Talk:Palestine All Party Parliamentary Group

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Politics of the United Kingdom

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom

??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

More information:
/
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Palestine Low‑importance

	Palestine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palestine, a team effort dedicated to building and maintaining comprehensive, informative and balanced articles related to the geographic Palestine region, the Palestinian people and the State of Palestine on Wikipedia. Join us by visiting the project page, where you can add your name to the list of members where you can contribute to the discussions.PalestineWikipedia:WikiProject PalestineTemplate:WikiProject PalestinePalestine-related
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Whether meeting with Hamas was illegal

I presume it is said that the meeting with Hamas was illegal as Hamas are a proscribed terrorist group. If so, that should be spelt out. The violation of international law is less clear to me: either it has perhaps violated some UN security council resolution or some such thing (in which case again this should be explained) or it is argued that, as Hamas routinely violate international law, meeting with them amounts to collaberating or inciting furthe violations. If it is the latter then I think it is far too tenous, arguably POV or original research (in that it is a novel legal argument).

--Lucifer 13:37, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It specifically says it violates international law in the source provided. KazakhPol 15:44, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The source does not support the claim. Besides it is absurd, international law applies to states, not individuals or members of parliamentary groups. I am not however going to push the issue further, as it is evident that the the editor who put the claim there has an POV agenda and is willing to defend his POV by edit warring. Let the absurdity of the claims be proof of the overall POVness of the article. -- Petri Krohn 16:37, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The source should be footnoted at the end of the sentence referring to the illegality also. Seperately, in concurrence with Petri Krohn, it does not support the claim. I don't think it is fair to assume a POV "agenda" though and would be obliged if KazakhPol would explain his position further. Otherwise I shall delete the reference to the meeting being illegal. Allegations of illegal behaviour should not be made except in a clear manner. That would seem only fair.--Lucifer 14:20, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Terrorism in the UK?

I really don't think that category is appropriate. It is OR. There have been numerous international contacts with the Hamas government ranging from the EU, Germany, Russia and Turkey besides almost all of the Arab League including Saudi Arabia (a major US ally in the war on terror) which recently brokered a power sharing deal between Hamas and Fatah. I understand you are angry that there was a meeting but this doesn't mean that it is about terrorism in the UK. Notice I am not saying denying any connection between Hamas and terrorism, but that isn't the issue here. --Abnn 03:43, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reading my mind. I'm glad your psychic powers have enabled you to tell my emotions regarding Hamas and the PAPPG. The fact that other countries' governments have had representatives meet with this org has no relevance to the UK gov's designation of Hamas as a terrorist organization. KazakhPol 03:58, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't about Hamas being a terrorist organization, but rather whether Palestine All Party Parliamentary Group meeting with them in their role as the elected representatives of the Palestinian National Authority in the Palestine territories, means that Palestine All Party Parliamentary Group should now be associated with terrorism in the UK. It's not a logical association. --Abnn 04:00, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The UK gov has designated Hamas a terror org. The UK had a diplomatic embargo on meeting with Hamas. British diplomats, this org, tried to meet with them nonetheless. That is clearly relevant to the topic of Terrorism in the UK. KazakhPol 04:03, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your sources do not backup your claims. EU officials, according to the source you provided, flatly denied meeting with Hamas officials. This was in 2005.[1] Your link for the meeting with the German official is, again, a report on an event that took place in 2006.[2] In other words other than the Russian meeting all of these meetings were before the Hamas boycott. KazakhPol 04:16, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From the EU article: "Ghazal said most of the contacts in the West Bank and Gaza were with lower level EU diplomats, but that higher level contacts between the EU and Hamas were taking place abroad. He did not elaborate." But it is true that the those specific contacts happened before the election. --Abnn 05:00, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll leave it to just Russian and Turkish contacts for now. --Abnn 05:04, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]