Mahzor

New York Public Library

Churches

Sarajevo Haggadah

Mah Nishtanah

Sarajevo haggadah

Antaea Darom

Israeli women's art

Action

Torah as music

Ben Heine

Action

ceramic bowl

Mohammad Said Kalash, "Offering Reconciliation" exhibit (photo: Ilan Amihai)

Action

Punch and Judy/Pinchas and Jamila

Avi Katz

Action

David Grossman

Ben Heine

Action

Eldrige Street shul

Lower East Side

Action

Dove

Ben Heine

Action

Two birds

Hoda Jamal

Action

Israeli and Palestinian boys

from documentary, Promises

Action

Cat in the Hat

Yiddish version

Action

Daylight through the Wall

Banksy: graffiti art on Separation Wall

Action

Maurice Sendak's Brundibar set

New Victory Theater (photo: Nan Melville/NYT)

Action

Daniel Barenboim, West-Eastern Divan Orchestra

Palestinian-Israeli musical ensemble (photo: Kerstin Joensson/AP)

Action

Great Day on Eldrige Street

N.Y.'s klezmer greats celebrate shul rededication (photo: Leo Sorel)

Action

Joint Appeal for Peace

(Avi Katz)

Joint Appeal for Peace

Ketubah, Ancona, Italy (1772)

(Jewish Theological Seminary library)

Ancona ketubah

Posts Tagged ‘doron-almog’

IDF Castrator Earns Second-Highest National Award

Wednesday, July 6th, 2011

One of Israel’s most decorated and veteran officers, Amos Horev, recently earned the ‘Security of Israel Prize’ for Lifetime Achievement (Hebrew) in a ceremony presided over by Pres. Shimon Peres and defense minister Ehud Barak. This is the second highest national award offered after the Israel Prize. Among his achievements, he was also president of the Technion and a trusted booster of the Israeli armaments industry. Those of you who read this blog regularly may remember that Horev was among the younger of the octogenarians and nonagenarians appointed to the Turkel Commission, which did its duty by whitewashing the Mavi Marmara massacre, finding Israel’s siege of Gaza was just and the killings aboard the Turkish humanitarian vessel likewise justified.

But one of the most infamous incidents in Horev’s military career goes all the way back to the mid-1940s, when he served in the Palmach at a time when a notorious sexual assault occurred in which the victim of the attempted rape was a Jewish kibbutznik. Through intelligence data, the authorities identified a local Israeli (then Palestinian) Arab they believed had committed the crime. Presuming that legal justice would be insufficient to punish the alleged perpetrator, and that the Biblical dictum of an eye for an eye and a penis for a rape would better apply, Horev commanded a unit which kidnapped the man and castrated him on the spot, after they learned the proper medical procedures from an Israeli medical doctor [!].

Not only was the incident not suppressed, it became the subject of a famous pop song whose lyrics (though bowdlerized to protect the sensitive ears of Israeli womanhood, I suppose) were on the lips of all Israeli Jews, much as those of Justin Bieber are on the lips of all impressionable young American girls.

Horev certainly earned his award for whitewashing the Mavi Marmara and thereby doing a great service to his country. But the notion of offering Israel’s second most prestigious national award to a man made famous for castrating an Israeli Palestinian leaves the bitterest of tastes in one’s mouth. If truth be told, Amos Horev engaged in state-sanctioned terror way back when, and his nation he rewarded him handsomely for it. Can you imagine Lt. William Calley being awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom? I say it reeks.

At the time of his appointement to the Turkel inquiry, I wrote this:

…The next time any supporter of Israel’s draconian policies rants about Arab terror, let them consider for a moment the rather sordid past of some of Israel’s current élite. If those who engaged in acts of terror like Horev can play major roles in their nation’s subsequent history, there is no reason why those Israel currently labels dangerous, murderous terrorists cannot do the same in Palestine.

idf prize bestowed on mystery woman

Unnamed IDF prize bestowed on unnamed woman for unnamed reason (Arik Hermoni/ministry of defense)

At the same time as Horev received his award, the IDF also bestowed an award (Hebrew) on a “mystery woman” whose identity, rank, and service branch were under gag. The reason she earned her prize was under wraps. Which prize she earned was verboten too. She even wore civilian clothes so as to conceal her entire military identity. The author of the Ynet article even believes the name under which she was called to the podium was false. But he does note that she received her award among others bestowed on military intelligence, so that may be inferred as her service branch.

As my friend Dena Shunra writes:

“Somebody. Got a prize. For doing something. But we can’t tell you what, ’cause of a gag order. Aren’t you happy she’s out there doing nothing we can talk about?”

Given the rising hemline and leering glances offered by Pres. Peres and IDF chief of staff Benny Gantz standing across from her, and the fact that she’s connected to intelligence, one wonders whether she’s a honeypot of the type who captured Mordechai Vanunu and a number of other men wanted by Israel.

The awards committee which bestowed the awards was composed of the best and worst of the IDF officer corps. It included Uzi Elam, who has consistently voiced strong opposition to an Israeli attack on Iran. It also included Doron Almog, the infamous commander who approved orders to asssassinate Salah Shehadeh despite the fact it meant murdering almost a score of civilians as well. This was also the incident about which then air force chief Dan Halutz said, the murders disturbed his conscience about as much as the dropping of a bomb on its target disturbs the flight of the plane. It caused him “a slight shudder” was the way he so infamously put it.

One wonders whether the conscience of mystery woman was similarly disturbed by whatever intelligence operation she starred in.

Michael Weiss Supports Banning Palestinian, But Not Israeli Jewish Racists

Friday, July 1st, 2011

This is getting to be a habit.  I seem to have gotten under Michael Weiss’ skin.  He takes umbrage with a minor error in my blog post attacking his hysterical coverage of Sheikh Salah’s banning.  I said that his Henry Jackson Society brought Doron Almog via video uplink to speak at a British conference on avoiding Israeli accountability for war crimes.  I did that because a British blogger informed me that this was the case.  It turns out that the the overall conference was sponsored by Dore Gold’s Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs and that the Jackson Society paid for Gold to attend.  Almog, who was featured on a panel together with Gold, appeared thanks to Gold’s group.  Got that?  You can be forgiven for having a bit of trouble following all the permutations of sponsorship.  You go to the conference page and see if you follow it any better than I could.  But that’s it.  That’s the extent of his rebuttal of my claims against him.

So what has he refused to address?  An awful lot it seems.  I’ve noted that while Weiss raves about Sheikh Salah’s alleged anti-Semitic outbursts, he says nary a word about similar anti-Muslim outbursts by Israeli Jewish leaders too numerous to mention including, but not limited to foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman.  I pointedly asked Weiss whether he supported their banning.  Whether he supported the banning of settler extremist and Likud party leader Moshe Feiglin, who actually was banned by a previous Labor government.  Not a word from Weiss on those much more salient, substantive issues.

So let’s challenge him again, Michael, tell us what your specific view is on entry to Britain for Israeli Jewish racists.  What are your criteria to justify banning alleged Palestinian racists and are there any Israeli Jews who would justify banning?  Do you support the banning of Feiglin?  Lieberman?  Rabbis Dov Lior or Dov Wolpe, who are the Jewish “spiritual” equivalents of Salah’s supposed anti-Semitic views?  By the way, Michael, if you know Hebrew, which is doubtful, you should read this Haaretz article about Lior which notes that while he publicly supports the murder of Palestinian children, Salah does not support the murder of Israeli Jews.

Weiss also rewrites history I’m afraid, about our past when he was an editor at the ill-fated online magazine, Jewcy.  What actually happened, as opposed to what Weiss claims, is that he invited me to transfer my blog to Jewcy, which was a big move for me to consider since it meant my blog would essentially be owned by Jewcy as I understood it.  I told him initially that I was interested.  He said he would send me a contract to review.  And then I waited, and waited, and waited.  And I called him a few times asking in a friendly way what was going on.  He always replied that things were in the works and I’d receive the contract shortly.  But it never came.

Then, after two months or so of waiting, the Gaza war intervened.  In looking through the Jewcy site, I noticed 20 posts or so addressing the war in various guises.  I counted two posts that could be construed to be even remotely critical.  Weiss only refers to one writer, Adam LeBor, as offering this view.  There was probably at least one other.  So I began to think of what I would represent in such a mix of right-wing pro-Israel coverage.  At that time, I didn’t know Weiss to be the spiteful, mean-spirited egotistical fellow I now know.  So I called him in an attempt to ask forthright, candid questions about the editorial content and direction of Jewcy.

Eventually, he became so angry he told me to take a hike in an incredibly vicious, vitriolic fashion.  Which was fine with me.  In fact he did me a favor.  Within a week or so of Weiss’ banishment, came news that pro-Israel neocon Michael Steinhardt and the other money-bags behind the venture were pulling the plug.  Then Weiss himself was out of a job.  It seems to have stopped his U.S. literary career in its tracks as he made his way subsequently to England, where he’s become the toast of the tawdry tabloid circuit with his Telegraph blog.

Jewcy’s imminent demise was likely the real reason he never sent the contract.  But, as he seems to prefer opacity over transparency, he didn’t want to let me know the website was about to go belly up and they couldn’t have paid me if they’d wanted.

Among Weiss’ other vain attempts to demean me he talks nonsense of a long night of the soul regarding whether I should move my blog to Jewcy.  To which, all I can say is that at least I have a soul.  Where his should be there’s an empty place filled with hollow words and silver-tongued vitriol.

I wonder why Weiss never told his readers at Harry’s Place about Jewcy’s demise and the real reason he refused to send that contract?

While you’re there take a look at the comment thread and note the high level of discourse there including pathetic ad hominem attacks on my physical appearance.  It’s makes the threads here look like the Oxford debating union.

Weiss’ Knickers in Knot Over Sheikh Salah

Thursday, June 30th, 2011
michael weiss fire breathing dragon

For behold, The Weiss breathed fire and smote the wicked, racist enemies of Israel

Michael Weiss, that insufferable, braying pro-Israel zealot, has his knickers in a knot over Sheikh Salah’s visit to England.  The Telegraph blogger began his crusade before Salah arrived, with a shot across the bow on June 22nd, in which he crowed about alleged anti-Semitic statements made by Salah.  Though a number of Weiss’ claims are based on the notoriously unreliable MEMRI and Jerusalem Post, at least one is based on a Haaretz report.  That paper is by no means universally reliable, it is surely a more serious source.  So let’s get this out of the way, since it will surely be Weiss’ first shot when he reads I’ve had the temerity to cross him yet again after his purported Syrian government memo claiming the intelligence services led the Naksa Day protests which led to 15 dead at the hands of the IDF.

If Salah has said the things he’s alleged to have said by Haaretz then he is a truly dim figure and anti-Semite to boot.  But I would note that there are laws against incitement in Israel and though Salah has been charged with violating those laws he’s never been convicted.  I would think if he did say any of these things it should’ve been fairly easy to convict him.  Though again, I’m not making any claims regarding whether or not he said what MEMRI and the others allege.

Further, the Israeli government has attempted to ban the Sheikh’s Islamic movement, but the Israeli Supreme Court rejected the effort.  As Ian Black asks in The Guardian:

The real question about the episode is this: if Salah is tolerated in Israel, why did the UK government object to his presence?

Further, there are several anomalies in Weiss’ coverage and in his omissions from the record.  First, he neglects to mention that Salah was nearly killed by an Israeli Border Police bullet to the head in the first Intifada in 2000.  Second, he neglects to mention that Israeli media reports there are recordings of the Shin Bet asking accused Jewish terrorist Chaim Pearlman to assassinate Salah.  Third, in Weiss’ first Telegraph post he also neglects to mention an important claim that he does make in later ones, that Salah was banned from entering Britain.  This is important because later Weiss and other pro-Israel supporters claimed that he had been banned a week before his entry into England.  This would make it appear that Salah was up to no good, possibly used fraudulent documents to gain entry, etc.  The Israeli Palestinian leader’s own attorneys claim he was never aware of such a ban and that he entered England using his Israeli passport.

Now, it’s clear that immigrations officials do stupid things all the time in the U.S., Britain and Israel.  But to allow a wanted man to enter Britain, especially an allegedly wanted Islamist—this strains credulity.  Not to mention that Heathrow immigration authorities would’ve had the plane’s passenger manifest and would’ve had early warning that he was planning to land.  Of course, Weiss and others might insinuate that he traveled under a false name or whatever.  But there is no indication this is true.

What appears to have happened was that Weiss’ report spooked the Home Office and they immediately banned Salah, who may already have entered Britain.  When he writes on June 28th that Salah “somehow” entered Britain a few days earlier, he makes it appear that his entry was based on fraud on the Sheikh’s part or incompetence on the government’s.  When in truth it was likely based on fear of being beaten over the head by Weiss and his Islamophobic cronies.

But now let’s talk a bit about Michael Weiss’ hypocrisy.  No matter how shady Salah’s alleged views about Jews may be, I bet the pro-Israel blogger never uttered a peep when Moshe Feiglin tried to enter Britain (did you, Michael?).  Then the Home Office (under a more liberal Labor government) banned Feiglin for his undesirable racist views of Arabs.  Has Weiss ever said that any Israeli racist such as Avigdor Lieberman should be banned from England?  I could list twenty or thirty of his more disgusting comments made in the Israeli Knesset and on television about his fellow Palestinian citizens.  But the former Moldovan bar bouncer and Kach party member is OK, isn’t he?

And if we want to talk about flaming racists, has Weiss ever uttered a word about Israeli Orthodox rabbis who urge that Palestinian citizens be put in concentration camps or that it’s just to murder their children lest they grow up to kill Jews.  Yes, rabbis have said those things.  Would you support their banning, Michael?  And if so, will you write to the Home Office encouraging them to do so?  I can provide the names and sources for their comments (and they’re not from the Palestinian version of MEMRI, but from mainstream Israeli press).

Even more importantly, Weiss’ Henry Jackson Society arranged for that handsome, dashing IDF officer Doron Almog to speak via video conference to a gathering of the pro-Israel flock eager to hear the good general opine on the topic, Ending Impunity or Decreasing Accountability?: Averting Abuse of Universal Jurisdiction.  There would appear to be more than a little bit of self-interest in Almog’s appearance at such a gathering.  Almog couldn’t speak in person because there was a little matter of a warrant for his arrest for ordering the deaths of 18 Palestinian civilians including women and children when the IDF assassinated Salah Shehadeh in 2003.  And lest Weiss blame British law for the ‘nonsense’ of holding potential Israeli war criminals responsible for their actions, we should remember that it is Israeli NGOs like Yesh Gvul and Anglo-Israeli human rights lawyers like Daniel Machover, who have spearheaded these efforts.

No matter what you wish to say about Sheikh Salah, he’s never murdered a soul.  You can’t say that about Doron Almog.  What’s more, Weiss surely thinks it an outrage that such a man who ordered a bombing that killed Palestinian woman and children should be banned from Britain.  What irks me about the pro-Israel flack is that he likes to play the morality card, as if his are universal values based on justice and morality, while Arab or Muslim values are based on racism and hate.  He’ll never admit to you that there are just as many Israeli Jewish racists as Palestinian, and that many of them are welcome to visit England whenever they wish.  In fact, I’d venture to say Weiss has broken bread in his adopted country with a few of them in his role as one of Israel’s chief apologists.

He’d do a lot better if he calmed down and wrote as many posts about the audacity of Doron Almog and Moshe Feiglin entering England, as he has in the three posts which he’s filled with the spew of yellow journalism regarding Sheikh Salah.

Spanish Supreme Court Rejects Shehadeh War Crimes Jurisdiction

Thursday, April 15th, 2010
Salah Shehade

Salah Shehadeh, assassinated by IDF in 2002 (Image via Wikipedia)

The Israeli army has won a victory on behalf of impunity in its war against the Palestinian people with this week’s announcement that the Spanish High Court has rejected jurisdiction over the case of the assassination of Palestinian militant Salah Shehadeh and 18 civilians by the IDF in 2002.

After an appeal by Israeli human rights lawyer Michael Sfard to the Israeli Supreme Court, the State established the Inbar commiittee, ostensibly to investigate the incident and determine whether criminal charges were warranted. As insurance, anti-Occupation activists brought cases against the IDF principals in Britain and Spain.

Now it appears likely Gens. Doron Almog and Dan Halutz, the senior chain of command for the attack, may never be held accountable.  The Spanish court, in its decision pointed to the creation of the Inbar committee as proof that Israel itself was pursuing its own investigation.  Under international law, the nation in which the violation occurred is given first opportunity to prosecute the case.  If they don’t, then other states may take up the case.

The hypocrisy of the Spanish decision is noted by Sharon Weill’s International Journal of Criminal Justice article in which she described the members, structure and mandate of the Inbar committee:

…Following the recommendation of the HCJ [Israeli High Court of Justice], the state agreed to establish an objective and independent commission of inquiry investigating into the killing of Salah Shehadeh. The structure, nature and mandate of that commission would be entirely determined by the state: the very entity whose actions were to be investigated. On 23 January 2008, the commission was appointed by the Prime Minister: it was composed of three members, two of them former Military Generals and another a former official from the security services.

The commission was mandated to investigate the legality of the killing of Salah Shehadeh according to the same legal framework as a military inquiry….While all the procedures, testimonies and even the final report remain confidential, it is authorized to bring to the attention of the relevant authorities criminal recommendations. Later on, if theMilitary Advocate General finds that there is a basis to open a criminal investigation, he can do so only after consulting a Major General.

Brig. General (Res.) Zvi Inbar, formerly the Military Advocate General and the Knesset Legal Counsel was appointed head of the commission; with him were appointed as members of the commission Maj. General (Res.) Iztchak Eitan, formerly the head of the IDF Central Command and Mr Iztchak Dar, who formerly held a large number of operative positions in the General Security Service (GSS), amongst others as the Head of the Service’s Israeli and Foreign Interests Section.

In other words: the fix was in.  Proof of this is that since its creation in 2008 it has not actually investigated the incident, let alone made recommendations.  And as Prof. Weill points out the longer the period from the actual crime to its investigation the greater likelihood witnesses die or disappear and evidence is lost or compromised.  Given Israel’s reputation in these matters this certainly shouldn’t be suspected in this case.

The inactivity of the Committee hasn’t stopped both the Israeli and Spanish Supreme Courts from pointing to its existence as proof that Israel was dealing with the matter.  So here you see the weakness of international law, which allows accused nations like Israel to use smoke, mirrors and obfuscation to exploit loopholes.  In addition, often the legal systems of other nations which might eliminate such impunity refuse to do so out of lack of political will.

Israel, of course, takes maximum advantage of this situation.  Like many authoritarian regimes and serial human rights violators, it develops maximally bureaucratic responses to maintain the network of terror and impunity behind the Occupation.  Whether this involves appropriating (i.e. stealing) Palestinian private land to build settlements or undermining the principle of universal jurisdiction, such regimes become quite skilled at the game.

But this doesn’t mean the game is over.  It means a skirmish has been lost and activists must redouble their political and legal efforts.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

British Police Allowed Israeli General to Escape War Crimes Arrest

Wednesday, February 20th, 2008

Thanks to reader American Goy for tipping me off to this fascinating story in The Guardian about the almost arrest of Israeli general Doron Almog for war crimes (he was the commander who approved the 2002 assassination of Saleh Shehadeh, resulting in the toppling of an entire apartment building and the killing of nearly 20 civilian residents and neighbors).

I wrote about this dramatic incident when it happened in 2005 noting that I approved of holding both Israeli officers and Palestinian and Hezbollah militants responsible for their assault on civilian populations. I thought it would be an incredibly powerful statement against the Occupation. One that would be heard around the world. It would’ve met with fierce anger and resentment within most sectors of Israeli society. Something along the order of how Serbia reacted to the arrest and trial of Slobodan Milosevic and others implicated in Balkan war crimes. But just as Serbia has come to understand, albeit grudgingly, the reason why this was important, eventually I’m convinced Israel would come to a similar level of understanding, if not acceptance.

What is especially intriguing about the Guardian story is that it makes clear that the British attorney general himself approved the secret indictment of Almog:

The arrest warrant was issued at Bow Street magistrates court, central London. It was believed to be the first warrant for war crimes of its kind issued in Britain against an Israeli national over conduct in the conflict with Palestinians.

The attorney general would have had to sanction the war crimes prosecution before it went ahead.

This means that the Blair government was prepared for the tremendous fallout that would’ve occurred in British-Israel relations. Of course, it is possible that the government itself warned the Israeli embassy about the impending arrest, thus enabling Almog to flee back to Israel, thereby avoiding an international incident.

There are several troubling aspects of the incident revealed in the police investigation. First, the commanding officer on the scene decided not to board Almog’s plane to arrest him despite the fact that it was on British soil. Supposedly, he feared a gun battle between El Al security guards and any security detail that might have accompanied Almog. I’d say he was right to be concerned about such an eventuality. But tell me this–would any Israeli security officer have risked an international diplomatic incident by commencing a firefight at a British airport? The idea beggars belief.

Additionally, the indictment filed was supposedly secret, yet the police reached out to a member of the Jewish community to prepare for the eventuality of the arrest of an unnamed Israeli high-profile suspect:

…Before the planned arrest, Scotland Yard consulted West Midlands police and a special police unit called the national Communities Tensions Team, for advice on reaction in the British Jewish community. A “trusted partner” of the police, a Jewish contact, also made inquiries about finding a lawyer for Almog and raising his bail money, once he was arrested. The document says the inquiries were made “discreetly” without Almog’s name being mentioned.

What use is such secrecy if you inform the community of what you’re planning? Do the police think this individual didn’t turn right around and inform the Israeli embassy of the impending arrest? Do they think in a tight knit community like the one in Britain that such an inquiry can be made “discreetly?”

I would say that the British police made themselves into something of a laughingstock over this. Either that or they didn’t want to arrest Almog in the first place and are justifying their craven behavior after the fact.

Finally, Almog’s “who-me” response to the incident would be laughable if it weren’t so serious:

Almog said: “As a soldier and a general, I have never committed a crime. Many times I have saved Palestinian lives by risking my life and the lives of my soldiers.”

The actions of the Israeli army in Gaza were to prevent terrorist attacks against Israel, he said.

Tell that to this Gazan survivor of the Shehadeh assassination quoted in a Gideon Levy dispatch published originally in Haaretz:

Among the ruins, I met Mohammed Matar, a Palestinian laborer who had worked in Israel for 30 years, lying in the rubble of his home, his arm and eye bandaged. In the “targeted killing” planned by Dichter’s Shin Bet, Matar lost his daughter, his daughter-in-law and four toddler grandchildren. The pictures of the horror from the Gazan neighborhood have haunted me ever since. Someone, I thought, must pay for this. Could it be that no one is to blame or responsible for such an act?

Israel Appoints Independent Commission to Investigate Shehadeh Civilian Massacre

Monday, September 17th, 2007
salah shehadeh assassinationAftermath of 2002 Shehadeh attack (AP)

When I first read the headline in Haaretz, Panel to Look into Civilian Deaths in 2002 IAF Attack on Shehadeh I was pleased and surprised that one of the bloodiest civilian massacres of recent IDF history would finally be investigated. But I quickly realized that there is probably less here than meets the eye:

The State Prosecution has agreed to establish an independent commission to investigate the circumstances surrounding the targeted assassination of Hamas’ former military leader in the Gaza Strip, Salah Shehadeh, in June 2002.

Shehadeh died when the Israel Air Force dropped a one-ton bomb on a Gaza City neighborhood, killing 14 innocent people – mostly women and children – in the process.

The panel will establish whether a criminal investigation should be opened against those involved in the decision to bomb the neighborhood. The State Prosecution told the High Court of Justice of its decision during a hearing on a petition filed the peace organization “Yesh Gvul.”

The organization filed the petition in September 2003 against then-military prosecutor Menachem Finkelstein, who refused to order a criminal investigation into the deaths of the 14 civilians.

This incident is the source of the famous comment by Dan Halutz, then IAF commander, when asked if he felt anything when he dropped a bomb on a Palestinian target. “Just a slight tremble of the wings [of the plane] is all,” was his mordant reply. Any number of famous Israeli commanders are well known for similarly cold boasts, and this one stuck with Halutz. The IDF commander at the time of the raid was Doron Almog, who was nearly arrested at a London airport under an international warrant for his role in the massacre.

Which takes us to the issue of why there may be less here than meets the eye. Yesh Gvul, the Israeli group, sued the IDF for this incident, taking the case all the way to the Israeli Supreme Court. The Court was put in what for it was a terrible bind. Clearly, the IDF had engaged in a horrible massacre which in the normal course of legal events should be reviewed. But also clearly, the Court was loathe to second guess military commanders even when they stepped over a moral-legal line (as they certainly did here). The justices knew they should review the case, but detested the idea of doing so. They held off for years on hearing it.

When Israeli human rights lawyers began pursuing the case outside Israel under the jurisdiction of international law, then the Supreme Court’s inaction made it look witless. Then they finally devised a way out of their predicament that preserved a fig leaf of judicial probity. They heard a separate case about targeted assassinations and ruled (don’t ask me how they reached this conclusion) that they were legal under international law in limited circumstances.

This allowed them at least to ratify the commanders’ original decision to kill Shehadeh. But they still had to deal with the other deaths. Which brings us to the independent commission concept:

Three months ago, the High Court ordered the state to declare whether or not it would agree to the establishment of an independent panel. When the court ruled in December 2006 that targeted assassinations are not illegal under international law, it also determined that the state is obligated to “objectively” investigate decisions taken by the Israel Defense Forces in cases where innocent civilians have been killed.

“Despite the fact that the regulations determined by the High Court’s verdict on the policy of targeted assassinations are not applicable to the incident in question,” wrote deputy State Prosecutor Shai Nitzan, “the state agrees that the circumstances under which innocent civilians were hurt [!!] in the course of the action against Shehadeh will be examined by an objective investigative committee that will be appointed for this purpose by state authorities.”

The attack in July 2002 leveled an entire residential building in Gaza City. High Court justices repeatedly delayed the hearing on the petition, deciding it would be heard only after ruling on the targeted assassinations policy.

My guess is that the Supreme Court has just engaged in a bit of a nod and a wink to the state prosecutor which allows both of them to say that they dealt with the issue without dirtying their hands with it. There will be an independent commission which will find that despite the terrible loss the judgment of the commanders was sound and the civilians were an unfortunate casualty of a nasty but necessary war on terror.

Cynical? Perhaps. But if you don’t become cynical watching how Israel operates regarding matters like these then you’re either a flag-waving true believer or Pollyana. And I’m neither. That being said, one always preserves the hope that some justice will be done in this case and some officer’s judgment will be questioned if not excoriated.

Performance Optimization WordPress Plugins by W3 EDGE