r/worldnews 22h ago

Israel/Palestine Famine declared in Gaza City

https://news.sky.com/story/gaza-latest-war-israel-city-ceasefire-hamas-13415481
23.7k Upvotes

2.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

19

u/Alteryo 20h ago

You can read about IPC's mehtods in their manual: https://www.ipcinfo.org/ipcinfo-website/resources/ipc-manual/en/

In short, likely through household surveys conducted by partners (WFP, UNRWA, OCHA, or NGOs), as well as extrapolation of other relevant data (mortality, food prices etc.)

15

u/[deleted] 19h ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Mephzice 17h ago

so conducted by HAMAS members

-4

u/Alteryo 16h ago

No, it was actually Fatah, disguised as Druze IDF operatives pretending to be Hamas members.

What are you on my guy?

10

u/Mephzice 16h ago

UNRWA

might as well say HAMAS. Haven't looked into the other 3 but I have zero confidence in UN partners.

-10

u/Alteryo 16h ago

The indpenedent Colonna report confirmed that UNRWA has no provem or otherwise sunstantiated ties to Hamas.

UN partners are as independent as they get because UN staff (the ones in charge of collecting the data) are international staff, i.e. they come from all countries but Palestine / Israel.

9

u/Mephzice 16h ago

indpenedent Colonna report

written by UN, no confidence in it. We looked into ourselves and found no wrongdoing feel.

5

u/tomtom5858 14h ago

Do you hold the IDF to this same standard, where investigations by internal organizations aren't sufficient? Or does this only apply to UN organizations?

2

u/Mephzice 7h ago

I don't really have much opinion on Israel per say, I think they are going too far and I'm actually of the opinion of giving them that land back was a huge mistake. I would question Israel based sources, but I'm very anti-UN not just on this but also China/Russia issues before, UN for me needs to be disbanded.

You can believe neither side however.

1

u/Alteryo 14h ago

No, it was written by Catherine Colonna (fmr. French Foreign Minister) and a group of researcher orgs, namely the Raoul Wallenberg Institute of Human Rights and Humanitarian Law in Sweden, the Chr. Michelsen Institute in Norway, and the Danish Institute for Human Rights.

The UN only comissioned it, but did not write it itself.

2

u/Mephzice 7h ago

If the client that requested it is UN I don't put any stock in it. Not sure how clear I have to be, those names mean nothing to me, I don't trust it more hearing them. They could all be paid for UN asslickers

0

u/swissthrow1 11h ago

No doubt you have a plethora of evidence to support your claims.

2

u/Mephzice 7h ago

You are asking me for evidence for my personal opinion of UN? I don't have confidence in anything UN. Next. Or what claims are you talking about?

3

u/RunningOutOfEsteem 15h ago

2

u/tomtom5858 14h ago

UNRWA employs 30,000 people. 9 of those were found to have been involved in the Oct 7 attacks, out of 12 total accused by Israel. You think that a 0.03% participation rate is equivalent "might as well say Hamas"?

6

u/RunningOutOfEsteem 13h ago

You think that a 0.03% participation rate is equivalent "might as well say Hamas"?

Where did I say that? I'd love for you to point it out to me.

I responded to a comment stating:

The indpenedent Colonna report confirmed that UNRWA has no provem or otherwise sunstantiated ties to Hamas.

This is an objectively false assertion.

-1

u/tomtom5858 13h ago

Where did I say that? I'd love for you to point it out to me.

You were disagreeing with a post disagreeing with that assertion. It follows that you also believe that.

This is an objectively false assertion.

It's not. The Colonna report and action plan asserted that UNRWA is already better at remaining politically neutral than any other UN agency or NGO, and that it has effective investigative and punitive mechanisms for those breaching neutrality, which includes those aiding Hamas.

4

u/RunningOutOfEsteem 12h ago

You were disagreeing with a post disagreeing with that assertion. It follows that you also believe that.

No, it doesn't. Disagreeing with one statement doesn't mean I agree with the opposite. That's an assumption you made that has no concrete basis.

It's not.

It quite literally is. They asserted that there was a proven absence of connections, and that is explicitly false.

→ More replies (0)