Mighty Intellect
Posts: 1,898 
Location: in town
Location: in town
May 2nd, 2008, 01:01 AM
US rebuke over Palestinian funds
Ms Rice was careful not to pinpoint individual Arab states for criticism
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has implied Arab states could do more to help the Palestinians.
Without singling out specific Arab states for criticism, Ms Rice said they should focus on how much they can do - not how little - for the Palestinians.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7379066.stm
----------------------------------------------------------
She is absolutely right! Those oil-rich Gulf States should help their brothers and sisters.
I know they already have millions of refugees to take care of, but that is peanuts!
Why do the Palestinians need help anyway? Don't they have enough land to feed themselves? And Israel already provides them with free electricity!! What's the problem, I wonder?
US rebuke over Palestinian funds
Ms Rice was careful not to pinpoint individual Arab states for criticismUS Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has implied Arab states could do more to help the Palestinians.
Without singling out specific Arab states for criticism, Ms Rice said they should focus on how much they can do - not how little - for the Palestinians.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7379066.stm
----------------------------------------------------------
She is absolutely right! Those oil-rich Gulf States should help their brothers and sisters.
I know they already have millions of refugees to take care of, but that is peanuts!
Why do the Palestinians need help anyway? Don't they have enough land to feed themselves? And Israel already provides them with free electricity!! What's the problem, I wonder?
Jerk Extraordinaire
Posts: 2,909
Location: Atlantic Canada
Location: Atlantic Canada
May 2nd, 2008, 09:06 AM
Man Rice is U'ckin F'ugly.... like she fell from the ugly tree and smacked every branch on the way down.
Then again, maybe she just needs to learn what a smile is.
Of course her comments about getting the Arab States to help out Pal is kinda hypocritical considdering those running the place they considder are terrorists, and if they help out terrorists, then they're contributing to terrorism by their standards and then they can be invaded by the US...... of course they're going to help, just watch them jump to the plate (Yeah Right)
All that is needed is one of these states to send in money or supplies and then Israel or the US finds some way of tracking those supplies and resources going into terrorist hands by whatever method they can find (intentional or indirectly) and then that Arab country in question would be the next Iran on the chopping block for the US.
I'm not suprised any of them are not helping anymore then they already are.
Man Rice is U'ckin F'ugly.... like she fell from the ugly tree and smacked every branch on the way down.
Then again, maybe she just needs to learn what a smile is.
Of course her comments about getting the Arab States to help out Pal is kinda hypocritical considdering those running the place they considder are terrorists, and if they help out terrorists, then they're contributing to terrorism by their standards and then they can be invaded by the US...... of course they're going to help, just watch them jump to the plate (Yeah Right)
All that is needed is one of these states to send in money or supplies and then Israel or the US finds some way of tracking those supplies and resources going into terrorist hands by whatever method they can find (intentional or indirectly) and then that Arab country in question would be the next Iran on the chopping block for the US.
I'm not suprised any of them are not helping anymore then they already are.
Super Genius
Posts: 1,467
May 2nd, 2008, 10:25 AM
I fully support Canada's position regarding funding belligerent organizations like the democratically elected Hamas. Canada and Canadians should not help people kill each other or take sides in disputes (unless that activity serves Canada's interests.) While Hamas does have many legitmate causes like building schools, hospitals, mosques, housing... they also use charitable donations to buy arms.
While many other countries allow individuals to make donations to Hamas, it is illegal for Canadians to make donations to Hamas or belligerent organizations on the side of Palestinians.
Unfortunately Canada does not have a balanced approach to this conflict because it is legal for Canadians to make donations to help the belligerents on the other side of this conflict. It is legal in Canada to make donations to organizations which help Israel's government ethnically cleanse Palestine of Palestinians, buy arms for killing civilians and impose a crippling economic blockade.
Essentially our government has taken sides in this dispute and as a result actively supports Israel's activities which have been condemned by the UN General Assembly repeatedly as violations of the UN Charter, international laws, treaties and conventions.
All official aid to Gaza, must go through Israel. Lately Israel has imposed an econmic blockade on Gaza. Most food aid and humanitarian aid is not getting into Gaza. As a result many Gazans are suffering chronic shortages of food and medicine.
If you want to know more about the current humanitarian crisis in Gaza, please read this recent document by a coalition of Non-Government Organizations in Gaza.
http://www.wiamep.org/resources/Gaza...osionMar08.pdf
The end of the document has a contact which can help Canadians wanting to make legal donations organizations which assist Gazans. By the way, these organizations do not take sides in his dispute and are only interested in providing humanitarian assistance.
Another note, Canada has also cut most of its aid to Gaza and is guilty of contributing to this man-made humanitarian disaster. We should be ashamed.
I fully support Canada's position regarding funding belligerent organizations like the democratically elected Hamas. Canada and Canadians should not help people kill each other or take sides in disputes (unless that activity serves Canada's interests.) While Hamas does have many legitmate causes like building schools, hospitals, mosques, housing... they also use charitable donations to buy arms.
While many other countries allow individuals to make donations to Hamas, it is illegal for Canadians to make donations to Hamas or belligerent organizations on the side of Palestinians.
Unfortunately Canada does not have a balanced approach to this conflict because it is legal for Canadians to make donations to help the belligerents on the other side of this conflict. It is legal in Canada to make donations to organizations which help Israel's government ethnically cleanse Palestine of Palestinians, buy arms for killing civilians and impose a crippling economic blockade.
Essentially our government has taken sides in this dispute and as a result actively supports Israel's activities which have been condemned by the UN General Assembly repeatedly as violations of the UN Charter, international laws, treaties and conventions.
All official aid to Gaza, must go through Israel. Lately Israel has imposed an econmic blockade on Gaza. Most food aid and humanitarian aid is not getting into Gaza. As a result many Gazans are suffering chronic shortages of food and medicine.
If you want to know more about the current humanitarian crisis in Gaza, please read this recent document by a coalition of Non-Government Organizations in Gaza.
http://www.wiamep.org/resources/Gaza...osionMar08.pdf
The end of the document has a contact which can help Canadians wanting to make legal donations organizations which assist Gazans. By the way, these organizations do not take sides in his dispute and are only interested in providing humanitarian assistance.
Another note, Canada has also cut most of its aid to Gaza and is guilty of contributing to this man-made humanitarian disaster. We should be ashamed.
Mighty Intellect
Posts: 1,898
Location: in town
Location: in town
May 2nd, 2008, 10:53 AM
Quoting Praxius
Hi, Praxi, you have such clear perceptions and sharp logic.... I never thought along those lines. What a perfect trap set for the Arabs to walk into!!
Man Rice is U'ckin F'ugly.... like she fell from the ugly tree and smacked every branch on the way down.
Then again, maybe she just needs to learn what a smile is.
Of course her comments about getting the Arab States to help out Pal is kinda hypocritical considdering those running the place they consider are terrorists, and if they help out terrorists, then they're contributing to terrorism by their standards and then they can be invaded by the US...... of course they're going to help, just watch them jump to the plate (Yeah Right)
All that is needed is one of these states to send in money or supplies and then Israel or the US finds some way of tracking those supplies and resources going into terrorist hands by whatever method they can find (intentional or indirectly) and then that Arab country in question would be the next Iran on the chopping block for the US.
I'm not suprised any of them are not helping anymore then they already are.
Then again, maybe she just needs to learn what a smile is.
Of course her comments about getting the Arab States to help out Pal is kinda hypocritical considdering those running the place they consider are terrorists, and if they help out terrorists, then they're contributing to terrorism by their standards and then they can be invaded by the US...... of course they're going to help, just watch them jump to the plate (Yeah Right)
All that is needed is one of these states to send in money or supplies and then Israel or the US finds some way of tracking those supplies and resources going into terrorist hands by whatever method they can find (intentional or indirectly) and then that Arab country in question would be the next Iran on the chopping block for the US.
I'm not suprised any of them are not helping anymore then they already are.
Super Genius
Posts: 1,467
May 9th, 2008, 10:15 PM
Don't bite the hand that feeds you:
Don't bite the hand that feeds you:
Quote:
Money like this buys influence...
$50 billion later, taking stock of US aid to Egypt
Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak meets with President Bush Sunday in Crawford, Texas.
By Charles Levinson | Contributor to The Christian Science Monitor
CAIRO –
Amid fresh fighting by US forces in Iraq, Sunday's meeting between Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and President Bush at his Texas ranch serves as a reminder of America's deep involvement in this other key Arab nation.
Aid is central to Washington's relationship with Cairo. The US has provided Egypt with $1.3 billion a year in military aid since 1979, and an average of $815 million a year in economic assistance. All told, Egypt has received over $50 billion in US largesse since 1975.
The money is seen as bolstering Egypt's stability, support for US policies in the region, US access to the Suez Canal, and peace with Israel. But some critics question the aid's effectiveness in spurring economic and democratic development in the Arab world's most populous country - a higher US priority after Sept. 11, 2001.
"Aid offers an easy way out for Egypt to avoid reform," says Edward Walker, the US ambassador to Egypt from 1994 to 1998. "They use the money to support antiquated programs and to resist reforms."
Egypt's economy is deeply troubled. Unemployment has climbed to 25 percent, foreign investment last year dropped to a 20-year low, and until recently the currency was losing value on a weekly basis. Rather than helping, American aid is "depressing the need for reform," according to former Ambassador Walker.
Meanwhile, the Mubarak regime is inching towards political reform and democratic pluralism at a pace so slow that many question the sincerity of the government's pro-democracy rhetoric.
In the past, issues like democracy and economic reform were of secondary concern to policymakers looking to shore up a friendly government. Support for Egypt jumped after it made peace with Israel in 1979.
However, US policy has changed since 19 hijackers demonstrated that bolstering stable, pro-American, but undemocratic regimes in the Middle East affected America's security. The ringleader and four of the 9/11 hijackers were Egyptian.
In 2002, the US National Security Strategy articulated a new aid doctrine, saying that money should go to "countries whose governments rule justly, invest in their people, and encourage economic freedom."
Colin Powell's Middle East Partnership Initiative (MEPI) is refocusing funding priorities in the Middle East - including those at USAID's 300 person Cairo office - on economic reform, democracy, education, and women's issues.
"We're shifting our emphases to reflect changes in US foreign policy," said Ken Ellis, the director of USAID Egypt.
USAID is a government-to-government economic assistance program. It operates on the premise that economic development will spur democratic development. In the words of Mr. Ellis, "There is a correlation between strong, vibrant, open economies, and a strong, vibrant, open political system."
But many say that USAID needs to alter its approach if it is going to push successfully for substantive reform in Egypt. Ismail Sabry Abdallah is the former Egyptian minister of development and planning, and negotiated the first USAID contract on behalf of Egypt in 1974.
Now an independent economist, Abdallah says USAID needs to decrease support for the Egyptian government, and increase its support for civil society in order to realize the sort of economic and political reforms that the United States and the Egyptian people desire.
"[USAID] is distributed by the Egyptian government in an anarchic way, through personal contacts and political influence," Abdallah says.
Each year USAID gives $200 million to the Egyptian government in cash handouts to do with as it pleases. The money is theoretically conditional upon economic reforms in problem areas such as deregulation, privatization, and free trade.
Top recipients of US aid each year
Iraq - In 2004, it will become the largest recipient of US aid, receiving $18.4 billion.
Israel - The largest recipient of US largesse in 2003, getting $2.1 billion in military aid annually; $600 million in economic aid.
Egypt - Out of a US foreign aid budget of about $14 billion in 2003, Egypt was the second largest recipient with $1.3 billion in military aid; $615 million for social programs.
Colombia - Got $540 million to battle the drug trade, and local terrorist groups.
Jordan - Got $250 million in economic support; $198 in military financing.
Peru, Ukraine, Russia - Received approximately $200 million each in economic and military aid annually.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0412/p07s01-wome.html
Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak meets with President Bush Sunday in Crawford, Texas.
By Charles Levinson | Contributor to The Christian Science Monitor
CAIRO –
Amid fresh fighting by US forces in Iraq, Sunday's meeting between Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and President Bush at his Texas ranch serves as a reminder of America's deep involvement in this other key Arab nation.
Aid is central to Washington's relationship with Cairo. The US has provided Egypt with $1.3 billion a year in military aid since 1979, and an average of $815 million a year in economic assistance. All told, Egypt has received over $50 billion in US largesse since 1975.
The money is seen as bolstering Egypt's stability, support for US policies in the region, US access to the Suez Canal, and peace with Israel. But some critics question the aid's effectiveness in spurring economic and democratic development in the Arab world's most populous country - a higher US priority after Sept. 11, 2001.
"Aid offers an easy way out for Egypt to avoid reform," says Edward Walker, the US ambassador to Egypt from 1994 to 1998. "They use the money to support antiquated programs and to resist reforms."
Egypt's economy is deeply troubled. Unemployment has climbed to 25 percent, foreign investment last year dropped to a 20-year low, and until recently the currency was losing value on a weekly basis. Rather than helping, American aid is "depressing the need for reform," according to former Ambassador Walker.
Meanwhile, the Mubarak regime is inching towards political reform and democratic pluralism at a pace so slow that many question the sincerity of the government's pro-democracy rhetoric.
In the past, issues like democracy and economic reform were of secondary concern to policymakers looking to shore up a friendly government. Support for Egypt jumped after it made peace with Israel in 1979.
However, US policy has changed since 19 hijackers demonstrated that bolstering stable, pro-American, but undemocratic regimes in the Middle East affected America's security. The ringleader and four of the 9/11 hijackers were Egyptian.
In 2002, the US National Security Strategy articulated a new aid doctrine, saying that money should go to "countries whose governments rule justly, invest in their people, and encourage economic freedom."
Colin Powell's Middle East Partnership Initiative (MEPI) is refocusing funding priorities in the Middle East - including those at USAID's 300 person Cairo office - on economic reform, democracy, education, and women's issues.
"We're shifting our emphases to reflect changes in US foreign policy," said Ken Ellis, the director of USAID Egypt.
USAID is a government-to-government economic assistance program. It operates on the premise that economic development will spur democratic development. In the words of Mr. Ellis, "There is a correlation between strong, vibrant, open economies, and a strong, vibrant, open political system."
But many say that USAID needs to alter its approach if it is going to push successfully for substantive reform in Egypt. Ismail Sabry Abdallah is the former Egyptian minister of development and planning, and negotiated the first USAID contract on behalf of Egypt in 1974.
Now an independent economist, Abdallah says USAID needs to decrease support for the Egyptian government, and increase its support for civil society in order to realize the sort of economic and political reforms that the United States and the Egyptian people desire.
"[USAID] is distributed by the Egyptian government in an anarchic way, through personal contacts and political influence," Abdallah says.
Each year USAID gives $200 million to the Egyptian government in cash handouts to do with as it pleases. The money is theoretically conditional upon economic reforms in problem areas such as deregulation, privatization, and free trade.
Top recipients of US aid each year
Iraq - In 2004, it will become the largest recipient of US aid, receiving $18.4 billion.
Israel - The largest recipient of US largesse in 2003, getting $2.1 billion in military aid annually; $600 million in economic aid.
Egypt - Out of a US foreign aid budget of about $14 billion in 2003, Egypt was the second largest recipient with $1.3 billion in military aid; $615 million for social programs.
Colombia - Got $540 million to battle the drug trade, and local terrorist groups.
Jordan - Got $250 million in economic support; $198 in military financing.
Peru, Ukraine, Russia - Received approximately $200 million each in economic and military aid annually.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0412/p07s01-wome.html
Bright Spark
Posts: 316
Location: California
Location: California
May 12th, 2008, 03:13 AM
The Arab states all despise the US and why would one of our Cabinet members ever get the idea that telling those Arab states to help the Palestineans out would ever begin to listen? None of them have any intention of getting involved for fear that the elements in the Palestinean Refugee Camps would seek residency in their nations. They don't want trouble and the Palestineans are regarded as a threat to their individual security. But more importatly why would they ever rush to follow any US originated order?
The Arab states all despise the US and why would one of our Cabinet members ever get the idea that telling those Arab states to help the Palestineans out would ever begin to listen? None of them have any intention of getting involved for fear that the elements in the Palestinean Refugee Camps would seek residency in their nations. They don't want trouble and the Palestineans are regarded as a threat to their individual security. But more importatly why would they ever rush to follow any US originated order?
Steven Hawking's Tutor
Posts: 4,612
May 12th, 2008, 06:40 AM
For whatever reasons and it's far easier to imagine unscrupulous nefarious manipulation as the most genuine reason, the United States of Unrelenting Greed provides foreign aid to states throughout the region........Why?
Perhaps it's to keep the pot simmering......
Condi Rice should spend her time fixing the avalanche of crap that's troubling the United States and maybe that'd be far more positive on everyone else's condition and circumstance in the world than flapping her gums about what everyone else should be doing.
America should simply cut-off "aid" to every region in the area, no more money, no more weapons, stay the hell out of other people's business and accept that nations have a right to succeed or fail based on their own behaviour decisions and actions.
For whatever reasons and it's far easier to imagine unscrupulous nefarious manipulation as the most genuine reason, the United States of Unrelenting Greed provides foreign aid to states throughout the region........Why?
Perhaps it's to keep the pot simmering......
Condi Rice should spend her time fixing the avalanche of crap that's troubling the United States and maybe that'd be far more positive on everyone else's condition and circumstance in the world than flapping her gums about what everyone else should be doing.
America should simply cut-off "aid" to every region in the area, no more money, no more weapons, stay the hell out of other people's business and accept that nations have a right to succeed or fail based on their own behaviour decisions and actions.
jimmoyer
Posts: 4,910
Location: Winchester Virginia
Location: Winchester Virginia
May 12th, 2008, 07:32 AM
The Arab states all despise the US and why would one of our Cabinet members ever get the idea that telling those Arab states to help the Palestineans out would ever begin to listen? None of them have any intention of getting involved for fear that the elements in the Palestinean Refugee Camps would seek residency in their nations. They don't want trouble and the Palestineans are regarded as a threat to their individual security. But more importatly why would they ever rush to follow any US originated order?
------------------------------------------normbc9------------------------------------------------------------
Very true.
We all know the Arab wealth has not been used to help their Palestinian brothers.
We also know the Arabs know the Palestinian society is so sick it would turn on any hand that feeds them.
We learn this in Al-anon. Often the person who is sicker is not the alchoholic but the person in the vicinity of that alcoholic.
The Arab states all despise the US and why would one of our Cabinet members ever get the idea that telling those Arab states to help the Palestineans out would ever begin to listen? None of them have any intention of getting involved for fear that the elements in the Palestinean Refugee Camps would seek residency in their nations. They don't want trouble and the Palestineans are regarded as a threat to their individual security. But more importatly why would they ever rush to follow any US originated order?
------------------------------------------normbc9------------------------------------------------------------
Very true.
We all know the Arab wealth has not been used to help their Palestinian brothers.
We also know the Arabs know the Palestinian society is so sick it would turn on any hand that feeds them.
We learn this in Al-anon. Often the person who is sicker is not the alchoholic but the person in the vicinity of that alcoholic.
jimmoyer
Posts: 4,910
Location: Winchester Virginia
Location: Winchester Virginia
May 12th, 2008, 07:56 AM
LOL.
Maybe it's not that funny, but I guess the answer to this pop quiz is : The United States of America.
However, there are many enablers in the whole Arab region. Many in the Arab world want to keep the pot boiling.
Everyone is afraid to speak the truth and too wary to do what is right, because there are many committed to destroy any chance for peace.
LOL.
Maybe it's not that funny, but I guess the answer to this pop quiz is : The United States of America.
However, there are many enablers in the whole Arab region. Many in the Arab world want to keep the pot boiling.
Everyone is afraid to speak the truth and too wary to do what is right, because there are many committed to destroy any chance for peace.
Super Genius
Posts: 1,467
May 12th, 2008, 10:08 AM
If a group of heavily armed immigrants came to your town and set up shop in the middle of your town's center would you be happy? If the armed immigrants began terrorizing the locals by committing acts of rape, torture and murder in order to purify your town of unbelievers, would you object? When the refugees displaced by the armed immigrants show up on your doorstep would you give them shelter? If the immigrants declared independance and began expanding their borders by conquering parts of your neighborhood, would you fight back?
Explain again why Israel's neighbors are responsible for fixing problems created by Zionists immigrants on a mission from God to purify the holylands of non-Jews.
If a group of heavily armed immigrants came to your town and set up shop in the middle of your town's center would you be happy? If the armed immigrants began terrorizing the locals by committing acts of rape, torture and murder in order to purify your town of unbelievers, would you object? When the refugees displaced by the armed immigrants show up on your doorstep would you give them shelter? If the immigrants declared independance and began expanding their borders by conquering parts of your neighborhood, would you fight back?
Explain again why Israel's neighbors are responsible for fixing problems created by Zionists immigrants on a mission from God to purify the holylands of non-Jews.
Steven Hawking's Tutor
Posts: 4,612
May 12th, 2008, 10:15 AM
EAO
I hear what you're saying but how is this condition served...addressed by funding everyone involved? What possibility of peaceful negotiations can proceed when the next shipment of missiles and high-tech munitions is on its way? It would be fair to suggest that other interests...Russia China.... might perhaps be playing a more robust role in continuing the conflicts of the region if the U.S. of A dramatically reduced its "foreign-aid"...but why not let nature take its course? If the U.S. stopped funnelling money into the region (to all nations) what would be the most likely outcome?
EAO
I hear what you're saying but how is this condition served...addressed by funding everyone involved? What possibility of peaceful negotiations can proceed when the next shipment of missiles and high-tech munitions is on its way? It would be fair to suggest that other interests...Russia China.... might perhaps be playing a more robust role in continuing the conflicts of the region if the U.S. of A dramatically reduced its "foreign-aid"...but why not let nature take its course? If the U.S. stopped funnelling money into the region (to all nations) what would be the most likely outcome?
