Guardian

Guardian falsely suggests that Hamas has “softened” its call for Israel’s destruction


In May 2017, we posted about multiple British news sites – including the Guardian – which misled readers about a new Hamas political document, falsely characterizing it as a sign of the group’s new ‘moderation’.  We noted that nothing could be further from the truth, as the document – despite a few sentences suggesting they’d accept a state on ’67 borders for the time being – still called for violence to liberate Palestine from the ‘River to the Sea’.

A new Guardian report by Oliver Holmes on recent border violence included the following paragraph in the penultimate paragraph:

In May last year, Hamas presented a new charter accepting the idea of a Palestinian state in the occupied territories, not all of historical Palestine, a move that was seen as a softening from the militant faction’s founding charter that advocates Israel’s destruction.

However, the Guardian, as they so often do, is cherry picking a few sentences from the document to support the risible idea of the radical group’s new ‘softening’, whilst ignoring other passages clearly indicating they’re still committed to violence and Israel’s destruction.

CAMERA’s backgrounder explains the following about the new Hamas document.

  • It does not replace the original charter;
  • It does not accept the existence of Israel in any borders;
  • It continues to embrace the goal of trying to destroy Israel; and
  • It does not repudiate violence, including against civilians.

 It defines “Palestine” as follows:

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.

 It also explicitly refuses to accept the legitimacy or existence of a Jewish state within any borders:

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 believes that no part of the land of Palestine shall be compromised or conceded, irrespective of the causes, the circumstances and the pressures and no matter how long the occupation lasts. Hamas rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea.

There is no alternative to a fully sovereign Palestinian State on the entire national Palestinian soil, with Jerusalem as its capital.

It also explicitly continues to endorse violence:

Resistance and jihad for the liberation of Palestine will remain a legitimate right, a duty and an honour for all the sons and daughters of our people and our Ummah. … Resisting the occupation with all means and methods is a legitimate right guaranteed by divine laws and by international norms and laws. At the heart of these lies armed resistance, which is regarded as the strategic choice for protecting the principles and the rights of the Palestinian people.

Bottom line: Contrary to the Guardian’s claim, Hamas has not “softened” its founding charter’s rejection of Israel’s existence, nor has it abandoned its promotion of violence to achieve this end.  As with the Guardian’s risible claims that recent Hamas sponsored border riots have been largely “peaceful”, suggestions that the proscribed terror group – whose leaders have called for the mass murder of Jews – is ‘moderating’ are completely counter-factual.

Related Articles

6 replies »

  1. Of course, the very term “historical Palestine” is inherently and deliberately misleading. This “historical” geographic entity dates only to 1923.
    While history for the 20th century creation called the “Palestinians” might indeed begin in 1923, that of the Jewish people demonstrably stretches back several millennia.
    Also lost on the pro-Palestinian, anti-imperialist, anti-colonial crowd are the references to “our people and our Ummah”. That certainly suggests that the Palestinians admit to being an Ummah settler-colonial enterprise that expanded into the land of Israel.
    When your national narrative is a mash-up of untruths and exaggeration, inevitably you will find internal contradictions. Such contradictions and logical inconsistencies fairly abound in the Palestinian narrative, should you care to look for them. The Guardian and its anti-Israel fellow travelers obviously cannot be bothered.

  2. We need a time machine to bring back a Roman emperor or two to explain to these Arabs what Palestine was, and who lived there at the time the area, with no fixed boundaries, was declared to be “Palestine”. Possibly even a Turkish professor of history might explain what the Ottomans thought “Palestine” was (or was not – it had become “Southern Syria by the time the Brits conquered the Ottomans in WW I). The one thing we can be certain of is that “Palestine” was never defined as Hamas does.

  3. Please show me where the Guardian has EVER said anything truthful about Israel. Or Jews. Or Zionism.

  4. Still no Palestinian coins found …

    No matter how hard they look ….

    https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-5266587,00.html

    5 rare Jewish coins discovered by Temple Mount project
    Coins, minted by autonomous Jewish province of the First Persian Empire in late 4th century BC, attested to existence of commercial, administrative life in and around Second Temple and Temple Mount; ‘These were the first coins ever minted by Jews,’ says project’s co-director, adding pilgrims would convert their tithes into these coins.

  5. All of historical Palestine? And what exactly is that? Perhaps the Guardian can clear this one up for us? Come on, guys and gals, give us that great history lesson.