this post was submitted on 18 Oct 2024
83 points (86.7% liked)

World News

39019 readers
2420 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 12 points 4 weeks ago

I took it from a different user who created it to combat misinformation and have been re-using it because of comments such as yours.

You're entire argument is why you don't believe it's genocide when I've given you sources by credible institutions and hundreds of scholars explaining why this viewpoint is wrong. To take your climate change denial example, in this case you're the climate change denier who's intentionally ignoring the voice of so many experts and very blatant evidence.

You're link to the ICJ ruling doesn't prove your point. They didn't say there was no genocide. This is what they said:

Rather, she said, the purpose of the ruling was to declare that South Africa had a right to bring its case against Israel and that Palestinians had “plausible rights to protection from genocide” - rights which were at a real risk of irreparable damage.

The judges had stressed they did not need to say for now whether a genocide had occurred but concluded that some of the acts South Africa complained about, if they were proven, could fall under the United Nations’ Convention on Genocide.

So they didn't say it wasn't genocide. They just said the case of genocide brought forth by South Africa can proceed.