The ulterior motives behind those campaigning for Gaza

The storm surrounding the BBC's refusal to air the DEC's Gaza appeal continues, with the BBC arguing that its impartiality will be compromised if it goes ahead and airs the appeal.

The BBC's position is entirely understandable when you consider how politicised charities have become in general (and not only when it concerns Israel). Just a few examples of politicised charities:

1. Amnesty International not only campaigns for human rights but has now extended its campaign into social, economic and cultural rights. It has reversed its previous neutrality on abortion and now actively campaigns for access to it.
2. The NSPCC opposes more openness in the family courts, and wants to criminalise parents who smack their children.
3. Environmental charities are completely divided on nuclear power. Some support it because it results in less reliance on fossil fuels, but others oppose it because they think nuclear power is dangerous.
   

In other words, just because you give money to a charity doesn't mean that your money goes to a "good cause", it merely goes towards supporting what the charity considers to be a good cause.

It is only right and fair that charities should aid the Palestinian people, but I can't help but feel that those involved have ulterior motives. I can't recall such a high profile appeal during all the years that hundreds of thousands died in Darfur, the Congolese war and in Zimbabwe. Which leads me to the question... what is motivating these charities? Is it Palestinian suffering? Or is it their political world-view? I think the answer is pretty obvious.