Not guilty. The Israeli captain who put 17 bullets into a Palestinian schoolgirl

  • News
  • Thread starter Bilal
  • Start date
  • #1
Bilal
http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,1643573,00.html

Officer ignored warnings that teenager was terrified
· Defence says 'confirming the kill' standard practice

The transcript

The following is a recording of a three-way conversation that took place between a soldier in a watchtower, an army operations room and Capt R, who shot the girl

From the watchtower "It's a little girl. She's running defensively eastward." "Are we talking about a girl under the age of 10?" "A girl about 10, she's behind the embankment, scared to death." "I think that one of the positions took her out." "I and another soldier ... are going in a little nearer, forward, to confirm the kill ... Receive a situation report. We fired and killed her ... I also confirmed the kill. Over."

From the operations room "Are we talking about a girl under the age of 10?"

Watchtower "A girl about 10, she's behind the embankment, scared to death."

A few minutes later, Iman is shot from one of the army posts

Watchtower "I think that one of the positions took her out."

Captain R "I and another soldier ... are going in a little nearer, forward, to confirm the kill ... Receive a situation report. We fired and killed her ... I also confirmed the kill. Over."

Capt R then "clarifies" why he killed Iman

"This is commander. Anything that's mobile, that moves in the zone, even if it's a three-year-old, needs to be killed. Over."
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
Evo
Mentor
23,540
3,177
Bilal, you need to state what in the story you wish to specifically discuss. Threads of this nature, with nothing more than a link to story aren't going be allowed going forward.
 
  • #3
Art
This was despicable. Perhaps one day Israel will realise it is actions such as this that make people so critical of her and has nothing to do with the jewish religion; though I suspect in reality they already know that. Accusing people who criticise Israel's actions of being anti-semitic is simply a way to deflect attention away from the issue and put their detractors on the defensive.
 
  • #4
Hurkyl
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
14,950
19
AFAIK, claims of anti-Semitism are based on the perception that some people are far more willing to criticize Israeli actions than those of others, and not just a knee-jerk "OMG, he's criticizing an Israeli, he must be anti-Semetic!" attitude.
 
  • #5
True sometimes but not always.

Also could it be that with Israel there just may be more to criticize? If they did more bad stuff, couldn't someone bring up Israeli atrocities more often because there are more to bring up, not because they're anti-semetic?
 
  • #6
Art
Hurkyl said:
AFAIK, claims of anti-Semitism are based on the perception that some people are far more willing to criticize Israeli actions than those of others, and not just a knee-jerk "OMG, he's criticizing an Israeli, he must be anti-Semetic!" attitude.
One unfortunately expects attocities from terrorist groups as that is what they do and why they are reviled by most people.

One rightly expects a higher standard of behaviour from so called civilised states which is why they are more heavily criticised when they practice the same methods as terrorist scum. In fact it is the terrorists' acts which defiine them and so when states practice these same acts they too become terrorist scum.

One of the problems with the 'war on terror' is it is getting harder and harder to distinguish between the 'good' guys and the 'bad' guys with neither side adhering to the rules of war or the Geneva Conventions or even simple human morals.
 
  • #7
kat
39
0
I Guess I Always Thought That One Thing That Defined The Difference Is That In Dealing With The "good Guys" The "bad Guys"..never Had To Worry That Their Children Were Going To Be Used To Attack Them Or Were Going To Be Used As Human Bombs.
 
  • #8
Astronuc
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
19,970
3,505
I guess the biggest problem I have with this is -
In the recording, a soldier in a watchtower radioed a colleague in the army post's operations room and describes Iman as "a little girl" who was "scared to death". After soldiers first opened fire, she dropped her schoolbag which was then hit by several bullets establishing that it did not contain explosive. At that point she was no longer carrying the bag and, the tape revealed, was heading away from the army post when she was shot.
Of course, I am not there, nor am I in a position of facing suicide bombers, snipers or rocket attacks at any moment.

I find the act of killing any child abhorrent, but then it is no less abhorrent than suicide/homicide bombers blowing up unarmed civilians, especially children.

Here's a novel idea - just simply STOP the violence - period!
 
  • #9
175
0
all most all of the people in this mess are semitic
thats why I dislike the anti-Semitism label
arabs who dislike jews are not racist as they are the very same race
and many jews are also anti -arab but are NOT accusued of being anti-semitic
this mess is about a zionist idea a religious + political idea
and the militant moslem responce to it
with race not a part of it

thats why I am againts both the militants be they jew or moslem
as they are both reglious NUTS with a political agenda

while stoping the violence is a good start
a fair and balanced plan is needed
so the rights of all people are protected
and as far as possible past wrongs are corrected
 
  • #10
Art
kat said:
I Guess I Always Thought That One Thing That Defined The Difference Is That In Dealing With The "good Guys" The "bad Guys"..never Had To Worry That Their Children Were Going To Be Used To Attack Them Or Were Going To Be Used As Human Bombs.
Can you quote an example where a 3 year old was used as a human bomb please or a 10 year old for that matter? There are however numerous examples of children been killed by both the 'bad guys' and the 'good guys'. PS ARe YoU HaVINg ProbLEMS WitH YouR CAps LoCK? :tongue2:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #11
kat
39
0
Art said:
Can you quote an example where a 3 year old was used as a human bomb please or a 10 year old for that matter?
um...there was a ten year old suicide bomber in iraq...but I'm trying to find where I mentioned an age...
PS ARe YoU HaVINg ProbLEMS WitH YouR CAps LoCK? :tongue2:
Not sure how that happened...:redface:
 
  • #12
Art
kat said:
um...there was a ten year old suicide bomber in iraq...but I'm trying to find where I mentioned an age...
In the OP the barbarian who killed the little girl was recorded saying that if a 3 year old entered the security zone they were to be shot. That is the context of this discussion.
 
  • #13
ray b said:
all most all of the people in this mess are semitic
thats why I dislike the anti-Semitism label
arabs who dislike jews are not racist as they are the very same race
and many jews are also anti -arab but are NOT accusued of being anti-semitic
this mess is about a zionist idea a religious + political idea
and the militant moslem responce to it
with race not a part of it

Well Jews and Arabs are a little different ethnically speaking, but you're right that it's not so much an ethnic dispute. It's just that there's a significant portion of Muslims, like Iran's president, who are anti-zionist. And sure as heck don't want a state based on a faith so contradictory to the Quran on what they see as their turf. There are some who can't have that; Israel's existence is an insult to them, for this political reason the chaos continues.
 
  • #14
Moonbear
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
11,558
53
Sadly, there's no way to know if the girl was "scared to death" because of the presence of the soldiers, or because she had been sent as a decoy. The first statement from the watchtower said she was "moving defensively." What does that mean? Do the soldiers have reason to believe that terrorists will use children for suicide missions or other reasons, because the terrorists think nobody will stop a child? I don't know what to think about this...it's horrific that children are being shot, but I also can't imagine having to be the one sitting up in the watchtower trying to decide if a child carrying a backpack might be headed my way with a bomb. Do you risk killing an innocent child, or risk not killing a child being used as a pawn of terrorists and getting yourself and your fellow soldiers killed? War is quite ugly; horrific things happen, and both sides are involved. There's a reason people come back from wars suffering post-traumatic stress disorder and having nightmares and flashbacks, because they see and participate in horrific things that no person should ever have to see or do.
 
  • #15
Art
Moonbear said:
Sadly, there's no way to know if the girl was "scared to death" because of the presence of the soldiers, or because she had been sent as a decoy. The first statement from the watchtower said she was "moving defensively." What does that mean? Do the soldiers have reason to believe that terrorists will use children for suicide missions or other reasons, because the terrorists think nobody will stop a child? I don't know what to think about this...it's horrific that children are being shot, but I also can't imagine having to be the one sitting up in the watchtower trying to decide if a child carrying a backpack might be headed my way with a bomb. Do you risk killing an innocent child, or risk not killing a child being used as a pawn of terrorists and getting yourself and your fellow soldiers killed? War is quite ugly; horrific things happen, and both sides are involved. There's a reason people come back from wars suffering post-traumatic stress disorder and having nightmares and flashbacks, because they see and participate in horrific things that no person should ever have to see or do.
Did you read the article???
In the recording, a soldier in a watchtower radioed a colleague in the army post's operations room and describes Iman as "a little girl" who was "scared to death". After soldiers first opened fire, she dropped her schoolbag which was then hit by several bullets establishing that it did not contain explosive. At that point she was no longer carrying the bag and, the tape revealed, was heading away from the army post when she was shot.
Although the military speculated that Iman might have been trying to "lure" the soldiers out of their base so they could be attacked by accomplices, Capt R made the decision to lead some of his troops into the open. Shortly afterwards he can be heard on the recording saying that he has shot the girl and, believing her dead, then "confirmed the kill".
"I and another soldier ... are going in a little nearer, forward, to confirm the kill ... Receive a situation report. We fired and killed her ... I also confirmed the kill. Over," he said.
Palestinian witnesses said they saw the captain shoot Iman twice in the head, walk away, turn back and fire a stream of bullets into her body.
At the time she was killed she was absolutely no threat to the soldiers. It was fellow soldiers who reported Cap'n R who claimed they were 'out to get him' out of religious bigotry which is why I made the point earlier that this seems to be a common defense in Israel.
 
  • #16
Moonbear said:
Do you risk killing an innocent child, or risk not killing a child being used as a pawn of terrorists and getting yourself and your fellow soldiers killed? War is quite ugly; horrific things happen, and both sides are involved.
If i read the article correctly, this dilemma (I agree with you, a dilemma) is not applicable to this situation. The officer unloaded a clip into a 13 yr old human being. He didn't kill her, he shredded her, if the accusations are true. "Unloaded his clip" at close range, That means bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang... you get the point.
Well, the soldier denies shooting the girl, but says he shot around her, even though the autopsy shows numerous bullet wounds inflicted at close range, including 3 to the head. Since it appears that your post assumes the soldier did shoot the girl numerous times at close range (correct me if i'm wrong), it should not matter that war is ugly, the soldier is guilty of conduct unbecoming. As for whether he is a criminal for this, i agree that an insanity defense wouldn't be unreasonable, though i have my doubts about this guy.
"The army's initial investigation concluded that the captain had "not acted unethically"." Moral relativism at its worst.
 
  • #17
Moonbear
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
11,558
53
kcballer21 said:
If i read the article correctly, this dilemma (I agree with you, a dilemma) is not applicable to this situation. The officer unloaded a clip into a 13 yr old human being. He didn't kill her, he shredded her, if the accusations are true. "Unloaded his clip" at close range, That means bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang... you get the point.
Well, the soldier denies shooting the girl, but says he shot around her, even though the autopsy shows numerous bullet wounds inflicted at close range, including 3 to the head. Since it appears that your post assumes the soldier did shoot the girl numerous times at close range (correct me if i'm wrong), it should not matter that war is ugly, the soldier is guilty of conduct unbecoming. As for whether he is a criminal for this, i agree that an insanity defense wouldn't be unreasonable, though i have my doubts about this guy.
"The army's initial investigation concluded that the captain had "not acted unethically"." Moral relativism at its worst.

Sorry, I thought the debate was over them shooting a "scared to death" child, not over how many times they shot the corpse. I misunderstood the emphasis of what people were getting upset about, if that's the case. From the article, I thought many of the shots hit her backpack (not clear if they also hit her), and were to assure them before approaching that there was nothing that would detonate in the backpack. But, yes, I'd agree with you that numerous shots at close range make it more egregious. I also don't know if she was dead or just wounded by the first shot. Once taking her down and being sure there were no explosives on her, rather than continue shooting to kill, they could have sent her for medical assistance.

I don't know if this is relevant to the situation, but if someone were an intruder in your home and you shot them once or twice, a defense that it was self-defense would probably get you let off by a jury, but if you continued shooting the intruder 15 more times, you'd very likely be serving time for murder.
 
  • #18
This is eerily similar to some Brazilian guy shot to death in London subway last summer. It seems that the fear that terrorists can instill creates some pretty bad trigger-happy impulse responses.
 
  • #19
devil-fire
The army's initial investigation concluded that the captain had "not acted unethically"- who is the army publishing these investigations for? they sound like a farce
 
  • #20
40
1
There's always looking up the reason why he was aquitted. Apparently Captain R was framed because he wasn't a Jew...I mean 'liked.' But boy isn't that qutie the under reported little nugget.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1132320216117&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull [Broken]

R, who is from Israel's Druse community, spent three months in jail and was only released last February after one of the soldiers confessed that the unit framed him because he was a strict disciplinarian and hence highly unpopular.

Though the media cannot be held completely to the standard that we rely on the judicial system to uphold, neither is it exempt from respecting the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. Worse, the military prosecution, perhaps to curry favor with opinion-makers, also assumed R guilty and leaked all too many ostensibly incriminating insinuations, later proven false.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #21
Art
Zlex said:
There's always looking up the reason why he was aquitted. Apparently Captain R was framed because he wasn't a Jew...I mean 'liked.' But boy isn't that qutie the under reported little nugget.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1132320216117&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull [Broken]
He was never charged with offences related to his actual shooting of the girl which is the part that disgusted many people here.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #22
40
1
Art said:
He was never charged with offences related to his actual shooting of the girl which is the part that disgusted many people here.

But charged with what? If we are not talking about his set-up, ie a bloodthirst baby killer who rammed 17 bullets into the body of a fleeing little girl, then his action of shooting the girl was following an unfortunatly necessary policy. There have been over 200* suicide bombing attempts performed by minors in Israel. A little girl running through a secure zone is now a clear and present threat in the state of Israel.


Source*
 
Last edited:
  • #23
Bilal
First- The girl was killed in Gaza not inside Israel, and hundreds of meters far from a military camp.

Second - Could you provide a link to support your claim about 200 suicide attacks inside Israel? could you show how the average of these attacks per year?

Third - This story is reported based on military Israeli sources, but the Palestinian have another story about those blood thirsty soldiers.

Fourth - I expect that we all agree that this is barbaric crime; I just wanted to show how the Israeli justice works!!

I am highly offended to find people trying to justify murdering of kids in such barbaric by blaming the Palestinian: terrorists, suicide..... bla, bla …

Zlex said:
But charged with what? If we are not talking about his set-up, ie a bloodthirst baby killer who rammed 17 bullets into the body of a fleeing little girl, then his action of simply killing the girl was following an unfortunatly necessary policy. There have been over 200* suicide bombing attempts performed by minors in Israel. A little girl running through a secure zone is now a clear and present threat in the state of Israel.
Source*
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #24
40
1
First- The girl was killed in Gaza not inside Israel, and hundreds of meters far from a military camp.

Yes, my mistake. It was in the Gaza strip, but it was during the Days of Penitence operation which took place after rocket attacks were launched from Gaza into Sderot (two child fatalities, b.t.w.). I believe buffer zones were marked and set up in Gaza.

Second - Could you provide a link to support your claim about 200 suicide attacks inside Israel?

...I did?

Third - This story is reported based on military Israeli sources, but the Palestinian have another story about those blood thirsty soldiers.

I have no doubt that there are a myriad of views from many people. However, I don't believe that the Guardian could be classified as biased pro-Israel, do you?

Fourth - I expect that we all agree that this is barbaric crime; I just wanted to show how the Israeli justice works!

I don't think so, I mean the guy was clearly set up by his cronies because he dared not to be a Jew. Tape was doctored, etc. Racism, is unfortunatly rampant in Israel. As for the policy of firing upon children, I would have to refer to my post above. Child suicide bombers are quite common.

If anyone is wondering why the fact that he was framed is so under reported it's because it clearly doesn't fit the agenda. Quickly buried in Israel because we don't want everyone to know about the rampant amount of racists that exist in Israel. Quickly buried by sources like the Guardian because then the IDF isn't a group of baby hunting murderers.

Sometimes the media digusts me.

I am highly offended to find people trying to justify murdering of kids in such barbaric by blaming the Palestinian: terrorists, suicide..... bla, bla …

I would never justify the murder of a child, don't put such words into my mouth. I do not believe that murder is the case. I don't think this man went out of his way to kill a child he believed was innocent, I believe he was trying to protect lives by stopping a potential attack, and got stabbed in the back by his racist cronies.

And please, I didn't blame 'the' Palestinians. If anything I would blame the awful parents these kids must have had. And I am not blind to the fact that children are used in terrorist bombings.
 
Last edited:
  • #25
Art
Zlex said:
But charged with what? If we are not talking about his set-up, ie a bloodthirst baby killer who rammed 17 bullets into the body of a fleeing little girl, then his action of shooting the girl was following an unfortunatly necessary policy. There have been over 200* suicide bombing attempts performed by minors in Israel. A little girl running through a secure zone is now a clear and present threat in the state of Israel.
Source*
He was charged and acquitted with trying to cover up what happened during and after the shooting. The actual circumstances of the shooting were not part of the court case so for you to suggest his acquittal meant the killing of the girl was 'justified' is a false arguement.
One can't help but wonder if pressure was brought to bear on the soldier who claimed it was a conspiracy against Captain R. Although nothing is impossible I for one find it difficult to imagine how such a story could be so quickly contrived by a group of soldiers. Especially the amazing allegation that tapes were edited by soldiers in his unit to support this supposed conspiracy.

A more likely explanation would be that the allegations 'including' the brutal killing of the girl, were true but the IDF and it's military court decided the attendant bad publicity warranted a cover up.
I have no doubt that there are a myriad of views from many people. However, I don't believe that the Guardian could be classified as biased pro-Israel, do you?
What do you mean by this??

p.s. Do you have a source showing where the alleged perpetrators of this conspiracy have been charged in relation to what would be a very serious offence? I would be more inclined to believe in this conspiracy allegation if that were the case.

Also when quoting sources to support controversial contentions would you refrain from citing wikipedia references with this tag
This article needs to be cleaned up to conform to a higher standard of quality.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Related Threads on Not guilty. The Israeli captain who put 17 bullets into a Palestinian schoolgirl

  • Last Post
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • Poll
  • Last Post
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • Last Post
4
Replies
80
Views
13K
Replies
81
Views
8K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
46
Views
4K
A
  • Last Post
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
28
Views
3K
Top