Back on topic:

As you are obviously not aware “Ein Shaliach Li’dvar Aveirah.” doesn’t usually apply to military orders

No, I’m not aware. I’m a grosse Am Ha’Aretz. Site your source.

…. since soldiers are trained and drilled to obey orders and can be punished or even executed (in war time) for refusing to obey order.

This doesn’t nullify “Ein Shaliach”. In a best case scenario, this would be “Anus Rachmana Patrei.”

This is all beside the fact that Rabin received no “Hatra’ah” nor was he ever tried, let alone in front of a Halachic Bet Din.

As far as my blog you are clearly not qualified to judge its merits if you can so confidently invoke ein shliach ledvar aveira in regards to military orders. The blog has a Chareidi dayan in Yerushalaim as the main posek

Yes, you repeat that ad nauseum everywhere you post. People wouldn’t buy chickens with an anonymous hechsher but are expected to bed down with Gilui Arayot under such dubious claims to anonymity.

everything I write in it in regards to halacha is based on the words of our sages and even the Avi Shafran spokesman of the Agudat Israel of America of all people agreed in a newspaper interview that what I promote is permitted albeit not normative.

You left out what Rabbi Shafran first had to say about you, and I quote:

“He should call Agudah’s volunteer services department and we’ll help him get a life.”

How convenient to forget his introductory words. But who can blame you?!

In any case, Shafran’s full quote is:

“While conceding that the practice is not a sin, Rabbi Shafran said “many things are permitted but not engaged in. This is not anything that is normative in the Jewish world. The definition of a marriage is between a man and one wife, like the first man and his wife.”

In any case, this has been well covered by such fascinating and heileger blogs as FailedMessiah, etc.

As far as it being lame or nor kol haposel be mumo posel just look at your very own screen name ‘shy guy’ how lame can that be?

I’m lovin’ it!

However, there is no known testimony that Rabin himself actually fired a weapon with his own hands against the Altalena and even if he did, no verification that he actually hit someone.

And as you must know, “Ein Shaliach Li’dvar Aveirah.” Giving the orders to murder is not the equivalent of doing the actual murdering.

Your halachic analysis here is as lame as what your blog attempts to promote.

PS. By the way halachikaly speaking Yigal Amir
is exempt from punishment for killing Rabin who as has been pointed out in comments above volunteered to shoot innocent Jews on the Altalena .
According to Torah law someone who kills a murderer is exempt from punishment in human court.

michael Says:
October 28th, 2007 at 7:56 am

I know that Israel has no death penalty, but there are a few folks out there who need it, and Amir is one of them.

So was Rabin, for his giving the order (Ben Gurion’s BTW) to fire on the Altalena, murdering 17 people in cold blood.

Or has “just following orders” become a legitimate excuse?

17 people, Jews killed by Jews. Not bad for one afternoon’s work.

I know that Israel has no death penalty, but there are a few folks out there who need it, and Amir is one of them.

And please, no one respond with “if the shoe fits.”

themiddle Says:
October 24th, 2007 at 5:40 pm
I don’t understand why people don’t believe the recording of Amir during the interrogation.

TM, to the best of my knowledge, there is no documented evidence that shows that Amir had any other intention other than to assasinate Rabin. If someone can show us otherwise, please do. Otherwise, TM, there is no argument on that point.

However do note that the just released interogation film of Amir is chopped and spliced to pieces. This alone doesn’t indicate anything. Maybe someone in the Israeli police department was an extreme novice user of MS Movie maker. But you must wonder why someone went out of their way to edit the film so heavily if there are no state secrets to hide. In any case, Amir’s words on the tape reveal nothing new and do not contradict what was already documented as Amir’s own words.

Here’s a simple question: is the interviewed woman in this Nov. 1999 interview in Olam Ha’Isha magazine also a 4/11 “truther”? It’s your choice.

Note that I personally do not reference David Rutstein’s writings for any of his opinions, though they may coincide at times with mine. His site is simply the only one I can google for right now that has the verbatim text of the Olam Ha’Isha article. I read the original article in Hebrew in the 1999 magazine issue. And – no – I do not otherwise read Olam Ha’Isha!

People who scoff at ‘truther’ theories about 9/11 because they’re on the receiving end, have no problem coming up with their own for Rabin’s murder by Amir.

What do these conspiracies have to do with each other? Just the opposite, one is heavily disproven, the other is not, even according to Ha’aretz’s own Tom Segev, no lover of the anti-Rabin crowd. Try searching for what Segev had to say about Barry Chamish’s book back in 1999. And again, refer to the documentary aired on Channel 2 again last night. These are not right wing ‘truthers’ bringing this up and 12 years have passed with no one succeeding to resolve the inconsistancies. Rather, people have disappeared out of sight and others have remained clammed up. Does this sound like an open and shut case, which it certainly should have been if you do nothing more than acknoledge that Amir pulled a trigger 3 times behind Rabin’s back.

Michelle’s comments in this thread are the mindset behind Amir’s actions. The feeling was, among some pockets in the population, that Rabin was committing a basic sin against the Jewish state. In this school of thought, putting an end to Oslo would have the effect of bringing order to the situation and preventing a historic mistake.

It isn’t unusual to have believers and true believers who take actions after listening to the believers.

Or to Avishai Raviv, who preached the same to Yig’al Amir. And if you don’t believe that, you don’t believe anyone because even Karpin and Friedman’s anti-conspiracy book “Murder in the Name of G-d; The Plot to Kill Yitzhak Rabin” acknowledges that Raviv was a Shabak employed agent provacateur. There is no one that argues against this fact, only people who would prefer that all of this quietly disappears down the memory hole. I suggest you search for Sarah Eliash’s testimony at the Shamgar Commission to read just what Raviv was trying to provoke. And this is at a minimum the crux of the matter, that a Shabak agent, working for their filthy “Department of Jewish Affairs” (the thought of this should make one sick) directly goaded Amir to kill Rabin, with Raviv himself labeling it a “holy mission”.

And the names Rubenstein and especially Beinish keep popping up in regard to the supression of information (and staged provocations in Beinish’s case), all in the name of ‘state secrets’ and ‘national security’. It just gets uglier.

One need not theorize anything. One need simply to hear, read and see the films, and numerous testimonies and interviews to become aware of the contradictions. Someone is lying.

People who scoff at “truther” theories about 9/11 because they’re on the receiving end, have no problem coming up with their own for Rabin’s murder by Amir.

Michelle’s comments in this thread are the mindset behind Amir’s actions. The feeling was, among some pockets in the population, that Rabin was committing a basic sin against the Jewish state. In this school of thought, putting an end to Oslo would have the effect of bringing order to the situation and preventing a historic mistake.

It isn’t unusual to have believers and true believers who take actions after listening to the believers.

Trying to find a missing bullet or seeking to understand why anybody would ever shoot blanks at a prime minister is a little too heavy for me, if you know what I mean. It is simpler to believe that a man who held a gun up behind a prime minister and pulled the trigger and then admitted to his actions in a police interrogation is guilty of murder.

This isn’t some talmudic exercise.