There is a hell of a difference between the law and a casual conversation in which a legal term is being co-opted to signify an insult rather than a definition of a crime. Using it exclusively to insult Israel in this way not only betrays the intention to target Israel and Israel alone, but it also insults the real legitimate victims of the international crime of genocide as it is happening in other parts of the world but is never mentioned by those who pretend to object to the crime itself rather than misappropriate the term genocide to direct it exclusively against Israel.
There are war crimes other than genocide, usually committed by all belligerent parties (since you can’t win a war when only one belligerent party plays by the rules and the other one doesn’t), and I have yet to see a single war in which war crimes didn’t occur, but I know exactly why these fake humanitarians selected genocide to exclusively misuse it against Israel:
Jews are the most egregious victims of genocide in the history of the world. Accusing the victims of this crime of committing that same crime belittles the standing of the Jews as victims and at the same time, since the fake humanitarians do not hold themselves accountable to the accuracy of the term in the arbitrary ways they use it, belittles the crime itself..
You don’t have to be a rocket genius to see covert antisemitism behind this. And you bet I will not remain silent about this. You know why? Because, as a Jew, my ass is on the line in this play on semantics. To me, this is not play. It is very real and consequential indeed.
= new reply since forum marked as read