kenway

Great line. There are rumours that Israel plans to show the court the same "graphic video" that was shown to Owen Jones (among other journalists) as well as Elon Musk, and various Hollywood actors. Apparently the video is highly graphic footage of the Oct 7 Hamas attacks, that appear to show people being killed and is regarded as being very emotionally-led and a difficult watch. According to Owen Jones, he was only allowed to view the video once, in a controlled environment, and although impactive on his initial viewing, had subsequent questions about what he thought he saw, compared to what he actually saw. Following up investigations, led to a kind of potential Mandela Effect in his eyes, and to me would imply that the video might be deceptive in its nature. Certainly, following recent revelations that the IDF was actively invoking the Hannibal directive on Oct 7, there's space to assume that not everything about the events that took place are accurate. Israel is the persistent illusionist when it comes to propaganda, but despite being creatively ground-breaking in this regard, its efforts become neutered the moment the broader audience catch on to its gameplay. The question is, will the court have sufficient acuity to recognize that? In any event, it's reasonable to conclude that Israel is planning a supernova of emotional and intellectual manipulation - if so would be a stark contrast from the measured objectivity of South Africa's approach.

Maybe in a week or so. Israel makes its defense tomorrow.

So the SA speakers conveyed extremely strong explanitories for why the ICJ should consider it genocide (albeit as plausible) and I think they have played it really smart. By playing down emotional manipulation, and playing up facts and the underlying objectivity of "how and why", they've positioned the court into a space where the judges cannot credibly disagree. Someone else mentioned about the use of UN reports serving as the basis for the argument. This is clever because to reject the motion would mean the UN overruling it's own faculties and findings. Most of the evidence appeared to be predominantly from UN or Israeli sources, rather than Palestinian ones. There was a speculation that Article 51 might be used as a defense by Israel. That is to say, that theoretically, even if provisional measures are advised or enforced, nothing can overrule a state's right to self-defense, and if Israel determined that its actions continue to be defensive in nature then it could theoretically ignore any such measure. SA's pre-emptive response to this was to remind the court that Israel, is in fact an occupation as according the United Nations, and therefore Article 51 cannot apply because Article 51 only applies between two sovereign states, and that in actuality, there is no such division between Gaza and Israel main. Or in other words, self-defense is a non-issue when you are in fact an occupying power, especially when charged with genocide against the people who you are occupying.

It's a little subjective. I think he's trying to make the case that Jews and South Africans live peacefully in South Africa, and that it's not like South Africans have a historical and emotional conflict with Jews to the extent that they could be considered as having a vested interest.

Synchronises with recent statements made by Israeli Finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich, who says:- "Hague Court, like other international tribunals, are political bodies plagued with anti-semitism and are exposed time and time again in stunning shows of hypocrisy." Would also seem to indicate that Israel is getting prepared to lose: "Of course we lost. The whole world is against us...".

What was it that was said that was derogatory?

Fascinating conversation between Finkelstein and Rabbani as a preview to the ICJ hearing, broadcast last night.

"Article 51 has no application." There goes Israel's defense.

Well said.

ICJ Hearing being broadcast now from the Hague (United Nations Official Livestream):- https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k11/k11gf661b3

I asked several people in this thread:- 1 Palestinian = 1 Israeli ... Correct? None of the Israelis answered. The correct answer is this: 1 Israeli = 1 Palestinian. Now here is a video of Nelson Mandela.

1 hour ago, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke to the nation.

This goes a long way in underpinning the Nazi mindset. If it is strong enough for a Jewish woman to explain, then it is strong enough for a nation (or group of nations) to believe.

On the eve of this moment that will define history. We are all on the cusp of change and it feels amazing.

@zazen Yes, with a preview tonight. Edit: Looking at the times / timezones I can't see how this would be a live commentary but worth seeing nonetheless.

Just released. A pretty good analysis from Counterpoints on how the ICJ hearing will go. I agree with the synopsis, but there are some caveats.

So it's spread out over two days. South Africa makes its case on Thursday. Israel makes its defense on Friday. Each session begins at 9:30am European Time (3:30am ET / 10:30am IL / 8:30am UK) on both days. Hearings will be livestreamed on UN Web TV - https://webtv.un.org/en Will I be eating popcorn? Haha probably yes lol. I'm really interested in seeing where the Israeli defense goes with this. It's almost certainly going to involve some kind of BS wall-to-wall horseshit. If the defense attorney has any professional self-respect he should really just plead guilty.

ICJ hearing begins tomorrow. What's going to be the Israeli strategy for defense in your opinion? I believe Israel is being defended by British lawyer Malcolm Shaw, who has considerable experience within human rights law. What do you think he should be focussing on? Do you think he'll do a good job?

Are you sure you watched it all? The video is 1 hour and 9 minutes long. It's been 29 minutes since I posted it. The truth hurts, my brother.

The Psychology of Israeli Propaganda