URNWA - Hamas investigation. Thread 2

The Palestinians do NOT possess any ‘right to return’

Only Israel’s government believes this. The Human Rights Watch has an infographic that shows this injustice.

"The Palestinians do NOT possess any ‘right to return’."

How fucking convenient.

@Alwayslookonthe
You’re saying there’s no such thing as a Palestinian refugee and the Palestinians who were forced to give up their land should just suck it up to facilitate world peace because many groups were displaced in the aftermath of WW2.

Firstly, they were displaced due to the actions of the UN doing a deal with the British so the UN has a special responsibility to sort out the ensuing difficulties. Secondly the role of UNWRA is to provide assistance to the Palestinian refugees, not to co-operate with ethnic cleansing or forced relocation.

You could argue that Israelis don’t really need to live in Israel and they’d be far safer in Brooklyn and as a result the world would be more peaceful and stable and see how far you’d get. But it seems that it’s ok to say the Palestinians should be moved on permanently without their consent purely to accommodate the state of Israel which has forcibly annexed the land that had been allocated to the Palestinian state. 1948 is not that far back- my dad was a middlaged man of 40 in 1948 and I have a teenage son

@SugarandSpiceandAllThingsNaice

At 29.35 journalist Benno asked;
“Sorry to understand, to go back to the word ‘may’, but does that mean you see that these 9 people likely or highly likely were part of the attacks?”

Farhan Haq deputy spokesperson for the UN Secretary General replied;
“I think that is a good way of describing it, yes.”

So I will amend my statement slightly that Farhan Haq acknowledged that the 9 employees highly likely were part of the attacks.

It does matter whether any did participate, as it is 9 are suspected of involvement, not participation. UNRWA isn’t an ideology it is an agency of the UN and the “idea of return” is codified in international law, the UN charter and UN resolutions which Israel is a signatory to but feels they are above obeying.

The Palestinians do NOT possess any ‘right to return’.

They do meet the criteria as internally displaced refugees within a nation and in occupied territories. The ones that have fled to neighbouring countries also meet the criteria for international refugees. Much of the issues you have is because unlike other conflicts, the refugees have not been allowed to return since 1948 so we have generations of refugees. It is the longest running conflict on the planet rn.

Internally displaced people are not refugees, they are internally displaced.

The vast majority of those registered with UNWRA have never fled their homes.
UNWRA has registered millions of people as refugees, over the decades, who do not meet the basic criteria applied to EVERY other group of refugees in the world.

Eligibility requirements to be recognised as a Palestinian refugee changed in 1965 to include third generation descendants. In 1982 eligibility changed again to include ALL descendants of Palestinian males. The Result?
The creation of a permanent and perpetually growing population of Palestinian refugees.

UNRWA refuses to divulge how many registered refugees meets its own original definition ' of having lived in Mandatory Palestine between June 1946 and May 1948'.
There are currently 5.9 million refugees. No one comes off the list.

UNWRA refuses to accept that people who are citizens of a country are not refugees. Jordan granted citizenship to the Palestinian refugees who fled there including (at the time) those in the West Bank, which Jordan occupied between 1949 and 1967. So more than 2.2 million Palestinian refugees are actually citizens of a sovereign state.

UNWRA ensures that the conflict with Israel will continue and remain intractable.
This is why UNWRA should be dismantled/defunded.

Ty for that, I did make a genuine error.
However “may have been involved” is a long long way from “highly likely they participated”

May have been involved is usually used for may be associated with those who participated.

And we all know how guilt by association works.,

@SugarandSpiceandAllThingsNaice You've read that wrong, which is not surprising because the highlighting in the report is slightly misleading so I've re-bolded it for accuracy. The whole excerpt says:

Investigators made findings in relation to 19 UNRWA staff alleged to have been involved in the attacks, UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq told journalists in New York.
“In one case, no evidence was obtained by OIOS to support the allegations of the staff member’s involvement, while in nine other cases, the evidence obtained by OIOS was insufficient to support the staff members’ involvement,” he said.
Regarding these10 cases, he said that appropriate measures will be taken in due course, in conformity with UNRWA Regulations and Rules.
With respect to the remaining nine cases, the evidence obtained by OIOS indicated that the UNRWA staff members may have been involved in the 7 October attacks.

I'll leave it to you to make your own judgements about the semantic game playing in Philippe Lazzarini, UNRWA Commissioner-General's statement that "the evidence – if authenticated and corroborated – could indicate that the UNRWA staff members may have been involved in the attacks of 7 October."

@Alwayslookonthe
The spokesperson then acknowledged it was highly likely the 9 employees had participated in the October 7th attack.

They said no such thing.

This is what was actually said by UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq:
“In one case, no evidence was obtained by OIOS to support the allegations of the staff member’s involvement, while in nine other cases, the evidence obtained by OIOS was insufficient to support the staff members’ involvement,”*
https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/08/1152841

There isn’t even enough evidence to say the nine were involved, so it is actually only suspicion at this point as the investigations continue.

So I vehemently disagree with you misreporting what the UN spokesperson actually said “insufficient evidence they may have been involved” to the more serious “highly likely they participated.”

They have been fired as a precaution, just like UNRWA fired the 10 in January on the basis of IDF allegations alone that post firing were investigated and zero evidence found by the independent French investigation on behalf of the EU and zero evidence from the IDF for their allegations. So it is not true that UNRWA only fire employees if it is “highly likely”. They fire as a precaution.

It doesn’t matter if 19, 12 , 9 or 0 UNRWA employees participated in the massacre of October 7th UNRWA is the ideological backbone that gives birth decade after decade, generation after generation to the idea of return.
It does matter whether any did participate, as it is 9 are suspected of involvement, not participation. UNRWA isn’t an ideology it is an agency of the UN and the “idea of return” is codified in international law, the UN charter and UN resolutions which Israel is a signatory to but feels they are above obeying.

UNRWA has registered millions of people as refugees over the decades who do not meet the basic criteria..
They do meet the criteria as internally displaced refugees within a nation and in occupied territories. The ones that have fled to neighbouring countries also meet the criteria for international refugees. Much of the issues you have is because unlike other conflicts, the refugees have not been allowed to return since 1948 so we have generations of refugees. It is the longest running conflict on the planet rn.

Had the rest of the world been recognised as refugees in the same way as UNRWA does for the Palestinians the (relative) peace that has marked much of the world since WWII would have been replaced by constant war.

Sorry what? That’s not even remotely plausible.

Nine have been fired due to potential links to Hamas.
Nine have been fired as there is sufficient evidence that they may have been involved in the armed attacks of October 7th. Not due to potential links with Hamas. Farhan Haq deputy spokesperson for the UN Secretary General agreed it was highly likely that the 9 employees of UNRWA have participated in October 7th attacks.

There isn’t enough evidence to refer to criminal investigation.
This has not been stated and is not under the remit of the OIOS.

It is all precautionary on the part of UNRWA.
Definitely not what was stated by the UN. The UN deputy spokesperson was challenged by journalists on his vague language and why indeed they were firing employees if the evidence is not conclusive. The spokesperson then acknowledged it was highly likely the 9 employees had participated in the October 7th attack.

Links can even mean things like was hired or forced to deliver goods that were then later used on Oct 7th or lent their motorcycle to a friend and he lent to to a terrorist who rode it into Israel for the attack or their sister is married to a Hamas terrorist. So often is an issue of close contacts known for a fact to be Hamas or Hamas having used something they own or unknowingly or forced to do some support function and thus suspicion they may be linked or involved too.

Participation in the October 7th attacks could also include butchering, burning, raping kidnapping, and keeping hostages, or perhaps even kidnapping dead bodies and putting them into the back of a car.

It doesn’t matter if 19, 12 , 9 or 0 UNRWA employees participated in the massacre of October 7th because UNRWA is the ideological backbone that gives birth decade after decade, generation after generation to the idea of return. It keeps the Palestinian forever war going against the Jews being sovereign in any part of the land.

It counts 5.9 million refugees.
It has not settled a single refugee in it’s history.
Almost none of them are refugees by International standards.
40% are citizens of Jordan.
40% are in the West Bank and Gaza, somewhere they consider to be Palestine and indeed engage in efforts to have it recognised.
The rest are in Lebanon and Syria of which 2/3 have left and become citizens of other countries.

UNRWA has registered millions of people as refugees over the decades who do not meet the basic criteria applied to EVERY other group of refugees in the world. It seeks not to settle refugees but in registering millions of refugees its desire is to keep the 1948 war going.
Had the rest of the world been recognised as refugees in the same way as UNRWA does for the Palestinians the (relative) peace that has marked much of the world since WWII would have been replaced by constant war.

This is the reason why UNRWA should be dismantled/ defunded.

Nine have been fired due to potential links to Hamas. Nothing is proven. There isn’t enough evidence to refer to criminal investigation. It is all precautionary on the part of UNRWA.

Links can even mean things like was hired or forced to deliver goods that were then later used on Oct 7th or lent their motorcycle to a friend and he lent to to a terrorist who rode it into Israel for the attack or their sister is married to a Hamas terrorist. So often is an issue of close contacts known for a fact to be Hamas or Hamas having used something they own or unknowingly or forced to do some support function and thus suspicion they may be linked or involved too.

How many staffers and unwra staff have so far been fired or involved?

https://apnews.com/article/un-unrwa-staffers-fired-oct-7-cc33d0ab25dc4bacc0af1db10705e0d6

They’re doing it to it “legal” to
shoot to kill UN employees and
bomb/bulldoze all UN buildings, convoys.

Also to make it “legal”
expel all UN officials still in Israel
bar UN investigators from entering Israel and the OPT to gather evidence of war crimes and crimes against humanity.

It also makes it “legal” for them to seize the UN funding going to UNWRA as per the agreements in place, the UN funds go via Israel and must be approved and portioned out by Israel to the UNWRA offices in the OPT to ensure no funds end up benefitting Hamas.

I wonder if Israel will be tagged as a rogue state and expelled from the UN as they are certainly ignoring the UN and going against the UN charters they signed up to.

Pathetic.

Really glad to read this. I really feel for Unrwa employees, they've suffered the loss of so many friends and colleagues, they've been asked to do what amounts to an impossible job whilst being in very real fear for their lives and they have been demonised whilst doing so. I really hope if this conflict ever ends that the bravery of unrwa empoyees is recognised in some way. All of the aid workers in Gaza are real heroes, I'm not sure how they will ever recover from what they have been through but I hope that they are provided all the support they need to try and help them do that.

Yes I agree.

And I speak as a paid up member of the Labour party who re-joined to vote for KS.

I've 'held my nose' on this. I'm not proud about that, but I'm not a single-issue voter.

UNWRA funding today.. let's see...

Yes I saw! Finally! The U.K. is standing up for humanity instead of being the US yes man. Now if we could also stop arming Israel that will help. Otherwise it is give bread followed by a bomb.

Great.

Labour government restoring the funding.

The usual morons on X out in force.

Hurray. Sense has finally prevailed.

The UK is going to resume funding to UNRWA
Hopefully many other countries will also follow

www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-to-restart-funding-to-unrwa

They have. Red Cross/Crescent is also being shamelessly targeted.

They've treated UN personnel like shit for decades but obviously this latest assault is beyond belief.

And plenty of useful idiots going along with the fiction that UNWRA are terrorists.

I doubt that it is being used as a technical term. Whoever translated it probably thinks battlefield is synonymous with war zone.

As for how, well Isrsel declared UNWRA to be a terrorist organisation so that means every building or vehicle or person with “UN” on them is considered by the IDF to be terrorist infrastructure, terror vehicles or terrorists.

You're right, but fortunately I doubt that's going to hold up in court. 😀