But not when choosing who to believe when it comes to evidence.
Last edited:
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
UNRWA fires 12 workers over suspected involvement in the October 7 attacks on Israel
- Thread starter Shaul
- Start date
I thought this sentence addressed that clearly.
(Notice particularly the underlined portion.)
"Being an employer means hiring people you
later find out you wish you never met."
You wouldn't be making the veiled claim
that UNRWA nurtures & validates terrorists
would you? Or that I might be grooming
drunks, murderers, & pedohphiles?
One can be biased towards authoritative sources.
Bias towards untrustworthy sources supporting
one's agenda would be prejudice.
I thought I was reinforcing it.
Veiled claim? No.
I do, however, suspect that UNRWA is laced with Hamas militants and sympathizers. GAZA is dense, and both Hamas and UNRWA have a massive footprint in the region wherein sophisticated tunnel systems are built and sustained, terrorist attacked are conducted behind human shields, and civilian hostages are sequestered. To presume that UNWRA has maintained some semblance of independence from Hamas seems more convenient than reasonable.
The supposition is far from stupid. Meanwhile, stupid, antisemitic vitriol is not hard to find.
I am relieved.
(It's getting more difficult to relieve myself lately.)
OK.
In my opinion:
- Exposing UNWRA complicity whenever and whenever it exists is important.
- Providing humanitarian aid to the Gazan population is imperative.
So when we have two conflicting parties we should trust?
abti semitic? The same trope. Always the same going backwards to substantiate a supposition that everyone hates us (israel).
But reality is easy to witness:
The actual Jews are against what israel (zionist) are doing.
The use of the term aniti-semitism is getting old.
Until it can be shown why anyone would hate a Jew, then discuss the concept of anti semitism as a sound argument to defend the atrocities that zionist are committing.
The only one that I have truly identified is the concept that the religion, suggests that 'they' are better than the rest of mankind, as 'chosen ones' by god. Then I could see what would make people hate such a tyranny of self condemned arrogance.
It mirrors the culture of egyptian pharaohs and then also kings/queens of many cultures the world over and like most they end up fading in the civilized world.
I urge healthy skepticism
& thoughtful consideration.
Then make a choice, & decide
on a confidence level.
You implicitly deny an increase in antisemitism while justifying it.
And no true Scotsman puts porridge in his porridge.
Speaking of tropes ...
Deny? Where did you get that? I said the use of the trope is getting old. Then I ask if you could show any reason why ANY could hate a JEW?
So you hate Jews for being against israel and zionism?
Do you even know what the word means?
Let me help you:
: a common or overused theme or device : cliché the usual horror movie tropes. 2. : a phrase or verse added as an embellishment or interpolation to the sung parts of the Mass in the Middle Ages. -trope
Though I suspect that you're doing your best, the question is too incoherent to be defamatory.
dybmh
ויהי מבדיל בין מים למים
It's been known for quite a while that UNRWA is supporting terrorism. It comes up regularly in the US Congress.
Here's an example from 2009. There are examples from 2010... and 2011.. and 2012... and 2013....
This one from 2009 is important because it includes the transport of weapons via UNRWA ambulance.
I am unable to disagree or agree with this post due to the ambiguity of this statement.
If you're saying that the UNRWA has 'supported terrorism' in the sense that terrorists have used resources gathered from UNRWA in their operations, I agree that this is an established fact. That members of Hamas have been students at UNRWA schools or fewer have actually been employed by the UNRWA, I do not disagree.
On the other hand, if you're suggesting that the UNRWA mandate or leadership defend or actively promote terrorism, you've lost me.
I find it unconscionable that the alleged crimes of a dozen employees who have already been fired are being used an excuse to take the last lifeline of millions of people days after Israel was ordered by the ICJ to provide basic humanitarian aid to avoid a potential genocide.
Last edited:
From today's The Times of Israel ...
What I found somewhat interesting was:
Meanwhile, yesterday's Washington Post lists the countries withholding funds as:
[ List edited to add U.S. and Canada -- thanks @libre.]
What I found somewhat interesting was:
Despite Israel’s long-running objections to UNWRA, it also continues to cooperate with the agency, reflecting a split in policy in Jerusalem.
On Saturday, Foreign Minister Israel Katz said the body “must be replaced with agencies dedicated to genuine peace and development” after the Gaza war and called for the resignation of the agency’s head Lazzarini.
At the same time, Chanel 13 published documentation showing that Israel was directly supplying flour and other goods to UNWRA in Gaza.
Meanwhile, three diplomatic sources told the Israel Hayom daily that Jerusalem had the information on the UNRWA workers for weeks but had held back on distributing publicly it because “there was an understanding in the Israeli political system that UNWRA must be preserved in Gaza, because it is the only functioning body in Gaza and without it, the chaos would be even greater.”
The paper claimed that it was not clear why UNWRA had suddenly announced the investigation into its workers and speculated that it was because it was due to be publicly exposed in an upcoming US congressional hearing.
Meanwhile, yesterday's Washington Post lists the countries withholding funds as:
- United States
- Canada
- Australia
- Germany
- United Kingdom
- Italy
- Netherlands
- Finland
- Japan
- Austria
[ List edited to add U.S. and Canada -- thanks @libre.]
Last edited:
Canada threw it's hat in the ring too: https://www.cbc.ca/lite/story/1.7097515?feature=random
With our Conservative leader spouting the type of demagoguery that I have come to expect from him.
USA isn't withholding bombs for Israel.
Just aid for Palestinians.
And now these thugs want war with Iran too.
Just aid for Palestinians.
And now these thugs want war with Iran too.
GOP hawks press Biden to target Iran directly over soldiers' deaths
I'm so proud of my government.
dybmh
ויהי מבדיל בין מים למים
I'm saying that UNRWA has been compromised. This is not a new development. If 12 were caught actively participating, it is reasonable for many nations to consider it "the last straw", "the straw that broke the camel's back." What's happening right now is not totally abandoning UNRWA, but they are being given a long overdue "wake-up-call". They need to get their house in order, if they can. This is because of the long history of abuses, the development, encouraging, inciting of terrorism that is well documented.
The mandate? No, of course not. The leadership? On the ground? They're an important part of the "hate-campaign".
To the public they are "alleged" because israel does not expose its surveilance and intelligence capabilities. It's a true axiom among security professionals: "anything you say can and will be used against you." Showing all the evidence to the public is helping the enemy to avoid detection in the future. Israel needs to balance the need for informing (placating) the public with the potential for aiding their enemy by disclosing too much.
It's frustrating for the public, but, they are not priviledged to all the facts when it comes to military intelligence.
In regard to the humanitarian aid. Just like anything in this conflict past and present, nothing is simple. Everything is complicated.
Because israel is accused of maliciously, artifically, creating punitive bottlenecks in aid distribution, what needs to happen is the military of US, UK, and other nations need to take over the role of securing the border, inspecting the aid, accompanying the aid convey on distribution into and out of Gaza. This is good for israel and good for the citizens of Gaza. Win-win. More people means faster inspections and potentially more check-points opened. Israeli COGAT, in a recent interview on Ha'aretz, is on the record in support of permitting more aid to reach the Gazans if it is available.
The losers are Hamas ( and the other VEO factions cooperating with them ) because they will no longer be the solitary provider to the Gazans. This projected image of of Hamas as social-acttivists is the "long-game" adopted by Hamas post 9/11. This has been documented here, and also in a pre Oct. 7th interview of Dr. Shiraz Maher: Director of the International Center for the Study of Radicalization and senior lecturer in the Department of War Studies at Kings College London. These VEOs, violent extremist organizations, need to the the only provider for the people which they are exploiting. They cannot operate successfully without the cooperation of the public in which they are embedded. The VEO coerces the public by proving them with basic neccessities, but restricting the supply so that the VEO is the "mother-bird" feeding the desperate little ones in the nest.
As I mentioned, dislodging the "mother-bird" from the nest is complicated, but, in this case neccessary. They are developing, encouraging, and inciting terrorism, but are masquerading as social-activists. IF US, UK, and others send the needed assitance to the border of Gaza there is a significant risk of starting WW3. US and UK ground forces will be perceived as invaders, especially if they are entering Gaza to secure the convoy of aid distribution. There MUST BE a very good reason for US, UK, and others to enter into this role. UNRWA has long been known to be operating behind the scenes to encourrage terrorism, now therre is evidence of active participation as soldiers ( murders, kidnappers, etc.. ). This is an opportunity to replace "mother-bird-Hamas".
Now. From this it makes perfect sense that israel would seize this opporunity, at this specific time, immediately following the ICJ's decision, to release the accusations of UNRWA active particiaption in terrorism against israel. There is international momentum to ensure humanitarian aid to Gaza. If UNRWA cannot be trusted to provide it AND israel cannot be trusted to provide it, now, there is good reason for US and UK to enter the region with ground forces. Now is when the iron is hot. Now is the ideal time to request international military support for ground forces to enter the region. US UK and others are already engaged in the Red Sea. Israel can now makee a strong argument for the necessity of US, UK, and others to active on the ground. There are so many reasons why this is beneficial to israel. If US and UK put "troops on the ground", the flow of money and weapons will certainly continue.
Make sense?