Comments on: High Court Rejects Migron Deal – Grants Limited Extension

By: Milhouse

Milhouse — Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:13:46 +0000

Yes, Akuperma, I realise what the Jackson case was about. It’s still heartening to hear of a president who put the judiciary in its place. But at least Marshall didn’t try enforcing his decrees; the Israeli court might actually try.

Please tell me exactly what would be fascist about telling the Israeli Supreme Court to stuff its decision. The decision is plainly illegitimate, and it’s far past time that someone put these thugs in their place. Netanyahu doesn’t control 61 votes, but he can control the army and police and order them to leave these people alone. Everyone agrees they’ve done nothing wrong, they’re living on their own property, so by what right are they to be expelled? How does a judicial diktat change that?

By: akuperma

akuperma — Mon, 26 Mar 2012 13:25:31 +0000

#2- You realize the famous case involving Jackson involved his, and the Congress’s, desire to engage in some “ethnic cleansing” (as we call it now – confiscation of private property, forced death marches – the sort of things that are now considered to be crimes against humanity).

Remember, that it only takes 61 members to overrule the Israeli Supreme Court. All the settlers need is a majority of the parliament. There’s no need to turn fascist over it.

By: Milhouse

Milhouse — Mon, 26 Mar 2012 05:55:18 +0000

It’s time for the government to tell the High Court to take its ruling and shove it up its behind. It should announce that it does not recognise the court’s authority to make this decision and refuses to commit the crime of stealing the Migron residents’ homes from them.

Andrew Jackson famously said “John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it”; I’m afraid that if Netanyahu were to say the same thing the court may well try!

By: akuperma

akuperma — Mon, 26 Mar 2012 01:34:25 +0000

You do understand that it only takes 61 votes in the knesset to overrule the Supreme Court.