Friendly forums for passionate Dems!
More than 91 million posts since 2001
Home Latest Greatest Videos Forums Hide ads Join up!
Home Latest Greatest
Videos Forums Help
Hide ads Join up!
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Israel/Palestine»President of IJC confirms...»Reply #4
Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Israel/Palestine

In reply to the discussion: President of IJC confirms that it did not decide that SA's claim of genocide was plausible. [View all]

Beastly Boy

(9,525 posts)
4. I am assuming you read the summary you cited.
Reply to David__77 (Reply #1)
Sat Apr 27, 2024, 11:58 AM
Apr 27

Could you provide the excerpt(s) from it that confirm what you are saying?

I read the whole ting and I couldn't find any.

TopBack to the top of the page AlertAlert this post for a rule violation ShareGet links to this post PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
  EditCannot edit other people's posts RecommendRecommend this post ReplyReply to this post

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.
20 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
President of IJC confirms that it did not decide that SA's claim of genocide was plausible. [View all] lapucelle Apr 27 OP
Right. The ruling was that their right not to be genocided is plausibly being violated. David__77 Apr 27 #1
That's exactly the takeaway that Ms O'Donaghue said was incorrect. lapucelle Apr 27 #3
A relevant section. David__77 Apr 27 #5
A section relevant to the right of SA to bring charges. Beastly Boy Apr 27 #6
Yes, I know. Ms O'Donoghue explained what that the means for those who don't understand the finding. lapucelle Apr 27 #7
It pertains to Israel's actions David__77 Apr 27 #8
The President of the ICJ disagrees with your interpretation of the ruling she authored and released. lapucelle Apr 27 #9
And none of their decisions pertains to plausible violations of anyone's rights. Beastly Boy Apr 27 #11
Disagree. AloeVera Apr 28 #13
People are free to disagree with the President of the ICJ about what she clearly says lapucelle Apr 29 #15
I was disagreeing with you. AloeVera Apr 29 #16
"Palestinians have a plausible right to be protected" is how Ms. O'Donoghue stated it. lapucelle Apr 29 #17
I'll try to explain it differently. AloeVera Apr 29 #18
I'm not sure what or why you're arguing. The Court preserved rights, as it saw fit. lapucelle Apr 29 #19
I was debating a point I think is fair and correct. AloeVera Apr 29 #20
I am assuming you read the summary you cited. Beastly Boy Apr 27 #4
Not even close. It was closer to the concept of "standing" FBaggins Apr 28 #12
Yes, another way of saying what the ICJ President said. AloeVera Apr 28 #14
What does SHE know ? Who is she to keep college sophomores from speaking truth to power? Beastly Boy Apr 27 #2
Here's the analog: Suppose Democracy Now! wanted to bring a case at the ICJ lapucelle Apr 27 #10
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Israel/Palestine»President of IJC confirms...»Reply #4
Home | Latest Discussions | Greatest Discussions | Latest Videos | All Forums

About | Copyright | Privacy | Terms of service | Contact

In Memoriam

© 2001 - 2024 Democratic Underground, LLC. Thank you for visiting.