Billions for Jew killing, crumbs for peace
Happened to Fifty Years of Aid Money? - Frederick Forsyth
I saw Gaza on my first visit to Israel in 1968. It was created in the same year as the UN created Israel: 1948. It was supposed to be a temporary camp for Palestinians displaced by the new Israeli state. Its inhabitants were supposed to be able to return to new plots of land inside Israel or accept a living space in the lands of their surrounding Arab "brothers." (This was 19 years before the 1967 war.) Alas, the "brothers" did precious little. Gaza had better propaganda value as a festering sore of human misery to be waved before the world. It soon became a sewage-smelling slum.
But aid did pour in; billions of it, enough to make that tiny plot a mini Garden of Eden, a prosperous, healthy, thriving enclave beside the blue Mediterranean south of Ashkelon. Fifty years later, it was still a sewage-smelling slum, wreathed in chaos. What happened to all the money? Well, the Palestinian leadership embezzled half of it; the rest went on guns, bullets, and explosives. (Daily Express-UK)
Goodbye Gaza, Hello Hamas
It's funny (not) but when I was flying down to Florida a couple of days ago, the FOX channel wasn't working on the flight and so I was forced to watch CNN...........yeah I had to pin my eyelids open to stop from cringing.
Anyway, it was the day before the Jews were scheduled to disengage from Gaza and all CNN kept talking about, especially that 2nd rate, C list ,numbskull Jack Caffertywas "why should America help Israel pay for the disengagement and the resettling of the families?" (three generations mind you) torn from their homeland.
Oh and just for knowing, Bush has agreed to half of what Israel requested.
UPDATE: Must give props to the New Zealand Herald for this extremely even handed piece on the UN and media's prejudice on the Pali/Israeli conflict;
Two things immediately occurred to me while reading them. The first was the astounding absence of context; the second was that the attacks were coming from representatives of an organisation whose stance on the Israeli-Arab conflict, over decades, has hardly been exemplary.
Reading the articles, one would be forgiven for thinking Israelis have had nothing better to do than bomb or shoot up Palestinian communities. The implication is that Palestinians have, as a result of their benighted circumstances, had no choice but to take up arms against their oppressors.
The story is full of holes. Why no reference to the fact that Gaza has been for years been the planning base and launch pad for hundreds of bomb, mortar and other attacks against Israelis?
And in case we've become hardened to the idea of terrorism, let's remember what it entails: body parts splattered across city streets, infants without limbs, orphaned children maimed for life.
Why have the writers ignored the fact that, far from distancing itself from attacks by Hamas and Islamic Jihad, the Palestinian Authority (PA) has embraced these groups, failing to honour its commitments to dismantle the terror networks?
There's also no reference to the fact that establishing bomb factories in the midst of civilian neighbourhoods have long been favoured Palestinian extremist tactics.
Why, one wonders, did Newman fail to mention that those same traumatised Palestinian children she writes about have been subjected, through PA media outlets, school textbooks and holiday camps, to programmes inciting violence against Jews and lauding the "martyrdom" of suicide bombings.
Another missing piece: Palestinian leaders have for 10 years been responsible for administering Gaza. During that time, they have squandered millions of dollars in foreign aid - setting up a dozen security agencies, bankrolling propaganda, diverting funds to private bank accounts, buying apartments in Paris.
Then again, taking a one-sided view of the Israeli-Arab conflict is standard operating procedure for the United Nations.