Thursday, September 27, 2012

English Text from the Rachel Corrie sham lawsuit courtesy Judy Lash Balint:

Back in March 2003 when Rachel Corrie was killed while trying to prevent Israel from clearing ground to expose terrorist hiding places, I interviewed several International Solidarity Movement (ISM) people who were present in Rafiah that day.

Having lived for many years in Washington State where Corrie attended Evergreen College, I had an inherent interest in trying to bring to light the motivations and actions of the ISMers. I wrote several pieces about the case and was sued for libel (later thrown out of court) by an ISMer who didn't like hearing the truth.


Today, after years of testimony and months of deliberation, an Israeli judge handed down a decision that verified what many of us familiar with the facts of the case already knew: he rejected the lawsuit brought by the Corrie family whose only purpose was to vilify Israel, not to get to the bottom of the facts of the case; and he ruled the death an accident that resulted due to the stupid actions of Corrie and her fellow travelers in purposefully entering a war zone and ignoring repeated warnings to get out of the way.

For those interested in the facts, not the Corrie family hype, here's the translation of today's decision:

Summary of the Verdict (T.A. 371/05) Estate of the Late Rachel Corrie, etc.
v. The State of Israel – Ministry of Defense


1. The decedent, Rachel Corrie, was born on April 10, 1979. She was an American citizen, residing in Olympia, Washington. On March 16, 2003, the decedent was killed during an incident which is the focus of this lawsuit. She was 24 years old.



The decedent was an activist in the International Solidarity Movement (hereafter: "the Organization" or "the ISM").



2. In this lawsuit (T.A. 371/05) the plaintiffs, the estate of the late Rachel Corrie (hereafter: "the decedent"), the decedent's parents, brother and sister, are petitioning to direct the defendant, the State of Israel, to pay them compensation for special damages and general damages inflicted on them, they claim, as a result of the death of the decedent during the incident that is the focus of this trial. In addition to the aforementioned, the plaintiffs have petitioned to direct the defendant to pay "punitive damages".



3. The plaintiffs claimed in their lawsuit that on March 16, 2003, the decedent, together with other activists in the ISM, arrived at the "Philadelphi Corridor" in the Rafiah area of the Gaza Strip where two bulldozers and an IDF tank were observed conducting operational activities in the area. The plaintiffs claimed that the bulldozers were about to demolish a house in the area and that the decedent and her fellow members of the ISM stood in the path of the bulldozers in order to prevent them from implementing their plan.



In Article 8.5 of the Statement of Claim, the plaintiffs claimed as follows:



"At 17:00 or thereabouts, the decedent stood near the house of Dr. Samir Nasrallah, which was designated for demolition, and one of the bulldozers was 10 to 15 meters from her. The bulldozers approached the decedent and pulled dirt from under her feet. The decedent fell and the blade of the bulldozer ran over her leg and later the bulldozer ran over her body. When the bulldozer backed up the decedent was gravely injured and was bleeding extensively, although she was still breathing.



The decedent was evacuated to the Al-Najer Hospital in Rafiah, where her death was declared after 20 minutes".



4. The plaintiffs claimed that the bulldozer intentionally caused the death of the decedent. The plaintiffs based their claim on the following three grounds: assault, negligence and legal grounds.



5. After hearing many witnesses from both sides, including expert witnesses, and studying the extensive summations from representatives of both sides, I hereby determine as follows:



a. During the relevant period of time, the "Philadelphi Corridor" was the site of daily warfare, i.e. daily gunfire by snipers, missile fire and IED explosions directed at the IDF forces. During this period, unceasing efforts were made to kidnap IDF soldiers. Only soldiers who were in combat units fought in the region.



According to the notes made in the IDF records, from September 2000 to the date of the incident that is the focus of this lawsuit (March 16, 2003), nearly 6,000 grenades had been thrown at IDF forces in the Corridor; there had been approximately 1,400 incidents of gunfire; and there were more than 40 occurrences of mortar fire. These aforementioned events led to the injury and death of many Israelis.



The United States government issued a travel warning on March 16, 2003 to warn American citizens against visiting the Gaza Strip area or the West Bank.



b. During the period pertinent to this case, there was a military directive in force declaring the "Philadelphi Corridor" a "closed military area" and forbidding the entry of civilians.



c. The ISM assigned itself the task of working alongside the Palestinians against the "Israeli occupation" by using what it called "non-violent protest activities". However, the evidence presented to me shows a significant gap between the Organization's statements and the true character of its activities and actions. The actions taken by the members of the organization, in practice, do not match its statements. In fact, the Organization exploits the dialogue regarding human rights and morality to blur the severity of its actions, which are, in fact, expressed through violence.



Inter alia, ISM activities included "defending" Palestinian families, even ones that were engaged in terror activities. The Organization's activists "specialized" in sabotaging the IDF's operational actions. ISM activities included, inter alia: stationing activists to serve as "human shields" for terrorists wanted by Israeli security forces; financial, logistical and moral assistance to Palestinians, including terrorists and their families; interrupting demolition activities or the sealing off of houses belonging to terrorists who conducted suicide attacks with multiple casualties.



d. The mission of the IDF force on the day of the incident was solely to clear the ground. This clearing and leveling included leveling the ground and clearing it of brush in order to expose hiding places used by terrorists, who would sneak out from these areas and place explosive devices with the intent of harming IDF soldiers. There was an urgency to carrying out this mission so that IDF look-outs could observe the area and locate terrorists thereby preventing explosive devices from being buried. The mission did not include, in any way, the demolition of homes. The action conducted by the IDF forces was done at real risk to the lives of the soldiers. Less than one hour before the incident that is the focus of this lawsuit, a live hand-grenade was thrown at the IDF forces.



e. I hereby determine that, on the day of the incident, the two bulldozers and the armored personnel carrier were occupied with the clear military operational task of clearing the land in a dangerous area which posed a significant risk. The force's action was designed to prevent acts of terror and hostility, i.e. to eliminate the danger of terrorists hiding between the creases of land and in the brush, and to expose explosive devices hidden therein, both of which were intended to kill IDF soldiers. During each act of exposure, the lives of the IDF fighters were at risk from Palestinians terrorists. As aforementioned, less than an hour before the incident that is the focus of this lawsuit, a live hand-grenade was thrown at the IDF force.



For this reason, I hereby determine that the act of clearing the land with which the IDF force was occupied during the event was "a war-related action" as defined in The Civil Wrongs Ordinance.



f. On March 16, 2003, the decedent and her fellow ISM activists arrived at the location where the IDF force was working to clear the land. They did so, they claim, in order to prevent the IDF force from demolishing Palestinian houses. They did so illegally and in contradiction of the military directive declaring the area a "closed military area". They held signs, stood in front of the bulldozers and did not allow them to carry out their mission. The IDF soldiers informed the activists that they had to distance themselves from the area, threw stun grenades towards them, fired warning shots towards them and used methods to disperse demonstrations. All without avail.



The IDF force was very careful not to harm the Organization's activists. Because of the activists' interference, the force repeatedly relocated to continue carrying out their mission.



g. Based on the evidence presented to me, including the testimony of the expert for the prosecution, Mr. Osben, I hereby determine that at approximately 17:00, the decedent stood roughly 15 to 20 meters from the relevant bulldozer and knelt down. The bulldozer to which I refer was a large, clumsy and shielded vehicle of the DR9 model. The field of view the bulldozer's operator had inside the bulldozer was limited. At a certain point, the bulldozer turned and moved toward the decedent. The bulldozer pushed a tall pile of dirt. With regard to the field of view that the bulldozer's operator had, the decedent was in the "blind spot". The decedent was behind the bulldozer's blade and behind a pile of dirt and therefore the bulldozer's operator could not have seen her.



The bulldozer moved very slowly, at a speed of one kilometer per hour.



When the decedent saw the pile of dirt moving towards her, she did not move, as any reasonable person would have. She began to climb the pile of dirt. Therefore, both because the pile of dirt continued to move as a result of the pushing of the bulldozer, and because the dirt was loose, the decedent was trapped in the pile of dirt and fell.



At this stage, the decedent's legs were buried in the pile of dirt, and when her colleagues saw from where they stood that the decedent was trapped in the pile of dirt, they ran towards the bulldozer and gestured towards its operator and yelled at him to stop. By the time the bulldozer's operator and his commander noticed the decedent's colleagues and stopped the bulldozer, a significant portion of the decedent's body was already covered in dirt.



The decedent's entire body was not covered in dirt. In fact, when the bulldozer backed up, the decedent's body was seen to free itself from the pile of dirt and the decedent was still alive.



The decedent was evacuated to the hospital and after 20 minutes, her death was declared.



I hereby determine unequivocally that there is no foundation to the plaintiffs' claim that the bulldozer struck the decedent intentionally. This was a very unfortunate accident and was not intentional. No one wished to harm the decedent. I was convinced that the bulldozer's operator would not have continued to work if he had seen the decedent standing in front of the bulldozer, as he and his colleagues acted in similar circumstances earlier that day, when they moved from location to location because of the disturbances caused by the members of the Organization.



h. Because I find, as aforementioned, that the decedent was accidentally killed in the framework of a "war-related activity" as defined in The Civil Wrongs Ordinance, and in light of the instructions laid out in Article 5 of the aforementioned ordinance, the State bears no responsibility for the damages inflicted on the plaintiffs resulting from a war-related action.



This makes superfluous the need to discuss the cause of action made by the plaintiffs because legally their demand should be rejected.



Nevertheless, above and beyond what is necessary, I have also decided to discuss the cause of action filed by the plaintiffs as well as their other claims.



i. The plaintiffs claimed that evidentiary damage was done in two areas: first, they claim that the Criminal Investigations Division (CID) investigation carried out after the event was sloppy and unprofessional and led to evidentiary damage for the plaintiffs; the second area, which refers to the responsibility of the Institute for Forensic Medicine for evidentiary damage caused to the plaintiffs as a result of the violation of the judicial order and the destruction of the recording documenting the decedent's autopsy.



It could be expected that, in light of the claim made above, the plaintiffs' representative would submit to the court the file of the investigation conducted by the CID so that I could form my own opinion regarding the investigatory actions carried out and the manner in which the investigation was carried out, and to learn if the actions taken by the CID were sufficient or not. However, it was the plaintiffs that objected to submitting the full file of the investigation as evidence, even though the defendant agreed to do so. Thus did the plaintiffs, by their own actions, introduce circumstances in which an extremely important tool to examine their claims was denied to the court.



After examining the evidentiary material and studying the claims made by representatives of both sides, I reached the conclusion that the CID investigation was conducted appropriately and without fault.



j. With regard to the claims made regarding evidentiary damages relating to the Institute of Forensic Medicine:



Investigators from the CID concluded that in order to advance the investigation, an autopsy would have to be performed on the decedent. As a result, they approached the District Court in Rishon LeZion and asked for a court order that would allow for such an autopsy. The court order "…that the body be autopsied at the Abu Kabir Institute for Forensic Medicine by a doctor who is not in the military and in the presence of a representative of the American State Department" (Exhibit 6/T).



Professor Hiss testified that since the American Consulate saw no need to send a representative to be present at the autopsy, the autopsy was conducted, with the family's agreement, without a consular representative. He also testified that the Consulate sent a fax confirming that the autopsy could be conducted without a representative from the family (Exhibit 11/T).



After examining the evidentiary material and studying the claims made by representatives of both sides, I reached the conclusion that the plaintiffs' claim of evidentiary damage by the Institute for Forensic Medicine seems strange. This is because the decedent's father himself testified that, from the outset, the family had no intention of conducting an autopsy and that their intention was to pursue the matter diplomatically in order to clarify what happened to the decedent. Moreover: it appears that the decedent's family had no interest regarding the identity of the Consular representative that was to be present during the autopsy, nor in the type of professional training they had had. The family wanted a Consular representative to be present even if a secretary or typist had been sent!



Professor Hiss explained in his testimony that the aforementioned fax was sent to him after he telephoned the United States Embassy and asked that they send an American doctor to be present at the autopsy. He claims that the embassy did not find a need to do so. Professor Hiss asked to receive approval from the decedent's family and he then received the fax 11/T in which it is specifically stated that the decedent's family agreed to the autopsy and that no other faxes would be sent.



I believe that under these circumstances, Professor Hiss was well within his rights to conclude that, ultimately, the decedent's family conceded its demand for a representative to be present during the autopsy. The family's desire was to receive the decedent's body as soon as possible. Indeed, the family did not conduct any additional examinations after receiving the decedent's body and it was cremated: see Mr. Craig Corrie's testimony.



I am aware of the fact that, according to the language of the District Court's decision regarding the autopsy of the decedent's body, there should have been a representative of the US Embassy present during the autopsy. However, under the circumstances, when it was explained that the embassy saw no reason to send a representative, as Professor Hiss testified, and because the fax sent to Professor Hiss (11/T) stated that the family agreed to the autopsy, we can understand why Professor Hiss believed that there was nothing preventing him from conducting the autopsy without an embassy representative being present. There is no doubt that the proper course of action would have been to return to the District Court so that, in light of the change in circumstances, the court could amend its decision and remove the condition regarding the presence of an embassy representative. However, given the circumstances and in light of the aforementioned, it is not clear what evidentiary damage was made to the plaintiffs' case because of the conduct of the Institute of Forensic Medicine.



With regard to the plaintiffs' claim regarding the recording documenting the autopsy, I found no grounds to accept it. It is an audio recording (as opposed to a video recording) which served as a draft for Professor Hiss when preparing his report. Recordings like this are made because, during an autopsy, the doctor's hands are holding scalpels and covered in blood, and therefore notes cannot be taken. Apparently, the aforementioned audio recording simply does not exist anymore because, due to budgetary problems, the Institute of Forensic Medicine recycles tapes (see the testimony given by Professor Hiss). Under these circumstances, it is not clear what evidentiary damage was caused to the plaintiffs as a result of the aforementioned draft having been erased due to recycling.



In summation, with regard to evidentiary damages, I hereby determine that the two cumulative conditions necessary as laid out in the precedent determined by the Supreme Court were not upheld. They did not prove that evidentiary damage was caused which harmed their ability to prove their claims, nor did they prove that the defendant, through negligence, caused the claimed evidentiary damage.



k. With regard to grounds for assault I hereby determine that there is no foundation for such claims because there is no component of "malice". As I have determined that the decedent was killed accidentally and not intentionally, legally the claim regarding grounds for assault must be rejected.



l. With regard to grounds for negligence: I am convinced that, given the circumstances created at the location of the incident, the actions taken by the force were without fault. Indeed, the field of vision of the bulldozer's operator was limited. However, the decedent's field of vision while she stood in front of the bulldozer and knelt down was open and without any limitation. The decedent could have distanced herself from any danger without any difficulty. However, she chose to take the risk described above, and that eventually led to her death.



Given these circumstances, I have reached the conclusion that it was not negligence on the part of the defendant or any of its representatives that caused the decedent's death. Therefore it can be understood that I reject the claim that there is any foundation for the grounds of negligence in this case.



m. The defendant claims a "willing endangerment" defense, in accordance with Article 5(A) of the Civil Wrongs ordinance. I reached the conclusion that the foundation for this defense, as determined by the Supreme Court, has not been proven in this case, and therefore I hereby determine that the aforementioned defense does not exist with regard to this lawsuit.



However, even though I have determined that it was not negligence on the part of the defendant or its representatives that led to the death of the decedent, and although the aforementioned defense does not exist with regard to this lawsuit, it is not enough to change the result of rejecting this claim.



n. With regard to legal grounds: It is true that the decedent was killed during the incident that is the focus of this lawsuit. However, in this case the defendant did not violate the decedent's right to life. The decedent put herself in a dangerous situation. She stood in front of a large bulldozer in a location where the bulldozer's operator could not see her. Even when she saw the pile of dirt moving towards her and endangering her, she did not remove herself from the situation, as any reasonable person would have. The decedent began to climb the pile of dirt, got tangled up in it, fell and eventually died.



The decedent's death was the result of an accident that the decedent caused. This occurred despite the efforts of the IDF force to distance her and her colleagues from the area.



I believe that, under these circumstances, there is no justification to obligate the State to pay compensation for damages that the decedent could have prevented, but preferred not to, thereby choosing to risk her life as she did.



Therefore, I reject the request to obligate the State to pay compensation on legal grounds.



6. Because of this and in light of the aforementioned, I reject the lawsuit.

Because of the circumstance surrounding the decedent's death, I will not make the plaintiffs' pay the legal expenses and each side will bear its own costs.
More info on my invovlement with the Corrie case here:
 
http://isracampus.org.il/third%20level%20pages/Editorial%20-%20Lee%20Kaplan%20-%20BGU%20-%20Rebuts%20Neve%20Gordon.htm and
to read about the woman who sent the little idiot Rachel Corrie off to her death
here:
http://isracampus.org.il/third%20level%20pages/Editorial%20-%20Lee%20Kaplan%20-%20SUNY%20-%20Simona%20Sharoni%20-%20sent%20Rachel%20Corrie%20to%20her%20Death.htm and
 

 
Corrie Street in Ramallah. Photo: ISM Palestine@Flickr

4 comments:

Dan Kelso said...

Your totally right Lee.
The best article i read about Corrie was this.

A Tribute to Rachel Corrie
Thanks for showing us what "peace" really means.
RUHAMA SHATTAN
March 16, 2004

Today is the first anniversary of Rachel Corrie's death. I want to thank Corrie for the explosives that flow freely from Egypt to Gaza, via the smuggling tunnels under the Gaza homes that she died defending.

Perhaps it was these explosives that in the year since her martyrdom--oops, death--have been strapped around suicide bombers to blow up city buses and restaurants in Israeli cities, particularly in Jerusalem, killing men, women and schoolchildren (two of them classmates of my daughter and her friend in the February 22, 2004 bombing) and leaving hundreds more widows, orphans and bereaved parents.

On the first anniversary of her death, I want to thank Rachel Corrie for showing Palestinian children how to despise America as she snarled, burned an American flag, and led them in chanting slogans, and as she gave "evidence" at a Young Palestinian Parliament mock trial finding President Bush guilty of crimes against humanity.

Perhaps her help in fanning the flames of violent anti-American sentiment led to the October 2003 bombing of the Fulbright delegation to Gaza to interview scholarship candidates, killing three. There will be no new crop of Palestinian Fulbright scholars this fall.

On the first anniversary of her death, I wanted to thank Rachel Corrie for providing her organization, the Palestinian-sponsored International Solidarity Movement, with the opportunity to release a manipulated photo sequence "showing" an Israeli military bulldozer deliberately crushing her. (I would also like to thank the Associated Press and the Christian Science Monitor for taking up the baton and immortalizing this cynical ISM stunt.)

On the first anniversary of her death, I want to thank Rachel Corrie for showing the way to all those who seek peace in the Middle East. Unfortunately, Corrie's peace, as anyone familiar with the Palestine Liberation Organization, Fatah, Hamas and Hezbollah organizations that she defended with her life knows--or as anyone familiar with the weekly rants of the Friday preachers in the Palestinian mosques is aware--means not peaceful coexistence but the elimination of the state of Israel, and death to those they call "the usurping Jews, the sons of apes and pigs."

Thank you, Rachel Corrie, of Evergreen State University, where the profs wear khakis and kaffiyehs at graduation ceremonies, for showing us what peace really means.

Dan Kelso said...

Lee, i know this off topic, so you dont have to post this.
But there's an article on TimesofIsrael today called,
New York Times ad seeks candidates for joint Israeli-Palestinian parliament.

Confederation initiative launched by Israeli-born lawyer who now lives in California
October 2, 2012
Here's the link to the article.
http://www.timesofisrael.com/new-york-times-ad-seeks-candidates-for-joint-israeli-palestinian-parliament/

You wrote a great article showing what a nutjob Josef Avesar is.
http://www.bruinalumni.com/articles/ipc.html

I'v tried to post your article 3 times on the post thread and 3 times the TimesofIsrael deleted my post.
I said Lee Kaplan shows the true agenda of radicals like Josef Avesar.

You should post on the article.

I find it amazing that Josef Avesar wants a 1 state solution, which you brilliantly said is to really eliminate Israel.

I wonder what world Simona Sharoni, Josef Avesar and Shlomo Ben Ami are in?

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4119676,00.html
World forgot Israel’s 9/11
Op-ed: Italian journalist says world should be ashamed for forgetting Israeli terror victims
Giulio Meotti Published: 09.08.11

http://palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=663&fld_id=663&doc_id=5832
Female Palestinian terrorist does not regret murder of 15 civilians at Sbarro pizza shop that she planned.
Oct 23, 2011

Ahlam Tamimi was happy to learn that 8 Israeli children were murdered at the Sbarros terrorist attack in 2001 instead of the 3 children she thought originally.
Read her interview. Again i ask Josef Avesar, do the Palestinians have a conscience?

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/151758
PA Religious Official Publicly Calls for Genocide of Jews
PA’s principal religious leader presents the killing of Jews by Muslims as a religious Islamic goal.
Elad Benari
1/16/2011

http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2012/03/hamas-celebrates-10th-anniversary-of.html
Hamas celebrates 10th anniversary of Netanya Passover massacre
March 27, 2012

Maybe I missed it, but I don’t recall seeing any Arabs protesting against this attack, or writing anguished op-eds about how a fellow Muslim could have done such a thing. No Arab groups popped up on college campuses calling for solidarity with Jews against terror. There were no UN resolutions condemning the massacre.
But there was a PA-sponsored soccer tournament in Tulkarem named after the suicide bomber.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011/07/73-of-palestinians-believe-jews-should-be-killed-wherever-they-hide/
73% of Palestinians Believe Jews Should Be Killed Wherever They Hide
Jim Hoft
July 16, 2011,

http://www.palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=157&doc_id=1526
Abbas honors terrorist Dalal Mughrabi, killer of 37
12/31/09
This week Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas once again honored the memory of the terrorist Dalal Mughrabi – this time by sponsoring a ceremony celebrating the 50th anniversary of her birth. Mughrabi led the worst terror attack in Israel’s history in 1978, when she and other terrorists hijacked a bus and killed 37 civilians. Present at the ceremony were Palestinian dignitaries and a children’s marching band. Earlier this year, Abbas sponsored a computer center named after Mughrabi.
The PA further glorified Mughrabi on the date of her birth when the Governor of Ramallah announced the naming of the “Dalal Mughrabi Square”.

Dan Kelso said...

Josef Avesar seems to turn a blind eye to the racist Arabs.

http://palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=157&doc_id=2531
Abbas honors mastermind of Munich Olympics massacre
Itamar Marcus and Nan Jacques Zilberdik
July 6, 2010

http://www.palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=157&doc_id=5581
PA TV honors Sbarro pizza shop terrorists
Itamar Marcus and Nan Jacques Zilberdik
Sept. 4, 2011
PA TV host sends “best wishes” to “our glorious” prisoner who transported suicide bomber to attack that killed 15, including 7 children.
These are the sadists that the left supports.

http://www.palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=157&doc_id=3351
PA continues to teach denial of Israel's existence
Oct 5, 2010
Itamar Marcus and Nan Jacques Zilberdik
Last week, PA TV rebroadcast an educational documentary that has been broadcast numerous times since 2007. The documentary describes the Israeli cities of Haifa, Acre, Ashkelon, Jaffa and the Sea of Galilee as Palestinian.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/134228
PA Historian & Official Deny Israel's History in Land of Israel
An Arab PA historian and a senior PLO official have denied that the Jewish nation has any historical connection to the Land of Israel.
Yoni Kempinski
11/4/2009

http://www.palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=157&doc_id=5490
PA TV: Western Wall area to be turned into Arab housing neighborhood.
Palestinian Authority TV:
Western Wall area to be turned into Arab housing neighborhood -Jewish presence in Jerusalem will be erased from history.
Aug. 17, 2011

http://www.thememriblog.org/blog_personal/en/10166.htm
Hamas MP: A Palestinian Who Kills One Jew Will Be Rewarded As If He Killed 30 Million

http://www.likud.nl/extr486.html
Hamas Cleric Calls for Extermination of Jews
Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook
April 19, 2009

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1147480.html
Karni Eldad/
The PA is poisoning its children against Israel
2/4/2010

http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2012/04/hamas-celebrates-anniversary-of-haifa.html#disqus_thread
April 01, 2012
Hamas celebrates anniversary of Haifa restaurant bombing

Hamas newspaper Palestine Times has a featured article celebrating the ten year anniversary of the bombing of the Arab-owned Matza restaurant in Haifa, that killed 16 Israeli civilians. The article includes photos of the bomber as well as of the devastation to the restaurant, whose roof collapsed from the force of the explosion.

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-singer111902.asp
Following the murderous terrorist attack on Kibbutz Metzer in 2002, the PLO cold-bloodedly stated on its official website, "We will continue to strike in any place, targeting their children as well." Five innocent Israelis, including a mother and her two little boys, were butchered in that attack, all of them, Fatah said, "Zionist colonizers" killed in a "qualitative operation in the settlement of Metzer."

Dan Kelso said...

Shlomo Ben Ami another nutjob who cant see the agenda of the Arabs.
This tells you all you need to know about Barak, the fact that Ben Ami was his Foreign Minister.

Here's how the official Palestinian Authority newspaper Al-Hayat al-Jadida headlined its coverage: "Five Israelis killed in an attack on the settlement Metzer." The report continued, "A Palestinian infiltrated the settlement Metzer and opened fire on the settlers." It is not well known that the Palestinian press frequently refers to towns in Israel, such as Holon and Kiryat Shmona, as "settlements." Besides implying that all of Israel is an illegitimate colonial outpost, such references clearly are brought to justify the killings and distinguish them from terrorism.

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/jeff/jacoby011003.asp
After the Tel Aviv massacre on January 12th 2003, where 2 Palestinian homicide bombers massacred 23 Israeli civilians. The PLO web site posted a statement -- celebrating the attacks:
"With faith in the calling of holy jihad," it said, "two suicide attackers . . . succeeded this evening to infiltrate the Zionist roadblocks and to enter the heart of . . . Tel Aviv and carried out two consecutive suicide attacks... These suicide attacks caused a large number of fatalities and casualties in the center of the Zionist occupation of our land. We swear before our people that additional suicide operations will occur."
That is a view with which much of Arab opinion concurs. ArabicNews.com, for example, datelined its story on the Tel Aviv attack "Palestine-Israel," and reported that the bombings had killed "23 Israeli settlers."

http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_print=1&x_context=6&x_article=46
One day after the Ramallah lynching of two Israelis, Ahmad Abu Halabiya, a member of the PA-appointed Fatwa Council, called on listeners to find and butcher Jews “no matter where they are, in any country. Fight them, wherever you are. Wherever you meet them, kill them.”

http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2011/11/manly-palestinian-arab-hero-who.html
Manly Palestinian Arab hero who murdered little old Jewish ladies at Passover massacre.
11/3/2011

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/144760
Fogel Baby-Stabber ‘Proud of What I Did’
Hakim Awad and Amjad Awad happy about Fogel massacre.
6/5/11

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2008/05/hamas-official-after-we-defeat-the-zionists-we-will-persecute-them-we-will-persecute-them-to-eternit.html
Hamas Foreign Minister “Zahar:”After we defeat the Zionists we will persecute them… we will persecute them to eternity”
May 14, 08

http://www.hvk.org/articles/1201/34.html
Sheikh Muhammed Siyam, a Hamas military leader.
“I’ve been told to restrict or restrain what I say. . . . I hope no one is recording me or taking any pictures, as none are allowed . . . because I’m going to speak the truth to you,” Siyam reportedly said at the conference. “It’s simple. Finish off the Israelis. Kill them all! Exterminate them! No peace ever! Do not bother to talk politics.”