Talk:Supreme Court of Israel

message: Strange the article does not properly mention the clear presence of masonic symbolism; should be added. I am not referring to the pyramid alone, but also the inverted cross on the parking, the stairs, the fertility symbols, etc. Admitted, the architect did great work, but the massive presence of occult symbolism is frightening.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.218.86.5 (talk) 09:37, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  HAHAHA.... Show me a source for that which is not from some wacko conspiracy theorist website!WacoJacko (talk) 03:59, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Old/misplaced comments 

message: I think there should be a list of presidents of the supreme court included in the article. I will try to acquire one and add it, but if I cannot, it would be great for someone to add this information. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 20:06, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: List of presidents?

message: These links: http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2004/09/297062.shtml and http://www.abidemiracles.com/555701.htm, are full of silly consporatorial content, surely there's better photo galleries available. Don't know what the official policy is but with such ridiculous nonsense and not particularly good photos they should probably be taken out.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by ShaiOne (talk • contribs) 00:36, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  the pictures speak for themselves. "silly consporatorial content" is POV, but the pictures speak for themselves. "but with such ridiculous nonsense and not particularly good photos they should probably be taken out" smacks of political POV on the part of ShaiOne  84.68.47.125 ----------- (talk) 17:57, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

text: Unsourced editorial opinion removed. Viriditas (talk) 20:08, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  All the sources for this so called "zionist conspiracy" come form conspiracy theorist websites, ie they are not valid sources.WacoJacko (talk) 04:02, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Photo Link

message: Wikipedia accepted the picture of the Supreme Court of Israel presumably as being verified before posting it. 
Image:Beit_Mishpat_Elyon_min.JPG|Model of the Israel Supreme Court Building
Image:SupremeCourtIsrael ST 06.jpg|Side view
Do you see the pyramid with a circle at the top left corner of the same picture ?
Viriditas refuses to add this note : "Note the blue pyramid with a circle at the top left corner in the above image."
Reason : Viriditas says it is unverifiable (!).
Mr Viriditas: do you see a pyramid with a circle on Wikipedia's picture of the Supreme Court building of Israel ?
Under wikipedia's Zero-Revert Rule removing my note is against Wikipedia's philosophy. This is not a conspiracy theory but the picture of a building that was verified before.
:There is nothing essentially wrong with the phrase "Note the blue pyramid with a circle at the top left corner in the above image." If you were writing about pyramids in architecture, or simply describing the design of the building one would not need a reliable source simply to describe what is visible. The problem is that you seem to think this motif has some specific significance. I'm sure there are guide books and other sources explaining the meaning or function of this motif. You seem to think that it refers to the "all-seeing eye". Maybe it does, but there's nothing sinister or masonic about that. It dates back to emblem books. Look for literature on the architecture. Paul B (talk) 15:10, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I've added stuff from some architecture critics. My guess is that the pyramid is intended to refer to the all-seeing eye, which would be entirely appropriate for a Supreme Court building, since the symbol refers to God himself as the final judge and overseer of his jurisdiction, the world. Similar motifs have existed in other court buildings. However, in the absence of any sources stating that this was the intended meaning of the motif, I've left descriptions in the words of the critics. Paul B (talk) 16:17, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

text: What on earth does the presence of an "obelisk" have to do with "Zionist control of Wikipedia"? There are obilisks all over the place. I came here because you left a message at the Reliable Sources noticeboard. The "noise" is reliably sourced information about architecture, one of which explicitly mentions the pyramid (or "obelisk" as it has apprently now become). Why would these secret masonic conspirators build giant 'masonic' symbols visible to everyone I wonder? Paul B (talk) 06:39, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sorry I can't resist... Paul B Because sadism and ritualistic taunting of course! Hesperian Nguyen (talk) 19:45, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Do you see the pyramid with a circle or do you deny it? 

message: I don't see anything here on the issue of judicial activism, or Justice Minister Friedmann's attempts to curb the power of the Supreme Court (the two are closely related, and both are hot topics in arguments about the Supreme Court, with those who agree with the Court's politics generally supporting activism and opposing Friedmann's reforms, and those who oppose the court's politics generally opposing judicial activism and supporting the reforms.)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.98.193.182 (talk) 13:56, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another issue that needs discussion 

message: The article should say how the demography of Israel is represented in the membership of the court (how many Ashkenazim, Sephardim, Arabs etc). --Redaktor (talk) 12:48, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: A good idea. Including the Mishpat Ivri seat. On the other hand, all of this is determined by unofficial rules, so would need good sourcing. Debresser (talk) 17:44, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Composition of court 

message: My factual reference to the criticism of the Supreme Court of Israel was removed by User:TimothyBlue, reason given "Weight". My sentence was factual and quoted reliable source: "According to the B'Tselem, when it comes to the rights of Palestinian people under Israel's military control, the Supreme Court of Israel "neither holds effective judicial review nor keeps the security forces in check" and therefore sanctions human rights violations and the occupation itself." My concern is two-fold: this could be revision by Israeli IDF wikipedia farms who remove any reference that is critical of Israel, and/or this was removed in bad faith. The information quoted is from a reliable source, it's neutral, and verifiable. I am asking it to be reinstated. My concern with getting consensus is, how do you gain consensus when you have wiki farms in Israel connected to Israeli government with hundreds of people using different computers and removing any criticism of Israel? This information should not have been removed. As I mentioned above, it's from a reliable source, it's verifiable, and it's objective reality. I am asking for the above information to be re-inserted into the WIkipedia article (if you wish to re-word it, go ahead, but for God sake, don't remove it, it's factual information). 24.87.14.45 (talk) 22:20, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: There are also NPOV and sourcing issues. This has been reverted per WP:ONUS, "The responsibility for achieving consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content." The personal attacks above are unacceptable.  // Timothy :: talk  22:43, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

text: It makes no sense to allow biased editors to remove factual references that are critical of Israel and then demand that the onus is on original user  to "achieve consensus" on including factual content that some other user deems "disputed". How can factual content be disputed? 2+2 = 4, how can you dispute this fact and then place onus on me to achieve consensus with people who may or may not be biased in their "disputing" of facts?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.87.14.45 (talk) 23:18, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism of Court