Omar Suleiman from Kufr Qallil walked through his 10 dunums of olive trees on Saturday the 30th of September, occasionally grabbing hold of a tree trunk and nimbly climbing up to inspect the higher clusters of fruit. He shook his head and gestured toward the empty branches here and there. Nestled on a slope between Berakhya colony and Huwarra checkpoint and military base, his olive grove is frequently invaded by Israeli colonists. They beat the trees to make the ripest olives fall to the ground in order to steal them, and also sabotage the harvest in other ways. About two months ago, they set fire to a 16 dunum large plot of land below the olive grove. Haj Suleiman’s family now have to trudge up a slope of desolate scorched earth in order to reach their land – an ugly reminder of the threat that the Israeli colonists of Berakhya present to their Palestinian neighbours.
Two years ago, the family was attacked by a group of Israeli colonists armed with machineguns. Haj Suleiman bears scars on his chin and scalp from big rocks thrown at him in unprovoked outbursts of colonist violence. When he attempted to defend himself by physically restraining his attackers, the Israeli military retaliated by forcing him and his family out of their house at two o’clock in the morning for five nights in a row – threatening the family members with violence and randomly breaking parts of their furniture. The family is now afraid to go to harvest their olives from the land closest to the colony. After having kept silent and submissive for a few years, the family have now had enough, and therefore decided to request international and Israeli accompaniment this year.
The first three days of harvesting in Kufr Qallil were relatively quiet, apart from an incident of theft from land on the south side of the road leading up to Berakhya colony. Israeli colonists were spending the eve of Yom Kippur bathing at a holy mountain spring adjacent to the road, some of them also having brought bags to fill with Palestinian figs and pomegranates.
On the fourth day of harvesting (Tuesday October the 3rd), an armored jeep full of soldiers arrived at the scene, shouting and motioning at the olive pickers to cease their work. They told the group – Haj Suleiman, his family and volunteers from IWPS and ISM – to pack up and leave as they had not obtained permission from the DCO (District Coordination Office) and were therefore not allowed to work the land on that particular day. Although the group argued that this order was unlawful and requested that the soldiers consult their higher commanders and the DCO before chasing them off the land, the soldiers insisted and threateningly escorted everyone back to the village. Afraid of retaliation, the family did not wish to directly resist the order but after hours of phone calls to the International Committee of the Red Cross and various levels of command at the DCO, it was ascertained that the order given by the soldiers was actually contrary to Israeli law and military policy, in light of recent judicial developments.
On 26 June 2006, the Israeli High Court of Justice issued a ruling in response to a petition regarding the right of Palestinian farmers, who are residents of the West Bank, to gain access to their land (H.C.J. 9593/04 Rashad Morar v. The IDF Commander for Judea and Samaria). In short, the court decision means that Palestinian farmers have a right to enter and work their land, with or without DCO permission, and that the military commander in the area must defend this right. In the past, Israeli military have often opted for attempting to stifle any violence on the part of Israeli colonists by declaring land a “closed military zone.” They have justified this by saying that the law is aimed to protect the Palestinian residents, but has in reality saved them from any real confrontation with Israeli colonists. The court ruling stipulates that this is no longer allowed and that territorial closure is subject to a number of strict preconditions.
This decision is crucial to many Palestinian farmers in providing them with a legal weapon to use in fighting for their rights to their land. Apart from land in “red zones,” which are not subject to such rapid status changes as “closed military zones,” and can be checked on military maps, all farmers should in theory be unhindered and protected in working their land and harvesting their olives this season. Tuesday’s events, however, clearly illustrate how this new policy, whether due to misinformation or malice, is not being implemented by soldiers on the ground.
It seems that the more senior and legally conscious echelons of the Israeli military are reluctant to inform foot-soldiers about the changes unless faced with farmers or volunteers who know the law and can argue their case. This was made apparent yesterday, as the DCO tried to dissuade Haj Suleiman from harvesting his olives on the day he wanted, instead suggesting a later date more suitable to them. Despite this, the family continued harvesting, their numbers boosted by international and Israeli volunteers, the latter from Rabbis for Human Rights and other anti-occupation organizations. The Israeli military were also present, although this time as protection from Israeli colonists.
Despite manipulation and lies from the Israeli military and the DCO, the olive harvest continues. We urge all internationals to do their utmost to come to Palestine in solidarity with farmers who have been denied safe and unconditional access to their land. Harvesting is resisting.
Footnote: Wednesday night, more violence befell the village of Kufr Qallil, when 40 year old Nasir Hasan Mansur was shot by Israeli military. Mansur was sitting in front of his home when the soldiers fired north from Beit Ur checkpoint, hitting him in the left foot.
On the 5th of October a special meeting made up of regional ISM coordinators took place to present their plans for the olive harvest and to make everyone aware of each other’s activities so that better coordination between the regions can take place. Below is a summary of each region’s activities to give an idea of how well organized we are this year and to hopefully encourage more people to come and support the Palestinian farmers and their families against the violence of the colonist settlers and the obstruction and harrassment of the Israeli army. If you are an ISM support group doing training in your country, please let new volunteers know about this plan so that they can have an idea of what they will be doing, and can be reassured that they will be needed.
Nablus region
Some of the most ideological settlers in the West Bank live here in notorious settlement outposts such as Itamar. Nablus region will be the top priority for the campaign because of the danger to farmers from these settlers, and the large number of villages in the area that the ISM Nablus committee has forged contacts with in the lead-up to the harvest.
Picking in 24 villages all over the Nablus region
Started 1st October. Ongoing till 30th November (most villages will start after Eid).
Need for continuous presence of 20-30 internationals from October 25th.
Accommodation for volunteers in ISM apartment in the Nablus Old City, but also villages. Bring sleeping bags because of cold nights
Co-ordination wtih EAPPI (in Yannun) and Rabbis for Human Rights being done
Hebron region
ISM volunteers will focus on families picking from their gardens and groves in the Tel Rumeida area of Hebron city. Last year settlers tried to steal olives. Tel Rumedia contains some of the most extreme, Kahanist elements of the settler movement, hence it is a high priority for the campaign. The Israeli army frequently declares the area as a closed military zone to “protect” the settlers.
Eight families in the area have asked for volunteers. Also, 6 families in villages near the Kiryat Arba settlement have asked for volunteers.
Starting mid-November
Need minimum 5 internationals
Accommodation for volunteers in the ISM/Tel Rumeida Project apartment in Tel Rumeida
Co-ordination being done with many international organisations. In case of an urgent need in other parts of Hebron region (e.g. Qawawis, Jab’a), will co-ordinate with the international organisations working in those areas such as CPT, EAPPI. to send people if we have them available. The ISM Hebron committee has also talked to Palestinian university students. Will send people to other areas in Hebron region for demonstrations as requested by local committee co-ordinating internationals.
Ramallah region
Generally, not big risks, but people needed in Bil’in outpost. Maximum 7 people needed for whole region. It’s not top priority – if there is an emergency and enough volunteers, people will go there. Direct action is always an ISM priority, even during the olive harvest so we will encourage volunteers to take part in demos, eg. Bil’in and other actions, eg. roadblock removals at Jaba.
Bil’in – Priority for this region. Need minimum 2 people to stay in the outpost – they can participate in Olive harvest, but there is minimal risk. It is still a priority, because there is now a problem with getting people past the fence and to the outpost. This was no problem until now.
Possiblity of help needed in Beit Sira (first olive harvest since wall built there), Aboud (one family might need some help), Beit Furik (might face some risk because of it’s location) or Biddu (no risk from settlers).
Tulkarem region
There are only three settlements in this region. Five Palestinian villages have land near to them. For the first time this year, Palestinians with certain land in this area will try to access it to pick olives. Not a high-risk area, hence not a high priority for ISM volunteers.
Picking in two areas
Starting mid-October. Every village needs a week to finish
Need around 5 people to move around the region
IWPS in Salfit
Anticipates enough IWPS volunteers over this period to cover their areas. Will send IWPS volunteers to other areas in emergencies if they have the numbers.
Strong focus on 7 villages, 5 on standby, going to meet 2 more in next few days
Az Zawyia – from mid-October, most after Ramadan – 6 internationals. for 1-2 weeks
IWPS are based in Hares village, Salfit region
Co-ordination with Rabbis for Human Rights being done
While harvesting with the Palestinians of Kufr Qallil, colonial settlers from Berakhya settlement were observed entering a Palestinian fruit grove and stealing fruit. The area in question is located south-east of Nablus city center, and surrounded by At Tur and Huwarra checkpoints, a settler-only road, and a military observation tower.
On a road cutting through the Palestinian fruit grove is a fountain used by colonial settlers to bathe. Today this fountain was especially busy as the local men ceremonially cleansed for the Jewish holiday of Yom Kippur, which was to begin that night. From their vantage point in the Kufr Qallil olive grove, international activists observed seven men drive into the area in three cars, take two bags from the trunk, and enter the grove. They then watched as the settler men stole figs and pomegranates, filling two large bags. This crime was caught on video, and while one activist filmed, two others hiked down the hill to intervene, after calling the DCO (District Coordination Office) to report the crime in progress.
The DCO was seemingly not interested in listening to the crime report, and appeared more concerned with why the activists were in the area. While waiting for the DCO, the activists approached three of the settlers and inquired as to why they were stealing fruit. The settlers responded by saying that the “law” allowed them to be in the Palestinian farmland, and that, “The law says [that] all Arabs are killers.” Pointing to the Palestinian grove, the settler continued, “All of this land is ours, we live in that village up there.” The “village” he pointed to is the militarized hilltop colonial settlement of Berakhya where the settlers reside.
After approximately twenty minutes, the DCO arrived, though at this point the settlers had left with their stolen fruit. The activists reported the crime for the third time, and showed the DCO more than fifty pictures documenting the incident. These pictures included the license plates of all of the vehicles, the vehicles themselves, and the faces of the settler thieves. The soldiers initially refused to record any of the information offered, but after repeated requests they looked at the pictures and wrote scant notes on a scrap of paper.
While reporting the crime of the seven settlers to the DCO and soldiers, another settler man with a child in his arms entered the grove and began to steal more fruit. The activists alerted the soldiers to this obvious crime going on in front of their eyes. One soldier entered the grove and spoke to the settler, though the settler proceeded to steal, and within a few minutes the DCO and soldiers left without stopping the evident crime. Before leaving, the soldiers told the activists to wait on site in order to report the incident to additional soldiers en route. No additional soldiers ever responded.
The three cars involved in the fruit theft are:
1.) silver Ford, Mondeo, license plate, 64-017-56
2.) white Chevrolet Aved LT, license plate, 45-193-59
3.) black Volkswagen Polo Classic, license plate, 53-784-18
UPDATE, Saturday 7th – A few hours after the demonstration yesterday Israeli soldiers eventually managed to invade the village shooting rubber bullets and firing sound bombs at Palestinian children who threw stones at them to defend their village. Three houses were damaged. Reuters cameraman Emad Bornat (who is also a resident of the village), who was the only person present filming this, was arrested and beaten. He was taken to hospital in Jerusalem and then taken back to the police station where he was questioned until 1am. He is currently being held at Ofer detention center near Ramallah. Emad was originally charged with assaulting a border policeman and throwing stones but the assault accusation was later dropped. Emad has been documenting the non-violent resistance to the Wall in Bil’in and his video footage has often refuted the false allegations of the Israeli military and helped to get those detained or arrested released. He has made a film called “One Year of Peaceful Resistance to the Wall”, made up of the hundred of hours of footage of the demonstrations he has taken.
* * *
As on every Friday for the last 20 months, the villagers of Bil’in, supported by international and Israeli activists, marched from the village mosque after prayers to the apartheid wall, which has stolen around half of the village’s agricultural land.
Following the pattern of last week’s demo Israeli forces didn’t hinder the marchers on their way to the gate in the Wall. The IOF declared the area a Closed Military Zone and banned the villagers accessing their land on the other side of the Wall. At the gate the villagers chanted resistance slogans, reminding the occupiers that their spirit of defiance and demand for justice won’t be suppressed.
As some villagers attempted to climb onto the gate, soldiers hauled them off onto the other side. Two villagers, Ayad and Iyad Burnat, were detained in this way.
Not deterred by the intense midday heat and their empty stomachs, many villagers decided to continue the protest by marching down the slope along the wall and were immediately attacked by Israeli forces firing multiple rounds of tear gas. Around 20 protesters suffered from the effects of the gas and were forced to disperse into the olive groves where they watched as the IOF turned their attention to children in the olive groves on the opposite side of the road. Snipers took up positions and started firing rubber bullets at children in the groves who responded by throwing stones.
As the IOF prepared to invade, villagers blocked the road with rocks and the village youth once again successfully managed to prevent the world’s fourth largest army from invading, armed only with what they could find on the ground.
Today, the 5th of October 2006, US magazine Mother Jones reposted on their website a slanderous article from 2003 by reporter Joshua Hammer called “The Death of Rachel Corrie”. The article contains numerous factual errors, misleading statements as well as outright plagiarism from various sources, including some of dubious journalistic value. For example, Hammer merges a memorial for Rachel Corrie held by the Palestinian Fatah party in Rafah that was “attended by representatives of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades as well as ordinary Palestinians” with an entirely separate memorial held by ISM at the site of her killing that was attacked by the Israeli military. He did this because his paragraph describing this was plagiarised from an article in the UK Observer, which he had obviously only skim-read. In their Nov/Dec 2003 issue Mother Jones corrected this particular factual error. They also acknowledged that their fact-checking should have been more vigilant. The article reposted to the Mother Jones site today is the original published in the print version, and full of the original errors.
At the time of the original publication, Phan Nguyen wrote the following article refuting Hammer’s smears (Nguyen later even debated Hammer on the radio who conceded that most of Nguyen’s points were true, he simply disputed how much this mattered). See also this Palestine Media Watch article on the same subject. Since Mother Jones has chosen to once again lie about Rachel Corrie and the events surrounding her death, we are republishing Nguyen’s article. The text of the article is unchanged, but some of the links now broken in the Counterpunch original have been updated.
The above text was updated and corrected: 6th October.
Mother Jones Smears Rachel Corrie: Specious Journalism in Defense of Killers
Mother Jones demonstrated how low it could set its standards for investigative journalism when it hired Newsweek reporter Joshua Hammer to surf the web and write a 7000-word feature story on Rachel Corrie and the International Solidarity Movement (“The Death of Rachel Corrie”, Sept/Oct 2003). It appears that fact-checking and verification was not a priority in the production of this article. Before I had even finished reading the Hammer’s smear job I had already discovered that the writer had no shame in culling information from indiscriminate websurfing and no compunction against committing plagiarism. Take, for instance, Hammer’s description of a memorial service held for Corrie in Rafah soon after she was killed:
Days after Corrie’s death, Arafat’s Fatah Party sponsored a memorial service for her in Rafah, attended by representatives of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades as well as ordinary Palestinians. Midway through the service, an Israeli tank pulled up beside the mourners and sprayed them with tear gas. Peace activists chased the tank and tossed flowers, and the Israeli soldiers inside threatened, in return, to run them down. After 15 minutes of cat and mouse, Israeli bulldozers and APCs rolled in, firing guns and percussion bombs and putting a quick end to the memorial.
In Rafah, Arafat’s political party Fatah held a wake for “Retchell Corie”, attended by representatives of Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the Al-Aqsa Martyrs brigade, among others. These are the militant Islamic fronts condemned by Rachel’s government as terrorists. Their people mingled with secular organisations and droves of ordinary Palestinians who came to pay their respects…
Later in the article, Jordan writes about another memorial service:
As the memorial service got under way, the Israeli army sent its own representative. A tank pulled up beside the mourners and sprayed them with tear gas. A bizarre game of cat-and-mouse began as the peace activists chased the tank around to throw flowers on it, and the Israeli soldiers inside threatened, in return, to run them down. The game ended when the Israeli bulldozers came out, accompanied by more APCs, firing guns and percussion bombs. The insult was as clear as the danger of the situation and the people went home, the service halted.
We can break down the sentences to reveal how Hammer slightly restructured Jordan’s words. Selections from Jordan’s article (in italics) are followed by Hammer’s sentences in his own chronology.
In Rafah, Arafat’s political party Fatah held a wake…attended by representatives of Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the Al-Aqsa Martyrs brigade, among others… Their people mingled with secular organisations and droves of ordinary Palestinians…
Days after Corrie’s death, Arafat’s Fatah Party sponsored a memorial service for her in Rafah, attended by representatives of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades as well as ordinary Palestinians.
As the memorial service got under way…A tank pulled up beside the mourners and sprayed them with tear gas.
Midway through the service, an Israeli tank pulled up beside the mourners and sprayed them with tear gas.
…the peace activists chased the tank around to throw flowers on it, and the Israeli soldiers inside threatened, in return, to run them down.
Peace activists chased the tank and tossed flowers, and the Israeli soldiers inside threatened, in return, to run them down.
A bizarre game of cat-and-mouse began…
After 15 minutes of cat and mouse…
The game ended when the Israeli bulldozers came out, accompanied by more APCs, firing guns and percussion bombs.
…Israeli bulldozers and APCs rolled in, firing guns and percussion bombs and putting a quick end to the memorial.
Hammer produced an exemplary model of plagiarism, but with one major flaw. Because he had so casually swiped three paragraphs from the Observer and subtly restructured it, he incorrectly combined the “Fatah-sponsored wake” with the separate memorial service that was held at the site of her killing. Sandra Jordan did not make it clear in her article that the two were separate, and so Hammer misinterprets the article as he steals from it, thus presenting us not only with a clear case of plagiarism, but also misinformation. Once we realize this, it is not surprising to find other discrepancies in Hammer’s article. Such is the case in Hammer’s description of the International Solidarity Movement. According to Hammer,
the ISM upholds the right of Palestinians to carry out “armed struggle” and seeks “to establish divestment campaigns in the U.S. and Europe to put economic pressure on Israel the same way the international community put pressure [on] South Africa during the apartheid regimes.”
And curiously, according to Myles Kantor in an article written for David Horowitz’s Front Page Magazine last April:
ISM refers to a “right” of Palestinian “armed struggle” and seeks “to establish divestment campaigns in the US and Europe to put economic pressure on Israel the same way the international community put pressure [on] South Africa during the apartheid regimes.”
Somehow, Hammer managed to selectively extract and distort the exact same 32 words from ISM’s 900-word mission statement as did an extreme right-wing website. Indeed both articles selected the least significant aspects from the mission statement, which least described ISM’s activities. The mission statement had been drafted in the early days of ISM (as it is clearly dated “December 2001”), when ISM’s focus was envisioned to be broader than it currently is. Thus the reference to divestment campaigns is obsolete, as there are no ISM-coordinated divestment campaigns. Yet Hammer still felt it was significant enough to single out as a definitive aspect of ISM, simply because his right-wing web source had already done so. The other portion of ISM’s mission statement which Hammer cites is the reference to “armed struggle.”
However, if Hammer will ever decide to read ISM’s mission statement, he will learn that it refers to armed struggle only in the context of clearing the misperceptions that such is the only method of resistance and that all Palestinians engage in it. In contrast, the mission statement declares that ISM exclusively engages in “the proactive tactics of non-violent direct action epitomized by Gandhi, Archbishop Tutu, Dr. Martin Luther King, and other practitioners of creative non-violent resistance.” If Hammer reads further, he will find that while armed struggle is mentioned only once–and only in the context just described–the bulk of the mission statement refers to nonviolent resistance–that is, the only form of resistance practiced by ISM.
Ironically while Kantor’s article stated that “ISM refers to a ‘right’ of Palestinian ‘armed struggle,'” Hammer altered it to read that ISM “upholds” the right, which is even more misleading. He does not explain how ISM “upholds” this right. ISM explicitly states that it acknowledges the right of Palestinians to resist occupation in accordance with international laws. This is not a blanket “uphold[ing]” of “armed struggle,” as Hammer seems to claim.
And of all the right-wing articles Hammer could choose to swipe from, he chose to swipe from Kantor’s article, which is full of false statements, such as the outrageous allegation that ISM activist Susan Barclay was working for Hamas and Islamic Jihad. Kantor even falsely attributes a quote to Rachel Corrie: “More Martyrs are ready to defend the honor of Palestine.” None of this seems to trouble Hammer, who still finds Kantor credible enough to sample.
While Hammer doesn’t mind flat-out plagiarism, he is just as capable of misleading when he does mention his sources. In describing The Evergreen State College, the school that Rachel Corrie attended, Hammer references only one quote:
“The radical ideologies espoused every day at Evergreen State College are of every nasty branch of extremism,” one columnist recently wrote. “Anti-Americanism. Anti-God. Anti-life. Anti-Israel. Anti-capitalism. Anti-tradition.”
And yet who is this single “columnist” that Hammer chooses to quote? Hammer doesn’t say, but a simple Google search reveals his source: A young ultraconservative named Hans Zeiger. Zeiger, who is 18 years old, has never attended The Evergreen State College. In fact, in the article from which Hammer quoted, Zeiger cites only two visits to Evergreen–one of which was when he was in the seventh grade!
Interestingly Hammer does not bother to quote Zeiger’s homophobic statement in the same article. Nor does Hammer note Zeiger’s suggestion that Evergreen may have connections to “terrorist organizations,” or his ridiculous claim that Corrie “had stood guard outside of Yasser Arafat’s compound”, when in fact she had never even set foot in Ramallah. Hammer conveniently ignores all these revelatory tidbits because that would destroy the credibility of the man whom Hammer selectively quotes and refers to simply as a “columnist.”
Of course credibility is something that Hammer has trouble judging. He finds contradiction in the testimony of Joe “Smith,” who witnessed Corrie’s killing. “Smith” insists that the bulldozer driver saw Corrie as he approached her, and saw her when she climbed atop the dirt pile that he was pushing, while elsewhere “Smith” “acknowledged that the bulldozer operator could well have lost sight of Corrie after she tumbled down the dirt pile” that he was pushing–that is, the driver eventually lost sight of her as he was driving over her. That would seem to be common sense, and Hammer fails to explain where the contradiction lay.
Hammer also implies that ISM activists intentionally misrepresented the photos taken during the day of Corrie’s killing, that the activists merely “claimed” that the news wires had miscaptioned the photos. His baseless conclusion is that the activists were “probably just too young and inexperienced to know” not to “burn” the media. Of course he merely speculates when he says “probably,” but that seems to be good enough for his style of journalism. Instead of seeking the truth, Hammer is satisfied with his own speculation and moves on.
This type of shallow skepticism is reserved for the activists, while Israeli military claims are treated with respect by Hammer and often go unquestioned, even when the statements are clearly disputable and even laughable. While ISM activists “claimed” their versions of the story, Hammer trusts IDF spokesperson Sharon Feingold as having “assured” and “explained” to him the facts. Feingold “assured” him that the IDF “do[es] not target civilians,” that Tom Hurndall was shot in the head simply because he was too close to a Palestinian gunman. Feingold “explained” that reporter James Miller was killed because he was caught in some crossfire. Hammer questions neither of Feingold’s claims, despite numerous witnesses to both killings who all contradict the claims. In the case of James Miller, the Israeli military even evolved its explanation, since the autopsy report contradicted the earlier IDF claims that Miller was killed by Palestinians. Indeed, video footage of the Miller shooting, filmed by a fellow journalist and also clearly contradicting IDF claims, is publicly available.
Hammer gives no indication that he has viewed the footage of his fellow Middle East journalists. However he admits to having viewed an Israeli propaganda video that was produced specifically to absolve the military of any responsiblity in Rachel Corrie’s death. The video, along with a PowerPoint slideshow that was distributed to US Congress members, was produced prior to the conclusion of the Israeli investigation.
This does not keep Hammer from finding that the propaganda video–which featured the inside of a D9 bulldozer–made “a credible case” of innocence for the Israelis. Nor does he wonder why the Israeli investigation, which he states was supposed to be “transparent,” has not been made public. And nor does he mention that according to the Israeli investigation, at no point did the bulldozer even drive over Corrie’s body, clearly contradicting the tread marks that appear in the photo reproduced in the Mother Jones article, not to mention contradicting the Israeli autopsy report and all the eyewitnesses who were interviewed for the investigation.
And when Feingold informs Hammer that “Palestinian terrorists are using the [Palestinian] civilians to hide behind,” he finds it worthy to quote but not to question, despite the fact that there is no clear documentation to corroborate Feingold’s accusation. Conversely, there is a wealth of documentation of Israeli soldiers using Palestinian civilians as human shields–what the IDF refers to as the “neighbor procedure”–as can be found in the mainstream Israeli press, in accounts of ISM activists, and in the work of several human rights groups, such as Human Rights Watch. In fact Hammer extensively interviewed and quoted Miranda Sissons, a researcher for Human Rights Watch, but somehow failed to ask her about this use of human shields, as if Feingold’s “assurances” were adequate enough.
As well, Hammer informs us that when the Israeli military conducts home demolitions, “residents can gather their belongings; and each house is searched for occupants before it is demolished.” There have been numerous cases that prove otherwise. We can read one such Human Rights Watch report from Rafah in late 2002: “At least 20 people were injured, nine of them children, when the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) prevented residents from evacuating their home while the IDF was demolishing the next-door house…” Just two weeks before Corrie was killed, a pregnant Palestinian woman, Nuha Sweidan, was killed in the process of an Israeli-conducted house demolition. And in the cases where residents are actually allowed to “gather their belongings,” Hammer fails to mention that such accomodations are often afforded fifteen minutes or less. Again, Hammer saw fit to print the Israeli claims and felt no need to question them in the face of documented facts.
But Hammer already proves that he is too willing to document and judge things he knows nothing about. For example, he revealed that “some of [Rachel Corrie’s] causes verged on New Age parody.” But he provided only one example–one that reveals his own ignorance: “She paraded through Olympia dressed as a dove in the ‘Procession of the Species,’ billed as an ‘environmentally aware celebration of the earth and life.'” Rather than being “New Age parody,” the Procession of the Species is actually a large annual family event in Corrie’s hometown that attracts tens of thousands of locals of all backgrounds. Last year Corrie organized scores of Olympia residents, young and old, to participate as doves for the event. Hammer does not bother to research the event before dismissing it as “New Age parody.” Based on this single false assumption, Hammer concluded that “some of her causes verged on New Age parody.” Was this Hammer’s attempt to make his story more colorful?
This kind of generalization also enables him to mysteriously state that the photo of Corrie burning a paper American flag “prompted anti-war protesters and other likely allies to distance themselves from her.” Once again, he makes a generalization and provides no elaboration. Just how many “anti-war protesters and other likely allies” did he find before he was satisfied enough to make a generalization? (Incidentally, the caption of the photo of Corrie with the burning paper flag incorrectly states that it occurred during a mock trial of the Bush administration. Actually it occurred during the worldwide protests against a pending US war on Iraq on February 15, in which Corrie was one of over 10 million protesters. The mock trial happened a few weeks later. There are several minor errors such as this throughout the article.)
He extends his generalizations with misleading accusations about the nature of ISM. In addition to misquoting ISM’s mission statement via Front Page Magazine, Hammer stereotypes ISM as “a motley collection of anti-globalization and animal-rights activists, self-described anarchists and seekers, most in their 20s.” The truth is ISM activists range in age from 18 to 77, and they come from all backgrounds, from college students to soccer moms to white collar professionals, and they have come from all over the world. Hammer merely demonstrates his limited experience and knowledge of ISM by applying a cliche. Out of the hundreds of internationals who have participated in ISM campaigns, how many ISM activists has Hammer met personally?
He goes on to falsely claim that ISM “embrac[es] Palestinian militants, even suicide bombers, as freedom fighters,” a baseless accusation commonly alleged and left unsubstantiated by right-wing pundits. As usual he proclaims and elaborates no further. Perhaps next time he should provide us with the website link.
In a move to show he prefers the Israeli military’s point of view, he claims that ISM “has adopted a risky policy of ‘direct action’–entering military zones…” What Hammer refers to as “military zones” are actually Palestinian cities and villages, residential neighborhoods where ISM is invited by the inhabitants. Only the Israeli military refers to them as military zones. Hamas may regard Tel Aviv as a “military zone,” but I doubt Hammer would consequently label Tel Aviv as such. Indeed, quite often the Israeli military declares a city to be a “military zone” after ISM activists have settled in.
What’s amazing is that in Hammer’s 7000-word article, he spends very little time explaining what ISM really is. He makes no mention of its purely nonviolent tactics or even its most basic activities, such as accompanying ambulances, assisting farmers in reaching their crops, clearing roadblocks, and walking children to school, perhaps because they’re not sensationalist enough to merit his attention. He does not even explain ISM’s goal, except for the misleading claim that ISM “upholds” the right to “armed resistance.” In truth ISM’s goal is to nonviolently resist the Israeli occupation. That simple objective is mentioned nowhere in his article. Instead, if we are to envision ISM according to Hammer’s description, we would have to imagine that it is a group of animal-rights activists in their 20s who enter military zones and establish divestment campaigns.
Hammer’s article freely quotes IDF spokesperson Sharon Feingold as she excuses the actions of the Israeli military. But when Hammer wishes to explain ISM, he selectively quotes from third parties who have limited experience with ISM, such as an anonymous “human-rights observer in Jerusalem” and Miranda Sissons, and he does so blatantly out-of-context. The anonymous human-rights observer is quoted immediately after Hammer incorrectly recounts two sensationalized ISM actions, while Sissons criticizes ISM in the context of what she admits are “unsubstantiated allegations.”
Hammer himself describes the “recklessness” of ISM but in the process once again exposes his own recklessness and low standard of journalism. He attempts to recount the case of a young Palestinian, Shadi Sukiya, who was captured by Israeli forces in the ISM office in Jenin. According to Hammer, “ISM insists he was an innocent, terrified teenager who’d asked for refuge during an Israeli sweep.” Here, Hammer resorts to fabrication. ISM issued a press release soon after Sukiya’s capture, which shows the extent of ISM’s “insistence”:
One of the volunteers went into the hallway to see what was happening and met a young man coming up the stairs. He looked terrified, was soaking wet and appeared to be in pain. Concerned about his welfare–under Israeli military curfew, Palestinians spotted in the streets are shot on site–he was brought into the apartment. He spoke only Arabic, which none of the ISM volunteers present understood. He was given a change of clothes, a hot drink and a blanket… Eventually the military knocked on the ISM door and 30 soldiers entered with their machine guns trained. They arrested the young man, claiming he was “wanted.” The two women were not able to prevent the soldiers from taking the young man, whose name they did not even know, but requested that he be treated humanely.
ISM reported only the events as they happened. ISM “insisted” nothing else. The question, as always, is where did Hammer come up with his claim? And where was the “recklessness?” Hammer appropriately recounts the IDF’s claim that Sukiya “was a ‘senior militant’ who’d sent four suicide attackers into Israel.” And yet he doesn’t follow up to reveal that Sukiya was subsequently held under administrative detention–that is, he was held indefinitely without charges. Hammer made no attempt to verify the IDF’s accusations. Hammer also doesn’t bother to note that the IDF additionally claimed they found either a pistol or two rifles in the ISM Jenin office when they apprehended Sukiya, a blatant lie which both the IDF and consequently the Associated Press were forced to retract.
Apparently Hammer didn’t feel too “burned” by the IDF lies. (Incidentally, one of Hammer’s valued sources, Front Page Magazine, has not retracted its own claim that “a pistol and a cache of Kalashnikov rifles” were found in the Jenin office, and they have twice claimed that ISM volunteer Susan Barclay was hiding Sukiya in the Jenin office. In reality Barclay was in the United States at the time of the Sukiya “incident.”) It is revealing that Hammer would apparently concoct an ISM claim that undermines the actual testimony of the activists, while he conveniently omits the proven lies of the IDF and his right-wing sources, which would reasonably undermine their own claims.
The other instance of supposed “recklessness” occurred when two Britons briefly visited the ISM Rafah office. One of the Britons later committed a suicide bombing in Tel Aviv. Hammer claims that they were “posing as activists,” although he doesn’t bother to mention exactly how they posed as activists, because his allegation is false.
Shortly before noon on Friday, the 25th of April, about 15 people came to the ISM apartment in Rafah, the Gaza Strip. They were in three groups: 4 British citizens from London who were looking to prepare a summer camp in Gaza in conjunction with local Palestinians from Rafah; three Italians and two Britons. The last two have been accused of perpetrating the attack in Tel Aviv early last Wednesday morning.
Our group of 5 offered all of them tea. I asked them general questions like who they were? were they with any group? and what they were doing in Rafah? The two accused Britons answered that they weren’t with any particular organization but that they came with “alternative tourism”…We stayed in the apartment for approximately 15 minutes, before we went down to the place where Rachel Corrie was killed by an Israeli Occupation Force bulldozer on March 16. Owing to the presence and approach of an Israeli army tank, we were only able to spend a few minutes at the site where Rachel was killed. We placed a flower on the place in the dirt where Rachel was run over. Our ISM group then went to the house of Dr. Samir Nasrallah, the house that Rachel died defending, while everybody else, including the group that had visited us, went their own way.
ISM neither harbored nor provided any assistance to the two. When the bombing happended, ISM activists stated upfront that they had briefly met the two. Again, Hammer fails to explain exactly what ISM did that was reckless–only that it was. He is always willing to list the charges, but as a journalist is unwilling to investigate them.
What’s more, even if the two Britons had posed as activists, it is unclear how that would make ISM in any way responsible. Last May, a man disguised as an observant Jew boarded a bus in the French Hill settlement and detonated the explosives strapped to his body. Would that make observant Jews reckless? Would that make the bus driver who allowed him to board reckless?
However, that is enough for Hammer to label the ISM “reckless.” Hammer goes on to write, “Still, the perception has lingered that the group is a sympathizer–and even a harborer–of terrorists.” Hammer doesn’t say among whom this “perception has lingered,” only that it has. Nor does he investigate the validity of his unattributed claim. For Hammer, reporting hearsay is enough. Such unsubstantiated allegations are best left to the gossip columns, if left anywhere at all–not in writing that purports to be investigative journalism.
But Hammer is too caught up in artistic license to report accurately, as when he claims, “Corrie had come to Rafah a paper radical, primed for outrage, but with little real-world experience. That changed immediately.” The truth is that Rachel was not “primed for outrage.” Her primary interest was in establishing a sister city relationship, so she was more “primed” for exchanging pen pal letters. That didn’t sound too exciting to Hammer, who took the opportunity to read Corrie’s mind.
Hammer concludes the article with his thesis that Rachel Corrie died for nothing. He claims that “momentum has faded for a U.S. congressional investigation,” which is incorrect. House Concurrent Resolution 111 started out with 11 sponsors and has grown to 49 sponsors in the House, with the latest two having signed on September 3 (Congress was out of session in August), so the resolution is still gaining sponsors. And on September 9, the Berkeley City Council voted to endorse Resolution 111. The reason the resolution has not moved is not because “momentum has faded,” but because action is required by the House Committee on International Relations, which, under control of Henry Hyde, is failing to address it.
Hammer continues: “Corrie herself has faded into obscurity, a subject of debate in Internet chat rooms and practically nowhere else.” Once again, reality contradicts Hammer’s world-view. Her letters from Rafah have now been published in mainstream English-language media such as Harper’s and The Guardian. They have been translated into numerous other languages and have been reprinted in publications throughout the world. In the Arab world, her name continues to resonate as a reminder that not all Americans support the policies of their president. Documentaries have been made about her in the US, Japan, the Middle East, and elsewhere. Around the world, including in Israel, songs and poems have been written about her. Participation in ISM has risen as a reaction to her killing. Memorials, scholarship funds, and humanitarian centers are being established in her name and in her honor. ISM has even been nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize, with special recognition of Corrie, Brian Avery, and Tom Hurndall. Arab parents are naming their children after her. Veterans for Peace has awarded her with a posthumous membership. Susan Sontag recognized her as she presented the Rothko Chapel Oscar Romero Award to Ishai Menuchin of Yesh Gvul, and Israeli conscientious objectors have evoked her name when they explain their refusal to serve in the Occupied Territories.
But perhaps Hammer is too busy debating on Internet chat rooms to notice. Or worse, Hammer merely wanted to add some melodrama to his story: “And that, perhaps, is what is saddest.”
The article is littered with other errors, many are of peripheral significance, but taken together, along with all of Hammer’s proclivities as described above, add up to a shoddy piece of work: Corrie did not “propose an independent-study program in which she would travel to Gaza”, she did not fly to Israel from Seattle, the friend who returned from five months in Gaza was not involved in ISM and thus did not “talk enthusiasically to Corrie about the International Solidarity Movement,” the Red Cross did not ask ISM to vacate its Jenin office, the Arabic sentence in the article was translated to English incorrectly, and the list goes on.
Hammer’s style of investigative reporting utilizes plagiarism, indiscriminate surfing of right-wing websites, unquestioning reliance on hearsay and authority figures, skimpy fact-checking, misinformed speculation, artistic license, and a contrived melodramatic thesis. What’s most amazing is how he is able to consolidate all these flaws into a single article. Ironically the cover story of this Mother Jones issue deals with environmental protection. Perhaps Mother Jones could have spared a few trees by omitting the Joshua Hammer article, and instead providing us with links to the websites where Hammer took his information from. Then we could judge the credibility of his sources ourselves.
Phan Nguyen lives in Olympia, Washington and can be reached at: nguyenp@evergreen.edu
[Please take the time to write to Mother Jones and express your outrage at Hammer’s shoddy reporting. Send your letters to Backtalk, Mother Jones, 731 Market Street, Suite 600, San Francisco, CA 94103; fax: (415) 665-6696; or email backtalk@motherjones.com ]
