And some other cutting humor.
I added some background for some of the segments below.
Caroline Glick gives some background for some of the segments on this week's Latma on her blog in her post Bibi obeys "the law":
This week on the Tribal Update, the weekly satirical newscast produced by Latma, the Hebrew-language, satirical media criticism website that I run, we bring you several exceptional items. You may or may not have heard about the scandal at Israel's Forensic Medicine Institute. Prof. Yehuda Hiss, has again come under fire when it was discovered that he had held body parts of thousands of Israelis in his institute without receiving the permission of the families of the deceased. This is not the first time he has been caught doing this and I simply do not understand why he wasn't forced out of his position years ago.For background on the segment with Netanyahu, read Caroline Glick on Defeating the Jewish Alinskyites:
We bring you a special interview with Prof. Hannibal Hiss.
You may also not have heard, but this week it was revealed that the upscale Ramat Aviv mall in Tel Aviv is barring entry to ultra-Orthodox Jews. We discuss the rationale behind the ban.
Finally, we bring you a special exclusive interview with Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu where he discusses his decision to implement the Supreme Court's decision to destroy the homes of 30 families in Bet El.
...In the event, the radical activist group Yesh Din petitioned the court in the name of a Palestinian who claimed to be the rightful owner of the land on which the neighborhood was built. Yesh Din presented the court with an affidavit in which the Palestinian claimed that the land in question belonged to him. Yesh Din then asked the court to make the state explain why, given the affidavit, the IDF had not yet evacuated the neighborhood.Read the whole thing.
On its face, the job of the state prosecution couldn't have been more obvious. All they had to do was tell the court that the issue of ownership is contested and that the court should require Yesh Din to adjudicate ownership in the lower courts.
So, too, they ought to have rejected the unsubstantiated assertion that the IDF is required to destroy homes built on private land. There is ample precedent for both positions, including a nearly identical case regarding a neighborhood in Barkan where the land in question belonged - without question - to a private Jewish landowner.
But the state prosecution decided not to take any of those obvious positions. By not questioning the veracity of the affidavit or the assertion that the IDF is required to destroy homes built on private land without the permission of the owner, the state prosecution, which is supposed to represent the elected government, left the justices no choice. All they could do was set a date for the expulsion of the 30 families living in the five apartment buildings. And so they did.
Both the Knesset and Netanyahu seem to recognize that Israel's elected leaders were manipulated by political radicals abusing their positions in the state prosecution to undermine the elected government. And they seem to be taking appropriate action.
Technorati Tag: Israel and Latma.