Crowdfunded Journalism

The Ideology of Evil

Marianne Azizi photo
Marianne AziziIsrael
The Ideology of Evil
Human rights activists described as having an Ideology of Evil for writing about crimes of Judiciary, Welfare and Police in Israel.

When an action by public officials causes the death of innocent people, is it a crime?

Or is the real crime to write about it?

The crime of defamation by Israeli law was committed by extreme blogging against judges and social workers.  It should be addressed, no doubt.  But how far can the system go to silence the core elements of stories.

Last week, Judge Avraham Heiman described the activists as having an Ideology of Evil.  He spent over an hour describing how shameful they were to have exposed judges or social workers who drove people to name those officials in suicide notes.

An Ideology of Evil?  In modern terms this terminology has been used when condemning islamic terror ideas, or acts of terrorism such as attacks or bombs.

It is a step too far to describe bloggers as evil.

Just how far will the Judiciary and Court Administration go to silence free speech in Israel?

As many activists say - first stop the corruption and crimes, and then there is no need to write about it!




#Judge Avraham Heiman, #Israeli bloggers in prison

0
1
0

Yohanan Weininger

27 days ago

As I wrote in a Hebrew comment -- (in the Thurs 27-10-2017 decision of the preliminary arrest hearing in the Tel Aviv District Court file number 14615-04-17) the judge spoke of an evil ideology in the three arrested bloggers. However, the evil here is in our State of Israel’s oversized and corrupt family services and court system – and not in protest, news, criticism or whatever hyperbole in blogs and social protest activism. The evil cause lies in the authorities’ removing children from parents without just cause and with no open legal recourse and also for wholesale promotion of parental alienation. Such evil can be likened to the sale of Joseph by his brothers into slavery in Egypt.

The decision to continue the trio’s arrest in jail (after almost the full nine months before requiring an extension and before the opening of the actual trial) was because of their “dangerousness” (in criticising and insulting the system). However, the actual great danger is in the state's suppression of protest, censorship of the web, closing blogs, repression of dissent. The three arrestees are each in their own way protestors, organizers and advisors for a large disenfranchised population injured by the Israel’s social services system. This particular Israeli governmental and NGO bureaucratic family social services system allows for no external oversight and has no real public representatives or impartial ombudsman. Also complaints on judges and petitions to the supreme court receive no more than rubber stamp treatment “receipt acknowleged”.

The vengeful, inquisitional judge claims the public interest. In fact he represents the establishment. The disenfranchised public may be a private public but it is partisan and it will not be scared silent. Instead of due process of injured public claims and correcting injustices, the family services and justice system prefer to try repression. Can you suppress your own population without harming democracy? There are decrees that the public will not bear.

As for clowning in blogs? There were many serious activities in the protests of the trio. For example, see the conference programs on the Coalition for the Children's Family website. There were many serious evening panels and discussion sessions, including lectures by a retired district judge and by a former Minister of Social Services who leveled criticism at the establishment.
http://ccfisrael.org/eng/