Doc's Talk: Archives: Lenny Ben David with the straight facts on Rachel Corrie

Monday, August 27, 2012

Archives: Lenny Ben David with the straight facts on Rachel Corrie

Rachel Corrie Trial Restarts.
Key Questions Need Repeating
[For illustrations:

http://lennybendavid.com/2010/09/rachel-corrie-trial-restarts-key.html ]
Monday, September 6, 2010

The Rachel Corrie trial restarted in Haifa yesterday. Her parents, Craig and
Cindy Corrie, are using the civil trial to confront and vilify Israel. It is
perfectly in character: in May Craig Corrie blessed the naming of one of the
Gaza flotilla ships after his daughter Rachel. She had been a member of the
Palestinian-led International Solidarity Movement, and the radical group was
of the sponsors of the Gaza flotilla.

[Later this week ISM founder Adam Shapiro will be speaking at Stanford
University. He is touted as a "co-founder of the International Solidarity
Movement (along with this wife, Huwaida Arraf), Board member of the Free
Gaza Movement, and organizer of the U.S. Boat to Gaza project."]
1. Where did the Rachel Corrie bulldozer incident take place?

Few people recall that the IDF's ground-clearing operation was carried out
only 50 meters from the Egyptian border -- near the infamous Philadelphi
road. [See map and diagram. All graphic material is from IDF sources.] Up
until Corrie's death, the IDF had uncovered more than 40 tunnels from Egypt
used to smuggle weapons and terrorists into Gaza. In recent years, after the
Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, the number of tunnels approached 1,000.
Why was the ISM trying to block the bulldozers seven years ago? Presumably,
they were attempting to protect Hamas' tunnels.
2. Couldn't the bulldozer driver see or hear Corrie?
The noise generated by the bulldozer is deafening, and Corrie had a
megaphone only at an earlier confrontation with the Israel Defense Forces.
It was not with her the afternoon she died.
The field of vision on the armored bulldozer is exceptionally limited (as
the chart on the left indicates), and the driver could not see her.
Corrie's comrades claim that she was standing in front of the bulldozer --
and she was not -- but even if she were, the driver's line of vision is
limited as the diagram shows.
The fact is, witnesses at the time of the incident reported that Corrie was
sitting.
â€œWhen the bulldozer approached a house today,â€ wrote the New York Times,
â€œMs. Corrie, who was wearing a bright orange jacket, dropped to her knees.â€
â€œThe bulldozer drove toward Rachel slowly, gathering earth in its scoop as
it went,â€ an ISM friend stated in 2003. â€œShe knelt there, she did not move.â€
Another ISM colleague related: â€œShe did not â€˜trip and fallâ€™ in front of the
bulldozer. She sat down in front of it, well in advance.â€Žâ€œ [Emphasis added.]
3. Was there a deliberate attempt by the IDF to kill Corrie, as her parents
claim?
Indeed there was a plan to escalate the confrontation between the bulldozers
and the "peace activists." But it was the ISM members who decided to
escalate, as described by Newsweek writer Joshua Hammer in a lengthy article
in Mother Jones. Why? One possible reason was because of the sexual tension
that was hurting their relations with the local Palestinians.
"An anonymous letter was circulating," Hammer reported, "which referred to
Corrie and the other expatriate women in Rafah as 'nasty foreign bitches'
whom 'our Palestinian young men are following around.' That morning [of
Corrieâ€™s death], the ISM team tried to devise a strategy to counteract the
letterâ€™s effects. 'We all had a feeling that our role was too passive,' said
one ISM member. 'We talked about how to engage the Israeli military.' That
morning, team members made a number of proposals that seemed designed only
to aggravate the problem. 'The idea was to more directly challenge the
Israeli military dominance using our international status,' said the ISMer."
4. But why was Corrie singled out?
She wasn't. At least two ISMers had to be pulled out from under the
bulldozers' blades after they started acting in accordance with their more
aggressive policy. Newsweekâ€™s Hammer reported on â€œJennyâ€™sâ€ close call: "An
Irish peace activist named Jenny was nearly run down by a D9. 'The bulldozerâ€™s
coming, the earth is burying my feet, my legs, Iâ€™ve got nowhere to run, and
I thought, â€˜This is out of control,â€™ she told me. 'Another activist pulled
me up and out of the way at the last minute.'â€
5. Does anyone believe this story that the ISMers were suicidal?
They should believe that the International Solidarity Movement is homicidal.
The ISM has a long record of putting its members, particularly young Western
women, into harm's way. Some are unbelievably naive and just plain dumb.
Like Corrie, they were encouraged to confront the Israel Defense Forces. Not
surprisingly, some were injured and killed:
* On 2 April 2002, Australian Kate Edwards was shot and wounded in Beit Jala
near Jerusalem from where Palestinians were firing on the Jewish
neighborhood of Gilo. She and other volunteers marched on Israeli lines to
protect their Palestinian friends. The clearly logic-challenged Edwards
complained, "I never thought for a moment that they would fire live
ammunition at us."
* In April 2002, Irish ISM member Caomhe Butterly served as a human shield
in Yasir Arafat's compound in Ramallah during the intifada. Later, on
November 22, 2002, she inserted herself as a human shield again and was
wounded during an IDF operation in Jenin. One of her admirers described how
Butterly "would walk up to a tank and place her hand over the muzzle."
Butterly was an organizer and spokesperson aboard the 2010 Gaza flotilla.
* April 13, 2003, ISM member Thomas Hurndall was shot and killed when he
challenged an Israeli tank force in Gaza.
* On April 24, 2010 Bianca Zammit, a Maltese national, joined a group of
Palestinians who charged the security fence between Gaza and Israel. That
area of the fence has often seen terrorist attacks. Zammit was shot through
the thigh by a sniper, but was back to her comrades an hour later (pictured,
right).
* On May 31, 2010, Emily Henochowicz, an American Jewish ISMer, lost her eye
after she was hit by a tear gas grenade that ricocheted off a highway
divider during a violent demonstration near Qalandia in the West Bank. She
had been a regular at Palestinian demonstrations at Sheikh Jarrah, Bilin,
Nilin and Nabi Saleh.
As the Haifa trial proceeds, it is clear that the International Solidarity
Movement should be the one on trial for reckless endangerment. Yet, when
young Western women are injured, arrested or killed, the media pays
attention.
Maybe Rachel Corrie wasn't so dumb, after all. She wrote to her mother about
the possibility of an American activist's death as a propaganda tool: "You
just can't imagine it unless you see it, and even then you are always well
aware that your experience is not at all the reality: what with the
difficulties the Israeli Army would face if they shot an unarmed U.S.
citizen."

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk