It's remarks by the plaintiff's attorney meant to elicit emotion. It includes zero context. Who died - were they militants with guns? Were they civilian casualties of war? No one knows. Just a bizarre connection between Bethlehem and Gaza. Bethlehem is not in Gaza.
I am not sure what facts I am supposed to gather from this.
Watch the closing remarks, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ttrJd2aWF-Y it is short.
And then the whole thing https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FryDCvI7YLo
https://web.archive.org/web/20240125185410/https://www.irish...
It's remarks by the plaintiff's attorney meant to elicit emotion. It includes zero context. Who died - were they militants with guns? Were they civilian casualties of war? No one knows. Just a bizarre connection between Bethlehem and Gaza. Bethlehem is not in Gaza.
I am not sure what facts I am supposed to gather from this.
Of course it was, those were the closing remarks. You can watch the full speech which gives you the argument spelled out.
Or read South Africa's case https://www.icj-cij.org/case/192
Ms Ní Ghrálaigh's pedigree in addressing genocide is extensive, as mentioned in the linked article.
One can only counter misdirection with facts. There is a Zionist genocide of Palestinians going on right now in Gaza.
2 replies →
Thanks for literally linking the Dictionary.com definition of "genocide", but what is the title of the article are you commenting on again?
[flagged]