A Leauki's Writings
Published on February 3, 2009 By Leauki In War on Terror

Remember the reports about Israel firing at a UN school in which "civilians" had found refuge?

It was a lie.

Physical evidence and interviews with several eyewitnesses, including a teacher who was in the schoolyard at the time of the shelling, make it clear: While a few people were injured from shrapnel landing inside the white-and-blue-walled UNRWA compound, no one in the compound was killed. The 43 people who died in the incident were all outside, on the street, where all three mortar shells landed.

...

The teacher, who refused to give his name because he said UNRWA had told the staff not to talk to the news media, was adamant: "Inside [the compound] there were 12 injured, but there were no dead."

...

Soon it was presented that people in the school compound had been killed. Before long, there was worldwide outrage.

...

John Ging, UNRWA's operations director in Gaza, acknowledged in an interview this week that all three Israeli mortar shells landed outside the school and that "no one was killed in the school."

"I told the Israelis that none of the shells landed in the school," he said.

Why would he do that?

"Because they had told everyone they had returned fire from gunmen in the school. That wasn't true."

Mr. Ging blames the Israelis for the confusion over where the victims were killed. "They even came out with a video that purported to show gunmen in the schoolyard. But we had seen it before," he said, "in 2007."

The Israelis are the ones, he said, who got everyone thinking the deaths occurred inside the school.

"Look at my statements," he said. "I never said anyone was killed in the school. Our officials never made any such allegation."

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090129.wgazaschool29/BNStory/International/home

Note that it wasn't "the Israelis" who made the claims about the school, as John Ging claims, but Hamas and the western media (reporting what Hamas told them as fact). And UNRWA, far from telling people the truth immediately to avoid a violent backlash, told their staff not to talk to newsmedia.

The 2007 video indeed shows terrorists firing from a UN school.

The report goes on:

And in its daily bulletin, the World Health Organization reported: "On 6 January, 42 people were killed following an attack on a UNRWA school ..."

The UN's Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs got the location right, for a short while. Its daily bulletin cited "early reports" that "three artillery shells landed outside the UNRWA Jabalia Prep. C Girls School ..." However, its more comprehensive weekly report, published three days later, stated that "Israeli shelling directly hit two UNRWA schools ..." including the one at issue.

Such official wording helps explain the widespread news reports of the deaths in the school, but not why the UN agencies allowed the misconception to linger.

So the WHO reported, officially, that Israel attacked a school, which according to UNRWA didn't happen. Why would the WHO report a lie, especially considering that this lie was likely to cause violence all over the world? Is this UN organisations trying to prolong a war that pays for their existence to "help" the victims (as long as they are not Jewish)?

Far from helping the civilian victims of a war, the UN have chosen sides. Not only do they NOT help Jewish civilian victims, but they also pay terrorists to teach in their schools, allowed them to fire from schools (as the 2007 video shows), and lie about Israel's action.

John Ging goes on:

"The state of Israel still has to answer for that. What did they know and what care did they take?"

Well, I think the state of Israel doesn't have to answer for killing people in a war started by someone else. But the UN should have to answer for violating their neutrality, encouraging violence, their racism, and for prolonging the war.

The UN should especially have to answer for helping and supporting a terrorist organisation who chose to start a war, despite the fact that starting a war is illegal according to "International Law".

 


Comments
on Feb 03, 2009

There is a game called Taboo the subject of which is to describe something without using the word for it or five closely related words.

Some anti-Semites are spectacularly good at that game. They manage to talk about Israel without ever mentioning the word "Jews".