British MP Galloway secretly meets with Haniyeh in Gaza

[oberliner]

British lawmaker George Galloway held a meeting Wednesday with Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh at an undisclosed location.

Haniyeh has kept out of sight since Israel launched a three-week offensive against Hamas last December in Gaza.

Haniyeh's office said the meeting took place on Tuesday. It released a picture of the two men embracing and said Galloway was awarded an honorary Palestinian passport.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1070336.html

[LSparkle]

1. I LOVE George Galloway! His evisceration of Norm Coleman years ago ..

still brings a HUGE smile to my face. He absolutely took
Chipmunk Chicklets APART while testifying before some
Senate committee Norm chaired at the time.

Good on you, Galloway!

[shira]

3. Gotta love his material support for Hamas

You do know all that he brought to Gaza he has now given directly to Hamas?

Shows Galloway's true colors.

If he knows anything about Hamas, Galloway knows that by helping Hamas he is not helping Palestinians (at least the non-extremists) one bit. He now supports Sharia law, Hamas' treatment of women and religious minorities, its child abuse (killer bunnies who hate, kill, and are praised), human shields, etc. He supports fascist warmongering terrorists, which is against international law.

Yeah, he's the man alright.

[Tripmann]

4. True Colors?

Galloway was protesting against Saddam outside the iraqi embasy in london when the us and uk were arming him. Now he's bringing aid to the palestinians when most of the world turned their backs on them.

The guys a hero.

[Idealism]

8. Is it the money, the medical supplies, or the food you protest against him bringing?

[shira]

9. he supports Hamas

Do you really trust Hamas to just give all of Galloway's stuff away to the people and children who need it most? Are you sure they won't just sell it and use the money for their warmongering efforts? What makes you think Hamas has the best interests of Palestinians at heart and that they deserve to be trusted with charitable donations?

If Galloway followed up with a trip to Sudan and gave the Sudanese dictator millions of dollars in financial support to help Sudanese families and victims of oppression, would you be in favor of that? Would you be against the money, medical supplies, or food?

[Idealism]

10. He is trying to help the Palestinian people

I guess that is not noble enough for you? How would you like him to distribute the aid? Door to door?
How would Hamas sell the aid? The Palestinians, specifically Gazans, are among the worlds poorest people- who would be able to afford any of this? Why else must 750,000 of the 1.5 million get their nutrition through humanitarian aid- you think they just have money laying about?

[shira]

11. do you help the Sudanese people by giving money and aid to Sudan's dictator?

If not, then why would you do this WRT Hamas?

You do realize how much money Hamas makes off of food and supplies sent through tunnels, right? You do realize what Hamas stood to gain financially by stealing UNRWA food and supplies recently? Or do you think they just stole all those truckloads in order to give it all away themselves?

[Idealism]

12. Did Sudan elect Bashir?

Did their citizens get to vote for his military coup? Was the non-vote deemed free and fair by international observers?

[shira]

14. oh, I see, if the dictator is democratically elected then it's different

okay, so let's go to Zimbabwe instead where Mugabe was democratically elected. Should Galloway go there and give money, supplies, and food directly to Mugabe so that Mugabe can then hand it out to all those who need it most?

[Idealism]

16. Mugabe's election was not deemed free and fair.

[shira]

17. only recently, he's been in power since 1980

[Idealism]

18. No, the March 1980 elections were accusation laden with intimidation, ballot stuffing, violence,

and the promise to continue the civil war if Mugabe lost the election. Each election since has had similar complaints.

[shira]

19. so help me understand you better

Because regressive dictators are fairly elected, no matter what they do to their own people or their neighbors, they should always be supported and never punished - otherwise such punishment tends to be collective. Dictators then realize there's no incentive to be more progressive and tolerant. They'll be supported no matter how regressive and horrible they are. Is that your position?

[Idealism]

20. Not so fast, cowboy

Because regressive dictators are fairly elected

Hamas are not dictators as of this point. They would be dictators if they barred all other parties from running in the next elections, or if they abolished the next elections. They may have committed crimes, and treat dissent unfavorably (to say the least), but that qualifies about 85% of the current governments in the world as being "dictators" by using your definition, too, which they technically are not.

no matter what they do to their own people or their neighbors, they should always be supported and never punished

Did I say Hamas should "never be punished" and they should "always be supported?" Find me that quote, thanks in advance.

The best thing Israel can do to undermine Hamas isn't to bomb Gaza into submission, it is to show Palestinians that their life can be better if their leadership changes direction and renounces violence. Israel can negotiate with Hamas, and if Hamas remains the elected government, Israel should accept that legitimacy and realize you won't get anything accomplished by violence. As Israel is clearly the bigger power of the two, they hold the cards and must concede some things that they have since been unwilling to fully implement in the past.

Dictators then realize there's no incentive to be more progressive and tolerant.

No, that is not why dictators realize there is no incentive to be more progressive. International funding from organizations like the IMF and the World Bank pour into country's no matter how repressive they are if the dictator in charge embraces free market fundamentalism. This is why dictators do not care about their people- they have billions of easy financing ready if they only implement practices that hurt the citizens in their country. They never stand for re-election, so they are not answerable to them in any way, only fueling the deregulation and privatization process required by IMF and World Bank loans.

They'll be supported no matter how regressive and horrible they are. Is that your position?

I wish you would stop professing knowledge of "my position," seeing as how you clearly have yet to pick up the idea. I am for peace between the two groups in question in the I/P conflict. I believe that peace can happen with a unity PA government borne of Fatah and Hamas. I am not so certain it can happen under a Likud-led right-wing coalition in Israel, although it is possible with enough outside pressure. The problem is the Likud government needs to stop pandering to religious extremists and start doing what is in the best interest of all Israeli citizens, Arabs included. Hamas needs to realize that their pathetic attempts at resistance do nothing of any military value and only bring hardship to their group as well as the citizens they are charged with governing. Both sides could use a leadership change, to say the least.

[shira]

21. let's play what if

If Hamas becomes a dictatorship and rejects all moves towards peace by Israel, moves that you agree are legit, you're in favor of doing __________ to Hamas for keeping the conflict going and victimizing both Israelis and Palestinians.

How's about filling in that blank for us?

You have a plan 'A'. Sounds nice. But it's worthless without a plan 'B'. The above fill-in-the-blank is plan 'B'. Your move now. What do you do to convince Hamas to change its ways? What do you do if you have to implement plan 'B'?

[Idealism]

30. I don't know what would work if "plan A" fails, honestly

Neither does anyone else it seems. The problem is Iran in all of this. We cannot stop Iran from funding Hamas or other militant groups. We have tried sanctions, we have tried covert operations that assassinate high level personnel, we have tried sabotaging their nuclear energy program, nothing has worked.

Lets focus on Hamas since Iran is much harder to deal with. Instead of trying sanctions, instead of trying to punish the Palestinian people for electing Hamas, lets try to help their situation. Starved, desperate people will vote for anyone promising to struggle and fight for them. If there was some hope, if there was some source of work and income besides being a Hamas policeman in Gaza, Hamas would not be so popular. If you make the situation of the people better, raise them out of abject poverty- most importantly: give them some pride back. Too many have subsisted completely off of handouts and humanitarian aid their entire lives because the world has given the Palestinians the cold shoulder.

Hamas is not a permanent group, but the idea of resistance will never go away as long as the Palestinians feel they are being wronged and oppressed. The more repressive Israel's policies towards Palestinians become, the more violent the resistance.

Once Palestinians lives are improving, there isn't electricity shortages, there isn't a food shortage, and the people have a sense of pride again, elections should be held immediately. Hamas will not win an election where Palestinians see their living conditions improving if they give up violent resistance.

[Ken Burch]

24. Look shira, if none of the punishment Israel has inflicted on Gaza has undermined Hamas yet

Isn't it delusional to think that further collective punishment could ever work?

[shira]

25. so by doing nothing to Hamas....

you'll really be advocating peace and doing all you can to help Palestinians.

Suppose Israel does all it realistically can do to make peace, Hamas doesn't budge, and they remain the same warmongerers they are today. You'd be against doing anything to Hamas and just allow them to keep on keeping on, right? And this will help Palestinians and Hamas' Israeli victims.....how? How does your do-nothing stance help promote peace?

[Ken Burch]

28. I'd allow legitimate self-defence against an invasion.

But you're still assuming that the Israeli government has no alternative than to do what it's been doing.

Even though if what it's been doing hasn't stopped Hamas from resisting it's not ever going to get it to do so?

Even though the status quo can't be maintained?

Why can't you see that what the Israeli government is doing ISN'T working? That the hardline can't lead to peace?

And the Israeli government has never come close to doing "all it realistically can do" to make peace. Doing that would have meant a permanent settlement moratorium starting in 1994 for the West Bank. Doing that would have meant treating Palestinians in an ambulance as innocent people seeking medical care(as they all were). Doing that would have meant not setting up the checkpoints where every Palestinian was forced to prove, over and over again, that she or he wasn't a terrorist.

Doing that would have meant replacing all the olive trees that were cut down.

Doing that would have meant apologizing for the implication that Palestine was "a land without people" and for equating Palestinians with European antisemites. Doing that would have meant(and this would not do Israel any harm whatsoever)admitting that Arabs did have a long-standing history in Palestine, that they did cultivate the land, that they were educated, and that they were never "generic Arabs" who were just shipped in on the night bus from Cairo in December of 1947 to cause trouble.

The Israeli government never came within a million miles of doing any of that.

And it keeps stealing the water(the water in the Territories is controlled by the Israeli military), continuing to take the good land in the West Bank and force Palestinians into the useless land, kept pretending that Palestinians had had no history in these lands and no right to remain.

And it keeps trying to starve the people of Gaza to death.

And, while doing this, the Israeli government has the mega-chutzpah to be indignant because Palestinians resist, as if it were reasonable to expect anyone, anywhere, to have simply accepted the treatment Palestinians have received as their natural station in life. And it expects that people to, essentially, surrender and accept that they will never get a state.

Israeli security policy in Gaza meets the definition of insanity: doing the same things over and over again and expecting a different result.

[azurnoir]

13. Well Israel could stop all of that by opening the border

crossings but it apparently prefers bombs, and besides what would Israel's supporters self righteously complain about then?

[shira]

15. so if Israel opens the borders and Hamas gets better weapons that

lead to more war and more devastation against Gazans, you're fine with that?

[azurnoir]

31. So which crossing do you think those weapons

would enter through Erez or Karni or would Hamas be ironic and bring them in Kerem Shalom?

[Ken Burch]

23. It isn't possible to distribute aid without going through Hamas.

You can't insist that the Gaza starve until Hamas falls, for G-d's sake. Hamas isn't ever GOING to fall. Refusing to deal with them makes as much sense as the U.S. pretending that Chiang Kai-Shek still governed all of China until 1977.

[shira]

26. Aid gets through without Hamas unless aid convoys are stolen by Hamas

as they were recently. Aid went through without Hamas before Hamas came to power.

[Ken Burch]

22. Look, shira, you know as well as anybody that a settlement HAS to include direct talks with Hamas

You can't have a settlement without both sides. It is certain that Fatah will never be popular among Palestinians again, and the Israeli government won't do the sane thing and let Barghouti, the only possibility for a secular, democratic and progressive Palestine, out of jail to campaign in the upcoming elections(the polls show that Barghouti would beat Haniyeh and Abbas for the PA presidency). Therefore, negotiating with Hamas is essential.

As Rabin said, you make peace with your enemies.

It isn't possible to ever wipe out Hamas militarily, and any Palestinian leadership that emerged if Hamas were crushed on the battlefield would have to be even more intransigent, so why stay loyal to "peace through victory" when you know there can be no such thing?

[shira]

27. what does this have to do with Galloway giving material support directly to Hamas?

as if Hamas can be trusted to use their powers for good and not for bad, given all this aid?

[Ken Burch]

29. The "facts on the ground" are that Hamas is the legitimate government of Gaza

And that Fatah has been permanently discredited in the eyes of the Palestinian people, especially since Fatah did everything IT could to meet Israeli demands in the 90's and got nothing but humiliation from the Israeli government for its troubles.

You don't create a "partner for peace" by insisting n treating it as a junior partner who is only in the partnership on sufferance rather than as a natural right.

It isn't possible to use collective punishment to discredit Hamas or to get the people of Gaza to reject it. If it was, they'd have rejected it by now.

Therefore, you have to work through Hamas to get the aid to the Gazan people. It's silly to let people go hungry in the name of a precondition.

[azurnoir]

2. Well apparently the meeting is not that big a secret n/t

[bemildred]

6. Sounds like a PhotoOp to me, but what do I know. nt

[Alamuti Lotus]

7. most of us have photographers available for secret gatherings..

but, I suppose the 'secret' aspect is the location, since Haniyeh has been somewhat incognito lately.

[Purveyor]

5. Godspeed Galloway. Kick / eom