As seductive as certain perspectives of international law may appear to those who disagree with the outcome of the interpretative exercise conducted by this Court in the contempt judgment, sight must not be lost of the proper place of international law, especially in respect of an application for rescission. The approach that my Brother adopts may be apposite in the context of an appeal, where a court is enjoined to consider whether the court a quo erred in its interpretation of the law. Although it should be clear by now, I shall repeat it once more: this is not an appeal, for this Court’s orders are not appealable. I am deeply concerned that seeking to rely on articles of the ICCPR as a basis for rescission constitutes nothing more than sophistry.
Ultra-Orthodox Jews have rioted repeatedly in the past week, burning tires, assaulting policemen and damaging police cars. A 32-year-old ultra-Orthodox man was arrested Thursday morning carrying a homemade explosive device. Under questioning, the man said he wanted to plant the explosive along the parade route, said police spokesman Mickey Rosenfeld.
Marchers carried multicolored balloons and posters of Nelson Mandela and the Dalai Lama. Three men wore matching pink T-shirts, shiny pink hats and carried pink lace umbrellas. On their shirts were written, “The Israeli Gay Party.”
Strange how homophobia can unite old enemies. I assume that the leaders of Hamas would also be rather upset if a gay pride march took place in Gaza. Some of Hamas’ members would probably enthusiastically cheer on the killing of some homosexuals in Jerusalem. I always find it sad that people who have been persecuted and oppressed – like those Orthodox Jews, the Hamas supporters, some Afrikaners – can turn around and condemn and persecute other groups for no reason than that they are different or affront some strange moral code.
Of course, it is also interesting that the news reports did not refer to the Orthodox bomber as a “terrorist”. I could not find any statements about the “war on terror” (what a ridiculous term) or the evil of those who unleash “terror” against gay men and lesbians. Is this, I wonder cynically, because the target was not “innocent”, “straight”, “pure” “Jewish” or “white” people, but only “filthy” and “perverted” homosexuals?
Or does the Western media reserve the term “terrorist” for those who are not “Western”, but “other” – usually black and/or Muslim? Will an Orthodox Jew ever be called a “terrorist” in the Western media? I doubt it.
It reminds one that concepts like “terror” and “terrorist” have been completely hijacked and politicized by George Bush and his cronies and have, in essence, become meaningless slogans used to brand opponents. Not that meaningless, I suppose, because many people still buy into the division between “our” freedom fighters and “their” terrorists.
When the US or Israel governments bomb civilians it is not called terrorism. It is “war” or anti-terror action. Maybe it is time that we stop using this meaningless but very intimidating term altogether.