“This site is dedicated to preying on peoples vanity, ignorance, or loneliness, gaining their trust and betraying them without remorse.”

Monday, August 04, 2014

What is Justice?

33 comments:

  1. Justice is a dead Ebola virus.

    Ending the day on possible good news - - -

    U.S. government seeking to test Ebola vaccine on humans: reports

    LOS ANGELES Thu Jul 31, 2014 7:41pm EDT

    (Reuters) - The U.S. government will begin testing on people an experimental Ebola vaccine as early as September, after seeing positive results from tests on primates, according to media reports on Thursday.

    The National Institutes of Health's infectious disease unit is working with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to put the vaccine into trial as quickly as possible, according to CNN and USA Today. The director of that unit could not be reached for comment.

    (Reporting by Alex Dobuzinskis; Editing by Sandra Maler)

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/07/31/us-usa-ebola-vaccine-idUSKBN0G02T320140731

    g'nite and

    Cheers !

    ReplyDelete
  2. .

    Saw that video the other night. I think it was on the series The Sixties. Great stuff.

    The music of the '60s

    Seems to me the music coming out of the '60s was all about breaking down walls.

    Today's music seems to be more about introspection and how we are feeling about ourselves.

    .

    ReplyDelete
  3. .

    I see we have moved up a couple streams so I will put up my response to WiO here.

    Two streams back, the article WiO posted without attribution was from Haartz and it starts out

    Former Mossad chief Meir Dagan thinks the demand to recognize Israel as a Jewish state is nonsense.

    I agree with Mr. Dagan and firmly believe that the demand is just one more obstacle Israel has concocted to postpone or eliminate any chance for a negotiated settlement on Palestine. If this doesn’t work another will be invented such as Bibi’s latest moves to break up any reconciliation agreement between the PA and Hamas.

    But back to the question at hand, why does Israel demand that the Palestinians recognize Israel as a Jewish State? I have seen many responses put forward. One from an editorial in the JP saying the PA refuses the recognition solely because it wants to deny the history of a people that goes back 3000 years. This is one I find unsubstantial as it says nothing about facts on the ground during the 20th century and merely sounds like someone on the editorial board got his feelings hurt.

    And then you have 4 reasons put up by WiO from the Haartz article.

    But before I respond to those, I will once again bring up a question I have asked here before and am still awaiting an answer to. Israel wants to be recognized as a Jewish State. My question is simply, “What is a Jew?” Is it an identity, a nationality, a religion, all of the above, none of the above? My questions might sound trivial; however, in a state that has a bifurcated system of justice divided into Jew and non-Jew, the question becomes important real fast especially when the definition of ‘Jew’ is determined arbitrarily by a religious tribunal made up primarily of one particular sect. The system not only discriminates against Arabs, Christians, Druze but also in some instances against Jews who are not of the proper sect.

    So if the Lobby could answer the question for me, it would not only clear up the matter in my own mind but would also help me going forward an answering the Haartz article.

    What is a Jew (as the term is used in regard to the concept of a Jewish State)? Is there a formula you can use to define it, is it defined by the Chief Rabbinate, or is it simple shorthand for saying it is whatever the state says it is in order to maintain a state where some Jews remain firmly in charge?

    .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. quirk: My questions might sound trivial; however, in a state that has a bifurcated system of justice divided into Jew and non-Jew,

      The State of Israel has one system of justice for all it's citizens. period.

      Delete
    2. But that state denies the citizenship of over five million of its people.

      That is the Apartheid, that is the inequality, that is the repugnant core of the ideology that consumes the Zionist regime currently in power in Palestine.

      Delete
    3. APARTHEID AND OCCUPATION
      More than 5 million Palestinians are denied equal rights by the state of Israel under a system of apartheid, a deliberate policy of racial or ethnic segregation.

      Under Israeli military occupation, millions of Palestinians live in conditions which closely resemble the apartheid system that existed in South Africa:
      • No right of free speech, assembly or movement
      • Arrest and imprisonment without charge or trial
      • Torture
      • House searches without warrant
      • Assassination, extra-judicial murder
      • No right to vote for the Israeli government (even though it controls their lives)
      Israel controls all Palestinian borders, all imports and exports, and all movement between towns and cities. 
      THE GAZA STRIP, still surrounded, besieged and controlled by Israel, has been sealed off and effectively turned into the world’s largest open-air prison.

      http://www.seamac.org/EqualRights.htm

      Delete
    4. The Zionist state rules over all of Palestine. Its actions in Gaza stand in evidence of that fact.
      There is a civil war raging in Palestine. And Israel, as far as the United States is concerned, is a portion of Palestine.

      Delete
    5. This Government has been informed that a Jewish state has been proclaimed in Palestine, and recognition has been requested by the provisional government thereof.

      The United States recognizes the provisional government as the de facto authority of the new state of Israel

      Harry Truman

      Approved
      May 14, 1948



      Notice, "O"rdure the 's' in state is not capitalized.

      Delete
    6. What an idiot.

      Delete
    7. "O"rdure is not an idiot, he is just an ESL minor at school

      He has been having trouble with the standard for capitalization.

      Delete
    8. But we do think that with the proper coaching, he will become fully functional as a blogger.

      "O"rdure still needs to obtain that book, "HTML for Dummies", to meet the blogger standard.

      It can be gotten for under a dollar.

      Delete
    9. .

      The State of Israel has one system of justice for all it's citizens. period.

      A simple google search would tell you otherwise.

      .

      Delete
  4. For political Zionism to come to fruition –

    - for a Jewish state to be created in Palestine -

    it was necessary to carry out as large a scale as possible ethnic cleansing of the country’s unwanted Arab natives.

    But even in 1948, and especially in 1967,
    Israel was unable to fully ‘cleanse’ the land of the Palestinians.

    As a result, Israel’s fallback position was to implement an apartheid regime of exclusion and discrimination.


    Where the dispossession had been most effective
    – inside Israel’s pre-1967 borders –
    apartheid could be less explicit.

    But in the OPT, home to a vast majority of Palestinians,
    Israeli apartheid had to be overt and iron-fisted.



    “Why have the Palestinians continued to reject a compromise with Israel, from the very beginning of the state in 1948, to Arafat’s ‘No’ at Camp David?

    The myth of ‘brave but peace-seeking’ Israel always let down by violent, compromise-rejecting Arabs is powerful and enduring.

    Israel’s defenders argue that if only the Palestinians had accepted partition in 1948, rather than seeking ‘Israel’s destruction’, everything would have been different.

    Likewise, for the propaganda war of the Second Intifada, the Palestinians – and Arafat in particular – were said to have turned down a ‘best ever’ offer from Israel at Camp David, instead opting for violence.

    Let’s take a look at 1948 first.
    The real story of Israel’s creation – the Nakba –
    … is very different from the sanitized, Zionist narrative.

    When the UN proposed partition, Jews owned less than 7 per cent of the land, made up a third of the population – yet over half of the land of Palestine was assigned to the Jewish state.

    Moreover, even in its proposed borders,
    the Jewish state’s population would be almost half Arab.


    Ironically, while Palestinians are often accused of ‘rejectionism’,
    the Zionist leadership only accepted the idea of partition for tactical reasons.

    Prime Minister Ben Gurion described a
    “‘partial Jewish state’” as just the beginning:

    “‘a powerful impetus in our historic efforts to redeem the land in its entirety.’”


    In a meeting of the Jewish leadership in 1938,
    Ben Gurion shared his assumption that

    “‘after we build up a strong force following the establishment of the state – we will abolish the partition of the country and we will expand to the whole Land of Israel.’”

    Ben White

    http://israeliapartheidguide.com/sample/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Another idiot.

      Delete
    2. .

      I suspect the need to go anonymous so as not to look more stupid than they actually are is a strong imperative for some here who lack the balls to post under their own screen name.

      .

      Delete
  5. Israel's 'equality under law' doesn't apply to Palestinians

    Israel's pretention to be a country with a just legal system appears ridiculous in the face of the other justice system that applies to juveniles that are not Palestinian.

    Haaretz Editorial

    http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/israel-s-equality-under-law-doesn-t-apply-to-palestinians-1.373978

    ReplyDelete
  6. Israel’s apartheid isn’t just political, it’s ideology wrapped in history and religion
    Marc H. Ellis

    http://mondoweiss.net/2013/10/apartheid-political-religion.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A third idiot ! - All named rat.

      Delete
    2. Rat is a figment of your imaginationMon Aug 04, 02:24:00 AM EDT

      .

      Delete
  7. Is there a better adjective than 'apartheid' to describe Israel?

    The key question is the identification of a regime that practices
    systematic oppression and domination by one group over another.


    How then does it apply to Israel?

    To answer that, we need to clarify another concept: Israel.

    Although usually seen as residing within its pre-1967 boundaries,
    the Israeli regime exercises control over Palestinians
    in the occupied territories of the West Bank and Gaza.


    For the past 46 years, all residents within greater Israel have lived under the same regime,
    which claims to be the sole legitimate political and military authority.

    The state controls the territory between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, ruling over eight million rights-bearing citizens
    (75% of whom are Jews) and four million Palestinian subjects denied civil and political rights.

    Millions of Palestinian refugees
    (who were born in the territory or whose direct ancestors were)
    cannot set foot in their homeland, let alone determine its political future as citizens.

    Insiders
    How is the notion of apartheid relevant to this reality?

    The Israeli regime is based on an ethnic-religious distinction
    between Jewish insiders and Palestinian outsiders.

    It expands citizenship beyond its territory,
    potentially to all Jews regardless of their links to the country,
    and contracts citizenship within it:

    Palestinians in the occupied territories and refugees outside have no citizenship and cannot become Israeli citizens.

    The regime combines different modes of rule:
    civilian authority with democratic institutions within the Green Line
    (the pre-1967 boundaries), and military authority beyond it.

    In times of crisis,
    the military mode of rule spills over the line to apply to Palestinian citizens in Israel.
    At all times,
    the civilian mode of rule spills over the line to apply to Jewish settlers.

    The distinction between the two sides of the line is constantly eroding as a result,
    and norms and practices developed under the occupation filter back into Israel.

    Israel as a "Jewish democratic state" is "democratic" for Jews and "Jewish" for Arabs.

    http://mg.co.za/article/2013-10-04-00-is-there-a-better-adjective-than-apartheid-to-describe-israel/

    ReplyDelete
  8. August 4, 2014
    Jihad means there will be blood
    By Amil Imani

    From Northern Iraq to Northeastern Syria, from Nairobi, Kenya to Benghazi, Libya, from Lahore, Pakistan to the rugged mountains of Mali and Afghanistan, radical Muslims have executed hundreds of their fellow Muslims and are on a killing rampage against Christians. The world is shocked and distressed.

    The Muslims' killing campaign did not end with their defeat at the gates of Vienna. Their eviction from Spain was a temporary forced retreat. But now Muslims have, in huge numbers, penetrated the gates of every city and town in Europe and North America without even having to use their swords.

    Distressed by the Muslims’ trouble-making and killing sprees, civilized nations are bending over backwards in the hope of placating them and helping them join the family of humanity by admitting hordes of immigrants and offering them all manner of hospitality and assistance. All these gestures remain in vain and to no avail. Many of the new arrivals, deeply infected by the violent side of the Islamic ethos, find it impossible to assimilate in the host countries. Instead, they strive to impose their own order, which is the cause of their own backwardness and inhumanity in the nations from which they have emigrated.

    The non-Muslim world is at its wit’s end. No accommodation or kindness seems to stem the tide of Islamic violence. Countless numbers of proposals have been advanced in dealing with this systemic Islamic disorder. Some feel that, in general, Muslims are law-abiding citizens of their adopted countries and it is only a minority that is responsible for the violence and mayhem. Thinking along these lines has prompted people to say that the solution to Islamic violence rests with Islamic leaders. That is, Islamic leaders should speak up and condemn jihad and jihadists.

    Western armchair theorizers and wishful thinkers need to take time and study the Islamic system in order to avoid making demands on Muslim leaders -- demands that will never be met because they are completely unrealistic.

    Islam presently has its hold over on over a billion humans, posing an existential threat to all non-Muslims. Islam, yet again, has risen from the ashes of defeat and is on a campaign of conquest throughout the world. Hordes of fanatical Islamic foot soldiers are striving to kill and get killed. What they all want is the opportunity to discharge their homicidal-suicidal impulses, on their way to Allah's promised glorious paradise. And in the background, granting the foot soldiers' wishes, are their handlers, the puppeteers, who pull the strings and detonate these human bombs. Those who cherish life must recognize these emissaries of death -- what makes them, what motivates them, and how best to defend against them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. America, with a long tradition of protecting religious freedom, still clings to the “hands off” practice of leaving alone any doctrine or practice billed as religion. A thorny problem is in deciding what constitutes a religion and who is to make that call. There is a glimmer of hope that the American people are finally waking up to the deceit and the menace. Their opposition to the building of the mosque at Ground Zero showed that the creeping Islamization of America is indeed something to stand against and prevent before it is too late.

      As more and more Muslims arrive in America, as they reproduce with great fecundity, as they convert the disenchanted and minorities, and as petrodollar-flush Muslims and Muslim treasuries supply generous funds, they gather more power to mount a serious challenge to the American system of governance, representative democracy. As for democracy, the rule of the people, Muslim theology has no use for it at all. Devout Muslims believe that Allah’s rule must govern the world in the form of a Caliphate, a theocracy. Making a mockery of democracy, subverting its workings, and ignoring its provisions is Islam’s way of falsifying what is already believed to be a sinful and false system of governance invented by infidels.

      I have been sounding the alarm for decades about the ever-increasing menace Islam is posing to America and our way of life. Apathy, political correctness, and massive Islamic lobbying have successfully prevented the public from truly grasping the all-pervasive Islamic assault.

      Time and again we are told by the politically correct “experts” not to worry about Islam posing a threat to our way of life. We’re also told, not to worry about the horrific things that are happening on the other side of the world! If Muslims act heinously toward non-Muslims, it is just the way things are in those countries and it is hardly any of our business. This is the same attitude that set the Islamization of Europe on a seemingly irreversible track. One European country after another is rapidly buckling under the weight of Islamism.

      With heavy assurances like this, coming from so many know-it-all authoritative figures, we can sleep soundly without the aid of sleeping pills. Yet, the problem of aggressive Islam is very real and deadly. Neither the pronouncements of the experts, nor the tranquilizing pills of the mind can make it go away. Islam will continue its bloody conquest, as mandated in the Ko

      Delete
    2. as mandated in the Koran.

      Delete
  9. .

    Looks like I am not going to get an answer to my 'what is a Jew' question, so...

    Responding to

    • What is "Occupation"Sun Aug 03, 08:53:00 PM EDT

    Four reasons why Israel must be recognized as a Jewish state

    http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.574000


    The first reason: The Israeli-Palestinian conflict did not start in 1967 and does not revolve around the occupation and the settlements. It is a deep national-religious-cultural-social conflict…

    The first reason given goes on to suggests a reciprocity principle. If Palestine recognizes Israel as a Jewish state, Israel will recognize Palestine as a Palestinian state. In other words, if Palestine wants to same flawed democracy Israel has Israel will support that. The PA might want to accept this arrangement but I see two problems with it.

    First, this is the first time I have ever seen the arrangement suggested. Would Israel really accept it? The last time the PA foreign minister suggested the Jewish settlers would have to leave once a Pali state was formed all we heard here were cries of Judenfrei. Second, this skirts the real issue why Israel wants recognition as a Jewish state which is to remove the ‘right of return’ issue. Since this issue is raised in ‘reason 3,’ so we can address it further there.

    (continued…)

    .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. .
      The second reason: The great achievement of the Oslo Accords… there is no reason that the people residing in Palestine cannot open its eyes finally and see that there is another people in the land, and that it is entitled to a different country that will express its right to self determination…

      This is an unctuous argument we see raised on this blog on a regular basis. The author argues that Israeli self-determination is dependent upon the PA recognizing Israel as a Jewish state. This is absurd. How a state defines itself is up to the state. It is internal to the country. It has nothing to do with how that country is viewed externally by other players.

      self-determination

      self-de•ter•mi•na•tion

      [self-di-tur-muh-ney-shuhn, self-] Show IPA

      noun

      1. determination by oneself or itself, without outside influence.
      2. freedom to live as one chooses, or to act or decide without consulting another or others.
      3. the determining by the people of the form their government shall have, without reference to the wishes of any other nation, especially by people of a territory or former colony.


      Israel already has self-determination. While it doesn't have a constitution, it has a tricameral government with executive, legislative, and judicial branches. It has laws and a judicial review process to establish precedent.

      The PA recognizes the Israeli state and its legitimacy. That should be plenty. I can understand the reasons Jews might want Israel to be considered a Jewish State but the Jews aren't the only citizens of Israel. As WiO has mentioned numerous times, Israel is also made up of Muslims and Christians most of whom I would assume would prefer Israel not be a 'Jewish State'. One only has to see the discrimination written into the laws to understand the reasons why.

      But more to the point, why should the PA which has already recognized the State of Israel go beyond that and recognize a Jewish State of Israel which would in effect have them condoning the discrimination currently in place against Israeli Arabs?
      Likewise, the US has recognized the State of Israel, why should we go further and condone a system that by its very nature discriminates against non-Jews. It goes against the ideals of most western countries.

      (continued…)

      .

      Delete
    2. .
      The third reason: The Palestinians will not give up on the demand for the right of return. The trauma of the Nakba is their foundational trauma, and the experience of the refugees is the experience that molded them, and there is no Palestinian leader who will declare that the Palestinians will never return to the cities and villages they lost in 1948. If there is any solution at all to the refugee problem, it will be a superficial and insignificant one. But because it is actually impossible to demand from the Palestinians that they change their spots and convert their identity, it is required to demand they recognize this: that the Jewish people is a people of this land, and it did not arrive here from Mars. It is necessary to demand of them to admit that the Jewish people has a history of its own and a tragedy of its own and its own justification. The Palestinians must concede that the Jews are not colonialists but legal neighbors. There will not be peace if the children growing up in the Deheisheh refugee camp will not know that the country across the border is a legitimate Jewish state of a true Jewish people, whom they are decreed to live with. It is those who give up on the recognition of Israel as a Jewish state who are actually giving up on peace.

      Rather than edit this particular section, I left it intact. It talks of the thorny issue of ‘right of return’. A close reading shows the arrogant condescension and pomposity of the author. First, he dismisses any possible negotiated settlement on the issue as insignificant and superficial. Then he describes what Israel must ‘demand’ of the Palestinians, what the Palestinians must ‘concede’, what their children are ‘decreed’ to do. It is the language of a tyrant with the strong hand.

      The author says, “The Palestinians must concede that the Jews are not colonialists but legal neighbors.” It seems that this particular Jew really is from Mars. The PA has already conceded that Israel is a legal state and some stinking paper isn’t going to change what some kid in the Deheisheh refugee camp thinks of Jews.

      This isn’t about the right of return which can only be settled through negotiation. No it is about rubbing their face in it. We have seen the same suggested by some here.

      (continued…)

      .

      Delete
    3. .
      The fourth reason: An Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement is to a great extent a one-sided agreement in which Israel gives and the Palestinians receive. Only the recognition of Israel as a Jewish state would turn the longed-for agreement into a two-sided one. While Israel will transfer concrete assets to its neighbor, territory and rights, the Palestinians will give the only gift they are capable of giving: legitimacy.

      More condescension from the party holding the strong hand. It will be interesting to see how this all unfolds as year after year political alliances shift and the costs in lives and treasure mount.

      .

      Delete
  10. Good GOD Quirk, I get up to take a crap and your are blabbing along about what is a Jew?

    What in the hell do you think you are trying to prove?

    Go to bed Quirk. Get some rest.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ah jeez, I don't know, maybe what you need is stem cell therapy rather than sleep.

      Delete
  11. The reason that Israel demands US financial support, ostensibly because they need the money is another canard. US financial support gives legitimacy to the state demand of recognition of a Jewish State. It would send a terrible precedent to the World. We cannot get away from this country fast enough for our own good.

    ReplyDelete
  12. David Cameron has warned Israel that it is “wrong and illegal” to target civilians, in his strongest comments so far on the conflict in Gaza which has killed more than 1,800 people.

    The prime minister would not be drawn on whether he believes Israel has broken international law by shelling children outside a school, but he told the BBC the UN was "right to speak out in the way it has, because international law is very clear that there mustn't be the targeting of civilians or the targeting of schools, if that's what's happened".

    It comes after the US said on Friday that the missile strike on a school was "totally unacceptable", while the UN said on Sunday a subsequent attack was a "moral outrage" and a criminal act.

    Cameron addressed the issue after days of pressure from the opposition leader, Ed Miliband, to condemn Israel's military action in Gaza.

    The prime minister does not go as far as the Labour leader, who has said the whole incursion into Gaza is wrong, or Nick Clegg, who has said Israel's actions appear to be a disproportionate act of collective punishment and called for talks with Hamas.

    However, Cameron's comments are a significant hardening of the UK position after the third report of shelling in or outside a UN school in recent days.

    Speaking before commemorations for the centenary of the first world war, Cameron said: "International law is very, very clear that the use of force always has to be proportionate, that civilians should not be targeted, and I was clear about that two weeks ago in the House of Commons."

    The prime minister defended himself against Miliband's criticism that the UK had not been bold or quick enough to criticise Israel.

    "We've been very clear that there needs to be an immediate, comprehensive humanitarian ceasefire and that we want this conflict to stop. And we obviously think it's appalling, the loss of life that there's been. From the start, though, we've also made the point that if the Hamas rocket attacks on Israel stop, then that would be probably the fastest way to stop this conflict," he said.

    On Sunday, Miliband said politicians needed to be "speaking out without timidity and truthfully about what is happening" and warned Israel that its actions were counterproductive because every death of an innocent Palestinian could increase support for Hamas.

    He said it was essential for the government to be much clearer that Israel's actions in Gaza are wrong, just like the rocket attacks perpetrated by Hamas.

    "Speaking out is necessary to put the pressure on Israel as, of course, there must also be pressure on Hamas, a terrorist organisation, to end this violence."

    ReplyDelete
  13. Now all a few of these politicians have to do is eliminate the obligatory preamble about being a “great friend of Israel” and actually do something, such as sanctions.

    ReplyDelete
  14. What ever “Justice is”, it is not happening for the Palestinians.

    ReplyDelete