Jihad Watch Advisory Board Vice President Hugh Fitzgerald considers (with jaundiced eye) the money flow from the West to the Islamic world:
“Since the outbreak of the Intifada in 2000, UNRWA has been appealing to the world community to increase its contributions in the face of new challenges and increasing poverty in the Palestinian territories…” — IMRA, May 8, 2005
Why does UNRWA exist, except as an extension of all the other institutions of “Palestinian” life — and practically indistinguishable from the rest of them. All are directed at prolonging whatever misery and whatever resentments can be kept alive. Now more than 55 years after the Arab attempt to strangle in its cradle the nascent infidel state of Israel, UNRWA’s handouts, paid for almost entirely by the Infidel West, should end. They have done nothing except encourage millions of Arabs to avoid work, and in avoiding work to spend their time in other ways: digging tunnels in Gaza, putting bombs at Passover services and on busses and in pizzerias, producing children’s shows where little kids are praised for singing “I want to be a suicide bomber” and suchlike. Many Arabs who never had anything to do with Mandatory Palestine, never lived there, and had no connection to it, have nonetheless over the years managed, especially in Lebanon and Jordan, to get on the same Western-paid dole that is UNRWA. Just compare Arab statistics, and keep in mind the maximum number of so-called “refugees” from 1948. (There were no refugees in 1967 to speak of, for the Arabs knew perfectly well that there was nothing to fear, and everything to gain, from staying put — they could see with their own eyes the benign treatment of the Arabs who had not left Israel, a treatment far more generous that what was received by those who left at the hands of fellow Arabs).
What is particularly maddening is that the Arabs themselves have been the recipients of the greatest unearned wealth, and the greatest transfer of wealth, in human history. Since 1973 Arab and Muslim oil states have received between 5 and 6 trillion dollars. Yet it is the United States, Japan, Australia, and Europe (and even Israel) that are the main contributors to UNRWA. Why?
And, while we are on the subject, why are the Infidel lands offering, in addition to the fantastic oligopolitic rents charged by the OPEC oil nations (and some of which could have been, and could still be, recaptured through entirely possible means — i.e. taxes on gasoline at the pump and similar measures), a kind of vast Jizya? Why has the United States, having spent more than $200 billion freeing the Iraqis from Saddam Hussein, cancelled Iraq’s $4.5 billion debt, offered to spend another $20 billion on reconstruction projects — when Iraq has, or will have future, oil revenues, against which it can certainly borrow. And in addition, the United States has managed to get the Infidel countries to agree to cancel nearly $100 billion in debt to Iraq — but there has not been a peep, outside of the usual soothing words, that any Muslim countries (Saudi Arabia, U.A.E., Kuwait) are going to cancel Iraq’s debt to them — no, no, it is all a question of extracting money from the Infidels alone. For the game is seen clearly as one between the Infidels, viewed economically as one power, and on the other side, the Muslims, also viewed as one.
And if that were not enough, the United States has poured more than $60 billion into Egypt in the last two decades. Egypt has failed utterly to be a reliable ally, although now again it is making transparent attempts, especially for the Israeli audience, and of course Washington, to pretend to be slightly friendly. This farce will continue for as long as Mubarak and Company deem necessary, and not a moment longer.
Add it all up. 5-6 trillion in the OPEC revenues. $60 billion to Egypt. Whatever sums Infidel France transfers to the countries of the Maghreb. A few hundred million a year now to Jordan. $200 billion to free Iraq, and tens of billions, apparently, to “rebuild” Iraq while Americans need that money for social security, health care, and so on. And of course, let us not forget that sinister organization, a kind of Hamas lite, which emphasizes the care and feeding of those who promote, through propaganda or through terrorism, the same agenda, and which has also taken billions in Western money to feed the huge, deliberately huge, families of “Palestinians.” And now, one reads, the American government is actually thinking of contributing, along with its “allies” (i.e. European Infidels, not the Arabs), another 6-8 billion dollars, to the “Palestinian Authority.”
The transfer of wealth to Muslims, from Infidels, for any reason, is madness. It is not only counter-intuitive, but flatly wrong. Think of the world as the Muslims do: dar al-Islam, and dar al-Harb. They are careful to extract every last concession or aid they can, either for themselves, or where that is not possible, for other Muslim states or groups. And the Western world keeps doing it. If some of the Arabs are poor, that should be of no concern to Infidels — not only because there is no causal nexus between poverty and terrorism, but because there is, if anything, a reverse nexus. Those who are truly poor, and have to work all day, have less, not more time, to sit around and make terrorism their hobby. If the entire Muslim world were as poor as Mauritania, or as wretchedly chaotic as Somalia — that, from the Infidel point of view, would be splendid. Keep them poor? No. Let them prosper through honest work and offering something to the world. Not from the dole.
All one asks, as an Infidel, is that one’s rulers do nothing to transfer further wealth. That transfer is what has permitted the doctrine of Jihad to come alive again. It remains dormant whenever the wherewithal to conduct it is lacking — whether of men, materiel, or money — but comes alive, as it has over the past 30 years, when that wherewithal is available. In our age it has been supplied in the main by OPEC oil money from the Infidel world. The same attitude should be taken in regard to Muslims within the Infidel lands. Make it hard to get on the dole. Offer work, work that must be taken. Make sure that no one can have more than one wife, and that there is no fraud so that the numbers of scandals — the Venissieux imam with the plurality of wives (Fenelon updated for modern France) and the 16 children, all paid for by the French Infidel taxpayers — are diminished. No Infidel state should be paying, as Belgium will now be paying, for hundreds of imams. Everything should be done to discourage the ability to hire imams. One can monitor, or ban, the “bad” imams without supplying, and paying for, supposedly “good” imams (exactly what texts will those “good” imams rely on?).
No money, no more building of mosques, or maintaining the upkeep on those already built, all over the West. No money, no more madrasas, all over the Muslim world, where people who have memorized 6,200 verses of the Qur’an, and are fit for nothing but to be Jihadis, are churned out — especially, now, in Pakistan and Indonesia. No money, and no money for p.r. men and hangers-on, and propagandists, and paid-for chairs in universities to be filled by Arab hirelings of richer Arab paymasters in the Gulf. No money, no satellite Al-Jazeera and Al-Manar. No money, and no buying of weaponry or plans or Western know-how in the well-honed style of A. Q. Khan. No money, and the threat has been “ridimensionato” — that is, cut down to a size we, the Infidels, can deal with.
Before 1973 the same things were taught, the same hostility to Infidels, the same hatreds, the same desire to spread Islam which “must dominate and not be dominated.” But they didn’t have the money. That changed everything.
We must work to take away, everywhere we can, that money.
In addition to ending all foreign aid from Infidels to Muslims, in order to limit the further transfer of wealth from Infidels to Muslims, one must put at the center of foreign policy what should be at the center of domestic policy: cutting down the use of fossil fuels. Fight the Jihad, and save the environment. The time-frame for each, that is, the point beyond which it will be too late to prevent either the islamization of Europe, or the irreversible large-scale damage to the environment, is nearly identical.
What a remarkable state of affairs. A race: who wakes up, how fast, when. And who doesn’t. That’s what it comes down to.