Key Details of the Funding

Mechanism: Beginning in 2018, with the approval of the Israeli security cabinet led by Netanyahu, Qatar began sending millions of dollars in cash to Gaza monthly. Qatari officials, often escorted by Israeli intelligence officers, carried suitcases filled with cash (initially around $15 million, later up to $30 million per month) through the Rafah crossing.
Total Amounts: The total amount transferred over the years amounted to hundreds of millions of dollars. One source indicates a flow of approximately $35 million monthly for multiple years.
Stated Purpose: Netanyahu's stated justification was to prevent a humanitarian crisis in Gaza by funding critical infrastructure like water and sewage systems, supporting the payment of civil servants, and providing aid to families in need.
Strategic Motivation: The policy was also part of a deliberate long-term strategy to bolster Hamas as a counterweight to the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank. By keeping the Palestinian leadership divided, Netanyahu aimed to thwart the establishment of a unified Palestinian state.
Criticism and Warnings: The policy faced significant criticism from some Israeli officials, including former spy chiefs and security advisors, who warned that the Qatari funds were being diverted to strengthen Hamas's military wing and build its capabilities, including the extensive tunnel network.
Aftermath: After the October 7, 2023, attacks, the funding policy came under intense scrutiny, with many Israelis and critics globally blaming it for enabling Hamas to grow into the formidable force that launched the assault. Netanyahu has denied that he intentionally strengthened Hamas, maintaining the money was for humanitarian purposes and that his government sought to degrade the group's military capabilities.

Netanyahu built up Hamas himself.

A bit more history.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-OKn_i5TRI

I read the article, and what a lengthy one it was.
I wrote this comment without reading other posts.
I didn't want to seem to be simply rehashing what others were saying.
As usual, I will read other comment afterwards.

There are always at least two sides when there is disagreement.
I think that far too often the blame can be allocated to one side only, when it should be shared.
So called innocent persons are often guilty of provoking or encouraging animosity or aggression.
Or putting themselves in danger, by making foolish decisions.
I am not saying this is such a case, but it is something which needs to be considered.
I am sure that Albo, with the rest of government, takes many things in to account when making decisions.
I am sure they try for a balanced view.
I am also sure that whatever precautions governments take, these can be circumvented by those who are determined.
So we cannot prevent such attacks entirely, whatever we do.
Education seems to be the best way forward.
Make it clear to all citizens, from an early age, that it is not ok to harm another person.
This must apply, except for the rare occasions where physical action is both lawful and necessary.
Such as when defending a life.
I don't think this being is done, but it should be.

I am sure that Albo, with the rest of government, takes many things in to account when making decisions.
Ipso Fatso,
Do you actually believe what you write ? The only thing this administration takes into account is to follow their indoctrination to the point. Having conviction is admirable however, conviction when it's misguided is extremely detrimental as we witness daily !
Also, conviction is severely compromised when threats are made.

I had a few more thoughts.
What is happening in Gaza is worse than world war two?
The killing of many to eliminate a few is bizarre.
And if someone attacks you, you should ask yourself WHY.
Ask yourself: 'what have I done to earn such treatment?'
And take an adult considered view of the circumstances.
Perhaps be religious for a change, and turn the other cheek?

I don't take sides.
I merely express any disapproval in words: peacefully.
I think that is both fair and legitimate.
Others express their disapproval by harsh action or harsh words.
That is something with which I do not agree.
Random killing will not solve anything.
It is my wish that the killing, the slaughter, the grotesqueness of it all, will stop.

If Albo does need to do something, it is to take a firm stand on Israel.
He needs to condemn Israel strongly and unequivocally.
No pussyfooting around, No beating around the bush.
Just say it out loud and say it very clearly.
A balanced view is all very well, but sometimes a more forthright statement is needed.

And just one more comment.
Yes. I am sure Albo and his government take a balanced view.
I cannot imagine that they start the day by discussing how to make mayhem.
Each day will involve assessing priorities, and working out the most favorable approach.
I am sure Mr Frydenberg would acknowledge that government does just that.