We found eight instances where the Israeli legal team misrepresented the visual evidence they cited, through a combination of incorrect annotations and labelling, and misleading verbal descriptions. These instances are presented and explained in this report.
Our study also reveals that the Israeli legal team presented single instances of alleged Palestinian military use of civilian infrastructure as blanket justifications for the systematic and widespread attacks on civilians, shelters, schools, and hospitals.
Hope it's true.
Still, I'll wait and see what the US-backed state of Israel has to say about it. US has lied so many times so far on that, that I don't trust their claims.
So the US gives some food to Palestinians, and plenty of bombs & money to Zionists (while they are accused of Genocide and ICJ said "plaussible" they are doing one).
I think I will start using the acronym USBSI (US Backed State of Israel). UBSI maybe? I dunno, open to suggestions!
South America has issues with colonial border since the europeans colonisers left, and later on also due to US intervensions. Nicaragua has additionally a horrifying past from the Sandinistas revolution -supported by people from all over the world- that succeeded and turned authoritarian, as they do. Not that long ago. Many people who fought in it are still alive. To my understanding they still suffer the consequences.
In order for the US-backed state of Israel to stop killing and starving civilians and children, all other countries need to demand it by diplomatic pressures, economic sanctions, boycott etc.
I am not ignoring the first part, this is why every military action doesn't qualify under that statute but Israel is “plausibly” doing a Genocide according to ICJ. Personally I don’t need a court decision to make up my mind.
Plausible does not mean probable
see dictionary for details?
Apart from that, you haven't said anything about what are Israel’s responsibilities, and you actively ignored my specific question on the matter. We cannot talk solutions without that so I don’t see any point continuing this attempt to have a conversation.
to get the Arab League to enforce a demilitarized zone between Palestine and Israel
Let’s say that this is what he’s saying. I don’t see you mentioning what Israel has to do, so this reading cannot not be a solution cause it leaves out the responsibilities of Israel. What would you put on the top of the list of what Israel has to do? My answer to that would be that Israel has to stop bombing and starving, civilians and children, as well as recognize Palestine.
On Genocide, Israel is doing at least 3 of the 5 required for one to be called as such. And ICJ court said "plausible" so far.
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.
It's more than "calling them out" when they helped create the situation. The Arab league invaded Israel (…)
I was not talking about Arab people, I don’t know where you got that from.
Also before the Arab league invaded Israel, (debatable but not our topic) Israel had to be created as a country. If Israel has the right to exist in West Asia, there are no valid arguments on why Palestine should not have that right as well. Are there?
For the apartheid in South Africa to end, both colonizers and colonized worked together for some sort of solution. Palestine has recognized Israel as part of the Oslo agreement. As long as Israel is not recognizing Palestine, no solution can be implemented, and the Genocide will continue.
that's assuming all these concerned parties actually want a solution and not just to vilify Israel
For this statement to be valid it would be required that the concerned parties are equal. In the case of the Israel and Palestine there is a power imbalance. On one hand there is the zionist settler colonial power of Israel that is one of the strongest military forces in the world. One the other hand you have Palestine that is not even recognized as a country by the colonizers and instead of borders the colonizer has raised a wall controlling amongst other things the few entrances.
Calling out Israel for its settler colonial policies is no synonym to vilifying it.
The title: U.S. [claims it] wants Israeli written assurances on using U.S. weapons in Gaza by mid-March
The last sentence: The Israeli Defense Ministry declined to comment.
Does this sums it up or is it just my impression??