9 ms·

For context, this is only possible because the state of Palestine pushed hard and persisted for years to become an ICC member and thus give the ICC jurisdiction

For context, this is only possible because the state of Palestine pushed hard and persisted for years to become an ICC member and thus give the ICC jurisdiction over crimes committed on Palestinian territory, whether by Israel or by Palestinian factions. The USA is still mad at them for doing it. The full account is worth reading, it includes considerations by the various resistance factions that they’d also be subject to ICC jurisdiction and realized threats of punitive measures by the USA and Israel if they continued to push for ICC membership: https://palepedia.org/wiki/International_Criminal_Court%27s_jurisdiction_in_Palestine https://palepedia.org/wiki/International_Criminal_Court%27s_...

xenospn 2y ago
[flagged]
- tdeck 2y ago
  Yes. The PA is controlled by a party that staged a coup when Hamas won an election in Gaza and has been able to prevent elections since 2006.
  - TeaBrain 2y ago
    This doesn't serve as evidence that the PA would be willing to arrest Hamas members.
    - vinay427 2y ago
      To be fair, the GP comment asked what one thinks about the possibility, and the parent comment provided some limited grounding. It’s a bit difficult to provide concrete evidence for a hypothetical.
    - ceejayoz 2y ago
      Fatah and Hamas have engaged in open combat regularly. Willingness isn't really in question. Ability to do so is, though.
      - asdefghyk 2y ago
        [flagged]
        ceejayoz 2y ago
        I think you've commented on the wrong thread.
    - ComputerGuru 2y ago
      The PA routinely arrests Hamas members. On the daily. Locks them up or hands them over to Israel to lock them up for years. Isn't that already evidence?
      - TeaBrain 2y ago
        Yes, that absolutely serves as evidence. I don't think what was written in the comment I replied to serves as evidence by itself though, which is all I was pointing out.
      - TheGuyWhoCodes 2y ago
        [flagged]
        tdeck 2y ago
        https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/7/29/palestinian-authority-arrest-campaign-one-of-the-worst-in https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/7/29/palestinian-authori...
        TheGuyWhoCodes 2y ago
        [flagged]
        tdeck 2y ago
        Why?
        TheGuyWhoCodes 2y ago
        [flagged]
    - babkayaga 2y ago
      ICC issued a warrant for very dead Muhammad Deif.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- excalibur 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - zer8k 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - youngtaff 2y ago
      Israel has been oppressing Palestinians for decades so it’s not really surprising that some portions of the Palestinian population is going to be ‘belligerent’ and commit horrific atrocities Of course when we talk about Hamas we also have to talk about how Israel encourage and supported it’s creation so that it would undermine Fatah There are people committing crimes against humanity on both sides, unfortunately it’s the innocents of the Palestinian population who bear most of the price (and of course those Israeli’s who were victims of Hamas on Oct 7th)
    - churchill 2y ago
      Terrorism is defined as the use of violence in the pursuit of political aims. By that definition, the American founding fathers were terrorists. Hell, Jewish military & paramilitary groups like Irgun, Tzahal, Stern gang and Palmach were all terrorist gangs using force to establish the Jewish State and expel Palestinians from their homes. By that logic, America's drone strikes that killed hundreds of innocent bystanders in the Middle East were acts of terror. Do you want us to take your logic a bit further?
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
      - slibhb 2y ago
        > Terrorism is defined as the use of violence in the pursuit of political aims. Using this definition, all war is terrorism. No one defines terrorism this broadly! > Hell, Jewish military & paramilitary groups like Irgun, Tzahal, Stern gang and Palmach were all terrorist gangs using force to establish the Jewish State and expel Palestinians from their homes. The Jewish paramilitary groups were terrorists! They staged terrorist attacks (i.e. against noncombatants).
- feedforward 2y ago
  The New York Times and Haaretz reported in the summer and autumn of last year (just prior to the current flareup), Netanyahu had sent the Mossad head to Qatar in order to convince them to send money to prop up the Hamas government in Gaza. As Netanyahu said publicly in 2012, he wanted Hamas strong and the Palestinian Authority and Fatah weak, as the PA was pursuing measures at the United Nations. You're pointing the finger at the State of Palestine and "any Muslim country", when the real supporters of Hamas for years has been Israel and Netanyahu.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - dlubarov 2y ago
    Those were ostensibly aid funds; it's not as if Qatar was sending rockets. Do you think Israel should block such aid?
    - criddell 2y ago
      The person you are replying to didn't imply that it was military aid. They said it was to strengthen Hamas and weaken the Palestinian Authority. I have no idea if that's true or not, but it's a different claim than you are challenging.
  - edanm 2y ago
    > You're pointing the finger at the State of Palestine and "any Muslim country", when the real supporters of Hamas for years has been Israel and Netanyahu. You said true things before about Netanyahu propping up Hamas, and he certainly has a lot to answer for. But you then went way too far in this statement. The "real supporters" or Hamas are not the Israelis or Netanyahu. They existed before Netanyahu, and they're armed and funded to massive degrees by Iran. And while Netanyahu certainly had a certain symbiosis with Hamas, and used them to weaken the PA, Hamas is its own organization; the diversion of the funds that Netanyahu helped secure them to creating the October 7th attack was certainly not anyone's desire except Hamas's own.
- netsharc 2y ago
  The whole "The Muslims/Muslim countries won't do X, and therefore why should we?" argument is funny and depressing to me. Why won't they do X? Because maybe in your mind you think they're savages/less civilized. Less, that is, compared to you/your community's (in whatever scale: nation, race, hemisphere). But if you're saying "If they don't do X, we can behave the same", isn't that a call for you/your community to abandon your civilization and embrace the "equal" savagery? How is it a winning argument? "In our eyes we're civilized and they're savages, and if they don't act civilized we're also free to abandon or civilized ways and act the way we condemn...".
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - nujabe 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - Grimblewald 2y ago
      raising a valid and logically sound critique of an argument is not like deflection at all, in fact it doesn't even come close to being similar, they're directly addressing the core argument. I think you might benefit from some time with a dictionary.
      - nujabe 2y ago
        [flagged]
  - jojobas 2y ago
    >Because maybe in your mind you think they're savages/less civilized. No, rather because they want to use the international law to their advantage, not to their detriment.
    - Grimblewald 2y ago
      I would say that when you are being treated poorly in a way where laws exist protecting your right to demand better and realistically should be able to expect better, then using those laws is using them as intended. Sure it is to your advantage, however, the way you say it implies it is an unfair advantage, rather than simply trying to remove an unfairly applied disadvantage/detriment. Are you suggesting they should not try to use laws to protect themselves from genocide/displacement?
- culi 2y ago
  Yes, the PA has stated that they would comply with the ICC
FireBeyond 2y ago
> For context, this is only possible because the state of Palestine pushed hard and persisted for years to become an ICC member and thus give the ICC jurisdiction over crimes committed on Palestinian territory, whether by Israel or by Palestinian factions. The USA is still mad at them for doing it. That sounds biased. Why -shouldn't- Palestine be able to be a member of the ICC? Your verbiage makes it sounds like they basically bullied the ICC into membership. And frankly, so what if the US is still mad at them for it? The US won't join organizations like this because it'd rather protect people like Kissinger who openly committed war crimes (and wants the freedom to be able to do whatever it wants, wherever, without consequence).
- tsimionescu 2y ago
  I think the GP intended to congratulate the Palestinians for their digged resilience in pursuing this, despite the extraordinary opposition they faced. I think they were using this language specifically to suggest how hard the fight was, not to imply that it was a bad thing.
  - ComputerGuru 2y ago
    You are correct. But given the normal position people take when it comes to Palestine, I don’t blame GP for misinterpreting! :)
    - FireBeyond 2y ago
      Well, I apologize for the misreading, certainly!
    - joejohnson 2y ago
      > normal position people take when it comes to Palestine out of curiosity, where are you from? sympathy for the Palestinian liberation struggle is very common where I live (despite what our government says and does)
exe34 2y ago
[flagged]
insane_dreamer 2y ago
> state of Palestine pushed hard and persisted for years to become an ICC member good for them; is there some reason they shouldn't have?
- nailer 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - cwkoss 2y ago
    The scale of torture and killing perpetrated by the IDF and illegal settlers inside Palestinian territory is several orders of magnitude larger, and the right of an occupied people to resist violently is protected by international law.
    - nailer 2y ago
      [flagged]
      - insane_dreamer 2y ago
        If you're going to go back to 1967 to explain the WB occupation, then you have to go back to the war of 1948 whereby Israeli Jews took over Palestine to begin with as the British withdrew, resulting in over 700,000 Palestinians fleeing their homes or being expelled (read up on the Nakba). That's the root cause of why the WB and Gaza are occupied and the ongoing conflict. > Calling it occupied is like calling parts of Poland and France occupied because Germany started a war in 1967 and lost, losing territory. very false equivalency
        nailer 2y ago
        [flagged]
        insane_dreamer 2y ago
rendall 2y ago
[flagged]
- crazygringo 2y ago
  > Palestine, officially the State of Palestine, is a country in the southern Levant region of West Asia recognized by 146 out of 193 UN member states. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Palestine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Palestine
joejohnson 2y ago
And in that time, Israel spied, hacked and intimidated ICC officials. They knew recognition of Palestinian rights would open the door to criminal cases like this, so they’ve been working for almost a decade to discredit the International Criminal Court. https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/may/28/spying-hacking-intimidation-israel-war-icc-exposed https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/may/28/spying...

xenospn 2y ago

[flagged]

tdeck 2y ago
Yes. The PA is controlled by a party that staged a coup when Hamas won an election in Gaza and has been able to prevent elections since 2006.
- TeaBrain 2y ago
  This doesn't serve as evidence that the PA would be willing to arrest Hamas members.
  - vinay427 2y ago
    To be fair, the GP comment asked what one thinks about the possibility, and the parent comment provided some limited grounding. It’s a bit difficult to provide concrete evidence for a hypothetical.
  - ceejayoz 2y ago
    Fatah and Hamas have engaged in open combat regularly. Willingness isn't really in question. Ability to do so is, though.
    - asdefghyk 2y ago
      [flagged]
      - ceejayoz 2y ago
        I think you've commented on the wrong thread.
  - ComputerGuru 2y ago
    The PA routinely arrests Hamas members. On the daily. Locks them up or hands them over to Israel to lock them up for years. Isn't that already evidence?
    - TeaBrain 2y ago
      Yes, that absolutely serves as evidence. I don't think what was written in the comment I replied to serves as evidence by itself though, which is all I was pointing out.
    - TheGuyWhoCodes 2y ago
      [flagged]
      - tdeck 2y ago
        https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/7/29/palestinian-authority-arrest-campaign-one-of-the-worst-in https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/7/29/palestinian-authori...
        TheGuyWhoCodes 2y ago
        [flagged]
        tdeck 2y ago
        Why?
        TheGuyWhoCodes 2y ago
        [flagged]
  - babkayaga 2y ago
    ICC issued a warrant for very dead Muhammad Deif.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
excalibur 2y ago
[flagged]
- zer8k 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - youngtaff 2y ago
    Israel has been oppressing Palestinians for decades so it’s not really surprising that some portions of the Palestinian population is going to be ‘belligerent’ and commit horrific atrocities Of course when we talk about Hamas we also have to talk about how Israel encourage and supported it’s creation so that it would undermine Fatah There are people committing crimes against humanity on both sides, unfortunately it’s the innocents of the Palestinian population who bear most of the price (and of course those Israeli’s who were victims of Hamas on Oct 7th)
  - churchill 2y ago
    Terrorism is defined as the use of violence in the pursuit of political aims. By that definition, the American founding fathers were terrorists. Hell, Jewish military & paramilitary groups like Irgun, Tzahal, Stern gang and Palmach were all terrorist gangs using force to establish the Jewish State and expel Palestinians from their homes. By that logic, America's drone strikes that killed hundreds of innocent bystanders in the Middle East were acts of terror. Do you want us to take your logic a bit further?
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - slibhb 2y ago
      > Terrorism is defined as the use of violence in the pursuit of political aims. Using this definition, all war is terrorism. No one defines terrorism this broadly! > Hell, Jewish military & paramilitary groups like Irgun, Tzahal, Stern gang and Palmach were all terrorist gangs using force to establish the Jewish State and expel Palestinians from their homes. The Jewish paramilitary groups were terrorists! They staged terrorist attacks (i.e. against noncombatants).
feedforward 2y ago
The New York Times and Haaretz reported in the summer and autumn of last year (just prior to the current flareup), Netanyahu had sent the Mossad head to Qatar in order to convince them to send money to prop up the Hamas government in Gaza. As Netanyahu said publicly in 2012, he wanted Hamas strong and the Palestinian Authority and Fatah weak, as the PA was pursuing measures at the United Nations. You're pointing the finger at the State of Palestine and "any Muslim country", when the real supporters of Hamas for years has been Israel and Netanyahu.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- dlubarov 2y ago
  Those were ostensibly aid funds; it's not as if Qatar was sending rockets. Do you think Israel should block such aid?
  - criddell 2y ago
    The person you are replying to didn't imply that it was military aid. They said it was to strengthen Hamas and weaken the Palestinian Authority. I have no idea if that's true or not, but it's a different claim than you are challenging.
- edanm 2y ago
  > You're pointing the finger at the State of Palestine and "any Muslim country", when the real supporters of Hamas for years has been Israel and Netanyahu. You said true things before about Netanyahu propping up Hamas, and he certainly has a lot to answer for. But you then went way too far in this statement. The "real supporters" or Hamas are not the Israelis or Netanyahu. They existed before Netanyahu, and they're armed and funded to massive degrees by Iran. And while Netanyahu certainly had a certain symbiosis with Hamas, and used them to weaken the PA, Hamas is its own organization; the diversion of the funds that Netanyahu helped secure them to creating the October 7th attack was certainly not anyone's desire except Hamas's own.
netsharc 2y ago
The whole "The Muslims/Muslim countries won't do X, and therefore why should we?" argument is funny and depressing to me. Why won't they do X? Because maybe in your mind you think they're savages/less civilized. Less, that is, compared to you/your community's (in whatever scale: nation, race, hemisphere). But if you're saying "If they don't do X, we can behave the same", isn't that a call for you/your community to abandon your civilization and embrace the "equal" savagery? How is it a winning argument? "In our eyes we're civilized and they're savages, and if they don't act civilized we're also free to abandon or civilized ways and act the way we condemn...".
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- nujabe 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - Grimblewald 2y ago
    raising a valid and logically sound critique of an argument is not like deflection at all, in fact it doesn't even come close to being similar, they're directly addressing the core argument. I think you might benefit from some time with a dictionary.
    - nujabe 2y ago
      [flagged]
- jojobas 2y ago
  >Because maybe in your mind you think they're savages/less civilized. No, rather because they want to use the international law to their advantage, not to their detriment.
  - Grimblewald 2y ago
    I would say that when you are being treated poorly in a way where laws exist protecting your right to demand better and realistically should be able to expect better, then using those laws is using them as intended. Sure it is to your advantage, however, the way you say it implies it is an unfair advantage, rather than simply trying to remove an unfairly applied disadvantage/detriment. Are you suggesting they should not try to use laws to protect themselves from genocide/displacement?
culi 2y ago
Yes, the PA has stated that they would comply with the ICC

FireBeyond 2y ago

> For context, this is only possible because the state of Palestine pushed hard and persisted for years to become an ICC member and thus give the ICC jurisdiction over crimes committed on Palestinian territory, whether by Israel or by Palestinian factions. The USA is still mad at them for doing it. That sounds biased. Why -shouldn't- Palestine be able to be a member of the ICC? Your verbiage makes it sounds like they basically bullied the ICC into membership. And frankly, so what if the US is still mad at them for it? The US won't join organizations like this because it'd rather protect people like Kissinger who openly committed war crimes (and wants the freedom to be able to do whatever it wants, wherever, without consequence).

tsimionescu 2y ago
I think the GP intended to congratulate the Palestinians for their digged resilience in pursuing this, despite the extraordinary opposition they faced. I think they were using this language specifically to suggest how hard the fight was, not to imply that it was a bad thing.
- ComputerGuru 2y ago
  You are correct. But given the normal position people take when it comes to Palestine, I don’t blame GP for misinterpreting! :)
  - FireBeyond 2y ago
    Well, I apologize for the misreading, certainly!
  - joejohnson 2y ago
    > normal position people take when it comes to Palestine out of curiosity, where are you from? sympathy for the Palestinian liberation struggle is very common where I live (despite what our government says and does)

exe34 2y ago

[flagged]

insane_dreamer 2y ago

> state of Palestine pushed hard and persisted for years to become an ICC member good for them; is there some reason they shouldn't have?

nailer 2y ago
[flagged]
- cwkoss 2y ago
  The scale of torture and killing perpetrated by the IDF and illegal settlers inside Palestinian territory is several orders of magnitude larger, and the right of an occupied people to resist violently is protected by international law.
  - nailer 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - insane_dreamer 2y ago
      If you're going to go back to 1967 to explain the WB occupation, then you have to go back to the war of 1948 whereby Israeli Jews took over Palestine to begin with as the British withdrew, resulting in over 700,000 Palestinians fleeing their homes or being expelled (read up on the Nakba). That's the root cause of why the WB and Gaza are occupied and the ongoing conflict. > Calling it occupied is like calling parts of Poland and France occupied because Germany started a war in 1967 and lost, losing territory. very false equivalency
      - nailer 2y ago
        [flagged]
        insane_dreamer 2y ago

rendall 2y ago

[flagged]

crazygringo 2y ago
> Palestine, officially the State of Palestine, is a country in the southern Levant region of West Asia recognized by 146 out of 193 UN member states. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Palestine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Palestine

joejohnson 2y ago

And in that time, Israel spied, hacked and intimidated ICC officials. They knew recognition of Palestinian rights would open the door to criminal cases like this, so they’ve been working for almost a decade to discredit the International Criminal Court. https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/may/28/spying-hacking-intimidation-israel-war-icc-exposed https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/may/28/spying...