Now let's see. For the past 60 years any Arab who showed up at an UNRWA office was, without much investigation, put on the rolls, and these rolls turn out to grow and grow and grow. And in the first decade or so of UNRWA’s existence there were those who, in the refugee business, understood how grotesque was the deliberate attempt not to integrate these Arabs among "people just like them" (as Elfan Rees, Adviser on Refugees to the World Council of Churches, so famously wrote) but to deliberately keep them together, as "refugees," and what's more, on the permanent dole of UNRWA. Furthermore, and uniquely among all the groups claiming refugee status, the Arab "refugees" -- unlike, say, refugees from the Nazis or Communists -- could actually hand down, apparently through their genes, this "refugee" status, so that it remained forever. Does this make sense? Stravinsky or Nabokov may have been refugees from Soviet Russia, but who would describe their children as "Russian refugees"? Is the grandson of Panofsky a "German Jewish refugee" because his grandfather was? And Richard Holbrooke's parents may have been refugees, one from the Nazis and one from the Communists, but is Holbrooke a "refugee," and will his children be "refugees"? Nor is this the only thing unique to the Arabs who left, beginning in the fall of 1947, convinced that they would, after hostilities not expected to last long, be returning triumphantly to seize the homes and other possessions of the defeated and presumably massacred Jews.
Despite Elfan Rees, and despite many others who recognized the deliberate exploitation of the Arabs -- many of them the grandchildren of people who had arrived in Mandatory Palestine from Egypt, Iraq, Transjordan (oh, the demographic information has long been mainly hidden from view) -- the "Arab refugee" problem remained, and grew like Topsy, and grew and grew. By now, as everyone knows, the "plight of the Palestinians" is the most discussed, most investigated, most everything at the U.N., where an Arab and Islamic cabal sets the agenda, and makes sure that not a month, not a week, not a day, not an hour goes by without, somewhere in the world, someone at the U.N. or one of its succursales bringing up, yet again, the "Palestinian problem." And what about the aid? Ah, there we find that out of all the aid that is available for distribution through the U.N. to refugees all over the world, fleeing military conflict, famine, drought, ethnic cleansing, every possible kind of woe, almost as much goes to the "Palestinian" (quondam "Arab") refugees, as to all the other refugees, all over the world, put together.
And what gives this a certain additional piquancy is that in addition to the aid through the U.N., the "Palestinians" -- despite the incredible corruption of the PLO (Arafat, who managed to pocket billions for himself and his most loyal henchmen and of course his "wife," who is now enjoying her hundreds of millions of dollars in her Parisian existence) that continues to the present day under nobody-here-but-us-mild-mannered-accountants Mahmoud Abbas -- the "Palestinians" have received billions from both the E.U., with its foreign policy in the grip of a cabal of islamisant and arabisant apparatchiks who only now may feel the ground shaking under their feet, and from the United States. This is the most spoiled group of "refugees" in the history of mankind.
By way of contrast, one may note that Israel, from 1948 to 1967, during the time it had to both fight a war of survival (see the Arab League's Azzam Pasha's threatened "war of termination"), brought to Israel hundreds of thousands of Jews from Arab lands, and integrated both them and the hundreds of thousands of survivors of the Nazis. This was all done without Israel receiving any foreign aid from the U.N. or any government. All it had was private aid, from Jews outside. Contrast this with the billions given by non-Arabs and non-Muslims, while the Muslim Arabs, those who have been the recipients since 1973 alone of some twelve trillion dollars, have given almost nothing, vastly preferring to see the Infidels spend their money on the Gazan Arabs, and the "West Bank" Arabs, and the Arabs in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, where their "refugee camps" are in fact cities, with DVD stores, and cell-phone stores, unlike any other real refugees, as opposed to those whose "refugee status" is now a matter of choice, or in some cases imposed by fellow Arabs and Muslims.
The aid given by Infidels to Muslims, such as the Gazan Arabs, will not be cause for any gratitude. It will be received as if by right, and the Infidels, if the past is any guide, will find themselves worried about cutting such aid, for fear of the reaction of both the immediate Muslim Arab recipients, and of other Muslims and Arabs. Just look at how fearful the American government has been of cutting aid to Egypt, which as a despotism has become a world center of antisemitism, and has certainly failed to live up to its solemn commitments -- about ending "hostile propaganda" and encouraging friendly relations with Israel -- that it gave in return for Israel's giving up, in three tranches, the entire Sinai, comprising 95% of the land area won by Israel in the 1967 war of self-defense. Only once -- in order to obtain better treatment for a well-known Egyptian dissident, did the American government threaten to cut a mere $30 million, and it got results. But then it was a return to the mixture as before.
How fearful Infidels have become in their inability to cut aid, to Egypt, Jordan, Pakistan, to Iraq and Afghanistan (where we have lavished tens of billions, and spent in both places more than two trillion to save Muslim countries from the political and economic and social consequences of Islam itself), and of course, to the "Palestinians." Just look. Here are the sparsely-populated sheikdoms of the (Persian, Arab -- choose one) Gulf. They receive, without lifting a finger, tens or hundreds of billions. Saudi Arabia continues to get a free ride, despite being one of the most sinister countries on earth, and with the Islamic Republic of Iran, for Infidels the most dangerous -- for the Money Weapon that pays for mosques and madrasas and armies of Western hirelings to conduct propaganda all over the Infidel world is a largely funded by Saudi Arabia.
Why not withhold Western, Infidel aid, and ask the Gazan Arabs, and the Jordanians, and the Egyptians, and the Pakistanis, tutti quanti, to go ask for aid from the fabulously rich Saudis and other Arabs of the Gulf, in the U.A.E., in Kuwait, in Qatar? If they turn their fellow members of the Umma down, that will cause division, and possibly worse. If they do not turn them down, whatever they offer will be taken, but with the feeling that "the rich Arabs" can still do more, and more and more. Whether the aid is forthcoming or not, it will help to foster divisions and resentments among the Arabs, and even by the poorer non-Arab Muslims (as in Pakistan) against the rich Arabs. These kinds of resentments and divisions are useful to Infidels.
Think of the world of Islam as a closed system, and the world of the Infidels as another closed system. It isn't accurate, of course, but what one wishes is to have as little contact between the two as possible, because recent experience shows that Westerners, Infidels, are easily fooled and manipulated, or in some cases begin to focus on this or that appealing gunga-dinnish member of the Iraqi or Afghani military, and forget the meretriciousness of the vast majority of people, and forget as well what can be found in the texts and tenets of Islam to constantly renew the hostility toward Infidels. Something -- protection, or aid, or simple kindness – may briefly make a few people, for a brief period, seemingly well-disposed. As soon as the Americans leave, the full ingratitude of the people in Iraq (not the "Iraqi people") will become apparent to Americans. They will not be pleased.
The goal should be to force the rich states of the umma to be held responsible for the economic distress of the poorer (i.e., those who forget to have oil and gas desposits) members of the umma. No more money should be transferred than is already being transferred, in gigantic unheard-of amounts, from the oil-consuming Infidels to the Muslim states that happen to sit on top of that oil, or that gas -- discovered, brought to the surface, transported by pipe to ships and then distributed around the world, all by Infidels. Remove the Infidels, and the entire oil and gas sales of the Muslim states would collapse. They could not find, could not lift, could not move, could not distribute, any of this themselves. What they can to is drive hard bargains. What they can do is spend money on palaces, and buying trillions of dollars in arms, and spending hundreds of billions on spreading Islam around the Infidel world.
Had Saudi Arabia had to give Egypt $70 billion over the past few decades, that would have been $70 billion less in discretionary funds, much of which goes to such things as campaigns of Da'wa and other Muslim propaganda in the West. Had Kuwait and Qatar and the U.A.E. had the Pakistanis and Jordanians clamoring for money, they would have had less to support, for example, Al Jazeera (in the case of Janus-faced Qatar), less to buy up journalists, businessmen, retired diplomats, intelligence agents, in the capitals of the West, and less to spend on such things as Esposito's little propaganda fiefdom that unfortunately continues to maintain a disturbing Georgetown connection.
It should be a goal of all Infidel powers to transfer as little wealth as possible to the Muslim states, and certainly no aid, no further aid, no grotesque proposal for an additional $900 million to the Gazan Arabs, should be contemplated. It makes no geopolitical, economic, or moral sense. Let's hope Congress does the right thing when this absurd proposal is presented to it. And let much be made, by opponents, of the fantastic sums that have been received, entirely unmerited sums, by the Arab oil states, and the question asked, again and again: why the hell aren't they paying for whatever aid the Gazan Arabs claim to need, or their agents at UNRWA (riddled with Hamas supporters) claim they need?
This is something everyone can easily grasp. Rich Arab states -- twelve trillion dollars since 1973 alone. Poor Arab and Muslim states -- Pakistan, Afghanistan, Jordan, Egypt, and of course "the Palestinians" --- have received or had spent on them more than two trillion dollars, in order to rescue them from the consequences of their own Lords of Misrule. This does not compute. This does not add up. This is not accord with the Generally Accepted Accounting Principles that the Infidels of this world now wish, despite their craven governments, to see imposed. New rules, for a new world, where the Infidels are now chastened by experience (including the experience, in Western Europe, of having large numbers of Muslims now settled deep within Infidel lands, and attempting bit by bit to transform them), and by the knowledge they are acquiring, day by day, of the meaning, and the menace -- permanent, alas, given the texts of Islam./span>
No comments:
Post a Comment