Jihad Watch Board Vice President Hugh Fitzgerald makes a proposal to Cairo and the dhimmis in Washington:
Foreign aid should be subject to return if the recipient fails to show that it has put that foreign aid to good use. That good use should include, in the first place, encouraging gratitude, and friendship, toward the giver of such aid. In Egypt's case, there has been none.Egypt has failed to fulfill a single one of its solemn commitments, not one of which amounted to anything like the requirement on Israel to relinquish the entire Sinai, together with three new airfields, oil fields, and roads (not to mention St. Catherine's Monastery, which like all Christian sites can only be guaranteed by Israeli, and not Egyptian or other Muslim control). The carefully-controlled Egyptian press and television, instead of encouraging an end to hostilities with Israel, has instead whipped them up on every possible occasion -- a television series based on The Protocols of the Elders of Zion does not exactly fulfill the requirement of "ceasing to engage in hostile propaganda" that was imposed on Egypt by the Camp David Accords. The money that started to flow as a way to insure compliance with those Accords was given by the Americans and pocketed by the Egyptians, wrongly.
And since, further, the same Egyptian media that has whipped up more anti-Israel hatred has also managed to do the same with the American government, why should not the Americans ask the Egyptians to return the $60 billion?
That $60 billion could be applied to solar and wind energy, which together have received additional funding, according to the State of the Union address, of less than $100 million, or 1/60th that amount. $60 billion can do us a lot of good. Sending it to Egypt has done us no good whatsoever.American taxpayers want that money back.
What Congressman will demand that this be looked into? Whether or not anything comes of such a demand is not important. The mere making of it, publicly, should get Egypt's attention. The next stop is to start talking, publicly, about the concept of the "Jizyah" and about how very like the Jizyah is our foreign aid to Muslim countries, all Muslim countries. They take that aid for granted and are astounded when we make noises about cutting -- much less ending -- it. But we should end it. We need that money. We do not need to give it to those who hate us (see Qur'an, see Hadith, see the Sira, to find out for yourself what Muslims are taught about all Infidels, and what fate, in the Muslim view, lies in store for those Infidels).
We are those Infidels. That fate is what they have in store for us. Why are we supplying them with money?
Look at the Copts, Egyptian Muslims’ nearest-to-hand Infidels. Do they enjoy equality of rights with Muslims? Of course not. Most Copts in Egypt, who must endure Islamic religious instruction -- mandatory -- in the schools, are keenly aware of their precarious situation. Many echo, for obvious reasons, the prevailing anti-Israel sentiments. This is a way for them to fit in and to be as "Egyptian" as the Muslims, who for the most part are descendants of those very Copts they persecute. These are people whose ancestors were forced, in difficult conditions, to convert in order to avoid the financial, legal, and social disabilities that make life so difficult for all non-Muslims under Islam. One wonders if any of them give a thought to those ancestors, or begin to question their own commitment to Islam.
Court Copts, such as the sad-eyed Boutros Boutros Ghali, are forced to lend their linguistic and diplomatic talents to a regime that secretly, they must despise. Boutros Boutros Ghali cannot forget that his own great-grandfather was assassinated in the teens of the past century, and that if he dared not to promote Egyptian and Muslim Arab interests, not only he, but many innocent Copts -- essentially held hostage by Egyptian Muslims -- would suffer.
It is only in the West that Copts can speak the truth about their situation -- and then, only those who do not have close family members still in Egypt. But some do, and they should be heeded. If the American government could threaten to withhold $30 million to obtain a new trial, and of course a new verdict (guaranteed through the Egyptian judicial system's total subservience to its political masters) for Saad Eddin Ibrahim, then it can damn well withhold every last penny until Egypt does the following:
1) Complies with its solemn undertakings to end all hostile propaganda toward Israel and to encourage all manner of friendly relations
2) Ends all anti-American campaigns in the hysterical press -- which is carefully controlled (just look at what happens if someone mentions a word about Mubarak's son's prospects)
3) Ends all persecution of non-Muslims in Egypt, which will be determined by a committee that, from abroad, will monitor how such people -- and especially the Copts -- are treated.
The ridiculous support for the Mubarak regime began as a confused blend of "let's pay off Sadat for his sheer wonderfulness" and "let's keep paying off Egypt because the Sinai wasn't enough, and we need them to be on our side.” Why, exactly? And how, exactly, is Egypt 'on our side'? Egypt is malevolently inclined toward America. The malevolence increases with every cent of American aid. It should be cut, and the aid sent, instead, to aid the black Christians of Ethiopia, and of southern Nigeria, and of the southern Sudan.
Black Caucus -- where are you?
I wouldn't quibble with the notion that it's high time to re-evaluate our various aid packages around the world, and especially that aid which flows to Islamic nations --
America must begin to demand full value for any and all aid, or it should be curtailed and eliminated -- I also agree that first and foremost, we must not be repaid with contempt and anti-American propaganda by ungrateful recipients of US tax dollars.
We need genuine conservative leadership -- but American leadership has been woeful in this regard over the last 2 decades. We have been cursed for 2 decades with pseudo-liberal and pseudo-conservative politicians --
It may take another Muslim horror such as 9/11, or perhaps something even more horrific, to finally shake America from her comfortable complacency... We didn't have/don't have moral or intellectual clarity from Bush1, Clinton, or Bush2... Despite all the rhetoric, American policy has been adrift since the collapse of the Soviets. It should come as no surprise, however.
America has become habituated to the notion that stability trumps all -- this was a reasonable idea if the collapse of the Soviet empire represented the end of existential threats to America's existence. Few envisioned the rise of a new mortal enemy in Islam -- Few today yet recognize the shape and nature of the Islamic threat.
Nothing focuses the mind like an enemy -- The fact that our leadership still refuses or is too blinded to recognize the truth about Islam augers ill -- we're still asleep -- but, sadly, it's only a matter of time...
It will take more and more horrific Muslim atrocities before our revulsion with Muslims and Islam really takes root -- In part, it's a testimony to our hopefulness and confidence in ourselves that has prevented us from seeing Muslims as the menace they truly are -- but the giant is being roused -- teased to consciousness by the endless pricks and jabs that characterize Islam.
Hugh .. Great proposal .. now if only our elected leaders would have the guts to enact it. I find it about impossible to believe they are ALL ignorant of the facts, so it does come down to courage and integrity, I think.
Can we apply what we already have in place?
Jizyah is the same as "Protection money" after all.
From RICO website:
"In 1970, Congress passed the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1961-1968. At the time, Congress' goal was to eliminate the ill-affects of organized crime on the nation's economy. To put it bluntly, RICO was intended to destroy the Mafia."
Does the RICO Act extend internationally? (I know it's very effective in dealing with illicit drug $$) This would be essential.
"Today, RICO is almost never applied to the Mafia. [my note: That's because it was so effective in the demise of both the Mafia and the KKK)] Instead, it is applied to individuals, businesses, political protest groups, and terrorist organizations. In short, a RICO claim can arise in almost any context."
Why are we not willing to call Egypt a Terrorist Organization? After all, the name does have the advantage of being true. Of course, the US would need to acknowledge (at least to itself) the fundamental error of having paid into a Protection Racket. And even though that could seem embarrassing - nevertheless, ultimately it would be character building.
"Any person who operates or manages an enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity may be in violation of the RICO Act. Any group may be a RICO enterprise regardless of whether its members wear pinstripes, poster boards, fatigues or hoods."
.. or bukahs or dishdashans and pretends to be a legitimate governing body but in reality is a Theothuggery.
Let the West set milestones for economic aid, connected to advances in human rights. Let the milestones NOT be set by anyone with connections to the oil industry... but that would require real response to electorate. Are the people of the West ready to reclaim their democratic heritage and demand governments responsive to their interests?
The chief distinction should be: no aid of any kind to countries whose people, in large numbers, support the idea of Jihad. That is a good way of distinguishing Muslim from non-Muslim recipients. Since so many Muslim countries are fabulously rich, and since they are supposedly loyal to the umma al-islamiyya, it should be up to them, if they so wish, to support less-richly-endowed Arabs and Muslims. If they do, the problem then becomes theirs, and not a matter for Infidels to worry about. If they don't, the problem becomes a matter for the would-be recipients to force the money out of them, and that can only be a cause of intra-Islamic hostility which, from the Infidel point of view, is always to be encouraged.
Does the RICO Act extend internationally?
Screw that. Does it apply domestically to anything besides the Mafia is the question.
If the answer is yes, and it should be, then our law enforcement leadership is confronted with two follow-on questions:
1) Is the fake religion called Islam (or, Surrender in the Arabic) a military-politco ideology to which RICO may be legally applied?
2) Are the various acts involved in practicing Islam felonies?
How does it feel - as a Western, law-abiding tax-paying citisen - to know that your tax dollars are being sent to such people? In a similar arrangement, I am disgusted that Western/EU funds are to be 'given' to the terrorist Palis. And if I refuse to pay my taxes as a protest against funding terrorist organisations, what happens to me? Suppose Hamas continues to shred alive innocent Israeli women and children after receiving such funds. Does Israel declare war on the EU as associates of terrorists? *Sigh*
Mubarak is an expert in pulling the strings of American presidents. Bush wants democracy, no problem, give him the Muslim Brothers!
Now Bush wants peace in the Middle East, OK.. give him Hamas. Today Bush wants tolerance, fine..let's burn some coptic churches!!. He's simply throwing the monkeys in the lap of America, and each American president has to appease the Monkey Catcher?!!!.
"Does the RICO Act extend internationally?
Screw that. Does it apply domestically to anything besides the Mafia is the question."
Alarmed Pig Farmer, I claim no expertise w/ RICO but, yes, it does .. Big time Drug dealers have been disabled through the RICO act .. so has the KKK .. It's been applied to all sorts of rackets .. and since Islam appears to be one big protection racket .. it could be an interesting avenue to explore ...
here's a link: http://www.ricoact.com/
PS .. Pig Farmer ..
here's another .. and very pertinent .. link:
http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/394
Concerning the class action suit issued against CAIR ( for complicity in 9-11) scroll down to see:
Aug. 15, 2005 update: The plaintiffs in Estate of John P. O'Neill, Sr., et al. v. Al Baraka, et al. have provided more specifics today in their "Amended RICO Statement Applicable to Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and CAIR-Canada," a 22-page document. It contains new information (for example, concerning Mohammad Nimer) and new claims. Some excerpts (the first and last of these are the most dramatic and novel):
I don't know the current status of this case .. but, it's evident that RICO and Islam have indeed intersected ...
The recently submitted FY 2007 US budget estimates $9.3 trillion national debt by the end of said fiscal year. And that will continue. I can think of better ways to spend the money. Foreign aid is unconstitutional, anyway.
It's like pissing into outer space.
Except you don't even get the incidental beauty of the zero-g stream of gold.
More like cutting of pieces of your children's flesh to mail to wolves.
Maybe they're our friends.
Like the folks of the UAE.
I like falconing, too.
Rico might not apply to CIAR as it is than peaceful religios org protect by the Constitution of the United State. Than Jewish family illegal sue tham Islamist Religish Book Company for 150 million dollar use than dumd law pass by Israel control Congress that allow just hated and bias thing. First they never prove that the book company was ever involved with terrorist in the first place. It in appeal court right now and for the last few year as the court is afraid of the rightwing Christian Group
to declare it unconstitution.
America is hatered around the world for our unjust action around the world and foreign aid isnot going to change people opion of america round the world.
Without the perspicacity of the Muslim mind -- where would we all be! Thanks for clearing everything up, DefenderofIslam!
BTW -- you're "one of the endless pricks ... that characterize Islam" which I refer to above...