It has now been proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that Israel's "disengagement" from Gaza was one of the most tragic mistakes ever made by any Israeli government, and was directly responsible for the Hamas victory, as well as the daily Kassam rocket bombardment of Israel. Israel's retreat under fire and the release of hundreds of convicted terrorists has only proven that terrorism works. Yet, despite all this, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has still not given up on his plan to "disengage" from the West Bank, as well; a folly that can only lead to more destruction and disaster, G-d forbid.
It should be quite clear therefore, that anyone participating in removing settlers from their homes is committing a terrible crime against Israel's citizens. For police or soldiers to claim that they are "just following orders," as the Nazis claimed in the Nuremberg trials, has been more than once discredited as a defense. It was employed and rejected during the court martial of William Calley following the My Lai massacre in 1968. It was also used to defend soldiers during the Abu Ghraib torture scandal, but wasn't given any credence.
Every soldier must follow his ethical and moral beliefs, and he must never abandon them, no matter what the consequences. It should be abundantly clear that all Israeli soldiers and police, whether they are religious or not, may not follow such orders of "disengagement", even if they will go to jail for their refusal. This is not a question of Greater Israel or politics, but one of survival. Pikuach nefesh - preventing danger to life - takes precedence over all else.
Hamas and Fatah have clearly stated that their goal is to make all of Israel Judenrein, not just the West Bank.
Furthermore, many of Israel's leading generals and security chiefs strongly oppose the present government's disastrous suicidal policies, with some even fired for their outspokenness. But it was an American senator, not an Israeli rabbi, who said, "There is a higher law than the Constitution."
One must also note that Israel's former Deputy Attorney General, Nahum Rackover, has joined those who claim that the directive to expel Jews from their homes in Gaza and northern Samaria was an illegal order. Professor Rackover said that a 1977 law deals specifically with individual liability despite one's acting on the basis of superior orders. The most often cited example of this principle was in 1957, when IDF soldiers were convicted after following an order to fire upon a busload of Arab workers from Kfar Kassam during a curfew they were not aware of at the time of the Suez campaign. Every IDF soldier who participated in the incident was convicted of following an illegal order.
Let's remember that just because a decision is made by a democratically elected majority doesn't insure that it is just and moral. Yasser Arafat, as well as Hitler and Hamas, were also elected "democratically." Does "democracy" mean that those following their orders should be absolved of guilt?
If every single settler, along with their thousands of sympathizers, will allow themselves to go to jail for their moral convictions, then there is no way the government can implement their suicidal expulsion orders. It must be one for all and all for one.
It should be quite clear therefore, that anyone participating in removing settlers from their homes is committing a terrible crime against Israel's citizens. For police or soldiers to claim that they are "just following orders," as the Nazis claimed in the Nuremberg trials, has been more than once discredited as a defense. It was employed and rejected during the court martial of William Calley following the My Lai massacre in 1968. It was also used to defend soldiers during the Abu Ghraib torture scandal, but wasn't given any credence.
Every soldier must follow his ethical and moral beliefs, and he must never abandon them, no matter what the consequences. It should be abundantly clear that all Israeli soldiers and police, whether they are religious or not, may not follow such orders of "disengagement", even if they will go to jail for their refusal. This is not a question of Greater Israel or politics, but one of survival. Pikuach nefesh - preventing danger to life - takes precedence over all else.
Hamas and Fatah have clearly stated that their goal is to make all of Israel Judenrein, not just the West Bank.
Furthermore, many of Israel's leading generals and security chiefs strongly oppose the present government's disastrous suicidal policies, with some even fired for their outspokenness. But it was an American senator, not an Israeli rabbi, who said, "There is a higher law than the Constitution."
One must also note that Israel's former Deputy Attorney General, Nahum Rackover, has joined those who claim that the directive to expel Jews from their homes in Gaza and northern Samaria was an illegal order. Professor Rackover said that a 1977 law deals specifically with individual liability despite one's acting on the basis of superior orders. The most often cited example of this principle was in 1957, when IDF soldiers were convicted after following an order to fire upon a busload of Arab workers from Kfar Kassam during a curfew they were not aware of at the time of the Suez campaign. Every IDF soldier who participated in the incident was convicted of following an illegal order.
Let's remember that just because a decision is made by a democratically elected majority doesn't insure that it is just and moral. Yasser Arafat, as well as Hitler and Hamas, were also elected "democratically." Does "democracy" mean that those following their orders should be absolved of guilt?
If every single settler, along with their thousands of sympathizers, will allow themselves to go to jail for their moral convictions, then there is no way the government can implement their suicidal expulsion orders. It must be one for all and all for one.