By Robert Tait’s reckoning, Palestinian unity with antisemitic extremists is a ‘boon for peace’

the Islamic Resistance Movement aspires to realize the promise of Allah, no matter how long it takes. The Prophet, Allah’s prayer and peace be upon him, says: “The hour of judgment shall not come until the Muslims fight the Jews and kill them, so that the Jews hide behind trees and stones, and each tree and stone will say: ‘Oh Muslim, oh servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him,’ except for the Gharqad tree, for it is the tree of the Jews.” (Hamas Charter, Article 7)

Imagine for a moment if Binyamin Netanyahu dismantled his current government coalition and entered into a partnership between Likud and an Israeli political party whose platform cited religious texts and conspiracy theories to incite its member to murder Muslims – a movement so extreme that their leaders have called for genocide.

Of course, there is no such Israeli political party.  But, if there were, and such a coalition was formed, you can certainly bet that UK journalists wouldn’t be characterizing such an agreement as a ‘boon for peace’.

However, that’s exactly the term used by The Telegraph’s Jerusalem correspondent Robert Tait in characterizing the recent deal between Fatah and Hamas.  His April 25th report,’Kerry reminded no peace deal can be struck without addressing Gaza, reads more like an op-ed than a straight news story, especially in the highlighted passages within the following paragraphs:

Wednesday’s reconciliation pact between Mahmoud Abbas’s Fatah movement and the Islamist Hamas group promised to end years of in-fighting by forming a new national unity government within five weeks. Fresh elections are planned within six months to give the Palestinian political landscape a new air of legitimacy.

By normal reckoning, such heartening news would be seen as a boon to any peace process with hopes of flourishing.

What could be more conducive to resolving the century old conflict between Jews and Arabs than a united front on both sides?

Instead, the development has prompted an almost apocalyptic response from Israel, with Benjamin Netanyahu, the country’s prime minister, all but writing off the talks and ordering their suspension five days before their official expiry date on April 29.

By whose reckoning would Palestinian unity between Fatah and a designated terror group which engages in the most extreme antisemitism (and rejects Israel’s right to exist within any borders) be considered a positive step for peace?

As a US State Department spokesperson said during a press conference after the unity deal was reached:  

“But I think the Secretary [of State] and we all understand it’s hard to see how Israel can be expected to negotiate with a government that does not believe in its right to exist. And that is one of the principles that’s long been expected”.

Remarkably, Tait himself acknowledges Hamas’s rejection of Israel’s continued existence in a later passage in his report, but still blames Bibi for his “apocalyptic” response, a word, it seems, more suited to describing this speech by top Hamas leader (and group co-founder) Mahmoud Al Zahhar in 2012:

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5UT6grrx8do]

What part of Hamas’s clearly stated desire to annihilate the Jews doesn’t Robert Tait understand?

 

Enhanced by Zemanta
Written By
More from Adam Levick

UK Media Watch prompts correction via Twitter to misleading Telegraph report

Last evening, we Tweeted a Telegraph journalist to point out an error...
Read More