Can you spot what’s wrong in this story?
Here’s a very short item that appeared in today’s Haaretz:
Fund-raising group inadvertently reveals information about top-secret IDF units
An association that fund-raises for the Israel Defense Forces revealed sensitive information, Haaretz has learned. The Association for the Wellbeing of the Israeli Soldiers revealed the names of classified IDF units on its Web site, as part of a list of units that received donations. The units use the money to fund entertainment and sports activities. This is part of the “Adopt a combat fighter” campaign, which raises $100,000 a year for each participating unit. The information was removed following Haaretz’s query. (Anshel Pfeffer)
The original Hebrew is slightly longer and adds a few details:
The list includes several units whose name has been barred from publication in the Israeli press for many years due to [military] censorship restrictions. In addition to the names of the units, the site published reports about the adoptions, including several details about the units, and in one case also the name of the CEO of one of the adopting companies, who was in the past the commander of one of the units.
Now, this is by no means major news. On the contrary, it’s a minor news item, not worthy of much comment in and of itself. But in a different sense, it is quite telling; it tells you a few things about the Israeli society. An external observer might be asking some questions:
- How come a country that advertises itself as a democracy has military censorship determining what can and what cannot be published in the (supposedly) free press?
- How come private donations are solicited for military units, when the Israeli military budget is all but unlimited?
- How come this quite unnecessary fund-raising effort is so successful (the photo above gives a hint; it’s taken from the website of Israel’s second largest bank, and shows some bankers at a special event with the soldiers they “adopt”; the bank used this for PR)?
- What exactly are the qualifications of the former head of a secret missions military unit for the job of corporate CEO (this would not have been so puzzling had it been an isolated case, but of course it is by no means an isolated case)?
- Last, but by no means least, why does a leading Israeli newspaper, which even has a reputation of being liberal, contact another publication, completely on its own initiative, to ensure the demands of the military censorship on that other publication are being met?
I’ll leave you, folks, to ponder these questions on your own…
Taken from Israel Palestine Blog