International Criminal Court - Arrest warrants sought for Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant

Karim Khan, ICC prosecutor, claims there are reasonable grounds to believe that Mr Netanyahu and his Defence Minister, Yoav Gallant, bear criminal responsibility for war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza.


Karim Khan, Office of the Prosecutor, statement:

On the basis of evidence collected and examined by my Office, I have reasonable grounds to believe that Benjamin NETANYAHU, the Prime Minister of Israel, and Yoav GALLANT, the Minister of Defence of Israel, bear criminal responsibility for  the following war crimes and crimes against humanity committed on the territory of the State of Palestine (in the Gaza strip) from at least 8 October 2023:

·       Starvation of civilians as a method of warfare as a war crime contrary to article 8(2)(b)(xxv) of the Statute;

·       Wilfully causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or health contrary to article 8(2)(a)(iii), or cruel treatment as a war crime contrary to article 8(2)(c)(i);

·       Wilful killing contrary to article 8(2)(a)(i), or Murder as a war crime contrary to article 8(2)(c)(i);

·       Intentionally directing attacks against a civilian population as a war crime contrary to articles 8(2)(b)(i), or 8(2)(e)(i);

·       Extermination and/or murder contrary to articles 7(1)(b) and 7(1)(a), including in the context of deaths caused by starvation, as a crime against humanity;

·       Persecution as a crime against humanity contrary to article 7(1)(h);

·       Other inhumane acts as crimes against humanity contrary to article 7(1)(k).

My Office submits that the war crimes alleged in these applications were committed in the context of an international armed conflict between Israel and Palestine, and a non-international armed conflict between Israel and Hamas (together with other Palestinian Armed Groups) running in parallel. We submit that the crimes against humanity charged were committed as part of a widespread and systematic attack against the Palestinian civilian population pursuant to State policy. These crimes, in our assessment, continue to this day.

My Office submits that the evidence we have collected, including interviews with survivors and eyewitnesses, authenticated video, photo and audio material, satellite imagery and statements from the alleged perpetrator group, shows that Israel has intentionally and systematically deprived the civilian population in all parts of Gaza of objects indispensable to human survival.

This occurred through the imposition of a total siege over Gaza that involved completely closing the three border crossing points, Rafah, Kerem Shalom and Erez, from 8 October 2023 for extended periods and then by arbitrarily restricting the transfer of essential supplies – including food and medicine – through the border crossings after they were reopened. The siege also included cutting off cross-border water pipelines from Israel to Gaza – Gazans’ principal source of clean water – for a prolonged period beginning 9 October 2023, and cutting off and hindering electricity supplies from at least 8 October 2023 until today. This took place alongside other attacks on civilians, including those queuing for food; obstruction of aid delivery by humanitarian agencies; and attacks on and killing of aid workers, which forced many agencies to cease or limit their operations in Gaza.

My Office submits that these acts were committed as part of a common plan to use starvation as a method of war and other acts of violence against the Gazan civilian population as a means to (i) eliminate Hamas; (ii) secure the return of the hostages which Hamas has abducted, and (iii) collectively punish the civilian population of Gaza, whom they perceived as a threat to Israel.

The effects of the use of starvation as a method of warfare, together with other attacks and collective punishment against the civilian population of Gaza are acute, visible and widely known, and have been confirmed by multiple witnesses interviewed by my Office, including local and international medical doctors. They include malnutrition, dehydration, profound suffering and an increasing number of deaths among the Palestinian population, including babies, other children, and women.

Famine is present in some areas of Gaza and is imminent in other areas. As UN Secretary-General António Guterres warned more than two months ago, “1.1 million people in Gaza are facing catastrophic hunger – the highest number of people ever recorded – anywhere, anytime” as a result of an “entirely manmade disaster”. 

Today, my Office seeks to charge two of those most responsible, NETANYAHU and GALLANT, both as co-perpetrators and as superiors pursuant to Articles 25 and 28 of the Rome Statute.

Israel, like all States, has a right to take action to defend its population. That right, however, does not absolve Israel or any State of its obligation to comply with international humanitarian law. Notwithstanding any military goals they may have, the means Israel chose to achieve them in Gaza – namely, intentionally causing death, starvation, great suffering, and serious injury to body or health of the civilian population – are criminal.  

Since last year, in Ramallah, in Cairo, in Israel and in Rafah, I have consistently emphasised that international humanitarian law demands that Israel take urgent action to immediately allow access to humanitarian aid in Gaza at scale. I specifically underlined that starvation as a method of war and the denial of humanitarian relief constitute Rome Statute offences. I could not have been clearer. 

As I also repeatedly underlined in my public statements, those who do not comply with the law should not complain later when my Office takes action. That day has come.

Today’s applications are the outcome of an independent and impartial investigation by my Office. Guided by our obligation to investigate incriminating and exonerating evidence equally, my Office has worked painstakingly to separate claims from facts and to soberly present conclusions based on evidence to the Pre-Trial Chamber.

As an additional safeguard, I have also been grateful for the advice of a panel of experts in international law, an impartial group I convened to support the evidence review and legal analysis in relation to these arrest warrant applications. The Panel is composed of experts of immense standing in international humanitarian law and international criminal law, including  Sir Adrian Fulford PC, former Lord Justice of Appeal and former International Criminal Court Judge; Baroness Helena Kennedy KC, President of the International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute; Elizabeth Wilmshurst CMG KC, former Deputy Legal Adviser at the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office; Danny Friedman KC; and two of my Special Advisers – Amal Clooney and His Excellency Judge Theodor Meron CMG. This independent expert analysis has supported and strengthened the applications filed today by my Office. I have also been grateful for the contributions of a number of my other Special Advisers to this review, particularly Adama Dieng and Professor Kevin Jon Heller.

Today we once again underline that international law and the laws of armed conflict apply to all. No foot soldier, no commander, no civilian leader – no one – can act with impunity. Nothing can justify wilfully depriving human beings, including so many women and children, the basic necessities required for life. Nothing can justify the taking of hostages or the targeting of civilians.

The independent judges of the International Criminal Court are the sole arbiters as to whether the necessary standard for the issuance of warrants of arrest has been met. Should they grant my applications and issue the requested warrants, I will then work closely with the Registrar in all efforts to apprehend the named individuals. I count on all States Parties to the Rome Statute to take these applications and the subsequent judicial decision with the same seriousness they have shown in other Situations, meeting their obligations under the Statute. I also stand ready to work with non-States Parties in our common pursuit of accountability.

It is critical in this moment that my Office and all parts of the Court, including its independent judges, are permitted to conduct their work with full independence and impartiality. I insist that all attempts to impede, intimidate or improperly influence the officials of this Court must cease immediately. My Office will not hesitate to act pursuant to article 70 of the Rome Statute if such conduct continues.

I remain deeply concerned about ongoing allegations and emerging evidence of international crimes occurring in Israel, Gaza and the West Bank. Our investigation continues. My Office is advancing multiple and interconnected additional lines of inquiry, including concerning reports of sexual violence during the 7 October attacks, and in relation to the large-scale bombing that has caused and continues to cause so many civilian deaths, injuries, and suffering in Gaza. I encourage those with relevant information to contact my Office and to submit information.

My Office will not hesitate to submit further applications for warrants of arrest if and when we consider that the threshold of a realistic prospect of conviction has been met. I renew my call for all parties in the current conflict to comply with the law now.

I also wish to emphasise that the principle of complementarity, which is at the heart of the Rome Statute, will continue to be assessed by my Office as we take action in relation to the above-listed alleged crimes and alleged perpetrators and move forward with other lines of inquiry. Complementarity, however, requires a deferral to national authorities only when they engage in independent and impartial judicial processes that do not shield suspects and are not a sham. It requires thorough investigations at all levels addressing the policies and actions underlying these applications.

Let us today be clear on one core issue: if we do not demonstrate our willingness to apply the law equally, if it is seen as being applied selectively, we will be creating the conditions for its collapse. In doing so, we will be loosening the remaining bonds that hold us together, the stabilising connections between all communities and individuals, the safety net to which all victims look in times of suffering. This is the true risk we face in this moment.

Now, more than ever, we must collectively demonstrate that international humanitarian law, the foundational baseline for human conduct during conflict, applies to all individuals and applies equally across the situations addressed by my Office and the Court. This is how we will prove, tangibly, that the lives of all human beings have equal value.

The report of the independent experts advising the ICC prosecutor is linked below and gives insights into the nature of the accusations levelled against Israel. 

Panel of Experts in International Law - Report

Comments

  1. Didn't they do this for Putin too? The ICC seems utterly performative.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They did ....

      What struck me about the statement and the report of the independent advisory panel was the absence of any consideration being given to Hamas sheltering behind civilians. How is Israel to wage war against such an enemy. Indeed, in their allegations against Hamas, no reference is made to this.

      That said, one wonders if there is a case to answer.

      Delete
    2. Yes, it's a good question - and surely one the international community should have addressed by now. Didn't Hussein use civilians as human shields in the first Gulf War?

      Have any theologians addressed this from a just war perspective that you know of? I know that JWT accepts that innocents may be accidentally killed while attacking legitimate targets, but it seems like a stretch to apply that to targets that are being deliberately shielded by civilians.

      Delete
    3. Not recently that I'm aware of. There was commentary back in late 2023.

      Thee Jesuit magazine [America' published this back in October 2023:

      https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2023/10/17/johnston-just-war-gaza-civilians-246311

      Basically, the author is a pacifist and says neither side is working to JWT:

      No matter how just the cause may seem, a war is not just unless it is fought in a way that clearly discriminates between combatants and civilians. This is not a flexible principle. Killing civilians is not excusable even if one’s enemy is using them as “human shields,” as Hamas is claimed to do. Nor is killing civilians excusable because you are the weaker side and lack the capacity for a more traditional military campaign, as the Palestinians are ....

      The situation in Gaza is such that it is all but impossible to carry out an invasion that actually respects the principle of non-combatant immunity, given the density of the urban environment and the fact that half of its residents are children."


      There was this is December 2023, and is more balanced:

      https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/256386/catholic-u-theology-dean-just-war-doctrine-requires-israel-to-avoid-civilian-casualties

      “It’s clear that Hamas and the state of Israel cannot coexist and Israel’s judgment — that whatever it’s doing now has to have as one of its political goals the eradication of Hamas — is an apt judgment,” said Capizzi, who is also the dean of the university’s School of Theology and Religious Studies. “Hamas is designed and animated by the desire to extinguish the state of Israel.”

      The Israeli government has claimed that it does not target civilians. The Israeli offensive has reportedly resulted in more than 20,000 deaths, according to the Hamas-controlled Gaza Ministry of Health. This amounts to nearly 1% of Gaza’s population prior to the invasion.

      Capizzi said Israel must “pursue the execution of [its] political aims by military means in a manner that is attentive to … the proportion of innocent people who will die as a consequence of the use of military force. There is a point at which Israel has to be concerned about how many people it’s killing,” Capizzi added.

      To comply with just war doctrine, Capizzi said military forces must “follow the normal morality that the rest of us have to follow in our lives (such as the moral principle) to not kill innocent people … by intention. The most important thing is that war, or the use of force in war, be understood as serving actual political goals, all of which themselves are in the service of peace, So everything that you do in war has to serve the goal of peace.”

      This is why I made the points I did in an earlier post - Hamas is aware of this and is using it to its advantage,

      JWT has been tested and found wanting for all the years of the Gaza-Hamas situation. The nature of fighting terrorism is that if you go all-in, it inevitably leads to actions that look a lot like terrorism too! Hamas chooses violence; Israel feels compelled to respond.

      Delete
    4. No matter how just the cause may seem, a war is not just unless it is fought in a way that clearly discriminates between combatants and civilians.

      I think that one of the biggest problems with JWT is that it predicates itself on assuming that this kind of forensic discrimination is possible. I don't believe that it is in modern warfare and, arguably, never really has been. It assumes that war is something like a fencing match, where both opponents meet honourably and follow the rules, whereas war is more like a messy barroom brawl where it's often unclear who is who. You cant win a bar fight if you're sticking to Queensbury Rules and your opponent is trying to glass you in the back.

      The situation in Gaza is such that it is all but impossible to carry out an invasion that actually respects the principle of non-combatant immunity...

      This is correct. But, since 'Hamas is designed and animated by the desire to extinguish the state of Israel' what's the alternative? If Israel does not respond in kind, the conflict will be unending and many more will die. Plus, Israel has a moral duty to its own citizens. I think this conflict also inverts to common notion of a defensive war, implicit in JWT, of a weaker state defending itself against a stronger aggressor. Here, the agressor is the weaker belligerent (which, having no little of success is contra JWT in the first place), and any response is likely to seem 'disproportionate'.

      There is a point at which Israel has to be concerned about how many people it’s killing.

      This is the hard part. If Hamas is so deeply embedded in the population, at which point does the eradication of Hamas become the eradication of Palestine? If civilians are willingly sheltering Hamas in hospitals and schools, are they, strictly speaking, innocents? It's a horrible mess, and it looks very bad on Israel's part.

      Delete
  2. Our old friend Anton sends his best regards to all here at Jack’s, with a perceptive comment about the ICC and its arrest warrants:

    Israel is not a signatory to the Rome Statute which set up the International Criminal Court.

    You can hold people (and states) only to their own word. The notion of international law extends no further than that. Anything more is pretence, which of course is what the ICC is doing.

    Screw them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tell him HJ says that's a very 'Antonesk' comment. Of course, he has some particular opinions on Israel and future prophesy that tend to colour his opinions.

      America is also a non-signatory to the Rome Treaty too. As is Russia, I also recall Carl having very anti-ICC views. It is a rather idealistic concept - if not somewhat pompous. Something of this pomposity is reflected in the statement of the Karim Khan, the ICC prosecutor.

      However, Israel's overall conduct of the war does raise legitimate concerns. And I say this as someone who acknowledges they face an impossible situation in responding to Hamas and the threats from Iran.

      Delete
    2. Anton is correct here, though. The ICC is a toothless organisation, it's basically a glorified voluntary code of conduct . Leaders don't get brought to trial unless they're defeated in war and/or on the wrong side of the Anglo-American alliance, which is why we will never see Putin, Netanyahu (or Blair!) in the dock.

      I would imagine the Carl's opposition comes from his belief that anything that advances the interests of one's own nation is automatically legal and moral, and that no other body has the right to say otherwise.

      Delete
    3. Anton is never right!

      Okay, on this he might have a point - just.

      Delete
    4. Ssh, he need never know.

      Unrelatedly, does anybody know why, in a country where it rains for most of the year, the PM addresses the press from a jumped up music stand in the middle of the road, rather than some kind of press office? Even in good weather, it all looks a bit cheap and cheerful.

      Delete
    5. @Ray,
      Great to hear that Anton is still active! Where is he hanging out these days (or did you make contact through personal communication)?

      Delete
    6. @Gadjo Dilo,

      This came up in my YT recommendations recently:

      GAUDEAMUS IGITUR- Corul Gh. Dima al Facultatii de Muzica Brasov

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FkYI7NSMMT0

      Delete
    7. Anton frequently posts on this site:

      https://www.psephizo.com/

      Delete
    8. Some of the commenters on that site are bonkers.

      Delete
  3. Starvation in Gaza is hardly Israel’s fault:

    https://allisrael.com/hamas-steals-70-of-aid-trucks-cripples-deliveries-via-new-u-s-built-gaza-pier

    “… Reuters reports that nearly 70% of the aid delivered so far has been stolen by Hamas terrorists.”

    “The terror group has made over $500 million in profit selling the aid since the war began, Israel’s Channel 12 News reported last week.”

    (About All Israel News: “The site was founded by Joel C. Rosenberg, the New York Times best-selling author, Middle East analyst, columnist and Evangelical leader who lives with his wife and sons in Jerusalem.”)

    ReplyDelete
  4. Ireland, Spain and Norway have just announced they will recognise a Palestinian state.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Will they be taking refugees?

      Delete
    2. Spain and Ireland are full, and then some. Norway I'm not sure about. What interests me is why anyone in the west is taking sides in this. The Israelis are every bit as murderous as Hamas, and they've never been anything else. Somehow, they've managed to con the west into bankrolling them and keeping them in guns, but they've got no rights in the matter as far as I can discern.

      Delete
    3. I think part of it is, as you said on the last thread, the obsessive need to take sides in everything now. I can understand official support for Israel as an ally of the West in a part of the globe that's hostile to Western interests (the same way that the USA made an ally of post-war Japan against communism in the Asia-Pacific region), although whether that extends to arm sales is up for debate (but war is a great money spinner).

      I don't understand why Spain et al. are aligning themselves with Palestine; one can sympathise with the plight of the innocent civilians there without recognising a terrorist state. Perhaps it's something to do with the changing demographic in Europe.

      Delete
    4. @ Lain
      Not forgetting the Dispensationalist in the Evangelical 'Christian-Zionist' community in the USA.

      Delete
    5. Oh, yes. I confess to not being too au fait with all the various evangelical sects. My eyes tend to glaze over when people start talking about being a quasi-Arminian premillennial synergistic dispensationalist. Some people need to go out and look at flowers more.

      I think there's something vaguely distasteful about supporting the state of Israel because one thinks it's necessary to usher in the end times, rather than because it gives a persecuted people a place to live. It also feels to me like trying to force God's hand.

      Delete
    6. "It also feels to me like trying to force God's hand."

      This was one of the principle factors in my father's rejection of Zionism during the 1940s which prepared him for conversion from Judaism to Christianity.

      Delete
    7. My understanding was that the great majority of Jews rejected Zionism until about the 1967 war. From what I've read of its history, it was founded by atheists for reasons that were purely tribal and material. On a darker note, the rejection was entirely mutual. The sabras had a vision of themselves as noble warriors and the Holocaust victims -- who actually didn't begin to arrive in Israel in any great number until the 1950s -- were considered an embarrassment and not treated well at all.

      Delete
    8. It's somewhat more complex as no one body/school speaks for Judaism. However, up until about the 1980/90s a majority in Haredi Judaism developed what is a controversial theological response to the Holocaust. This was based primarily on the idea of punishment for sin brought about by Zionist attempts to hasten the end of history by returning prematurely to the land of Israel.

      Delete
    9. In her account of the Eichmann war trial in Jerusalem, Hannah Arendt wrote that the survivors faced hostility arriving in Israel and something close to blame for allowing the Holocaust to happen to them. Quoting Israeli Prime Minister and founder David Ben-Gurion, she says that 'the Jews in the Diaspora with were to remember how Judaism "four thousand years old, with its spiritual creations and its ethical striving, its Messianic aspirations" had always faced "a hostile world," how the Jews had degenerated until they went to their death like sheep, and how only the establishment of a Jewish state had allowed Jews to hit back, as Israelis had done in the War of Independence, in the Suez adventure and in the almost daily incidents on Israel's unhappy borders.'

      I wonder if it's almost easier to some extent to view the Holocaust as divine punishment, rather than an atrocity which God allowed and during which he seemed to have abandoned his people.

      Delete
    10. There are some complex and thought provoking theodicies' about the Holocaust in Jewish writings.

      Delete
    11. Lain -- not sure what you're driving at.

      Delete
    12. The "divine punishment" bit. I'm not a great one for the angry God smiting the wrongdoer thing. I prefer to think of the consequences of sin as being just that -- consequences, natural and entirely foreseeable, the same way as sticking your hand in moving machinery will cost you a finger.

      Delete
    13. I was referring to Jack's previous comment. I wonder if the tendency among some groups to attribute catastrophes to divine punishment comes from a desire to rationalise them. It may be easier to believe that the Holocaust (or earthquake or tsunami) was a punishment from God because this a) offers an explanation and b) neatly justifies the explanation with an appeal to a known characteristic of God - that is, he dispenses justice. Otherwise, one is left with the possibility that a good, loving and omnipotent God either allowed such a thing to happen because he is not good or he is impotent (the age-old question at the heart of theodicy). These are logical conclusions but undermine biblical revelation.

      The other options are that God allows mankind to do great evil because the good obtained by giving humans free will outweighs the bad. This is a hard sell, IMO, and very 'pie in the sky'. Or we accept that it is a mystery which, I think, is logically unsatisfactory but the only possible response in this life.

      Delete
  5. I was also puzzled why the PM gave his speech in the pouring rain. Perhaps it was to gain the sympathy vote. Maybe his party is ganging up against him and hid all the umbrellas?....Cressida
    How do you conduct a war when Hamas sacrifices and hides behind its own civilians?I wonder if the civilians know....Must say it is an ingenious way of getting world support against Israel...More countries signing up to support the two state solution so Hamas has won really....also a great example how to win for future tyrants....deliberately place your own civilians in a situation so they get slaughtered en masse and victory is yours !

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I was also puzzled why the PM gave his speech in the pouring rain.

      This week's Spectator cover says it all.

      https://www.spectator.co.uk/magazine/25-05-2024/featured-articles/

      Delete
    2. Ha ... was there a prophetic political message in the rain?

      Oh, raindrops are fallin' on my head, they keep fallin'.

      But there's one thing I know
      The blues they send to meet me
      Won't defeat me, it won't be long
      Till happiness steps up to greet me.

      Raindrops keep fallin' on my head
      But that doesn't mean my eyes will soon be turnin' red
      Cryin's not for me
      'Cause I'm never gonna stop the rain by complaining
      Because I'm free, nothing's worryin' me.
      It won't be long till happiness steps up to greet me.

      Delete
    3. It was embarrassing; the image of a sad, drowned Sunak has dominated the election launch and gone around the world. We are not a serious country. I thought they spent a load of money a few years ago constructing an indoor press room next door, too.

      I hear that he's kicked off his campaign by asking Welsh voters if they're excited for the Euros, for which wales apparently failed to even qualify. He really is bad at connecting with people.

      On the bright side, at least we only have to put up with six weeks of the two charisma voids rolling up their sleeves in pubs and pretending to be one of us normal folk.

      Delete
  6. Would some kind soul care to explain the pitch invasion incidents at Wembley yesterday? It was Real Madrid v Borussia Dortmund. Is there an Israel-Palestine connection in there somewhere? Or “Just stop oil”, maybe, or “Just stop the boats”? Or were they streakers who had forgotten to take their clothes off? Or football hooligans who refrained from committing any actual violence? It’s a mystery to me, that the BBC and other news outlets have taken care not to clear up.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. According to the Mail on Sunday, it was orchestrated by a Russian vlogger just to cause trouble in the west.

      Delete
    2. Well, I think we can take that version with a pretty large dollop of salt from the famous Siberian salt mines. However much trouble it caused for the players, the referee, and the Wembley security people, not to mention the spectators, will it have been enough to persuade Sunak, Starmer, Biden, Macron and the rest of them to change their minds about Putin and his war in Ukraine? No, still not quite enough, would be my guess.

      Delete
  7. Clive Mitchell18 June 2024 at 22:52

    Hi Jack are you ok?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I’m thinking the same: this is one of the few sane spaces on the internet.

      Delete
    2. Likewise. I've looked through the psephizo blog he linked above, and I can't find any comments from Jack later than the date of this post. I hope all is well.

      Does anybody know anywhere else he posts?

      Delete
  8. Clive Mitchell19 June 2024 at 22:02

    Cressida has access to jack. Cressida can you help?

    ReplyDelete
  9. I have contacted Jack....I will let you know, if I hear any news...... Cressida

    ReplyDelete
  10. Clive Mitchell21 June 2024 at 13:00

    Can someone remind me of jack's real name?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. His Christian name is Peter. That's all I know. I have an email address for him and I

      Delete
  11. ... and I've just set him a message. By the way, this is Ray Sunshine speaking. I'm just coming back from a computer crash and I'll need to do some resetting.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Does anybody remember the other blog that Jack used to keep, where he posted pictures of his grandchildren? It's not the one linked on his profile here. He shared some posts over at Cranmer's, but I looked through Jack's Disqus posts and they were all lost when Cranmer nuked his site.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Clive Mitchell21 June 2024 at 20:55

      Didn't he occasionally comment on conservative woman?

      Delete
    2. There was this one:
      https://httpwwwmreman.blogspot.com/

      Delete
    3. @Clive - he does, it's on his Disqus profile and his last post was a month ago. I cant find anything helpful in his posts. https://disqus.com/by/disqus_oYzTyXaAYB/

      @Ray - thanks, but there was another one with pictures of his family on it. He shared it a few years back when his grandchild (Seth?) was born, and there were posts about his granddaughter dressing up as a Jedi.

      Delete
  13. Bless you all - but I am okay - just been a bit low of late and lost track of time. Please accept my apologies for any unnecessary concern I've caused.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Shroud of Turin - The Icon of Icons.

Open Thread - Contemporary Christian Songs

The Rioters – Far Right?