Rabin in keffiyeh: just another poster?
Yigal Amir: not driven by incitement?
I held my breath and closed my eyes Tuesday as I watched the tension-filled landing of the space shuttle Discovery after its mission to the International Space Station.
A short while later, the door opened, and who should we see standing next to the astronauts, but Israel’s Attorney General, Menachem Mazuz. What a surprise!
Mr. Mazuz’s statements Wednesday about the relationship, or rather lack thereof, between incitement and the murder of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin were - how shall I put it… surprising and strange.
By Moran Zelikovich
Late Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin's assassin was not driven to murder because of incitement, Israel's Attorney-General says, sparking outrage from left-wing officials; Meretz MK: We must uproot bad weeds from national-religious community
I have nothing but the greatest respect for Menachem Mazuz, but some of his statements of late bring into question whether or not he was really here in 1995, or whether he was one of the astronauts at the space station?
If he invited me to his office, I would tell him about that infamous balcony in Jerusalem’s Zion Square, about the caskets in Raanana, excrement-filled letters, swastikas, and dead cats that were sent to the prime minister’s office.
I’d tell him about the posters showing Rabin in a kaffiyeh, the closed streets, the demonstrations at traffic junctions, how they ran after him everywhere he went.
How could you say that months of Jewish terror that preceded Rabin’s murder had nothing to do with the events in Kings of Israel Square (the former name of Rabin Square) that cursed November night?
I’m trying to understand the attorney general. I am convinced he was speaking, with his lawyerly precision, about the strictly legal aspects of the issue.
Is there evidence? Is there proof? Bring the perpetrators to justice. If not, there must be no connection between incitement and murder.
This is how one Tel Aviv lawyer sees things.
But the attorney general must act not only on evidence placed directly in front of him, but must also try to understand things of another variety.