The judges had stressed they did not need to say for now whether a genocide had occurred but concluded that some of the acts South Africa complained about, if they were proven, could fall under the United Nations’ Convention on Genocide.
Israel isn’t convicted of committing genocide, yet as there’s only “a plausible risk of genocide” - and I’m sure the “defense” minister calling for the starvation of all people in Gaza and referring to them as “human animals” will do wonders for Israel’s case…
The current ruling is that “Israel must take all measures to prevent genocidal acts in Gaza” - which is an interesting statement to make if the ICJ thought no genocidal acts were happening.
But hey innocent until proven guilty right - I just hope if it does get proven you’ll be the first one to start shouting how Israel is committing genocide - the same way you’re currently doing the opposite - as that would show your true lack of bias…
Because I have a brain and understand being critical of Israel is not a detriment to a newspaper.
As a perfect example, your obvious bias strongly influences readers evaluation of your opinion. Guess what mine is.
prolly genocide denial.
Removed by mod
Ok let’s be pedantic then
Israel isn’t convicted of committing genocide, yet as there’s only “a plausible risk of genocide” - and I’m sure the “defense” minister calling for the starvation of all people in Gaza and referring to them as “human animals” will do wonders for Israel’s case…
The current ruling is that “Israel must take all measures to prevent genocidal acts in Gaza” - which is an interesting statement to make if the ICJ thought no genocidal acts were happening.
But hey innocent until proven guilty right - I just hope if it does get proven you’ll be the first one to start shouting how Israel is committing genocide - the same way you’re currently doing the opposite - as that would show your true lack of bias…
Removed by mod