08 February 2017

’Stalin Also Had to Have His Laws Approved by the Court’

Tova Strasberg-Cohen:  
’Stalin also had to have his laws approved by the court’
[me: and their anti-Semitic court approved murder and the killing of Jews]

"Former High Court Justice Tova Strasberg-Cohen slammed the national camp for wanting to change the Supreme Court, claiming that the Supreme Court's decisions reflect the fact that the majority of the judges' worldviews are leftist liberal."

"In an interview with Kol Israel Radio, Strasberg-Cohen said, "The right is attempting to harm democracy.” [such hubris]

[me: Democracy is "a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections”.  The definition states “A GOVERNMENT".  She belongs  to a Court, and in America a Supreme Court is, "The Supreme Court is the final judge in all cases involving laws of Congress, and the highest law of all — the Constitution. The Supreme Court, however, is far from all-powerful. Its power is limited by the other two branches of government. The President nominates justices to the court.” But in Israel, there is no American style government. One could propose that the Leftists are Democrats, and the Right is Republican. And what is happening in America is that the Republicans are in power and the government is changing; this is what should happen in Israel, but Israel is still tied to the umbilical cord of America, the UN and the EU. Israel must ‘grow up’ and become what it is supposed to be.]

"They want to appoint judges who understand their perspective, they want the judges to be a mini-Knesset, and think the Supreme Court should represent different political streams.”

[me: I don’t see what is wrong with having judges that are NOT LEFTISTS, but normal, honest, and fair in their decision-making. Where does it say that liberalism is the ideal of any government? There has to be a balance!]

"It's true that the justice system is totalitarian. In communist Russia, Stalin had to get every new law approved by the court.

[me: so they “approved” murder and killer of Jews; and by way of association, the court could be said to be communistic in its opinions. let one not forget that Stalin was a mashumad Jew!]

"This [idea of the right's] is an irregular way of doing things which harms democracy and is inappropriate for a democratic country. The Supreme Court is protecting human rights and Israel's democracy. You cannot run a democratic country without allowing criticism of the government."

[me: The definition of Democracy is NOT LEFTIST LIBERAL THINKING. what’s irregular are CONSTANT ONE-SIDED LIBERAL DECISIONS. we are witness to the liberal left-leaning supremes in the US that allowed immorality and indecency over the recent "8 years” to flourish as ‘a right’ under the law. And an "8 years” of trampling on the Constitution. this was not the constitution envisioned by the early “settler-lawmaker-pioneers” of America]

"I understand governments do not like to be criticized. In a democratic country, you cannot have a government which is not criticized by an objective body which checks, objectively, the government's actions."

[me: True, but from a TRUE objective body, NOT A LIBERAL ANTI-JEWISH ANTI-ISRAEL NON-objective deciding body. The Courts are to support the Government NOT SERVE THE UN and the EU.]

"Such a government should never have been elected and should never have been anyone's choice. The government needs to be true to the country's values, founding laws, and its identification as a democratic country," she said..

"Israel's Supreme Court is highly leftist and politicized, according to the Right, and tends to strike down any law which is not to their liking."

:Justices have been chosen, up to now, by a committee where the residing justices have the power to veto any candidate whose views differ from theirs and have done so time and time again, perhaps the most well known instance being that of Hebrew University Professor and Israel Prize Laureate [for legal research] Ruth Gavison.:

[me: the last 8 years’ of America’s governing did nothing but tear down the fabric of a once great nation, founded on the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and the pursuit of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

Source: INNews
Democracy definition: "a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections”

Ruth Gavison: Ruth Gavison is an Israeli Law professor at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Her areas of research include Ethnic Conflict, the Protection of Minorities, Human Rights, Political Theory, Judiciary Law, Religion and Politics, and Israel as a Jewish and democratic state. […] Gavison was nominated for a position on Israel's Supreme Court in 2005 but failed to secure a majority for the appointment.[2] Justice Minister Daniel Friedmann reportedly asserted in 2007 that existing Supreme Court justices opposed her nomination because of their disagreement with her views. Wikipedia

“Jewish”and “Democratic” Can They Co-Exist?

The Gavison-Medan Covenant: Main Points and Principles

Is Democracy Jewish? And some choice quotes herewith:

“[…] that which Thomas Jefferson called “inalienable rights.” Rights do not arise spontaneously out of democracy. On the contrary, in a very vital way, inalienable rights is in direct conflict with democracy, and can run smack up against it: Even if all the people of the land would vote tomorrow that Muslims can no longer read the Koran, or that the mentally retarded do not have a right to live, that vote would have to be declared invalid in the successful democratic states of today. Ironically, for democracy to be viable, it must allow itself to be limited, bridled and trumped by human rights.

“[…] In the second sentence of their declaration, they asserted openly that these “unalienable rights” are endowed upon men “by their Creator.” Who else could determine that, “all men are created equal” other than the One that made them that way? Democracy could work, therefore, because it remained bridled by the law of G‑d.”


“As paradoxical as it may sound, a stable and sustainable world in which every individual has liberty and equality before the law is only possible when we accept the voice of a single Higher Authority, one who cares for this world He has made, and for every creature He has placed within it.”

No comments: