The decision to brutalize and degrade the protesters at Amona by Acting Prime Minister Ehud Olmert was made well before the horrors took place. Numerous meetings were held among the settlers and the security forces to reach a compromise, and thus avoid a physical confrontation. The night before the assault, representatives of the two groups, together with the attorney general of Israel, came to an agreement. However, when the proposal was presented to Acting Prime Minister Olmert, he spurned it.
The results of Mr. Olmert's rejection of the compromise were the brutalization and degradation of many of the protesters (examples of which may be seen on the video from the following link: http://www.israelnn.com/must-watch). Mr. Olmert likely knew what the results would be before they occurred. He made statements indicating that the assault on the protesters should be physically heavy-handed, and provisions were made not to arrest, but to strike and maim - to "open heads". The combined "security" forces beat, trampled over and clubbed their fellow Jews indiscriminately -- as the acting prime minister and police chief had instructed they do.
The physical beatings, and the emotional trauma they caused, were the focal point of the tragedy at Amona. However, there were a number of other issues involving Amona that reflected a grave lapse in thinking by Mr. Olmert. The acting prime minister's immediate reaction to the physical brutality against the protesters was his shameful display of disassociation from the events. He quickly rejected the idea of an investigation into the confrontation. And there were no television clips on Channels 1, 2, 10 or 23, or newspaper photos in Arutz Sheva, the Jerusalem Post, Yediot Aharonot, or even Ha'eretz or Ma'ariv, picturing Mr. Olmert comforting the family of Yechiam ben Rachel, the teen-age boy who was put into a coma as a result of the baton strikes to his head. In one fell swoop, Mr. Olmert announced to the voters of Israel his party's main platform: no responsibility; no compassion.
Another terrible error committed by the acting prime minister concerns the reasoning behind his decision to encourage and promote a conflict with the protesters. Ehud Olmert desperately wished to demonstrate to the electorate (and, most probably, to himself), his ability to fight. The acting prime minister wanted Israeli voters to go to the polls March 28th thinking that Olmert was "strong on defense." His use of an overwhelming show of force would have been an appropriate strategy if it had been directed towards one of Israel's numerous violent enemies, such as against terrorists, in reaction to rockets flying left and right into Israel from Gaza. But it just didn't have that "flex your muscles" effect when it was carried out against his fellow citizens, most of whom were defenseless teen-age boys and girls. The encouragement to Hamas is plain.
If all of the above mistakes were not bad enough, they pale in comparison to the threat to Israel's very existence created by Olmert's obsession with achieving a "military victory" at Amona. As the acting prime minister, Mr. Olmert is responsible for the security and survival of the Jewish State. Olmert's drastic lapse in judgment in deploying crucial security forces to destroy nine homes, and thus putting the nation at risk, is unforgivable. Imagine the huge number of police and military personnel he would feel compelled to deploy to destroy not nine homes, but 500 or 1,000 in a single campaign, as he has implied he would do if elected prime minister.
The police brutality and degradation at Amona have been recorded by numerous sources and are horrible to recount, no less than to watch. Even more importantly, and of utmost concern to the Jewish State, they are symptomatic of the acting prime minister's irrational thinking; the result of an illogical zigzagging of knotted, vulnerable and unstable circuitry that, at best, is dangerous; at worst, it is catastrophic. Yet, most sadly, this irrationality could very well determine the fate of Israel.
The results of Mr. Olmert's rejection of the compromise were the brutalization and degradation of many of the protesters (examples of which may be seen on the video from the following link: http://www.israelnn.com/must-watch). Mr. Olmert likely knew what the results would be before they occurred. He made statements indicating that the assault on the protesters should be physically heavy-handed, and provisions were made not to arrest, but to strike and maim - to "open heads". The combined "security" forces beat, trampled over and clubbed their fellow Jews indiscriminately -- as the acting prime minister and police chief had instructed they do.
The physical beatings, and the emotional trauma they caused, were the focal point of the tragedy at Amona. However, there were a number of other issues involving Amona that reflected a grave lapse in thinking by Mr. Olmert. The acting prime minister's immediate reaction to the physical brutality against the protesters was his shameful display of disassociation from the events. He quickly rejected the idea of an investigation into the confrontation. And there were no television clips on Channels 1, 2, 10 or 23, or newspaper photos in Arutz Sheva, the Jerusalem Post, Yediot Aharonot, or even Ha'eretz or Ma'ariv, picturing Mr. Olmert comforting the family of Yechiam ben Rachel, the teen-age boy who was put into a coma as a result of the baton strikes to his head. In one fell swoop, Mr. Olmert announced to the voters of Israel his party's main platform: no responsibility; no compassion.
Another terrible error committed by the acting prime minister concerns the reasoning behind his decision to encourage and promote a conflict with the protesters. Ehud Olmert desperately wished to demonstrate to the electorate (and, most probably, to himself), his ability to fight. The acting prime minister wanted Israeli voters to go to the polls March 28th thinking that Olmert was "strong on defense." His use of an overwhelming show of force would have been an appropriate strategy if it had been directed towards one of Israel's numerous violent enemies, such as against terrorists, in reaction to rockets flying left and right into Israel from Gaza. But it just didn't have that "flex your muscles" effect when it was carried out against his fellow citizens, most of whom were defenseless teen-age boys and girls. The encouragement to Hamas is plain.
If all of the above mistakes were not bad enough, they pale in comparison to the threat to Israel's very existence created by Olmert's obsession with achieving a "military victory" at Amona. As the acting prime minister, Mr. Olmert is responsible for the security and survival of the Jewish State. Olmert's drastic lapse in judgment in deploying crucial security forces to destroy nine homes, and thus putting the nation at risk, is unforgivable. Imagine the huge number of police and military personnel he would feel compelled to deploy to destroy not nine homes, but 500 or 1,000 in a single campaign, as he has implied he would do if elected prime minister.
The police brutality and degradation at Amona have been recorded by numerous sources and are horrible to recount, no less than to watch. Even more importantly, and of utmost concern to the Jewish State, they are symptomatic of the acting prime minister's irrational thinking; the result of an illogical zigzagging of knotted, vulnerable and unstable circuitry that, at best, is dangerous; at worst, it is catastrophic. Yet, most sadly, this irrationality could very well determine the fate of Israel.