The only "tom" I found was 5 times as part of the word "customary"... Sorry, pal.

Read the highlighted segment in this text: "...must be determined by a competent international or national court of law with the jurisdiction to try such cases, after an investigation that meets appropriate due process standards". Nowhere does it say some guy called Tom highlighting the Genocide Convention meets that definition.

You have suggested that, but that's not enough un.org/en/preventgenocide/rw…

I didn't name any particular person - I was referring to your screenshot that said student amongst a number of other people:

Is this genocide?

ICJ and UN are different. The UN Commission can’t legally rule, only the ICJ can. Oh and you mean the same genocide scholars I can join for $125 a year? Right because that’s, of course, a solely specialist group of experts…

You mean, the reporting that is so obviously you (#bias) but you don't name the person making the analysis. Who wrote that piece?

People not being employed at all doesn't make them authoritative voices in a case that ONLY the ICJ can determine. They might be called up on their expertise in certain areas (although none of the following have "genocide" in their credentials) but that doesn't make the UN credible in their determination of "war crimes" and "genocide".

It's a real phone call so well done for literally justifying my point

I think Raheem has been drinking the wrong type of tea... How's the misogyny and lies going for you, @RaheemKassam? Still aggravated?

@E_Morris99 @RaheemKassam

Fact check: Literally nowhere has it been called a scandal but you putting quote marks around it makes it seem like you’re reporting something factual. Disagree with the merits of the story, sure, but don’t misquote something it’s not. Very silly.

Yes, but the picture they are using is not the same couple.