Burqa bungle

A hot topic in Australia going by the number of comments!

But I feel it's important to take each case individually and avoid generalisations. I'm sure most burqa wearing ladies mind their own business and do not try to scam the law or claim victim status.

I am not in favour of banning burqas either. The state should not be able to tell people what to wear (except in extreme circumstances).

The example is about how someone can use accusations of racism against another one to malign his reputation.
This should remind you of an international campaign against the single democracy in the Middle East.
And this time, the example came from a supposedly Islam-practicing idiot, who went as far as bearing false testimony.

That is we learn from both the individual case and the analogical case.

'This should remind you of an international campaign against the single democracy in the Middle East'

But is Israel really a democracy? Some of the laws in the Knesset - such as the Loyalty Oath - are hardly democratic. And neither is the fact that landlords have refused Arab tenants for years. It's not new. (Rabbis say no to housing for Arabs) What's new is the feeling that one can express this without shame and when you lose shame you've reached an extremely dangerous situation.

Human rights groups are concerned about scores of other bills, including one that would allow communities to turn potential residents away due to their ethnic, religious, or socioeconomic background, and another that would punish any citizen - Jewish or Arab - who participates in the global campaign to boycott Israeli products. That's not democratic.

Why are Palestinians subjected to military court but Jews to civilain court? That is not democratic.

But is Israel really a democracy?

One man, one vote... So yes, it is a democracy.

Some of the laws in the Knesset - such as the Loyalty Oath - are hardly democratic.

Is that a law? What does it says and when was it voted. Last time I heard about it, the project (ie not voted at all) was to make all say the Loyalty Oath.
By the way, that is something that is expected from all citizens from all countries, democratic or not. Only the traitors can object to being loyal to one's own country.
Personally, I wouldn't object to reciting a Loyalty Oath to Israel and I expect all Olim to feel the same.

Why are Palestinians subjected to military court but Jews to civilain court?

Because they are not Israeli citizens. Israeli law applies only to Israeli citizens. Palestinans who attack Israelis and live oustide the green line or Jerusalem are not dealt by civilian courts.
The military courts replace the missing PA ones, since there is no justice under PA dictatorships.

So, before we were rudely interrupted by the naughty boy newsmax, we were saying that the Israeli democracy was libelled as that poor policeman was.
It is a significant thing that in both cases, this is done by people who pretend that their religions tells them not to bear false testimony.

The reason, Newsmax, why there are military courts for Palestinians is because the West Bank is under occupation. There is also the scandal of Administrative Detention which is detention with out charge, evidence or trial. Needless to say this only applies to Palestinians.
Despite repeated pleas and offers of more weapons from the US, Israel refuses to stop building settlements in the West bank. This seriously undermines - infact negates - the peace process and keeps the occupied Palestinians in a very precarious position.

Certain countries in S. America have recognised Palestine and this is something that will hopefully gain momentum.
The Palestinians do deserve to be free from occupation.

Yes Suzanna because Argentinian foreign policy is something the rest of the world should seek to emulate.

Free the Malvinas!

Germany had an interesting foreign policy with regards to Jews as well, should we copy that example as well?

The reason, Newsmax, why there are military courts for Palestinians is because the West Bank is under occupation

No, the reason is that there is no justice in the PA dictatorships. Criminals are not condemned but celebrated, there.

I remind all, that according to UN, the two-state solution implies a negotiation to define the borders of the 23rd Muslim state and perhaps also the 24th.
Then and only then, we shall know which part is occupied and which is liberated (ie in Israel).
So the term "occupied territory" implies a partisan prejudice on what will or will not be part of Israel.

Most of the time the racists insist that East Jerusalem, liberated in 1967 from the Jordanian occupier, think that it is 'occupied'. They never complained when it was occupied by Jordan. But double standards are a sure sign of antisemitism.