20 thoughts on “PM’s Chief of Staff Accused of Sexual Harrassment of Female Advisor – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.

  1. The Israeli media is not revealing this woman’s name, probably to protect her, but you’ve outed her. That is a reprehensible act. In all seriousness, I did not bother reading this sensationalist drivel till the end – it looks absurd.

    Oh, and according to the Israeli media, Eshel’s victim is divorced, not married. Did you even bother reading what the Israeli has to say before publishing this unsubstantiated nonsense?

    This is why bloggers aren’t journalists. They have not commitment to the truth, and will suffer no consequences for their journalistic incompetence. You’re a one-man tabloid.

    1. Haven’t you even bothered to read my post? Globes published her name before I did. And she’s not a victim of sexual harrassment. My post also made that clear. You’re baying at the moon buddy.

      1. I read both your post, and the globes article you linked to.
        Globes does not mention the name of the employee.
        they may have removed it.

  2. Why are you publishing the name of the alleged victim? The Israeli press is referring to her as R. In your previous posts about similar stories, you at least had the decency to refrain from plastering the victim’s name all over the internet, even when foreign (i.e. non-Israeli) sources had let it slip. What’s the difference this time?
    Could this be the answer? “Kidron is the former director of American Friends of Likud, a seasoned operative and political advisor to the PM. “

    1. “Victim?” What was she the victim of? I specifically noted that there are no charges of sexual impropriety against Eshel. None. Her boss snooping on her cell phone makes her a victim? And this means her ID should be protected? Please. Not to mention that she may be shtupping the PM. She’s a prime news story & deserving of no anonymity whatsoever. Besides Globes already identified her. Take it up with them.

      In case you hadn’t noticed, I’m not the Israeli press so I don’t have to follow their antiquated journalistic rules. There is absolutely no gag order or censorship preventing publication of her name. And in case you hadn’t noticed Globes IS the Israeli press and since they did report her full name saying the Israeli press is using her initial to refer to her is false. Some report her full name and others don’t. I do.

      You tire & annoy me. If you want to carp & whine at least pick a worthwhile subject to do so. You’ve published 2 comments saying virtually the same thing. Do not repeat yrself, that’s a comment rule violation.

      1. Sorry about the double post. That was an accident, due to the fact that when I first posted it, I got an error message (404 or 402 or something like that), so I re-posted and didn’t realise that the first post had got through.

        “she may be shtupping the PM”.
        Or rather, the PM may be shtupping her – and I’ve no doubt that’s what really interests you – an opportunity to get a dig at the PM. I’m only surprised you failed to mention Natan Eshel’s previous connection with Yisrael Hayom. How could you let a chance like that slip by?

        “One should never underestimate the ability of male Israeli pols for putting their feet in their mouths and other parts of their body in places they don’t belong. There seems to be a sense of entitlement that powerful Israeli men feel regarding women.”
        Now, on that, I agree with you. On the other hand, the same is true of American, British, Italian and French politicians. In fact, the same could be said of male politicians world-wide. And not only politicians.

        1. I cover all instances of sexual transgress whether they be acts of prime ministers or TV reporters. You should know that. I’m interested in exposing abuses of power whether they be political or sexual acts & whether committed by Likudniks or whomever. I must say though that MKs from Meretz & the Palestinian political parties seem to control their sexual urges much better than Likudniks.

          1. “I specifically noted that there are no charges of sexual impropriety against Eshel. ”

            Yet your headline screams:”PM’s Chief of Staff Accused of Sexual Harrassment of Female Advisor”.
            And in your (original) post you write “The Globes story claims that Eshel was jealous of a close relationship that Kidron had with another “senior” member in the PMO … ” So how could you have made the claim (in your original post, before you were proven wrong on so many points, including the unsubstantiated piece of yellow journalism about the supposed affair with Bib, and Sara’s jealousy) that she is in no way a victim. You outed her for no better reason than the chance to stick one to Bibi. How low can you sink?

          2. There are now direct charges of sexual harassment as he’s accused of taking dirty pictures of her. So now the headlines are accurate. Let’s have another English lesson shall we: impropriety means a sex act. There is no accusation that he had sex with her or sought to. But sexual harassment can fall short of a sex act.

  3. In previous posts by you, where you report on alleged sex scandals, sexual harassment and rape cases, even when there’s a gagging order on the suspect’s identity which you have ignored, you at least had the decency to withhold the alleged victim’s name. Why are you now splashing her name over the Internet? And don’t say Globes already published it. The Israeli Press is referring to her as “R”.
    Oh wait: “Kidron is the former director of American Friends of Likud, a seasoned operative and political advisor to the PM. She appears to be the wife of Nadav Kidron, the high powered CEO of an Israeli company, Oramed.”
    Could that possibly be the reason?

    1. Silverstein says: “Let’s have another English lesson shall we: impropriety means a sex act. ”

      Excuse me??? Is this the Bill Clinton definition (as in “I did not have sex with that woman”)?

      Anyway, I’m not letting you off the hook so easily. My point, as you very well know, is that even as you were publishing her name, you KNEW she was the alleged victim of sexual harassment. Yet you chose to expose her identity (whereas in the past, you have expressed yourself strongly on the permissibility of exposing the name of the suspect and on the impermissibility of exposing the name of the alleged victim). How do you justify that?

      1. You wouldn’t be such a friggin’ hypocrite if you’d at least argued consistently when previous stories of rape and harassment were reported here. But when I wrote about P’s rape by Yoav Even you betrayed no such protectiveness for P. Instead you were protective of Israel’s reputation & Even’s as well. You only care about female victims who share yr politics. You’re a moral fraud. But I’m glad you’re here so you remind readers of the hypocrisy of the pro Israel hasbarista crowd.

        If Kidron had been raped you bet I’d protect her identity. BTW have you shared your moral dudgeon with the Israeli media who reported her ID before I did? I didn’t think so.

        1. Silverstein says: “Instead you were protective of Israel’s reputation & Even’s as well.”

          Now that is a barefaced lie! I went back and checked exactly what I wrote about the case and I did no such thing.
          This is what I said: “It is quite true that a decision not to prosecute for lack of evidence is not the same as clearing someone on grounds of innocence. But the state prosecutor cannot clear someone on the grounds of innocence (that is the prerogative of the courts) and there is no way of knowing if “lack of evidence” means “not quite enough to secure a conviction” or whether the lack of evidence against a particular suspect stems from the fact of them actually being innocent. The only way a suspect could actually be cleared and PROVEN innocent, is by holding a trial. But no prosecutor is going to bring charges if they don’t think they can make them stick.
          You should also consider that there is the possibility that further evidence may later become available, increasing the possibly of obtaining a conviction whereas, if charges are brought now and the suspect is acquitted for lack of evidence, that would be like a second rape for the victim.”

          In what conceivable way can that be interpreted as being protective of israel’s reputation or of Even’s. Did you even bother to go back and check what I wrote?

          1. Of course what you wrote at the time of the Even rape controversy was protective of Israel. Yet you neglected to argue against that pt of mine. As for protecting Even’s reputation, I see nothing in anything you quoted or anything else you wrote on the subject that indicates any sensitivity to P. predicament and or her victimhood. Your concern was almost solely with what you & others viewed as my smearing or rush to judgment concerning Even.

  4. “few have done anything other than offer the barest outlines.”

    “Another threat to freedom of the press averted, but just barely.”

    The Freudian overtones here are just BARELY visible!

    Occupying the leading edge of thought-provoking speculation with respect to Israeli military/diplomatic/political issues is the indisputably strongest point of this blog.

    But I have found that when it comes to purulence, it is a wiser approach to stand well back from the leading edge of speculation lest one get sucked into the smelly vortex.

    So often it is the purveyors of purulence and not the participants that get bit the worst. Just ask John King of CNN, who has now been outed by Gingrich as the total schlemiel that he (King) is, whilst the pervo-creeeeep Gingrich has gained the high ground.

    IMHO, better off to just report news in the gutter and let it play itself out rather than revealing the unseemly workings of one’s own mind by offering unsavory speculations.

    BTW, I don’t do Hebrew, but the photo on the Globes link tells the story — priceless.

  5. I’m not really sure what this blog is trying to prove in the broader context of Tikun Olam. In the past you’ve blogged about Israel’s unjust treatment of Palestinians and alleged breaches of international law. Now you’re going into the minutiae of sexual impropriety (of Israelis – not of their neighbours). Does that mean you’ve decided to go from being broadsheet to being tabloid?

    1. I wouldn’t expect you’d be able to follow the larger meaning & purpose of this blog. The sexual oppression of women in Israel is certainly part of the cheapening & corruption that characterizes that society & needs to be addressed.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Share via
Copy link