What because one of the lawyers for Israel is British? There are British lawyers for South Africa as far as I m aware. Politicsjoe is an anti- English Irish channel that has an anti- English agenda. Are you ashamed of this? ua-cam.com/users/shortsm3IYwGWtkzk
@whataboutme7174 oxiiioioxxiv Senor, there are very few like YOU on the planet to have the guts to admit and speak The TRUTH. YOU will indeed be rewarded accordingly. The Creator Supreme knows your Intentions and Actions. Have a good day in Peace. Adios.
They were taking notes, because this barrister was giving dates, times, and a serious legal argument. The SA lawyers arguments were based upon attempting to stir emotional responses from the judges of collateral damage during war, and assumptions.
@@grmair He is a defense attorney - his job is to represent his client and defends it even if he himself believes it to be guilty. Even the Nazis in Nuremberg had defense lawyers. That’s how the legal system works.
As a Scot, it's clear to me the way that British lawyers and statesmen use language and technicalities to dismiss an actual observable situation and substitute their own reality to obtain the outcome they desire. Language manipulation is their modus operandi. Hopefully the judges at the Hague can see through these language tricks and view the reality with a clear mind and not be influenced by words that may sound wise but are nothing more than fog to obscure their judgement.
I assume that you wouldn't make the same sweeping generalisation when it comes to assessing (British lawyer) Prof. Vaughan Lowe KC's brief, delivered in support of SA's case against Israel. Israel's only possible defence is to obscure and find some sort of technicality, this lawyer merely did what any other lawyer would have done for their client. As one Scot to another, you might want to leave aside your worn out stereotypes about, and prejudices against, "the British" and try judging them on their merits as individuals.
Indeed. He would convince us that black is white given half the chance. The numbers speak for themselves - multiple thousands of kids dead. A much higher proportion than any other war in recorded history. This is insane to believe that Israel has not purposefully targeted the civilian population. Hell Tzipi Hotoveli, the Israeli ambassador to the UK unambiguously admitted to the policy of wiping the population of Gaza out
Israelis... always have to be the victims even though they are the ones who have dropped 69,000 tons of bombs on a 25 x 6 mile strip of land that used to house 2.3 million people, their universities, schools, hospitals, churches and mosques and no place to flee.
@mcprofacy oxiiioioxxiv Lawyers are just LIARS, they are paid to LIE.......will sell their own mothers if it benefits them.... Some of these LIARS become Justices to act like Just Asses.......
@@therichieboy full facts? Israel has denied access to any independent bodies to verify what has taken place. Israeli bullets killed more festival-goers than Hamas bullets. Israel is rapidly losing its standing in the world. Everyone has seen their mask slip.
The dispute started when South Africa was the first nation to openly accuse Israel of genocide and collective punishment, then proceeded to withdraw its Ambassador from Israel and closed its diplomatic mission in that country. Israel responded by withdrawing its Ambassador from South Africa. In the realm of international relations, there's no greater declaration of dispute than this.
@@IM_MOUNTAINso you’re under the belief that South Africa, and the people of the world, don’t actually believe there’s a genocide, it’s just we want a different news headline for South Africa… Get a grip.
The Lawyer did a good job and activated nerves of the judges to see the truth. What intend can South Africa put out to construed its allegations of genocide against Israel. Was 17 October 2023 where innocent unarmed Israelites were slaughtered in hundreds and was carried out by the Hamas Palestinians an act of genocide? Was it not an act that instigated defence of its citizens and was Israels action in defense an act of self defense??? Israel is fighting in a Hamas created war where civilian ought to take precaution to protect themselves as in this case in the hub known as Rafar where about a million Palestinians took refuge with the Hamas taking advantage of its tunnels underground to create more tension.
@@MaisieDaisyUpsadaisy Yes... they did. Like, Israel did not even know that South Africa had a 'dispute' with them. So... yes, now that we are all here... South Africa, why did you call the police on Israel? I mean, I know you severed all diplomatic ties with Israel and all... but can we all *just go back* and have a buddy-buddy discussion about this?! Yes? Good. *Case dismissed, right?* Washington DC, pay me. Thank you. Bye.
There's NO INNOCENT people in Gaza. Almost 90% of all the gazans support the irrational hatred that Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Fatah, PLO, Daesh, Waqf, etc. have towards jews in general. The other 10% are kids who are not valued by their parents enough to not be indoctrinated and sacrificed by them. Most people in the world don't even comprehend the life of palestinians in Gaza, their way of thought, their convictions. How come you can defend them so blindly? All the information that comes from within Gaza is controlled by these terrorists groups. The world is seeing ONLY what they want you to see in order to control the narrative. All of you are so ignorant, so emotionally driven. It sadens me profoundly the sole idea that the world will understand Israel's arguments and response to the conflict ONLY when the evil reach them in their own countries. Bunch of fools...
It is a court of law, technicalities is what it's about, and definitions, laws, etc... It's not about who can shout the loudest, or who can cry the most. How did people in this world become so utterly stupid idk, but it does sicken those of us with functioning brains. Google what the law is.
@@RoxanneLavender Not strictly true it depends on the type of court ,definitely in courts with juries emotion plays a big part . Probably why juries get it wrong so often
Let's spend our time googling while lives are lost rather than calling out what the Israelis are doing amd what inaction the USA is preventing by vetoing
With all the evidence broadcasted to the world they can't really argue the outcome of their actions, so resorting to breaches in technicalities indicates the level of their desperation.
Yup. It's like as a civilisation we don't have to learn anything from wars and atrocities of history and say "Well. If it was okay back then it's okay now yes?". Politics and Religion poisons everything because the root of the problem is dysfunctional sociopaths and psychopaths are drawn to and overrepresented in politics, religion, finance and economics.
That is not what is happening here. Listen and concentrate. You will learn how the law operates regardless of whether contesting a tv licence evasion summons, genocide, or anything else inbetween.
its a disgrace to have so much hate for they jews, and not allow them to defend themselvs ageinst terror attacks. only a racist jew hater can claim defense ageinst terror are genocide. its hamas that should been called out for genocide ageinst israel and the jews, its outragous to accuse israel of the crime they defend them selvs ageinst
I've listened carefully to the argument despite the premise being abhorrent to me. I understand what the lawyer is trying to do and as I see it, its more of the same from what has now become a terrorist state, ie Israel. Trying to obfuscate, dismiss and distract from their illegal acts. They seek to dismiss on technicalities South Africa's case stating that they have no dispute with South Africa, denying public statements from government officials right down to the military supporting and encouraging genocide with protocol which plainly is being overridden in line with the genocidal statements issued in the media and not only once. I hope that the court understands israels tactics and based on overwhelming evidence as put forward in support of South Africa's case they dismiss israels argument and rule against them. As a uk born citizen I for one am ashamed that a uk lawyer has taken up this case to defend israel, I do not support israels illegal occupation of Palestinian lands and the oppression of the Palestinians over the decades since 1948. I do not support with equal weight the actions of Hamas, both are abhorrent to me. The only solution as i see it is for the usa, uk and other nations supporting israel, in particular with weapons must cut off those weapon supplies and apply pressure upon israel to both comply fully with international law as well as through negotiations put in place a genuine and fair to both parties two state solution. I do not support my governments support of israel and their appeasement which allows the Palestinians to continue being treated worse than animals and murdered in large numbers even prior to this attack. I can't call it a war or a conflict as it is too one sided, the Palestinian civilians are not armed or fighting the Israeli forces, they are simply being exterminated in plain sight, this must stop, the rest of the world must stop this from continuing and i applaud South Africa for bringing this case to the court.
@@dancecommando Thanks, more of our politicians need to be given the message that we do not support them where Israel and Palestine is concerned. The weapon sales and support have to stop 👍
Lawyers should be subject to an oath to do no harm to the public the same as doctors. Otherwise we're left with law interpreters who lie for the biggest fee like this guy, Sir Keith, Lammy, Thornberry, etc. 😢
Perhaps the most stupid take I've seen, as someone studying law and knowing how absolutely ambiguous "harm" as a concept is in a legal context (financial harm, damages vs losses, etc.).
Doctors don’t have to take the Hippocratic oath anymore.. Havnt done for quite some time.. Some do as a voluntary matter but by no means is it compulsory.. Which explains ATOS 🤷🏻♂️
What a ridiculous thing to say. If Israel is being accused of a war crime of course lawyers should get their chance to defend it without being threatened by legal action themselves. Your view is full on authoritarianism
Tell me about it... So many times when listening to The Defense I cringed and wondered... Dude... aren't you concerned that you'll antagonize the judges with crossing that line where you're telling them how to do their job, Man? And, one of their lawyers had this argument where he said: even if in 1945 the Genocide Convention had already been ratified, would the Court have ordered the allies to stop the military operation in Dresden at the risk of allowing the third Reich to regather strength? Surely, the whole point of such a convention is to prevent situations where the risk of the third Reich regathering strength did not justify the loss of civilian lives that was meted out. He seemed to totally not get that, and totally did not address that... It's like, he's certain that the Court would not have ordered the allies to stop their military actions, and the allies would have carried on just the same. What kind of an argument is that?? Dude was basically telling the Court to their face: That Law has no power to make any difference anyway.
Thus showing a fundamental lack of understanding of jurisprudence. Interpretaion of the law is based on previous case law. Judges can't fly in the face of established interpretation of any law just because a particular cause is favoured or disfavoured. The law has to be administered dispassionately regardless of whether or nor you favour one or the party to the case. This lawyer has meticulously set out the legal precedents in favour of the judgement he seeks. The South African deposition was, by contrast, emotive and weak. The court judges will weigh the case on the strength of the very arguments you find so boring. Maybe you need to suspend your emotional sympathies and listen to the legal arguments. So far, he is wiping the floor with the SA case...
@@worldwearyuk178the situation is emotive, Palestinians are dying by the truckload and the only defence is to introduce whataboutism by quoting legal presidents and definitions. The legal profession will be the first to fall to AI, using heartless logic, lacking in humanity.
@@ianbirkinhead4103 In a court of law, it's not about who can cry the most, it's about the actual law. Why bring something to court if you don't understand what law is.
I British and this actor doesn’t speak for me. Honestly I’m tired of all this outdated system. The wigs, the gowns, the theatre. Lies are visible and the people are awake. Vive the awakening. Love is the answer ❤
Q: What is a lawyer A: Nothing more than someone with a good memory, a silver tongue and the presence of mind to turn their clients lies into "believable truths" oh, and the good business sense to arrange with the opposition lawyer to string out civil court cases while rinsing both of their clients of thousands in cash, for unnecessary consultations, phone calls and letters
South Africa has presented no evidence of value apart from newspaper articles. it is also interesting that black South Africa would involve itself in the Middle East and the Arabs who have supported slavery for hundreds of years. Go back to school and get an education..
@@hubertagamasu6283 I listened, intently, and he stripped SA arguments apart and showed up their failures. But SA is anti-sematic state as is Ireland so this is what is driving them.
The British lawyer is explicitly trying to ignore the situation and playing legal games. Not one statement in regard to the actions of Israel against Gaza
Have you ever followed or been part of a court case? The lawyer first establishes precedent in law and then introduces how his case fits the precedent. If you were in less of a hurry to get to the verdict (hoping for Guilty no doubt) you might learn the legal justification for that verdict - whichever way it goes. Merely watching newsreels, and THINKING you know what you are seeing, is not enough. It has to be proven in law.
@ballyhoo48 : Not one statement by the bigotted Irish judge in regard to the actions of Hamas against the innocent civilians of Israel, including burning piled up bodies of children and babies.
@@worldwearyuk178Fair enough, I don't think it's really a genocide but it's not because of lack of willingness. So this case served his purpose by merely existing
@@worldwearyuk178 "How can I help it? How can I help but see what is in front of my eyes? Two and two are four." "Sometimes, Winston. Sometimes they are five. Sometimes they are three. Sometimes they are all of them at once. You must try harder. It is not easy to become sane."
The number of commenters here impatient to implement a verdict regardless of any questions of fact or law shows how ignorant and easily manipulated the petitioners are. I appreciate the ignorance it exposes of them. This lawyer is calm, focused, professional and everything that the "Hate Israel" mob are not. Bravo.
When they are told, “Do not spread corruption in the land,” they reply, “We are only peace-makers!” Indeed, it is they who are the corruptors, but they fail to perceive it. Al-Quran chapter 2 verse 11 and 12
What a pity so many posters allow their prejudices regarding the subject matter to obscure their judgement of this lawyer. He is an excellent, even brilliant, advocate. I'd rather he were supporting than opposing me on any day of the week.
@@therichieboy There's no evidence of what happened to the Canaan when the Israelites landed in their territory around 1200BCE, it might simply have been a cultural shift that saw them slowly convert and not a genocide.
@@therichieboy The history of exactly what happened in 1200BCE isn't what you'd call well documented. It does look like they diverged from the Canaanites through the development of Yahwism and the similarities between Hebrew and Canaan language implies a link but that could have developed later. The bible claims that the Canaanite Jacob fled to Egypt due to drought and found the faith there changing his name to Israel. The Israelites then enslave by the Egyptians eventually returning in the story of Moses. I can't give you a 100% true version but probably a bit of both.
I think the judges all woke up when he "lost a page". I admire anyone who can concentrate/listen intently and take in everything he is saying for more than 50 minutes.
From your statement anyone can draw the inference that you essentially were not able to comprehend jack shit all his arguments were rational and yes arguments are meant to be rebutted but you sir have no clue what law is all about. And that is translating into you commenting stuff which are as inapposite as they come
We cannot turn away from the truth whether it is in our favor or not. Truth can be suppressed for some time but cannot be defeated.Lies are used to hide the truth And Israel will need thousands of lies to hide the genocide. Israeli lawyers should know that the first lie is responsible for telling a thousand lies. Well-done South Africa for a courageous step🎉❤🎉
In his memoirs, which were censored by the Israeli military but leaked to the New York Times, the late Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin recalled a conversation he had in July 1948 with David Ben-Gurion, head of the Zionist community in Palestine and first prime minister of Israel, regarding the fate of 50,000 Palestinian residents of the cities of Lydda and Ramleh: We walked outside, Ben-Gurion accompanying us. Allon repeated his question, "What is to be done with the Palestinian population?" Ben-Gurion waved his hand in a gesture which said "Drive them out!"
“We must expel the Arabs and take their places…. And, if we have to use force-not to dispossess the Arabs of the Negev and Transjordan, but to guarantee our own right to settle in those places- then we have force at our disposal.”
He keeps citing what Israeli states about complying with International law, while their military acts belie this. Surely they should be judging actual actions, not words?
Not certain that you’re making a point about Israel’s desire to commit genocide, but even you must admit, your quote there is highly, “interpretive,” don’t you think? I note, even one commenter, above, seems to have fallen for your, “slight of hand.” He refers to a gesture, not words. He interprets it and transposes his whole thought process into coming up with his own words. He could just as easily have said, “He waved his hand in a gesture which seemed to say, ‘welcome everyone in as equals.’” That’s why such a point of view would be inadmissible in a court as, “evidence,” of anything. Don’t get me wrong. I don’t doubt that there was some truth to his quote. Maybe he nailed it? Or maybe he applied his own bias? Knowing what I know of the man under discussion, his history and character, I would have guessed that his gesture (if he truthfully did make such a gesture and was asked this question?) more likely meant, “Who knows?” or simply, “I don’t know. Don’t ask me.” Indeed, perhaps it was a gesture of exasperation toward the man asking the question? My point being, such quotes, in this context are more appropriate to an Alan Partridge book . . . “he seemed to say.”
For me, no amount of words & reasoning could divert my belief that Hamas is all to blame & any consequence, critics against Israel should just close their mouth The S African president is grandstanding blindly & no doubt with personal ambitions like those that threaten world peace & order..
It is a fact. In order for it to be genocide there has to be the intent to erase a people based on nationality or genetics, and Hamas' intent is to kill all Jews, and they certainly did purposely murder many. It can't be proved that Israel is killing Gazan people on purpose, it's an easy legal argument to make that they are just casualties of war, collateral damage. The fact that you equate purposely r*ping and stabbing people to death, burning them alive, shooting them in the head whilst r*ping them, etc, as the same as ''we're gonna drop the bomb on the terrorists we know are in that building because we have drone camera-proof they're in there'' and a civilian Hamas didn't allow to leave is outside and also dies in the blast, that is ridiculous. That's in the same realm as stating that vegetables have feelings and scream when you cut them, like we're all carrots or something. I'm sorry you people don't understand the law, and that you don't understand that words have actual definitions in law...
@@Veron-sv4pg Yeah ok. Not sure where you get your definition of genocide from. Must be from the new Zionist only dictionary. Those of us living in the real world do not recognize that distorted version
I assume that you wouldn't make the same racist and occidentalist generalisation when it comes to assessing (British lawyer) Prof. Vaughan Lowe KC's brief, delivered in support of SA's case against Israel. Nor when describing the tens of thousands of members of the British public who have been on the streets demonstrating, protesting, and lobbying the British government in support of the Palestinian people. Nor the millions of Brits who have donated to relief efforts on behalf of the Palestinians. FYI, the middle east and Arab world is hardly innocent when it comes to charges of "colonialism", fortunately most people are able to leave those crimes in the past and deal with the states and individuals that exist today on the basis of their merits, rather than resorting to derogatory generalisations.
We set it up to fail; we took land from the state of Palestine (also under British control at the time) and gave it to Jewish people as their historical homeland - knowing that it began with strife and would continue to be strife for its entire existence. It's disgusting and shows just how little the British government cares about anything except itself. Signed, A Brit.
They are defending themselves against a terrorist organisation who continues to attack innocent civilians, do you not watch the news, why have they spent so much on tunnels rather than helping the Palestinians people, because they clearly don’t want peace but war.
When I was being lied to by the army (a guy pretending not to be working for them), he dropped his pencil exactly when he got caught in his own lie. Imagine pretending you're from a city that someone else actually lives in and you don't know anything about it. That's why in those spy movies people come up with all sorts of stupid stories about their fake passports, like the ice cream stand at a certain intersection. Locals actually know this stuff. Someone rushed in and ushered him out of the room.
@@grmair Yes he is! How did you not understand his dispute with SA's case? How did you not understand how he very specifically denies the accusations?? Watch it again for goodness sake. He presents a very good case!!
"just doing his job" is NOT a defense. you could insert that quote into any of histories monsters. that was what most of tthe psychopaths that were in the criminal court for the other genocide by na z i...."just following orders" is not defendable
Everyone in this comment section saying why is arguing against genocide it’s called due process and a Defense even the Nazis had defence lawyers everyone should be entitled to proper representation and a fair process of law
I know he’s just doing his job, so I can’t fault him for that, but the whole Israeli defence case seems to be based, at best, on trying to dismiss the case on technicalities or that their extreme interpretations of international humanitarian law are acceptable, or - with respect - outright lies. When every charity, UN aid organisation and more operating in Gaza are saying the same thing, and Israel says differently, you find it difficult to believe the Israeli defence. Incredible scenes, we have witnessed a moment in history that I think many will find difficult to stomach in the centuries to come. How we allowed it to get this bad, how the world watched, the complicity of western media and its partisan ship. I am grateful that Politics Joe has tried to present both sides with equal air time, but that serves to show how good SA’s case is and how out of touch with reality Israel’s is.
@@grmair Everyone including states have the right to defence lawyers. If not him, it would be someone else. You are correct in saying he could have said no, thats between him and his conscience or God. I won’t condemn him for his work, i will criticise approach though.
People need to understand that the legal profession is adversarial, that is why you have a referee/judge, who decides which argument wins. It’s not personal and the lawyers are emotionally detached from the case.
@@BocaoZ i did not suggest that he was criticised personally. I merely stated the adversarial nature of the legal protection and how lawyers are generally not emotionally invested in the cases they take. A lot of people believe they are, unfortunately. You must be aware that lawyers are often criticised for representing a particular client. Someone suggested elsewhere in these comments that lawyers should be subject to the same oath as doctors; clearly, the person does not understand how the profession works, including the rules and ethics that lawyers must comply with.
@@BENTWOONEZEROsave your energy. When uneducated people make their minds up, reason goes out the window. It's one of the true causes of violence and hatred across the world.
@@BENTWOONEZERO It is possible for both sides to be wrong. The problem is that Hamas is fighting against occupation and Israel is killing 10 times as many people with a far higher percentage of civilians.
I hope the UK tax payers are are not paying for this. Is he working independently of the government. Is he working for the UK government. His ranting on and on trying to get Israel off on a technicality is the worst kind of legal routes to take. Its fine when you know you cant beat the evidence. All very hard to convince a jury nevermind experienced judges. They know. I hope the judges work on evidence and the south African case was very effective with its presentation. Most legal experts have said Israel is not in a great position. Let's see how the judges see it all.
How can they live together when one side wants the other completely destroyed? The proof is in the pudding - what Muslim country allows non Muslims to thrive and take high positions of authority? Muslims love living in any democratic nation because their human rights are respected. Sadly the same cannot be said of non Muslims and ex-Muslims in Muslim majority countries. Israel deserves to live and not have to be afraid for their lives every single day.
Yes, events started in 2007 when Hamas took control over Gaza. What a bunch of „liberators“ who oppress their own people an sacrifice thousand of Gaza civilians for their Jihad.
@@epschronos Who rules Gaza with military force? Who called Palestinians human animals? Any clues there? Listen to Mico Paled; he explains the reality. Your pseudonym account is noted btw
@@killpridebeforepridekillsy6504 "To live" meaning imposing rule through force and applying apartheid. Welcome to reality. You can play the victim for so long...
Explicit defense of no case submission of genocide allegedly presented by South Africa to the ICJ against the state of Israel by this British Lawyer . I have learn a lot for your Sir that Law is different from opinion
Have to give it to the comment section, if the people in here would be in charge, there would be no rule of law, no due process, just hearsay, emotional arguments, no lessons learned from history. Brilliant stuff for education.
Does he include the IDF firing at its own citizens on the 7/10 with artillery and apache helicopters btw, so they wouldn't be taken hostage and then forced to be exchanged for Palestinian prisoners (usually uncharged children). Or just the ones killed by smalls arms fire from Hamas? Personally though I would say as a nation we Brits are responsible historically anyway. He also tries to use the justification that Israel is simply a state defending itself, could the same not be said about the 7/10, it was simply the Palestinians defending themselves from an occupying force or is Israel the only one allowed to do so? Lets not forget how much evidence has come to light on the IDF killing their own hostages.
You no nothing it appears. Isarel is not an occupying force under the international laws it is disputed territory, Aside from the League of Nations signing into international law the undeniable right of Jews to create their own sovereign state in Israel based on historical and ancestral rights, Article 80 of the United Nations (UN) Charter is equally as important to acknowledge. When the League of Nations dissolved, the United Nations was shortly formed afterwards. In 1945, at the San Francisco Conference, Jewish leaders came forth to ensure that the Jewish rights to Israel were secured. The Mandate for Palestine was thus duly recognized by the UN. This measure guaranteed that Jews had the unalterable right to live anywhere in Palestine, in the region between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. Even today, this legal right allows Jews to live anywhere in Jerusalem, Judea & Samaria, and in Gaza. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) reaffirmed the meaning and validity of Article 80 in three separate cases; the dates included 1950, 1971, and as recently as 2004. Eli M. Hertz, an expert on Israel notes, “Professor Eugene Rostow concurred with the ICJ’s opinion as to the “sacredness” of trusts such as the “Mandate for Palestine”: “‘A trust’ - as in Article 80 of the UN Charter - does not end because the trustee dies … the Jewish right of settlement in the whole of western Palestine - the area west of the Jordan - survived the British withdrawal in 1948. … They are parts of the mandate territory, now legally occupied by Israel with the consent of the Security Council.” Arabs were never granted political rights under the Mandate for Palestine, only Jews. The reason for that is because Arab political rights were granted in 4 territories: Iraq, Lebanon, Transjordan (later Jordan), and Syria.
Why can t people understand that this man is doing his job as a lawyer working for the Israeli s who have the right to legal representation. He is not there to represent the United Kingdom and his views are not necessarily shared by the rest of the British population. There is a British lawyer on sa s side as well.
This man made his mind before the trial. Wonder how many millions his been paid and of course his job needs securing. So yeah he just smeared mud in our eyes😮
@stesrad Do you know why, of all countries that called for an end during the UN vote, that South Africa was the one that called forth this motion. It's because the two have a historic link as people under apartheid systems. In fact, during the struggle against apartheid in South Africa, when Nelson Mandela was approached twice while imprisoned to denounce the use of violence by the ANC, Mandela rejected the call both times. Some of those arms that were provided came courtesy of Yasser Arafat and the PLO. When most of the world had placed apartheid South Africa under a BDS movement, guess who was one of the few that remained trading with the ruling Boers, that's right, it was Israel. Israel also sold nukes to South Africa during that time. So let's talk a step back and recap. During the fight to end apartheid, a nearly universally positive action that the world agrees on, we have Israel helping the oppressors as the Palestinians helped the oppressed. Now let's fast forward to the end of apartheid and the emancipation of Nelson Mandela. In one of his first outings, a US representative asked him to condemn Yasser Arafat. Mandela refused to do so. He instead spoke of the Palestinians as brothers in arms, fighting the same fight. He added on by saying South Africa will never be free until Palestine is free. South Africa is the most humane country right now as it pertains to this current conflict. Did you even watch the case put forth by South Africa? It is incredibly damning and compare that to the other Israeli rep that spoke for the defence of Israel, their main claim was "it's all been decontextualised". No sane person can walk away from seeing South Africa's opening statement as being stripped from context.
@stesrad they are not a joke! But a moral human being. Do not want history repeat itself, no matter who. If only Jews will learn from this. They could have coexisted with Palistanians and christans who did for decade. Looks like the honesty is way to complex to grasp by some. So yeah laugh. Clearly shows what we dealing with. South Africa is poor but did the decent thing by trying. If that judge accepted the truth, can you picture what colonial terrorists look like now?
@stesrad Mandela was arrested for civil disobedience, not for terrorist acts. You want to play the singular nation card, let's do that then. Let's talk about the "statehood" for the Palestinians. Yitzhak Rabin was the most pro-2 state leader of Israel and even by his own words, they were offering the Palestinians "less than a state" during the discussions of the Oslo Accords. Remember that Yasser Arafat, the then leader of the PLO offered a land split of 80-20 in favour of Israel. He was willing to concede that much in order to broker a deal. Another crucial stipulation was that Palestinians would never be given the right to form a standing army. Do you think it is remotely conscionable that one country can force another to not be able to defend itself militarily? After all, a lot of defenders for Israel note as much as when the scale of attacks by Israel are called into question. Remember that the Oslo Accords were scuppered not by any Palestinian action, but the assassination of Rabin at the hands of a right wing extremist in Israel. The Israeli citizen that assassinated Rabin explicitly made it clear he did so because he didn't want to remotely normalise conditions with Palestinians. You are saying that 30k dead within the space of 3 and a half months is not an excessive death count? For a population of 2m people. A population that was 50% children in the first place. Let's also tackle the Hamas election aspect because I'm sure you believe that it's their own fault for having elected Hamas. As was mentioned before, 50% of the populace are children, and for a vote that took place in January 2006, against the backdrop of a physical withdrawal by Israel in 2005. Fatah and the PA warned against running the vote but it was undertaken at the behest of the US. Hamas won the election by a plurality and not a majority (less than 50% of the votes). Let's do some counting, that means as if right now, Hamas won a single election 18 years ago, for control of a population where 50% are under the age of 18, meaning they weren't even alive when Hamas were voted in, let alone had the ability to vote for them. Let's look to the other side with Israel, they regularly hold elections. If memory serves correctly, this coalition of right wing groups in Israel was voted in during 2022. By comparing the date of elections between the two groups, the average Israeli citizen would be far more complicit, that's without factoring in the mandatory conscription that Israeli citizens have to undergo. I'll use the conscription to segue back to Israeli governance and your point about protecting its citizens. As I've already said, conscription is mandatory, however on the rare occasion, they do bar individuals from conscription. One such notable exclusion was for the current minister for security, Itamar Ben-Gvir. A far right extremist politician deemed too extreme for conscription. This is the man who kept a framed picture of the terrorist, Baruch Goldstein. The man responsible for the Hebron massacre, when Goldstein went into a mosque in Hebron in 1996 and killed 29 Muslims. But let's get back to Ben-Gvir. As the minister for security, he is in charge of IDF allocation and where they should be placed. In the months leading up to October 7th, he reduced IDF presence in the south and reallocated them in the West Bank. That was done in an effort to help steal more land for illegal settlements. Settlements not unlike the one that Israeli finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich, lives in. For the final point I'll talk about in this comment, I'd like to ask you a question. Let's give this conflict a bit of an analogy, let's say you're sharing a house with someone. In this instance, you'll be Israel and your housemate Hamas. The next door neighbour can be Egypt. So you've always had issues with your housemate but neither wants to let go of the house so it's a kinda stalemate. One day, your next door neighbour tells you they overheard your roommate planning to attack you by coming through the kitchen door. You hear that and decide to ignore it in favour of trying to claim more of the living room for yourself. You put more of your effort into taking control of the living that you didn't reinforce against the kitchen. You are then attacked from the kitchen. Do you think you have done enough to protect yourself against the warnings of attacks? Do you think given the reallocation of troops, that Israel acts in the best interests of protecting their citizens?
According to Malcom we are executing a Genocide because South Africa did not tell us about it. This Malcom guy is not smart , A Confirmation of receipt and a meeting suggestion is not a reply to issues raised by South Africa, very dumb point.
And "what about the 7th of October". Yes, what Hamas did on the 7th of October was terrible, but that doesn't mean make the destruction of Gaza at such immense cost to innocent life doesn't put it right
@stesrad true but it had a greater ring of truth, it was compelling in it’s presentation as the team laid out the fundamentals of the case with supporting evidence. The response to the South African charges was overwhelmingly positive, leaving very vivid images in their mind. I believe that the general public were positively for the Palestinians and have become more likely to view Israel as the pariah state. Maybe the court will not be swayed and will consider only the relevant facts, but they are human and as they all come from different countries will undoubtedly relate to their own experience. I believe that the court of public opinion is pro Palestine especially after South Africa’s day in court. At the end of the day it is not to convict Israel or to condemn Hamas, it is to stop the killing and ethnic cleansing, so the South African approach was more likely to convey urgency. The Israeli presentation was more likely to have the justices say ok hopefully we can decide by Christmas 2024.
Everyone or state has to have access to Defence. This is not a personal matter or where this barrister comes from. Without a Defence anyone could be prosecuted on any charge. It is absolutely right that the Isreali government has a Defence in Law. The ICJ is not a lynch mob, nor should it ever be. The Court all of us have the right to hear All arguments whether we agree with them or not.
@@therichieboy we don’t defend them, we defend the people of Gaza. While I’m not defending Hamas, It’s ironic that they are actually called the enemy here when it is the state of Israel that is committed the greater atrocity.
Court of Justice President Joan Donoghue - United States - ? 45th time in UN history that America has vetoed Resolutions in order to protect Israel. UN resolutions against: Israel = 761 Syria = 54 Myanmar = 38 Russia = 31 Sudan = 25 North Korea = 24 Iran = 23 Somalia = 19 Congo = 19 Belarus = 17 Ukraine = 16
I will be complaining to the BBC and Sky 'News' etc tomorrow for not showing South Africa's case against Israel and only showing Israel's defence. F-ing impartial my r-ectum.
This is an excellent lawyer. Does his job factually and dispassionately using the full force of the law. South Africa's case cannot be allowed to stand just because it fits popular conceptions and prejudices. It has to comply with the law and the law only. So far, the South African offering has been all emotive and p***-poor on legal argument.
My country never fail to make me ashamed to be associated with them.
It's all about money!
What because one of the lawyers for Israel is British? There are British lawyers for South Africa as far as I m aware. Politicsjoe is an anti- English Irish channel that has an anti- English agenda. Are you ashamed of this?
ua-cam.com/users/shortsm3IYwGWtkzk
@whataboutme7174 oxiiioioxxiv Senor, there are very few like YOU on the planet to have the guts to admit and speak The TRUTH.
YOU will indeed be rewarded accordingly.
The Creator Supreme knows your Intentions and Actions.
Have a good day in Peace.
Adios.
It is isreal lobby (bribe) funding at full play.
absolutely, the Uk is very persistant about its genocidal behavior and limitless greedy
I am surprised with patience of the judges listening to this man for more 54 minutes.
Actually one of the judges falls asleep for a few moments in between
As a practicing pro se, when the factfinders seem to be uninterested in your discourse. It often means they already have their mind made up.
It’s called being good judges.
They were taking notes, because this barrister was giving dates, times, and a serious legal argument. The SA lawyers arguments were based upon attempting to stir emotional responses from the judges of collateral damage during war, and assumptions.
@@RoxanneLavender Lol ok.
Nothing to do with how implicated Britain is in all this murder if the Israelis are found guilty.
The lawyer is a British lawyer independently representing Israel. The UK isn’t involved.
@@grmair He is a defense attorney - his job is to represent his client and defends it even if he himself believes it to be guilty. Even the Nazis in Nuremberg had defense lawyers. That’s how the legal system works.
@@grmair that makes literally no sense. As a lawyer he’s allowed to represent whoever he wants. He doesn’t need permission.
@@grmair
You are arguing that Britain should be a tyranny. No wonder you support Hamas.
@@grmair
You have single-handedly proven that everything the IDF does in Gaza is 100% moral.
Only the truth. Rediculous accusation in the face of urban warfare.
As a Scot, it's clear to me the way that British lawyers and statesmen use language and technicalities to dismiss an actual observable situation and substitute their own reality to obtain the outcome they desire. Language manipulation is their modus operandi.
Hopefully the judges at the Hague can see through these language tricks and view the reality with a clear mind and not be influenced by words that may sound wise but are nothing more than fog to obscure their judgement.
words that kill
I assume that you wouldn't make the same sweeping generalisation when it comes to assessing (British lawyer) Prof. Vaughan Lowe KC's brief, delivered in support of SA's case against Israel. Israel's only possible defence is to obscure and find some sort of technicality, this lawyer merely did what any other lawyer would have done for their client. As one Scot to another, you might want to leave aside your worn out stereotypes about, and prejudices against, "the British" and try judging them on their merits as individuals.
Indeed. He would convince us that black is white given half the chance. The numbers speak for themselves - multiple thousands of kids dead. A much higher proportion than any other war in recorded history. This is insane to believe that Israel has not purposefully targeted the civilian population. Hell Tzipi Hotoveli, the Israeli ambassador to the UK unambiguously admitted to the policy of wiping the population of Gaza out
Bias one from You
....truth is Justice....and The God of Israel is TRUTH...
Israel has truth on their side.
Watch and see
Israelis... always have to be the victims even though they are the ones who have dropped 69,000 tons of bombs on a 25 x 6 mile strip of land that used to house 2.3 million people, their universities, schools, hospitals, churches and mosques and no place to flee.
Shame on him, and anyone supporting these war crimes.
Everyone has a right to a fair trial and everyone has a duty to explore the full facts before passing judgement.
@therichieboy we've all seen the evidence with pur own eyes through news and other media whether on TV,Internet or other!
@mcprofacy oxiiioioxxiv Lawyers are just LIARS, they are paid to LIE.......will sell their own mothers if it benefits them....
Some of these LIARS become Justices to act like Just Asses.......
Self-righteous comments....
@@therichieboy full facts? Israel has denied access to any independent bodies to verify what has taken place. Israeli bullets killed more festival-goers than Hamas bullets.
Israel is rapidly losing its standing in the world. Everyone has seen their mask slip.
The dispute started when South Africa was the first nation to openly accuse Israel of genocide and collective punishment, then proceeded to withdraw its Ambassador from Israel and closed its diplomatic mission in that country. Israel responded by withdrawing its Ambassador from South Africa. In the realm of international relations, there's no greater declaration of dispute than this.
South africa are known to be the most hostile country towards israel and the jews, so no surprice this nonsens came from them
O really? To me it seems like the minimal amount needed to break the news cycle of its own racial problems.
@@IM_MOUNTAINso you’re under the belief that South Africa, and the people of the world, don’t actually believe there’s a genocide, it’s just we want a different news headline for South Africa…
Get a grip.
@@IM_MOUNTAIN you have sheet for brains
So that's the crux of the matter 🤪
The Lawyer did a good job and activated nerves of the judges to see the truth. What intend can South Africa put out to construed its allegations of genocide against Israel. Was 17 October 2023 where innocent unarmed Israelites were slaughtered in hundreds and was carried out by the Hamas Palestinians an act of genocide? Was it not an act that instigated defence of its citizens and was Israels action in defense an act of self defense??? Israel is fighting in a Hamas created war where civilian ought to take precaution to protect themselves as in this case in the hub known as Rafar where about a million Palestinians took refuge with the Hamas taking advantage of its tunnels underground to create more tension.
Well said
Thank you.
Did the lawyers for genocide know there was no practice round and they had to come with arguments instead of empty rhetoric?
Would that be the lawyers for ham ass or the lawyers for the only Jewish state in the middle east
They did come with arguments.
They presented a clear and a convincing genocide case.
@@MaisieDaisyUpsadaisy Yes... they did. Like, Israel did not even know that South Africa had a 'dispute' with them. So... yes, now that we are all here... South Africa, why did you call the police on Israel? I mean, I know you severed all diplomatic ties with Israel and all... but can we all *just go back* and have a buddy-buddy discussion about this?!
Yes? Good. *Case dismissed, right?* Washington DC, pay me. Thank you. Bye.
@@bonganingcwangubonganingcw1119 who did?
Lets focus on technicalities whilst lives continue to be lost. How many INNOCENT people died during this response? Disgusting!
Why do people like you never mention the death toll of people and children in Yemen, which makes Gaza look like a bun fight ,,,Oh no Jews involved lol
There's NO INNOCENT people in Gaza. Almost 90% of all the gazans support the irrational hatred that Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Fatah, PLO, Daesh, Waqf, etc. have towards jews in general. The other 10% are kids who are not valued by their parents enough to not be indoctrinated and sacrificed by them.
Most people in the world don't even comprehend the life of palestinians in Gaza, their way of thought, their convictions. How come you can defend them so blindly? All the information that comes from within Gaza is controlled by these terrorists groups. The world is seeing ONLY what they want you to see in order to control the narrative. All of you are so ignorant, so emotionally driven. It sadens me profoundly the sole idea that the world will understand Israel's arguments and response to the conflict ONLY when the evil reach them in their own countries.
Bunch of fools...
It is a court of law, technicalities is what it's about, and definitions, laws, etc... It's not about who can shout the loudest, or who can cry the most. How did people in this world become so utterly stupid idk, but it does sicken those of us with functioning brains. Google what the law is.
@@RoxanneLavender Not strictly true it depends on the type of court ,definitely in courts with juries emotion plays a big part . Probably why juries get it wrong so often
Let's spend our time googling while lives are lost rather than calling out what the Israelis are doing amd what inaction the USA is preventing by vetoing
Unfortunately, as a Brit myself, this moral cowardice is exactly what I expect of our legal and political system.
nasty.
You should n t feel too bad as a Brit given it s the international criminal court not the British legal system.
Yet I guess you don't consider the murder of 1500 Jews as genocide or nasty. I despair at people like you.
@@fransrabie6609 don’t know what u mean. Can u explain
It's a disgrace to try to dismiss genocide on the grounds of technicalities...
With all the evidence broadcasted to the world they can't really argue the outcome of their actions, so resorting to breaches in technicalities indicates the level of their desperation.
Yup. It's like as a civilisation we don't have to learn anything from wars and atrocities of history and say "Well. If it was okay back then it's okay now yes?". Politics and Religion poisons everything because the root of the problem is dysfunctional sociopaths and psychopaths are drawn to and overrepresented in politics, religion, finance and economics.
That is not what is happening here. Listen and concentrate. You will learn how the law operates regardless of whether contesting a tv licence evasion summons, genocide, or anything else inbetween.
its a disgrace to have so much hate for they jews, and not allow them to defend themselvs ageinst terror attacks. only a racist jew hater can claim defense ageinst terror are genocide. its hamas that should been called out for genocide ageinst israel and the jews, its outragous to accuse israel of the crime they defend them selvs ageinst
Technicalities like the Palestinian population being up by millions since 1970s. yeah. "technicalities".
I've listened carefully to the argument despite the premise being abhorrent to me. I understand what the lawyer is trying to do and as I see it, its more of the same from what has now become a terrorist state, ie Israel.
Trying to obfuscate, dismiss and distract from their illegal acts. They seek to dismiss on technicalities South Africa's case stating that they have no dispute with South Africa, denying public statements from government officials right down to the military supporting and encouraging genocide with protocol which plainly is being overridden in line with the genocidal statements issued in the media and not only once.
I hope that the court understands israels tactics and based on overwhelming evidence as put forward in support of South Africa's case they dismiss israels argument and rule against them.
As a uk born citizen I for one am ashamed that a uk lawyer has taken up this case to defend israel, I do not support israels illegal occupation of Palestinian lands and the oppression of the Palestinians over the decades since 1948. I do not support with equal weight the actions of Hamas, both are abhorrent to me.
The only solution as i see it is for the usa, uk and other nations supporting israel, in particular with weapons must cut off those weapon supplies and apply pressure upon israel to both comply fully with international law as well as through negotiations put in place a genuine and fair to both parties two state solution.
I do not support my governments support of israel and their appeasement which allows the Palestinians to continue being treated worse than animals and murdered in large numbers even prior to this attack. I can't call it a war or a conflict as it is too one sided, the Palestinian civilians are not armed or fighting the Israeli forces, they are simply being exterminated in plain sight, this must stop, the rest of the world must stop this from continuing and i applaud South Africa for bringing this case to the court.
You have been very objective in your submission and your thoughts. Keep it up.
Totally agree.
This is put so well, I noticed his technicality tactics and your comment hit the nail on the head
@@dancecommando Thanks, more of our politicians need to be given the message that we do not support them where Israel and Palestine is concerned.
The weapon sales and support have to stop 👍
Clearly you support Hammas & its vile atrocities!!!
I’m trying hard not to view this proceeding as straight up good v evil
@chrisviking7807No.
Take of your welding googles then
Try harder. Go watch the videos from 10/7.
Lawyers should be subject to an oath to do no harm to the public the same as doctors. Otherwise we're left with law interpreters who lie for the biggest fee like this guy, Sir Keith, Lammy, Thornberry, etc. 😢
Perhaps the most stupid take I've seen, as someone studying law and knowing how absolutely ambiguous "harm" as a concept is in a legal context (financial harm, damages vs losses, etc.).
Doctors don’t have to take the Hippocratic oath anymore.. Havnt done for quite some time.. Some do as a voluntary matter but by no means is it compulsory.. Which explains ATOS 🤷🏻♂️
Brilliant idea that of course will never happen.
seems most doctors bent over to keep their licenses and jabbed folks with, what we are finding now, toxic profit juice
What a ridiculous thing to say. If Israel is being accused of a war crime of course lawyers should get their chance to defend it without being threatened by legal action themselves. Your view is full on authoritarianism
So clear more than cristal clear explanation... GOD bless British.
I suppose seeking a dismissal on legal technicalities is the only path open for the defense.
Tell me about it... So many times when listening to The Defense I cringed and wondered... Dude... aren't you concerned that you'll antagonize the judges with crossing that line where you're telling them how to do their job, Man?
And, one of their lawyers had this argument where he said: even if in 1945 the Genocide Convention had already been ratified, would the Court have ordered the allies to stop the military operation in Dresden at the risk of allowing the third Reich to regather strength?
Surely, the whole point of such a convention is to prevent situations where the risk of the third Reich regathering strength did not justify the loss of civilian lives that was meted out. He seemed to totally not get that, and totally did not address that... It's like, he's certain that the Court would not have ordered the allies to stop their military actions, and the allies would have carried on just the same.
What kind of an argument is that?? Dude was basically telling the Court to their face: That Law has no power to make any difference anyway.
Thus showing a fundamental lack of understanding of jurisprudence. Interpretaion of the law is based on previous case law. Judges can't fly in the face of established interpretation of any law just because a particular cause is favoured or disfavoured. The law has to be administered dispassionately regardless of whether or nor you favour one or the party to the case. This lawyer has meticulously set out the legal precedents in favour of the judgement he seeks. The South African deposition was, by contrast, emotive and weak. The court judges will weigh the case on the strength of the very arguments you find so boring. Maybe you need to suspend your emotional sympathies and listen to the legal arguments. So far, he is wiping the floor with the SA case...
@@worldwearyuk178the situation is emotive, Palestinians are dying by the truckload and the only defence is to introduce whataboutism by quoting legal presidents and definitions. The legal profession will be the first to fall to AI, using heartless logic, lacking in humanity.
@@ianbirkinhead4103 In a court of law, it's not about who can cry the most, it's about the actual law. Why bring something to court if you don't understand what law is.
SA's case had way more evidence presented, and also precedents, I'm not sure you watched it whole or read the document@@worldwearyuk178
I British and this actor doesn’t speak for me. Honestly I’m tired of all this outdated system. The wigs, the gowns, the theatre. Lies are visible and the people are awake. Vive the awakening. Love is the answer ❤
Q: What is a lawyer A: Nothing more than someone with a good memory, a silver tongue and the presence of mind to turn their clients lies into "believable truths" oh, and the good business sense to arrange with the opposition lawyer to string out civil court cases while rinsing both of their clients of thousands in cash, for unnecessary consultations, phone calls and letters
@chrisviking7807 justice is to be respected. Theatre and lies and support dependant on how much money you have in the bank is not….
don't toke and type.
spoken like a true brainlet
If the law stuff doesn't work out, he has a career in comedy.
Why exactly?
@@epschronosBecause he's a buffoon.
He’s an incredibly successful lawyer, hence why he’s presenting a case at the ICJ.
You're obviously an expert comedian yourself. Brilliant lawyers are hard to follow but try again.
Israel not only has the right to defend itselves ,but an obligation to defend themselves
Imagine just being like "but they didn't send the right letter!"
Imagine being like " hey dude, you're not emoting with me" 😂
This is obviously way past your bedtime.
South African argument : Evidence
Israeli argument : Word salad
South Africa has presented no evidence of value apart from newspaper articles. it is also interesting that black South Africa would involve itself in the Middle East and the Arabs who have supported slavery for hundreds of years. Go back to school and get an education..
💯
It is clear that even the man himself does not believe in anything he says. I appreciate the patience of everyone present there during this defence.
@@hubertagamasu6283 I listened, intently, and he stripped SA arguments apart and showed up their failures. But SA is anti-sematic state as is Ireland so this is what is driving them.
" excuse me I lost a Page!🙊
" Someone has shuffled my Papers!🙊😅
Papers have a right to defend itself from lies😂
The British lawyer is explicitly trying to ignore the situation and playing legal games. Not one statement in regard to the actions of Israel against Gaza
Have you ever followed or been part of a court case? The lawyer first establishes precedent in law and then introduces how his case fits the precedent. If you were in less of a hurry to get to the verdict (hoping for Guilty no doubt) you might learn the legal justification for that verdict - whichever way it goes. Merely watching newsreels, and THINKING you know what you are seeing, is not enough. It has to be proven in law.
@ballyhoo48 : Not one statement by the bigotted Irish judge in regard to the actions of Hamas against the innocent civilians of Israel, including burning piled up bodies of children and babies.
@@worldwearyuk178Fair enough, I don't think it's really a genocide but it's not because of lack of willingness.
So this case served his purpose by merely existing
@@worldwearyuk178 "How can I help it? How can I help but see what is in front of my eyes? Two and two are four."
"Sometimes, Winston. Sometimes they are five. Sometimes they are three. Sometimes they are all of them at once. You must try harder. It is not easy to become sane."
Palestinian population is up since 1970s. You just like to use the word genocide bec. it's what woke idiots identify with.
The number of commenters here impatient to implement a verdict regardless of any questions of fact or law shows how ignorant and easily manipulated the petitioners are. I appreciate the ignorance it exposes of them. This lawyer is calm, focused, professional and everything that the "Hate Israel" mob are not. Bravo.
When they are told, “Do not spread corruption in the land,” they reply, “We are only peace-makers!” Indeed, it is they who are the corruptors, but they fail to perceive it.
Al-Quran chapter 2 verse 11 and 12
What a shame he’s brought to his family and friends
Actually quite the opposite
@chrisviking7807"It's an honour to be standing here today for a state that doesn't exist to lay rest to these factual claims of utter nonsense."
What a pity so many posters allow their prejudices regarding the subject matter to obscure their judgement of this lawyer. He is an excellent, even brilliant, advocate. I'd rather he were supporting than opposing me on any day of the week.
Its a 75 year genocide
Any knowledge of history from before 1948 or would that break your internal narrative?
@@therichieboy There's no evidence of what happened to the Canaan when the Israelites landed in their territory around 1200BCE, it might simply have been a cultural shift that saw them slowly convert and not a genocide.
@@kevinsmarts9953where did they land from?
@@therichieboy The history of exactly what happened in 1200BCE isn't what you'd call well documented. It does look like they diverged from the Canaanites through the development of Yahwism and the similarities between Hebrew and Canaan language implies a link but that could have developed later. The bible claims that the Canaanite Jacob fled to Egypt due to drought and found the faith there changing his name to Israel. The Israelites then enslave by the Egyptians eventually returning in the story of Moses. I can't give you a 100% true version but probably a bit of both.
It all comes from God. Humans are not really very successful creations of God. Then God is guilty.
Of course. Of course if you want someone to defend mass murder you get on the phone to London. For fuck's sake, this country...
The Irish defence barrister also works for a London law firm cretin.
I think the judges all woke up when he "lost a page". I admire anyone who can concentrate/listen intently and take in everything he is saying for more than 50 minutes.
50 seconds morelike
Damn hamas! 😂they even managed to tunnel to ICJ to ruffle his papers 🙄🤣
From your statement anyone can draw the inference that you essentially were not able to comprehend jack shit all his arguments were rational and yes arguments are meant to be rebutted but you sir have no clue what law is all about. And that is translating into you commenting stuff which are as inapposite as they come
Idiotic comment. Judges are trained to respect the presentation and pay attention to all arguments. Go back to school and get an education.
We cannot turn away from the truth whether it is in our favor or not. Truth can be suppressed for some time but cannot be defeated.Lies are used to hide the truth And Israel will need thousands of lies to hide the genocide. Israeli lawyers should know that the first lie is responsible for telling a thousand lies.
Well-done South Africa for a courageous step🎉❤🎉
He should be ashamed of himself.
Grow up.
@@therichieboy Good one.
In his memoirs, which were censored by the Israeli military but leaked to the New York Times, the late Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin recalled a conversation he had in July 1948 with David Ben-Gurion, head of the Zionist community in Palestine and first prime minister of Israel, regarding the fate of 50,000 Palestinian residents of the cities of Lydda and Ramleh:
We walked outside, Ben-Gurion accompanying us. Allon repeated his question, "What is to be done with the Palestinian population?" Ben-Gurion waved his hand in a gesture which said "Drive them out!"
“We must expel the Arabs and take their places…. And, if we have to use force-not to dispossess the Arabs of the Negev and Transjordan, but to guarantee our own right to settle in those places- then we have force at our disposal.”
Pretty much like mass immigration is driving out the original population in Britain then ?
He keeps citing what Israeli states about complying with International law, while their military acts belie this. Surely they should be judging actual actions, not words?
Golda Meir in an interview noted that after 1948 both Jews and Arabs had Palestinian passports
Not certain that you’re making a point about Israel’s desire to commit genocide, but even you must admit, your quote there is highly, “interpretive,” don’t you think? I note, even one commenter, above, seems to have fallen for your, “slight of hand.” He refers to a gesture, not words. He interprets it and transposes his whole thought process into coming up with his own words. He could just as easily have said, “He waved his hand in a gesture which seemed to say, ‘welcome everyone in as equals.’”
That’s why such a point of view would be inadmissible in a court as, “evidence,” of anything. Don’t get me wrong. I don’t doubt that there was some truth to his quote. Maybe he nailed it? Or maybe he applied his own bias? Knowing what I know of the man under discussion, his history and character, I would have guessed that his gesture (if he truthfully did make such a gesture and was asked this question?) more likely meant, “Who knows?” or simply, “I don’t know. Don’t ask me.” Indeed, perhaps it was a gesture of exasperation toward the man asking the question?
My point being, such quotes, in this context are more appropriate to an Alan Partridge book . . . “he seemed to say.”
For me, no amount of words & reasoning could divert my belief that Hamas is all to blame & any consequence, critics against Israel should just close their mouth The S African president is grandstanding blindly & no doubt with personal ambitions like those that threaten world peace & order..
I can't even stomach listening to this guy after he said that October 7th is the real genocide.
same, 2 minutes in and I have to leave again
It is a fact. In order for it to be genocide there has to be the intent to erase a people based on nationality or genetics, and Hamas' intent is to kill all Jews, and they certainly did purposely murder many. It can't be proved that Israel is killing Gazan people on purpose, it's an easy legal argument to make that they are just casualties of war, collateral damage. The fact that you equate purposely r*ping and stabbing people to death, burning them alive, shooting them in the head whilst r*ping them, etc, as the same as ''we're gonna drop the bomb on the terrorists we know are in that building because we have drone camera-proof they're in there'' and a civilian Hamas didn't allow to leave is outside and also dies in the blast, that is ridiculous. That's in the same realm as stating that vegetables have feelings and scream when you cut them, like we're all carrots or something. I'm sorry you people don't understand the law, and that you don't understand that words have actual definitions in law...
It was a literal attempt to kill Jews for being Jews. What would you call that?
Genocide happened on October 7th 2023
@@Veron-sv4pg Yeah ok. Not sure where you get your definition of genocide from. Must be from the new Zionist only dictionary. Those of us living in the real world do not recognize that distorted version
Colonial masters will always be colonial masters they will never change.
I assume that you wouldn't make the same racist and occidentalist generalisation when it comes to assessing (British lawyer) Prof. Vaughan Lowe KC's brief, delivered in support of SA's case against Israel. Nor when describing the tens of thousands of members of the British public who have been on the streets demonstrating, protesting, and lobbying the British government in support of the Palestinian people. Nor the millions of Brits who have donated to relief efforts on behalf of the Palestinians.
FYI, the middle east and Arab world is hardly innocent when it comes to charges of "colonialism", fortunately most people are able to leave those crimes in the past and deal with the states and individuals that exist today on the basis of their merits, rather than resorting to derogatory generalisations.
100%
Those "colonial masters" were stopping the slave trade whilst you Muslim Arabs were selling blacks and whites in Arabia.
@rahmamohamed9664 : Yes you are correct about South Africa.
@@scented-leafpelargonium3366 he didn't say anything about South Africa. You are in the wrong chat. I think the not-see chat is further right. Enjoy.
Must keep an even judgement on this, but the evidence is damming. The UK is entangled in this , which I feel no good will come of it.
We set it up to fail; we took land from the state of Palestine (also under British control at the time) and gave it to Jewish people as their historical homeland - knowing that it began with strife and would continue to be strife for its entire existence. It's disgusting and shows just how little the British government cares about anything except itself.
Signed,
A Brit.
The UK isn’t. This is an independent lawyer from the UK representing Israel.
@@liamcragin he is talking about UK historicaly involved the British are with this mess and the middle east generally. They literally caused it
Lol
Lol
Outrageous that this man wears a wig and tells us what we see with our own eyes is a lie 😂
😂😂😂narcissist
They are defending themselves against a terrorist organisation who continues to attack innocent civilians, do you not watch the news, why have they spent so much on tunnels rather than helping the Palestinians people, because they clearly don’t want peace but war.
Its called "justice" ...
No honesty, no integrity : they will do anything for money.
they all wear wigs. It's a British tradition in court that looks quite stupid nowadays.
It's the wig for me 😅
love when he loses his paper
May you linking me the livestream where the lawyer loses the paper?
19:17
@@kawsarShirazul Thank you and does the paper founded?
"Where's that other page full of bullshit gone?" - His thought process while looking for it
When I was being lied to by the army (a guy pretending not to be working for them), he dropped his pencil exactly when he got caught in his own lie. Imagine pretending you're from a city that someone else actually lives in and you don't know anything about it. That's why in those spy movies people come up with all sorts of stupid stories about their fake passports, like the ice cream stand at a certain intersection. Locals actually know this stuff. Someone rushed in and ushered him out of the room.
This guys main argument is Prima Facie technicality. Not even denying or disputing anything.
@@grmair Yes he is! How did you not understand his dispute with SA's case? How did you not understand how he very specifically denies the accusations?? Watch it again for goodness sake. He presents a very good case!!
No wonder I am not understanding him 😅😅😅
@@paulhancock3791 the dead children and the world would disagree. That's why he is in court answering charges for genocide.
@@vidcreatorlondon They would disagree that he disputed SA's case?
This British attorney’s presentation is almost unlistenable.
Paid off. How much money did they give you sir?
He is just doing his job. Both sides must be heard.
But I'm still on the side of south Africa. This topic needs to be made more public.
"just doing his job" is NOT a defense. you could insert that quote into any of histories monsters. that was what most of tthe psychopaths that were in the criminal court for the other genocide by na z i...."just following orders" is not defendable
@@misterr50 I am completely with you. I did not defense this man. I just mentioned what is obvious. What did you think?
@@beaearth9273 you are correct of course , even the worst people have the right to have defence in court or we end up with kangaroo courts
@@misterr50you're off your nut. You're comparing a defence lawyer to the Nazis? Stop reading the Daily Mail, mate.
@@misterr50it literally is. Everyone is entitled to a fair trial and a defense. Even the guilty.
Everyone in this comment section saying why is arguing against genocide it’s called due process and a Defense even the Nazis had defence lawyers everyone should be entitled to proper representation and a fair process of law
No. What this 'person' is doing amounts to obfuscation.
I know he’s just doing his job, so I can’t fault him for that, but the whole Israeli defence case seems to be based, at best, on trying to dismiss the case on technicalities or that their extreme interpretations of international humanitarian law are acceptable, or - with respect - outright lies. When every charity, UN aid organisation and more operating in Gaza are saying the same thing, and Israel says differently, you find it difficult to believe the Israeli defence. Incredible scenes, we have witnessed a moment in history that I think many will find difficult to stomach in the centuries to come. How we allowed it to get this bad, how the world watched, the complicity of western media and its partisan ship. I am grateful that Politics Joe has tried to present both sides with equal air time, but that serves to show how good SA’s case is and how out of touch with reality Israel’s is.
@@grmair Everyone including states have the right to defence lawyers. If not him, it would be someone else. You are correct in saying he could have said no, thats between him and his conscience or God. I won’t condemn him for his work, i will criticise approach though.
Biden administration, UK & colonial countries supported & continues to support the genocide, as Nelson Mandela would say, to the hilt.
This make me ashamed to be British
Guess the road to Hell is going to be crowded this year…….
You would have no idea ...
@@MaxCASSIDY-f6r 1 hour ago
You would have no idea ...
Hope you don't get an idea either.....
Crowded...and wide? "Narrow is the road to life & few follow."?
@@qnwh-gi5gx
Life of a hermit you mean? I agree….
People need to understand that the legal profession is adversarial, that is why you have a referee/judge, who decides which argument wins. It’s not personal and the lawyers are emotionally detached from the case.
Yeah he's only obeying orders.
@@BocaoZ i did not suggest that he was criticised personally. I merely stated the adversarial nature of the legal protection and how lawyers are generally not emotionally invested in the cases they take. A lot of people believe they are, unfortunately. You must be aware that lawyers are often criticised for representing a particular client. Someone suggested elsewhere in these comments that lawyers should be subject to the same oath as doctors; clearly, the person does not understand how the profession works, including the rules and ethics that lawyers must comply with.
@@BocaoZ lots of people here literally are criticising him personally. Makes me very worried.
Israel: guns down children in the streets.
Britain: that's fine. Do carry on.
But its ok when Hamas does it ?
@@BENTWOONEZEROsave your energy. When uneducated people make their minds up, reason goes out the window. It's one of the true causes of violence and hatred across the world.
@@BENTWOONEZERO It is possible for both sides to be wrong. The problem is that Hamas is fighting against occupation and Israel is killing 10 times as many people with a far higher percentage of civilians.
They learn from the best.
@@kevinsmarts9953 Hamas wants to destroy Israel, and the Jews have been there for about 3000 years.
I hope the UK tax payers are are not paying for this. Is he working independently of the government. Is he working for the UK government. His ranting on and on trying to get Israel off on a technicality is the worst kind of legal routes to take. Its fine when you know you cant beat the evidence. All very hard to convince a jury nevermind experienced judges. They know.
I hope the judges work on evidence and the south African case was very effective with its presentation. Most legal experts have said Israel is not in a great position.
Let's see how the judges see it all.
thanks again for broadcasting all arguments
Yes. Let's pretend that apartheid never happened and that world events started on the 7th October...
How can they live together when one side wants the other completely destroyed? The proof is in the pudding - what Muslim country allows non Muslims to thrive and take high positions of authority?
Muslims love living in any democratic nation because their human rights are respected. Sadly the same cannot be said of non Muslims and ex-Muslims in Muslim majority countries. Israel deserves to live and not have to be afraid for their lives every single day.
What apartheid? Arabs are in Israel parlanet. A Jew cannot live in Gaza. Who’s doing apartheid?
Yes, events started in 2007 when Hamas took control over Gaza. What a bunch of „liberators“ who oppress their own people an sacrifice thousand of Gaza civilians for their Jihad.
@@epschronos Who rules Gaza with military force? Who called Palestinians human animals? Any clues there? Listen to Mico Paled; he explains the reality. Your pseudonym account is noted btw
@@killpridebeforepridekillsy6504 "To live" meaning imposing rule through force and applying apartheid. Welcome to reality. You can play the victim for so long...
What a disgrace he is
Why is that? He is brave to stand for justice against distorted reality led by imams
@@epschronos your view of justice is quite distorted, in no way is what Israel is doing justified
@@DreZato12it is war if the Palestinians didn't want to get wiped out they should not have declared war with Israel through a genocidal act.
He’s a defense attorney. It is his job to defend his client. If he didn’t he wouldn’t be a very good lawyer.
@@liamcragin They should get an Israeli lawyer to trot out their propaganda. This guy should be ashamed to call himself British
British lawyer with no clue
Well said sir!!!!!
Explicit defense of no case submission of genocide allegedly presented by South Africa to the ICJ against the state of Israel by this British Lawyer . I have learn a lot for your Sir that Law is different from opinion
Shameless
Genocide isn't just unaliving it also means moving people to a place that isn't safe. So it surely also falls in that category too
this guy is pathetic....
Where does this pathetic guy really come from.
Why?
No, he is a distinguished jurist and is correct, no genocide.
@@allenmoses110 🤡
the guy wouldn't even know what genocide is
Have to give it to the comment section, if the people in here would be in charge, there would be no rule of law, no due process, just hearsay, emotional arguments, no lessons learned from history. Brilliant stuff for education.
Does he include the IDF firing at its own citizens on the 7/10 with artillery and apache helicopters btw, so they wouldn't be taken hostage and then forced to be exchanged for Palestinian prisoners (usually uncharged children). Or just the ones killed by smalls arms fire from Hamas? Personally though I would say as a nation we Brits are responsible historically anyway. He also tries to use the justification that Israel is simply a state defending itself, could the same not be said about the 7/10, it was simply the Palestinians defending themselves from an occupying force or is Israel the only one allowed to do so? Lets not forget how much evidence has come to light on the IDF killing their own hostages.
You no nothing it appears. Isarel is not an occupying force under the international laws it is disputed territory, Aside from the League of Nations signing into international law the undeniable right of Jews to create their own sovereign state in Israel based on historical and ancestral rights, Article 80 of the United Nations (UN) Charter is equally as important to acknowledge. When the League of Nations dissolved, the United Nations was shortly formed afterwards. In 1945, at the San Francisco Conference, Jewish leaders came forth to ensure that the Jewish rights to Israel were secured.
The Mandate for Palestine was thus duly recognized by the UN. This measure guaranteed that Jews had the unalterable right to live anywhere in Palestine, in the region between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. Even today, this legal right allows Jews to live anywhere in Jerusalem, Judea & Samaria, and in Gaza.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) reaffirmed the meaning and validity of Article 80 in three separate cases; the dates included 1950, 1971, and as recently as 2004.
Eli M. Hertz, an expert on Israel notes, “Professor Eugene Rostow concurred with the ICJ’s opinion as to the “sacredness” of trusts such as the “Mandate for Palestine”:
“‘A trust’ - as in Article 80 of the UN Charter - does not end because the trustee dies … the Jewish right of settlement in the whole of western Palestine - the area west of the Jordan - survived the British withdrawal in 1948. … They are parts of the mandate territory, now legally occupied by Israel with the consent of the Security Council.”
Arabs were never granted political rights under the Mandate for Palestine, only Jews. The reason for that is because Arab political rights were granted in 4 territories: Iraq, Lebanon, Transjordan (later Jordan), and Syria.
Coloniser says what
Beautifully presented ❤
Why can t people understand that this man is doing his job as a lawyer working for the Israeli s who have the right to legal representation. He is not there to represent the United Kingdom and his views are not necessarily shared by the rest of the British population. There is a British lawyer on sa s side as well.
This man made his mind before the trial. Wonder how many millions his been paid and of course his job needs securing. So yeah he just smeared mud in our eyes😮
Because it doesn’t align with your brainwashed head it doesn’t mean it’s not true
@stesrad Do you know why, of all countries that called for an end during the UN vote, that South Africa was the one that called forth this motion. It's because the two have a historic link as people under apartheid systems. In fact, during the struggle against apartheid in South Africa, when Nelson Mandela was approached twice while imprisoned to denounce the use of violence by the ANC, Mandela rejected the call both times. Some of those arms that were provided came courtesy of Yasser Arafat and the PLO.
When most of the world had placed apartheid South Africa under a BDS movement, guess who was one of the few that remained trading with the ruling Boers, that's right, it was Israel. Israel also sold nukes to South Africa during that time.
So let's talk a step back and recap. During the fight to end apartheid, a nearly universally positive action that the world agrees on, we have Israel helping the oppressors as the Palestinians helped the oppressed. Now let's fast forward to the end of apartheid and the emancipation of Nelson Mandela. In one of his first outings, a US representative asked him to condemn Yasser Arafat. Mandela refused to do so. He instead spoke of the Palestinians as brothers in arms, fighting the same fight. He added on by saying South Africa will never be free until Palestine is free.
South Africa is the most humane country right now as it pertains to this current conflict. Did you even watch the case put forth by South Africa? It is incredibly damning and compare that to the other Israeli rep that spoke for the defence of Israel, their main claim was "it's all been decontextualised". No sane person can walk away from seeing South Africa's opening statement as being stripped from context.
@stesrad they are not a joke! But a moral human being. Do not want history repeat itself, no matter who. If only Jews will learn from this. They could have coexisted with Palistanians and christans who did for decade. Looks like the honesty is way to complex to grasp by some. So yeah laugh. Clearly shows what we dealing with. South Africa is poor but did the decent thing by trying. If that judge accepted the truth, can you picture what colonial terrorists look like now?
@@mohammedsaleh7Nice read. South Africa are great for bringing this forward
@stesrad Mandela was arrested for civil disobedience, not for terrorist acts. You want to play the singular nation card, let's do that then. Let's talk about the "statehood" for the Palestinians. Yitzhak Rabin was the most pro-2 state leader of Israel and even by his own words, they were offering the Palestinians "less than a state" during the discussions of the Oslo Accords. Remember that Yasser Arafat, the then leader of the PLO offered a land split of 80-20 in favour of Israel. He was willing to concede that much in order to broker a deal. Another crucial stipulation was that Palestinians would never be given the right to form a standing army. Do you think it is remotely conscionable that one country can force another to not be able to defend itself militarily? After all, a lot of defenders for Israel note as much as when the scale of attacks by Israel are called into question. Remember that the Oslo Accords were scuppered not by any Palestinian action, but the assassination of Rabin at the hands of a right wing extremist in Israel. The Israeli citizen that assassinated Rabin explicitly made it clear he did so because he didn't want to remotely normalise conditions with Palestinians.
You are saying that 30k dead within the space of 3 and a half months is not an excessive death count? For a population of 2m people. A population that was 50% children in the first place. Let's also tackle the Hamas election aspect because I'm sure you believe that it's their own fault for having elected Hamas. As was mentioned before, 50% of the populace are children, and for a vote that took place in January 2006, against the backdrop of a physical withdrawal by Israel in 2005. Fatah and the PA warned against running the vote but it was undertaken at the behest of the US. Hamas won the election by a plurality and not a majority (less than 50% of the votes). Let's do some counting, that means as if right now, Hamas won a single election 18 years ago, for control of a population where 50% are under the age of 18, meaning they weren't even alive when Hamas were voted in, let alone had the ability to vote for them.
Let's look to the other side with Israel, they regularly hold elections. If memory serves correctly, this coalition of right wing groups in Israel was voted in during 2022. By comparing the date of elections between the two groups, the average Israeli citizen would be far more complicit, that's without factoring in the mandatory conscription that Israeli citizens have to undergo.
I'll use the conscription to segue back to Israeli governance and your point about protecting its citizens. As I've already said, conscription is mandatory, however on the rare occasion, they do bar individuals from conscription. One such notable exclusion was for the current minister for security, Itamar Ben-Gvir. A far right extremist politician deemed too extreme for conscription. This is the man who kept a framed picture of the terrorist, Baruch Goldstein. The man responsible for the Hebron massacre, when Goldstein went into a mosque in Hebron in 1996 and killed 29 Muslims. But let's get back to Ben-Gvir. As the minister for security, he is in charge of IDF allocation and where they should be placed. In the months leading up to October 7th, he reduced IDF presence in the south and reallocated them in the West Bank. That was done in an effort to help steal more land for illegal settlements. Settlements not unlike the one that Israeli finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich, lives in.
For the final point I'll talk about in this comment, I'd like to ask you a question. Let's give this conflict a bit of an analogy, let's say you're sharing a house with someone. In this instance, you'll be Israel and your housemate Hamas. The next door neighbour can be Egypt. So you've always had issues with your housemate but neither wants to let go of the house so it's a kinda stalemate. One day, your next door neighbour tells you they overheard your roommate planning to attack you by coming through the kitchen door. You hear that and decide to ignore it in favour of trying to claim more of the living room for yourself. You put more of your effort into taking control of the living that you didn't reinforce against the kitchen. You are then attacked from the kitchen. Do you think you have done enough to protect yourself against the warnings of attacks? Do you think given the reallocation of troops, that Israel acts in the best interests of protecting their citizens?
Losing 50 minutes of my precious time listening to that guy bla bla bla . No wonder he simply had nothing to say .
What a load of shite
The case is very strong, the defense has no meaning and talking out the box, Israel is in a big trouble.
This lawyer is a black mark on the judiciary.
How?
@@MaisieDaisyUpsadaisybecause he's doing his job despite the lynch mob mentality of the New Left.
Prof Shaw should be ashamed of himself he's a disgrace to his profession and to our country.
people like him will say anything for the right price.
He's not convincing at all.
Already at minute 8 and I can’t bare it but to be objective and just, I must watch! 😂😅
Watch through to the end; he nails it!
According to Malcom we are executing a Genocide because South Africa did not tell us about it.
This Malcom guy is not smart , A Confirmation of receipt and a meeting suggestion is not a reply to issues raised by South Africa, very dumb point.
Israeli defence... "It's no Genocide, trust me bro...."
It is aclear case lf genocide
And "what about the 7th of October". Yes, what Hamas did on the 7th of October was terrible, but that doesn't mean make the destruction of Gaza at such immense cost to innocent life doesn't put it right
I STAND STRONGER WITH THE JEWISH PEOPLE 💫 ❤🥰😍🤩👍
I can not listen this mo-ron talking
Hell is waiting for that man
God Bless Palestine and Sudáfrica 🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼❤️🇪🇭
When the South African team spoke. It was with passion and compassion. This Israeli lawyer is just reading a script, a word salad. Very unconvincing.
@stesrad true but it had a greater ring of truth, it was compelling in it’s presentation as the team laid out the fundamentals of the case with supporting evidence. The response to the South African charges was overwhelmingly positive, leaving very vivid images in their mind. I believe that the general public were positively for the Palestinians and have become more likely to view Israel as the pariah state. Maybe the court will not be swayed and will consider only the relevant facts, but they are human and as they all come from different countries will undoubtedly relate to their own experience. I believe that the court of public opinion is pro Palestine especially after South Africa’s day in court. At the end of the day it is not to convict Israel or to condemn Hamas, it is to stop the killing and ethnic cleansing, so the South African approach was more likely to convey urgency. The Israeli presentation was more likely to have the justices say ok hopefully we can decide by Christmas 2024.
This guy reminds me of those legal guys in the movies who backs all the terrible things in historic movies.
Everyone or state has to have access to Defence. This is not a personal matter or where this barrister comes from.
Without a Defence anyone could be prosecuted on any charge. It is absolutely right that the Isreali government has a Defence in Law. The ICJ is not a lynch mob, nor should it ever be.
The Court all of us have the right to hear All arguments whether we agree with them or not.
Best comment yet.
He is just saying what his paymasters want him to say.....
Yes. That’s literally what a lawyer does.
Those who stand and defend Israels actions have a black soul.
those who defend Hamas have lost their humanity.
@@therichieboy we don’t defend them, we defend the people of Gaza. While I’m not defending Hamas, It’s ironic that they are actually called the enemy here when it is the state of Israel that is committed the greater atrocity.
19:17 - it speaks volumes, that when he loses a page, he has no argument. Preprepared fabricated speech.
Absolutely revealing. So as in 42:36 where he reckons that someone must have shuffled his papers :)
the lawyer is gaslighting. looks like a weak, childish , desperate argument to make. the entire planet.. knows better.
Even his own lungs and his paperwork are protesting and trying to stop him from continuing with his deranged diatribes
This UK Lawyer is talking sense. I salute you May the Lord God of Israel bless you and your family. Love ❤️ ❤❤Israel 🇮🇱 forever and ever
“The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”
― George Orwell, 1984
Tell me about your time living in Gaza and Israel.
Court of Justice President
Joan Donoghue - United States - ?
45th time in UN history that America has vetoed Resolutions in order to protect Israel.
UN resolutions against:
Israel = 761
Syria = 54
Myanmar = 38
Russia = 31
Sudan = 25
North Korea = 24
Iran = 23
Somalia = 19
Congo = 19
Belarus = 17
Ukraine = 16
The guy knows he has an impossible task: defend there is no genocide practice.
ISREAL HAVE EVERY RIGHTS ON THIS PLANET EARTH TO DEFEND THEM 💫❤🥰😍🤩👍
This is some impressive mental gymnastics
Only to the easily confused 🤔
I will be complaining to the BBC and Sky 'News' etc tomorrow for not showing South Africa's case against Israel and only showing Israel's defence. F-ing impartial my r-ectum.
Call yourself a 'justice' ? A disgrace to my country.
This man certainly hadn't an easy Job.
What a shame to this lawyer, unbelievable and a joke
This is an excellent lawyer. Does his job factually and dispassionately using the full force of the law. South Africa's case cannot be allowed to stand just because it fits popular conceptions and prejudices. It has to comply with the law and the law only. So far, the South African offering has been all emotive and p***-poor on legal argument.
Bravo the British Lawyer, this is exactly how Lawyer should address issues with critical evidence.
He quotes israeli propaganda as fact, the whole argument is nonsense
Hamas shuffled this mans papers!