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 : Formerly About Applied Materials -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cary Salsberg who wrote (68681)	3/14/2003 11:32:57 AM
From: zonder	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 70976

I think you should "see how" Yaron was exonerated before you join a Sharon lynching party Help me understand, then. I only mentioned Yaron's obvious knowledge of the massacre as it progressed to give my opinion that it is very probable that Sharon would also be told. I also said you are free to believe he was not told. We have a long history in the US which supports the conclusion that African-Americans "can never be judged" by a jury of white Americans Really? Is this "long history" the past few years since the a white jury found two LA cops innocent of beating a black guy up, captured on film for all to see? The only reason why you would not see an all-white jury in the trial of a black man is because his lawyer would object to it in the jury selection process. Coming back to the topic at hand, I asked you to explain why you believe the said court in Belgium cannot be trusted to act without prejudice. "They are not Jewish" is not enough, I am afraid. Your posts indicate that you are not expert on the findings of the Commission of Inquiry. Is that a rhetorical question? Yet, you have judged that Sharon "let such a massacre take place" I was talking about Yaron there. Do you doubt he knew a massacre was taking place? Please don't make me post the findings of the Israeli Comission that clearly states he was told about the killings. that Israeli courts "refuse to...take up the matter" This is for both characters. Israeli commission found Sharon responsible and he was forced to resign. Why was he not prosecuted afterwards? Remember, it was the Lebanese Christian army that massacred the Palestinians. Why is Sharon the target? Here is a part of the article I posted the other day. It answers your question: In February 1983, an official Israeli commission of inquiry named Sharon as one of the individuals who "bears personal responsibility" for the massacre. Yet neither Sharon nor any other official has been investigated criminally for this evident atrocity. Because Israel has refused to act, it is only natural for the Sabra and Shatilla victims to seek justice elsewhere. Rather than fuming at Belgium for doing what all countries should do but few dare, Israel should preempt Belgium by completing its own unfinished business. . The writer is special counsel with Human Rights Watch in New York. iht.com