Debunking the Myth That “israel” Created Hamas

If Palestinians decide to stop being perpetual victims who lay down and accept to be culled and decimated, by rising up through their legitimate right of armed resistance, do they suddenly become robots and pawns of the “israeli” Mossad? Certain segments of internet commentators on both the left and the right, some of whom are famous mainstream media pundits, are trying to push the narrative that this is indeed the case, asserting that “israel” created Hamas.

It’s important to debunk the misconception perpetuated by Western media that the Zionist entity created Hamas or had prior knowledge of the Al Aqsa Flood operation. The events of 7 October 2023 surprised the enemy, catching the occupation off guard. This narrative suggesting that “israel” had prior knowledge of Hamas’ plans not only lacks truth but also serves to mask the weakness of the entity, bolstered by US support.

The Zionist entity was oblivious to Operation Aqsa Flood, and the aftermath not only humiliates “israel” but also exposes the fragility of its occupation that resorts to violence, especially against children, to assert its power.

The idea that resistance only emerged following the “israeli” occupation of Palestine or the establishment of Hamas is flawed. Historical records show that acts of resistance were present long before the physical occupation took root. Palestinians were engaged in resistance against Jewish terrorist groups like the Haganah, Irgun, and Lehi operating in Palestine, notably in the Arab revolts of 1916 and 1936-39 respectively. For instance, there are documented cases where the Irgun openly declared that global security would always remain threatened unless Zionists gained control of the entirety of Palestine:

“Irgun Commander Begin told the UN UNSCOP Committee that the peace of the world will be threatened should Palestine not be given in its entirety to the Zionists,” (1947, “State of Terror,” p. 206)¹.

The Jewish Agency established Jewish settler “hiking parties” or “walking tours” as early as 1942. Their task was to compile intelligence surveys of Palestinian Arab areas (p. 863)². These were used, especially in the 1948 Nakba war, to guide Zionist forces in their ethnic cleansing of Palestinians and land seizure. Despite ongoing espionage, which continues even after the occupation and involves the use of Musta’ribeen (“israeli” operatives disguised as Palestinians or Arabs to gather intelligence or carry out assassinations), nothing could have prepared the enemy for the operation that occurred on October 7th.

Contextual Background: Ottoman Rule in Palestine

Resistance has been ingrained in Palestinian culture for centuries, dating back to the time of the Ottoman Empire. One notable figure exemplifying this resistance is Zahir al-‘Umar al-Zaydani (1690-1775), who emerged as a prominent provincial leader in the Ottoman Sultanate’s Syrian provinces, establishing an autonomous regime in northern Palestine (Joudah, 2002, p. 73)³.

Coming from a family of local potentates and tax farmers, he was supported by the Shihabi Emirs of Mount Lebanon. Zahir al-‘Umar played a significant role in the politics of Damascus and Sayda provinces, particularly in parts of Palestine and southern Lebanon, until his death in 1775 (Joudah, 2002, p. 73). In 1771, Zahir al-Umar and Nasif al-Nassar allied themselves with Ali Bey al-Kabir of Egypt, who sent Ismail Bey and Abu al-Dhahab to conquer Ottoman Syria.

With support from the Russian Navy, the rebel alliance captured Sidon and Damascus in early June, ousting their governors, Darwish Pasha al-Kurji and Uthman Pasha al-Kurji. The Battle of Lake Huleh on 2 September 1771 saw the rebel forces of Zahir al-Umar and Nasif al-Nassar defeat the army of Uthman Pasha al-Kurji, the Ottoman governor of Damascus, in eastern Galilee. Therefore, there is an early history of Palestinian resistance against external powers during Ottoman rule.

Exploring the Relationship Between Islam and Hamas

After the “israeli” occupation of the West Bank and Gaza in 1967, the Mujama’ al-Islamiyah (Islamic Centre), which was established in 1973, focused primarily on cultivating what it termed “the upbringing of an Islamic generation” by establishing religious schools, charity organizations, social clubs, and similar institutions:

“In short, Hamas did not arbitrarily emerge in Gaza with the blessing of ‘israel’; the organization was an outcome of a systematic process involving years of planning, preparation, internal evaluation, and strategizing. It was the fruit of years of progress and investment by the Muslim Brotherhood aimed at countering Western hegemony in the Middle East,” (Abdulhaq, 2018)⁴.

Hamas was formed during the intifada, which marked a resurgence of Islamic political influence in the West Bank and Gaza Strip amidst “israeli” occupation. Furthermore, the Islamic resistance groups in occupied Palestine upheld a comprehensive interpretation and exact depiction of Islamic principles across various facets of life: belief and doctrine, governance and finance, learning and community welfare, legal matters and legislation, encouragement and instruction, media and culture, the tangible and intangible, and all other aspects of human existence.

Islamophobia in the West and the Palestinian Threat

Terms like “Islamic terrorism” or “radical Islamists” are often used to describe resistance from Muslim groups in the Axis of Resistance. These labels are designed to evoke fear and wrongly merge the concepts of terrorism and Islam; this conflation misleads Western audiences into viewing Islam and terrorism as inherently linked, fostering Islamophobia. The irony is that Al-Qaeda and ISIS were directly created by NATO allies and the Zionist entity. The Gulf monarchies which fund the propagation of the terrorists’ Wahabbi ideology are also close allies of NATO and many of them have openly normalized ties with the Zionist regime.

This narrative, promoted by racist-Zionist news outlets, supports the rhetoric that defeating groups like Hamas requires targeting Islam itself. Hamas is not only an armed resistance group opposing occupation, colonization, violence, genocide, Western imperialism, Jewish supremacy, and Zionism, but it also incorporates an Islamic framework into daily life. This framework is also embraced by many Palestinian Christian communities in occupied Palestine, highlighting its deep cultural integration.

This sentiment of Islamophobia is not limited to one political bloc. It is found on both the right-wing and the left-wing. The right-wing will approach it from a standpoint of racial supremacism, of viewing certain ethnicities as inferior, while the leftist will view those with an illiberal worldview as inferior and in need of “civilizing.”

Professor David Miller, in an essay for Al Mayadeen English,⁵ expounded on the often untouched issue of Islamophobia on the left.

“[The left] uses terms like ‘Islamist’ in much the same way it is used by neoconservatives and Zionists,” Miller noted.

“Another key term in left Islamophobia is ‘fundamentalism.’ In the UK, a certain current of feminists created a group called Women Against Fundamentalism back in the late 1980s,” he continued. “It’s extraordinary that it was thought appropriate for this Islamophobic term to be used in the name of an organization claiming to be progressive, but there it is. One of the key activists was Julia Bard, a member of the Jewish Socialists’ Group – putting one of a number of question marks over that organization. Others involved included Nira Yuval-Davis who describes herself as ‘an anti-Zionist diasporic Israeli Jew;’ a term which appears to endorse the false Zionist conception that Jews outside Israel are a diaspora and give political legitimacy to the concept of ‘Israel.’ Perhaps the most well-known figurehead of the WAF was Gita Sahgal, best known for attacking the civil rights group Cage as ‘Jihadi,’ on which I have previously written at length. The use of the term ‘Jihadi’ is yet another Islamophobic term for Muslims active in political life.”

According to Miller, sentiment of hatred for Islam, as being something “backwards” that needs “civilizing” by secular liberal models of governance and culture, is prevalent on the left regardless if they are supportive of western foreign policy, or even feign protest against it.

“This is not just a question of language, but a tendency on the left to see specifically Muslim involvement in politics as problematic unless it conforms to Western secularist tenets of belief, tenets which only really apply to – or at least emerged from – a critique of Christianity specifically. This is to say that it is not only the “pro-war” (secular) left with which there are problems but also parts of the “anti-war” (secular) left. If we are to foster an international realist anti-Imperialist movement, we will need to leave Islamophobic ideas and conceptions behind and develop a more thoroughgoing critique of Western culture and society,” Miller concluded.

The propagation of the myth that “israel” created Hamas is rooted in Islamophobia, viewing the secular Fatah movement as preferable to Islamic parties. This myth is repeated by those who claim to be pro-Palestine on both the left and the right. A major source of this myth is popular pseudo-centrist liberal commentator and journalist Mehdi Hasan, who mostly cites “israeli” and US officials (not exactly unbiased sources) in order to perpetuate the myth that Hamas was created by the “israeli” intelligence network.

Their lack of understanding of Palestinian history and its current political dynamics is either due to willful blindness or deliberate distortion of the truth, because as it stands the Palestinian group which is quite openly and directly controlled by the Zionist occupation is the Palestinian Authority (PA), which was formed due to the Palestinian Liberation Organization’s (PLO) capitulation to the illegitimate occupation regime during the Oslo and Camp David agreements. The PA directly works as a proxy of the Zionist security establishment and routinely arrests, tortures, and kills Palestinians on behalf of the Zionist regime.

It was the secular materialist, with their strong affinity for the wares of this transient world, who sold their principles in exchange for material benefit (money, women, power, position, etc), while those firmly rooted in their faith in God had the discipline and strong morals to resist the temptations to sell their soul, and sell their country and people, for a cheap price.

Today, the forces in Palestine which are controlled by “israel” is the PA and its affiliates, who are directly opposed to groups like Hamas and other Islamic resistance organizations.

Zionism and “Anti-Semitism”: Germany’s Strategic Maneuver

Zionism is birthed on a foundation rooted in racism, genocide, and the mass graves of Palestinian children. The establishment of the occupied “state” did not occur in a vacuum; it was supported and leveraged by countries hostile towards Jews as a race of people (rather than rational opposition towards their behavior and actions), with Germany being one of its strongest proponents.

This is contrary to Islam’s approach, as outlined by Professor Amal Saad in her book Hizbullah: Politics and Religion, where she describes the Islamic approach towards Zionism and even Judaism as lacking any racialism or any unfair and irrational motivations, but purely academic in offering critiques to the distortion of the original religion of Moses, whom Muslims also believe in. Islam in Arabic is more of a verb than a noun, since it means submission to God, and therefore all God’s prophets came with a religion of submission to God (Islam), including Moses. The Islamic view is that all Abrahamic religions originated as Islam (although a variant of the word in the native tongue of each prophet, such as in Syriac, Aramaic, or Hebrew), but over time they incurred various levels of man-made distortions. This criticism has nothing to do with race and Islam wholly rejects biological determinism.

Even Christians prior to the European “enlightenment” era also did not approach Jews from a racialist perspective, believing that it was an issue of the soul and people could be saved if they accepted Jesus Christ, or at least behaved according to generally acceptable moral standards. Liberalism and the rejection of God from European society brought about the emergence of scientific racism and its theories of racial hierarchies, which placed Europeans at the top and solidified the ideological justification for imperial aspirations.

Aside from the fact that most Jews cannot be classified as ethnically Semitic, the fact that the Islamic world does not even view this issue from a racialist lens, makes the accusation of “antisemitism” against Islamic social, political, and militant groups totally fallacious and illogical.

They are projecting the baggage of European liberal theories on race onto the Islamic world. Ironically, the phenomenon of hatred of Jews as a race of people, who cannot be saved by changing their religion or keeping their religion while adhering to universally acceptable moral values, is a product of European liberalism, which they weaponized to justify Zionist aspirations.

Zionism was used not only as a tool to encourage Jews to leave their countries of origin in Europe but also to force the creation of a Jewish homeland where Jews worldwide could emigrate. Even Theodor Herzl, the founder of Zionism, admitted that for Zionism to succeed, “anti-Semitic” individuals/countries would become its greatest allies:

Modern Germany has been one of its most significant supporters. From 2003 to 2023, German governments approved nearly €3.3 billion ($3.6 billion) in arms export licenses to “israel,” according to Forensis, a Berlin-based investigatory nonprofit (Glucroft, 2024)⁶. More than half of these exports are listed as “war weapons,” including submarines and other major military equipment.

Forensis’ report, based on open-source data from the German government and other public sources such as SIPRI, highlights Germany’s role (Glucroft, 2024). A recent SIPRI report identified Germany as “israel’s” second-largest supplier of weapons, behind the United States, from 2019 to 2023. These two countries account for nearly all of “israel’s” weapons imports, with the split between them being almost 50-50 in 2022 and 2023.

Germany is not only a significant provider of weapons to “israel” but also a key source of military funding used in the occupied territories, contributing to the murder of children in Palestine.

Germany also experiences a significant increase in Islamophobia and racism towards Black and Brown communities, despite the fact that Germany was involved in destroying many of the countries of refugees it has taken in, cynically “welcoming” them to exploit their relatively cheaper labor costs.

This dynamic reinforces the rhetoric of “Islamic terrorism,” which prioritizes Jewish and white supremacy. It perpetuates the notion that Muslims and/or people of color are a threat to Zionist Jews, motivated by the same irrational racialism as the European racialist, thereby justifying the maintenance and funding of the Jewish homeland as a means of protection.

The Balfour Declaration and the First Arab Revolt: Shaping the Past and Future of Arab Resistance

During World War I, the British made a promise to establish a Jewish homeland in Palestine. The Zionist aspiration for such a homeland gained momentum thanks to the efforts of Chaim Weizmann, President of the Zionist Organization, the Rothschild family, and other figures in Europe (Qadir et al. 2018, p. 53, 2017)⁷.

This support from the West not only facilitated the establishment of a Jewish homeland but also extended to send European Jews to the new occupying “state”. The West covered all necessary expenses and arrangements to ensure their settlement in West Asia. Moreover, on November 2, 1917, British Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour issued a letter stating, “His Majesty‘s government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people…” (Kramer, p. 149)⁸.

To gain the support of global Jewry during World War I, the British pledged to establish a Jewish state. According to the historical book Against Our Better Judgment by journalist Alison Weir, Zionists in America had the US promise entry into WW1 on the side of Britain, to tip the war in its favor, in exchange for the Balfour Declaration. Consequently, Palestine’s borders were forcefully opened, allowing European Jews to enter and settle in Palestinian homes.

Following the events of the Arab Revolt in May 1916, twenty-one Arab citizens of Damascus and Beirut were publicly hanged for being disloyal to the sultan, sparking widespread revolt. In retaliation for Arab resistance, Turkish authorities blocked relief supplies, leading to the starvation of approximately 300,000 Arabs. Sharif Husayn (appointed Sharif and Emir of Mecca in 1908) ordered tribes in the Hijaz to attack Ottoman garrisons and declared Arab independence in May 1916. Within three weeks, the Ottoman garrison in Mecca fell.

The Balfour Declaration of November 1917 and the first Arab Revolt of May 1916 showcase a year marked by persistent battle and resistance. Prior to the establishment of the Muslim Brotherhood or the Hamas movement, Palestinian and Arab resistance was already active, targeting both Ottoman rule and British colonial forces.

The Balfour Declaration, initially promising Palestinians a state of their own, demonstrates how extensive lobbying efforts led the British to favor European Jews. This illustrates that with sufficient financial resources and influence, the theft of land can be achieved, as evidenced by the establishment of “israel” in Palestine with the backing of Western nations.

The Arab Revolt highlights the struggle against Ottoman rule by those seeking freedom from Ottoman control and the strategic effort to drive out British colonial powers to create self-governing Arab states. The Balfour Declaration served as crucial support for Jews during World War I. Simultaneously, Palestinian and Arab resistance against colonization and external domination demonstrated their unwavering determination to overcome any violence from the enemy.

As the Zionist armies began their ethnic cleansing of Palestine, the illustrator in the above picture, Arthur Szyk, a staunch Zionist, drew a cartoon dehumanizing Arabs. Szyk portrayed them as opposing democracy and freedom and as wanting to rob and kill. This depiction, using the swastika to associate Palestinians with Nazis, was a calculated strategy to influence public opinion and shape the perceptions of World War II survivors. It exemplifies orientalistic stereotypes, with Zionists casting themselves as innocent while perpetrating violence and theft against Palestinian Arabs.

Distorting the Truth: Suffocating Conditions on Palestinian Groups by the Occupation Does Not Equal Support

Some of the key historical facts that disingenuous analysts on both the left and the right of western political spectrums intentionally distort to justify their myth that “israel” created Hamas are the fact that when Hamas began, it was a social benefit organization, “focused on charity, education, and building social institutions.”⁹

According to Abdulhaq, Islamic individuals and groups organized similar social efforts on campuses, and the presence of rivals naturally led to frictions with established nationalist and Marxist groups like Fatah or PFLP. The “israelis” exacerbated these frictions without the knowledge of either the Islamic or secular branches, especially since the Zionists had hoped the Islamic groups would just stay focused on social efforts and remain apolitical as such.

“Soon after Israeli authorities observed Islamist involvement in armed resistance in 1983, the occupation forces imprisoned Sheikh Ahmad Yassin, along with dozens of prominent Hamas leaders for their role in forming armed militias,” Abdulhaq explains.

Another fact which is intentionally distorted by analysts on both the left and the right in the west is the fact that all Palestinian groups needed permits from the “israeli” government in order to operate. This was a blanket policy that forced all groups to be under the watchful eye of their occupier, and was not within their power, choice, or control to avoid these permits. The fact that Hamas and associated Islamic groups were forced to have these permits, does not mean that Hamas was created by “israel.”

These are the only two historical facts about Hamas’ origins which are used to slander and spread myths about its existence. These distortions are additionally pushed by “israeli” intelligence sources, who always mix truth with falsehood. According to the bombshell insider book By Way of Deception by a former Mossad agent, Mossad and “israeli” intel use deception to wage war.

The slander dished out by Mossad is part of the Likud vs Labour binary in Zionist politics, much like the artificial left-right paradigm in the west. Yet in practice, they all pursue the same general agenda, only differing on the tactics on how to achieve it. Right-wing neoconservative Bill Kristol once praised liberal Democrat former president Barack Obama as a “born again neocon” for his bloody intervention in Libya. Just the same, liberal Zionism is the Obama of the “israeli” political spectrum.

Liberal Zionist politicians like Ehud Barak, an accomplice of Jeffrey Epstein, are no less of war criminals and butchers than Netanyahu, but put on the phony face of wanting peace and negotiations as part of the good cop, bad cop strategy. The fact that Barak also portrays the narrative that Netanyahu and Hamas are two sides of the same coin should be a source of great reflection and critical thinking for those who think this myth holds any weight.

Another lie spread about the Palestinian resistance and the Al Aqsa Flood retaliatory operation is that “israel” knew in advance every single detail about the operation and let it happen anyway. This defeats all logic, as the purpose of controlled opposition is not to weaken the master.

Currently, the “israeli” military has had its image of invincibility shattered. It has been humiliated, with the very small and relatively simple weaponry of the Palestinian resistance leading to video after video of tanks being destroyed, soldiers being sniped, and buildings intentionally wired with explosives so that when Zionist occupying forces inhabit those buildings, they can be collapsed on top of them. Despite the immense destruction in Gaza, the leadership of Hamas and Islamic Jihad remains, the hostages are still in their possession, and they are still able to fire rockets into occupied Palestine.

The people of Gaza resolutely stand behind the resistance axis and due to the fact that the Palestinian cause was about to fade into dust and their miserable existence under siege and blockade would have had no chance of improving, the population of Gaza gave their consent to their leadership by being willing to make the biggest sacrifice for the dignity, independence, and liberation of not only Palestinians in Gaza but the entirety of Palestine and its people.

This notion of a “false flag” serves Zionist propaganda interests, to present themselves as all powerful; to delegitimize Palestinian resistance; to separate the people from resistance; and to lay the ground for a fake “peace” which will remove Netanyahu from power, replacing him with some liberal leader with a fake smile, and create a puppet government to rule over Gaza.

Many Western social media commentators who claim to be friends of Palestine spread these myths about the Palestinian resistance, as if Palestinians cannot stand up for themselves without being robots controlled by Mossad. According to their logic, Palestinians must therefore lay down and accept genocide and humiliation, and be perpetual victims so that a few social media users can get clicks, likes, attention, and in many cases money, from the dead bodies of Palestinians.

“Does the world expect us to be well-behaved victims while we’re getting killed?” Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar once asked in an interview. According to many so-called “friends” of Palestine, the answer is yes, and if they do not sit down and accept mass slaughter by rising up with armed resistance, then they are controlled opposition and a creation of Mossad.

According to Martyr Nizar Banat (ra), who was beaten to death by PA police forces, a helpless and weak Palestine would never be able to gain global support for its cause, only mere pity as a sidenote and afterthought. He stated that Palestine only gets respect because they have a rocket, and to not believe the sophistry of the PA or liberal Zionist organizations who think that Palestine’s respect and standing is due to Mahmoud Abbas’ visits to the UN, as if Palestine’s freedom will come from the halls of the UN and other such international organizations.

Such assertions about Hamas being controlled opposition makes no logical sense, except if we view it as part of the good cop, bad cop tactic of the US government and Zionist network. To present a false peace that liquidates the resistance – a liberal Zionist government in “Tel Aviv” and a puppet government in Gaza similar to the Palestinian Authority led by collaborationist Mahmoud Abbas – they will demonize Netanyahu, condemn the genocide, but blame the resistance for the genocide, as if Gaza was some paradise prior to 7 October 2023, and then celebrate that the genocide is over and an era of “peace” has begun. The aim is for the US to switch to the “good cop” once a puppet government in Gaza is installed, and this narrative of Netanyahu and Hamas being two sides of the same coin helps sell this false “peace.”

This narrative is supported by dubious individuals such as Motaz Azaiza, who became a celebrity during the early months of the genocide. He was a known Fatah supporter prior to this, but many people kept quiet about his inconsistencies out of respect for those enduring the brutal conditions. However, while many in Gaza could not escape through the Rafah crossing, Motaz was airlifted in a military aircraft and sent to Qatar, whose leaders shook hands with “israeli” officials at a climate conference during the midst of the genocide.

Azaiza also shook hands with Mahmoud Abbas and has insulted the resistance, including sectarian insults against Hezbollah which he himself stated or reposted others’ posts on his social media channels. Azaiza promotes the idea that Gaza was a paradise before the genocide, and that the genocide is the fault of both the occupation and the resistance. This blurs the line between the truth and falsehood, and equates the initiatory violence of an illegitimate occupation with the retaliatory violence of the occupied and oppressed. In reality, every Palestinian operation since the Nakba (or even earlier when Zionist terrorism and land stealing schemes began prior to the Nakba) is a retaliatory operation, including but not limited to Al Aqsa Flood.

In reality, the planning for Al Aqsa Flood was done through primitive means in order to prevent surveillance by the high-tech Zionist spy networks and Palestinian collaborationists and spies who work with the occupation. Plans were written down on paper, so that the occupation’s digital surveillance networks could not see it. Additionally, false information was fed to those who were known to be spies and collaborators.

Therefore, whatever information the Zionist regime had was minimal, lacking exact specificities, and included intentional disinformation. They did not know the full extent of the operation and their hubris deceives them into thinking that Gazans are so primitive and lacking in basic supplies, that they could never overcome the Zionist military nor engage in any kind of sophisticated, powerful operations that could even cross the barrier wall that keeps Gaza caged in.

At best, the Zionists would have only thought any operation would be just like the other operations: a few days or a week of missile salvos, such as the “Revenge of the Free” operation whereby the Zionists were humiliated and defeated only after a few short days, and then it is finished. They did not expect such a sophisticated cross-border hostage-taking operation. The Zionists would not want the resistance to be successful in taking hostages, since that gives them leverage to negotiate for things they could not attain in normal times.

The controlled opposition is actually the mainstream secularist groups, not the Islamic groups. Currently, the Palestinian Authority is controlled by the Zionist occupation. The corruption of the PLO was well known, and it was due to their lack of moral discipline which stems from weak faith in God and addiction to materialism. Many leaders as well as rank-and-file members would pursue hedonism, decadence, and more, including some fighters selling their weapons for alcohol and prostitutes. Those who have faith in God are not enslaved by their lowly desires and have no price on their soul, in contrast.

The Zionist regime supported ISIS, which attacked all of “israel’s” enemies, and never attacked “israel” except for one instance, where ISIS swiftly apologized. Overzealous Salafis poured over the borders of Jordan into Syria with full approval of NATO and the Zionist regime – yet the Salafis cannot have the same energy to pour over the Jordanian border into Palestine to help their brothers. This is because their Zionist masters and the Jordanian puppet regime will not allow such a thing, although most Salafis don’t even envision such a thing in the first place.

The Palestinian resistance does not have any of the characteristics of controlled opposition groups. This myth is a psyop which benefits Zionist propaganda, especially the myth of Zionist invincibility and omnipotence. In reality, all Satanic regimes and rulers have fallen, from Nimrod to Pharaoh to Abu Sufyan to Yazid.

Conclusion

The Palestinian people have long demonstrated a spirit of resistance, which existed well before the official emergence of Hamas in 1987 amidst the “israeli” occupation. It’s inaccurate to solely attribute the creation of Hamas to “israel,” as resistance has been ingrained within Palestinian history, predating the Zionist entity’s establishment. Claims that “israel” engineered Hamas or was aware of certain events serve to consolidate power in Western regimes and the US-backed Zionist entity while disregarding the historical context of Palestinian resistance. True power lies within the hands of the oppressed, who have historically determined their destinies through various forms of resistance.

The Palestinian people have chosen the path of armed resistance as a result of logic, morality, and popular will. Exercising their legal, moral, and divine duty to engage in armed resistance against an occupier does not make them robots or pawns of Mossad.

Sources:

1 Suárez, Thomas. “State of Terror.” Irgun anti-Partition Broadside, 1947. URL: http://paldocs.net/

2 Elaine C. Hagopian. Arab Studies Quarterly, vol. 39, no. 2, 2017, pp. 861–64. JSTOR, URL: https://doi.org/10.13169/arabstudquar.39.2.0861.

3 Joudah, Ahmad. “Zahir al-‘Umar and the First Autonomous Regime in Ottoman Palestine (1744-1775)”.

4 Abdulhaq, Raja. “Distorting Hamas’s Origins: A Response to Mehdi Hasan.” February 21, 2018. Milestones Journal. URL: https://www.milestonesjournal.net/articles/2018/2/21/distorting-hamass-origins-a-response-to-mehdi-hasan-1

5 https://english.almayadeen.net/articles/opinion/from-fundamentalists-to-islamists:-is-there-a-problem-of-isl

6 Glucroft, William Noah. “Legal pressures mount on Germany to cut aid to Israel”. Conflicts Germany, 10 Apr. 2024, URL: www.conflictsgermany.com/legal-pressures-mount-on-germany-to-cut-aid-to-israel.

7 Abdul Qadir, Zahir Mengal, Pervaiz Ahmed, and Shazia Jaffar. “Arab Revolt of 1916.” Bi-Annual Research Journal “Journal of Education & Humanities Research,” vol. 3, no. 1, Institute of Education and Research (IER), 2017, pp. 1-3. ISSN: 2415-2366.

8 Kramer, G. (2008). “A History of Palestine: From the Ottoman conquest to the founding of the State of Israel”. UK; Princeton University press, p. 149.

9 Abdulhaq, Raja. “Distorting Hamas’s Origins: A Response to Mehdi Hasan.” February 21, 2018. Milestones Journal. URL: https://www.milestonesjournal.net/articles/2018/2/21/distorting-hamass-origins-a-response-to-mehdi-hasan-1