Tweet
The two-phase civil lawsuit, brought by Cindy and Craig Corrie against the Israeli Defense Forces and Defense Ministry, seeking a judgement of wrongful death in the matter of their daughter Rachel, near Rafah, Gaza, on March 16, 2003. resumes today in Haifa. In this phase, the defendant government will seek to rebut the plaintiff’s case, presented last spring.
According to Jack Khoury (how’s that for irony), writing for Haaretz:
Among the witnesses to appear today, tomorrow and after the holidays, are two Military Police investigators who in March 2003 decided, together with the southern district prosecutor, to close the case. The state will also present an expert witness who will give his opinion as to the bulldozer driver’s field of vision.
The state submitted 13 affidavits, including that of the driver who ran down Corrie, his commander and other military officials involved in the case.
As in just about everything having to do with Rachel Corrie’s death, our American media will not cover this trial more than it has to. At least, unlike Furkan Dogan, our press won’t continually list Rachel as being a foreigner in their page B-25 coverage’s terse, short, pro-Israeli paragraphs.
Jack Khoury’s article, just posted, is already eliciting the predictable comments at Haaretz:
Can the driver of the bulldozer sue the Corries for emotional damage. Can you imagine the horror he has to deal with every day to know she threw herself in front of his bulldozer.
I hope to blog about this at The Seminal throughout the second phase of the suit, even though I’m committed to keeping somewhat aloof to I/P issues here for a while. I covered it here during the first phase. The Rachel Corrie Foundation’s site offers good coverage, and Haaretz has been the most even-handed of the Israeli media on this important issue, so far.
A summation of documents having to do with the first phase can be found at the niche at the Rachel Corrie Foundation devoted to the trial. Before the civil suit began, I felt strongly that Corrie had died in an unfortunate event. But the patterns of IDF communication uncovered during the first phase indicate to me that she was intentionally killed.
28 Comments
Thanks so much for staying on top of this, ET. I still can’t get over the insane cruelty of wingnut haters selling “got syrup?” t-shirts on cafepress a few years ago (a coded sick reference to Rachel being flattened like a pancake). Or the cowardice of US theatres toward presenting the play “My Name is Rachel Corrie.”
I had never heard of that, but there are some real sickos out there — just dreadful
Left the fool a comment.
Thanks for this, and from my experience watching parts of the Holy Land Foundation trial, my astonishment at the media’s reluctance to cover events that do not show Israel in a good light grows with each proof of that failure. Russert’s Rule that you get access by never speaking truth when it’s offensive doesn’t quite stretch that far.
Any idea how the trial will go?
Not really but if history is an indicator the court will find it was all Rachel’s fault.
Who knows what will happen?
When talking with my younger friends, I often mention Rachel Corrie.
What a difference between the care and conviction of Ms. Corrie and the cruel jollies of Trip Emmer and pal from the subject of Phoenix Woman’s last night thread.
Indeed. Alan Rickman was so moved by her diaries that he worked to create a play based on them.
From the trial today (emphasis added):
Death of anyone is a tragedy – and death of the young even more so -
But you mention “IDF communication uncovered ” – is there a communication by a commander that says “keep going forward” to the driver? – or a “I got her as per orders” by the driver? Or is it just folks that are scared over the death and planing a cover-up – a Pat Tillman moment?
Surely you jest. Not a remote chance. It was prededitated and the order came from the highest of government circles. If you don’t believe me, just wait and see how many commenters will make that statement over and over again ad nauseam. That being said, the death of Rachel Corrie is surely a tragedy that was completely unnecessary.
Should be premeditated. My bad.
Considering the depth and intensity of your concern for the victim, as well as your total lack of bias which allows you to see the incident from all points of view, perhaps you could explain for us the IDF response at the scene to the ‘accident’.
From an eyewitness account:
A cynic might say she died merely for a house. An intellectual could say she died for an idea. Or then again a patriot could say she sacrified herself for the Palestinian People. Any way you cut it, she’s dead. But she made a decision, and either knowingly accepted death, or unknowingly misjudged how the event would play out. Once again, her death was unnecessary and a tragedy. I did not know her; I would not have done what she did; and her cause is not one I would sacrifice my life over. Anything else?
Just one other thing.
You totally ignored (avoided?) the question I asked:
If I were interested in what you would sacrifice your life for, I would have asked. I’ve gone over my prior entry, and find the question nowhere in there.
What question would I have to ask to get you to answer the one I did ask?
Knowing you, doremus, that was a great comment…! It was a tragedy, thru and thru…!
Papau,
Here is a link to the trial documents made public so far. As far as somebody giving a command such as you suggest, there is obviously a lot of IDF material that has so far not been released, including voice transmissions and videos.
A weird Aside:
Robert Stacy McCain, writing a lot of inaccurate stuff about me yesterday, refers to Rachel Corrie as “St. Pancake.”
The far far right and militant Zionists have made hundreds of fairly disgusting caricatures of Rachel Corrie being killed by a bulldozer. i’m not going to link, but “The Other” McCain’s resurrection of this image on the first day of Corrie’s trial is particularly appalling.
Dayam, racking up quite a few ‘Badges of Honor’ there ET…! Wear ‘em proudly…! ;-)
Mods: I accept the reality that sometimes I win and sometimes I lose. I accept my wins with a modicum of humility and accept my loses with resignation and no hard feelings. I know that you all have a tough job and are dedicated to protecting the FDL brand. Again, I appreciate the very hard and good work that you all do. With the Warmest of Regards, doremus35
I’m kind of new here, and I seem to be missing something.
Who was that guy?
Ok, you strike me as a rather stand up type of guy. So, here goes. The moderators(aka mods)monitor the web site and critique comments and moderate comments but also have the power and do on occasion delete comments they judge inappropriate or not in the best interest of the FDL “brand’. I sent you a response to your comment #19 that I thought was appropriate but apparently the mods thought was a bit over the top. So they deleted it. I then responded to their deletion that I though they had been a bit heavy handed and then they deleted my critique of their deletion of my comment. This does happen. My next reponse was #21 which the mods did allow to ‘go on the air’ so to speak. But I must say the mods have a tough job and I respect their judgement because it cuts both ways. Regarding my comment, I do want you to know that regardless of our differences of opinion I was being very sincere when I said that the death of Rachel Corrie was an unnecessary tragedy.
I totally misconstrued your #21, which I took to be your swan-song and farewell address to the troops. Thank you for clarifying matters. I deeply regret that the moderator deprived me of your…I don’t doubt it for a minute…devastating riposte and thrust, and possibly of your equally devastating answer to my (as yet unanswered) question. I do not know if the driver of the tractor told about in #26 was a settler or a soldier, but I do note that the boy was taken to an indigenous…not a Jewish…hospital.
But now, you raise another questioin. If the death of Rachel Corrie was an unnecessary tragedy, what would be on your short-list of necessary tragedies?
More details emerging from the first day of the trial (emphases added):
The trial resumes at 9:00 a.m. Monday Haifa time.
Anyone reading through the transcripts and/or findings of the first phase of this suit and what is emerging now, who then continues to believe the U.S. government should allow the Israeli Defense Forces and Defense Ministry to be the ones conducting the investigation into the death of American citizen Furkan Dogan – which is exactly what your congress and senate have demanded your president actually do – please comment on that here.
It’s probably been told here many times before, but what the hell.
Why will Israel never agree to become the 51st state?
Because then they would have only two senators.
Here’s another. Too bad he was just a palestinian.
Nablus boy dies after hit by tractor
Published yesterday 16:35