For whom do the Dugmash's work?
The Dugmash clan's 'Army of Islam' was the group that kidnapped
BBC Reporter useful idiot Alan Johnston. Hamas has taken credit for freeing Johnston, and just to keep things fair, Johnston also paid a visit to 'moderate' 'Palestinian President'
Mahmoud Abbas Abu Mazen before escaping to the Scottish highlands.
Each side has accused the other of 'running' the Dugmash's. Hamas claims they are really pro-Fatah and close with Fatah bad boy Muhammed Dahlan. Fatah claims that Johnston could have been released long ago but Hamas kept preventing it.
I cannot even pretend to know which claim is correct. I only point out the two sides of the argument to show that there is really no difference between Fatah and Hamas. They are two sides of the same coin.
Hamas is responsible:
Abu Zaida, a senior Fatah official kidnapped briefly by Hamas gunmen this year, said the kidnapping arose from a dispute between Hamas and the Daghmush family who, he claimed, have acted as their mercenaries. He said: “The people who kidnapped Alan Johnston are the people who were supported by Hamas.
“The weapons which they used to kidnap Alan Johnston were supplied by Hamas. Their budget comes from money given to them by Hamas.
“One of the reasons for Alan Johnston’s kidnap was that Hamas stopped supplying the kidnappers with money. Hamas has now had to drink from the same cup as everyone else.”
So far there has been silence from the BBC about visits made to Gaza by its director-general Mark Thompson during the kidnapping.
It is believed he was meeting senior Hamas officials with the aim of securing the release of one of his staff.
A few weeks ago the Sunday Express was informed that the BBC was taking advice on how to handle the crisis from a London-based private security firm which employs former members of the special forces. We were told that the corporation was considering paying a ransom of about £2million for the return of their man, a claim strenuously denied by senior executives at the time.
The Sunday Express did not run the story for fear of damaging the delicate negotiations going on behind the scenes in London and Gaza.
It is being claimed that Hamas has benefited greatly from Mr Johnston’s release and there has been a trade-off.
Fatah officials in the West Bank say Hamas passed weapons and cash to the Daghmush clansmen in exchange for the hostage.
Yasser Abed Rabbo, an adviser to Palestinian president and Fatah leader Mahmoud Abbas, said Mr Johnston’s release was carefully scripted.
He added: “It’s as if we’re watching a movie where the thieves in Gaza fall out and one of them claims to be honest and brave and the other is the bad guy. This Hamas game fools no one.”
If it was a game the stakes have been very high, with the BBC and Mr Johnston’s family convinced that his life was in real danger on more than one occasion.
One theory is that he was kidnapped to exert pressure on Hamas to hand over the killers of Daghmush fighters. Sources in the Gaza Strip say the relationship between the Daghmush clan and Hamas leader Ismail Haniyehit is one born of mutual needs.
Fatah is responsible:
"Michael Ancram: You mentioned that Alan Johnston's captors were a family...
Usamah Hamdan: The Dagmoush family.
MA: That they were associated with Dahlan. Would Dahlan have known?
UH: Yes. He knew this, he does. And for three times we came to the point to release Alan Johnston and by telephone call from [Samir Musharawi], who is Dahlan's man, they stopped that." (thanks Keval)
You make the call.
Revealing remarks about Alan Johnston and the BBC's Gaza coverage
At The Augean Stables, Richard Landes pointed out some
'revealing' remarks about how
Alan Johnston and the BBC have covered events in Gaza:
Again the BBC has an article about the (fairly feeble) attempts of Gazans to protest his kidnapping. As one Restaurant owner Mohammed Zomlot, who is from Gaza, said:
…the Palestinian community in the UK wanted to support Mr Johnston. “I feel that we are the people who really should care about Gaza, and who should care about Alan,” he said. “Because Alan, at the end of the day, he’s one of the people who cares about us and he works for us, and that’s why we have a responsibility to protect him, and we have to ask for his immediate release.”
Now there are multiple observations we can derive from such a statement.
- Johnston was not a “balanced” reporter, but an advocate. “He worked for us.” One can well imagine that Johnston’s reporting reflected, articulated, translated the “Palestinian victim narrative” very faithfully in order to have Gazans describe him so. No foreign reporter in Israel would allow himself to fawn over the Israeli narrative the way Alan did over the Palestinian.
- If Johnston, a tireless advocate for the Palestinian cause got kidnapped by a clan of Muslim extremists, imagine what would happen to a reporter who actually showed skepticism about Palestinian claims, and wrote articles critical of Palestinians — say, something on the way they have turned their schools and media into factories of hatred. As I suggested in my essay on Steve Erlanger’s weak and misleading essay on the “lost generation” in the Palestinian territories, if he were to speak about the poisons that Palestinians administer so generously to themselves, he wouldn’t be welcome back. Johnston was not the “last foreign reporter reporting from Gaza” by accident.
- Whether Johnston was an advocate from conviction (I assume he was), or malicious (any evidence?), he was dishonest. His advocacy, if only by omitting the negative, badly misled his public, and left them with blaming Israel as the only way to explain the utter failure of Gazan society to take advantage of European largesse and getting the Israelis out of their hair to get on their own two feet. One wonders how he would have covered the Gaza Sewage Tsunami, or the current civil war.
- All the overwhelming evidence that Johnston did not even try to be “fair and balanced,” that he sided with the people who allegedly “reported back” to a Western audience about, has not harmed his reputation at all. On the contrary, the BBC article concludes this damnably revealing account by noting that “Last week, Alan Johnston was named broadcast journalist of the year by the London Press Club for his work reporting from the Gaza Strip.”
Read the whole thing.
What if Israel had kidnapped Alan Johnston?
There's a great piece in Saturday's London Daily Telegraph that asks us to indulge in an intellectual exercise:
What if Israel had kidnapped Alan Johnston? (
Hat Tip: Power Line via Daled Amos):
Watching the horrible video of Alan Johnston of the BBC broadcasting Palestinian propaganda under orders from his kidnappers, I found myself asking what it would have been like had he been kidnapped by Israelis, and made to do the same thing the other way round.
The first point is that it would never happen. There are no Israeli organisations - governmental or freelance - that would contemplate such a thing. That fact is itself significant.
But just suppose that some fanatical Jews had grabbed Mr Johnston and forced him to spout their message, abusing his own country as he did so. What would the world have said?
There would have been none of the caution which has characterised the response of the BBC and of the Government since Mr Johnston was abducted on March 12. The Israeli government would immediately have been condemned for its readiness to harbour terrorists or its failure to track them down.
Loud would have been the denunciations of the extremist doctrines of Zionism which had given rise to this vile act. The world isolation of Israel, if it failed to get Mr Johnston freed, would have been complete.
If Mr Johnston had been forced to broadcast saying, for example, that Israel was entitled to all the territories held since the Six-Day War, and calling on the release of all Israeli soldiers held by Arab powers in return for his own release, his words would have been scorned. The cause of Israel in the world would have been irreparably damaged by thus torturing him on television. No one would have been shy of saying so.
But of course in real life it is Arabs holding Mr Johnston, and so everyone treads on tip-toe.
...
Throughout Mr Johnston's captivity, the BBC has continually emphasised that he gave "a voice" to the Palestinian people, the implication being that he supported their cause, and should therefore be let out. One cannot imagine the equivalent being said if he had been held by Israelis.
Well, he is certainly giving a voice to the Palestinian people now. And the truth is that, although it is under horrible duress, what he says is not all that different from what the BBC says every day through the mouths of reporters who are not kidnapped and threatened, but are merely collecting their wages.
The language is more lurid in the Johnston video, but the narrative is essentially the same as we have heard over the years from Orla Guerin and Jeremy Bowen and virtually the whole pack of them.
It is that everything that is wrong in the Middle East and the wider Muslim world is the result of aggression or "heavy-handedness" (have you noticed how all actions by American or Israeli troops are "heavy-handed", just as surely as all racism is "unacceptable"?) by America or Israel or Britain.
The Telegraph goes on to tie the BBC's reporting on Johnston's kidnapping to the decision last week by Britain's Universities and Colleges Union that its members "consider the moral implications of existing and proposed links with Israeli academic institutions." It goes without saying that the British union's decision to boycott Israeli institutions - the only ones in the entire Middle East that don't discriminate based on religion or ethnicity (and in fact, there is reverse discrimination here in favor of the Arabs to an extent that far exceeds "affirmative action" in the US - but that is a subject for another post) - is rank hypocrisy and worse. I'll have more on that later.
As far as Johnston goes, James Taranto of the Wall Street Journal's
Best of the Web hit it on the head:
"What's grimly humorous about this is that the BBC is so anti-Israeli, anti-American and even anti-British that unlike in most hostage situations, there is ample reason to doubt Johnston's insincerity."
That's funny.
I said that.
Remember Alan Johnston?
Remember Alan Johnston, the
BBC reporter and useful idiot who was
kidnapped in Gaza three weeks ago? Well, someone remembers. This ad
appeared in al-Guardian on Monday (some of the signatures were cut when I snagged it):
The ad, organised by the BBC and placed in the MediaGuardian section, has 300 signatories, including Sir David Frost, BBC director general Mark Thompson, CNN chief international correspondent Christiane Amanpour, Jon Snow, Jeremy Paxman, John Humphrys and Sir Trevor McDonald.
Virtually every UK national newspaper editor has signed, including the Guardian's Alan Rusbridger, the Times' Robert Thomson and the Sunday Times' John Witherow; the Sunday Telegraph's Patience Wheatcroft and the Daily Telegraph's Will Lewis; the Daily Mail's Paul Dacre; and the Daily Mirror's Richard Wallace.
The ad is also backed by the ITV News editor-in-chief, David Mannion; the director of BBC news, Helen Boaden; the BBC director of radio, Jenny Abramsky; Channel 4 controller of news and current affairs Dorothy Byrne; head of Sky News John Ryley; and the Channel 4 director of television content, Kevin Lygo.
"We, the undersigned, demand the immediate release of BBC Gaza correspondent Alan Johnston," the ad states.
"It's now been 21 days since Alan was abducted and we have still not received firm word about his whereabouts or his condition ... We ask again that everyone with influence on this situation increase their efforts, to ensure that Alan is freed quickly and unharmed."
...
Palestinian journalists are planning a rally and a boycott of coverage of government activities to press for his release.
And here's the
part of the ad that is missing from the text above:
Alan has worked in Gaza for three years -- he decided to live in the area as he felt it was the only way to tell the story of the people of Gaza.
Useful idiot.
Arutz Sheva is reporting this morning that
Johnston's kidnappers have been identified:
The kidnappers of British Broadcasting Corp. (BBC) reporter Alan Johnston have been identified, but no further information has surfaced, according to the American-based Committee to Protect Journalists. Johnston was kidnapped last month in Gaza, where he has made his home for three years.
Palestinian Authority (PA) Interior Ministry spokesman Khaled Abu Hilal said the identification of the kidnappers was based on the preliminary information, but the group has denied any involvement.
Journalists in Gaza began on Monday a three-day boycott of PA government news in an effort to pressure officials to secure his release.
I guess no one wants to say whether they are Fatah or Hamas.
Islamic Human Rights Commission calls for Johnston's release
I'll bet many of you would regard the term "Islamic Human Rights Commission" as an oxymoron. This is the first I have heard of there being one. But English blogger Little Bulldogs notes that the Islamic Human Rights Commission, which is based in England, has awoken and called for the release of BBC reporter Alan Johnston
nearly two months after he was kidnapped. Here's an excerpt from their
press release:
The Islamic Human Rights Commission is very concerned about claims on al-Jazeera news that BBC journalist Alan Johnston’s kidnappers are demanding the release of Muslim detainees in Britain in exchange for his release.
IHRC calls for the release of British journalist Alan Johnston and condemns any attempt to link his plight to that of Muslim detainees in Britain.
Tony at Little Bulldogs is aptly named, and he doesn't let the IHRC off easily:
The point of this statement was to try and remove the link between the kidnapping and the "plight" of Muslims detained in Britain. Why? Well, because the IHRC spends a lot of its time working towards having Muslims released from British prisons, including Abu Qatada who's name was mentioned by the kidnappers.
The IHRC wouldn't like to be seen to be campaigning for the same goals as terrorists. But, that is what they are doing. And this statement will not be able to remove that fact.
Now I understand why there's an Islamic Human Rights Commission - it's only to protect Muslims.
But as an Israeli, I found the second part of the IHRC statement even more interesting:
Chairman of the IHRC, Massoud Shadjareh, stated:
“We are calling for the immediate and unconditional release of Alan as there can be no justification for the kidnapping and detention of innocent people in any part of the world.”
I suppose it would be too much to expect the IHRC to apply that statement to kidnapped IDF soldiers Gilad Shalit, Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev.
But there's more bad news on the Johnston front. Arab blogger Amal A. cites a report in
al-Quds al-Arabi (link in Arabic) which says that we may soon see
Johnston in an orange suit:
Al Quds al Arabi reports that the thugs (my word not theirs) of the Army of Islam are preparing a video they will soon post of Alan Johnston wearing an orange suit, as a threat that they will execute him if their demands are not met.
But let's just give them a
state reichlet and all the world's problems will be solved.
Why Alan Johnston was released
Why after nearly four months in captivity was Alan Johnston - seen in the photo at top left celebrating with 'moderate' ex-'Palestinian' Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh - suddenly released? Several reasons have come to light this morning.
First and foremost, the London Arabic daily
al-Quds al-Arabi (link to Arabic home page only) reports this morning that at the British government's request, the Syrian government put pressure on Hamas to bring the story to an end.
Second, Hamas hoped that arranging for Johnston's release would convince the western powers to stop isolating Hamastan. The New York Times reports this morning
that has not happened - yet:
While Hamas presented the release as proof of its ability to restore order in the Gaza Strip now that it is solely in charge there, Western and Israeli officials said Mr. Johnston’s freedom would not translate into international recognition and support for the group, which the United States, Israel and the European Union still classify as a terrorist organization and formally boycott.
“It would be premature to expect an immediate impact on relations between the European Union and Hamas,” said Cristina Gallach, the spokeswoman for the Union’s foreign policy chief, Javier Solana.
David Baker, an Israeli government spokesman, said the release of Mr. Johnston, who spent 114 days in the hands of a shadowy group called the Army of Islam, was “something the Israelis had been hoping and praying for.” But he said Hamas was “the same terrorist organization that orchestrated and perpetrated” the seizure of an Israeli soldier, Cpl. Gilad Shalit, just over a year ago.
Nevertheless, Hamas has undoubtedly given its image a boost and gained in respectability.
In London the new British foreign secretary, David Miliband, acknowledged what he called “the crucial role” of the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas of Fatah, and of Ismail Haniya of Hamas, whom Mr. Abbas dismissed as prime minister after the Hamas takeover of Gaza.
Ms. Gallach said the efforts to secure Mr. Johnston’s release “by the international community, local Palestinian leaders and Hamas won’t go unmentioned or unrecognized.”
Third, Israel's Channel 10 (cable television news) reported last night that Hamas gave a substantial amount of cash and weapons to the Dugmash clan, which held Johnston. Ahmed Bahr, a top Hamas leader in the Gaza Strip,
denies that Hamas paid the Dugmash's. (It's also not clear whether money and weapons were paid to the Dugmash's for Johnston or for kidnapped IDF corporal Gilad Shalit or for both or for neither. See the discussion of Shalit below).
Fourth, so long as Hamas and Fatah were at war in the Gaza Strip, the Dugmash clan was able to play each of them off against the other. Once the Gaza Strip became Hamastan, Hamas no longer needed the Dugmash's, but it was kind enough to find them a way to
release Johnston 'honorably' (there's
that word again):
The leader of the Army of Islam, Mumtaz Doghmush, used to spend time with the heads of the Hamas military wing, Ahmed al-Ja'abari, Ahmed al A'ndur and others.
One of their bonding experiences occured when the vehicle the three were riding in was attacked by members of the Doghmush clan who were affiliated with Fatah, and did not know that Mumtaz was a passenger.
And that was the point at which the blood feud between the Army of Islam and Hamas began.
Suddenly, the Doghmush clan in Hamas descriptions became an obstacle to public order, "collaborators with Fatah." However, the well-armed clan knew full well that so long as Hamas and Fatah were at each other's throats for control of the Strip, they could benefit from the chaos in the streets.
No one tried to confront them, or seek the release of kidnapped BBC reporter Alan Johnston. On the contrary: Each one of the groups needed the clan's services and hoped to get its support in the war against the rival organization.
...
Hamas managed to gain the release of the BBC reporter though negotiations Gaza-style. A correct combination of stick, carrot and ladder. The stick: the gunmen of the Executive Force, which Hamas deployed around the Doghmush clan's compound and used to threaten an assault.
The carrot: guarantees that the clan will not be harmed after Johnston's release, and that it will be allowed to keep some weapons. And the ladder that enabled Mumtaz Doghmush, a devout Muslim, to climb down from the tree on which he found himself: the religious figure who acted as the mediator between Hamas and the Army of Islam allegedly issued a fatwa (a religious decree) demanding that Doghmush release the foreign journalist.
The question here in Israel is whether any of this may bring about the release of Gilad Shalit. In an interview with Channel 10 last night, Dugmash clan leader Abu Mutfana said that Shalit had been handed over to Hamas, and urged the Shalit family to pressure the government because to release 'Palestinian'
prisoners terrorists in exchange for Shalit because otherwise the Army of Islam (which is the Dugmash clan) would take action. A Channel 10 commentator also claimed that Hamas had offered the Dugmash's money and weapons in exchange for Shalit. It is not clear whether money and weapons were delivered or even that Shalit has actually been turned over to Hamas. Hamas and the Army of Islam were two of the three groups that collaborated on Shalit's kidnapping last year.
Alan Johnston video released
A video of kidnapped BBC reporter
Alan Johnston was
released today on the al-Ekhlaas web site (on which I did not find a word that was not in Arabic).
Al-Beeb has the video here. While one cannot be sure whether Johnston was speaking willingly when he condemned Israel, the United States and Britain for all of the world's problems, there is nothing in his past to prove that he feels any differently than what he said in the video:
Mr Johnston says: "First of all, my captors have treated me very well... They have fed me well, there has been no violence towards me at all and I'm in good health."
Mr Johnston, seated and wearing a red sweatshirt, calls for an end to Western sanctions that have been imposed on the Palestinian government.
He talks of the "huge suffering" of the Palestinian people, saying: "Everyday there are Palestinians arrested, imprisoned for no reason. People are killed on a daily basis. The economic suffering is terrible, especially here in Gaza."
He also says the British government is working to occupy Muslim lands against the will of the people there.
Mr Johnston refers to the "failed invasion of Iraq by America and Britain" and the "terrible" situation in Afghanistan.
At the end of the video, Mr Johnston begins a message to his family, saying, "to my family, to my family..." but the audio is then cut off.
A message then says the BBC "refused to take this message to the family".
In response the BBC said it had kept the family informed throughout and the Johnston family statement said relatives had been "fully informed and involved by the BBC since the day Alan was abducted".
The BBC statement read: "This is a highly distressing time for them and for his friends and his colleagues. We repeat our call for his immediate release."
On the tape, the Army of Islam demand the release of Abu Qatada, a Palestinian-born Islamic cleric who is suspected of close links to al-Qaeda and is currently held by the UK government as a threat to national security.
A full transcript of the video is
available here. There is no indication when the video was made.
Maybe if Mr. Johnston is released, al-Beeb can consider posting him to Sderot? (It'll never happen...).
Alan Johnston and the BBC's Israel coverage
Former JPost editor Bret Stephens has a great article in Tuesday's Wall Street Journal in which he argues that kidnapped BBC reporter
Alan Johnston is
symptomatic of the BBC's coverage of - and bias against - Israel.
I last saw Mr. Johnston in January 2005, the day before Mahmoud Abbas was elected to succeed Yasser Arafat as president of the Palestinian Authority. Mr. Johnston was by then the only Western correspondent living and working full time in Gaza, although the Strip was still considered a safe destination for day-tripping foreign journalists. He kindly lent me his office to interview Sami Abu Zuhri, a Hamas spokesman, and asked whether I was still editing the Jerusalem Post. He seemed genuinely oblivious to the notion that my by-then former association with an Israeli newspaper was not the sort of information I wanted broadcast to a roomful of Palestinian stringers.
...
Yet in August FOXNews's Steve Centanni and cameraman Olaf Wiig were held for two weeks, physically abused and forced to convert to Islam. Plainly matters were getting progressively worse for foreigners. So why did the BBC keep Mr. Johnston in place?
One answer is journalistic fidelity. Mr. Johnston had been the BBC's man in Kabul during the Taliban era; he was used to hard places. His dispatches about the travails of ordinary Gazans brimmed with humane sympathy. And any news organization would prefer to have its own reporter on the scene than to rely on stringers.
Yet the BBC also seemed to operate in the Palestinian Authority with a sense of political impunity. Palestinian Information Minister Mustafa Barghouti described Mr. Johnston as someone who "has done a lot for our cause"--not the sort of endorsement one imagines the BBC welcoming from an equivalent figure on the Israeli side. Other BBC correspondents were notorious for making their politics known to their viewers: Barbara Plett confessed to breaking into tears when Arafat was airlifted to a Parisian hospital in October 2004; Orla Guerin treated Israel's capture of a living, wired teenage suicide bomber that March as nothing more than a PR stunt--"a picture that Israel wants the world to see."
Though doubtlessly sincere, these views also conferred institutional advantages for the BBC in terms of access and protection, one reason why the broadcaster might have felt relatively comfortable posting Mr. Johnston in a place no other news agency dared to go.
By contrast, reporters who displeased Palestinian authorities could be made to pay a price. In one notorious case in October 2000, Italian reporter Riccardo Cristiano of RAI published a letter in a Palestinian newspaper insisting he had not been the one who had broadcast images of two Israeli soldiers being lynched in Ramallah. "We respect the journalistic regulations of the Palestinian Authority," he wrote, blaming rival Mediaset for the transgression. I had a similar experience when I quoted a Palestinian journalist describing as "riff-raff" those of his neighbors celebrating the attacks of Sept. 11. Within a day, the journalist was chided and threatened by Palestinian officials for having spoken to me. They were keeping close tabs.
Read the whole thing.
Alan Johnston did not come cheaply
A report at Maan News based on anonymous sources within the 'Army of Islam' indicates that a
high price was paid for the release of kidnapped
British journalist useful idiot Alan Johnston.
According to the sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity, "the army of Islam will receive five million US dollars and more than one million bullets". The sources added that "a pledge was made by some of the religious leaders, who issued a fatwa announcing that the acquiring of a ransom would be preferable to killing the reporter". The clerics also allegedly received guarantees from the leaders of the Hamas-affiliated Al Qassam Brigades and the leaders of the Army of Islam, who agreed to exchange the reporter for the money.
The anonymous sources confirmed that the Popular Resistance Committees (PRC) mediated between the Army of Islam and the Qassam brigades. "The army [Army of Islam] first received the money and the bullets, although the deal also included the release of members of [the Army of Islam], abducted by Hamas, and a pledge from the Hamas movement not to attack 'the army' in the future." The militant group then apparently handed Johnston to clan sheikhs, and then on to former Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh.
In statements to journalists, the PRC confirmed the fatwa, but did not speak about any financial ransom.
A spokesman for the PRC said that the deal was that the abductors would be allowed to keep their weapons, and denied any ransom in the deal.
Prominent Hamas leader, Mahmoud Zahhar, is reported to have said that the man was released "without any conditions".
Al Quds al Arabi, the London-based newspaper reported that Said Siyam, the former Hamas interior minister had stated that Mumtaz Doghmosh, and three of his comrades, had stood accused of committing the assassination of the late General Jad at-Tayih.
According to Palestinian sources, Doghmush has now received guarantees from Hamas that he will not be taken to court for the crimes it is alleged he has committed. The same sources added that the deal also includes the release of Khattab Al Maqdsi, abducted by Hamas some days ago.
Dismissed Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh, however, denied the reports of a deal made to release the BBC reporter.
...
Haniyeh also stated that his government "will not touch the arms of the resistance groups, as long as these weapons are aimed at the correct target… If these weapons are moved in another direction, or to create lawlessness, we will surely pursue those responsible, as we don’t want to return to the former state of disorder."
But this evening, it seems that Hamas has
forgotten that it ever made a deal with the 'Army of Islam' and the Dugmash clan.
... a senior Hamas official in the Gaza Strip said his movement was determined to disarm the Dughmushes.
"There is a decision by Hamas to confiscate the weapons of all clans and gangs in the Gaza Strip," the official said. "It's only a matter of time before the Dughmush clan is also disarmed."
The Hamas official said the Army of Islam, which is headed by Mumtaz Dughmush, was "nothing but a group of gangsters operating under the cover of Islam." [Talk about the pot calling the kettle black! CiJ]
The group has nothing to do with Islam, he stressed. "When its members kidnapped the British reporter, they demanded $2 million and a plot of land from the Palestinian Authority," he said. "But when Hamas came to power, the gang knew that they would never get anything out of us."
A clan member told The Jerusalem Post that the five-point agreement with Hamas recognized the Army of Islam as "the weapon of mujahideen [holy warriors] against Jews, Crusaders and apostates."
He said the deal also banned Hamas and the Army of Islam from attacking each other and called for solving future disputes peacefully.
"The Army of Islam belongs to all Muslims, and not a particular clan or faction," the clan member said. "We decided to release the journalist so as not to give an excuse to the Crusaders to dispatch international troops to the Gaza Strip."
Another member of the clan said Mumtaz Dughmush decided to release Johnston after he received assurances from Hamas that he and his relatives would not be killed. "We wanted to avoid a bloodbath in the Gaza Strip," he said. "It's forbidden for a Muslim to shed the blood of his Muslim brother."
Mumtaz, his brother Mu'taz and one of his top aides, Ahmed Mathloum, are all wanted by Hamas for involvement in the killing of Hamas operatives over the past two years.
Johnston paid an
equal opportunity visit to 'moderate' 'Palestinian' President
Mahmoud Abbas Abu Mazen today (pictured at top).
Johnston's visit to Ramallah, a day after his release from 114 days in captivity in Gaza, came at the request of senior PA officials, who were unhappy with the fact that the British reporter had given Hamas full credit for his release, the officials said.
They said that PA Prime Minister Salaam Fayad and former Fatah security commander Jibril Rajoub visited the British Consulate-General in Jerusalem on Wednesday night and extended an invitation to Johnston to meet with Abbas.
However, BBC Middle East Bureau Editor Simon Wilson said the idea for the Abbas visit originated with Johnston himself.
"Alan wanted to thank as many people as possible," said Wilson. "There were many Palestinians across the West Bank who worked to secure his release," he said.
In the car on the way out of Gaza, Johnston said that he wanted to thank Abbas, Wilson recalled.
"We [the BBC] asked for a meeting with the president," Wilson said. He added that the British consulate put in a request for the meeting on Thursday morning and it was accepted by the Palestinians.
But give them a
state reichlet and they'll start keeping their word and stop arguing with each other. Then they'll only want to kill Jews....
Alan Johnston is caught in a clan war
The Jerusalem Post reports in Friday's edition that kidnapped BBC reporter Alan Johnston has become
a pawn in a battle between the
Dugmash clan of the Gaza Strip and Hamas. Hamas has given the Dugmash's a Monday deadline to release Johnston - whom they apparently hold - but the Dugmash's fear that once they release Johnston Hamas will kill them. Hamas claims that the Dugmash's were close with Fatah strongman Muhammed Dahlan, a charge that the Dugmash's deny. You'll need a scorecard to keep track of this one....
Since last Saturday, the sources said, dozens of Hamas militiamen have been surrounding the area where the Dughmush clan lives in Gaza City's Sabra neighborhood. Hamas has warned that it will use force unless Johnston is freed by Monday.
"This man is a big thug," a source said. "He is claiming to head a group calling itself the Army of Islam. In fact, this is just a group of murderers and thugs who want money and jobs."
On Wednesday, a member of the clan, Munir Dughmush, was shot by unknown gunmen in Gaza City's Zeitoun neighborhood. His killing raised fears that the clan might try to kidnap another foreigner.
The Foreign Press Association has advised its members to take precautionary measures when visiting the Gaza Strip for fear of reprisal.
A Hamas official in the Gaza Strip said Mumtaz Dughmush was very close to Fatah operative Muhammad Dahlan.
"In the past he was close to Hamas, but he later started working with Dahlan," the official said. "This man will do anything for money. He was asking for $2 million in exchange for the British journalist. But now he knows he's not going to get anything out of Hamas."
The Hamas official said Mumtaz and his brother, Mu'taz, were wanted by Hamas for their involvement in the killing of a number of Hamas men in the Gaza Strip over the past year.
"We have told them that we will negotiate with them about their safety only after they release the journalist," he said. "Hamas is determined to end this case as soon as possible because we won't allow clans to control the streets."
The official expressed fear that the Dughmush clan might kill Johnston at the request of Dahlan and other top Fatah leaders to prevent Hamas from taking credit for his release.
But Mumtaz Dughmush on Thursday strongly denied any link to Dahlan, saying he was actually very close to the Hamas leadership in the Gaza Strip. He also claimed that he and Hamas had planned to assassinate Dahlan at least five times in the past.
"They are lying when they say that I belong to Muhammad Dahlan," Dughmush said. "The Hamas leadership knows very well that I have no connections to Dahlan. They can also check this through the documents they seized inside the headquarters of the Palestinian Authority security forces in the Gaza Strip."
This is interesting because while the Dugmash's claim not to be close to Dahlan, they are the same group that kidnapped CNN reporters Steve Centanni and Olaf Wiig last summer, and the $2 million ransom for that kidnapping was
partly shared with 'moderate' 'Palestinian President'
Mahmoud Abbas Abu Mazen's Fatah's al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades. It's inconceivable that could have been done in Gaza last summer without Dahlan's approval.
So maybe Hamas is telling the truth?
Sigh.... What nice people. Give them a
state reichlet and I'm sure we'll be able to sort this all out.
Breaking: 'Palestinians' kidnap BBC reporter in Gaza
Al-AP is reporting that the 'Palestinians' have
kidnapped a BBC television reporter in the Gaza Strip:
A BBC reporter was kidnapped Monday in Gaza City, a senior Palestinian security official said.
Palestinian security officials said four armed men in a white Subaru kidnapped a reporter who threw a business card on the street that identified him as Alan Johnston of the BBC.
The BBC bureau chief in Jerusalem, Simon Wilson, said his news network had lost contact with Johnston, but Wilson could not immediately confirm a kidnapping.
Palestinian security sources said a car was found abandoned near Johnston's Gaza City apartment. Police found the lease of the rental car, which stated the vehicle was rented to the BBC.
There goes another
convert to Islam.
I know: let's give them a
state reichlet.
UPDATE 7:03 PMHamas has confirmed the kidnapping:
In Gaza City, a spokesman for Hamas condemned Johnston's abduction.
"We call on these criminal groups to stop this destruction of our reputation and to let this journalist free," he told The Associated Press.
ROTFL!
Alan Johnston is actually a long-standing
friend of the 'Palestinians' useful idiot.
The BBC operated with political impunity in Gaza
Last week, I blogged an article by Bret Stephens in the Wall Street Journal about
kidnapped BBC reporter Alan Johnston. Stephens accused the BBC of operating with 'political impunity' in Gaza, and generally accused the BBC's reporters - including Johnston - of wearing their sympathies for the 'Palestinian' cause on their sleeves.
On Sunday, the BBC's Fran Unsworth, writing on the BBC's editors' blog, accused Stephens of publishing a '
scurrilous piece of journalism.'
But the article goes on to propose that our reasons for this complacency were as a result of our institutional pro-Palestinian views which meant we felt able to operate in the Palestinian authority with “political impunity”. He would appear to be suggesting that Alan was a Palestinian sympathiser and therefore we felt he would be protected by that. The author throws in the few other BBC correspondent names to stack up his case – saying Barbara Plett and Orla Guerin had also made their views known to the public.
He alleges we believed this stance gave us “institutional advantages in terms of access and protection” and that is why “we felt comfortable posting Alan in a place no other news agency dared to go”.
Aside from the lack of sympathy shown by the Wall Street Journal, who must have asked themselves a few questions over the appalling tragedy of Daniel Pearl, it also happens to be totally unfounded. I would have thought the writer would have attempted to establish some facts before committing to the page. Had he put a call into the BBC he might have discovered that we had been by no means complacent about Alan’s safety.
Today, Tom Gross returns the issue back to where it belongs:
the BBC's Middle East coverage. And he also introduces an interesting new theory as to why Johnston may have been grabbed:
Stephens’s view, however, is widely accepted among reporters covering the Middle East, including myself. It is common knowledge that Johnston, who was abducted in Gaza on March 12, was one of the most pro-Palestinian reporters in the region. However, sources tell me that some in Hamas may have felt that his reporting had become too pro-Fatah, which is one possible factor in his abduction by a Hamas-connected group, and also a possible reason why (despite the BBC’s repeated claims that the Hamas-led Palestinian Authority is doing everything in its power to secure Johnston’s release) in fact the Palestinian Authority has been doing next to nothing to help release the kidnapped BBC man.
When will the BBC realize that pandering to terrorism just doesn’t work?
Unfortunately, if the BBC has not realized it until now, I don't think they're going to realize it any time soon. And even if they do realize it in other parts of the world, that won't apply to Israel. Israel has a special place in the BBC's gallery of enemies and it's not going to change anytime soon.
Johnston kidnappers send tape to al-Jazeera
The kidnappers of BBC reporter Alan Johnston have
sent a tape to al-Jazeera with their demands. The tape reportedly contains pictures of Johnston's identification card.
Arutz Sheva reminds us that the kidnappers of
Eliyahu Asheri did the same thing after he had already been murdered.
Update 8:40 AMAl-Jazeera has
more details on the tape:
A group called Jaish al-Islam, or Army of Islam, has claimed to be holding Alan Johnston, the BBC's missing Gaza correspondent, and demanded Muslim prisoners in Britain be freed in exchange for his release.
Al Jazeera received a tape purportedly from the group and informed the BBC, which said it was investigating but would not comment further.
In the tape, the group said: "We demand from Britain that it release our prisoners and particularly Sheikh Abu Qatada the Palestinian and in this regard we do not forget our prisoners in other infidel countries and we say to all of them free our prisoners or we will do the same to you.
...
"We won’t make an exception for anyone. If you need money to release our prisoners we will give you all you need up to the last dirham we have."
...
Nour Odeh, Al Jazeera's Gaza correspondent, said there was no information on Johnston's whereabouts, his health or the group's intentions, but noted that the absence of any threat could be a good sign.
She said the group's demands were unusual as kidnappings in Gaza commonly had to do with factional fighting or the conflict with Israel.
She added that Jaish al-Islam was not a group seen on Gaza's streets and only came to prominence last year when it participated in the capture of Israeli Corporal Gilad Shalit alongside the more established Hamas and Popular Resistance Committees.
Hamas using the BBC to influence UK government policy
At the Spectator,
Melanie Phillips gives voice to something I have
long suspected:
According to Hamas — an account uncritically swallowed by the Western media — Johnston was kidnapped by a criminal Gaza gang, the Dagmoush family, also known as the Army of Islam, which was said to be at odds with Hamas and to have possible links to al-Qa’eda.
Hamas eventually made a deal with the Army of Islam’s principal protagonist Mumtaz Dagmoush and Johnston was escorted out of captivity by jubilant Hamas officials, with the British Foreign Secretary’s praise ringing in their ears and the Western media now falling over itself to promote their cause.
But this account is highly improbable. The claim that Hamas was unconnected with Johnston’s kidnappers is wrong. The evidence points instead to an elaborate piece of manipulation, with Hamas using the kidnap to open a line of communication with Britain (as its Gaza leader, Ismail Haniyeh, boasted last week).
The government not only sanctioned an informal visit to Britain by a senior Hamas official, Ghazi Hamad, but the UK Consul-General in Jerusalem, Richard Makepeace, met Ismail Haniyeh in Gaza to ask for his help in freeing Johnston.
In doing so, the Western embargo on contact with Hamas was broken — an important step in Hamas’s strategy of gaining international legitimacy, and integral to its plan to undermine Mahmoud Abbas, take over the West Bank and further its goal of Islamising the region.
The Hamas claim that Dagmoush conspired with Dahlan and Fatah elements to kidnap Johnston is highly implausible. Instead, it is much more likely that Dagmoush operated with the knowledge and at least tacit approval of Hamas.
Phillips goes on to back it up piece by piece, explaining how Hamas has used the Dagmoush clan and their 'Army of Islam' to give it 'plausible deniability' for attacks on both Israel and Fatah. Here's the bottom line on the Johnston kidnapping:
But since Johnston was so close to Hamas it is naive to think that Dagmoush would have kidnapped him without receiving at least tacit approval from his powerful patron. And although Hamas said immediately it knew who was holding him, it did nothing for many weeks — although its closeness to the Army of Islam enabled it to stop them killing him.
It was Hamas which had everything to gain from the ordeal of Alan Johnston, its friend whom the BBC was about to transfer out of Gaza anyway — and its strategy has worked brilliantly. Not only did it open communication with Britain, but the idea of negotiating with Hamas is now gaining traction fast on both sides of the Atlantic.
Phillips explains what's behind Britain's behavior:
The real purpose behind bringing Hamas in from the cold lies in a fundamental shift in global strategy. In the US, gripped by despair over Iraq, ‘realist’ isolationism and appeasement are on the rise.
Secular Arab states, horrified by the collapse of nerve in the one power which might save them from the Islamists, are now looking for deals with radical Sunnis to counter the greater threat of Shiite Iran. The emerging EU/American strategy is to help that process, gambling that the Sunni Islamists will fight the Shiites rather than topple secular Arab governments. The wooing of Sunni Hamas is the West’s opening gambit.
This strategy is lethally ill-judged. It fails to recognise that, despite all the splits between Islamist factions, they are united by a common project of Islamising the world. The most likely outcome of this suicidal Western approach will be the further radicalisation of Arab and Muslim society, the toppling by Islamists of secular Arab regimes and a strengthening of the global jihad. This most dangerous development has been given an enormous boost by the way the Johnston kidnap has been manipulated — no small thanks to the BBC itself.
She also takes a shot at the BBC:
Since Johnston’s release, the BBC seems to have turned itself into a vehicle for Hamas propaganda. Alastair Crooke has been given airtime granted to no other lobbyist, in interviews and one-off programmes giving him unprecedented opportunity to push his views.
This is the BBC whose other Gaza reporter Fayed abu Shamala reportedly told a Hamas rally in 2001 that the BBC was
‘waging the campaign of resistance/terror against Israel shoulder-to-shoulder together with the Palestinian people’; and whose Middle East bureau editor, Simon Wilson, has acknowledged that he met Hamas leaders in Gaza and Damascus to discuss Johnston’s fate — meetings about which the Foreign Office was closely consulted.
In the Telegraph's blogs, Damian Thompson calls for the
clarification of al-Beeb's relations with Hamas (
Hat Tip: Solomonia):
I’m always a bit wary of Mel P and her conspiracy theories. But there’s no doubt that the public needs to know more about the BBC and its strange coverage of the Middle East.
The Corporation has spent thousands of pounds trying to block the release of the Balen Report into its coverage of Israel and Palestine. Why?
My guess is that this is the one area where the BBC is genuinely alarmed by the consequences of its actions. Its reporting of the Middle East has been so relentlessly pro-Palestinian for so long, and that coverage is so influential, that it finds itself an actual player in the conflict, as opposed to an impartial observer.
The BBC is now regarded by Palestinian factions as a sympathetic but naive middleman to be manipulated at will, rather as the Catholic Church in Ireland was manipulated by the IRA during the Troubles. I certainly wouldn’t go so far as to call Johnston a friend of Hamas; but it is possible that he was a victim of this dynamic.
At any rate, don’t expect the Balen Report to be published any time soon.
Hey Brits, those are your tax schillings at work (BBC is publicly funded). It sure sounds like the BBC is going all out to change British government policy to favor Hamas or at least to 'engage' with it. Is there anyone out there who disagrees?
Alan Johnston is shilling for Hamas again
That didn't take long now did it?
Alan Johnston, the
BBC reporter useful idiot who was held 'hostage' for 114 days by the 'Army of Islam' is back
singing the praises of Hamastan to the international media.
Hat Tip: Elder of Ziyon "It is lovely to remember and to be remembered, and tell your crew and students that I returned home with most beautiful memories of Gaza."
Those were the words with which BBC reporter Alan Johnston replied to a letter of congratulations that he received from Dr Yahia Al Sarraj, the dean of the Training and Practical Scientific College in Gaza.
The journalist, recently released from captivity having been abducted in Gaza by a radical Islamist group and held for over 100 days, added expressions of his pride of Gaza, its people “and the beautiful memories that Gaza gave to me during the last years”.
He concluded, "I spent 3 years in Gaza before my kidnapping, and I know very well the meaning of friendship and generosity that Palestinians have".
He expressed his happiness and stated that, when remembering Gaza, he will first remember the beautiful things which Gaza gave to him.
It's funny that most of the international media in these parts hang around Jerusalem, but we never hear that kind of praise from them even though Jerusalem is a lot more comfortable for reporters than Gaza. Hmmm.
Johnston release: A picture says 1000 words
BBC reporter Useful idiot Alan Johnston was released early this morning by the 'Army of Islam' after a 'prisoner exchange' with Hamas. The fact that Hamas regarded Johnston as its prisoner, and gave up members of the
Dugmash clan in return for his release, along with the picture at the top of this post, speaks volumes about who Johnston really is and what he represents. While rejoicing with Johnston, Haniyeh said that kidnapped IDF corporal Gilad Shalit could be released as well if Israel will be 'reasonable.' I wonder how many murderers of Hamas members were released in exchange for Johnston. I would assume none.
In fact, the Dugmash clan and Hamas have committed to
work together in the future.
It was not immediately clear why Johnston's captors chose to release him at this time or under what specific terms he was freed, but Hamas said there would be no crackdown on the Army of Islam.
...
Ayman Taha, a Hamas spokesman, said Johnston's captors had responded positively to recent efforts by tribal and religious leaders to end Johnston's ordeal. Taha said the Army of Islam would not be dismantled or disarmed in return for freeing the reporter.
Army of Islam spokesman Abu Khatab al-Maqdisi, who had been arrested by Hamas as a potentially valuable bargaining chip earlier this week, said his faction would work together with Hamas, a onetime ally.
...
The same group was involved in the capture of IDF soldier Cpl. Gilad Schalit, who was seized more than a year ago in a raid on an Israeli army post near Gaza.
But don't expect Hamas to negotiate (and pay for) Shalit's release.
Who is Alan Johnston?
I'm sure you already know who Alan Johnston is. This is from
Friends of al-Jazeera:
Tonight the Archbishop of York, the Most Rev Dr John Sentamu, will call on the BBC man’s captors to release him, citing part of Islamic theology relating to the merciful nature of Allah.
Earlier this week the Archbishop also reflected on the capture of the journalist from his own perspective as one who was held captive under the regime of Idi Amin in his native Uganda.
In his broadcast interview, to be shown at 2100 GMT Dr Sentamu also points to the fact that Alan Johnston has played a key role in giving a voice to the Palestinian people as the only journalist to have remained in Gaza.
I had him
pegged correctly all along.
Is the Alan Johnston kidnapping connected to Gilad Shalit?
DEBKAfile is reporting tonight that BBC reporter
Alan Johnston, who was
kidnapped in Gaza ten days ago, is actually being used to try to drive up the price to be paid by Israel for the release of kidnapped IDF soldier
Gilad Shalit.
Our counter-terror sources disclose that Montaz Durmush, leader of the Army of Islam (Al Qaeda-Palestine), which is holding both hostages, is using the British journalist as a tool to drive up the price demanded of Israel for Shalit’s freedom.
Neither has been seen since their abduction. Durmush is posting threatening notices to the UK government about Johnston’s fate through a third party, to make the British lean on Israel to extort an exorbitant price for the two men’s release.
A team of 20 British agents, most of them from the MI6 secret service, is working in Gaza to make contact with the abductors, or just to obtain a sign of life from Johnston – so far without success. It is beginning to dawn on the group that the BBC reporter’s seizure was not just another short-lived kidnapping of a Westerner like the ones plaguing Gaza and the West Bank in recent months, but a drawn-out affair with no knowing how it will turn out.
March 20, a longwinded statement was released in the name of a faction called the “Popular Resistance Front” with details about the Shalit kidnapping. The wording implies that the three groups holding Shalit, Hamas, the Popular Resistance Committees and the Army of Islam, are vying over which can squeeze better terms from Israel.
British and Israeli intelligence circles believe both hostages are caught up in factional rivalries in Gaza over who will dominate the Palestinian unity government. Neither Palestinian Authority chairman Mahmoud Abbas nor prime minister Ismail Haniyeh was in any position to deliver on their promises to work for Shalit’s early release. They never were, since they have no influence with the kidnappers and are not in touch with them.
I just hope that Israel doesn't let itself get talked into paying an
even more exorbitant price for Shalit's release so that the 'Palestinians' will also release the
useful idiot.
What Hamas really wants
This morning's New York Times gives a
voice to terror in the person of Ahmed Yousef, who is the 'political advisor' to 'moderate'
'Palestinian Prime Minister' Ismail Haniyeh. After a lengthy diatribe in which Yousef accuses the US and Israel of arming Fatah against Hamas (as if Fatah would otherwise have lived in peace and tranquility with Hamas), Yousef finally gets around to telling us what Hamas wants.
We want to get children back to school, get basic services functioning again, and provide long-term economic gains for our people.
Our stated aim when we won the election was to effect reform, end corruption and bring economic prosperity to our people. Our sole focus is Palestinian rights and good governance. We now hope to create a climate of peace and tranquillity within our community that will pave the way for an end to internal strife and bring about the release of the British journalist Alan Johnston, whose kidnapping in March by non-Hamas members is a stain on the reputation of the Palestinian people.
We reject attempts to divide Palestine into two parts and to pass Hamas off as an extreme and dangerous force. We continue to believe that there is still a chance to establish a long-term truce. But this will not happen unless the international community fully engages with Hamas.
Let's start with the children. Yousef wants to 'get them back to school' but for what purpose? So that they can be taught to murder Jews and
wish for death? My children (who, if you read my profile, range in age from 3-23) go to school less than 100 miles from the 'Palestinians.' Depending upon their ages, my children are taught Bible, Mishna, Talmud, English, Math, Science, Language, Citizenship and other religious and secular subjects. None of my children has ever - God forbid - been taught the value of committing suicide or murdering others. Would Yousef be willing to send 'Palestinians' to schools where they learn to be tolerant of others - even those who are not or who do not dress as devout Muslims? Or would Yousef's schools condemn 'Palestinian' children to another generation of hatred, violence, murder and suicide? Yousef doesn't say, but based on what the 'Palestinian' media
teach 'Palestinian' children, I think the answer is obvious.
Yousef says that Hamas wants to "get basic services functioning again, and provide long-term economic gains for our people." Again, Hamas' actions belie his words. When Israel left Gaza in 2005, James Wolfensohn and Bill Gates purchased the Gush Katif greenhouses from Israeli farmers for the 'Palestinians.' That should have been an obvious 'long-term economic gain' for the 'Palestinian people.' But the 'Palestinians' who support Hamas used the
Gaza hothouses bought for them by
Bill Gates and
James Wolfensohn by digging
weapons tunnels through them instead of for
growing food like Israel did. That makes Yousef's words seem rather empty.
Yousef says that Hamas' sole focus is 'Palestinian rights and good governance.' I wonder whether Yousef thinks that 'Palestinian rights' extend to '
Palestinian'
Christians and whether they too are entitled to 'good governance.' Today's news would seem to make Islamism Hamas' sole focus and not the rights of 'Palestinians' especially those 'Palestinians' who are also Christians.
It's very nice that Hamas wants to release Alan Johnston and hopefully they will succeed in doing so before Johnston's kidnappers murder him. One can only wonder whether Hamas' 'humanitarian' bent extends to kidnapped IDF soldier Gilad Shalit or whether Hamas has other plans for him. Yousef is silent on the issue.
Finally, Yousef talks about Hamas wanting to establish a 'long-term truce.' It's not clear from his article whether Hamas wants to establish that 'long-term truce' with Fatah or with Israel, but for argument's sake, let us assume that he wants to establish it with Israel. The problems with Hamas' truce idea have been well-documented in the past. First, Hamas wants Israel to give up all of the disputed territories in return for the truce, which means that when it ends, Israel will be at the 'Auschwitz borders' (as
Abba Eban once called them) when Hamas attacks again as it inevitably will. Second, Hamas' idea of a truce is that Hamas will use the time to regroup and re-arm so that it will be better able to attack a shrunken Israel, which will have been shorn of many of its strategic assets in exchange for agreeing to the truce in the first place. And third, by this time, most people who are familiar with Islam are familiar with the story of the
unfortunate Quraish tribe (of Jews) that agreed to a '
hudna' (truce) with the prophet Muhammed. Muhammed violated the
hudna by attacking the Quraish as soon as he felt confident he could defeat them, which he did. From this, Muslims learn that it is permissible to violate treaties and truces with 'infidels' (non-Muslims) whenever the Muslims feel that they can defeat the party with whom they made the treaty. Israel would have to be insane to agree to a 'truce' that will be violated as soon as Hamas feels it can defeat Israel.
But then,
I have told Yousef that before.
If Hamas wants to play in the political arena, it has to become a political actor. To do that, it must renounce violence, recognize Israel's 'right to exist' and agree to abide by previous agreements between Israel and the 'Palestinians.' When Hamas does that, we can discuss what it wants. Until then, the world should ostracize Hamas.
The wages of sin
I've noted a couple of times that the 'Palestinians' allegedly consider BBC reporter
Alan Johnston, who was kidnapped more than two months ago,
one of them. Apparently being 'one of them' isn't worth much if one is just a worthless kufr.
Internet Haganah is reporting on a poll on the 'Palestinian' al-Ommh website asking whether Johnston should be killed. And most of the 'Palestinians' who have bothered to vote think
he should be killed.
In the discussion following the poll, comments ranged from "do the killing in coordination with al-Qaida in Iraq who have hostages of their own who need to die - the combined effect will be very good", to "mmmm, Roman [i.e. Crusader] blood is good!". One guy tried to argue that they needed a fatwa, and not just people's personal opinions - to no avail.
It is not known to us if the person who asked the question, or any of the respondents, is connected to the Jaish al-Islam in Gaza, though this is not unlikely.
But I'll bet if he comes out of this alive, Alan Johnston will go right back to writing the same pro-'Palestinian' drivel that he wrote before.
The Dugmash clan's 'Army of Islam' was the group that kidnapped 
