We stand firmly against injustice in all its forms. Nothing can justify the current war crimes committed by Israel in occupied Palestine. Equally, nothing can excuse the continued support offered by other nations to this apartheid regime. If you believe in human rights, dignity, and justice, then we urge you to boycott this rogue state. Silence is complicity, do what’s right.
We believe that establishing international peace and justice is only possible through international law. We reject double standards and international law must apply to everyone. The credibility of international law depends on the court’s decision and opinion.
Israel is doing confirms that the situation in Palestine is the greatest threat to international security.The court must consider the repercussions of Israel’s practices. The Israeli occupation must stop. Israel’s illegal practices are not a coincidence. The court has jurisdiction and there is no reason to refuse to present its opinion.
Israel has obstructed all peaceful solutions and continues to occupy Palestinian Territories. The Israeli occupation is illegal. Israel is pursuing an apartheid policy with regard to its settlement project. Israel’s practices are a flagrant violation of international humanitarian law.
The basis of the Israeli project is settlement and the imposition of settlers on the occupied territories. The war in Gaza was exploited to cover settlement activities in Jerusalem and the West Bank
The situation in Gaza is related to the work of the court. The court’s powers are consistent with the situation in Gaza even before October 7. The situation in the West Bank is no less bad than the situation in Gaza. Israel divides the Palestinians, isolates them, and hinders their movements and daily activities
Israel has been isolating the residents of Gaza from the world since 2007. Israel imposed an inspection regime to which thousands of Palestinians are subjected daily. Israel imposes an unprecedented siege on all residents of the West Bank
Settlers, with the support of the state, practice violence against the Palestinians. The court cannot ignore the worsening situation in the Gaza Strip. Israel targets Palestinians in the West Bank with planes and missiles. Israel’s use of violence in the West Bank has expanded since October 7. Israel is pursuing everyone who calls for its accountability, including journalists.The Israeli occupation is illegal and illegitimate
Israel has violated many basic laws and principles. Israel violates the Palestinians’ right to self-determination and pursues a policy of apartheid. The Israeli occupation is illegal because it is based on the use of force. The Israeli occupation is illegal because the annexation of lands by force violates international treaties. We support all arguments that confirm that the Israeli occupation is illegal
It is the court’s duty to take into account all opinions that consider the Israeli occupation illegal. The Israeli occupation is illegal and based on apartheid. Ending the apartheid regime requires creating a situation that gives the Palestinians their rights
The International Court of Justice has allowed the United Kingdom to file an amicus brief challenging the court’s jurisdiction over Israeli nationals in the investigation by The Hague tribunal into alleged Israeli war crimes and crimes against humanity.
The court’s Pre Trial Chamber I decided on Thursday to give the UK until July 12 to submit its brief, meaning that the decision-making process on whether or not to issue arrest warrants against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant will be suspended until a decision can be made on the UK’s challenge.
According to court documents published on Thursday, the UK made its request on June 10, where it cited a decision by the same chamber from 2021 when it ruled that, despite the State of Palestine not being a sovereign state the ICC did have jurisdiction over any alleged violations of the Rome Statute, the ICC’s foundational charter, in the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza.Skip Ad
The UK’s argument is that the Palestinian authorities cannot have jurisdiction over Israeli nationals under the terms of the Oslo Accords, and so it cannot transfer that jurisdiction over to the ICC to prosecute Israelis.
International Criminal Court Prosecutor Karim Khan shakes hands with Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro during a visit of Khans to Caracas from April 22 to 24, 2024. (Courtesy: International Criminal Court)
The court said that other member states of the ICC could file similar briefs if they so wished by the July 12 deadline.
Dr. Tal Mimran, a lecturer in law and technology at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and a program director at the Tachlith Institute, said he did not expect the decision to delay the ICC’s decision-making process on the arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant for very long.
Anne Herzberg, a legal adviser to NGO Monitor, said however that the move was however significant since it would force the Pre Trial Chamber to deal with the issue.
She also noted that the ICC had sought to keep the filing secret but that it acceded to the UK’s request to make the amicus brief public.
Herzberg said that in February 2021, the Pre Trial Chamber had allowed the Prosecutor to move forward with an investigation of Israel but that it had “ignored that the Oslo Accords fully barred the Palestinians from delegating criminal jurisdiction over Israelis to the ICC.”
Continued Herzberg “The UK filing, which the ICC tried to keep secret, forces the Pre Trial Chamber to address this issue, which if the Court actually applies the law, will require the rejection of the Prosecutor’s request for warrants against Netanyahu and Gallant.”
She said she hoped that now the hearing is public, “additional countries of conscience will step in and demand the Court end the Prosecutor’s egregious jurisdictional overreach.”
ICC Chief Prosecutor Karim Khan announced in May that he was seeking arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant due to suspected crimes of “causing extermination, causing starvation as a method of war including the denial of humanitarian relief supplies, deliberately targeting civilians in conflict.”
The decision was fiercely criticized by Israel, the US and others, arguing among other claims that Israel’s independent judiciary and legal system was capable of investigating any criminal wrongdoing during the ongoing Gaza war, and that the prosecutor had not allowed enough time to Israel to exercise that power.
Critics also argued that Khan had not engaged with Israel to understand what steps it might have taken or was currently carrying out to investigate any possible criminal actions during the war, unlike his attitude in other investigations such as against Caracas where he has engaged with the dictatorial regime of Nicolas Maduro.
The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), revered globally for its commitment to impartial and accurate journalism, has found itself embroiled in controversy regarding its coverage of issues related to Israel and Palestine. Over the years, accusations of bias and pro-Israeli sentiment have dogged the BBC, raising questions about the influence of Israeli interests on its reporting and editorial decisions.
Critics argue that the BBC’s coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict often tilts in favor of the Israeli government’s narrative, downplaying Palestinian perspectives and amplifying Israeli perspectives. This perceived bias manifests in various ways, including selective framing of events, unequal airtime given to Israeli and Palestinian voices, and reliance on sources sympathetic to the Israeli government.
One of the most contentious aspects of the BBC’s coverage is its language and terminology used to describe the conflict. Critics argue that the BBC’s use of terms such as “conflict” or “clashes” to describe Israeli military actions against Palestinians obscures the power dynamics at play and perpetuates a false equivalence between occupier and occupied. Similarly, the BBC’s characterization of Israeli settlements in the occupied territories as “disputed” rather than “illegal” is seen as a departure from internationally recognized legal terminology.
Furthermore, the BBC’s treatment of Israeli officials and spokespersons has come under scrutiny, with accusations of deference and softball questioning. Critics point to instances where Israeli government officials are given a platform to disseminate their views without rigorous scrutiny or challenge, while Palestinian voices are marginalized or sidelined.
The influence of Israeli interests on BBC reporting extends beyond the content of news coverage to include editorial decisions and management appointments. Allegations of pro-Israel bias within the BBC’s editorial leadership have raised concerns about the organization’s independence and integrity. Critics argue that individuals with close ties to pro-Israel advocacy groups or the Israeli government have been appointed to key positions within the BBC, influencing the organization’s editorial direction and agenda-setting.
In response to accusations of bias, the BBC has defended its reporting practices, citing its commitment to impartiality and adherence to journalistic standards. The BBC maintains that its coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is guided by principles of accuracy, fairness, and balance, and that it seeks to provide a range of perspectives on complex issues.
However, despite these assurances, the BBC’s coverage continues to face scrutiny and criticism from advocates for Palestinian rights and media watchdogs. Calls for greater transparency, accountability, and diversity in BBC reporting have grown louder in recent years, as the organization grapples with the challenge of maintaining its reputation for impartiality in the face of mounting pressure and scrutiny.
Ultimately, the debate over Israeli influence on BBC reporting underscores the broader issue of media integrity and the challenges of reporting on contentious issues in a balanced and objective manner. As the BBC navigates these challenges, it must remain vigilant in upholding its commitment to impartiality and accountability, ensuring that its reporting reflects a diversity of voices and perspectives, including those of Palestinians, in order to provide audiences with a comprehensive understanding of complex geopolitical conflicts
Dabke is a traditional Palestinian folk dance that symbolizes unity, resilience, and cultural identity. It is performed at weddings, celebrations, and national events, bringing people together in a powerful display of strength and heritage.
Origins and Meaning
The word “dabke” comes from the Arabic root “dabaka,” meaning to stomp or step. Historically, the dance originated from villagers stomping on the roofs of their homes to compact clay and straw. Over time, it evolved into a communal dance that reflects Palestinian pride and solidarity.
How It’s Performed
Dabke is performed in a circle or line, with dancers holding hands and moving in rhythmic steps to the beat of a tabla (drum) and mijwiz (reed flute). A leader, or “lawweeh,” guides the group, adding energetic moves and encouraging the dancers. The footwork is intricate, with strong stomping, kicks, and synchronized steps that emphasize strength and defiance.
Cultural and Political Symbolism
For Palestinians, Dabke is more than just a dance—it is a form of cultural resistance. In the face of occupation and displacement, it serves as a reminder of their enduring heritage and national identity. Performing Dabke is an act of defiance, a way of preserving traditions despite efforts to erase Palestinian culture.
Modern Influence
Today, Dabke continues to thrive, not only in Palestine but across the Palestinian diaspora. Dance groups perform it worldwide, and contemporary artists fuse traditional Dabke with modern music, ensuring that this powerful expression of Palestinian identity lives on.
Palestinian Dabke is more than a dance—it is a celebration of life, a symbol of unity, and a testament to the unbreakable spirit of a people who refuse to be silenced. With every stomp and every beat, it tells the story of Palestinian resilience and hope.
It’s official: the Israeli occupation has hit a new level of absurdity. While Israeli families of released captives are showered with media sympathy and state-sponsored parades, Palestinian families whose loved ones return from Israeli dungeons are treated like criminals. And now, in a move so brazen it could only come from a regime steeped in hypocrisy, Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir has banned any Palestinian celebrations for released prisoners. Yes, you read that right—celebrating the survival of torture is now a crime.
This decree comes as no surprise from Ben Gvir, the terrorist ideological torchbearer of extremism, who has made it his personal mission to turn Israel’s already notorious prison system into a hellscape of starvation, physical torment, and systematic sexual violence. His latest policies have stripped Palestinian detainees—many held without charge—of food rations, water, medical treatment, and even basic hygiene. Reports of beatings, humiliations, and rape at the hands of Israeli prison guards are mounting, painting a chilling picture of a system that thrives on breaking people, not just imprisoning them.
But let’s pause for a moment and marvel at the sheer audacity of the occupation. The same Israel that demands global outrage over its captives in Gaza—whose suffering is indeed tragic—has no problem imprisoning tens of thousands of Palestinians without trial, subjecting them to medieval-style torture, and then banning their families from so much as expressing relief when they come home alive. The logic is stunning: if a Palestinian prisoner emerges from a cell where he was starved, electrocuted, and violated, his mother must mourn as if he had died—because to the Israeli state, his survival is not a cause for joy but an inconvenience.
And where, you might ask, is the chorus of Western democracies—the self-proclaimed beacons of human rights? Silent. Again. The same governments that can draft resolutions overnight to defend Israeli settlers in the West Bank suddenly develop amnesia when it comes to Palestinian suffering. The same leaders who cry “war crimes” when an Israeli soldier is taken captive have no problem arming the very state that has been systemically torturing Palestinian men, women, and children for over seven decades.
But here’s the part that Israel and its Western enablers will never understand: Palestinians don’t need permission to celebrate resilience. They don’t need state-sanctioned approval to honor those who return from the jaws of death. The Israeli occupation can ban music, arrest families, and raid homes, but it will never erase the pride of a people who have endured the unthinkable and still stand tall.
For over 75 years, Palestinians have been stripped of their land, their rights, their freedom—and yet, they remain unbreakable. The world may turn a blind eye to the atrocities committed in Israeli jails, but Palestinians know the truth. They have lived it. And every time a prisoner walks free, no matter how broken his body may be, his spirit carries the weight of a nation that refuses to be silenced.
So, let Israel outlaw joy. Let the terrorist Ben Gvir criminalize resilience. Palestinians will celebrate anyway. Not just for the prisoners who have survived the occupation’s brutality, but for the inevitable day when all Palestinians—whether in prison or under siege—will finally be free.
