[Saeko]

I haven't finished watching it all yet. But the parts I've seen so far are very interesting.

[late]

Yeah, this has been a long time coming, and I am genuinely curious how it all plays out.

[Skynet]

South-Africa has chosen forgiving the Apartheidcrimes instead to prosecute them for the sake of reconsiliation between Boers und Zulus.

South-Africa has moral authority.

South-Africa remembers who was the Apartheid regime's closest ally -Israel- they tested even nukes together.

[late]

South-Africa has chosen forgiving the Apartheidcrimes instead to prosecute them for the sake of reconsiliation between Boers und Zulus.

South-Africa has moral authority.

South-Africa remembers who was the Apartheid regime's closest ally -Israel- they tested even nukes together.

Yeah, long time coming..

[Saeko]

Israel responds:

[Deutschmania]

Some excerpts from a couple articles I just read .

A factor driving Israeli outrage at the proceedings — so much so that the country has reversed a longstanding policy of ignoring United Nations-affiliated bodies — has been that a country founded in the ashes of the destruction of its people should face the charge of genocide.

“A terrorist organization carried out the worst crime against the Jewish people since the Holocaust, and now someone comes to defend it in the name of the Holocaust,” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said earlier this week.

Israel’s lawyers also said the breadth and methods of Israel’s counterattacks did not deviate from the laws of war and instead show that Israel is not intent on killing Palestinians en masse.

Galit Raguan, a legal adviser at Israel’s Justice Ministry, noted the measures Israel had taken to facilitate the entry of assistance into the strip, to warn civilians of impending attacks and to facilitate their evacuation. “The charge of genocide in the face of these extensive efforts is frankly untenable,” she said.

She listed a number of actions Israel has taken, including the allowing in of food and water, and medicines and medical equipment — an accounting that she said was far from comprehensive. She said the list showed that the evidence underlying the genocide charge is”tendentious and partial” and that “the allegation of the intent to commit genocide is baseless.”

She added, “If Israel had such intent would it delay a ground maneuver for weeks, urging civilians to seek safer space and in doing so sacrificing operational advantage?”

Israel’s critics say the country has frustrated the delivery of relief to Gaza Palestinians. Israel blames international aid groups for haplessness and Hamas for stealing the food and equipment. World health agencies say Gaza is on the verge of starvation.

Malcolm Shaw, a British barrister who specializes in human rights and who is leading the Israeli team, referred to quotes by Israeli officials that South Africa said signaled genocidal intent. Shaw said the citations were ripped from context or were made by officials who are not part of the decision-making process.

He noted, for instance, South Africa’s citation of comments by Israel’s minister of heritage, Amichai Eliyahu, who said “there is no such thing as uninvolved civilians in Gaza” and who fantasized about a flattened Gaza as “beautiful” and recommended nuking the strip.

Eliyahu, Shaw noted, “is completely outside the policy and decision making of the war. In any event, his statement was immediately repudiated by members of the war cabinet and other ministers, including the prime minister.” Netanyahu suspended Eliyahu from Cabinet meetings because of his remarks.

Shaw noted that the war was run by a small coterie of officials, and said South Africa ignored multiple statements by those officials upholding the protections of civilians, including Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant.

“The prime minister stated time and again, ‘We must prevent a humanitarian disaster, ‘” Shaw said.

Jewish Telegraphic Agency

In South Africa’s document setting out its genocide case against Israel over the Gaza war, there are nine pages dedicated to genocidal incitement. It notes that Benjamin Netanyahu twice “invoked the Biblical story of the total destruction of Amalek”, declaring: “You must remember what Amalek has done to you, says our Holy Bible. And we do remember.” A later passage in the Bible leaves no doubt for interpretation: “Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.” This was no throwaway comment. Consider the unprecedented slaughter of Palestinian children – or “infants and sucklings” – and note that six days after invoking Amalek in a national address, Netanyahu referred to it again in a letter to army soldiers and officers.

Then there’s Isaac Herzog, the Israeli president, who declared: “It is an entire nation out there that is responsible. It’s not true this rhetoric about civilians not aware, not involved. It’s absolutely not true.” No demarcation between militants and civilians exists here. Yoav Gallant, the minister of defence, was a repeat offender. On 9 October, in an unashamed commitment to collective punishment, he declared Israel was imposing a “complete siege on the Gaza Strip. There will be no electricity, no food, no fuel, everything is closed,” he said. “We are fighting human animals and we are acting accordingly.”

On witnessing Israeli soldiers gleefully destroying civilian infrastructure on TikTok, some have speculated there has been a breakdown in army discipline. More likely is that soldiers listened when Gallant informed troops he had “released all the restraints” and “lifted all restrictions” on Israeli forces.

Another senior official, Israel Katz, now minister of foreign affairs, declared last year when he was energy minister: “All the civilian population in Gaza is ordered to leave immediately. We will win. They will not receive a drop of water or a single battery until they leave the world.” Meanwhile the heritage minister, Amihai Eliyahu, opposed humanitarian aid on the grounds that we “wouldn’t hand the Nazis humanitarian aid”. He also suggested nuking Gaza, declaring “there is no such thing as uninvolved civilians”. That saw him suspended by Netanyahu.

Some army officers are willing participants. In a video addressed to Gaza’s residents, one major general, Ghassan Alian, castigated “citizens of Gaza” for celebrating Hamas’s extremism, promising: “Human animals are dealt with accordingly. Israel has imposed a total blockade on Gaza, no electricity, no water, just damage. You wanted hell, you will get hell.” Another retired major general and adviser to the defence minister, Giora Eiland, demanded other countries be prevented from offering assistance, demanding that Gaza’s people be left with “two choices: to stay and to starve, or to leave”. He advocated Gaza being made “a place that is temporarily or permanently impossible to live in”, declared women were not innocent because “they are all the mothers, sisters or wives of Hamas murderers”, and advocated “humanitarian disaster” and “severe epidemics” to achieve war aims: the finance minister Bezalel Smotrich tweeted he agreed “with every word”.

South Africa’s document is incomplete: there have been countless new examples since it was published. After the Israeli attorney general reportedly issued a warning to colleagues to “watch their words”, clearly concerned that Israel was being incriminated on the eve of the international court of justice investigation, the Knesset deputy speaker, Nissim Vaturi, doubled down on a previous assertion that “Gaza must be burned”.

Netanyahu is said to have warned his ministers to “be sensitive”, yet each day brings more examples of genocidal intent and incitement. This should define media coverage, and yet still the fantasy that this is a war against Hamas – with a side debate about proportionality – is indulged. Without western support, Israel’s mass slaughter would immediately end. This is why we must address complicity: lives depend on it. The Guardian

[Deutschmania]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4f_yoal4gx8

I haven't finished watching it all yet. But the parts I've seen so far are very interesting.

I have just now finished watching the above quoted video. I found it especially noteworthy that the South African delegation made mention of Netanyahu's invoking of the commandment to exterminate the Amalekites as a nation . I feel that the only way that the government of Israel could have seemed even more culpable of the accusation of genocide would be if it and/or the IDF were to quote from Psalm 137 , especially this striking verse . " Happy is the one who takes and dashes
your little ones against the rock! " . Such seemingly atrocious passages as these has long troubled the moral sensibilities of the Jewish conscience . https://www.jpost.com/not-just-news/ask-the-rabbi-does-the-torah-endorse-genocide-473646 And what I have witnessed here , with regards to the before mentioned United Nations court trial , reminds me of this screen play I once saw years ago , titled " God on Trial" , which all those interested can watch below . ( TW: brief rear nudity) As for me , if my Judaism and my humanism were to ever come into conflict , I believe that I should put a higher priority on being a human above being a Jew . The Jewish scriptures even states that we are to do justly and love compassion . Plus , that all other people who dwell in the land among us must be treated with fair consideration , and are not to be oppressed in any way . Micah 6:8 , Leviticus 19:34 Such ethical imperatives I believe abrogates any scriptural examples of supposed divinely authorized war crimes .

[wat0n]

If the best SA can do to prove intent is a straw man, oh boy...

[ingliz]

@wat0n

I can see you are not a lawyer.

South Africa doesn't have to prove intent at this stage.

Prima Facie Jurisdiction

The Court may indicate provisional measures only if the provisions relied on by the Applicant appear, prima facie, to afford a basis on which its jurisdiction could be founded, but need not satisfy itself in a definitive manner that it has jurisdiction as regards the merits of the case.

[wat0n]

@wat0n

I can see you are not a lawyer.

South Africa doesn't have to prove intent at this stage.

Prima Facie Jurisdiction

The Court may indicate provisional measures only if the provisions relied on by the Applicant appear, prima facie, to afford a basis on which its jurisdiction could be founded, but need not satisfy itself in a definitive manner that it has jurisdiction as regards the merits of the case.

I know. Even that is shaky.

Also, for all we know the ICJ may delay taking any measures at all for enough time to allow the war to end on its own. I suspect that would be in its best interests.

[Deutschmania]

I know. Even that is shaky.

Also, for all we know the ICJ may delay taking any measures at all for enough time to allow the war to end on its own. I suspect that would be in its best interests.

This is why South Africa , from what I have today heard from the video @Saeko posted above , has demanded a ceasefire. So that there may be time to settle this matter before it is too late .

[wat0n]

This is why South Africa , from what I have today heard from the video @Saeko posted above , has demanded a ceasefire. So that there may be time to settle this matter before it is too late .

Yes, and the ICJ may decide to take its time on this. Maybe it won't need to wait for too long, though, given Israel announced (before this case) that it's transitioning to a lower intensity phase given it's taken control of northern Gaza.

[Deutschmania]

Israel responds:

Well that was hours I'll never get back. I had a lengthy response about ready to post , when I accidentally clicked off the page . So in short I will just state that the first speaker was a propagandist , who used emotionally charged loaded language , and whataboutism , complaining of "identity politics" , we he himself used his own sort of Jewish identity politics , and failed to appreciate the fact that the International Court of Justice seems to use an adversarial , rather than inquisitorial system of adjudication , unlike incidentally how things were handled in the old Soviet Union courts of law . And if he wants us to feel sorry for the hostages , Israel shouldn't have slaughtered some of them , during its military operations in the Gaza Strip. I felt that the second was boring , and that his loquacious pontification added nothing of special value to the proceeding . The second and third engaged in victim blaming , and invoked the historic legal precedent of World War 2. And the final speaker gave what amounted to a closing summation. I just wonder what these professional defenders of Israel would have had Jews do , if the shoe were on the other foot . Did not Jewish people offer up armed resistance , when they were confined to ghettos ? Under similar material conditions , how can Israel reasonably expect the Palestinian population of Gaza to behave any differently ? I am not sure though that the IDF will be able to be brought to account for its aerial bombardment of civilian areas , given that both sides , during World War 2 carried out comparable actions , the Luftwaffe in London , and the Allies in both Dresden , and Royan , among other targets . Which was why the German war pilots were never brought to justice , at the Nuremburg Trial. And though both Islam and Judaism , in terms of just war theory , condemns excessive destruction of human life , and asserts that those who exceed the rightful limits , and wantonly kill even one person is guilty of genocide, exactly what all should fall beyond the pale of international human rights law remains to be clearly established . This basically summarizes my previous more detailed commentary. The remaining links consist of my list of footnotes. https://archive.nyu.edu/bitstream/2451/61278/2/Jihad%20in%20Islam%20Just%20war%20theory.pdf , https://academic.oup.com/ejil/article/24/1/343/438602 , https://mosaicmagazine.com/observation/history-ideas/2016/10/the-origins-of-the-precept-whoever-saves-a-life-saves-the-world/ , https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=2979&context=ilj , https://www.unodc.org/e4j/en/organized-crime/module-9/key-issues/adversarial-vs-inquisitorial-legal-systems.html , https://www.palestine-studies.org/en/node/1654483# , https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/jewish-resistance , https://www.trtworld.com/opinion/if-warsaw-ghetto-in-1943-enacted-an-uprising-and-not-terrorism-so-did-gaza-in-2023-15671465 , https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/jewish-uprisings-in-ghettos-and-camps-1941-44 , https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/06/14/gaza-israels-open-air-prison-15 , https://www.wagingpeace.org/nuremberg-and-nuclear-weapons/ , https://www.facebook.com/pakistanidefence/videos/jon-stewart-destroys-israel/10152330001112663/

[wat0n]

I don't recall Jews ever mass raping and massacring German civilians over Nazism, @Deutschmania

[Rich]

I don't recall Jews ever mass raping and massacring German civilians over Nazism,

Well, for starters I'm not sure that Jews as collectives were ever in a position to mass rape and massacre German civilians. In Poland after the war Jews were more concerned with not getting murdered themselves by Polish patriots. Jews best opportunities to mass rape and massacre German civilians was as officers in the Red Army. So Jewish Soviet officers may well have led mass rapes and massacres.

However it should be noted that the taboo against rape, against not even raping your enemy's women is very much a western Christendom thing. Judaism for example had no problem with sex slavery. Islam had no problem with sex slavery. In the West we like to debate the morals of sanctions and blockade, White Phosphorous, land mines, the destruction of urban areas by artillery, fire bombing and even nuclear weapons. Is it OK to to enslave, cage and torture Muslims without due process, this is a tricky question that probably only professional philosophers are fully qualified to answer. But a single rape as an act of war, No that's completely out of the question. That's completely immoral and couldn't be justified in any circumstance.

Edit, sorry my mistake, when I said Is it OK to to enslave, cage and torture Muslims without due process I misspoke, or mistyped Of course what I meant to say was Is it OK to to enslave, cage and torture people who have nothing to do with Islam without due process,

[wat0n]

Well, for starters I'm not sure that Jews as collectives were ever in a position to mass rape and massacre German civilians. In Poland after the war Jews were more concerned with not getting murdered themselves by Polish patriots. Jews best opportunities to mass rape and massacre German civilians was as officers in the Red Army. So Jewish Soviet officers may well have led mass rapes and massacres.

I also don't recall something similar being done by Jewish resistance movements against e.g. Nazi collaborators.

[ingliz]

raping

A 2023 study in Conflict and Society, a journal that is part of the Berghahn Open Anthro project, records numerous examples of Israeli State sexual violence against Palestinians

[wat0n]

A 2023 study in Conflict and Society, a journal that is part of the Berghahn Open Anthro project, records numerous examples of Israeli State sexual violence against Palestinians

I don't think this is the evidence of mass rape you think it is, and the paper does not cite statistics. Even taking its examples at face value - and there's no reason one should, given the paper counts supermarket bomber Rasmea Odeh as a rape victim - the few cases show those are isolated incidents and not massive.

[ingliz]

@wat0n

Are you saying you can't be raped if you are a supermarket bomber?

That it is OK to sexually abuse detainees?

[late]

I don't recall Jews ever mass raping and massacring German civilians over Nazism, @Deutschmania

Actually, right after the war, Jews killed thousands of former soldiers.

Can't really blame them, but it did happen. (and having seen your prior complaint, go look it up yourself)