Home | Why do so many, both Israeli and non-Israeli Hebrews condemn Rabin's assasination?
When Igal Amir shot the bastard I was at a small East European town with a large Jewish population, and the people were celebrating the news. What Rabin has done was criminal, and he should've been court-mashalled for giving in to Clinton's anti-Israeli agenda. I really fail to understand why he is treated as if he was a respectable leader, and not like a traitor who got what he deserved.
Last edited by KettleWhistle; 07-16-2004 at 11:16 AM.
This thread has a bit about Rabin's assassination:
http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php?t=4161
Disregarding the political relevance to Rabin's murder, the killing of a Jewish political figure by a Jew, on political grounds, rises a dark spactor of civil war. This is a Tabo and abomination, that a Jew will murder Jew on political reasons.Originally Posted by AJL
One of the main reasons for the fall of Jerusalem on summer 70 ACE, was a civil war. The reason the Romans were able to capture Judea a century before, was a result of a civil war. The rise of Christianity was a result of the same civil war.
When the great Rebelion (67-73) against the Romans failed, it was a result of an inner fighiting among political-religious factions, among Jews. Had we been more united, there was a chance, the second Temple was still in his original place in Jeruslam and the whole diasopora thing was avoided.
Yig'al Amir borke a Taboo. Although he wasn't first to break that Taboo, he still was one of those. A Jew must never rise his hand against another Jew, apecialy on political religious grounds.
Clinton is not to blame, but Peres-Bailin and a cader, a cult of far left financial-academic faction. Rabin and Clinton simpley jumped on the band wagon. Many many others did so too in Israel. A lot of money was involved, Arab, European and Israeli, to a degree it'd take decades before all the details will be disclosed. It is obvious, that this cader of academics and business men and politicians made many millions by different transactions and deals, made possible by the Oslo agreement. For example, fuel and cenemt are monopols in the PA, Israelis and Israeli firms acted as sole supplayers for PA goverment (meaning Arafat, who sold these down the chain). Same goes for many other services. Many Israelis in made millions that way, and pressured the goverment for more.What Rabin has done was criminal, and he should've been court-mashalled for giving in to Clinton's anti-Israeli agenda.
Peres and Rabin were also about sidelineing the oposition and ways and attitude who were highly undemocratic. Like using provocators, spreding lies in the media (who collaborated perfectly), conducting boundry leagal investigations and legal persecution, ect...
The left will neither admit a mistake of judgment nor knowlageable treason. "Remembering" Rabin is both a leftic propaganda instrument against the right, and denail of accountablity for the failed "Oslo accords" policy.I really fail to understand why he is treated as if he was a respectable leader, and not like a traitor who got what he deserved.
If Rabin would considered either stupid or dangerous, it will discredit a mojore portion of the nation, and a huge most powerful financial-political social elite.
That elite is in a state of fast decline over the last 3 decades. Never so rapid as in the last 4 years.
Wow!
Jews celebrating the assination of the leader of Israel?
What ever happened to elections?
Hitler was elected pretty much by the same means as Rabin. Would you say it would have been "wrong" if somebody shot Hitler after he invaded Poland?
Gilgamesh,
I was asking the question from a secular perspective, and as an atheist, I don't look too much to what is religiously defined as an abomination. However, I do appreciate Judaism as mythology of my people, and I am realtively well familiar with Tanah. Not to get into a lengthy theological discussion, but isn't there a religiously sanctioned way to deal with corrupt or incompetent leaders?
To me Igal Amir is a hero. I see him as someone who got rid of a dangerous dictator that was selling our motherland to our enemies. I am glad he took action, and from my secular/atheist perspective I cannot see a good reason why he should be condemned for his act.
Additionally, I agree with most of what you wrote on the subject, particularly that the biggest problem among Jews/Hebrews is the lack of unity in support of Israel, and lack of any form of common vision and determination in that regard.
[QUOTE=AJL]
To me Igal Amir is a hero. I see him as someone who got rid of a dangerous dictator that was selling our motherland to our enemies. I am glad he took action, and from my secular/atheist perspective I cannot see a good reason why he should be condemned for his act.
QUOTE]
How come Rabin is a Dictator? He was elected democratically and when the public disagreed on his and his party's policy they sent them home in the 96 elections, that is the thing about democracy people who don't think like you might get elected and do their policy, I am very much opposed to Sharon's policy but I never doubt his legitimacy as the elected leader of Israel.
I believe Gilgamesh explained his propaganda very well in the following quote:
However, despite that Rabbin's support was very low. Additionally, the decisions on a national scale are typically decided by a national refferendum, not by one or two people, and a couple thousands of their supporters.
Well according to the Israeli Law there's no need to national refferendum for such decisions, and the dirty tactics are a problematic but a common thing in politics for both sides.
Well, Israel does not have a constitution, so the legalistic issues of Israeli law can be debated. More important, a dictator can operate within the law and still be a dictator. But democracy is meant to be the rule of majority, and when one person goes against a vast majority of his people to pursue a selfish and harmful agenda, he is definitely not acting upon any democratic merits.
His party got more votes, than means he is the elected leader, he can make any policy the parliament will allow him, the public has a voice once in 4 years (or in Israel's case 2-3 years) that is the system.
Israel is a representative democracy (like most democratic countries) the public elects the people (according to their agenda) and the elected officials do their policy through the parliament (knesset)
Yes, I know how the Israeli system works, but that does not mean he wasn't a dictator. Saddam Hussein was also legally elected. Hitler's Nazi party similarly got "more votes" in 1933 Germany. The lack of representative flexibility within the system does not take away from these leaders' dictatorial rule.
Saddam Hossein took power in a cue he later won fake elections when he runned unopposed, and Hitler's Nazi party got one third of the votes in 1933.
that's for the history part.
Democracy can defend itself only against major threats to democracy, the flexibility you are suggesting much mean that any person who disagrees with the goverment can go and shoot them up.
Regardless, both were accepted as legal rulers. Regarding the Nazi's, one third was more than any other party.
But I only used these as examples of how legal rulers can be dictators. Here is a recap our debate (correct me if I got it wrong):
* I said that Rabin was a dictator
* You said he couldn't be one because he was a legally elected official
* I countered by providing you with examples of other legally elected dictators
So do you still disagree that a dictator can be legally elected, and can operate within the law?
No, I am not suggesting that. I merely stated that I see no reason why Rabin should be revered the way that he is. The flexibility I am talking about, would have removed him from the office before he'd had a chance of becoming a dictator. But that would be another topic, and I'd rather not divert from the one at hand.
Yes dictators can be legally elected, that is the thing about democracy it can cancel itself if it has a majority support.
If Rabin was a dictator he would crushed the opposition or made it illegal but under his law there was an opposition lead by the Likud they could take him out of power if they had a majority vote in the parliament, So just say the truth according to your beliefs Rabin was a bad leader and even a dangerous one (I think the same of Sharon) but he was a democratical leader and talking about him as a dictator is just a right wing rhetorique to delegetimize his positions
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks