Holy shit. I noticed that too and thought that must be one of the ones that hurts going in, figured it was from when they draw the medicine into the syringe,. Or may e even from taking the cap off.

I’d like to punchasize his face, for free.

Lol yes we fucking are.

I don’t know what the outcome will be. Of course I read the complaint and some of the initial legal opinions, as to jurisdiction, application of the conventions, and the preliminary injunction, and at this stage of the case, the decisions are based on the complainance statements and are presumed to be true. Like, if everything South Africa says happened really did happen exactly as they say, does the court have jurisdiction, do the convention supply, and did they state a plausible case for genocide?

My takeaways from the complaint are posted in detail elsewhere, but in summary it provided a lot of hyperlinks to news articles that were based on second and third hand reports, mostly from anonymous sources, with pretty half assed reporting.

For example, reading the articles, it’s impossible to determine if you just read 10 articles about 10 different events, or 10 articles about the same event, because the articles don’t include enough detail. Yet, if people read the same headline then times, they’re going to think it must be true. I’ve gotten into it with people here on Lemmy where they tell me how wrong I am and just look at all these examples of Israel doing a thing, and then they post three examples all talking about the same one event and they don’t even realize.

To prove up the claims in court, South Africa is not going to be able to rely on hearsay and anonymous sources; Twitter posts aren’t evidence. They’re going to need names, dates, exact locations, credible witnesses, and Israel is going to have a chance to respond and cross-examine every claim.

A lot of the most sensational claims are going to fall apart when Israel’s position is included. Like the headline might have said that no weapons were present, no terrorists were killed, just all kids and women. And when the IDF investigators present their evidence, it will show that there were weapons, or there were terrorists present.

A lot of claims fall apart now just with critical analysis. I recall a series of articles about a local doctor quoted as saying that he treated a boy who had been shot by an Israeli sniper, and others with similar wounds, but if you actually look at what the guy said, he based his opinion on the idea that because a kid had a hole through his center, it must have been fired by a sniper; he said something like ‘only a sniper could be so accurate.’ Maybe that sounds plausible, especially if you want to believe Israel is monstrous, but it’s absurd on its face; emergency room doctors cannot identify the shooter or the motive or intended target from a bullet wound. It could have been fired from two miles away at some other target entirely. That’s how bullets work.

On the other hand, there have definitely been what seems like some pretty egregious war crimes; IDF blames a lot of horrible things on freak accidents and mistakes. Some I’m sure are freak accidents snd honest mistakes, sometimes I find that unbelievable. So when the media reports a bunch of wild nonsense, sprinkled with a little truth, people find the nonsense believable. I tend to think that when any news articles makes me think “God damn, that’s unbelievable,” such as Israel sniping kids, it shouldn’t be believed without extraordinary evidence.

I’ve found that a lot of the reporting has been like this, rhetorical or wildly exaggerated, claims that the declarant could not possibly know. In law that’s called incompetence. Like the driver of a car could testify as to what they experienced, but would be incompetent to testify that a manufacturing defect caused a crash; you need a mechanic to say that, and at that, one who examined the car at issue.

A lot of the claims are circumstantial, which is fine, but if the reporting only includes one view of the circumstances, it’s insufficient to draw a conclusion. Much of that sort of coverage begs a conclusion anyway. Al Jazeera constantly does this. They’ll talk about one recent report, which is often just some random Twitter post with nothing else, just to have an article, and then they’ll say “well Israel has been accused of this kind of thing several times before, so it must be true.” Again, if people want to believe Israel is a monster, they’re likely to accept the article at face value without thinking through the clearly false logic.

Further, part of the Hamas strategy is to lie and encourage people to lie. By their account, everyone killed is a woman or child, no terrorists are ever among the dead, and none of the dead ever had any weapons. Hospitals are always hospitals and schools are always schools. Israeli troops are getting in small arms fire fights everyday. Someone must be a terrorist, someone must have some weapons.

All this said, I’m not there, I don’t know what’s true or not, and like mostly everyone with an opinion on this stuff, I only have my experience and instincts to guide me, and this has been how I see it.

https://www.thestar.com/politics/federal/justin-trudeau-breaks-silence-over-canadas-position-on-israel-genocide-allegations/article_613ade0a-b16b-11ee-b3e1-4b98cc95f239.html

Take him to the same place every day, no stops, no sniffing, walk to the potty spot, do the potty, walk back home. Worked for my old dog a while back when we moved from having a yard to having no yard.

Of course number doesn’t make something right or wrong.

I also find persuasive the list of The country’s in support of South Africa’s complaint to the ICC; a bunch of religious dictatorships and monarchies with their own abysmal human rights records, compared to those who supported Israel, which includes like France, Australia, Japan, and even Canada. Canada is widely known for its cool head in international affairs and it’s consistent stance where human rights are concerned, which might not be as aggressive as some wish, but they manage to maintain relations and push their agenda, which is usually shared by the western world, forward.

It was a walleye.

My favorite part of this is that at some point, slapping a fool senseless with a fish must have been based in truth. Like, that happened to someone.

Just look at all the leaders and western institutions that say otherwise. Probably your own country’s intelligence and diplomatic heads, probably your chief executive. The list of institutions that agree with me is much longer than your list of loudmouths. The question you should ask is when did South Africa and Ireland start working for Iran?

Yes and in the Bosnian genocide there were not credible claims that the deceased were incidental casualties, which are permissive and expected in war. There were soldiers going door to door murdering families, lining them up and shooting them, sometimes hundreds at a time. You know, actual genocide.

Nothing like that has happened in Gaza, not even allegedly. There’s been some mistakes and some definite war crimes. That’s all war, though.

Except for all my other comments.

1% per year?

“An eradication.”

Grow up.

1% of Gaza is dead.

“Murdering all their population.”

Grow up.

Patsies do the deed, the organizer collects the reward. It wouldn’t be a spectacle back in Iran, they would claim to have no knowledge lest there be retaliation, and also for that reason it wouldn’t be paid by the Iranian government, it would be paid by Iranian financiers and business people, backers of the Immamate, likely even by people living outside Iran, same people who are paying bounties to Hamas for killing Jews, for example, various Iranian-alligned “foundations”; might get some in gold, some in Bitcoin, some in various currencies, probably some even in USD. The person would hole up in some Iranian proxy state, and live out their days lavishly in like Qatar or something, maybe in Pakistan. It’s not like a free for all prize.

Further, this kind of thing might be served ice cold, when nobody expects it. There’s still people trying to kill Salman Rushdie for Iran and his bounty is only $3 million and has stood for forty years. Iran doesn’t have elections every four years with foreign policy swinging around like monkeys from a tree like some fucking people I could mention, they play a long game.

Fun question.

Same. Years. Two or three times a week, easily.

Hasbro.

This is disgusting.

“But then a few days ago…”

What, you crawled out from under a rock?

“Everything is fucked… how can this be?!”

Man that water looks fishy.

Looks like central New Hampshire? If I had to guess.

Would love to know the name of the river if you don’t mind sharing. If not, that’s cool too.