Friday, July 15, 2011
When the Knesset tries to Defend Israeli Deomcracy from the Subversive Left
Israeli Knesset to defend Israel and Israeli democracy. These are by
and large designed to rein in the Israeli treasonous Left. Among them
are measures to strip anti-Israel subversive leftist NGOs of their tax
exempt status, and requiring full disclosure of sources of funding for
them. Other proposals involve requiring an oath of allegiance for
non-Israeli Arabs granted Israeli citizenship. Still others would
strip Israelis involved in treason and espionage of their citizenship.
Another would strip Israeli universities of funding if the singing of
Hatikva at official ceremonies is banned in them.
To date the only measure that has actually passed is the anti-boycott
law. In some ways, the anti-boycott law is the least important of all
the proposals being discussed, and the only one that is a bit "iffy"
in parts when it comes to civil liberties. For reasons I outlined in
previous postings, the segments of the anti-boycott law that contain
measures against Israeli traitors working for world economic
aggression ("BDS") against Israel should be celebrated. The parts
about steps against those who boycott this or that institution in
Israel for ideological reasons are on a bit less solid ground.
Meanwhile, Bibi Netanyahu has just announced that the only one of the
many measures in the set of proposals against leftist treason that he
supports is the anti-boycott law, the one law that is "iffy" on civil
liberty grounds, but he OPPOSES each and every OTHER proposal in the
set we are discussing, despite the fact that none of the other
proposals contain ANY problems at all from a civil liberties point of
The newest cause celebre of the radical Left and of Israel's judicial
activist judges is to prevent parliamentary review of appointments to
the Israeli Supreme Court and other courts. Bibi by the way is
opposed to that review as well. Judges in Israel are not elected and
are selected by an appointments panel dominated by other judges. To
date, appointments have never required approval of elected
representatives of the people.
The opposition to democracy and freedom of speech in the Israeli law
community transcends court justices. In recent weeks we have seen
repeated rounds of petitioning in favor of leftist causes signed by
numerous professors and other faculty members in the Israeli law
schools. These include a petition against singing Hatikva, signed by
scores of law professors. Law professors have also signed petitions
in favor of allowing the genocidal Hamas Sheikh Salah to speak on
campuses, as well as petitions opposed to allowing a woman army
colonel to teach on campus. They have signed numerous other group
statements in favor of leftist pet causes in large numbers, including
calls for boycotting Ariel University and opposition to all Knesset
initiatives against radical subversive NGOs. Not a single one has
spoken out against SLAPP suit harassment in Israel. Naturally, they
are also now opposed to parliamentary review of appointments of
judges. If the Knesset has a say, then how on earth will we manage to
fill the Israeli bench with leftists?
At the same time it is all but impossible to find examples of law
professors speaking out in favor of freedom of speech for
non-leftists, or in denunciation of infringements of freedom of speech
for non-leftists. I am not aware of a single law professor who spoke
out against the harassments and arrests of rabbis in recent weeks,
when those rabbis dared to exercise freedom of speech. I am not aware
of a single law professor who denounced the suppression of freedom of
speech for Kahanists. I am not aware of a single law professor who
denounced the wave of leftist McCarthyism after the Rabin
assassination, in which freedom of speech for non-leftists was
massively suppressed and non-leftists who exercised that freedom were
denounced and arrested by the government as "inciters." I am not
aware of a single law professor who has spoken out against the
anti-democratic harassment by the deputy Attorney General of settlers
and rightists. I am not aware of a single law professor who denounced
the firing of Prof. Yeruham Leavitt for daring to express his opinions
at Ben Gurion University, this in spite of open public appeals to
those same law professors to take a stand, or of the firing of a high
school teach who criticized the indoctrination into "Rabin's doctrine"
in schools. I am not aware of a single law professor who has spoken
out against SLAPP suit harassment in Israel. I am not aware of a
single law professor who has condemned Neve Gordon and the Nazareth
court for their behavior in the Plaut-Gordon lawsuit, this despite
appeals to these same professors to speak out, while I know of a
handful who have actually endorsed Gordon and the Nazareth court.
In short, Israeli law schools have become home to masses of law
professors and other academics who are either fundamentally
anti-democratic, or are too intimidated and cowardly to take a public
stand in favor of freedom of speech. No doubt part of this is the
desire by so many law professors to be appointed to the bench and the
awareness on which side that bench is buttered.
Meanwhile, Israeli judges and leftists now are campaigning against the
proposal to require parliamentary approval of appointments of judges.
They consider that idea preposterous. I mean, what does the Knesset
think this is here, the United States?
By the way, take a look at pacbi.com, which exposes the "BDS" fascists.
2. There is a long interview in weekend Maariv with Shai Nitzan, the
anti-democratic Deputy Attorney General in Israel who has been
battling against freedom of speech for non-leftists in Israel for
years. Nitzan complains about being vilified by "Kahanists" and other
members of the Israeli "Right." He complains about his own personal
discomfort at being targeted for criticism. One newspaper even called
his home and interviewed his teenage daughter.
I know how emotional you must be at hearing about Nitzan's discomfort.
I am sure he feels discomfort almost as terrible as that of those
rabbis he whisked away and arrested for daring to exercise their
freedom of speech.
3. Kalman Liebskind, one of Israel's best commentators and
unfortunately one not published in English, has an interesting little
item this weekend. It is hardly of cosmic earth-shaking importance.
I just found it amusing.
It seems that last Monday, Yediot Ahronot, the Israeli tabloid often
competing with Haaretz to see which can be the most leftist, ran a
story. It was entitled, "Synagogues in Israel are Being Flooded with
Leaflets Calling for Polygamous Marriages similar to those of King
Liebskind then unravels what the Yediot story was REALLY talking about.
First, it was not about "floods of leaflets" but rather a single
leaflet, named Shabbat Shabbato, placed in the backs of many
synagogues on tables, among other leaflets that discuss the weekly
Torah Portion and other matters of religious interest. It happens to
be one that I like to read. Second, the leaflet did not advocate
polygamy or anything else for that matter. Rather, it contained a
small paid ad, among other paid ads. That ad cited a ruling by Rabbi
Ovadiah Yosef stating that under some very restricted and rare
circumstances a man may take a second wife (such as his first wife
being institutionalized in an asylum and he is childless). It did not
CALL for Israeli men to take multiple wives en masse. The editors of
the leaflet had no comment at all on the subject. They also accept
ads for aluminum siding.
But the "story" about the "scandal" printed in Israel's largest daily
newspaper illustrates the level of journalistic standards at play in
Just for the record, by the way, Biblical Judaism permitted men to
have multiple wives and the only people for whom the number of wives
was even subject in the Talmud to a quantity restriction were kings!
I personally am opposed to polygamy because I can barely keep up with
the chores assigned to me by my ONE wife!