ICC THREATS: More Arrest Warrants To Come?

Right, so nothing quite says I’m innocent like threatening the organisation seeking arrest warrants against you, but that very much appears to be what Benjamin Netanyahu has done on camera to International Criminal Court Chief Prosecutor Karim Khan, but this is just one example of the screaming fallout coming from some politicians and spokespeople following the announcement that the ICC is pursuing arrest warrants against Netanyahu and his defence minister Yoav Gallant, as well as three figures from the Hamas leadership on different, separate charges. Nonetheless, the accusation is that the ICC is committing moral equivalence on this issue, and indeed if the charges were the same, there might be an argument for that, but they aren’t, so there isn’t. There are two separate cases here, one against Hamas leaders and one against Israel’s, the ICC is literally doing it’s job and some in the world so wedded to Israel’s existence that its conduct even down to committing war crimes gets excused, that now sanctions or worse are being threatened against a literal court. Nobody doing this, should be taken seriously as world leaders and actually, they could be committing crimes and risking arrest warrants being issued to them too by carrying on as they are:
Right, so that was Benjamin Netanyahu there saying that he is not concerned about his ability to travel, even though should an arrest warrant be issued, he would be arrested – or should be arrested – if he lands in one of the 124 countries that are state parties to the Rome Statute, the foundation upon which the International Criminal Court is built upon, including this one; but he is worried about the Chief Prosecutor’s ability to travel. Well why would that be then? He’s not in danger of being arrested for war crimes, so what does he have to fear then? What are you saying? Sounds rather threatening to me, very poundshop mafia of you, it would be a shame if you left the Hague, you might have an unfortunate accident kind of vibes. In another clip he compared the potential prosecution of him to prosecuting George Bush over 9/11 or FDR over WWII, emphasising an argument of moral equivalence here, because Hamas are being prosecuted as well as Israel, but it’s afalse equivalence because prosecution is being sought for them separately on separate charges. What the ICC has done, is dare to it’s job and fulfil it’s actual remit and done so despite pressure being put on them to stick to Africa and thugs like Putin and not prosecute western allies. It’s not a case of who do this guy Karim Khan at the ICC think he is, it’s who those refusing to acknowledge the truth of these potential prosecutions and those trying to excuse it that really need asking who do you think you are?
As much as Netanyahu is trying to excuse himself and threaten the ICC prosecutor, calling the ICC and Karim Khan antisemitic, calling the charges on him as being the same as levying charges on the Jewish faith, the same weasel excuses Zionists always come out with, he’s sadly very much not alone:
So speaks a man who seems dead set on losing to Donald Trump in November if he carries on with this frankly insane narrative of denying what is obvious to every sane person on the planet now. Genocide Joe Biden, knows better than the ICC on what counts as genocide, because sure he does, the emperor is now completely naked.
Selective application of international law, a complete denial of anything Israel ever does no matter how much that death toll rises.
Now the US are not signatories to the Rome Statute, or the ICC, so frankly they can butt as far as what the ICC does, but being America, of course they won’t. There is now talk of Biden’s Democrats working on a bipartisan deal with the Republicans to levy sanctions against the ICC over this prosecution, which is a headscratcher – what can they possible issue sanctions over?
Anyone who interacts with the ICC based in America and vice versa could have that blocked or impeded, from civil rights organisations, to lawyers and investigators, which could carry civil or criminal penalties for anyone who does. As for those working at the ICC elsewhere, any assets they might hold in the US could be frozen and they or their families could be banned from travelling there. All in all, what the US can do is enforce their own petulance essentially, and in blocking an internationally recognised criminal court from discharging its duties, only serves to make itself look like a bigger global pariah than it already does. Then of course there is the whole Hague Invasion Act business, good grief can you imagine the US literally attacking the ICC, which is part of the UN? There is no spin or optics that could save the US from consequences for that surely and for what when it all comes down to it? Saving Israel. Putting Israel and its needs and wants despite its conduct before America effectively. Personally I can’t see things going that far, but also, just what is the limit of Biden’s slavishness towards the apartheid state. Denial of genocide is just a sick joke at this point.
Equally however, the ICC needn’t just take such threats as these on the chin, because it has options of recourse too and the issuing of further arrest warrants over conduct such as this can’t be ruled out either and this brings us back to that Rome Statute again that the ICC is built on.
The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court is a vast document, comprising 128 separate articles, the informal version of which still stretches to almost 90 pages, but the specific article within it that some politicians are crossing the line over with threats of sanctions for doing its job, threats against individual persons as Netanyahu appears to have done on camera, is Article 70, which covers offences against the administration of justice. Interference in the courts duty in other words and specifically within Article 70, it is Part 1(d) that is applies here to my mind:
‘Impeding, intimidating or corruptly influencing an official of the Court for the purpose of forcing or persuading the official not to perform, or to perform improperly, his or her duties.’
I’d call threats of sanction or against a person directly who works for the court intimidation or corrupt influence. I’d also suggest Part 1(e) could be relevant too:
‘Retaliating against an official of the Court on account of duties performed by that or another official.’
Now the matter of jurisdiction again has to be demonstrated, but threats against the court directly, surely must count, you would think they would, but that has to be proven apparently, that is part 2 of Article 70, but the maximum punishment that can be meted out by the ICC in relation to all this is 5 years imprisonment. It would be entertaining to see how Biden copes with being arrestable in 124 countries because he won’t stop backing a genocidal apartheid state, but there we are, he is asking for it right now. Butt out of legal concerns that don’t involve you or your country, or you might find they soon do if and when you end up on the receiving end.
It is not just US politicians or British politicians making fools of themselves for the sake of Israel though, however the US and UK both face national elections this year and an intriguing possibility has been raised by Workers Party of Britain MP George Galloway in a tweet he’s posted:
‘British politicians who have backed the actions of Netanyahu now the subject of Arrest Warrants for War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity are themselves thereby complicit in those very crimes. They will soon be asking for your vote. Hoping to make you complicit too...’
Now I’ve spoken about the issue of complicity in my other video that I released today, where a dossier on some 22 officials, British and Israeli, including it is alleged 5 government officials, MPs, which the evidence compiled by the ICJP, the International Centre of Justice for Palestinians has handed to the police, Scotland Yard’s war crimes division to investigate possible charges of complicity in war crimes. Now, it’s reasonable to assume this will all take a while to investigate, but with Sunak now having finally called the General Election, is voting for a politician allegedly considered complicit in genocide, potentially being investigated for it, also making you complicit as a voter, by voting for them? Voting for such a person unknowingly being investigated, I would suggest not, but if we find out they are under investigation prior to the election, well, that could be different. Now obviously our votes are anonymous, so we needn’t fear prosecution for it as individuals, but vote that person in, vote them into power potentially, well, I suppose it could in theory invite sanctions on the country, given we as a nation would have given them a mandate despite any such charges. I’m not a lawyer of course I could be wrong, I also wonder how enforceable such a measure might be, please do correct me if you know different, but it seems that it is at least plausible sounding and besides anything else to knowingly vote for an MP facing charges of complicity in war crimes, do you really WANT to vote for such a person, and if so, well, what does that say about you? I certainly wouldn’t be, nor any party they were a part of, especially if said party, didn’t pull them from standing to begin with! Something else to think about if nothing else.
Fortunately there are alternatives and a Jewish former South African ANC MP by the name of Andrew Feinstein has created much excitement as he’s finally announced his intention to stand against Keir Starmer in Holborn & St Pancras, Starmer himself having been caught on film supporting Israel’s right to cut water and power from Gaza, despite denials since. Feinstein is Starmer’s worst nightmare, find out all about his official campaign launch on this video recommendation here and I’ll hopefully catch you on the next vid. Cheers folks