Morch

@thaibeachlovers Topic is about a film showing Hamas 7/10 attack, atrocities etc. I'm-Not-A-Terrorist-Supporter poster's first comment - a deflection post about Israel, the ICJ and minimizing Hamas's attack and role in this. Well done.

I am not ignoring the details, I have addressed them. This is neither a first, nor do involved parties seem to believe that's the sum of it. And rightly so. As said on another post, aid for Gaza is one thing, having UNRWA as the mediating body is not a must. It can either be overhauled, or replaced by a new agency. Personally, I think it cannot be fixed by now. You making general claims about Israel 'lying' is irrelevant. The evidence presented in this case was obviously accepted. Why would there be only a few bad apples, in your mind? Why not many? Do you think simply being an employee of UNRWA testifies as to a person's morals? positions? It doesn't have anything to do with that. For most, it's just a job. The USA not agreeing with the ICJ is relevant when you question why the USA does not de-fund Israel. It's USA money, not the ICJ's nor other countries' - and there are no sanctions involved. Yeah, UNRWA and other agencies have a dodgy track record in the Gaza Strip, already mentioned that. A good opportunity to change and improve things. If you ever worked with such bodies you'd know. Some of are, some of us are not. Not everyone shares your point of view anyway. Speak for yourself.

As usual, no sources, no links - just the usual bile. What 'pro-genocide' people would these be? What 'genocide' are you on about?

The Palestinians were not the 'owners of the land'. You're making things up. Many of them weren't even 'indigenous', but work immigrants. You can also make up stuff about 'Israel would have been livid', without support - it's how you roll. If the Palestinians would have agreed, there might have been no war back then, a war which cost the Palestinians (Nakba) and the Israelis (a little over 1% of the latter died in the war - worse than what the Palestinians are experiencing now). There were circumstances leading to the 1967 war which you gloss over. Not quite the story you tell. Post-war, the Palestinians/Arab side further embraced a rejectionist position, leading to an impasse. The illegal settlement effort is another matter, and Israel is clearly in the wrong on that. Your comment on Palestinian willingness to compromise is the usual misleading fare. They have agreed to some things, rejected many others. It's a wee bit more complex than you 'suggest'. As for Israel's positions, that 'will not be satisfied' bit - again, misleading, inaccurate, out of context - the usual.

I am sure that you can provide a working link for that, but you chose not to. Could also try to use an acceptable source, but went for AJ. As for making up stuff about 'my logic' - yeah....never said that or something similar. Carry on with your trolling.

It's not the first time such issues come up with UNRWA. Previous 'investigations' did not seem to bring fundamental changes. The cases in question are just the more blatant, obvious ones - and given the organization's track record, there's no reason to think that's where it ends. Donor countries, the UNSG do not seem convinced. Apparently you know better. As for the evidence coming from Israel - obviously it was found to be solid, or the allegations would have been rejected and nothing done. The USA said (linked in the relevant topic) it does not agree/find merit/whatever with the ICJ's provisional ruling. Simply blaming Israel is not the same as said agency employees being shown to actually be complicit. Just another bogus false equivalence attempt on your part. And it is not 'we', stop co-opting everyone and speak for yourself.

The UN. As in the World. The vote was quite decisive. It did not leave the Palestinian homeless, it gave them the option to have their own state for the first time ever. They declined, going for the whole thing instead, failed and lost. Cry me a river.

Sure, Israel should have just rolled over and let Hamas go on with the rampage. You'd like that, no doubt.

@ozimoron You claim that on a regular basis.....

What 'militant faction'? Who are it's heads? Does it exist apart from Israel? Alongside the government? Parallel to the IDF? Who leads the 'Israelis', in your nonsense version of reality?

What 'militant faction'? You can't even explain what you're on about, what this includes, what it signifies other than the bogus label. What, in your confused mind, sets this imaginary 'militant faction' from 'Israelis'? How strong is each? What are the relationship between them? Can't wait for your next bunch of nonsense on that. There wasn't anything said about all Palestinians supporting Hamas. There was much discussion about how much support Hamas generates among Palestinians. Not the same thing. As for Israel, Zionism not being what you insist it is, most of the Israelis would probably describe themselves as Zionists, but that would not necessarily have much to do with your idiosyncratic notion about what this implies. There is no equivalence as you suggest - Hamas ideology is a rather narrow thing, Zionism is a wide ranging framework. You most certainly have objections to the existence of Israelis, given that a whole lot of them are Zionist, regardless of their political leanings. You have no idea what you're posting about.

Yes...And?

That would be more of your standard issue nonsense. There is nothing even in this dictionary definition that contradicts what I posted. The fact is that there are political parties and many Israelis identifying as Zionist, while also holding Left-Center political views, and are pro-peace. The anti-government protests were mostly attended and carried out by such people. That you choose to announce otherwise in the face of reality means less than nothing. You obviously have no idea what you're talking about. You display an astounding level of wilful ignorance on these matters. In your imaginary nonsense world - who were those protestors then? Who signed the Oslo Accords with the Palestinians? There are obviously no anti-Zionists serving in the IDF. Why would they? That would run against their creed. So your comment about the the IDF in Gaza is yet more meaningless drivel. Can you actually point to some non-Palestinian members of Hamas? Or is that just something you imagine, made up etc? What 'mercenaries' would these be? Citizens of other countries assisting Hamas are not necessarily members of Hamas, certainly not of the military wing. So you don't know of any, but go on and on about them. Same way like you don't actually know much about Israel, Israelis, politics therein, but comment about them with 'confidence'.

@Brickleberry Poll results are dealing with positions at a specific point in time. They are not about trends, they do not capture change unless they are routinely conducted. Basically, you pick a picture that fits what you want to say, and claim it's always like that. It most obviously not. You simply ignore the fact that public opinion shifts, everywhere, and seem to insist that Gazan view are fixed. That's neither reasonable, and is not true. It depends on when the poll was taken, what were the circumstances, how questions were presented and other things. Taking polls as a clear representation of reality and political positions, or ignoring their transient nature - these indicate misconceptions about what polls are and how they work.

Yeah, but then you make comments like bellow.... Which are neither factual, nor balanced, and employ a vile over the top rhetoric. So back to the usual......one-sided commentary, with the most of the serious criticism, never mind the language saved for Israel. Guess it was expected. People don't change much.

I don't think even Israel seriously claimed that they are all complicit.

The ones fired are just the most obvious recent cases. If you believe that's the sum of it - up to you. Obviously, donor countries and even the UN take another view - whether based on common sense, information or awareness to UNRWA's track record. I have no idea why you'd think it 'extremely difficult' to identify staff actually involved with terrorism. Quite the opposite. Belonging to a large organization comes with a more significant 'footprint' as far as intelligence and investigations go. Then there's a question of what comes under 'actually involved'. Does lending an UNRWA car for Hamas use count? Does diverting some budgets? Does letting them take supplies from stocks? Or is it just the actual participation in violence? UNRWA had such investigations before. Not a whole lot changes. There aren't a whole lot of security agencies able to apply scrutiny in the Gaza Strip. Having some organization, some body to manage aid for the Gaza Strip is ok. There is not requirement that it would continue to be UNRWA, or UNRWA without a serious overhaul.

@ozimoron That would be you claiming things you do not actually know. Apparently, the donor states are not satisfied, and neither is the UNSG. They do not share your confidence. Of course, you know better. You are also ignoring UNRWA's poor track record on these things.

@ozimoron That would be you, either through haste or intentionally posting an untruth. Israel did not 'give them money'. It was Qatar.

@ozimoron These sort of allegations are nothing new. UNRWA routinely rejects them, until things cannot be covered. Then there's an 'investigation', some underlings get the boot, rinse repeat. There's no systematic overhaul of the organization, and not enough oversight. The articles linked explain the reasoning for de-funding. There are already 9 donor countries who feel the same way about it. Maybe take your issues with them. Or do you think they have less insight into this than you and your posts?

@ozimoron What pro-Israeli bias is 'included' in UNRWA? Do you even know who works there?

I hate when that happens.

@thaibeachlovers I wonder if there's a lower bar to your comments. As for the ignorance on display - are there not wars, killings, murders and so on appearing in the Old Testament? Is this any different from how secular laws work? You get a basic tenet, and then there are exceptions, motivations, circumstances and so on. And, of course, other than in your vile post Israel does not 'blow kids because they live in Gaza'.

Interesting. There's another poster who claims to receive spiritual advice for a Rabbit.

@Brickleberry 70% out of 2,000,000. How strong were protests referenced? You're grasping at straws. More Gazans out celebrating the 7/10 attack on that morning. More than that invading Israel after Hamas breached through.