skeptic, you might want to read some of the author's other articles before making assunptions, e.g. http://www.mercatornet.com/articles/view/without_a_home_without_a_future/

[Deleted for abuse.]

Mishka Gora,

': 'better that ten guilty escape than that one innocent suffer'. It is one of the most fundamental ideas to our justice system, the reason we presume innocence and insist on proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Israel's practical commitment to this notion puts us all to shame.'

By this quote you are either completely ignorant of both the basis of Israeli Justice and Western Liberal Democracy's Justice or you are dealing in untruths.

In Western Liberal Democracy such a principle and it's practice is applied to everyone ... openly ... equally ... whether citizens or not.

To say the Israeli justice system is committed to these principles and practices,

to quote David f (Posted by david f, Thursday, 20 October 2011 7:42:07 PM, in the comments to David Singer's article
'Sorry Sarko, your position on Palestine is a mistake :) Comments'

makes 'you seem ignorant and prejudiced.' but some doubt as to whether 'you are a contemptible idiot.'

An Event of No Lasting Substance

The recent announcement that Gilad Shalit would be released by Hamas has been met with mixed feelings in Israel. Indeed the hawks in Israeli politics feel like the death knell has sounded. For them the release of over 1,000 Palestinian militants – many with Israeli blood on their hands – is an absolute tragedy. For the families of the victims murdered at the hands of these convicts it’s a day where justice has been turned on its head. The imminent release of Gilad Shalit is something which should be solemnly celebrated. While Hamas militants and their sympathizers will be blasting their machine guns in anticipation of the release of their brethren, Israelis will be hoping that this will not come back to bite them.

But of course it will. Hamas knows now, as did other terrorist organizations in the mid-80s that Israelis place a tremendous value on the life of each and every one of their citizens. That over 1,000 convicted militants – murderers among them – were released to bring back the body of Gilad Shalit is astounding. And it is the body, because Gilad’s mind has certainly been irreparably damaged by more than 5 years of living in the deepest, darkest hell imaginable. Gilad may well return to rapturous applause in Israel. The French, British and Americans will cheer, but Gilad’s mind has long since been broken by Hamas. The terror group who refuse to acknowledge the right of Israel to exist will be emboldened by their bargaining power and will no doubt seek to abduct more Israeli soldiers or civilians in times to come.

This sad day for Israel is a pyrrhic victory if anything. Gilad will be reunited with Noam and Aviva and the hoopla will die down, for now. But the path to peace is peppered with intransigence on both sides. The sad reality is that Israel will never be recognized by the Hamas rulers in Gaza, so there is no basis for negotiation – period.

imajulianutter,

It might be helpful, if you intend to use david f's quote, to deliver it in context. He used the term "contemptible idiot" in reply to your reference to it in the previous post. You wrote:

"Hundreds of great western thinkers over many generations have re-inforced the teachings of Christ as part of the basis of Western justice and society. We have never looked to our musicians for deep thought and sensible philosophy.That you think we would suggests that you hold us as contemptible idiots who hang onto or adopt shallow and/or unworkable ideas."

He replied:
"I doubt you are a contemptible idiot. You seem ignorant and prejudiced. However with an open mind and a willingness to learn both can be corrected."

Graham,

I believe this article is offensive in the extreme to Christians and Liberal Democrats. It seems to me a deliberate troll.

Christians would find objectional the blatandly wrong assertion Judeaism and Christianity share the same tradition.

The Christian belief is that Christ was crucified at the behest of the Jews because he disputed and rejected the Jewish traditions and beliefs. (Whether the belief is true or not is irrelevant.)

I believe having attended a Catholic School the author would be well aware of this divergence in beliefs and traditions.

To suggest Liberal Democracies, which have as part of their a foundations christian traditions of forgiveness and turning the other cheek, have common beliefs and practises as the Israeli system based on the Judean religious beliefs and practises is offensive to liberal democrates adhering to the Liberal Democratic philosophy and practise.

The author, having grown up in a Liberal Democracy and watched it's justice systems, both criminal and civil at work, would be well aware of the differences with a system based only in revenge... on the principle of an eye for an eye.

Could you please assess this article and would you mind explaining your assessment.