Posts
Here’s a thought. If you want to stop Palestinian terrorism,
stop rewarding it. The United States and Western Europe sends billions of
dollars in foreign aid to the Palestinian Authority. The PA, in turn, hands out
millions to the families of anyone who murders an Israeli Jew. The obvious conclusion
is: cut off the aid payments.
The Wall Street Journal editorializes this morning:
Since
the 1990s, as the U.S. and other countries have sent billions of dollars in aid
to the Palestinians, Palestinian leaders have paid hundreds of millions of
dollars in rewards to those who carry out bombings, stabbings and other attacks
in Israel. These payments, codified in Palestinian law, are an official
incentive program for murder that in any other context would be recognized as
state sponsorship of terror. But the U.S. and other Western states have looked
the other way while continuing to send aid, giving Palestinian leaders no
incentive to stop.
How can we do so? The Journal recommends that we and
especially president-elect Trump support the Taylor Force Act:
Senators Lindsey
Graham, Dan Coats and Roy Blunt have introduced a bill to end
U.S. economic aid unless Palestinian leaders stop rewarding terrorists. It’s
called the Taylor Force Act, after the 28-year-old U.S. Army veteran
stabbed to death in March by a Palestinian in the Israeli city of Jaffa. Other
American victims of recent Palestinian terrorism include 13-year-old Hallel
Yaffa Ariel and 18-year-old Ezra Schwartz.
“They
will never achieve peace when you pay one of your young men to kill someone
like Taylor Force. That’s inconsistent and it needs to stop,” Mr. Graham (R.,
S.C.) says. “We’re not going to invest in a group of people that have laws like
this. It’s just not a good investment.” The same Palestinian laws guarantee
civil-service employment to terrorists upon their release from prison—the
bloodier their crime, the cushier their post.“If you’re in jail for five to six
years, you come out with the civilian rank of department head or lieutenant in
their security forces, you get to choose. If you’re in jail 25 to 30 years, you
become a deputy minister or a major general,” Mr. Graham adds.
5 comments:
Disgusting. End all support for the Palestinian Authority.
Well, Schneiderman, I was reading the WSJ over a salad today, and I also noted they're pounding the table about Yucca Mountain. Yucca Mountain? Really? I mean yeah, it's a thing. Nuclear waste needs a landfill, I'll give them that. But right outta the box? Now?
And the same could be said about the Taylor Force Act. I understand that Lindsey Graham might be feeling neglected right now. But to we really need a Bill for this? Is it, like, against the law to just not give the Paleostinians any money? Can't we, you know, just say no? Do we really need the good offices of Lindsey Graham, et al? I'm just sayin'...
I'm thinking maybe top of mind might be, you know, the border. It got mentioned in the campaign, if I recall correctly.
Yucca mountain is payback to Harry Reid. It does not require too much effort to appoint some better people to the NRC. As for the Taylor Force Act, what makes anyone think that the government cannot pass the law and deal with immigration at the same time. Besides, the TFA would send a message to Islamist terrorists-- not such a bad thing in my view.
I understand all that, Stuart. But theres a lot at stake here without every attention whore in Congress getting in on the act and yelling "Squirrel!" Border, health care, SCOTUS, EPA, sanctuary cities, VA, etc etc.
Besides, I think the message we need to send the Islamists has a mailed fist on the leading edge.
IIRC, it's already against the law to send money to terrorist entities.
However, every administration to date has skated around it to "help" Palestinians, either as bribes to stay "invested in the peace process" or to avoid being labeled "haters" by the anti-Israel brigades of the UN.
At any rate, Congress is always making new laws because the President isn't enforcing the ones we already have.
For instance, there is already a law mandating a fence on the southern border; Congress could have appropriated the actual funds any time (Maybe they did?) - but they don't have any enforcement entities under their direct control.
Maybe the next time we need to elect two presidents, one for each party, and let Congress fund the one they like best.
Post a Comment