Aid Groups Dispute Israeli Claims in Gaza Attacks

United Nations, 11 January, (IPS): As the Israelis try to justify the massive loss of civilian life in Gaza, their arguments and counter-charges continue to be shot down either by the United Nations or by international human rights organizations.

Did the Israelis misidentify a school run by the U.N. Relief Works Agency (UNWRA), where 43 Palestinians seeking shelter were killed in an early morning air strike? Or were there Hamas gunmen shooting from the school drawing Israeli fire?

Neither assertion is accurate, says John Ging, UNRWA's director of operations in Gaza.

All U.N. schools in Gaza are clearly marked, and they fly the Organization’s distinctly discernible blue-and-white flags.

Moreover, he told reporters, Israel has been provided with Global Positioning System (GPS) coordinates of all of UNRWA's installations in Gaza.

So there could not have been a misidentification of the U.N. school in the Jabaliya refugee camp whose compound was hit by an artillery shell early this week.

Asked if Hamas militants could have taken shelter in the school that was attacked, Ging said that UNRWA was "hugely sensitive" to maintaining the integrity of its facilities.

"We vet all those who seek shelter in our facilities to make sure militants were not taking advantage of them," he said.

Ging said that after visiting the site, he was confident no militants had been inside the building at the time of the bombing and no fire had come from within.

However, he said, "Israel's position on the issue had shifted to suggest that militant fire had come from the vicinity of the school rather than from inside."

Still, Ging demanded an independent investigation to prove the U.N.'s credibility against the unfounded charges.

CONTINUE READING ... http://www.asiantribune.com/?q=node/15110

The UNRWA, specifically former Commissioner-General Peter Hansen, has admitted to hiring members of Hamas for their work.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UNRWA#Peter_Hansen

That, on top of other alleged claims for assisting and supporting terrorist activities in the region question the validity of their claims.

Wow, welcome to the site, are you here to promote half-truths?

Peter Hansen

Israel has stated that Peter Hansen, UNRWA's former Commissioner-General (1996-2005) "consistently adopted a trenchant anti-Israel line" which resulted in biased and exaggerated reports against Israel.

Hansen caused controversy in Canada in October 2004 when he said in an interview with CBC TV

"Oh I am sure that there are Hamas members on the UNRWA payroll and I don't see that as a crime. Hamas as a political organization does not mean that every member is a militant and we do not do political vetting and exclude people from one persuasion as against another." "We demand of our staff, whatever their political persuasion is, that they behave in accordance with UN standards and norms for neutrality".

Hansen later specified that he had been referring not to active Hamas members, but to Hamas sympathizers within UNRWA. In a letter to the Agency's major donors, he said he was attempting to be honest because UNRWA has over 8,200 employees in the Gaza Strip. Given the 30 to 40 percent support to Hamas in Gaza at the time, and UNRWA's workforce of 11,000 Palestinians, at least some Hamas sympathizers were likely to be among UNRWA's employees. The important thing, he wrote, was that UNRWA's strict rules and regulations ensured that its staff remained impartial UN servants.


"Admitted to hiring Hamas" is a nice way to paraphrase something to your view. He said he didn't ask locals political persuasion.

If he meant that UNRWA hires only Hamas sympathizers or supporters, he would have said as much originally. His quote is plain and clear. Hamas members on the payroll is not even close the same thing as Hamas supporters.

I apologize for leaving my original response without much context, but I thought the disparities between his original quote and his attempt to "clarify" were plain.

It would be one thing if this was an isolated incident, but when added to other situations such as the textbook controversy from the late 90s (where it was found that UNRWA sponsored schools used textbooks containing anti-semetic messages. When one understands that without the Israel/Gaza conflict, the UNRWA doesn't exist, it makes one question the motivation of the organization.

If you don't poll new hires on their political affiliations, how are you to know who among them belongs to Fatah or to Hamas? It stands to reason that there will be some Hamas supporters/members in their ranks, but you seem to think all Hamas to be horrible terrorists. There are two arms of the organization, you should know. The militant/political wing is bat-shit crazy and should be jailed. The civil wing has done good in the community, as far as opening schools and hospitals and brought some semblance of law to a previously lawless region.

and agree with the argument that polling and vetting aid organizations for members of specific group is a tiresome task that takes away from the primary goal of such an organization. And I will even accept your argument that Hamas has done some good work for a small group of people. However, a majority of the organization, heck the tenets of the organization, support the destruction of an entire country.

I don't mean to generalize all Hamas members as terrorists, but it is hard to differentiate when a person is willing to join a group that supports and advocates for such violent and lawless action.

Around 45% voted for Hamas in the last election. This amounts to 440,409 votes for Hamas, but these aren't all from Gaza. The West Bank and East Jerusalem were allowed to participate in the elections as well. So out of the 25,000 people who work for the UNRWA, there are potentially 440,409 Hamas voters who could be hired to work for them. Obviously, there will be some people who could be considered supporters of Hamas working for the UNRWA.

The argument that I find holds the most weight of anything you have presented thus far would be that the UNRWA's funding and survivability depend on Israeli-Palestinian disputes. I don't, however, think this particular wing of the UN is in jeopardy in the future, given the instability in the region. Do remember, the Israeli government is the first to tell you that there is no humanitarian crisis in Gaza, even though it isn't just the U.N. who says otherwise, but several prominent human rights groups, and NGO's.

www.gisha.org

Gaza truce proposed after Israeli shell kills 30

Israel's military said its shelling at the school — the deadliest single episode since Israeli ground forces invaded Gaza on Saturday after a week of air bombardment — was a response to mortar fire from within the school and said Hamas militants were using civilians as cover.

Two residents of the area who spoke with The Associated Press by telephone said they saw a small group of militants firing mortar rounds from a street near the school, where 350 people had gathered to get away from the shelling. They spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisal.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/M/ML_ISRAEL_PALEST ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

another newbie Pro with no profile wow you guys are popping up like mushrooms these days

The Nazis the US Hired are like the Hamas hired here, they know the people, the country and what is needed. Those hired by the US (Except by the Intelligence and Military agencies, a separate subject) were hired for their connections within the communities the US was operating in during the Post WWII Occupation. These people had been hired by the Nazis for the same reason the US hired them. connections with the community. Remember Hamas is like the Nazis (or the Democratic and Republican parties in the US, the Communist party in France and Italy etc), in that these were members of the Nazi party do to their ability to work within their communities (and the same for the Democrats and Republicans in the US, there are some communities I would hire Republicans for their know that area, its people and what is needed better then I do even if I defeated them in the previous election).

The fact that this agency hired some Hamas member is meaningless, unless you can show those members hired committed some act of terrorism (Thus my exception for Nazis hired by the Intelligence and Military agencies in Post WWII Germany, those hired do to record in Russia which included acts of what we now call Terrorism). If no connection with any act of terrorism, a connection with Hamas is pointless.

One last comment, Hamas won the election in 2006 for it was viewed by the Citizens of Gaza as Honest (something the PLO was NOT viewed even under Arafat) and committed to righting the wrongs of the citizens of Gaza (Which the Citizens of Gaza believed of Arafat BUT NOT his successors as head of the PLO). The main reason for this belief in the honestly of Hamas was Hamas with less access to funds, provided more services then did the PLO (Corruption was taking to much off the top by the PLO for it to provide the services needed). Given this comparison it is simple to see why 46% of the population of Gaza voted for Hamas (only 42% for the PLO, 10% voted for other candidates).

Wikipedia does a pretty remarkable job of policing the articles for accuracy. The quote has been replayed and published in other sources as well.

It had only one paper source, JPost, which is a right-wing IDF mouthpiece honestly. The rest were UN statements through the rest of the piece.

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2004/10/03/unwra041003.html

Here is an article from the Canadian Broadcasting Centre, the organization that initially conducted the interview where Mr. Hansen said the statement in the wikipedia article. Note the quote is exactly the same as it appears in the article.

They need all the help they can get over there. Thanks

last edit at the bottom of the page

# this page was last modified on 9 January 2009, at 20:57.

not even subtle is it?

An he has previously admitted not caring if he hired Hamas members or not. Yet he claims they vetted people in the shelters. Not sure how he could have it both ways.

this is all dishonest bullshit. Simply being a member of Hamas is not a capital crime, and it is no justification at all for killing innocent bystanders. Even then, it would not be much more than a fig-leaf.

Ging has claimed to be a pure as the driven snow in all of this, but his prior comments and human nature argue against that.

How far away from a UN building does Hamas have to get before its not human shields (even unknowingly). It should start by being further away than the CEP of 155mm howitzer. Otherwise Hamas is putting the UN shelters at risk

At first it was "militants fired from inside the building"
Next it was "militants were seen near the area" (I shouldn't have to point out how relative of a term 'near' is)
Now it is "Oops, we didn't mean our laser-guided bombs to hit there"

And you think it is Mr. Ging who is being dishonest here?

Even the DU mods joined threads about different UN buildings being hit a while back

Clearly UN buildings are being hit. Clearly explanations are called for. We (DU, mass audience, etc) may never get one. Hopefully the UN will. However, Israel will be loath to expose their capability for the UN, let alone for all to see. The best we can realistic expect for is some sort of private explanation of why Israel did what they did to the UN.

The 'press' has a hard time keeping it straight because it repeats Israeli Defense Ministry statements as fact, and not the press release that they are. How many times have you read a news article based upon how the IDF says things happened, why they did something, or other justifications for some egregious 'mistake'?

Your context was clear. Its not clear that the sources are

You keep taking the "wait and see" towards several issues that I recall. The White phosphorous issue being the last that I remember off the top of my head (even though there has been plenty of evidence, even carried by the MSM). I just would like to ask, when do you believe something? When the IDF refuses to comment on the matter?

WP is being used. When it first came out, it was unclear if that was true or not. Now we know. Nothing substantive showing its being used intentionally on people, though using it at all in urban areas is questioned by some.

Waiting until some real data becomes available and caring about facts is not hear no evil, see no evil.

self-delete