"As far as I'm concerned, the [Palestinian] Authority can call itself the Palestinian Empire," he said at the event in the Sharon region. "The goals of PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas are similar to those of Hamas," he purported.
Meanwhile, Tzipi Livni, the only candidate who favors a 'two-state solution,' warned that the world will impose a solution on us in March if she is not Prime Minister.
"The United Nations' decision was just the overture," the Tzipi Livni Party leader said. "We are sitting on a volcano that is due to erupt in March, when the world will lay a diplomatic plan on the table," she said.
"Either they will impose a plan on us, or we can initiate our own plan."
You can imagine I had me some laughs on account of this story.
A leading Egyptian daily falsely claimed that former foreign minister Tzipi Livni conducted sexual relations with Arab officials during her years as a Mossad agent in an attempt to entrap them, and used what it said was a 2009 interview with The Times of London as ostensible proof. The article in Al-Masri Al-Youm, an independent and widely read Egyptian daily, was headlined: “Livni: I had sex with Arabs in return for ‘political concessions.’” It featured prominently in the paper’s Saturday print edition and was still leading its website on Sunday afternoon. The article went up on Al-Masry Al-Youm’s website Friday night and was its most widely read story over the weekend. It had garnered 20,000 Facebook shares and 1,800 tweets as of Sunday morning, and was quoted extensively in Egyptian and Arab media.
The overexcited Egyptian readers may not be sated yet with frisson they got imagining whatever they did, so here is another photo of Tsipi for them to peruse:
Oops, sorry, a printing error, here is the correct picture:
So go ahead, dear excited readers, peruse. But in moderation, please.
I thought that this could round up the whole story, but then I've stumbled on another article in the same ToI (Times of Israel). And, of course, it shows clearly that ToI are the guilty party, causing the whole uproar in Egypt by publishing that one, titled What the Mossad’s female agents do — and don’t do — for the sake of Israel. The article carries another picture that may be even more exciting to the same group of readers:
It shows the one and only Bar Refaeli playing a Mossad seductress... oy vey...
(I am really concerned now about the above mentioned group: please leave this photograph for tomorrow or something. Try to control yourself, anyway.)
Unfortunately, the article's thrust caused me a grave concern. It says, for example:
“We use our femininity because any means is valid,” confirmed Efrat, the most senior female operational commander in the Mossad. “But even if we think that the way to advance the mission is to sleep with [Iranian President Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad’s chief of staff, no one in the Mossad would allow us to do it. Women agents are not used for sexual purposes. We flirt, but the line is drawn at sex.”
It is bad. It is really very, very bad. I am sure that we shall see soon an article full of rage from the Haaretz' own Gideon Levy telling us that the female Mossad agents wouldn't have sex with Arabs because they (the female agents) dehumanize them (the Arabs) and thus don't see... well, you got the drift by now.
Methinks it's time to discuss the dire situation with the wannabe Elders from the Mossad and to tell these young upstarts that their operational manuals should be revised, having in mind the weight of the public opinion in general and Gideon Levy's opinion in particular.
So there.
(Carl) If we as a country are foolish enough to do this, then we as a country deserve the lousy retread leadership we would get. A JPost poll has a 'center left mega party' including former Prime Minister Ehud K. Olmert, former Prime Minister Tzipi Livni, convicted sex offender Haim Ramon (who once told Ted Koppel that if his party has just one more vote than the other side, they can crush the other side), and the vapid Yair Lapid, would win 31 Knesset seats as compared with 22 for the Likud.
The poll found that such a party would win more seats than Likud, which would receive 22 mandates. Yisrael Beytenu would come in third, with 14 mandates, closely followed by Labor with 12, and Shas with 11 seats.
The poll of 500 people representing the general population was conducted on October 9 and 10, and has a margin of error of 4.5 percent.
The poll results follow reports of progress on Wednesday by Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s political opponents, in their efforts to build a “Center-Left mega-party” that could pose a serious challenge to him in the upcoming general election.
Netanyahu officially informed President Shimon Peres of his intention to advance the elections, in a meeting at the President’s Residence on Wednesday. Peres expressed hope that the elections would be clean.
Netanyahu finalized the election date on Thursday. The date is acceptable to all the coalition parties and is just two days after the inauguration of the president of the United States. ...
Ramon’s first preference is for former prime minister Ehud Olmert to lead the mega-party, which would bring together former Kadima head Tzipi Livni, current Kadima MKs and other well-known figures on the Left. He would also want Yesh Atid leader Yair Lapid’s party to join. Olmert told a stream of visitors to his office and home on Wednesday that he would decide whether to run within a week or two after receiving the results of in-depth surveys.
Livni, who met recently with Olmert, will not decide her political future until she returns from a lecture tour in the US in the middle of next week.
While popular former IDF chief of staff Gabi Ashkenazi is legally prevented from running for Knesset, Olmert, who is close to Ashkenazi, would present him as his candidate for defense minister if he chooses to make a comeback.
If Olmert heads a Center- Left bloc he would be able to form a coalition with religious parties and with Yisrael Beytenu, whose leader, Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman, met with Olmert this week.
Kadima leader Shaul Mofaz has said in closed conversations that he would not stand in the way of an Olmert comeback, but he is not expected to cooperate with an effort to reinstate Livni as head of the Center-Left bloc after he defeated her by a landslide in Kadima’s leadership race.
Itzik expressed confidence that Mofaz would be willing to make political compromises for the good of the country.
Mofaz celebrates victory in Petah Tikva (Photo: Yaron Brener)
here is a bet that she doesn't go quietly. She'll be in the public eye... she can't help it.
(ynetnews)Sources close to former Kadima leader estimate Livni will soon announce her retirement from politics after losing primaries to Shaul Mofaz.
"Tzipi, you belong with us," said Knesset Member Shaul Mofaz Tuesday night after winning the Kadima primaries. However, former Kadima Chairwoman Tzipi Livni does not intend to stay in the party for much longer.
The Kadima election committee said Tuesday night that Mofaz had won 61.7% of the votes and Livni 37.2%.
Sources close to Livni estimated that the former party leader will soon announce her retirement from politics. "I'll see you sometime, somewhere," she told her supporters on Tuesday night after losing the vote.
"She realized it was over after she saw the results," a source close to Livni said. "She said she understood she had missed her calling."
Elected Kadima chairman Mofaz called on Livni to stay in the party and be part of its leadership, but it appears Livni is not even considering this option.
"If I'm not leading this thing, there's nothing to vote for," she was reported as saying. "I won't be there for the sake of being there."
Livni told reporters that she had called Mofaz and congratulated him on his victory. She refused to take any questions.
(nydailynews.com h/t Jane Smith of the Republican Jewish Coalition) oh...noes... I'm shocked! bad Jews? come now... this shouldn't of made the news... someone was looking for some feminist spin. walk around the block and you will find someone doing something nasty, but when it is a Jew then it makes the news. This is pathetic. In Egypt the police are kicking the shit out of women in the streets, but a few oddball naughty Jews that don't even support the state of Israel are the focus of the media. It's all about cultural equivalences.
Naama Margolese is a ponytailed, bespectacled second-grader who is afraid of walking to her religious Jewish girls school for fear of ultra-Orthodox extremists who have spat on her and called her a whore for dressing "immodestly."
you can expect Livni to get a word in... she lives for this:
Israeli opposition leader Tzipi Livni said, "It's not just Beit Shemesh and not just gender segregation, it's all the extremist elements that are rearing their heads and are trying to impose their world view on us."
suspiciously going on while Hitlery Clinton attacks Jewish men because Arabs are raping and beating women. How about the Duke Lacross... or Tawana Brawley... or how many other stories that turned sour on the media. this is fabricated. it stinks of B.S.. If this really happened as often as they claim then where is the video footage?? surely it would not of been hard to get if this were a pattern. I've seen it before... I've experienced it before. the timing is of course suspect. it is obviously a fabricated political story meant to deny what is going on in Egypt. This is the way the leftist media complex works... and anyone who can't identify this at this point isn't worth arguing with. The facts don't matter... the facts are created. and people try to frame the story... there is nothing to talk about. It's vapor.
The United States Senate and House of Representatives treated Bibi like a Rock Star, but you would not know it from the Progressive newspaper of record, the New York Times headline proclaimed:
"Israelis See Netanyahu Trip as Diplomatic Failure."
“Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel returned from Washington on Wednesday to a nearly unanimous assessment among Israelis that despite his forceful defense of Israel's security interests, hopes were dashed that his visit might advance peace negotiations with the Palestinians.”
Two new polls prove the NY Times report about Israeli reaction was totally biased.
A poll conduced by the liberal Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz which reported the positive Israeli reaction to Netanyahu's trip.
"Ha'aretz Poll: Netanyahu's Popularity Soaring Following Washington Trip"
"A new poll conducted by Dialog, under the supervision of Prof. Camil Fuchs of the Tel Aviv University Statistics Department, showed that 47% of the Israeli public believes Netanyahu's U.S. trip was a success, while only 10% viewed it as a failure."
When asked in the poll whether they saw Obama’s administration as more pro-Israel, more pro-Palestinian or neutral, just 12 percent of Israeli Jews surveyed said more pro-Israel, while 40% said more pro-Palestinian, 34% said neutral and 13% did not express an opinion.
Other polls taken after the Netanyahu trip agree with the other two:
A Telesker poll published in Ma’ariv on Wednesday found that the Likud had strengthened against Kadima. The poll predicted that the Likud would rise from 27 to 30 Knesset seats, while Kadima would fall from 28 to 27.
Asked who was more fit to be prime minister, 36.9% said Netanyahu; 28.3% said Kadima leader Tzipi Livni; 9.2% said Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman of Israel Beiteinu; 2.6% said Defense Minister Ehud Barak on Independence; and 18.2% answered none of the above.
A Sarid Institute poll broadcast on Channel 2 Tuesday night found that 38% of Israelis found Netanyahu most fit to be prime minister, and 35% Livni. The poll found that the Likud had grown in support at Kadima’s expense.
If the NY Times had any interest in the truth it would have declared that Israelis saw the Netanyahu trip as a success, and as a result the Likud party grew in support. But the truth isn't the story the progressive media wanted to convey. They wanted to brand the Netanyahu trip as an object failure for the Israeli PM, after all he had dared to "school" the precious infallible President.
Despite AIPAC speech, 40% of 600 Jewish Israelis deem US administration pro-Palestinian in ‘Jerusalem Post’/Smith poll.
US President Barack Obama’s attempt to portray himself as pro-Israel in a
high-profile speech to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee on Sunday
did not succeed, according to a Smith Research poll sponsored by The Jerusalem
Post.
The speech was intended to correct impressions that he was hostile
toward Israel, which may have been reinforced by a landmark address about the
Middle East that he delivered at the State Department last Thursday, and by a
tense press conference at the White House on Friday with Prime Minister Binyamin
Netanyahu.
In the AIPAC speech, Obama chose not to specifically rule out
the “return” to Israel of millions of descendants of Palestinian refugees, and
did not announce his first visit to Israel as president, as many hoped he would.
But he did insist that Israel must remain the Jewish “homeland,” indicating
opposition to the Palestinian demand for refugees’ “return, spoke about Jews’
yearning for Israel through the centuries, listed many ways in which his
administration was helping Israel and clarified his position on creating a
Palestinian state based on the pre-1967 lines with mutually agreed land swaps.
When asked in the poll
whether they saw Obama’s administration as more pro-Israel, more pro-Palestinian
or neutral, just 12 percent of Israeli Jews surveyed said more pro-Israel, while
40% said more pro-Palestinian, 34% said neutral and 13% did not express an
opinion.
Still, the poll found that the gap between Israelis who say the
administration is pro-Palestinian and those deeming it pro-Israel has narrowed
since previous surveys.
The poll of 600 Jewish Israelis, representing a
statistical sample of the adult Jewish population, was taken on Monday and
Tuesday and had a 4-percentage point margin of error.
Respondents who
defined themselves at the left end of the political map were more likely than
others to deem the Obama administration more pro-Israel – 28% compared to 12%.
Among Kadima supporters, 37% said the administration was more pro-Palestinian;
19% said it was more pro-Israel.
The respondents most likely to label the
Obama administration as more pro- Palestinian were Orthodox Israelis, at 58%,
and right-wing respondents, at 53%. Among Likud supporters, 49% said the
administration was more pro-Palestinian; 11% said it was more
pro-Israel.
The question asked was exactly the same as in five previous
polls sponsored by this newspaper since May 2009.
The first poll, which
was taken before the first Netanyahu-Obama meeting in the White House – and
Obama’s landmark speech in Cairo in June 2009 – found that 31% considered his
presidency more pro- Israel, and 14% more pro-Palestinian.
The next poll,
taken just one month later, found a huge shift, with the proportion calling the
Obama administration more pro-Palestinian rising from 14% to 50%, and the
proportion calling it more pro-Israel falling from 31% to only 6%.
Those
calling the Obama presidency more pro-Israel than pro-Palestinian fell in August
2009 to 4%, and rose to 9% in March 2010.
Since then, the share who
consider this White House more pro-Israel has risen gradually and slightly,
while the percentage saying it is more pro-Palestinian has gradually
fallen.
Polls taken in March and July 2010 found that 9% and 10%,
respectively, called the administration more pro- Israel; 48% and 46%,
respectively, called it more pro-Palestinian.
The gap between Israelis
calling the administration more pro-Palestinian and more pro-Israel has fallen
from 47% in August 2009 to 28% this week.
Obama fared better in a Dialog
poll published by Haaretz on Thursday, which found that a quarter of the public
considers him friendly to Israel, while 20% called him hostile and 43% described
him as “businesslike.”
The Dialog poll found that 47% of the Israeli
public deemed Netanyahu’s trip to Washington a success, while only 10% viewed it
as a failure.
Nearly half of the public felt pride at seeing Netanyahu
address Congress on Tuesday, while only 5% deemed it a “missed
opportunity.”
The proportion of the population expressing satisfaction
with Netanyahu’s performance as prime minister rose from 38% in the last Haaretz poll five weeks ago, to 51%.
Other polls also indicated a rise in support
for Netanyahu and his Likud Party since his speeches in Washington.
A
Telesker poll published in Ma’ariv on Wednesday found that the Likud had
strengthened against Kadima. The poll predicted that the Likud would rise from
27 to 30 Knesset seats, while Kadima would fall from 28 to 27.
Asked who
was more fit to be prime minister, 36.9% said Netanyahu; 28.3% said Kadima
leader Tzipi Livni; 9.2% said Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman of Israel
Beiteinu; 2.6% said Defense Minister Ehud Barak on Independence; and 18.2%
answered none of the above.
A Sarid Institute poll broadcast on Channel 2
Tuesday night found that 38% of Israelis found Netanyahu most fit to be prime
minister, and 35% Livni. The poll found that the Likud had grown in support at
Kadima’s expense.
Since the last poll taken by the institute during a
crisis over gas prices, Kadima fell by five seats and Likud rose by
four.
The poll found that if an election were held now, Likud would win
34 seats (up seven from the last election in February 2009); and Kadima 29 (up
one).
A Geocartographic Institute poll broadcast on Channel 1 Tuesday
night predicted that the Likud would win 33 seats, and Kadima 22. According to
that survey, 61% of Jewish Israelis oppose Obama’s formula of the 1967 lines
with land swaps as a basis for an agreement with the Palestinians, while only
27% favor it.
On Monday, hours before the arrival of U.S. special envoy George Mitchell in Israel, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu welcomed Washington's new position, taking the condition of another settlement freeze in the West Bank off the table. He said:
To reach peace, we have to discuss the issues that are truly delaying peace ... I welcome the fact that we will now begin discussing these issues and try to narrow gaps.
When Mitchell arrived in Israel, Netanyahu declared:
In their direct talks, both sides decided together to pursue a framework agreement that would establish the fundamental compromises on all permanent status issues and pave the way for a final peace treaty. That remains our goal.
Reaching this goal [face to face negotiations] will not be easy by any means. The differences between the two sides are real and they are persistent. But the way to get there is by engaging, in good faith, with the full complexities of the core issues and by working to narrow the gaps between the two.
But the Prime Minister still faces a challenge. The Obama Administration wants a "fresh" start for indirect talks from both sides. Netanyahu is expected to put forth an offer, especially on borders between Israel and a Palestinian state. The US hopes that a consensus on those borders will bring the solution of other core issues such as security, Jerusalem, water, and settlements.
On the Palestinian side, West Bank "Prime Minister" Salam Fayyad confessed the bluff of going unilaterally to the United Nations for recognition of "State of Palestine". Fayyad said, "We have already done this in 1988. We are looking for statehood."
Fayyad is right. The recognition of the state of Palestine by dozens of countries will not solve the problem, even if chief negotiator Saeb Erekat has sent an official letter to the European Union's foreign policy chief, Catherine Ashton, calling for recognition based on pre-1967 borders. Ramallah knows that the only approach is to fulfil all the requirements of a sustainable state. That begins --- along with steps towards the legitimacy of the rule of law, the political system, and economic policy --- with an open dialogue with the Israelis.
But that of course brings everyone back to the difficulty of resuming direct negotiations, especially with the conservative and cracking Netanyahu government. As the leader of the opposition party Kadima, Tzipi Livni, revealed, Netanyahu has ruled out the possibility that Jerusalem could be divided, contradicting the statement of his Defense Minister Ehud Barak.
via enduringamerica.com
Livni does not come across as someone I would want representing me.
forget all the baggage that you might know. She looks weak and ineffective.
Israeli media reports that WikiLeak documents reveal that Opposition leader Tzipi Livni (Kadima) told U.S. officials that the she has no faith in PA Chief Abu Mazen and that the PA is not capable of reaching a peace deal with Israel. The remarks are in contradiction of official Kadima policy.
Livni said in response to the reports that the comments were made in 2007 and came after a break in talks between the two sides.
And now, after they turned down Olmert's offer at the end of 2008 she thinks that they are capable of reaching peace with Israel? Maybe she is as dumb as she looks.
I love Wikileaks. They tell us what our politicians are really thinking when our politicians won't.
women are fickle. Female politicians generally change their mind when the pressure is put on them. the same with Hillary. She acted like the Conservatives were the paranoid ones... when she was just as scared of the UN (as the Wikileaks show). The difference between the Left and the Right in the West is that the Right has friends and allies and the Left generally lives in equivalent fear of everyone. I prefer having friends then thinking like a woman without a husband, child or any loyalties.
The NY Times doesn’t even pretend to hide its bias any more:
JERUSALEM — Israel’s right-leaning Parliament approved legislation late Monday that could hamper the leadership’s ability to seal future peace deals with the Palestinians or Syria.
The measure requires that any peace deal involving the ceding of territory annexed by Israel — namely East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights — must be put to a national referendum.
The West Bank, which Israel never annexed, does not fall within the scope of the legislation, but it would include other pieces of sovereign Israeli territory that might be ceded in the context of land swaps in a peace agreement.
East Jerusalem became part of Israel in 1980, with the passage of the Basic Law — Jerusalem. Although the Golan Heights was not actually annexed, Israeli law and administration was extended to it in 1981.
The new law says that if the Knesset approves such a deal by a simple majority but by less than a 2/3 vote, there must be a popular referendum before it can be implemented.
Palestinian Authority negotiator Saeb Erekat is opposed because,
Ending the occupation of our land is not and cannot be dependent on any sort of referendum.
Translation: “It’s mine, give it to me.” We’ve seen this argument before.
Opposition politicians are opposed because, in the words of Kadima leader Tzipi Livni,
It is about decisions that should be taken by the leadership that understands the scale of the problems and is privy to all their aspects… The people are not a substitute for such leadership.
Translation: “We know what’s good for you.” But the history of the ‘peace process’ and the wars that followed showed that they don’t. In the famous words of Barack Obama, “elections have consequences,” and the Israeli electorate expressed their clear belief that the left-wing parties did not have their confidence after the débacles of Oslo and Gaza.
The NY times dislikes the idea, because it might “hamper” the God-given right of the Obama Administration to squeeze Israeli politicians until the blood flows. You see, the administration’s bullies can threaten the Prime Minister and others in private, with actions that the American people — and Congress — would find repulsive. We’ve seen hints of this already in suggestions that the US might not veto a Security Council resolution establishing a Palestinian state on the basis of the 1949 lines, something that could lead to economic sanctions or even military force against Israel.
A referendum would wreck this strategy. Any threats would have to be public ones.
The Times faithfully reflects administration thinking on this issue, and the attitude toward democracy is telling.
Kadima leader Tzipi Livni made a U-turn on a bill the party once backed, requiring a plebiscite before surrendering any land officially under Israeli sovereignty, specifically the the strategic Golan Heights. Nevertheless, the bill is expected to pass a vote in the Knesset Monday evening.
The kollel stipends debate made for strange bedfellows as the stipends were slammed by MK Aryeh Eldad of the largely religious National Union party, while receiving support from MK Ibrahim Sarsur of the virulently anti-Zionist Ra'am Ta'al.
The Knesset's leading opposition party, Kadima, was embarrassed Wednesday when it was revealed that party leaders had supported stipends for kollel students. Kadima MKs have vociferously opposed the stipends in recent debates.
note: I don't know many details concerning this or if the supposed Hereidi group is really against the state of Israel. I am keeping myself informed and only wish to know details... which to this point are political at this point
Why would the Left and Progressives be so afraid that an innocent person were free? Because it highlights that those behind the assassination of Rabin were justified in their actions. All government is based on the blood of a revolution. No power is innocent of having blood on it's hands.
One of the biggest injustices that came out of the Rabin assassination was the conviction of then-19-year old Margalit Har Shefi for allegedly failing to inform the authorities of her friend Yigal Amir's intention to assassinate Yitzchak
Rabin. Har Shefi spent four and a half years in jail for that conviction.
Three years ago, Ami Ayalon, who was the chief of the Shin Bet (like the FBI and Secret Service rolled into one) at the time of the assassination) admitted that he had lied under oath at Har Shefi's trial.
Last night, at a campaign rally for his candidacy for the Labor party leadership, Ami Ayalon, who was appointed chief of the General Security Service after Rabin was assassinated, made what would be a shocking admissionin any other Western country: He admitted that Margalit Har Shefi was falsely charged and falsely convicted. And that the GSS knew it all along:
Former chief of intelligence (Shabak) Ami Ayalon, now a Knesset Member, revealed Thursday night that Margalit Har-Shefi did not realize that Yigal Amir intended to assassinate Prime Minister Yitzchak Rabin. She was convicted in 1998 of failing to prevent the murder. In 2001, she began a serving a nine-month prison term, which was terminated by President Moshe Katzav after six months.
Ayalon made the disclosure at a meeting with Labor party supporters in Ashkelon, but he did not explain why he kept silent until now. "Har-Shefi did not know that Yigal Amir wanted to murder the Prime Minister," MK Ayalon said. "I know this from intelligence and was head of the intelligence agency. "She was part of the crazy reality [at that time]."
How's that for an excuse? 'Part of the crazy reality.'
Among those leading the campaign are MKs Otniel Schneller (Kadima) and Uri Ariel (National Union) as well as Rabbis Yuval Sherlo and Yaakov Meidan.
In a letter to Attorney General Yehuda Weinstein, the campaigners quoted former Shin Bet officials Carmi Gillon and Ami Ayalon who expressed their belief that Har-Shefi, was not, in fact, aware of Amir's intention to kill Rabin.
Weinstein made the decision to pardon himself from being responsible for the issue due to the fact that he was in touch with Har-Shefi's family in the past, when he was requested to represent her as a lawyer in the private sector.
Opposition leader Tzipi Livni talked with Rabin's daughter, Dalia Rabin, and said that "Rabin's assassination is not just his family's interest, nor is it just his political party's issue but it is interest but of the entire nation."
"Even if years have passed since Rabin's assasination we can't return to tagging it as a matter of right and left. We have paid a heavy price in the past and as a society and we were able to learn the lesson from the murder," Livni continued.
Livni said "It's far beyond matters of the individual, but instead of society as a whole as, and as a former justice minister I oppose involvement of MKs in civil proceedings. I regret the involvment of politicians in this application because it may change the discourse surrounding the political field which should not be there."
State Prosecutor Moshe Lador will apparently handle matter. The attorney general disqualified himself because of contacts he had with Har-Shefi's family when he was in private practice. Har-Shefi served half of her sentence before she was given a pardon by then-president Moshe Katzav.
Peace Now is opposed out of fear that it will eventually lead to Yigal Amir's being released (I'd settle for Amir getting a fair trial with a real lawyer representing him).
"The Right will not succeed in erasing its part in the incitement and violence that led to the assassination of a prime minister in Israel," Oppenheimer said, adding that he would appeal to the High Court of Justice against the request if it is accepted.
further... now we know that this assassination was the right thing to do to protect the people from cooperating with terrorists. I loved Rabin as the man who fought for Israel, but if lives could be saved to protect the people from his foolish move (that by the way at the time I supported) then it should be historically celebrated as a necessary existentialist tactic of the people to protect themselves from a tyrannical government that cooperated with hostile internationalists. It is odd the way the Left can always justify bloodshed for a social revolution, but can not understand why it would be necessary to have revolution for anything other then centralization of government and limitless power for the few.
The kollel stipends debate made for strange bedfellows as the stipends were slammed by MK Aryeh Eldad of the largely religious National Union party, while receiving support from MK Ibrahim Sarsur of the virulently anti-Zionist Ra'am Ta'al.
