Why the IDF blurred the faces of the kidnappers but showed the child
Investigations will be made and lessons will be learned
The Israeli Military Censor responded sharply to criticism on social media over recently released photographs showing a 12-year-old boy in his underwear after being kidnapped on October 7, 2023, while the faces of his kidnappers are blurred. Many conspiracy theorists have even alleged that October 7 was an inside job, and that some of the kidnappers were Shabak / CIA agents, which is why their faces were blurred.
Mostly Real News Agency (MRNA) sat down with a spokesman for the Israeli Military Censor to set the record straight.
“First of all, why all the hate?” asked D., dressed in a smartly tailored black ski mask and dark sunglasses over his uniform. “Why wouldn't they give the benefit of the doubt and assume this was an intelligence failure? Maybe the person working on the photographs accidently blurred the wrong faces, and it was overlooked by dozens of people up the chain of command who carefully examined the photos before they were published. It’s a simple mistake anyone could have made, especially when they were distracted by the child.”
D. leaned forward. “I’ll tell you why they assume the worst. Jealousy! They are jealous that we have THOUSANDS more photos and videos just like these, and they don’t.”
D. further explained that the photos were intended to promote a new documentary highlighting the plight of the hostages, in order to garner public support for at least five more years of operations in Gaza. “Why would we jeopardize that by showing the faces of terrorists, which might distract viewers from the suffering child?”
D. added that showing the faces of the kidnappers would make heroes out of them, and would also make it easier for them to collect payments from whoever it is that pays them. “Let them have a bureaucratic nightmare,” he said. “You have no idea how many documents I have to file to receive bonuses for special operations. Why should some [expletive] Arab assets have it better?”
The Israeli Military Censor office also issued a stern instruction to citizens not to share pictures of children in their underwear, warning that it could help Iran improve their aim.
“Only pictures of children in their underwear that have been approved by the Military Censor are permitted to be shared. We cannot have a free-for-all where anyone can trade pictures of children, which might lead to a free-for-all where anyone can traffic children.
“Unapproved photos are a threat to national security. Police and intelligence agencies will be closely monitoring social media for pictures of children in their underwear, and Knesset members have cancelled their vacations to rush through tighter censorship laws.”
The statement concluded: “Unapproved media will be seized, and the children pictured will be brought in for...questioning. If you are unsure if your pictures of children in underwear are approved, please contact the Military Censor for clarification and a possible job offer.”
Note: A reader was genuinely unsure if the above was a parody, noting that the government would probably have thought of more elaborate points to make.
A producer at MRNA (me) responded: I realize the actual news is so ridiculous it can be hard to tell the difference, but you should know me well enough by now. Of course it’s parody. And come on, Mostly Real News Agency? Obviously that’s a parody. The actual media is barely real.
And if you the think the government makes better points, you clearly haven’t been reading Arutz Sheva.
 |
A few thoughts:
Yeah, if we don’t smilingly encourage (or brutally force) 34,000 boys from places like Mir and Ponovezh into the IDF soon, it’s all over...even though we just won Gog Umagog.
I think there’s a typo. It should probably read 33,000...
As always, the questions we aren’t supposed to think long enough to ask:
Who paid for this? Who’s really behind this campaign? What’s the backstory behind the slick propaganda?
Why is it even legal to hang banners in these places, which are nothing but unnecessary, potentially deadly distractions to drivers?
I wish we could have a better look at the person leaning over the railing. Are they Arabs? Do they handle the Bring Them Home Now banners, too?
“Mommy, why is the sky blue today?”
1 comment:
"really expensive advertisement "
How expensive?
"Who paid for this? Who’s really behind this campaign? What’s the backstory behind the slick propaganda?"
A recent poll found that 85% of the country supports the drafting of haredim. So it could be anyone of those millions of people.
"Who’s really behind this campaign? "
Why use the word "really"? Why is difficult to accept that someone out of those 85% hung up a banner?
"What’s the backstory...?"
That question assumes there's a backstory. Maybe there's no backstory and someone out of those 85% simply hung a banner.
" slick propaganda?"
It's a rather heavy-handed message and reveals no particular sophistication or slickness. Maybe it's not propaganda put out by a profession PR firm and simply reflects the attitudes of millions of people who make up that 85%.
"Why is it even legal to hang banners in these places"
It may very well be illegal. But relatively easy. It's not the cops are going to patrol every single overpass. Zip ties and duct tape. Maybe some staple guns or hot glue.
" potentially deadly "
Lots of things have potential. I doubt the activists involved are thinking of he danger- potential or otherwise. Perhaps RCW can cite how many accidents are caused by advertising banners over overpasses. Has there been a marked increase of accidents in the vicinity of overpasses with banners?
"Are they Arabs?"
Given that 85% support drafting of חרדים, and some 20% of Israelis are Arab- guess the odds that these activists are Arab.
Post a Comment