What happened to the previous Anat Kamm?

Posted: April 11th, 2010 | Author: | Filed under: In the News, media | Tags: , , , , | 2 Comments »

History repeating itself, with slight changes.

8 years ago, a soldier who served as a secretary in an IDF regional HQ, handed some classified documents to (then) Kol Ha-Ir reporter (a local paper from Haaretz group), one Uri Blau. The documents had to do with a charge that was set off in Gaza and Killed 5 Palestinian children.

The army started an internal investigation and was able to trace the soldier who leaked the documents. She was tried by her CO and sentenced to 35 days in army prison.

Around the same time, an IDF Brigadier general was forced to retire from the service after leaking to reporters the content of a classified meeting with the Chief of Staff.

Read the report from 2002 on Ynet [Hebrew] (hat tip: Amitai Sandi).

Anat Kamm, a former secretary in an IDF HQ, was recently charged with espionage for leaking secret army documents to Haaretz’s reporter, Uri Blau. An article based on two of the documents suggested that senior IDF generals, including Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi, knowingly violated our own Supreme Court ruling by ordering the assassinations of Palestinians even when it was possible to arrest them, and when it was known innocent people might be killed.

mish

(illustration by Mish)


2 Comments on “What happened to the previous Anat Kamm?”

  1. 1 mina said at 4:28 pm on April 11th, 2010:

    Jesus Noam, I thought you were smarter than this. How can you make this false comparison? this is not journalism, it’s just making up your own reality so it will get along well with your political perceptions.

    There is one big, no no – wait, HUGE different. like 2,000 bigger. There is a Different between stealing one or five documents, and systematically stealing 2,000 classified docs, most of which aren’t suitable for journalistic purposes. So what do you expect, what do you want the Shin Bet to think?

    I mean, come on, Noam, can you really not see the difference here? Look, if you want to be a journalist, you can’t take sides based on symbols. Some people hear the words Shin Bet – and automatically take the other side.

    While most of the times they are right – they will never be journalists. Do me a favor, don’t be one of those.

  2. 2 noam said at 11:35 pm on April 11th, 2010:

    Mina- sorry, but I do think that on this one Shin Beit went crazy, and acted totally out of line. they broke into a reporter’s house – when they could have gotten a warrant easily – just to show who is the boss, and they went after Anat Kamm for pure vengeance, as well as to spread fear in future sources. this wouldn’t happen in a different country, in different time, as the article I cited demonstrates. BTW, 2002, the year of the previous event, was much worse as national security goes. some will argue we were at war back then.

    the number 2000 (documents) by itself doesn’t impress me. many leaks contain much more materiel than the article demands. as you might know, the Pentagon Papers had 7,000 pages when they were leaked to the NYT.

    but even if you think this is a far worse case, charging Anat Kamm with espionage is ridicules and shameful. and trying to do it in the dark is just scary.

    i will give the Shin Beit this: their spin worked. nobody talks on the original article and what it revealed anymore.