+972 Magazine's Stories of the Week

Directly In Your Inbox

Analysis News
Visit our Hebrew site, "Local Call" , in partnership with Just Vision.

IDF Spokesman denies Jawaher Abu Rahmah died of medical negligence

The IDF keeps offering new versions regarding the death of Jawaher Abu Rahmah – and is contradicted by its own spokesperson

Several major Israeli media outlets published yesterday a new IDF “investigation,” which claimed that Jawaher Abu Rahmah – who died after inhaling CS (tear) gas in Bil’in – did not die as a result of the gas itself , but rather as a result of the treatment she received at the hospital. This is the IDF’s fourth version of the events. In previous versions she was not present at the demonstration, then she was present; she died of cancer; then she died of a different pre-existing condition; and so on. A list of all of the IDF’s lies, edited and commented on by Jerry Haber, can be read here.

Jerry makes just one mistake, which isn’t his fault: The newly released “investigation” was not released as an official IDF briefing. A close reading showed it is attributed not to the IDF Spokesman, but to anonymous “military sources.”

I did the sensible thing and called the IDF Spokesman’s office. The reply I received, which I recorded, was unequivocal: “This isn’t our research, this isn’t something we distributed, it’s something that somehow got out [to the media]”. As far as the Spokesman’s office is concerned, the investigation of Jawaher Abu Rahmah’s death is still ongoing.

During the conversation, the soldier on the other side of the line inadvertently admitted to what I exposed here in a previous article: that the person giving the briefing which claimed that Abu Rahmah died of cancer and was not present at the demonstration was the commander of the Central Command, Major-General Avi Mizrahi. It is, therefore, probably not an accident that information presented yesterday was described as “information presented to the Commanding General of the Central Command.”

As I noted earlier, the IDF keeps running a psyops against the Israeli public, composed of two pincers: one, that of the Central Command, keeps spouting various version designed to distance the IDF from the blame; the other, the official IDF Spokesman line, adheres to the position that everything is under investigation. One should note that the IDF Spokesman’s position does not motivate him to speak out in its defense. He has not protested or commented on the various rumors spread by Major-General Mizrahi and his men, even though they contradict the IDF’s official version; the spokesperson is quite happy to leave matters as they are.

Ambulances under CS gas attack, Bil'in (Yossi Gurvitz)

They gas ambulances, too. Bil'in, 7.1.11 (Yossi Gurvitz)

Once again, one finds that the military affairs correspondents – a well-respected caste in Israeli media circles – serve all too often as a propaganda channel for “military sources,” without any qualifiers. They did not report the IDF Spokesman’s official version – ie, that the death of Jawaher Abu Rahmah is still under investigation. Instead, they rushed to publish the unofficial version – the unsupported story from the anonymous “military sources.”

Of particular ill mention are the little propagandist bloggers, who were so excited to be briefed by the senior brass, that they repeated his lies – she died of cancer, she wasn’t at the demonstration – and spread the world as gospel, without checking anything. I wonder how they felt this morning, when Mizrahi threw them away like used napkins, spreading a whole new version – she was at the demonstration, that she did inhale tear gas, that she did not die of cancer –blithely shredding their reliability and exposing them as the small hasbara shills they are.

The IDF has invested unusual propaganda effort in the question of Jawaher Abu Rahmah’s death. It made brilliant use of the claim that Abu Rahmah’s doctors treated her with atropine; if there’s one thing every Israeli knows of the drug, it is the slogan “don’t use atropine!” made popular during the First Gulf War. It has invested so much effort, in fact, that one wonders what is it trying to cover up.

Before you go...

A lot of work goes into creating articles like the one you just read. And while we don’t do this for the money, even our model of non-profit, independent journalism has bills to pay.

+972 Magazine is owned by our bloggers and journalists, who are driven by passion and dedication to the causes we cover. But we still need to pay for editing, photography, translation, web design and servers, legal services, and more.

As an independent journalism outlet we aren’t beholden to any outside interests. In order to safeguard that independence voice, we are proud to count you, our readers, as our most important supporters. If each of our readers becomes a supporter of our work, +972 Magazine will remain a strong, independent, and sustainable force helping drive the discourse on Israel/Palestine in the right direction.

Support independent journalism in Israel/Palestine Donate to +972 Magazine today
View article: AAA
Share article
Print article

    * Required


    1. Where did you read I was at any IDF briefing? I wasn’t, and never claimed to be. The questions I raised came from my own independent reading of various reports and the inconsistencies I saw.

      If you can’t get that simple fact right, what does that say about the rest of your claims?

      Reply to Comment
    2. Umm, you received an invitation, did not attend – and cited what someone who did attend wrote as gospel. You have referred to those lies, now debunked, as “revelations”, and blamed Haaretz for not being “up to speed”, did you not? Did you later correct your post, when the IDF retreated from that position?

      Reply to Comment
    3. Um, in your attack piece above, you wrote:
      “Of particular ill mention are the little propagandist bloggers, who were so excited to be briefed by a senior brass, that they repeated his lies.” This is utterly wrong as I just reminded you.

      Secondly, if you bothered reading both my posts on the subject, you would have noticed I looked at different reports and asked questions based on the inconsistencies:

      Yes, the IDF raised some pertinent questions, but I noticed some more troubling things on my own.

      My suggestion to you is to argue on the facts, instead of resorting to half truths and ad hominem attacks.

      Reply to Comment
    4. BlightUntoNations


      Wise folks don’t get in arguments with holocaust deniers, because it implies there is an actual controversy over facts when of course, there isn’t. The same is true of arguing with those taking the official Israeli line regarding atrocities against Palestinians. These people must be rejected out of hand as pathological liars, due no consideration. To even engage them is a mistake. An IDF statement is SYNONYMOUS with a lie.

      Reply to Comment
    5. LisaB

      Come on “Aussie Dave” if you are going to be a mindless robot shill at least man up to what you are. I actually wasted time going to your blog to find the thoughtful analysis of reports you claim to have posted. Absolute bull hickey. It’s nothing more than sheep like repeats of any second hand rumors and innuendo you can pick up on the internet that will back your assertion of a blood libel.
      If you really want to play journalist get out of your chair and look the targets of your slander in the eye.
      Your posts are fatuous and you don’t even have the balls to post a retraction. You do more damage to Israel by repeatedly spreading self serving lies than you ever could by admitting to the occasional hard truth. You make us all look like pathetic mindless and blind drones.

      Reply to Comment