Bernie - back from the USSR

The current spate of controversies surrounding the candidacy of Bernie Sanders in the 2020 presidential race includes his trips to various socialist heavens. Including his 1988 visit to Soviet Union.

1988. The perestroika, lead by Mikhail Gorbachev, is at its peak. Aside of old apparatchiks and babushkas, no one believes anymore in the shining future of socialism, managed by the "mind, honor and conscience of our era", the crumbling Communist Party of Soviet Union.

The Berlin wall has one year left to stand. The arms race, imposed by Ronald Reagan, has been irrevocably lost by USSR, its economy collapsing under the burden. Anti-Russian sentiments are rising in the "satellite" socialist countries of the Soviet camp in Eastern Europe. The camp is slowly but surely being teared apart.

The attitude of the Soviet people to the boogeyman of seventy years, the Western capitalism and, especially, to the Big Satan, the most cursed capitalist enemy, has changed drastically. (It will go back to enmity and alienation during Putin's rule, but for now...). The flow of information from the West is unstoppable now, and Soviet people are seeing for the first time the huge gap between their lives in the socialist heaven and these in the West.

And the flow of information in the other direction is unstoppable now too. Hundreds thousands immigrants from USSR are now in the West, telling it all. The previously suppressed stories and books by the dissidents and victims of the regime are published even in the USSR, not to mention the West. The truth is out.

And this is the year when one Bernie Sanders, then Mayor of Burlington, heads with a group of other Burlington notables to Yaroslavl, a soviet city to become a sister city of Burlington. The itinerary of the team also included Moscow and Leningrad*.

Unsurprisingly, their itinerary was managed exactly as it is described in the remark below. Surprisingly, Bernie and his comrades for that trip didn't see through it, and here is the trip report from the horse mouth:



So here are the salient points from the Bernie's speech:

• Openness and warmth of the citizens and officials. He didn't really get to see many real citizens, naive as he is, but yes, the times have changed, as I have described above.
• It (the above warmth) might go back to WW II. Wrong. The huge assistance provided (with a big loss of lives and enormous effort) by Americans and Britons during WWII was one of almost totally forbidden subjects.
• People were delighted by the presence of Ronald Reagan etc. Crap. Soviet people at the time didn't give a flying donut about high level summits like this one. Again - talking with token "citizens" might have confused him.
• Surprised by the degree of self-criticism Soviet officials displayed. Perestroika, man, where have you been?
• Moscow News has articles with self-criticism and debate... same thing again. Bernie has no idea whatsoever about what is going on in that place.
• Soviets estimate that they are behind US about 10 to 15 years in healthcare. In 1988 it is rather 20 to 30 years, but why be a nitpicker? The healthcare was free, of course (better bring some food to your near and dear patient, and yeah, that rare medicine - be a good father/mother/son... and get it via your connections...
• Housing now. How about young newlyweds waiting for years and years for their government-built low quality 50 square meters flat, while folks close to the trough get it without delay?
• Public transportation. Measured by visits to Leningrad, Moscow and Yaroslavl - two major centers of state investment and one major tourist destination. All in all, about 5-7% of total Soviet population, with absolutely unreliable train, bus and airline services that caused headache and toothache to so many millions...
• Moscow Metro now - "the fastest, cleanest and most effective I have seen in my life". "With many works of art, beautiful chandeliers etc..." this one made me choke up. The Moscow metro, built on the bodies of hundreds of Stalin's prisoners, far from all of them being criminal ones. And beautiful chandeliers...
• Culture palaces for young people with cultural programs - where grooming of "pioneers" and "komsomolets's" with party-approved cultural programs and impoverished libraries where only party-approved books were available. Both under tight control of that three-letter outfit, needless to say.
• And to crown it all: "They want to go back to some early vision of their revolution". Ye gods - when the last thing the vast majority of Soviet people wanted to hear at the time was more inane revolutionary slogans and revolutionary ideas...

To summarize, there are only two possible explanations to the above nightmarish inanity: either the man is dumb as two planks or he really lacks elementary information.

It is not for nothing that I have mentioned above the flow of information from USSR to the West and the waves of immigrants who came over to US, ready to tell it all. So we have here a man who dedicated himself to politics and spent quite a few years in social-related activities, leadership etc. And this man was heading a delegation to another country without trying to learn the basic A to Z about it? When this information was so easily obtainable? Hard to believe, ain't it?

Well, it is not my job to explain the inexplicable. It is rather my duty to point out that this man, with a bachelor of arts degree in political science (that he himself describes "as a mediocre college student because the classroom was "boring and irrelevant", while the community was more important to his education") - that this man, who freely and so convincingly displays his ignorance in most vital matters, is vying for the presidency of United States.

Heed the message, dear Americans.


(*) Not surprisingly, Moscow, Leningrad and Yaroslavl were usually included in a standard itinerary of Western tourists. The sightseeing offered and the tourists' timetables were orchestrated to the minute details and, of course, coordinated with the KGB and its well-trained watchers. Even during the years of perestroika. The masters of Potemkin village creation made their lives easier by channeling the tourists through the same well-mapped treks...

Nachman Shai's open letter to Benjamin Netanyahu

Update: in the first version of the post the letter was wrongly assumed to be by Benny Begin. Apologies.
(With thanks to Vittaly).

Nachman Shai with an message for Bibi. Apologies for bugs in translation, if encountered.

***

Without flaming, out of appreciation and clear vision.
(Published by Ynet)

My acquaintance with Bibi, I call him Bibi, is long-standing. I first met him 43 years ago, after his brother Yoni's death in Entebbe. Yoni was my classmate at Rehavia Gymnasium in Jerusalem. A few years earlier, immediately after the Yom Kippur War, I interviewed him as commander of the Golan Heights Armored Battalion. It was the only journalistic interview Yoni had ever given.

In 1976, Bibi asked to speak to me and presented his vision for the war on terror. He was 27 years old and already brilliant at the time. He has developed an international counter-terrorism project and recruited people from all over the world to assist. The project exposed him both in Israel and in the US. Later, the late Moshe Arens chose him to serve as his deputy at the Washington Embassy. At the time, I served as the embassy spokesperson and couldn't help but admire his personal and policy capabilities.

Once again, we worked together in the First Gulf War - he in political PR and I in the military, and later in the Madrid Conference and beyond. Of course, I also followed him during my years in the Knesset, and occasionally we even talked and exchanged opinions.

I value and respect him even today, so I refuse to join the chorus that now rolled him in the tar in the outskirts of the city. But last Thursday I listened to the things he said on television - true, with great excitement, a stir of emotion and lack of sense - and realized that he could go no further.

It's over, Bibi.

The Israeli prime minister cannot burn the house on its residents. No, you can't. Only yesterday and maybe tomorrow you will send Air Force pilots or other IDF fighters to protect this home. A home is not just land, roads, buildings. The home is the set of values ​​and norms we all share.

You, the Prime Minister of Israel, have to respect our democracy, which has been serving you for 13 years. This democracy rests on the foundations of law and order and morality. Without them, it would not be democracy and will collapse. So many countries have already seen it. It might happen to us too. The distance is short.

No, this is not a "coup" and it is not an attempt to oust illegally a prime minister. The law keeping and enforcement system has come to a wise and measured conclusion that the Israeli prime minister should be prosecuted. Even now my hands are shaking at the sound of those words. This system may be faulty. But once a decision has been made, after many hesitations and varied considerations, including the timing, the way is now open to you to fight for your innocence. Not through the microphone and booth, which you so well use, but in court. There and only there.

I wish you got out of the indictments. It's hard for me to watch another convicted prime minister go to jail, but the decision is not mine or yours, and at this moment no longer public. Only the justice system, which you have complimented at the beginning of your speech, then roasted it on fire. The court will hear you, Bibi, with an open heart and soul. Go there, cope, and if there was nothing, there would be nothing.

***

To be on the safe side, follows the original in Hebrew.

Read more »

So, how about it now, Bibi?

In this recording Bibi, at the best of his glorious indignation and superb powers of speechifying, explains why Olmert, suspected of corruption, must resign. A part of his tirade reads:

A prime minister neck deep in investigations does not have a moral and public mandate to make fateful decisions for the State of Israel. There is a fear, I must say, and it is real and not unfounded, that he will make his decisions for his personal interest of political survival, not for the national interest.

To remind you all, at the time Olmert resigned even before the charges against him were finalized to indictment.

MK Miki Zohar* and will of the people

The above mentioned is one of the chief brownnosers of our illustrious and legally haunted PM. It is not news, besides he is only one of many. However, his recent musings on the ongoing legal battle between Bibi and the justice system left a good part of the nation flabbergasted.

“The attorney general and the legal system will have to consider the election results, because the people are the sovereign,” Likud MK Miki Zohar** told Kan public radio. “The people determine the social norms.”

“Those who are responsible for Netanyahu’s legal fate are only the Israeli nation and Israeli citizens,” Zohar said. “If they come to the ballot station in a few months and again tell the attorney general, law enforcement systems, the left and the media that they want Netanyahu as their prime minister — with all due respect to everyone, he will remain their prime minister.”

I am not sure I have to comment on this too extensively. Just, as a side notion: this revolutionary idea, if expanded and fully implemented, will save uncounted billions that are going into support and maintenance of the legal system. No obscure and complicated law books, no judges, thus no lawyers, only the people who determine the social norms and thus the award and/or punishment for each of their fellow citizens.

Come to think of it, there is no need for the law enforcement too in this new world. Just volunteer citizen committees, equipped with rope, tar and feathers, as in the good old days.

Wow. Just wow.

On the other hand, that brief Knesset bio blurb says that the ideas man also chairs the Lobby for the Promotion of Sports and an Athletic Lifestyle. Should the Hon. MK focus solely on sport in the future?

Vote.

(*) The one on the right in this picture. The hand is, apparently, obscuring his tongue to hide its color.

(**) This comes from a man with apparent knowledge of the law:

Makhlouf Miki Zohar ... holds a 'Bachelor of Laws' (LLB) degree from the College of Law and Business in Ramat-Gan and a Master of Laws (LLM) degree from Bar-Ilan University.

US Defense Department or Radio Hezbollah?

I am totally unsure that I understand where US international politics is going. If CNN is to be believed (and no MSM source is to be believed these days), the shameful act of withdrawal from Syria occurred just so:

Erdogan was explaining all the problems with the US presence in Iraq and Syria and was irritating Trump, according to a senior administration official who received a detailed readout of the phone call between both presidents.
"OK, it's all yours. We are done," Trump said, according to the source.

Kurds, who played a major role in the defeat of Daesh, sacrificing thousands lives in the process, are left to the predictable fate in the hands of the Turkish dictator. That because Trump was irritated?

And there is another, relatively new quirk in the US mandarins' behavior. After each Israeli strike in Syria (real or imagined), some "anonymous sources in the US Defense Department" sees it as her/his/... duty to produce a statement of this kind:

US Defense Department official claims alleged Israeli attack occurred shortly after several senior Hezbollah officials boarded a plane bound for Tehran, according to a report by Newsweek.

Sources in the US Defense Department claim that several senior Hezbollah officials had been hit in an alleged Israeli airstrike near Damascus, according to a report Wednesday by Newsweek.

If there is an agreement between IDF and US Defense Department, engaging the "anonymous sources" there as our spokesperson?

Confused and discombobulated here...

Miri Regev and degenerate art

She wasn't any good as IDF Spokeswoman either.

History provides many examples of political leaders’ efforts to censor art and restrict public funding of culture in the name of promoting nationalist ideals and protecting communities from adverse artistic influence. The Jewish people have not come out on the winning side of such efforts.

There isn't much I can add to the above quote from the article by Scott Mortman, the Israeli Chair of the America Israel Cultural Foundation.

When you assign the ministry of culture to a person proud of not ever reading Chekhov and the ministry of justice to a person whose main goal is to limit the power of the High Court of Justice etc etc... the outlook is poor.

Gaza - as a bolt out of the blue?

Whatever you say about our politicians, their ability to play dumb*, coupled with their ability to point an accusing finger at somebody else are still up there with the best.

Recently, while desperately searching a way out of the Gaza stand-off, some of our ministers happened to find what looked to them a suitable scapegoat: out Chief of Staff, Lt. Gen. Gadi Eisenkot. The soldier's soldier was suddenly blamed in the situation:

...one unnamed minister was quoted as saying, “In the final analysis, Eisenkot’s policy on responding [to Gaza violence] has failed and allowed things to deteriorate.”

Amazing, but it is not all:

Ministers used the meeting to lambast the IDF chief for allowing an Israeli “loss of sovereignty” on the border, and what they called the military’s insufficient action against the balloon launchers.

The sheer gall and stupidity of these attacks is mind-boggling. Blaming your gun for not jumping up and shooting your enemy? The very same people who are responsible for IDF and should decide, after interminable months of border violence, what to do, are accusing IDF in inaction?

To the honor of our illustrious minister of defense, whom I never suspected of overflow of any honor at all, he stood up in defense (no pun intended) of CoS.

It’s ridiculous that cabinet members are blaming the chief of staff for a policy they laid out. This crosses a red line, and it hurts national security.

Liberman's response has probably been strong enough, because lately, due to the general impotence and lack of ideas, our ministers have found another, even better, scapegoat.

According to the lightning theory that emerged Thursday, the projectiles were armed, ready and aimed at Beersheba and Gush Dan in case of an outbreak of violence with Israel when lightning struck in the area and sent them on their way.

Five bolts of lightning struck in the Gaza area around between 3:10 and 3:20 a.m. that morning, according to maps produced by Dr. Barry Lynn of the Weather-It-Is company and the Israel Total Lightning Network, which tracks lightning strikes.

Four of them touched down out at sea, but one struck within the Gaza Strip.

So now it is not Hamas and even not the so handy Gadi Eizenkot. It is He who sends the bolts out of the blue. To save the ministers' faces, which are already so covered by the proverbial eggs that it is difficult to see them.

What can I say? If it looks like bullshit, if it sounds like bullshit, if it smells like bullshit - it is probably a politician...

(*) Or being dumb, choose your preferred option.

Corbyn's pearls - for own collection

Really, one can get overdosed on so much crap, so this will be for my own archives. You don't have to... you know.

There seems to be a great deal of pressure on the BBC from the Israeli government and the Israeli embassy, and they are very assertive towards all journalists and to the BBC itself - they challenge every single thing on reporting the whole time.

"I think there is a bias towards saying that Israel is a democracy in the Middle East, that Israel has a right to exist, that Israel has its security concerns.

So, saying that we have a right to exist or, for that matter, to have own security concerns, is biased. What would be the unbiased version, I haste to inquire?

Oh boy, what a worm...

MK David Bitan, esq. - and this is how it rolls in our Knesset

In an radio interview several topics were discussed with the illustrious member of Knesset David Bitan, until last year* the coalition chair in the Knesset.

One of the topics was the newly hatched Nationality Bill that caused (deservedly or not) an eruption of responses from all shades of the Israeli and international political spectrum. One of the factions that really feel injured by the law is the Druze population. Openly and traditionally supportive of the Jewish state, Druze community in Israel is fiercely loyal to the state and its sons serve in IDF and die together with us, protecting the country. Lack of the clause ensuring equality of all non-Jewish communities in the new law, even if that equality is protected by other existing laws, caused anger and protests that are easy to understand. And here is what he had to say on the subject (partial translation only):

(B. - David Bitan, I - the intervieiwer).

• B. I am sorry that they [Druze MKs!] were allowed [sic!] to vote against the bill, and now [they appealed to] High Court of Justice... this is something unacceptable. 
• I. This wouldn't have gone this way during your time [as a coalition chair]?
• B. No, it wouldn't have.
• I. What you would have done?
• B. There are all kinds of thing that it's possible to do...
• I. Sanctions are to be applied to them?
• ...
• I. Can't you understand them a little bit?
• B. No, I can't understand them, because in general we are guarding the rights of the Druze in a special way. We have a covenant of blood with them, we... they receive all they need. There is no reason that a group... a minority of 120,000 will receive special rights in the Nationality bill. It is not all these millions, it is only 120,000 people. Druze are all in all only 120 - 160 thousands... they get a preferential treatment... 
• I. So they should be thankful, you say... 
• B. I didn't say that, I say that it doesn't go as they want... Druze too have to respect the majority, it is not like the majority should respect the Druze...
• I. [changing the subject]

And no, just in case you have asked: he is not the only one on that level of mental prowess, lucidity etc. This is how it rolls - but I have already mentioned it.

Too bad.

(*) Quit that post due to police investigation of alleged bribery. But still remains a member of Knesset. Unfortunately.

Bibi and his cigars: I am sure he didn't inhale!

Of course, only a millennial wouldn't recognize the reference to inhalation. Besides, one doesn't usually inhale cigars' smoke anyway. It is a bit different with champagne, though.

To preempt the obvious questioning: no, I am not happy with the charges of bribery as described in a very general way in this article:

The gifts the Netanyahus received—such as cigars, champagne and jewelry—were given over the course of about a decade, reaching a total of about NIS 1 million—NIS 750,000 in gifts from Milchan and about NIS 250,000 from Packer, according to the police.

And:

According to the police, Prime Minister Netanyahu and Yedioth Ahronoth owner and publish Arnon Mozes discussed mutual assistance to promote one another's interests during private meetings that began in 2009 and lasted for several years.

Nope, I am not happy about it, unless in my own general way of cynical suspicion toward any and all politicos out there. The words of Peter the Great that could be roughly translated as "Every superintendent should be hanged after three years of service without investigation and without trial" ring now as true to me as at any other time.

The main reason I am unhappy about is that the political scene in our smallish place is devoid of people who look half able to take over that thorny and sleepless job. There are a lot of mice and no men*. Not that Bibi is... but I am diverting from the main subject.

At the end of the day, no matter what his other transgressions are, Bibi confesses to taking the above mentioned cigars, champagne etc. And no matter what will the final decision of Attorney General be (we'll have to wait for it quite a long time, several months at least) - the law forbids a person in Bibi's position to receive gifts of any kind - even a movie ticket.

No matter whether the whole caboodle will come to trial or, moreover, the trial will end in a conviction: this behavior stinks to high heaven. As does the wall-to-wall support Bibi receives from the coalition parties.

This, to remind you, in a country where one PM (Itzchak Rabin) resigned because a foreign account in his name, containing about $10,000, was discovered.

And another PM (Menachem Begin), who, aside of other stuff, is remembered for this:

His family lived in a one bedroom flat on Rosenbaum street in Tel Aviv the entire time he was in the opposition, a period of almost three decades.

And his three rooms flat in Jerusalem...

Just go, Bibi.

(*) "Men" in this case applies (but not limited) to cisgendered men and women as well as to all 70+ known genders.

Kaya Netanyahu, Bibi and our barking lawmakers

A short time ago I, together with a lot of other Israelis, experienced a jaw-dropping event. A bunch of Knesset members were recalled from their vacation to vote for a new law that will... yes, that will allow Kaya Netanyahu, the First Dog, to stay at home after biting somebody (again).

We'll never know whether it was an isolated event of ridiculous ass-licking by some eager Likud mandarins or a trial balloon, meant to check the limits of that sanity envelope that is supposed (oh well...) to rule the behavior of our lawmakers. In any case, I have written then:

... I can already see a bill granting immunity to the incumbent PM being pushed through the Knesset by Bibi's faithful, whose number is legion. And I sincerely hope this attempt will fail.

And here we are, less than three months after that post was written, and the law is already in the works:

The proposed legislation to shield the prime minister from police investigations would constitute an amendment to Israel’s Basic Law: The Government. The new bill stipulates that criminal investigations against a sitting prime minister cannot be conducted for corruption, fraud or breach of trust.

MK David Amsalem, who proposed the bill, and Prime Minister Netanyahu

And yes, we know that the idea for the law in question isn't exactly new and stems from the so called "French law". The French law protects the incumbent president of France from investigations - while in the office. At least from investigations not directly related to his duties as a president. Why should we adopt a bad law here, remains unclear, though.

As you will be able to see in the linked Ynet article, not all coalition members are happy with the idea. Some MKs realize that it is not the usual left vs. right dogfight and are firmly (for now) against the law. Several amendments that allow a few investigations of Bibi, that are looming, to start, were added to mollify the objectors.

The opposition to the law, outside of the solid ranks of Likud, is quite strong. Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit is a staunch critic of the disastrous idea.

"A complete bar on the ability to investigate a serving prime minister, such as MK Amsalem proposes, fails to strike a balance between the various public interests and ignores the special mechanism currently stipulated in the Basic Law: The Government," Mandelblit writes, and warns that "the result to which the bill leads is extremely severe and unacceptable – there will be no power to investigate a serving prime minister, even if clear, specific evidence has come to light that gives rise to a suspicion of a serious act of bribery, for example, or other serious offences."

A scathing rebuke to the incessant mad lawmaking was voiced by no one but a loyal Likud member (in the past), president Rivlin.

Rivlin accused political leaders of weakening state institutions by attacking them for narrow political gain. “From the ‘political’ professional bureaucracy to the ‘political’ state comptroller, the ‘political’ Supreme Court ‘politicians,’ the ‘political’ security forces, and even the IDF, our Israel Defense Forces are ‘political;’ the whole country and its institutions – politics,” he said.

This doesn't seem to deter the boiling mad solons of a few ruling parties.

“There are judges in Jerusalem who have forgotten that there is also a government in Jerusalem,” said Bennett

Well, maybe it's time to create a new ministry, something in the line of "Netanyahu family laws Ltd"?

With Kaya Netanyahu as a minister?

Afterword: yes, and read this too.

There are still judges in Jerusalem. For how long?

It is not news that our illustrious Minister of Justice, Ayelet Shaked, is fighting the HCJ (High Court of Justice) for several years. It is not news that she and several other "patriotic" MKs are hell bent to reduce the authority of HCJ, especially its power to strike down the laws HCJ considers unconstitutional*.

The latest flare-up is related to the treatment of illegal aliens.

Minister of Justice Ayelet Shaked attacked Tuesday the High Court of Justice's (HCJ) Monday decision—in which it ruled that illegal aliens refusing to be transferred to a third African country cannot be detained indefinitely—insisting that the principle of Zionsim will not be subordinated to 'a universalistic system of individual rights.'

Of course, as always with Ms Shaked, her unhappiness with this decision caused another eruption of bile, directed at HCJ. Not at the border guards that let the immigrants in, not at the (undefined) authorities that bussed the immigrants to the poor neighborhoods of Tel Aviv and left them there, mostly to cope for themselves. Nope, it is HCJ that is supposed to bear the brunt of her unhappiness, in her superbly demagogic crescendo.

In a speech before the Israel Bar Association conference in Tel Aviv, Shaked addressed the hot-button issue of demographics and the Zionist goal of preserving a Jewish majority in Israel at the expense of human rights for asylum seekers, genuine or otherwise.

Despite the vitriolic protests of some in the crowds, Shaked promised that "Zionism will not continue bowing its head before a universalistic system of individual rights."

"Israel of 2017 is a country that's constitutionally made up of crisscrossing individual rights, without its Basic Laws referencing Israel being the nation state of the Jewish people," Shaked lamented.

"Zionism has become a blind spot for the judiciary," she continued. "Questions concerning it have become irrelevant. National challenges are a judicial blind spot, not at all to be considered in today's climate, and certainly not to be ruled in favor of when faced with individual rights issues.

And of course, it is HCJ that stands in the way of Ms Shaked's dreams.

Shaked said the Israeli judicial branch operates as if in a "dream," adopting a "utopian and universal worldview sanctifying individual rights to an extreme degree and ceasing taking part in the struggle for Israel's very existence."

At this point, she called for an overhaul of the system that enables individual rights to displace the importance of national identity.

I have already dedicated two posts to this particular firebrand's and her colleagues' incessant attacks on HCJ. There is hardly anything to add but a short history lesson. To start with - Menachem Begin's view of democracy:

Begin’s deep commitment to democracy was also expressed in his belief that there is no democracy without the rule of law. In this matter as well, Justice Zamir attested that Begin served as an outstanding role model, who practiced what he preached. This was reflected, for example, in Begin’s respect for the independence of the Prosecutor-General’s Office and for the need to comply with judicial rulings, as evidenced by his saying “there are judges in Jerusalem.” A memorable example is the case of a High Court ruling declaring the Elon Moreh settlement to be illegal. Justice Zamir recalled that at the tempestuous cabinet session that followed the ruling, several ministers demanded that the Court’s decision be ignored. Begin, however, silenced them, declaring that “the courts in Israel have made their decision and the government is obligated to honor and carry out whatever they decided.”

There is more in that document, but let's see a more powerful example.

In 1952, on the eve of the reparations affair that year, the head of the Herut movement, our teacher and leader MK Menachem Begin, put in his writings ("a view of life" as his favorite expression) his view of the three elements of a national liberation movement: freedom of the individual, improvement [Tikun] of the society and the superiority of the law. ...

"The supremacy of the law will be expressed in the fact that an independent panel of judges will be granted not only the authority to determine, in the case of a complaint, the legality or justness of an administrative order or regulation issued by the executive branch, but also the power to adjudicate in the event of a complaint, whether the laws, enacted by the house of representatives (created, as we have seen, under a considerable influence of the government) are compatible with the Basic Law or the civil rights set forth in the law. "The right to a legal complaint in relation to the laws must be granted to every citizen if he considers himself directly or indirectly harmed by them.

Quite clear, isn't it? As well as timeless, but not for Ms Shaked and her bunch of supporters.

As well as being a critical issue that might be a first attempt to seriously undermine our democracy, the situation is a serious test for our (frequently spineless) prime minister. Does he understand the gravity of the attacks on HCJ? Is he aware of the dangers inherent in these attacks? Will he stand up to populism?

We shall see.

(*) To avoid nitpicking: there is no constitution in Israel, like in some other democracies, and the term "unconstititional" here means contradicting the basic laws of the state.

Is our Knesset barking? Kaya Netanyahu bill, Alan Dershowitz etc

There are lots of law proposals being in process of lively debate, modification and sometimes quiet death on someone's shelf. Some of them outlandish, some reasonable and some (like the hotly debated recently law on state assistance to disabled people) vital for thousands of citizens, eagerly awaiting tangible results.

Meanwhile, the first family which, for reasons* of its own, decided to add to its roster a first dog two years ago, has experienced a few domestic upheavals due to the said canine's tendency to bite all and sundry.

The dog, Bibi assured his constituents, was “gentle and of a good disposition.”

Kaya herself must not have gotten the memo: five months later, during a reception at the Prime Minister’s Residence, she bit a member of Knesset who leaned in to pet her. Three months after that, she struck again, biting one of Netanyahu’s secret service agents. Eventually, she also bit the prime minister himself.

Since Kaya is the first dog, I don't even try to argue that this behavior is unseemly or should be in any way restricted. The first dog sees, the first dog bites. As it should be. There is a small catch, however: if a dog bites somebody inside the Israeli borders, the dog should be quarantined for a period of time (ten days) required to ensure it (the dog) isn't rabid.

Which might be good enough for a regular dog, but not for the first one, apparently. Bibi wants Kaya to stay at home, with its loving family. So, to accomplish this, the Knesset members were yanked out of richly deserved summer break. To vote on an amendment to the law which... you guessed the rest. Yep, Kaya the serial biter will stay at home, thanks to our suddenly proactive lawmakers and the appropriate legal beagles. So much for lawmaking and lawmakers.

Kaya, meanwhile, got more exposure in our media, paired with another member of the first family, Yair Netanyahu, Bibi's son.

According to a Facebook post by Talila Amitai, one of the Netanyahu family's neighbors, Yair Netanyahu took the family dog Kaiya for a walk in one of the local dog parks but failed to pick up her waste. Amitai wrote that when she pointed this out to the Israeli leader's son, who was accompanied by a bodyguard at the time, he stuck up his middle finger towards her in response.

There are different versions of the event (or non-event), but as far as Kaya concerned, it is a moot point. She poops, the rest is history, with its different versions and interpretations of thereof.

But what is the connection between the canine poop and the illustrious legal man, mentioned in the headline, one of the more eloquent supporters of Israel and all around brilliant person?

I happened to hear a summary of an interview Alan Dershowitz granted to Israeli radio and his views on the ongoing investigations into alleged Netanyahu's financial and other misdeeds frankly surprised me. To start with, he somehow concluded that Israeli police, on its own, persecutes Bibi. Of course, the usual culprit that motivates the police is, according to Dershowitz, the leftist media. But curiously, he has decided that police pursues our poor Bibi using its free will and free initiative.

Not to mention the inherent absurdity of the idea of our police being politically motivated, professor Dershowitz obviously doesn't know much about the local police, its authority and its betters, which are not that different from those in US of A. The attorney general here is the person whose authority it is to open (or to close) any police investigation, much as it is in US. Blaming the cops in the various investigations plaguing Bibi lately is missing the point by a mile (or 1.6 km).

I have googled up other opinions on the subject by professor Dershowitz and was surprised to find out that he expressed his deep dissatisfaction by this state of affairs quite a lot of times. Here is one example, from January 2017:

...Dershowitz took aim at the Israeli left and media outlets for what he described as attempts to use ongoing police investigations into the Netanyahu family to hobble the Prime Minister.

"[T]hey can't beat him through democratic means, so they're trying to use these investigations and the media to push him out of office. That would really undercut democracy. He's been elected by a proper method of election in Israel and he should be left to complete his term without interference. If there are issues they should be pursued after he leaves office.”

So, the Prime Minister, according to this, should be granted immunity while in the office. And the reasoning behind the idea is:

"The Prime Minister in this case has to work 24/7 particularly now, between now and the time when President Obama leaves office, to respond to the U.N. Security Council resolution, to the Kerry speech, to try to prevent another Security Council resolution - the idea that the Prime Minister is now going to have to be questioned about what appears to be relatively trivial incidents, really undercuts democracy."

So, Bibi works 24/7 and couldn't be bothered. I would agree if it were not widely known that he spent 5 years fighting the Israeli Broadcasting Authority, which, according to him, is (was) a part of that much hated leftist media that destroys the country and him personally. If the relentless fight for the freedom of canine quarantine described above (2 years only) wasn't so widely know, etc. A good part of these 24/7 isn't spent worrying about the fate of the country, but about the fate and the chair of one Benjamin Netanyahu, unfortunately.

Another poor argument used by Alan Dershowitz in the interview was "this is not how things are done in United States". Really? Kenneth Starr vs William Clinton and Robert Mueller vs Donald Trump - how is it exactly different from investigations of Bibi? Aside of multi-million budgets unseen in Israeli police cases?

In another article (Hebrew), professor Dershowitz went even further:

When asked what he thought of Israel's former prime minister [Olmert] behind bars, he replied, "First of all, the prime minister was sent to prison for things that were done before he was prime minister, and he was not sent to prison during his term of office, only after he left. Attorney general said unequivocally that the issue under investigation was not similar to what was being investigated in Olmert's or Sharon's case, and that suspicions in their cases were much more serious."

First of all, the chief reason Olmert decided to quit was the ongoing investigation. Then, to prejudge the seriousness of the cases against Bibi, when the final conclusions and relevant materials haven't been passed by the police to the attorney general seems to be out of character for a famous legal mind.

Anyway, logical or not, I can already see a bill granting immunity to the incumbent PM being pushed through the Knesset by Bibi's faithful, whose number is legion. And I sincerely hope this attempt will fail.

Besides - wouldn't now be too close to the Kaya Netanyahu bill?

One member of the family at a time, please.

(*) The reasoning is a bit outdated, since the current POTUS, unlike his predecessors, isn't known for his love of four legged beasts.

Benjamin Netanyahu at his best: zigging and zagging

Whatever they say about Bibi, in one aspect of his behavior he is consistent: he will switch direction at the merest sign of trouble for his ruling coalition, i.e. to his seat of power.

His sudden change of heart regarding the plan to establish a pluralistic prayer pavilion at Jerusalem’s Western Wall is just another example of his all consuming passion for that chair.

The cabinet on Sunday suspended a government-approved plan to establish a pluralistic prayer pavilion at Jerusalem’s Western Wall, following calls by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s ultra-Orthodox coalition allies to scrap the deal. The announcement was swiftly condemned by Israel’s Reform Movement and the Jewish Agency.

But, Bibi being Bibi, even this decision was half-hearted:

In a statement, the Prime Minister’s Office said that Netanyahu instructed Cabinet Secretary Tzachi Braverman and Likud Minister Tzachi Hanegbi to formulate a new plan for the site.

It also said construction work on the southern edge of the Western Wall plaza — where the pluralistic prayer pavilion was slated to be built — would continue uninterrupted.

Just in case Bibi detects that the damage caused by his sudden about-turn might outweigh the threat of not turning about. But of course.

Still, I tend to think that the ToI headline on David Horovitz' op-ed is a bit of exaggeration:

Netanyahu to millions of Jews: We don’t really want you

First of all, I seriously doubt that there are literally millions of conservative and reform Jews hurt by this zigzag. Besides, there are more young American Jews being indoctrinated by J-Street, JVP and extreme left - the writing is on the wall*. Not that the two cases are completely unrelated.

As a side note: I would dare guess that the case of pluralistic prayer pavilion is quite closely related to the recent brouhaha with the work performed on the railroad during Shabbat. Political horse trading in its typical naked glory.

Yep. As it was said, politicians and diapers should both be changed regularly, and for the same reason.

Quite the time.

(*) This statement of mine must be amended. Apparently the report used and several other articles using it as a base for alarm were quite significantly exaggerated. Not that there isn't a reason to worry, but on the other hand panic doesn't help too. Here it is:

Vast majority’ of Jewish students are connected to Israel, insists Brandeis prof

Hat tip: Elise Ronan.

Read and share this, so says Bibi

Our illustrious leader should seemingly be buoyed by the warm rays of sunshine directed at him from the White House, by the total absence of opposition leaders of note at home, by the unending strife among the potential enemies, by the tolerably well doing economy etc. But to rest on his laurels is not Bibi's lot, apparently. In the best tradition of various chieftains of the past, Bibi is always on guard and always looking out for the enemies who aim to dethrone him, be these enemies real or imaginary.

We all have barely recovered from the intolerable noise of his multi-year battle against the late Israel Broadcasting Authority, eventually replaced by the Israeli Public Broadcasting Corporation - a move that doesn't make any visible sense, having only an explanation: Bibi's unrelenting hate of the media. A man, who has a free (you don't pay for its paper version, it is free) newspaper practically of his own, could not tolerate criticism, coming out of the media owned/financed by the government, spending a good part of his valuable time for several years fighting that criticism. The fact that this media is financed by the taxpayer, who might want to hear this criticism, didn't phase Bibi at all.

And now Bibi turned his main turrets in a new direction: the enemy within. The repercussions of his recent snubbing of the German foreign minister are still not fully known or understood, but Bibi isn't stopping at this doubtful act. His rhetoric ratchets up continuously. And now he's introduced a new term into his repertoire of battle cries: "putsch". Just to make sure we are on the same page:

Putsch: A sudden and decisive change of government illegally or by force.

Here is a snapshot of his recent Facebook post:

To be fair - Bibi didn't say it by himself, he just endorsed an article (in Hebrew) from the Internet outfit called Mida. "Read and share" adds Bibi. So what is there to read and share?

The headline of the article says most of it directly:

Leftist putsch attempt: "We encourage harm to government institutions"

The article claims that the left is trying to carry out an illegal coup, with cooperation between organizations and leaders of various protests. The article also claimed that the demonstration outside the attorney general's house exposed this "truth".

Yep. A demo by a few largely irrelevant fringe elements of our generally right-leaning society is qualified as a "putsch" by a delirious journo, and our glorious leader unsubtly endorses and recommends this "slight" exaggeration. Nothing more, nothing less.

But wait, this is not all. Besides presenting several reprehensible characters who took part in the demo and were duly arrested for some excesses, the article points a finger at a person who, according to the author, is the real engine behind the "putsch". No one else but Ehud Barak, a warrior, a Chief of Staff, a PM and a defense minister in his past. Go figure...

What next? Is the next term to be introduced by Bibi to be "enemies of the people"? With all the expected consequences? Where does the paranoia of a ruler stop indeed?

Just to make it clear (in case some polite people in civil clothing come by to question me in the future): the "Leftist putsch" article referred above does describe several revolting characters of the leftie fringe groups I largely despise. I don't harbor especially warm feelings towards Mr Barak as well - for reasons not having to do with this post.

But paranoia is surely a big step on the road to madness. And Valium is not a name of a computer game, but a fairly useful medicine in many cases.

So there.

Taking Purim to Moscow - really, Bibi?

Purim, between other things, is for practical jokes. So, probably, one should consider the latest Bibi's shenanigan being a part of that tradition.

In a meeting with Putin in Moscow, Netanyahu said Persia had made “an attempt to destroy the Jewish people that did not succeed” some 2,500 years ago, an event commemorated through the Jewish holiday of Purim, which Israel will celebrate starting Saturday night and lasting in some places until Monday.

“Today there is an attempt by Persia’s heir, Iran, to destroy the state of the Jews,” Netanyahu said. “They say this as clearly as possible and inscribe it on their ballistic missiles.”

Putin, somewhat uncharacteristically, found a soft way to respond to this amazing hysterical historical lesson:

Adopting a conciliatory tone, Putin said that the events described by Netanyahu had taken place “in the fifth century B.C.”

“We now live in a different world. Let us talk about that now,” Putin said.

Calling for a doctor and a padded cell would have been a breach of diplomatic protocol, surely. Oh well... and of course, Putin's way out of the issue, the "We now live in a different world." was readily provided to Putin by Bibi himself.

But no doubt, this visit will be touted by Bibi's office as another brilliant victory by Bibi over... whatever.

Happy Purim, anyway, people!

Man, do your duty! Or else...

The notorious State Duma Deputy, Yelena Mizulina, has already appeared on these pages. Twice, and I've used the same picture of her twice, which is really doing an injustice to the lady. So here is another one:

This time Ms Mizulina turned to a new domain for her unerring sense of problem solving: the male performance in their marital beds. Here is the article, translated mostly by Google, with some nudges here and there from yours truly.

State Duma Deputy, Yelena Mizulina from the party "Fair Russia", Chairman of the Duma Committee on Family Affairs, Doctor of Jurisprudence proposes to introduce a penalty for men for failing to perform their marital duty.

- The family is a social unit, - says Mizulina, - evasion of execution of marital duty is an evasion of duty to the community. If a man for no apparent reason (eg health-related.) systematically fails to fulfill his conjugal duty, or executes it carelessly to get done with it - he must pay a fine to the State. This measure will further strengthen the family and improve the morale in the country. And adultery must be punished as treason - by imprisonment. It is proposed to set the quota of execution of marital duty in Russia for men aged up to 45 years - to 1 time per week. For older people, this rate can be reduced.

The idea looks good, but I would suggest that for the public to get into the spirit of the thing, a few public executions here and there, from time to time, would be helpful.

So there.

Russian hacking of US elections process: for Trump or against Hillary?

After several months of indecision, CIA came out swinging. The result is expressed in a WaPo headline:

Secret CIA assessment says Russia was trying to help Trump win White House

The article leaves at least one line of investigation untouched. It also puts the headline's conclusion (Russians rooting for Trump) as the final one. Of course, WaPo is not a PR branch of CIA, but if in that article WaPo faithfully reproduced the CIA findings, they (the findings) smell fishy. It is not unheard of that this mighty intelligence outfit fails to produce a correct assessment of the goings on. But in most cases it was related to predictions and not to the analysis of the past affairs - the hindsight so far worked OK. More or less.

I am not challenging the conclusion about the Russian involvement, far from it. After all, if European media, talking heads and others were so heavily involved in the US elections process, why would SVR/KGB stay away from the occasion to muddy the waters?

Nope, the point that I still can't agree with is the insistence that Russians rooted for Trump. Russian style of managing their international affairs always favored stable and predictable leaders in the seats of power abroad. Why would Russia work to help out a totally unpredictable and mercurial one like Trump and not Hillary, much more stable and predictable? Highly doubtful.

We have to look at the timing and the contents of the leaks to understand their purpose. That same WaPo has quite clearly stated at the time what was the intention of the leaks:

Many of the most damaging emails suggest the committee was actively trying to undermine Bernie Sanders's presidential campaign. Basically all of these examples came late in the primary -- after Hillary Clinton was clearly headed for victory -- but they belie the national party committee's stated neutrality in the race even at that late stage.

Lots of other leaks attacked Hillary directly, of course:

Long before Hillary Clinton called millions of Americans a “basket of deplorables,” her top campaign advisers and liberal allies openly mocked Catholics, Southerners and a host of other groups, according to newly released emails that offer a stunning window into the vitriol inside the Clinton world less than a month before Election Day.
The emails, published by WikiLeaks after a hack of Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta’s private account, also show Clinton campaign officials and Democratic leaders disparaging supporters of Sen. Bernard Sanders as “self-righteous” whiners, calling Hispanic party leaders such as Bill Richardson “needy Latinos,” labeling CNN anchor Jake Tapper “a d—k” and even lambasting longtime Clinton ally Sidney Blumenthal.

Yes, Hillary clearly was the target, but was the leaking campaign inspired by support for Trump? The timing doesn't figure. The leaks came when the main focus of Hillary's campaign was one Bernard Sanders.

I would say that if there was active SVR involvement, knowing the Russian penchant for predictability and deeply rooted sympathies for the left and far left, the goal was to help out Bern. And this is the line of inquiry totally neglected by the high and mighty in CIA. Why had CIA chosen to produce a conclusion that seems to be so detached from reality? Beats me. Consider me confused. Like this:

I apologize to Benjamin Netanyahu if he was offended

by me calling him [place you insult(s) here]. I am confident that he is not [place you insult(s) here], as I called him and I shall refrain in the future from calling him [place you insult(s) here].

From the long history of public insults, scurrilous rumors and deadly innuendo, aimed at public figures, one learns that the best way to deal with such activities is to ignore them. Drawing attention of Joe Public by repeating these insults and raising hell in the media, only to get a backhanded apology of the kind outlined above, is definitely the worst way.

Here are three examples of that second kind of response by Bibi, collected just for year 2016:

March 2016:

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his wife, Sara, on Sunday filed a libel suit against a journalist for the Israeli daily Yedioth Ahronoth who alleged last week that the prime minister’s convoy stopped on a central highway because Mrs. Netanyahu was angry at her husband and forced him to get out of their vehicle.

September 2016

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has filed an appeal to keep the details of the amount of money his official residence spent on laundry from being made public. The laundry information request is part of a larger request by the Movement for Freedom of Information for details of all state-paid expenses for the family’s private home in Caesarea and official residence in Jerusalem for 2014.

And, to top it all:

November 2016: Netanyahu threatening to sue unemployed citizen over Facebook post

Yoav Salem, 56, said on Sunday that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is threatening to sue him over a blog post shared on Salem’s Facebook page. The blog post claims – without evidence – that Netanyahu’s son, Yair, served as a courier to shelter the Netanyahu family’s money in overseas tax havens.

Does Bibi (or somebody appointed by him for the purpose) really sift through Facebook to find out what rumors are being spread about him and his near and dear? Does Bibi or that somebody keep trace of the repeated (true or untrue) allegations by a reporter?

It looks like, instead of growing more layers of thick skin, as appropriate for a politico, Bibi is doing just the opposite, getting more and more hysterically sensitive to various allegations bandied in the press. True or not, and there is the rub, of course, but it is another matter.

With all that hypersensitivity, isn't it a good time, you know... ?

Jeremy Corbyn Appears to Compare Israel to ISIS During Antisemitism Speech

That term "Appears" is taken obviously from a Guardian article so titled. I kept it for its irresistible cuteness. There are two reasons I post this. The first is for documentation: lots of Corbynistas hurriedly declared that the words of the Leader were invented or, at least, misinterpreted by the enemies of the people. So here it goes:

In prepared remarks, Corbyn said: “Our Jewish friends are no more responsible for the actions of Israel or the Netanyahu government than our Muslim friends are for those of various self-styled Islamic states or organisations.”

After all it wasn't a slip of the tongue, so typical for a somewhat senile old Socialist (like this one, for instance), but a prepared remark. If Harriet Sherwood, the notorious anti-Israeli journo who penned the article, says so, you must believe it in this case.

Now to the other reason this should be kept for ever and ever:

Did Jeremy Corbyn really mention ISIS in a negative sense?

Fork me sideways...