More comment from Cindy and Craig Corrie, on the Israeli judge’s verdict that neither the state nor the army bears any responsibility for the murder of their daughter Rachel.  Thanks to Leehee Rothschild and the Mondoweiss blog for this:

While not holding their hopes high, the family is intent on pursuing the case and appealing to the Israeli Supreme Court. The Corries are seeking to draw attention to the story through the process and they feel obliged to continue promoting Rachel’s message of “building connections” through all possible means, among which the legal system is but one.  [MR: same reason I’m sharing the story here.  Please pass it on.]

Cindy and Craig Corrie.  (Photo: Canadian Broadcasting Corporation.)

“We started this trial seeking truth, but we also seek changes,” Cindy said.  Throughout the conference Rachel’s family continually stressed that their struggle for acknowledgment is inseparable from the Palestinian struggle.  They put Rachel’s presence in Rafah that day in the context of 16,000 who had lost their homes in the prior months, as well as the family of Rachel’s Palestinian friends, amongst them children, who were hiding behind the walls of the house that Rachel was protecting.  The Corries emphasized that many more Palestinians killed by the Israeli military cannot seek justice in the Israeli court systems, as they do, and that their struggle for justice is done in the name of Palestinians as well.

The family also highlighted, as did Israeli activists in a protest vigil outside the Tel Aviv court, that Israel’s impunity from international law must be ended.  Cindy Corrie stated, “My family and I personally, as well as the Rachel Corrie Foundation, are in full support of BDS [boycott, divestment, sanctions]”, as a means to this end.  She specifically voiced her support for the campaign targeting Caterpillar, manufacturers of the D9 bulldozer that killed Rachel, with whom the family has tried to communicate throughout the years, to no avail.

In the final question at the press conference, a reporter asked the Corries how they feel about the judge’s comment that Rachel should have moved out of the bulldozer’s way.

Cindy Corrie replied, “I don’t think that Rachel should have moved.  I think we should all have been standing there with her.”

In a Tel Aviv courthouse today, Judge Oded Gershon, a former military judge, ruled that the State of Israel bears no responsibility in the death of Rachel Corrie.

Rachel Corrie, Gaza, March 16, 2003

On March 16, 2003, Corrie, an American citizen, was crushed to death by an Israeli military Caterpillar D9-R bulldozer as she joined other activists in protesting the demolition of Palestinian homes in Rafah, Gaza.  She was 23.

After an Israeli army investigation predictably exonerated the soldiers involved, Rachel’s parents Cindy and Craig Corrie launched a wrongful death suit in 2005.  It charges the State of Israel with responsibility for Rachel’s killing and failure to conduct a credible investigation in the case. Apparently even the U.S. government, Israel’s most faithful backer, agrees. Last Friday The Guardian UK reported that Dan Shapiro, the US ambassador to Israel, told the Corrie family two weeks ago that the U.S. government “did not believe the Israeli military investigation had been ‘thorough, credible and transparent.'”

In his ruling, judge Oded Gershon said, “I reject the suit.  There is no justification to demand the state pay any damages.”  Calling Corrie’s death a “regrettable accident”, he said the state was not responsible because the incident had occurred during what he termed a war-time situation.

He added that the soldiers had done their utmost to keep people away from the site.  “She (Corrie) did not distance herself from the area, as any thinking person would have done.”

Though it was anticipated that the judge would whitewash the Israeli military, still his arrogant disregard for human rights and international law is a shock.

Cindy and Craig Corrie commented: “We are deeply saddened and troubled by what we heard today in the court of Judge Oded Gershon. This was a bad day, not only for us, but for human rights, for humanity, the rule of law, and the country of Israel.  From the beginning, it was clear that there was a system to protect the military and soldiers, to provide them impunity.  This extends to the courts.  The diplomatic process failed us. The Israeli court system demonstrated that it failed us too.  Rachel was a human being who deserved accountability, and we as her family deserve that too.”

The Corrie family’s attorney Hussein Abu Hussein commented, “We knew from the beginning that we had an uphill battle to get truthful answers and justice, but we are convinced that this verdict distorts the strong evidence presented in court, and contradicts fundamental principles of international law with regard to protection of human rights defenders.  In denying justice in Rachel Corrie’s killing, this verdict speaks to the systemic failure to hold the Israeli military accountable for continuing violations of basic human rights.”

In the United States, Jewish Voice for Peace also condemned the verdict.  “This verdict reflects the impunity of the Israeli army and the deficient investigation undertaken by Israel after Rachel’s death… JVP joins the Rachel Corrie Foundation in urging concerned activists in the US to mark the trial verdict with actions to end the housing demolitions that deny Palestinians the basic human right of being secure in their own homes.  We urge people to visit the local offices of retirement fund TIAA-CREF [a huge US pension fund management firm for people in academic, medical, cultural, governmental and research fields] to deliver a letter remembering Rachel Corrie and drawing attention to Israel’s policy of home demolitions, frequently carried out using Caterpillar bulldozers.

“While TIAA-CREF recently dropped Caterpillar from their social choice funds, they continue to invest over $1 billion in Caterpillar in their general funds.  Jewish Voice for Peace is the founding member of the national coordinating committee of the We Divest campaign demanding that TIAA-CREF divest from companies like Caterpillar that are profiting from the Israeli occupation.”

Omar Barghouti of the international BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions) movement added, “Given that Israel’s courts, like their South African counterparts during apartheid, have systematically and consistently been a reliable pillar of Israeli occupation, colonialism and apartheid, Israel’s war crimes and crimes against humanity ought to be prosecuted in international courts where justice has a chance to see the day of light.

“This should also convince anyone who still needed to be convinced that without effective BDS against Israel it will never comply with international law.  This was the lesson of South Africa.”

The forces arrayed against Palestinians are overwhelming.  Often they seem, as they are meant to seem, invincible.

History suggests that they are not.

For people in other countries who seek a just peace in Palestine-Israel, one of very few effective levers we have is BDS – boycott, divestment and sanctions.

Last week the United Church of Canada took a huge step forward in this vital arena.  The following op-ed by Peter Larson details how momentous it is.  Larson is Vice-President of the National Council on Canada-Arab Relations and chair of its Education committee on Israel/Palestine.  The op-ed was published August 21 in Embassy Magazine, an influential Canadian foreign policy publication.  Peter Larson:

The recent decision by an overwhelming majority of the nearly 400 delegates of the United Church of Canada to support a boycott of goods from the illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank was significant in four important ways.  [MR: Boycott is one of several initiatives to be launched decided in the final resolution.  The document, not long, is well worth reading in detail.]

First, it’s remarkable that the Church has dared to approach this issue at all.  For too long, the Israel-Palestine issue has been stuck in what seems like a shouting match between those who support Israel unconditionally and those who are principally concerned about the fate of the Palestinians. Even trying to raise the subject in public often evokes reflexive cries of “anti-Semitism”.  But the United Church has shown that it is possible for Canadians to take a thoughtful, respectful, and fact-based approach to what is one of the thorniest and perhaps emotion-laden public policy issues for Canada and most other western countries.

Second, the decision was so overwhelming. Many had feared that the debate would split the 600,000 member church, causing irreparable damage to one of Canada’s most respected institutions.  Delegates were painfully aware that some groups were already painting the report as “unfair” and “unbalanced”.  They also knew that many of their own members were still very uncomfortable voicing public criticism of Israel.  Yet in the end, the vote was not even close.  A large majority supported the resolution.

Third, the Church’s deliberate and thoughtful process was respectful of all and every opinion. In fact, a similar motion was rejected by the Church’s General Council three years ago, in the face of strident opposition from various outside groups and concern among its members.  Faced with doubt, the delegates decided to set up a Working Group to give detailed study to the issue, which was instructed to report back to this General Council.

That working group travelled across Canada consulting church members and various outside partners including Muslim and Jewish organizations.  In addition, it made a two-week trip to the Israel and the Palestinian territories to see the situation on the ground first hand and meet with both Palestinians and Israelis.  (The working group was denied access to Gaza by the Israeli authorities, so the report’s coverage of Gaza is limited.)

After much research and investigation, the working group submitted its report and proposal for consideration to this year’s week-long General Council in Ottawa.

In essence, the report concluded that it was a moral duty for the Church to take a stand against Israel’s occupation of Palestinian land, and against the expansion of settlements as key obstacles to finding peace between Israelis and Palestinians.  These policies, it was pointed out on several occasions, are fully consistent with what is Canada’s official policy, though it is mostly ignored by senior government ministers.

The discussion on the report took place over several days, with many pauses for prayer and reflection.  Countless corrections and amendments were suggested – some were approved, some not.  United Church Moderator Mardi Tindal was unfailingly polite, respectful and thoughtful as she steered the discussion to a near unanimous conclusion.

The discussion on Israel/Palestine now moves back to hundreds of United Church congregations across Canada.  The report of the working group and the hours of intense discussion during the General Council have been a valuable educational process for the 400 or so UCC “commissioners”.  They return home with a much deeper understanding of the complicated Israel-Palestine issue and strengthened in their conviction that supporting the boycott of settlement products is neither unfair nor an act of anti-Semitism.

In short, the United Church of Canada has succeeded in bringing discussion about Israel/Palestine into the mainstream of Canadian moral and political conversation.

Consideration of what Canadians should do in the face of a 45-year old occupation, the illegal destruction of Palestinian homes, the suffering of over 4 million Palestinian refugees, or even what Canadians think about Israel as ‘a Jewish State’ in which Jews have many rights not shared by its non-Jewish citizens, has begun to expand from protest demonstrations to serious public discussion and policy change.

How long will it be before such an informed discussion reaches the ultimate public policy forum: Parliament itself?

This is a small story, happens every day.  But still it needs to be told.

(Photo: Jonathan B Young)

First the basic news item, sent by Israeli activist Dorothy Naor, then a little more personal detail about Hani Amer, the Palestinian farmer mentioned in the story.  Dorothy took me to meet Hani, at the farm he is now about to lose.

Ma’an News agency, July 30, 2012:

“Israeli occupation authorities have started to install a fence around the southern side of Azzun Atma in Qalaqiliya in the northern West Bank.

A two-meter high spiral fence was installed on about 1,500 meters running from the settlement of Oranit to the crossroads of Kafr Qasim and route 505, according to Abdul-Karim Ayyoub, the secretary of the local council.  ‘With this fence, Israel is isolating the area known as Beer al-Shilla, the artesian well, and about 800-1000 dunams (over 8,000 square meters) of fruit and olive groves.’

Hani Amer, who is in charge of the artesian well, said that neither the well nor the groves could be accessed anymore, as the Israelis have not left openings or gates leading to the well or to the dirt roads.”

That’s the story.  A friend of Hani’s, Dorothy Naor sent it, along with her own comment: “Apparently Hani and family are losing their lands and their wells to the fence, which cuts them off from their land.  Hani lives in Mas’ha, but his family lands are in Azzun Atma — used to be a 5 minute drive, now it takes an hour or more due to the road having been taken over by Jewish colonists, with no Palestinians allowed.”

The Amer family have already endured a long series of assaults by settlers and soldiers.  On a day-trip into the occupied West Bank, Dorothy Naor introduced me to Hani.  I wrote of our encounter in Our Way to Fight, at the farm he is now about to lose:

We [Dorothy and I] clamber over the military barrier, continue on foot, then climb onto the roof of a small outbuilding surrounded by olive trees.  At midday the air is still and baking hot.  A sparse woody vine offers thin but welcome shade.  Among the silver-grey olive leaves I see the precious fruit, still green but tinged with blue, a month before harvest.  Then Hani arrives in a rusty Toyota that’s burning oil.

He’s broad and sturdy, walks heavily, supported by a stick.  Black hair under a white cotton cap, mustache on a sun-browned face deeply etched by weather and history.  Hard hands, a gentle grip.  We set out three plastic chairs on the roof.

I ask how long he has farmed.  “All my life,” he says, “like my father, my grandfather and before.  The Israelis make it harder all the time.  I’m only 51, but I’ve seen more destruction in my lifetime than you would in 1000 years living somewhere else.  The only thing that doesn’t change is the olive trees.  They are still here, thanks to Allah.”

What does he grow?  “Olives, figs, apples, grapes, avocadoes, lemons, clementines, peppers, cucumbers, tomatoes.”  Where does he sell them?  “Nablus, Qalqilya.  It’s hard to get there – you need permits, and sometimes you get them, sometimes you don’t, so transport is very expensive.  With the fence it’s also difficult to get workers for the farm, often they can’t get here.”

An ancient farmer in a faded grey djellabah emerges from the olive grove, on a wagon pulled by a donkey.  Marhaba, he and Hani call to each other, hello.  He needs water.  Hani replies that he doesn’t have any, but he’s working on it.

I ask Hani if water is getting scarce here, as I’ve heard.  He nods.  “For the past ten years it’s drier than it used to be – last winter there was hardly any rain.  A few more years like this and there won’t be any water left to pump.”  [MR: He refers here to the artesian well that the Israelis are now preparing to steal.]

Here the weather is shared, but not the water.  According to a 2009 study by the World Bank, Israel controls all the water sources, but allocates to Palestinians only 20 percent of the water.  It is forbidden for Palestinians to drill new wells, forcing them to buy water if they can from the Israeli national water company, Mekorot, at highly inflated rates.  The World Health Organization reports that water consumption in many parts of the West Bank has fallen well below basic needs.

Dorothy tells Hani that we have to move on.  She wants to bring a group from Austria to meet him next week, would that be alright?  “Beseder,” he says, Hebrew for okay.  I ask him, does he get tired of telling his story to foreigners year after year?  “It’s easier for me,” he says.  “This way I get my pain out, instead of keeping it to myself.”

For more on the Amer family, this short video is a good place to start.

A small story, happens every day in occupied Palestine.  But still it needs to be told.  Please pass it on.

Vast clouds of propaganda obscure reality on the ground in Palestine-Israel.  But now and then, through accident or arrogance (as in the New York Times op-ed described below), the clouds part and, for a moment, stark reality can be seen.

Here is such a moment, a revelation vividly caught by Ilene Cohen, and published on the excellent Mondoweiss website:

Heartfelt thanks (truly) to the New York Times for doing a public service by publishing this op-ed by Dani Dayan, the essential manifesto of the current state of Israeli colonialism, stripped of any pretense: one state in all of Palestine, run by the Jews in perpetuity, with a basket of limited rights for the lucky subject people – if they behave themselves.

And forget about the “right of return of Palestinians to Palestine,” the sine qua non of the so-called homeland of the Palestinian people.  NB: I’m not speaking of Israel.  Dayan makes clear: Greater Israel (i.e., what others call the occupied territories) will not allow itself to be overrun by returning Palestinians).  That’s out of the question.  The bizarre Israeli concept of democracy rests on controlling the demographic threat such that there must never be a Palestinian majority in the one state.  So long as Jews are the majority, the thinking goes, they may in good conscience oppress the minority.  That is the meaning of majoritarian democracy (also known as ethnocracy) as understood by Israeli Jews; a bill of rights protecting all does not figure in to this system.

Author Dani Dayan is not a crank in the sense of being a wild-eyed outlier.  Rather, he is the chairman of the settler council [MR: he lives in Maale Shomron, an Israeli colony in the occupied West Bank] in the “Jewish Communities in Judea and Samaria” — to the rest of us aka the occupied Palestinian territories.  He speaks truth to (1) the leadership of the Western world, too cowardly ever to challenge the voracious Israeli appetite for Lebensraum [MR: German for “living space,” the term was a central component of Nazi ideology, and served as justification  for Nazi Germany to remove other peoples, making way for a Greater Germany]; Dayan speaks truth to (2) all those Jewish organizations that supported Israeli aggression and colonialism through thick and thin in the name of a “two-state solution” that was being obviated by the very acts they supported; and he speaks truth to (3) all those individual Jews who have mouthed the two-state lies themselves while also denying the aggression and colonialism to critics.  I know plenty of the number 3’s myself, and I know that many of you do, too.

There are many in the Jewish world—the Adelson types, the Malcolm Hoenlein types, the Mort Klein (ZOA – Zionists of America) types, the AIPAC [American Israel Public Affairs Committee] types, most of the Orthodox Jewish world – who were already on board with the apartheid program.  But for the faux liberals—the JStreet types—this will be uncomfortable indeed, as playing pretend has been their stock in trade.

But the mask has been removed, revealing the ugly face of Israeli colonialism for all to see. The time for denial has ended, because this, then, is the dystopian vision of the single state of Greater Israel, in which the Palestinian population will live in its bantustans under the oppressive thumb of the Jewish overlords as Israeli Jewish colonists expand their illegal reach to every corner of Palestine, what the rest of the world considers the OPT (occupied Palestinian territories).  The solution (Lebensraum) to the Israeli housing crisis lies on stolen land.

This is the apartheid one-state solution of which Jimmy Carter warned in Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid (2006).  No doubt all recall that he was excoriated as an anti-Semite for daring to utter the words. Now we should welcome this bald, if grotesque, presentation by Dani Dayan because it is indeed the reality on the ground and it is time that everyone knew it.

Let the foolish Europeans sort this one out, for they know well that Dayan expresses the reality that comes out of Netanyahu’s government and yet, as we read not two days ago in the Guardian, the EU is piling up the presents it intends to heap on Israel—for bad behavior, apparently. Presumably President Obama, if re-elected, will not embarrass himself with any more talk of two states.  And presumably the Israelis advocating Israeli unilateralism to get toward a two-state solution (that is, of course, totally unfair to the Palestinians), e.g., Blue White Future, or Shaul Mofaz’s absurd 60 percent plan, will realize that they have been exposed as frauds by the settler movement and the government that backs it.

The question now is how the “world” – states, organizations, individuals – will choose to go forward.  Will they continue to support the one apartheid state?

One thing is for sure: the growing grass roots movement to end the occupation, including BDS, will continue to expand its push for justice and equality for all (in this case for Palestinians, who are the ones lacking justice and equality).  And that effort is looking more and more as if it must be in the context of the one-state reality created by the Jewish colonial project – only without the apartheid.

Dani Dayan pulls no punches: it’s there in blue and white for all to see.