|
al-Sharifs killer Elor Azraya
|
|
Abdel Fattah al-Sharif 21
Ramsey Qasrawi 21 March 24 2016 |
25 sept 2016
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu offered his support to Charlie Azaria, as his son Elor Azaria stands trial for shooting a neutralized Palestinian; after urging him to offer up any evidence they might have, Netanyahu attempts to console the weeping father by saying, ‘I understand your pain.’
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu conducted a phone conversation with Charlie Azaria, the father of Sgt. Elor Azaria who is standing trial for shooting neutralized terrorist Abdel al Fatah al-Sharif in Hebron last March.
During the phone call, Netanyahu told the senior Azaria, “I understand your pain. Over the last few months, our soldiers have courageously and with determination stood up against acts of terrorism carried out by those seeking to kill them. And they are required to make real-time decisions, in what is not an easy reality. So my first point to you is that I am sure the examination is taking these circumstances into consideration, and that I am convinced that it will be professional and fair toward your son.”
“My second point to you,” continued Netanyahu. “Is that I have full faith in the IDF and its chief of staff, and that I think you, too, should have faith in the commanders and examination, just as the people of Israel need to stay united around its army. We only have one army, with many more challenges ahead of us.”
Azaria’s father responded, by saying,” My family only asks that there be a fair trial. They can’t judge the boy without evidence, without anything.” He added, “My home is always open to you, Sir, and I would be happy to have you over, Sir.”
“Thank you, Charlie,” said Netanyahu. “I want to ask you to do one thing: anything you have to give (the defense), to show, please do so as part of the examination. An examination is supposed to be a real, honest and fair one. I ask that you understand this, and that you not think for one moment that your son won’t get the most objective, professional and decent examination. Please pass my words on to your entire family.”
“I gave my whole life to this country, Mr. Prime Minister,” said Charlie Azaria. “I’ve been a law enforcement man for 30 years. I’ve examined criminals, I’ve put them in jail and escorted them with handcuffs on. And when I see my son with handcuffs…” At this point Azaria broke down in tears, to which Netanyahu responded by saying, “Charlie, I understand your pain.”
On Saturday, Netanyahu was asked whether he regretted having the conversation with the elder Azaria. He responded that he does not. “I told him to bet on the IDF, the IDF chief of staff, the commanders, our troops and legal system,” he said.
When asked whether he has called other families of soldiers who did not comply with IDF orders, Netanyahu said, “No, but I have called other suffering parents whose sons had fallen in battle, were missing or both, and this case involves a great suffering for Israel’s citizens.”
Netanyahu elaborated on his last remark. “There are countless parents who see their children, both male and female soldiers, finding themselves in almost impossible situations. On the one hand, they have to protect themselves, and on the other hand, they face the truly difficult issue of having to be careful not to be too trigger happy. This isn’t easy, and I myself have been in this situation. I’ve been in run-ins or near run-ins with enemy forces, where I had to decide when to shoot and when not to shoot. If an officer in Sayeret Matkal (the elite combat unit in which Netanyahu served) finds this difficult, I feel any soldier would.”
The Prime Minister’s Office issued a clarification on Sunday, in which Netanyahu stated, “I am sorry if my words were misunderstood.” He continued to say that “In no way did I compare the suffering of bereaved families—a suffering I am very familiar with—to that of other parents who are also suffering. There is no comparison and can be no comparison.”
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu conducted a phone conversation with Charlie Azaria, the father of Sgt. Elor Azaria who is standing trial for shooting neutralized terrorist Abdel al Fatah al-Sharif in Hebron last March.
During the phone call, Netanyahu told the senior Azaria, “I understand your pain. Over the last few months, our soldiers have courageously and with determination stood up against acts of terrorism carried out by those seeking to kill them. And they are required to make real-time decisions, in what is not an easy reality. So my first point to you is that I am sure the examination is taking these circumstances into consideration, and that I am convinced that it will be professional and fair toward your son.”
“My second point to you,” continued Netanyahu. “Is that I have full faith in the IDF and its chief of staff, and that I think you, too, should have faith in the commanders and examination, just as the people of Israel need to stay united around its army. We only have one army, with many more challenges ahead of us.”
Azaria’s father responded, by saying,” My family only asks that there be a fair trial. They can’t judge the boy without evidence, without anything.” He added, “My home is always open to you, Sir, and I would be happy to have you over, Sir.”
“Thank you, Charlie,” said Netanyahu. “I want to ask you to do one thing: anything you have to give (the defense), to show, please do so as part of the examination. An examination is supposed to be a real, honest and fair one. I ask that you understand this, and that you not think for one moment that your son won’t get the most objective, professional and decent examination. Please pass my words on to your entire family.”
“I gave my whole life to this country, Mr. Prime Minister,” said Charlie Azaria. “I’ve been a law enforcement man for 30 years. I’ve examined criminals, I’ve put them in jail and escorted them with handcuffs on. And when I see my son with handcuffs…” At this point Azaria broke down in tears, to which Netanyahu responded by saying, “Charlie, I understand your pain.”
On Saturday, Netanyahu was asked whether he regretted having the conversation with the elder Azaria. He responded that he does not. “I told him to bet on the IDF, the IDF chief of staff, the commanders, our troops and legal system,” he said.
When asked whether he has called other families of soldiers who did not comply with IDF orders, Netanyahu said, “No, but I have called other suffering parents whose sons had fallen in battle, were missing or both, and this case involves a great suffering for Israel’s citizens.”
Netanyahu elaborated on his last remark. “There are countless parents who see their children, both male and female soldiers, finding themselves in almost impossible situations. On the one hand, they have to protect themselves, and on the other hand, they face the truly difficult issue of having to be careful not to be too trigger happy. This isn’t easy, and I myself have been in this situation. I’ve been in run-ins or near run-ins with enemy forces, where I had to decide when to shoot and when not to shoot. If an officer in Sayeret Matkal (the elite combat unit in which Netanyahu served) finds this difficult, I feel any soldier would.”
The Prime Minister’s Office issued a clarification on Sunday, in which Netanyahu stated, “I am sorry if my words were misunderstood.” He continued to say that “In no way did I compare the suffering of bereaved families—a suffering I am very familiar with—to that of other parents who are also suffering. There is no comparison and can be no comparison.”
Sgt. Elor Azaria with the witness who was stabbed during attack
The soldier who was stabbed during the March Hebron terror attack, before Sgt. Elor Azaria shot the seriously wounded terrorist, told the court Sunday that he feared the terrorist could have been trying to detonate a bomb; ‘I am still of the belief that the terrorist constituted a threat.'
The soldier who was wounded during a March stabbing attack in Hebron—shortly before Sgt. Elior Azaria shot the seriously wounded terrorist—testified on behalf of the defense Sunday morning.
The soldier ‘A.’ opened by telling the court that he sensed a threat of an explosive device, a line of defense which has been robustly pushed by Azaria’s defense team to justify his actions. Asked whether he believed that the terrorist could have been strapped with an explosive belt, A. responded unequivocally, “yes.”
The prosecutor immediately engaged in an exchange with the witness, challenging his testimony and pointing to contradictory evidence he previously provided during and investigation with the military criminal investigation division (CID).
“I immediately recognized the terrorist in white who was walking regularly with his hands out and the second terrorist was hunched over with his hands in his pockets, A. recalled. “This immediately aroused suspicion and I immediately saw that something was not right. During the checks they did not stop at the metal detector. They went around it. They avoided it so that if they had a knife or a bomb it would not be apparent.”
The witness went on to recount the details of how the incident unfolded. “The second the commander told them to go back. I saw that something wasn’t right. They stood and looked at each other. I put my hand on my gun, the terrorist in white pulled out a knife, ran at my platoon commander and tried to stab him twice,” A. said.
“The platoon commander’s gun jammed so he ran back. I loaded my gun and shot six bullets at the terrorist who fell. Then I thought, ‘where is the second terrorist? Perhaps he is trying to detonate an explosive device or something? I felt two stabs from behind. I turned around and the terrorist pushed me. I shot while I was falling and the terrorist started to escape,” he continued.
“I am still of the belief that terrorist constituted a threat, that he had an explosive on him or something that he did not yet manage to detonate. I began running after him. He stopped, looked at me and saw that I wasn’t managing to work my gun and he ran at me again.”
Prosecutor: Your initial testimony is different
Responding to the prosecutor's allegation that A. had previously provided contradictory evidence during a preliminary investigation by the CID, the soldier said: “During the incident I was in shock. I had been stabbed. I shot both terrorists and I believed that both of them had been neutralized and didn’t seem to constitute a threat.”
“You never said during the time of the attack that you thought that one of the terrorists had a bomb on him,” the prosecutor insisted, to which A. said the CID never asked him about his thoughts in the field. However, the prosecutor continued to press A. on the point. “During your first testimony they allowed you to say everything that happened in the incident. You never said, at any stage, that you thought there was an explosive device on one of the terrorists.” To this, A. replied, “correct.”
The witness was asked why he never warned of the danger of an explosive device. “I was in shock,” he repeated. “I was tending to my wounds. Everyone already knew that the terrorist was still alive so I didn’t need to say.”
The soldier who was stabbed during the March Hebron terror attack, before Sgt. Elor Azaria shot the seriously wounded terrorist, told the court Sunday that he feared the terrorist could have been trying to detonate a bomb; ‘I am still of the belief that the terrorist constituted a threat.'
The soldier who was wounded during a March stabbing attack in Hebron—shortly before Sgt. Elior Azaria shot the seriously wounded terrorist—testified on behalf of the defense Sunday morning.
The soldier ‘A.’ opened by telling the court that he sensed a threat of an explosive device, a line of defense which has been robustly pushed by Azaria’s defense team to justify his actions. Asked whether he believed that the terrorist could have been strapped with an explosive belt, A. responded unequivocally, “yes.”
The prosecutor immediately engaged in an exchange with the witness, challenging his testimony and pointing to contradictory evidence he previously provided during and investigation with the military criminal investigation division (CID).
“I immediately recognized the terrorist in white who was walking regularly with his hands out and the second terrorist was hunched over with his hands in his pockets, A. recalled. “This immediately aroused suspicion and I immediately saw that something was not right. During the checks they did not stop at the metal detector. They went around it. They avoided it so that if they had a knife or a bomb it would not be apparent.”
The witness went on to recount the details of how the incident unfolded. “The second the commander told them to go back. I saw that something wasn’t right. They stood and looked at each other. I put my hand on my gun, the terrorist in white pulled out a knife, ran at my platoon commander and tried to stab him twice,” A. said.
“The platoon commander’s gun jammed so he ran back. I loaded my gun and shot six bullets at the terrorist who fell. Then I thought, ‘where is the second terrorist? Perhaps he is trying to detonate an explosive device or something? I felt two stabs from behind. I turned around and the terrorist pushed me. I shot while I was falling and the terrorist started to escape,” he continued.
“I am still of the belief that terrorist constituted a threat, that he had an explosive on him or something that he did not yet manage to detonate. I began running after him. He stopped, looked at me and saw that I wasn’t managing to work my gun and he ran at me again.”
Prosecutor: Your initial testimony is different
Responding to the prosecutor's allegation that A. had previously provided contradictory evidence during a preliminary investigation by the CID, the soldier said: “During the incident I was in shock. I had been stabbed. I shot both terrorists and I believed that both of them had been neutralized and didn’t seem to constitute a threat.”
“You never said during the time of the attack that you thought that one of the terrorists had a bomb on him,” the prosecutor insisted, to which A. said the CID never asked him about his thoughts in the field. However, the prosecutor continued to press A. on the point. “During your first testimony they allowed you to say everything that happened in the incident. You never said, at any stage, that you thought there was an explosive device on one of the terrorists.” To this, A. replied, “correct.”
The witness was asked why he never warned of the danger of an explosive device. “I was in shock,” he repeated. “I was tending to my wounds. Everyone already knew that the terrorist was still alive so I didn’t need to say.”
Asked if he called parents of other soldiers who transgressed, the prime minister said: 'No, but I have called many parents in distress over the fact their children were killed,' seemingly drawing a parallel between the two; on Sunday morning, Netanyahu clarified: ‘Sorry if my words were misinterpreted. In no way did I seek to draw comparisons.’
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu apologized Sunday morning after seemingly drawing a comparison between his phone call to the father of Sgt. Elor Azaria, who is currently standing trial for shooting a seriously wounded terrorist, and the calls he often makes to families of fallen soldiers.
“I am sorry if my words were misunderstood or misinterpreted,” Netanyahu said. “In no way did I seek to draw comparisons between the distress of families of fallen soldiers—distress which I am very familiar with—and the situation of other suffering parents. There is no parallel and there can be no comparison.”
During an interview with Channel 2 News aired on Saturday night, the prime minister said he did not regret conducting the telephone conversation with Charlie Azaria, adding, “I told him to have faith in the IDF, in the chief of staff, in the commanders, in our soldiers, and in our justice system.”
Asked whether he also made telephone calls to other parents of soldiers who had allegedly transgressed, Netanyahu responded: “No, but I have called many parents in distress over the fact their children were killed, or are missing or were killed and are missing. There is a lot of distress among citizens of Israel on this and I want you to understand this.
“There are countless parents who see their children—male and female soldiers—who are put in almost impossible situations. On the one hand, they need to protect themselves and on the other hand—and it is not a simple problem—need not to be light on the trigger. It isn’t easy because I was in this situation, I was in many instances, encounters or near-encounters with the enemy, and I needed to decide when I shoot and when I don’t shoot. For an officer in (the Special Forces unit) Sayeret Matkal, it wasn’t easy and I think that for any soldier it isn’t easy.”
Just hours after the interview on Saturday night, the Prime Minister's Office issued a statement attempting to clarify his remarks.
“Netanyahu did not draw a comparison between Sgt. Elor Azaria and fallen soldiers. This is a heinous attempt, a manipulation and a false representation of his words,” the statement read. “The prime minister respects the bereaved families and those of missing soldiers and is well aware of their intolerable pain.”
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu apologized Sunday morning after seemingly drawing a comparison between his phone call to the father of Sgt. Elor Azaria, who is currently standing trial for shooting a seriously wounded terrorist, and the calls he often makes to families of fallen soldiers.
“I am sorry if my words were misunderstood or misinterpreted,” Netanyahu said. “In no way did I seek to draw comparisons between the distress of families of fallen soldiers—distress which I am very familiar with—and the situation of other suffering parents. There is no parallel and there can be no comparison.”
During an interview with Channel 2 News aired on Saturday night, the prime minister said he did not regret conducting the telephone conversation with Charlie Azaria, adding, “I told him to have faith in the IDF, in the chief of staff, in the commanders, in our soldiers, and in our justice system.”
Asked whether he also made telephone calls to other parents of soldiers who had allegedly transgressed, Netanyahu responded: “No, but I have called many parents in distress over the fact their children were killed, or are missing or were killed and are missing. There is a lot of distress among citizens of Israel on this and I want you to understand this.
“There are countless parents who see their children—male and female soldiers—who are put in almost impossible situations. On the one hand, they need to protect themselves and on the other hand—and it is not a simple problem—need not to be light on the trigger. It isn’t easy because I was in this situation, I was in many instances, encounters or near-encounters with the enemy, and I needed to decide when I shoot and when I don’t shoot. For an officer in (the Special Forces unit) Sayeret Matkal, it wasn’t easy and I think that for any soldier it isn’t easy.”
Just hours after the interview on Saturday night, the Prime Minister's Office issued a statement attempting to clarify his remarks.
“Netanyahu did not draw a comparison between Sgt. Elor Azaria and fallen soldiers. This is a heinous attempt, a manipulation and a false representation of his words,” the statement read. “The prime minister respects the bereaved families and those of missing soldiers and is well aware of their intolerable pain.”
22 sept 2016
Speaking in a military court in Jaffa Wednesday, Sgt. R. from Sgt. Elor Azaria's unit testified on behalf of the defense, saying of his commanders, 'They were afraid the company was going to mutiny and they said that Elor is a liar. They presented the event as negative.'
Sergeant R., a soldier in Sgt. Elor Azaria's platoon, testified Wednesday night in court in Jaffa for the defense, saying, "I feel like my commanders brainwashed me and made me think something I know isn't right." Azaria was indicted in April for manslaughter after he was captured on camera shooting an already neutralized Palestinian terrorist, Abed al Fatah al-Sharif, in Hebron in March.
"My brigade commander is a colonel and I'm just a regular soldier. It makes me want to believe him because he's my brigade commander. This is a hard feeling for me," Sgt. R, continued.
He added that "after the incident, there were a lot of conversations with the platoon commander, the battalion commander and the brigade commander. They were afraid the company was going to mutiny and they said that Elor is a liar. They presented the event as negative."
Speaking in Azaria's defense, Sgt. R. said, "We were friends before he started his current position and we were in the same room. He is an outstanding soldier and was awarded a certificate of excellence in our last training period. Elor always helped everybody all the time."
Sgt. R. then turned to the circumstances of the incident for which Azaria was brought to trial. "I was in my position from 4:00am to 8:00am. I was supposed to be where the soldier who was stabbed was, but we switched positions so we could guard at the same time. Before I went to sleep I heard shots fired. I grabbed my weapon and I met my sergeant at the front gate. From there, we ran to the Jilber checkpoint. We got there and saw one terrorist on the ground and another who tried to run also on the ground. At this point, I started talking to the wounded soldier and he told me he was alright. I was in shock because he was stabbed and I wasn't."
The witness told the judge that concerns that the neturalized terrorist was strapped with an explosive device were genuine, thereby effectively buttressing one of Azaria's main lines of defense for his actions.
"During the incident, I was anxious because I thought I had to be in the area. I heard someone yell 'there's a bomb here, don't touch the terrorist until an engineer gets here,' and that made me think there really was a bomb," Sgt. R. said. "There was a terrorist in a black coat who was alive and moving. From my point of view, he looked like a threat. I was standing away from him and took cover until commanders came to take care of the situation."
Sergeant R., a soldier in Sgt. Elor Azaria's platoon, testified Wednesday night in court in Jaffa for the defense, saying, "I feel like my commanders brainwashed me and made me think something I know isn't right." Azaria was indicted in April for manslaughter after he was captured on camera shooting an already neutralized Palestinian terrorist, Abed al Fatah al-Sharif, in Hebron in March.
"My brigade commander is a colonel and I'm just a regular soldier. It makes me want to believe him because he's my brigade commander. This is a hard feeling for me," Sgt. R, continued.
He added that "after the incident, there were a lot of conversations with the platoon commander, the battalion commander and the brigade commander. They were afraid the company was going to mutiny and they said that Elor is a liar. They presented the event as negative."
Speaking in Azaria's defense, Sgt. R. said, "We were friends before he started his current position and we were in the same room. He is an outstanding soldier and was awarded a certificate of excellence in our last training period. Elor always helped everybody all the time."
Sgt. R. then turned to the circumstances of the incident for which Azaria was brought to trial. "I was in my position from 4:00am to 8:00am. I was supposed to be where the soldier who was stabbed was, but we switched positions so we could guard at the same time. Before I went to sleep I heard shots fired. I grabbed my weapon and I met my sergeant at the front gate. From there, we ran to the Jilber checkpoint. We got there and saw one terrorist on the ground and another who tried to run also on the ground. At this point, I started talking to the wounded soldier and he told me he was alright. I was in shock because he was stabbed and I wasn't."
The witness told the judge that concerns that the neturalized terrorist was strapped with an explosive device were genuine, thereby effectively buttressing one of Azaria's main lines of defense for his actions.
"During the incident, I was anxious because I thought I had to be in the area. I heard someone yell 'there's a bomb here, don't touch the terrorist until an engineer gets here,' and that made me think there really was a bomb," Sgt. R. said. "There was a terrorist in a black coat who was alive and moving. From my point of view, he looked like a threat. I was standing away from him and took cover until commanders came to take care of the situation."
21 sept 2016
The former Deputy Chief of the Israeli military, Uzi Dayan, testified Monday at the trial of an Israeli soldier changed with manslaughter for the shooting in the head of a wounded Palestinian who was lying wounded on the ground.
In his testimony, Dayan said the killing was justified, and should not have been investigated by military police, because they “don’t have the tools to investigate an operational incident.”
In addition, Dayan implicated himself in the killing of other unarmed or wounded Palestinians, saying, “I’ve ordered to kill terrorists just because they’re terrorists, regardless of their condition, whether they are dangerous or not.”
Dayan was not charged with any of the killings that he says he ordered as Deputy Chief of the military.
This is not the first time that an Israeli official has openly admitted that the Israeli military routinely kills unarmed Palestinians who pose no immediate threat simply because they are on a list as being ‘wanted’ for ‘terrorism’ charges.
But despite the fact that numerous Israeli officials, including the Defense Minister and the Prime Minister, have admitted to this practice, none have been charged with violations of the Fourth Geneva Convention.
The killing of unarmed civilians, even if they are suspected of crimes, is a direct violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention and other international laws.
Dayan gave his testimony at the trial of Elor Azaria, who is facing a charge of manslaughter for the killing of 21-year old Abdul-Fattah Sharif in March.
Azaria shot Sharif in the head while Sharif was lying on the ground wounded after allegedly attempting to stab an Israeli soldier. The incident was captured on video.
In his testimony, Dayan said the killing was justified, and should not have been investigated by military police, because they “don’t have the tools to investigate an operational incident.”
In addition, Dayan implicated himself in the killing of other unarmed or wounded Palestinians, saying, “I’ve ordered to kill terrorists just because they’re terrorists, regardless of their condition, whether they are dangerous or not.”
Dayan was not charged with any of the killings that he says he ordered as Deputy Chief of the military.
This is not the first time that an Israeli official has openly admitted that the Israeli military routinely kills unarmed Palestinians who pose no immediate threat simply because they are on a list as being ‘wanted’ for ‘terrorism’ charges.
But despite the fact that numerous Israeli officials, including the Defense Minister and the Prime Minister, have admitted to this practice, none have been charged with violations of the Fourth Geneva Convention.
The killing of unarmed civilians, even if they are suspected of crimes, is a direct violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention and other international laws.
Dayan gave his testimony at the trial of Elor Azaria, who is facing a charge of manslaughter for the killing of 21-year old Abdul-Fattah Sharif in March.
Azaria shot Sharif in the head while Sharif was lying on the ground wounded after allegedly attempting to stab an Israeli soldier. The incident was captured on video.
20 sept 2016
The respected journalist Amnon Abramovich was outside the Azaria trial in Jaffa when he required police intervention to extricate him from the threatening crowd; they apparently weren't aware that he received one of the IDF's highest decorations for his heroism in the Yom Kippur War.
Amnon Abramovich, the veteran journalist from Channel 2 News, went to the military court in Jaffa to cover the Elor Azaria trial on Monday and was verbally harassed by those present.
According to an eyewitness, one of the protestors outside the courthouse yelled at the journalist, "What did you do in the army? Enemy of Israel!"
When he was exiting the scene, a crowd of several dozen gathered around him and the Channel 2 news crew. They yelled at Abramovich, "Traitor!" and "Enemy of Israel!" According to the eyewitness, the police had to intervene to safely escort the journalist to his car.
The 66-year-old Abramovich served in the 600th Armored Brigade in the Yom Kippur War. He was awarded the Chief of Staff Citation ("Tzalash Ramatkal") for his service then, when, as a tank driver, he was seriously wounded, but continued to operate the tank.
Abramovich refused to speak about the incident beyond saying, "I want to thank our excellent boys in the Jaffa police."
Dayan calls for not suing soldiers over killing Palestinians
Former deputy chief of the Israeli army Uzi Dayan has called for not condemning or holding trials for soldiers who kill potential attackers or wounded Palestinians posing no threat to Israeli lives.
Dayan made these remarks on Monday at the Jaffa military court in defense of Elor Azaria, the soldier who is charged with manslaughter in the killing of a wounded Palestinian attacker in al-Khalil city last March, according to Israel's Channel 2.
The army official affirmed that he allowed soldiers during his years of service to kill Palestinians whether they were dangerous or not, and did not ask the military police to investigate killing incidents.
Azaria was caught on video shooting in cold blood a wounded Palestinian in the head as he was lying on the ground in al-Khalil on March 24.
Amnon Abramovich, the veteran journalist from Channel 2 News, went to the military court in Jaffa to cover the Elor Azaria trial on Monday and was verbally harassed by those present.
According to an eyewitness, one of the protestors outside the courthouse yelled at the journalist, "What did you do in the army? Enemy of Israel!"
When he was exiting the scene, a crowd of several dozen gathered around him and the Channel 2 news crew. They yelled at Abramovich, "Traitor!" and "Enemy of Israel!" According to the eyewitness, the police had to intervene to safely escort the journalist to his car.
The 66-year-old Abramovich served in the 600th Armored Brigade in the Yom Kippur War. He was awarded the Chief of Staff Citation ("Tzalash Ramatkal") for his service then, when, as a tank driver, he was seriously wounded, but continued to operate the tank.
Abramovich refused to speak about the incident beyond saying, "I want to thank our excellent boys in the Jaffa police."
Dayan calls for not suing soldiers over killing Palestinians
Former deputy chief of the Israeli army Uzi Dayan has called for not condemning or holding trials for soldiers who kill potential attackers or wounded Palestinians posing no threat to Israeli lives.
Dayan made these remarks on Monday at the Jaffa military court in defense of Elor Azaria, the soldier who is charged with manslaughter in the killing of a wounded Palestinian attacker in al-Khalil city last March, according to Israel's Channel 2.
The army official affirmed that he allowed soldiers during his years of service to kill Palestinians whether they were dangerous or not, and did not ask the military police to investigate killing incidents.
Azaria was caught on video shooting in cold blood a wounded Palestinian in the head as he was lying on the ground in al-Khalil on March 24.
