It was recently brought to my attention that there is another active killer of children. Left I on the News fills us in:
"One by one, the killer claims victims. The latest, a 12-month-old infant named Muhammad Rami Ibrahim Nofal. Just last week, another 1-year-old named Odai Samir Abu Azzoum and 10-year-old Ribhi Jindiyeh. The majority of victims of this serial killer have been children. Remarkably, though, virtually none of these murders have even been reported in the Western media. Much less has there been
an outcry to do something about the killer, even though the identity and location of the killer is well-known.
Of course this killer is Israel, but, sad to say, there plenty of accomplices. Active accomplices like the U.S., E.U., and Egypt, who actively help to promote and enforce the blockade which claimed these victims - the 337 Palestinians who have died because they were refused or delayed entry into Israel where they could have obtained medicine or medical care unavailable in Gaza - and many more - the unknown number who have died in Gaza, the victim of "natural" causes which were anything but natural.
Why do I call this murder? I don't know what the law states, but if someone is poisoned and you hold the antidote in your hand and refuse to give it to them, surely you're as much of a murderer as the person who administered the poison. It's not a perfect analogy, since the "poisoner" in at least some of these examples is actually genetics, although in others, it's even worse, since it may well be that the one with the antidote is also the "poisoner," that is, that Palestinians in Gaza are developing deadly medical conditions which never would have occurred in the first place had they been living under less squalid conditions. Continues.... "
Al Jazeera English has a specific story on how the Israeli blockade of Gaza caused the death of a two year old by denying him medical care in a timely manner. It should be noted that Israeli doctors wanted to treat him.
Like I had wondered before, why are there no demands by these so-called "pro-life" people to demand radical action to end this horrible oppression? Is it because only some babies are worthy of concern? Or that only in gestation babies are worth saving because it gives these zealots a moralistic finger to wag at "loose" women? Hmmmm?
No comments:
Post a Comment