This is pure hypocrisy, that's just it. It's "we support democracy" but if you vote for someone we are no particularly supporting, or if we think you're just wrong. It's forced "democracy" (and here frankly, concepts of democracy differ from one country to the other, I for one, think it is democratic to have free education all the way through and have decent health insurance, but that is not the case in the USA), and it's democracy as we want to define it... It's different rules for different players, and just unfaire overall... This type of action only further triggers hate, violence, and frustration. It's just plain stupid.

Confrontational attitude does not work, it's against diplomacy even in an un-balanced world.
Hamas is now in gov, it represents all palestinians, including fatah followers. they must adapt to their new role and tone down their rhetoric. they must gain the trust and the understanding of the world community, including arabs.

i don't think we should be that naive and believe that the US wants democray at its purist state. Yes for democracy as long as it suits their strategic interests, and honestly i don't see any problem with that. the US wants friendly (to their policy) governments regardless of the way they came to power

Ironically, hypochritical wants to welcome Hamas not because they're fond of them, but just to piss off the US...

In this case, Hamas is against the intersts of the US..so by all means they should get rid of him and moeny is a way of doing that.

I mean look at Rice's comments recently about syria, she does not miss any opportunity to corner those guys, first, it was hariri, then khaddam, now the cartoons.

i don't think it is necessarily double standards to not want to give your money to hamas. they are a terrorist organization, that would be like giving money to al-qaida. i can understand why nobody would do that. if the palestinians or at least their leadership aren't going to even want to find a peaceful solution they don't deserve any money. not having any money is their problem. too bad.

Napo, I agree with you that it is Hamas' responsibility to put down its arms, get into the political arena and start talking seriously with all sides as its new political role asks of it.
I totally agree that confrontation does not work, and will never work, it just creates more problems.
But still, just like Hamas has to accept its new role and work with it, so do the Israelis and the US.

Dane, I don't want to get into a debate about whether Hamas is a terrorist organization or not, as I think that the saying that one man's terrorist is the other's freedom fighter holds true here, as a lot of people see Hamas as fighting against someone who came and stole their land, killed their people and denied them their rights.
The countries who created this problem in the first place and who fuel the conflict by injecting money into the Israeli war machine have a responsibility towards the Palestinian people, so it is their problem too.

sorry, mmm, I am not a big believer in reagan's famous quip about terrorists and freedom fighters. besides he made that remark in regards to the contras in central america, who were targeting the government and military not civilians. anybody who willfully makes civilians (as opposed to military/government personnel) the target of their attacks is a terrorist without exception in my book.

also, I don't buy the standard palestinian line on their land simply being stolen. if you want to know why, well . . . I pretty much agree with these guys:

http://www.frontpagemag.com/media/pdf/BigLies.pdf
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=4454
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=16351

speaking of hamas,
http://bareknucklepolitics.com/?p=855

MMM,

Relax dude. You know as well as I do that no matter what the US / Israelis do has no effect on HAMAS.

For the past 20 years they’ve called them terrorists, tried to assassinate them, tried to infiltrated them, tried their army on them and used everything under then sun against them. But they couldn’t and would never be able to stop them.

Politics is not the end result that HAMAS is looking for; to them it’s one of those disposable means.

They got their by the votes of the people, if that shit doesn’t work for any reason. Fuck it; they’ll be more than happy to go back to the endless Israeli ass kick’en.

So fuck’em and fuck whatever they say, do, plan and even think. HAMAS is setting on the table now. You wanna work with them as is, Fine. You don’t, then prepare your asses for some serious kick’en.

So relax and chill they won’t be able to lay a single scratch on HAMAS, they don’t even have the guts to do it.

Sandmonkey just pointed out the hypocrisy of the Arab world on the Hamas/foreign aid issue on his blog (http://egyptiansandmonkey.blogspot.com/)

He states:

Mushir al-Masri, an incoming Hamas lawmaker, condemned the Israeli economic threats.

"This is collective punishment on our people," he said. "The world should realize that more pressure on the Palestinian people will create more tension and everyone is going to be a loser, including Israel."

Ohh, so now the collective punishment of a group of people via a boycott of economic goods and suspension of diplomatic tie until the government in power does something it doesn't want to do is bad? Go tell that to Denmark. Oh, wait, I doubt they care about you anymore. I think that started after seeing how fast your people wanted to kill their people over a cartoon, after their people supported your people for years. Yeah, that may be it!

Hamas admits that to the fact that it was supported and trained by Hezbollah after years of denying this fact as 'Israeli propaganda':

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3216432,00.html

“It must be noted that men with bad instincts are more in number than the good,
and therefore the best results in governing them are attained by violence and
terrorisation, and not by academic discussions. Every man aims at power, everyone
would like to become a dictator if only he could, and rare indeed are the men who
would not be willing to sacrifice the welfare of all for the sake of securing their own
welfare.”

“It is indispensable for our purpose that wars, so far as possible, should not result
in territorial gains: war will thus be brought on to the economic ground, where the
nations will not fail to perceive in the assistance we give the strength of our
predominance, and this state of things will put both sides at the mercy of our
international AGENTUR; which possesses millions of eyes ever on the watch and
unhampered by any limitations whatsoever. Our international rights will then wipe out
national rights, in the proper sense of right, and will rule the nations precisely as the
civil law of States rules the relations of their subjects among themselves.”

“At the present day we are, as an international force, invincible, because if
attacked by some we are supported by other States. It is the bottomless rascality of
the GOYIM peoples, who crawl on their bellies to force, but are merciless towards
weakness, unsparing to faults and indulgent to crimes, unwilling to bear the
contradictions of a free social system but patient unto martyrdom under the violence
of a bold despotism - it is those qualities which are aiding us to independence. From
the premier- dictators of the present day, the GOYIM peoples suffer patiently and bear
such abuses as for the least of them they would have beheaded twenty kings.”

“The word "freedom" brings out the communities of men to fight against every
kind of force, against every kind of authority even against God and the laws of nature.
For this reason we, when we come into our kingdom, shall have to erase this word
from the lexicon of life as implying a principle of brute force which turns mobs into
bloodthirsty beasts. These beasts, it is true, fall asleep again every time when they have drunk their fill of blood, and at such time can easily be riveted into their chains. But if they be not given blood they will not sleep and continue to struggle.”

“But even freedom might be harmless and have its place in the State economy
without injury to the well-being of the peoples if it rested upon the foundation of faith
in God, upon the brotherhood of humanity, unconnected with the conception of
equality, which is negatived by the very laws of creation, for they have established
subordination. With such a faith as this a people might be governed by a wardship of
parishes, and would walk contentedly and humbly under the guiding hand of its
spiritual pastor submitting to the dispositions of God upon earth. This is the reason
why IT IS INDISPENSABLE FOR US TO UNDERMINE ALL FAITH, TO TEAR OUT OF THE
MIND OF THE "GOYIM" THE VERY PRINCIPLE OF GOD-HEAD AND THE SPIRIT, AND TO
PUT IN ITS PLACE ARITHMETICAL CALCULATIONS AND MATERIAL NEEDS.”

THE PROTOCOLS OF THE LEARNED ELDERS OF ZION

http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/przion1.htm

First, it needs to be pointed out that no reputable historian regards the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" as anything other than anti-Jewish propaganda--a pure invention of those who are intent on defaming Jews and stirring up hatred against them (the Nazis used this piece of crap too). So "Tango", try joining the majority of the world not taken in by this entirely mendacious, fraudulent "document".
But what I really want to address is the question of Hamas and its refusal to repudiate violent means to create a Palestinian state. I write as someone who holds the view that Israel should withdraw to the pre-'67 boundaries, that Jerusalem should be an international city, that Gaza and the West Bank must be united in some fashion, that all Jewish settlers should either accept Palestinian citizenship or leave the West Bank. I also believe that Hamas and the PLO in general enjoy the "right" to use whatever violent means they regard as legitimate to expel the Israeli army and Jewish settlers from the West Bank. But there is a difference between enjoying a moral right to do something, and the decision to exercise that right. Hamas and the Palestinian are fixated on the moral claim to use violence to force the invader out, and proclaim it unceasingly with righteous fervor. Once a movement enters the realm of power and politics, it's not enough, however, to animate one's followers with righteous fervor (and even less, to proclaim that righteousness to the world, as if that is going to change things on the ground). In politics, one looks to the end (as Machiavelli observed), and one must judge whether the means one chooses are likely to bring about the desired objective. Only an utter fool would believe today that the military operations of Palestinians move them one centimeter closer to realizing their objective. Of course, they have a "right" to continue to persist in their resistance to an unlawful, despicable occupation of their lands, but does that matter as much as the choice of means likely to have a measure of efficacy? (The behavior of most Arabs makes me wonder if such a word even exists in Arabic.) Any rational calculation of the efficacy of the violent means employed and exalted in by Palestinian organizations would tell you that their efficacy is virtually zero in terms of helping the Palestinian people achieve their objective of an independent, viable State. The only means which the Palestinian people can employ today with any hope of efficacy are non-violent. A unilateral repudiation of all violence (and the strength to hold on to that repudiation in the face of inevitable Israeli provocations) would turn the tide in favor of the Palestinian people, not only all over the world, but also within the United States and Israel itself. It would require extraordinary organization, discipline and spiritual strength to submit to the violence of others without responding in kind, but if one's eye stays focused on moving the movement forward towards the objective, that would be the way to go.