Two tiered justice systems have arisen in the English speaking world

by tonytran2015, Melbourne, Australia.

The judiciary system in USA has been so distorted that two Presidential candidates on opposing sides doing similar things (falsifying financial records of election campaigns) resulted in one is left untouchable while the other has been convicted (conviction subjected to appeals) of a felony! Two former Presidents/Vice-Presidents on similar actions of not returning classified papers after leaving office also got treated totally differently. One current President had been exempted from prosecution because of his questionable mental capacity (Yes, a serving current President with questionable mental capacity 🤣🤣)

Prosecutors said it was possible that Mr. Biden would “present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.” During his interview with Hur, the special counsel wrote that the president was confused about the timeline of events and was unable to ascertain questions about his time as vice president. , https://www.cbsnews.com/news/biden-special-counsel-report-handling-classified-documents/

while a former President were sent FBI agents authorised to use deadly force to collect evidence and has been prosecuted.

Judges who have been politically elected or appointed by politicians now decide on what is “acceptable free speech”. They may mould the meanings of words and of written American constitution to suit their political aim. This has been anticipated by T. Jefferson.

The Constitution is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form they please. Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson (1829). “Memoirs, Correspondence and Private Papers of Thomas Jefferson, Late President of the United States”, p.325, https://www.azquotes.com/quote/555643

To consider judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions is a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy., Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson “Selected letters of Thomas Jefferson”, Lulu.com, https://www.azquotes.com/quote/570633

The breaking down of fairness has arisen from the long propaganda war running since World War 2. Two tiers justice had arisen from that time. It has been gradually fed to a hypnotized American public. Some of the questions on the unfairness in the society are given below.

1/- Why is it acceptable for blacks to discuss and demand restitution for their enslavement and past oppression but not acceptable for Christians to discuss and demand the prevention of another repeat of the killing of their deity by another religion abusing its political power. Why is it acceptable for Jews to hang and burn an effigy of Haman and his ten sons during Purim but not acceptable to promote the ceremonial flogging, hanging and burning the effigy of Judas Iscariot who betrayed Jesus Christ (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burning_of_Judas, https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/3970/how-did-judas-die-how-can-the-stories-in-matthew-and-acts-be-reconciled, https://www.history.com/news/why-judas-betrayed-jesus) because of his race(Polish Judas ritual ‘anti-Semitic’ – Jewish congress, https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/liverpools-burning-judas-custom-kids-23679743, https://www.grunge.com/819572/what-is-the-easter-tradition-of-the-burning-of-judas/)? Next would US be required to pardon and apologize to the executed spies because of their race (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_and_Ethel_Rosenberg)?

2/- Why is it acceptable to only say vaguely that Roman soldiers carried out the order to crucify Jesus Christ but not acceptable to say what was the power structure of that local Roman province of Judaea, where the local Roman governor Pontius Pilate had to accomodate the demands of the local racial/religious leaders? (Attitudes split by region: in texts from the Eastern Roman Empire, Pilate was portrayed as a positive figure…Pilate has frequently been a subject of artistic representation. Medieval art frequently portrays scenes of Pilate and Jesus, often in the scene where he washes his hands of guilt for Jesus’s death., https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontius_Pilate. The Jewish historian Josephus, the philosopher Philo of Alexandria, and the Gospel of Luke all mention incidents of tension and violence between the Jewish population and Pilate’s administration. Many of these incidents involve Pilate acting in ways that offended the religious sensibilities of the Jews., https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontius_Pilate), (Judas then went on his own to the priests of the Temple, the religious authorities at the time, and offered to betray Jesus in exchange for money—30 pieces of silver, as specified in the Gospel of Matthew, https://www.history.com/news/why-judas-betrayed-jesus).

3/- Why is it only acceptable to only say American and Western made weapons that killed Palestinians but not how and who actually used the weapons to kill the Palestinians (https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2024/06/un-experts-condemn-outrageous-disregard-palestinian-civilians-during-israels)?

4/- Why is it acceptable to only condemn only Nazis massacre of civilians in World War 2 (3 Good Men at Nuremberg: The American Attorneys In Pursuit of Genuine Justice) but not to acceptable to condemn the current genocide of Palestinians (https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/06/1150596)? (“The military operation in Nuseirat stands out as one of the most heinous acts in Israel’s destructive assault against the Palestinian people since 7 October, which has killed over 36,000 Palestinians, injured over 80,000 and displaced and starved 2 million people in Gaza, while violence against Palestinians in the West Bank and east Jerusalem also continues unabated,”, https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2024/06/un-experts-condemn-outrageous-disregard-palestinian-civilians-during-israels), (Netanyahu and the Laws of Killing ‘Goyim’), (Shahak further suggests that the Jewish tradition values Jewish life more than Gentile life. He cites Maimonides’ assertion that whereas one who murders a Jew is subject to the death penalty, one who murders a non-Jew is not (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Murder 2:11). According to another leading commentator, indirectly causing the death of a non-Jew is no sin at all (Rabbi Yoel Sirkis, Bayit Hadash, commentary on Bet Yosef, Yoreh Deah 158).), (Classified Docs Reveal Massacres of Palestinians in ’48 – and What Israeli Leaders Knew).

5/- Why is it acceptable to state only vaguely that enslavement were practiced by some European nations but not more specifically that their governments were acting to benefit only some polical/religious/racial pressure groups (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_slavery, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_slave_traders, https://www.history.com/news/transatlantic-slave-trade-facts, https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/jews-and-the-african-slave-trade/)?

6/- Why do properties have to be returned to of people some race if they were looted/robbed/stolen in World War 2 but lands and houses of Palestinans can be demolished/stolen after World War 2 (https://news.un.org/en/story/2019/11/1051711) or archaelogical items looted by illegal occupiers after 1945 don’t have to be returned to descendants of (mostly Arab or Islamic) original owners?

7/- Why is it acceptable to promote the falsehood of “Land without people for people without land” (implying then existing Palestinians were less than human) but is not acceptable to say “From the river to the sea“, ‘From the river to the sea’ – a Palestinian historian explores the meaning and intent of scrutinized slogan?

American people had been hyonotized into accepting a two tiered social justice since after World War 2. Their acceptance was noted by the legal case of Afroyim v. Rusk overruling one of its own precedents, Perez v. Brownell (1958). American people had nurtured that baby snake and it has now grown into a monster giant snake eating their governments as well as the whole of their own nation.