The three Palestinian militant groups that captured an Israeli soldier gave Israel until Tuesday morning to release Palestinian prisoners or "pay the consequences."
The statement, which was faxed to news agencies on Monday, did not say what those consequences would be.
Cpl. Gilad Shalit, 19, was captured June 25 in a cross-border raid by militants linked to the Palestinians' ruling Hamas party, the Popular Resistance Committees and the Army of Islam. The last two groups have ties to Hamas.
I don't think we have to imagine
Meanwhile, Hamas's armed wing, Izaddin al-Kassam, on Sunday threatened to attack infrastructure facilities inside Israel, including schools, hospitals and universities
Ahmed Bahar, deputy speaker of the Palestinian Legislative Council, said that the soldier would not be handed back unless Israel accepted the conditions of the captors. "These are the conditions of all the Palestinians, including the families of prisoners and martyrs," he said.
Bahar said Israel's dilemma is that it is facing only two scenarios either to suffer humiliation by accepting the conditions or to launch a military operation that could result in the death of the soldier.
Gee, I wonder what that would mean?
Tents in the desert for 1.3 million?
Continue reading "HAMAS - even your 4 year olds are not 'innocent'" at Villagers with Torches »
2 comments:
Alexa McDonough, Foreign Affairs critic for Canada's New Democratic Party [NDP], sent out a press release on June 30, 2006 supporting Hamas:
"Thursday’s capture of Palestinian Parliamentarians further limits the Palestinian Authority’s already constrained capacity to function as a responsible, duly elected government, particularly during this time when Israel has cut all food and fuel supplies to Gaza’s 1.4 million people and withheld Palestinians’ tax revenues."
The left-wing NDP has seats in Canada's Parliament but is not the ruling party.
[The full test of the press release can be found on the Judeoscope website.]
On the positive side, Canada interfered with the travel plans of a Shaik who had a record of preaching violence against Jews and assorted infidels. He intended to travel to a conference to speak to young Muslims in Eastern Canada; he lives somewhere in Europe. Canadian officials had a chat with him before he left and explained that, although he was free to travel to Canada, he could not be guaranteed entry. He cancelled his travel plans, and will now be speaking to the young impressionables from a tv screen.
Muslims in Canada had the nerve to accuse Canadian officials of not upholding freedom of expression in relation to the Shaik -- even though many Muslims are still mad as hell about the Western Standard's exercise of freedom of expression by publishing cartoons of Mohammed. Don't Jews have a word for this? Chutzpah.
"Muslims in Canada had the nerve to accuse Canadian officials of not upholding freedom of expression in relation to the Shaik"
Would they complain about the Grand Wizard of the KKK coming into Canada to preach against 'mud people'and other assorted non bleached human varietals?
Post a Comment