Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Hamas/Israel conflict: news and discussion

Well imo you're wrong about that. Also, the BBC is one of the worst culprits when it comes to burying important stories about Gaza, so it's not just The Times. The Times was simply an example given. And it is correct that they left it off their front page for the whole of yesterday. Your post seemingly justifying or excusing that omission was bizarre.
"The Times was simply an example" which you gave more than once, starting by embedding someone's x-tweet with a scrolling video of the Times front page as it was in the early evening yesterday. You commented sarcastically about "the paper of record" (something the Times has not been for many decades). I went and looked, saw there was a story not yet on the 'front page' of their website and posted a link to an archived version of it. I didn't do so to contradict you but for the benefit of anyone who wanted to see what bollocks they had published.

At 11.34am today you posted:
Twelve people out of 30,000 working for UNRWA stand accused. Until the accusations are verified by someone other than Israel, I'm going to assume they are a lie. A lie that was of course coordinated with the ICJ ruling. And it's worked. As we saw on The Times front page - nothing about the ICJ ruling, only this story.
I pointed out that their ICJ story actually was now on the 'front page' and that they only remake their 'front page' a couple of times a day. I didn't do so because I was intent on
seemingly justifying or excusing that omission
but to indicate that the Times front page was not continually updated like The Guardian's, and so all that could be drawn from it was whether or not they considered a story important enough to add it to the front page between remakes. Nine hours later their ICJ story is still there as I type this, although the Sunday Times remake has already begun. I also don't think one could draw any inferences from the fact it is still there.

Meanwhile, trying to make your point using the tweets of someone from Gaza was a pretty low thing to do. Who here has been going on about the ICJ ruling being a 'game changer'? That's a crap straw man.
Marvellous. Have we moved from 'no fighting in the war room' to 'no Gazans on the Gaza thread'?
This is an open thread about Gaza not about you.
 
"The Times was simply an example" which you gave more than once, starting by embedding someone's x-tweet with a scrolling video of the Times front page as it was in the early evening yesterday. You commented sarcastically about "the paper of record" (something the Times has not been for many decades). I went and looked, saw there was a story not yet on the 'front page' of their website and posted a link to an archived version of it. I didn't do so to contradict you but for the benefit of anyone who wanted to see what bollocks they had published.

At 11.34am today you posted:

I pointed out that their ICJ story actually was now on the 'front page' and that they only remake their 'front page' a couple of times a day. I didn't do so because I was intent on

but to indicate that the Times front page was not continually updated like The Guardian's, and so all that could be drawn from it was whether or not they considered a story important enough to add it to the front page between remakes. Nine hours later their ICJ story is still there as I type this, although the Sunday Times remake has already begun. I also don't think one could draw any inferences from the fact it is still there.


Marvellous. Have we moved from 'no fighting in the war room' to 'no Gazans on the Gaza thread'?
This is an open thread about Gaza not about you.
You might want to check who said what before you start ranting like this.

The views of people in Gaza are more important than those of any of us here, but you were using them in a very particular and, imo, unpleasant way to shut down other posters.
 
It is grotesque that so far the only real world effect of the ruling has been the defunding of UNRWA.

Until we have non-Israeli evidence, we should treat these accusations with giant scepticism. There may be something in it. Out of the 30,000 workers 12 may have helped Hamas. Still doesn't justify defunding. And of course, if it is true then Israel presenting it yesterday is no accident.

Also worth remembering that more than 150 UNRWA staff have been killed by Israel.

Allegations so for seem a bit thin. From BBC online news.

UNRWA claims: UK halts aid to UN agency over allegation staff helped Hamas attack

On Friday, an adviser to the Israeli prime minister told the BBC that the 7 October Hamas attacks had involved "people who are on their [UNRWA] salaries".
Mark Regev said there was information showing teachers working in UNRWA schools had "openly celebrated" the 7 October attacks.
He also referred to an Israeli hostage who, on her release, said she had been "held in the house of someone who worked for UNRWA".
"They have a union which is controlled by Hamas and I think it's high time that the UN investigated these links between UNRWA and Hamas," he added.

Unless other news outlets have more detailed allegations this does not sound like UNRWA should have anything to worry about.

Also on the teachers. I thought salaries for these kinds of jobs were paid through PA? Not Hamas directly?

Am I wrong on this?

So should not Israeli government raise this with the PA?

On Hamas. Its not a small terrorist organisation. Its a political party with an armed wing. Some of its work ( continuing from Muslim Brotherhood days) is providing welfare. So its not unlikely that members or sympathisers of Hamas ( not high ups. Just rank and file members) may work for UNRWA. As this is one of the few jobs going due to Israel states blockade.

Hamas are proscribed terrorist organisation in UK. But in West Bank and Gaza for Palestinians they are among the political parties that are legitimate in Palestinian viewpoint. From Palestinian viewpoint one may not support Hamas but that does not mean its an illegitimate party to support.

One of the arguments by IDF / Israeli government for bombing blocks of flats for example was that they housed Hamas "cells". What they really mean is that a Hamas member lived there with his family. As Hamas has membership like any political party its hardly surprising that IDF find Hamas everywhere across Gaza.


So this does not mean that UNWRA are controlled by Hamas.

What this sounds like to me is that Israeli politicians are outraged anyone could support Hamas.
 
Last edited:
What I find particularly offensive about the attack on UNWRA ( which googling have been going on for years) by Israeli apologists is that it was first set up to deal with the refugee problem created by the Zionist ethnic cleansing of Palestine in 48 to create state of Isreal.

The refugee problem was left to UN and neighbouring states to deal with. Whilst the Zionists appropriated land stolen by them from Palestinians for Jewish only settlement.

So UNWRA have been dealing now with a problem by same kind of Zionists who perpetrated a war crime in 48. And there staff have been killed who stood by their posts to help their fellows in Gaza As head of UN has pointed out.

The same kind of ethnic cleansing in Gaza, possibly genocide, is happening now under the auspices of a Zionist government in Israel and all they can do is accuse an organisation dealing with the mess they made of being supporters of terrorists.

With Western governments lining up to support this line of attack.

Whole thing is sickening.
 
Allegations so for seem a bit thin. From BBC online news.
Colour me shocked. Utterly shameful. UNRWA has acted immediately upon being told of the allegations. There is no reason whatever for anyone to suspend funding. They should be increasing funding right now.

From Al J:

Philippe Lazzarini has spoken out against the “shocking” decision of several Western nations to suspend aid for the UN’s Palestinian refugee agency, amid Israeli allegations that several employees may have taken part in the October 7 attacks, during a time of crucial need for displaced Palestinians.

Israel has long criticised and sought to dismantle the agency. UNRWA has launched an investigation into the allegations and fired the employees under review.

“UNRWA lifesaving assistance is about to end following countries decisions to cut their funding to the Agency. Our humanitarian operation, on which 2 million people depend as a lifeline in Gaza, is collapsing,” Lazzarini said in a social media post on Saturday.

“I am shocked such decisions are taken based on alleged behavior of a few individuals and as the war continues, needs are deepening & famine looms. Palestinians in Gaza did not need this additional collective punishment. This stains all of us.”
 
Ranting 😂

You might want to check who said what before you start ranting like this.
I Did. Bit of a waste of time in retrospect.
The views of people in Gaza are more important than those of any of us here, but you were using them in a very particular and, imo, unpleasant way to shut down other posters.
That's your opinion. You've every right to hold and express it. Just as I have the right to an opinion about yours.
I posted Hind Khoudray's tweets not out of any desire to silence anyone, but as an expression of my own irritation. Also in retrospect that was foolish.
 
"The Times was simply an example" which you gave more than once, starting by embedding someone's x-tweet with a scrolling video of the Times front page as it was in the early evening yesterday. You commented sarcastically about "the paper of record" (something the Times has not been for many decades). I went and looked, saw there was a story not yet on the 'front page' of their website and posted a link to an archived version of it. I didn't do so to contradict you but for the benefit of anyone who wanted to see what bollocks they had published.

At 11.34am today you posted:

I pointed out that their ICJ story actually was now on the 'front page' and that they only remake their 'front page' a couple of times a day. I didn't do so because I was intent on

but to indicate that the Times front page was not continually updated like The Guardian's, and so all that could be drawn from it was whether or not they considered a story important enough to add it to the front page between remakes. Nine hours later their ICJ story is still there as I type this, although the Sunday Times remake has already begun. I also don't think one could draw any inferences from the fact it is still there.


Marvellous. Have we moved from 'no fighting in the war room' to 'no Gazans on the Gaza thread'?
This is an open thread about Gaza not about you.
In the paper copy of The Times there is only a small article on Page 42 about the ICJ ruling,
 
Also on the teachers. I thought salaries for these kinds of jobs were paid through PA? Not Hamas directly?

Am I wrong on this?

So should not Israeli government raise this with the PA?
Yeah I'd be interested t know this too. I went on a teachers exchange to the West Bank almost a decade ago and from what I can remember there were free UNRWA schools, Fatah run state schools, and Hamas run private schools. This might be a simplification (or tbh just me misremembering), but id assume ppl teaching at UNRWA schools would be paid by UNRWA.

Tho at the time I went I doubt anyone was being paid cos the schools had been on strike for something like 10 weeks. The teachers we met were scathing of the national union and he NUT exchange (different to ours) which they saw as scabbing.
 
I believe that there have been a couple of cases of doctors working for the NHS in Britain who have been accused of supporting terrorism. Should the government stop funding the NHS altogether? (Rather than underfunding and privatising it).
 
Yeah I'd be interested t know this too. I went on a teachers exchange to the West Bank almost a decade ago and from what I can remember there were free UNRWA schools, Fatah run state schools, and Hamas run private schools. This might be a simplification (or tbh just me misremembering), but id assume ppl teaching at UNRWA schools would be paid by UNRWA.

Tho at the time I went I doubt anyone was being paid cos the schools had been on strike for something like 10 weeks. The teachers we met were scathing of the national union and he NUT exchange (different to ours) which they saw as scabbing.

Looking around more and you recollection is correct:

More than 40 percent of schools (288) in Gaza are run by the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), while the rest are either directly operated by the Palestinian Authority or privately managed.


Schools and Universities have been targetted by IDF.

At early stages of war people attempted to use the schools as shelters. Obviously thinking IDF would be less likely to target them. Not the case.

For higher education (Universities) IDF in particular targetted this infrastructure for destruction.

Blowing up the ruined buildings after bombing for example.

My partner went out to Palestine to visit schools few years ago. Said one thing Palestinians set store by is education. Even in the difficult circumstances they live in. Something they are proud of. And its not about being Fatah or Hamas supporter.

Its a form of resistance to Israeli Zionist oppression to put this effort into education imo. Steadfastness.

So Israeli destruction of education infrastructure is understandable from their point of view. One thing a coloniser does not want is an educated people. Or people who refuse to have their society destroyed.
 

Keir Starmer Refuses To Say Israeli War Crime Is A War Crime​



Coincidentally just watched this,

On Gaza Starmer does the lawyerly one cannot make a judgement so soon. One must wait for the correct authorities to investigate and pronounce a judgement. I havent seen this particular footage etc.

Its oh so difficult to come up with an opinion.

( even though the bombing of Gaza has been going on for months its to early to have an opinion.)

Of course with Ukraine its different.

These war criminals need to be "hunted down" he says.

How he manages to do this with a straight face is beyond me,
 
Coincidentally just watched this,

On Gaza Starmer does the lawyerly one cannot make a judgement so soon. One must wait for the correct authorities to investigate and pronounce a judgement. I havent seen this particular footage etc.

Its oh so difficult to come up with an opinion.

( even though the bombing of Gaza has been going on for months its to early to have an opinion.)

Of course with Ukraine its different.

These war criminals need to be "hunted down" he says.

How he manages to do this with a straight face is beyond me,
if you'd spent the past five years hurling people out of your party on the basis of often doubtful accusations of anti-semitism due to criticism of the zionist entity you too might balk at declaring that the zionists are doing something wrong, lest you leave yourself open to accusations of hypocrisy
 
Done with Labour.
View attachment 409972

That's so fucking disingenuous. Even if the allegations are true - and given that they've been made by Israel, they very well may be partially or entirely fabricated - aid money has not gone to terrorists. The allegations consist of UNRWA teachers celebrating the attack and an UNRWA employee's home being used by Hamas. Neither of those things constitute 'aid supporting terrorism'.
 
The "All Party Parliamentary Group for the Prevention of Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity" has members who abstained from voting or voted against support for a ceasefire.

The chair is Labour MP Fleur Anderson. She abstained from the ceasefire amendment vote in November. In other words, she chose not to oppose a ceasefire as people in Gaza were being murdered, maimed, bereaved and deprived of any kind of normal life en masse.

Vice-chairs Feryal Clark, Rushanara Ali, Florence Eshalomi -who are all Labour - also abstained.

Vice-chair Nicholas Bourne is Conservative so either voted against the call for a ceasefire or abstained.

Vice-chair Brendan O'Hara is SNP and I don't know how he voted.

Underneath the Chair and Vice-Chairs is a list of members:

About — APPG on the Prevention of Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity

There are a lot of hypocrites on that list.

Sorry I can't go through them all.
 
Back
Top Bottom