Would Spain allow ETA to run in an election and to electioneeer by intimdation at the polls as HAMAS did!? NO. Would the UK allow the IRA to run in an election in Northern ireland and to electioneer by intidimation at the pols? NO. Would Algeria allow the GPSC to run in an election and to electioneeer by intimidation at the polls? NO. Would the Phillipines allow their Moro Rebels to run? NO. Would Iraq allow al Qaeda? NO.
SO WHY DID THE USA AND THE UN AND THE EU ALLOW HAMAS TO EVEN RUN A SINGLE CANDIDATE IN THE RECENT ELECTION!? They are NOT a political party; they are a jihadoterrorist group. Since they don't play by the RULES of politcal engagement, they should NOT have been allowed to run ANY CANDIDATES.
This was the fatal flaw of the recent election.
AND ANSWER ME THIS: Do you think ANY Arab Palestani can voice opposition to HAMAS (or IJ or Al Aksa or the PFLP or any other terrorist group) without FEAR OF REPRISAL!? Of course they can't. And in that atmosphere of intimidation and fear NO ELECTION CAN BE REGARDED AS FAIR OR TRUE OR JUST. Or valid. No matter what Jimmy Carter says.
SO WHY DID THE USA AND THE UN AND THE EU ALLOW HAMAS TO EVEN RUN A SINGLE CANDIDATE IN THE RECENT ELECTION!? They are NOT a political party; they are a jihadoterrorist group. Since they don't play by the RULES of politcal engagement, they should NOT have been allowed to run ANY CANDIDATES.
This was the fatal flaw of the recent election.
AND ANSWER ME THIS: Do you think ANY Arab Palestani can voice opposition to HAMAS (or IJ or Al Aksa or the PFLP or any other terrorist group) without FEAR OF REPRISAL!? Of course they can't. And in that atmosphere of intimidation and fear NO ELECTION CAN BE REGARDED AS FAIR OR TRUE OR JUST. Or valid. No matter what Jimmy Carter says.
IOW: the HAMAS WIN IS INVALID.
Voting is not ever moral except in cases where it is exercised with the full consent of everyone involved. It's not right that any person can vote to brutalize or threaten another person or class of people or to take their justly earned property no matter the excuse. "The biggest gang wins" is the whole sick principle behind voting.
ReplyDeleteHamas being elected points to the obvious: ALL voting procedures in modern society are wholly and completely invalid, Hamas or no Hamas, as voting "to steal" completely contradicts the known principles of conscience and justice.
So why not cut to the chase and say that stealing - the basic evil - is the real problem. Stealing people's lives in whatever slice, by taking their property, their earning, their right to freedom of action -- all that is entirely illegitimate unless it is in self-defense. Hamas isn't the only one doing this stuff. They've just taken it to it's logical endpoint.
Funny thing is, Bush has presided over one of the most vast expanses of executive power and non-military expenditures in recent history. It's just nonsense that people defend him. God gave man rights, not GW, whose policies violate rights continuously and ever-more expansively. The rights that men have and the principals of justice are built into the nature and conscience of man. They are not to be denied by any but despots.
u make an innerestin argument but i disagree.
ReplyDeletewhen someone steals from u they are denying your personhood.
it's why slavery is morally wrong.
hamas and the other islamofascists all routinely deny the universal rights of their mothers and wives and daughtes just becasue they are women.
if they can do that to their won flesh and blood, of course they can steal. and kill infidels.
the creed is what's wrong and bad and evil, and it's deeper than just stealing.
their theivery and deceit are symptons of deeper evil.
they deny the ineherent inalienable rights of ALL humans by virute of us being humans.
only male islamothgugs have any value to them.
that's why they are evil scum.
who GLEEFULLY commit genocide.
and of course: steal elections. that's nothing to this crowd.
thanks for commenting. i will think more about what you wrote.