1. One of the fundamental facts of life in the Middle East is that the Israeli Left is, and always was, fundamentally anti-democratic. It manifests its hostility to the rules of democracy in many different ways. It launched a massive wave of McCarthyism against opponents of Oslo after Rabin was assassinated and demanded that anti-Oslo activists be arrested for "incitement". It claimed that all those who disagree with itself were in fact accomplices in that murder, but anyone who says that the LEFT is an accomplice in the murders perpetrated by the PLO should be jailed for sedition.

   The Left also manifests its hostility to democracy and freedom in its role as the hegemonic power over the judicial system and the universities. The Left’s idea of pluralism is on display for all to see every day in Haaretz.

   All of which makes Avram Burg’s latest prank all the more understandable. Avram Burg recently ran for head of the Labor Party, which is itself polling less than 15% in the polls. At first he "won", but only through massive voter fraud involving Druse voters in the party primaries. He was challenged and in a second round he was soundly licked by Labor Head Benjamin "Fuad" Ben-Eliezer. Burg however is still the Chairman of the Knesset (like the House Speaker).

   In an attempt to rescue his career, he is moving sharply to the Left. His latest prank is to plot to appear before the PLO’s "parliament" and ask for a "hudna". The idea for asking for a "hudna" was originally raised by some of the country’s tenured extremists. A "hudna" in Islam is a temporary ceasefire the Moslems grant when they are not strong enough to wipe out the enemy - at the request of the enemy. And where it is crystal clear that at the first opportunity to annihilate the non-Moslem enemy, the Moslems are free to violate the "hudna" and attack. It was a tactic adopted by the early Moslem empire.

   Which means that the suggestion to request a "hudna" is one of the very stupidest ever to emerge from the Israeli Left, and the competition there is fierce. It is the ultimate in self-abasement and self-disgrace. President Katsav toyed with the idea of doing it until it was explained to him what the "hudna" means, and in any case Sharon’s cabinet nixed the idea. Even the head of the Labor Party opposes the idea. But Burg says he is going on his own, as a sort of Israeli Ramsey Clark. (Clark was a far-leftist and - as it turns out - an anti-Semite, who ran to Iran in the middle of the hostage crisis in 1980 to praise the ayatollahs and betray America.)

   Burg now says he is going no matter what, and will even go if he has no bodyguards. With his itsy bitsy quarter-sized yarmulka, he just might be mistaken by the PLO stormtroopers for a settler, in which case one of Israel’s most pressing political problems would be solved.

   Meanwhile, in another manifestation of the anti-democratic nature of the Israeli Left, a group of 50 Far Left reserve officers have published an ad in which they declare they will refuse to do military service in the "territories" because such service is merely the "War for the Safety of the Settlers". Got that? Military actions on the West Bank and Gaza have nothing to do with the PLO and its friends blowing up groups of Israeli children and similar living things.

   This ad of manifest treason, like so many before it, has failed to motivate the Sharon government to throw all the signers into prison. But it does show nicely the leftist view of democracy, which is that soldiers need only obey orders when they are approved by the extremist leftist opposition opposed by 80% of the public.

2. Finally, I am amused to tears by the sudden interest of the world in the "human rights" of the al-Qaeda prisoners being held in Guatanamo Bay by the US. The poor lads are being kept in prison cages in the lush tropical warmth and fed three square a day, unlike most Cubans living in Cuba. How amusing that the very same people suddenly concerned about the "rights" of the terrorist garbage sacks have never had a caring word to say about any human rights on the REST of the Cuban island. In fact, the ordinary Cuban has fewer rights and a lower standard of living than the al-Qaeda prisoners.

   Meanwhile, suddenly the question of whether it is ok to torture terrorists has suddenly become a hot debating topic in the US. Alan the Dersh from Harvard says it is ok, and others agree, while naturally the caring Left argues that no matter how many civilian lives are at risk, one must never speak loudly into the face of a captured terrorist or withhold tobacco.

   Dersh and the others have proposed the "ticking bomb" test, that is, where torture is permitted when there is the equivalent of a ticking bomb that requires the terrorhoid to spill his guts at once. Israel has long had a similar debate, and the Left has been pushing to prohibit any rough-housing with terrorists by the security forces.

   I, however, would like to propose a DIFFERENT terrorist torture criterion, one sharply dissenting from Dershowitz’s.

   I would like to propose that terrorists be tortured even when there is NOT a ticking bomb. Even when there are NO other lives at risk. Terrorists should be tortured because it is the moral, proper, correct thing to do. Terrorists who target children and civilians deserve to be tortured for its own sake, because they are human garbage. Because this makes a statement to the world, that they are neither military prisoners of war nor common criminals, and deserving of NONE of the rights of those. In other words, the torture of terrorists criterion should be that terrorists be tortured whenever someone finds it fun to do so.

   And let us hear nothing about, Well if we torture THEIR captured terrorists then they will do the same to our troops. This is nonsense. They will torture our troops and civilians ANYWAY (Ron Arad, etc). This consideration did not deter the Americans in Afghanistan and should not deter them in Iraq and Somalia, nor should it deter Israel.

Steven Plaut

You can e-mail your comments to Steven at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il

About Steven Plaut.

Copyright © 2002 by Steven Plaut.
All Rights Reserved.

-Published with permission