Trending Topics:

Unedited security camera footage shows Israeli officer fired at Hebron teenager after he retreated

on 61 Comments

Robert Mackey at the New York Times Lede blog has the story behind the video above. It is security camera footage of Israeli border police killing 17-year-old Mohammed Salayme at a Hebron checkpoint on December 12th. The Israeli military released a version of the video on December 17, and it was clear it had been edited. Allison Deger wondered at the time what had been edited out? Now we know.


On Wednesday, a correspondent for Israel’s Channel 10 uploaded what appears to be unedited video of the encounter at the checkpoint to his personal YouTube channel. According to the correspondent, Roy Sharon, the security-camera footage, which includes 19 seconds omitted from the edit posted on an Israeli military channel last week, was “raw material provided by the I.D.F. Spokesperson’s unit.”

The longer version displays a time stamp indicating that it was recorded on Dec. 12, from 8:09 p.m. to 8:10 p.m. The unedited recording includes about 14 seconds that was cut from the middle of the version released by the military last week and another five seconds that was trimmed from the end of the encounter.

The newly released video of the end of the incident appears to show that the Israeli officer fired at least three shots at the Palestinian boy, Muhammad al-Salameh, after he had already retreated from the officer he had been fighting with when the first shot was fired. The officer’s final shot, which was omitted entirely from the military’s edited version, looks to have been fired from some distance, after the boy had doubled over, perhaps from the impact of the earlier shots. The boy was not close to any of the Israeli officers visible in the footage.

Here is the edited version the Israeli military released on December 17:

Adam Horowitz

Adam Horowitz is Executive Editor of

Other posts by .

Posted In:

61 Responses

  1. Blank State on December 27, 2012, 11:38 pm

    When assessed honestly, the word “murder” applies.

    Think anyone will be punished??? I mean, after all, it was just a Palestinian, whats the big deal?

  2. Avi_G. on December 27, 2012, 11:38 pm

    1. Now that this second video has appeared, it’s clear that the time and date in the first were airbrushed. It was also zoomed-in for some reason. Why did Israeli authorities find it necessary to airbrush the time and date on that video?

    2. From the start, the female, clearly identifiable by the long hair, points the gun at the alleged Palestinian. Meanwhile, two — presumable — males attempt to subdue him. She, however, continues to shoot at the alleged civilian. Why didn’t she attempt to use physical force like her male colleagues and instead resorted to deadly force?

    One can speculate, but this incident reminds me of the fear-induced racism that used to — and to some degree continues to — be directed at black males in the US. Protect your white females lest the black savages get them and rape them goes the racist trope. So it’s no wonder that a woman had the civilian in her gun sights from the very beginning for he, too, was a threat, not immediately, but certainly in the grand scheme of things. Much like the “Demographic Threat” and the threat that Gazan babies pose when they could very well grow up to become terrorists — as Israeli officials have often stated over and over, or the rabbis who have warned Jewish females of the menace of befriending or marrying Palestinian males. Heck, even NPR managed to produce a short report about what are known in Jewish Jerusalem as Decency Patrols. Meanwhile, her male colleagues were content with physical force instead.

    It should also be noted that if the civilian is the same teenager in question, then he is hardly the muscular and physically threatening individual who would be seen as a threat to a female soldier of presumably smaller physique.

    But this entire discussion is pointless, not because it will be difficult to determine what really took place that day, but because Israel’s track record of murdering innocent Palestinians is simply appalling. And even if, for the sake of argument, one assumed that the civilian was the culprit and was acting in a manner that justified his shooting, the thousands of well-documented cases of Israeli murder, assault, rape and mayhem are an overwhelming indictment of Israel’s criminality and violations of both international law, common decency and morality.

    • Avi_G. on December 27, 2012, 11:56 pm

      And I should add the simple fact that Israel is an occupier that continues to defend lawless Jewish colonists — in all their acts of criminality and viciousness — while it imposes a system of apartheid on Palestinians in Hebron. The same strong-arm way through which colonists took over land in the occupied West Bank as early as the 1960s is their modus operandi in Hebron where some 500 colonists have forcibly moved in to a Palestinian city of more than 100,000 Palestinians.

  3. FreddyV on December 27, 2012, 11:54 pm

    Any Hasbarists here care to revise their previous comments?

    This is the problem with Israel. It gets caught out lying every time.

    • seafoid on December 30, 2012, 2:57 am

      It gets caught out but after the media circus has moved on. Most people don’t notice and the process is repeated endlessly. It is such a pity for Israel that this sort of puerile news management is still necessary 60 years on. Israel’s legitimacy is still based on goy acceptance. It will always be thus.

  4. Obsidian on December 28, 2012, 12:13 am


    I see the youth moving away only after the initial shot fired by the officer.
    But more important, Adam, you’ve omitted mention of the shiny gun from your report. That shiny thing in the kid’s hand from the first attack on the checkpoint soldier’s neck right through the entire assault and shooting.
    BTW. As I see things, there was no ‘Israeli provocation’ edited out of the film clip, as suggested by Mondoweiss earlier.

    • eGuard on December 28, 2012, 6:51 am

      Obsidian: … as suggested by Mondoweiss earlier.
      How? Where?

    • SimoHurtta on December 28, 2012, 7:25 am

      Shiny gun? Have you Obsidian tried to hit an adult heavily armed man with a plastic pistol? The only effect of that is that the target gets a cramp caused by the laughter. That shiny (= reflecting to light) object in this unbelievable unclear video is more likely a mobile phone and its screen reflecting to lights surrounding the checkpoint.

      Most of us have a small camera which can produce HD quality video. The hightech Israeli army surveillance cameras on checkpoints and drones produce so laughable quality video that it is impossible to believe it being the reality. In this video and those other numerous other videos published by IDF the common dominator is that they are so unclear and blurry, that anybody can claim what ever they want based on the “evidence” these videos provide. I wounder how can Israelis use for example face recognizing programs if the video feed has the quality IDF “offers” in these videos it publishes.

      It is almost certain that Israeli soldiers/police on the checkpoints have in their pockets a collection of plastic pistols and knives. These are useful when covering up unclear killings. Not the first time these fake weapons appear and are used as an excuse. One thing is certain that this video doesn’t prove that there was any shiny fake gun.

      • Obsidian on December 28, 2012, 3:34 pm

        Pushing a cell phone into a soldier’s neck is unlikely. Holding onto the cell phone while you brawl with a soldier is even less likely.

        Captain Baz posted the photo of the shiny Luger days before the checkpoint video was released. Is it coincidence that young Mohammed also had something shiny in his right hand throughout the fist fight? Mohammed begins his attack on the soldier by pushing a shiny object into the soldier’s neck. Most likely a fake shiny pistol.

      • talknic on January 1, 2013, 11:48 pm

        Obsidian A watch face reflects light. Quite common. In fact, highly likely to have a watch. Far more likely than any BS put out by the IDF

      • pjdude on January 1, 2013, 10:16 pm

        I work in a electronics store for about a hundred bucks I could get a security system with better quality footage than that. more camera angles too.

      • talknic on January 2, 2013, 12:01 am

        I don’t think the IDF wants a clear picture. I can’t remember there ever being a really clear picture released by the IDF.

      • pjdude on January 6, 2013, 7:21 pm

        that was kinda of the point their intentional using crap systems to protect them selves.

    • Cliff on December 28, 2012, 7:41 am

      List the frame numbers. It’s a YT clip, so should be easy. Clearly, you were watching the video with a paper bag over your head.

    • ThorsteinVeblen2012 on December 28, 2012, 3:44 pm

      Explain to me what was the purpose of editing the film in the first place?

      If you try to hide something it is usually because there is something to hide.

      It seems there is no other film of this guard post than from the camera they bought at Radio Shack in 1978. How convenient.

  5. talknic on December 28, 2012, 4:51 am


    “I see the youth moving away only after the initial shot fired by the officer” and then all the other shots… after he’d moved away … see them did you?

    “But more important, Adam, you’ve omitted mention of the shiny gun from your report. That shiny thing in the kid’s hand”

    Frame number?

    ” on the checkpoint soldier’s neck right through the entire assault and shooting”

    Frame numbers ?

    Say, can you see the soldier standing next to the settler as he shoots a Palestinian

    Armed settlers are a valid military target, deserving of more than stones, which they could have walked away from BTW

    “As I see things, there was no ‘Israeli provocation’”

    Of course of course…. Ever wonder what might have been said in order to provoke such an immediate reaction? Or can your super hearing tell us it was only kind words?

    • Obsidian on December 28, 2012, 5:37 am

      Shiny object in kid’s right hand at frames (edited version) 31, 36, 38, 42, 54..or more.

      I understand that you can’t see the same things I see.
      No problem.

      Regarding provocations, I had said, ‘as I see things’.
      Obviously since there’s no audio, I won’t speculate.

      • eGuard on December 28, 2012, 4:02 pm

        Obsedian: I had said, ‘as I see things’.

        No. You used quotes so you were quoting: “‘Israeli provocation’
        Where did Mondoweiss say so?

      • Egbert on December 28, 2012, 4:16 pm

        The camera is a night vision camera. It is sensitive to heat. When the IDF soldier fires her gun, you can see the extended hot muzzle flash with a very high intensity core, the heat of the bullet as it flies towards the victim and a flash as it hits him. This is totally different to the ‘flashes’ from whatever the Palestinian had in his hand. Whatever it was, its temperature was much lower than that of a muzzle flash or bullet.

      • talknic on January 2, 2013, 12:03 am

        “Shiny object in kid’s right hand ..” or shiny object on kids wrist?

  6. Fritz on December 28, 2012, 6:04 am

    Obsidian, You have an extreme good faith into people with weapons. However, even if I follow your point of view, the problem is the third shot. I can’t see anything else than two soldiers and a female IDF-officer who kills a heavily wounded person.

    • Obsidian on December 28, 2012, 9:30 am

      “I can’t see anything else than two soldiers and a female IDF-officer who kills a heavily wounded person.”

      Yes. A heavily wounded person with a (realistic looking) pistol in his hand, who’d just throttled an unsuspecting soldier.

      The officer, the shooter, was protecting the men under her command.

      • SimoHurtta on December 28, 2012, 3:32 pm

        Do you really honestly believe in that desperate pistol story? Nobody with a plastic pistol as his only “weapon” attacks an adult male and heavily armed soldier/police so that he tries to hit frequently the soldier with the hand where the plastic pistol is. The alleged plastic pistol doesn’t make the hits more effective – on the contrary. That kind of toy pistol is light and fragile. The only realistic way in using such a fake pistol is to pretend it being a real weapon and make equal threats as one would do with a real pistol. Not using it like it would be a hammer or ax.

        It is certain that Israel has of the event better quality videos taken from different angles. Israel with 100 percents certainty films every passing person on check points to gather information of the Palestinians movements using face recognition. It would be a simple matter for Israel to prove that the young man had really a shiny toy pistol in his hand by presenting a decent picture of that. Instead it can only present an edited blurry extremely low resolution (240p) video which proves nothing.

      • eGuard on December 28, 2012, 4:06 pm

        Obsedian: A heavily wounded person with a (realistic looking) pistol in his hand

        The pistol, real or fake, is not visible in the video. It is only mentioned by IDF. There os no proof of its presence.

        Now Obsedian, a few lines up you said: I won’t speculate. But clearly you do.

  7. seafoid on December 28, 2012, 6:07 am

    The Jewish soldiers shot and killed the Palestinian at close range . Pour encourager les autres Palestiniens. She was awarded a special prize and glorious media coverage. Pour encourager les autres Zionistes.

    Fine. Run your society along “dog eat dog” lines. Great. Just don’t come whining to the goys when it goes tits up.

    • Mooser on December 30, 2012, 12:37 pm

      “Fine. Run your society along “dog eat dog” lines. Great. Just don’t come whining to the goys when it goes tits up.”

      Let’s see now, you call Gentiules beasts or cattle, then imply they have better ethics than we do. Okay, sure, whatever you say. Seems like a very useful attitude.

  8. gingershot on December 28, 2012, 8:08 am

    The list of things doesn’t manipulatively lie about is a lot shorter list than the list it lies to beat the band.

    That’s the secret – it’s proud of it’s lying

    • Obsidian on December 29, 2012, 6:56 am

      ‘Tits up’. A ‘car crash’.

      Well. I guess the 3/12 million tourists that came here in 2012 just wanted to say farewell.

      BTW Seafoid. Putting aside Israel’s growing economy, that Europe and America are now envious of, Israel is now a nuclear power that no longer whines to the goyim.

      Sea. You are projecting in your echo chamber.

      • justicewillprevail on December 29, 2012, 7:32 am

        Yes, so successful that you come to the US taxpayer with the begging bowl every year.
        Good argument for Iran becoming a nuclear power too.

      • seafoid on December 30, 2012, 3:00 am

        Obsidian- look at your own role. Selling smoke to galut. Why is it necessary? Israel is a US overseas dependency. Once the goys smell apartheid you can start the kaddish for Zionism.

      • Mooser on December 31, 2012, 1:18 pm

        “Once the goys smell apartheid you can start the kaddish for Zionism.”

        I knew those lousy “goys” would ruin everything! If only they wouldn’t poke their upturned noses into our business.

      • American on December 31, 2012, 2:27 pm

        “Once the goys smell apartheid you can start the kaddish for Zionism.”…seafoid

        I doubt it if your talking about the goy politicians…they’ve supported everything Israel has done so far. I can even envision them ‘rationalizing’ the transfer of Palestines by Israel. The non politicians goys might do something.

      • on December 31, 2012, 4:45 pm

        “The non politicians goys might do something.”
        Sure, like they did with the Armenians, the Kurds, the Jews, the Gypsies, the Tutsi and so recently with brownish-looking people right here in God’s own country. In the latter case, it seems to me that the non-politician inciters weren’t necessarily Goys, or did I miss something?

      • Cliff on December 31, 2012, 5:10 pm

        Goys don’t care about our own wars (Afghanistan) so why would we care about Jewish nationalism circumventing our democracy?

        Especially with the Holocaust Industry and Islamophobia defining our political culture.

        And there is no precedent for such an intellectual awakening in this country. People aren’t going to turn against one part (albeit one very important part) of our foreign policy if they can’t even turn against our own wars.

      • seafoid on January 4, 2013, 3:08 pm

        Israel is already losing Europe . Jim Crow didn’t make it as far as 2013. I would give more credit that you to the people of the US. What makes Israel so fragile is its need for goy approval .

      • on December 31, 2012, 4:32 pm


        “Well. I guess the 3/12 million tourists that came here in 2012 just wanted to say farewell.”

        We know there are millions of morons, emotionally screwed-up smarter people and a few outright murderous criminals who define themselves as “Jewish” because we know the proportion of Zionists among them. A few million among them are stupid enough to go there. So what?
        In fact, even non-Zionists like Phil and his troup go there, no matter their support for boycott.
        It still is a major failure.

        “Putting aside Israel’s growing economy, that Europe and America are now envious of, Israel is now a nuclear power that no longer whines to the goyim.”

        Putting aside its clearly dominant position in economy and science, which Europe and America were envious of, Nazi Germany was a military power that did not have to kowtow to any non-Germanics.

        A “nuclear power” violating all international law and that is continually waging war of aggression is a major danger that has placed itself consciously outside all civilized humanity and must be put out asap. So there you have the failure.

        But whining to the Goyim is all that the Zionist entity does for a living, because all its existence depends exclusively on its ass-coverage by the pussywhipped US and its nonvoting dependencies like Polynesia and the UK, to whom it whines and caterwauls night and day.
        What a failure! Choose your verbs better.

        And thanks for documenting the failure of the pitiful Zionist enterprise with your own words. Obsidian is used for cutting, you don’t even rate Jelly.

      • American on December 31, 2012, 6:28 pm

        “Obsidian says:

        BTW Seafoid. Putting aside Israel’s growing economy, that Europe and America are now envious of, Israel is now a nuclear power that no longer whines to the goyim.”….

        You want us to make you whine? The Man could change any day……☺

        ♫……There’s a man going around taking names
        And he decides who to free and who to blame
        Everybody won’t be treated quite the same
        There will be a golden ladder reaching down
        When the man comes around…..♫

        Whoever is unjust let him be unjust still
        Whoever is righteous let him be righteous still
        Whoever is filthy let him be filthy still
        Listen to the words long written down
        When the man comes around…….♫

        ..good old johnny cash

      • Obsidian on January 1, 2013, 1:34 pm


        …good old johnny cash loved Israel.

        Are you a fan of Cash too?

      • annie on December 31, 2012, 6:48 pm

        goyim is a yucky term. i don’t like it.

      • seanmcbride on January 1, 2013, 11:14 am


        goyim is a yucky term. i don’t like it.

        The problem with the term “goyim” — which also means “the nations” or all non-Jews — is that it is grounded in a dualistic ideological construct from ancient and classical Judaism which is often (but not always) an expression of radical and raw racism.

        You recently posted that infamous Ovadia Yosef quote in which Yosef described “goyim” as, basically, disposable beasts of burden and slaves. There it is, from a leading Jewish religious authority in contemporary Israel.

        People who hold these views will obviously generate extreme hostility against themselves and against the cause they represent. When they try to describe this hostility as “antisemitism” they are on exceedingly thin ice. If opposition to these beliefs constitutes antisemitism, then the entire world would be morally obligated to be antisemites.

        Religious Zionists have tied themselves up in some amazingly self-destructive knots. And the more their bizarre self-contradictions come to light, the more they try to bully the world into submission — which of course inflames even more hostility from the rest of the world. They are trapped in an ever-downward spiral.

        This is not going to end well.

      • annie on January 1, 2013, 4:57 pm

        it just seems weird to have that term bandied around here as if it wasn’t an racist insult. i mean really, can we say ‘k*ke’? i don’t think so, rightly NOT. and yet this insulting slur is allowed. i just find it offensive. it shouldn’t be normalized.

  9. seafoid on December 28, 2012, 9:04 am

    The distinguishing mark of a ‘manifestly unlawful order’ should fly like a black flag … Not formal unlawfulness, hidden or half-hidden, nor unlawfulness discernible only by the eyes of legal experts, is important here, but … unlawfulness piercing the eye and revolting the heart, be the eye not blind nor the heart stony and corrupt—that is the measure of ‘manifest unlawfulness’ required to release a soldier from the duty of obedience (Chief Military Prosecutor v. Melinki (1958), 13 Pesakim Mehoziim 90, cited in Israel (A.G.) v. Adolf Eichmann (1961), 36 I.L.R. 18 at 256 (Israel, District Court of Jerusalem)).

    what a car crash Israel is

  10. Bing Bong on December 28, 2012, 11:12 am

    17 year old youth approaches IDF checkpoint with fake pistol, attacks soldier and is shot dead.

    Why is there such a lack of international outrage speaking out against this crime?

  11. piotr on December 28, 2012, 2:01 pm

    Was the “fake gun” ever shown? Tested for fingerprints? Also, indeed it is a bit strange that a nation so technologically advanced as Israel can produce videos of that quality.

    Also, how many days before the incident a Cabinet minister extolled soldiers not to hesitate but shoot to kill?

    • Obsidian on December 28, 2012, 2:30 pm

      I tried posting a photo of the gun on Mondoweiss three times. Ask the moderator why the photos (and my comments) were not posted.

      The photo was also posted by Captain Baz on Twitter. He is a Border Police spokesman.

      The fake gun was a chrome Luger.

      It’s pure speculation on my part, but maybe the fake gun was a cigarette lighter the youth was carrying (with the birthday cake). Who knows?

      • valency on December 29, 2012, 8:19 am

        Police and security forces around the world know to carry “drop weapons” for such incidents, such as toy guns, that can be planted on someone to retrospectively justify shooting them. For example, see

        The israelis have been caught doctoring the video, the border guards are certainly not above planting a fake weapon. It’s a standard trick used by police from LA to Tel Aviv.

  12. radii on December 28, 2012, 2:12 pm

    just a typical day in the zionist neighborhood

  13. Talkback on December 28, 2012, 2:58 pm

    Why did the IDF initially said that the boy arrived “about 6:30 pm”,7340,L-4319188,00.html allthough it was 8:10 pm?
    Why did the IDF initially say that “when one of the soldiers asked him to present identification, the youth attacked him, pulling a gun and holding it to the soldier’s head”,7340,L-4319188,00.html allthough it is clear from the video that the boy presented him the identification card? Compare this to “As one of the officers was inspecting [!] the ID card, the boy began to beat him with his fists, knocked him down and pulled out a gun. … fired two [!] bullets at the teen.”
    Why did the IDF cut out 20 seconds between presenting the ID card and attacking (which is at least one reason to blur out the time stamp in their first video)?
    Why did the IDF cut out the third and final shot?
    Why was the boy shot into abdomen and chest?,7340,L-4319188,00.html
    Why did the IDF claim that the “youth was critically injured and rushed to a local hospital, where he died of his wounds” allthough he “died on the way to the hospital” and “the Palestinian EMTs that arrived at the scene were not allowed to take him to a hospital”?,7340,L-4319188,00.html. Why weren’t they allowed?

  14. WeAreAllMadeOfStars on December 28, 2012, 6:33 pm

    This video doesn’t prove anything to me. How do we know who the victim is ? How do we know there is a victim ? When I watched the edited video I thought the IOF could very well have staged it all the way … and I still believe they did.
    C’mon, they release an edited video and days after comes the original … Yeah, not me. I don’t need a video to understand that the IOF murdered (yet another) innocent young man.

  15. Xpat on December 29, 2012, 4:49 pm

    Even the Jerusalem Post, staffed overwhelmingly by American Jewish – usually rightwing – immigrants to Israel, did not accept the Border Police account at face value.
    The questions posted here by other commenters are good and have been ignored by the IDF and Israeli government.
    How did a scuffle turn into shooting to kill? If he had a gun, why did Mohammed use his fists? After he was disabled why did the soldiers fire into his body?
    What triggered the attack? It looks like Mohammed Saleymeh did not approach the guard station with the intent of attacking…did the Israeli soldier say something offensive to Mohammed?
    I’ve served on the West Bank and am familiar with the workings of the IDF machine. As Mondoweiss has documented repeatedly, the boys (and girls) in the Israeli army routinely respond with literal overkill to physical attacks – making the assumption that Mohammed was unprovoked – like these. The brass is standing behind this killing and regularly condones this violence.
    All part of a day’s work for the occupying army.

  16. Obsidian on December 30, 2012, 12:03 am


    “If he had a gun, why did Mohammed use his fists?”

    Eliot. The Border Police always maintained that Mohammed attacked them with a toy gun, not a real one.

    • Xpat on December 30, 2012, 9:06 am

      Per the Jerusalem Post, for example, the story changed over time.

      However, if indeed, the army maintains they knew Mohamed was not carrying a gun when they killed him, then, what happened on Dec. 12 was: the Israeli army team used lethal gunfire to kill an unarmed civilian after they had already won a fistfight with him.

  17. DICKERSON3870 on December 30, 2012, 5:18 am

    RE: “The unedited recording includes about 14 seconds that was cut from the middle of the version released by the military last week and another five seconds that was trimmed from the end of the encounter. The newly released video of the end of the incident appears to show that the Israeli officer fired at least three shots at the Palestinian boy, Muhammad al-Salameh, after he had already retreated from the officer he had been fighting with when the first shot was fired.” ~ Mackay

    MY SARCASM: How caring and considerate of the IDF to edit the video in an altruistic effort at saving us those 19 seconds!


    DICKERSON3870 says:
    December 17, 2012 at 6:52 pm

    RE: “Also Allison Deger notes that there is a skip in the video at second 24 or so. Was something edited out?” ~ Alex Kane and Phil Weiss

    MY COMMENT: How dare anyone suggest that The Most Moral Army in the World™ would ever selectively edit a video! ! !
    I have no choice but to report you guys to the Anti-Defamation League (ADL). You best go ahead and “lawyer up”!

    SOURCE –

    I.F. STONE (1967): “All governments lie, but disaster lies in wait for countries whose officials smoke the same hashish they give out.” ~ In a Time of Torment, 1961-1967 (1967), p. 317

  18. Fritz on December 30, 2012, 9:53 am

    I’d like to understand the distinction between IDF (regular troops in which everybody has to serve?) and border police (professional troop you choose to earn money?). Is the so called “border police” part of the IDF? Which is the Hebrew name? (and ironically which is the “border”).

    • Shmuel on December 30, 2012, 10:14 am

      Hi Fritz,

      “Magav” or “Mishmar ha-gvul” (lit. “border guard”) is kind of a police/army hybrid. It is deployed both within the “green line” and in the OPT as an auxiliary force both to the Israel Police and the IDF. It is technically under the command of the Israel Police, but is routinely “lent” to the army. Many of its members are career, but many others are conscripts who fulfil their draft obligation in the Border Police, rather than the IDF. Due probably to greater career options, draftees to the Border Police tend to come from lower socio-economic classes and discriminated groups (e.g. Druze, Ethiopians, Bedouin, Mizrahim). Magav is also known for its particular brutality, and has been involved in a number of highly publicised incidents of extreme and gratuitous violence.

      The “border” part of its name has mostly to do with the history of the corps, originally established to patrol the ’49 armistice line.

      • Fritz on December 30, 2012, 1:08 pm

        Thanks Shmuel,
        it seems to me that the female officer had interpreted the situation with Muhammad as a chance to improve their “career options”.

  19. piotr on December 30, 2012, 12:19 pm

    Upon some checking, there is a version that cites “Palestinian witnesses” that claims that the victim indeed had the toy gun and the incident started from the toy (gift from a friend on that day?) being confiscated. Mohammad was a student in circus school so he was perhaps much more agile and strong than ordinary and somehow got his toy back, for a few last seconds of his life.

    The version of gun being confiscated makes much more sense that “sudden pulling out”. Also, I cannot see anybody being thrown on the ground, another part of the initial IDF story which is not provably false. Which is as surprising as the fact that the Earth still rotates. IDF spokespersons are not even trained to invent plausible stories, so this one was actually better than most. They also lie so regularly that the mere fact that the story was invented does not prove that they “hide something”. Checking facts is beneath their dignity.

    The unvarnished truth would probably make shooting of the victim justifiable. Once there is a scuffle, soldiers have to make split second decisions and a mistake in such a situation is not “cold blooded” — although “finishing shot” is an ugly thing, and it seems that we had it here. If the victim was provoked, if the confiscation was not justified, the story is positively non-heroic.

    • Xpat on January 5, 2013, 9:31 am

      @Piotr – if the sequence of events was as you describe:
      1.Border Policeman confiscated the toy gun earlier in the day,
      2. Mohammed managed to wrestle that gun (photographed earlier by captain Baz?) from the hands of that same soldier at the checkpoint (that’s an odd pair of coincidences in itself).
      3. a scuffle ensues
      4. soldiers topple Mohammed to the ground.
      5. they shoot him multiple times culminating in the infamous killing shot (in Israeli Hebrew: “v’doo harigah”).

      That doesn’t “justify” Mohammed’s death. Why did the soldiers shoot to kill a man “armed” with, what they knew was, a fake gun?

      And where is the investigation: interviews of the soldiers involved and so on?

Leave a Reply