Arutz Sheva / Israel National News, on West Bank, 8 November 2026

7.3out of 10Serious

Excavator used by IDF confiscated in Gush Etzion

Tap a highlight to see why it matters.5 findings

The Honenu legal aid organization has contacted the Civil Administration demanding the immediate return of an excavator and tools allegedly taken from a couple living in during an operation by security forces last Wednesday. According to the organization, the confiscated excavator had previously been used by the IDF for many months during the fighting in the Gaza Strip. Its owner is a reservist who has served more than 800 days since the beginning of the war.

Left out here: Hedges the documented record

The article never says that Gefen Ami lies in the occupied West Bank or that settlements there are illegal under international law. A reader meets the outpost as an ordinary community in Israel.

How we know

  • On the recordThe International Court of Justice's July 2024 advisory opinion found Israel's occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem unlawful.icj-cij.org (opens in a new tab)
  • On the recordThe International Court of Justice's July 2024 advisory opinion found Israel's settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem illegal under international law.icj-cij.org (opens in a new tab)

At the center of the affair are Adi and Ma'ati Kolani, residents of the community. Adi works as a renovation contractor and heavy equipment operator. During his reserve service, he participated in regional defense operations in , as well as operations in Lebanon and the Gaza Strip. In addition, both spouses volunteer as ambulance drivers and paramedics with Magen David Adom (MDA). The incident occurred against the backdrop of disturbances in the area surrounding the community.

On Wednesday, . During the incidents, concerns were also raised about a possible infiltration into the residential area. At the time, Adi was involved in securing the community. Later that evening, the couple heard noises near their home. When they went outside to investigate, they reportedly saw dozens of Border Police officers operating at the scene.

According to the couple, one of the officers was already sitting in the driver's cab of their excavator, which was parked near their home, preparing to drive it away. Meanwhile, other officers were loading equipment belonging to Adi, which he uses to earn his livelihood, onto their vehicles. According to Honenu, the items taken included circular saws, three power screwdrivers, a leaf blower, and additional tools, with a combined value estimated at tens of thousands of shekels.

The couple attempted to find out why the equipment was being taken and what legal grounds justified the action, but they claim they received no satisfactory explanation. They further alleged that the officers did not present any confiscation orders. According to their account, the officers referred them to the commander of the regional brigade. When they contacted him, he reportedly responded that the operation had been carried out "because of what happened in the village."

The excavator was driven from the scene to a military base near the community of Karmei Tzur. Honenu claims that the excavator was defective and unfit to be driven, and that moving it under its own power could cause serious damage. Another detail concerning the circumstances of the confiscation relates to the military's previous use of the excavator. According to the couple, the excavator was requisitioned twice for IDF service through the Defense Ministry during the war and was used by troops in the Gaza Strip for extended periods.

After it was returned from operational service, the couple had to invest thousands of shekels in repairs. Following the numerous mechanical problems discovered after its most recent deployment, they decided to sell it. The sale was scheduled to take place on Thursday morning, just hours after the excavator was taken from their home. The allegations extend beyond the confiscation of equipment. According to Honenu, as the security forces were leaving the community, officers ordered Ma'ati Kolani to move a vehicle that was blocking the excavator's path.

When she asked to look for the vehicle's key, she was detained by the officers. The organization claims that she was released only several hours later and was forced to walk home alone from a nearby intersection after dark. Following the incidents, attorney Azriel Pikar of Honenu's Civil Department contacted the Civil Administration, demanding the return of the excavator and all other equipment taken from the couple. In his letter, Pikar emphasized the excavator's previous use during the war and the fact that the additional tools are essential to Adi's livelihood.

"The excavator belonging to my client was requisitioned for an extended period of IDF service through the Defense Ministry. My client made the equipment available to the state out of a desire to assist the war effort and contribute as much as he could during the difficult period the country was experiencing," he wrote. He further stated: "My client is a renovation contractor by profession, and the tools taken during the incident are the professional tools he uses to carry out his regular work.

"This is a serious and outrageous incident in which, instead of showing appreciation to residents who dedicate their lives to the security of the state, the authorities choose to harm them and take away their work tools and personal equipment. "It is unacceptable that a person who has served hundreds of days in the reserves, contributed his excavator to the IDF during the war, and is also involved in saving lives ."

The attorney made clear that the organization intends to pursue legal action to secure the return of the property. "We demand the immediate return of the equipment, and we will use every legal means available to us to prevent the recurrence of serious incidents of this kind."

Read the original article on israelnationalnews.com (opens in a new tab)
What we found (5)

Arutz Sheva tells a dispute between settlers and the occupation authorities entirely in the settler movement's vocabulary. It calls the Gefen Ami farm a "community", uses "Judea and Samaria", and never says occupied West Bank. It names the neighbouring Palestinians only as "Arabs" and states their alleged stone-throwing as fact in its own voice. It never explains the brigade commander's own reference to "what happened in the village", and only the couple and Honenu are heard.

  1. Uses the occupation's words

    Serious

    “the community of Gefen Ami in Gush Etzion”

    Why this matters
    The outlet calls Gefen Ami a "community" in its own voice and places it only in "Gush Etzion", a settlement bloc name.
    The impression it gives
    A reader takes Gefen Ami to be an ordinary residential community, with nothing unusual about its status or location.
    The context
    The outlet's own earlier report calls the site a farm, and settlements in the occupied West Bank are illegal under international law. The article never uses the words settlement, outpost or occupied.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

    “Judea and Samaria”

    Why this matters
    The outlet names the occupied West Bank with the Israeli state's term "Judea and Samaria" in its own narration.
    The impression it gives
    A reader takes the territory to be an Israeli region where reserve duty is "regional defense", not land under military occupation.
    The context
    The ICJ has found Israel's occupation of the West Bank unlawful. The article never once says West Bank or occupied.

    How we know

    • On the recordThe International Court of Justice's July 2024 advisory opinion found Israel's occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem unlawful.icj-cij.org (opens in a new tab)
    • Checked against the whole articleIt never uses the words “West Bank” and “occupied”.

    Show it in the article

  2. States one side's claim as fact

    Serious

    “entered the community, threw stones toward its access road, and clashes developed in the area”

    Why this matters
    The outlet states in its own voice, with no source, that the villagers entered the outpost and threw stones, then folds whatever followed into "clashes developed".
    The impression it gives
    A reader takes it as established that the trouble began with Palestinians attacking the settlers, and that the Border Police raid answered that attack.
    The context
    Nothing in the article sources this account. The brigade commander's own explanation points to an event in the village itself, which the article never describes.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“because of what happened in the village”

    Show it in the article

    Written straight

    Settlers say people from Beit Ummar threw stones towards the outpost's access road on Wednesday. The brigade commander later linked the seizure to "what happened in the village", which the article does not explain.

  3. Erases a people's national identity

    Minor

    “Arabs from the village of Beit Ummar”

    Why this matters
    The outlet identifies the residents of Beit Ummar only as "Arabs", and never uses the word Palestinian anywhere in the article.
    The impression it gives
    A reader meets the neighbouring villagers as a generic ethnic group, cut off from their people and from the occupation they live under.
    The context
    The article never names Palestinians at all. The only people in the story who are not settlers, soldiers or officials appear as an unnamed ethnic label tied to stone-throwing.

    How we know

    • Checked against the whole articleIt never uses the words “Palestinian”.

    Show it in the article

  4. One side gets the space

    Minor

    “should find himself subjected to such harassment by the security forces”

    Why this matters
    The outlet closes its account with Honenu's charge of "harassment". No response from the Border Police, the brigade or the Civil Administration follows.
    The impression it gives
    A reader takes the seizure and the detention as unexplained harassment of a decorated reservist.
    The context
    The article gives no comment from any authority it accuses and no account from Beit Ummar. Its only explanation of the raid is a second-hand quote from the commander.

    How we know

    • Checked against the whole articleIt never uses the words “comment”.

    Show it in the article

  5. Hedges the documented record

    Minor

    What is missing

    The article never says that Gefen Ami lies in the occupied West Bank or that settlements there are illegal under international law. A reader meets the outpost as an ordinary community in Israel.

    How we know

    • On the recordThe International Court of Justice's July 2024 advisory opinion found Israel's occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem unlawful.icj-cij.org (opens in a new tab)
    • On the recordThe International Court of Justice's July 2024 advisory opinion found Israel's settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem illegal under international law.icj-cij.org (opens in a new tab)

    Show where it belongs

Spot something we missed? Report this article

More from Arutz Sheva / Israel National News

  1. 6 NovOlmert lashes out at Central Command chief, claiming he is aiding Jewish terrorism6.0
  2. 6 NovFearing leaks to terrorists, IDF stops informing PA about arrest operations8.2
  3. 5 NovJewish family's car torched in Gush Etzion amid clashes with Arab villagers8.2
  4. 5 Nov“A fight against boycotts": Groundbreaking meeting of Argentine President and Yisrael Ganz6.0
  5. 5 NovFirst night in Jericho8.7

Everything we scored from Arutz Sheva / Israel National News