Steven Bonnell (Destiny)
speaker
516 appearances
1 recordings
1 series
first heard Mar 2024
last heard Mar 2024
Steven Bonnell (Destiny)’s voice in public audio — every appearance, attributed to the second.
Trend
recordings per month · last 12 monthsNo recordings in the last 12 months.Older appearances are listed below; set an alert to hear about the next one.
Appearances
If you believe that they deliberately target civilians, they would have killed many, many more. The fact is that they don't deliberately target civilians.
A good historian tries to get into the heads of the various protagonists.
It was said in a sort of a very questionable way. He didn't say they should drop an atomic bomb.
Iran has for years, its leaders for years have said we should destroy Israel. You agree with that? They've said we should destroy Israel. Israel must be destroyed. Is that correct? This is what the Iranian leaders have been saying since Khomeini.
Okay, okay. But some of them have said, including Khamenei and Khomeini. If you don't know their evidence, if you don't know their evidence, why are you laughing?
Brace yourself. Wait, wait, wait. Wait, wait.
And it decided to proceed.
But you said they committed genocide. You already said they committed genocide.
But Norman has determined already.
I'd like to finish.
Not because of that, because they supported an organization which murdered 1,200 people deliberately.
But they haven't because these 30,000 are basically human shields used by the Hamas in which the Hamas wanted killed.
The Hamas wanted these people killed. You don't think they wanted them killed? They didn't provide them with shelters. They build tunnels for their fighters, but not one shelter for their own civilians.
Didn't say genocide.
Use the word Amalek because the Hamas are a really good organization, if I may.
So for the ICJ case that South Africa's brought, I think there's a couple things that need to be mentioned. One is, and I saw you two talk at length about this, the plausibility standard is incredibly low. The only thing we're looking for is a basic presentation of facts that make it conceivable, possible, plausible, which legally, this is obviously below criminal conviction.
Think of it as an indictment. Sure, possibly. Maybe even at a lower level than even an indictment. So plausibility is an incredibly low standard, number one.
Number two, if you actually go through and you read the complaint that South Africa filed, I would say that if you go through the quotes and you even follow through to the source of the quotes, the misrepresentation that South Africa does in their case about all of these horrendous quotes, in my opinion, borders on criminal. Well, 16 ICJ judges disagree. That's fine if 16 ICJ judges disagree.
You know, they could be.
This is based on the official ICJ report that was released. I'm not sure if you read the entire thing or not. I read every aspect. Okay, that's great. Did you go through and actually identify any of the sources for the underlying quotes?
Showing 301–320 of 516 · page 16 of 26
← Previous
Next →