Israel

[George M]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/ ... fy-israel/

Sorry , got it completely wrong. You are not denying the Genocide. You are disputing the numbers.

Err no, I’m saying that the terrorist group you sympathise with is telling you lies, but don’t let that get in the way of your agenda.

My agenda is the same as every civilised person in the world. An end to the Genocide , a return to peace , and punishment in an international court for those who deserve it. What’s yours ?

[BoniO]

Sorry , got it completely wrong. You are not denying the Genocide. You are disputing the numbers.

Err no, I’m saying that the terrorist group you sympathise with is telling you lies, but don’t let that get in the way of your agenda.

Anyway I’m going to stop this, you believe what you want. Merry Xmas.

Bye. Missing you already.

Another loony-tunes Israel supporter who doesn't give a flying f**k about the massacre of innocents. Quotes a newspaper that is knowingly quoting a right wing Islamophobic "think tank" as the truth. You should be ashamed of yourself.

I can't speak for anyone other than myself but do I believe everything that Hamas says? Well, of course not. No more than I believe everything that Israel says. But it's fact that tens of thousands of innocent people, many of them children, have been slaughtered in Gaza, and Lebanon is now receiving similar treatment. The UN has supported the data as have other reliable sources. But it makes no real difference to the crime whether Israel has massacred 20,000, 30,000 or 40,000 people. They are guilty of crimes against Humanity in each case and they need to be stopped.

[faldO]

An end to the Genocide..

Which definition of genocide are you using? The one used by the ICJ - in which case Israel has no current case of genocide to answer - or the new one being proposed by the likes of South Africa and Ireland because the generally accepted one isn't broad enough to cover those they don't like?

[George M]

An end to the Genocide..

Which definition of genocide are you using? The one used by the ICJ - in which case Israel has no current case of genocide to answer - or the new one being proposed by the likes of South Africa and Ireland because the generally accepted one isn't broad enough to cover those they don't like?

It’s a little sad when you are trying to find the least offensive definition of the word. You choose. The number of deaths will remain the same

[faldO]

An end to the Genocide..

Which definition of genocide are you using? The one used by the ICJ - in which case Israel has no current case of genocide to answer - or the new one being proposed by the likes of South Africa and Ireland because the generally accepted one isn't broad enough to cover those they don't like?

It’s a little sad when you are trying to find the least offensive definition of the word. You choose. The number of deaths will remain the same

I'm curious as to why you suppose genocide is being perpetrated by Israel. The ICJ havent said so and the term has a legal definition. I couldn't care less whether the definition is offensive or not.

If it's necessary to change the definition, as South Africa and Ireland want to do, so as to fit a narrative, I'd suggest the attempts to pin "genocide" on Israel under the current definition (the one used by the ICJ for example) are on shakey ground.

[Frogger]

Sorry , got it completely wrong. You are not denying the Genocide. You are disputing the numbers.

Err no, I’m saying that the terrorist group you sympathise with is telling you lies, but don’t let that get in the way of your agenda.

My agenda is the same as every civilised person in the world. An end to the Genocide , a return to peace , and punishment in an international court for those who deserve it. What’s yours ?

Stop wasting my time on people who don’t have all the facts and just spurt out rubbish

[George M]

Err no, I’m saying that the terrorist group you sympathise with is telling you lies, but don’t let that get in the way of your agenda.

My agenda is the same as every civilised person in the world. An end to the Genocide , a return to peace , and punishment in an international court for those who deserve it. What’s yours ?

Stop wasting my time on people who don’t have all the facts and just spurt out rubbish

Hop off to whatever stone you were hiding under frogger.

[George M]

Which definition of genocide are you using? The one used by the ICJ - in which case Israel has no current case of genocide to answer - or the new one being proposed by the likes of South Africa and Ireland because the generally accepted one isn't broad enough to cover those they don't like?

It’s a little sad when you are trying to find the least offensive definition of the word. You choose. The number of deaths will remain the same

I'm curious as to why you suppose genocide is being perpetrated by Israel. The ICJ havent said so and the term has a legal definition. I couldn't care less whether the definition is offensive or not.

If it's necessary to change the definition, as South Africa and Ireland want to do, so as to fit a narrative, I'd suggest the attempts to pin "genocide" on Israel under the current definition (the one used by the ICJ for example) are on shakey ground.

About as shakey as your beliefs. The fact that you believe the law will save Israel from being called anything worse than naughty probably says
all there is to say about you.