37"You are a king, then!" said Pilate.
      Jesus answered, "You are right in saying I am a king. In fact, for this reason I was born, and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me."

 38"What is truth?" Pilate asked. With this he went out again to the Jews and said, "I find no basis for a charge against him. 39But it is your custom for me to release to you one prisoner at the time of the Passover. Do you want me to release 'the king of the Jews'?"

 40They shouted back, "No, not him! Give us Barabbas!"

                                                                                                    John 18:37-40

FORWARD

This is one of the Biblical passages discussing this 'ad hoc' jury of Jews.

However, the Romans killed The Christ. I mean whether or not any of the Roman Soldiers had 'Jewish Blood' or not, I would not know. And there are tens of thousands of pages that have been written in the last century alone attempting to define the terms 'Jewish' and 'Jewish Blood'.  We do have a pretty good idea that Jesus and all his apostles were Jewish, however.

It was, after all, the Italians who killed Jesus. And of course, they did not do a very good job of it.

A conundrum of the Gospels is that the same story is not told exactly in each book.  But another conundrum that has bothered me for more than half a century is this:

If Jesus was God, is God and ever shall be God; what was HIS risk in this passion play?

That was the position of the Gnostics and most of them were wiped off the face of this planet by good and pious Christians, at least that is the story from good and pious Christians.

Frankly, I feel that this story is just another thread from the Osiris passion story, but there have been thousands of books written on this subject over the last century also.

Were the Jews complicit in the torture and crucifixion of Our Lord & Savior Jesus Christ?

Well, Judas was Jewish and we are told that Judas kissed and told.  Under our laws, Judas was guilty of conspiracy to commit murder I suppose.  And he was also guilty of aiding and abetting I should think.

Peter was Jewish and he certainly was guilty of obstruction of justice by denying any knowledge of The Christ when asked.

Those who accused a group of  Jews of killing Jesus in the olden days, appear to have focused upon one item in four Gospels; a reference to some ad hoc jury residing in the Holy Land two thousand years ago. So, Jesus had a verdict delivered by a jury of his peers. 

Anyway, enough of that. The Roman Catholic Church under John Paul II, through its mysterious communication network with God decided in the 1960's that the Jews were not responsible for The Christ's death.

HELEN THOMAS

Perhaps it is most appropriate to turn to Beck's own judgment, however, at the time of the Thomas blowup. On June 7, when he aired the Thomas sound bite that quickly became so notorious, Beck was unsparing. "The old hatreds are reappearing," he said. "Now, how Helen Thomas has a job today is beyond me ... You know, may I tell you, this Jewish-run media, really, they're bad at running the media, if they are indeed Jewish. You know what I mean? The Zionist masters really suck at being Zionist masters ... if you still have Helen Thomas sitting in the front row after saying go back to Germany, go back to Poland. Play it again, please."

So, Beckerhead has come to the defense of The Jews. How admirable is this stalwart of democracy and protector of the minority groups around the world.

BECKERHEAD

Discussing liberation theology and its portrayal of Jesus, Beck said: "If he was a victim and this theology was true, then Jesus would have come back from the dead and made the Jews pay for what they did."

Beck's recitation of the old Christ-killer canard -- a foundation of anti-Semitic ideology from the Passion Plays of the Middle Ages through the rise of Nazism to Mel Gibson's contemporary spewing -- may or may not represent personal prejudice. As the Fox News star might say, some of his best friends (including his publicist Matthew Hiltzik) happen to be Jewish. 

I mean, some of my best friends are Jewish, says the beckerhead.

Making the Jews pay for what they did. Mmmmmmmmmmm. Interesting take do you not think?

JAY BYBEE

The focus of the article is Bybee's recent Congressional testimony that several of the torture tactics used by the CIA were never approved by the Justice Department -- which means they should fall outside the scope of the Obama DOJ's immunity shield from prosecution -- but it was the last passage that I think is most noteworthy (h/t reader rg):

• Continue reading

[Bybee] said he was "proud of our opinions" at the Office of Legal Counsel, too, calling them "well researched" and "very carefully written."

Still, he said the controversy surrounding his tenure there had been difficult.

"I have regrets because of the notoriety that this has brought me," he said. "It has imposed enormous pressures on me both professionally and personally. It has had an impact on my family. And I regret that, as a result of my government service, that that kind of attention has been visited on me and on my family."

Just think about that.  The so-called "government service" Jay Bybee did caused countless detainees to be subjected to systematized, medieval torture techniques designed to permanently break their mind and spirit.  Innocent men spent years wasting away in a cage, with no due process of any kind, subjected to horrific and life-destroying abuse because of what Bybee authorized.  So frivolous were Bybee's opinions that they were scorned even by subsequent right-wing, Bush appointees such as Jack Goldsmith, and the DOJ's own Office of Professional Responsibility formally renounced and harshly criticized those memos.  For that work, he was rewarded with a life tenured, permanently-well-paying job as a federal appellate judge

All this hubbub surrounds that famous paper that shall be discussed along with our Declaration of Independence and our Constitution for centuries to come. Known as the Bybee Memo, this sacred paper came to the following conclusions:

The Eighth Amendment protections may not apply to those in custody who have not been charged with a crime.

"Torture" per se is kind of a subjective concept to begin with; that is "torture" is really something in the eyes of the beholder, or the holder of the thumb screws so to speak.

The principles of the Geneva Convention may not apply to the Executive Branch of this Nation; treaties sometimes run their course, so to speak.

People who are not citizens may not be protected by our Constitutional Rights anyway; especially if they claim bloodlines anathema to good white Christians.

There are so many wonderful ideas and concepts in the Bybee Memo that there is hardly space enough to cover them all here.

But these sacred words shall forever be with us as long as the Stars & Stripes still fly all over this globe protected by drones and such:

We conclude that, under the current circumstances, necessity or self-defense may justify interrogation methods that might violate Section 2340A.  http://www.tomjoad.org/bybeememo.htm

It all depends upon the circumstances.

How much more eloquent can you be than this; I ask you!!!

And then Judge Bybee says that the CIA and other torturers maybe went to far, further than he intended in this sacred document.

Waterboarding is fine and dandy but 500 uses of this fine enhanced interrogation technique on one person just goes too far. I guess that this great jurist just felt that a few close encounters with death among friends passes his 'current circumstances' test, but more than that number is just going too, too far.

What Judge Bybee seems to be saying is:

I WASH MY HANDS OF ALL OF THIS.

IT'S NOT MY FAULT.

There is a difference between Judge Pontius Pilate and Judge Jay Bybee.

The end.