Searching for information on the International Court of Justice hearings yielded an Israel-sponsored ad calling the ongoing genocide hearing against it “meaningless.”
Israel is defending itself against allegations that its siege of Gaza is a genocide with Google search ads, in what appears to be a world first.
A Google search for the ongoing hearing against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) yielded an ad calling South Africa’s genocide case against it “meaningless” and linking to an Israeli government website for some users on Thursday. Motherboard viewed the ad, which appears above news coverage of the hearing being held in the Hague in the Netherlands. Google told Motherboard it reviewed the ad against its policies and did not take any action.
The ad was first noted on X when a user posted a screenshot of their Google search for “icj” which yielded a sponsored ad titled “Israel response to Hague ICJ” above the Google information panel for the ICJ. The ad includes subheadings of “October 7th: The Invasion” and “The North Border,” as well as survivor testimonies and resources.
Motherboard was not able to replicate the search using only the term “ICJ,” but was able to find the ad when searching “ICJ Israel.” The ad’s descriptive text reads in full, “SA’s claim is meaningless—the malicious blood libel advanced by South Africa seeks to slander the State of israel. South Africa’s claim lacks any factual or legal basis and renders meaningless.”
The ad links to the Israeli government website govextra.gov.il. The page lists information about Hamas' Oct. 7 attack which killed 1,200 Israelis, and a video claims that “Israel is doing everything in its power to prevent harm to innocent civilians in Gaza and is acting according to international humanitarian law.”
That so called global superpower would rather invade the ICJ than recognise such a ruling. Let’s be real here.
Am not even going to dignify that nonsense with a response.
Has the US ever respected an ICJ ruling against it?
What you want here is a normative statement , not a descriptive one. In other words, yes the US can definitely prevent others from intervening against Israel. Whether they should is another matter.
How do they keep not respecting ICJ rullings against them and their allies then? Like, bruh. This shit is not magic. Without a structure that would be able to physicaly force the US if and all of it's intricate global military alliance to respect the rulling if nessessary, which there are none of currently, the rullings are just empty words which they can and will ignore. It's like expecting that convicted criminals will walk from the courtroom to the prison on their own without any escort being needed to make sure they respect their sentence.
Unless Israel forces itself to become a recognized colony of the US, you don't have a case here. IDK why you guys insist on arguing with me about some of the most basic shit. It's almost like you support genocide but are too afraid to come out and say it.
How so? Israel doesn't have to be a "recognized colony" or whatever for this to be about US interest in the region. There is a reason why the US is Israel’s largest foreign arms supplier and Israel is one of the coutries who buy the most american weapons in the world.
Israel is the only coutry in the middle east who is willing to do the US's bidding there without questions, if it disapear, all the US will have left will be a shaky alliance with Saudi Arabia and a fragile ocupation in Iraq, and with Iran just next door, without Israel those too will be gone sooner rather than later as the middle eastern country realize that now that the US can't do shit to them anymore they can freely make an allience that makes much more sense for their geopolitical interests with Iran.
And without any influance there the US has no way of stealing middle eastern oil or to at least presure middle eastern countries to sell their oil in dollar and severe concurence to american oil company will soon apear which the US doesn't want.
Saying that an ICJ rulling wont stop the US from doing whatever they want isn't supporting genocide, it's being realistic and realizing that the US wont stop pursuing their interests just because an organization with "international" in it's name scolded them.
OF COURSE it would be good if that made the US stop, but we are analysing a real life geopolitical situation, not power-of-friendship shonen where the good guy convince the bad guy that it's not very nice to not be nice with a speach.
How would the ICJ rulling stop the US?
The ICJ DO NOT have the power to enforce it's rullings, especialy not on the US.
Not to mention, like everyone here keep showing you, all of the instences where did not respect an ICJ rulling in the past.
They already did it and nothing happened, there is no reasons to think it would be any different this time.
CONSIDER THIS MY LAST COMMENT ON THE MATTER.
AN ICJ RULING FAVOURABLE TO PALESTINE WILL BRING A SWIFT END TO THE GENOCIDE HAPPENING IN GAZA. WHETHER THE US LIKES THE OUTCOME OR NOT.
END OF STORY.
I mean, it's good to have hope. It would be awsome if the ICJ will stopped the genocide.
But I'm telling you, you'll be disapointed in the end.
Either way, well see what happen when it does.
no, but bombing israel to dust would
one can dream
Exhibit A
I think you are confusing the ICC with ICJ. Those are 2 different institutions.
America was happy enough to threaten one. What makes you think they won’t threaten the other?
What ifs don't add anything to the argument.
Anyway, here's to hoping other nations will do the right thing when the ICJ ruling is passed and hold all the financial supporters of genocide against Palestinians to account.
They won’t, we have to be realistic here. While I want the opposite to be true. America does whatever it wants when it comes to international law. It’s very much ‘rules for thee but not for me’ with the states.
Ruling is against Israel, maybe we can hope to see the U.S mentioned as a co-conspirator but am not keeping my hopes up.
That wont change anything even if they are. Their geopolitical iterest in the middle east are at bay, they just won't care and will continue to support Izrael anyway. That's what they always do.
Hehe. Not if Hesbolla and the Houthis have anything to say on the matter.
South Yemen's blockade is certainly hurting Israel and making it way harder for the US to supply Israel while Hesbolla's strikes are successfuly spliting Israel on 2 fronts, all of that is very good, and yes it is effective, but they're not gods, they can only do so much, Ansar Allah can only blockade the red sea, they can't do anything about the supplies comming from the Mediteraneean, and Hesbolla, while very competent, must keep in mind that the IDF despite all the paper-tiger behavior they showed are still a well equiped modern military supplied by the world's first military power, they can't act recklessly and they know that, which is why they are not going all out against Israel (yet).
However, you are correct in saying that they are reliable support that Hammas can count on.
Give them some time, and with the current unraveling on US influence, they will win against Israel eventually.
As soon an the US can't support them anymore, Israel will be done for, they will fall like Saigon when the US finally left Vietnam.
They wont.
The fundamental rule of economic sanctions is: never assume you wont be sanctioned back. Nations who attempt to sanctions Israel's economic backers will be sanctioned back by those very economic backers, among which is the US, a country who hold a massive deals of control over the global economy through the US dollar, the curency which is used for the majority of international trade and which every countries hold assets and reserves in. Not to mention the fact that despite the massive ongoing deindustrialization the US is still the world's second major exporter and importer. Almost any economy cut from them would imediatly enter a massive economic ressetion. You can't just sanction coutries and expect everythong to be hunky-dory ICJ rulling or not.
You speak as if openly supporting the genocide of a race is an acceptable norm. It has never been. Not in modern times at least.
And there are many ways for member states to enforce the ICJ's decision on ISRAEL (IDK why I have to keep repeating myself on this single point) and the US if they get mentioned as well, economic sanctions are just one of them.
What ways then?
Dump the dollar. Dump US Treasury bond holdings. Exclude the U.S from international activities, sports etc. First two if applied with full effect from "non-allied" countries, the effects on the US economy would be devastating.
I see your point.
This is correct, these mesures would indeed be tremendously effectives, the problem is that it's easyer said than done, and it's already happening even without ICJ rulling anyway.
The BRICS block is working to move away from using US dollar as we speak, they have started to progressively replace the US dollar by local currencies in trades between themselves and are trying to create an international currency for international trade.
But compleating those projects will take a few years at least, you don't move half the world's economy in one day.
Until then, a lot of countries will have no choice but to continue using the dollar for international trade, at least partially, not to mention Europe, Japan, South Korea and the others former British colonies who will undoubtedly continue to use US dollar to support the US.
But even once the dollar stop being the international unit of acount, I doubt the US will stop supporting Israel (if Israel is still there by then, let's hope it's not), as I said Israel perfoms the US's budding in the Middle East, this is why they support Israel so much, the US has demonstrated during it's recent history that its typical reaction to a competitor appearing was to push it lower than they have sunk rather than pull themself higher and Israel is a tool to do this to Arab countries, ensuring that the huge oil reserves of the region keep flowing to US company and don't feed potential Arab competitors, among other things.
In fact, I wonder if that wouldn't make their support of Israel more direct and agressive, it would be very US-like to, as the empire start unraveling, keep clawing on every bit of international influence and every way they extract wealth from the 3rd world to slow down ever so slightly they collapse.
My point is, wait for the US egemony to unravel some more and trust Hammas, Hesbolla and Ansar Allah to deal with Israel, the end of the genocide will come from that, not from the ICJ rulling.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members'_Protection_Act
You have some exciting learning to do! The above act, also known colloquially as the "Hague Invasion Act" gives the president power to use "all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any U.S. or allied personnel being detained or imprisoned by, on behalf of, or at the request of the International Criminal Court".
So it's not nonsense to suggest the US would rather invade the ICJ than recognize such a ruling.
Hold on there, the ICJ is not a country you can invade!
And as I said earlier, ICC & ICJ are 2 different institutions.
Do you think such technical arguments are relevant to the question of whether the USA will abide by an ICJ ruling?
They have no choice and let me remind you once again, the U.S is not the only powerful country that has signed the genocide convention treaty.
They have no choice? Have you ever seen the US made to heel by anyone?
Case is against Israel. What the US wants and doesn't want doesn't really matter here.
Have you not paid attention to the last several decades? Israel has the nuke thanks to the USA despite international law.
There's no international law forcing and/or forbidding any country from building nukes.
There is a nuclear nonproliferation treaty to stop nuclear countries from transferring the technology
Gee. I wonder how North Korea was able to create their nuke stockpiles.
Whataboutism, liberal
A lot of these countries are at least ally of the US if not pupets, don't count on those to do anyting about it if the US decide that they don't care what the ICJ says.
As for the coutries that aren't, what they can do is very limited, they can place embargos and apply sanctions but that's about it, they certainly won't perform any military actions against the US even if they are in theory able to because they aren't stupid and understand that a war with the US won't end well for them even if they win.
Even without going that far, the actions that can be taken against the US are limited because since in the real world coutries aren't closed off pocket universes and are rather part of the same world and all connected by economy, politics, history and geography in some ways, any actions taken by one country against an other will have consequances for the PERPETRATOR of those actions as well.
Don't flutter yourself too much.
If today the ICJ rules that Palestinians have been victims of genocide, that war is ending in the next few days/weeks.
You can take that to the bank.
This is naive. Like we keep teling you, the US has made it a habit to go against decisions from intrenational institutions like the UN, the ICJ etc. Nothing has ever happened to them as a consequance of that behavior. If they decide to keep backing Israel's genicide anyway, which they without a doubt will, there will be very little consequances for them at best.
And I will keep reminding you that Israel is not the US in this context.
But the US can fully back and support a genocidal "war" that came to an end all they want after Israel is expunged from Palestine.