• @Glytch
    link
    48 months ago

    A claim like that requires evidence to be believed.

      • WhatTrees
        link
        fedilink
        English
        58 months ago

        It’s the second half of your claim you’d have to support with evidence. Of course we help fund them, but it’s not so clear that they “benefit Hamas”".

        If you read something like this article here, you’d note that of the 19 alleged ties to Hamas (of 34,000 workers btw) none have been found to be supported by evidence. Some of them are still going, and maybe they will show some kind of connection, but A) the time to believe that is when evidence is provided, not when the claim is made and B) I don’t really think cutting funding for an agency that does legitimate help to people currently starving and dying is justified just because 0.05% of employees have ties to Hamas. Would you be Ok condemning and demanding we cut funding to the IDF if we found 0.05% of their personnel had ties to radical Zionist movements calling for the eradication of Palestinians? Something tells me you wouldn’t.

      • @Glytch
        link
        18 months ago

        That wasn’t the part that requires evidence, but you knew that and are simply being obtuse.

        I’ll be more clear: what source do you have to support the idea of the UNRWA funding Hamas?

        Added requirement: the source must not trace back to Israeli or American intelligence/defense agencies.