• Milk_Sheikh@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    8 个月前

    Hamas is a proscribed terrorist organization, under international sanctions. Nobody expects them to bow to UN pressure.

    Israel is supposedly a responsible and law abiding nation state, with diplomatic ties, international recognition, and is expected to behave according to international law.

    If you want equal treatment that can be done, the UN is repeatedly tired of Israel’s behavior

      • pjwestin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        8 个月前

        Weird how the Israeli forces suddenly started finding all of these connections between UNWRA and Hamas hours after the ICJ ruled against them. Also weird that the IDF claims that anything set up to help Palestinian civilians, like UNWRA, hospitals, and refugee camps, are Hamas strongholds, but no one can ever verify these claims (usually because they been obliterated by Israeli air strikes).

          • pjwestin@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            21
            ·
            edit-2
            8 个月前

            LOL, you are claiming the U.N. is in league with Hamas my guy, please get some perspective.

            • Rapidcreek@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              8 个月前

              You can talk to the Wall Street Journal. They think the same thing. But, you can’t even accept what your eyes see on video.

              • pjwestin@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                14
                ·
                8 个月前

                Well, I can’t read most of the WSJ’s coverage because it’s behind a pay wall, but it’s anything like the AP or Reuters coverage, it’s going to say that these claims are only being made by the Israeli military and not independently verified (the opening paragraph of the WSJ coverage seems to line up with this). The AP even notes, “It did not prove definitively that Hamas militants operated in the tunnels underneath the UNWRA facility, but it did show that at least a portion of the tunnel ran underneath the facility’s courtyard.” So, did the IDF show that Hamas was working with UNWRA, or did they show some journalists a tunnel near UNWRA building?

                  • pjwestin@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    16
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    8 个月前

                    I can read the first paragraph, the rest is behind a pay wall. Have you never seen a pay wall? Here’s the first sentence: “Hidden deep below the headquarters of the United Nations’ aid agency for Palestinians here is a Hamas complex with rows of computer servers that Israel’s armed forces say served as an important communications center and intelligence hub for the Islamist militant group.” My guess is, based on the fact that no news agency is verifying this claim, and the opening sentence of the WSJ coverage is citing Israeli claims, they also don’t have any evidence besides the IDF’s claims.

                    But why don’t you tell me? You obviously read the entire article, or you wouldn’t be referencing it. Does the WSJ have any independent evidence outside of the Israeli presentation show to the news agencies? What evidence is provided by the WSJ that is absent from the AP coverage I linked to? I mean, you must know, you did read the article, not just the headline, right?

                    Edit: Weird, this guy made 9 comments since I left this reply, including some trying to undermine the AP article I cited, but he hasn’t responded to this. If I didn’t know any better I’d swear he hadn’t read that WSJ article.

      • dlatch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        8 个月前

        Ah yes, an Israeli “AI expert” is really a reliable source of information in this conflict.

      • Milk_Sheikh@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        edit-2
        8 个月前

        Multiple cuts to the video, no verification it is a UNRWA building, nothing linking the tunnel to the UN building is shown. Just talk

        Do better, don’t swallow propaganda willfully

          • Milk_Sheikh@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            15
            ·
            edit-2
            8 个月前

            Yes. I’m denying the pathetic ‘evidence’ you tried to insert into the discussion, because it functionally proves nothing:

            • A tunnel entrance, then the video cuts
            • Now we’re in a tunnel, looking at computers racks and screens. And another video cut
            • Now we’re in a BUILDING! Ooooh how’d they get into the building? Hmmmm that’d seem like some actual proof if they showed how the tunnel and building were linked! Too bad they don’t show that part, I wonder why not? 🤔
            • Ohhh now he’s saying things. “Omg look at the wires, they’re cut! Only eeeevil people cut wires, they must be hiding something” DAMNING PROOF, we clearly need to disband UNRWA immediately

            You keep offering these low effort drive-by claims, and reply with cheap arguments or retorts when challenged. There’s plenty that Al-Quassam and Hamas have done wrong, without inventing false narratives that lack evidence.

              • Keeponstalin@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                14
                ·
                8 个月前

                I am sensing some denial here. I’m sure they just accidentally added cuts to the video, surely they wouldn’t try to mislead people by fabricating evidence.

                Why has there been zero independent verification if the IDF proof is so clear cut?

              • TheFriar@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                14
                ·
                8 个月前

                offers dubious evidence

                “Oh, so now you’re just deny deny deny, huh?! So typical!”

                And the other option is…blind belief in unfounded claims? Here’s a suggestion: back up your claim. Don’t just chant “denial denial denial” like it’s actually an argument.