A top Hamas political official told The Associated Press the Islamic militant group is willing to agree to a truce of five years or more with Israel and that it would lay down its weapons and convert into a political party if an independent Palestinian state is established along pre-1967 borders.
Two issues. The first is that they aren’t going to get pre-1967 borders. The larger more important point though is that Hamas just admitted they aren’t a legitimate government power and are actually terrorists instead. Own goal.
What’s the difference between terrorists and the resistance to an occupation?
The distinction comes from the ends they seek and the means they go about achieving those ends.
-prayer of Sheik Ahmad Bahr
I could easily get behind a platform that acknowledges that 7 million Jews now live in Israel and forcing them out (or even worse, killing them) would be a humanitarian catastrophe, but instead Hamas’ position is just as unyielding and genocidal as what Bibi’s admin has been waging upon the people of Gaza and the West Bank. They’re only now talking about laying down their arms because it benefits their attempts to paint themselves as the reasonable party in this conflict which I find to be a farce. More conflict and death benefits both Likud and Hamas.
Are you going to spam the same quote from some dude that’s already dead all over the thread? The fact you can’t find anything more recent than is astounding. Let’s do it the other way around:
I posted it twice, somehow that qualifies as spam, fucking lol. Fuck that lady and the other genocidal maniacs at the wheel in Israel.
-Fathi Hamad, 2018
That recent enough for you? Fathi is still kicking as well. It’s quite easy to find more.
Yeah thats indeed a bad statement. Looks like Hamas made him walk it back and he apologized.
Hamas official walks back call to Palestinian Diaspora to kill ‘Jews everywhere’
“Whoopsie! So sorry I called for a global genocide there. Never meant a word of it”
Oppressed people tend to conflate the attributes of their oppressors and generalize everyone with those attributes.
Slaves often started to hate every white person instead of just slave owners.
As israel constantly screams they represent all Jews, and commit all their crimes in the name of Judaism, some Palestinians (mistakenly) conflate the two.
Luckily Hamas as an organization does not and clearly separates the two. Hamas has also never murdered a Jew outside of israel. Because they do not target Jews. They target the people that colonize their land.
Unlike israel where half the cabinet screams they want to murder every Arab and Ethnically Cleanse their land.
Terrorism is a verb.
Terrorists are people that commit terrorism.
Official count is now 42,000 dead Palestinians, but that is because the ability to count the dead no longer exists. The number is probably closer to 100,000
Israeli doctors have come forward to detail how amputations are regular for Palestinian prisoners who have been zip tied for months now.
Any definition of terrorism that includes Hamas, also includes the Israeli government.
Edit: recognizing your username, now is when you’ll call me antisemitic.
You’re at the very least anti-partsofspeech.
You just got downvoted for correctly realizing that terrorism is literally a noun. Strange times.
My comment was terrorismed.
I didn’t downvote you, but I didn’t understand your comment are all. But, I probably couldn’t diagram a sentence anymore.
But, at the risk of being stupid here, wouldn’t terrorist be the noun and terrorism the verb?
Terrorist is someone who uses violence against a civilian population to enact political change, and terrorism is the act of using violence against a civilian population to enact change?
Thanks for asking. I respect that.
Terrorism is a noun. It is the use or act of political violence to create fear in a populace. It’s a little tricky because those sound like doing something, which would be a verb. But we’re describing the thing those people are doing.
Terrorists do acts of terrorism. People do things. What do they do? They terrorize. They terrorized. They will terrorize. She terrorizes. That’s the verb.
Terroristic would be the adjective.
Huh, okay, I think I see where you are coming from.
The only issue I have with trouble with understanding is that I don’t think terrorism and terrorize can be considered the same word.
If I’m a terrorist, I do a terrorism, I don’t terrorize.
Similarly, I terrorize my cats when the get poop on a paw with water, but I don’t commit a terroristic act against them when I wash their feet
Of course, I think most of that comes from creaturely a poorly defined word with an amorphous meaning that is based off of, but isn’t, a similar word.
Terror may be a root word for terrorism, but I fell like the definition has changed enough that the conjugation is different
I honestly don’t understand how people who think this is easy can think math is hard.
Than you got your previous response, too. I did find out useful.
Edit: to be clear, I am fully aware I have no idea what I’m talking about here, language wise, so the above ‘I think I can see where you were coming from’ was meant more as a ‘I think I understand’
It’s fair to say “terrorize” isn’t a verb that fits well. But then we’re left with “doing” being the verb in “doing terrorism.” And “terrorism” in that context is a thing - a noun.
Most “isms” are nouns. Mormonism, romanticism, communism, terrorism. Romanticists romanticize and are different than romantics who romance. Communists don’t really commune. There’s really no Mormonizing.