Friends,

Thank you everyone who contributed in any way to the event Wednesday evening and to all who joined us.  It has been a challenging week on a number of levels.  Having the support of all who made the event possible and of all who attended was more important this particular week than I could have anticipated.  I am very grateful to all of you

I thank all of you, too, who have written or called KOMO TV or Ken Schramm about his very negative commentary regarding Rachel, our family, and the Caterpillar lawsuit.  These attacks aren’t new, of course, but it is a new topic.  I know that many may have questions about the lawsuits and I hope that as we go along that the answers become clear.  There was a Robert Jamieson opinion piece in the Seattle P.I. this morning.  I had a good conversation with him when he called late last night.  Craig talked with him yesterday.  He asked me if I had thought about the P.R. implications of the Caterpillar lawsuit, and I told him that, frankly, that wasn’t a consideration for me.  He asked, “The decision came from the heart?”  And I said, “Yes.”  I hope people will come to understand that in all of the choices we are making that we are doing what we feel is right.  I, of course, wish that Jamieson had been supportive of the lawsuit.  I actually think he’s a bit conflicted about that.  But overall, I think this is a good and quite constructive article—except for one statement.  After reading Jamieson’s article, I dashed off a note to him this morning that is pasted here and addresses that.

Robert,

Thank you for taking the time to speak with both Craig and me yesterday.  I read the article and will probably have more to say about it.  I certainly respect your point of view, and I found much of what you had to say heartening.   I want to draw your attention though to a statement you make in the article that I feel is the kind of message that distorts the picture.   This is really what jumped out at me—more than your position on the CAT lawsuit—so you know how important I feel it is: 

“She saw how the Israeli government uses bulldozers to raze homes of suspected Palestinian terrorists and foster fear.”   I can talk to you about this further, but for now I want to quote from the Israeli Human Rights Organization B’selem which reports the following:

“Three Different Kinds of House Demolitions:  Over the last four years, Israel has demolished some 4,100 Palestinian homes in the Occupied Territories . About sixty percent of the demolitions were carried out in the framework of what Israel calls "clearing operations." Some twenty-five percent were destroyed because Israel claims they were built without permit. The remaining fifteen percent were demolished as a means to punish the families and neighbors of Palestinians suspected of involvement in carrying out attacks against Israelis. “

Fifteen percent of home demolitions were directed at the families of “suspected Palestinian terrorists.”   I believe B’tselem reports that twelve innocent people were punished for every one that may have been associated with “terrorism” in those demolitions.  Israel recently ceased (or put on hold) that type of demolition because they said they were not being effective.  (There was no mention of the fact that they are also a violation of international humanitarian law.)

But more to the point, the demolitions in Gaza where Rachel was killed were “clearing operations”—part of the 60 % of home demolitions that occur because of the clearing Israel does to build walls, roads, settlements, and to indiscriminately punish.  Human Rights Watch in their report, “Razing Rafah” issued late last year reported that over 16,000 residents of Rafah have lost their homes in the last four years.  The number has now risen to over 17,000.   Rachel was killed so the Israelis could clear the buffer area along the border and continue the construction of the high steel wall—that now runs along the border just beyond where the Nasrallah house stood.  This was not about terrorists.  This was about control—keeping Gaza under siege.  This is a wall that our media doesn’t even talk about, though it will have the effect of keeping Gaza under siege if and when disengagement occurs. 

There is much more to say about this.  I would like to send you photos of the Nasrallah family returning this week to the spot where they think there house may have stood—in order to have a memorial for Rachel.  But for now I am going for a walk with a friend.  This is hard work—and I need a break from it for an hour or so.

Have a good day, Robert.

Cindy

P.S.   Caterpillar aids and abets the work of the Israeli military by continuing to sell the equipment, the parts,  and the maintenance information when they know how this equipment is being used.  They have been put “on notice” that there is a pattern of human rights violations that have been committed over many years and that continue with their equipment, and they continue to lend support to it.  Someone suing Honda because a bomber randomly uses that type of vehicle is not a comparable analogy.