It is not enough for a good newspaper to print the factual details of such a case. The paper must give additional information that would allow the reader to understand and appreciate the issue in more depth. In this, Haaretz has a lot to learn from a good paper like The New York Times. In this article, it appears that the gag order was imposed by the military censor, not by a judge. Moreover, it appears that one of the arrests was done over 2 weeks ago. In most democracies, this arrestee would have been brought before a judge by now, and the judge would have issued the gag order if appropriate. Did this happen here, or does Israeli law allows for such prolonged "disappearances"? In any case, an arrest which is discussed over the internet and known to many, should be officially acknowledged, as the Court has recently decided in the Anat Kamm case. Freedom of the Press is a necessity, with rare exceptions only when absolutely needed (such as not letting Hizballah know that a spy of theirs has been arrested, so the rest of the "ring" can be arrested too).
Iraqi police fire tear gas as thousands of protests burst into Green Zone, storm Parliament (AP)