Soldier pays the price for criticizing the Israel army

IDF soldier Shachar Berrin was sentenced to a week in prison after he attended the taping of an international TV program, during which he stood up and expressed his opinion of the occupation.

Corporal Shachar Berrin, an immigrant from Australia and a religiously observant lone soldier – he has no family in Israel – is waiting to be sent to military prison. Berrin is a member of the rescue unit of the Home Front Command, and is stationed in the Jordan Valley.

http://www.haaretz.com/weekend/twilight-zone/.premium-1.657553

No wonder the Breaking the Silence soldiers asked for their names to be kept out of the oublic domain.

Irn Bru wrote:IDF soldier Shachar Berrin was sentenced to a week in prison after he attended the taping of an international TV program, during which he stood up and expressed his opinion of the occupation.

Corporal Shachar Berrin, an immigrant from Australia and a religiously observant lone soldier – he has no family in Israel – is waiting to be sent to military prison. Berrin is a member of the rescue unit of the Home Front Command, and is stationed in the Jordan Valley.

http://www.haaretz.com/weekend/twilight-zone/.premium-1.657553

No wonder the Breaking the Silence soldiers asked for their names to be kept out of the oublic domain.

Read again and then understand your error.

He must have realised his error and left for the evening.

To those interested:




Following correspondence with the Daily Telegraph, the offending headline has been promptly amended to more accurately reflect the story. The headline is still, however, arguable. After all, the soldier was imprisoned for an unauthorized TV appearance, not for his criticism of Palestinian treatment:



The headline would have you believe that the soldier was imprisoned as a result of highly critical comments he aimed at the behavior of the IDF. Shachar Berrin is effectively turned into a free speech martyr and Israel is portrayed as a society where criticism of the army lands you in jail, much as it would in a military dictatorship.
It’s only in the final paragraph of the article that this appears:

The IDF said that “the soldier was tried for expressing himself in the media without authority or permission, as called for by army orders.”

Indeed, Berrin was not arrested and imprisoned for what he said. Israel is a very self-critical society with freedom of speech and freedom of the press. Berrin would have been within his rights to say whatever he wanted were he not a serving soldier and plenty of former soldiers and reservists have publicly criticized the IDF in recent times.
The reality is very simple as outlined by these IDF regulations that are known and available to all IDF soldiers. These regulations are not about stifling of free speech or the opinions of soldiers but ensuring that the IDF remains a disciplined and organized body that is free from politicization.
This is common to many armies. In the U.S. Army, soldiers do not have the same constitutional rights to express themselves as civilians while the British Army’s regulations clearly state:

Members of the Army are not permitted to disclose Service information or express views on official matters or experiences to any media organisation without prior approval from the Ministry of Defence, sought through the chain of command; this includes leaking official information to the media. Besides being contrary to regulations, it is unprofessional and can damage the reputation and interests of the Ministry of Defence and the Armed Forces and, whether intentional or not, undermines the Army’s apolitical position.

We’ve translated from Hebrew some of the most relevant sections from the IDF’s regulations:

1. A soldier may not express himself in public, orally or in writing, on political or military matters, unless he was authorized to do so by the IDF Chief of Staff or the IDF Spokesperson’s Unit.
 
2. The soldier may not appear as a military representative before audiences outside of the IDF, may not attend any meeting, party or other event as a representative of the army, unless authorized to do so by the IDF Chief of Staff or the IDF Spokesperson’s Unit. …
 
7. A soldier may contact a newspaper on any matter relating to the areas of culture, science, health, etc., provided that the matter has no relation, directly or indirectly, with political or security issues, and it does not criticize any Israeli public body or any part of the Israeli public.
 
8. The soldier will execute his army duties in a manner that does not involve his personal opinions on subjects beyond his responsibility, authority and his profession, and especially not his personal views on publicly controversial issues of a political, social or ideological nature.
 
9. The soldier will ensure that in any public appearance (especially to mass media outlets) will be with prior approval, and will express a clear and unconditional loyalty to the values and rules of the IDF, reflect the IDF’s policies and decisions and will contribute to public confidence in the IDF.

Irrespective of what he said, Shachar Berrin broke these regulations and appeared in uniform in the media. That he was sentenced to only one week’s imprisonment says much about the light treatment that Berrin has received despite his indiscretion.
At a minimum, the Daily Telegraph should amend its headline to more accurately reflect the real story.


http://honestreporting.com/imprisoned-soldier-or-free-speech-martyr/


This what the extreme left do, twist the facts and reinvent them to look completely different to what the actual facts are.


Night all

Of all the bloopers you have dropped on here (and there are quite a few) that must rank up there with one of the best.
You see, the headline you are talking aboutis a headline in the Daily Telegraph and the headline I gave you was from Haaretz which is quite different from what must have appeared in the Daily Telegraph.

The headline here is quite clear and the article is accurate in that Berrin was sentenced to a week in jail (which was pending). So here's the headline again

Soldier pays the price for criticizing the Israel army

That is 100% accurate because as you have stated he broke the rules and was recalled to his base by his Battalion Commander and charged with what your article states.

Oh, and I did mention in a post that I was away up the club for a couple of pints before you posted your article.

okay doke old bean - all cleared up now.

I never said the report was in error.
Just you Irn.


No wonder the Breaking the Silence soldiers asked for their names to be kept out of the oublic domain.


His arrest had nothing to do with the identities being hidden of the soldiers or even a need to be.


I was very clear.


Your error


   


Thanks Irn that was hilarious you can wipe the egg off your facenow

Good grief, the man's so stupid that he can't see that this case shows why Breaking The Silience soldiers would not give their names, because they would have had the same treatment as the man in this case. Thick or what!

sassy wrote:Good grief, the man's so stupid that he can't see that this case shows why Breaking The Silience soldiers would not give their names, because they would have had the same treatment as the man in this case.  Thick or what!

No I find it unbelievable that people with information like Snowden who did not hide his identity would not come forward Sassy. As they would then have the protection they need of the world knowing who they are. Anything then happens to them, the finger would point at Israel and why Israel would do anything if their identities were known. It would demonize themselves It proves even further that the reports claimed are questionable
The man was arrested and given a very light punishment for breaking the rules which many armies have on speaking publicly in uniform. He was not charged over what he said

DOH

What the fuck has Snowden got to do with it. We are talking about Israeli soldiers who can't give their names because they know they will be prosecuted, but you believe Israeli propaganda that they are lying because they don't, and here is an exact case of why they don't.

Cuchulain wrote:I never said the report was in error.
Just you Irn.


No wonder the Breaking the Silence soldiers asked for their names to be kept out of the oublic domain.


His arrest had nothing to do with the identities being hidden of the soldiers


I was very clear.


Your error


   


Thanks Irn that was hilarious you can wipe the egg off your facenow

Oh no Didge that just won't do. They kept their name quiet because they didn't want to face the same fate that Berrin did.

The article was 100% accurate and you quickly jumped in quoting the article you posted making out it was wrong.

You just got your articles mixed up because the Haaretz headline was completely different from the one in the Daily Telegraph.

The Breaking the Silence stuff you are coming out with is a complete red-herring.

Just live with it - there's no shame in being wrong.

Cuchulain wrote:

sassy wrote:Good grief, the man's so stupid that he can't see that this case shows why Breaking The Silience soldiers would not give their names, because they would have had the same treatment as the man in this case.  Thick or what!

No I find it unbelievable that people with information like Snowden who did not hide his identity would not come forward Sassy. As they would then have the protection they need of the world knowing who they are. Anything then happens to them, the finger would point at Israel and why Israel would do anything if their identities were known. It would demonize themselves It proves even further that the reports claimed are questionable
The man was arrested and given a very light punishment for breaking the rules which many armies have on speaking publicly in uniform. He was not charged over what he said

DOH

Diversion alert

sassy wrote:What the fuck has Snowden got to do with it.  We are talking about Israeli soldiers who can't give their names because they know they will be prosecuted, but you believe Israeli propaganda that they are lying because they don't, and here is an exact case of why they don't.  

Such anger and hate and all because you are so intent on hate for Israel.
Snowden knew like anyone else his best chance of life was to be known.
Anything happens to him the fingers will point
They should give their names if they are telling the truth to lend weight to their claims.
They would then have he world knowing who they are.
There is no reason to hide their identity, because they are placing themselves at a "what if" you and others claim will happen to them, over corroborating their claims with who they are
People know who Snowden is, it brings validity to his claim.
So this claim to having to hide is absurd, they would not worry or care if they ended up facing jail time if what was more important was the truth. As the truth would supersede their need to remain hidden. As they would be better placed known to add weight to their claims


Its that simple sassy

Irn Bru wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:I never said the report was in error.
Just you Irn.


No wonder the Breaking the Silence soldiers asked for their names to be kept out of the oublic domain.


His arrest had nothing to do with the identities being hidden of the soldiers


I was very clear.


Your error


   


Thanks Irn that was hilarious you can wipe the egg off your facenow

Oh no Didge that just won't do. They kept their name quiet because they didn't want to face the same fate that Berrin did.

The article was 100% accurate and you quickly jumped in quoting the article you posted making out it was wrong.

You just got your articles mixed up because the Haaretz headline was completely different from the one in the Daily Telegraph.

The Breaking the Silence stuff you are coming out with is a complete red-herring.

Just live with it - there's no shame in being wrong.

Oh yes it will do Irn, as I was very clear

I stated you were wrong twice in two posts.

You got so easily suckered in again.

So wipe the egg off your face mate

Irn Bru wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:


No I find it unbelievable that people with information like Snowden who did not hide his identity would not come forward Sassy. As they would then have the protection they need of the world knowing who they are. Anything then happens to them, the finger would point at Israel and why Israel would do anything if their identities were known. It would demonize themselves It proves even further that the reports claimed are questionable
The man was arrested and given a very light punishment for breaking the rules which many armies have on speaking publicly in uniform. He was not charged over what he said

DOH

Diversion alert

Points valid, intellect overrules irrational Jock

Oh well Irn, you know when he has lost the plot, he starts calling you a Jock. Back on the hamster wheel. Poor lad.

Cuchulain wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:


No I find it unbelievable that people with information like Snowden who did not hide his identity would not come forward Sassy. As they would then have the protection they need of the world knowing who they are. Anything then happens to them, the finger would point at Israel and why Israel would do anything if their identities were known. It would demonize themselves It proves even further that the reports claimed are questionable
The man was arrested and given a very light punishment for breaking the rules which many armies have on speaking publicly in uniform. He was not charged over what he said

DOH

Diversion alert

Points valid, intellect overrules irrational Jock

Keep going Didge - you were in a big enough hole as it was and your just making it worse now.

Give him a bigger spade lol

Irn Bru wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

Points valid, intellect overrules irrational Jock

Keep going Didge - you were in a big enough hole as it was and your just making it worse now.

I proved you do not understand English.
Irn wrong to Irn means the article is wrong lol

You keep explaining that to yourself to ease the fun I had with you

Do you need a tissue to wipe off the rest.

Night Irn, sweet dreams

sassy wrote:Oh well Irn, you know when he has lost the plot, he starts calling you a Jock.  Back on the hamster wheel.   Poor lad.

It's the default position - always is.

sassy wrote:Give him a bigger spade lol

I really need a bigger spade to help shovel up the endless bullshit you have left over the forum tonight.

There you go, all the usual phrases, 'the fun I had with you' etc when he looks a total tit. You have to laugh.

Cuchulain wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

Points valid, intellect overrules irrational Jock

Keep going Didge - you were in a big enough hole as it was and your just making it worse now.

I proved you do not understand English.
Irn wrong to Irn means the article is wrong lol

You keep explaining that to yourself to ease the fun I had with you

Do you need a tissue to wipe off the rest.

Night Irn, sweet dreams

The Haaretz article was spot on = you just got your articles mixed up. I forgive you

I love it when they need each other as if it makes their views look better.
It actually proves they lack conviction in themselves.

Go figure lol

Right you two, have fun

Oh bless him, just can't drag himself away knowing he looks a twat.  Nighty poos dear.

Cuchulain wrote:I love it when they need each other as if it makes their views look better.
It actually proves they lack conviction in themselves.

Go figure lol

Right you two, have fun

How many 'night all' posts will we have this morning?

Cuchulain wrote:I love it when they need each other as if it makes their views look better.
It actually proves they lack conviction in themselves.

Yes, there is a bit of that tag-teaming creeping back into this site. It's indicative of cyber-ganging, as the factions form.

Oh well...Federalist No. 10.