Comments on: Israeli President Cops Plea for Rape, No Jail Time

By: Richard Silverstein

Richard Silverstein — Fri, 06 Jul 2007 06:14:09 +0000

The scandal began because Katsav complained to Mazuz that A was trying to blackmail him.

Given this, we have to add to his ugliness and lack of charisma, his stupidity. He’s screwing members of his staff right & left & turns to the AG when one of them attempts to blackmail him? What did he expect would happen? That the AG wouldn’t find out about his behavior toward his female staff? Or did he think his denials of his behavior would be believed while A’s charges wouldn’t? Obviously, he was so oblivious to the offensiveness of his own behavior he didn’t think his screwing around would be seen by others as it was. That’s a hallmark of sex abusers. Who me? What am I doing wrong? The women want it, etc., etc.

By: amir

amir — Thu, 05 Jul 2007 20:03:28 +0000

What I can say is that A. at least reported Katsav’s behavior to the authorities

This isn’t entirely accurate. The scandal began because Katsav complained to Mazuz that A was trying to blackmail him.
I don’t see much difference in the supposed behaviour of Clinton and Katsav. The public and press reaction, in my opinion, is different because Clinton is good looking and charismatic while Katsav is neither. A is very convincing in her testimony until you realize how long this was going on. While some women may not complain of sexual harrasement for fear of losing their job, others might not complain because they might feel that their sexual activities may help them advance in their career (duck). That doesn’t make sexual harrasement legitimate, but it does spread the responsbility to both persons. (I know, I know, there I go blaming the victim) The questions then becomes did the woman make it clear that the sexual encounters are unwanted. When accosted by Clinton, this question is legitimate. When accosted by Katsav, well, who would want to have sex with Katsav? (as I’ve heard so many women say).

By: Richard Silverstein

Richard Silverstein — Thu, 05 Jul 2007 20:01:33 +0000

Imjudy: I finally read the interview with Rubinstein. I’ve always found him a quirky individual. I was never sure of his precise political convictions on any particular issue. It’s great to be a maverick & not have people able to pigeonhole you. I always thought that was a great virtue in McCain till he decided he wanted to become a Republican milquetoast & lost the Straight Talk Express quality of his campaign.

Rubinstein despite his protestations to the contrary has become basically a slightly liberal neoconservative in the sense that he has adopted Islamophobia hook line & sinker. So like McCain, Rubinstein has lost the quirky, maverick nature of his belief system & become a parody.

It is preposterous to believe that Israel is in danger of imminent collapse or that Islam stands poised to take over the world. Those are the ideas of a hysteric. Unfortunately, extremism has driven many people in the world over the edge both on the Muslim side & in the west. And Rubinstein, alas, is one of them.

I do agree w. him on one pt. though. The method of choice of justices for the Supreme COurt is not good. I far prefer the U.S. method in which there are hearings & the legislature votes to confirm the justices. I completely disagree with Rubinstein about his characterization of the Barak court, which I valued very highly.

By: Richard Silverstein

Richard Silverstein — Thu, 05 Jul 2007 19:35:33 +0000

I read the Broaddrick entry. What can I say. Clinton was a despicable womanizer. Did he commit this alleged crime? I don’t know. What I can say is that A. at least reported Katsav’s behavior to the authorities & pursued his prosecution while Broaddrick did not. If you want to go after a politician you have to use the system to do so. If you do it so far after the fact that you can’t use the legal system to adjudicate, well, then it allows the perpetrator to get off the hook–at least legally speaking. If Broaddrick had done so & prevailed Clinton might never have become president. That would have been a shame in my opinion, but at least the people would’ve been allowed to judge for themselves whether in light of what he did to women he deserved higher office.

By: Richard Silverstein

Richard Silverstein — Thu, 05 Jul 2007 04:55:26 +0000

Imjudy: Ramon’s apptmt. is despicable–among the many despicable things Olmert has done. It does indeed show the Israeli political system to be based on morally bankrupt individuals.

Ben Gurion, Begin & the other founders may not have been perfect but they were a damn sight better than this vulgar lot.

By: Andy

Andy — Wed, 04 Jul 2007 19:05:04 +0000

Richard, Wikipedia has a Juanita Broaddrick entry, with links for further reading, at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juanita_Broaddrick

By: imjudy

imjudy — Wed, 04 Jul 2007 16:21:34 +0000

Richard-fair enough.

Today, Haim Ramon was apointed minister and Deputy Prime Minsiter, in spite of the fact that he was convicted of a crime. Now, something doesn’t jibe here. Either what he did really wasn’t so bad, so that he should be able to continue his political career, but if that was so, then why was he convicted of a crime in the first place? And since he WAS indeed convicted of a “harrassment” crime, they why isn’t there an outcry against his appointment?

By: Richard Silverstein

Richard Silverstein — Wed, 04 Jul 2007 09:12:35 +0000

Thanks for the link to Tom Segev, who I do indeed respect. There’s no doubt the case is complicated & there’s no doubt that justice in Israel is a relative thing and not more absolute as it is elsewhere. I will concede that it is possible the error lies more with Mazuz than I have acknowledged. I simply don’t know. But again, if Katsav himself is innocent then he shouldn’t have agreed to the plea bargain & should’ve fought the case to the end to prove his complete innocence. Of course, there are many reasons someone may cop a plea. There might be a reason for a person to cop a plea who is innocent. But in the case of a powerful person like Katsav who has access to the best attorney one could find, copping a plea is an admission of some level of guilt.

I will try to get to the other article as soon as I can. Contrary to what you may believe I do do other things with my life than read links you provide & answer yr comments. I’m not diminishing your efforts here, but I do have other things on my life’s plate. I hope you’ll respect that.

By: imjudy

imjudy — Wed, 04 Jul 2007 08:51:47 +0000

Try reading this column by Tom Segev, a progressive, in Ha’aretz. Apparently
things aren’t as clear as you seem to think.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/877967.html

I am still waiting for your comments about Ari Shavit’s interview with
Amnon Rubinstein, another progressive. He believes there is a partisan
judicial tyranny in Israel.

By: Richard Silverstein

Richard Silverstein — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 07:02:47 +0000

Juanita Broaderick, as you must certainly know, accused Clinton of rape

Actually, I’ve never heard of her. If you have a link to anything about her accusations I’d be curious to read them.

Remember that Imjudy said that Clinton & JFK were “100 times worse” than Katsav. I hope we can agree that despite Clinton’s unpardonable treatment of women, that this characterization is wholly unsupportable.

You may think the US justice system is fine and dandy

Just because I criticize the Israeli justice system doesn’t by any stretch mean I think U.S. justice is anywhere near “fine & dandy.” Just look at tonight’s news about Libby. It’s a schande of first magnitude. I just hope it has hammered the final nail into the coffin of the GOP’s chances of retaining the White House in 2008.