Post towards the end of the last thread:
ChardonnaysPetDragon Wed 06-Apr-22 17:40:47
To call it genocide in law there has to be an element of intent to destroy a particulate group, that's very difficult to prove.
It's not only a moral issue, it has to the exact definition in law.
About that proving intent and planning:
Katty Kay @KattyKay_
German intelligence has evidence that massacres in Bucha were actually planned and coordinated. Think about that. Not the random violence of individual soldiers pumped up on adrenaline - this was a strategy.
Peter R. Neumann @PeterRNeumann
THREAD: German intelligence service BND captures radio messages of Russian soldiers coordinating Bucha massacres.
www.spiegel.de/politik/butscha-soldaten-besprachen-graeueltaten-gegen-zivilisten-ueber-funk-a-9e01662c-aa7e-4828-bf6f-f662d9b6164e
According to @derspiegel , many of the messages match locations in which bodies were found. Also, some of the descriptions by soldiers are consistent with photographs that have emerged in recent days.
In the recordings, Russian soldiers casually speak about killing people. In one, a soldier describes how he shot a Ukrainian civilian "off his bike". Another talks about how Ukrainian soldiers are questioned, then executed.
The material seems to indicate that Russian mercenary group Wagner has participated in the massacre. It suggests that the atrocities are part of a deliberate strategy to break Ukrainian resistance by terrorising local populations.
Most disturbingly, the BND has captured plenty of similar recordings whose locations could not yet be identified. This means that there could be more Buchas around Ukraine.
At what point do we pass the threshold where there is enough evidence to say that calling it a genocide is pretty reasonable accusation and there is a good case to answer in law?
When we've got Putin's 10 point plan, in his own hand writting which says: "Squadon 45 are to go to X Town, and their orders are to rape, loot and execute as many people as possible who simply happen to live in Ukraine"?
Do we think the Germans have made this story up?
Do we think its JUST the Germans who have this intel?
I really do think that saying 'oh well we haven't got enough evidence to make a case in line with the letter of the law yet', really starts to look like its merely trying to throw a technical point.
Are we actively trying avoid using the word Genocide because of the magnitude of using the word?
Why?
As I keep saying, Western governments KNOW this stuff. They have this intel.
I do not believe for one second that Zelensky would have used the word purely for propaganga or to try and manipulate anyone. I don't think he would use it because he was 'understandly overly emotional' as some have accused him. His background makes him unlikely to carelessly use the word.
I said yesterday, we are going to see a gradual creep towards the word.
Yesterday Johnson said attacks on civilians by Russian forces in the Ukrainian town of Bucha do not "look far short of genocide".
As I say, if the Germans have this, evidence is going to start piling up fairly quickly...