The Guardian has its typical head-in-the-sand overview of the result of Hamas murderers in the PA, but little leaks of common sense are beginning to appear.

To compete in the elections, Hamas has largely retreated from “armed resistance” - its strategy of murdering civilians in suicide bombings and shooting soldiers - in favour of a political pragmatism some Palestinian analysts believe will make it difficult for Hamas to return to a sustained violent campaign.

The Hamas manifesto hinted at the change when it left out any reference to the call in the group’s founding charter for the destruction of the Jewish state.

I would not expect the Guardian to actually admit that “resistance” equals murder, and yet, there it is.

Then again, the article ends on this note:

Hamas leaders say the problem could be resolved by integrating the movement’s fighters into the Palestinian security forces. But persuading Hamas to drop its charter calling for the destruction of Israel, and recognising the Jewish state’s right to exist, is a more complicated matter.

“It’s our land,” said Dr Zahar. “Nobody among our sons and grandsons will accept Israel as a legal state. Historically, they occupied this land as the British occupied it. Israel is a foreign body. Not in this generation, not in the next generation, will we accept it here.”

But asked if that meant Hamas would continue to try to destroy Israel, Dr Zahar said that would be for the next generation to decide.

Yeah, real complicated. It’s a simple yes-no decision, sport. That’s not complicated at all. Either Hamas recognizes that Israel exists, or they do not. I think it’s pretty simple to interpret what they’re saying as, well, what they’re saying.