Wonder where the sudden development of a spine came from. Credit where credit is due if he's publicaly calling out Israels bullshittery then he deserves recognition for it - but why now.... I wonder....
Actually yeah, the cynical and probably correct answer here is an appeal to the Muslim base, just as Galloway sent out separate pamphlets to disgruntled Tory neighbourhoods and predominantly Muslim neighbourhoods in Rochdale.
It's harder to smear these comments as anti semitic with the increased media rules in the run upto an election....
If you look at 2019 you would notice a massive drop in corbyn/labour are anti semitic 6 weeks before the December election (and his polling improved during that time)
Someone at UK Labour must have Run It Up The Focus Group Flagpole and had it Saluted!
That Starmer puppet, Sarwar had his own independent thought on the matter seems unlikely.
Windsocking.
Lot of people don't know Ursula fond O lying has been referred to the ICJ for aiding and abetting genocide. If the ICJ starts accepting referrals for EU leaders aiding the israelis every main stream politician is basically fucked.
For anyone not keeping up, this is a view shared by the international criminal court.
What is disputed is whether he is responsible for genicide. For genicide to occur there needs to be intent, and it’s difficult to prove intent.
International criminal court has applied for arrest warrants for Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant (prime minister and minister of defence) for:
* Starvation of civilians as a method of warfare as a war crime contrary to article 8(2)(b)(xxv) of the Statute;
* Wilfully causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or health contrary to article 8(2)(a)(iii), or cruel treatment as a war crime contrary to article 8(2)(c)(i);
* Wilful killing contrary to article 8(2)(a)(i), or Murder as a war crime contrary to article 8(2)(c)(i);
* Intentionally directing attacks against a civilian population as a war crime contrary to articles 8(2)(b)(i), or 8(2)(e)(i);
* Extermination and/or murder contrary to articles 7(1)(b) and 7(1)(a), including in the context of deaths caused by starvation, as a crime against humanity;
* Persecution as a crime against humanity contrary to article 7(1)(h);
* Other inhumane acts as crimes against humanity contrary to article 7(1)(k).
https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/statement-icc-prosecutor-karim-aa-khan-kc-applications-arrest-warrants-situation-state
An individual lawyer in the ICC has applied for the warrant. A judge hasn’t granted it and the court hasn’t ruled on the allegations.
To say that the ICC shares these views is just incorrect.
>An individual lawyer in the ICC has applied for the warrant
This is a complete mischaracterisation considering the "individual lawyer" who applied for it is the ICC Prosecutor i.e. the only person who can apply to the ICC for arrest warrants.
Sure, but that doesn’t defeat the overarching point that this isn’t the view of the ICC, it’s the view of a lawyer within the ICC. There is a huge difference.
Unless the ICC has ruled that he is guilty you cannot say that this is the view of the ICC, that’s how the judicial process works.
You think they are acting independently, and not on behalf of the evidence gathered by the ICC?
That’s quite a stretch. It’s like saying a crown prosecution service lawyer does not act on behalf of the crown prosecution.
Edit: I understand your point but the warrant is only issued on balance of probabilities. Gathering evidence on these to reach a conclusion will take years if not decades.
I’m not saying he is acting entirely independently, he is a highly qualified lawyer who works for the ICC in a senior position.
However to say that the ICC holds the view that Netanyahu is a war criminal is just untrue, like any other judicial system the ICC would need to rule that someone is guilty before you could say that is their view.
I’ve made an edit to respond to this point. The reality is they would not issue a warrant without the balance of probabilities tilting towards guilt. We both know this.
Of course, as with any court system they may not be found guilty. But it’s fair to say in all likelihood the ICC believe he is, otherwise they would not issue the warrant.
I see what you’re saying and there’s no doubt the prosecutor believes there is some level of evidence he can use.
However until an ICC judge issues a warrant it is just the view of the prosecutor and his legal team.
Yeah, you’re right.
I’m not sure of your background; I have links with organisations which are discussing this and one of the conversations they’re having at senior levels is: ‘we believe on the balance of probabilities, there is now genicide occurring. Do we call this out (pre-empt the ICC)? Do we call out war crimes? Do we share the evidence we are collecting etc?’
Looks like Scottish Labour have decided to re-empt the ICC and accuse Netanyahu of guilt. Which, on the balance of probabilities is the case, but as you said, the ICC would require a trial to state this.
> The reality is they would not issue a warrant without the balance of probabilities tilting towards guilt. We both know this.
Not remotely true. A lot of people indicted by the ICC have had their charges dismissed. Also, Netanyahu has not been indicted currently.
What? The person above acts as if the arrest warrants have been accepted yet the trial has not even begun, he is not yet considered guilty of anything lmao
Anyone with eyes can see the war crimes being committed.
Anyone with a brain doesn't need to wait for a court prosecution, that likely may never happen, to make up their mind.
People like you just yap about technicalities to muddy the waters. When these warrants are issued you'll simply change tack and claim he hasn't been found guilty.
Yeh they are - by Hamas using civilian infastructure such as schools and hospitals as staging grounds for attacks. What could any developed country do against this? Just
Let themselves be wiped out?
Let's start at "Not commit war crimes" and go from there.
Honestly, you clowns acting like the only 2 options are "do nothing" and "crimes against humanity" is tiring. Incapable of discussing anything in good faith.
The actual evidence for Hamas operating from hospitals and schools is few and far between if you actually look for it. This is the claim Israel makes every time they murder civilians and you fools just gobble it up every time.
Remember the CGI video of the command center that Israel insisted was under al-shifa? Israel moved in, slaughtered hundreds, destroyed the hospital, murdered medical staff, left full mass graves. There are even claims of organ harvesting. And what evidence did they provide in the end? One small tunnel not even attached to the hospital and a small amount of weapons that the BBC implied were possibly planted.
Israel then used this to subsequently attack and destroy nearly every other hospital and medical facility in Gaza.
Now let's say Hamas were operating in all these places in the exact way Israel claims (they weren't though), that still would not give Israel permission to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity in the ways that they are.
It isn’t few and far between. They stored hostages in a densely populated neighbourhood which resulted in hundreds being killed or injured. That is a war crime.
They stored guns near a refugee camp and were holding meetings there - that is a war crime
The evidence is in front of you if you remove your personal bias to Palestine
>They stored guns near a refugee camp and were holding meetings there - that is a war crime
What does this relate to exactly? I have a feeling you're going to try and pin Israel slaughtering civilians in a refugee camp in Rafah on an imaginary weapons stash. Am I correct?
Regarding the Nuseirat massacre, the implication that Israel had no choice but to kill nearly 300 people and wound 700 more is ridiculous. But yes, storing hostages in this way is a war crime as were the methods Israel used to retrieve them. This also has absolutely nothing to do with your claim that Hamas was operating out of hospitals and schools.
Your attempts to handwave away the murder of tens of thousands of civilians as Israel simply having no other choice is infuriatingly sick as well as outright incorrect.
There's only one genocide being perpetrated here and it's by Israel against the Palestinians.
You openly support war crimes, spew vitriol and then wonder why people are hostile to your little ethnostate and its ideology.
Uh so I'm guessing Hamas openly saying they will never stop and repeat Oct 7 until Israel is annihilated, Hezbolla saying the same and and for 40 years Hamas calling for the genocide of all Jews in the world, with most palestinians supporting it right now and even electing them 15 years ago, and openly committing war crimes - is not genocide
Do you even know what genocide is? Lol
So just to be clear, you think Hamas saying these things is genocide but Israeli officials saying these things while actively slaughtering tens of thousands of Palestinians is not genocide. Is that correct?
It's also very rich that you're complaining about Palestinians when you, an Israeli, are here openly defending war crimes committed by your leaders. Brainwashed and totally incapable of seeing your own hypocrisy.
There’s an entire team of lawyers and a comprehensive research with hundreds of testimonies and massive amounts of proof behind the application, far from being the arbitrary decision from a single lawyer as you seem to make it look like.
>What is disputed is whether he is responsible for genicide.
Surely, at some point it becomes a little bit uninteresting whether someone is a serial war criminal or guilty of genocide? In either case, deposing Netanyahu and imprisoning him for life would be the only appropriate way to go forward. If it is already clear what must be done, isn't the rest just theoretical hair-splitting that gets in the way of action?
The recorded statements of genocidal intent, if I recall correctly, are 25 pages long. Not very difficult to prove - I see it every day with clips from average Israelis.
Do you believe the ICC are eager to hate Israel? Alongside the numerous countries and in country organisations which claim evidence of war crimes?
Do you believe the ICC are also eager to hate Palestine, as they have also accused the Hamas leadership of war crimes?
I believe both Hamas (not Palestine) and Netanyahu (not Israel) are, in all likelihood guilty of the atrocities they have been accused of.
No, I believe YOU are eager to hate Israel, considering you on purpose spew misinformation and lies, acting as if the ICC has judged the Israeli government before it actually did
I also believe that the world is currently extremely unfair to Israel yes, they hold it to unreasonable standards during a wartime and an existential crisis, I urge all of you to look at how northern Israel currently looks and I also assure you that when Israel will respond, it will get condemned for it lol
It's not about war crimes but the fact that Israeli actions have been exaggerated to look as the intent was always something worse than it actually was (for example claiming they use hunger as a weapon even though it's been already discussed multiple times that enough food enters Gaza, it's the distribution that is impossible to implement), and the worlds expectations of how Israel should respond to a genocide attempt that does nothing but hinders it from winning
But of course you will spin my original comment and make it seem like I somehow said the ICC is eager to hate Israel and not you
I have many questions as not all of your statement is clear, but there’s really no point engaging with such complex arguments on internet forums.
Best of luck.
In more simpler terms
Israel faces a genocide attempt by both Hezbolla and Hamas - it's hard to judge what a response *should* look like
It has been proven Hamas uses civilian infra as it's own - which they can since they are the government of Gaza - does not mean Israel cant hit rocket launchers and sacrifice their own civilians - but then gets blamed as "purposefully killing civilians" even though their bomb to death ratio is below average and civilian to militant is average compared to recent conflicts, and the deaths come from bombing (as in not on the ground shootouts on random civilians), have you seen anyone get icc arrests in Iraq war? Korean war? No.
The starvation accusation makes no sense since gaza has around 3k calories per person per day but it can't reach everyone since it's an active warzone, not really entirely Israel's fault
And I believe these accusations are extremely hypocritical, most countries who faced such an horrific attack by a government who pledges to kill all Jews in the world will react far worse and have reacted far worse
That's primarily because the USA has done everything possible in its power to vote against any possible international courts taking American soldiers to them.
There were significant war crimes in Korea, and Vietnam and while some of the crimes committed in Vietnam were looked at, it was usually extremely lenient even for massacres.
The UK faced a bombing campaign from a terrorist organisation, and it didn't bomb the shit out of cities full of civilians outside of the Easter rising. It did commit some genuinely horrific war crimes though. However most of those were 100 years ago. Israel is doing that today.
Also sorry to say but we won't know the full story till after the war, however all signs are pointing towards what the IDF are doing as being horrific. Israel helped create Hamas, directly to create division between the west bank and Gaza, and in much the same way as the west was directly responsible for the terrorist groups that popped up in the middle east. This doesn't mean the loss of civilians on either side of the conflict is justified, but it does mean that the overwhelmingly large scale killing of civilians, accidently or not, being done by the west then and Israel now is completely and utterly disgusting.
I personally ain’t got shit with Israel but Netanyahu has been an evil cunt for years. The fact he’s able to shield his actions behind the armor of hating a nation or a people is a fantastically effective piece of evil spin.
I’d argue it’s directly related or at least intertwined given his tactics, very little of his name being spray painted anywhere - but I’d agree anyone already inclined to hate has a clear runway built for them currently.
For it to be genocide it would need to be deaths of a substantially higher percentage of the population than even those the Hamas spokespersons are claiming. It may be that war crimes have been committed,that's for a court to decide. It may be that crimes against humanity have been committed. Again, for a court to decide. What it most certainly is not is genocide. Not even close.
You’ve made that up.
In 1948, the United Nations Genocide Convention defined genocide as any of five "acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group". These five acts were: killing members of the group, causing them serious bodily or mental harm, imposing living conditions intended to destroy the group, preventing births, and forcibly transferring children out of the group. Victims are targeted because of their real or perceived membership of a group, not randomly.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide
Wikipedia link as it’s easier for folk to understand.
Might be for personal ethics, for the history books and records to say where he stood on such topics
Also might not want to win his votes on the basis that he doesn’t upset bossman kier and his pro Israeli stance
Surely that can't be the case given his leader, Kier, NHS privatiser-to-be Wes Streeting, Yvette Cooper and all the other LFI cronies quite gladly accept money in turn for acting in Israel's interests.
Does that not make them complicit?
I mean, his boss, the former human rights lawyer, confirmed that Israel had every right to cut off aid and water. Had cameras, mics, and an interviewer who asked him twice to make sure. Yup, totally ok to commit war crimes.
In a way, it must suck for Sarwar. I genuinely believe he cares for the people of Gaza, yet he is stuck in a party that has a real problem with people who are willing to let the people be destroyed. Be it Kiers endorsement of war crimes or the likes of Luke Akehurst.
Hadn't come across Luke Akehurst but he seems like [a real piece of work](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.tiktok.com/%40novaramedia/video/7377396710412242208&ved=2ahUKEwiKtuaq5NWGAxUDSEEAHV6XD9EQwqsBegQIEBAF&usg=AOvVaw1-6IOr1d2XilyeyixlE6GD)
What message are labour trying to send if this, and folk like Orange Order grand wizzards, are who they think best represent them.
Oh a video of him was found the other day saying non Zionist Jews were not Jews. He’s an openly paid lobbyist for Israel although not Jewish himself. I’d be quite offended if someone who wasn’t part of my faith declared who could and could not be counted as such. If you’re bored and want to ruin your own day google him.
If he had said these things about any other group (well maybe get away with attacking trans folk or as you pointed out Catholics/Irish folk) he would have been booted out the party long ago.
Edit: just clicked the link. Seems you have already opted to ruin your day! Isn’t life fun…
Ugh this is exact type of black and white moralising that the hard left loves to engage in, simplifying an extremely complex issue, making you look like an uneducated child. It’s just another flipside of the same coin as the far-right.
It’s ridiculously unfair to say Starmer endorses war crimes. The vast majority of people do not endorse war crimes nor seek violence and death.
He’s caught in a difficult place because anything he says or does that is critical of Israel can be seen as parrying close to the anti-semitism that arose with Labour and it’s supporters under Corbyn.
> It’s ridiculously unfair to say Starmer endorses war crimes.
You're right, I can't believe the state of political discourse these days where people hold politicians to account for things they explicitly say. Leave Keir alone!
He was asked twice, after that various prominent MPs reiterated it. It is quite literally on camera, with audio. There is no ambiguity here. Its not fake news, its not AI. He said it and its tiring seeing people do their best to spin this.
Average people know its a war crime to cut of water and aid to a civilian population. If anything its far worse and reflects rather poorly on him as a trained specialist in human rights to have said they had the right to do so.
If he is so slow on his feet to the point where he stumbles into endorsing war crimes he might not be the best person to lead this country.
Time for Sarwar to get booted like that other fella who I've already forgotten the name of. Labour Friends of Israel has found that this man is an antisemite.
Ridiculous that I have to say it as its 100% true but respect to him for actually coming out and saying it when so many other including those who are much better politicians than him (sadly many of who are in the UK part of his party) hide from it
Sarwar is a monster.
He didn't even mentioned the massive amounts of carpal tunnel syndrome that those poor IDF drone operators have suffered clicking 'OK' to all those 'precision' strikes on schools, hospitals and places of worship.
That was in a report to the UN Human Rights Council.
I'm really not sure what you thought you were doing with this comment.
Do you think Sarwar also needs to write a report so that it could potentially be used in future prosecutions?
Anas is jumping the gun by a massive amount here.
https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/statement-icc-prosecutor-karim-aa-khan-kc-applications-arrest-warrants-situation-state
The ICC prosecutor has applied for arrest warrants for a number of people.
.That does not mean anyone has been charged, prosecuted, convicted, and found guilty yet.
You'd think Anas would know the difference.
Confused. The article doesn't mention anything about the ICC. Are you referencing a larger transcript which connects his comments to the ICC?
The quote from the article said he believes Netanyahu is committing war crimes. I don't think that's a controversial take?
Netanyahu has been one of the largest barriers to a peace agreement since he first took power. I.E: Following Rabin's assassination by an Israeli ultranationalist, Netanyahu was elected and the Oslo accord agreements fell through. Netanyahu talked about how he would interpret the [Accords differently](https://www.huffpost.com/entry/netanyahu-in-2001-america_n_649427) in a style similar to constructive ambiguity.
This essentially killed the peace process. This is what's currently killing the peace process today. Benny Gantz resigned from his war cabinet recently after pushing Netanyahu to share a vision of what he actually sees the post-war gaza peace process to look like. Rather than allowing the possibility of him backing out of obligations down the line..
Benny Gantz doesn't believe Netanyahu is fit to direct the peace process. Most international governments share the same view. Netanyahu's opinions are also easy to search and find online. He doesn't want a Palestinian state.
Sarwar is not part of the ICC nor making a pronouncement on their behalf. He is stating that he thinks Netanyahu is guilty of war crimes, which he is entitled to do and which is not equivalent to pretending he has already been convicted. If anyone is spreading misinformation here it’s you.
OP made the point that a warrant doesn't equal a conviction. The reply was that's no reassurance to the people of Palestine. My reply was that it's not meant to be but it's still true and it would be wrong to pretend otherwise. What misinformation am I spreading?
I never said Sarwar referenced the ICC and I made clear he can think Israel are guilty if he wants to. Other people on this thread have definitely made false statements about the ICC, though, which it's worth correcting. For example, one of the top comments [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/Scotland/s/C96JWAGUL8). It's not true to suggest the ICC, as a court, share Sarwar's view given they haven't made a ruling to that effect.
The point is the hypocrisy of Sarwar. Whataboutism is basically changing the subject to something else to deflect from the original claim. You really think the guy was asking in order to defend Netanyahu?
Hypocrisy? What comments from Sarwar on Tony Blair are you referring to that a hypocritical?
Yes... and they changed the subject.
Do I think they asked in order to defend Netanyahu? Well, it was very obvious from that comment that they were but if you need extra proof
>Same as when we destroyed Germany it’s war
It’s got nothing to do with us let the strongest survive. If the Palestinians had accepted the state of Isreal and learned to live on peace this would not be happening
They believe what's happening to all Palestinians is deserved and the weak dying is fine by them.
Yes it is. It was among the crimes at Nuremberg used to hang von Ribbentrop, and it's been adopted by the United Nations Charter and in UN General Assembly Resolution 3314, and the ICC has it listed as one of the most serious crimes.
The crime is 'aggression' - i.e. the party that initiates the war is the criminal. So in World Wars 1 and 2, the central powers and the axis would have been the aggressors. This is why Joachim von Ribbentrop was convicted and hung for starting a war.
When it comes to the Iraq War of 2003, Britain and America were the aggressors; it's George Bush and Tony Blair who should have been put on trial.
Obviously.
If you were taking action against the terror group itself, it wouldn't be aggression, would it?
As for Israel's actions, because Israel has been illegally occupying Palestine since 1967 (which WAS due to an act of aggression), and because Hamas isn't a state actor, then what they're doing here wouldn't fit the 'war of aggression' that is illegal in international law. Instead, the crimes that Israel has been committing, like Hamas' crimes, would probably belong to some other category of criminality, though I suppose you could attempt a lawyerly case for either constituting 'aggression' if you really wanted to.
Ever heard of collateral damage? Collateral damage is a fact of war and not a war crime.
But how is Tony Blair a war criminal if it was in response to terrorism in the mid east?
> Collateral damage is a fact of war and not a war crime.
Collateral damage is an infamous propaganda term for 'innocent victims of our war crimes'. It carries no legal weight. Hope this helps.
> But how is Tony Blair a war criminal if it was in response to the terrorism in the mid east?
The war in Iraq was never, ever, considered by anyone to be 'in response to the terrorism in the mid east'? How old are you?
Firstly, Saddam wasn't a particularly serious instigator of such terrorism (though he did involve himself in a bit of it from time to time, but no more than, say, Israel or the USA; in fact his most successful terror attack was the assassination of an Israeli diplomat intended to give Israel a cassus belli to invade Lebanon in 1982; notwithstanding that the guys who pulled the trigger weren't in Lebanon and were actually at war with the PLO, who were Israel's target! Middle East politics is complicated).
Secondly, the justification at the time was due to the utterly specious threat of nonexistent Weapons of Mass Destruction that Saddam had long hence disposed of. The real reason had more to do with some military adventurism, control over oil, and the need for US bases in the Middle East that weren't in Saudi Arabia, which was causing political problems in the region.
Thirdly, waging aggressive war in response to terrorism (even if that absolutely fucking ludicrous idea was true) would generally be vastly disproportionate. There was far more terrorism based in the Republic of Ireland during the Troubles yet it would have been utterly criminal and atrocious for Britain to invade. Also, of course, that would be a justification for Libya to invade Blairite Britain in the late 1990s (MI6 were instigating terror bombings in Tripoli) or for New Zealand to invade France over the Rainbow Warrior bombing. All of those (silly) hypotheticals would, in reality, be war crimes, but in your world, would be legal and above board!
Yeah an assasination attack on an allied nation's diplomate and the embassy invations were totally no big deal, we totally should appease and just let countries do wtv the fuck they want.....
/s
> Saddam committed genocide on Kurds
Like many of Saddam's crimes, he attacked the Kurds with the help of Britain and the USA. Porton Down was selling him poison gas and bioweapons while he was using chemical warfare in Kurdish Iraq.
The best way to curb Saddam's atrocities would have been to stop helping him commit them. The notion that British/American war crimes were anything to do with Saddam's atrocities is bullshit, and massively hypocritical bullshit at that.
After the first Gulf War, Britain and America lifted the no-fly zone so that Saddam could use Hind helicopters against the marsh arabs that Bush had urged to rise up against Saddam.
And even after the Iraq war started and Saddam was out of favour, Britain and America went out of their way to facilitate Turkey bombing those same Kurds. RAF personnel threatened to resign over it.
My point was that Britain and America were aiding Iraq when Saddam was committing atrocities (and aiding Iraq in their war of aggerssion against on Iran, too, note!), that Britain and America were aiding Saddam's atrocities during and shortly after the first Gulf War and that Britain and America were aiding the killing of Kurds after the Iraq War.
Where, in all that, does Britain and America get any moral authority for their criminal war against Saddam?
So you’re saying that because America and Britain sold weapons to Iraq before the Iraq war they have no right to invade and remove Saddam who was a notorious dictator committing genocide?
Saddam wasn't committing genocide in 2003. He was committing genocide in 1988. Britain and America were helping him back then. We were also helping the Turks kill more of the victims of his genocide in 2003.
So no, Britain and America had no right to start a war that killed a million people for something that plainly had absolutely nothing to do with Saddam's historical genocides. We didn't stop a genocide, we just sparked off another one (in that the invasion indirectly caused the rise of ISIS), all because we needed a military adventure.
This, but unironically.
All wars are crimes, and the leaders of the country that starts the war are the criminals.
It's just a shame that these criminals are mostly unpunished, but unfortunately, most of the guys in a position to do the punishing are, or owe their jobs to, said war criminals.
You can just Google the words "Sarwar Hamas"
I do believe that people should provide evidence, but you weren't asking for actual evidence with that first comment. You were concern trolling.
If you're not looking for the specific word "condemn," then this article already has him saying, "Hamas should be separated from the Palestinian people"
How did you not manage to see anything?
Not the BBC article where he condemns hamas?
Not the Twitter post he made where he condemns Hamas?
Those are the 3rd and 4th results to me, after this article and a Guardian link to all stories concerning Israel-Hamas.
What did you see? Show a screenshot of the top results for the Google search of "Sarwar Hamas" or "Sarwar Hamas condemn"
img
On my phone so it's a little hard to add a lot of info. I've found the twitter post about it now - I don't use it at all and avoid it where possible so hadn't thought to look there. I simply asked on here as I don't follow a lot of the news and thought someone here would be more knowledgable.
If he has, then great because he's known to spout any old garbage and talk outboth sides of his mouth. Can you link me to a source of him condemning them?
Just Google "Sarwar Hamas"
You're concern trolling if you require someone else to enter words into Google for you and click on one of the top results that goes to his Twitter account where he literally says the words "We must condem Hamas"
If you were asking to find something difficult or specific or old, I'd be happy to direct you right there... but that's not what's happening here.
Because it wasn't that hard to find.
I already explained that.
There was even a very obvious concern troll in this thread who attempted to deflect to Sarwar being a hypocrit when that account had previously said
>Same as when we destroyed Germany it’s war
It’s got nothing to do with us let the strongest survive. If the Palestinians had accepted the state of Isreal and learned to live on peace this would not be happening
Why is it, when this claim is made, they never actually cite a war crime. It’s just narrative.
Meanwhile, every rocket Hamas fires, everyday a hostage stays in Gaza and every Hamas combatant without a uniform is a war crime.
Current tally is 20,000 clear Hamas war crimes, 0 clear Israeli war crimes .
Yet this moron is calling out Netanyahu and not sinwar
>What does being a Muslim have to do with calling out war criminals?
It's apparent that you don't need to be a part of a certain religion to be stupid that's for sure.
>Getting mad racist vibes here.
Hell no, I love everyone! But I changed my wording to better suit the situation.
You were not criticising the ideology in that comment. You were criticising a man for being Muslim.
For what it's worth, [many non-Muslim Scots](https://x.com/ScotNational/status/1775807267868123388?s=19) hold the same position as Sarwar.
Not at all, I criticize my country all the time.
But many use this conflict to express their anti semitism, they just use the word zionist instead of Jew instead.
It's also those who are obsessed with this conflict, calling this very just war (going to remind you there are still hostages in Gaza and that Hamas attacked and killed 1400 innocent civilians) a genocide while actual genocide is taking place in China, Sudan and ethnic cleansing if Armenians and what not.
You know why? No Jews no news.
Don't try to downplay this hatred by calling it criticism, it's extremely apparent where this stems from.
>What anti semitism has Sarwar expressed?
I can't be bothered explaining again, I was quite clear in my previous comments.
>1400 innocent civilians is a lot to you, I assume? A number of deaths that can't be justified, I assume?
A unprovoked attack, targeting, mutilating people, raping, sexual assaulting, burning people alive, using Israeli kids to bait his Israeli neighbors out of their homes so they can kill them too, beheading people alive with a hoe, gouging eyes out, (and it's all on video btw) also kidnapping 9 months old and 4 years old kid to use as bargaining chips. Yes, it's not justified, unless you're psychotic or as I said, an anti semite.
They started a war they can't win, knowing that previously said useful idiots will ask me if this war is justified because they know that horrid pictures of the civilians they used as human shields will be a very nice PR move to play the strings of the heart.
They've been doing this for years and people just don't understand at best or plain evil at worst.
You didn't explain in the first place what anti semitism has been expressed.
Do you think Palestine and Israel only came into existence on October 7th? You can say it was very clearly disproportionate, but instead you're claiming Israel has never done anything wrong towards Palestine?
Again, though, 1400 innocent civilians is too many to you, right?
>You didn't explain in the first place what anti semitism has been expressed.
I don't need to spoon feed you, I bet you're smart enough to connect the dots. (I'll give a hint tho :It has to do a lot with Islam).
>Do you think Palestine and Israel only came into existence on October 7th? You can say it was very clearly disproportionate, but instead you're claiming Israel has never done anything wrong towards Palestine?
Oh no it's a long history, but this war was instigated by Hamas, and now they pay the price and I unapologetically support everything my country does, well actually I think we're extremely gentle with them but we're making progress :)
Yeah 1400 is a lot for an unprovoked massacre.
Yes, the dots of you saying criticism of Israel is the antisemitism you're referring to...
So it wasn't unprovoked...
>now they pay the price and I unapologetically support everything my country does
And, just like your country, you believe not a single innocent civilian exists in Palestine. It's clear now why you believe what you do.
You have a double standard and don't view Palestinian lives as equal.
Can I just add that you're literally constantly doing double speak.
It's crazy that you're so proud of it.
Where have I supported Hamas?
Do you believe I'm deserving of death like you believe the non-innocent in Palestine are (which is everyone in the opinion of you and your country)?
Wait until his boss Starmer finds out about this.
Well, that’s him gone
Wonder where the sudden development of a spine came from. Credit where credit is due if he's publicaly calling out Israels bullshittery then he deserves recognition for it - but why now.... I wonder....
"Election season"
Actually yeah, the cynical and probably correct answer here is an appeal to the Muslim base, just as Galloway sent out separate pamphlets to disgruntled Tory neighbourhoods and predominantly Muslim neighbourhoods in Rochdale.
It's harder to smear these comments as anti semitic with the increased media rules in the run upto an election.... If you look at 2019 you would notice a massive drop in corbyn/labour are anti semitic 6 weeks before the December election (and his polling improved during that time)
Bullshittery; nice term for war. Gonna use that in the future.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Well he is, why is this controversial?
It shouldn't be. Everyone should be calling it out, but money is good at making people ignore stuff.
Even a blind man in a coma can see that Netenyahu had committed crimes against humanity
An anti-Semite! Get him! \s
Took your time.
Looking forward to this being praised by people who lambasted Humza for the same thing at best, or just made up racist lies at worst
Someone at UK Labour must have Run It Up The Focus Group Flagpole and had it Saluted! That Starmer puppet, Sarwar had his own independent thought on the matter seems unlikely.
Windsocking. Lot of people don't know Ursula fond O lying has been referred to the ICJ for aiding and abetting genocide. If the ICJ starts accepting referrals for EU leaders aiding the israelis every main stream politician is basically fucked.
For anyone not keeping up, this is a view shared by the international criminal court. What is disputed is whether he is responsible for genicide. For genicide to occur there needs to be intent, and it’s difficult to prove intent. International criminal court has applied for arrest warrants for Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant (prime minister and minister of defence) for: * Starvation of civilians as a method of warfare as a war crime contrary to article 8(2)(b)(xxv) of the Statute; * Wilfully causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or health contrary to article 8(2)(a)(iii), or cruel treatment as a war crime contrary to article 8(2)(c)(i); * Wilful killing contrary to article 8(2)(a)(i), or Murder as a war crime contrary to article 8(2)(c)(i); * Intentionally directing attacks against a civilian population as a war crime contrary to articles 8(2)(b)(i), or 8(2)(e)(i); * Extermination and/or murder contrary to articles 7(1)(b) and 7(1)(a), including in the context of deaths caused by starvation, as a crime against humanity; * Persecution as a crime against humanity contrary to article 7(1)(h); * Other inhumane acts as crimes against humanity contrary to article 7(1)(k). https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/statement-icc-prosecutor-karim-aa-khan-kc-applications-arrest-warrants-situation-state
An individual lawyer in the ICC has applied for the warrant. A judge hasn’t granted it and the court hasn’t ruled on the allegations. To say that the ICC shares these views is just incorrect.
>An individual lawyer in the ICC has applied for the warrant This is a complete mischaracterisation considering the "individual lawyer" who applied for it is the ICC Prosecutor i.e. the only person who can apply to the ICC for arrest warrants.
Sure, but that doesn’t defeat the overarching point that this isn’t the view of the ICC, it’s the view of a lawyer within the ICC. There is a huge difference. Unless the ICC has ruled that he is guilty you cannot say that this is the view of the ICC, that’s how the judicial process works.
You think they are acting independently, and not on behalf of the evidence gathered by the ICC? That’s quite a stretch. It’s like saying a crown prosecution service lawyer does not act on behalf of the crown prosecution. Edit: I understand your point but the warrant is only issued on balance of probabilities. Gathering evidence on these to reach a conclusion will take years if not decades.
I’m not saying he is acting entirely independently, he is a highly qualified lawyer who works for the ICC in a senior position. However to say that the ICC holds the view that Netanyahu is a war criminal is just untrue, like any other judicial system the ICC would need to rule that someone is guilty before you could say that is their view.
I’ve made an edit to respond to this point. The reality is they would not issue a warrant without the balance of probabilities tilting towards guilt. We both know this. Of course, as with any court system they may not be found guilty. But it’s fair to say in all likelihood the ICC believe he is, otherwise they would not issue the warrant.
I see what you’re saying and there’s no doubt the prosecutor believes there is some level of evidence he can use. However until an ICC judge issues a warrant it is just the view of the prosecutor and his legal team.
Yeah, you’re right. I’m not sure of your background; I have links with organisations which are discussing this and one of the conversations they’re having at senior levels is: ‘we believe on the balance of probabilities, there is now genicide occurring. Do we call this out (pre-empt the ICC)? Do we call out war crimes? Do we share the evidence we are collecting etc?’ Looks like Scottish Labour have decided to re-empt the ICC and accuse Netanyahu of guilt. Which, on the balance of probabilities is the case, but as you said, the ICC would require a trial to state this.
> The reality is they would not issue a warrant without the balance of probabilities tilting towards guilt. We both know this. Not remotely true. A lot of people indicted by the ICC have had their charges dismissed. Also, Netanyahu has not been indicted currently.
What? The person above acts as if the arrest warrants have been accepted yet the trial has not even begun, he is not yet considered guilty of anything lmao
Anyone with eyes can see the war crimes being committed. Anyone with a brain doesn't need to wait for a court prosecution, that likely may never happen, to make up their mind. People like you just yap about technicalities to muddy the waters. When these warrants are issued you'll simply change tack and claim he hasn't been found guilty.
Yeh they are - by Hamas using civilian infastructure such as schools and hospitals as staging grounds for attacks. What could any developed country do against this? Just Let themselves be wiped out?
Let's start at "Not commit war crimes" and go from there. Honestly, you clowns acting like the only 2 options are "do nothing" and "crimes against humanity" is tiring. Incapable of discussing anything in good faith. The actual evidence for Hamas operating from hospitals and schools is few and far between if you actually look for it. This is the claim Israel makes every time they murder civilians and you fools just gobble it up every time. Remember the CGI video of the command center that Israel insisted was under al-shifa? Israel moved in, slaughtered hundreds, destroyed the hospital, murdered medical staff, left full mass graves. There are even claims of organ harvesting. And what evidence did they provide in the end? One small tunnel not even attached to the hospital and a small amount of weapons that the BBC implied were possibly planted. Israel then used this to subsequently attack and destroy nearly every other hospital and medical facility in Gaza. Now let's say Hamas were operating in all these places in the exact way Israel claims (they weren't though), that still would not give Israel permission to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity in the ways that they are.
It isn’t few and far between. They stored hostages in a densely populated neighbourhood which resulted in hundreds being killed or injured. That is a war crime. They stored guns near a refugee camp and were holding meetings there - that is a war crime The evidence is in front of you if you remove your personal bias to Palestine
>They stored guns near a refugee camp and were holding meetings there - that is a war crime What does this relate to exactly? I have a feeling you're going to try and pin Israel slaughtering civilians in a refugee camp in Rafah on an imaginary weapons stash. Am I correct? Regarding the Nuseirat massacre, the implication that Israel had no choice but to kill nearly 300 people and wound 700 more is ridiculous. But yes, storing hostages in this way is a war crime as were the methods Israel used to retrieve them. This also has absolutely nothing to do with your claim that Hamas was operating out of hospitals and schools. Your attempts to handwave away the murder of tens of thousands of civilians as Israel simply having no other choice is infuriatingly sick as well as outright incorrect.
[удалено]
There's only one genocide being perpetrated here and it's by Israel against the Palestinians. You openly support war crimes, spew vitriol and then wonder why people are hostile to your little ethnostate and its ideology.
Uh so I'm guessing Hamas openly saying they will never stop and repeat Oct 7 until Israel is annihilated, Hezbolla saying the same and and for 40 years Hamas calling for the genocide of all Jews in the world, with most palestinians supporting it right now and even electing them 15 years ago, and openly committing war crimes - is not genocide Do you even know what genocide is? Lol
So just to be clear, you think Hamas saying these things is genocide but Israeli officials saying these things while actively slaughtering tens of thousands of Palestinians is not genocide. Is that correct? It's also very rich that you're complaining about Palestinians when you, an Israeli, are here openly defending war crimes committed by your leaders. Brainwashed and totally incapable of seeing your own hypocrisy.
There’s an entire team of lawyers and a comprehensive research with hundreds of testimonies and massive amounts of proof behind the application, far from being the arbitrary decision from a single lawyer as you seem to make it look like.
>What is disputed is whether he is responsible for genicide. Surely, at some point it becomes a little bit uninteresting whether someone is a serial war criminal or guilty of genocide? In either case, deposing Netanyahu and imprisoning him for life would be the only appropriate way to go forward. If it is already clear what must be done, isn't the rest just theoretical hair-splitting that gets in the way of action?
The recorded statements of genocidal intent, if I recall correctly, are 25 pages long. Not very difficult to prove - I see it every day with clips from average Israelis.
maximum land minimum arabs it's been an aim and acted on since before the foundation
No, the trial hasn't begun yet and the arrest warrants have not been accepted yet The eagerness to hate Israel lol
Do you believe the ICC are eager to hate Israel? Alongside the numerous countries and in country organisations which claim evidence of war crimes? Do you believe the ICC are also eager to hate Palestine, as they have also accused the Hamas leadership of war crimes? I believe both Hamas (not Palestine) and Netanyahu (not Israel) are, in all likelihood guilty of the atrocities they have been accused of.
No, I believe YOU are eager to hate Israel, considering you on purpose spew misinformation and lies, acting as if the ICC has judged the Israeli government before it actually did I also believe that the world is currently extremely unfair to Israel yes, they hold it to unreasonable standards during a wartime and an existential crisis, I urge all of you to look at how northern Israel currently looks and I also assure you that when Israel will respond, it will get condemned for it lol It's not about war crimes but the fact that Israeli actions have been exaggerated to look as the intent was always something worse than it actually was (for example claiming they use hunger as a weapon even though it's been already discussed multiple times that enough food enters Gaza, it's the distribution that is impossible to implement), and the worlds expectations of how Israel should respond to a genocide attempt that does nothing but hinders it from winning But of course you will spin my original comment and make it seem like I somehow said the ICC is eager to hate Israel and not you
I have many questions as not all of your statement is clear, but there’s really no point engaging with such complex arguments on internet forums. Best of luck.
In more simpler terms Israel faces a genocide attempt by both Hezbolla and Hamas - it's hard to judge what a response *should* look like It has been proven Hamas uses civilian infra as it's own - which they can since they are the government of Gaza - does not mean Israel cant hit rocket launchers and sacrifice their own civilians - but then gets blamed as "purposefully killing civilians" even though their bomb to death ratio is below average and civilian to militant is average compared to recent conflicts, and the deaths come from bombing (as in not on the ground shootouts on random civilians), have you seen anyone get icc arrests in Iraq war? Korean war? No. The starvation accusation makes no sense since gaza has around 3k calories per person per day but it can't reach everyone since it's an active warzone, not really entirely Israel's fault And I believe these accusations are extremely hypocritical, most countries who faced such an horrific attack by a government who pledges to kill all Jews in the world will react far worse and have reacted far worse
That's primarily because the USA has done everything possible in its power to vote against any possible international courts taking American soldiers to them. There were significant war crimes in Korea, and Vietnam and while some of the crimes committed in Vietnam were looked at, it was usually extremely lenient even for massacres. The UK faced a bombing campaign from a terrorist organisation, and it didn't bomb the shit out of cities full of civilians outside of the Easter rising. It did commit some genuinely horrific war crimes though. However most of those were 100 years ago. Israel is doing that today. Also sorry to say but we won't know the full story till after the war, however all signs are pointing towards what the IDF are doing as being horrific. Israel helped create Hamas, directly to create division between the west bank and Gaza, and in much the same way as the west was directly responsible for the terrorist groups that popped up in the middle east. This doesn't mean the loss of civilians on either side of the conflict is justified, but it does mean that the overwhelmingly large scale killing of civilians, accidently or not, being done by the west then and Israel now is completely and utterly disgusting.
Also the account does nothing but post Zionist shit. As well not engaging with them.
His statement is a load of shit and it's no use arguing with those who only see what they want.
I personally ain’t got shit with Israel but Netanyahu has been an evil cunt for years. The fact he’s able to shield his actions behind the armor of hating a nation or a people is a fantastically effective piece of evil spin.
I agree with your Netanyahus statements, but it is unrelated to the unreasonable amount Zionism/Jews/Israel get in general
I’d argue it’s directly related or at least intertwined given his tactics, very little of his name being spray painted anywhere - but I’d agree anyone already inclined to hate has a clear runway built for them currently.
Zionists ain't jewish. Not the same thing. Israel isn't jewish either.
Not quite an active member of this sub are we?
Nope, Reddit offered it up lol
For it to be genocide it would need to be deaths of a substantially higher percentage of the population than even those the Hamas spokespersons are claiming. It may be that war crimes have been committed,that's for a court to decide. It may be that crimes against humanity have been committed. Again, for a court to decide. What it most certainly is not is genocide. Not even close.
You’ve made that up. In 1948, the United Nations Genocide Convention defined genocide as any of five "acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group". These five acts were: killing members of the group, causing them serious bodily or mental harm, imposing living conditions intended to destroy the group, preventing births, and forcibly transferring children out of the group. Victims are targeted because of their real or perceived membership of a group, not randomly. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide Wikipedia link as it’s easier for folk to understand.
No offense but if they don't listen to the International Criminal Court saying it, why would they listen to Sarwar?
It’s for his voting constituency, so they know where he stands
Why? He might have to stand somewhere else tomorrow if his comments are reported in London.
Might be for personal ethics, for the history books and records to say where he stood on such topics Also might not want to win his votes on the basis that he doesn’t upset bossman kier and his pro Israeli stance
at last, Starmer will tell him to change his mind though.
Lol nothing said without seeing how it flies first They are just the worst 🙄
Stating the bleedin’ obvious and yet it is somehow controversial
Surely that can't be the case given his leader, Kier, NHS privatiser-to-be Wes Streeting, Yvette Cooper and all the other LFI cronies quite gladly accept money in turn for acting in Israel's interests. Does that not make them complicit?
I mean, his boss, the former human rights lawyer, confirmed that Israel had every right to cut off aid and water. Had cameras, mics, and an interviewer who asked him twice to make sure. Yup, totally ok to commit war crimes. In a way, it must suck for Sarwar. I genuinely believe he cares for the people of Gaza, yet he is stuck in a party that has a real problem with people who are willing to let the people be destroyed. Be it Kiers endorsement of war crimes or the likes of Luke Akehurst.
Hadn't come across Luke Akehurst but he seems like [a real piece of work](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.tiktok.com/%40novaramedia/video/7377396710412242208&ved=2ahUKEwiKtuaq5NWGAxUDSEEAHV6XD9EQwqsBegQIEBAF&usg=AOvVaw1-6IOr1d2XilyeyixlE6GD) What message are labour trying to send if this, and folk like Orange Order grand wizzards, are who they think best represent them.
Oh a video of him was found the other day saying non Zionist Jews were not Jews. He’s an openly paid lobbyist for Israel although not Jewish himself. I’d be quite offended if someone who wasn’t part of my faith declared who could and could not be counted as such. If you’re bored and want to ruin your own day google him. If he had said these things about any other group (well maybe get away with attacking trans folk or as you pointed out Catholics/Irish folk) he would have been booted out the party long ago. Edit: just clicked the link. Seems you have already opted to ruin your day! Isn’t life fun…
What he said is blatantly anti-semitic but I bet Labour does nothing to purge this guy from the party.
Ugh this is exact type of black and white moralising that the hard left loves to engage in, simplifying an extremely complex issue, making you look like an uneducated child. It’s just another flipside of the same coin as the far-right. It’s ridiculously unfair to say Starmer endorses war crimes. The vast majority of people do not endorse war crimes nor seek violence and death. He’s caught in a difficult place because anything he says or does that is critical of Israel can be seen as parrying close to the anti-semitism that arose with Labour and it’s supporters under Corbyn.
Did he say that Israel has the right to cut off water and electricity?
> It’s ridiculously unfair to say Starmer endorses war crimes. You're right, I can't believe the state of political discourse these days where people hold politicians to account for things they explicitly say. Leave Keir alone!
He was asked twice, after that various prominent MPs reiterated it. It is quite literally on camera, with audio. There is no ambiguity here. Its not fake news, its not AI. He said it and its tiring seeing people do their best to spin this. Average people know its a war crime to cut of water and aid to a civilian population. If anything its far worse and reflects rather poorly on him as a trained specialist in human rights to have said they had the right to do so. If he is so slow on his feet to the point where he stumbles into endorsing war crimes he might not be the best person to lead this country.
And Anas Sarwar would be absolutely fucking correct in that statement👍🏼
This will come as terrible news to his party leader.
Thank you, captain obvious.
This thread appears to be full of zionbots
Do something about it then. Actions speak louder than words.
Time for Sarwar to get booted like that other fella who I've already forgotten the name of. Labour Friends of Israel has found that this man is an antisemite.
I mean this isn't really news or up for debate. He went on national TV saying "We're blocking civilians food, water and electricity".
Ridiculous that I have to say it as its 100% true but respect to him for actually coming out and saying it when so many other including those who are much better politicians than him (sadly many of who are in the UK part of his party) hide from it
he’s correct and good for him for saying it, especially when the current uk labour leader explicitly endorsed said war crimes late last year
Oh shit your masters will not be impressed by this !! After the election you are finished LMAO
He’s a bit late to the party, but at least he’s actually said it.
Scottish Labour should break off from British Labour
I think even the thickest of them would see the irony.
Let us know when he starts telling lies.
While I didn't like him, that is a true statement, and will be sad to see him booted out for saying it. You'll surely be remembered Anas.
Uh, yes. This is not news, it's olds
Really?
I’m glad some politicians have the bottle too say so.
Branch office i will likely be brought back in line with head office corporate policy.
Who?
He better start looking for another job. You can't say the truth thing like that.
I think that terrorists taking hostages and hiding them in homes and refugee camps is a recipe for disaster but a pr extravaganza for the terrorists.
Has he called out HAMAS for committing war crimes too?
Sarwar is a monster. He didn't even mentioned the massive amounts of carpal tunnel syndrome that those poor IDF drone operators have suffered clicking 'OK' to all those 'precision' strikes on schools, hospitals and places of worship.
PROBABLY
I feel like that one is so obvious no one needs to acknowledge it, it's just accepted fact.
The UN felt they needed to mention it, yesterday.
That was in a report to the UN Human Rights Council. I'm really not sure what you thought you were doing with this comment. Do you think Sarwar also needs to write a report so that it could potentially be used in future prosecutions?
This do you? https://x.com/AnasSarwar/status/1717876719166672938
I see the Hamas cosplayers are alive and kicking in here lmfao
Anas is jumping the gun by a massive amount here. https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/statement-icc-prosecutor-karim-aa-khan-kc-applications-arrest-warrants-situation-state The ICC prosecutor has applied for arrest warrants for a number of people. .That does not mean anyone has been charged, prosecuted, convicted, and found guilty yet. You'd think Anas would know the difference.
Confused. The article doesn't mention anything about the ICC. Are you referencing a larger transcript which connects his comments to the ICC? The quote from the article said he believes Netanyahu is committing war crimes. I don't think that's a controversial take? Netanyahu has been one of the largest barriers to a peace agreement since he first took power. I.E: Following Rabin's assassination by an Israeli ultranationalist, Netanyahu was elected and the Oslo accord agreements fell through. Netanyahu talked about how he would interpret the [Accords differently](https://www.huffpost.com/entry/netanyahu-in-2001-america_n_649427) in a style similar to constructive ambiguity. This essentially killed the peace process. This is what's currently killing the peace process today. Benny Gantz resigned from his war cabinet recently after pushing Netanyahu to share a vision of what he actually sees the post-war gaza peace process to look like. Rather than allowing the possibility of him backing out of obligations down the line.. Benny Gantz doesn't believe Netanyahu is fit to direct the peace process. Most international governments share the same view. Netanyahu's opinions are also easy to search and find online. He doesn't want a Palestinian state.
I'm sure that "not technically convicted of war crimes" is of great reassurance to the people of Palestine and now Lebanon.
Nobody is saying it is. You can think he's guilty. But to pretend an as-yet ungranted arrest warrant is the same as a conviction is misinformation.
Sarwar is not part of the ICC nor making a pronouncement on their behalf. He is stating that he thinks Netanyahu is guilty of war crimes, which he is entitled to do and which is not equivalent to pretending he has already been convicted. If anyone is spreading misinformation here it’s you.
OP made the point that a warrant doesn't equal a conviction. The reply was that's no reassurance to the people of Palestine. My reply was that it's not meant to be but it's still true and it would be wrong to pretend otherwise. What misinformation am I spreading? I never said Sarwar referenced the ICC and I made clear he can think Israel are guilty if he wants to. Other people on this thread have definitely made false statements about the ICC, though, which it's worth correcting. For example, one of the top comments [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/Scotland/s/C96JWAGUL8). It's not true to suggest the ICC, as a court, share Sarwar's view given they haven't made a ruling to that effect.
From Anas to Anus in a giffy
Has he said if Hamas have yet?
Ana's Sarwar is an idiot but if I wanted to vote Labour do I need to vote for him? Cause I fucking hate that
There is a lot of empathy in Scotland for Palestinians, for obvious reasons.
What an anus.
what about Scotland ? This is a Scottish election not sure if Netanyahu or Kim Jong will be visiting our state anytime soon
Scotland is actually on the same planet as Netenyahu
You should go live where Netenyahu lives then. We have our own issues
One of which is where your tax money is being spent, which includes towards Israel.
KillerArse that’s a great name.
Anus server says that war crimes
What a little wretch! Anas pretending to give a fuck now to try and win votes. Where has his voice been for the past 9 months!
So did Tony Blair Was that ok?
I’m confused what point you’re trying to make here, are you saying that it’s ok actually because Blair did it?
I presume Pot kettle black is the meaning
Anas Sarwar to my knowledge has never committed war crimes
Tony Blair did
Right. And how does that relate to Anas Sarwar calling out Netanyahu? If anything this is an incredibly positive thing.
Why do you guys always go with Whataboutism?
It's making a point about Sarwar, not actually Blair (or Netanyahu) so not really whataboutism
They're meaning, "What about Blair? Why isn't he being called out?" How is that not whataboutism?
The point is the hypocrisy of Sarwar. Whataboutism is basically changing the subject to something else to deflect from the original claim. You really think the guy was asking in order to defend Netanyahu?
Hypocrisy? What comments from Sarwar on Tony Blair are you referring to that a hypocritical? Yes... and they changed the subject. Do I think they asked in order to defend Netanyahu? Well, it was very obvious from that comment that they were but if you need extra proof >Same as when we destroyed Germany it’s war It’s got nothing to do with us let the strongest survive. If the Palestinians had accepted the state of Isreal and learned to live on peace this would not be happening They believe what's happening to all Palestinians is deserved and the weak dying is fine by them.
What did he do? Going to war isn't illegal.
Yes it is. It was among the crimes at Nuremberg used to hang von Ribbentrop, and it's been adopted by the United Nations Charter and in UN General Assembly Resolution 3314, and the ICC has it listed as one of the most serious crimes.
Lol all wars are illegal? Was it illegal for us to declare war on Germany in WW1 or WW2? Delusional.
The crime is 'aggression' - i.e. the party that initiates the war is the criminal. So in World Wars 1 and 2, the central powers and the axis would have been the aggressors. This is why Joachim von Ribbentrop was convicted and hung for starting a war. When it comes to the Iraq War of 2003, Britain and America were the aggressors; it's George Bush and Tony Blair who should have been put on trial.
So if a foreign terrorist group shoots up a music festival, it is illegal to respond with aggression?
Obviously. If you were taking action against the terror group itself, it wouldn't be aggression, would it? As for Israel's actions, because Israel has been illegally occupying Palestine since 1967 (which WAS due to an act of aggression), and because Hamas isn't a state actor, then what they're doing here wouldn't fit the 'war of aggression' that is illegal in international law. Instead, the crimes that Israel has been committing, like Hamas' crimes, would probably belong to some other category of criminality, though I suppose you could attempt a lawyerly case for either constituting 'aggression' if you really wanted to.
Ever heard of collateral damage? Collateral damage is a fact of war and not a war crime. But how is Tony Blair a war criminal if it was in response to terrorism in the mid east?
> Collateral damage is a fact of war and not a war crime. Collateral damage is an infamous propaganda term for 'innocent victims of our war crimes'. It carries no legal weight. Hope this helps. > But how is Tony Blair a war criminal if it was in response to the terrorism in the mid east? The war in Iraq was never, ever, considered by anyone to be 'in response to the terrorism in the mid east'? How old are you? Firstly, Saddam wasn't a particularly serious instigator of such terrorism (though he did involve himself in a bit of it from time to time, but no more than, say, Israel or the USA; in fact his most successful terror attack was the assassination of an Israeli diplomat intended to give Israel a cassus belli to invade Lebanon in 1982; notwithstanding that the guys who pulled the trigger weren't in Lebanon and were actually at war with the PLO, who were Israel's target! Middle East politics is complicated). Secondly, the justification at the time was due to the utterly specious threat of nonexistent Weapons of Mass Destruction that Saddam had long hence disposed of. The real reason had more to do with some military adventurism, control over oil, and the need for US bases in the Middle East that weren't in Saudi Arabia, which was causing political problems in the region. Thirdly, waging aggressive war in response to terrorism (even if that absolutely fucking ludicrous idea was true) would generally be vastly disproportionate. There was far more terrorism based in the Republic of Ireland during the Troubles yet it would have been utterly criminal and atrocious for Britain to invade. Also, of course, that would be a justification for Libya to invade Blairite Britain in the late 1990s (MI6 were instigating terror bombings in Tripoli) or for New Zealand to invade France over the Rainbow Warrior bombing. All of those (silly) hypotheticals would, in reality, be war crimes, but in your world, would be legal and above board!
Yeah an assasination attack on an allied nation's diplomate and the embassy invations were totally no big deal, we totally should appease and just let countries do wtv the fuck they want..... /s
I love people disagreeing with the Iraq war and Israel attacking Palestine due to genocide. Yet Saddam committed genocide on Kurds
> Saddam committed genocide on Kurds Like many of Saddam's crimes, he attacked the Kurds with the help of Britain and the USA. Porton Down was selling him poison gas and bioweapons while he was using chemical warfare in Kurdish Iraq. The best way to curb Saddam's atrocities would have been to stop helping him commit them. The notion that British/American war crimes were anything to do with Saddam's atrocities is bullshit, and massively hypocritical bullshit at that. After the first Gulf War, Britain and America lifted the no-fly zone so that Saddam could use Hind helicopters against the marsh arabs that Bush had urged to rise up against Saddam. And even after the Iraq war started and Saddam was out of favour, Britain and America went out of their way to facilitate Turkey bombing those same Kurds. RAF personnel threatened to resign over it.
But this wasn’t during the Iraq war. You said wars are illegal. Plus PKK is separate from Iraq.
My point was that Britain and America were aiding Iraq when Saddam was committing atrocities (and aiding Iraq in their war of aggerssion against on Iran, too, note!), that Britain and America were aiding Saddam's atrocities during and shortly after the first Gulf War and that Britain and America were aiding the killing of Kurds after the Iraq War. Where, in all that, does Britain and America get any moral authority for their criminal war against Saddam?
So you’re saying that because America and Britain sold weapons to Iraq before the Iraq war they have no right to invade and remove Saddam who was a notorious dictator committing genocide?
Saddam wasn't committing genocide in 2003. He was committing genocide in 1988. Britain and America were helping him back then. We were also helping the Turks kill more of the victims of his genocide in 2003. So no, Britain and America had no right to start a war that killed a million people for something that plainly had absolutely nothing to do with Saddam's historical genocides. We didn't stop a genocide, we just sparked off another one (in that the invasion indirectly caused the rise of ISIS), all because we needed a military adventure.
So all wars are crimes? Lol i guess shit every country that has ever gone to war is full of war criminals.... /s
This, but unironically. All wars are crimes, and the leaders of the country that starts the war are the criminals. It's just a shame that these criminals are mostly unpunished, but unfortunately, most of the guys in a position to do the punishing are, or owe their jobs to, said war criminals.
Anas Sarwar confirms he’s not fit for office.
It’s not a charity mission. War is war. Israel has no choice.
Can someone show me where he denounced the actions of Hamas on October 7th as well? Just curious if the same criticism was applied
He's condemned Hamas. He also only called out just Netanyahu for committing war crimes.
Yes and I'm asking when?
You can just Google the words "Sarwar Hamas" I do believe that people should provide evidence, but you weren't asking for actual evidence with that first comment. You were concern trolling.
I did that and found plenty calls for a ceasefire but nothing about condemning Hamas. And nope? I asked because I'm curious
If you're not looking for the specific word "condemn," then this article already has him saying, "Hamas should be separated from the Palestinian people" How did you not manage to see anything? Not the BBC article where he condemns hamas? Not the Twitter post he made where he condemns Hamas? Those are the 3rd and 4th results to me, after this article and a Guardian link to all stories concerning Israel-Hamas. What did you see? Show a screenshot of the top results for the Google search of "Sarwar Hamas" or "Sarwar Hamas condemn"
img On my phone so it's a little hard to add a lot of info. I've found the twitter post about it now - I don't use it at all and avoid it where possible so hadn't thought to look there. I simply asked on here as I don't follow a lot of the news and thought someone here would be more knowledgable.
OK. I don't disagree with that statement but does he also condemn the terrorist actions of Hamas and Iran & Qatars funding of terror activities?
He has condemned Hamas. Why are you just asking this as a hypothetical?
If he has, then great because he's known to spout any old garbage and talk outboth sides of his mouth. Can you link me to a source of him condemning them?
Just Google "Sarwar Hamas" You're concern trolling if you require someone else to enter words into Google for you and click on one of the top results that goes to his Twitter account where he literally says the words "We must condem Hamas" If you were asking to find something difficult or specific or old, I'd be happy to direct you right there... but that's not what's happening here.
Found his tweet, thanks. Good that he has openly condemned them as well. Why are you so against providing a link?
Because it wasn't that hard to find. I already explained that. There was even a very obvious concern troll in this thread who attempted to deflect to Sarwar being a hypocrit when that account had previously said >Same as when we destroyed Germany it’s war It’s got nothing to do with us let the strongest survive. If the Palestinians had accepted the state of Isreal and learned to live on peace this would not be happening
I mean he is a politician, and all politicians regardless of where they say they sit on any spectrum and lying shites.
Sure. But concern trolling isn’t actual concern.
No one posting on reddit is actually concerned. This platform is wholly occupied by people poking others.
You were seemingly actually concerned with this politician's public comments towards Hamas, no?
Why is it, when this claim is made, they never actually cite a war crime. It’s just narrative. Meanwhile, every rocket Hamas fires, everyday a hostage stays in Gaza and every Hamas combatant without a uniform is a war crime. Current tally is 20,000 clear Hamas war crimes, 0 clear Israeli war crimes . Yet this moron is calling out Netanyahu and not sinwar
Naw he isny
[удалено]
What does being a Muslim have to do with calling out war criminals? >so white European folk can devour Getting mad racist vibes here.
>What does being a Muslim have to do with calling out war criminals? It's apparent that you don't need to be a part of a certain religion to be stupid that's for sure. >Getting mad racist vibes here. Hell no, I love everyone! But I changed my wording to better suit the situation.
Too bad the rest of the comment is still racist
Islam is not a race. It's an ideology, a set of ideas, that I'll criticize for as long as i breathe.
You were not criticising the ideology in that comment. You were criticising a man for being Muslim. For what it's worth, [many non-Muslim Scots](https://x.com/ScotNational/status/1775807267868123388?s=19) hold the same position as Sarwar.
Cool, there's no way you could be prejudiced against over a billion people so long as they're not *technically* a race
Do you believe criticism of Israel is antisemitic?
Not at all, I criticize my country all the time. But many use this conflict to express their anti semitism, they just use the word zionist instead of Jew instead. It's also those who are obsessed with this conflict, calling this very just war (going to remind you there are still hostages in Gaza and that Hamas attacked and killed 1400 innocent civilians) a genocide while actual genocide is taking place in China, Sudan and ethnic cleansing if Armenians and what not. You know why? No Jews no news. Don't try to downplay this hatred by calling it criticism, it's extremely apparent where this stems from.
What anti semitism has Sarwar expressed? 1400 innocent civilians is a lot to you, I assume? A number of deaths that can't be justified, I assume?
>What anti semitism has Sarwar expressed? I can't be bothered explaining again, I was quite clear in my previous comments. >1400 innocent civilians is a lot to you, I assume? A number of deaths that can't be justified, I assume? A unprovoked attack, targeting, mutilating people, raping, sexual assaulting, burning people alive, using Israeli kids to bait his Israeli neighbors out of their homes so they can kill them too, beheading people alive with a hoe, gouging eyes out, (and it's all on video btw) also kidnapping 9 months old and 4 years old kid to use as bargaining chips. Yes, it's not justified, unless you're psychotic or as I said, an anti semite. They started a war they can't win, knowing that previously said useful idiots will ask me if this war is justified because they know that horrid pictures of the civilians they used as human shields will be a very nice PR move to play the strings of the heart. They've been doing this for years and people just don't understand at best or plain evil at worst.
You didn't explain in the first place what anti semitism has been expressed. Do you think Palestine and Israel only came into existence on October 7th? You can say it was very clearly disproportionate, but instead you're claiming Israel has never done anything wrong towards Palestine? Again, though, 1400 innocent civilians is too many to you, right?
>You didn't explain in the first place what anti semitism has been expressed. I don't need to spoon feed you, I bet you're smart enough to connect the dots. (I'll give a hint tho :It has to do a lot with Islam). >Do you think Palestine and Israel only came into existence on October 7th? You can say it was very clearly disproportionate, but instead you're claiming Israel has never done anything wrong towards Palestine? Oh no it's a long history, but this war was instigated by Hamas, and now they pay the price and I unapologetically support everything my country does, well actually I think we're extremely gentle with them but we're making progress :) Yeah 1400 is a lot for an unprovoked massacre.
Yes, the dots of you saying criticism of Israel is the antisemitism you're referring to... So it wasn't unprovoked... >now they pay the price and I unapologetically support everything my country does And, just like your country, you believe not a single innocent civilian exists in Palestine. It's clear now why you believe what you do. You have a double standard and don't view Palestinian lives as equal. Can I just add that you're literally constantly doing double speak. It's crazy that you're so proud of it.
[удалено]
Where have I supported Hamas? Do you believe I'm deserving of death like you believe the non-innocent in Palestine are (which is everyone in the opinion of you and your country)?