Yedidya Meir, B’Sheva January 10, 2019

To: The Director of the Jewish Division of the GSS (a.k.a. Shin Bet or Shabak)

What made me change sides this week, to a camp that I'd always thought was
crazy?

1. Greetings, Director of the Jewish Division of the GSS. I don't know you, I
don't even know your name - after all, it's classified as long as you're in office -
but you may know me. I assume your department never misses an issue of
"B'Sheva," from Emanuel Shiloh's opening column to Kedem and Leshem's
weekly advertisement.

I just want you to know that you lost me this week. And that shouldn't have
happened. Until just a few days ago not only wasn't I against you, I always felt
disdain for anyone who attacked you. I can't relate to conspiracy theory
mongers at all. Yeah, sure, the GSS assassinated Rabin, and Peres' mother was
an Arab, and Haneen Zoabi's grandmother is Jewish, and if you forward this
message to five other people, Microsoft will donate a million dollars to
Yeshivat Pri HaAretz's library. Spare me your urban legends, I always said. The
Jewish Division of the GSS does its job faithfully - preventing a handful of
radicals from carrying out horrendous acts. It's a Mitzvah to support them.

But this week I totally changed my mind, and I don't think I'm the only one.
Two things brought this change about. The first was the decision of the district
court in Lod to permit the publication of its reasons for disqualifying the
confessions of a 17-year-old minor. This particular minor was arrested in
connection with the murder of the Dawabsheh family in Duma and accused of
being a member of a terrorist organization, insulting a religion for racist
reasons (what's with that law, anyway? I know several media figures who could
be tried for this offence and they wouldn't even try to deny it), torching the
Dormition Abbey in Jerusalem and writing anti-Christian graffiti.

And why did the court dismiss all of this minor's confessions? As it turns out,
as part of a very elaborate investigative stratagem he was held in Akko for four
days in a prison built especially for this purpose (!) along with interrogators
who were actually policemen who presented themselves as dangerous
criminals. In response to the claims of his attorney, Itamar Ben Gvir,
concerning the admissibility of the confessions, State Attorney representative
Yael Atzmon argued that the minor acted of his own free will when he decided
to confess to the crimes. Sounds reasonable, doesn't it? He confessed, period.
Would you confess to something you didn't do?

2. Oh, but this is where Judge Michal Brant comes in. "A heartrending picture
becomes clear," she writes virulently in her verdict. "It seems that the minor,
while being denied the right to meet with an attorney, was subject to a barrage
of threats while imprisoned along with policemen disguised as hardened
criminals as part of the stratagem. In their attempt to get the defendant to
disclose the events for which he was arrested, 'they accused him of being a
stool pigeon' liable to inform on them, and in order to protect themselves they
created a balance of terror. The interrogators ordered the defendant to tell them
about crimes he committed so if he intended to inform on them they would
have incriminating evidence against him, thus preventing him from informing
on them."

In the judge's verdict, which spans a full 96 pages, it's revealed, among other
things, that one of the interrogators, Aviv, demanded half of the minor's meal
after the fast of the Tenth of Tevet, and at another time he forbade him to lay
Tefillin when he wished to. "Aviv's conduct in this matter," wrote the judge,
"was utterly unacceptable and constitutes a violation of an elementary right of
every detainee - the right to be fed."

But that's not all - this big performance also included a "drug stratagem"
intended to put pressure on the minor. One interrogator hid drugs in the minor's
bed and gestured to him to keep quiet. Later the interrogators blamed the minor
for snitching on them about the drugs. "The conduct of David, one of the
interrogators in the cell," continues the judge, "went far beyond that of the "bad
cop" and overstepped the bounds of the permissible... the defendant mumbled,
answered halfheartedly, stated nothing clear about his involvement but rather
was induced to follow David's statements. This behavior is consistent with the
defendant's great fear of David and his claim that once he told David about the
abbey he calmed down."

Another mention of the interrogators' ploy from the verdict: "Harsh pressure
was applied to the defendant along with threats of bodily violence, a promise of
silence if he confessed, real and destructive damage to his body and the threat
of rape. The defendant was not left with the free choice to either confess or
remain silent. The defendant was pressured and frightened throughout his stay
in the cell until he said what he said about the torching of the abbey, and then
he was left alone."
If anyone among you is still unsure of his attitude toward the Jewish Division
of the GSS, I invite you to Google the entire article by Yoram Yarkoni who
revealed this week in Yedioth Aharonoth all the details that have been released
to the public. Don't read it before bedtime.

3. This scandal should have been the lead item of every newscast, led to the
establishment of an investigative committee and upstaged Netanyahu's
undramatic announcement. That didn't happen. The State Attorney's office
responded by saying that the GSS believed that the stratagem remained within
the bounds of the law and that they're "studying the verdict in depth."

Actually, Mr. Director of the Jewish Division, what finally pushed me into the
strange arms of the camp that doubts your credibility was a statement issued by
the GSS itself. Apparently, as a result of the judge's verdict as well as the
damning evidence revealed a week before on the "Fact" investigative television
program, you decided to bolster my faith and the faith of others like me in your
organization. So what did you do? You issued a press release that looks more
like an op-ed article. And I quote: "Due to the reduction of the gag order which
allowed for the publication of details of the investigation of Jewish terrorism
currently being conducted by the GSS, we'll inform you that in our
investigation of the attack we found evidence that demonstrates how anti-
Zionist, radical and dangerous the suspects are, as illustrated by their harsh acts
and statement against the State of Israel and its symbols. For example, among
the items found during the GSS investigation of the suspects was a video
documenting the burning of an Israeli flag by some of the detainees.
Furthermore, in the room of one of the detainees was found an Israeli flag with
the words "Death to the Zionists" written on it next to a drawing of a swastika
(see attached link to download the video)."

Well, if I see that, I'm sure to be convinced that this week's detainees should be
tortured and denied the right to see a lawyer. Instead of providing facts and
evidence pertaining to the actual accusations you gave us bells and whistles. It's
hard to explain exactly why, but that opened my eyes once and for all. I don't
know the details of this particular case. After all, the gag order still conceals
more than it reveals. But your assumption that you can so easily distract the
public's attention from the grave acts you committed because "see what a
dangerous subversive group we've discovered" is simply absurd. I'm sorry, but
someone who draws a swastika on an Israeli flag is far from being a danger to
the public. The main danger of someone who draws a swastika on an Israeli
flag is... that he'll draw another one. That isn't how sophisticated subversives
act. That's how troubled kids act. Now, I'm not saying that kids with problems
shouldn't be dealt with. They should. But not by locking them up in GSS
cellars and denying them their most fundamental rights.

In contrast with the GSS's lowly media-mongering, Yeshivat Pri HaAretz and
the parents of the detained youths expressed themselves, both at the press
conference and in their letter, moderately and responsibly.

4. Oh, I forgot to condemn: I utterly condemn rock-throwing. And not only

rocks, tomatoes too. And I'm against slime-throwing. Forget throwing, I'm even
against just holding slime and playing with it. It's gross. But seriously, the GSS
should look into how it managed to make someone like me switch sides. After
all, I'm no big fan of the hilltop extremists. One shouldn't generalize, some of
them are good, sweet people, but in principle I'm not the type with a romantic
view of young anarchists who rebel against grownups with an impudent look in
their eyes, even if those negative traits are channeled toward the Mitzvah of
settling the Land of Israel. The Land of Israel is acquired through derech eretz
(decent behavior). Unfettered youths who scoff at Pinchas Wallerstein and
Zambish because they seem too bourgeois haven't done a thousandth of they've
done to build Israel.

And I'm not just talking about physical violence - that's definitely a no-no - I'm
even talking about verbal violence. I heard recently that one of the more
prominent, well-known activists was expelled from the Hesder yeshiva where
he was studying because he talked back to his Rosh Yeshiva, a Torah sage and
venerable personage. I consider that worse than any graffiti. But it's a long way
from there to what government institutions like the GSS and the State
Attorney's office are doing to them.

And the GSS is only the executive arm. Behind the GSS are the law
enforcement authorities. Just a few days ago State Attorney Shai Nitzan said
the following at the Calcalist conference: "This is the place, apropos the events
of the last few days, to emphasize the fact that terrorism is terrorism is
terrorism. Whether it comes from Arabs or Jews it should be treated in exactly
the same way. It must be fought with all legal means. Terrorism from both sides
threatens national security." Get it? The State Attorney stands there and equates
Jewish terrorism with Arab terrorism. As if they're on the same scale, occur just
as frequently, as if Israel is dealing with two equally dangerous threats. You
know, now they're investigating rock-throwing in Rehelim, and a few weeks
ago there was a shooting attack in Givat Assaf (and by the way, kudos to the
GSS for catching the terrorist, after all, that's what they're supposed to do). As
if there are two types of terrorist organization out there, and who knows what
might happen tomorrow. What's going to happen next - will an Arab attack a
Jew or a Jew attack an Arab? Only time will tell. After all, both sides have
educational systems that encourage terrorism, spiritual leaders who preach
terrorism and governments that fund terrorists, who are turned into cultural
heroes to boot.

Well, there is no Jewish terrorist movement. There may be a bunch of kids who
threw rocks (and I'm not even sure I believe that any more since I became an
honorary member of the Barry Chamish Club). So there's no need to build a
special jail in Akko with brutal interrogators (by the way, how much did that
whole grandiose production cost the taxpayer? Did they set up a phony gallows
while they were at it?). That's what the desk sergeant at the police station in
Ariel is for - to register the complaint of a violent crime so that the police can
start an investigation and presumably call in the suspects for questioning -
while protecting the minors' rights, of course.

True, there are rare, exceptional, pinpoint incidents. And that's not okay. That's
bad. That's terrible. They should be dealt with. But the eight million citizens of
a 70-year-old country who face the threat of brutal, bloodthirsty terrorism every
day and grit their teeth and let the IDF deal with it should be praised, not
condemned. Especially the population of about half a million law-abiding
settlers who live next to these terrorists and are pelted with rocks again and
again (and that's if they're lucky). They deserve, especially this week, praise for
the noble way they face this challenge.