Al-Qaida's No. 2 calls on Palestinian militants to end cease-fire with Isr

[Colorado Blue]

CAIRO, Egypt - Al-Qaida's No. 2, Ayman al-Zawahri, released a new video, aired on Al-Jazeera television Friday, in which he called on Palestinian militant groups to end a cease-fire with Israel and stay out of upcoming legislative elections in the Gaza Strip and West Bank.

Al-Zawahri urged Palestinian militants "not to forsake their jihad, not to lay down their arms ... and not to be dragged into the game of secular elections under a secular constitution."

The militant group Hamas is planning to enter the elections, a major change from its longtime boycott of Palestinian Authority politics.

The message - al-Zawahri's first video since February - appeared to be an attempt by Osama bin Laden's al-Qaida to co-opt the rising wave of reform movements in the Middle East.

He denounced the U.S. concept of reform and said armed jihad is the only way to bring change in the Arab world.

snip

"The removal of the Crusader and Jewish invaders won't occur by peaceful demonstrations," he said in a brief clip aired on the pan-Arab network. "Reform and expelling the invaders from the countries of Islam won't happen except through fighting for God's sake."

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/589271.html

[Colorado Blue]

1. Swell.

This, we didn't need.

[dameocrat]

2. Israel would love this

this is why the are stalling on the disengagement. They are waiting for the nuts to start suicide bombings again.

I do believe negotiations are futile however because Israel will not negotiate in good faith, and will just stall forever, and the only thing the Palestinians can do is engage in civil disobedience, and fight to be citixens or Israel.

[Colorado Blue]

3. Do you think the Palestinians really want to be citizens of

Israel?

I'm interested in your thoughts.

Thanks.

[dameocrat]

4. They want control over their lives and their leaders

Two state, One state makes no difference. There is no will to create two states however. The government is lead by a settler, so one state maybe the only way they will ever be able to throw the bums out. If Israel doesn't want Palestinians in there state than they will be more serious about two but negotiations do nothing. One things for sure there should be no negotiations with the Israelis so long as settlements are expanded and built.

[Behind the Aegis]

5. throw out the bums?

Who are the bums?

[dameocrat]

6. Sharon is a settler bum

I doubt he would have been elected if Palestinian residentx of the west bank had been able to vote just like the settlers can.

[Behind the Aegis]

7. so I am clear

You are advocating for one state, wherein the Palestinians will be able to expel....who? Sharon? Israelis? the Likud?

[dameocrat]

8. There is already one state(reply to post 7)

as evidenced by the settlers on the West Bank. The Palestinians should have just as much right to vote for the leaders of that state as the settlers. Yeah, I would say Sharon and the other likudniks would be a defunct party at that point. One man, one vote, unless Israel chooses to make two states, and they are the only ones who have control of this, so negotiation is a waste of time. Better to organize mass demonstrations against the settlements the checkpoints and the annexation wall.

[eyl]

13. Oh,

Likud actually has some Arab voters

[eyl]

12. Sharon would never have been elected

if the intifada hadn't started - he was widely considered inelectable up till then.

[eyl]

11. Stalling in what way?

True, the date was changed once, but it shouldn't have been set when it originally was in the first place.

I know for a fact that the police are already neck-deep in preparations for the disengagment (it's playing merry hell with their normal operations).

BTW, if the resumption of suicide bombings is so dependable, how much are peace negotiations worth anyway?

[Coastie for Truth]

9. There's a special place in Heaven for

MDs who think they alone are God - like Ayman al-Zawahri MD, Baruch Goldstein MD, Bill Frist MD (I have Frist fatigue - Bill, Tom, HCA Helth Care, the bunch), Tom Coburn MD, Dave Weldon MD, and William Hammesfahr MD and Nobel Nominee.

[Colorado Blue]

10. I can imagine:)

Such a congregation, oi:)

[geek tragedy]

14. Gee, and here I thought that Al-Qaeda was in favor of the cease fire.

Glad he clarified things.

[Colorado Blue]

15. I'm beginning to question whether the I/P violence is really

local in nature, as popularly assumed, or if it's actually part of a much larger scenario.

This has actually been my thesis all along - that the refugees and the people of the OT has been used as a focal point, but they're not the primary issue, nor is statehood for them the true goal of this broader war.

Ideas?

[Igel]

16. I'm conflicted.

Makes sense, in this context. It's both local and regional.

It's local. The Palestinians truly do want autonomy (which I will take great pains *not* to define), with a spread of views from "leave me alone on my patch of dirt" to "extirpate the Jews wherever they live." So the fighters are local with local concerns. But the views of some groups also feed, and feed off of, non-local views.

It's regional/other. The Sa'udis, Saddam Hussein, the Iranian clerical government, the Muslim Brotherhood wherever they are, and many others view it as part of a larger struggle, whether ethnic, religious, political, or some horrible chimera.

Part is religious, part I: There's an Islamist stream of thought that they've imbibed deeply from: once control of some dirt's passed to the control of those who have submitted to Allah, it must always remain remain under their control. Anything else implies Muhammed's screwed up. So it's jihad.

Part is religious, part II: Regardless of the justice of having non-Muslims control Muslim land, there's the rule of non-Muslims over Muslims. Oppression, variously construed, is grounds for jihad. Therefore any offense against Israeli Arabs--who, by and large, I suspect would prefer *not* to be under PA control--is magnified into the Crusades.

Part is ethnic, part I. How dare Arab-controlled land be rendered non-Arab? Whether it's Kirkuk or Haifa. So it's Arab versus Jew.

Part is ethnic, part II: Nobody much wants the Palestinians. Saddam used them as a tool, to show support for pan-Arabism. But otherwise, seldom are they given full citizenship wherever they go. In Lebanon, they must be kept in camps to preserve the ethnic balance. In Jordan, elsewhere, they're pushed or forced to preserve their distinctness.

Part is political, part I: if all the problems on earth are the result of Jews, how can anybody in Qom or Bahrain or Morocco say it's their local leader's fault? So it's the existing political order against their populace.

Part is political, part II: Israel was imposed by the west. So right-thinking anti-colonialists must want to return the land to the indigenous population. OK, if the population isn't truly indigenous, it's been there for a while; and, if it needs to have been there for longer, that can be arranged.

In other words: I find no generalization apart from "can of worms" and "complex" to be intelligible when examined up close. For some Palestinians, it's primarily a local struggle with local issues; for others, it's probably a fuzzy mess; and for a few, it's more a global struggle. Same for Arabs/Muslims not in the Israeli-controlled areas.