International Belgian Police Arrest Israeli Soldiers, Interrogate Them Over Gaza War Crimes

[oldshadow]

Well I guess Israel should warn its citizens not to travel to countries that hate them and will arrest their citizens randomly for nothing.

Then warn these countries that if their citizens are found in Israel they will be arrested and deported.

I guess the US could start denying visas to any citizens of these countries also. And maybe look at any funding of any kind.

But it's that countries right to support hamas as they wish.

 

[LeonardoBjj]

Well I guess Israel should warn its citizens not to travel to countries that hate them and will arrest their citizens randomly for nothing.

Then warn these countries that if their citizens are found in Israel they will be arrested and deported.

I guess the US could start denying visas to any citizens of these countries also. And maybe look at any funding of any kind.

But it's that countries right to support hamas as they wish.

- Or stop comiting genocide...

 

[oldshadow]

- Or stop comiting genocide...

Like hamas was trying. Then use "their people" as shields.

Or should all the allies be charged with genocide because of WW2

 

[PainIsLIfe]

Belgian police question Israelis over alleged Gaza war crimes​

The Hind Rajab Foundation called the questioning of Israeli soldiers a ‘turning point in global accountability’.

Belgian authorities have interrogated two members of the Israeli military following allegations of serious breaches of international humanitarian law committed in Gaza, the Federal Prosecutor’s Office in Brussels said.
The two people were questioned after legal complaints were filed by the Hind Rajab Foundation and the Global Legal Action Network. The complaints were submitted on Friday and Saturday as the soldiers attended the Tomorrowland music festival in Belgium.
“In light of this potential jurisdiction, the Federal Prosecutor’s Office requested the police to locate and interrogate the two individuals named in the complaint,” said the prosecutor’s office in a written statement on Monday. “Following these interrogations, they were released.”
The questioning was carried out under a new provision in Belgium’s Code of Criminal Procedure, which came into effect last year. It allows Belgian courts to investigate alleged violations abroad if the acts fall under international treaties ratified by Belgium – including the 1949 Geneva Conventions and the 1984 UN Convention Against Torture.
The prosecutor’s office said it would not release further information at this stage of the investigation.
The Hind Rajab Foundation, based in Belgium, has been campaigning for legal action against Israeli soldiers over alleged war crimes in Gaza. It is named after a six-year-old Palestinian girl who was killed by Israeli fire while fleeing Gaza City with her family early in Israel’s war on Gaza.
Since its formation last year, the foundation has filed dozens of complaints in more than 10 countries, targeting both low- and high-ranking Israeli military personnel.
The group hailed Monday’s developments as “a turning point in the global pursuit of accountability”.
“We will continue to support the ongoing proceedings and call on Belgian authorities to pursue the investigation fully and independently,” the foundation said in a statement. “Justice must not stop here – and we are committed to seeing it through.”
“At a time when far too many governments remain silent, this action sends a clear message: credible evidence of international crimes must be met with legal response – not political indifference,” the statement added.
Israel’s Foreign Ministry confirmed the incident, saying that one Israeli citizen and one soldier were interrogated and later released. “Israeli authorities dealt with this issue and are in touch with the two,” the ministry said in a statement cited by The Associated Press news agency.
The incident comes amid growing international outrage over Israel’s conduct in its war on Gaza. More than two dozen Western countries called for an immediate end to the war in Gaza on Monday, saying that suffering there had “reached new depths”.
After more than 21 months of fighting that have triggered catastrophic humanitarian conditions for Gaza’s more than two million people, Israeli allies Britain, France, Australia, Canada and 21 other countries, plus the European Union, said in a joint statement that the war “must end now”.
“The suffering of civilians in Gaza has reached new depths,” the signatories added, urging a negotiated ceasefire, the release of captives held by Palestinian armed groups and the free flow of much-needed aid.
On Sunday, the World Food Programme accused Israel of using tanks, snipers and other weapons to fire on a crowd of Palestinians seeking food aid.
It said that shortly after crossing through the northern Zikim crossing into Gaza, its 25-truck convoy encountered large crowds of civilians waiting for food supplies, who were attacked.
“As the convoy approached, the surrounding crowd came under fire from Israeli tanks, snipers and other gunfire,” it said on X, adding that the incident resulted in the loss of “countless lives” with many more suffering critical injuries.
“These people were simply trying to access food to feed themselves and their families on the brink of starvation. This terrible incident underscores the increasingly dangerous conditions under which humanitarian operations are forced to be conducted in Gaza.”
Gaza’s Health Ministry described the Israeli attack, which killed at least 92 people, as one of the war’s deadliest days for civilians seeking humanitarian assistance.
More than 59,000 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza since Israel began its war on Gaza in October 2023, according to local health officials. Much of the territory lies in ruins, with severe shortages of food, medicine and other essentials due to Israel’s ongoing blockade.

---

Fabulous news, well done to Belgium.

Hopefully sooner or later Israeli war criminals are arrested and sentenced wherever they go.

How exactly were these 2 soldiers identified as possible war criminals?

 

[TheMoa]

How exactly were these 2 soldiers identified as possible war criminals?

posts on their own social media blowing up civilian houses, using bodies a shields and laughing about it.

 

[TheMoa]

Well I guess Israel should warn its citizens not to travel to countries that hate them and will arrest their citizens randomly for nothing.

Then warn these countries that if their citizens are found in Israel they will be arrested and deported.

I guess the US could start denying visas to any citizens of these countries also. And maybe look at any funding of any kind.

But it's that countries right to support hamas as they wish.

I actually super in favor is Israel doing that, I'm tired of brazilian politicians who get a "free trip" there and came back with cell phones hacked by Mossad. Politicians and the evangelical nuts.

 

[PainIsLIfe]

Arresting someone for an interrogation due to suspicion of war crimes isn't depriving them of freedom of speech.

Freedom of speech protects anyone speaking in the US. Hence the founders were very clear to not use the term citizen in the first amendment.

..... or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.​

The "people" are obviously supposed to be citizens or else there is no reason to keep non-citizens from owning guns

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.​

 

[Scerpi]

Like hamas was trying. Then use "their people" as shields.

Or should all the allies be charged with genocide because of WW2

Are we going to start arresting Palestinians for October 7th?

 

[oldshadow]

Are we going to start arresting Palestinians for October 7th?

Should they be arrested for supporting a terrorist organization.

 

[avenue94]

..... or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.​

The "people" are obviously supposed to be citizens or else there is no reason to keep non-citizens from owning guns

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.​

It very clearly means resident. If it meant citizens, how come Native Americans had guns?

Or to make it very simple, how would the government verify citizenship without modern databases?

Or even better, why does the presidential requirement clause use the term citizen, if citizen and people are interchangeable?

 

[Scott Stapp]

Justice, Van Damme style.

 

[PainIsLIfe]

It very clearly means resident. If it meant citizens, how come Native Americans had guns?

Or to make it very simple, how would the government verify citizenship without modern databases?

Or even better, why does the presidential requirement clause use the term citizen, if citizen and people are interchangeable?

Then how do you explain non-citizens being barred from owning guns in the US? It says right there that "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Doesn't say anything about citizens




As to why would natives not have them? They technically were subjects of their tribes. If you're interested in reading about it, here is an interesting tidbit:

Thus, even though Indian tribes are mentioned three times in the U.S. Constitution, they have never been brought within its ambit.[2] Practically speaking, this means that Indian tribal governments are not bound by the United States Constitution, and thus, not constrained by the Bill of Rights, which, of course, includes the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms. Though Congress sought to remedy this situation with federal legislation by passing the Indian Civil Rights Act (ICRA) of 1968, the statute does not address the gun rights issue.[3] In fact, the ICRA only extends select provisions of the Bill of Rights to Indian nations – excluding, for example, a prohibition on the establishment of religion, among others – and altogether omitted a Second Amendment corollary.​

Native Nations and The Right to Bear Arms in a Post McGirt World | Duke Center for Firearms Law

firearmslaw.duke.edu

 

[avenue94]

Then how do you explain non-citizens being barred from owning guns in the US? It says right there that "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Doesn't say anything about citizens




As to why would natives not have them? They technically were subjects of their tribes. If you're interested in reading about it, here is an interesting tidbit:

Thus, even though Indian tribes are mentioned three times in the U.S. Constitution, they have never been brought within its ambit.[2] Practically speaking, this means that Indian tribal governments are not bound by the United States Constitution, and thus, not constrained by the Bill of Rights, which, of course, includes the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms. Though Congress sought to remedy this situation with federal legislation by passing the Indian Civil Rights Act (ICRA) of 1968, the statute does not address the gun rights issue.[3] In fact, the ICRA only extends select provisions of the Bill of Rights to Indian nations – excluding, for example, a prohibition on the establishment of religion, among others – and altogether omitted a Second Amendment corollary.​

Native Nations and The Right to Bear Arms in a Post McGirt World | Duke Center for Firearms Law

firearmslaw.duke.edu

Again, as I've noted, the constitution uses the term citizen non-interchangeably with people.

Rights affirmed for people means citizens and residents.

Your argument is wildly unhistorical.

 

[Daverisimo]

Israeli cruise ship turned away from Greek island by Gaza war protest​

Tourists greeted on Syros by banner saying Stop the Genocide and prevented from disembarking

Helena Smith in Athens

A cruise liner carrying Israeli tourists has been forced to reroute to Cyprus after being turned away from the Greek island of Syros after a quayside protest over the Gaza war.

Around 1,600 Israeli passengers on board the Crown Iris were prevented from disembarking amid safety concerns when more than 300 demonstrators on the Cycladic isle made clear they were unwelcome over Israel’s conduct of the war and treatment of Palestinians in Gaza. A large banner emblazoned with the words Stop the Genocide was held aloft alongside Palestinian flags.


A statement from the protesters also took issue with Greece’s increasingly close “economic, technological and military” relationship with Israel. “As residents of Syros but more so as human beings, we are taking action that we hope will contribute to stopping this destruction from the genocidal war that is taking place in our neighbourhood,” it said.


Some passengers on the vessel reacted by raising Israeli flags and chanting patriotic slogans, eyewitnesses said.

Confirming the incident, Mano Maritime, the Israeli shipping firm operating the vessel, said: “The ship arrived at Syros, encountered a demonstration by pro-Palestinian supporters, and passengers were stuck on board without permission to disembark.”

Israel’s foreign minister, Gideon Saar, contacted his Greek counterpart, George Gerapetritis, over the incident, the Greek foreign ministry confirmed. It did not release any details of their discussion.

In recent years, Greece has become popular among Israeli tourists, reflecting the increasingly close ties between the two Mediterranean nations.

Although the protest concluded without injuries nor arrests, the episode highlighted mounting disquiet in Greece over Israel’s actions in Gaza. Anti-Israeli graffiti have proliferated across the country, as has signage in support of Palestinians.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...outed-after-aegean-islanders-protest-gaza-war

Good. Israel ought to be treated as a pariah state. I'm completely in favor of granting political asylum to the minority of Israelis who oppose the actions of their government, but as for the 64% of Israelis who believe there are no innocent people in Gaza, or the people who rioted over soldiers being arrested for raping Palestinian prisoners? Fuck 'em.

 

[PainIsLIfe]

Again, as I've noted, the constitution uses the term citizen non-interchangeably with people.

Rights affirmed for people means citizens and residents.

Your argument is wildly unhistorical.

So Duke history professor is wrong?

You just said that freedom of speech is for everyone, but agree that gun rights aren't; even though the same terminology (the people) is used in both instances. It's a very tenuous position to hold - almost as if people/courts have just arbitrarily decided what "the people" means at different times for different reasons.


Edit: And I've never claimed that citizen and people were used interchangeably - only that the courts have depending on the cases.

 

[avenue94]

Belgian government had such full proof evidence of war crimes that they detained and later released two IDF soldiers? What level of retarded is it? Either they had enough to arrest and prosecute them or to do nothing.

If they had a video of them using a human shield or needlessly blowing up someone's home then arrest them, jail them and prosecute them. By releasing them it really seems like it was some dog and pony show.

International law isn't that simple, Belgium wouldn't be the one to prosecute.

 

[avenue94]

Well I guess Israel should warn its citizens not to travel to countries that hate them and will arrest their citizens randomly for nothing.

Then warn these countries that if their citizens are found in Israel they will be arrested and deported.

I guess the US could start denying visas to any citizens of these countries also. And maybe look at any funding of any kind.

But it's that countries right to support hamas as they wish.

You consider using human shields to be "nothing"?

 

[avenue94]

Then how do you explain non-citizens being barred from owning guns in the US? It says right there that "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Doesn't say anything about citizens

Permanent residents are allowed to own guns.

As to why would natives not have them? They technically were subjects of their tribes. If you're interested in reading about it, here is an interesting tidbit:

Thus, even though Indian tribes are mentioned three times in the U.S. Constitution, they have never been brought within its ambit.[2] Practically speaking, this means that Indian tribal governments are not bound by the United States Constitution, and thus, not constrained by the Bill of Rights, which, of course, includes the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms. Though Congress sought to remedy this situation with federal legislation by passing the Indian Civil Rights Act (ICRA) of 1968, the statute does not address the gun rights issue.[3] In fact, the ICRA only extends select provisions of the Bill of Rights to Indian nations – excluding, for example, a prohibition on the establishment of religion, among others – and altogether omitted a Second Amendment corollary.​

Native Americans very clearly bought and were allowed to carry guns (there are exceptions, ie many states had laws against natives having guns during the Indian Wars).

As to the bolded part, this was because constitutionally, each tribe was a de facto sovereign nation. Hence the constitution didn't apply within their jurisdiction, anymore than it would apply in France. Obviously this isn't waht happened in reality.

Edit: And I've never claimed that citizen and people were used interchangeably - only that the courts have depending on the cases.

And yet you're arguing that the 1A applies only to citizens, despite decades of history that says otherwise. I don't know how it can be any clearer: If the founders intended for the 1A to only apply to citizens, they would have used the word citizen, just like they did when describing the requirements to be US president.

Are you going to tell me that the 8th Amendment only applies to US citizens too while you're butchering basic civics?

 

[Devil's_Advocate]

International law isn't that simple, Belgium wouldn't be the one to prosecute.

That's a cop out.

Belgian authorities: confess! Tell us everything!

Them: Fuck you , eat shit, we were doing our jobs and you have no jurisdiction.

Belgian authorities: oh ok, sorry to have bothered you.

If the Belgian government had the authority to arrest /detain them then they had the authority to jail them and send them to the Hague. You said there was video evidence of their crimes.

Or perhaps it's all bullshit.

 

[avenue94]

That's a cop out.

Belgian authorities: confess! Tell us everything!

Them: Fuck you , eat shit, we were doing our jobs and you have no jurisdiction.

Belgian authorities: oh ok, sorry to have bothered you.

If the Belgian government had the authority to arrest /detain them then they had the authority to jail them and send them to the Hague. You said there was video evidence of their crimes.

Or perhaps it's all bullshit.

Who do you think would prosecute and what is needed for an arrest to happen?