Powered by WebAds

Monday, August 28, 2006

PA gov't spokesman: 'Palestinian' People are to blame for situation

At least one 'Palestinian' has had a mild epiphany. If I could do pictures here, this would be a flying pigs moment:

Dr Ghazi Hamad, the spokesperson of the Palestinian government, waged scathing criticism against the Palestinian public on Sunday, blaming the Palestinians for turning the Gaza Strip into a lawless and violent place.

"Have mercy on Gaza," he wrote in an op-ed published on Sunday.

"After the withdrawal from Gaza, we hoped for a bright future, we thought that this year we will reap the fruits of our sacrifices. But I ask myself today – why did the occupation return to Gaza. The occupation – wise men and commentators will say – is responsible. I am not defending the occupation, but I want to stop at our mistakes, which we are accustomed to blame on others."

"Anarchy, wanton killing, land steeling, thuggery … is the occupation responsible for all?," he asked, saying that the Palestinians should stop espousing conspiracy theories which "limit our thinking."


Hamad appeals to leaders of Palestinian factions saying that resistance against Israel is worthless when "the land is full with anarchy, corruption, thuggery, and gang killings. Isn't building the homeland part of the resistance?"

He also criticized the phenomenon of kidnapping foreigners in Gaza. Two Fox News journalists kidnapped almost two weeks ago by Palestinian gunmen were released on Sunday.

Hamad said the phenomenon has become a "profitable business," charging that kidnappers of innocent foreigners apathetic to the harm their deeds cause to the Palestinian cause.

"Let's admit to our mistakes, let's do some logical soul searching and place the interest of our people before us and say honestly – We were right here and we erred there. Only then will we see that the faces of Gaza and the homeland changes," he concluded.
Read the whole thing.


At 3:32 AM, Blogger Scott said...

Dead man walking.

At 4:48 AM, Blogger Kranky (in the civilized world) said...

May this man live long enough to convince the palis masses. A peaceful Gazastan is in everyone's interest. No-one on the right thought it would happen. No-one on the left dared imagine it wouldn't.

Because, after all, it was always about the "occupation". So once the "occupation" ended, utopia would set in.

(sarcasm off)

I do not understand this mental illness of those on the left, of whom I was once a member, that refuse to acknowledge that the core truths that they hold (and I held) dear are in fact, fundamentally incorrect.

It is not about land. It never was.

For if it was about land, when they got the land, and could administer it, they would build the foundation of a nation.

Which they did not.

They chose the course of war, the tools of war, the ways of war. War is what they pushed for.

They were given, one last opportunity not to completely blow it. One opportunity not to completely screw this pooch. The buggering began in earnest long before the last jewish occupant of gaza was forcibly removed.

The first step on the path they need to take to unbuggering themselves, if it is at all possible, though I doubt it, is to admit to themselves that they have in fact buggered themselves. To take responsibility for their own predicament. To realize that the position they find themselves in is one entirely of their own making, with their fingerprints from their guiding hands at every step of the way.

The second step is to not shoot the messenger. They are singularly bad at this.

Inside of a week he will be branded a collaborator. And then he will be lynched.

Inside the big stinking dung heap that is gazastan, a rose tries to bloom. And it will be cut down by those who cannot stand to see anyone change the big stinking dung heap. Because if one rose can bloom, so can others. And pretty soon, it is possible that peace can exist.

And the palis in charge couldn't have that now.

I give the guy a week to live.

At 4:18 AM, Blogger Concerned UCI Student said...

Where can one find the full text of the Op-Ed itself (as opposed to an article on the Op-Ed)?


Post a Comment

<< Home