RSS Feeds
The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people who are evil,    but because of the people who don't do anything about it    
Occupation magazine - Life under occupation

Home page  back Print  Send To friend

Of Liars and Hunters, B. Michael

Translated from Yediot Aharonot,
Courtesy of the Other Israel
September 3, 2005
http://www.geocities.com/toi_billboard/b.michael.htm

Ever since the Intifada outbreak, the official communiques published by the IDF have progressively liberated themselves from the constraints of truth. By now, the time when the factual veracity of an IDF communique was taken for granted is no more than a distant and faded memory. And if anybody deluded themselves that the policy of `openness` announced by the new IDF Spokeswoman heralds a return to these far-off times, cruel reality soon undeceived them. Like their predecessors, the IDF communiques of the past weeks require a reader to wade through a heavy morass of half-truths, twisted information, misdirection, total nonsense and simple lies.

Two recent examples would suffice to demonstrate the point:

1) On the night of August 24, IDF soldiers entered the Tulkarm Refugee Camp in order to arrest Adel Abu Halil, an Islamic Jihad militant. When they came out, some hours later, they left five dead Palestinians behind them.
The IDF communique had this to say: `The force encountered several armed wanted terrorists, who are part of the Islamic Jihad infrastructure... fire was opened at the force which was carrying out its assigned mission... in the exchange of fire, five terrorists were killed.` Colonel Roni Numa, commander of the Hahal Brigade of which the soldiers concerned were part, added: `None of those killed was an innocent bystander. Positively none of them.`

So far the communique. And here are the facts: four of the five killed were neither carrying any kind of weapon nor had any connection with the Islamic Jihad. Colonel Numa to the contrary, three of them were nothing but innocent bystanders. Anis Ma`arug Abu Zina was shot to death while sitting at a computer in a nearby internet cafe. He was 16 years old, and was not connected to any organization defined as terrorist. Muhammad Tarek Othman was shot while drinking a bottle of soft drink which he bought at a stall on the street corner. He was 17, member of no organization. Muhammad Hatib, 18 years old, was simply walking in the direction of his home when the bullet hit him. He had no connection with any organization, either. Majdi Muhammad Atiya, the fourth casualty, had been a member of an organization - Tanzim, not Jihad - but he was unarmed at the moment of his death. Only one of the five - Adel Abu Halil - was indeed armed and a member of the Islamic Jihad.

Did the army spokeswoman publish any correction, or an apology for the wrong information provided? of course not. Not did Colonel Numa apologize to the parents and families of the three teenagers, killed as completely innocent bystanders? But why should he do such a thing?

Another example: in the beginning of August, the army announced the `liquidation` of Muayed Musa of Shufa Village. Allegedly, he deserved such an end since it was him who had transported a suicide bomber to Netanya, where he blew up himself and five Israelis.

There was even a (rather embarrassing) full-scale feature article about `The Hunter`, nickname of `Major Y. of the Border Guard`s Special Unit`, who as the article proudly noted `had already liquidated 25 senior terrorists in the past year`. After `the army got exact information of the location of the man who had transported the bomber`, this brave intrepid fighter was called into action, pulled the trigger for the 26th time and `added one more terrorist to the list`.

The description was full of glorious cliches: `The fighters moved carefully... the force moved quickly forward...and then Musa made a sharp movement which sealed his doom. Major Y. and another officer opened fire and killed him on the spot. That was the way that most encounters between The Hunter and a wanted terrorist end.`

But somehow, just four days after this inspiring heroic story saw the light of day, there was a completely new story. After all, it turned out, it had not been Muayed Musa who had driven the Netanya bomber to his fateful assignation. That was done, the IDF now announced, by somebody else entirely: Muhammad Azem of Taibeh Village, an Arab citizen of Israel. He was not `liquidated`, but rather detained alive, pending trial. This, too, was hailed as a success (though less loudly). There was no reference to the discrepancy, that was left for devoted students of IDF communiques to resolve on their own. I tried to do that, and here are some conclusions and findings.
Well, for one thing, the heroic `Hunter` did not kill a `wanted terrorist`. He killed an unarmed man, wearing nothing but underwear, who had squeezed himself in fear into a small cupboard in the kitchen of his father`s home. More then 80 cartridges were collected from the kitchen floor, and the body (according to the photo in my possession) was totally shredded.

Also, Muayed Musa has not transported anybody, and was member of no organization. He was a small-time car thief, for which he had time in the Israeli prison and got released about a year ago. Shortly before the Netanyah bombing he was asked to arrange for a person introduced to his as a fellow thief to get into Israel. He used use his old contacts and phoned Muhammad Azem.

That is the entire story. Certainly, he fell short of being a sterling character. But only in Israel, the land of heroic `Hunters` and year-long open seasons, can a petty thief be summarily put to death for the crime of having made a single phone call.

Did the IDF make any correction to its previous communique? As a matter of fact, they did. The new version: Musa was `deeply implicated in the bombing` and `was killed while resisting arrest`. (One unarmed man in his underwear, jammed into a cupboard, `resisting` several professional `Hunters` armed to the teeth...).

One thing is even more urgent then dealing with the extremely faulty standards of reporting by the army`s public relation department. This so-called `Hunter` must be immediately discharged and offered some mental treatment. After all, which human being can remain sane after completing 26 `liquidation contracts`?
Links to the latest articles in this section

In summer, West Bank towns have little water
In the Heart of Hebron, `America` is Light Years Away
Ramadan in Gaza: its in the details