J.Post May 1: Double Standard in Taser Torture?

Sir, - I must confess that reading on Holocaust Remembrance Day the account of contemporary sadism by a patrol policeman who tortured a suspect with the use of a Taser gun disturbed me beyond revulsion. My vexation was seriously compounded by the fact that the suspect was handcuffed and completely helpless at the time, that the shooting to the back of his head was without any provocation, that it was followed by three more shots after he fell to the ground, then nine more during the drive to the police station as the policeman cursed at him. 

The officer was sentenced to 28 months in prison by the Tel Aviv District Court after being charged with two counts of torturing a helpless person with a Taser gun and on one count of causing serious bodily harm. Judge Zvi Gurfinkel said that the law regarding "use of a taser is the same as for use of a gun." To a layman like myself, it seems that when unprovoked sadism is employed in the torture of a helpless human being, a more appropriate and just sentence demands a much lengthier prison term!

At the end of the same report we are told about the case of Boaz Albert from Yitzhar, Samaria, in which police delivered electric shocks to his chest as he lay helpless on the ground. This action was caught on video and established that Albert was not resisting arrest when the Taser gun was used on him. In Albert's case, however, the Police Investigation Department closed their investigation, finding the Taser use justified under the circumstances. Because Albert was from Yitzhar in Samaria? Is the justice system merely perverted, or corrupt as well?

ZEV CHAMUDOT
Petach Tikva

[Image credit: Wikimedia user Rama]

Releasing Palestinian Terrorists -- Senseless, Revolting, Insensitive

Sir, - The unbearable pressure to make additional gestures to the P.A. that resulted in the decision to release terrorist murderers brought with it a great deal of humiliation and heartbreak to Israelis. Once that inexpedient decision has been made, however, the people of Israel have every right to expect their government to be exacting in their demands that the Palestinians scrupulously observe the reciprocity requirements built into the fabric of that resolution.

This is clearly not happening.

The decision was predicated on the basis that prisoners would be released "according to progress in the talks." The patent absurdity of the government's behavior was revealed on Sunday, when Netanyahu sent a letter to Kerry complaining about Palestinian incitement, and on Monday a ministerial committee prepared a list of the first batch of terrorists to be freed. If indeed there is continued incitement, it is then both senseless and revolting to release these savages before the incitement is brought to an end.

Coinciding with the above, we read about the appalling behavior of Justice Grunis as described in front page headlines , "Grunis leads walkout by justices on terror victims families." This not only reinforces the problematics inherent in the decision but further exacerbates the problem by revealing a most shocking insensitivity and impatience by leading members of our judiciary to the genuine cries of pain and anguish of the families of the terror victims.

ZEV CHAMUDOT

Petach Tikva

[Image credit: Amir Farshad Ebrahimi]

"Critical Mass" Malaise: Zoabi & Israeli Democracy

Sir, - The recent decision by Israel's Attorney General, Yehuda Weinstein, for the State to refuse to defend Zoabi's disqualification , because her pro-terrorist activities have not reached a "critical mass," as well as the unanimous decision of Israel's Supreme Court granting her permission to participate in the forthcoming elections, raises a number of disturbing questions not only about the substance of Israel's democracy, but also about the presence in Israel of a malignant disorder that seriously threatens its security.

The Central Elections Committee, comprised of MKs representing a cross section of Israel's political composition, voted by a substantial majority to bar Haneen Zoabi from running for reelection. They did so after expending much time and effort in deliberating on the merits of the relevant controversial arguments, and concluded that Zoabi by both word and deed clearly acted against the interests of the State of Israel. It must be noted that in contradistinction to the elected MKs who make up the Elections Committee, neither the Attorney General or the members of the Supreme Court earned their positions through an election process. It thus appears to be indisputably evident who has the greater right of claiming to be the true reflection of the will of the people.

Israel's electorate has thus clearly spoken out against Zoabi as well as about their existential fear of the tumor present in the "critical mass" criterion of the Attorney General and the Supreme Court. Who has greater sensitivity in judging when "red lines" are crossed than the citizens of Israel as reflected through their elected officials? The "critical mass" criteria has crippled Israel's responsive behavior toward years of terrorist rockets that have traumatized our southern communities, and it continues to seriously hamper our response towards Iran's call for our annihilation.

It is clearly about time for the government of Israel, its Attorney General and its Supreme Court, to realize that for the people of Israel, the first rocket fired against our civilian population already attains "critical mass!" The same is true about Zoabi's pro-terrorist activities!

Zev Chamudot

Petach Tikva

[Image credit: Flickr user Russell Tribunal on Palestine]

Front Page: Biased Report of High Court Case

Sir, - Yonah Jeremy Bob certainly has the right to express his opinions, even though they may be highly prejudicial. He however has absolutely no right to impose his biases on the front page of the newspaper which should and must be reserved for accurate and honest reporting.

In the article "9 High Court justices hear historic discrimination case" Bob insists on introducing editorially charged words and comments which should rightfully find their place in either opinion columns or letters to the editor, and not under the guise of news reporting. He writes, "The panel was skeptical of the charges, with at least four of the nine justices, including Supreme Court President Asher D. Grunis battering the petitioners." In the continuation of the article Bob again reverts to his biased opinionating when stating that "most of the hearing consisted of Grunis, Supreme Court Deputy President Elyakim Rubinstein, and justices Hanan Melcer and Neal Hendel battering the petitioners."

Does it not seem rather strange that Bob describes how "only Justice Salem Joubran appeared to openly side with the petitioners"?

ZEV CHAMUDOT
Petach Tikva

J.Post October 4: Gross Betrayal

Sir, – The arguments presented by Yonah Jeremy Bob against appealing Ehud Olmert’s corruption verdict (“A parade of errors?,” Rule of Law, September 28) initially appear to be quite compelling.

Bob cites the waste of resources and additional embarrassment of the state prosecution as the underpinnings of his thesis. The cogency of his arguments, based on additional considerations of legal technicalities, seems to be almost convincing.

However, he [goes on to ask a most patently absurd and morally misguided question, that both eclipses the merits and shatters the substance of his position. He asks,] about the wisdom of “toppling a prime minister for ‘breach of public trust’ – the criminal equivalent of jay-walking....”

It must be pointed out that the misdemeanor of the jaywalker affects only the jaywalker, but breach of public trust by an elected official does violence to his office and is a gross betrayal of all those who have elected him. [Conviction by the court for such a betrayal and then sentenced to a rather inappropriate sentence, certainly warrants an appeal by the prosecution who would thereby give the proper weight to the seriousness of the crime.]

ZEV CHAMUDOT 
Petah Tikva

J.Post July 25: Why didn't he serve?

Sir, – In her passionate defense of Itay Tiran (“The golden boy of Israeli theater,” Think About It, July 23), Susan Hattis Rolef states that efforts to delegitimize him are “undemocratic and repulsive.” She acknowledges that these efforts at delegitimization are based on Tiran’s not serving in the IDF together with other political views that found expression in his refusal to perform in Ariel.

It must be noted that Rolef, when mentioning Tiran’s lack of service in the IDF, surprisingly adds in explanation: “apparently on grounds of conscientious objection.” Do we, the readers, not deserve to be clearly told the reasons behind such a critical issue and not be left with assumptions? Rolef further states that Tiran has done “nothing illegal or illegitimate.”

She thus, perhaps unwittingly, gives her imprimatur of legitimacy to those who do not serve in the IDF.

Does she believe that Tiran’s acting skills permit him to avoid service? I personally feel that it is quite consistent with the definition of a democracy for citizens to take offense and express their objection to those who choose to act against the will, sentiments and values held by a majority of the populace.

ZEV CHAMUDOT
Petah Tikva

J.Post July 13: Ehud Olmert Acquitted? Not So Fast.

Sir, – The glee exhibited by supporters of Ehud Olmert (“Olmert acquitted of central corruption charges in two cases,” July 11) may soon be proven to be misplaced. This is in view of the fact that the former prime minister still faces the possibility of a sentence that says his conduct constituted moral turpitude, plus the additional and very formidable charge of bribery in connection with the Holyland complex.

[There are, however, several other disturbing points concerning the recent verdict. Firstly, there is the very surprising statements in The Jerusalem Post in describing its reaction to its being "inundated by angry emails" when Olmert was chosen to be the keynote speaker at its New York conference in April. The angry letters made eminent sense, when considering that Olmert faced five very serious charges of corrupting almost every public office that he held. The charges of accepting large sums without disclosure was not denied by the judges, but were dismissed on the basis that criminal intent was not proven.

Far more perplexing is the very clear implication, by the author of the Post's article, that there was an insidious plot hatched against Olmert, because he "came very close to reaching a peace agreement with the Palestinians during his premiership." This is an evil and malicious statement that should not have been printed. One may be permitted to ask its author, Was the Jerusalem Post in on some plot to grant Olmert dignity and credibility because of political considerations, despite the serious charges that he faced? Did the Post have some 'inside information' that Olmert would not be convicted?]

The saddest part, however, is the assessment by many politicos and media personalities that Olmert’s conviction on breach of public trust is merely a technicality or unpleasant.

It would appear that we have some way to go before we can be described as a “light unto the nations.”

ZEV CHAMUDOT
Petah Tikva

A House Divided: Netanyahu's Threat

Sir, - There is no room for doubt about the fact that both the government as well as the entire people of Israel will very soon be facing major challenges. To deal with these serious issues, Prime Minister Netanyahu insists on the necessity for a "United and disciplined government." In order to establish that discipline he forbade his coalition ministers to vote in favor of legislation that the government opposes, and if they did so he says that he would fire them.

I feel that there are two reasons why the Prime Minister is making a serious mistake! Firstly, a government that must be held together by threats to its most loyal ministers who choose to vote based on conscience is an assault on the fundamental principles of democratic governance, and is already sowing the seeds of its own demise. Second, the proposed legislation has the support of most members of the coalition, who in turn reflect the will of a majority of Israel's most dedicated, idealistic, and loyal citizens. By opposing legislation that would avoid the need to uproot people who acted in good faith and with government support from their homes, will not only traumatize their lives, but will open the flood gates that would threaten the whole Zionist enterprise.

Instead of national unity and a sense of common purpose and destiny, we will be tearing the people apart and opening the same wounds that led to the tragedies of our recent and ancient past.
  
"A house divided against itself cannot stand." Wise words by Abraham Lincoln.

ZEV CHAMUDOT
Petach Tikva

[Image Credit: Itzik Edri]

J.Post June 5: What Comes After?

Sir, – Do I detect a malodorous stench of duplicity? Prime Minister Netanyahu is avidly against legislation that would circumvent the top court’s decision to remove the Ulpana homes and has ordered his coalition members to oppose the bills. However, there seems to be a legitimate solution to this very grievous problem by relocating the 30 homes to land that has already been authorized for housing in the Beit El settlement.

The fact that the land has been authorized for such activity would seem sufficient and certainly not require any further decision by the attorney-general.

So if this can be technically accomplished, why is Netanyahu soliciting a judgment by the attorney-general before he decides to take such action? Could it be that by asking for this unnecessary decision he is signaling that he would not mind a negative response? Such a response would allow him to argue that he earnestly tried for a fair solution but was frustrated by the legal apparatus.

The settlers who have acted in good faith with the encouragement of Israeli governments from the Left and Right are surely entitled to fair and equitable treatment!

ZEV CHAMUDOT
Petah Tikva 

[Image Credit: Wikimedia Commons user יעקב]

Nakba Law: Arab Free Speech in Israel

Sir, - I feel that I am compelled to express a fundamental disagreement to the way your "Nakba and freedom" editorial presents the issues involved in the controversy. By juxtaposing Israel's Nakba Law with the democratic rights of the Arab minority to freedom of expression, grossly distorts the concerns involved.

I believe that the vast majority of Israel's citizens would favorably accept a Nakba day commemoration if the Arabs adopted the bemoaning of their plight based on the concept of "Mipnei chataaynu galinu maiartzenu." However, Israel dare not and must not provide or permit them a platform, for the spread of hatred and perversions of the truth. The issue then is not at all, that of freedom of speech, but rather a declaration of war against all that Israel has achieved since its independence. Good and evil cannot exist in harmony. Historical truths cannot be tolerant of those who attempt to rewrite history based on lies and fiction.

We in Israel unfortunately, have never witnessed, nor in all probability will ever witness, a parallel Arab demonstration upholding the right of Israel to exist in peace with secure borders. Only when that comes about may we consider reevaluating our Nakba Law!

ZEV CHAMUDOT
Petach Tikva

[Image Credit: PSP photos]

J.Post February 27: More on Tal Law

Sir, – The controversy regarding the Tal Law and its invalidation threatens to do violence against the unity of our society that is so vital for our security and survival.

The necessity for all citizens to contribute to their country’s well-being in equal measure should be beyond dispute.

There is a real problem, however, in being able to measure or quantify the contributions of the different segments of our nation. Which carry greater weight? Which are more dangerous? Which are most important in helping forge the type of social structure we all aspire to? While it behooves the Jewish state to recognize the role of Torah learning as a vital element in achieving that desired society, the yeshiva world must at the same time unbegrudgingly recognize the absolute importance of military service.

The hesder program of Torah study combined with army service provides an almost ideal vehicle for serving both God and country. It produces great achievement in Torah studies and some of the finest, idealistic and dedicated army officers.

Would it not be a wonderful solution to some of the dilemmas plaguing our country?

ZEV CHAMUDOT
Petah Tikva 

Aaron Barak and the "Revolutionary" Court

Sir, - Former Minister of Justice, and Tel Aviv University professor of Law, Daniel Friedman, presents us with a most sobering picture of the problematic and questionable 'legal revolution' undergone by the nation's Supreme Court under Chief Justice Aaron Barak.

Friedman's most damning criticism is directed at the court for its intrusion into the sensitive areas of security and defense, when it even became involved in military affairs in the midst of ongoing operations. He also is highly critical of the Supreme Court's domination of judiciary appointments, that invited allegations of not being always based on merit. Recent attempts by Knesset Members to refocus the court's purview, so to make it more reflective of the will of the people, have been met by vehement accusations of their trying to undermine the pillars of democracy. However, based on Friedman's insightful observations it appears that they were attempting to restore democracy to its former pre-revolutionary, rightful place.

ZEV CHAMUDOT
Petach Tikva 

J.Post February 15: Prostitution - Yes, No

Sir, – Prostitution dates back to ancient times and although not encouraged, it was not frowned upon, and most certainly neither the practitioner nor her visitor was stigmatized as a criminal.

Both “Legislation to criminalize prostitution on its way after ministers back bill” (February 13) and “Stopping prostitution” (Editorial, February 15) rightly claim that the practice in our time has attracted a variety of associated negative elements. These are the low-lifes who are engaged in human trafficking and the degradation of women and children, and it is they who should be the objects of vigorous arrest and prosecution. Instead, the proposed legislation misdirects its focus and vehemence against those who contribute least to the sadism, greed and violence that dominate today’s reality.

The sad truth about the legislation is that it has very little chance of successfully accomplishing what it purports to do.

It will, however, succeed in diverting attention from the ugly criminal elements and even permit them to flourish, while the necessary protection against the exploitation and abuse of women will flounder under an avalanche of verbiage.

ZEV CHAMUDOT
Petah Tikva 

Inequality

Sir, - Prof. Yedidia Stern has earned a well-deserved reputation as a vigorous defender and champion of Israeli democracy. However, when confronted by the question that is central to the concern of many, that of the apparent discriminatory implementation of the law, his answer is sorely disappointing.

His response as to why rabbis, and not intellectuals of the left who incite violence, are singled out by the authorities, is almost frivolous.

Instead of insisting on the same rigorous standards of equality before the law for all, he tries to defend the inequality by saying that the rabbis have greater influence.

He thus sullies a fine reputation!

ZEV CHAMUDOT
Petach Tikva

J.Post January 1: Judging the Judges

Sir, - The opening sentence of the Book of Ruth lends itself to two explanations. The first is, 'In the days that the judges judged'; the second is, 'In the days of the judging of the Judges' - i.e., the judges committed more abominations than the rest of the people.

Personally, I lack the professional qualifications to judge the judges. However, I join many of my peers in feeling that the court's decision to open Highway 443 to Palestinians is a morally grotesque one. The original closing of the road was due not to theoretical threats; rather, it was based on the real loss of Israeli lives in terror attacks. We are further told that this decision will prompt an influx of court petitions to open more roads ('Defense Ministry braces for spate of court petitions to open more roads to Palestinians,' December 31).

Judges who ignore imminent danger to human lives for the sake of ideals, however lofty, are not adequately acting in the interests of their fellow citizens.

ZEV CHAMUDOT
Petah Tikva