Thank you for some actual evidence. First, to add some detail from reading it, first the cut off part: However, without compromising its rejection of the Zionist entity and without relinquishing any Palestinian rights, Hamas considers the establishment of a fully sovereign and independent Palestinian state, with Jerusalem as its capital along the lines of the 4th of June 1967, with the return of the refugees and the displaced to their homes from which they were expelled, to be a formula of national consensus. And from p.2, where 'Palestine' is defined geographically, which seems to include much or all of Israel (including Israel in a two-state solution). However, a quick search did not turn up Ras Al-Naqurah or Umm Al-Rashrash. The Land of Palestine: 2. Palestine, which extends from the River Jordan in the east to the Mediterranean in the west and from Ras Al-Naqurah in the north to Umm Al-Rashrash in the south, is an integral territorial unit. It is the land and the home of the Palestinian people. The expulsion and banishment of the Palestinian people from their land and the establishment of the Zionist entity therein do not annul the right of the Palestinian people to their entire land and do not entrench any rights therein for the usurping Zionist entity. ------------- Second, though I think it obviously weighs significantly on the question, I'll point out some considerations: * Hamas doesn't speak for Palestinians generally. What does the Palestinian Authority say? Optimally, we'd need information on the Palestinian public now or before Oct 7, when the issue was less politicized and information more reliable. * Again, the document is significant, but generally, something in a document doesn't reliably tell us the beliefs of the public. Even scripture won't tell you what people are doing or thinking (even the leaders - compare some of their ideas with scripture). * It's from 2017; I wonder how old the phrase is. Anyway, hardly criticism; thanks for contributing. It's not an easy question. > calls for ceasefire appeared while Hamas terrorists weree still in Israel, by no less than U.S. representatives Warfare, including as currently conducted by Israel, is not the only means of Israel defending itself. IMHO elliding the two seems like an obviously disingenous attack, and it undermines all supporters of Israel by making their other claims equally suspect.

EvgeniyZh 3y ago
> did not turn up Ras Al-Naqurah or Umm Al-Rashrash. Ras Al-Naqurah, I think, is Rosh HaNikra [1], the current northern border of Israel. Umm Al-Rashrash is now Eilat [2], the southernmost Israeli city. For me, both were the first google links. > Optimally, we'd need information on the Palestinian public now or before Oct 7, when the issue was less politicized and information more reliable. You can check the polls from July 2023 [3]. For example, 50% thought that Hamas should stop calling for Israel’s destruction. > Again, the document is significant, but generally, something in a document doesn't reliably tell us the beliefs of the public. Would you use a slogan actively used by some racist organization to call for white supremacy because it also meant something else you believe in? > Warfare, including as currently conducted by Israel, is not the only means of Israel defending itself. I don't see how else you can possibly defend yourself from armed people killing your citizens in their homes. Again, this specific call happened while Hamas was still killing Israelis in Israel. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosh_HaNikra_Crossing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosh_HaNikra_Crossing [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eilat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eilat [3] https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/polls-show-majority-gazans-were-against-breaking-ceasefire-hamas-and-hezbollah https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/polls-sh...

pydry 3y ago

>Again, people may use it trying to say something else, but slogans do not exist in a vacuum. "From the river to the sea, palestine will be free" implies a desire to see freedom not genocide. If you're looking for slogans that genuinely impute racist genocidal intent look no further than the Israeli Prime Minister's references to Amalek. People who say that they support Israel may not believe this imputed genocidal intent is what they support that in a practical sense it is.

wolverine876 3y ago
> "From the river to the sea, palestine will be free" implies a desire to see freedom not genocide. To read it literally (and choose one of many possible literal interpretations), doesn't work in this situation, if it ever works. It's not a statement someone just now made up on the spot in an isolated context; it's a slogan in an extremely politicized situation, with many years of history and meaning upon it.
- pydry 3y ago
  It absolutely works. If you want to play join the dots from slogan to genocidal racism, Netanyahu's references to Amalak is what you are looking for.
EvgeniyZh 3y ago
"Arbeit macht frei" implies a desire to see freedom not genocide.
- wolverine876 3y ago
  One of my favorites is the Democratic People's Republic of Korea - North Korea. See, they're a democracy - for the people! :) Words, by themselves, are so easy to lie with.
  - bentley 3y ago
    Or the Antifaschistischer Schutzwall—“Anti-Fascist Protection Rampart”—better known as the Berlin Wall.