by G. van Gelder
Five years have passed, and I feel the prosecution in the Duma case did not investigate with an open mind. Israel's Dreyfus case? Op-ed
The Italian journalist Giulio Meotti wrote in Arutz Sheva, May 14, 2014, - please note the date!
“What is the only thing unifying everybody in the Israeli government, media, military and legal system?”
“Easy. Blaming and targeting the 'settlers', of course, who are now symbolized by Yitzhar's Jews (once it was Elon Moreh, Kiryat Arba etc...).
“Why? Because they know that Yitzhar Jews will resist, that they can't stop them. We are talking about religious Jews who are heroic settlers of land (east Samaria), the most essential region for Jewish security and continuity.
“It seems that a malignant flower is now growing in Yitzhar: a yeshiva was seized by the army, Boaz Albert underwent pain and humiliation in front of his wife and children, some houses were randomly destroyed...
“What will be the next target of this blood libel fabricated to tear down many isolated, but vital, communities around Yitzhar?”
“Hundreds of Palestinian Arab mass murderers can be released, but Jewish tire-slashers must be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, while two MK's call for alleged Jewish vandalism to be termed terror to allow administrative detention without due process.”
“There is something pathological in a state, given all the Middle East unrest, that considers the greatest danger to be a few right-wing hooligan Jews, probably wayward kids who should be caught and punished, so that the Supreme Court, the Shin Bet, the biggest media, the army and the political echelons need to keep attention focused on them rather than on the Arab terrorists.”
Almost fifteen months later on the 31st of July, a house in Kfar Duma was firebombed and a family murdered, and without any hesitation it was announced to the world “We know who is responsible, this is the work of Jewish Terrorists.” Today the prime Jewish suspect was convicted of that murder.
It seemed at the time that there was too much of a hurry in coming to that conclusion. It was as if the authorities had been waiting for the murder to happen. With the foreknowledge about Kfar Duma’s history of internal arson attacks by one Arab against another, why did the authorities announce they suspected Jews?
Could it be that Arabs had painted the Hebrew grafitti nearby in order to connect the crime to Jews?
This was exactly what Giulio Meotti had expected. This was also the “vandalism to be termed terror to allow administrative detention without due process.”
Almost five years have passed, the prosecution never fully investigated the crime with open minds. Instead, the Jewish Division of the Shabak rounded up around a dozen victims, treated them as ‘terrorists with ticking timebombs’, and even tortured innocent young law- abiding citizens to coerce them to confess to the crime. Most had the good sense and resolve to withstand the painful interrogations and keep their mouths firmly shut. They were ultimately released. That period casts a dark shadow on the Jewish State.
When a ‘ticking bomb’ did explode, a quick response to the arson attack followed, stating that this attack was not a Jewish crime. Was there an investigation this time around?
The accused Amiram Ben Uliel was the last hope of the authorities to pin the crime on a Jew. One can imagine the torture was used to make sure Ben Uliel would not walk away a free man as most of the arrestees had done.
The shocking fact is that unlike in other civilized countries a confession in Israel is treated as key evidence.
Other interested parties have investigated the Duma crime, and witnesses have freely told whoever asked, that there were at least two people involved. The grandfather of the only survivor pointedly asked “How can one man drive off in two cars”. In fact any observer of the Duma libel will note that the crime was too much to have been accomplished by any one person.
When the arrested were eventually allowed to speak to their lawyers - and yes, that took a very long time during which they were questiioned in ways the courts later criticized severely - the reaction to the torture and lack of due process caused an outcry from both ends of the political spectrum, and the Jewish Division engineered a fake video production “The Wedding of Hate”. This was intended to prove, as Caroline Glick wrote “that not only were there murderers amongst the Hilltop Youth but that the whole community supported the crime”.
Except there never was a "wedding of hate". It was a choreographed incident that amounted to about five seconds of video in which hatred was expressed on signs and a picture was stabbed, and it was created to accomplish a nefarious objective. Nobody attending the wedding witnessed the incident. It took place in a corner of the hall, but the Shabak camera’s long lens was ready and focused on one actor, whose face was covered. The five second clip was later mixed with genuine wedding dancing and the special video was distributed to specific media people. These were persons who could easily be convinced of its contents and would not ask embarrassing questions, such as why did it take weeks for the producers to release it?
The father of the bride pointed out that the wedding was on December 7, and the footage was released weeks later when public opinion against the Shin Bet was at its peak - all this an obvious attempt to demonize the hilltop youth and manipulate public opinion, as if to say: "It's OK now, you can torture the boys". And it worked according to script, as it was believed and everyone chimed in with condemnations of the hilltop youth and suddenly justified the Shin Bet.
The father of the bride continued, “I really don't know who arranged those pictures anyway. Knowing the hilltop youth, I can tell you that photographing pictures and mounting them on signs is not their specialty. If you look closely, everyone dancing is wearing white shirts, but the guys holding the signs are wearing jackets and their faces are blurred.
“And even if those holding the signs are not Shin Bet agents, it's no problem to give the signs to some overzealous youth and let him run with it. We know for sure that the Shin Bet had a heavy presence at the wedding, a fact nobody denies. So yes, there could have been "champagne" (codename of former Shin Bet provocateur Avishai Raviv) at the wedding, a beverage I never ordered”.
When lawyers for the wedding party asked to inspect the video for tampering, it had somehow disappeared never to be found again --- and this was not the first time the prosecution had lost important documents pertaining to the Duma affair. The actor who stabbed the picture and the camera crew will never be charged, of course.
Why would this incident be videotaped for international distribution? The objective here was to make it seem as if the whole community were celebrating a murder. Prejudices concerning Hilltop Youth were now firmly confirmed by the fake video.
Like the diaspora blood libels throughout history, so too, I see the Duma case.
The writer, not associated with the hilltop youth, has asked to remain unidentified.
G. van Gelder
Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter