A news report from the days of the secession: Channel 1's reporter is serious.
Behind it is a private house of one of the settlements of Gush Katif.
On the roof a bearded man with tools.
"The people of the settlement are preparing resistance positions in order to create a height advantage over the evacuating forces."
It was really a disturbing report, to hear that settlers were preparing to snipe the IDF soldiers who came to them on state missions. There was only a small matter: the bearded person behind the report was the father of a friend. He did oppose the deportation, but he went up to the roof with tools not to set up a fortified sniper position But - hold on tight - to fix roof tiles. The reporter finished the report and returned the broadcast to the studio. In the studio we informed about more dangers from the residents of the block. No response, no questions, and the reporter in the field did not even walk a few meters to ask the guy what he was doing on the roof There is a settler here who built a position on the roof, there are many more like him, this is a fact and trust us and see you soon. What a dark time.
I remembered this anecdote, one of the many false and amazingly absurd reports that appeared in the media in Israel during the disengagement, when I watched Mrs. Suzi Navot in Studio 12 to explain why it is clear to everyone that the legal reform is a code name for a dictatorial coup.
As a viewer who knows that many in Israel think the exact opposite, I remembered the moments when a public without social networks read, listened, watched and consumed Israeli media 24/7, lying down and standing up, in traffic jams and on the weekend extras, on the news at one-five and six and eight-nine and midnight and flash and on the Internet, and only understood - But only - one thing: disengagement is a process that both agree is perfect.
All of them, except for a few lunatics from the fringes, who don't really deserve attention.
Millions who thought the exact opposite tore their hair out of frustration.
In recent years, every right-wing voter in Israel is certain that today, with strong networks and a certain diversity in the cadre of media personnel, there is no chance that secession would have gone that way.
I admit it too.
I thought that the days when the news studios contain one commentator who explains that disengagement is excellent and beneficial and an opposing commentator who actually claims that disengagement is beneficial and only then is excellent, will never return... But then I saw Suzi Navot on the news channel that is watched in Israel, explaining how foolish the reform is.
Her, and only her.
It is important to explain: inviting Navot, a left-wing woman and admirer of the judicial system, to the studio to interpret the legal reform is like inviting Ofira Assig to interpret the Eyal Golan affair.
I, and the majority of the Jewish voters in Israel, watch the portals, newspapers and the main channels that simply officially gave up on the show and embraced only one side, and cannot believe: what fools we were when we thought that the days of darkness, incitement and unimaginable lies that accompanied the disengagement could no longer return.
We all have to hope that the members of the current government also remember those days - whether they supported secession or not - and draw conclusions: will they lend their hand to another secession (and let there be no misunderstandings: canceling or softening the reform is definitely tantamount to secession in terms of historical impact), or will they surrender to the media and ignore from the majority of the public in Israel.
Because of course everyone thinks like that.
What not?
were we wrong
We will fix it!
If you found an error in the article, we would appreciate it if you shared it with us