Sunday, August 27, 2006

Congressman Tom Lantos:No US aid to Lebanon unless UNIFIL patrols Syrian border

Finally some common sense.

US Congressman Tom Lantos (d-CA) has announced his intention to put a hold on US aid to Lebanon unless UNIFIL patrols Syrian border..and unless Israel receives reconstruction aid from the Bush Administration.

"It would be singularly unfair and inequitable in the wake of this disaster to have aid flow to one party, which basically allowed the provocation, but not to the other victims," he said. "Lebanon will get help from Europe, the Arab world and the United States. And unless the United States provides some aid to Israel, Israel will not receive aid."

Lantos said that he would seek to prevent any funds going to Lebanon until it allowed for UNIFIL control of the Syria/Lebanon border.

"The international community must use all our available means to stiffen Lebanon's spine and convince the government of Lebanon to have the new UNIFIL troops deployed on the Syrian border in adequate numbers," he said. "To provide aid while allowing a porous Lebanon-Syria border will only invite the repetition of a Hezbollah attack in the future. Hezbollah must not be allowed to rearm."

As I reported here, US President George W. Bush has earmarked $230 million of our money as aid to be sent to Lebanon. Since Hezbollah is a major part of the government of Lebanon and since they are already taking a major part in the `reconstruction', there's no telling how much of that money will be siphoned off the Hezbollah's coffers.

I dimly recall somebody who once said that `you're either with us or with the terrorists' and pledged not to aid countries that harbored them......and I sense 241 dead US servicemen murderd by Hezbollah in Beirut turning over in their graves.

Lantos, who is the ranking Democrat on the House International Relations Committee has the ability to put a hold on any aid going to Lebanon. Lanto s referred to this as a `friendly hold.'

"No one wants to see that hold removed more than I do," he said. "But I am convinced that the government of Lebanon must take the necessary steps to make Lebanon a fully sovereign country."

Lantos also noted to reporters that in 2001 he pressed legislation to prevent the US from giving aid to Lebanon as long as Hezbollah wasn't disarmed, in accordance with the UNSC resolution..but apparently the fable of `Arab democracy' came first with the Bush Administration.

"At that time, the administration chose to sweep the problem under the carpet, and now the disaster has happened," he said. "I am convinced that, had my legislation been implemented, the tragedy of recent weeks could have been prevented, would have been prevented, and moreover, a thousand precious Lebanese and Israeli lives would have been saved."

I'm rather familiar with Congressman Lantos, one of the handful of Democrats with a common sense attitude towards the War on Jihad.

Maybe his being a Holocaust survivor has something to do with it.

You go, Congressman..make them do the right thing.


lilfeathers2000 said...

I recieved a phone call from an aide in Congressman Sullivan's office just last week. Asking me if I and my family still felt strongly about not aiding Lebanon.

I informed them that whatever they freakin sent to Lebanon they should send three times that to Israel, since Israel is a friend to the U.S. Or keep our money at home.

I had quite a conversation touching on many issues.
I am satisfied that they won't be calling me back for an opinion.

Anonymous said...

a stopped clock is right twice a day.

Freedom Fighter said...

Hi Lifefeathers, thanks for dropping by. I have a decent relationship with several congressional staffers, and they mostly really do try to convey stuff to the congressmen..especially if they hear the same thing from more than one source.

An articulate e-mail or phone call and an occasional financial contribution also can help gets you listened to, even if it's modest or your from out of state.

Hi Louie.
I hope you're not referring to Lantos as a `stopped clock.'

Anonymous said...

i am.
while his actions in this instance are upright, and in line with supporting israel, this will put him at odds with the left.
admittedly i am not familiar with all of his positions, however, he is a dem. from kalifornia.
those are two indications he is a socialist.
headlines at mr. lantos website indicate he likes to spend taxpayers money, what is news about that, and is opposed to the nsa wiretapping procedures.
to be specific from mr. lantos website the closing para. on the nsa procedures position reads:
Last week, a United States District Court ruled that the NSA’s surveillance program to monitor phone calls and e-mails of Americans without warrants is unconstitutional.

in this manner he is using as a justification for his position, a reference that yourself have criticized the source, repeatedly on this site.
to be specific from mr. lantos website, his position on transportation:
In particular he has been instrumental in securing federal funding for the extension of BART to the San Francisco International Airport in order to reduce highway congestion, cut air pollution, and speed passengers to, from, and around the airport.
as i read that, federal funding means i am paying for BART improvements.
as i am conservative as i am, i would say if the bay area residents want improvements, let them pay for said improvements themselves.
his support for israel is correct.
it's just all that other stuff.
but hey, that's just me.