Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : America Under Siege: The End of Innocence -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elmer Flugum who wrote (4872)	9/22/2001 7:10:18 PM
From: chalu2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27666

I'm not an expert on international law, but maybe someone else can answer. If Eichmann had been acquitted, I suppose it would have been horribly unfair for him to be retried again until a more acceptable verdict was reached. But that is what is happening to Sharon: he prevailed in a trial already!!! Why have another one? And what does fairness to Sharon have to do with Eichmann? Did Sharon head the Isreali government in 1961? If the U.S. government did something arguably unfair or irregular in 1961, should unfair and irregular procedures be applied today if someone dislikes the actions of american citizen Grasso in a trial brought against Grasso? I do think it comes down to disliking Jews, because the mental formulation seems to be: Jew A did something years ago, and Jew B today either has to explain it or pay for it. I think the root of this is the deicide accusation which modern antisemites have absorbed either consciously or subconsciously, and this leads them to view all Jews as evil, or all Jews as acting as one collective entity, each one answerable for the acts of all other Jews.