Gaza - conflict, war, land, water rights, bad colonional legacies...

[Malcador]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/12/05/israel-military-offensive-hamas-destruction-gaza/

https://archive.is/e1WnY

"At least 5,000 Hamas militants have been killed, according to three Israeli security officials, leaving the majority of its estimated 30,000-strong military wing intact."

https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/05/middleeast/israel-hamas-military-civilian-ratio-killed-intl-hnk

Conricus added: “I can say that if that is true – and I think that our numbers will be corroborated – if you compare that ratio to any other conflict in urban terrain between a military and a terrorist organization using civilians as their human shields, and embedded in the civilian population, you will find that that ratio is tremendous, tremendously positive, and perhaps unique in the world.”

Now that's hasbara.

 

Edited December 5, 2023 by Malcador

[Lexx]

Conveniently ignoring the amount of died and displaced civilians.

[Zoraptor]

Quote

Conricus added: “I can say that if that is true – and I think that our numbers will be corroborated – if you compare that ratio to any other conflict in urban terrain between a military and a terrorist organization using civilians as their human shields, and embedded in the civilian population, you will find that that ratio is tremendous, tremendously positive, and perhaps unique in the world.”

Sheesh, did Trump write that Conricus quote? Only missing a bigly and digression about how people come up in the street to tell him the IDF is the most moral army in the world.

Really though, talk about making a rod for their own back. If eliminating Hamas is the target even if Israel's figures are correct that would require 60k civilian casualties (and 90k total). It seems unlikely that even someone as supine as Joe Biden would allow that number. Not for moral considerations- it's clear the west doesn't actually care about the civilians deaths on moral grounds, just political- but because every time the Rules Based Order throws accusations he knows they'll get 'but Gaza' thrown in their face.

With the current figures they can probably get away with ICC head Karim Khan deciding there's only enough money to investigate Hamas war crimes, not Israeli, in a few years time*. It'll get progressively harder as casualties mount though.

*not really snark either- Brit Karim Khan's near first order of business when appointed to head the ICC was... to limit investigations in Afghanistan to Taleban/ ISIS war crimes. 'Budgetary limitations' meant that potential Coalition war crimes won't be actively investigated... heh, classic Rules Based Order, such lovable little scamps.

[Keyrock]

52 minutes ago, Zoraptor said:

It seems unlikely that even someone as supine as Joe Biden would allow that number.

Do you think Biden & Co would actually have the spine to go against the rather powerful Zionist lobby and cut funding and/or pull Murica's blanket diplomatic protection of Israel? Because that's what I believe it would take to have any real effect. Quite a few US politicians, including Hair-sniffing Joe, have warned Israel to change their tactics, repeatedly, and it's had **** all effect. Bibi sees them as having all bark and no bite because, well, there's all the evidence in the world for that. Until the US grows the stones to cut ties I think we're going to continue getting ethnic cleansing full speed ahead.

[Zoraptor]

They wouldn't have to go against Israel itself to get the desired effect. There's no practical chance of, say, the US cutting off Israel from supplies, let alone embargoing them. There's a lot that can be done to apply pressure without going that far though.

Probably the most obvious being going after Netanyahu personally, especially if it looks like he's deliberately stalling to try and prolong his political life. There's also going after the more intransigent elements in his cabinet (some evidence this is already happening, with some Settlers being sanctioned and Bibi largely relying on their votes). The US can certainly make his position untenable if they want to, it's mostly a question of how public they'd want to be while doing it.

[BruceVC]

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/12/06/investing/bill-ackman-harvard-penn-antisemitism/index.html 

A most disturbing story, when the presidents of 3 prominent US universities were  asked " whether calling for the genocide of Jews violates their respective school’s code of conduct on bullying or harassment"

The response was "None of the school leaders explicitly said that calling for the genocide of Jews would necessarily violate their code of conduct. Instead, they explained it would depend on the circumstances and conduct "

But I can guarantee you they would have an immediate response on other types of bigotry at Universities like racism or homophobia and circumstances wouldn't matter

 

 

[Malcador]

https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/12/1144447

US might as well file their veto now

[Elerond]

20 hours ago, Malcador said:

https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/12/1144447

US might as well file their veto now

It would be first time after 1959 when soviets blocked resolution against Vietnam because of their aggression towards Laos. Usually countries that opposite issues that have been brought up using article 99 just refuse to participate in the vote. Although last time when article 99 was invoked was in 1989 for Lebanon crisis.

[Malcador]

At least the UNSC session is starting off funnily, Russian Federation representative just mocking Blinken and being very upset about destruction and devastation.

Vetoed as expected.  Sort of funny to see the US rep as the only one with his hand up

Edited December 8, 2023 by Malcador

[Zoraptor]

Ah well, time for the old Uniting For Peace approach I guess... though I suspect there will be a few less advocates for that than there have been for other issues.

13-1 is actually worse than the February22 UNSC resolution aimed at Russia over Ukraine (11-1) and which triggered a bunch of articles on Russia's diplomatic isolation. Couldn't even get two of the NATO members or Japan to abstain.

[Gorgon]

On 12/7/2023 at 3:16 PM, BruceVC said:

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/12/06/investing/bill-ackman-harvard-penn-antisemitism/index.html 

A most disturbing story, when the presidents of 3 prominent US universities were  asked " whether calling for the genocide of Jews violates their respective school’s code of conduct on bullying or harassment"

The response was "None of the school leaders explicitly said that calling for the genocide of Jews would necessarily violate their code of conduct. Instead, they explained it would depend on the circumstances and conduct "

But I can guarantee you they would have an immediate response on other types of bigotry at Universities like racism or homophobia and circumstances wouldn't matter

 

 

to be fair, if there was some sort of mandate on free speech the first thing that would happen is that Palestinean and Israli students both would start accusing eachother of promoting genocide and blaming the university for taking sides.

What constitutes "calling for genocide of Jews" is not something everyone agrees on. It's a leading question too isn't it. They aren't asking whether you should be allowed to support mass civilian Palestinean casualties.

Insisting on a case by case evaluation is a better idea. 

[Gorgon]

Also, a house hearing is more a chance for politicians to gain visibility than a serious treatment of an issue.  It rarely comes without some outrage or another. that's kind of the point.

[BruceVC]

1 hour ago, Gorgon said:

to be fair, if there was some sort of mandate on free speech the first thing that would happen is that Palestinean and Israli students both would start accusing eachother of promoting genocide and blaming the university for taking sides.

What constitutes "calling for genocide of Jews" is not something everyone agrees on. It's a leading question too isn't it. They aren't asking whether you should be allowed to support mass civilian Palestinean casualties.

Insisting on a case by case evaluation is a better idea. 

I'm  not sure if you  aware what a backlash the terrible and tone death responses  the 3 presidents  gave  has created ? They might be fired and I wouldnt be surprised. There is lots of criticisms  towards how they responded but it was clear  they had listened to their  lawyers too much and lacked any expected empathetic  response. They couldnt   answer definitively   things like " is calling for  genocide  of Jews considered harassment   and bullying of Jewish  students  "   And there has been no real actions towards  the students but lots of lip service 

Imagine if it was far  right students calling for  the genocide of black  people or LGBT, there would be no uncertainty if that was  considered bullying or harassment . The presidents have subsequent apologized but the damage  is done

Here is a video that  summarizes the disaster  and then apology that came afterwards 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 9, 2023 by BruceVC

[Gorgon]

the witnesses are both tiptoeing around a beartrap, that's why they appear so suspiciously non comitant. They want to maintain their ability to judge these things for themselves.

The game is to say nothing of substance while appearing to answer.   These "gocha" moments are the whole point. It's a setup from the moment you take your seat.

 

[BruceVC]

Just now, Gorgon said:

the witnesses are both tiptoeing around a beartrap, that's why they appear so suspiciously non comitant. They want to maintain their ability to judge these things for themselves.

The game is to say nothing of substance while appearing to answer.   These "gocha" moments are the whole point. It's a setup from the moment you take your seat.

 

Sure but they could have easily avoided  the fallout  and criticism if they stated the obvious "  yes it is harassment and bullying "  

Watch this  apology video from Magill afterwards, this is exactly what they should have said or at least something similar. I do think she is being sincere and I blame there lawyers for not preparing them properly  because all 3 of them had the same types of response and it was understandably  a united legal response they tried to make at the inquiry ....it was just an epic failure 

 

 

 

[Zoraptor]

They couldn't have avoided it, because the situation is so polarised that anything that isn't complete and acritical support for Israel is 'genocide advocacy' to some. It's political theatre, not academic debate; Ted Cruz or whoever isn't going to politely applaud a well made point and ponder whether his position is actually correct while thinking about how he viewed the plight of Bana from Aleppo compared to Zainab from Gaza and what that says about his personal morality. Indeed, the whole idea of that is ludicrous; they'll be thinking about how it plays electorally and how much money his PAC will receive in donations if he gets in a particularly spicy zinger.

You just get the same headlines when they refuse to say that 'from the river to sea' is advocating genocide- and reminder, same phrase appears in the Likud Charter, but presumably isn't genocide advocacy there. The whole point of Israel advocacy in that style is not to have a rational debate, it's to have a chilling effect where people Just Shut Up because anything said against Israel is considered antisemitic and advocating genocide.

[BruceVC]

18 minutes ago, Zoraptor said:

They couldn't have avoided it, because the situation is so polarised that anything that isn't complete and acritical support for Israel is 'genocide advocacy' to some. It's political theatre, not academic debate; Ted Cruz or whoever isn't going to politely applaud a well made point and ponder whether his position is actually correct while thinking about how he viewed the plight of Bana from Aleppo compared to Zainab from Gaza and what that says about his personal morality. Indeed, the whole idea of that is ludicrous; they'll be thinking about how it plays electorally and how much money his PAC will receive in donations if he gets in a particularly spicy zinger.

You just get the same headlines when they refuse to say that 'from the river to sea' is advocating genocide- and reminder, same phrase appears in the Likud Charter, but presumably isn't genocide advocacy there. The whole point of Israel advocacy in that style is not to have a rational debate, it's to have a chilling effect where people Just Shut Up because anything said against Israel is considered antisemitic and advocating genocide.

They could have  avoided it  by answering the question in the same way they would have answered the question and do answer the question if any other minority was threatened by violence or genocide. But they didn't answer  it  because since 7 October they have allowed violence and anti-semitic protests and they did nothing about that either at all these universities 

And they knew the next  question would be " why havent  you done anything then about the bullying and intimidation of Jewish students " 

So they  got terrible legal  advice and failed to explain or convince anyone they were committed to what the University is suppose to represent which is a safe place for students where they not bullied or intimidated 

They failed to do that over the last 2 months and they failed at the inquiry 

 

[Zoraptor]

Let's be real here, a lot of the people puling about anti semitism at Yale or wherever would be shouting equally enthusiastically about freedom of expression if (and indeed when) it were (was), say, Chinese students being 'targeted' by pro Uighur or Tibetan protests. Banning their organisations and pandering to the feefees of the poor oppressed Chinese who don't want to hear about the genocide their government is perpetrating? An affront to the 1st amendment and just another example of the Cultural Marxism pervading academia. Not banning (some, plenty have been) pro Palestinian student organisations and not banning protests on their behalf? Strangely, also Cultural Marxism and not an affront to the 1st amendment. Exactly the same way 'from the river to the sea' is genocidal when it comes from a Palestinian, but not when it's Likud saying it. It's not a moral stance, it's a political one, and political stances should not be part of a university's brief.

Palestinians probably aren't that keen on and feel a bit harassed and oppressed by the US Congress supplying most of the weapons that have killed 6000 of their children, after all, nor for all the pro Israeli demonstrations celebrating it either openly or tacitly, nor for the US recognising the annexations of East Jerusalem and the Golan, nor for the UNSC ceasefire veto.

Indeed, kind of funny seeing the US talking up the PA taking over in Gaza as it's exactly the worst approach for the PA if you want it to be credible. They're already seen as Quislings by most of their constituents, if the US thinks its support is going to help them the delusion is off the scale.

[HoonDing]

The Rules Based Order must support the genocide of those other semites nobody really likes because it ushers in the second coming of Jeebus.

[uuuhhii]

On 12/10/2023 at 4:05 AM, HoonDing said:

The Rules Based Order must support the genocide of those other semites nobody really likes because it ushers in the second coming of Jeebus.

god that require massacre and political manipulation to summon and bring with it twilight of human

this sound like a world of darkness plotline

Edited December 11, 2023 by uuuhhii

[Zoraptor]

“CPJ is deeply alarmed by the pattern of journalists in Gaza reporting receiving threats, and subsequently, their family members being killed,” said CPJ Middle East and North Africa Program Coordinator Sherif Mansour. “The killing of the family members of journalists in Gaza is making it almost impossible for the journalists to continue reporting, as the risk now extends beyond them also to include their beloved ones.”-- via the Committee to Protect Journalists.

Remember this next time someone tells you the Caesar or Magnitsky Acts are moral stances rather than political ones, because here's the US not just failing to do anything about the targeted killing of journalists but also of their families; indeed, by vetoing a ceasefire they're encouraging its continuation.

Who knows, maybe there'll be an Al-Anas Act and I'll have to eat my words. I'd bet against gravity failing before that though.

[Zoraptor]

For what it matters- basically nothing, since it's non binding- the UNGA has voted 153-10 for an immediate ceasefire. Last ceasefire vote in the UNGA back in October was 121-14 so a lot of abstentions flipped to yes including some minor pillars of the Rules Based Order. 12000 dead civilians in 9 weeks is still all good with most of the most vocal proponents; US, UK, Germany all voted no or abstained.

To put it in perspective the vote for Russia to withdraw from Ukraine was 141-5.

[BruceVC]

On 12/12/2023 at 3:36 AM, Zoraptor said:

“CPJ is deeply alarmed by the pattern of journalists in Gaza reporting receiving threats, and subsequently, their family members being killed,” said CPJ Middle East and North Africa Program Coordinator Sherif Mansour. “The killing of the family members of journalists in Gaza is making it almost impossible for the journalists to continue reporting, as the risk now extends beyond them also to include their beloved ones.”-- via the Committee to Protect Journalists.

Remember this next time someone tells you the Caesar or Magnitsky Acts are moral stances rather than political ones, because here's the US not just failing to do anything about the targeted killing of journalists but also of their families; indeed, by vetoing a ceasefire they're encouraging its continuation.

Who knows, maybe there'll be an Al-Anas Act and I'll have to eat my words. I'd bet against gravity failing before that though.

Its terrible when journalists are killed in wars or by a  state. Imagine just getting killed for doing your  job and trying to bring the truth to people 

Here is a list of journalists killed  by Russia in Ukraine and this list extends far beyond the current war. And  Russia still sits on the UNSC and claims moral stances like outrage against the US but yet its blatantly political. The  worlds  so  full of falseness and crocodile tears 

https://cpj.org/data/killed/europe/ukraine/?status=Killed&motiveConfirmed[]=Confirmed&motiveUnconfirmed[]=Unconfirmed&type[]=Journalist&type[]=Media Worker&cc_fips[]=UP&start_year=1992&end_year=2023&group_by=location

[Zoraptor]

For the out and out war in Ukraine it's 15 journalists killed, in 22 months. Let's assume they're all Russia's fault, to make it as bad as we can for them. Similarly, don't use the 2023 figures (2 deaths, which for a large scale conflict with high media exposure is, well, very very low) or the figures since Oct7th in Ukraine (no journalist deaths) because the idea is to make things as bad they can be.

For Israel/ Palestine (+Lebanon) it's 63 in 9ish weeks. If Russia were killing journalists at the same rate they'd have killed ~630 journalists over nearly two years. Or in other words Israel is killing them at ~40 times the rate Russia is. Shall I adjust for the population difference between Gaza and Ukraine too? OK, Israel is now killing journalists at ~750x the rate. That doesn't include any of the Gazan family members killed for Chilling Effect either.

I don't think anyone thinks Russia's hands are actually clean, but as often happens you run through the stats and find that there's a certain amount of... rhetorical massaging of the message going on based not on what is actually happening but on who you're meant to dis/like.

[BruceVC]

48 minutes ago, Zoraptor said:

For the out and out war in Ukraine it's 15 journalists killed, in 22 months. Let's assume they're all Russia's fault, to make it as bad as we can for them. Similarly, don't use the 2023 figures (2 deaths, which for a large scale conflict with high media exposure is, well, very very low) or the figures since Oct7th in Ukraine (no journalist deaths) because the idea is to make things as bad they can be.

For Israel/ Palestine (+Lebanon) it's 63 in 9ish weeks. If Russia were killing journalists at the same rate they'd have killed ~630 journalists over nearly two years. Or in other words Israel is killing them at ~40 times the rate Russia is. Shall I adjust for the population difference between Gaza and Ukraine too? OK, Israel is now killing journalists at ~750x the rate. That doesn't include any of the Gazan family members killed for Chilling Effect either.

I don't think anyone thinks Russia's hands are actually clean, but as often happens you run through the stats and find that there's a certain amount of... rhetorical massaging of the message going on based not on what is actually happening but on who you're meant to dis/like.

Let me  ask you and others a different question.  And I think  most  of us are guilty of selective outrage and what matters   to us around that outrage. And I put myself in that group

There are  several active conflicts in the world at the moment but our focus and commentary is mostly Gaza and Ukraine 

And my question is about ICC war crimes  and who should be charged. Do you think the following countries\people should be charged 

 

• Israel\Netanyahu
• Hamas leadership
• Russia\Putin

And each group should be charged for different war crimes based on what they have done in each conflict. And Putin is not being charged for what the Russian military has done in Ukraine, he is being charged for openly admitting he moved  Ukrainian children to Russia 

I think all 3 groups need to be charged