Bennett Lapid government

The rabbi doesn't automatically support? The rabbi could still be called an instigator.

I didn't say I don't support it. I said I can't have an opinion on an unborn egg. When it's born and we see how it goes, I'll have a position on it. You can ask whether it's appropriate to form such a government. But to ask what my opinion is on this government is a question that can't be answered.
I'm in favor of anything other than Bibi. I didn't sign petitions in favor of this government (which were sent to me in large numbers) because I'm skeptical about its ability to last. That's why I thought it would be better to go to the elections again and again until the Likud comes to its senses and throws out the corrupt one and forms a government without him. But now if it is formed, we'll wait and see. Maybe they'll form it and pass a law that doesn't allow the corrupt to run (which I'm not sure I support, for several reasons: personal legislation, and also going against the will of the voter), and then it would have been worth forming it even if it didn't last.

On the one hand, I support personal laws, and in particular the law proposed here, and on the other hand, if I were a Likudnik and such a “personal” law were enacted, I would have no problem explaining to everyone that we will put Shimon Bokobza as the acting leader of the Likud, and if there are 61 seats after the elections, then we will pass a unique law that a person named Shimon Bokobza leading the Likud in 2021 can be replaced by a person named Benjamin Netanyahu and receive all the powers as if he were directly elected.
The condition for the prime ministership and the condition for enacting laws are the same: 61 seats. This means that small tricks (although in themselves I support them) are not supposed to work at all and it is always possible to turn the wheel backwards.

But in a year or two, it's likely that he'll be in prison and won't be able to replace the current Bokobza. The game is about time.

Then a law will be enacted that even convicted prisoners (provided their name is Benjamin Netanyahu) can serve as prime ministers and the prison sentence will be suspended or canceled.

How much does the rabbi know about Ilan Yeshua's testimony that he thinks Netanyahu is corrupt?

Apparently the rabbi is fed by a lot of propaganda that has been going on here for 3 years

Your Honor, the question is what do you think about Bennett's act of fraud and if it is possible to write an even better column about it?

The combination Bennett-Lapid is not at all problematic, even with the torch they will bring a soldier to the hand, because there is a soldier here, and especially Ayelet Shaked has already seized him, and the torch can only bring him to a serious glow that will make him fit.

The problem is the combination of Lapid with Saar, whose wind of the storm is liable to carry the fire far away, and Man Pace that Saar's company will have time to say "I will" and calm the storm, and perhaps with the combination of "biton" there is reason to believe that the fire will not spread, and so on.

Best regards, Pirro Man

Paragraph 1, line 2
… Jett Ben Dashri, …

The propaganda that was here made voters choose Bibi again and again.
If the truth had been told, he would have flown from the beginning.
But the media wanted him there. He was useful to them.

What do you think about the deception of the Sages who said that the difference over the cup brought him male sons? The Sages said that the difference over the cup, under normal conditions, brings male sons, but sometimes there are other parameters that can neutralize this (such as in the sin of vows, where a person's sons die). Under different conditions, a person may break his promises because the new circumstances require him to do X even though it is a breach of promise, and this is better than not doing it and keeping the promise because the expected damage is greater.

On September 21, 2019, the Left Bloc is ready to hand out some “candy” to Bennett and Saar, but the left-wing majority prime ministership is a worthless honor. What is the value of a prime minister whose opinion in the government is a “minority opinion”? They will give Bennett and Saar and co. the honors of Prime Minister, Minister of the Interior, Minister of Education and Minister of Justice, but those who will determine foreign, security and economic policy will be leftists.

The leftists need Bennett and Saar to oust Netanyahu, but if they insist on determining anything in the political, security and economic fields, or determining the appointment of judges or attorneys, the whole “dance of the devils” will begin against them. That Netanyahu has earned, slander and demonstrations, investigations and cases, until they “understand their place” or until they leave in disgrace.

And where will they go? They know that in the next elections they will not pass the threshold, after losing the trust of most of their voters on the right. Their partners on the left can safely assume that in this situation, Bennett and Saar will have no choice but to faithfully serve their partners on the left so that they can prolong their symbolic “kingdom” in Balfour and Salah ad-Din.

This is the painful choice left to Bennett, Saar and Co.: either endure the persecution that Netanyahu went through or become puppets in the hands of the left. This is the fruit of envy and the urge to “be in charge,” and it’s a shame.

Best regards, Yaron Fishel Ordner.

In the meantime, Ayelet Shaked is challenging the group with a strong demand to be appointed to the Judicial Appointments Committee in place of Merav Michaeli. This is a demand that puts the leftists to the test, whether they will allow the ’Right’ to have real influence. Perhaps there is another provision for the ’Right’…

The similarity to Chazal's words is not accurate. Chazal did not promise that they would give sons to the winemaker, but rather tried to explain a reality (specific, I assume) - and in such a situation it really makes sense that there are more parameters beyond what they said in that specific sentence. Which is not the case when a person promises that he will/will not do something.
Beyond that - it is not clear what the new circumstances are since Bennett declared that there will be no PM with Lapid “not even in rotation” - it is clear that he was referring to a situation in which Lapid is forming a government (and not Netanyahu) - so what exactly has changed?
And what is more, Bennett is acting against the will of the majority of his voters (according to the polls) - which can definitely be interpreted as fraud. And what is more, two weeks ago he declared that the government of change had fallen out of favor - and since then it is not at all clear what has changed.

This behavior, in which the party chairman dictates the policy to all members of his faction and they approve it without being able to object, for fear that in the next elections they will be thrown off the list, invites contempt for the electorate.

When the faction's members of Knesset are elected in the primaries by all party members or by its elected institutions, they can criticize the moves of their party leader, but when they depend on him, they must say yes to even his most dubious whims.

Today, the only major party, whose leader and representatives in the Knesset are elected by hundreds of thousands of party members, It is the ‘Likud’, not for nothing does a party gain the trust of a million voters, who feel that the party leader and its representatives in the Knesset are true ‘elected officials’, in whom one can place trust.

Best regards, Yifa”r

Anonymous, I hope you understand the distinction you made. I don't. It's exactly the same logic.
It's debatable whether circumstances have changed, but you're mixing up a statement from two weeks ago that was a tactical decision and not a promise to the voter, with promises made before the elections, since when the situation has changed a lot (for example, the results were received).

Wow, your statements sometimes reflect a magnificent disconnect from reality. In Likud, are there criticisms from the MKs and voters
of the party and its leader? This is precisely an example of contradicting your wonderful theory (but logical a priori, it must be admitted) regarding the influence of primaries on the party. Throughout the entire period, the clear interest of Likud voters is that Bibi will fly so that there will be a full-fledged right-wing government (ALK) and not a "left-wing" government (ALK). I don't see them achieving this. The Likud is a party that has a tyrannical single-party government against the interests of the party and the state, no less and even more than all the "dictatorial" parties.

On the occasion of Sivan Tashaf

Ramada –a – Hello,

What can be done against the facts? The chairman of the Likud and the party's representatives to the Knesset were elected in secret elections by hundreds of thousands of party members, to whom they are accountable.

Gideon Sa'ar lost the internal elections, and was even less successful in the general elections. His demand that the party leader – who was elected by a large majority of its members and won the trust of about a million voters – Resigning is a recipe for the collapse of the Likud, since Netanyahu has earned the public's trust due to his proven experience and ability.

Netanyahu stood firm and did not give in to heavy pressure from home and abroad, including from the hostile US President Obama, and despite the pressure, he managed to advance the country's economic, political, and security position. In his handling of the Corona crisis, Netanyahu succeeded in bringing the State of Israel to be the first country to emerge from the pandemic by obtaining vaccines, while the rest of the world is behind us.

Replacing Netanyahu with a much less experienced leader, a leader who has never stood up to the US President's shoe-horned shoe and was not impressed - is an excellent move for Saar. Not for the Likud and not for the country.

Best regards, Yaffo

In the last paragraph, lines 1-2
… to the pointed shoe of the President of the United States”…

On the 21st of Sivan, 2015

Surprising thing, or not? I discovered it in an article from Tevet 3, 2015, ‘The New Israel Fund: We financially support Beit HaYehudi’, on the ‘Radio Kol Hai’ website. According to the article, the New Israel Fund informed Emilie Amrossi that the fund financially supports Beit HaYehudi’, and thus indirectly supports Bennett.

In an article on Channel 7 (19th of Nisan 2015), the fund's director, Momar Gitzin, states that he supports a government led by Bennett that would replace Netanyahu, and that he is not afraid of Bennett's right-wing, because his partners on the left would greatly limit him.

In short: old ties with the new foundation 🙂

With greetings from ‘every foundation has a hat there’, Zvika Karni

In the 24th of Sivan, 2017

In the emerging government of change (Khul Hila), three types of leaders occupy a prominent place, whose interaction between their opposing qualities - can have a positive and beneficial effect.

Of course, the predatory populists come to the fore. Types like Yair Lapid, Avigdor Lieberman, Meirav Michael, Tamar Zandbergi and Nitzan Horowitz - their ability to execute tends to zero and their political power comes from the hostility and provocations they arouse.

They are somewhat balanced by the second type, the pale and pleasant one, Benny Gantz. Secular but respectful of tradition, leftist but a bit of a security hawk who has a certain empathy for settlers and religious Zionists

Opposite them is the right-wing minority, headed by Naftali Bahat, who is a wonderful combination of a predatory populist with an excellent executive. The desire for power in the unconquerable does not bode well. Even his tendency towards light religiosity as an ideal – invites trouble. On the other hand, his tendency towards the right and national and security activism – may somewhat moderate the amok run to free himself from the ’territories’, to which Lapid, Meretz and Michali will be drawn.

In the third type – the excellent executive – Standing on the right side of the map (I don't know the leftists. Maybe there are some there too...) are people like Ayelet Shaked, Matan Kahane, Gideon Sa'ar, Yifat Biton Shasha and Ze'ev Elkin, who on the one hand will be able to promote positive trends in the areas they will be entrusted with - Interior and Justice, Education and Housing - and perhaps also have a slightly positive influence on the conduct of most left-wing members of the government.

Mansour Abbas also belongs to the type of excellent performers, who will pose a major problem in the security sector, preventing them from taking a firm hand against rioters and terrorists, and on the other hand will act against the predatory liberalism that aspires to undermine traditional family values, wage an all-out war against gender segregation and in favor of predatory homosexuality.

It is possible that the contradictions in this strange government will manage to moderate each other a little, thereby maintaining a relatively slow pace of deterioration, and in the process will allow Netanyahu to rebuild his political path, not being content with the past with assertive and charismatic leadership, but rather giving more room for teamwork with his leadership colleagues, so that the Likud can return to leading.

With concern and hope, Nehorai Shraga Agami-Psisowitz’

In the name of the Lord, send people to you, and you will be successful.

It is possible that the strange government of change will be a solution to the halakhic quandary created by the prohibition of "bribing things" (= making a decision for the sake of "favorable coverage") on elected officials.

The prohibition of "bribing things", which in Jewish law prohibits judges from sitting in the court of someone who has given them "favorable coverage", is very applicable to a judge or magistrate, who, once appointed, has no dependence on "public opinion" and does not need anyone's "favorable coverage".

In contrast, an elected official in a democratic regime, who is elected for a term of several years, and may be a candidate for another term - after all, his entire motivation in making decisions is his expectation of receiving 'sympathetic coverage' from the public, and public sympathy is what will determine whether he 'will prolong his reign' or be deposed.

The democratic nature of government requires the leader to be attentive to the public's sympathy or dissension, and public opinion is a central component of the leader's considerations in making decisions. As the elders advised Rehabam, he should be attentive to the will of the people so that they will accept his rule.

Applying the prohibition of 'bribe-giving' Even for an elected official, it requires that the elected official be independent of public opinion, and this is only possible if the elected official is elected for only one term, for example, as a judge who is appointed until he reaches the age of 70, or as a president who is elected for a single term of 7 years, and then truly from the moment he is elected

In this legal situation, which the halakha recognizes as ’dina demalchut’. A leader who may stand for another term is prohibited from making any decisions except in situations of pikuach nefesh, and indeed the situation of a paralyzed transitional government is the only thing that prevents elected officials from failing to comply with the prohibition of ‘bribe devarim’.

The government of change has brought about a new type of elected official who is qualified to make decisions, and he is the ’political suicide’. A leader who has lost his political base and the trust of most of his voters, and knows that this term is the last in his life – He is truly the one who can make decisions without any expectation of ’sympathetic coverage’. Bennett, Shaked, Saar and Elkin know that the right-wing people have burned their bridges, and the left will also accept them only as a tool to remove Netanyahu from Balfour and throw them to hell at the first opportunity – These leaders know that no one will give them ‘sympathetic coverage’ and therefore all their decisions are kosher according to Dina Demalkuta 🙂

In this way, perhaps the ministers of the ‘right-wing government‘have resolved the prohibition of ‘making decisions with ‘sympathetic coverage’ for this term, and then God has mercy…

With greetings, Dina Zeor, our legal interpreter

By the way, in Israeli law, the prohibition of ‘bribing things’ has not been applied Sweepingly even on judges, and self-disqualification in the form of ‘sympathetic coverage’ depends on the practical fear of bias. A very vague definition. See the article by retired judge Rachel Shalev Gretel, ‘Bribery in Jewish and Israeli Law’.

On September 27, 2017, it was seemingly puzzling why Bhat and Saar refused Netanyahu's offer to rotate as right-wing prime ministers when Bennett was supposed to be the first? Why did they prefer a government whose majority members are leftists, including the ministers of foreign affairs, defense, and internal security?

To answer the second question, there is one answer: fear of international pressure. Both activists knew how to utter strong right-wing slogans, but to stand up to pressure from the president of the United States, the European Union, etc. – after all, the two had never faced such pressure in their lives. If Biden had only opened his mouth, their "stirrups would have snapped here and there" and their arguments would have been muffled.

Netanyahu is the only one who does not "melt" In the face of international pressure, because he has a systematic strategic mindset, and the ability to ‘play’ in the international arena even against powerful people. Netanyahu transferred the game to the ’American court’ with his ability to appeal to public opinion and raise awareness of the danger of Islamic, Palestinian and Iranian terrorism.

If pressured by a hostile president – Netanyahu had the ability to mobilize senators and members of Congress, and factors that influence public opinion and present them with clear facts that present the dangers of Islamic terrorism.

And not only with factors within the US. Netanyahu developed extensive relations with various countries. With Russian President Putin, with the Prime Minister of India and heads of state in Africa, and positioned himself as an important factor in the international arena.

In a brilliant move, Netanyahu took advantage of the Gulf states' fear of the Iranians, and established ties with several Arab countries to warm the hearts of the Iranians and the Palestinians.

The continued deterioration with the Palestinians, as a result of the Oslo Accords and the disengagement - Netanyahu could not stop it head-on and deny international agreements. What did Netanyahu do? He firmly conditioned the advancement of the "peace process" on the fact that there would truly be "peace" while stopping terrorism, and since the "other side" is not willing to abandon terrorism - the "withdrawal process" is stuck.

So Bennett and Saar, who know that they have neither a political strategy, which combines strategic determination with a certain flexibility, nor the ability to fight the American administration within its ‘home turf’ understand that they will not be able to implement a right-wing policy that will be led by them.

Admit that they need Netanyahu's experience, abilities and courage – they will not admit it. So they form a government with Lapid and Gantz, who unequivocally make it clear that they are committed to full compliance with every American dictate, and that they have no other way but to lobby. Gantz and Lapid will close matters with the Americans, and Bennett and Saar will answer amen with no choice. After all, neither the residents of Tel Aviv nor the residents of Ra'anana will pay the price 🙂

With greetings, Simcha Fish”l Halevi Plankton

What Bennett managed to influence on his “brothers” Lapid and Lieberman was a change in the perception that required pushing the Haredim towards the Kantians. Bennett explained at the time that the Haredim are a factor that is easy to work with, because they have no pretensions to substantially influence government policy. They need to establish their education, health and housing needs, and beyond that, for the heads of government to do what they want.

Therefore, Lapid and Lieberman abandoned their anti-Haredi line, realizing that the real threat to the secular nature of the country is actually the people of religious Zionism. Therefore, Bennett and Lapid are trying to separate the Haredim from the “right-wing bloc”, using the “carrot and stick” method.

The stick is giving the Ministry of Finance and the chairmanship of the Finance Committee to Lieberman and handing over the Ministry of Health to Meretz, and the Ministries of Interior and Religious Affairs to Yamina. In these positions, those who hold them can make life miserable for the Haredim.

The cut is the explicit call for the Haredim to join their government. They expect that the United Torah Judaism members will join first in exchange for the chairmanship of the Finance Committee and the Ministry of Health or Housing. And at the next stage, Shas will also join and win the Ministry of Interior or Religious Affairs.

This way, they will have a relatively stable government that will take care of the economic interests of the secular and religious bourgeoisie and the interests of the Haredim, while promoting a political plan that will harm the settlers, and bring to the Tel Aviv State a savior 🙂

With greetings, Shifi

And for the record, the fundamental mistake of religious Zionism was the appointment of Bennett as the leader of religious Zionism. The fundamental failure is that from a movement that proclaimed the Land of Israel for the people of Israel according to the Torah of Israel, we became the Yamin. And the practical failure was in not being strict about loyalty to our natural partners, the Likud and the Haredim.

We appointed as our leader a man who challenged the Likud leadership, and also a member of the Brotherhood Alliance. To Yair Lapid in issuing decrees against Torah scholars. Now that same man has risen up against us, as the greatest obstacles to his reaching the coveted status of ‘Prime Minister’ It is a pity that we did not settle for the designation of ‘the connecting hyphen’ between ”religious’ and ’national’, as Dr. Yosef Burg said.

Best regards, Yaron Fish”Ordner

Meanwhile, his leftist partners are already informing the Americans (behind his back?) of their intention to renew negotiations on ‘two states for two peoples’ immediately upon the formation of the government. To convey these messages, Gantz went to Washington (while still serving in Netanyahu…s government). See the article: ‘Seniors in the Change Bloc: Political negotiations will be renewed upon the formation of the government’, on the ‘Channel 7’ website;

In short: In the Change Bloc, ‘they are not counting’ Bennett, Shaked and Saar, as it is written: ‘Augrayu Zili’ 🙂

With greetings, Yifa”r

To the honorable Rabbi.
Why do you call Netanyahu corrupt? Is there evidence for this? Isn't this a bad name?

There is countless evidence for this. And I'm not just talking about the trials that are being conducted against him. But there's no point in getting into those debates here.