Messianic Jews say they are persecute...

Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel

There are 71944 comments on the Newsday story from Jun 21, 2008, titled Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel. In it, Newsday reports that:

Safety pins and screws are still lodged in 15-year-old Ami Ortiz's body three months after he opened a booby-trapped gift basket sent to his family.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Newsday.

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#52463 May 15, 2013
Voluntarist wrote:
<quoted text>
This is just another case where there is documentary proof and people reject it because "the courts have rejected it".
That doesn't mean it isn't true , that just means some politicians in robes are running interference for the system.
And if you go back to when the amendment was ratified, the wording that was rejected was stunning. The vague wording in the sixteenth amendment seems to have been picked on purpose.
The courts interpret the law. Noone else is tasked with this. Certainly not you.

If you dont recognize the courts, besides from being UnAmerican, you are a certified member of the fringe. Therefore, you have no standing to discuss anything of legal import.
former res

Cheshire, CT

#52464 May 15, 2013
Voluntarist wrote:
<quoted text>
You believe in aggression don't try to pretend that you don't.
I don't have a problem with services provided, it's in the manner that they are paid for.
You shouldn't have to pay foe my kids education no more than I should pay for yours.
There is a gas tax that pays for roads, but your politicians can't seem to stop putting their hands in the cookie jar.
Aggression has its place.

It's not a matter of "believing in" it like a religion. Like love, hate, fear - it's part of the human experience.

Not too many people can afford brain surgery (for example) so we all pay a little bit every month so that the funds are there when we need them. You would call this collectivism. I call it something that seems to work.

You don't mind paying the gas tax? Why or why not?

Use taxes are ok?

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#52465 May 15, 2013
former res wrote:
<quoted text>

Aggression has its place.

It's not a matter of "believing in" it like a religion. Like love, hate, fear - it's part of the human experience.

Not too many people can afford brain surgery (for example) so we all pay a little bit every month so that the funds are there when we need them. You would call this collectivism. I call it something that seems to work.

You don't mind paying the gas tax? Why or why not?

Use taxes are ok?
Illogical and incoherent reply.

Use the little intelligence you have in a more productive way.

OK, Mon?

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#52466 May 15, 2013
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>

The courts interpret the law.
You're talking as if the laws framed by the judiciary are infallible or the last word on truth and justice or that the dispensation of justice is perfect.

Neither are the laws perfect nor is the working of the courts perfect.

So, anyone, even a fool like Voluntarist, can question the loopholes that he spots in the judicial framework.

Your replies are silly.

Be more rational and think deeper.

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#52467 May 15, 2013
former res wrote:
<quoted text>

Sixteenth Amendment ratification arguments have been rejected in every court case where they have been raised and have been identified as legally frivolous.
Legally frivolous?

LOL.

Yes, that's true only within the framework of the existing laws that however leaves much unsaid and that're far from comprehensive, far from being unprejudiced and far from perfect.

There's scope for better interpretation and application of existing laws and there is a need to frame better laws and to do away with redundant and flawed laws and there is also a need to review disputed judicial pronouncements.

Besides, pressure applied on the judiciary from various lobbies with vested interests, questionable appointment of judges to top judicial bodies ought to be reviewed and the independence of the judiciary from the legislature and executive should be ensured.

The justice systems in the world are far from perfect.

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#52468 May 15, 2013
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>

Unlike you, I can differentiate.
Highly questionable claim.

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#52469 May 15, 2013
Oh, yawn.

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#52470 May 15, 2013
former res wrote:
<quoted text>

"Support the warrior, if not the war."
Idiot.

A war cannot be fought in the absence of warriors.

So, by supporting a warrior you're indirectly supporting war.

LOL.

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#52471 May 15, 2013
Voluntarist wrote:
<quoted text>

Politicians can't seem to stop putting their hands in the cookie jar.
Right.

There's too much interference/pressure in the working of the judiciary from powerful lobbies with vested interests who if probed deeply dictate the pace or crack the whip.

As expected the men/women comprising the judiciary are as biased and as stupid as the average Joe though they pretend to present themselves as beacons of truth, intelligence and justice. LOL.

The quality of a man determines the quality of his judgements.

As quality is a relative factor thus there's no last word on the corpus of existing laws and nothing absolute/unquestionable about judicial verdicts.

I've followed many well-publicized legal cases back home and abroad too and in most instances I am not impressed with the quality of the impressionable judges, venality of the lawyers, the half-baked laws and partial or questionable remedies.

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#52472 May 15, 2013
JOEL THUMBS UP wrote:
<quoted text>
You're talking as if the laws framed by the judiciary are infallible or the last word on truth and justice or that the dispensation of justice is perfect.
Neither are the laws perfect nor is the working of the courts perfect.
So, anyone, even a fool like Voluntarist, can question the loopholes that he spots in the judicial framework.
Your replies are silly.
Be more rational and think deeper.
It appears that you are having a problem understanding the word "interpreting", as in "interpreting the laws"

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#52473 May 15, 2013
JOEL THUMBS UP wrote:
<quoted text>
Legally frivolous?
LOL.
Yes, that's true only within the framework of the existing laws that however leaves much unsaid and that're far from comprehensive, far from being unprejudiced and far from perfect.
There's scope for better interpretation and application of existing laws and there is a need to frame better laws and to do away with redundant and flawed laws and there is also a need to review disputed judicial pronouncements.
Besides, pressure applied on the judiciary from various lobbies with vested interests, questionable appointment of judges to top judicial bodies ought to be reviewed and the independence of the judiciary from the legislature and executive should be ensured.
The justice systems in the world are far from perfect.
Then get an American law degree and you can join the foray. Until then, you are just blowing smoke.

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#52474 May 15, 2013
JOEL THUMBS UP wrote:
<quoted text>
Highly questionable claim.
Then question it. Who is stopping you? Just be specific and dont spam us.
Voluntarist

United States

#52475 May 15, 2013
former res wrote:
<quoted text>
By that logic, you probably think abortion is still illegal.
Roe vs Wade was just some guys in robes making stuff up?
Do you know it was the Supreme Court that decided the 2nd Amendment applied to everyone, not just militias (as stated in the Constitution)?:
"Nor is the right involved in this discussion less comprehensive or valuable: "The right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed." The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State.."
No roe v wade is not about ratification if an amendment.
I didn't need the supreme court to tell me that the 2nd is an individual right, it's quite obvious.

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#52476 May 15, 2013
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>

It appears that you are having a problem understanding the word "interpreting", as in "interpreting the laws"
What?

Does your fuddled mind know what it's typing?

If I take on you in a serious manner, I'll blow away all your miseducated and superficial logic in minutes.

Ok, then.
Voluntarist

United States

#52477 May 15, 2013
former res wrote:
<quoted text>
Not to repeat myself, but:
Sixteenth Amendment ratification arguments have been rejected in every court case where they have been raised and have been identified as legally frivolous.[3]
All done.
Next...
And the sky is purple today
Voluntarist

United States

#52478 May 15, 2013
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>
The courts interpret the law. Noone else is tasked with this. Certainly not you.
If you dont recognize the courts, besides from being UnAmerican, you are a certified member of the fringe. Therefore, you have no standing to discuss anything of legal import.
Was not asking for interpreting law, read it again.
Voluntarist

United States

#52479 May 15, 2013
former res wrote:
<quoted text>
Aggression has its place.
It's not a matter of "believing in" it like a religion. Like love, hate, fear - it's part of the human experience.
Not too many people can afford brain surgery (for example) so we all pay a little bit every month so that the funds are there when we need them. You would call this collectivism. I call it something that seems to work.
You don't mind paying the gas tax? Why or why not?
Use taxes are ok?
Of course an individual in a free market can do it better and cheaper than government, no problem with services just have a problem with how they are funded, by the gun.

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#52480 May 15, 2013
JOEL THUMBS UP wrote:
<quoted text>
What?
Does your fuddled mind know what it's typing?
If I take on you in a serious manner, I'll blow away all your miseducated and superficial logic in minutes.
Ok, then.
Oh stop with arrogant BS already.

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#52481 May 15, 2013
Voluntarist wrote:
<quoted text>
Was not asking for interpreting law, read it again.
The question is whose interpretation of the law do we follow? The courts or yours?
Voluntarist

United States

#52482 May 15, 2013
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>
The courts interpret the law. Noone else is tasked with this. Certainly not you.
If you dont recognize the courts, besides from being UnAmerican, you are a certified member of the fringe. Therefore, you have no standing to discuss anything of legal import.
It's not about recognizing the courts, it's about ratification.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Monterey Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News SD-area man gets 14 years for abusing wife (Jan '11) Aug 22 dGo mnaDde lyHo i... 5
News Fear mongering in Spreckels will have been in vain Aug 7 I am sorry 1
Monterey Public Officials VIOLATING FEDERAL LAWS Aug 7 Un agenda 21 and ... 6
News Del Rey Oaks Garden Center grand opening schedu... Jul '15 Kathi Buckley Smith 1
drugs Jul '15 JayJay 2
News Sex offender Tom Pollacci pleads not guilty to ... (Mar '09) Jul '15 martin5 360
City of seaside needs to replace more than PD T... Jul '15 fed up 1
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Monterey Mortgages