A Cynic Parody: Ecclesiasticus Gadget—Sample

When the sactimonious redeemer pontificates usually, then some deceit beyond incomprehension negotiates an agreement with another greened resurrection. Another biblical scholar earns justified criticism, and Pontius Pilate ponders deceitfully; but, it is that the infrequent emotion upholds the force of mental exertion. God the deceit prophesied Garden of Eden, and Isaiah prophesied eschatology; yet, always the infernal presence prays. Saith Yehouah: Because the daughters of lie are complicated and walk with ponderous necks and consuming eyes, therefore Yehouah will smite with the just enigma or paradox or member of the humblest flock, and the Lord will lay bare a feverish diagnosis. And, not that Peter is immoral exploiting Satan by failing to give full value for the miserly end of evil. Yet, often a gentile, the abject punishment for the wicked, and the ontological shekinah of the Lord are what made the avowal of faith next to the prognosis and the mark of the seven avenging angels!

Herod annoyingly vanishes. When some fatness is ontological, the commitment or purpose caricatures a sealed book inside the false prophetic vision. Saith I: Woe is me for I am underhanded because I am a man of a cup of wine, for mine eyes have seen Mary Magdalene, the Lord of hosts. God’s retribution on Mary Magdalene killing Daniel was morally wrong and incompatible with Jesus. The accidental gesture in the marketplace is transcendental. Pontius Pilate and metaphor shall be the overwhelming clergyman because they are sordid. Never put a pollution or the money lender related to Isaiah over a pustule or ontological angelic favour. Where an unstable allegory gratifyingly has a change of heart about the tattered sad disjuncture, then Mary the Virgin always dies. But, then again, the truth procrastinates often. Judas suffering from the true insanity yet god they called Yehouah should have the choice of being put painlessly to death.

Rise up, the Lord said to Isaiah: Go forth inexorably to meet Mary Jashub at the profound feeling of inferiority in God, and say: Let us go up and steal kudos from it against Lord Jesus to have a bit of evidence and epiphany. Only by going back to the hefty day can we hope to teach the final age. Smugness enslaves: Christians have hardly ever been foreign, and poorly consume and imbibe with the twisted sinner. The people conquer the ostensible master or they hurl vituperation on the avowal of faith. Unless a righteous one cries in shame again, why should anyone imagine Lord Jesus absconds?

So check out gadgets at AskWhy! Google Gadgets

Add to Technorati Favorites

Patriotic Law or Fascist Law?

Notes from the Press

Detention without trial is contrary to human rights. We should return to legal principle. Instead the government uses it as a pretext to make the country lawless. Anyone could be detained indefinitely on utterly anonymous and unchallengeable suspicions. No evidence is needed, and any evidence for the defence need not be disclosed, even when it is known!

Law is our basis of justice, even in the face of terrorism, and is nothing if it is not available to everyone equally. Imprisonment without trial cannot be an equal law. It presupposes that some people deserve to be imprisoned without any evidence being offered for scrutiny. It makes no essential difference whether it is a politician or a judge that serves the detention order.

It is back to the Inquisition when people were imprisoned for life on the say-so of personal enemies, and anyone who could benefit from someone’s imprisonment. Torture and death could not be prevented, once people are imprisoned, as we have seen at Guantanamo and Abu Graib, and our Nazi governments even allow evidence obtained by torture, albeit supposedly outside the country. But then, who will be in a position to object to any evidence obtained by torture, wherever it is obtained.

Policemen have a new duty, to be judges and prosecutors, to practise the Gestapo roles they see coming. They will claim to know who the guilty are, but only they will get to see the evidence, besides certain politicians with a fondness for jackboots. Detention without a trial is a punishment with no crime visible. Anyone subject to it will be thought a terrorist on unchallenged, undisclosed material which may have come from an informant who has reason to lie or who is seeking some benefit in return for information. The intelligence which justified the detention of some men who have spent years in prison is apparently no longer such a source of alarm. They are being released. The only thing that seems to have changed is the government’s mind. Our choice is not fascist measures or nothing. The law has plenty of options, but it needs politicians and policemen willing to use them.

People should be detained only pending a criminal charge. The mysterious and mainly invisible Al Quida trained terrorists should be dealt with the way people like them have always been dealt with, the way they were dealt with in the past. They are kept under surveillance and their properties are raided at a suitable moment, they are arrested, and subject to due process, the evidence being gathered there, and elsewhere, by scientific investigation, by proper legal interrogation of them and their contacts, and from subsequent enquiries. Suspects can be held briefly while these investigations are continuing. After 14 days, they should be charged or released. If lesser infringements have been found, they can be charged with them, and detained legally, and they can be still kept under surveillance if suspicion remains though they are released.

So, when people are suspected of terrorism, they should be investigated thoroughly and, if there is evidence, they should be put on trial. If not, but suspicion remains, they should be kept under surveillance. Instead we have a misconceived suggestion by some decent politicians that all will be well if a judge authorises the house arrest or control order. Judges might not be given all the information. Sugar-coating the unpalatable by suggesting all will be well if a judge makes the order is to forget that it may not feel significantly different if it is Judge Floggem or the Administration who issues an order if you still don’t know the nature of the allegation or the evidence on which it is based.

Blair’s and Bush’s governments have abandoned timeless principles, showing they are intrinsically fascist. The put us back to 1933 in Germany, to apartheid South Africa, and such regimes as Burma where detention without trial, even as “house arrest”, has rightly been decried. Nor does it make any difference that the powers, we are assured, will only be used exceptionally. Nazi’s like Hitler and our own neocons have no trouble in making exceptions into the norm.

Add to Technorati Favorites