Current WAR CRIMES Israel - * ICC issues warrants for Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu & Yoav Gallant & for Hamas's Mohammed Deif

[Kurve]

The ICC has also issued a warrant for Hamas leader Mohammed Deif, who Israel says they have killed.

According to the ICC, the chamber “found reasonable grounds to believe” that Deif was “responsible for the crimes against humanity of murder; extermination; torture; and rape and other form of sexual violence; as well as the war crimes of murder, cruel treatment, torture; taking hostages; outrages upon personal dignity; and rape and other form of sexual violence”.

It also said there were reasonable grounds to believe the crimes against humanity were “part of a widespread and systematic attack directed by Hamas and other armed groups against the civilian population of Israel”.

For Netanyahu and Gallant, who was replaced as defence minister earlier this month, the chamber “found reasonable grounds to believe” that they “each bear criminal responsibility for the following crimes as co-perpetrators for committing the acts jointly with others: the war crime of starvation as a method of warfare; and the crimes against humanity of murder, persecution, and other inhumane acts”.

It also found reasonable grounds to believe that “each bear criminal responsibility as civilian superiors for the war crime of intentionally directing an attack against the civilian population”.




INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT

INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT - Elements of Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Where is the claim that the IDF is shifting kill zones randomly without telling people all over Gaza so they can shoot civilians and call them terrorists coming from?

What do you mean, where is the claim?

Why do you think they are killing all the journalists Jazny?

 

[Zidane98]

Strongly disagree with this. Nobody is exempt from war crimes charges - even those who have suffered the most heinous of terrorist attacks like Israel did on Oct 7.

Instead of sanctioning the ICC how about launch their own investigation and work alongside ICC investigators.

 

[Jazny]

What do you mean, where is the claim?

Why do you think they are killing all the journalists Jazny?

I am asking him where his claim comes from. What source he is using.

I don't know that they are deliberately killing journalists because they are journalists. What evidence do you have they are?

 

[faible]

The Ireland submission as part of their joining the Genocide case has some worthwhile additions

https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/192/192-20250106-int-01-00-en.pdf

These are the same sections Kurve posted in a tweet the other day.

38. That the pattern of conduct could only point to the existence of such intent is not to say that it could point to such intent only. The human mind can of course accommodate and act upon more than one intention and the same conduct can be intended to achieve two or more results, however attainable each may be. It follows that it is perfectly possible that a pattern of conduct, upon examination, could point to two separate intentions, only one of which is genocidal. This possibility was recognised by Judge Bhandari in his separate opinion in the Croatia case, where, in warning against conflating punitive motive with genocidal intent, he noted that 'genocidal intent may exist simultaneously with other, ulterior motives. 'The co-existence of two or more intents does not mle out, exelude or displace either intent.

39. A clear example of this is where genocide is committed during the course ofan armed conflict, where two reasonable inferences might be drawn from the conduct of the State concerned - both that it sought to defeat the enemy and that it intended to destroy a protected group in whole or part. This possibility was considered by Judge Cancado Trindade in the same case:
'One cannot characterize a situation as one of armed conflict, so as to discard genocide. The two do not exclude each other. In this connection, ii has been pertinently warned that perpetrators of genocide will almost always allege that they were in an armed conflict, and their actions were taken 'pursuant to an ongoing military conflict'; yet, 'genocide may be a means for achieving military objectives just as readily as military conflict may be a means for instigating a genocidal plan. '

40. Ireland submits that, in order to avoid the possibility of genocide being excluded in most, if not all, cases of anned conflict the application of the 'only reasonable inference' test clarifies that a pattern of conduct can only be fully explained as intended to destroy - at least in part - the protected group. In applying the test, Ireland respectfully submits that it is not necessary that the acts concerned should be exclusively intended to destroy the group but could also be committed with the intent of achieving one or more other objectives.

 

[faible]

perpetrators of genocide will almost always allege that they were in an armed conflict, and their actions were taken 'pursuant to an ongoing military conflict

The above sounds extremely familiar.

 

[Jazny]

The above sounds extremely familiar.

Really difficult case to make if your actions explicitly target civilians like in the 3 recognized cases of genocide under the '48 definition.

Cambodia: 25% of the population wiped out in mass killings, civilians executed in killing fields.

Srebrenica massacre: thousands of males, mostly civilians, systematically executed in fields, thousands of women mass r*ped and tens of thousands of women, children and elderly forcibly removed.

Rwandan genocide: roughly a 500k-1M civilians killed with clubs, machetes and machine guns in 100 days, 250,000-500k women r*ped. Their leaders gave orders to spare nobody including infants...

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

He is talking about genocides when armed forced bomb civilians? I am saying I haven't heard reports of a policy of the IDF intentionally targetting civilians with bombs.

The IDF are of course bombing civilians, knowingly and deliberately. They may believe their war goals are worth the civilian deaths.

Take the Oct 31 strike on Jabalia which alone killed 69 children:

Then you have come along and said: A policy of targeting civilians is not a requirement for war crimes, nor for genocide.

Which doesn't refute anything I said or was talking about.

If the IDF were committing genocide through a bombing campaign against civilians, I imagine the death tally would look vastly different. Obviously there are other ways to commit genocide and even when targetting military, an airstrike can still be a war crime if it's disproportionate, but that's not what I am responding to.

I don't think he was saying they were committing genocide through airstrikes alone, but I understand where you were coming from now.

It's very easy to claim that all bombs were intended for enemy combatants, and many people will believe them.

Many believe the fact that the bomb was dropped means it must have been intended for enemy combatants, no claim required.

Airwars' thorough investigations into Israeli strikes on Gaza in October 2023 found that of 606 incidents of civilian harm, only 26 (4%) included the death of at least one militant, even where that status was ambiguous or contested.

He seems to be talking about the Netzarim corridor in the excerpt, the Netzarim is also where a Haaretz article claimed that the imaginary lines were shifting daily. I don't know what article you pulled excerpt from so I can only guess it was originally in Hebrew or Arabic? Where is the claim that the IDF is shifting kill zones randomly without telling people all over Gaza so they can shoot civilians and call them terrorists coming from?

There's a link to the article in my post, and yes it's in Hebrew. A sobering read.

 

[Zidane98]

PA also posted evidence of a summons by Hamas issued to a Palestinian for interrogation at a hospital:




This is obviously a war crime. In terms of responsibility it would be the state of Palestine although there is an argument that Palestine has no effective control over what the government of Gaza does even though they are ultimately responsible in a legal sense for any war crime committed by any government in the entire state of Palestine.

 

[faible]

Really difficult case to make if your actions explicitly target civilians like in the 3 recognized cases of genocide under the '48 definition.

Cambodia: 25% of the population wiped out in mass killings, civilians executed in killing fields.

Srebrenica massacre: thousands of males, mostly civilians, systematically executed in fields, thousands of women mass r*ped and tens of thousands of women, children and elderly forcibly removed.

Rwandan genocide: roughly a 500k-1M civilians killed with clubs, machetes and machine guns in 100 days, 250,000-500k women r*ped. Their leaders gave orders to spare nobody including infants...

No one ever said Netanyahu was stupid.

Forensic Architecture

forensic-architecture.org

The patterns we have observed concerning Israel’s military conduct in Gaza indicate a systematic and organised campaign to destroy life, conditions necessary for life, and life-sustaining infrastructure.

In years to come it'll be clear what's gone on.

 

[faible]

This is obviously a war crime. In terms of responsibility it would be the state of Palestine although there is an argument that Palestine has no effective control over what the government of Gaza does even though they are ultimately responsible in a legal sense for any war crime committed by any government in the entire state of Palestine.

This claim is going to need a source.

 

[Jazny]

The IDF are of course bombing civilians, knowingly and deliberately. They may believe their war goals are worth the civilian deaths.

Take the Oct 31 strike on Jabalia which alone killed 69 children:

View attachment 2200944

Oh god, this is doing my head in. Targeting civilians means that your actual target are the civilians. This is never allowed or justifiable (except when Hamas does it according to some arguments you have given). Under IHL you are allowed to strike military targets with civilians present as long as the harm to civilians is proportionate to the military advantage.

So nobody seems to be suggesting that the strike explicitly targeted civilians, that it was instead disproportionate which is absolutely a war crime.

Airwars' thorough investigations into Israeli strikes on Gaza in October 2023 found that of 606 incidents of civilian harm, only 26 (4%) included the death of at least one militant, even where that status was ambiguous or contested.

What's their methodology?

 

[faible]

Oh god, this is doing my head in. Targeting civilians means that your actual target are the civilians. This is never allowed or justifiable (except when Hamas does it according to some arguments you have given). Under IHL you are allowed to strike military targets with civilians present as long as the harm to civilians is proportionate to the military advantage.

Civilian deaths are a feature, not a bug.

 

[Zidane98]

This claim is going to need a source.

It's literally in the post you quoted. But you knew that.

 

[Jazny]

Civilian deaths are a feature, not a bug.

If so, why do Gazans still exist at a population level roughly the same as when the war started? What's the purpose of killing roughly 30,000 civilians? Turn the international community against them? They could wipe out Gaza in a month with zero IDF fatalities if that's their goal. What explains the deliberate killing of civilians on this scale?

 

[faible]

It's literally in the post you quoted. But you knew that.

Why would I know that?

You posted two Tweets, neither of which are from the UN / ICJ / ICC.

 

[Zidane98]

Why would I know that?

You posted two Tweets, neither of which are from the UN / ICJ / ICC.

One of which contained a tweet of the Palestinian Authority showing a summons made by Hamas against a Palestinian civilian for interrogation at a hospital in Gaza.

Let's not let facts get in the way of things though.

 

[faible]

If so, why do Gazans still exist at a population level roughly the same as when the war started? What's the purpose of killing roughly 30,000 civilians? Turn the international community against them? They could wipe out Gaza in a month with zero IDF fatalities if that's their goal. What explains the deliberate killing of civilians on this scale?

It would be more accurate if I wrote civilian impact.

I don't think Israeli leadership cares whether they're dead or displaced.

Going full 'slaughter the whole population in a month' would obviously be a level of repercussions even the US veto and support couldn't shield them from.

Instead they've opted for the plausible deniability pathway; which is what results in plenty of people arguing that maybe displacing the majority of the population and destroying pretty much every element of civilian life in Gaza isn't part of the plan, just a happy accident.

 

[faible]

One of which contained a tweet of the Palestinian Authority showing a summons made by Hamas against a Palestinian civilian for interrogation at a hospital in Gaza.

Let's not let facts get in the way of things though.

These are the claims you made. You didn't say it was an opinion, you stated them as fact;

In terms of responsibility it would be the state of Palestine

they are ultimately responsible in a legal sense for any war crime committed by any government in the entire state of Palestine.

There's no source that I can see for such a claim.

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

Oh god, this is doing my head in. Targeting civilians means that your actual target are the civilians. This is never allowed or justifiable (except when Hamas does it according to some arguments you have given). Under IHL you are allowed to strike military targets with civilians present as long as the harm to civilians is proportionate to the military advantage.

You're literally the only one saying targeting. That would be almost impossible to prove as someone completely uninvolved posting from the other side of the world.

The IDF have knowingly and deliberately bombed civilians, in the tens of thousands.

It's very easy for a modern force to create the circumstances for plausible deniability. Even when they state 'we shoot anyone we like' you have shown how easy it is to give them an out.

We can draw obvious conclusions from the IDFs actions, we can see the complete disregard for Palestinian civilians, and let the experts do the judging.

I didn't justify Hamas targeting civilians. The IDF would call those civilians human shields and say civilian deaths are a tragedy of war though.

So nobody seems to be suggesting that the strike explicitly targeted civilians, that it was instead disproportionate which is absolutely a war crime.

The assumption is that 12-24 militants were killed, going by IDF statements. Anywhere from 126-143 civilians were killed by this particular strike, including 69 children.

I guarantee if Hamas somehow struck an Israeli refugee camp, killed 20 IDF and 130 Israeli civilians, people would be screaming genocide.

What's their methodology?

Read for yourself - https://gaza-patterns-harm.airwars.org/

ISPT0783 – October 31, 2023

On October 31, 2023 confirmed Israeli strikes on the densely populated Jabalia refugee camp killed at least 126 civilians, including 68 children. A further 280 civilians were reported injured by the director of the nearby Indonesian Hospital. A second strike hit the same location the following...

airwars.org

 

[Zidane98]

These are the claims you made. You didn't say it was an opinion, you stated them as fact;





There's no source that I can see for such a claim.

It is a fact that the Palestinian Authority tweeted an image of Hamas summoning a Palestinian civilian for interrogation at a hospital in Gaza.

Further to this it is a fact that the state of Palestine is legally responsible for any acts committed by any government entity in the state of Palestine.

State responsibility | How does law protect in war? - Online casebook

casebook.icrc.org

You of course know this.

Also faible:


Accepts claims by other posters that an airstrike on Oct 31 was targeted at civilians only without any evidence to support.

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

The weapons belonging to 240 supposed Hamas operatives

PA also posted evidence of a summons by Hamas issued to a Palestinian for interrogation at a hospital:

Do you have the PA post? I don't trust this guy at all.

This is obviously a war crime. In terms of responsibility it would be the state of Palestine although there is an argument that Palestine has no effective control over what the government of Gaza does even though they are ultimately responsible in a legal sense for any war crime committed by any government in the entire state of Palestine.

rofl

It is a fact that the Palestinian Authority tweeted an image of Hamas summoning a Palestinian civilian for interrogation at a hospital in Gaza.

Where is the tweet? Hamas run Gazan hospitals, as the governing body, so a summons to a hospital is pretty meaningless.

Also faible:


Accepts claims by other posters that an airstrike on Oct 31 was targeted at civilians only without any evidence to support.

No one ever claimed this? Can you even comprehend what you read?

 

[Jazny]

The weapons belonging to 240 supposed Hamas operatives

View attachment 2200985

Missed a few.

I thought they fabricated evidence though. Why not just throw a few more in their so apologists on line can't say "is this all lmao"?

 

[Zidane98]

The weapons belonging to 240 supposed Hamas operatives

View attachment 2200985



Do you have the PA post? I don't trust this guy at all.



rofl



Where is the tweet? Hamas run Gazan hospitals, as the governing body, so a summons to a hospital is pretty meaningless.



No one ever claimed this? Can you even comprehend what you read?

Sure

The IDF are of course bombing civilians, knowingly and deliberately.

If you believed what you post you would offer evidence that it was civilians the IDF was targetting.

Do you have any evidence of IDF deliberately & knowingly bombing civilians?

This claim will need a source.

In reality IDF is bombing Hamas military targets. I would agree that there is evidence to suggest guilt of disproportionate action which is a war crime.

Of course I am sure you are aware that Hamas use of civilian areas amounts to a war crime as per the Geneva convention

https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/geneva-convention-relative-protection-civilian-persons-time-war

Article 19 is of note here where enemy use of hospitals renders the protects status of hospitals void.

 

[Zidane98]

https://www.timesofisrael.com/hamas-member-tells-idf-interrogators-that-gunmen-operated-in-kamal-adwan-hospital/

"Before the raid COGAT oversaw the transfer of 350 patients to other hospitals"

Civilians were evacuated with warning.

Find this interesting as there are plenty of postrs here would have you believe that Israel would simply kill all of these civilians instead.

 

[Zidane98]

I really hope Trump doesn't do something stupid when he takes over. The two state solution he attempted to mediate was farcical and there is this:



Suspect he will probably not change too much in reality.