There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

Unrwa chief says Israel has not yet presented evidence on its accusations

The UN agency Unrwa’s commissioner general, Philippe Lazzarini, has told the Financial Times that Israel has yet to present any evidence to it over its accusations that around a dozen Unrwa staff had been involved in the 7 October attacks against Israel.

The allegations, made last month, resulted in a number of countries halting funding to the organisation Lazzarini said that he is still taking the allegations seriously and that an investigation is ongoing.

The Financial Times also stated that it had seen the intelligence assessment which provided no evidence for the claims, which include an accusation that a staff member kidnapped a woman.

Gazumi ,

Evidence? Do they need to if anyone criticizes their government? I thought that any questioning either meant that you support Hama’s, and / or you are antisemitic? (Sarcasm).

HuddaBudda ,
@HuddaBudda@kbin.social avatar

Why doesn't Israel take it up with the humans right court or the UN?

File a case, say the UN is supplying Hamas terror cells, provide evidence, Bam! Slam dunk case, and you earn the benefit of the doubt on the world stage.

Unless.... there is no evidence?

mihies ,

Wait, didn't UNRWA already got rid of those 12 or something? Without evidence no less?

Milk_Sheikh ,

12 accused individuals out of over 13,000 UNRWA staff, or expressed differently 0.00092%. Accused with no public evidence, and the ‘concerned’ diplomats gutted funding for the most critical aid agency in Gaza.

Do I find it plausible that some UNRWA staff or affiliates/contractors have links or communications with Hamas members? Absolutely

Should those individuals be highlighted and prosecuted accordingly for aiding terrorism and/or committing acts as Israel has alleged? Absolutely

Do I believe an Israeli spokesperson talking about anything dealing with the UN, Palestinians, any of the militias/terrorist groups? Absolutely not, and neither should you.

This is a war, and this is all part of the information warfare’s propaganda efforts to discredit international institutions in order to blunt the ICJ and general assembly by guilt via association - even without proof.

IndustryStandard ,

Israel must still be preparing the evidence for the Hamas base underneath the hospital. They’ll get to fabricating gathering the UN evidence after that.

Transporter_Room_3 ,
@Transporter_Room_3@startrek.website avatar

Good fabrications take time.

Linkerbaan OP , (edited )
@Linkerbaan@lemmy.world avatar

They’ve supposedly shown the evidence to NYT and Sky News already which published headline articles with it.

The Financial Times was now also allowed to see it but they weren’t quite sure where the actual evidence was which is very telling.

Initially it seemed perfectly possible for 4/13.000 people to be involved in the attack. But I thought israel already showed UNRWA the evidence. The current scenario of israeli “evidence” not begin delivered is getting eerily familiar.

A reminder that a month before the accusations an israeli politician lobbyist was openly calling for the destruction of UNRWA on video

breakfastmtn , (edited )
@breakfastmtn@lemmy.ca avatar

That woman in the video, Noga Arbell, is actually a low level public policy researcher at a conservative NGO think tank speaking at a public hearing. She doesn’t even appear on KPF’s staff page, despite it listing other researchers. Not only are they non-governmental, they don’t receive or accept government funds. She is not an Israeli politician. She was never an Israeli politician. Years ago, she was a low-level staffer at the Foreign Ministry. The only time she’s appeared in the press in that role she was complaining about budget cuts six years ago. She’s described in the article as the “deputy chair of the Foreign Ministry’s workers committee”, a position so important I can find no other mention of it.

But why let the truth get in the way of a good story, right?

The NYT did not claim to see the evidence. They reported on the leaked dossier that the US government received from Israel:

The accusations are contained in a dossier provided to the United States government that details Israel’s claims against a dozen employees of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency who, it says, played a role in the Hamas attacks against Israel on Oct. 7 or in their aftermath.

The U.N. said on Friday that it had fired several employees after being briefed on the allegations. But little was known about the accusations until the dossier was reviewed on Sunday by The New York Times.

Here you are again stacking lies upon lies to construct a narrative.

Archive

Linkerbaan OP , (edited )
@Linkerbaan@lemmy.world avatar

First of all the Sky news claim is still true you conveniently ignored it.

https://news.sky.com/story/israeli-intelligence-report-claims-four-unrwa-staff-in-gaza-involved-in-hamas-kidnappings-13059967

For Noga I am unsure of her personal past, the articlese indicate she was a former foreign government employee. That speech however was made in front of the Knessset along with several others that tried to convincec israel to attack UNRWA

The headline of the article you linked indicates that NYT was presented evidence from their headline.

Israeli officials have presented evidence they say ties workers at a Palestinian aid agency in Gaza to violence during the Hamas-led attack on Israel.

You are correct it’s mentioned further down in the paywalled article in a part that is not readable without subscription. So NYT is writing spectacular headlines about presented “evidence” which has not been presented. I thought that the leaked dossier was about the evidence? Maybe I’m not reading that correctly then

What NYT did is bad framing of a narrative with plausible deniability. You can score brownie points there if you want so you get 1/3.

breakfastmtn , (edited )
@breakfastmtn@lemmy.ca avatar

Your Sky News claim is false too!

From the article:

Sky News has seen Israeli intelligence documents that Israel claims are evidence that staff working for a UN agency were connected with Hamas in Gaza.

The report, which has been shared with foreign governments, alleges that six employees of the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) infiltrated Israel. Four of them were allegedly involved in kidnapping Israelis, while another worker is said to have provided “logistics support”.

Further claims include accusations that “out of approx. 12,000 UNRWA employees in GS [Gaza Strip], about 10% are Hamas/PIJ [Palestinian Islamic Jihad] operatives and about 50% are first-degree relatives with a Hamas operative”.

And last but not least:

The Israeli intelligence documents make several claims that Sky News has not seen proof of and many of the claims, even if true, do not directly implicate UNRWA.

The article is very clear about what they’ve seen, what is accused, and what Israel claims.

The NYT headline is “Details Emerge on U.N. Workers Accused of Aiding Hamas Raid” and the section I posted is the second and third paragraph. Your argument that you’re right so long as you ignore both the headline and the content of the article is some weak shit.

For Noga I am unsure of her personal past, the articlese indicate she was a former foreign government employee.

Then why did you post calling her an “Israeli politician”? If you don’t know who she is, why would you post it at all? How is that not an indication that you’re not doing enough to make sure it’s the truth? Obfuscating someone’s identity to make it seem like they’re someone significant is insanely dishonest. That’s why the fever swamp you pulled it from called her a “former Israeli official.” The reality makes it impossible to imply that she speaks for the Israeli government. And that’s what you’ve done several times.

If Wilson C Beaver of the Heritage Foundation - who is featured on their staff page - speaks before Congress, is he speaking for the government? For all Americans? That would be a very stupid claim. Lots of people say stupid shit before Congress. That’s what this is. She is someone speaking to them and you’re telling people she’s speaking for them. It’s a lie.

Linkerbaan OP , (edited )
@Linkerbaan@lemmy.world avatar

For Noga you can be right that she is a lobbyst not a politician I will change that. As she was speaking in the Knesset I assumed she was a politician but she is a lobbyist.

Sky News has seen Israeli intelligence documents that Israel claims are evidence

That’s like saying “Sky News has seen evidence but they didn’t confirm the evidence was true!” you’re going real hard on semantics here.

Let’s say you even get Sky News just for good faith. Wow that’s 3/3 corrections my narrative is completely changed!

So let’s see how the story changed after all these amazingly important factual corrections:

  • ~ One month ago multiple lobbyists went in front of the israeli Parliament to convince israel to destroy UNRWA,
  • ~ 25 days later israel declared UNRWA terrorists and launched a massive Hasbara compaign against them directly after the ICJ ruling
  • NYT and Sky News publish sensationalist nothing-burgers on it with clickbait headlines.
  • No public evidence has been provided anywhere for israel’s accusations

Boy that nararative really changed I’m totally not convinced that this was a planned smear campaign to destroy UNRWA anymore!

breakfastmtn ,
@breakfastmtn@lemmy.ca avatar

They’re reporting what Israel is saying.

“It’s raining outside.”
“Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson says it’s raining outside.”

I’m saying those sentences present claims by two different people. You’re saying they’re identical. You’re wrong.

Bragging about not changing your conclusion is a self-own. You’re just admitting to being a conspiracy theorist. The failure of the supporting facts not changing the conclusion proves you weren’t using them to reach that conclusion to begin with. The supporting facts shouldn’t be set dressing. It’s dishonest to start with the conclusion then work backwards to find anything to plausibly support it while ignoring contradictory evidence.

You’re alleging a conspiracy that began with that hearing. There is no evidence of a conspiracy. The only “evidence” you have is that one thing happened after another – between two branches of government without evidence of communication let alone collusion. Correlation isn’t causation. Israel hates UNRWA. They have always hated them and they talk about it constantly. Throw a dart at a calendar and you’ll find some Israeli official talking about defunding or replacing UNRWA. At any time that dossier was released there was always going to be some official, some report, or some hearing talking about it relatively recently. That doesn’t make it a conspiracy. A leaked Foreign Ministry report said that Israel wanted to remove UNRWA after the war just days before that hearing.

NYT and Sky News publish sensationalist nothing-burgers on it with clickbait headlines.

The only reason we even know about the contents of the dossier is the NYT. That article broke the story. The idea that they shouldn’t report on the contents of a document being used by world leaders to suspend funding to a critically important organization providing aid to millions of Palestinians is laughable. We’re better off not knowing? Give me a break.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •