רק עכשיו הוסר (חלקית) איסור הפרסום על מה שחשפתי ב-2017: קצין המינהל האזרחי הורשע באונס פלסטיניות
In 2013, Palestinian women began to complain that an IDF Major working on behalf of COGAT, the unit responsible for the Palestinian Territories, solicited sex in exchange for work permits, and even raped Palestinian women.
But it wasn’t till 2017 that the army actually prosecuted him. He was convicted and sentenced to 11 years in prison. In an extraordinary act of courage, several Palestinian women came forward to authorities and supported the charges. This played a critical role in the prosecution.
The military censor permitted only the barest facts of the case to be reported by Israeli media. It could not report he was charged with rape: only that he had been accused of serious crimes. Nor could his rank be reported. An Israeli source informed me of the precise charges and his rank and I published this in 2017. But my source would not identify the rapist.
The reason offered by the censor was that news of the case would disturb Palestinian sexual sensitivities. In other words, they were protecting the honor of the female victims. Unmentioned, was the likely reason: the army was mortified that a senior officer would debase the uniform and the armed forces by pandering to his basest instincts. Revealing the story in full would embarrass the IDF.
But this year, the convicted rapist appealed his conviction, seeking to overturn it. Today, the appeals court rejected most of his claims. The censor has now, eight years after the crimes were committed, allowed more facts to dribble out.
Ynet reported the rape charge and some of the sordid details. But it’s claim to have “broken” the story is only partially true since it was reported back in 2017 (fully by me and partially by other Israeli outlets). Ynet quotes the court proceedings in detailing some of the seedier aspects of the IDF officer’s behavior. This is a translation of the passages from the court transcript displayed in the Ynet article:
This is an exceedingly disturbing case about which there is no argument concerning the great interest in publishing its details to a wider public. In light of the importance of the principle of the public nature of the court proceeding; and as a result of the publication of the decision, we once again emphasized in the course of the proceedings the importance of publishing the details of the case under the necessary constraints [censorship of the name and rank of the officer and the names of the accusers]…
[Initials of the accusers] live in Jenin. At the beginning of August 2015, the appelant received secret intelligence. He discussed with his commander the source of the information, who told him the Shabak had transmitted it. It related to a potential Hamas operation in the Territories and was classified top secret. Three days later, the appelant spoke with [Accuser A] and told her all of the information–in order to explain why he never responded to a telephone message she left him. That same day, he talked with [Accuser B] and told her all of the details in order to explain to her why he cut off their phone conversation. The appelant was charged with acts outside his authority which endangered the security of the state.
…He told him [a Palestinian man]: “I will take you to a hotel and you’ll enjoy yourself. I can do nice things for you because I know you deserve it: dress nice and wear cologne. Shave yourself above and below. I want to have sex and make you happy. The Palestinian said these things were forbidden in Islam and refused his advances.
…He told her that she was beautiful and tried to have intercourse with her. She said No. But the accused continued [the rape] and told her to be quiet. He took down her slacks while they stood and had sex with her against her wishes. As he stood behind her…the accused climaxed outside of her and told her to clean the floor on which he’d spilt his semen. Then he gave her the permit and threatened her not to reveal what had happened or he would take it back.
A few days passed, and the accused contacted [Accuser C] and took away her permit. He undressed and told her to perform oral sex. She refused. Then he tried to have sex lying on the floor despite her refusal. He penetrated her, but C told him she was sick and the accused stopped. In this instance, the accused did not achieve climax. Also, in this instance he threatened C, if she told what happened he would take the permit from her. Then he gave to her the permit he’s taken away [before they had sex]. He specified he had no defect [sexual disease] and she had to continue to come to him. She did not respond to him.
In other circumstances, he forced the victim to have sex with another person {either male or female) and told her what he wanted her to do during intercourse. Once he said: “Next time come with another woman, nice-looking like you, and bring your daughter too.”
The only portion of the appeal approved by the court concerned his expulsion from the army. Instead he was stripped of his rank, but permitted to retain financial benefits (pension, etc.).
The irony in this case is that while the Israeli court shudders with disgust at the predatory nature of the major’s behavior, this is precisely the way the Shabak deals with Palestinians seeking work or medical permits. In return for the permits it recruits them to spy on their families or communities. The only difference is that the IDF officer did it for his own sexual pleasure, while Shabak did it in order to spy on Palestinians. The latter is no less destructive to the bonds of Palestinian family life and community than the former.
The censor is still withholding the rapist’s name and rank. Protecting the honor of the army. But in actuality, preventing the Israeli public from knowing how its army debases Palestinians. If any Israeli reading this knows more about this story please contact me in confidence.
I wonder why the IDF decided to relax censorship in this case. My guess is that the appeal angered the IDF because it believed it had put the case behind it when he was sentenced to jail back in 2017. In response, it decided it would further impeach him and sully his reputation by revealing the full nature of the acts for which he was charged.
Was the Major a Jewish Israeli or a Muslim or what?
Some time ago there was a report of rape and it turned out the perpetrators were Israeli but not Jewish Israeli.
It helps to make the distinction because Jewish Israelis invariably get the blame for any crime reported to be an ‘Israeli’ one.
@ VarmWoice: There have been so many stories about IDF soldiers & officers raping their female subordinates, Palestinian women, even murdering them. Alas, all Jewish officers.
But your attempt to distinguish between Jewish & non-Jewish officers is macabre and racist. You’re making a distinction w/o a difference. Not to mention attempting to redeem Jewish officers at the expense of Israeli Palestinians.
Finally, there are almost no non-Jewish IDF officers the rank of Major or above.
You don’t have to be a Palestinian to be a Muslim in Israel, which is why I said Jewish and Muslim rather than Palestinian or Israeli. So the distinction was religious not racial. The second largest religious majority is Muslim and I can tell you some stories through people I know but they are not relevent here.
Khaled Abu Toameh doesn’t call himself a Palestinian.
I forget the name of that Israeli Druze (Muslim) whose son is a major or some high level officer.
I still think the IDF (accepting your criticisms as true and valid) are a moral army compared to any other, especially in the region.
Of course, any major who bribes or rapes should be disciplined. That is more likely to happen in Israel than in any other country. You yourself prove that by criticising the lack of action. Expectations from the IDF are high.
@ Varm: Again, it’s a distinction without a difference. Whether Muslim or Christian or whatever, you were trying to distinguish between Israeli Jews and non-Jews in order to blame the latter and protect the former. A fail.
The IDF is an immoral army. A terror force. Compared to any other army in the region it is more ruthless, brutal and lethal. Not to mention engaged in war crimes.
Israel is far less likely than western armies to discipline those officers who commit war crimes or engage in other serious non-combat crimes of violence including rape. Expectation of the IDF are non-existent. It has carte Blanche to do whatever the hell it pleases to whoever it pleases
You are done in this thread.
“..there are almost no non-Jewish IDF officers the rank of Major or above..”
Richard:
Actually there are; a load of them. Bedouin, Druze – even holding senior positions.
However as stupid as the original question has been, there was no need for such a long Megillah as an answer; a simple “I don’t know” would have sufficed.
And what about naming that rouge officer? Seems like age is taking its toll on you too…
@ Eli Gal: I don’t believe this is true. Nor do I know what “a load” means. I strongly doubt there are many more than a few handfuls, if that. The main point to keep in mind is that Palestinians generally refuse to serve in the IDF, and that even if they did, the IDF would not advance them except in certain limited niches in which Israeli Palestinian soldiers specialize.
As for naming the rogue officer, it’s not for lack of trying.
Richard said:
“..this is precisely the way the Shabak deals with Palestinians seeking work or medical permits. In return for the permits it recruits them to spy on their families or communities.”
Despite having fought with Hamas this past May, Israel seeks to improve the living conditions in Gaza by granting Gazans 3,000 work permits that allow them to enter Israel to earn a wage.
https://www.ynetnews.com/article/bjsvq9phf
Precisely.
@ Cillian: Do your homework, hasbaroid. Read Haaretz’s main headlines. Had you done so, you’d have read this: Israel’s Permits for Gaza Workers: More About Security Than Benevolence https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium.HIGHLIGHT-new-gaza-work-permits-intended-to-postpone-next-clash-1.10312832
Israel Rule 1: Israel never does anything regarding Palestinians, Arabs or the world for ethical or altruistic reasons. Never. Nor did it do so in this case.
You are done in this thread.
“The only difference is that the IDF officer did it for his own sexual pleasure, while Shabak did it in order to spy on Palestinians. The latter is no less destructive to the bonds of Palestinian family life and community than the former.”
Are you serious?! Have you lost all touch with reality and morality? Threatening to withhold permits to collect intel is not at all comparable to raping women (or men for that matter) and to even insinuate such is reprehensible. It also shows to what degree you don’t know or understand Palestinian society. The repercussions for a rape victim and their family is the worst possible scenario.
@ Nicole: Lord, spare us from those who “know” Palestinians, their culture, and society.
So let’s put your narrow, misleading focus in perspective. Of course sexual issues are sensitive subjects in Palestinian families. They’re sensitive subjects in many families, even non-Palestinian ones. Of course, a woman who has been raped (whether Palestinian or not) will feel shame and fear rejection by her loved ones.
But if what you claim were true, none of these women would have come forward. They all would have internalized their shame and kept it entirely to themselves. But they didn’t. They did just the opposite of what you claimed they would. They broke the taboo. They went to the authorities and complained. They testified against him. These are huge milestones for these women.
Now, as for your denying the destructive impact of Israel’s extortion, blackmail and intrusive surveillacne of Palestinian society: what do you think is the impact on a Palestinian with a terminal disease who is desperate for a medical entry permit to get treatment in Israel, when in return for the permit he’s told he must rat out his brother, father, sister, mother, uncle, best friend to an Israeli agent. What does that do to the social fabric of families and communities? Is it any less degrading does it wrench the social fabric any less than a rape? I guess we could argue about this. BUt it would be pointless because both are deeply damaging. Your denial of this shows you don’t understand Palestinian society.