Pure Blasphemy

How do we achieve peace in the Middle East?

How do we achieve peace in the Middle East? More specifically, how do we achieve peace in Israel? Alice introduced me to mepeace.org, so I own her a debt of gratitude. Thank you Alice, it would appear that you are right and that there are bunches of people here that are looking for a way to find peace. Although, how do we as Jews and Palestinians forge a peace where everyone is happy? How do we stop a cycle of violence that has been going on since 1917? Almost 90 years we have been fighting over this peace of land. I used to live on a ranch in Texas that was bigger than Israel. 15 people and 10,000 head of cattle used to live and wander on a stretch of Texas, actually a little bigger than Israel is as a whole. Yet nations and some 10 million people are fighting over this piece of land I call Israel. The ranch is worth $20 million; can I buy Israel for the same and call it a day? No, I cannot. It is just not that simple. Can I say hey Jews, or hey, Palestinians I have access to a ranch the same size as Israel come live here? No, I cannot. First, the land cannot support that many people. Second, no one would come. Israel/Palestine is their home. It is where their families are buried. It is where they worship their particular G-d. Israel is the very holiest place for Jews and the 3rd or 4th holiest place for Muslims. It is also the holiest place for Christians. So how do we achieve a peace in the holy land where everyone is happy? I will get back to that question later.

All of us, Jew and Palestinian come to this room for the purpose of trying to find a way to make peace. I think that those of us, here in mepeace.org, have found that peace among ourselves. Everyday someone new comes into the organization. I am number 940. I see there are still factions among us, and some that just post articles about how evil the Jews are, and there are those who post articles on how evil the Palestinians are. There are a bunch of people who cannot see beyond the last bad thing that happened to our family. Except for Alice, I do not think there is a Jew or Palestinian that has not lost a family member, or property, or both because of this conflict. There is enough blame to go around for everyone. We have been fighting over control of this land since a British guy created the Balfour declaration, making a promise to the Jewish people that Israel will be a Jewish Homeland. Then another British guy came along with the White Papers, making a promise to give control of the land to the Arabs living here. The first major fight between us came in 1929, with what the Western history books call the Arab Uprising. Then there was the Jewish uprising, and back and forth and back and forth for the last 90 years. Prior to the British controlling the holy land, the Turks and Ottomans controlled the land. Therefore, the historical claim of the land, on both sides is weak, at best. Neither group of people prior to 1948 had majority control of the land for millennia.
Alice has brought us the story of Abir Aramin, and the work her father, Bassam, is doing with the combatants for peace to unite fighters from both side to try to find peace. The work they are doing is great and should be supported. Alice told me the other day of a video where it shows a Palestinian already in custody was shot dead by the IDF. People ask what Abir did to deserve such treatment by the IDF, to loose her life at 10 years old? She did nothing but walk out of a school. It is very sad that she had to give her life for this conflict. She did not even give it, it was taken from her she had no choice in the matter. Whether is was a bullet, a rubber bullet, a gas canister, or a rock thrown by a Palestinian (all the versions of how Abir died) it does not matter she was 10 years old and should not have died. If it were my daughter, I would be angry. I would demand to know why. I would want justice. Although, on the other side of the coin this happened; Three women were killed and at least 30 more people were injured when a bulldozer driven by a Palestinian resident of east Jerusalem trampled over pedestrians and vehicles and plowed into two buses in downtown Jerusalem at around noon Wednesday. If any of these women were my wife or daughter, I would be angry. I would demand to know why. I would want justice. The answer I would get would be that this was Israel’s fault. Israel forced this man to take a bulldozer and kill your wife. That is not true. This man worked for the city of Jerusalem. In a way, he was the government. Israel did not make him turn his bulldozer onto a crowd of people that were doing nothing more than shopping. This finger pointing can go on all day, and all night for the rest of our lives. We as Jews and Palestinians can sit here and point to what happened yesterday forever but it does not look at what we are going to do to make tomorrow better. It is intellectual dishonesty.

Alice started another thread talking about Apartheid. Jimmy Carter compared Israel to Apartheid South Africa. Apartheid is a very strong word. The main claim to the apartheid conditions in Israel from what I can tell is the checkpoints. Israel does not let Palestinians move freely throughout Israel and in and out of Gaza and the West Bank. To hear it described in the Israeli, and Palestinian media, Israel is the only country in the world that has checkpoints. To get from the ranch I mentioned earlier to where I live now I have to go through 5 checkpoints. Even in the United States, there are checkpoints where the Border Patrol and National Guard are stationed to ensure that the people going through the checkpoints have the proper permits to move through those checkpoints. They take drug dogs and bomb dogs around your vehicle looking for drugs and bombs. You have to tell these troops what you are doing, where you are going and what your purpose is. If you do not have the proper paperwork to be in the US you are arrested and sent back to where you belong. How is this any different than what is happening in Israel? If you do not have the paperwork to leave (Palestinian) or enter (Jewish) Gaza you are not allowed into Gaza. I have friends that used to own property in Gaza. It was taken away from them and they are not allowed to freely travel in Gaza. Is that apartheid on the part of Hamas? I know that one of the readers is going to say well Palestinians cannot get jobs in Israel. To answer that, I say, what about that guy who drove his bulldozer into a group of pedestrians? He had a job. Every country in the world has requirements before you are allowed to work in their country are required to agree to obey the laws of that country and get the required paperwork/permits to work there. When I lived in Turkey, I was required to carry around this little blue book everywhere I went. This blue book showed the authorities that I was in Turkey for work purposes. I am sure that there are other complaints about why Israel is an Apartheid state but I am already at 3 pages single spaced and I am not copying and pasting like some do. To call what is going on in Israel Apartheid is intellectually dishonest.

Like you said John, this thing is already 3 pages long single spaced and you have not answered the question you posed at the top of your babbling. How do we achieve peace in the Middle East? I contend that I have answered the question several times. I guess you missed it. The answer is being intellectually honest with each other. Has both sides of this conflict done some pretty evil things? Yes, they have. Is either side of this free from blame? No they are not. For every innocent Palestinian that has been killed, there is be a Jewish person killed. We can point at these atrocities all day everyday, but where will it take us? Nowhere, we will remain right here fighting and killing each other for another 100 years. Do you think this might have been the plan of the British all along? We need to start with intellectual honesty and move from there. Here is my peace plan
1. Both sides Jewish and Palestinians need to acknowledge the right of the other to exist
2. Both sides need to forgive what happened yesterday and focus on tomorrow
3. Israel need to pull back to the ’67 green line, and the independent State of Palestine created.
4. Jerusalem will be the capital of both nations with the city ruled by a 7 person panel elected from within the city consisting of 2 Jews, 2 Muslims, 2 Christians and 1 person at large (received the most votes) these elections will occur every 2 years.
5. Jerusalem will not be divided and travel throughout will not be restricted.
6. The temple mount will be free access to all.
7. Israel is to release all funds allotted for the Palestinians.
8. Israel is to give complete independence to Palestine without condition.
9. Palestine is to take complete independence without condition.
10. Palestine will be responsible for its own infrastructure. It will receive no aid from Israel unless Israel chooses to give it.
11. Israel will stop treating Palestine like a colony and Palestine will stop act like one.
12. There will be no right of return. If you want to live in Israel or Palestine, you will apply for the proper immigration.
13. If you, personally (not a parent or grandparent), have proof that you owned property in Israel or Palestine and you lost your home due to the conflict or the peace, you will be paid $60,000.00 USD for that property by the country your land was located.

I believe that this is an intellectually honest peace plan. Until Jews and Palestinians alike can be intellectually honest with themselves and each other there will be no peace in the Holy Land

Ethics in Criminal Justice part 2

The concept of justice is almost as elusive as the face of G-d. Justice means something different to each and every person that seeks justice. To some justice is equality and fair treatment. To others it is the equal distribution of wealth, to others still it has a meaning of equal protection under the law. Philosophers have attempted to define justice as long as there have been philosophers on the earth. However and more specifically we are searching for criminal justice. Another term that is illusive and filled with controversy in searching for a definition. To some criminal justice is where the criminals of society receive all the rights, and protections and the victim gets nothing. Others believe that criminal justice is where the state exacts revenge on the offender for the victim. Criminal Justice should be a combination of both of these extremes. As Socrates shared with us that virtue is found within the two extremes. With that in mind criminal justice should be a practice of the state exacting a fair and just revenge against an offender for the victim of a crime with the rights and protections of the law. When a state seeks revenge for an offense it must be sure that the person they are pursuing is the person that committed the violation of law.
Religion has established a moral code of living throughout the history of religion. Within the constraints of religion moral principles have been established through certain universal truths like; there is a Supreme Being, the Supreme Being established a set of behaviors, and morality is obtained through the obedience and or grace of the Supreme Being. Justice is a side affect of these universal truths.
Religion is considered a deontological theory of ethics because it requires us to perform those acts that conform to duties and rights, independent of the consequences. Morally correct acts are those that display the most intrinsic value. Within most religions there are two primary rules that every person must follow:
1) Love G-d above all else
2) Love your neighbor as yourself
If you follow these two rules according to just about every religion you will live a moral life. These rules are slightly different from the basic deontological theory where people are to always treat a person as an end and never as means, and to always treat people as you would like to be treated. In such religion places the greatest of all virtues as faith or belief in G-d.
A life lived in accordance with faith and belief tends to make everything black and white, right or wrong, righteous or evil. This is not a bad trait but it has a tendency to make zealots that wish to destroy everything that does not agree with their particular faith or belief. Through religion or a theocracy in search of criminal justice where we are looking for a fair and just revenge for offenses against society, justice is rarely every found.
Not everyone in the world accepts the existence of a Supreme Being let alone a universal truth to the moral principle established by this “so-called” Supreme Being. When dealing with these people as a religious person you must remember what every spiritual leader of every religion I know of has said, “You are to be a light, a shining example of how life should be lived.” Does this attitude allow for an immoral or amoral life to be lived by many people? Yes, it does. Thomas Aquinas and Aristotle both declared that choice or free will was the main element in living a moral life. You have the right to use the knowledge that you have gained either through study (Aristotle) or Devine revelation (Aquinas) to choose the actions that you take.
In western society the search for criminal justice has to remain in the secular, natural law area of moral life, because criminal justice seeks to protect the laws of the land. Sexual activities which are considered immoral in the religious realm are not necessarily a violation of societal laws. For example a few years ago a movie “Rumor Has It” depicted a story of a man (Kevin Costner) who had had a sexual relationship with a woman (Shirley MacLaine), her daughter (Jennifer Bini Taylor), and grand-daughter (Jennifer Anniston) over a period of 30 years. The man was never married to any of these three women. Within religion this activity would be a great taboo, and in some religious cultures if caught the women would be executed. In western society this activity became the topic of a movie, not illegal, not even frowned upon. In most cases the man would be touted for his sexual prowess.
In conclusion, although religious moral principles may assist the criminal justice professional in being a better person it does not necessarily make him or her a good professional. Criminal Justice is a natural virtue and although can be a result of religious faith or belief it needs to be a universal truth in itself not just a side affect of obedience or grace of the Supreme Being.

Ethics in Criminal Justice

From the beginning of time philosophers, religious/spiritual leaders have all asked the same question. “How should I behave? How should I act? How can a person achieve a good and moral life?” These questions hall have several different answers. If you were to ask the 6.6 billion people on the plant you would get 12 billion different answers on how dose a person live a moral life. Many people look to ethics to define good and bad; right and wrong; righteous and evil, and it is hard to find any single theory that addresses all of these issues without finding contradictions within that theory. This issue becomes even more complicated when you try to apply these questions to a criminal justice professional. How should a Police Officer behave? How should a police officer act? How can a police officer achieve a good and moral life? What makes a good, bad, right, wrong, righteous or evil police office?
At this point it needs to be pointed out that ethics and morals are not the same thing. These terms are used interchangeably, and treated as the same word, but should not. Ethics simply, is the study of right and wrong, good and bad, righteousness and evil. Morals are the practice of living a good life. Living a moral life is implementing your personal and social principles. The issue over ethics and morals gets even more confusing when you put a code of conduct in the mix for criminal justice professionals. A code of conduct is a list of do’s and don’ts for police, probation, parole, and correctional officers
Just in asking these question I am sure every reader in right now considering the ethics and morals of police officers or maybe a specific police officer that the reader has had contact with. Most of you if not all are thinking about “bad cops” because these are the ones that we remember the most. Most of you are saying that cops need to treat everyone fairly, and be consistent with their actions. Let’s talk about being fair. I am speeding down the interstate and a cop pulls me over, he gives me a warning, do I think that is fair? Yes I do. Sobby is speeding down the same road at the same rate of speed, the cop pulls him over and gives him a ticket; is that fair? Sobby thinks so because he got caught speeding. I think so because I did not get a ticket who really cares what the cop did to Sobby. However, does Bouncy think it is fair? No, she does not because Sobby and I committed the same offense but I got off with a warning. It is not fair to Sobby regardless of what everyone thinks. So now that I got you thinking about fairness, does it really have any weight in living a moral and ethical life? Again it would depend upon who you talked to.
Criminal Justice professionals are held to a higher level of ethics than most people. Most people do not even apply their own ethical code of living to these hard working criminal justice professionals. Let me give two over-simplified examples of how this happens. The first being foul language. People, at least people in America use foul language as a matter of everyday dialect as a matter of course, and it would appear that no one really cares about the foul words polluting the air. Let a police officer use foul language and a complaint is filed with the police department of abuse. Am I condoning that police officers should use foul language? No, I am not, police officers must maintain a professional attitude in their interactions with the public but a bank teller is not going to loose their job for cursing at the convenience store. A police officer could. The second is looking into the Hedonistic ethical code of behavior. Hedonism says that a person should pursue the greatest level of pleasure while minimizing pain. If 2 consenting and single adults decide to have sex at work, or even after work no one is going to complain much if it does not bother them specifically. A police officer has sex at work even after work with someone they met during the duty day it is automatically assumed that the non-cop was forced to have sex and the police officer could face up 40 years in prison. The best example of people’s moral outlook on sexual conduct is the President Clinton-Monica Lewinski relationship. The world came out and said that it was no ones business on who President Clinton has sexual relations with. Yet when the Navy had their tail hook scandal the world came out screaming how immoral the Navy was.
The question of which moral principle and ethical theory that applies most to criminal justice officials, and how they should act and react is the focus of my current book. Over the next several chapters we will look into the different ethical theories of Aristotle, Plato, Bentham, Beccaria, Kant, and many others. By the end I hope to discover the perfect ethical theory to support the moral behavior of criminal justice professionals. I hope to also establish a moral principle for the police probation, parole, and the correctional officers to apply to their lives as the keepers of order.