Today on eNews SAUJS Political officer Rafi Eliasov and Shministim member Sahar Vardi debated issues raised by the young Israelis visiting South Africa who refused to serve time in the Israeli Defence Force.
The debated was aired on the programme Judge for Yourself (hosted by Judge Dennis Davis) and if you missed it you can catch the repeat on DSTV Channel 403 at the following times throughout this week:
Judge for Yourself
Monday 21:30
Tuesday 10:30
Wednesday 21:30
Thursday 9:30
Friday 23:30
Saturday 12:30
For those of us who are so under-priviliged as not to have SABC (or DSTV, or a TV for that matter) - is there a youtube or can someone give a decent synopsis?
Posted by: Religious Fundamentalist 1 | October 12, 2009 at 10:09
It was screened for the first time yesterday on yom tov so i didn't get to see it. From what I hear Rafi Eliasov is really good.
I doubt whether Judge for Yourself gets ported to YouTube :-)
Posted by: Steve | October 12, 2009 at 10:45
Yes. What can one say about Dennis Davis? Maybe "judge for yourself" in this case would be appropriate. What a traitor and constant manipulator this little self-serving man is. Think about the publicity the Shministim got and Davis couldn't wait to give more. On the evening the Shministim were to meet and face the Cape Town Jewish Community, Davis takes one off for a TV interview, more publicity and yet another opportunity for this truly despicable man to ingratiate himself to the rulers of this country.
Let us not forget that Davis was part of Doron Isaacs' delegation to Israel and that the Shministim were brought out by Isaacs' Open Shuhada Street.
Stay tuned for the next outrageous scheme by Isaacs & Co and how davis will, as usual, cease the opportunity to further his own ambition and carreer. Like with Goldstone, its time to treat him appropriately and reject him in every way.
What a disgrace this man is and no one stands up to him, certainly not the Board of Deputies, gutless as usual.
Posted by: Sam | November 13, 2009 at 01:30
News in Israel last night had a long piece about the anti-Zionist movement in South Africa and the warning that Israeli’s with South African citizenship could face prosecution.
Also interviewed was Saar, one of the shimistim who travelled to South Africa.
She proudly supported the idea of charging South African citizens with war crimes, in addition to a general boycott of Israel.
I am aware of a number of dual South African/Israeli citizen who are now are seriously rethinking traveling to South Africa.
A foreign ministry official recently warned that Israelis traveling to South Africa for the world cup may also be targets of anti-Israel law-fare.
Why is the SAJBD silent on this issue?
Posted by: Shaun | January 06, 2010 at 10:48
Well we don't actually know that they are silent on this. They may be working very hard behind the scenes.
By the way, why is the Israeli embassy silent on this? The way things work here, these issues fall under the domain of the Israeli embassy.
Posted by: Steve | January 06, 2010 at 10:51
Working hard behind the scenes? That’s about as effective as expecting the Israeli embassy to issue an articulate response of their own.
Posted by: Shaun | January 06, 2010 at 11:25
Well I don't actually know that anything is being done. But do you really think a strident public comment at this stage would be useful?
Posted by: Steve | January 06, 2010 at 11:41
Maybe a public comment is superfluous, but how about something to the boys in Israel who are a little troubled by these event.
The SAJBD could come out and say something encouraging like, don’t worry guys we have your back and are proud to defend you no matter what?
Or how about a brief e-mail saying; “hold-off on visiting until we take care of it.”
Even a well worded notice letting the local community know that the board are working tirelessly to sort this out.
While I’m sure that Mbeki might argue the merits of quiet diplomacy, I suggest a change in tactics?
We are talking about South African law (Act No. 27, 2006)
“The intent of the Act is to prohibit mercenary activity.”
This means that South African citizens are forbidden to serve as combatants in an armed conflict without the permission of the Government. A careful reading of the text reveals that dual citizens have significant grey area to their advantage.
This law is far more significant when it comes to South Africans who have in the past, or are presently fighting in Pakistan, Iraq and Yemen.
Perhaps we should start compiling a list of names of the South Africans and South African based institutions that are involved in recruiting, training and encouraging South African to contravene South African law and fight in these conflicts.
Posted by: Shaun | January 06, 2010 at 12:24