Tuesday, 26 February 2013

Prisoner Y

X Marks The Spot

The latest revelations tell us in great detail the story behind the saga that is now known as Israel’s handling of the case of Prisoner X. For that elaborate story, feel free to go here, here and here. Try the second link if you can only be bothered with the executive summary. I have to warn you, though, that all these linked sources are in Hebrew; you can use Google Translate to stick their URL in and read the story in your preferred language.
Assuming you went through the links and read the story, let me ask you this: do you think Prisoner X was a traitor? Do you think he deserved death? Do you think he deserved imprisonment under unprecedented conditions, his identity totally hidden from the press and the public? Would you say he deserved the full weight of the Israeli judicial system on his face? My answer to all of the above would be “no”; in fact, given the information in the links I would say Zygier is innocent by my book. Don’t know if I would have liked to make friends with him, but see him end up the way he did? Never.

With that in mind, pay attention to the judge conducting the investigation into Zygier’s death. Despite looking into the matter for a year and a half (!), she never bothered visiting the actual prison cell where the death took place (read here). Exemplary.
There’s another point raised in that last link: Israel is yet to deny the existence of additional Prisoner Xs. One wonders how long it would take before we learn of Prisoner Y? Or Z? And for that matter, how would we label them once we run out of letters?
Let us hope you are not to find yourself labelled Z1.

4/3/13 update: It was interesting to read today of a similar case to Prisoner X, the case of Bradley Manning (see here). Indeed, the similarities are striking; it seems obvious that both Manning and Zygier are victims to some major organizations trying to keep the public oblivious of their wrongdoings through silencing anyone who would dare speaking.

Image by Mr. Ducke, Creative Commons license


wile.e.coyote said...

If you base your information on the data that is published by a person that goggling his same shows only negative feedback (on the quality of his trues, not on him as a person) then I'm sure you are right based on the data you have in hand.
However if you base your data on the official information, you can't know anything.

One of the option that are being discussed was that he (not Yehuda) was sharing information with additional agencies (not the Aussie one), based on my view of life, a person that share such data which can harm a secret operation that its objective is to stop nuclear attack on me should be behind bars.

If publishing his picture to the public will show the enemy that the person they worked with is the enemy and therefore they will throw the fault equipment, it is enough to hide his identity.

If I understand your view, then it is more important to share his identity over the option to delay a nuclear attack on me, well hope you will not feel that once the Tasmanian devils will throw their numclear ACME bombs on Melbourne.

Moshe Reuveni said...

I don't think there's much risk of us reaching agreement over this matter, but for what it's worth:

Source credibility:
I agree it is important. However, I do not think that credibility is earned via positive feedback. Check out Julian Assange: there's negative feedback about him throughout, yet no one is disputing that his leaks were correct.
Moving on, I totally disagree about the value of "official information". You'd have to be totally naive to only accept "official information" and to take it as the holy word of god. Case in point, again, is the whole matter of Wikileaks: say, how the USA was trying to hide one of its attack helicopters committing murder. Moving back to Israel, if you listen to Dover Tsahal you might get the impression the West Bank is one big honeymoon suite. Well, call me a cynic.
In this day and age, with Twitter and all, everyone is a viable news source if they can prove themselves to be so. This particular source that I linked to was pointed out to me by Haaretz, which - I am sure you would agree - is a generally reliable source.
Besides, your "official sources" are keeping to their silence. What do they have to hide?

Definition of treason:
You seem to have a very black & white view of the world. Allow me to ask you this -
Should we attack the USA? After all, the Obama administration is preventing Israel from attacking Iran, thus allowing them to drop an atomic bomb on your head. Surely you cannot tolerate that? How can you sleep at night with this Obama on the loose?
Re Zygier sharing information with other spy agencies: doesn't the Mossad do that on a regular basis anyway?
I accept there is a lot here that we do not know. What I was trying to say is that this person is innocent, first and foremost by the fact he was never convicted. Second, even if there was something going on, there is no evidence of that something being as horrible as to merit the person's very existence from being wiped out. In my view, nothing is worthy of such punishment; quite the opposite, the bigger the crime the more exposed it should be.

I will conclude by stating it does not seem to me as if Zygier did any horrible crime. His family getting paid certainly supports that assessment of the situation. It therefore seems to me like the whole handling of his case was more about saving face than sorting out a major traitor.