Ed Corrigan
Without anyone's permission, and simply because I was asked about this article by someone who was interested in reading it and doesn't know Hebrew, I translated it into English.Yigal
I figured others may be interested in it as well
Hebrew original:
The Fog of Battle
by Yossi Gurvitz
(The author is a freelance Israeli reporter and blogger. YA)
Eleven days have passed since the battle on the Mavi Marmara, and we still don't know what took place there.
The Israeli "Hasbara" (sic, in English. YA) establishment peppers us daily with "new information" that it is unclear why we were not made privy to earlier. This morning we were informed of a new film clip, in which the captain of the Marmara is seen telling us that the thugs – in Israel they are referred to as "terrorists" – on the ship arranged for themselves light weaponry when the Israeli forces arrived, and that he tried to prevent this.
It's worth noting that this information is coming via MLM (Hebrew acronym for the Center for Intelligence Community Heritage. YA), an organization associated with Israeli intelligence agencies, and not from the Foreign MInistry and/or the IDF Spokesperson. The reason is simple: On the morning of the battle on the Marmara we were informed (in a news item in Ha'aretz. YA) that the Foreign MInistry was about to transfer its "Hasbara" (sic. YA) to external groups, preferably ones that are not recognizable as elements of official Israel. The reason: just like the Scientologists, who use similar tactics and form sham front organizations whose purpose is to spread their message without being identified as Scientologists, official Israel is well aware that its brand is poisoned. Its announcements are seen, automatically and justifiably, as lacking credibility.
A few questions about that film clip:
A. The Israeli establishment claims that the Turkish "terrorists" organized ahead of time to attack the soldiers. Would a pre-organized team need to spend the time before contact sawing up its own ship in order to prepare weapons?
B. Our dear Prime MInister has announced that the phony baloney sham of a committee he's pretending to assemble – the one whose intended chair already announced today that he does not believe in singling out responsible individuals – will investigate how the activists on the Marmara obtained knives and axes. The captain answered that question: From the cafeterias on the ship and from its emergency cabinets. He said so, I must remind you, ten days ago. Is Netanyahu not aware of this?
C. As long as we're mentioning that, why did it take the system ten days to leak this film clip?
D. Was the Turkish captain tortured prior to his interrogation?
Eleven days have elapsed since the attack, and the Israeli establishment has yet to provide the Israeli public a definite version of what took place there, minute by minute. Their story changes like a chameleon. Most of the ship's passengers participated in the resistance; this version was dropped. The number of those attacking the IDF soldiers was around 30 (half the number of people shot by the soldiers). They were members of al-Qaeda; no, they were mercenaries; no, they were members of the IHH. The soldiers opened fire after a 40 minute long heroic battle; no, they fired after only a minute and a half. The activists tried to lynch the soldiers; no, they were planning a hostage exchange, for which they captured three of them.
The version that the IDF spokesperson has managed to imprint on the Israeli psyche is the one about lynching. But taking soldiers prisoner and providing them with medical care – as evidenced by that photograph that the IDF spokesperson can't figure out how to deal with – cannot be made to conform to that story. The hostage exchange version doesn't agree with the fact that the three captives didn't hesitate to try and escape, and successfully so. Unofficially, sources in the IDF say that two of them jumped overboard. From this we can deduce that they were not restrained, and that the security they were subjected to – if there was any – was not particularly restrictive.
So, what happened there? We don't know. The IDF doesn't want us to know. It is keeping to itself all the evidence it seized on the ships – an Australian journalist reported that she was tasered to prevent her from recording what was taking place – and stubbornly refuses to release it. It uses parts of the films it captured for its own purposes (e.g., the famous clip about the flash-bang grenade thrown into a navy boat). Every once in a while it cooks up some kind of recording (like the "go back to Auschwitz" one) and quietly admits to it later, knowing that the Israeli media will back it up and not report on it.
What does the IDF have to hide, then? What is there in the stolen recordings that it doesn't want us to see? Perhaps things like in this clip, which nevertheless managed to get out:
The video isn't as clear as one would like, but in it we plainly see two IDF soldiers who don't appear to be in any danger – at any rate, no danger that they're aware of – who are kicking a person lying at their feet, and then shooting him (it seems with paintball shots from point-blank range). The repeated cocking of their weapons demonstrates repeated firing.
It isn't clear at which point in the course of the battle that film was shot. What is clear is that it tears a hole in the Israeli version of events. One may claim, of course, that it is forged; the question is, then, why one should accept as valid the film clips being released by the IDF spokesperson. After all, the spokesperson did not hesitate – as we've seen – to cook up a voice recording for the purposes of its propaganda war, and it has a long history of lies.
What then happened on the Marmara? I don't know. I wasn't there, and even if I were I would have suffered – like any eyewitness – from tunnel vision. But more and more material that is being made public
However, if I had to *guess* what occurred, considering what we know already, I would say that the following took place:
A. The first commando crew descends to the Marmara, is beaten, captured, and taken to the lower deck.
B. Senior officers who are present at the scene – the Commander of the Navy, the Commander of the SEALs – conclude that there is a possibility that soldiers were abducted on their watch, and due to their own exceptional stupidity. In their mind's eye they can vividly see their careers nosediving into the raging waters, with them becoming new versions of Gal Hirsch (a division commander during the Second Lebanon War who had to resign in disgrace after being blamed for the kidnapping of the soldiers that triggered the war. YA).
C. One or both of them gives the order to use any degree of force necessary to find the soldiers. The second commando force arrives on the Marmara agitated and nervous and begins firing indiscriminately at anyone who might seem dangerous – even though they themselves (the two soldiers in that clip above?) are not in any danger.
D. The soldiers escape and join the second force, or jump overboard and are picked up by the boats. The great cover-up begins.
As I said, I don't know. I'm speculating. If the IDF spokesperson wants to convince me that this is not what happened, let it kindly release all the material it has. And since it documented everything from the air and from the ships, let it please release a complete, unedited film that does not exclude a thing, including recordings of all radio communications.
Given that this has not yet happened, and given that the inquiry committee being assembled appears quite plainly to be a whitewash effort, I believe that like in the past – the bus 300 incident, for instance – the security authorities are trying to hide some crime. Now, what I think as an Israeli citizen need not bother the authorities; most of the sheep who make up the Israeli public will gobble up any nonsense they put out. But more and more people around the world think as I do, and the IDF's effort to protect itself at the expense of the state of Israel – or what appears very much like such an effort – risks any remaining legitimacy the country it is supposedly meant to protect still possesses.
Because if it turns out that there was a cover-up, even one more minor than what I'm describing – if, for example, it turns out that the IDF is protecting a soldier who went berserk and fired in all directions – nobody in the world will ever believe another word of an Israeli spokesperson, and rightly so.
And then we really will need to get marketing advice from the Scientologists.
0 Have Your Say!:
Post a Comment