Targeting Israel....

 Most people, most people who carefully select those NGOs, the humanitarian groups who make it their purpose to offer humane aid, food, medical attention and assistance to the world's oppressed and the needy, the socially wounded and the physically maimed - to whom they will donate their charitable funds, do so carefully.  Funding exceptional groups delivering exceptional aid, like Doctors Without Borders, for example.

And most such humanitarian groups make it a point to be non-political, so that they cannot be accused of favouring one 'side' against another in a conflict zone, for example.  Their neutrality makes them uniquely favoured while delivering humanitarian aid to those so desperately requiring it.  And many of these NGOs deliberately go out of their way, even though they are mostly Western-sourced, to make it obvious that they have no contact whatever with the military.

Acting in complete isolation from complex political situations, from areas of combat within or beteween nations and resulting military confrontation, their sole purpose is to help deliver hope and succour to those in dire need.  The civilians for whom conflict has always been the bellwether for suffering beyond what they normally experience, even in places of the world where suffering is a normal part of their daily lives of want and privation.

And then there are those groups who think of themselves as having a dual purpose; on the one hand to deliver much-needed humanitarian aid in the most practical of manners; food, medical assistance, potable water, shelter and if possible protection from immediate harm.  On the other hand, they seem to feel it is incumbent upon themselves to balance that aid function with that of denouncing what they feel to be destructive, oppressive, tyrannical state policies.

Only those agencies whose reputations on a global scale have been built over time on delivering good deeds and in the process earning the support of a global community can feel themselves entitled to pronounce upon the human-rights abuses of governments, it appears.  It represents a type of hubris to feel that they can deliver a double-pronged approach; reproaching the state while tending to its citizens' needs. 

Denouncing a state apparatus is done judiciously.  To do so in Somalia, for example, is to ensure that they will be deprived of the opportunity to help the desperate.  To do so in Israel, or to accuse Israel, or to convince other states to treat Israel as a pariah as another example, they can be confident that no backlash will accrue to them.

Most humanitarian groups are by their very nature liberal-left-leaning.  Compassion and empathy is their byword, responsibility and deliverance their method.  That would surely seem to be a sufficient combination in dedication of their resources.  Yet it appears that Oxfam, massively supported by public charity, with its well founded reputation as a humanitarian charity, also indulges in condemning what it feels are state failures.

Oxfam describes itself as "an international confederation of 17 organizations networked together in 92 countries, as part of a global movement for change, to build a future free from the injustice of poverty."  Could a mission statement ever be more laudably admirable?  Who might anticipate a political agenda within that statement of purpose? 

And yet, Oxfam is a reflection of the activities within another global organization, one whose purpose is to foster equality between nations, to work diligently with its member countries toward achieving world peace and serenity, to ensure that poverty is decreased until it is eliminated.  And the United Nations has failed in its peacekeeping role, and as a defender of human rights.

Both entities have fallen victim to the age-old scourge of finding irremediable fault with that Semitic race that has always plagued the world by its vexatious presence, so much so that there was a well organized and almost successful plan to eliminate them entirely from the world, in a massive genocidal protocol.

In Canada alone, Oxfam is funded to the tune of about $26-million.  It is considered to be a charitable superpower.  Recently Oxfam, Crisis Action along with other NGOs with similar agendas will have sent delegates to Brussels to lobby the European Parliament to single out Israel through the labelling of goods originating from Israeli settlements in the West Bank.

It is passing strange that these charitable groups focus, and solely, on the State of Israel, a nation that has been forced into conflict on countless occasions by its neighbours whose intention has always been to destroy the state.  Those countries that have attempted time and again to expunge Israel from the map of the Middle East represent oppressive tyrannies, some of which export terror abroad.

Israel, a purpose-built nation in support of world Jewry returning to the geographic site of their ancient heritage, has absorbed a huge proportion of Arab Muslims and Christians into its population as citizens, though most Arab/Muslim countries have refused to give citizenship to Palestinian Arabs.  Israel is in practical possession of historical territories that were its own, latterly won in battles it did not initiate.

Yet it is identified by NGOs and UN committees alike, as an aggressive state, an occupier, an apartheid state.  Its constant state of being threatened with violence, the violence consistently levied against its population, ensuring it is kept on a war footing through the continual rocket attacks emanating from an adjacent geography it had vacated, guarantees it must 'occupy', or be 'eliminated'.

Yet there are no concessions to history, to current affairs or to the plight of an embattled population.  Injustices rage worldwide with states persecuting their own, in Africa in Asia and in the Middle East.  But the perennial object of derision, contempt and slanderous persecution continues to be Israel.  One can only wonder at the dysfunctional mass psychosis that infects the world of humanitarian charity.