Q&A: The Pegasus Affair
The Pegasus Affair
Question
Hello Rabbi,
What is your opinion about the recent revelations that the police tracked citizens using the Pegasus software?
Are witnesses who were extorted using personal information disqualified from giving testimony?
Do you think it is possible to prevent things like this in the future?
Answer
I have nothing to add, because I don’t have the information. Obviously, if they acted improperly, then it was improper.
In my opinion the witnesses are not disqualified, certainly not after the extortion was exposed. They are not being coerced to lie, but to testify truthfully. But again, it depends on knowing the facts.
I assume it can be prevented, but that is a question for those who know the facts and the methods of operation.
Discussion on Answer
That the fears… were confirmed.
To T.G. — greetings,
It seems that the desperate need to incriminate public figures from the “wrong” camp, which went so far as the forbidden use of spyware, stems דווקא from opposition to the occupation, which “Bibi” managed to prolong by de facto halting the longed-for “peace process” sought by the left.
In other words: opposition to the occupation is what corrupts!
Best regards,, Feiga Sus, the “Enough Whitewashing” movement
The whole “Pegasus” matter comes from Athena’s improper treatment of a victim of sexual assault. Instead of punishing the rapist “Poseidon,” Athena chose to vent her wrath on the girl “Medusa,” who had been harmed, and turned her into a monster, from whose head “Pegasus” emerged.
As a kind of “measure-for-measure response,” I suggest using “Pegasus” to incriminate sexual abusers and save their exploited victims. It is well known how hard it is to prove such abuse, to the point that 90% of complaints are closed without an indictment. It seems to me that surveillance with “Pegasus” would be very helpful both in preventing these terrible acts in advance and in catching the guilty afterward.
Best regards, Levin-Gorgon, the Institute for “Me-Too-logy”
Naturally, every group will see the event as proof of its prior position—whether to pin the stench on the occupation, or on the lack of oversight over the biased prosecution and police (or perhaps on the fact that people are not meticulous enough about using the double loaves to cut from the choicest place). Either way, the explainers maintain that what happened here is exactly the slippery-slope phenomenon they had warned about. And that is almost intrinsic to any systemic problem: it develops in stages—a slide down a slope.
There is a bit to add: namely, that the slippery-slope fears—that police-military practices used against enemies, Palestinians, criminals, and minorities would also be turned against the rest of the public—have been borne out. In short: the occupation corrupts.