"a crime committed with the intent to destroy a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, in whole or in part"
Which is why the ICJ had no difficulty in stating that there were plausible grounds for believing genocide was taking place. Even Hitler didn't kill the entirety of Europe's Jewish population - he killed just under two-thirds. The current claimed death toll of Palestinians in Gaza since October is just under 30,000, which is almost certainly a massive underestimate. The population of Gaza is around 2.4 million, and the population of the wider Palestinian territories is around 4.8 million (excluding residents of the illegal Israeli settlements). That means if the target population for genocide is considered to be Palestinians as a whole, a minimum of 0.6% have been killed so far, and if the target population is considered to be Palestinians specifically in Gaza, a minimum of 1.2% have already been killed. There comes a point where that can be considered a non-trivial "part" of the overall ethnic group, especially when no end to the killings is in sight and the numbers can only vastly increase, especially due to man-made (ie. Israeli-made) starvation.
But if the governor of New York had her way, Israel would already have taken the genocide much, much further. Kathy Hochul said this -
"If Canada someday ever attacked Buffalo, I'm sorry, my friends, there would be no Canada the next day"
On that analogy, she thinks Israel should have totally annihilated all 2.4 million people in Gaza, and possibly all 4.8 million people in the State of Palestine, on 8th October. Presumably this would have had to be done with nuclear weapons, because there is no other realistic way of destroying an entire ethnic group of millions in a single day. To make the analogy more exact, of course, she would have to assume that Canada's attack on Buffalo was in retaliation for decades of US military occupation of Canada, which would mean under international law that the Canadians have a right to self-defence against the US, but the US do not have a right to self-defence against the occupied peoples. That does not imply what Hamas did on 7th October was a legitimate form of self-defence, but it does mean that Israel haven't got a leg to stand on in suggesting that mass killings and mass destruction of infrastructure are a legal self-defence response to the events of 7th October, because they quite simply have no legal right to self-defence in Gaza at all.
Ms Hochul is, grotesquely, not a gun-toting Republican nutjob, but an elected Democratic Party governor in one of America's supposedly most liberal states. And yet she not only cheerleads for genocide but thinks it hasn't gone anything like far enough yet. As long-term readers of this blog may remember, I have a vote in US presidential elections, and it's been an almighty struggle to find a Democratic primary candidate who has even a vaguely human stance on the Gaza conflict. There was a Congressman who I agreed with on almost every policy, but when I got to his view on Israel/Palestine, I discovered that he thinks it's all the fault of the dastardly Arabs and everything would be as right as rain if they would just leave poor old Israel alone (ahem). To my relief, I did eventually find a candidate who is standing on an explicit pitch of stopping the war and ending arms supplies to Israel.
As there are suggestions that Keir Starmer would like the SNP to change their pro-ceasefire Commons motion so he can allow Labour to vote for it, could I urge the SNP to stand firm and refuse any request to remove the words "immediate ceasefire" or to put any conditions at all on the immediacy.
When I read the line "there would be no Canada the next day", my mind pictured a wholescale US invasion of Canada, destroying its government as they did to Iraq, and Germany in the day. Even that would take much longer than 24 hours, however. So there's just a teeny wee dash of hyperbolae in the line, in either case…
ReplyDeleteRegards Gaza, let me play Zionist's Advocate for a moment. If the state of Israel really did want to annihilate the Gazan people, they could have done so with the IDF using a shoot to kill policy on the entire territory. Sure, the Hamas fighters in the tunnels would still be out of reach, but even their position would be more desperate with civilians crowding them down there, more than they are now. As you say, there's still more than 2 million people alive in Gaza. They do so in awful squalor *above ground* and very much *in sight* of aerial and land based murder squads, if Netanyahu so chose.
ReplyDelete*Cough* urgh *cough* gross…
Yeah, enough of that devil's advocate stuff. It feels like praising the SS for for their patience at the gates.
Oh yeah, my point? There's a sliding scale of genocidal action and intent.
DeleteIsrael could go in hammer and tongs, hit every human there with everything the Americans will give them, and kill more people yet. That would be true 1940s, "Final Solution" madness.
At the other end of the intervention scale, they could have used their supposedly amazing smart weapons and world's best special forces exclusively in Gaza, taking out Hamas with laser precision, and even freeing hostages unharmed, while assisting aid workers the best they can to mitigate wider suffering. Obviously they've not done that either.
Instead, their active policy moves around in the middle ground between these two extremes. They go in hard whenever they feel like it, causing lots of collateral damage and getting almost no success on the hostage front. They pound domestic buildings, killing thousands, as collective punishment on the civilian population. Yet that population is still by and large alive, and angry as hell, making for the richest recruitment ground for Hamas, Da Esh, and every conceivable anti-Israel terrorist movement worldwide. Sensible, right!?
Netanyahu knows Israel is dead meat without 100% support from Washingston. So he's doing the largest scale genocide he feels he can get away with, without his country getting left to fend for itself. Evidently, that is quite a lot of genocide. He knows our politicians well. But it's not enough to future generations of Israel any good at all, in global sympathy or in local hatred.
Terry Callachan Dundee , here , i think it is so obvious that the USA is the exact opposite to what is portrayed by governments around the world including , sadly , our own.USA is portrayed as being the policeman of the world bringing justice settling disagreements giving out aid and issuing sanctions when it so chooses to do so.
DeleteWho gave USA this authority ? NOBODY , the USA just took it upon itself to bribe countries around the world with trade packages if those countries allowed the USA to site military bases on their land.
Apparently there are over 700 USA military bases in europe mostly around or with closes access to the mediterranean sea.
The USA likes to have films made that show USA as the good guy our tv here in UK is saturated with these good guy made in USA films the USA government subsidises the filmmakers.
Far from being the policeman of the world they are the bully in the playground it is common practice for them to issue sanctions on countries that sont do what they are told and you can be sanctioned if you decide to trade with a country that USA doesnt want you to trade with
( whats it go to do with USA who other countries trade with )
At present USA is sailing several of ts biggest war ships up and down the coast of China , a dangerous decision , just imagine for a moment if China sailed its biggest war ships up and down the coast of USA or if Russia did that .
There are big population countries around the world now who also have big economies and big trade arrangements these countries have grown in strength in the modern world , Russia China India Brazil South Africa Germany Iran can no longer be bullied into submission because they have allied themselves with others to form formidable groups.
USA UK Australia Canada ( do you see a pattern here ? ) all former colonies of UK , have formed a group too but that is more a case of old colonial pals together than anything else.
Israel is the USA lacky in the middle east it is the biggest USA military base in the world , Israel send most of its young to be educated in USA universities then they come back to Israel to do their national service practicing shooting and killing the palestinians that throw stones at them .
Its time the UK had a clear out and rid itself of the creeping poison that has inflicted USA.
I’m not saying you're wrong, Terry, but it's not quite as black and white and simple as all that.
DeleteDo movies like Apocalypse Now, The Deer Hunter and The Thin Red Line, let alone Fahrenheit 9/11, make the US government look good and righteous? Even Avatar, of all record making earners, has a cast of American military villains. Hollywood's far from a simple propaganda outfit for Raytheon and the rest.
Regarding trade and sanctions: lots of countries, even Washington's proudest stooge the UK, have trade and travel agreements with Cuba. I know people who've gone there with their UK passport no problemo. Difficult for US citizens but not their allies.
What propelled the Americans to de facto world leadership was the Second World War and its aftermath. Roosevelt's New Deal had given them such an economic advantage they had bang on 50% of the whole world's GDP in 1945. They had The Bomb, they had forces scattered over Europe and the Pacific, and Stalin was scaring the bejesus out of everyone he hadn't already conquered. The United Nations was put together by the Americans (who had missed the game entirely when they refused to join the League of Nations before it) and the Soviet Union largely acquiesced. Soon enough, the Cold War was on and the whole world was carved up into their two spheres of influence.
Come the 1990s, the Soviet Union collapsed, of course. George (HW) Bush missed the opportunity of a lifetime to re-engage with them and their possessions, and to redefine the world. Ten years later, Putin came to power and dedicated his effort to rebuilding the Soviet sphere of influence. And now it's all this.
The Americans aren't the good guys in a good vs. evil epic. They're not the bad guys, either, though. The world's complex, and great powers are often lazy.
SNP leadership deserves a lot of credit on this issue.
ReplyDeleteYes, they've shown sureness-of-touch and are growing into the role. We can all agree on this.
DeleteYou think it's hard for them to side with the public? Who's twisting their arm?
DeleteI agree, but not only on this issue. I feel there’s been much improvement within the SNP in recent weeks. Maybe people will start getting behind them now.
DeleteThis is what’s needed, as we really need a strong SNP. Let’s hope it continues.
What have been the other "improvements"?
DeleteThey’ve been “surely touching” themselves again, evidently …
DeleteAll I know is that a strong SNP showing at the election is the best way forward for independence. We can all agree on this.
DeleteYes, they're growing in strength, stature and sureness-of-touch. Humza made a brilliant speech and dealt with the heckler with his sureness-of-touch, which is growing at the same time as his strength and stature. His role is growing.
DeleteAnon at 12:43am, of course it is. Try telling that to the clowns who are talking of abstaining, spoiling ballot papers or voting for other parties though.
DeleteHumza may be in the doldrum in the polls, but his private "polling" is going strong, I’m sure. Such sureness of touch, this man's charisma is irresistible!
DeleteWe can all agree that the SNP has done bugger all for independence since 2014. I'll grant you that.
DeleteIt has only taking Wes Streeting, Labour MP, 3.5 months of deliberate murder of Palestinians by the IDF for him to say it is possible Israel has broken international law. Yeh that's right only possible - 100k dead and wounded - cultural sites deliberately demolished - majority of homes destroyed - hospitals/schools bombed - civilians deliberately deprived of food/water/ medical supplies - multiple forced relocations and kettled in to a small area but this Labour diddy says it is only possible.
ReplyDeleteTwo things that piss me off greatly about the British media coverage are:
ReplyDelete1. They only talk about the Hamas hostages but never the 6 thousand odd hostages the Israelis regularly hold in their prisons. They never mention the fact that some of these hostages in Israeli prisons just keep on dying and their bodies are not returned to their families but they find it no problem at all to report on the same thing happening to Putins opponent Navalny.
2. The suggestion that not enough people have died for it to be considered a genocide.
James in his excellent article has rightly pointed out that 2. above is just plain wrong but it is plainly also a very offensive position to hold. How many dead or wounded do these people need. The intent of the Israeli government and the IDF is to kill as many as possible and wipe out any cultural sign that Palestinians existed in Gaza. Whether the Zionists always had this as part of their plan or it is just over the top rage engendered revenge killings does not mean it is not genocide. It is.
Oh but IfS: the Israelis hold them in prison. Therefore they can not possibly be “hostages“. Everyone knows hostages are dressed orange suits and paraded before verses from the Quran.
DeleteThey are clearly not “political prisoners“ either, because Israel is not Russia, or otherwise allied against the UK. Look at a map! They’re in in the goodies bit.
Guys, guys. Isreal is real. It’s right there in the name. Also the US is US. The good guys. Right there in front of your nose do the research.
DeleteWhat is trumps position on this? is he siding with the Israelis orwith Putin? Must be a hard choice for him.
ReplyDeletegens, gentis, 3rd declension female = people, nation, tribe, clan
ReplyDeleteAlso latin -cide = killing
killing can be ongoing rather than a finished event, so completely by roots and definition, genocide = killing of a group of people, both ongoing or historically complete.
Yes I passed latin, if you got more than 2 mistakes you got 6 of the strap.
I see in a previous thread, James says I’m almost certainly an Englishman who’s spends little time in Scotland, because the only reference I make to the country is Nessie.
ReplyDeleteWrong I’m afraid James. I’m actually Scottish born and bred, and live in Dumfries and Galloway.
I’m also pretty confident the Tories will hold on in D & G, despite the excellent Alister Jack standing down at the GE.
By all means send us your name and a recent photo of yourself in Dumfries and Galloway if you want us to believe you. The current predictions are that the Tories will lose "the constituency you live in", and of course Alister Jack is so "excellent" that losing him means you'll have even less of a chance. Best brace yourself for disappointment.
DeleteWell anon are you proud of this:- Scotland 19% poverty - Norway 0.5% poverty. Scotland zero wealth fund. Norway over a trillion pound wealth fund. Your excellent Jack did exactly what to improve this situation? Even the Tory light Keir Starmer said that Westminster wasted Scotland's oil and gas resources but he never admitted that your Better Together mob lied to the people of Scotland when they said in 2014 oil would run out in 10 years time.
DeleteJames, most people want to remain anonymous, and use a moniker to avoid harassment for ourselves and our families.
DeleteThat's fine, but if he wants to maintain his anonymity, he can't really expect us to take his claims about his background at face value.
DeleteNothing against Dumfries, but, well, knowing a few folk from doon there I wouldn’t be too surprised if he really is speaking his truth. It’s very almost England there, psychologically as well as cartographically.
DeleteAh IFS, you’ve been quiet in recent days, I’ve missed your drivel🤣🤣
DeleteOh KFC 😝🍆 how we always miss yours. 💩😊💩😄💩
DeleteHang on a minute James. Wasn't a certain winter sports enthusiast something of an expert in the availability of unisex toilets in Dumfries and Galloway?
DeleteIdea d&g will go SNP when it didn't in the glory years is batgrabbing crazy.
DeleteI forget. Was that the one seat that remained Tory in 2015?
DeleteNope, the SNP won it in 2015 with a comfortable 11.5 point majority. I'm afraid what Anon is too "batgrabbing crazy" to have noticed is that Tory support has slumped back down to 2015-type levels, so with tactical anti-Tory voting, there's a clear path to victory for the SNP in the seat. This isn't the "glory years" of Ruth Davidson, y'know.
DeleteI live in Dumfries and Galloway when some nearby English complained to the council about the Saltire in my garden
DeleteMy home is detached on 9 acres of my own ground
It was within 4% in 2019. The SNP's clearly weaker now, but so are the Tories of course. It all depends which party slumps harder. The Labour vote was already squeezed very hard in all three elections since (Scottish) Labour's last good showing in 2010. Can't see it shrinking further. Indeed, with a landslide on the cards they'll surely rise. A lot of voters don't pay any attention to their own seat.
Delete@10:15 D&G council will order you to take it down as an offensive symbol to local residents!
DeleteFun fact: the Gaelic name for Galloway is Gall-Ghàidhealach. Gall is the word for foreigner, especially the English. In fact, the name for the whole of the lowlands is Galldachd, which means "an English connection", namely our use of the cursed foreign tongue.
DeleteAs someone who’s lived in D & G all my life, it’s difficult to see the Tories holding the seat.
DeleteThey have done so much damage to this country it’s going to be about damage limitation for them.
Yes, I'd have to agree. Especially once all the anti-Tory tactical voting for the SNP is factored in. Could be carnage.
DeleteYup. Seems to be one or two on here that are failing to grasp the fact that the Tories will always be hated more than the SNP.
DeleteIt’s quite an achievement to be hated more than the SNP.
DeleteLifelong unionist at 12.25pm - why are you a lifelong Unionist?
DeleteHere's an example of the crown of England, and the UK Government, never apologising for the barbaric practice of taking innocent hostages.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofScotland/Robert-The-Bruce-Women-Imprisoned/
Someone (not me) should write an article in the National about all the many hostages taken down to London and around.
Ah, go on, the National would definitely publish it.
DeleteI was thinking more like Hamish MacPherson, if anyone knows him.
DeleteNetanyahu's sureness of touch…
ReplyDeleteAnas Sarwar at the Labour in Scotland conference said that oil and gas will continue for decades to come in Scotland. This is the same Labour lot who told us in 2014 that oil would be finished in 10 years time. Did Sarwar apologise to the people of Scotland for lying to them in 2014. Of course not. Colonial political parties are there to take whatever resources they can get away with from their colony - deceiving the people in the colony is their job.
ReplyDeleteNorway, not being a colony, have always been clear about how much oil and gas there is - 50 years worth at least they say. It is the job of the colonial parties to emphasise that the oil and gas will not last that long - downplay the value of the resources and how long they will last so the natives don't get too bold. The oil and gas since the eighties has always been running out soon according to the Britnats. If you vote Labour you are voting to continue to live in a colony, be lied to and ripped off.
What about the CO2, though? Shouldn't we be trying our best to get off the stuff, instead of exploiting every climate-devastating drop of it?
DeleteThe future's going to look unkindly on our present age where we know the danger yet still keep drilling anyway. Who are helping here? Who benefits while all the rest of humanity ultimately bears the cost?
My point is that in a colony we have no say on whether to use our natural oil/gas resources or leave them in the ground. Not only that, we are lied to as to its possible future value. It should be for the people of Scotland to decide whether to use our oil and gas resources not Westminster. Currently, the waters around our east coast are getting covered in wind turbines to provide electricity for England. Did we get a say in this - no. Like oil and gas the financial benefit stays in England.
DeleteAll of this is under the control of Westminster and the voters of our colonial masters - England. Somehow I don't think Westminster or BP/Shell care one bit what the future thinks about them. If you want control of carbon emissions from our carbon resources you need independence.
Ifs, the oil and gas belongs to the UK.
DeleteThese colonial enablers cannae even get it right when posting their imperial shit. So I'll correct it for the Britnat numpty " the oil and gas belongs to England. "
DeleteThe same type of person many years ago used to say " India belongs to England" - feel free to replace India with any of the oppressed colonies of England that are now free. England's stolen possessions are down to the bare bones now - Wales /Scotland/NIreland/Gibraltar and a number of small assorted islands. England the world's greatest thief.
The same type of person used to say " the Americas belong to England and that won't change unless the Americas achieve independence, which is of course, at best, extremely unlikely."
DeleteEngland *is* the UK. They have 533 seats out of the 650 total, that's 82%, and therefore a permanent overwhelming majority.
DeleteElementary stuff, matey.
When was the last time the UK acted in Scotland's interest, over England's? Has it ever?
DeleteIfs, you need to cut the crap.
DeleteYou said it, mate. UK == England. That's why we need out. Their interest always comes first, second and last.
DeleteCan't answer that one, eh? God Save Your Blessed England! One day she'll be free, all to herself.
DeleteWe can’t even build 2 ferries, what chance would we have if we were independent?
DeleteAny update on Glen Sannox and Glen Rosa? They were only meant to be in service in 2018 !!
Anon at 2.51pm - the UK cannae build aircraft carriers that work. Both of these weapons of destruction keep breaking down and were also delivered late. Look to Norway to see what an independent country can do.
DeleteAnon at 2.05pm - " ifs, you need to cut the crap" what a stunning argument for remaining England's colony. Only a true Britnat numpty could come up with that intellectual gem of reasoning.
Independence for Scotland, you make a complete fool of yourself saying Scotland is a colony.
DeleteI’m actually embarrassed for you!
Anon at 5.05pm - please save your embarrassment for Britnat's who prefer to live in a colony with 19% of its population in poverty and having to beg to see its national football team on the telly . Of course you probably see England as your national football team.
DeleteAs my daily good deed I will alleviate you of part of your ignorance.
A definition of a colony: a country or area controlled politically by a more powerful country.
Another definition of a colony: a country or area under the full or partial control of another country and occupied by settlers from that country.
Scotland is a colony.
No need to thank me my reward is in helping others remove the shackles of ignorance.
If you believe America, India, Australia, Ireland, or any corner of the Great British Imperial Earth could manage as an independent country you live in cloud cookoo [sic] land.
ReplyDeleteYour therapist says to lay off the hostile blogs. It's not helping.
ReplyDeleteAnon at 3.24pm: You're wasting your own time trying to post deeply offensive comments like that. Smearing anyone who disagrees with you or with Israel as an "antisemite" may be acceptable behaviour in the Labour Shadow Cabinet, but it's not acceptable behaviour here.
ReplyDeleteWith regard to England always acting in Englands interest, but under the disguise of a UK unitary state, Kenny McAskill is calling out the English broadcasters for not showing Scotland's national football teams on terrestrial telly. No doubt James would have liked him to have included curling as well. Well let's see who votes for his bill to make it law that they must broadcast the games on free to air (well if you exclude the tv license) channels like they do for England. No reason the existing BBC Scotland channel couldn't broadcast them as most of the time they broadcast nothing at all - life in a colony - you gotta hate it - when you have to beg the English to broadcast your national football teams.
ReplyDelete