wnyc.org / 93.9fm / am 820

Comments

• [1] hjs from 11211 January 18, 2008 - 12:10PM

  Palestines don't want or need a country that looks like swiss cheese. that's why talks failed in the 90's

  
  
• [2] Stuart from Bronx, NY January 18, 2008 - 12:16PM

  when palestinian terrorism and racism ends, they will have peace. if you think giving them back 'their' land will create peace, just look at gaza today.

  
  
• [3] hjs from 11211 January 18, 2008 - 12:31PM

  a minority seizes power in gaza and some will judge all palestinians by the thugs that rule them. seems unfair. seems like racism to me.

  isn't gaza just a ghetto, a large prison?

  
  
• [4] Stuart from Bronx, NY January 18, 2008 - 12:32PM

  seizes power? are you not aware of the palestinian elections that brought hamas to power?

  
  
• [5] hjs from 11211 January 18, 2008 - 12:41PM

  seize power!

  know the facts

  the election you might be refering to were for the Palestinian Legislative Council not to rule gaza. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Gaza_%282007%29

  
  
• [6] Stuart from Bronx, NY January 18, 2008 - 12:49PM

  The fact is that Hamas won the election. That by definition is not a seizure of power. Simply put, they are a terrorist organization that has the popular support of the Palestinian people.

  from the Washington Post

  January 27, 2006

  ---

  Hamas Sweeps Palestinian Elections, Complicating Peace Efforts in Mideast

  By Scott Wilson

  Washington Post Foreign Service

  RAMALLAH, West Bank, Jan. 26 -- The radical Islamic movement Hamas won a large majority in the new Palestinian parliament, according to official election results announced Thursday, trouncing the governing Fatah party in a contest that could dramatically reshape the Palestinians' relations with Israel and the rest of the world.

  read the rest at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/26/AR2006012600372.html

  
  
• [7] Stuart from Bronx, NY January 18, 2008 - 12:51PM

  Hamas won the election. That by definition is not a seizure of power.

  Simply put, a terrorist organization has the popular support of the Palestinian people. Any claim that the majority wants peace is absolute nonsense.

  
  
• [8] Imre Nagy January 18, 2008 - 12:54PM

  Charles Enderlin has absolutely no credibility. In 2000 he perpetuated a lie regarding the staged death of a young Palestinian boy shielded by his "father" from what were supposedly Israeli bullets in

  Gaza. Mr. Enderlin should have his credentials revoked and be fined or imprisoned for his role in disseminating false information regarding the Israeli military. His anti-semitism is blatant, but that is another issue.

  
  
• [9] hjs from 11211 January 18, 2008 - 01:05PM

  so went bush wins the election to be president he doesnot have to follow the law? NO

  hamas seized power in gaza. they were never elected to rule gaza as thug and they have broken palistinan law.

  they are the crimals not the people

  please learn the facts and STOP WITH THE TRIBALISM.

  we are living in the 21st century

  
  
• [10] Stuart from Bronx, NY January 18, 2008 - 01:11PM

  ahh, tribalism...

  am yisrael chai!

  
  
• [11] hjs from 11211 January 18, 2008 - 01:17PM

  war without end!

  
  
• [12] Ephrem Wertenteil from Brooklyn, NY January 18, 2008 - 01:41PM

  Charles Enderlin's comments on the Second Lebanon are a total distortion. He states that 30,000 Israeli soliders could not defeat a few thousand Hizbollah fighters. He is either ignorant or purposely distorting the truth. Those 30,000 Israeli soldiers were not even mobilized until 2 weeks into the war and, even the, just sat at the border, since Olmert refused to let them go in. They did not invade until the UN deal was agreed to, which was 48 hours before the end of the war. Until then, there were only a few brigades on the ground inside Lebanon. Indeed, that is part of the crticism of Olmert, that he refused to let the army fight. Moreover, some 500 Hizbollah fighter were killed as opposed to 119 Israeli soldiers, which odds are quite good for an invading force. He also neglects the fact that Hizbollah entrenched itself among civilians which restrained Israel's army from using its overwhelming power. The times that Israel did kill civilians, it was harshly critcized. So, it's damnded if you do and damned if you don't for Israel, as usual. If Israel wipes out Hizbollah and in the course kills many civilians, then Israel is to be condemned. If it restrains itself to limit civilian casualties, it is seen as weak and incompetent.

  
  
• [13] Richard January 18, 2008 - 05:46PM

  Enderlin is behind a documentary that defames Israel—see the Wiki info on him and al-Durrah. Choosing him to comment on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict suggests that Lopate and WNYC are pushing an agenda rather than going for unbiased, professional journalism.