|
what's there to get about your post, raeanna?
after years of israeli policy geared around keeping the political organization amongst the palestinian population as shattered as possible, it's hardly surprising that something the israelis would like even less would come into play.
the assumption was that if the plo/fatah was prevented from governing, the population would turn against it. which supposes that the palestinian population is too stupid to figure out that the reason fatah could not govern followed from israeli policy. they were wrong.
so the reason there is hamas in something like power in gaza follows directly from israeli policy.
and that the population would be inclined to support an organization that is *more* radical in terms of rhetoric than fatah/plo *because* of that policy of occupation is not surprising.
that the israelis imposed a siege on gaza using the exact logic that failed in the first place the baffling. that the bush administration supported that action is not surprising, however--they were chumped by the discourse of "terrorism" in this, as they have been repeatedly--as they chumped a significant segment of the american population in the run-up to the war in iraq.
so you don't have the history straight, even in its broadest outlines.
so your post works off a false premise, based on not knowing how to actually account for the situation.
so there's not a whole lot to "get" about it.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|