JustZ

I thought this was going to be lesbian porn.

Looks exactly like several video game mini bosses standing on their evil spawn points.

Are you dense?

Larmy omitted a key part of the sentence in paragraph 79, which is the paragraph the original news story was paraphrasing. Both Larmy and the Guardian's omission gave a misleading impression that the ICJ ordered Israel not to kill any more Palestinians.

Obviously, that's not what the order said.

13,000 in UNRWA employees in Gaza, as I understand. The IDF's dossier also alleged that 1,300, or 10%, were direct supporters of Hamas whilst 50% have close family or close friends who are members of Hamas.

I don't think UNRWA itself was officially coordinating the attacks, but I have zero doubt that UNRWA negligently let it's resources being coopted, and the world needed a reality check on UNRWA's activities in Gaza. As you said, they do justifiably work with Hamas as much as anyone can justify working with terrorists. The question is how friendly is UNRWA to Hamas and it's strategies in that work? Some of longstanding allegations are that UNRWA teaches that martyrdom is honorable and that martyrs are heroes. Perhaps that explains some of the shocking numbers of civilians killed?

That's the logic of like a five year old.

Keeping intelligence classified is not the same as lying. You think the IDF gave their Intel to America and what, tricked the FBI, tricked the CIA, and tricked the Sec State, tricked the DNI, and tricked the foreign affairs committee, using forged evidence, but they didn't trick you. You know the actual truth?

You realize that sounds insane right?

Yes the language in that first paragraph about the Genocide Convention was left out of the Guardian articl and the person above, who purported to quote the order, but at least used an ellipses to indicate the omission, unlike the Guardian.

This part of the order (P79) refers only to killings to which are barred under the Genocide Conventions, not the mere killing of any Palestinian, which is what OP, you, and the Guardian article falsely implied.

P79 is another good example. You've quoted it here presumably to argue that "see, Israel does have to take affirmative steps." Here Israel must prosecute people for war crimes and incitement to genocide. Well, you're ignoring the part of the order that finds Israel is already doing that, and they are.

80 and 81, same thing. Israel is already in compliance, at least that's what they will argue and provide evidence of in their status report due to the ICJ on February 23.

E: If only down voting me could make your feelings about what's in the order actually match the order.

Back up the claim how? The raw intelligence is classified, no doubt. All anyone ever gets is public statements and watered down facts.

Israel is a democracy though and has traditions of open government and of prosecuting war criminals. Hamas is a far right theocratic authoritarian regime that rules by assassination and wanton use of human shields, i.e., literally building massive tunnel systems under every city and using them to conduct decades of terror attack and indiscriminate rocket attacks in civilian targets. Whenever a bunch of Palestinian's died, usually Israel says "well some of them were Hamas." Hamas on the other hand insists every time that none of the dead are Hamas. For that reason, Israel is more credible.

These allegations have been around for years. Dude, it's the largest employer in Gaza. You don't think there's some overlap between the largest employer and the hugely popular terrorist organization?

You know some of the MAGAs on January 6 probably worked at Wal-Mart, just statistically. Not really much difference here, except the MAGAs probably didn't co-opt Wal-Mart's resources to pull off their attack.

Zero proof that you accept.

They've provided photos, videos, and have let journalists tour.

That's more than zero.

Hard to take you seriously when you're so blatantly wrong/ignorant.

They have a report due to the ICJ February 23rd. I'll bet it contains some evidence.

I agree. It sucks that they let terrorists excavate tunnels under their three cities and then use them launch a mass shooting of civilians and first responders after decades of rocket attacks and suicide bombings, but they did. Probably should have violently overthrown Hamas instead of enabling it at all costs.

The court did not specifically order that. Luckily we have the order and you may read it for yourself. You don't have to rely on the incorrect analysis of the person who said otherwise or this article, which paraphrased the order to make it sound as though it contained something which it did not contain. OP-above used an ellipses to omit a pretty crucial sentence of the order. It does not bar the killing of any Palestinians as the Guardian article and OP have implied with selective paraphrasing and omissions.