International Criminal Court says it has jurisdiction in Palestinian territories

[dexterm]

The ICC investigation may take some years, but..

 

On the positive side...
1. It will expose war crimes, and the displaced, oppressed, tortured, maimed and murdered  deserve that at least. If not the ICC, who would defend them?

2. It may eventually result in some individual arrest warrants, which will give the criminals more than a few sleepless nights and may make life very uncomfortable for them, if caught and convicted.

3. Israel does its own propaganda job on Hamas's war crimes, but with continual ICC revelations of Israeli war crimes, often hidden and obfuscated by the right wing media, they will now be on the table for legitimate open discussion. More people worldwide will become more aware of the darker side of the Zionist narrative. And perhaps the airing of Israeli war crimes may actually haunt Biden and Harris's dreams, with some prompting from Sanders and other Democrat party progressives. 

4. It gives the Palestinian state legitimacy, as a recognised party to the ICC, which irks Israel bearing in mind it is not that long ago that it was illegal and a shootable offense to wave the Palestinian flag..still is if you count the Palestinian paraplegic shot dead by an Israeli sniper from hundreds of yards away beind a double steel fence... one of many war crime that I hope is on the ICC list to investigate.

[Morch]

1 hour ago, dexterm said:

>>In case you're not familiar with the poster, this is someone who refuses to discuss the any aspect, whatsoever, reflecting negatively on the Palestinian side. In the same way, he basically refuses to acknowledge that any form of accountability may be attributed to them.
... of course the Palestinians have made mistakes. 20:20 hindsight is wonderful counsel. But it has never been a level playing field. The Zionists are the invaders, the brutal illegal occupiers with all the powerful weapons, not the other way around.

 

Why should one do Israel's dirty propaganda work for it to bolster the false equivalence.. They are quite capable of doing that for themselves.

 

Thanks for making my point - that you are not here for an open discussion. All you've got to offer is vehement, one-sided rhetoric. It is not 'propaganda' to discuss issues reflecting in an uncomplimentary way on the Palestinians.

[Morch]

1 hour ago, dexterm said:

The ICC investigation may take some years, but..

 

On the positive side...
1. It will expose war crimes, and the displaced, oppressed, tortured, maimed and murdered  deserve that at least. If not the ICC, who would defend them?

2. It may eventually result in some individual arrest warrants, which will give the criminals more than a few sleepless nights and may make life very uncomfortable for them, if caught and convicted.

3. Israel does its own propaganda job on Hamas's war crimes, but with continual ICC revelations of Israeli war crimes, often hidden and obfuscated by the right wing media, they will now be on the table for legitimate open discussion. More people worldwide will become more aware of the darker side of the Zionist narrative. And perhaps the airing of Israeli war crimes may actually haunt Biden and Harris's dreams, with some prompting from Sanders and other Democrat party progressives. 

4. It gives the Palestinian state legitimacy, as a recognised party to the ICC, which irks Israel bearing in mind it is not that long ago that it was illegal and a shootable offense to wave the Palestinian flag..still is if you count the Palestinian paraplegic shot dead by an Israeli sniper from hundreds of yards away beind a double steel fence... one of many war crime that I hope is on the ICC list to investigate.

 

As pointed out several times on this topic, it seems that some posters are under some illusions as to the ICC's powers, efficacy or reach. That's often coupled with a strong emphasis on the potential PR/propaganda value of the investigation, rather than it's actual legal results or impact on the parties involved (never mind the conflict itself). It is also noted, that those repeatedly going on about the court investigating both sides, often focus their comments on Israel's supposed crimes, and wished for punishment.

 

Now for the "points" above...

 

The ICC will not, and can not, 'defend' anyone. It does not have any troops, power of enforcement, or authority when it comes to such matters. Further, cases investigated are limited in span. That is, the investigation will look into events in a defined time, and that's it. There won't be any ongoing, endless investigation looking into future issues. That would require a new petition, with the whole process starting over. As far as I'm aware, the ICC is not in the habit of accepting such further complaints.

 

If there are arrest warrants issued, they will be limited in number. Cases usually focus on relatively high level figures, and that too, is subject to countries cooperating to actually arrest anyone. There's a fine tradition of failing to do so. As with the previous comment, this is unlikely to effect future (or even current) holders of such posts, due to the nature of ICC investigations.

 

I don't think there's a shortage of Propaganda efforts pushing the Palestinian narrative, certainly not on these topics, for example. That you see it otherwise is amusing, if hypocritical.

 

Give the Palestinian 'state' more credibility? Which state would that be? The one headed by the Palestinian Authority (which you seem to claim doesn't do anything)? The one headed by the Hamas (and supposedly under investigation as well)? How would it reflect on the Palestinian 'state' if it failed to arrest Hamas leaders in case they are sought for trial by the ICC?

 

Your last comment an example is bogus. The guy was not shot for it being illegal to wave a Palestinian flag. Further, the actual circumstances of the shooting are less than clear. Even the Hamas backed down some on this one since. It was discussed, at length, on several topic back when (with your participation).

[dexterm]

13 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Thanks for making my point - that you are not here for an open discussion. All you've got to offer is vehement, one-sided rhetoric. It is not 'propaganda' to discuss issues reflecting in an uncomplimentary way on the Palestinians.

That's because it's a one sided conflict.

 

You, basically support Zionism, with a few disingenuous crumbs in order to appear objective. Whereas I regard Zionism as a racist supremacist ideology..the cancer at the core of the entire conflict.  And I have also learnt that if you give Zionist apologists an inch, they will take a mile.

 

I am hoping that the ICC investigation will lay bare the racist basis of Zionism, that the minority Israeli Jewish population are practising apartheid against the majority indigenous Palestinian population through a 54 year old supposedly temporary illegal occupation. Which is a war crime. I'd go even further to state that Zionists are guilty of the war crime of genocide, in ethnically cleansing the majority of Palestinians from their homeland, refusing them the right of return and trying to erase all traces of their history, culture and presence within historic Palestine.

[Morch]

 

@dexterm

 

No. That's your usual spin. My point is different.

 

This is a discussion forum. You're treating it like a propaganda arena.

 

Complaining about other posters (misrepresented) views, while openly engaging in a hyper biased manner is hypocritical.

 

Also, your rhetoric is almost always over the top. As in the post above.

 

 

 

[stevenl]

6 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

@dexterm

 

No. That's your usual spin. My point is different.

 

This is a discussion forum. You're treating it like a propaganda arena.

 

Complaining about other posters (misrepresented) views, while openly engaging in a hyper biased manner is hypocritical.

<snip>

Some self reflection would be nice here.

[Morch]

2 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Some self reflection would be nice here.

 

My positions, often expressed on these topics, are neither extreme, nor completely align with either side's narrative. They are not expressed with vehemence, and I do not shy away from discussing or criticizing the actions of a specific side. Try harder.

[dexterm]

36 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

As pointed out several times on this topic, it seems that some posters are under some illusions as to the ICC's powers, efficacy or reach. That's often coupled with a strong emphasis on the potential PR/propaganda value of the investigation, rather than it's actual legal results or impact on the parties involved (never mind the conflict itself). It is also noted, that those repeatedly going on about the court investigating both sides, often focus their comments on Israel's supposed crimes, and wished for punishment.

 

Now for the "points" above...

 

The ICC will not, and can not, 'defend' anyone. It does not have any troops, power of enforcement, or authority when it comes to such matters. Further, cases investigated are limited in span. That is, the investigation will look into events in a defined time, and that's it. There won't be any ongoing, endless investigation looking into future issues. That would require a new petition, with the whole process starting over. As far as I'm aware, the ICC is not in the habit of accepting such further complaints.

 

If there are arrest warrants issued, they will be limited in number. Cases usually focus on relatively high level figures, and that too, is subject to countries cooperating to actually arrest anyone. There's a fine tradition of failing to do so. As with the previous comment, this is unlikely to effect future (or even current) holders of such posts, due to the nature of ICC investigations.

 

I don't think there's a shortage of Propaganda efforts pushing the Palestinian narrative, certainly not on these topics, for example. That you see it otherwise is amusing, if hypocritical.

 

Give the Palestinian 'state' more credibility? Which state would that be? The one headed by the Palestinian Authority (which you seem to claim doesn't do anything)? The one headed by the Hamas (and supposedly under investigation as well)? How would it reflect on the Palestinian 'state' if it failed to arrest Hamas leaders in case they are sought for trial by the ICC?

 

Your last comment an example is bogus. The guy was not shot for it being illegal to wave a Palestinian flag. Further, the actual circumstances of the shooting are less than clear. Even the Hamas backed down some on this one since. It was discussed, at length, on several topic back when (with your participation).

1. You don't need troops to "defend" someone (another of your strawmen) But the ICC can point out the illegality of the  occupation...which is quite broad when you regard all the concommitent apparatus to achieve that: extrajudicial murders, land theft, ethnic cleansing, human rights abuses, and apartheid laws, roads, walls, and all the other separate and unequal trappings.

2. Then the war criminals had better get used to the Tel Aviv and Gaza beaches. Imprisonment would be preferable but metaphoric will do. 

3. The negative PR must be upsetting Israel. Otherwise why would they so vehemently want to silence the ICC investigation.

4. As of 31 July 2019, 138 of the 193 United Nations member states and two non-member states have recognised Palestine. The ICC investigation is another example of legitimacy. I expect if the PA failed to arrest Hamas war criminals, they would garner a similar reaction to Israel's failure to arrest the guilty, except in Israel's case it has all the state power to do so, but would be deliberately refusing to act.

[dexterm]

18 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

@dexterm

 

No. That's your usual spin. My point is different.

 

This is a discussion forum. You're treating it like a propaganda arena.

 

Complaining about other posters (misrepresented) views, while openly engaging in a hyper biased manner is hypocritical.

 

Also, your rhetoric is almost always over the top. As in the post above.

 

 

 

There are two sides to a debate. One is not obliged to argue both, especially if I regard one side, Zionism as positively evil. I'm not going to play the   there are fine people on both sides    schtick, just to please you.

[herfiehandbag]

22 minutes ago, dexterm said:

I'd go even further to state that Zionists are guilty of the war crime of genocide, in ethnically cleansing the majority of Palestinians from their homeland, refusing them the right of return and trying to erase all traces of their history, culture and presence within historic Palestine.

Genocide is defined as "the deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group".

 

That is certainly not what Israel is practising.

There may well be cases arising from the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land, but they should be viewed in the context that those lands were occupied as a result of wars fought whilst Israel was threatened with genocide, that being the stated war aim of a number of not all the combattant Arab states, certain of which, along with the Palestinian movements they support, have never abandoned that aim.

 

 

[stevenl]

15 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

My positions, often expressed on these topics, are neither extreme, nor completely align with either side's narrative. They are not expressed with vehemence, and I do not shy away from discussing or criticizing the actions of a specific side. Try harder.

This you accuse others of

 

"No. That's your usual spin. My point is different.

This is a discussion forum. You're treating it like a propaganda arena.

Complaining about other posters (misrepresented) views, while openly engaging in a hyper biased manner is hypocritical."

 

is IMO applicable to yourself.

[Morch]

1 minute ago, dexterm said:

1. You don't need troops to "defend" someone (another of your strawmen) But the ICC can point out the illegality of the  occupation...which is quite broad when you regard all the concommitent apparatus to achieve that: extrajudicial murders, land theft, ethnic cleansing, human rights abuses, and apartheid laws, roads, walls, and all the other separate and unequal trappings.

2. Then the war criminals had better get used to the Tel Aviv and Gaza beaches. Imprisonment would be preferable but metaphoric will do. 

3. The negative PR must be upsetting Israel. Otherwise why would they so vehemently want to silence the ICC investigation.

4. As of 31 July 2019, 138 of the 193 United Nations member states and two non-member states have recognised Palestine. The ICC investigation is another example of legitimacy. I expect if the PA failed to arrest Hamas war criminals, they would garner a similar reaction to Israel's failure to arrest the guilty, except in Israel's case it has all the state power to do so, but would be deliberately refusing to act.

 

You keep using the 'strawmen' trope as if you get what it means. Nothing to do with my post. The ICC can point out that the Israeli occupation is illegal - which is pretty much an already globally accepted position. Nothing new there, and not clear how it would 'defend' anyone. Also, as far as I understand, the scope of the investigation regarding the illegal settlements is bound to frustrate you some - it will almost surely focus on the act of moving population to occupied territory, appropriating lands and the like. It is very doubtful that it will resemble an all out review of the occupation.

 

The supposed war-criminals (well, wanted for trial, anyway) will not be limited to the degree you claimed. The USA, for example, will probably not comply, same goes for Russia, China, India and so on. As far as potential Hamas people effected, they aren't welcome most places anyway already, and Arab/Muslim countries they frequent won't give them up either.

 

I'm sure that Israeli authorities would love to get rid of the PR/propaganda noise, but it's nothing new. That you seem to expect this one would have a different effect than previous instances is not supported by much. You can reference past topics on similar issues where your high hopes were frustrated.

 

Countries recognizing Palestine, to this degree or other is one thing. That this investigation would bolster the credibility of the so-called Palestinian State is a different matter. It's just as likely to expose said Palestinian State being a failed one. 

[Morch]

5 minutes ago, dexterm said:

There are two sides to a debate. One is not obliged to argue both, especially if I regard one side, Zionism as positively evil. I'm not going to play the   there are fine people on both sides    schtick, just to please you.

 

There you go with your extreme labels. Not much of a debate offered by you, then.

 

You're no asked to argue both sides, that's yet another misrepresentation. Recognizing and addressing points made, even when they do not fit your narrative is sort of how these things go, however. Taking up an extreme position, trying to demonize any bit of argument offered, and doing so in a hyper vehement style is more akin to propaganda, not debate and discussion. 

 

And no, this wasn't even about fine-people-on-both-sides, but rather about both sides having their share of bad guys, bad decisions, policies and actions. You can't seem to address even that.

 

All the more dishonest when constantly raising issues and questions, while ignoring those posted by others.

[Morch]

6 minutes ago, stevenl said:

This you accuse others of

 

"No. That's your usual spin. My point is different.

This is a discussion forum. You're treating it like a propaganda arena.

Complaining about other posters (misrepresented) views, while openly engaging in a hyper biased manner is hypocritical."

 

is IMO applicable to yourself.

 

Then your 'IMO' needs a reality check.

 

My posts do not condone the Israeli occupation, the illegal settlement effort, or fully embrace the Israeli narrative. You can find examples of this up topic, but doubt you're not aware of it anyway.

 

I do not vent in anything coming close to the fiery tirades of the poster I replied to.

 

IMO, you're trolling.

[dexterm]

23 minutes ago, herfiehandbag said:

Genocide is defined as "the deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group".

 

That is certainly not what Israel is practising.

There may well be cases arising from the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land, but they should be viewed in the context that those lands were occupied as a result of wars fought whilst Israel was threatened with genocide, that being the stated war aim of a number of not all the combattant Arab states, certain of which, along with the Palestinian movements they support, have never abandoned that aim.

 

 

You are cherrypicking your definitons.
You don't have to kill every last person to commit genocide. You do realise that nonsense argument is also used by Holocaust deniers; Jews survived so it couldn't have happened.

 

Definition of genocide : 
the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group

www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/genocide

 

The transfer of a population to the West Bank and Jerusalem that the ICC is investigating, the Zionist ethnic cleansing of half the Palestinian population to engineer a phony Jewish majority and Israel's Nation State Law, as Netanyahu acknowledges:   "Israel is not a state of all its citizens. According to the basic nationality law we passed, Israel is the nation-state of the Jewish people - and only it."

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-47524518

 

These are all genocidal attempts to destroy Palestinian lives, culture, and identity 

[DaddyWarbucks]

10 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Then your 'IMO' needs a reality check.

 

My posts do not condone the Israeli occupation, the illegal settlement effort, or fully embrace the Israeli narrative. You can find examples of this up topic, but doubt you're not aware of it anyway.

 

I do not vent in anything coming close to the fiery tirades of the poster I replied to.

 

IMO, you're trolling.

Stick to the topic and stop the nasty comments on other posters.

[Morch]

6 minutes ago, DaddyWarbucks said:

Stick to the topic and stop the nasty comments on other posters.

 

Stop playing moderator, or at least try and be more even-handed with your nonsense reproaches.

 

[Morch]

@dexterm

 

The ICC investigation is of a limited scope. It will investigate war crimes (which is a distinct legal category of issues), not the whole gamut of issues pertaining to the conflict, not your whole barrel-full of complaints. The investigation will be limited to a certain time span, rather than covering the whole decades worth of the history related to the conflict. There were no (to the best of my knowledge) mentions of crimes against humanity, or genocide (again, a distinct legal category) playing a part in this.

[darksidedog]

This thread is a long way off topic and as it has been reduced to pretty much pure bickering it is now CLOSED!!