* * * * * * *

The following article was published on page 10 of the 3 November 1995 issue of THE JEWISH PRESS which was on the newsstands in Israel and the United States on the Wednesday before the fateful Saturday when Prime Minister of Israel Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated.

* * * * * * *

Following the murder of Yitzhak Rabin, in the rush to judgment against rabbis who had previously uttered maledictions against him, authorities overlooked a more subtle and sophisticated but certainly not less malicious incitement to remove from office by unlawful and violent force the leader of Israel, Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin.

* * * * * * *

NEEDED: A WRITTEN CONSTITUTION

by Prof. Paul Eidelberg

Americans wonder how the Rabin government can conclude treaties surrendering Jewish land. Absolute monarchs had no such power.

Israel’s Knesset, the only parliament in the world with unlimited power, has virtually delegated this power to the government, i.e., the cabinet. To be sure, it is theoretically possible for the Knesset to dissolve the government by a vote of no confidence. But since the Knesset’s ruling coalition composes the government, a vote of no confidence is almost as rare as Halley’s Comet. Israel’s government is above the law.

Cabinet ministers have repeatedly violated the law. Suffice to mention their negotiating with the PLO contrary to Section 8 of the Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance (before the repeal of this section in January 1993). (See THE JEWISH PRESS, 10 June 1994, p.24, for this and other violations of the penal law.)

Despite a petition by 26 prominent Israelis including professors and military figures impugning the legality of the Israel-PLO Declaration of Principles, Israel’s Supreme Court refused to consider the merits of the case, claiming it involved "political questions." At issue, however, were not merely the policies of the Rabin government, but actual violations of the law. Such violations, in any country governed by the rule of law, are justiciable. (See Attorney Howard Grief’s commentary, THE JEWISH PRESS, 23 September 1994.

In fact, Israel’s Supreme Court, sitting as the High Court of Justice, has sometimes adjudicated and annulled governmental decisions of doubtful justiciability and of obvious political character. In 1969, in a dispute over Friday night TV broadcasts, which violate the Sabbath, the Court, by a temporary order, instructed the Broadcasting Authority to proceed with the broadcasts, overruling a government decision.

In 1979, the Court invalidated a government resolution to establish a Jewish settlement in Samaria, which is administered by the military, rejecting the testimony of the Army Chief of Staff that the settlement was a political necessity.

These two cases reveal the secular and leftwing bias of Israel’s Supreme Court. Perhaps it was this bias that prompted the Court to dismiss the above mentioned petition impugning the legality of the Israel-PLO Declaration of Principles. It has also been argued that the Court, fearful of the government, put its own interests above the rule of law.

Be this as it may, Israel’s Supreme Court, unlike its American counterpart, is not a coequal and independent branch of government. The Court was established by the Knesset, and its decisions on major issues are very much determined by arbitrary, political considerations. Lacking in Israel is a system of institutional checks and balances that can ensure the rule of law. Lacking is a written Constitution.

Instead of a Constitution, Israel has so-called "Basic Laws." Not only have these Basic Laws been enacted piecemeal over the course of four decades, but they have no greater permanence than any other law. All Basic Laws and amendments thereto are enacted by ordinary legislative procedure.

Israel’s Knesset thus combines in itself two functions, that of a legislature as well as that of a constituent assembly! A more arbitrary political system - so readily susceptible to corruption - is hard to imagine. Yet pundits insist that Israel is a democracy! Strange democracy, when Israel’s government can not only violate the law with impunity, but ignore public opinion on matters of permanent national significance by surrendering parts to the Jewish homeland to Arab despots.

Is it any wonder that respectable Israeli citizens, out of desperation and concern for Israel’s survival, are now advocating the overthrow of the Rabin government? Indeed, according to THE JERUSALEM POST (7 July 1995, p.2), Likud Knesset Member Ron Nachman advocates illegal means to resist the government’s agreements with Yasser Arafat. One can only wonder whether it is illegal to resist a government that violates the law, a government, moreover, whose prime minister publicly scorns legality, violates his pledge to Jewish settlers not to abandon the Golan Heights, and tramples on their human and civil rights.

Former Knesset Member Elyakim Ha’etzni writes: "Many people including...Yossi Sarid and Yair Tzaban, now ministers, have publicly declared that soldiers should disobey evacuation orders. True, the populations they referred to were Arabs; but there are others who do not hesitate to say Jews, too, have human civil rights."

Because the Rabin government is violating these rights, an increasing number of responsible Jews are pondering a basic principle of the American Declaration of Independence: "Whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the People to alter or abolish it."

To avoid revolution or civil war in Israel - unlikely, yet possible - Israel needs not only a new government but a new system of government. Needed is a written Constitution, one that ensures the rule of law on the one hand, and safeguards the patrimony of the Jewish people on the other. The rationale and general outlines of such a Constitution will appear in subsequent articles.

* * *HELLENIZED CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE

Civil disobedience against the Rabin government and the Oslo Accords can only be effective if it stalls Israel’s economy and, at the same time, is based on Torah grounds. Unfortunately, certain American rabbis in Yesha have appealed to non-Jewish sources to justify and gain support for civil disobedience against the implementation of Oslo. This cannot but further corrupt and cripple the mentality of the Jewish people by rendering them more dependent on Gentile modes of thought.

One rabbi in Efrat justifies civil disobedience by referring to Socrates! No doubt he has in mind the trial of Socrates, in Plato’s dialogue the Apology. How embarrassing, for Socrates never advocates civil disobedience in that or any other Platonic dialogue. What he does do in the Apology is to boldly assert that he will disobey Athens if it forbids him to engage in philosophy. Indeed, in the sequel to that dialogue, the Crito, Socrates explicitly teaches absolute obedience to the laws!

Other American rabbis in Israel justify civil disobedience in the name of Antigone, the heroine of Sophocles’ play by that name. Antigone disobeyed Cleon’s decree prohibiting the burial of her brother Polynieces, who was killed leading an army against Thebes. It should be noted, however, that Antigone justified "civil disobedience" in terms of her ancestral religion, declaring, in effect, that the laws of the gods are paramount to the laws of men.

Unfortunately, our Hellenized rabbis either lack Antigone’s courage, or they believe that the G-d of Israel lacks the power or popularity of the gods of Thebes. How demoralizing! Apparently, these rabbis lack the wherewithal to teach their fellow-Jews that Israel was the first nation in human history that refused to worship the state or acknowledge the paramount authority of human law. Surely they would be more loyal to Judaism and more effective if they reminded us that Israel’s prophets repeatedly invoke the Torah as the supreme law of the Jewish people. Surely they know that it is precisely from the Torah that the West derived its "higher law" doctrine, the very doctrine manifested in the American Declaration of Independence. That document justifies not only civil disobedience but revolution when the laws of the state violate the laws of G-d.

It was not Antigone, but a ray of light from the Torah, that inspired the American Revolution. Still, all honor to Sophocles’ heroine. Would that we had her likes among Israel’s Hellenized rabbis!

* * * * * * *

Not long before the above article was published, THE JEWISH PRESS editors removed reference to Professor Eidelberg’s association with Bar Ilan University from the headline of his regular weekly column, "BEHIND THE HEADLINES Analysis & Commentary"; Rabin’s assassin attended Bar Ilan University.

* * * * * * *

Not long after the above article was published, THE JEWISH PRESS editors added a caveat to the page where Professor Eidelberg’s weekly column still appears; it reads: "Views Expressed On This Page Are Not Necessarily Those Of The Publisher."

* * * * * * *

*******************************

STEPHEN M. ST. JOHN

POST OFFICE BOX 449

ROCKEFELLER CENTER

NEW YORK, NY 10185

TEL/FAX: 212 534 5024

18 August 1999

Doctor Yossi Beilin

Minister of Justice

c/o The Knesset

Jerusalem, Israel

I am a citizen of the United States of America who has been committed for many years now to a just and lasting and truly comprehensive peace in the Near East and who grieved with so very many others when an assassin struck down Prime Minister Yitzak Rabin - a respected warrior who had bravely turned to peacemaking and who raised our hopes but still inspires us to follow in his path.

Now I turn to you in your new office of Minister of Justice to bring to your attention a circumstance related to the murder of Rabin which somehow has been overlooked or ignored by the proper authorities and by the news media. I refer to a JEWISH PRESS article by Bar Ilan University Professor Paul Eidelberg which appeared in the 3 November 1995 issue that was on the newsstands in New York City and in Israel on the Wednesday before that fateful Saturday. (A photocopy of this article is attached for your reference; because of the poor quality of this photocopy which was made from microfiche at the New York Public Library, a newly printed copy of the faithfully reproduced text is also attached.)

In short, I find the aforementioned article by Professor Eidelberg to be tantamount to incitement to remove by unlawful force the leader of your nation in 1995. I think you will agree. If so, I urge you to use the powers of your office to hold Professor Eidelberg accountable for his actions according to the laws of Israel.

*******************************

STEPHEN M. ST. JOHN

POST OFFICE BOX 449

ROCKEFELLER CENTER

NEW YORK, NY 10185

TEL/FAX: 212 534 5024

23 August 1999

Ms. Lynn F. Stewart

Attorney at Law

21 Warren Street

New York, NY

With regard to Benjamin Weiser’s report on the 2nd Circuit Appellate Court’s decision that backed the convictions of Sheik Omar Abdul Rahman et al, which appeared on the front page of The New York Times of 17 August 1999, and in view of the possibility that there will be a final appeal to the Supreme Court, I hereby send to you on the following pages of this fax transmission copies of a Jewish Press article, dated 3 November 1995, by Professor Paul Eidelberg, who in it incites for the overthrow of the Rabin government by violent force. Rabin was killed just three days after this article appeared on newsstands in New York and Israel on Wednesday 1 November 1995. In an appeal to our highest court, Eidelberg’s writing will serve as a prime example of how the "proper authorities" play fast and loose with the concept offered by Judges Newman, Leval and Parker: "Words of this nature - ones that instruct, solicit or persuade others to commit crimes of violence - violate the law and may be properly prosecuted regardless of whether they are uttered in private, or in a public speech, or in administering the duties of a religious ministry." The vastly differing circumstances whereby the Professor and the Sheik gave their actionable utterances, and the widely differing degrees to which they were held accountable for these utterances, point to an institutional bias that reflects local and international politics. Eidelberg, for example, is a regular weekly columnist for the right wing Jewish Press; so are New York State Governor George Pataki and New York City Mayor Rudolf Giuliani. Broadly speaking, bad news about Arabs is good news for the Zionists. These facts of life color the case of the Sheik, and I hope that they are brought out in any appeal before the Supreme Court.

*******************************

STEPHEN M. ST. JOHN

POST OFFICE BOX 449

ROCKEFELLER CENTER

NEW YORK, NY 10185

TEL/FAX: 212 534 5024

3 September 1999

Howard Safir

Police Commissioner

New York City Police Department

One Police Plaza

New York, NY

I write to express my concern about what I believe is an unfortunate bias in favor of the Jewish community here in New York City. What prompts me to write you now is the headline in this week’s The Jewish Press which is followed by a front page photograph with the caption "Top NYPD brass and Councilman Noach Dear met with The Jewish Press Editorial Board.

Despite my very best efforts, almost nobody is aware that one of the regularly featured columnists writing for The Jewish Press, Professor Paul Eidelberg, incited for the overthrow of the Rabin government by violent force in an article that appeared in the edition of 3 November 1995 and was on the newsstands in New York City and Israel on the Wednesday before the Saturday when Rabin was assassinated (A copy of this article follows in this telefax transmission). This man has never been held accountable for his criminal act! So you see, when I learn that Richard J. Sheirer, your Chief of Staff, and Brooklyn South Commanding Officer Joseph Raguso went hat in hand before the editors of a newspaper who, according to former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu himself, were instrumental in putting him in office after Rabin, I feel concerned, dismayed and disgusted.

What is more, I have a deep suspicion that because New York City Mayor Rudolf Giuliani and New York State Governor George Pataki are, like Eidelberg, regularly featured contributors to The Jewish Press, the proper authorities have not been properly channeled to prosecute Eidelberg so as to save them the embarrassment. This is not right!

You will perhaps recall the concept (as reported in The New York Times of 17 August 1999) offered by Appellate Judges Newman, Leval and Parker when they recently upheld the convictions of Sheik Omar Abdul Rahman et al: "Words of this nature - ones that instruct, solicit or persuade others to commit crimes of violence - violate the law and may be properly prosecuted regardless of whether they are uttered in private, or in a public speech, or in administering the duties of a religious ministry." It is obvious to me that what applies to the Sheik and everybody else does not apply to Paul Eidelberg! Why? Because he is Jewish? Please think about this.

Years ago there was an incident in Brooklyn when a large gathering of Jews surrounded a traffic cop who was rudely accosted by a man whose car he was ticketing. Backup was called in and, as I heard eyewitnesses say on the Zev Brenner radio talk show, a high ranking Police Officer - a precinct officer as I recall - was knocked to the ground. What is truly incredible is that no arrest was made! Really now, Commissioner Safir, what would have happened to me if I, God forbid, had done that? Be honest with yourself about this. I called your office to complain about this aforementioned incident but my call was never returned. But in all honesty I must say I heard on the news that you went into a hospital not long after my call so maybe under the circumstances I should let it pass. But then again, I wonder, is there a pattern here? Are our public servants walking on eggshells for the Jewish community? It appears to me that they are.

The bottom line of my concern is that unequal application of the law creates discontent in society and the necessary changes are not forthcoming. Of course I will be tempted to change my mind if I see Professor Eidelberg held accountable for his crime. The only question I have left is, will you take the necessary steps to see that justice is done?

*******************************

P.G. 2 PRODUCTIONS

Post Office Box 6103

Surfside, FL 33154

(305) 940 1399

With reference to the advertisement "Who Murdered Yitzhak Rabin?" that you placed with The Jewish Press some weeks ago, I wish to share with you an article that I wrote on the subject, which I tried to have published but without any success. Enclosed please find a copy of this article addressed to The New York Times and dated 4 November 1999.

Let me advise you that in your investigation of the Rabin murder, you may very well find some interesting leads by asking Professor Paul Eidelberg whom exactly did he have in mind when he referred to "respectable Israeli citizens" who were advocating the overthrow of the Rabin government in his 3 November 1995 article in The Jewish Press.

All facts given in my article have been checked and triple checked and I assure you that you can rely on them. I wish you the best of luck in your endeavors to get to the bottom of this mystery and bring all the conspirators to justice! If I can be of any help, please do not hesitate to write or call.

****************************************************

Reverend Hermes M. Caraballo

Borough President Fernando Ferrer

Thank you for your invitation to a meeting with Police Commissioner Safir to be held on 29 March at 10AM at 198 East 161st Street under the auspices of the Bronx Clergy Task Force with the Reverend Dr. H. Gaston acting as moderator.

I regretfully must inform you that due to prior commitments I cannot attend but I wish to send you this expression of my support for your endeavors vis a vis what appears to me to be a certain carelessness with human life which has manifested itself repeatedly in police actions especially over the past year or so.

In my opinion the problem is serious indeed and is rooted in the policies set by the upper echelon for the police officers who go out in the field. The responsibility for this serious problem is clearly that of the mayor and the police commissioner. I truly hope that your encounter with the police commissioner, if not with the mayor himself, will precipitate in a peaceable way the changes in policy and practice which are so evidently required of the New York City Police Department.

The vast majority of police officers do right by their vested authority to serve and to protect us; many of their actions on our behalf we sometimes take for granted; many of us would refrain from criticism if we had to walk in their shoes in sometimes dangerous situations; some of us are truly grateful they were there when we needed them. Even so, certain memories come to the fore.

Outside the White House, a homeless deranged person, disfigured by fire in an auto accident years before and now waving a sword on prime time TV and in an instant, from a good 50 feet away, a Park Police Officer shoots him dead in the chest. No comment from anyone anywhere. I tell you flat out I could have subdued the poor guy from behind with a net!

The same goes for the mad scimitar-waving Sikh shot dead by the NYPD on Third Avenue and 45th Street some years ago. A .22 bullet in the thigh would have been an extreme measure had this incident taken place on my watch.

Other examples abound. In every instance it seems that an immoral policy causes a perfectly good man not to think and do what is perhaps more difficult but certainly right. But what really worries me is that in most of these cases no voice is raised on behalf of the slain! They are simply gone and forgotten! Such lack of respect for life shames us all.

Where there is no respect for life, life becomes cheap. And so it goes that in so-called grey areas like the Diallo slaying and now the Dorismond slaying, where an alleged false move supposedly brought about their own demise - and, indeed, in the case of Dorismond, a certain history supposedly prophesied a certain fate - this lack of respect for life removes that split second of hesitation which would otherwise prevent the spilling of innocent blood.

Changes in NYPD policy and practice must come from a change in attitude. That change must be societal and not just upstairs at One Police Plaza. Such change must come from within all of us. Our nation has acquired a mindset that we can all do without! It is called a culture of death.

This proverb of Solomon comes to mind: "A man that doeth violence to the blood of any person shall flee to the pit; let no man stay him." Indeed, until we remove this culture of death, we can consider ourselves as standing shoulder to shoulder in a pit.

I salute Patrick M. Dorismond and commend him for his righteous indignation upon the NYPD’s presumption of his being a drug dealer. I express my sympathy to his family and friends for the loss of a loved one. And I express my condolences to all who care for the loss of a good man.

****************************************************

Stephen M. St. John

Post Office Box 449

Rockefeller Center

New York, NY 10185

Tel/Fax: 212 534 5024

metatron.metatron@verizon.net

18 August 2004

Office of the Governor

Hon. James E. McGreevey

125 West State Street

Trenton, NJ 08625

I write in pursuit of justice which perhaps will also be a silver lining to the cloud now over the State House. The name Golan Cipel immediately rang a bell upon my first hearing the news of your resignation effective November of this year. On 27 November 1995, just twenty-two days after the assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, I called the Mission of Israel to the United Nations to inform its personnel that a regularly-featured writer for a right wing weekly newspaper published in Brooklyn, New York, The Jewish Press, had been inciting for the violent overthrow of the Rabin Government in his article of 1 November which was still on the newsstands in New York and Jerusalem when Rabin was killed on 4 November. My call was evidently switched to the Consulate and Golan Cipel answered. I gave him the details, including the name of the author, Professor Paul Eidelberg, and followed up by mailing to him a copy of the article in question. Nothing came of this; now, I wish to make Mr. Cipel’s recent noteworthiness the occasion to revisit this issue and I hope that you will take an active interest in this matter. Following this page in this fax transmission are the offending Eidelberg article and an unpublished article on the subject which I submitted four years later to the New York Times. As you will see when you read the latter of the two, the Eidelberg affair is highly embarrassing to two prominent New York Republicans who just happen to have had a very close relationship with The Jewish Press. And if a pattern emerges here, it would seem to me that this Golan Cipel protects Republicans and undermines Democrats, perhaps because the Republicans seek peace through strength in the Middle East while the Democrats seek peace through better understanding and dialogue. Have you considered that the Likud would prefer a Republican Governor of New Jersey?