Hamas is trying to commit genocide, not Israel - Noa Tishby

[Igel]

5. This is something the ICJ has to not much like.

There's the body count. It's half the definition.

Then there's intent.

One commentator said he was proud of the compelling and surely triumphant case laid out by the RSA lawyer at the ICJ. Then, he said, he heard all the information he wasn't aware of that pretty much undercut that "compelling" case, point by point, and was so far from sure that the RSA would win that he was pretty despondent for thinking the RSA would lose. (I'm far from agreed with him--looking at the roster of judges, I suspect Israel would have a difficult time getting 9/18 judges to even agree that the Hamas attack triggered the war, much less the biased death toll isn't facial evidence of intent. Russia, China, Somalia, Morocco, Lebanon are probably biased out of the gate; Uganda's seldom been Israel/Jew friendly; Jamaica comes with its own anti-oppressor rhetoric; India, Brazil and Slovakia have their own baggage. I assume the RSA judge, one of the 17, will go with RSA, leaving 6 that might have a priori claims to neutrality and no obvious bias. It's an uphill struggle to get 1/3 of those with likely biases to flip, and that assumes the other 6 all go with Israel.)