Perhaps you remember the blog 2 days ago (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2019/10/09/one-failing-director/) where we get confronted with the Malka Leifer case. This case got heated news as the Israeli supreme court (at https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/oct/10/israels-supreme-court-overturns-ruling-to-release-malka-leifer) gave us about 7 hours ago: “following an appeal by the prosecution to Israel’s highest court, judges decided that Leifer should remain in jail for the remainder of an already five-year long extradition case“. And that is not all, you see the Australian media was interestingly not very forthcoming when we look to the article (at https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-israel-s-health-czar-threatened-psychiatrists-in-australian-principal-sex-abuse-case-1.6939570) and we are given: “Deputy Health Minister Yaakov Litzman has been questioned by the Israel Police over allegations that he tried to use his influence, including the use of threats, to get government psychiatrists to have Leifer declared unfit for trial and to block her extradition“, the Haaretz article gives us a larger issue and (obviously) I never knew that part, hence me pointing the finger at Mossad. Consider the premise “Leifer’s subsequent arrest in Israel in 2014, has involved lawyers, media advisers and ultra-Orthodox “fixers.” According to sources in the Gerer (or Gur) Hasidic sect, the campaign has been funded by Leifer’s family, as well as loans and donations“.
If members of the Gerer Hasidic sect are willing to put pressures on so that a pedophile is not prosecuted, what else are they willing to do? I admit that I have to be careful here, my limited knowledge of Hasidic is limited to the movie Left Luggage by Jeroen Krabbe from 1998 (marvelous movie). From a source I got the two interesting linked quotes. The first one is: “Yakov Yosef Moskowitz, told me, between 400 and 500 families receive these packages; this week being Passover, the number had more than doubled. Moskowitz had arranged 76 delivery routes around the county, each carefully assigned to volunteer drivers from other shuls and other villages to preserve the recipients’ anonymity. Drivers were trained to turn off their lights and drop the boxes off silently, on the stoop, so the charity was unseen. Often, Moskowitz hears from wives whose husbands have no idea they are getting food, or husbands whose wives don’t know“, and the second one is: “Some Hasidic acquaintances told me that whenever they encounter another Hasid in a secular environment, even if he is a stranger, they will greet him warmly and often share a meal. One way to understand this embrace is that life inside the Hasidic community has been, for those within it, rendered so complete that simply to see another Hasid is to enter it again, and to enter it is to move from the chimerical to the real.”
It is here that we see the danger ‘from the chimerical to the real‘, or in plain English from hoped for but illusory or impossible to achieve towards an actual premise. In my view: ‘to make a delusional state of being a reality‘, the harsh danger is that these people would be in a stage where they could be manipulated by the right person to do the greater harm. From my interpretation when we revisit Haaretz we get: “One source said that the community does not deny the gravity of the acts with which Leifer has been charged or think that she shouldn’t be punished; rather, the argument is that she should be in an Israeli prison, rather than in an Australian facility alongside non-Jewish inmates“, whilst the staged premise was “to get government psychiatrists to have Leifer declared unfit for trial and to block her extradition“, basically leaving Malka Leifer non trialled and free to roam around Israel optionally creating more victims, in addition to that, any elected official giving support to these acts is often willing to close one eye to other actions, for example when we take the other example of ‘receiving packages’, what when the delivery does more than deliver food and when the recipients remain anonymous, the chance that those with non-friendly intentions towards the state of Israel receive goods as well, the larger problem becomes clear. In any cell based structure where silence is key and the higher participants have no real oversight bad things become a larger danger and a realistic possibility. As such Mossad was very much the party to get involved, if only to make sure that the state of Israel is not being undermined.
Even as Haaretz gave us “There was no explicit request for a specific conclusion, but apparently the intention was clear, and a number of the psychiatrists were uncomfortable with it“, the initial source in the Guardian gave us “Her case has dragged on for five years, involved 57 hearings and more than 30 psychiatrists“, slightly opposing the stage of ‘a number of the psychiatrists were uncomfortable with it‘, which indicates that not enough were uncomfortable with it dragging this case on for 5 years, right under the noses of Mossad I might add (it seems cruel and overstated, but it is not). If Deputy Health Minister Yaakov Litzman did this, what else was done? I need to move more careful now, because there are indicators that there is a concern that Haredi support is almost based on blind faith (my interpretation), as such there is optionally a larger non guilty side to Yaakov Litzman, even if his support of Malka Leifer implies the opposite, even as I found “a separate bribery charge for helping to prevent the closure of a food business that his own ministry had deemed unsanitary” (source: Times of Israel), the stage at this point is that the bribery charge is out in the open, even as the Times of Israel gives us: “Litzman attempted to influence officials in the Health Ministry in order to prevent the closure of a food business whose owner “he is close to” — a closure that had been ordered due to “serious sanitary findings found that led to the sickness of a number of people who ate from its products” the stage remains that I do not see all the facts of basically both sides of the equation and in that a ‘just’ point of view is hard to maintain. Yet the revelations by Channel 13 in May (also never revealed in the Guardian article) gives us in addition: “Litzman helped at least 10 serious sex offenders obtain improved conditions, including home visits and other benefits, by pressuring state psychiatrists and prisons service officials” the larger question becomes, how was he able to maintain a larger undocumented presence (something Mossad should have been aware of), and my own premise (not entirely based on facts) that we know scores of terrorists who would never accept or condone the actions of a pedophile, as such those who do would have much less concern not dealing with terrorists, that is the pie that does directly hit Mossad, would a person like that knowingly did one thing also optionally impede the safety and security of the State of Israel. Consider that (almost) nothing is done for free, if a person is able to ‘obtain improved conditions, by pressuring state psychiatrists and prisons service officials‘ exactly what favour was done in return to the people that were pressured? Even if it was to merely hand over a few ‘innocent’ messages, we get to optionally see a much larger issue and the media is seemingly blind to that part.
The fact that in early 2019 Channel 13 gave the people “Earlier in the year, the TV channel had reported that police were investigating suspicions that Litzman and his chief of staff pressured a psychiatrist, Moshe Birger, to ensure that another imprisoned sex offender close to Litzman’s Gur sect of Hasidim was placed in a rehabilitation program” we see the facilitation of people in the Gur sect of Hasidim, as such what else was done? That ‘what else was done’ is almost a given, especially as the facilitation was optionally done by non-members of Gur sect of Hasidim.
It is my speculation that this is not merely the work of one person, merely one front man and as such there are other players under the carpet doing the work for alternative third parties, the question soon becomes what other parties which brings me back to my original placement two days ago when I (accidentally) specifically stated: ‘A case has been out in the open and I cannot fathom how Yossi Cohen left the game this open, and his pieces unprotected and setting them in the optional sunlight of direct peril‘; in all fairness, he might not have left it in the open and for the longest of times Director Yossi Cohen has not shared any issues of state security with me (for reasons unknown), yet the absence of other people in all this merely implies that the case was left in the open, yet that and the fact that this case has dragged on for 5 years gives a larger concern, one that should be dealt with before the end of the year at best. In all this there is still a larger concern in Australia as well, in a case where we see direct criminal transgressions we see the actions of School management moving alleged criminals to Israel, what else did they spirit away? The fact that the actions of Malka Leifer are directly in opposition to what the State of Israel finds acceptable is foundation enough to warrant deeper investigation to all who were involved and facilitated towards the non-prosecution of Malka Leifer; an important factor as the Australian prosecution will dig into that part, I reckon that Mossad would be most interested in setting the premise where they will not face questions that they cannot answer, or facing questions where the answer ends up being unknown to them, it makes for a really bad game of Basketball.
Lawrence van Rijn - Law Lord to be 