Palestinians Oppose Justice On Principle

[ibrodsky]

Israel has announced that it plans a public trial for Marwan Barghouti rather than a military tribunal. In essence, Israel is acknowledging that a military tribunal would be less fair or at least perceived as less fair.

Thus, Barghouti will have the chance to show the entire world that the evidence against him is not compelling or that the proceedings are unfair.

And what is Barghouti's response to the idea of conducting proceedings in broad daylight for everyone to see?

His lawyers have already announced they will not cooperate. Barghouti is reportedly considering a hunger strike. And PA officials say Israel doesn't have the right to put Barghouti on trial for the murder of Israeli civilians.

To wit, Barghouti and the PA find the idea of due process in an open forum unacceptable. Apparently, that does not meet their high standards: gunning people down in the street, trials that last twenty minutes (or a whole two days when the West is watching), and sentencing convicts to 60 days of free lodging.

[Mediocrates]

He looks like he could go weeks w/o eating. I wish him well. :p

[Philip]

If the Palestininians "oppose justice on principle," why does Israel oppose justice?

[ibrodsky]

Another brilliant contribution, Philip.

But seriously, why don't you address the topic. Palestinian supporters claim that Israel arrests Palestinians without charging them or bringing them to trial. Now Israel has announced plans to formally charge Barghouti and bring him to public trial, and they complain about that.

Please try to explain the contradiction without changing the subject.

Wouldn't you think Barghouti would welcome the chance to have Israel present the evidence against him for all the world to see? Wouldn't you think he would welcome the chance to have his lawyers explain to the world why the charges are baseless and Barghouti is a noble freedom fighter?

Yet this seems to be the last thing he wants to do.

And don't tell us that it will be a kangeroo court. You know that such a trial conducted by Israel will be examined under a microscope and held to the highest standards.

[Vic]

Originally posted by ibrodsky
Thus, Barghouti will have the chance to show the entire world that the evidence against him is not compelling or that the proceedings are unfair. Hmm... but what if the evidence against him is compelling, let alone that the court proceeding would be correct? :p

[elke]

Originally posted by Vic
Hmm... but what if the evidence against him is compelling, let alone that the court proceeding would be correct? :p

Then he will get his 17 years in prison sentense, and a couple of years later will get exchanged for an Israeli prisoner of war :p

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by elke


Then he will get his 17 years in prison sentense, and a couple of years later will get exchanged for an Israeli prisoner of war :p

It's gratifying to see Israel's current leaders recognize that it is moral to kill terrorists before they mass murder Jews.

Now it's time to take the next logical step: death sentences for those convicted of mass murder.

Arafat and Barghouti deserve nothing less than a firing squad.

[Vic]

Originally posted by elke
Then he will get his 17 years in prison sentense, and a couple of years later will get exchanged for an Israeli prisoner of war :p Why should he try to avoid it this much? Does reputation count in the Middle East or is he concerned about his Western image?

[elke]

Originally posted by Vic
Why should he try to avoid it this much? Does reputation count in the Middle East or is he concerned about his Western image?

Good question. IMHO, it's a "macho" thing: "who the hell do they think they are to try ME!" - probably, the show is for domestic consumption.

[Philip]

And is it "justice" to be subjected to laws, rules, and procedures that your people had no hand in crafting; laws, rules, and procedures that, indeed, have been crafted by people who have denied your people even the most basic of human rights? Would it, ibrodsky, have been untoward for Jews in Nazi Germany to have been skeptical about the "justice" meted out by a court of the Nazi government to Jews? Would it have been unseemly, ibrodky, for Armenians in Turkey to be doubtful about the "justice" a Turkish court might have offered them?

Is it, for that matter, shameful that Israel and the United States so strongly resist the authority of international courts, even though Israel and the United States do have a hand in crafting the laws, rules, and procedures of such courts?

Now it's your turn to find some way that my words here indicate that I support cannibalism of babies.


Originally posted by ibrodsky
Another brilliant contribution, Philip.

But seriously, why don't you address the topic. Palestinian supporters claim that Israel arrests Palestinians without charging them or bringing them to trial. Now Israel has announced plans to formally charge Barghouti and bring him to public trial, and they complain about that.

Please try to explain the contradiction without changing the subject.

Wouldn't you think Barghouti would welcome the chance to have Israel present the evidence against him for all the world to see? Wouldn't you think he would welcome the chance to have his lawyers explain to the world why the charges are baseless and Barghouti is a noble freedom fighter?

Yet this seems to be the last thing he wants to do.

And don't tell us that it will be a kangeroo court. You know that such a trial conducted by Israel will be examined under a microscope and held to the highest standards.

[Mediocrates]

What he objects to is the transparency of civil proceedings instead of closed military courts. With closed military courts he can always claim he was railroaded. With open court that's much harder to claim. With an open court he has to follow the rules of the court.

This is a great strategy because a crippling factor for the Israelis has and will always be, secrecy. They take it too far and it always works against them. It seeps into everything they do. They don't communicate well, they block others from access to information and events, they do a poor job of explaining things and it more often than not winds up looking like a cover up.

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by Philip
And is it "justice" to be subjected to laws, rules, and procedures that your people had no hand in crafting; laws, rules, and procedures that, indeed, have been crafted by people who have denied your people even the most basic of human rights? Would it, ibrodsky, have been untoward for Jews in Nazi Germany to have been skeptical about the "justice" meted out by a court of the Nazi government to Jews? Would it have been unseemly, ibrodky, for Armenians in Turkey to be doubtful about the "justice" a Turkish court might have offered them?

Is it, for that matter, shameful that Israel and the United States so strongly resist the authority of international courts, even though Israel and the United States do have a hand in crafting the laws, rules, and procedures of such courts?

Now it's your turn to find some way that my words here indicate that I support cannibalism of babies.

What twisted logic. Jews were the Nazis' victims. We are talking about the perpetrators, Palestinian terrorists.

By your analogy, after WW II Nazi War Criminals could only be tried under laws "their people had a hand in crafting." As if Nazi Germany's laws represented justice...

Palestinian terrorists have been accused by Amnesty International -- a group no one could accuse of being biased in favor of Israel -- of Crimes Against Humanity.

However, there is no valid reason to insist they must be tried by an international court, an Islamic court, or a Palestinian mockery of a court. The only requirement is that it be a fair court -- a court in which due process is used to determine whether the accused, who are granted the right to present their case themselves or through legal representatives, violated just laws.

(I would like to think even you, Philip, would not quibble with a law against randomly killing 20 ordinary people, including children and elderly, that you don't know. But I could be wrong.)

Note that in its report Amnesty International demands that Israel bring Palestinian terrorists to justice. It doesn't demand that Israel turn over the terrorists to some external court. It is understood by the rest of humanity, Philip, that the victims and their survivors have a right to be the ones to bring the perpetrators to justice.

[Philip]

Originally posted by ibrodsky
What twisted logic. Jews were the Nazis' victims. We are talking about the perpetrators, Palestinian terrorists.

And refresh my memory, ibrodsky -- what crimes had the Palestinians committed before they, alone of all people of the earth, were denied the right of self-determination of indiginous populations? Who perpetrated that initial crime, ibrodksy? Is it your position that the Palestinians should have to just bend over and take it, an shame on them for any resistance they offer?


By your analogy, after WW II Nazi War Criminals could only be tried under laws "their people had a hand in crafting." As if Nazi Germany's laws represented justice...

...except that the Nazi Germans, in their situation, were the first to subject people to laws not of their own crafting. The Palestinians, in their situation, are no such thing.


Palestinian terrorists have been accused by Amnesty International -- a group no one could accuse of being biased in favor of Israel -- of Crimes Against Humanity.

Pimp, pimp, pimp. We already know that you hold AI to be in disrepute -- why are you repeating anything they say?


However, there is no valid reason to insist they must be tried by an international court, an Islamic court, or a Palestinian mockery of a court. The only requirement is that it be a fair court -- a court in which due process is used to determine whether the accused, who are granted the right to present their case themselves or through legal representatives, violated just laws.

The real crime regarding Barghouti is that his trial is to be a show trial -- the Israelis will pimp it for years to come as proof of their belief in justice and the rule of law. Meanwhile, 99.99% of Palestinians are held indefinitely without charges or tried in secretive military courts without any real representation, and -- in case anyone has forgotten -- a great many of them will be tortured.


(I would like to think even you, Philip, would not quibble with a law against randomly killing 20 ordinary people, including children and elderly, that you don't know. But I could be wrong.)

And is this same "law" applied to the American pilots who drop bombs in populated areas of Afghanistan, or to the Israeli helicopter pilots who fire missles into urban areas, or to the Israeli artillery crews who fire explosive shells into urban areas, or to the other members of the Israeli military who cut off civilian water lines leading into urban areas of an arid regions? It isn't? Then I guess I would quibble in that a selectively enforced "law" is really just another name for tyranny.


Note that in its report Amnesty International demands that Israel bring Palestinian terrorists to justice. It doesn't demand that Israel turn over the terrorists to some external court. It is understood by the rest of humanity, Philip, that the victims and their survivors have a right to be the ones to bring the perpetrators to justice.

Then that would seem to excuse a lot that the Palestinians who had their land stolen from them by the Israelis have done, wouldn't it? I would like to think that even you, ibrodsky, would not quibble with a standard of law enforcement that permits elevating levels of force to be used against people who resist justice, as the Israelis have.

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by Philip

And refresh my memory, ibrodsky -- what crimes had the Palestinians committed before they, alone of all people of the earth, were denied the right of self-determination of indiginous populations? Who perpetrated that initial crime, ibrodksy? Is it your position that the Palestinians should have to just bend over and take it, an shame on them for any resistance they offer?


Prior to 1967 Palestinian Arabs never demanded the right to self-determination. (Refresh my memory: when did Palestinian Arabs ever demand the right of self-determination to their Jordanian and Egyptian rulers?)

Study the history of the region and you will find Islam is the primary motivation. Pan-Arabism has been a distant second. "Nationalism" never even showed up on the radar screen.



Pimp, pimp, pimp. We already know that you hold AI to be in disrepute -- why are you repeating anything they say?

You seem to know alot about pimping...

Why am I repeating what Amnesty International says? Because here are consistent critics of Israel who have been forced by the brutality and evil of Palestinian terrorism to denounce it for what it is: as a Crime Against Humanity.

A more interesting question is why do you suddenly find Amnesty International wrong? It's not exactly as if intentionally murdering children, mothers, and elderly is defensible.


The real crime regarding Barghouti is that his trial is to be a show trial -- the Israelis will pimp it for years to come as proof of their belief in justice and the rule of law. Meanwhile, 99.99% of Palestinians are held indefinitely without charges or tried in secretive military courts without any real representation, and -- in case anyone has forgotten -- a great many of them will be tortured.

Actually, what scares your hero Barghouti is that the trial will be fair and public. As another poster mentioned, if it were a secret military tribunal he could just denounce it as unfair. But as a public trial, in which he will be confronted with the evidence of his crimes, and have full opportunity to contest that evidence, well...

Your concern about the treatment of this mastermind of mass murder is touching.


And is this same "law" applied to the American pilots who drop bombs in populated areas of Afghanistan, or to the Israeli helicopter pilots who fire missles into urban areas, or to the Israeli artillery crews who fire explosive shells into urban areas, or to the other members of the Israeli military who cut off civilian water lines leading into urban areas of an arid regions? It isn't? Then I guess I would quibble in that a selectively enforced "law" is really just another name for tyranny.

No, it is the justice meted out to terrorists who blow up teenage Israeli girls waiting in line at a disco and massacre 3,000 Americans for the crime of going to work. Did you see the people jumping from the 90th floor Philip? Maybe if Afghanistan and Arafatistan were not such fertile grounds for recruiting, training, and sponsoring mass murder they would not be under attack.


Then that would seem to excuse a lot that the Palestinians who had their land stolen from them by the Israelis have done, wouldn't it? I would like to think that even you, ibrodsky, would not quibble with a standard of law enforcement that permits elevating levels of force to be used against people who resist justice, as the Israelis have.

This is a Big Fat Lie. Israel offered the Palestinians their own state -- something Egypt and Jordan never offered them. But that obviously is not what they really want. And their leaders have even gone on record saying so.

Pimping for Islamist mass murderers Philip?

[Philip]

Originally posted by ibrodsky
Prior to 1967 Palestinian Arabs never demanded the right to self-determination. (Refresh my memory: when did Palestinian Arabs ever demand the right of self-determination to their Jordanian and Egyptian rulers?)

Study the history of the region and you will find Islam is the primary motivation. Pan-Arabism has been a distant second. "Nationalism" never even showed up on the radar screen.

At the time of the barbaric partition of Palestine, the Palestinian Arabs insisted that all of Palestine should be an independent state with its government determined by majority rule.


You seem to know alot about pimping...

Why am I repeating what Amnesty International says? Because here are consistent critics of Israel who have been forced by the brutality and evil of Palestinian terrorism to denounce it for what it is: as a Crime Against Humanity.

A more interesting question is why do you suddenly find Amnesty International wrong? It's not exactly as if intentionally murdering children, mothers, and elderly is defensible..

I don't suddenly find AI wrong. I respect their conclusions. My only disagreement with them is that they essentially work under the assumption that we live in a world where justice can always be accomplished through peace, or, at worst, through a tidy variety of warfare.


Actually, what scares your hero Barghouti is that the trial will be fair and public. As another poster mentioned, if it were a secret military tribunal he could just denounce it as unfair. But as a public trial, in which he will be confronted with the evidence of his crimes, and have full opportunity to contest that evidence, well...

Your concern about the treatment of this mastermind of mass murder is touching.

Barghouti is not my hero. And, if you would read again, you would see that my concern is not for him but rather for the inevitability that his "fair and public" treatment will be used as a smokescreen to obscure the crimes against humanity that virtually all of the other Palestinian prisoners will be and have been subjected to.


No, it is the justice meted out to terrorists who blow up teenage Israeli girls waiting in line at a disco and massacre 3,000 Americans for the crime of going to work. Did you see the people jumping from the 90th floor Philip? Maybe if Afghanistan and Arafatistan were not such fertile grounds for recruiting, training, and sponsoring mass murder they would not be under attack.

Yes, I saw people jumping from the 90th floor, ibrodsky. Three people I knew and liked burned to death that day, ibrodsky. Maybe if the United States did not bankroll Israel so heavily as well as using its permanent Security Council member veto at the UN to help Israel evade justice, I will not have to watch as other people I care about burn to death.


This is a Big Fat Lie. Israel offered the Palestinians their own state -- something Egypt and Jordan never offered them. But that obviously is not what they really want. And their leaders have even gone on record saying so.

Pimping for Islamist mass murderers Philip?

Israel offered the Palestinians a Bantustan on 20% of Palestine, even though around 90% of Palestine had belonged to Palestinians prior to Israel and the UN's theft. Further, that 20% would be deprived of about half of its original water supply.

Who's telling Big Fat Lies, ibrodsky?

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by Philip


At the time of the barbaric partition of Palestine, the Palestinian Arabs insisted that all of Palestine should be an independent state with its government determined by majority rule.

Right: the area in which Jews were the majority would be enveloped in a wider area in order to make Jews appear a minority. Islamists just can't stand the idea of a state within "their" region of the world in which non-Muslims are not treated as second-class citizens and worse...


I don't suddenly find AI wrong. I respect their conclusions. My only disagreement with them is that they essentially work under the assumption that we live in a world where justice can always be accomplished through peace, or, at worst, through a tidy variety of warfare.

Because you support terrorism.


Barghouti is not my hero. And, if you would read again, you would see that my concern is not for him but rather for the inevitability that his "fair and public" treatment will be used as a smokescreen to obscure the crimes against humanity that virtually all of the other Palestinian prisoners will be and have been subjected to.

I see: the way to obtain justice is to oppose just proceedings.

One can only conclude that if all Palestinian detainees were either released or charged and brought to public trial that you and Barghouti would oppose that too.


Yes, I saw people jumping from the 90th floor, ibrodsky. Three people I knew and liked burned to death that day, ibrodsky. Maybe if the United States did not bankroll Israel so heavily as well as using its permanent Security Council member veto at the UN to help Israel evade justice, I will not have to watch as other people I care about burn to death.

How dare you blame their deaths on the US and Israel. They were murdered by your beloved Islamists. You are a thoroughly dishonest and immoral scoundrel.


Who's telling Big Fat Lies, ibrodsky?

Philip is. Your numerous comments justifying terrorism include statements such as that the innocents are at fault; that Jews act like Nazi-era Germans; and that US support for Israel and not Islamists massacred 3,000 Americans.

[elke]

"At the time of the barbaric partition of Palestine, the Palestinian Arabs insisted that all of Palestine should be an independent state with its government determined by majority rule."

Smoking banana peels again, Philip? Name one, just one Arab country where there is an "independent state with its government determined by majority rule"!

"I don't suddenly find AI wrong. I respect their conclusions. My only disagreement with them is that they essentially work under the assumption that we live in a world where justice can always be accomplished through peace, or, at worst, through a tidy variety of warfare."

So, this argument only works for the Palestinians, it doesn't work for anyone else? You are a hypocrite, in full sense of this word.

Israel offered the Palestinians a Bantustan on 20% of Palestine, even though around 90% of Palestine had belonged to Palestinians prior to Israel and the UN's theft. Further, that 20% would be deprived of about half of its original water supply.

20% of Palestine? Forgetting your math again, Philip?