[ International ] [ Main Menu ]
56671
From: akira, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Israel votes AGAINST resolution demandin immediate release of hostages
|
Drop Site@DropSiteNews: The UN General Assembly passed a resolution calling for an immediate, unconditional, and permanent ceasefire in Gaza and the immediate, unconditional release of all hostages. The vote was 158 in favor and 9 against, with the United States, Argentina, Czechia, Hungary, Israel, Nauru, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, and Tonga voting against. |
Responses:
[56673] [56685] [56692] [56698] [56700] [56682] [56675] [56679] [56676] [56681] [56697] [56677] [56678] [56683] [56699] [56680] [56684] [56686] [56672] [56674]
56673
From: mitra, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Israel votes AGAINST resolution and Why...
|
Beyond the propaganda headline: Just before the vote, Israel’s U.N. Ambassador Danny Danon accused the resolutions’ supporters of complicity with Hamas, which he said has “hopelessly infiltrated” UNRWA, and denounced their failure to link a ceasefire to the release of the hostages. “By demanding a ceasefire today without addressing the hostages, this assembly will once again side with those who weaponize human suffering,” Danon said. “It will send a message that the lives of innocent Israelis, including children, are not worth your consideration.” “This is not diplomacy,” he stressed. “It is appeasement. It is enabling terror and abandoning the innocent.” **************** UN General Assembly approves resolutions demanding Gaza ceasefire, more aid to Palestinian refugees World Dec 12, 2024 1:37 PM EST UNITED NATIONS (AP) — The U.N. General Assembly overwhelmingly approved resolutions Wednesday demanding an immediate ceasefire in Gaza and backing the U.N. agency for Palestinian refugees that Israel has moved to ban. The votes in the 193-nation world body were 158-9, with 13 abstentions to demand a ceasefire now and 159-9 with 11 abstentions in support of the agency known as UNRWA. The votes culminated two days of speeches overwhelmingly calling for an end to the 14-month war between Israel and the militant Hamas group and demanding access throughout Gaza to address the growing humanitarian catastrophe. Israel and its close ally, the United States, were in a tiny minority speaking and voting against the resolutions. Other opposing both resolutions included Argentina, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay and Tonga. While Security Council resolutions are legally binding, General Assembly resolutions are not, though they do reflect world opinion. There are no vetoes in the assembly. The Palestinians and their supporters went to the General Assembly after the U.S. vetoed a Security Council resolution on Nov. 20 demanding an immediate Gaza ceasefire. It was supported by the council’s 14 other members but the U.S. objected that it was not linked to an immediate release of hostages taken by Hamas militants during their attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, which triggered the war. The Palestinian U.N. Ambassador Riyad Mansour expressed gratitude for the overwhelming support for both resolutions Wednesday, saying the votes “reflect the resolve and the determination of the international community.” “We will keep knocking on the doors of the Security Council and the General Assembly until we see an immediate and unconditional ceasefire put in place and until we see humanitarian assistance being distributed at scale in all corners of the Gaza Strip,” he said. The language of the resolution adopted by the assembly on a ceasefire mirrors the text of the vetoed council resolution. It demands “an immediate, unconditional and permanent cease-fire to be respected by all parties,” while also reiterating a “demand for the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages.” That language is much stronger than General Assembly resolutions adopted on Oct. 27, 2023 – three weeks after the Hamas attack – calling for an immediate and sustained humanitarian truce leading to a cessation of hostilities and on Dec. 12, 2023, demanding “an immediate humanitarian ceasefire.” The resolution adopted Wednesday also marked the first time Germany and Italy, who abstained last December, voted in favor of a Gaza ceasefire. Their support left the United States as the only member of the Group of 7 major industrialized nations still opposed. On the humanitarian front, the resolution rejects “any effort to starve Palestinians” and demands immediate access to civilians to provide aid indispensable to their survival. The second resolution backs the mandate of UNRWA, which was established by the General Assembly in 1949. It deplores laws adopted by Israel’s parliament on Oct. 28 banning UNRWA’s activities in the Palestinian territories, a measure to take effect in 90 days. It reiterates U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres’ statements that UNRWA is “the backbone” of all humanitarian operations in Gaza and no organization can replace it. And it reaffirms the necessity for UNRWA’s continued “unimpeded operation.” The resolution calls on the Israeli government “to abide by its international obligations, respect the privileges and immunities of UNRWA” and uphold its responsibility to facilitate the unhindered delivery of aid humanitarian assistance throughout the entire Gaza Strip. Israel alleges that around a dozen of UNRWA’s 13,000 workers in Gaza participated in Hamas’ attacks on Israel that precipitated the war. It recently provided the U.N. with over 100 names of UNRWA staff it accuses of having militant ties. U.S. deputy U.N. ambassador Robert Wood reiterated America’s opposition to the ceasefire resolution ahead of Wednesday’s vote and criticized the Palestinians for again failing to mention Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel. “At a time when Hamas is feeling isolated due to the ceasefire in Lebanon, the draft resolution on a ceasefire in Gaza risks sending a dangerous message to Hamas that there’s no need to negotiate or release the hostages,” he said. The Hamas attack killed about 1,200 people, mostly civilians, and saw another 250 abducted as hostages. Gaza militants have not returned around 100 hostages, a third of them believed to be dead, and ceasefire efforts have ground to a halt. Israel’s retaliatory offensive has killed over 44,000 Palestinians in Gaza, according to the local Health Ministry. It says women and children make up more than half the dead but does not distinguish between fighters and civilians in its count. Wood said the U.S. will continue to seek a diplomatic solution to the war and called UNRWA “a critical lifeline to the Palestinian people.” But he said the UNRWA resolution has “serious flaws” because it fails to create a path to restore trust between the U.N. agency and Israel — despite U.S. efforts and a U.S. proposal. Just before the vote, Israel’s U.N. Ambassador Danny Danon accused the resolutions’ supporters of complicity with Hamas, which he said has “hopelessly infiltrated” UNRWA, and denounced their failure to link a ceasefire to the release of the hostages. “By demanding a ceasefire today without addressing the hostages, this assembly will once again side with those who weaponize human suffering,” Danon said. “It will send a message that the lives of innocent Israelis, including children, are not worth your consideration.” “This is not diplomacy,” he stressed. “It is appeasement. It is enabling terror and abandoning the innocent.” |
Responses:
[56685] [56692] [56698] [56700] [56682] [56675] [56679] [56676] [56681] [56697] [56677] [56678] [56683] [56699] [56680] [56684] [56686]
56685
From: akira, [DNS_Address]
Subject: August 2024 : UN completes investigation on UNRWA staff
|
how many times does this need to be reposted here? UN completes investigation on UNRWA staff Farhan Haq, Deputy Spokesperson for the UN Secretary-General António Guterres. United Nations Farhan Haq, Deputy Spokesperson for the UN Secretary- General António Guterres. 5 August 2024 UN Affairs The UN said on Monday that nine staff working for its Palestine refugee agency UNRWA will be sacked because they may have been involved in the 7 October 2023 Hamas-led attacks against Israel. The development follows the conclusion of an investigation by the UN Office of Oversight Services (OIOS), launched earlier this year after Israel alleged that several UNRWA personnel took part in the brutal assault on its territory in which some 1,200 people were killed and another 250 were taken to Gaza as hostages. Appropriate measures and terminations OIOS is the highest investigative body in the UN system and its reports are confidential but can be made available to Member States upon request. 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 these 10 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. UNRWA Commissioner-General Philippe Lazzarini issued a statement acknowledging the completion of the probe. “I have decided that in the case of these remaining nine staff members, they cannot work for UNRWA. All contracts of these staff members will be terminated in the interest of the Agency,” he said. Information not authenticated Asked about the extent of the staff members’ alleged involvement, Mr. Haq responded that he did not have specific information about the allegations. He said the OIOS investigation involved visits to Israel for discussions with officials and to see and review information held by authorities there. The investigators also travelled to Amman, Jordan, to obtain and review relevant information held by UNRWA, including on its staff and operations. They also reviewed information and communications technology data, such as email records and information on agency vehicles, in addition to information from various other sources, including that released to the media and other public sources, and communications with several Member States. “However, one thing I'd like to point out is that since information used by Israeli officials to support the allegations have remained in Israeli custody, OIOS was not able to independently authenticate most of the information provided to it,” he noted. Parallel probe The accusations surfaced in January when Israel informed UNRWA of the alleged involvement of 12 staff members in the attacks. UNRWA immediately identified and terminated the employment of 10, while two were confirmed dead. The UN later received information from Israel about seven more cases – five in March and two in April. Following the initial allegations, UN Secretary-General António Guterres immediately ordered OIOS to investigate. He also appointed an independent review panel to conduct a separate assessment into UNRWA to determine whether the agency was doing everything it could to ensure neutrality and to respond to allegations of serious breaches when they arise. The panel – headed by former French Foreign Minister Catherine Colonna - published its report in April. Speaking at the time, she said that “the set of rules and the mechanisms and procedures in place [at UNRWA] are the most elaborate within the UN system, precisely because it is such a difficult issue to work in such a complex and sensitive environment”. Mr. Lazzarini said that UNRWA has started implementing the panel’s recommendations and is fully committed to them. “Finally, I reiterate UNRWA’s condemnation of the 7 October attack in the strongest possible terms. I call – once again – for the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages and their safe return to their families,” he said. UN chief’s opinions Mr. Haq was asked about the Secretary-General’s views regarding the OIOS findings. The UN chief “believes that it is important that we go through this very carefully, given the fact that any involvement in these attacks would constitute a major betrayal of trust,” he said. “Obviously, there were actions that were taken for the benefit of the agency that were very swift and very decisive in terms of dealing with the individuals who had been named at first, and now it's good to have all of the information available,” he added. Referring to the Gaza war, Mr. Haq also underlined the importance of remembering that a “huge number” of UNRWA staff have been taking enormous risks for months, keeping hundreds of thousands of people alive, whether in shelters or by providing food and services. “And we want to make sure that the reputation of our UNRWA staff, our dedicated staff, including about 200 people who have lost their lives since 7 October, is fully recognized and that UNRWA gets the support that it needs,” he said. |
56692
From: mitra, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Without UNRWA there would be no Hamas — it must be dismantled
|
Canada’s temporary suspension of its financing of UNRWA over charges that some of UNRWA’s members participated in the Oct. 7 massacre in southern Israel should be made permanent. That UNRWA has created the ideal conditions for murderous terrorist groups to emerge, from Black September, which carried out the gruesome slaughter of Israeli Athletes in the 1972 Munich Olympics, to Hamas, is not a bug in the operating system, but a feature. Anyone who truly cares about charting a path to true peace in the Middle East should have every interest in ensuring UNRWA is dismantled. There was nothing particularly unique more than seven decades ago in the establishment of a temporary agency to settle refugees from war. With empires collapsing across the world — Habsburg, Ottoman or British — and new states emerging to replace the former imperial lands, tens of millions of people became refugees as they were fleeing across newly delineated borders. Whether in the Indian subcontinent, Europe, Africa and the Middle East, there was nothing unique in the brutal wars of post-imperial independence leading to tens of millions of refugees. Those refugees were all settled in the places to which they fled (typically new countries with similar ethnic makeup to that of the refugees) or in new places. This was done through local and independent efforts or through dedicated agencies. The general agency established to handle refugees, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, was mostly focused on Europe in its first years of operation. Therefore, in other conflicts of the late 1940’s and early 1950’s, such as the one in Korea or in the Middle East, temporary specialized agencies were established with the goal of settling the refugees in a few short years. Unlike the UNHCR these agencies were temporary because they were designed to carry out a specific purpose and close down upon achieving it. That was the case in Korea. UNKRA settled 3.1 million refugees from the war, at least three times the number of the Arab refugees from the Arab-Israeli war of 1947-1949, with a third of the budget allocated to UNRWA. It completed its job within a few short years and closed down, as planned. Look at South Korea today. It could have been the Arabs. But the Arab refugees themselves, today known as Palestinians, refused any form of settlement in place because they knew that would mean that the war is over and that the Jewish state would thereby be legitimized as a fait accompli. Given that the explicit Arab goal in the war of 1947-1949 was to ensure that no Jewish state of any size emerged anywhere between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, the Arab refugees were determined, even when a ceasefire with the Arab states ended the war, to keep fighting to ensure that the Jewish state is undone. Keeping themselves as perpetual refugees, rejecting any form of permanent personal settlement that would allow Israel to exist, became one of the main weapons in this total Arab war against the Jewish state. UNRWA was established with the best of intentions to help settle the Arab refugees from the war (the much larger number of Jewish refugees, including those from the war and those ethnically cleansed from across the Arab world in retaliation for Israel’s birth, as well as the Jewish refugee survivors from the Holocaust were all absorbed by Israel without any international support). But the Arab refugees and the Arab countries fought against UNRWA resettlement. The agency therefore failed to settle even one Arab refugee. UNRWA’s funders at the time, the U.S. and U.K., wanted to close down the failed agency. There was no question that UNRWA was failing to settle refugees. But the Arab countries would not hear of closing UNRWA. They had already secured the letter UN in its name in order to send the message that Israel’s existence was essentially the fault of the UN. They also secured a legal loophole exception for UNRWA from the UNHCR, knowing that if the Arab refugees would be treated like all other refugees in the world, no refugees would remain within a few short years. The next step then was to ensure that UNRWA remains open and funded by the West. Given the importance of oil and the Arab position in the Cold War the Arab countries successfully threatened the U.S. and U.K. to keep UNRWA open. UNRWA remains open to this day as a still temporary agency, now funded by numerous western countries to a tune of more than one billion dollars a year. Once it became clear that UNRWA would neither settle a single Arab refugee nor close down, it became necessary for UNRWA to keep busy, especially since immediate relief was no longer necessary. What started as initiatives for vocational training turned within a few short years into a sprawling education system run by the Arab refugees themselves. In the UNRWA compounds (misnamed “refugee camps״) and the schools a new nationalism was born, the Palestinian one, that united Arabs living in Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and the Gaza Strip around the goals of revenge and “return.” The idea that Palestinians were “refugees” generation after generation, possessing a “right of return” that supersedes Israeli sovereignty to settle in Israel’s sovereign territory, became the most deeply held markers of the Palestinian identity and its national ethos. But Palestinians are not refugees by any international standard. UNRWA registers 5.9 Million refugees in its five areas of operation: Gaza, West Bank, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon. Forty per cent of them live in the West Bank and Gaza. Certainly by their telling they live in Palestine. They have been born there and lived there. This is where they need to build their future. They are not refugees and have no need of resettlement. Another forty per cent are citizens of Jordan. Jordan naturalized the Arab refugees after the war. By now the vast majority of those registered as refugees in Jordan have been born in Jordan. Nowhere else in the world is a citizen of a country, born in that country, somehow a refugee of another sovereign country. The remaining 20 per cent are registered in Syria and Lebanon. Both countries have denied citizenship to these Arab born residents in their midst. Lebanon also has a web of laws preventing these Arabs from partaking in the Lebanese economy and society (an actual apartheid system). Yet recent data shows that most of those registered in Syria and Lebanon have long left these countries. Many of them attained citizenship in other countries, and yet UNRWA continues to register them as “refugees.” In practice the Palestinian “refugee” issue is quite small. Only around two to three hundred thousand people living in Lebanon and Syria are either the real original refugees (the ones who escaped the war from 1947-1949) or their status deprived descendants who are in need of settlement in place or resettlement in third countries. These are small numbers that the actual UN agency for refugees is quite capable of managing. But the issue was never practical, it was always symbolic, the purpose being to keep the Palestinian “refugee” issue as the living symbol that Israel’s existence as a Jewish state is temporary. Not only are those registered as “Palestine Refugees” not refugees by any international standards, but they also do not possess a “right of return”, meaning a right that supersedes Israeli sovereignty to settle within the sovereign territory of Israel. Such right for a people who were never citizens of a country, that supersedes the right of sovereign countries to control their borders and decide who become their citizens, simply does not exist. Even the various UNGA resolutions that Palestinians cite, do not support such a right. But Palestinians believe they have such a “right” and have forged themselves into a nation based on the singular commitment to “return” and revenge. It should therefore come as no surprise that UNRWA has given rise to generations of trained murderers who took pride in the slaughter of Jews, whether the Israeli athletes in the Munich Olympics of 1972, or the peace supporting Kibbutzniks on Oct. 7. Even if UNRWA employees were not directly involved in murdering Jews, and we know that several of them were, given that their entire ideology is about undoing the Jewish state, their continued existence all but ensures that such organizations, whether Black September or Hamas, will always rise to fulfill that goal. I have spent 14 years by now researching UNRWA, writing and speaking about it and advocating for its dismantlement. The only reason I devoted my time and capabilities to doing so is that, contrary to the reigning impression, UNRWA and the Palestinian “refugee” issue are not marginal aspects of the conflict. They are at the core of the conflict and the reason for its perpetuation. The conflict has always been about one thing and one thing only, the Arab rejection of the Jewish right to self determination in any part of the Jewish historical homeland. Everything else has been the outcome of that single rejection. UNRWA has been one of the most substantial forces in ensuring that this rejection not only never ends, but is indulged, supported and magnified to become the core element of an entire people. I have always supported the idea that the Jews and Arabs of the land would be best served governing themselves by themselves in states of their own — known as the two-state solution. I continue to support that idea, but I now consider myself a long-term peace activist. Precisely because I continue to be committed to peace, I understand there can be no peace as long as the fundamental reason for the century long war waged by the Arabs against a Jewish state remains. For there to be peace, the war must first end, and the war cannot end if there is an organization, supported by Canada and other Western powers, that does everything possible to ensure it continues. |
56698
From: akira, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Without UNRWA there would be no Hamas — Hogwash(NT)
| (NT) |
Responses:
[56700]
56700
From: mitra, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Without UNRWA there would be no Hamas — isn't that special?
|
You dismiss an article, research, history and experience in one word. Not dissimilar to your one word condemnations and you expect us to think as you do, that the world is so simple. We aren't so simple, and we don't think as you. |
Responses:
None
56682
From: akira, [DNS_Address]
Subject: "Israel alleges" with ZERO evidence
|
"Israel alleges that around a dozen of UNRWA’s 13,000 workers in Gaza participated in Hamas’ attacks on Israel that precipitated the war. It recently provided the U.N. with over 100 names of UNRWA staff it accuses of having militant ties." |
Responses:
None
56675
From: akira, [DNS_Address]
Subject: the epitome of propaganda...
|
according to mitra & her propaganda, anyone who criticizes Israel or doesn't do its bidding is accused of 'complicity with Hamas' and or being anti-semitic. It's Israel's mating call. from mitra's propaganda piece “By demanding a ceasefire today without addressing the hostages, this assembly will once again side with those who weaponize human suffering,” Danon said. “It will send a message that the lives of innocent Israelis, including children, are not worth your consideration.” from the thread's leading post: "The UN General Assembly passed a resolution calling for an immediate, unconditional, and permanent ceasefire in Gaza and the immediate, unconditional release of all hostages." Hello, anybody home? |
Responses:
[56679] [56676] [56681] [56697] [56677] [56678] [56683] [56699] [56680] [56684] [56686]
56679
From: mitra, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: the epitome of propaganda... think about it
|
Again, you are cherry picking phrases while ignoring the objections of the Israelis to UNRWA. So I can only direct you to the article I posted, your answer can be found in the text. Why would you think an organization which was forced to work with and through the auspices of a terrorist organization would be anything other than staffed with terrorists or terrorist approved staff??? Remember Hamas promised to "punish" anyone who got food from anyone but Hamas. Think beyond the headline. And read beyond the misleading title into the demands of the actual resolution. (It is no different than what trump is doing with his staff and you see who they are ) |
Responses:
None
56676
From: ryan, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: the epitome of propaganda...
| no, it seems you are out to lunch... |
Responses:
[56681] [56697] [56677] [56678] [56683] [56699] [56680] [56684] [56686]
56681
From: akira, [DNS_Address]
Subject: do you have anything more than one line attacks, Ryan?(NT)
| (NT) |
Responses:
[56697]
56697
From: ryan, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: do you have anything more than one line attacks, Ryan?
| i'm practicing my stand-up routine... |
Responses:
None
56677
From: chaskuchar@stcharlesmo, [DNS_Address]
Subject: so the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent palestinans is ok?
| thats what israel thinks. |
56678
From: ryan, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: so the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent palestinans is ok?
| on one level yes...on another, not in any way...are you so sure they are innocent? |
56683
From: akira, [DNS_Address]
Subject: on what 'level' are the Palestinian people guilty? Enlighten us
|
Are you suggesting Israel's ethnic cleansing campaign is justified? Please explain. If you can muster something more than a single sentence. |
Responses:
[56699]
56699
From: mitra, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: on what 'levels' are the propaganda ? Enlighten us. Okay!
|
Aw. That's what propaganda discourse does so well. Take one subject (unrwa) and mix it up with other (genocide) assume an off topic conclusion (genocide is acceptable) is presented as if that was the intent of objection, so egregious as to be obviously wrong. (winner! propaganda!) Damn, you are textbook. |
Responses:
None
56680
From: mitra, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: so the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent palestinans is ok?
|
Absolutely the sticking point. Israelis believe support, protection of UNRWA is support and protection of HAMAS. |
56684
From: akira, [DNS_Address]
Subject: I prefer evidence-based facts to unsubstantiated beliefs
|
you can continue believing a lying government led by a psychopathic war criminal.. it's a free country. But please stop pretending it's the intellectually superior thing to do. |
Responses:
[56686]
56686
From: mitra, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: I prefer evidence-based facts to unsubstantiated beliefs
|
Pretend?... the only pretense is taking quotes out of context and presenting them as fact. I just provided context. That is the opposite of propaganda. And I made no comment as to whether I believe the Israelis, just presented the argument. What I do not believe is bullet topics as if they were the truth. |
Responses:
None
56672
From: pamela, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Israel votes AGAINST resolution demandin immediate release of...
|
.."The vote was 158 in favor and 9 against, with the United States, Argentina, Czechia, Hungary, Israel, Nauru, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, and Tonga voting against." Not real bright is it? world is absolute insane |
Responses:
[56674]
56674
From: mitra, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Israel votes AGAINST resolution demandin immediate release of...
|
What is not bright is taking a phrase out of the resolution and assuming that is all there is to any objection. |
Responses:
None
[ International ] [ Main Menu ]