People should never dance on the blood of the dead. No one should yell "I told you so!" at those who fed the national hysteria that led to the 2011 Schalit prisoner exchange deal. And certainly no one should hold anything against Noam Schalit and his family for doing everything they could to free Gilad from Hamas captivity. We absolutely must not compare the blood of Baruch Mizrahi, killed on Passover eve by a Palestinian terrorist who had been released as part of the Schalit deal, to the mortal danger faced by Schalit during his more than five years in captivity. A man caught in a similar dilemma once asked a Talmudic sage how to act. The sage replied, "Who is to say your blood is redder-" But also not vice versa. This debate must be held without showing the portraits, without seeing the smiling faces of the kidnapped teens. It is a terrible issue, in which there are numerous contradictions of the precepts of Jewish wisdom. The discussion must be conducted seriously, with reasoned judgment. Ziad Awad was released in the Schalit deal. He pledged not to return to terrorism. Such pledges by released terrorists are worthless. Awad's son quoted him as saying that murderers of Jews go to heaven. What will happen in future prisoner exchange deals? Will Awad be freed a second time? A third time? The terrorists released in the Schalit deal who found themselves re-arrested this week serve as unequivocal proof as to why such deals should be "beyond the realm." Creative minds in the Knesset are seeking to find a way, via legislation, to find a solution to the dilemma. Likud MK Zeev Elkin wants to take away the president's ability to pardon terrorists, meaning the decision to release terrorists would lie in the government's hands alone. Therefore, if need arises, the government could make a corrective decision to put freed terrorists back behind bars. This is a reasonable proposal, but is only of secondary importance. Habayit Hayehudi MK Ayelet Shaked wants courts to be able to add clauses to the sentences of murderers that would prohibit them from ever being released. This would handcuff future governments. Such a law would not demonstrate strength. Rather, it would show distrust in politicians, who are incapable of withstanding pressure from families and part of the public. It is impossible to predict all future situations. There could be unique scenarios in which opponents of past prisoner exchange deals support future ones. Politicians supporting Shaked's proposal must ask themselves why they cannot stand firmly behind a decision and place it at the doorstep of the courts. The "no" to releasing terrorists must come from the mouths of politicians, rather than be enshrined in law.
