Rabin's murderer decided however and in whatever circumstances to do what he did. He killed the finest statesman Israel has ever had! That is the tragedy, it doesn't matter why!!

Mazuz sees things like a prosecutor. What and where is the evidence? The court has already ruled that Avishai Raviv was not guilty of incitement inspite of his publishing pictures of Rabin in a Kaffeya, organizing a marches with a casket, and secret (but well publicized) ceremonies. Of course other people also were involved: Some compared the opponents of Oslo with Hamas, and spoke of propellers spinning in the wind. Mazuz also sees no solid evidence of incitement in those words (and perhaps no difference in significance). Haber is different. He is a defender who sees and presents things to take the blame from his client and direct it elsewhere. Caveat emptor

I do agree with the words of the attorney general. The is no evidence the terrible murder of Yitzhak Rabin, was a result of a pure incitement. There will always be lunatics who will try to assasinate a PM who does not act according to their philosophy, try to commit a massive murder of Arabs, or blow up the Al Aqusa mosque in Jerusalem.

this is not complicated ! Mazuz said, '"No proof" incitement led to Rabin's murder', and there isn't, and wasn't. One will never know if and by how much Yigal Amir was (if at all) affected by 'incitement'. Let's see some logic here and forget about this - there's a whole world of other things to put one's attention on. Michael

If Mr. Haber is concerned about incitement, he should first condem the signers of the Oslo Accords, who incited the Palestinians to murder Jews by giving them tangible benefits for a piece of paper. However, what is really indictable is the fact that these negotiations were held in the good old days when it was illegal to talk to Palestinian terrorist!

facts please ? I immigrated to Israel 2 years ago and have only had contact with the police twice and both times were driving related. And both times they were very very polite. Maybe I was polite and not abusive or perhaps saying 'i obey a higher law than yours ?! Michael