Car recommendations

[bandito]

22 hours ago, dexterm said:

Congratulations, the Israeli justice system, in securing a conviction for manslaughter. I personally think the man is a cold blooded psychopath, who thought he could get away with murder in the culture of impunity in the IDF at the time.

 

He has had a fair trial. The prosecution completely demolished his excuses and ever changing story. The man has been found guilty by his military peers.

 

"The judges went through every shred of evidence the defence put through for Azaria, the 20-year-old who maintained throughout the trial that he was innocent as charged.

However, what was said time and time again throughout the 2.5-hour judgment was that Azaria's accounts didn't add up."

read on for his litany of failed excuses..
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/01/netanyahu-calls-pardon-convicted-soldier-azaria-170104190028634.html

 

Israel at the moment has earned itself some brownie points.

 

So my question is: what good in the cause of peaceful relations between Israelis and Palestinians would be served by pardoning this convicted killer? It would blatantly send the wrong message that even if you have been found crystal clear guilty of extra judicial killing, it's OK anyway. Because the killer is an Israeli Jew and the victim merely a Palestinian.

The two communities would see this obvious message of incitement which would lead to more violence.

And so would the rest of the world, undermining any kudos Israel has gained in even bringing this trial and conviction.

 

Why pander to a convicted murderer who deserves not an ounce of sympathy, when it may lead to more violence and deaths and exposure of Israel's hypocrisy?
He did the crime; let him do the time.

 

From purely pragmatic security considerations, what's the point of pardoning him? It would be a travesty of justice, but where Netanyahu is concerned maybe he has a different agenda.

 

You really are something, 2 Palestinians tried to murder Israeli soldiers and you have nothing to say about that but the Israeli who retaliated did the only thing he could do, which he did.

Don't reply because I already know your Palestinian loving answer.

[dexterm]

7 hours ago, Morch said:

 

The calls for pardon are largely immaterial as far as relations between Israelis and Palestinians go. These are already royally messed up. Palestinians (and yourself, obviously) are rather set in their views on this front.

 

Netanyahu does not pander to the convicted soldier, but to what he sees as a popular stance among his voter base. Generally speaking he is once again competing with other, more extreme right wing politicians, and following their lead. His words, in turn, lend a measure of "legitimacy" to the support, and enhancing it as mainstream.

 

The same thing was evident with his support for legislation pertaining to the illegal settlements in the West Bank, and other issues.

Consider:

What good would a pardon do?
What bad would a pardon do?

 

When skulls get crushed and people get killed demonstrating against a pardon granted (if that happens) and Israelis get knifed in anger, tell the loved ones of those affected then that it's "largely immaterial."

 

When confidence in Israel's justice system is undermined, prospects of peace pushed back again (all the conviction brownie points lost), and Israel's reputation trashed even further, tell me then that it's "largely immaterial."

 

A pardon would be incitement to violence..something you are always complaining that Palestinians are guilty of.

Edited January 6, 2017 by dexterm

[dexterm]

57 minutes ago, bandito said:

 

You really are something, 2 Palestinians tried to murder Israeli soldiers and you have nothing to say about that but the Israeli who retaliated did the only thing he could do, which he did.

Don't reply because I already know your Palestinian loving answer.

I believe we discussed at length the rights and wrongs of an army of illegal occupation and those resisting it in the thread relating to the original incident months ago. Try the search engine.

 

>>the Israeli who retaliated did the only thing he could do, which he did.
...I think the military judges disagreed with you. The killer had plenty of choices: the best one he could have made, after 11 minutes of deliberation, for the good of Israel's reputation was, as a medic, to treat the injured Palestinian, not wilfully pump a bullet in his head.

[ilostmypassword]

1 hour ago, bandito said:

 

You really are something, 2 Palestinians tried to murder Israeli soldiers and you have nothing to say about that but the Israeli who retaliated did the only thing he could do, which he did.

Don't reply because I already know your Palestinian loving answer.

Really?  And yet, he was the only one who did it.  No other soldier in that unit did "the only thing he could do." What made this soldier special? 

[Thorgal]

 
Those are your conclusions based upon your personal bias. Israeli law did not define this incident as premeditated murder. Common law  of the UK, Australia, Canada  etc. does not define the incident as  premeditated  murder either. It isn't premeditated under  French or Italian or Spanish law either. Know something else? It isn't under Jordanian or Turkish law either.  Come back and foment when you understand the difference  between premeditated  murder and manslaughter.  
 
Evidence is more than a video recording. How do you expect to be taken seriously when you spew such silliness? It  was impossible to prove that the accused had engaged in deliberate planning sand that this  event wasn't induced by emotion. It was more likely that this was an emotionally driven event for the simple reason that these assailants had been rampaging for weeks stabbing women in the back, running down old people and kids and  then the stabbing of the soldiers. Emotional  dysfunction was a direct result of the ongoing assaults. The accused was of the arab culture. This is how arabs react to events like this. For someone so extremist in his views, I would expect you would empathize with an arab doing what is normal  in his culture.

Elor Azaria tried in vain to prove his innocence because he was indoctrinated by the Israeli Chief Police, Minister of Defense and an religious extremist who spoke all publicly that no Palestinian stabber should leave the scene alive.

He even used in his defense that other similar cases were not investigated or brought to justice.

At least the Palestinian people and Elor Azaria will agree to the fact that more similar killings have been committed by IDF personnel, except that this case was caught on camera...

This case makes that latest verdict is in fact a new norm for the IDF to downplay murder to manslaugther.

Don't wave too early with modern foreign court procedures. Linking this latest verdict to earlier British, French, Dutch, Belgian, Italian and other ancient colonial court systems would be more rational and correct...


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

[Morch]

6 hours ago, dexterm said:

Consider:

What good would a pardon do?
What bad would a pardon do?

 

When skulls get crushed and people get killed demonstrating against a pardon granted (if that happens) and Israelis get knifed in anger, tell the loved ones of those affected then that it's "largely immaterial."

 

When confidence in Israel's justice system is undermined, prospects of peace pushed back again (all the conviction brownie points lost), and Israel's reputation trashed even further, tell me then that it's "largely immaterial."

 

A pardon would be incitement to violence..something you are always complaining that Palestinians are guilty of.

 

Consider: quoting a bit of my post out of context does not make your point nor does it reflect well on your credibility.

The "largely immaterial" reference was directly associated with relations between Israelis and Palestinians (" The calls for pardon are largely immaterial as far as relations between Israelis and Palestinians go."). This was in response to a point raised in your previous post.

 

When skulls get crushed and people get killed demonstrating against a pardon granted (if that happens) and Israelis get knifed in anger, tell the loved ones of those affected then that it's "largely immaterial."

 

To quote another "pearl of wisdom" from a previous post of yours on this topic: "Apart from not wishing to play the game of hypothetical deflections..". A pardon, if it will materialize, will be just another blip on the gloomy scale of Israeli-Palestinian relations. That was my point, it still is - regardless of your hypothetical deflections.

 

The Palestinians have no "confidence in Israel's justice system", and so a hypothetical pardon will not be out of sync with their  existing perceptions. If the references were to international perceptions then yes, but in this case, the "largely immaterial" quote would be out of context.

 

I had nothing positive to say about a possible pardon, quite the opposite. Just don't see it as being of major consequence when it comes to Israeli-Palestinian relations.

[sanemax]

On 1/6/2017 at 9:16 AM, Andaman Al said:

so lets say the New York Police capture a man that 10 minutes earlier killed someone.

 

   Although he wasnt a Police officer, he was Army in a combat situation.

The Police and Army have different jobs

  The Police are there to uphold the law, the Army are there to defend the Country from foreign hostile acts

 

[dexterm]

deleted.

 

 

Edited January 7, 2017 by dexterm

[Morch]

2 minutes ago, sanemax said:

 

   Although he wasnt a Police officer, he was Army in a combat situation.

The Police and Army have different jobs

  The Police are there to uphold the law, the Army are there to defend the Country from foreign hostile acts

 

 

Indeed.

However, much of the ongoing trouble stems from using army units for tasks more fitting for the police. Armies are usually ill fit and ill trained to deal with such situations, Thailand being a good example.

[dexterm]

18 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Consider: quoting a bit of my post out of context does not make your point nor does it reflect well on your credibility.

The "largely immaterial" reference was directly associated with relations between Israelis and Palestinians (" The calls for pardon are largely immaterial as far as relations between Israelis and Palestinians go."). This was in response to a point raised in your previous post.

 

When skulls get crushed and people get killed demonstrating against a pardon granted (if that happens) and Israelis get knifed in anger, tell the loved ones of those affected then that it's "largely immaterial."

 

To quote another "pearl of wisdom" from a previous post of yours on this topic: "Apart from not wishing to play the game of hypothetical deflections..". A pardon, if it will materialize, will be just another blip on the gloomy scale of Israeli-Palestinian relations. That was my point, it still is - regardless of your hypothetical deflections.

 

The Palestinians have no "confidence in Israel's justice system", and so a hypothetical pardon will not be out of sync with their  existing perceptions. If the references were to international perceptions then yes, but in this case, the "largely immaterial" quote would be out of context.

 

I had nothing positive to say about a possible pardon, quite the opposite. Just don't see it as being of major consequence when it comes to Israeli-Palestinian relations.

Pedantic nitpicking.

I quoted your entire post for all members to read and judge for themselves.

Nothing out of context. 

Edited January 7, 2017 by dexterm

[Morch]

1 minute ago, dexterm said:

Pedantic nitpicking. I quoted your entire post for all members to read and judge for themselves. Nothing out of context. 

 

 

 

BS. The bit you quoted in your post was obviously out of context. The only reference it was used was with regard to relations between Israelis and Palestinians getting worse.

[sanemax]

4 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Indeed.

However, much of the ongoing trouble stems from using army units for tasks more fitting for the police. Armies are usually ill fit and ill trained to deal with such situations, Thailand being a good example.

 

   The local policing of the area is done by the Palestinian Police , the Israeli Police do not go there .

   Only the Israeli army go there , with numbers and weaponry .

[dexterm]

4 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

BS. The bit you quoted in your post was obviously out of context. The only reference it was used was with regard to relations between Israelis and Palestinians getting worse.

How can something be obviously out of context when I quoted your entire post?

 

I would suggest that if there is large scale public disorder as a result of a pardon that would indeed constitute "relations between Israelis and Palestinians getting worse." and will be far from "largely immaterial" as far anyone killed or injured as a result.

 

Also, on a macro scale, the damage by Netanyahu's call for a pardon done to Israel's credibility, and confidence in its justice system both with Palestinians and internationally is already huge. When it could be the opposite.

 

[Morch]

1 minute ago, sanemax said:

 

   The local policing of the area is done by the Palestinian Police , the Israeli Police do not go there .

   Only the Israeli army go there , with numbers and weaponry .

 

Err no.

The area in question is out of bounds for Palestinian police, hence the presence of Israeli troops. The Israeli police, by the way, does operate in the West Bank - albeit not in areas defined as under Palestinian police jurisdiction. The reference, anyway, was to most of the relevant tasks carried out by the IDF would be better handled by Israeli police units. There are various reasons why this isn't so - mainly legal and practical.

[Morch]

Just now, dexterm said:

How can something be obviously out of context when I quoted your entire post?

 

I would suggest that if there is large scale public disorder as a result of a pardon that would indeed constitute "relations between Israelis and Palestinians getting worse." and will be far from "largely immaterial" as far anyone killed or injured as a result.

 

Also, on a macro scale, the damage by Netanyahu's call for a pardon done to Israel's credibility, and confidence in its justice system both with Palestinians and internationally is already huge. When it could be the opposite.

 

 

And you whine about "nitpicking"? Really?

 

I'd like to refer you, again, to your own posts re hypothetical deflections. There is a constant state of "public disorder" when it comes to Israeli-Palestinian relations, and no, I don't think the a the hypothetical pardon you harp on would prominently figure, even if it would become a reality.

 

Palestinian perceptions of Israel's justice system are already too far gone for Netanyahu's words to play a big role there. That you assert it possibly having a "huge" effect either way on Palestinian perception and public opinion is more imagination than familiarity with Palestinian opinions. It doesn't help to improve things, but it's main effect is, indeed, with regard to international and Israeli public opinion.

[sanemax]

8 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Err no.

The area in question is out of bounds for Palestinian police, hence the presence of Israeli troops. The Israeli police, by the way, does operate in the West Bank - albeit not in areas defined as under Palestinian police jurisdiction. The reference, anyway, was to most of the relevant tasks carried out by the IDF would be better handled by Israeli police units. There are various reasons why this isn't so - mainly legal and practical.

 

   Did the incident not happen in Hebron, in the West bank , which is controlled by the Palestinian authority ?

   Its such a violent hostile area , stabbings and bombs , that the task of trying to keep the peace is way beyond the duties of the Israeli Police .

  Its a place for 12 army guys with assault riffles, rather than for two Israeli police with walkie talkies and handcuffs

[Morch]

Just now, sanemax said:

 

   Did the incident not happen in Hebron, in the West bank , which is controlled by the Palestinian authority ?

   Its such a violent hostile area , stabbings and bombs , that the task of trying to keep the peace is way beyond the duties of the Israeli Police .

  Its a place for 12 army guys with assault riffles, rather than for two Israeli police with walkie talkies and handcuffs

 

Most of the Palestinian cities are indeed administered and policed by the Palestinians. In Hebron (or rather, al-Khalil), the situation is different, as there's still Israeli presence and about 20% of the city is administered and policed by Israeli forces. It is often a flash point both due to security forces presence and the Israelis living there representing the hardcore element of the religious right wing.

 

Your imagery is off with regard to Israeli police, they do have units which exactly fit the macho description preferred. They are also present, but not hardly enough of them. Letting IDF conscripts handle policing tasks is not a good policy, more to do with necessities.

 

[dexterm]

26 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

And you whine about "nitpicking"? Really?

 

I'd like to refer you, again, to your own posts re hypothetical deflections. There is a constant state of "public disorder" when it comes to Israeli-Palestinian relations, and no, I don't think the a the hypothetical pardon you harp on would prominently figure, even if it would become a reality.

 

Palestinian perceptions of Israel's justice system are already too far gone for Netanyahu's words to play a big role there. That you assert it possibly having a "huge" effect either way on Palestinian perception and public opinion is more imagination than familiarity with Palestinian opinions. It doesn't help to improve things, but it's main effect is, indeed, with regard to international and Israeli public opinion.

I would suggest that in future if you wish to make a specific point , then use specific language, and not vague glib phrases such as "largely immaterial" and "relations between Israelis and Palestinians" 

 

Back to the OP.

 

I am not alone in condemning Netanyahu for encouraging a travesty of justice.

 

"Moreover, Cohen warned that issuing immediate clemency to Azaria would run the risk of delegitimizing Israel’s legal system. “It would just become a game,” he said."
http://www.timesofisrael.com/elor-azarias-trial-is-over-but-the-tribulations-have-only-just-begun/

 

A pardon could also expose Israel to further war crimes accusations.

 

"Though some eventual form of leniency can be expected, an outright pardon with no jail time could be used to show that Israel does not adequately investigate and punish its own. This could open the Jewish state to additional international legal scrutiny, Cohen said."

http://www.timesofisrael.com/elor-azarias-trial-is-over-but-the-tribulations-have-only-just-begun/

[Morch]

3 minutes ago, dexterm said:

I would suggest that in future if you wish to make a specific point , then use specific language, and not vague glib phrases such as "largely immaterial" and "relations between Israelis and Palestinians" 

 

Back to the OP.

 

I am not alone in condemning Netanyahu for encouraging a travesty of justice.

 

"Moreover, Cohen warned that issuing immediate clemency to Azaria would run the risk of delegitimizing Israel’s legal system. “It would just become a game,” he said."
http://www.timesofisrael.com/elor-azarias-trial-is-over-but-the-tribulations-have-only-just-begun/

 

A pardon could also expose Israel to further war crimes accusations.

 

"Though some eventual form of leniency can be expected, an outright pardon with no jail time could be used to show that Israel does not adequately investigate and punish its own. This could open the Jewish state to additional international legal scrutiny, Cohen said."

http://www.timesofisrael.com/elor-azarias-trial-is-over-but-the-tribulations-have-only-just-begun/

 

I was replying to a specific point you raised, deflect away.

And nobody said you are "alone" in condemning Netanyahu for his words. Quite the opposite.

[bandito]

On ‎1‎/‎7‎/‎2017 at 6:40 AM, dexterm said:

I believe we discussed at length the rights and wrongs of an army of illegal occupation and those resisting it in the thread relating to the original incident months ago. Try the search engine.

 

>>the Israeli who retaliated did the only thing he could do, which he did.
...I think the military judges disagreed with you. The killer had plenty of choices: the best one he could have made, after 11 minutes of deliberation, for the good of Israel's reputation was, as a medic, to treat the injured Palestinian, not wilfully pump a bullet in his head.

 

Again! This Palestinian tried to murder an Israeli soldier and got what he deserved, a bullet in the head.

You try to murder a Palestinian soldier or a policeman and see what you get.

You will be tortured to dead, not a bullet in the head.

[dexterm]

1 hour ago, bandito said:

 

Again! This Palestinian tried to murder an Israeli soldier and got what he deserved, a bullet in the head.

You try to murder a Palestinian soldier or a policeman and see what you get.

You will be tortured to dead, not a bullet in the head.

 

Even in the IDF, a soldier, when he has an unarmed incapicitated suspect in custody, is not supposed to act as judge, jury and executioner. Same law and similar military rules of engagement as in most supposedly civilized modern democracies.

 

Depends whether you want to regard Israel as a civilized modern democracy, or as barbaric and lawless.

 

Israel was/is on trial just as much as the convicted killer Azaria.

Edited January 8, 2017 by dexterm

[Andaman Al]

1 hour ago, bandito said:

 

Again! This Palestinian tried to murder an Israeli soldier and got what he deserved, a bullet in the head.

You try to murder a Palestinian soldier or a policeman and see what you get.

You will be tortured to dead, not a bullet in the head.

I see you have a sound grip on the situation out there. Exactly what Palestinian soldiers or policemen do you refer to? What makes a 'civilised' country civilised is that there is law and order with those laws following a humanitarian set of codes (so not biblical!) and that those who break the laws are judged upon by people appointed by the people WE appoint to govern us. Putting a bullet in the head of someone lying wounded/injured on the ground, incapable of further wrong doing displays a society that is not in the least civilised. Remember that society has nuclear weapons which makes the attitudes of the supporters of this soldier something you should be very afraid of.

[Credo]

What a bunch of tosh....civilized society, barbaric, etc., etc..   

 

This was the action of one person who was convicted.   It is not an entire society or country.   

 

Get a grip .   

[stevenl]

7 minutes ago, Credo said:

What a bunch of tosh....civilized society, barbaric, etc., etc..   

 

This was the action of one person who was convicted.   It is not an entire society or country.   

 

Get a grip .   

The comments are more about the society that seeks to set free  somebody convicted of man slaughter by independent judiciary because they don't like the conviction than the actions of the soldier.

[sanemax]

1 hour ago, Andaman Al said:

Putting a bullet in the head of someone lying wounded/injured on the ground, incapable of further wrong doing displays a society that is not in the least civilised. Remember that society has nuclear weapons which makes the attitudes of the supporters of this soldier something you should be very afraid of.

 

   In that case, we should be absolutely petrified of other Countries who also have nuclear weapons .

   Look at the USA , there are regular reports of US Policeman killing unarmed people in the streets and rarely even go to Court , we should be absolotly petrified of the USA, much more so than Israel, going by your own standards

[Andaman Al]

12 minutes ago, sanemax said:

 

   In that case, we should be absolutely petrified of other Countries who also have nuclear weapons .

   Look at the USA , there are regular reports of US Policeman killing unarmed people in the streets and rarely even go to Court , we should be absolotly petrified of the USA, much more so than Israel, going by your own standards

Maybe, but the thread isn't about all the other countries is it. 

[sanemax]

Just now, Andaman Al said:

Maybe, but the thread isn't about all the other countries is it. 

 

  No, but it was you who mentioned Nuclear weapons and so, I was just making comparisons with other Countries who also have NWs

[Andaman Al]

24 minutes ago, Credo said:

What a bunch of tosh....civilized society, barbaric, etc., etc..   

 

This was the action of one person who was convicted.   It is not an entire society or country.   

 

Get a grip .   

Yet the Prime Minister of the nation wants him pardoned? Is that 'one person' representative of a country? I think he is, that is why he holds the office of Prime Minister.

[Morch]

5 hours ago, dexterm said:

 

Even in the IDF, a soldier, when he has an unarmed incapicitated suspect in custody, is not supposed to act as judge, jury and executioner. Same law and similar military rules of engagement as in most supposedly civilized modern democracies.

 

Depends whether you want to regard Israel as a civilized modern democracy, or as barbaric and lawless.

 

Israel was/is on trial just as much as the convicted killer Azaria.

 

Considering your posting history, it is doubtful that the court ruling made much of a difference with regard to your positions. Most countries do not fully conform to the either/or dichotomies you often present.

Edited January 8, 2017 by Morch

[Morch]

3 hours ago, stevenl said:

The comments are more about the society that seeks to set free  somebody convicted of man slaughter by independent judiciary because they don't like the conviction than the actions of the soldier.

 

These comments are no different than the usual stock nonsense brought up whenever anything to do with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict comes up. Most of the posters commenting in this manner single out Israel as if it's supposed to be the paragon of Western ideals. That's not so much an honest perception, but rather a set up for contrived failure.

 

Noticeably, whenever comparisons with other societies (or whatever generalization is used) aren't supportive of the criticism, they are dismissed and rejected as off topic. Not so when negative comparisons are used for further bashing.