The Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar has for years overseen a secret police force in Gaza that conducted surveillance on everyday Palestinians and built files on young people, journalists and those who questioned the government, according to intelligence officials and a trove of internal documents reviewed by The New York Times.
The unit, known as the General Security Service, relied on a network of Gaza informants, some of whom reported their own neighbors to the police. People landed in security files for attending protests or publicly criticizing Hamas. In some cases, the records suggest that the authorities followed people to determine if they were carrying on romantic relationships outside marriage.
Hamas has long run an oppressive system of governance in Gaza, and many Palestinians there know that security officials watch them closely. But a 62-slide presentation on the activities of the General Security Service, delivered only weeks before the Oct. 7 attack on Israel, reveals the degree to which the largely unknown unit penetrated the lives of Palestinians.
. . .
Everyday Gazans were stuck — behind the wall of Israel’s crippling blockade and under the thumb and constant watch of a security force. That dilemma continues today, with the added threat of Israeli ground troops and airstrikes.
Damn those anti-israeli national security advisors.
Did you read the article? Exactly as I said the argument that is that allowing aid info Palestine helped prop up hamas.
The same people that complain Isreal does not let aid in push this argument based on them letting too much aid in.
Why do you insist on conflating funding a terrorist organization with cash with providing humanitarian aid via food and medicine?
Because that’s what this argument is, they’re talking about UNRWA and similar groups that are officially separate from hamas but in practice are largely controlled by hamas.
Do you really not follow any of this? You have such strong opinions for someone that doesn’t seem to follow the big talking points at all. I get if you want to disagree but not knowing the arguments make you seem very uninformed.