Israel Dismisses Genocidal Intent as ‘Random Assertions’

A barrister for Israel argued that Israeli prime minister and cabinet members’ statements of intent to commit genocide were mere “random assertions,” and he instead accused South Africa of complicity in genocide, reports Joe Lauria.

Barrister Malcolm Shaw arguing for Israel before the World Court on Friday. (UN TV Screenshot)

By Joe Lauria
Special to Consortium News

In its defense against allegations by South Africa that it is committing genocide in Gaza, a British barrister arguing at the World Court on Friday for Israel downplayed numerous statements by senior Israeli officials of genocidal intent against Palestinians as mere “random assertions” that prove nothing. 

Instead, the barrister turned the tables, accusing South Africa itself of complicity in genocide. 

Kings Counselor Malcolm Shaw, for Israel, told the Court on the second day of a two-day hearing:

“As far as acts are concerned in this case, there is little beyond random assertions to demonstrate that Israel has or has had the specific intent to destroy in whole or in part the Palestinian people as such.”

Without proving intent, Shaw argued, a genocide case is impossible. “It is like Hamlet without the prince, a car without an engine,” he said.  As Shaw himself pointed out, lawyers for South Africa on Thursday thus “placed considerable emphasis upon intent.”

They laid out in great detail the “genocidal rhetoric” of Israeli officials and how it has influenced Israeli soldiers and airmen attacking Gaza. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu twice referred to an Old Testament genocide implying the same was needed for Gaza, argued attorney Tembeka Ngcukaitobi.

“The genocidal invocation to Amalek was anything but idle,” Ngcukaitobi said.  He then showed a video of Israeli soldiers singing in celebration of a victory in Gaza, in which they mention Amalek.

On Oct. 9, Defense Minister, Yoav Gallant, Ngcukaitobi,  went on:

“gave a situation update to the Army where he said that as Israel was imposing a complete siege on Gaza, there would be ‘no electricity, no food, no water, no fuel,’ everything would be closed because Israel is fighting human animals. Speaking to troops on the Gaza border, he instructed them that he has released all the restraints and that Gaza won’t return to what it was before.

‘We will eliminate everything. We will reach all places. Eliminate everything there, reach all places without any restraints.’

Heritage Minister Amichai Eliyahu said that Israel must find ways for Gazans that are more painful than death. It is no answer to say that neither are in command of the army. They are ministers in the Israeli government. They vote in the Knesset and are in a position to shape state policy. The intent to destroy Gaza has been nurtured at the highest levels of state. … 

Senior political and military officials encouraged without censure, the 95 year old Israeli army reservist Ezra Yachin, a veteran of the Deir Yassin massacre against the Palestinians in 1948, to speak to the soldiers ahead of the ground invasion in Gaza. In his talk, he echoed the same sentiment while being driven around in an official Israeli army vehicle dressed in Israeli army fatigue.

‘I quote the triumphant and finish them off and don’t leave anyone behind. Erase the memory of them. Erase them, their families, mothers and children. These animals can no longer live. If you have an Arab neighbor, don’t wait. Go to his home and shoot him. We want to invade. Not like before. We want to enter and destroy what’s in front of us and destroy houses.'”

Shaw argues his case. (UN TV Screenshot)

These are some of what Shaw dismissed on Friday as “random assertions.” The barrister said that only Israel’s ministerial committee on national security and the war cabinet can make decisions on policy and intent in Gaza. “To produce random quotes that are not in conformity with government policy is misleading at best,” he said. 

However, both Netanyahu and Gallant, whose “genocidal” statements were quoted by the South African lawyers, are members of the war cabinet. Minister of National Security Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich are on the national security committee, and both have made numerous statements about Palestinians that can be construed as genocidal in intent. 

Shaw only mentioned the South Africans quoting the heritage minister who is not on either committee and ignored reference to those ministers who are.   

And in response to South Africa on Thursday linking ministers’ “genocidal” statements to that of Israeli combatants, Shaw said “remarks or actions of a soldier do not and cannot reflect policy.”

Shaw contended that Israel’s intent is not genocide, but instead to “deal with Hamas” in response to its Oct. 7 attack on Israel, which he called itself “genocidal.” He said: “The truth is that if there has been any genocidal activity in this situation, it was the events of seventh of October.”  

Shaw ridiculed South Africa’s argument on Thursday of the need for historical context to place Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack in a 75-year history of Israeli dispossession and abuse of Palestinians.

Shaw asked why not go back to the 1922 decision of the League of Nations to create the British mandate in Palestine, or the 1917 Balfour Declaration that demonstrated Britain’s intent to create a Jewish homeland in Palestine or even to mention the Israelite tribes there 3,000 years ago?

Israel Turns Tables, Accuses South Africa of ‘Complicity’ With Genocide

Shaw went further, alleging that indeed “complicity in genocide is in play” in the case. But he was not referring to the United States, Britain, Germany or any other ally of Israel that continues to supply weapons, ammunition, funding and two U.S. carrier groups in the region to deter any nation that dares intervene to stop Israel’s slaughter, as the U.S. did against Yemen on Thursday. 

No, Shaw was referring to “states that supported, condoned, praised or glorified the events of the seventh of October both at the time, and later, ” who he said “stand guilty of a violation of Article 3e of the Convention as being complicit in genocide and indeed of the duty to prevent genocide under Article 1.”   

And then Shaw said: “South Africa has given succor and support to Hamas, at the least.”

Tal Becker at the World Court Friday. (UN TV Screenshot)

Tal Becker, a legal adviser to the Israeli Foreign Ministry who addressed the court before Shaw, told the Court that “on October 7th, before any military response by Israel, South Africa issued an official statement blaming Israel for, quote, the recent conflagration.” 

Becker then leveled his accusation that South Africa was complicit with a genocidal organization. He said:

“The absurd upshot of South Africa’s argument is under the guise of the allegation against Israel of genocide, this court is asked to call for an end to operations against the ongoing attacks of an organization that pursues an actual genocidal agenda.

That is an unconscionable request and it is respectfully submitted that it cannot stand. … The court is informed of the events of October 7th, because if there are any provisional measures that should appropriately be indicated here, they are indeed with respect to South Africa. It is a matter of public record that South Africa enjoys close relations with Hamas, despite its formal recognition as a terrorist organization by numerous states across the world.

South Africa has long hosted and celebrated its ties with Hamas figures, including a senior Hamas delegation that incredibly visited the country for, quote, solidarity just weeks after the massacre. In justifying instituting proceedings, South Africa makes much of its obligations under the Genocide Convention. It seems fitting, then, that it be instructed to comply with those obligations itself to end its own language of delegitimization, of Israel’s existence and its support for Hamas.”

Becker then blamed South Africa for “weaponizing”  genocide. He said:

“The attempt to weaponize the term genocide against Israel in the present context does more than tell the court a grossly distorted story. And it does more than empty the word of its unique force and special meaning. It subverts the object and purpose of the convention itself with ramifications for all states seeking to defend themselves against those who demonstrate total disdain for life and for the law.”

For good measure, Becker threw in this deceptive remark about Hamas, referring to “Hamas’s violent takeover in 2007.”  Hamas was elected in 2006. It later fought against Fatah to essentially defend its election. It is false to say Hamas took over Gaza violently.

In a similarly deceptive manner, lawyers for Israel tried to explain away the destruction of nearly half the buildings of Gaza in the past three months as a result of Hamas booby-traps and errant rockets. 

Israel’s ‘Warnings’

Shaw arguing on Friday at World Court with South Africa delegation looking on. (UN TV Screenshot)

Shaw claimed that Israel warns civilians of impending attack through the “unprecedented and extensive use” of telephone calls and leafletting. Typically these calls give residents ten minutes to leave their buildings before they are bombed.  The leaflets told residents of northern Gaza to move south where they were then bombed enroute and repeatedly in the south once they arrived there.

But Shaw argued that these warnings, coupled with Israel’s “facilitation” of humanitarian aid all “demonstrate the precise opposite of any possible genocidal intent” by Israel. 

The U.N. has repeatedly complained that Israel is severely restricting the amount of aid being allowed into Gaza compared to 500 trucks a day before its military operation began on Oct. 7. Gallants statement that there would be “‘no electricity, no food, no water, no fuel,” flies in the face of a contention that Israeli is “facilitating” humanitarian aid.

Malcolm argued that the World Court did not have jurisdiction to hear South Africa’s case because South Africa did not establish that there was a dispute between two states. Shaw said that South Africa did not wait for a reply to its note verbal before launching the case against it at the ICJ on Dec. 29. 

The jurisdiction for any question of war crimes needed to be in Israel, Shaw said. If in the course of its action against Hamas Israel overstepped the laws of war it would “tackled at the appropriate time” by Israel’s “robust legal system,” he said. 

Israel’s ‘Right to Self Defense’

Judges hear case against Israel. (UN TV Screenshot)

Both Shaw and Becker sought to twist the argument of British barrister Vaughn Lowe, who on Thursday argued before the court that based on a past World Court ruling Israel had no right to self-defense on the occupied territory of Palestine. 

He did not say they had no right to defend itself on Israeli territory. But this is what Shaw and Becker implied. Becker quoted from Lowe’s writing:

The source of the attack, whether a state or non-state actor, is irrelevant to the existence of the right to defense force may be used to avert a threat because no one and no state is obliged by law passively to suffer the delivery of an attack.” 

Neither Shaw nor Becker addressed the heart of the matter upon which the World Court had ruled, namely that Israel had no right to self-defense on a territory it occupies.

Lowe on Thursday referred to the 2004 World Court decision against the legality of Israel’s wall, which is built on occupied Palestinian territory.

“In its advisory opinion on the wall case, the court noted that the threat that Israel had argued justified the construction of the wall was not imputed to a foreign state, but emanated from the occupied Palestinian territory over which Israel itself exercises control,” Lowe said.

“For those reasons, the court decided, as a matter of international law, the right of self-defense under Article 51 of the charter, the U.N. Charter, had no relevance in such circumstances,” he said.

Just three weeks ago the U.N. Security Council reaffirmed that Gaza is occupied territory, he said. “The tightness of its grip may have varied, but no one can doubt the continuous reality of Israel’s grip on Gaza,” Lowe said.

“The court’s legal holding from 2004 holds good, and a similar point is to be made here what Israel is doing in Gaza, it is doing in territory under its own control. Its actions are enforcing its occupation. The law on self-defense under Article 51 of the U.N. Charter has no application,” he said.

Future of the Case

At this stage, the World Court is only considering whether there is a plausible case that Israel is committing genocide and whether it should then order Israel to cease its military operation until at a much later date the court decides the charge of genocide on the merits.

Given Israel’s history and that of its principal ally of ignoring World Court decisions against them that Israel would adhere to an order to stop the killing. The case could be taken up by the U.N. Security Council to enforce it through sanctions, and even military action, but the U.S. holds a veto on the council. 

Joe Lauria is editor-in-chief of Consortium News and a former U.N. correspondent for The Wall Street Journal, Boston Globe, and other newspapers, including The Montreal Gazette, the London Daily Mail and The Star of Johannesburg. He was an investigative reporter for the Sunday Times of London, a financial reporter for Bloomberg News and began his professional work as a 19-year old stringer for The New York Times. He is the author of two books, A Political Odyssey, with Sen. Mike Gravel, foreword by Daniel Ellsberg (Seven Stories); and How I Lost By Hillary Clinton, foreword by Julian Assange (OR Books). He can be reached at [email protected] and followed on Twitter @unjoe


Please DONATE to CN’S Winter Fund Drive


49 comments for “Israel Dismisses Genocidal Intent as ‘Random Assertions’

  1. Drew Hunkins
    January 15, 2024 at 00:09

    Be sure to watch the footage of the South African legal team at the Johannesburg airport returning from the Hague. It’s the best two minutes on the internet thus far in 2024.

  2. Valerie
    January 14, 2024 at 04:00

    “No one will stop us, not The Hague, not the axis of evil and not anyone else,” Netanyahu said in televised remarks on Saturday evening, referring to Iran and its allied militias.
    Guardian 14 jan

    Drew Hunkins is right. Only a military attack on Israel is going to stop this genocide.

    • Rebecca
      January 14, 2024 at 09:36

      I’m not sure if you were reading the news sites on 7th October last year when there was, apparently, a military attack on Israel by Palestinian resistance organisations. Given the gigantic response by the State of Israel to this relatively minor incursion, what do you imagine it would do were another state to launch an attack that would genuinely threaten the existence of it as a Zionist, Jewish-supremacist state? Bear in mind it possesses nuclear weapons.

  3. Vincent Amato
    January 13, 2024 at 11:29

    Flailing around like trapped cats, hissing and baring their teeth, the designated legal minds assigned with defending Israel’s genocidal attacks on the Palestinian people, have decided that the best defense is an offense. This morning’s news told of the Israeli ambassador to the UN stating that the UN should be put on trial. What will it take to tame this roaring mouse? Because unless Israel is forced to redefine its entirely unrealistic view of what its status among nations should be, its tragic course will never be altered. Only one nation has the influence to end this seemingly unending menace to world peace. When it stops writing checks for arms, we may be able to see some progress.

    • Izzatso
      January 13, 2024 at 20:07

      What’s your analysis to explain why only the USA has the power to stop this? Why do you suppose the USA is complicit with the Israeli genocide? Have you studied the underlying mechanisms? Care to share them publicly?

      • Onlooker
        January 14, 2024 at 16:37

        CN has published numerous articles on the influence of the Zionist lobby in Washington, and related topics. Try searching for stories about AIPAC,, etc.

  4. Vera Gottlieb
    January 13, 2024 at 10:55

    Over 22,000 killed Palestinians are RANDOM ASSERTIONS? Never short of CHUTZPAH! And 75 years of brutal treatment of Palestinians…RANDOM ASSERTIONS too? Shame!!! on you, israel!!! SHAME!

  5. anon
    January 13, 2024 at 08:13

    South Africa is the new global moral superpower.

    • Rebecca
      January 14, 2024 at 09:40

      That is hard to substantiate. Whilst its action at the ICJ is tremendously laudable, bear in mind the woeful record of the ANC government over thirty years of giving South Africa’s resources away to international capital for the benefit of a wealthy corporate class. The country is in dire straits, with poverty, inequality and crime rampant, and democracy almost non-existent. There is almost no real socialist opposition to the ultra-capitalist ANC and its cronies. Many South Africans, if I judge from social media, think that the ICJ action is to distract from the ANC’s catastrophic failures.

  6. Julia
    January 13, 2024 at 06:22

    “Here is one of the great crimes of our age, unfolding before our eyes, described to me by the Palestinian activist Omar Barghouti as “the world’s first livestreamed genocide”. Rarely has a crime so grave been so honestly spelled out to the world by its architects.”

    From an excellent article by Owen Jones today. As Barghouti says, the first ‘livestreamed genocide’. Unlike in the past, it is surely going to be well nigh impossible for Israel to defend itself on the grounds of ‘random assertions’, indeed on any grounds, when the world has seen quite a different reality with their own eyes .


  7. WillD
    January 12, 2024 at 22:19

    I imagine that telling the court that it ‘did not have jurisdiction to hear South Africa’s case because South Africa did not establish that there was a dispute between two states’ wouldn’t be well received by the judges.

  8. Randal Marlin
    January 12, 2024 at 21:37

    Good comments, Joe. I believe that British barrister Vaughn Lowe really made a powerful case by enunciating very clearly key points about what is at issue. It’s not a matter of whether Israel has or has not a right to defend itself. Whether it has that right or not, the prohibition against genocide takes precedence. It’s not necessary to prove genocide beyond a reasonable doubt. The path being taken by South Africa is to stop the mass killings by providing enough evidence of genocide to justify stopping the ongoing slaughter of Palestinians. They are using a law designed particularly to deal with this kind of situation, acting where time is of the essence for rescuing innocent people from total degradation, despair, dislocation, starvation, disease, and a host of other other horrors.
    No decent person who understands the nature of what is legally at issue can fail to support the South African case.
    My only hesitation in saying this is that the long history of Jewish persecution and the Holocaust under Hitler suggests that anti-Semitism may be encouraged among some circles. That must not be allowed to happen, and those who support the South African case should be prepared to counter any such perceived encouragement.

  9. Joy
    January 12, 2024 at 19:17

    I found the so-called defense by Israel to be completely baffling. They basically admitted one of the elements of the charge, incitement to genocide by calling the remarks “random assertions.” They may not be random, but regardless, they are incitement and a crime.

    Israel also relied on self-defense, which is not, itself, a defense to genocide. If it were, one could easily claim self-defense for any act.

    They also claimed a lack of standing, but the nature of this dispute, conferring jurisdiction, is very similar to the jurisdiction the ICJ has already asserted for itself with the Gambia vs Myanmar case that is currently active in the court. How likely are they to undo that?

    Which raises the question, what the heck are they thinking? Has the impunity, which has protected them over the decades, made them unable to grasp what needs to be done when they may very well be judged by an impartial standard by judges sworn to uphold the law? The ICJ judges understand, does Israel not understand, that accepting their defense would completely undermine the ICJ itself, and along with it the U?. The “Rules-based Order’ has served the interests of the USA and ruling elites very well. Perhaps the Israeli’s are confident that TPTB will consider it more important to continue shielding Israel than upholding that Order. It will be interesting to see which one of these pillars of the past 76 years will fall.

  10. firstpersoninfinite
    January 12, 2024 at 19:07

    It seems strange that the dead in Palestine don’t get a say in court. Instead, the argument is over which precedent took place first, and what meaning that would have going forward into a state of moral nullity. I say that if you are going to rewrite history so that it doesn’t include a seventy-five year occupation, you should have no problem with having your own borders rewritten for the sake of history.

    • Sam
      January 13, 2024 at 20:23

      Don’t forget that some of the countries that have judges on the ICJ are themselves open to accusations of genocide. That means to me that these governments will pressure their judges to give Israel a pass.

  11. SH
    January 12, 2024 at 17:10

    Well – regarding what “we” are going to do – there is an election coming up in a few months, which somebody will win. …. Considering that the duopoly, via legislation regarding ballot access is making it monumentally difficult for a 3rd party to be on the ballot – and i hear very little about that anywhere, including on “lefty” sites – our choices will be Terrible Trump v Genocide Joe – so whom will people choose …. will “we” hold ole Joe accountable – because, if many of the comments so far are correct, we will be the only ones who can …. and if we don’t, are we not also “complicit”?

    This is what our acquiescence to the TINA (there is no alternative) to the duopoly has brought us to – have we no shame?

    • J Anthony
      January 13, 2024 at 06:58

      Seems shamelessness is indeed all the rage these days. Smug know-it-all liberals tell me that if I don’t vote-blue-no-matter-who, I’m responsible for ruining the country. I get the same thing from Trumpers, albeit in different language. I say enough is enough already, I will not give support to criminal warmongering psychopaths with my vote. But I’m the bad guy.

  12. Will Durant
    January 12, 2024 at 13:04

    Truth has no currency in the U.S., UK, Israel. These states are based on deception. They use the law for the benefit of the rich and powerful, those whose positions and connections effectively put them above justice. This abuse of law is not, of course, unique to these 3 countries, but the fact that these states hold themselves to be the very best of modern civilization indeed indicts the larger system in which we all live and work. Did you believe in Justice? This system will crush your faith. There is justice neither for the broken, dismembered and annihilated children and mothers of Gaza nor for you, if you are not well-connected. This is the fruit of a cynical, secular system with no grounding in Truth and which is selective in its invocation of moral and ethical standards. A moral and ethical system that is selective in its application is neither moral nor ethical, and so the U.S., UK and Israel condemn themselves in the eyes of the world, the simplest citizen of which can recognize the Golden Rule and simple justice, whether or not they practice it in their daily lives. The blind are leading the blind, and the fact that the blindness is willful only compounds the sin. One can be dispirited by this were it not for those who continue to fight for the Truth, including Consortium News. Sophistry may be the modus of the courtroom, It will not work in the face of heinous state crimes. Whether SA, et. al. prevail in the ICJ the mere fact that the rest of the world recognizes genocide and ethnic cleansing–and Israel, the U.S. and the UK–for what they are promises a real change in world affairs and orientations. It will not work out well for the perps and their collaborators.

  13. Nathan Mulcahy
    January 12, 2024 at 12:08

    No matter how the court decides the implications are tremendous. Either USA/Israel face a diplomatic catastrophe OR the entire edifice of international law crumbles.

    • Todd Phillips
      January 12, 2024 at 19:30

      A checkmate move

    • Robert
      January 13, 2024 at 09:26

      You did not overstate the situation. This is an extraordinarily consequential decision because of which countries are involved. Israel/USA are not 3rd world countries and a determination that Israel has committed genocide will have far reaching effects. Global South governments would certainly begin the process of regaining trust in UN institutions and Western governments should come to realize the world has changed. It will be fascinating to watch the response of Western media. No doubt it will be a collective result and a propaganda plan is already in place for whatever the decision is.

  14. January 12, 2024 at 11:53

    Dolus Specialis for Genocide by Israel in Gaza is in The Bible:

    “As for the cities of these peoples that the Lord your God is going to give you as an inheritance, you must not allow a single living thing to survive. Instead you must utterly annihilate them — the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites (primary ancestors of today’s Palestinians) [2], Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites (the Canaanites of Jerusalem)” [3] (Deuteronomy 20:16-17 NET) [ 4].

    As put recently by Jeffrey Sachs, [5] “This extraordinarily violent text and related parts of the Bible (such as the annihilation of the Amalekites in the Book of Samuel), have become crucial points of reference [6] for right-wing-wing Israelis, both religious and secular. As a result, today’s Israel pursues a 6th century BC messianic vision of securing all of Palestine for Jews.”

    Please watch “Thou Shalt Not Kill … Whom?” [7]

    1. hxxps://

    2. hxxps://

    3. hxxps://

    4. hxxps://

    5. hxxps://

    6. hxxps://

    7. hxxps://

    • Carolyn L Zaremba
      January 12, 2024 at 22:14

      This is why I despise all religion and am a lifelong atheist.

      • Rebecca
        January 14, 2024 at 10:03

        Was, for example, Archbishop Óscar Romero a genuine hero because of his religion or despite it? And, of course, Martin Luther King, Jr.’s Christian beliefs underpinned and motivated his work from beginning to end. There are many other such examples of people of faith – and I’m an atheist too – whose ‘delusions of supernatural deities’ nonetheless propelled great work amongst the poor and despised. Such as the subversive revolutionary Jesus Christ who was murdered for making enemies of the Jewish ruling class in first-century Israel.

  15. January 12, 2024 at 11:35

    What in the hell are British barristers doing arguing Israel’s case in the ICJ? Is Biden going to send American lawyers to preach Israel’s innocence as well?

    If the ICJ allows the Brits to speak for the Israelis, I hope they also allow the Jordanians, Syrians, Lebanese, Iraqis, Saudis, Egyptians and Iranians speak for the Palestinians.

    • Izzatso
      January 13, 2024 at 21:08

      Thank you for this excellent point. The world has really gone insane. Let’s also keep in mind that some of these highly respected barristers are murdering Julian Assange, as we speak.

  16. Caliman
    January 12, 2024 at 11:26

    Well, a lawyer is supposed to make the best case for their client, no matter how weak and silly the case. Arguing that an occupying power has a right to “self defense” against the jailed people; arguing that levelling the entire living quarters, markets, destroying every hospital in a territory is anything other than attempted genocide; arguing that statements made by ministers, members of parliament, and leaders of the army are not representative of the state; these are all idiotic, of course, but not surprising.

    What is on trial is the law and the UN … are they going to rule as per the evidence? We shall see.

    • nwwoods
      January 14, 2024 at 14:53

      And furthermore, should the panel so rule, will Israel comply? I expect not, and if not, what is anyone or anything going to do about it?

  17. January 12, 2024 at 11:09

    A favorable ruling in the case is likely to be ignored by Israel at least in the beginning, particularly because at the interim measures stage the court does not a decide whether Israel has engaged in genocide. It only decides whether it is plausible that Israel has done so. The hard decision comes later.

    But all members of the Genocide Convention were required to enact enabling legislation that requires the nation to act to stop genocide anywhere it happens. One of those nations is the U.S.A. hXXps:// (.) Notice that the law has severe criminal penalties and makes liable those who incite genocide and those who conspire or attempt to commit genocide. The statute logically extends even to members of Congress and defense contractors.

    A pending federal civil case under that statute asks the court to order an end to military aid for Israel . The decision by the World Court would be entitled to significant deference by the U.S. courts. See
    Defense for Children International v. Biden, (U.S.D.C. N.D. Cal.), Complaint of 13 November 2023. hXXps:// (Accessed January 8, 2024). See also other case documents at hXXps:// (.)

    Magnify that problem by the 150-plus nations that are party to the convention.

    Now imagine a class action lawsuit by the heirs of Gaza’s dead and wounded against U.S. defense contractors who have provided Israel with weapons used in Gaza.

    Also, the International Criminal Court has been slow-walking its investigation of Israeli and Hamas war crimes. But looking down the barrel of an ICJ opinion , the ICC would come under very stiff criticism if it does not begin prosecutions of individuals who have engaged in it.

    Even the Houthis then become fighters on the side of angels, acting to stop Israel’s genocide, which is undoubtedly why they announced their intent to end their blockade of the Red Sea if Israel stops the genocide. The Genocide Convention authorizes military action to halt genocide by each and every nation. The U.S. makes itself complicit in the genocide by acting to stop Yemen from continuing its blockade.

    This isn’t a case about an apartheid wall. This is a case about a very serious war crime. A ruling in South Africa’s favor will have repercussions aplenty.

    • ikester8
      January 12, 2024 at 23:07

      Excellent points, particularly what could happen to nations that are complicit. There should be a rush to nullify any diplomacy or trade with Israel and its sponsor in terror, the United States.

  18. Carolyn L Zaremba
    January 12, 2024 at 10:58

    You know, I never hated Israel before. I mean, I disliked Zionism and thought it was a mistake and a crime to invade Palestine and displace its people for many decades. But now I actively HATE IT. There is nothing left to feel but total hatred.

    • Vesa
      January 12, 2024 at 13:28

      I agree and like to add that gradually i have begun to hate Britain with disgusting government and vartisters/judges.

    • Pat Boland
      January 12, 2024 at 13:40

      That reflects what in my read is a key but rather neglected point. Israel is not only ensuring a generation’s worth of utter hatred among Palestinians and who knows what forms of revenge, it is also muddying whatever level of respect it might have had amongst nations and people with previously a more neutral attitude on the matter. Why would it be so stupid?

      Now that is not a rhetorical question, because the Israelis are not stupid. We really should look at what their game really is.

    • Eric Foor
      January 12, 2024 at 15:54

      I’m angry too. As a Baby Boomer my moral compass was firmly anchored by the events of WW2. The first book I ever read was the children’s version of “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich” by William Shirer. I hated Hitler for what he had done to the Jews. All my Jewish friends felt the same way. I was glad that the UN had granted the Jews a land of their own. I felt they deserved it.

      That was then….Now I know it was all lies and propaganda. The fog finally cleared for me after 9/11. Since 1967 America has been Israel’s bullybitch. In 1963 JFK was terminated as he was attempting to halt Israel’s nuclear weapons program. In 1967 Israel maliciously attacked the USS Liberty. They killed 34 American and wounded 170. The coward, Lyndon Johnson ordered a cover up.

      Israel is now exterminating the Palestinians…blowing them to bits….in broad daylight…while America stand down. With the exception of a few brave Houthis the world is in fear of Israel. It is truly remarkable that the ex-apartheid country of South Africa is standing up. Many of the “resilient Jews” of my childhood have become the the murderous Nazis of our times….but only worse,… because they now profess a historic morality that is intwined with the beliefs of many naive and ignorant Christian Zionists. Their diabolic scheme is the epitome of selfishness.

      None of this would be possible if Israel had not acquired nuclear weapons. So… that was the very first goal Israel secretly set in 1948. In America, AIPAC now dictates US policy in the Mid East. That policy has evolved to incorporate all of Israel’s enemies as enemies of America… which explains our antagonism towards Iran, Russia and China. Zionists are a dangerous and belligerent people. To quote Henry Ford in 1922, “They have become the world’s foremost problem”.

      • Carolyn L Zaremba
        January 12, 2024 at 22:22

        I read the adult version of The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich when I was in high school in the 1960s. I was born in 1948 and first became politically aware during the debates between Nixon and Kennedy, which we were assigned to watch for our social studies class. Next thing I knew, when I was 15, was the assassination of JFK. Next, I joined the anti Vietnam War movement. I know the history very well. I have been a student of history nearly the whole of my life. I am also a Marxist and supporter of the Socialist Equality Party and vote only for its candidates. I would not say that the world is afraid of Israel. South Africa assuredly is not, and all of the countries supporting South Africa’s Application are not afraid of Israel either. I do not support Nazi Ukraine, either. I’m glad they’re losing. I respect Russia and China and the shift away from the west. The world is changing. All empires fall, and the U.S. is going down, which is why it is so violent and supporting Israel’s violence.

    • Joy
      January 12, 2024 at 18:58

      I urge you to move away from the road of hatred and retribution, not because I don’t understand your feelings, but because I had them myself for many years. What I see now, is not an Israeli problem but a human species one. And if we don’t learn the way to live with one another in love, and do it fast, we will not survive as the last hominid species. It took a long time for me to see this, but we are running out of time. If we don’t learn this lesson, we probably don’t deserve to continue. If we don’t learn it now, we may not be able to. I for one will not accept that.

      • Sam
        January 13, 2024 at 21:02

        Joy, I think your confounding two different things. Yes, Jews are humans and so are we all and yes, it’s a human problem. I don’t see that fact having anything to do with a person’s choice to hate any definable group. Especially when that group is political.

        Do you also chastise someone who hated the Nazis? Woul you tell the Gypsy family of Nazi victims that, no, don’t hate Nazis, only understand that we have a human problem?

  19. hetro
    January 12, 2024 at 10:45

    ‘And then Shaw said: “South Africa has given succor and support to Hamas, at the least”.’

    This Orwellian ploy that it is Hamas practicing genocide must, in turn, rest on evidence of damage to Israel and statements of intent from its leaders.

    *What damage has been done to the Israel community? The 1,200 figure is in dispute at this time. Studies show that IDF forces contributed to this number. The atrocity stories have fluctuated, been elusive, and are being challenged.

    *Additional damage = approximately 425 IDF forces deaths. Damage to Israel community infrastructure from rockets and small arms fire, if any, is what?

    *What indications are there of an ongoing Hamas genocide program versus, in the Gaza strip, the disproportionality in damage to infrastructure, control of electricity, food, water, and number of deaths (particularly of children and infants), given that Hamas forces do not possess tanks, armored personnel carriers, and jet bombers with 2,000 pound bombs?

    *What statements suggesting genocidal intent have emerged from Hamas or other Palestine representatives governing the Gaza enclosure?

    Shaw and his staff have given succor and support to the So. African case, at the least.

  20. David J Valachovic
    January 12, 2024 at 10:23

    None of this will matter. Israel will continue to enjoy complete immunity because the US has compromised the ability of every international body to function honestly. Look at how the US pressured the OPCW into suppressing what was revealed by its own investigators. Anyone who expects this to have a significant impact on Israel is profoundly naive.

    • hetro
      January 12, 2024 at 11:46

      I disagree. I think it does and will matter. Hugely. That is, it matters with those of us not in official positions to support an Establishment Purview, i.e. as “global rulers” etc etc. Let them continue with their delusions. If they think we do not see their manipulations and greedy self-interested bullshit they are very much mistaken. The world is changing. I firmly believe this, though I may not live long enough to see it come to pass, into a turning toward massive change. This exposure of what cocksure charlatans these “rulers” have become stands before us now with this ICJ case, and we are viewing it in all its naked arrogance.

      • Carolyn L Zaremba
        January 12, 2024 at 22:24

        Thank you. I agree.

    • Laurie Holbrook
      January 12, 2024 at 15:41

      The impact on Israel will come from the opinion of people the world over. The damage will be huge by adding fuel to the BDS initiative, destroying tourism in Israel , and possibly reducing or minimizing its trade with nations like China, Russia and the other Middle eastern countries. It is and will become a pariah state. It digs its own grave. As for the ICJ, if they rule against South Africa, in the eyes of the world, this institution will have lost all credibility.

      • Carolyn L Zaremba
        January 12, 2024 at 22:24

        That is my opinion also.

    • Izzatso
      January 13, 2024 at 21:06

      Agreed. The USA is the current World’s Evil Empire,” and lives up to the title as well as can be expected.

  21. J Anthony
    January 12, 2024 at 06:59

    This is just atrocious. If this were any other partnership-of-countries inflicting genocide, it wouldn’t even be a question. Will these people ever be held accountable for their state-sanctioned terrorism? Are powerful nation-states ever held accountable for the horrors they commit? Not in recent times. I would hope, as would anyone, that the US and Israel can be brought to heel through these legal mechanisms, but am not holding my breath. Ironically enough it seems the only ones who can make Israel stop is the US, but it is the US enabling them, so what are the chances? The Nazis of Germany had to be physically defeated before they were stopped, and I fear this is no different. The Israeli government has enjoyed complete immunity, thanks to US support, from any international court or treaty, no matter what they do, for a very long time. The Zionists obviously have a sense of entitled supremacy. They self-righteously and hypocritically rationalize all of their atrocities. And, they brag of their untouchable status and have no shame. It is clear that the long-term ramifications will haunt us for at least the next generation. There is no coming back from this. That it was allowed to go on for 3 days, much less 3 months and counting, is bad enough. That the judges at the ICJwere squirmy and uncomfortable during the proceedings is a tell that they are unlikely prepared to do the right thing, in the face of the unmitigated power of the US/Israeli unholy alliance, and the fear of consequences that may result should they rule the way the majority of the world would like them to. I can only imagine what type of behind-the-scenes pressure is being put on them.

    • Lois Gagnon
      January 12, 2024 at 10:36

      If it turns out your predictions are correct, it is incumbent on the nations of the world to boycott and sanction the US and Israel for as long as it takes to bring down their genocidal regimes. Let them have a big taste of their own medicine. The proof of that strategy’s success is the country bringing the case before the ICJ.

    • Valerie
      January 12, 2024 at 10:49

      ” I can only imagine what type of behind-the-scenes pressure is being put on them.”

      I believe many of us can imagine that JA.
      Meanwhile diversion of attention is achieved by US/UK attacks on Yemen.

    • Laurie Holbrook
      January 12, 2024 at 15:44

      Agree, but the support from Israel is not just from the US although that is its most powerful support. All the other western so-called democratic countries of the west support Israel. The circle of guilt is huge.

      • Big D
        January 13, 2024 at 02:16

        Israeli mask of democracy well and truly ripped off.Genocidal blood thirsty maniacs no different from the Nazis in ww2 who committed similar atrocities in Poland, Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union.

Comments are closed.