חשיפה: הסיבה שבגללה הצנזורה אוסרת לפרסם שישראל מייצרת ומפעילה מל”טים חמושים
Ronen Bergman, one of Israel’s most distinguished security and intelligence investigative reporters has earned the distinction of having an interview he conducted with the media watchdog publication, 7th Eye, censored not once, but twice. This happened last June, after he published an exposé about how Israeli counter-intelligence officials uncovered the most successful KGB spy in Israel. He was Marcus Klingberg, whom I’ve written about here before. He was exposed by an Israeli double agent, Boris Krasny, whose name was censored in the original Yediot Achronot story. I’ve also written extensively about the absurd censorship of Krasny’s role.
When 7th Eye interviewed Bergman about this story, he let loose against military censorship, pointing out examples of its absurdity and lack of common sense. For that, the censor, Col. Ariella Ben Avraham suppressed the entire article. It was there on the publication’s website one minute and gone the next. Of course, I published the entire article here. In it, I noted as a footnote that one of the examples of absurd censorship which Bergman offered was Ben Avraham’s refusal to acknowledge that Israel manufactures and operates armed drones.
Now, the censor has reconsidered her suppression of the Bergman interview, permitting it to be published. With one caveat: the entire passage about armed drones is gone from the original interview. That makes Bergman ‘twice-blessed’ by the censor. So in honor of Col. Ben Avraham, transparent journalism and a free press, I publish the censored passage here in translation:
One example in which the power of the absurd is even more evident is the knowledge that Israel has armed drones. Hebrew Wikipedia even mentions this, including the names of the different models and photographs of them. We’re selling these vehicles to Germany. It’s all there [in Wikipedia]. It’s all openly discussed. Yet the censor doesn’t permit us to publish it. Why? Because of a claim, which even when it was first raised seemed ridiculous: that if it would be published British companies would not sell certain components to Israeli aviation industry and Elbit. Proof is that the evidence is already public and they [the British] still are selling these components to us.
So there you have it: the astonishing revelation that Israel operates armed drones which, heaven forfend, actually kill Palestinians. What many don’t know is that Israel pioneered murder from the skies. And that the CIA learned at Israel’s knee how to kill Muslims without having to jeopardize any human life (except those of the victims, of course).
In a similar vein, a confidential Israeli source has informed me that Twitter’s act of censorship against me originated with a new Israeli cyber crimes unit established by chief prosecutor, Shai Nitzan. In effect, I’ve become a wanted man for cyber crimes against the State of Israel. In the first Israeli coverage of this case (I expect two others to be published shortly), in Calcalist, the unit advances the wholly preposterous argument that the crime of publishing the tweet was “multi-jurisidictional.” That is, it wasn’t just a crime in Israel proper. But it was a crime in other jurisdictions as well. This is a plain, flat-out lie which has no legal basis whatsoever. It’s a pure bluff by a bunch of shabby, shyster lawyers who have no arguments on their side, so they made up new concepts which never were.
Avigdor Feldman attorney … Chief Prosecutor Shai Nitzan “is not telling the truth”
[Source: Conviction of Roman Zadorov | JPost |]
From Twitter Terms of Service
“You may use the Services only in compliance with these Terms and all applicable local, state, national, and international laws, rules and regulations.”
You agreed to it when you signed up for their service.
Don’t bother. It’s all a big conspiracy.
Richard Silverstein says
@ Dany: I have to obey MY national laws, not Israel’s. To use Twitter must I obey the laws of New Zealand? China? North Korea? No.
@Richard: again – Twitter is a global company, serving content in individual countries. As explained in the Twitter TOS, Twitter is subject to local laws concerning the content served. That’s why your Tweet is restricted _in_Israel, not _in_the_US. To have your content shared in Israel, you have to follow Israel laws, that’s all.
If you go to Israel and stab someone, you’re prosecuted according to Israeli law, not American law. Same thing, only that now your action is in the Israeli network “space”, not in the streets.
Richard Silverstein says
@OneIsraeli: As Internet lawyer Jonathan Klinger told Calcalist, what Isrsel has done is the same as if you were photographed going 140 mph on the German autobahn & when you returned to Israel Shai Nitzan came to your door and arrested you for the crime you committed in Germany. In other words, it’s utterly absurd.
And Klinger understands internet law a mite better than you.
Further, if I was in Israel I would be prosecuted under Israeli law even though I’m not a citizen & didn’t commit the alleged crime there. That too…absurd.
“And Klinger understands internet law a mite better than you.”
Based on what, exactly, do you base that assumption? Btw, there’s no such thing as “internet law”. Who enforces it, the “internet police” ? Was it set down by the “internet legislation authority” ? If so, which “internet law” says “Tweets are exempt from restriction” ?
In this case here, there is only local law as applied over a foreign enterprise while operating in the confines of Israeli jurisdiction.
“Further, if I was in Israel I would be prosecuted under Israeli law even though I’m not a citizen & didn’t commit the alleged crime there. That too…absurd.”
Just in case you’re addressing my last paragraph, in your haste to answer you might not have noticed I wrote “if you are in Israel and stab someone”. Meaning, the crime has been committed under Israeli jurisdiction. In the case of material disseminated under Israeli jurisdiction, in this case, computers whose IP addresses fall into the Israeli allocated blocks, Israeli law applies. That’s why Twitter will restrict your tweet _in_those_computers_only. Absurd is to be unable to understand that.
Richard Silverstein says
Excuse me while I spew my morning coffee. Virtually every major law firm in the U.S. has at least one lawyer (many firms have more) who specializes in internet law. It is a growing practice everywhere. And Jonathan Klinger is one of the best known practitioners in this field in Israel.
As for “internet police,” you should know Shai Nitzan has created just such a unit of the Israeli police called the “cyber crimes unit.”
Israel has no jurisdiction over a foreign internet company operating in Israel (a foreign company with a physical presence in Israel is different). The only thing Israel can do is close down Twitter’s business in Israel as punishment for it defying the censorship order. But that in itself would probably violate Israeli law if any connection could be made between the two acts.
As for Israeli IP addresses: Israeli law applies to Israelis who live in Israel. It does not apply to virtual tweets which originate outside Israel. Unless of course Israel wishes to resort to the behavior of Erdogan & Xijing and Kim Jong On and censor the entire internet on behalf of Israelis. That’s the next “logical” step.
You’ve said enough on the subject. Now move on.
Trapper Jon says
Israel indicts ‘settler’ for cyber crime of incitement to violence.
A developing story from NRC Dutch newspaper …
Mossad suspect In death threats to Palestinian representative Nada Kiswanson @ICC in The Hague
Mossad involvement is my analysis of surveillance methods and sophisticated technology used for intimidation. Israel owns the Dutch telephone systems for government wire-tapping which ties into extensive Internet hub for Western Europe.
Another Israeli says
Link, not censored yet to interview with Ronen Bergman