This entry was written by Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) Senior Staff Attorney, Katherine Gallagher, who was in Haifa to observe proceedings in the civil case filed by the family of Rachel Corrie against the State of Israel. On October 21, 2010 she observed the testimony of the driver of the Caterpillar D9R military bulldozer that killed Rachel Corrie and below are her reflections. Katherine was part of the legal team in Corrie v. Caterpillar, in which CCR represented Rachel Corrie's parents and Palestinian families in a case brought against Caterpillar for aiding and abetting war crimes by providing theD9 bulldozers to Israel knowing they were used to unlawfully demolish homes in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
Transparent. Credible. Thorough.
These were the words used by Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in 2003 when setting forth the terms under which the investigation into the killing of Rachel Corrie would be conducted to George W. Bush, one day after Rachel was crushed to death by an Israeli military bulldozer. Both the scene at the courtroom in Haifa, where the Corrie family's civil case is proceeding against the state of Israel, and the testimony of the bulldozer driver who killed Rachel, expose the hollowness of those words.
Transparent? First, the scene at the courthouse. I arrived early with the Corrie family and their legal team. When we got to the court room, there was already a crowd gathered outside. Entering the court room, I was struck first by the small size of the room assigned to a case that has received significant international attention: there were only two rows that could each comfortably fit about 14 people.
Nearly half the seats were already taken by young members of the Israeli military, in uniform, and people we heard were from the Israeli Ministry of Defense. We quickly secured seats for the family and their translators, a team made up largely of dedicated volunteers as the proceedings are conducted in Hebrew and no translation is provided by the court. I was lucky to be in the court room, squeezed in between a journalist and shared translator. Many of the journalists, human rights observers and members of the public who had come to attend the proceedings were denied entry into the court room.
The one break in the four-and-a-half hour testimony of the bulldozer driver led to a chaotic scene with people trying to get into the court room and Israeli security officers pushing the lines of people back, as they decided who could come into the court room and who would be left in the hall. Sarah Corrie Simpson, Rachel's sister, had to intervene to secure entry for the family's translators.
Everyone asked the same question: why hasn't a bigger court room been provided for this case -- or at least for the testimony that the court knew many people would come to hear? When members of the press, human rights observers and the general public cannot watch the proceedings, it is hard to describe the process as transparent.
Next, the makeshift screen. Two mismatched screens that looked like they had been borrowed from the dressing-room of a clothes store and a hospital room were secured together on the right side of the courtroom. Following a court order granting the request of the State of Israel for protective measures, the bulldozer driver would testify from behind to hide his identity from the court's visitors - including the Corrie family. An Israeli journalist who regularly covers court proceedings involving the military remarked that she had never seen anyone testify under such measures.
Because of the screen, the lawyers' and the judge's gaze and attention was focused on a part of the court room that only they could see. We, in the audience, felt very much "outside" of the proceedings, privy to only half of the story.
These extraordinary protective measures granted to the witness known only as "Y.F." denied the public the opportunity to assess the credibility of the witness as he testified to what happened on March 16, 2003, the day Rachel was killed. It also denied the Corrie family the opportunity to see the bulldozer driver's facial expressions and body language as he testified, allowing them only to hear a muffled voice speaking words that they heard through a translator. Cindy Corrie, Rachel's mother, said that one of the saddest aspects of the day was the words that she heard expressed no sign of remorse.
Credible? Y.F.'s testimony was often confused and at points lacked credibility. A 38-year-old who immigrated to Israel from Russia in 1995 and said he learned Hebrew on his own after he arrived, Y.F. appeared to have difficulty with Hebrew and struggled to read the affidavit he signed less than six months ago. He also said he could not remember basic facts, such as the date of Rachel's killing or time of day it happened.
At times during the lengthy cross-examination by the Corrie's lawyer, Hussein Abu Hussein, Y.F. contradicted his own testimony, contradicted statements he had made to the military police in 2003, contradicted his signed affidavit and contradicted testimony given by other witnesses called by Israel.
Notably, however, Y.F. confirmed on multiple occasions that Rachel's body was between his bulldozer and a mound of dirt - and not hidden behind the mound of dirt. This testimony corroborates testimony about the location of Rachel's body after she was killed given by four international witnesses in March, and it is also consistent with photographic evidence.
Thorough? What struck me was how often Y.F. said "I wasn't asked that" when asked by Abu Hussein why an important piece of the information he testified to was not in any of the former statements he gave or the affidavit he signed. Many questions -- key questions, it seemed -- were not asked of Y.F. by the military police investigators charged with conducted a "thorough" investigation.
I appreciate having had the opportunity to witness the often chaotic rhythm of the proceedings and the way in which they unfolded: the detail pressed for in the cross-examinations and the answers given, the demeanor of the judge and manner in which he conducted the proceedings, the lawyering styles of the attorneys representing Israel. But my experience at the Haifa District Court was ultimately a very frustrating one. I left the court room convinced that the military investigation that led to the swift conclusion that Rachel's death was an accident for which no one should be held accountable was anything but "thorough, credible and transparent." I also left the court house deeply skeptical about the prospects for meaningful accountability any time soon. And this is of great concern in light of the many civilian deaths in the Occupied Palestinian Territories and other violations of international law that have so far been met with impunity, rather than accountability.
The Corrie case will continue on November 4th. In the stop-start of a case that has lasted 5 ½ years, and has had testimony heard over the course of seven months (though only 11 actual court dates), the Corries will remain in Israel through at least the next court date currently scheduled after that - November 15th. The court will decide on November 4th whether it will hear the final days of testimony in close succession, thereby minimizing the emotional and financial costs incurred by the Corrie family by the drawn-out schedule.
For more information on the on-going trial in Israel, see http://rachelcorriefoundation.org/trial, and check the CCR website for more information on Corrie v. Caterpillar.
Follow Vincent Warren on Twitter: www.twitter.com/@VinceWarren
Soldiers in the tank yelled obscenities at us, and told us to leave. They fired a few warning shots at the ground, and then fired a teargas canister. The wind blew the gas east of us; it never came close to a single activist. After a few more minutes of this confrontation, the bulldozers began driving east together along the border strip, and we thought they might have finally given up. Just in case, five of the activists walked on the Palestinian land, following the bulldozers. The other activist and I came down out of our houses. He joined the others, and I joined Rachel who had stayed with the tank in order to speak to the soldiers over the megaphone. They requested that she approach the tank, but she refused due their rude and aggressive behavior."
http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article1284.shtml
But news interviews with Ms. Corrie’s friends at the time tell a different story.
Immediately after the accident, the Israel Resource News Agency (IRNA) asked to speak with the spokesman of International Solidarity Movement Mike Shaik, and was referred to Lynn Clausen, a 24-year old resident of Washington from the Christians Peacemakers Team based in Hebron, which trains the International Solidarity Movement (ISM) volunteers.
The IRNA was then referred by Mr. Shaik and Ms. Clausen to Ms. Corrie’s friends who were with her at the time she was killed.
Ms. Corrie’s friend Joe Smith described how she sat on a mound of dirt facing the IDF bulldozer making its way to the house it was about to demolish.
“Rachel had two options,” Mr. Smith said. “When the bulldozer started to dig in the dirt pile, the pile started to move, and she could have rolled sideways quickly or fallen backwards to avoid being hit. But Rachel leaned forward to climb to the top of the dirt pile. The bulldozer’s digging drew her downward, and its driver could not see her anymore. So, without lifting the scoop, he turned backward and she was already underneath the blade.”
http://thebulletin.us/articles/2010/03/12/news/world/doc4b9a67373fea4710037763.txt
"The bulldozer continued driving forward headed straight for Rachel. When it got so close that it was moving the earth beneath her, she climbed onto the pile of rubble being pushed by the bulldozer. She got so high onto it that she was at eye-level with the cab of the bulldozer. Her head and upper torso were above the bulldozer's blade, and the bulldozer driver and co-operator could clearly see her. Despite this, he continued forward, which pulled her legs into the pile of rubble, and pulled her down out of view of the driver. If he'd stopped at this point, he may have only broken her legs, but he continued forward, which pulled her underneath the bulldozer. "
http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article1284.shtml
done with this avi. totally done.
"It would be far more accurate to describe the West Bank and Gaza Strip as "disputed territories" to which both Israelis and Palestinians have claims. As U.S. Ambassador to the UN Madeleine Albright stated in March 1994: "We simply do not support the description of the territories occupied by Israel in the 1967 War as occupied Palestinian territory.""
http://www.jcpa.org/jl/vp470.htm
Although he various positions of the world's government's may have changed (in both directions, sometimes over multiple instances) from time to time; from regime to regime (and sometimes based merely on the spot price of crude oil), Israel rightly resists the pressure to change with them.
Rachel Corrie was attempting not only to save a shanty-house but to change (reverse) Israeli military policy. Because . . . had she been successful, a few hundred other 'Rachel Corries' would have very likely begun interfering with other IDF actions. In that respect, I for one do not consider the question of whether the Cat driver saw her or not as dispositive to the controversy.
If I ever enter a hot war zone and put myself between an armored earth-mover and its mission, the driver has my permission (blessing) to run me over. He can do it 80 times, back and forth if he likes.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/bulldozer-driver-insists-he-did-not-see-rachel-corrie-2113346.html
Mr. Warren, that part of the testimony seems important. Why didn't Ms. Gallagher mention it?
"I heard a lot of people shouting and gesturing to the bulldozer to stop,"
"The bulldozer continues to move forward. Rachel turns to begin coming back down the slope ... As she nears the bottom of the pile, something happened to cause her to fall forward. The bull- dozer continues to move forward and Rachel disappeared from view. The bulldozer moves forward approximately another four metres before it stops." Mr Purssell, who works as a landscape gardener in the UK, said that before the bulldozer came to a stop, other activists started running towards her – as he himself did a few seconds later. "
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/i-saw-israeli-bulldozer-kill-rachel-corrie-1919464.html
Pictures of Rachel Corrie defending homes from Israeli bulldozing, we are supposed to believe the driver did not see her?
http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article1284.shtml
Link 2: Electronic Intifada is a Palestinian propaganda site and the pictures presented by the ISM have been proven to be Photoshopped (poorly I might add). Did you look at the picture Tallen posted below? Those bulldozers have narrow fields of vision.
Two things.
*First, how tall is Rachel? Because "the cab of the bulldozer" is 4 meters high....
that is 13 feet high....so how could she possibly be "looking into the cab of the bulldozer"???
*Second, every single *activist* that was there, has given a different account of
*what happened*. There is no consistency, other than Rachel being in front of an oncoming bulldozer.
http://bdsmovement.net/
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/business/record-breaking-tourism-could-spell-problems-for-israel-1.320812
The killer and the state of israel are cowards.
All of which is simply compelling evidence that this situation was handled by friggin idiots who should have treated this with truly transparent, credible, honest treatment seven years ago. Now the man just looks guilty as hell regardless and people have all the more reason to think it was intentional. If by some remote chance Y.F. isn't guilty he has been thoroughly screwed by the people in Israel who were supposed to be demonstrating his innocence and not making him look like a lying murderer.
Actually, we don't know any such thing.
We only know the author's impression which, in this article, is uncorroborated by any evidence.
they are told to simply "translate the words, nothing more"....they are warned not to add any
feeling to anything. The reason for this is that sometimes false feelings can be interpreted that were not meant by the person being questioned.
If the Corrie's complaint was that Y.F. showed no remorse, they don't really know that.
His words only, were translated.
We only know the author's impression which, in this article, is uncorroborated by any evidence."
This author is not by any stretch the only writer or journalist to cover the events of the trial though. Nor is he by any means the only one to point out the inconsistencies and problems with Y.F.'s testimony. We would have even more opinions and discussion coming out from an even wider pool of people if Israel had allowed for a larger venue.
"Notably, however, Y.F. confirmed on multiple occasions that Rachel's body was between his bulldozer and a mound of dirt - and not hidden behind the mound of dirt. This testimony corroborates testimony about the location of Rachel's body after she was killed given by four international witnesses in March, and it is also consistent with photographic evidence."
So, it looks like the IDF order the murder, no?
The authorities will probably convene the case for another few years to continue to try to wear down the Corries and their financial base.
here are the "facts" listed in this "story"...
>the room was small
>the room was crowded
>the driver appeared behind a screen and his "body language and face could not be seen", but his voice could be heard.
>the writer was "squeezed between a journalist and a shared translator"
>there was one break in 4 1/2 hours
>the "make shift screen was two *mismatched screens*
>it was at times chaotic
>they heard his words through a translator,
>they felt he "lacked remorse"...but they couldn't understand him...they only heard a translator....
where is the damning part of it?
Any facts about the actual trial? The author said that the cross-examination was 'lengthy' but provides little in the way of details. More info, please...
(I may have had serious political differences with their daughter, but that doesn't mean that I can't sympathize with their loss.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yehuda_Hiss
http://www.uruknet.info/?p=69627
Yet, more proof of Israel tampering with the evidence.
2) Most of the bodies on which he worked were of Israeli Jews, NOT Palestinians
As usual, when you speak the truth about Israel, a bunch of Israeli-apologists come out and attack the author or his credibility, because they cannot contest the truth in the article. You will find not a single Israeli-apologist who can find anything to contest in the article, just look below for the usual suspects who attack the messenger.