Q&A: "Your hands are full of blood"—literally?
"Your hands are full of blood"—literally?
Question
Most people can’t know everything in every field, and so every subject has its experts.
That’s true in medicine, engineering, the courts, and every other professional field.
An investigative commission sat, examined, investigated, heard testimony, reviewed documents, etc., and reached the conclusion that Bibi was apparently responsible for the deaths of 45 Jews through negligence or wrongdoing (apparently various political considerations led to the problem not being addressed for many years while he was prime minister).
To vote for him, or for parties that commit to crowning him, would seemingly be exactly the guilt of “your hands are full of blood,” no?
Is that really so?
Answer
That sounds wildly exaggerated to me. So he messed up. Is there any person in authority who has never messed up? It’s just that in most cases no disaster happens, certainly not one like this, but that’s just circumstance. I don’t see any relevant voting consideration here.
For that same reason, I also don’t understand the difference between terrorists with blood on their hands and those without, whether regarding releasing terrorists or regarding punishment (even criminal punishment). The whole difference is whether they succeeded or there was a mishap. The guilt and the danger are the same in both cases, and therefore there shouldn’t be the slightest difference between attempted crime and actually carrying it out.
Discussion on Answer
The basic methodological failure of such a commission is that instead of having experts in organizing large events sit on the commission and explain what should have been done, they seated a judge, a military man, and a political operator, who—with all due respect to their rich experience, each in his own field—organizing large events and securing them is not their professional field, and not for nothing did their “interim conclusions” lead to a colossal failure.
Best regards, the non-professional digger
It seems to me that the High Court did in fact rule lawfully that under the existing law there was no legal ability to carry out the renovations.
That doesn’t mean anything beyond that.
In light of the many people evacuated every year for medical treatment because of the load and overcrowding at Meron, should the number of participants be limited?
Apparently yes.
Does the prime minister bear legal responsibility to deal with this, or to appoint someone to deal with it anew every year in light of what happens year after year?
Apparently yes.
Mainly: could he have saved lives and prevented what happened there?
And in light of the accumulated knowledge each year of what happens there and what could happen.
The High Court—no, and it’s not within its authority.
The prime minister—yes, it is within his authority and his duty.
2 Cheshvan 5783
Surprisingly, one of the suspicions that should have been investigated was the responsibility of the High Court of Justice for delaying the renovation plan at Meron. As is known, Finance Minister Yair Lapid wanted to expropriate the Meron compound from the religious trusts in order to enable renovations at the site. The one that delayed the expropriation of the compound was the High Court of Justice. Surprisingly, the High Court justices were not called in to be questioned so they could explain why they saw fit to delay the necessary renovations, and in light of the fact that a judge heads the commission, the “immunity” granted to the High Court in advance is quite understandable.
So it’s not clear what they are claiming against Netanyahu. As for carrying out fundamental renovations to the site—his hands were tied; and regarding the security arrangements and management of the event—with all due respect to the former prime minister’s military abilities, securing a mass event is the police’s area of expertise and responsibility, and there was no reason to assume that the police’s success in getting the celebration through safely in previous years would not repeat itself in a year when the number of participants was many times smaller.
After all, the event’s dynamics have been fixed for years. At a certain hour there is a bonfire-lighting of Toldot Aharon that draws a large crowd. A professional security person aware of this should have directed proper entrance and exit routes. And this is the question: why was there no organizer familiar with the place and the crowd who had the ability to “direct the traffic”? Why was what the police does at every mass demonstration, from Rabin Square to Balfour, not done in Meron?
And in conclusion:
Two questions exist regarding the events at Meron: A. Why did the High Court of Justice delay the renovation of the site? B. Why did the police fail to fulfill its role of “directing the traffic” as in previous years?