What do a far left former Meretz leader and a certain Satmar-associated media organization have in common? They both tweet and they both call other people Nazis. And they both need to stop. It pretty much happens every year during yeshiva week (the time when many Yeshivots give days off – a winter vacation of sorts). There is some incident with an airline flight attendant or representative. The airline rep – reacts, possibly in a discriminatory manner. And we decide to make an issue of it. Now, there is nothing wrong with standing up for one’s rights, as long as it is done properly and respectfully. But there is something wrong with name-calling and throwing around accusations of anti-Semitism. Often, the name-calling is someone in the media or someone posting a comment on a website. A video went around on Tuesday this past week regarding a Monday Delta Airline flight from Fort Lauderdale to LGA wherein a flight attendant informed someone that he had too much carry-on and he needed to check some of the bags. In this case, the preliminary indication is that the stewardess was in the wrong. However, a Twitter account allegedly associated with a Satmar [Aroni follower] feed that reaches 15,000 people called for a boycott of Delta Airlines until they fire the “Nazi" staff member. And it happened on Wednesday in Israel too, Former MK Zehava Galon, once the chairwoman of the far-left Meretz party posted a tweet of a photograph of Israel’s National Security Minister Bem Gvir raising up his arm and compared him to Nazis. Shortly after the tweet was posted, Galon came under fire for the Nazi comparison even by some on the Left castigating the Meretz chief’s comment. Galon was unapologetic, saying “I deleted the tweet,” Galon wrote in a follow up post. “I am still waiting for racism to be erased from the Knesset.” Ben-Gvir responded, “The daughter of Holocaust survivors is cheapening and ripping up the [memory] of the holy Six Million. Zehava, what would your mother and father say about this?” Although what follows is pretty obvious and would seem that it is something that does not need to be said, but we should never ever label someone a Nazi. This is true for a number of reasons: It desecrates the memory of the six million kedoshim by equating the implementation of a harsh rule or policy with the murder and gassing of innocent people. It is just very very wrong. It causes immense pain to holocaust survivors and their family members by minimizing their traumatic and horrifying experiences. Indeed, it is highly likely that it is a negation of feeling another's burdens called “ noseh b’ol chaveiro. ” It also contributes to something called “Terminology Inflation.” Just like in a school, when someone that deserves a mark of an 83 instead receives a mark of 99 or a 100, then what can one give the A plus student who did get a 99 or a 100? Ultimately, it renders his or her mark meaningless. By the same token, calling just anyone a Nazi makes it so that a truly murderous person can no longer be called anything. Such excessive descriptions actually cause additional anti-Semitism. The Gemara in Bava Metzia (58b) states that all the people who descend to Gehinnom arise from there with the exception of three kinds: adulterers; those who affix a pejorative name to another; and one who embarrasses his friend in public. These three never arise. This halakhah is stated in Shulchan Aruch regarding other Jews, Bnei Brit (Choshen Mishpat 228:5) and is nogaya – that is, practically applicable. The Rambam (Hilchos Teshuvah 3:14) lists these as one of the 24 categories of people that have no share in the World to Come. Calling someone a murderer or a moiser or a Nazi is also the ultimate insult or embarrassment. Rabbeinu Yona in his Shaarei Teshuvah (3:139) discusses explains that embarrassing someone is abizraihu, an action ancillary to a specific sin, of murdering. He refers to the incident of Tamar and Yehudah and explains that Tamar preferred to be burned with fire – rather than embarrass Yehudah publicly. He implies that this is an actual halakha. Rabbeinu Yonah, citing the Gemorah in Bava Metziah 59a, states, “L’olam yapil adam es atzmo l’kivshan haAish v’al yalbin pnei chaveiro berabim – a person should always throw himself into a pit of fire rather than embarrassing his friend in public.” MEIRI’S VIEW – SUGGESTION There is, of course, another understanding of Rabbeinu Yonah’s citation. The text in our Gemaras (both BM 59a and Sota 10b) is different than that which Rabbeinu Yonah quotes. Our text states, “Noach lo le’adam sh’yapil – it is preferable for a person to throw himself etc.” The wording of preferable indicates that doing so is a stringency – rather than a requirement. Indeed, this seems to be the indication of the Meiri in his comments on the Gemara in Sotah where he writes, “A person should always be careful not to embarrass” – the indication of his language and the fact that he refers to the throwing oneself as a “ha’ara” – a suggestion is indicative that he holds it is just an act of preference – a chumrah , so to speak. The Baalei haTosfos in their comments on the Gemara in Sotah, however, pose the question as to why this concept is not listed in the Gemara in Psachim (25a) among the three sins that one must forfeit his life for. The Baalei Tosfos answer that this concept is not explicitly written in the Torah. The implication of Tosfos is that they agree with the position of Rabbeinu Yonah that it is a full halakhic obligation. There is perhaps a third possibility that we can suggest. Could it be said that our sages merely are indicating how very severe it is to embarrass someone and are speaking in hyperbole? We find that Chazal will occasionally speak in hyperbole in order to bring home the point that this is an action from which we should stay far away. Regardless of the actual understanding of the Gemara – we really need to change, upgrade our method of conversation and stop calling people Nazis. The Twitter Feed, if it is a Jewish tweeter, should remove its declaration and explain things in the calm, cool, and collected manner that we are known for. And Zehava Galon needs to issue a full apology. Rabbi Hoffman is an educator and author. He can be reached at yairhoffman2@gmail.com
The initiative by the newly elected government to enact a far-reaching reform of the legal system is an inevitable result of the ongoing process of erosion of public trust. According to the University of Haifa’s annual index for public sector performance, the public's level of trust in the Israeli judicial system is at the lowest level since the index was first published in 2001.— i24News , Nov. 6, 2018. After a decade in which left-wing voters expressed a 44 percent confidence in the judiciary, their confidence has eroded since 2017 to 25 percent in 2020.— Haaretz , Jun. 4, 2020. Today, Israel is engulfed in a tumultuous public dispute in the titanic clash between the advocates of a direly needed reform of the country's system of law enforcement on the one hand, and its increasingly strident opponents on the other. Waxing evermore vehement and venomous, these opponents are engaged in a desperate last-ditch effort to preserve the remaining vestiges of their waning political power, by freezing the current distorted reality that still allows them—despite their minuscule (and diminishing) electoral support—to control much of the national decision-making process in Israel today. A litany of travesties The arrogance and blatant double standards of the legal establishment in general, and the judiciary in particular, together with an increasing number of verdicts that fly in the face of common sense—and any commonsense perception of natural justice—have led to a steep and ongoing erosion in public confidence in the impartiality of the courts—including the Supreme Court itself. Indeed, the catalog of mystifying decisions is as long as it is disconcerting. The following is a far from exhaustive list: The trampling of the right of the opponents of the 2005 Disengagement to protest; The disregard of the fact that the investigation against Prime Minister Netanyahu was launched in flagrant disregard of explicit legal requirements—not to mention a litany of brazenly improper (to be charitable) police/prosecution measures during the investigation itself; The discriminatory prohibition of demonstrations during the COVID-19 epidemic, preventing gatherings by the haredi sector while allowing those by the anti-Netanyahu protesters outside his Balfour Street residence; The repeated overturning of government decisions aimed at stemming the flood of illegal infiltration on the country by African migrants, and the detrimental effect this was having on the lives and livelihoods of less affluent neighborhoods in South Tel Aviv and elsewhere. "Blaming everyone but itself…" Thus, the well-known social activist and left-leaning law professor Yuval Elbashan , warned as recently as last December: "Confidence in Israel’s justice system, once so high, has slumped, and the time has come for the system to stop blaming everyone but itself." Indeed, over a decade earlier, in a book entitled "Towards Juristocracy" published in 2004 by Harvard University Press, Ran Hirschl, Professor of Political Science and Law, at the University of Toronto, cautioned: "In Israel, the negative impact of the judicialization of politics on the Supreme Court’s legitimacy is already beginning to show its mark. Over the past decade, the public image of the Supreme Court as an autonomous and impartial arbiter has been increasingly eroded." He cautioned "…as political arrangements and public policies agreed upon in majoritarian decision-making arenas [such as the parliament and/or government-MS] are likely to be reviewed by an often hostile Supreme Court… the court and its judges are increasingly viewed by a considerable portion of the Israeli public as pushing forward their own political agenda…” The current initiative by the newly elected government to enact a far-reaching reform of the legal system is thus, an inevitable result of the ongoing process of erosion of public trust. Victims of judicial intervention in policy But the appalling harm that the current system inflicts on Israeli society can take on far more tangible and tragic forms. Perhaps, the most horrific (and I use the term with careful deliberation) illustration of this is the following: On May 2, 2004, a young social worker, Tali Hatuel, who was eight months pregnant with her fifth child, was driving home with her four children aged 2 to 11 years old. On the way, they were ambushed by two Palestinian Arab terrorists, lying in wait in a roadside building . From their hiding place, they opened fire on the young mother and her children, forcing them off the road. The terrorist then approached the vehicle and slaughtered all the occupants from point-blank range. What is both staggering and infuriating about this appalling tragedy is that the army had intended to demolish the buildings, which afforded cover to the murderers, because they had been used previously by terrorists to kill both Israeli civilians and IDF soldiers. However, the demolition was prevented by order of the Supreme Court, which, under today's system, is the ultimate arbiter of what is "reasonable" and "proportionate" even in areas where they have no professional expertise. The perils of unbridled authority with no responsibility Sadly, Tali Hatuel and her four daughters paid with their lives for the gross judicial intervention into Israel's security policy, while the judge(s) of course suffered no repercussions for the horrendous consequences of their decisions. But that is how things are when the judiciary has overriding authority, but zero responsibility. Clearly, a stop must be put to this glaring travesty! Dr. Martin Sherman spent seven years in operational capacities in the Israeli defense establishment. He is the founder of the Israel Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), a member of the Habithonistim-Israel Defense & Security Forum (IDSF) research team, and a participant in the Israel Victory Project .
Video: The Telegraph
