- Joined
- 29 Dec 2025
- Messages
- 3,569
- Reaction score
- 192
- Country
Filly runs to the Mods when his ability to excuse war crimes is exhausted.
You demonstrated your approval of such war crimes with your earlier comment:
Zionism Condemned
- Thread starter Odds
- Start date
-
- Tags
- zionism palestine
You demonstrated your approval of such war crimes with your earlier comment:
- Joined
- 7 Nov 2023
- Messages
- 20,187
- Reaction score
- 12,896
- Country
ReportedFilly runs to the Mods when his ability to excuse war crimes is exhausted.
You demonstrated your approval of such war crimes with your earlier comment:
A bit like a pensioner coming out of the Post office with his pension.
A mugger tries to grab his pension but the pensioner won't let go of it,he fights back, so the mugger starts to batter him, the pensioner is eventually beaten to death and his pension stolen.
The mugger claims in court that its the pensioners fault that he is dead because he wouldn't let go of his pension.
The muggers defence is that the pensioner attacked him , if he had handed over his pension he would still be alive.
I wonder what the jury would make of that defence.
That's a great story but the fact remains, self defence is not a war crime.
You would deny Palestinians have the same right?
Filly demonstrates his ignorance, not once, but he's content to repeat his display of ignorance.
I wonder if he's daft enough to do it a third time?
In 2006 Michael Byers (he Canada Research Chair in Global Politics and International Law at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver.)
wrote:
Clearly it's not inoperative, as shown by Noseall's presentation of the Netanyahu warrant for war crimes.
Michael Byers continues by discussing the difference between jus ad bellum and jus in bellum.
Even in domestic law you can only use a legal reason to negate a criminal act, if the conduct of that action is considered proportionate and necessary.
The Israeli War Crime suspects are not prepared to put their case before the ICC.
Filly relies on jus ad bello, and ignores the rules of engagement, i.e. jus in bello.
He needs to update his knowledge, or alternatively he can continue to demonstrate his ignorance and obvious bigotry.
From your first link:
GENERAL DISCLAIMER
“How does law protect in war?” promotes practice-based IHL teaching.Its contents are developed in partnership with academia and do not necessarily reflect the views of the ICRC.
Money well spent my arris.
