Subject: gag X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by aggie.pw.usda.gov id NAA11804 Status:
GAGGING ON THE PROTOCOLS by Barry Chamish
So it looks like the Rabin truth is emerging. The symphony began with the Ophir Pines Overture in late October, in which the Knesset member abuses his powers to force the country's largest book chain to ban my book Who Murdered Yitzhak Rabin. This was followed by the melodious flurry of State Attorney General Elyakim Rubinstein's on-air banning of the broadcast of the protocols of a meeting his predecessor attended, during which he agreed to close a criminal file against the Shabak provocateur and likely Rabin murder conspirator Avishai Raviv. Finally, came the glorious crescendo as the Rabin family; wife, daughter and son all called for a reinvestigation of the Rabin assassination.
By the November 4th commemoration of the murder, the whole country of Israel was talking about the assassination more honestly than ever before. And while Yediot Ahronot printed banner headlines about the Rabins' demand for a new commission of inquiry, little old me was, as usual, deliberately snubbed. The most irritating snub was brought to me by the Channel Two morning show which sent a crew to my home to interview me and then nixed my appearance.
However, Yuval Rabin saved the day. While being interviewed by the same Channel Two, he said, "Unless there is a reinvestigation there will be lots more Chamishes in the future." I was touched.
Now that the call is out nationwide for the air to be cleared, look who is getting on the new investigation bandwagon: Shimon Peres, Meir Shamgar anmd Eitan Haber. This is a good diversion strategy in the short term, or at least until they can contribute ideas on how to rig a new inquiry commission. Of this trio, the award for most unmitigated gall goes to Eitan Haber who wrote a piece in the Nov. 7 Jerusalem Post about the Still Unanswered Questions surrounding the murder. This is what I wrote the Post's editors:
Editors:
Surely Eitan Haber doth jest when he writes about Still Unanswered Questions surrounding the Rabin assassination? If not, the man has more gall than common sense.
Here is a summary of Haber's activities on the evening of Nov. 4, 1995. After hearing of the shooting, Haber rushed to Ichilov Hospital, ran straight to the operating theater and collected Rabin's blood-soaked belongings. At Rabin's funeral, the bloody song sheet was in Haber's hands instead of at the police forensics laboratory.
After absconding with the evidence at Ichilov, Haber rushed to the Prime Minister's office and emptied the file cabinets. When asked by Kol Ha'ir why he would do such a thing, Haber answered that he wanted to preserve Rabin's possessions for the IDF archives.
What a thoughtful act! Rabin wasn't dead ten minutes and Haber was thinking, "What can I put in the IDF archives for him?"
As a result of his actions and the sheer lack of any other explainable motive, many people accuse Haber of deliberate evidence destruction, a position I take in my book Who Murdered Yitzhak Rabin. Unless Haber can come up with a plausible explanation for his peculiar cleanup work on the assassination night, he would be wise not to comment on any aspect of the Rabin murder. He is included in the list of unanswered questions he has the nerve to write about.
Barry Chamish - Modiin
(If you have any doubt about the veracity of my version of events, I will fax you documented proof, including Haber's own testimony to the Shamgar Commission.BC)
In all the excitement of the truth unexpectedly going public, the issue of the secret protocols has been too forgotten. It was leaked to MK Michael Eitan and he had intended to present them on Nissim Mishal's evening tv show. And he would have too if Elyakim Rubinstein hadn't have slapped a gag order on the document in the middle of the show. Between banning my book and suppressing the public's right to information in front of a million members of that very same public, the government was clearly panicking or really, truly is bolshevist and undemocratic. Either way, these two actions alerted the public to the goverup and set the stage for the Rabin family's bombshell two days later. So what was in these protocols that is terrifying our political leaders? It turns out plenty and plenty more. Allow me to present the gagged minutes of the meeting with my comments beginning and ending with three stars,***.
Unofficial translation of the Document Document dated June 16, 1996 File 403
Summary of a Meeting on the Swearing-In Ceremony of the Eyal Organization Meeting Date: May 2, 1996
In attendance: 1. Attorney-General Micha Ben Yair 2. Noam Solberg - Senior Assistant to the Attorney-General 3. Edna Arbel - State Attorney 4. Talia Sasson - Head of the anti-incitement unit of the State Attorney's office. 5. N. Ben-Or - Head of the Criminal Division in the State Attorney's Office 6. Leora Chavilio, Senior Assistant in the Jerusalem District Attorney's office. 7. Chezi Kallo - direct GSS handler of Avishai Raviv 8. G. Ben Ami - GSS official 9. Eli Barak - Head of the Jewish Division of the GSS after Carmi Gillon, and during the Ya'akov Perry era, head of Perry's office. 10. Ledor, Jerusalem District Attorney
***Just look who is seated around the conference table: Two of the slimiest characters in the Rabin drama, Eli Barak and Chezi Kalo, heads of the Shabak's Jewish Department, which not only ran Avishai Raviv and controlled Yigal Amir, but was responsible for a campaign of incrimination against "anti-peace" youths which resulted in crimes so heinous, they defeat the Rabin assassination in the category of immorality.
Not written is the fact that the meeting was in the office of the Rabin-era State Prosecutor Micha Ben Yair. Nonetheless, look who is in the discussions: today's State Prosecutor Edna Arbel and then Attorney-General Micha Ben Yair. Recall, that this meeting was held just six months after the Rabin murder and keep in mind that the purpose of this meeting was ultimately to cover up that crime. What we have here is proof of direct collusion between the Peres government and two of the chief suspects in the Rabin assassination.***
Synopsis of deliberations on evidence 133/95 The swearing-in ceremony of the Eyal Organization, a document from 29.3.96 from Leora Chavilio; the summary report of the Eyal swearing-in ceremony; document from 5.2.96 from Y. Rodman
Attorney-General: We have all seen the videotape. Anyone who was there, on location, could have understood that this was not an authentic ceremony. Even the Shamgar Commission explicitly noted this in its report.
***Ben Yair makes it clear from the beginning that he knows a televised swearing-n ceremony of the Shabak straw organization Eyal, run by Raviv was staged. Even Shamgar had to admit it. For those unacquainted with the issue, a month and a half before the Rabin murder, Raviv "inducted" new members of Eyal in a ceremony where they swore to murder anyone who stood in their way of sabotaging the so-called peace process. On the night of the murder, Yigal Amir was identified as an Eyal activist and thus the public accepted this as proof of Amir's motive to murder.***
L. Chavilio: I didn't notice that the inauthentic sections were intentionally edited out of the video. I see a problem with issuing an indictment against the reporter.
***Ben Yair's Jerusalem court representative, however, for some reason, just can't see the phoniness of the tape and expresses doubt about issuing an indictment against the reporter who filmed the fraudulent clip, Eitan Oren.***
A-G: Perhaps some disciplinary action can be taken against him?
C. Kallo: We are talking here about the handling of a problematic agent. The loss-benefit evaluation looks like this: He served as our agent for 8-9 years. Within this time period, he generally worked well, except for the last year. He transmitted to us thousands of pieces of information... During the last year, he lost control, and we were able to nip the problem in the bud. He underwent an initial investigation, and admitted [to his actions] We continued to employ him. As for the story of the videotape [of the staged Eyal swearing-in ceremony] - from our perspective, this is a most serious episode. Our officials deliberated on the matter, and decided that he was out of control and that it was impossible to permit him to continue operating...
But we established new rules of operation... and that he would undergo psychological examinations. It was made quite clear to him that we wouldn't continue along the same path, and that he would not receive immunity for crimes he committed. In hindsight now, if we had gone ahead and broken off our ties with him -maybe he would have given us the murderer [of Yitzchak Rabin].
A court case against him would essentially be a case against the General Security Services (GSS). We would have to reveal all of our rules operation, something that would cause serious operational damage. We have to remember that our opponents pose some serious threats today. During a trial, everything would come out into the open.
I don't remember any trial against a GSS agent that was conducted behind closed doors. Great damage could be caused - revelation of operational strategies, etc.
***Jewish Department head Kalo makes a long, cliched appeal to quash any indictment Raviv by citing various national security platitudes. What is of interest is how much Kalo lies to Ben Yair. According to his scenario, Raviv worked for 9 years with the Shabak and suddenly, just in the past year, he lost control and unilaterally initiated a long campaign of complicated and violent incriminatory scams. But his superiors didn't issue any of the orders. No way us!
Because Raviv was so naughty, Kalo and his fellow Shabak officers were going to fire him but darn, new regulations forced them to keep him on. In retrospect, it's too bad because if he had been released from duty, maybe he would have told us all about Yigal Amir's intentions towards Rabin. But, gosh, darn, we kept him on and he just didn't want to inform us.
So you can't indict Raviv, even if he is guilty, because he's just a bad sort and we'll never hire his likes again. Promise. But if you put him on the stand, he could reveal all kinds of stuff that would endanger all the nice agents provocateur who infiltrate the Israeli Right.***
N. Ben-Or: The attorney who represented Avishai Raviv will have a strong ideological bias, and it is possible that he would join forces with extremist elements, and that together, they would reveal secrets.
T. Sasson: They would do everything they could to reveal secrets.
G. Ben-Ami: As far as his criminal intentions are concerned: Did he intend to commit a crime? They suspected that Raviv was a GSS collaborator and he had to prove himself [to right-wing activists] He had to remove all their suspicions that he was an agent. Dorit Beinish gave approval for his activities next to Bar-Ilan University, to incriminate someone else who would then be caught. He had to protect himself. Any Defense Attorney will call Raviv to the witness stand.
***Now two State Attorney executives and a Shabak officer gang up to persuade Ben Yair to illegally suppress a dangerous criminal act because those Right wing meanies might actually expose "secrets," a code-word for other crimes. And worse, that could lead to charges against our good friend and playmate Dorit Beinish, the State Prosecutor, now a Supreme Court judge, who we learn, approved Raviv's earlier crimes. My, isn't the web of government collusion, not just in supressing but in activating serious felonies, expanding? This could downright get out of hand.***
E. Barak: Raviv was part of a violent group --- the fact is that they suspected him of being a GSS collaborator. He had to, at all times, prove that he was as "active" as them╜
***Yediot Ahronot did a deep expose of Eli Barak two weeks ago. He is a wife-swapper, stalker, drunk driver and liar. And he was just fired as Deputy Security Director of El Al for unspecified reasons, which possibly stem from El Al's fear that if the Rabin assassination truth breaks out, Barak would cause irreparable damage to the airline's image. He was given a high-ranking post in the Shabak and we are warned, he is one of two officers being considered as next chief of organization. The same week that Barak got the boot from his job, the notorious Shabak chieftain and co-conspirator Carmi Gillon announced that he would be leaving his job as head of the National Insurance Institute to take up duties as director of the Shimon Peres Center For Peace. The announcement was celebrated by a three page article in Haaretz painting Gillon as a cross between Mother Teresa and Santa Claus.***
Ledor: We have to close the file "due to lack of public interest." An indictment [against Raviv] could seriously harm the GSS. We have to accept the GSS opinion on this. We close a lot of files in this manner, due to a "lack of public interest." The harm is clear - the trial would look crooked. Holding it "behind closed doors" just won't help.
***We now learn that the Attorney General's Office closes lots and lots of criminal files with the all-purpose excuse that the public wouldn't be interested in the facts. It's a much cleaner foil than rigging a trial that the public would know was "crooked." And these are the heads of the Israeli judicial system talking.***
Ben-Or: I am bothered by the criminal aspect of this - I am not sure that it won't end in a finding of "not guilty." Then we will be in a strange situation. This person was working in a problematic situation. His involvement in Eyal was illegal. They didn't allow him to bring television cameras. A police agent who is commissioned to 'buy' drugs is not allowed to smoke them himself, etc. When you're in the trenches, though, it's difficult, and sometimes [an agent] will "give himself permission" to break a law. Maybe he will argue the defense of "necessity," maybe the justification that he had to "earn the trust of those around him." I don't want to make a decision about his criminal culpability.
A-G: We see this as a serious matter. I don't dismiss the damage to the organization [the GSS]. Even the revelation of his code name caused great damage. But the additional damage is relatively insignificant, and we can make an effort to minimize it. It is possible to conduct proceedings behind closed doors. The case itself is very serious and there is a real public interest in filing criminal charges. This episode shocked television viewers and caused enormous damage, a virtual public storm! I just don't see how we can avoid beginning [criminal] proceedings.
***Remember, Ben Yair admits there IS public interest in Raviv's case. He is the only one at this meeting trying to talk truth.***
Ben Ami: Another factor [that must be considered]: The GSS ability to hire agents, and the organization's handling of already existing agents. Our sources demand that the Service ensure that they will not be revealed. It will be hard [if Raviv goes to trial] to handle present agents and hire new ones.
A-G: Sec.(b)(1); The whole trial will take place behind closed doors. The Shamgar Commission was also held behind closed doors. It is possible.
***Ben Yair finds a compromise. Raviv will be tried behind closed doors. Nothing involving sensitive security issues will be released. But even this isn't good enough for the forces ganging up against him.***
Sasson: Let's assume that there is evidence. The television clip made an impression on me. We see from Chezi Kallo's words what kind of damage [such a trial] would cause to the GSS. I must work with the assumption that there would be such damage. We have to weigh the benefits [of bringing him to trial] against the losses. It has to be evaluated in cold [objective] terms.
E. Arbel: From the perspective of the Attorney-General and the State Attorney's office: It is impossible to evaluate the evidence when we know that what is available there does not give an accurate portrait of what went on. The man was an agent. We don't know what the true picture was at the time. We can't know the clear details of the situation until he gets up on the witness stand, and maybe he will say that he was operating according to the directions of the GSS. It is impossible to say whether there is or is not evidence against him. The file [swearing-in] was staged. The lines were not clearly demarcated for Avishai Raviv. What would have happened if he would have prevented the murder? With all the difficulties that this [decision] entails, I am not sure that we can accomplish our goal. With a heavy heart, I suggest we close the file [against him].
***And here we go. Israel's current State Prosecutor, the one with the heavy heart, Edna Arbel, votes for coverup. And what worries her? Raviv could tell the truth and testify that he was just following the orders of his Shabak superiors...Who were just following the directions of the Prime Ministers, Rabin and Peres. It is for them that Arbel asks what difference it would have made if we could have saved Rabin or not. The important thing is "accomplishing our goal" and Ben Yair apparently knows what she means.***
A-G: Section 4(a) - I don't see a problem with the evidence. I don't see any problems in terms of his criminal intent. It is impossible to close the case without public exposure.
Ledor: Some time ago, we put together a format that we could use for a situation in which we announce that a file is being closed.
Arbel: It is simpler to defend the closing of a file due to a lack of evidence; it is possible that he [Raviv] wanted to convince them that he was "one of them." I see a problem with this. And if there is a problem with the evidence, it is easier to explain things [to the public]. I don't have to wait and come to the Court for it to say all this. My desire is to issue an indictment, but the risk is so big. We can in fact explain this to the Supreme Court; it's possible to defend [such an approach].
E. Barak: In actual fact, during the entire time that Raviv served as an agent for us, there were many "incidents." He could very well testify about the [numerous] cases in which we gave him directions. The entire story of his service will be revealed, and there will be legal difficulties. Even after the [Eyal] television broadcast, they continued to employ him.
***Barak admits that Raviv knows too much to be fired. If he opens his mouth, the real Rabin assassination couild spill out of it. Or the real Kahalani brothers case or the real story of Baruch Goldstein's setup to take the blame for the Hebron massacre etc. etc.***
Sasson: A "lack of evidence" and a "lack of public interest" together constitute good reasons [for closing the file]
A-G: I don't want to be involved in closing the file. I won't get into explaining. In any case, we have to send a letter to the Israel Broadcast Authority in which we express our bad feelings at the video clip [the swearing in ceremony of Eyal]. We have to write something against [TV reporter] Eitan Oren. I can't be involved in this. Were I to be the only one to decide, I would issue an indictment. But, as I said, I don't want to be involved in this. I would like to request that the issue be transferred over to the State Attorney's office, that the State Attorney's office make a decision on this, and issue a statement to the plaintiffs.
***So Ben Yair weasels out of responsibility for closing Raviv's file. He lets Beinish do that. And she does eventually for lack of public interest, the very pretext Ben Yair previously admits is not true. If he had his way, boy things would be different. But heck, he's only the Attorney-General, the man responsible for supervising justice in Israel. What does he know about law anyway?***
Who Murdered Yitzhak Rabin is available in Hebrew and Russian from Gefen Books: write isragefen@netmedia.net.il Phone 02 5380247 In English, from the Zionist Book Club. Write perkins@netvision.net.il Call 02 6712284 In North America and the UK, call (toll free) 1 877 RABINYY In French, by writing lurcat@netvision.net.il Please visit http://www.webseers.com/rabin
