Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Hamas/Israel conflict: news and discussion



Germany walking into the brick wall of their own history with their new 'a little bit of genocide is ok if you pretend it isn't happening' approach there. Unfortunate that Western powers have shown themselves to be so utterly and completely shameless really.


I am appalled by German government stance. Looked this up and they are really backing up a right wing racist Zionist government in Israel:


The Prime Minister’s Office said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyhau had spoken with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and thanked him for Berlin’s decision.

“Your stance and Germany’s stance on the side of the truth moves all the citizens of Israel,” Netanyahu told Scholz, according to the PMO.

“The blood libel, which is full of hypocrisy and malice, must not be allowed to prevail over the moral principles shared by our two countries and the entire civilized world,” Netanyahu said.

The Namibians are right. Germany did apologies years later. But to see the Genocide convention as giving a right wing Israeli government a get out of jail card so to speak for its mass killing of civilians in Gaza makes me wonder what is so great about European Western values as represented by Germany.

There was also the Armenian genocide.

A German Jew wrote a novel about that in 1930s, Banned by Nazis. Partly wrote it as a warning from history.


The German government seem to have this idea that the Genocide convention is purely about the Holocaust. And thus does not apply to Israel.

The "exceptionalism" of Israel state.

One aspect of the the Nazis is that they thought their murderous war in the East Europe was something they could get away with.

As others had got away with it previously.

Unlike the war in the West the War in the East was a war of colonisation. The mistake the Nazis made was that this kind of conquest was ok outside Europe but not in Europe.

The Nazis did think as others had acted this way why can we not behave like this.
 
Last edited:
I am appalled by German government stance. Looked this up and they are really backing up a right wing racist Zionist government in Israel:




The Namibians are right. Germany did apologies years later. But to see the Genocide convention as giving a right wing Israeli government a get out of jail card so to speak for its mass killing of civilians in Gaza makes me wonder what is so great about European Western values as represented by Germany.

There was also the Armenian genocide.

A German Jew wrote a novel about that in 1930s, Banned by Nazis. Partly wrote it as a warning from history.


The German government seem to have this idea that the Genocide convention is purely about the Holocaust. And does not apply to Israel.

The "exceptionalism" of Israel state.

One aspect of the the Nazis is that they thought their murderous war in the East Europe was something they could get away with.

Unlike the war in the West the War in the East was a war of colonisation. The mistake the Nazis made was that this kind of conquest was ok outside Europe but not in Europe.

The Nazis did think as others had acted this way why can we not behave like this.

I cannot imagine why the German government has done this (in terms of what interests or goals it is seeking to achieve by doing so), but it is really questionable whether the case that has been brought would amount to a genocide under the very narrow definition set out in 1948. I am not sure the wider international community would want it defined in that way either, sadly - we will probably end up with some sort of "well this isn't genocide, these things here (points to mounds of dead Palestinians) were probably caused by war crimes of one sort or another, but that wasn't what was charged so we can't condemn it, it will be for the responsible state's judiciary to deal with".

That the Court is going to issue a stop on this as a potential genocide is likely (simply because there is so much evidence provided by Israeli officials that they may be planning one), though.
 
I cannot imagine why the German government has done this (in terms of what interests or goals it is seeking to achieve by doing so), but it is really questionable whether the case that has been brought would amount to a genocide under the very narrow definition set out in 1948. I am not sure the wider international community would want it defined in that way either, sadly - we will probably end up with some sort of "well this isn't genocide, these things here (points to mounds of dead Palestinians) were probably caused by war crimes of one sort or another, but that wasn't what was charged so we can't condemn it, it will be for the responsible state's judiciary to deal with".

That the Court is going to issue a stop on this as a potential genocide is likely (simply because there is so much evidence provided by Israeli officials that they may be planning one), though.

Why.

Its because BLM don't matter as much as white ones.

That is what is behind the Namibian government criticism of Germany.
 
That the Court is going to issue a stop on this as a potential genocide is likely (simply because there is so much evidence provided by Israeli officials that they may be planning one), though.
That's all they're being asked to do at this stage, isn't it?

Any order to stop the killing will be a massive win, whatever the caveats they may feel the need to add. Anything less than that and this court's credibility is gone. I don't care what technicalities they come up with. There's a lot at stake.
 
That's all they're being asked to do at this stage, isn't it?

Any order to stop the killing will be a massive win, whatever the caveats they may feel the need to add. Anything less than that and this court's credibility is gone. I don't care what technicalities they come up with. There's a lot at stake.

No, there is a both the request to stop the acts in the interim and a request to rule whether the acts themselves represent a genocide. The first is far more likely than the second, sadly.
 
Just seen this


This makes me angry. She's also been subject to character assassination with allegations about her academic work.

This all in the name of combatting anti semitism
Unsurprisingly, some of her critics and pursuers have links to antisemites, white supremacists and misogynists. Who'd have guessed?

 
So Turkey arrest Israeli footballer Sagiv Jehezkel for making a harmless statement. This is so pathetic. South Africa and the Houthis are showing real solidarity. All Erdogan can do is gesture. If they wanted to gesture properly they could have at least boycotted Israeli sport.
 
Unsurprisingly, some of her critics and pursuers have links to antisemites, white supremacists and misogynists. Who'd have guessed?

I was intrigued about this case. Without specifying what exactly was plagiarised the author of this article commences by using the dog-whistle header "Claudine Gay: Critical Plagiarism Theory"
After some wittering about Claudine Gay being guilty of "mosaic palgarism" (an offence which could result in suspension for a student), he goes on to attack another left-wing academic for nicking another authors dissertation on Detroit, merely changing the descriptor to Atlanta for his own use.
American academic life must be trying. This is a culture of polarised idealogues in constant attack mode.
 
So Turkey arrest Israeli footballer Sagiv Jehezkel for making a harmless statement. This is so pathetic. South Africa and the Houthis are showing real solidarity. All Erdogan can do is gesture. If they wanted to gesture properly they could have at least boycotted Israeli sport.
It's totally bonkers. He faces prosecution and almost certainly the sack from his club for holding up a message on his bandage saying '100 days. 7/10'. He then explained that he was expressing solidarity with the Israeli hostages and wants the fighting to stop. He is being investigated for 'publicly inciting the public to hatred and hostility'.

Israel's response is typically OTT as well:

"In its actions, Turkey serves as the executive arm of Hamas," he said [Defence Minister Yadav Gallant]

Sagiv Jehezkel: Israel footballer in Turkey facing sack for hostage plea

That appears to be the standard response to any country expressing support for the Palestinians. In this instance, it has a bit more substance, though. It does appear that expressing public criticism of Hamas's actions on 7 October is now verboten in Turkey.
 
Guests on international law podcast give some fairly confident predictions about SA's genocide case against Israel in the ICJ.

In a nutshell:

1. South Africa will likely win some provisional measures against Israel, including 'desisting from incitement, and punish acts of and encouragement to genocide'

2. It is unlikely it will win the provisional measure to suspend military operations.

3. It will probably take around five years for the ICJ to issue a ruling on whether Israel committed genocide.

4. It is very unlikely the court will find Israel has committed genocide. The reason for this is that it is very difficult in international law to establish the intent required for a finding of genocide. One must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the only reasonable conclusion to be drawn from state action is that it intended the destruction - in whole or part - of a protected group. All a State needs to do is adduce some evidence that there are other possible motivations behind its actions, which is very easy to do. The only ever finding of genocide at the ICJ has been in relation to the Srebrenica massacre.

5. The decision is not about whether Israel has committed war crimes, crimes against humanity or any other illegal conduct other than genocide, a ruling in Israel's favour would only mean that the incredibly high bar for genocide has not been made out to a legal standard. This will be seen as a great victory for Israel and a crushing blow to the Palestinians, but the court is answering only a very narrow question - albeit a hughly important one.


Whilst South Africa's case has been an undoubted show of solidarity to the Palestinians and has been politically embarrassing for Israel, it is unlikely to deliver a legal victory for the Palestinians, or stop the bombs falling upon them.
 
It's totally bonkers. He faces prosecution and almost certainly the sack from his club for holding up a message on his bandage saying '100 days. 7/10'. He then explained that he was expressing solidarity with the Israeli hostages and wants the fighting to stop. He is being investigated for 'publicly inciting the public to hatred and hostility'.

Israel's response is typically OTT as well:



Sagiv Jehezkel: Israel footballer in Turkey facing sack for hostage plea

That appears to be the standard response to any country expressing support for the Palestinians. In this instance, it has a bit more substance, though. It does appear that expressing public criticism of Hamas's actions on 7 October is now verboten in Turkey.

It does seem sometimes there are more 'arms of Hamas' than Hamas has actual arms.

Anyway, obviously a ridiculous, unhelpful and biased intervention from Turkey. But it is only the other side of the coin to Usman Khawaja not being allowed to wear shoes with a peace message on them - and if he'd gone ahead, he too would have been sacked by Cricket Australia. Which, too, would have been a ridiculous, unhelpful and biased intervention.
 
Al Jazeera's panel think the strongest point from Israel comes in the arguments against the technicalities. Specifically, we have to hope that SA didn't make a mistake by not approaching Israel first. Most commentators do seem to think some kind of interim order will be made, but the only enforcement mechanism is the UN Security Council and the US will veto it. So this is the court of public opinion.

Interesting point made by one panellist that she thinks Israel has already changed its approach somewhat as a result of SA filing this case.

What will be the outcome of the ICJ genocide case against Israel?
 
It does seem sometimes there are more 'arms of Hamas' than Hamas has actual arms.

Anyway, obviously a ridiculous, unhelpful and biased intervention from Turkey. But it is only the other side of the coin to Usman Khawaja not being allowed to wear shoes with a peace message on them - and if he'd gone ahead, he too would have been sacked by Cricket Australia. Which, too, would have been a ridiculous, unhelpful and biased intervention.
More arms than an octopus, ironically
 
Al Jazeera's panel think the strongest point from Israel comes in the arguments against the technicalities. Specifically, we have to hope that SA didn't make a mistake by not approaching Israel first. Most commentators do seem to think some kind of interim order will be made, but the only enforcement mechanism is the UN Security Council and the US will veto it. So this is the court of public opinion.

Interesting point made by one panellist that she thinks Israel has already changed its approach somewhat as a result of SA filing this case.

What will be the outcome of the ICJ genocide case against Israel?

The legitimacy that any provisional measures brought in will give to other actions - things like boycotts, suspension of international ties with Israel, legal actions taken against pro-Israel governments like the UK within the UK - taken by governments elsewhere in the region and world is going to be the important thing, I think.

Yes, there probably won't be a UNSC resolution ordering a stop, but I would expect most of the world to start to organize a breaking-off of ties and bring in economic measures unless this is brought to a halt.
 
Looks like Wes Streeting will have to fight for his seat at next election.

Anger at Labour leadership stance on Gaza/ Palestine has lead to the British Palestinian being chosen to stand in his seat.


Also Starmer has now ditched Corbyn run party promise to acknowledge Palestine State if Labour takes power.

 
Back
Top Bottom