A Refutation of Amnesty International Claims of Genocide in Gaza

[Mosby]

Amnesty International literally redefined the legal term of genocide to suit their accusation, stripping the term of its actual meaning in the process. The craziest part? They admit this in their report, correctly assuming that most people won't read all the way to p. 101.¹

This is not just a failure of factual accuracy; it is a willful misrepresentation of international law.

In Bosnia v. Serbia (2007), the ICJ held that genocidal intent must be the only plausible inference drawn from a pattern of conduct.

The court reaffirmed this high bar in Croatia v. Serbia (2015), stating that such intent must be “fully conclusive.”

Under this standard, no reasonable observer could argue that Israel’s military actions—directed against Hamas, a terrorist organization explicitly dedicated to Israel’s destruction—constitute genocide.

How does Amnesty get around this inconvenient fact?
THEY DON'T. Take a look at p. 101¹

"As outlined below, Amnesty International considers this an overly cramped interpretation of international jurisprudence..."

To be clear, the 'report' is utter garbage for hundreds of reasons, but the definitional bait and switch is galling.

What is genocide then, according to Amnesty? Essentially: Trust us, 'we know it when we see it."

Amnesty says a determination of genocide must be made 'holistically," and that "the context in which Israel’s military campaign took place must be part of this holistic examination." Ok, @amnesty, you mean the Oct 7 massacre right? That's the relevant context, right?

"This includes its unlawful military occupation of the OPT, including Gaza, and the system of apartheid it imposes on Palestinians."

Amnesty says that: "Approached holistically, that is contextually and cumulatively, taking into account the entire offensive, including acts that may not be prohibited under the Genocide Convention... a different and much more disturbing picture emerges. It is this broader picture that must be analysed for a determination on genocide.

To understand what genocide actually looks like, take a look at Darfur. In the early 2000s the Sudanese government armed Arab militias to ethnically cleanse all African groups in the region through a campaign of mass murder, rape and persecution based on the victims’ race.

Even in that case, the United Nations hesitated to formally declare the campaign genocidal- because they said there might have been other motives.

Contrast this with Israel, which possesses the military capability to destroy Gaza entirely, in minutes, but has taken extraordinary measures and suffered losses of life to minimize harm to civilians- even as it fights an enemy that deliberately endangers its own people

Amnesty tries to cover the lack of genocidal intent by cobbling together an assortment of cherrypicked, out-of-context, & flat-out imaginary statements allegedly made by Israeli politicians, claiming they are somehow dispositive of such intent despite the facts and the law.

For example, Netanyahu's referencing the biblical commandment to eradicate Amalek is cited as a prima facie example of genocidal intent. Except, of course, that they disregard the previous sentences, in which Netanyahu explicitly said he is referring to “destroying Hamas.”

Israel’s official stance, repeated ad nauseum by the prime minister, the president, the Defense Minister, and the IDF spokesman — is that this “war is against Hamas – not the people of Gaza.”

Again, under UN jurisprudence, incitement to genocide cannot be “a mere vague or indirect suggestion” and to pretend that Israeli officials are calling for a genocide by cribbing sentences, ignoring facts, and selectively including outlying (and widely condemned) comments by people who do not have decision-making authority, that are clearly against official policy and bear no resemblance to what is actually factually happening on the ground- is nothing short of ludicrous.

Just for comparison’s sake, the United States did not commit genocide when it destroyed ISIS, even though President Trump once suggested we should use a nuclear bomb against their strongholds.

Nor did we commit genocide in Iraq, or Afghanistan, even though General Mattis once reflected that ‘It’s quite fun to shoot them, you know… guys who slap women around for five years because they didn’t wear a veil.’

America did not commit genocide in Vietnam just because the Air force Chief of Staff once said he thought American should “bomb them back into the Stone Ages.”

Nor did the Allies commit genocide against the Germans when they bombed their cities in WWII – even though Winston Churchill once admitted that “we will mete out to the Germans the measure, and more than the measure, that they have meted out to us.”

Those statements did not turn those wars into genocide because even poorly made comments from people in power made in the heat of the moment (and at least those comments were real!) do not change the fact that those were clearly not the actual positions of the relevant parties.

What is most dangerous about @amnesty's report is not merely its double standard antisemitism, but its implications for international law.

Amnesty International’s report does not just distort facts; it weaponizes the language of international law in a way that undermines its credibility. In doing so, it cheapens the real horrors of genocide and places the fundamental right of self-defense in jeopardy.

Today, it is Israel, but if @amnesty's 'definition' of genocide was to be accepted then in the future every democracy that wages war to defend itself against terrorism- or even a more conventional enemy- will face the specter of being labeled genocidal.

You know, "holistically."




¹https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/12/amnesty-international-concludes-israel-is-committing-genocide-against-palestinians-in-gaza/

Link to tweet
" target="_blank">

[madaboutharry]

1. Amnesty International has long despised the very existence of Israel.

Their blatant double standards and outright antisemitism is long documented and goes back decades before this current conflict.

But I will tell you something Mosby, nothing you cited here and nothing you wrote here will matter or influence those who are wedded to their hatred of Israel. History, reason, critical analysis, and even archeology and facts are not relevant. Anti-Zionism is used as cover for antisemitism, by both individuals and organizations.

We now live in a fact free world. When ignoring facts, inventing data, creating narratives, and rewriting history and legal definitions can be used against Israel and the Jewish people the world says "Why not."

The one thing that amazes me is the failure of the haters to understand, no matter how much they try to deny who and what they are, is that they easily give themselves away.

[sfdennis1]

2. Of course

Yes Amnesty International shouldn’t have categorized Gaza as a genocide…when the term “extermination” was there all along.

[questionseverything]

3. Du needs a "disagree " button choice, I would use it on this op

[Eko]

4. Here is some context to the one sentence you used.

The jurisprudence on genocidal intent on the part of a state is more limited. The ICJ has
accepted that, in the absence of direct proof, specific intent may be established indirectly by
inference for purposes of state responsibility, and has adopted much of the reasoning of the
international tribunals.380 However, its rulings on inferring intent can be read extremely
narrowly, in a manner that would potentially preclude a state from having genocidal intent
alongside one or more additional motives or goals in relation to the conduct of its military
operations. As outlined below, Amnesty International considers this an overly cramped
interpretation of international jurisprudence and one that would effectively preclude a finding
of genocide in the context of an armed conflict. The organization considers that the Genocide
Convention must be interpreted in a manner that ensures that genocide remains prohibited
in both peacetime and in war and that ICJ jurisprudence should not be read to effectively
preclude a finding of genocide during war..
https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/mde15/8668/2024/en/

You tell me, can Genocide happen in the middle of a war? Yes or no?

[Eko]

5. This guy Mark Goldfeder has some interesting ideas.

Biden Withholding Aid From Israel Sure Looks Impeachable
Speaker McCarthy Certainly Got This One Right
Biden Is Undermining the Law and Throwing Israel Under the Bus
Kinda seems anti-Democratic doesn't he? I mean he is calling for the impeachment of President Biden.

[The Mouth]

6. When every last hostage is returned and every hostage taker hung after trial *then* I might begin to care

Until then, fuck anyone who has even a word in support of Hamas or their supporters.

[lapucelle]

7. Biden's Department of State explicitly disagrees with Amnesty International's genocide claim.

US Department of State
Department Press Briefing
Vedant Patel, Principal Deputy Spokesperson
December 5, 2024


MR PATEL: Said, that’s an opinion. And you’re certainly welcome and you are entitled to it, as are all the organizations that you listed. They are entitled to make their own analysis of the situation and come to their own conclusions. What I can say as a spokesperson of the U.S. Government and as a spokesperson of this administration is that the findings of – the accusations of genocide, we continue to believe those to be unfounded. That does not change and that does not change the prioritization and the stress and the emphasis that we are placing on ensuring that there is appropriate access to humanitarian assistance, ensuring that every possible measure is taken to protect civilians, ensuring that we’re doing everything possible to bring this war to an end.

================================================

MR PATEL: People, organizations, groups are entitled to draw their own conclusions. The U.S. conclusion is that these allegations of genocide are unfounded. There are and there continue to exist a number of avenues within the U.S. Government in which we are looking at what’s happening on the ground, where those assessments continue to be ongoing. But I don’t have any update to provide as it relates to that.

https://www.state.gov/briefings/department-press-briefing-december-5-2024/