I am a hopeful sort and want to believe that the Palestinian's overwhelming choice of Hamas indicates a rejection of corruption and a call for better social services as opposed to a call for the destruction of Israel.  After all, we all "know" that the Palestinian people are no more or less peace-loving than Israelis, right?  That's what the media is reporting, right?

Palestinians often trace the appeal of Hamas to its network of social
services, which largely supplanted the crumbling and feeble
institutions of the Palestinian Authority. - NYT, January 28, 2006

Israelis are better able than those in the outside world to understand
the degree to which Palestinians chafed under the pervasive corruption
of Fatah -- and thus to read Hamas' victory as a collective expression
of disgust and anger with the status quo rather than a call to arms. - LA Times, January 28, 2006

The movement's success at the polls does not mean that more than half the Palestnians necessarily approve of suicide bombings against civilians. - BBC, January 28, 2006

By all accounts, Palestinians didn't choose Hamas because they reject
peace talks with Israel but rather because they were fed up with graft
in the ruling Fatah Party. - AP, January 28, 2006

In none of these articles, some of which are quite lengthy, is even one Palestinian quoted as saying that they reject Hamas' call for armed struggle and only wanted to a change in "domestic policy".  I'll bet you've bought this story hook, line and sinker.  I haven't.

Why are so many people ready to accept the historical example of the cultured German population being turned by propoganda into Jew-killing machines, but refuse to believe that the destitute, less educated Palestinians are capable of the same despite the open espousal of these policies by their leaders and media?