Thursday, 23 October 2025

"Israel's biggest enemy is not Hamas, it is the truth"

 https://x.com/SilentlySirs/status/1981019762470658461

SilencedSirs◼️
@SilentlySirs
"Israel's biggest enemy is not Hamas, it is the truth"
14.3K
Views

https://x.com/SilentlySirs/status/1981019762470658461

posted by Satish Sharma at 08:56 0 Comments

In a devastating ruling for Israel, the ICJ today issued an Advisory Opinion on Israel’s obligations as an occupying in relation to the presence and activities of the United Nations, international organisations, and foreign states in the territories it occupies.

Mouin Rabbani
@MouinRabbani
When the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in January 2024 ruled that South Africa's claims that Israel is violating the 1948 Genocide Convention were sufficiently plausible to justify a full hearing of the case, Israel and its apologists responded as they always do when criticism is levelled at the genocidal apartheid state: condemn the accuser, scream blood libel, work themselves into a frenzy about anti-Semitism, and play the aggrieved victim. Once the initial hysteria passed, anyone concluding that Israel is perpetrating genocide in the Gaza Strip was roundly denounced on the grounds that no such determination can be made unless and until the ICJ rules that Israel is indeed guilty of genocide. This was, of course, nothing but a disingenuous delaying tactic. If anyone seriously believes Israel and its flunkies will accept a ruling by the ICJ that does not absolve it of the genocide charge, the response was provided today. In a devastating ruling for Israel, the ICJ today issued an Advisory Opinion on Israel’s obligations as an occupying in relation to the presence and activities of the United Nations, international organisations, and foreign states in the territories it occupies. Since my purpose is not to analyse the ICJ verdict itself, for those interested a link to the full document is provided below, followed by a summary produced by the Court and a newspaper article on the matter. Suffice it to say that the Court rejected every single claim by Israel, and specifically refuted Israel’s unsubstantiated claims about UNRWA. It also made short shrift of Israel’s GHF project. It was also for all intents and purposes a unanimous ruling. The sole dissenter, Julia Sebutinde, will never let international law get between her and support for Israel. And how have those who claim we must wait for an ICJ ruling on the genocide case before drawing any conclusions responded? Entirely predictably: The ICJ got it all wrong, the judges don’t understand international law and have no clue what they’re talking about, the Court ignored the evidence that really matters, and so on. Israel, of course “categorically rejects” the ruling and announced it won’t implement a single one of its obligations as specified by the Court. True to form, Washington chimed in with similar language, denouncing not only the ruling but also the Court itself. For good measure Israel’s parliament the same day pushed forward legislation to formally annex the illegally-occupied West Bank. If the ICJ in several years defies expectations and finds that Israel is not guilty of genocide, Israel will trumpet the ruling as the definitive, unassailable conclusion of the matter. But if, as widely anticipated, the ICJ finds either that Israel’s entire campaign, or specific policies and atrocities conducted during this campaign constitute genocide, expect Israel and its flunkies to condemn the accuser, scream blood libel, work themselves into a frenzy about anti-Semitism, and play the aggrieved victim. Because Israel is always right, and it is always the victim, particularly when engaging in genocide. icj-cij.org/sites/default/ icj-cij.org/sites/default/ theguardian.com/world/2025/oct
2,951
Views

https://x.com/MouinRabbani/status/1981152819160682984

posted by Satish Sharma at 08:51 0 Comments