Israeli Arab member of Galilee terror group convicted of killing soldier
Mohammed Anbatawi, 23, from Kafr Kana, confessed to killing IDF soldier Oleg Shaichat in July 2003.
By Eli Ashkenazi Tags: Galilee IDFThe Magistrate's Court in Nazareth on Monday convicted Mohammed Anbatawi of murdering IDF soldier Oleg Shaichat in July 2003.
The panel of judges headed by Nazareth District Court President Menachem Ben-David ruled that Anbatawi, a 23-year-old from Kafr Kana, is also guilty of other crimes which he committed while a member of the terrorist group known as "Hofshiyei Hagalil" (Liberated Ones of the Galilee).
Authorities say the group has been active in the Lower Galilee, and that its goal was to harm the security of the state in retaliation for what it terms "the killing of the residents of the West Bank and Israel's actions in the territories."
Immediately following his arrest on April 19, 2004, Anbatawi confessed to the killing and reenacted the events which led up to Shaichat's abduction and murder.
Following his arrest, authorities released three other youths from Kafr Kana who were accused in the murder. Anbatawi then claimed that his friend, Mohammed Hatib, told him that four Palestinians were involved in the murder. At a later stage, Anbatawi offered another version to police, according to which Hatib is the one who murdered Shaichat.
Hatib himself was killed in a gunfight at Beit Rimon Junction on April 18, 2004, after firing at a Border Police patrol. Hatib's accomplice in the shooting, Ala'a Moussa, a 21-year-old resident of the Western Galilee town of Kfar Manda, suffered gunshot wounds and was arrested.
Investigators stumbled upon the most significant lead in the case when it was discovered that the rifles found in Hatib and Moussa's possession belonged to Shaichat.
According to the language of the indictment, Anbatawi and Hatib hatched their plan to abduct and kill an IDF soldier and to steal his weapon during a meeting between the two on July 21, 2003. Both men travelled in a car belonging to Anbatawi's brother to a store where they purchased a cable used as a bicycle lock. They planned to use the cable to strangle the soldier they were to abduct.
As Anbatawai and Hatib resumed driving, they spotted an armed soldier at Golani Junction, however Anbatawi hesitated and continued driving. Hatib taunted his partner, accusing him of cowardice. Both men turned the car around and proceeded driving towards Beit-Rimon Junction, where they noticed Oleg Shaichat. Hatib then moved into the rear seat of the car.
Shaichat entered the vehicle and sat in the front seat on the passenger side next to Anbatawi, who was behind the wheel. During the drive, Hatib spoke with Shaichat about his military service. Anbatawi then proceeded to drive onto a back road. After Shaichat questioned Anbatawai about the unusual route, Hatib answered that they were driving to pick up another friend, even going to the extent of feigning a phone conversation meant to fool the soldier.
|
Mohammed Anbatawi confessed to killing IDF soldier Oleg Shaichat. (Itzik Ben-Malki) |
Why Facebook Connect?
Comment on Haaretz.com articles with your Facebook login, and share your thoughts on your own wall.
- Latest
- Most Viewed
- Most Rated
- Open all
follow an American example, use waist chains, to limit hand movements---I'm sick and tired of these bozo's waving their hands around for emphasis---
Hang the smiling bastard.
Gennadiy Faybyshenko's video is paranoid propaganda that neglects to mention the ethnic cleansing of Palestine. The truth will come out, the crimes of the past will be rectified. Jerusalem was an Islamic city for centuries, it will be Islamic again.
You neglected to mention that he's an Israeli Arab, a traitor, who should be receiving the extreme penalty, instead of incarceration--- Come, gather some courage hop that flight for your life saving mission, they're waiting for you---Before you go, don't forget to sign over your property to the Abo's you stole it from--
Haaretz you need to check yourself - killing an armed soldier is not an act of terror. An act of terror is indiscriminate and kills unarmed civilians - something both sides is familiar with and one which Israel is incredibly successful at.
If he were a member of Hamas, he would already have been released in some sort of misguided, one sided, goodwill gesture.
There are those who see nothing wrong with lying and deceiving and murdering someone after gaining their trust. Then there are the rest of us, glad to not be your neighbor.
Try that one with the British.
I suppose in Israel's case... 'When in Israel do what the Israelis do.' Kill the 'militants,' isn't that right, Israel?
Peter Gabriel sung an eerily echoic tune of Holocaust mnemonic. If looks could kill, then Iran's president could unleash a global holocaust!
Does this make it clear that its not the conditions of Gaza that make Arabs terrorists? In India, Moslems have fought in the Indian army in every war that they've had against Moslem Pakistan and no one in India refers to the Moslems as a "potential fifth column." Its obviously different in Israel.
Most people try to use the term terrorist (T) to serve their purposes. If you can for a moment look at the matter objectively, maybe this person was not a T after all, though he committed murder. - A T does not have to kill randomly. Many terrorist acts are well-planned. - A T can be a private person or a state agent, or groups of either. - A T's main aim is to 'terrorize' by shock in order to achieve political gains. - A T targets civilian objects and persons. And with intention. - A T might use a variety of weaponry; from a knife to an F16. - For a sound definition of terrorism that can stand legal, political and moral tests, one must focus on the 'act of terror' and not on the 'identity, religion, nationality or color' of the perpetrator(s). A last point, certain boundless forms of 'freedom of speech' that incite for killing civilians by dehumanizing them and calling them animals can be acts of terror if they help killing of innocent civilians. Time to look in the mirror!
One significant point was missed in all the drivel written about this murderer, about Amir, about Goldstein, etc. Number 4 mentions calling an elephant an elephant. Hey, elephants are not only smart, but are not that bad looking. This guy was whooped with the ugly stick, and is in need of a serious case of solitary confinement pending hanging.
Your response is a pure as your fabric---Who should hang??..Two names have been mentioned in this string---
that was not a film. that was a power point attached to a racist hate speech.
Killing on a nationalist basis in cold blood is terrorism. Goldstein, Natan Zada, Amir all are terrorists and all are condemned by decent Israelis: by far the majority. So are those who fire missiles into Israel and so is this idiotically grinning boy. Are you the Rami that I know? if so, greetings.
He should hang.Don,t waste taxpayers money feeding him.
Hamas can have the same argument and say that all the attacks on Israelis are to stop the Israeli agenda... etc... Moreover, had Amir been a a muslim, i'm sure you would be the first to call him a terrorist.. Just like Hamas, Islamic Jihad and others...Y. Amir, Zada, Goldstien, settler who attack and kill palis in cold blood, IDF soldiers who kill Palis in cold blood.. all are terrorists..
He wanted to murder the policy and he killed the man. Stupid, limited but a murderer
ygal, is a political criminal, he disagreed with the prime minister views, and decide to kill him as means to stop Rabin agenda. Itshak rabin was targeted because of his political views, and because of his post. a terrorist kills randomly, to send a message of terror. Baroukh goldtsein was a jewish terrorist.
I dont see this man as a terrorist, he was taking part in the struggle to liberate his homeland.
The killing of innocent people is never a good thing. Israeli arabs are against such acts whether they are committed against Israelis or against palestinains. Obviously our values are different than yours.
To write many words would be pointless, i made a movie about this whole case, please take a look, there are two parts, please judge what do you think, feel free to critisize, also tell me, should I win an Oscar award, be honest, be brutally honest. http://youtube.com/watch?v=cyXkzEOPjSk http://youtube.com/watch?v=qsuD3SVE0Zk
Not to sure about it since you are speculating, and the facts allready say that the three were dodgy anyway... the question is if they would be convicted for murder of the soldier ? Hhhmmm interesting indeed however i allready spent more time on this then anyone in the territories will spent when it concerns the faith of kidnapped Israelis ? (a very few heroic exceptions not counted)...
Catching the innocent isn't uuusal---Sometimes there are circumstances that indicate they COULD have been involved and later found to be innocent--- In the USA, three Duke University Lacrosse players were alleged to have raped a sex show woman, they were indicated, awaiting trial, when the prosecutor was forced to admit that he hadn't taken all the conditions into consideration---They were declared innocent by the State Prosecutor's office---Innocent's get caught all the time, it's part of the legal process, whether we like it or not---Console yourself, they're still alive and now free---
what are they, seing the light???? its about time you call an elephant an elephant when you see one.
1- He is a terrorist, may he rot in jail 2- Had he not been caught, the three wrongly accused youth would not have been released. Which is another proof of the double standard arabs have to face when dealing with the legal system in Israel. Had they been Jews, most likely they would have not been arrested.
Another guy to be let out to appease Abu Mazen
Israel is already feeding enough prisoners