Hamas in its present form is a consequence of a century of genocide and settler-colonialism. There are other liberatory groups in Palestine such as the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine with better stated platforms, but Hamas gets the most attention and is the largest. Hamas is not perfect, but to condemn it equally with Israel, the country that created its conditions in the first place, is wrong and again a chauvanistic attitude.

Violence against genocidal oppressors is a factual consequence of genocidal oppression. The Wretched of the Earth by Frantz Fanon goes over this in detail.

People being genocided broke out of their open-air prison and attacked the people committing genocide against them. It was Israel that did this, because Israel has been committing genocide. There have been moderate attempts for Palestinian liberation, and all have failed, so violence became the only option for the Palestinian people.

The importance I am trying to stress is that both you and I are both oppressed by Capitalist societies, but at the same time benefit massively from Imperialism, and our stances and attitudes towards subjects of Empire is what separates us most.

Your stance seems to be that "a sin is a sin," so to speak. My stance is that all actions are part of a larger cause and effect, and the cause for Hamas's very existence is the genocide of Palestine that has been going on for a century. Israel's destruction of moderate groups and denial of moderate solutions has over time forced more people of Palestine to abandon those methods, they see more and more that they will only be free from genocide if the state of Israel is destroyed, and a new secular Palestinian state over former Israelis and Palestinians alike takes its place.

This is why I recommend reading Fanon. Violent anger towards oppressors from the oppressed is fundamentally different from violent anger towards the oppressed from oppressors. Treating the oppressed the same way you treat oppressors is the privledged aspect, as it entrenches that divide rather thank attempts to make it equal.

As beneficiaries of Imperialism, our internationalist stance requires fighting to make things worse for us. If we stop the system by which we are bribed into acceptance, we lose the benefits of cheap goods and resources produced overseas with Imperialism. We gain from Socialism, and we in the Imperialist countries lose from fighting Imperialism so that others may no longer be oppressed. The first mindset is easier to grasp than the second because we benefit from the second while being oppressed by the first.

That is the difference.