Live coverage thread of the International Court of Justice and the case of South Africa vs. Israel.
They didn’t really call for it to stop military action though. They called for it to stop doing things intended to be genocide; I predict that Israel will just disagree that it intends genocide, and keep on doing it.
Ruling that the Palestinians are a protected class under the Genocide conventions is pretty big though…
From the live thread:
"7m ago 07.43 EST International Court of Justice orders Israel to prevent genocide in Gaza Judge Donoghue says the court has decided that Israel must “take all measures within its its power” to prevent all acts within the scope of the genocide convention.
She adds that Israel must ensure “with immediate effect” that its forces do not commit any of the act in the genocide convention.
Israel must also take immediate measures to improve the humanitarian situation in Gaza."
and:
"14m ago 07.37 EST ICJ recognises right of Palestinians in Gaza to be protected from acts of genocide Judge Donoghue, speaking now at the ICJ, said at least some rights sought by South Africa in its genocide case against Israel’s war in Gaza are plausible. She said: “A link exists between the rights claimed by South Africa that the court has found plausible and at least some of the provisional measures requested.”
With the reading still ongoing, the court said it recognises the right of Palestinians in Gaza to be protected from acts of genocide. Palestinians appear to be a protected group under the genocide convention, the court said.
Friday’s ruling at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) does not deal with the core accusation of the case – whether genocide occurred – but will focus on the urgent intervention sought by South Africa."
Also, statements by Israel are pretty fucking damning IMO:
"20m ago 07.33 EST Judge Donoghue is detailing comments made by Israeli officials during the war, including:
Defence minister Yoav Gallant saying he had ordered “complete siege” of Gaza City”, and later said “we will eliminate everything” and that Israel was fighting “human animals”.
President Isaac Herzog saying, “It’s an entire nation out there that is responsible”."
deleted by creator
So is saying that we shouldn’t kill innocent humans ‘A big deal’
I know you’re being sarcastic, but yeah. The situation is so dire that having someone at least come out and say “This is wrong” is a net improvement.
Israel argued that because Jews were affected by a genocide, Israel is therefore unable to commit it themselves.
deleted by creator
The tl;dr is:
- Palestinians are protected under the genocide conventions.
- Israel needs to take steps to ensure genocide is not being committed.
- Israel needs to improve humanitarian aid to Gaza.
- Come back in a month.
Internet warriors distorted reality and made you believe self-defense is genocide. Although terrible, what the Palestinians are experiencing right now is nothing like what the Jews experienced in world war II, which is what the genocide statutes were written to address. Were they being forced into trains and worked to death or put into gas chambers, I guarantee you they would apply.
deleted by creator
I’m saying collateral damage is not genocide.
deleted by creator
Wait until the legal definition applies before punishing people for breaking the law.
Cutting off food water and power to the populace while preventing humanitarian aid is deliberate and is in no way collateral damage you fucking ghoul
You need help, bro. Read the article.
Back at your murder apologist trolling again, I see
Palestinians are a national group and should qualify under the statutes, I didn’t think that was ever under question. Hamas, however, is a political group and therefore not protected. If those Israeli statements refer to them, I don’t believe they violate any statutes.
Israel was fighting “human animals”.
If this referred to Hamas militants, not Palestinians in general, it is not incitement to genocide.
President Isaac Herzog saying, “It’s an entire nation out there that is responsible”.”
An entire nation did in fact elect Hamas to power and to this day they enjoy popular support among Palestinians, which would in fact make them responsible for everything that followed from their leadership. Pointing this out is not incitement to violence against them.
The phrases "he had ordered ‘complete siege’ of Gaza City”, and later said “we will eliminate everything” sure doesn’t make it sound like they are interested in limiting it to Hamas.
The siege is a war crime and most of the statements are straight genocidal. The Gallant quotes seem to have been from a poor translation by Bloomberg that spread everywhere – and used as evidence at the ICJ. They issued a correction a few days ago. He said “Gaza won’t return to what it was before. There will be no Hamas. We will eliminate everything.” That entire middle sentence was missing originally. He also said, “We are fighting human animals. This is the ISIS of Gaza.”
When Bibi comes out and outright says “in the future, the state of Israel has to control the entire area from the river to the sea” or alternatly “must have security control over the entire territory west of the Jordan River” it’s hard to argue any other intent.
Everything, not everyone. It sounds like he’s referring to destroying infrastructure, not people, but I’m not in his head so I could be wrong.
If your intent is to “eliminate everything”, that’s including non military targets, and would fall under Article II of the Genocide Convention:
https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/genocide.shtml
"In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
a. Killing members of the group;
b. Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
c. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
d. Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
e. Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."deleted by creator
That’s assuming that he was being 100% literal. Even if he was, Hamas uses civilian infrastructure thereby making non-military targets into legal military targets. In this context, “eliminating everything,” doesn’t necessarily mean destroying protected sites illegally.
More importantly, when it comes to operations and not merely statements, it’s very clear that Israel is quite selective about choosing targets, and they care if they are legal or not, they even built an AI for this purpose. They go to great lengths to try and minimize civilian deaths during their operations, taking far more precautions than I’m aware that any other country does. Info on how the IDF does this despite Hamas hiding among civilians can be found here.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
Info on how the IDF does this despite Hamas hiding among civilians can be found here.
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Everything, not everyone
Are “human animals” things or ones?
Except Hamas is the excuse and was never the real target. The real target are and always have been the Palestinian people.
The popularity of Hamas is a consequence of 70+ years of subjugation under control of the settlers. The genocide of Palestinians didn’t start 100+ days ago; it started with the Nakba.
Except Hamas is the excuse and was never the real target. The real target are and always have been the Palestinian people.
Perhaps it seems that way because of the popular support of Hamas and intifada in Palestine, the fact that Hamas is comprised of Palestinians, and because they hide among civilians to maximize collateral damage.
The popularity of Hamas is a consequence of 70+ years of subjugation under control of the settlers. The genocide of Palestinians didn’t start 100+ days ago; it started with the Nakba.
And why did the Nakba happen? All the jew murdering. Jews started out legally buying lands until they were murdered and genocided and ethnically cleansed by Arab nationalists and neighboring Arab countries allied with Palestine. It’s incredible you see the constant aggressors as the victims.
This is what happened when the shoe was on the other foot:
For the first time in 1,000 years not a single Jew remains in the Jewish Quarter. Not a single building remains intact. This makes the Jews’ return here impossible
“The operations of calculated destruction were set in motion. I Knew that the Jewish Quarter was densely populated with Jewish populations who caused their fighters a good deal of interference and difficulty. I embarked, therefore on shelling of the quarter with mortars creating harassment and destruction. Only for days after our entry into Jerusalem, the Jewish Quarter become their graveyard. Death and destruction reigned over it. As the down of May 28th was about to break, the Jewish Quarter emerged in convulsive cloud-a cloud of death and agony”
Yet somehow Israel is the bad guy and must be restrained, It is Israel who is genocidal for defending themselves, not the explicitly genocidal Hamas, not the constantly belligerent terrorists next door who target civilians and want to destroy Israel in whole in or in part.
And why did the Nakba happen? All the jew murdering.
And that somehow justifies the displacement and genocide of the Palestinian people.
Yet somehow Israel is the bad guy and must be restrained, It is Israel who is genocidal for defending themselves, not the explicitly genocidal Hamas, not the constantly belligerent terrorists next door who target civilians and want to destroy Israel in whole in or in part.
Because it’s the Settlers that are commiting genocide.
- Starting a war and losing does in fact arguably justify annexation. Distance from those trying to murder you provides safety and security.
- Peacefully living with Jews seems to have worked out pretty well for the Arabic 21% of Israel who stayed and currently enjoy full citizenship rights, it’s a shame those who left chose violence and continue to choose violence.
- The only side that has committed genocide in this conflict or that to this day advocates for genocide in this conflict is the Palestinian side. I oppose genocide, which is why I stand with Israel.
Your quote from the Jordanian commander dates to after the Nakba. There was significant intercommunal conflict in Mandatory Palestine because of the mismanagement of Jewish migration by Britain, and escalating tensions from the “legal” land purchases you mentioned that had been occurring since the late 1800s. Yes, Jews attempted to purchase and settle uninhabited land, but the fact is big chunks of the land purchased were misappropriated under the Ottoman Land Code, and European Jews frequently expelled (by force if the implication wasn’t clear) the Arab Muslims they found living on it, who may have had no idea it was sold out from under them.
Cope and justification.
“You’re committing genocide.”
“Okay, but did I intend to? :trollface:”
“stop committing hate crimes”
“Is it a hate crime if Im enjoying it?”
Genocide is literally a claim of intent.
So accidental genocide is okay? If you do a war and a genocide happens just…all well shit happens?
One cannot commit accidental genocide, genocide requires intent to destroy a protected group to be classified as such. See the legal definitions elsewhere in this thread. Different war crimes might apply to accidental action, but not genocide.
All genocides are war crimes, but not all war crimes are genocides. ;)
Expected and disappointing statement. This just backs the non-statement of saying Israel should “do what it can” to protect civilians. The simplest way to protect civilians is to order an immediate ceasefire. This will help Biden to continue supporting the genocidal campaign that Israel is conducting on the Palestinians, because nothing he says opposes the ICJ.
I’d add, I’m not happy with the “yeah, come back in a month” phrasing. Israel could see that as “Oh, so as long as we finish this in a month…?”
Yeah absolutely, since their wording is so vague there’s not really a bar that they would need to meet.
And at least one Israeli official’s response is patently offensive:
"12m ago 08.10 EST
Israel’s security minister responds to ICJ ruling by tweeting ‘Hague Shmague’
Itamar Ben-Gvir has responded to the ICJ ruling by tweeting: “Hague Shmague”.
The South African government said it welcomed the provisional measures the ICJ had ordered against Israel."
Israel is not genocidal, and this trial result supports that.
Ordering an immediate ceasefire would be the world binding Israel’s hands, preventing the nation from defending itself against Hamas before Israel achieves meaningful security goals.
The simplest way to protect civilians is for Hamas to return the hostages and immediately end the war, the next best way is to let Israel take out the terrorist government that keeps instigating violence and attacking theirs.
Israel is not genocidal
That is absolutely NOT the ruling of this court.
"Judge Donoghue says the court has decided that Israel must “take all measures within its its power” to prevent all acts within the scope of the genocide convention.
She adds that Israel must ensure “with immediate effect” that its forces do not commit any of the act in the genocide convention."
Since Israel is the only force attacking Palestinians, the order to prevent all acts under the genocide convention “with immediate effect” means that the court IS in fact recognizing Israel is committing genocidal acts against the Palestinian people and that they, and they alone, have the obligation to stop it.
If a court ordered you to “ensure you must with immediate effect dispose of any and all illegal drugs in your possession”. This doesn’t mean you have them, only that if you do you have to get rid of them.
The same applies here, they must make sure genocide isn’t happening, not stop their ongoing genocide.
Palestine is really winning hearts but not so much minds in the information side of this war.
It’s a genocide.
Removed by mod
Then Israel has nothing to worry about right? Right?
Removed by mod
When a court orders you to reverse an action, it’s a recognition that you are currently engaging in that action.
So when this court ruled “that its (Israels) forces do not commit any of the act in the genocide convention.”
They are stating that Israeli forces are, in fact, committing acts covered under the genocide convention.
If they weren’t, there would be no need for the court order.
Now, Israel’s defense could be that any genocidal action is the act of individual soldiers or units and is not official Israeli policy… I don’t BUY that, but it’s plausible deniability.
In this case, now, the court is saying Israel has an obligation to stop it regardless of who ordered it.
I don’t read it the same way you do.
I read it as in your way to school tomorrow make sure you don’t play in the road.
During your invasion of Palestine ensure you don’t commit any of the acts outlined here
The problem with that reading is we already know Israel is on the wrong side of the genocide convention (bolding mine):
https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/genocide.shtml
"In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
a. Killing members of the group;
b. Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
c. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
d. Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
e. Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."Israel is already engaging in A, B, and C. So it’s not a matter of telling them to not do something they are currently not doing.
The trial supports the opposite of what this comment is indicating. The role of the ICJ is to determine whether Israel’s alleged actions are capable of being covered by the Genocide Convention. Today they decided that this is indeed the case and the measures they announced, as meager as they are, are legally binding. A final decision will be probably only made in a couple of years.
from defending itself against Hamas before Israel achieves meaningful security goals
Please explain to me, in what world “defending against Hamas” (which are islamist terrorists) and “achieving meaningful security goals” includes bombing a Greek Orthodox Christian church?
They always answer the same. It had Hamas in it. Or under it. Behind every dead child and woman is a member of Hamas. All 26,000 of them.
Also do you really, truly believe they would stop if Hamas released all of the hostages today?
Honestly?
That was the deal Hamas offered them days ago - Netanyahu refused it.
Can we just have a little of that old South America shit we used to do, just a little one?
We don’t expect Hamas to do anything good because they are terrorists.
We used to expect Israel to do good things because they used to not be terrorists.
deleted by creator
The International Court of Justice rejects Israel’s bid to throw out the genocide case, calls for Israel to take steps to protect Palestinians in Gaza.
The ICJ also ordered Hamas to release the hostages being held in Gaza. There was no call by the court for Israel to end the war. The case will continue.
I mean, the ICJ is organized and maintained by the UN, so it makes sense that a “strong response” from them effectively amounts to hand-wringing.
Netanyahu told the ICJ to suck his balls and they got down on their knees.
Pretty much.
sigh
Well it certainly isn’t what Israel wanted, which was for the ICJ to throw out the case and say “what, the Jews are doing genocide? Don’t be silly!”
But they didn’t say that which of course means they have an antisemetic bias.
Because of all these brain damaged fuckwits tying their cultural identity to a corrupt government.
Waiting for the inevitable “ICJ is the judicial arm of Hamas!” claims.
Just watched. Thanks for the post.
Removed by mod
Lawfare, as usual, has a more in-depth article than any of the major news outlets. You can very much see the expertise on display in their work.
Expected but disappointing. As usual a vague ruling that can be interpreted in any way israel wants without any real demands. Not even forcing israel to let humanitarian aid in.
The court of “Justice” has become the court of Genocide.
I wonder how long it will take for Israel to file a countersuit against Palestine for their failure to prevent genocidal statements.
There’s plenty of room to have the ICJ force the UN to designate Hamas, PFLP, PIJ, Hezbollah, and others as genocidal terrorist organizations that cannot receive any UN funding or have their members employed by the UN. UNRWA would have to fire half their employees, but that’s not a bad thing.
There’s no doubt in my mind that Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, etc. etc. would, given half the chance, genocide Jews in Israel.
But I think part of genocide is having the power structure to actually accomplish that level of violence and they just aren’t capable of it. Individual ATROCITIES? Sure, that’s in their reach. Assassinating an entire people? They just don’t have that capability.
If you look at an American example… the Americans had the capability and desire to commit genocide against Native Americans.
The inverse? Massacres, sure, genocide? Not so much.
Except immediate access to the means isn’t actually part of it. They attempted to ethnically cleanse the area around Gaza, and publicly stated that one of their goals with the rocket fire was to empty the city of Ashkelon. They don’t get a pass because they failed to fully succeed.
