|
Writers Articles And Opinions |
|
|
|
21 April 2010 By Stephen
Lendman
Occupied Palestinians and Israeli
Arabs never had rights in a state affording them
solely to Jews. Now even they're at risk as democratic
freedoms fast erode on their way to extinction; to
wit, free expression, a right without which all others
are endangered. It includes free speech, a free press,
freedom of thought, culture, intellectual inquiry,
and the right to challenge government authority
peacefully, especially in times of war and cases of
injustice, lawlessness, incompetence, and abuses of
power.
Israel has no constitution or
specific laws guaranteeing equality or free
expression. Yet its Basic Laws protect human dignity
and liberty as fundamental democratic values, more
rhetoric than fact given its persecution of journalist
Anat Kam and Haaretz's national security reporter Uri
Blau.
Kam (held under house arrest
since December) will be tried in mid-April for passing
confidential documents she removed while stationed in
IDF General Yair Naveh's office during her mandatory
military service. Blau, fearing assassination or a
judicial lynching, is now hiding in London.
Two (internal security) Shin Bet
gag orders (code name "Double-Take") were judicially
implemented to silence press discussion, on October 8,
2009 and on January 1, 2010 for 90 days, now partially
lifted.
They're on grounds of harming
national security, damaging the investigative process,
and the ability of prosecutors to prove criminal
liability. Part of it is cited in an undated April
richardsilverstein.com Tikun Olam article headlined, "Anat
Kam Gag Order Published for the First Time," stating:
"....publication about the
investigation or that it even exists (is prohibited),
and on the judicial discussion of the matter and legal
decision rendered by the court which has been and will
be conducted....
We seek that the gag prohibits
publication even about the application for a gag
order, its content, and even the existence of a gag
order in this case; and any other publication likely
to identify the respondent, witnesses, suspects or
others engaged in the investigation, including
publications of their images, addresses, or other
identifying details."
On April 11, Haaretz writer Ofra
Edelman headlined, "Ex-soldier charged with espionage
for leaking documents to Haaretz," saying:
"Among the materials Kam
allegedly transferred to (Uri Blau) were (more than
2,000) files showing that high-ranking Israel Defense
Forces officers had approved targeted assassinations
of wanted Palestinians who could have instead been
detained," violating a Supreme Court order.
Uri Blau's
Expose
Kam's documents provided the
basis for Blau's December 4, 2008 Haaretz article
headlined, "License to Kill," revealing IDF Central
Command-ordered targeted killings of two alleged
terrorists - Ziad Subahi Mahmad Malaisha and Ibrahim
Ahmed Abd al-Latif Abed in violation of a High Court
ruling. Further "the most senior IDF echelons
approve(d), in advance and in writing, the harming of
innocent Palestinians during the course of the
assassination operations."
According to B'Tselem, IDF
assassins killed 232 Palestinians from October 2000 -
October 2008, and another 154 non-targeted civilians
coincidentally. The common code names used are Pa'amon
(preventive action) and Sakum (targeted
assassination). When carried out, official reports say
these were "arrest operations (or) exchanges of fire,"
force having been authorized to intercept and kill.
Involved was IDF Central Command
head, General Yair Naveh, in whose bureau Kam worked
as a clerk, then later as assistant bureau head.
Authorizing the assassinations, he said the target
"leads a 'ticking' infrastructure and meets the
required criteria for a preventive strike." Another
meeting in his office with General Sami Turjeman, head
of the Operations Directorate, ordered "no more than
five people" to be killed, the other three, of course,
innocent civilians.
The next day, Chief of Staff Gabi
Ashkenazi approved it, ordering only that it be done
on a different date in light of planned diplomatic
meetings at the time.
On December 14, 2006, High Court
President, Justice Aharon Barak, ruled that
well-founded information is necessary to say civilians
intend hostile acts, and no one should be assassinated
or harmed in lieu of nonviolent workable alternatives.
"In other words, a person should not be assassinated
if it is possible to arrest him, interrogate and
indict him."
According to international law
Professor David Kretchmer, "It turns out that in total
contradiction to the High Court ruling, there are
cases in which there is an order to assassinate
someone when it is possible to arrest him. Advance
approval to kill civilians who do not take part in
hostile activities (or against whom no evidence proves
guilt) makes things even worse....
Postponing an operation for
diplomatic reasons is unequivocal proof (that) this is
not a 'ticking bomb' situation."
General Naveh (Central Command
head from 2005 - 2007) admitted that at times "no
genuine attempts are made to arrest wanted men."
Saying they never happened on his watch, he claimed
Malaisha and Abed were legitimate targets as "ticking
bombs," despite no evidence to prove it and in
defiance of a High Court ruling.
"Don't bother me with the High
Court orders," he said. "I don't know when there were
High Court orders and when there weren't. I know that
a targeted assassination is approved and there is a
preventive action procedure and I received
instructions from the Operations Directorate."
The only State justification ever
given is that targeted killings are "an exceptional
step (taken) only when there is no other, less severe
way of" acting.
From seclusion in London, Haaretz
published Blau's April 10, 2010 article headlined,
"This isn't just a war for my freedom but for Israel's
image," saying: he never imagined his foreign trip
would prevent him from "return(ing) to Tel Aviv as a
journalist and a free man, only because I published
reports that were not convenient to the
establishment."
So when told if he returned, he
"could be silenced forever (and/or) be charged for
crimes related to espionage, (he) decided to fight,"
repeating the above title he chose for this article.
As a journalist, he expressed
commitment to provide "as much information as
possible and in the best way, with maximum
objectivity. (For Haaretz, his) name has appeared,
alone and with others (revealing) exposes dealing with
(high) public figures and institutions of all kinds."
None could have been published without sources and
corroborating documents.
All previous military related
exposes "were vetted by (their) censors before
publication." They weren't "pleasant to read," but no
matter. A journalist's job is to provide facts on
relevant "goings-on around them....but no Israeli
journalist has known until now that such exposes could
have him declared an enemy of the state and find
himself in jail" or perhaps killed.
The State of
Israel v. Anat Kam
Charges include:
1. "Serious Espionage (divulging
secret information with the intent to harm the
security of the state) - an offence against clause 13b
of the Penal Law 1977 (hence: the law).
2. Serious Espionage (gathering
secret information with the intention to harm the
security of the state) - an offence against clause
113c of the law."
The charges explain her exposure
"to many documents and presentations in various
degrees of classification, authored in the various
departments of the General Staff, the Chief of Staff's
office, and the various divisions of the command" with
respect to military operations, discussion summaries,
IDF targets, and related information.
"During her military service the
accused stored in a special folder the documents and
presentations and, near her discharge from the IDF, on
or about May 2007, the accused, through another,
copied the contents of the file onto two discs, one
for documents and the other for presentations."
"The accused did so out of
ideological motivations and with the intent to damage
the security of the state, among other means, through
publishing the documents to the general public."
She took the classified materials
home without authorization to do so. "In or around
June 2007, (she) copied the document disc onto the
mobile IBM computer at her home....contain(ing) over
two thousand documents, 700 of which were classified
as "secret (or) top secret."
"On or around September 2008, the
accused, acting without legal authority and with the
intention to harm the security of the state, delivered
a large amount of documents to journalist Uri Blau,"
including "top secret (and) secret" ones. He then
began publishing them in November 2008 and in
subsequent articles.
Haaretz
Responds to State Charges
On April 11, Haaretz Service "answer(ed)
four key questions on the Anat Kam case:"
1. Does Haaretz's protection for
Uri Blau and his sources harm state security?
"Of course not." All were
"submitted to the military censor and
approved....before publication, as required by law."
State security depends not only on abiding by censor
regulations, but also on upholding democratic
principles and values, "including a free press. The
agreement signed between Blau and the Shin Bet
security service proves that (it) understands this as
well."
2. Does Blau still have
classified documents? If so, why hasn't he returned
them to Shin Bet?
"Blau left on vacation with no
classified documents in his possession." But he
maintains previously used materials for all his
articles. "Haaretz, therefore, believes that it cannot
pass on all (his) documents (to the IDF and Shin Bet)
because its senior officials may use them to trace his
sources."
Blau believes he acted according
to his agreement with Shin Bet and broke no law. "He
passed on dozens of classified documents....and the
defense establishment had no complaint about" ones he
chose.
Blau gave Shin Bet dozens of
printouts and his personal computer, "which was
destroyed in his presence." Shortly after doing it,
Kam was arrested on suspicion for having been the
source.
3. "Why isn't Blau returning to
Israel to explain all this?"
He took a three-month vacation to
the Far East with his fiancee. While away, Kam was
arrested. Shin Bet told Haaretz it reneged on its
agreement, thus no longer assuring the immunity of his
sources, especially Kam.
If he returns now, she may be
further harmed as he'll be questioned on arrival,
given a lie detector test, have his entire document
archive examined, and called as a witness against her,
besides endangering his personal safety.
4. In Haaretz's judgment, can
state security be safeguarded without revealing
confidential sources?
Indeed so. "The combination has
worked and will keep working, and it's important to
ensure" no change of policy so future sources will
volunteer information they'd otherwise be reluctant to
do.
According to Haaretz writers Ofra
Edelman, Anshel Pfeffer and Gili Izikovich, in their
April 12 article headlined, "Anat Kam waives immunity,
urges Uri Blau to return to Israel:"
She's Blau's source, "her defense
attorney Avigdor Feldman told Haaretz on" April 11,
adding:
"I believe he will bring back the
documents, he will not be harmed and the affair with
Anat will also come to an end, I hope, quickly."
Blau's attorneys, Mibi Moser and
Tal Leiblich, called it "a positive development."
Meanwhile, a number of journalists signed a petition
requesting no prosecution of Blau, saying authorities
haven't previously done so for holding secret
information, which most reporter/writers at times get.
Thus far, the IDF Spokesman said only (on April 11)
that claims Blau reported "are upsetting and
distorted."
On April 12, Haaretz writer and
Haaretz Service headlined, "Anat Kam: I stole IDF
documents to expose West Bank war crimes," saying:
According to newly released court
materials, Kam explained that:
"Classified documents reveal that
the Israel Defense Forces had committed war crimes in
the West Bank....and that her motivation for removing
them was to expose 'certain aspects of the IDF's
conduct in the West Bank that I thought were of
interest to the public.' "
She added that "if and when the
war crime the IDF was and is committing in the West
Bank would be investigated, then I would have evidence
to present." She believed nothing she did endangered
Israel's security because she focused only on "the
principles and the policies that were behind the top
officers' decision," not specific military details.
By exposing these crimes, she
thought she "would make a change...."
Kam now faces trial and a
possible life sentence. Blau fears he's in danger no
matter where in the world he hides. Nazareth-based
journalist/author Jonathan Cook raised the specter of
Israel's "dark underbelly," its tarnished image, and
"battle for what is left of its soul," given its
eroding democratic freedoms and fast track toward
fascism in a nation where no one is safe, even Jews.
Stephen Lendman is a Research
Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.
He lives in Chicago and can be reached at
lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. Also visit his blog site
at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge
discussions with distinguished guests on the
Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio
Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and
Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are
archived for easy listening.
http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/.
EsinIslam.Com
|
Save
Add Comments To This Story