Canada Cuts Ties, Stops Aid To Hamas-Led Palestinian Authority

We have not declared "a freeze on annual aid worth $US21 million (Canadian$29 million)".

What Canada has done is suspend direct aid worth about $7.3-million annually until Hamas agrees to play nice with their neighbours.

The remaining 20-or so million that we give annually is going through the U.N in order to not be in the hands of a terrorist organization.

And IMO, this has gotten a ton of press both on TV and in print (i.e. every major Canadian news outlet).

Nobody seems to want the Israelis to play nice. Except the U.N. with their pointless resolutions.(sarcasm) Do you only become a terrorist organization if you're not funded by the americans. They are the elected government and we should be trying to work with them. The people have spoken...If the Americans are trying to bring so called democracy to the Iraqis then they (and we) should embrace the Palestinians choice.

The Globe and Mail titled their article "Canada follows Israel's lead". Since when have we started following Israel's lead? Since Martin? Since Harper? Or since we've been following other countries foreign policies rather than leading with our own?

If we are now going to be following Israel when do we bulldoze Anchorage and Fairbanks and take back Alaska?

---
"And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music." Friedrich Nietzsche

The Canadian government (doesn't matter which party) funded a corrupt and inept Palestinian Authority for years, until the peolle did the ONLY thing they could do short of lynching, and that was to vote them out. This should have met with the hearty approval of the US and Canada, staunch supporters of all things democratic that they are.. Imagine.....real democracy in action! But like Salvador Ellende in Chile, the people went a voted for the "wrong" party...........<br />
<br />
I would urge everyone to send a message to Peter MacKay<br />
<a href="http://www.petermackay.ca/newsroom.htm">http://www.petermackay.ca/newsroom.htm</a><br />
It's the democratic thing to do.<p>---<br>RickW

The Asia Times has a good article:<br />
<br />
HOW TO LOSE THE WAR ON TERROR<br />
PART 1: Talking with the 'terrorists'<br />
By Mark Perry and Alastair Crooke <br />
<br />
Seventy-two hours before the Iraqi people voted on a new parliament, on December 12, 2005, we were told by a senior US administration official that "detailed data received by the White House" pointed to a "decisive win" for Ayad Allawi's Iraqi National List. "Allawi's victory turns the tables on the insurgents," this official said gleefully. "Sectarianism will be the big loser." <br />
<br />
Allawi's prospective triumph was trumpeted repeatedly over the next two days by US news networks quoting administration officials. Weeks later, after the results of the election became known, it was clear that the White House had overestimated Allawi's popularity: his party received just over 5% of the vote. <br />
<br />
On the eve of the Palestinian parliamentary elections in late January, US-funded Palestinian polls suggested that while the mainstream Fatah movement had lost much of its popular support, Hamas was expected to win no more than "a third of the legislature's 132 seats". On January 27, when the results of the polling were complete, it was clear not only that Fatah had been defeated, but that Hamas had swept into office in a landslide. A prominent front-page article in the Washington Post stated that US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was "stunned" by the results, as the Hamas victory contradicted everything the administration of President George W Bush believed about Palestinian society. <br />
<br />
Just two weeks after the Hamas victory, on February 6, Lebanese Maronite leader Michel Aoun and Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah appeared together in Beirut to sign a memorandum of understanding between the Free Patriotic Movement and Hezbollah. The Aoun-Nasrallah agreement shook the State Department, which had worked for years to isolate Hezbollah. <br />
<br />
The US had underscored its anti-Hezbollah strategy as recently as November 23, when Aoun met with State Department officials in Washington. The State Department blithely discounted the importance of the talks that Aoun's movement had been having with Hezbollah and reassured the press that Aoun would remain a staunch supporter of the United States' Lebanon policy. Certainly, it was believed, the leader of Lebanon's Maronite Christians would never tie the future of his own movement to that of a group allied with Damascus and Tehran. <br />
<br />
In the aftermath of the Aoun-Nasrallah agreement, however, all of that changed: not only was Aoun's support for the US-led program against Syria in question, his agreement with Hezbollah meant that he was justifying Hezbollah's alleged kidnapping of Americans in Lebanon during the 1980s. Overnight, it seemed, Aoun had gone from being a friend of the US to a man allied with terrorists. <br />
<br />
Allawi's failure, Hamas' success, the Aoun-Nasrallah agreement - and the inability of the West to predict, shape or even understand these seminal events - have been variously interpreted: as a signal that the US intelligence community needs increased resources, that the West has not been doing enough to sell its "program" in the region, that the US and its allies have not been harsh enough in their condemnation of "radicalism", that the West has underestimated the amount of support its secular allies need, and (in the case of the Palestinian elections) that Hamas didn't really win at all - "Fatah lost." <br />
<br />
We have reached a much more fundamental and alarming conclusion: Western governments are frighteningly out of touch with the principal political currents in the Middle East. The US and its allies overestimated Ayad Allawi's strength, were "stunned" by Hamas' win, and were surprised by the Aoun-Nasrallah agreement because they don't have a clue about what's really going on in the region. <br />
<br />
But why? <br />
<br />
With the exception of Israel (where a US and European appreciation of realities is critical to the formulation of policy), there are, inter alia, five political movements and governments in the Middle East of undeniable importance: Iran, Syria, Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Muslim Brotherhood. The governments of the West don't talk to any of them. <br />
<br />
They do talk to the leaders of Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and the Persian Gulf region; but the net result of most of these contacts is that Western governments are dependent for information about the region on a set of clients who, as often as not, are mere reflections of what Westerners want the Middle East to be, rather than what it actually is: Ayad Allawi, who was wrong when he reassured US officials that Iraq's voters would reject sectarianism, Fatah, which was wrong when it told us that their acceptance of US funding for their campaign would enhance their legitimacy among Palestinian voters, and Lebanese leader Saad Hariri, who was wrong when he told the US government that its program for isolating Hezbollah would work. <br />
<br />
This clientism is not new; rather, it is a continuation of the misreading that led US and British officials to believe their soldiers would ride to Baghdad along flower-paved highways. <br />
<br />
Once again, we're being "Chalabied". <br />
<br />
First encounter<br />
In August 2004 - in an attempt to provide an opening to political Islam - a delegation including the writers of this article traveled to Beirut for discussions with the leaders of Hamas and Hezbollah. We were accompanied by Bobby Muller, a well-known American veterans advocate and a political activist recognized for his leadership of the anti-landmines campaign, and Dr Beverley Milton-Edwards, a professor at Queens College, Belfast, and an expert on Hamas. <br />
<br />
Our purpose was to begin a process that, we hoped, would eventually persuade Western governments to recognize and open up to political movements whose political legitimacy was derived from a broad base of popular support in their own communities. We knew our meetings would be controversial: both Hamas and Hezbollah were on the US and European Union lists of proscribed terrorist organizations, both had either been accused of participating in or had actually participated in the targeting of civilians, and both had vowed continued enmity to Israel - which enjoyed the strong support of the United States and its European allies. <br />
<a href="http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HC31Ak02.html">http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HC31Ak02.html</a><p>---<br>These days, if you are not confused, you are not thinking clearly. Mrs. Irene Peters

Hmmmm.....using White House "logic" then, Bush didn't win the presidency so much as the Democrats lost it.....? So does that mean Bush isn't REALLY president? Like Hamas isn't REALLY a legitimately elected government........?

Seems that the White House consistently fails to understand just how fed up the average person (anywhere in the world) can get with corruption and incompetence.......

---
RickW

Well the American government still can't get their head around Chavez being voted in. I expect something like "Okay, new rule, A democratically elected government is valid only if APPROVED by the administrative branch of the U.S. government.

I whole heartedly agree. The PA was as corrupt as a Mexican border guard. Yasser became a very rich man, by skimming money destined for aid right off the top.

I think Canada is saying that Hamas is the duly elected government, but we don't have to give you money to be used to kill people. No different than if Al-Queda had won elections there. Hamas is after all, a designeated terrorist group in Canada, so if they can't raise their blood money here, why send it to them there?

Screw sending a letter to Mr. MacKay. I'll shake his hand.

---
"I think it's important to always carry enough technology to restart civilization, should it be necessary." Mark Tilden

Well, the US IS the cradle of democracy (just ask them......)so if anyone can recognize a democracy it can.........

---
RickW

Palestinian Health Care Conditions Under Occupation<br />
<br />
By Sonia NettninMembers of the Ibdaa Health Committee are on tour in the US. They are educating Americans on the devastating health conditions of Palestinians and health care workers in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza.<br />
<br />
The facts on the ground are shocking, yet the international community ignores Israel’s widespread violence and warfare against the Palestinians. The violence against health care workers, the health care system and the Palestinian infrastructure are equally appalling. <br />
<br />
According to the Palestinian Ministry of Health, 36 health care workers have been killed, 447 health providers have been wounded and 129 patients have died at Israeli checkpoints. How? There have been 375 attacks on health care centers, 383 attacks on ambulances, with 38 ambulances destroyed altogether.<br />
<br />
Palestinian women in labor have not been left out of the equation of military occupation. Since September 28, 2000, at least 67 women have given birth at Israeli checkpoints. As a result, 39 newborns died or they were delivered stillborn.<br />
<br />
According to a map from the Applied Research Institute Jerusalem there are over 100 established checkpoints throughout the West Bank, an area totaling 5,970 sq. km, and this figure does not include flying checkpoints and barriers, such as roadblocks, razed roads, dirt mounds, etc. When Israel completes construction of the wall, approximately 33 per cent of villages within the West Bank will be denied “…free and open access to their health care system,” per the IHC. Moreover, 81 per cent “…of people living in isolated zones and enclaves cannot access primary health clinics, medical centers, and hospitals as needed.”<br />
<br />
There are instances where Palestinians need access to urgent medical care, but Israeli forces will not allow Palestinian ambulances to cross the checkpoint. When this happens Palestinians are forced to transfer to an Israeli ambulance, which costs anywhere from 350 New Israeli Shekels (NIS) – 650 NIS ($80 USD – 150 USD). Keep in mind that an estimated 50 per cent of Palestinians in the West Bank live below the poverty line ($2 USD per person/day). The average unemployment rate for Palestinians in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza combined is over 60 per cent. In essence, the Israeli occupation has created business opportunities from Palestinians in need of urgent medical care that already impoverishes Palestinian families who struggle to meet their daily needs. <br />
<a href="http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0604/S00133.htm">http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0604/S00133.htm</a><p>---<br>These days, if you are not confused, you are not thinking clearly. Mrs. Irene Peters