Remembering Rachel Corrie

    The courageous, visionary Israeli peace organizer Gila Svirsky delivered a moving address/homily at an event the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions held to mark this week’s one-year anniversary of the killing of U.S. peace activist Rachel Corrie. A friend sent it to me today, and I’m very happy to share it here with you:


I was not present in Rafah that terrible day, but I have frequently replayed in my mind the events leading up to the moment when a bulldozer rolled over Rachel Corrie. I think to myself: What compelled this young woman, neither Jewish nor Palestinian, to travel 10,000 miles from home, to throw in her lot with a family not her own, a people not her own, and ultimately meet a death that came suddenly, swiftly, in an instant of shocked comprehension.
In the biblical book of Ruth, we read of Naomi whose two sons have died, leaving two young widows. Naomi chooses to depart from the land of Moab and return to her home in Judah. She encourages her daughters-in-law to remain in Moab, their own land. One daughter-in-law kisses Naomi and bids her farewell. The other, Ruth, chooses to accompany Naomi to the distant climes of Judah. Why does Ruth go? “Entreat me not to leave thee,” says Ruth, “for whither thou goest, I will go; and where thou lodgest, I will lodge; thy people shall be my people, and thy God, my God.” And she continues, “Where thou diest, will I die, and there will I be buried: if the Lord do so to me, and more also, if ought but death part thee and me”.
The biblical figure of Ruth journeys to her new people, expecting never to return, but to be buried in foreign soil.
The modern figure of Rachel journeyed to her new people, expecting to return for the start of the school year, and never to be buried, or to be buried at some vastly distant unimaginable future, but never to find her death in the soil of her chosen destination…


She journeyed to her new people expecting to find another culture, another language, another way of interacting, but never to find another attitude toward the taking of life. She journeyed expecting to see death, but never to experience it directly, never toencounter herself as the object of deliberate death.
In his treatise Fear and Trembling, the philosopher Kierkegaard recounts the
story of Abraham as he takes his son Isaac to be sacrificed on Mount Moriah.
The story is so unfathomable – how could Abraham take his son, his only son,
and be willing to slaughter him for no apparent reason other than God’s
inscrutable request? Kierkegaard constructs several scenarios with thoughts
and emotions that may have been coursing through Abraham’s heart as he
walked his son to the place where he would kill him.
Writes Kierkegaard in one such scenario: “It was early in the morning,
Abraham rose betimes, he embraced Sarah, the bride of his old age, and Sarah
kissed Isaac, who had taken away her reproach, who was her pride, her hope
for all time. So they rode on in silence along the way, and Abraham’s
glance was fixed upon the ground until the fourth day when he lifted up his
eyes and saw afar off Mount Moriah, but his glance turned again to the
ground. Silently he laid the wood in order, he bound Isaac, in silence he
drew the knife – then he saw the ram which God had prepared. Then he
offered that and returned home.From that time on Abraham became old, he
could not forget that God had required this of him. Isaac throve as before,
but Abraham’s eyes were darkened, and he knew joy no more.”
In my mind’s eye when I see Rachel standing on that mound of earth and
facing the bulldozer, I envision a young woman looking at the small window
fast approaching her in the brow of the bulldozer, trying to peer into that
dark space, to find the eyes of the soldier who was driving, perhaps someone
her own age, someone who also loved to dance and joke with a younger
brother, someone who was thinking about how long it would take until he
could finish this job and get back to the base where he didn’t have to face
the anger of people who don’t understand what he’s doing, thinking about his
weekend pass and his own future, maybe he would go back to school and finish
that course, or about his own loneliness, and how it is to be out here alone
at the gears every day, and then there’s this girl out there, and why doesn’
t she get out of the way. What was the next thought of this young man?
“Shall I kill her?” or “Shall I scare her – she’ll move at the last minute”?
or “I’ll show them once and for all” or “Still time to brake”. Or some
other brief words that race through his mind as he hurtles ahead.
In this land where blood pours down like lemon drops and covers all the
senses, to paraphrase Joni Mitchell, we cannot know what thought compelled
this young man to carry out the deed. Blood pours down like lemon drops and
covers all the senses, and the senses ascribe new meanings to things. Later
that day, he may have wept and found comfort among his friends. He may have
shrugged it off – another killing in the line of duty, a sad but necessary
evil, a dirty job but someone’s gotta do it, another notch in his belt of
military exploits. But we do know one thing: He will live with the death
of Rachel for the rest of his life. He may not read every article about
her, he may agree only with those that justify his deed, but we know that he
reads some of what is written, and we know that he thinks about what
happened that day, and if things could have, somehow, ended differently.
How do we know this? We know because we agree with Rachel, who risked her
life in the belief that whoever was driving that vehicle would stop before
he harmed her. We know because we believe, like Rachel, in the fundamental
decency of every human being, and that even those who kill, harbor pain
inside their hearts for that death. We do not have to forgive this man or
this system that led him to kill in order to understand that the trauma of
Rachel’s death, which affected hundreds of thousands, millions of people
throughout the world, also affected the man who took her life.
On that blindingly sunny day in Rafah, when optimism glints irrationally
from every tank, every M16, every dogtag on the necks of 18-year-olds in
uniform, photos of loved ones in their pockets, Rachel stood her ground with
ease, waiting for his eyes to meet hers, waiting for decency to slow the
grinding treads, waiting for the moment of sanity to kick in, to interrupt
the flow of tension swelling toward collision, waiting for the inevitable to
happen – that reason would prevail.
Today we are one year from that moment, 12 months of time to think about it,
and still no more capable of fathoming what transpired that day: that until
the moment of impact, Rachel never lost her faith in the decency of this
bulldozer driver; that until the moment of impact, the driver never
understood that he was capable of this terrible crime.
Writes Kierkegaard, “It was a quiet evening when Abraham rode out alone, and
he rode to Mount Moriah; he threw himself upon his face, he prayed God to
forgive him his sin, that he had been willing to offer Isaac, that the
father had forgotten his duty toward the son.”
In my own efforts to understand these terrible deeds, the one on Mount
Moriah and the one in Rafah, I ask myself: At Moriah, what was the more
terrible – that Abraham had been willing to sacrifice his son? Or that God
had demanded this of him?
And in Rafah, who is the real sinner – the soldier who ended the life of a
girl on a mound of earth in a land not his and not hers – a land where
Rachel, like Ruth, was invited and welcomed, but he was an interloper and
resented? Or, in Rafah, too, is the real sinner the God who had demanded
this of him – God the army officers, God the brutal policies, God the
society of those willing to inflict pain on others to still their own fears
and traumas?
And whose gaze turned from one of trust to astonishing alarm? The driver,
who trusted that Rachel would leap away before it was too late? Or Rachel,
who trusted that the driver would halt the vehicle one tread sooner?
I end with an excerpt translated from “Season of the Camomile” by the
Palestinian Samir Rantisi. This poem was written 16 years ago after the
killing of an Israeli and a Palestinian near the village of Beita:

    How many more ordinary mornings
    will fill us with horror
    and transform our day to another sky
    who chose us
    to be the victim and the symbol
    to be the beginning of the beginnings
    the moment of historical trial
    we, the two dreamers
    the routine, the ordinary
    who chose us
    to be the heart of the conflict
    and the crossroads of time
    why didn’t you find someone besides me to be a symbol?
    why didn’t they find someone besides you to be a victim?
    why could they only find Beita in the spring.

Our hearts in grief, we ask: Why didn’t they find someone besides you to be a victim? Why didn’t they find someone besides you to be a symbol? Ah, Rachel, ah, unknown soldier, why could you only find Rafah in the spring?
Gila Svirsky
Delivered at an evening in memory of Rachel Corrie sponsored by the Israeli
Committee Against House Demolitions.

12 thoughts on “Remembering Rachel Corrie”

  1. Helena – I am sorry that you chose to reiterate the same old mendacious canards about the Rachel Corrie debacle.
    Rachel Corrie died trying to protect tunnels used to smuggle weapons into Gaza. These weapons had been and would continue to be used to kill Israeli civillians.
    All evidence indicates that Rachel was not crushed underneath the bulldozer (these are damned heavy bulldozers). If she had been, she would have died instantly and would have been absolutely flattened. The sad truth is that Rachel died under a mound of soil as a result of her own sheer stupidity and the driver’s unawareness that she was there.
    There is also no evidence that the Israeli driving the bulldozer even saw her – ISM fabricated photographic evidence to suggest that this was the case, but the two photos were taken at completely different times and of different bulldozers.
    When Rachel wasn’t teaching Palestinians how to burn US flags, she was abetting terrorists whose sole aim was to kill as many Jews as possible.
    Sorry if I do not shed a single tear for her. If I sound at all dyslogistical, it is only because I am sick of the beatification of ‘Saint Corrie’ by those who do not want the truth to get in the way of a good story.

  2. Lewis–
    Your contribution here is so tragically venom-filled that I feel sorry for you.
    Oh, you write with such ‘certitude’ about exactly how it all happened on the day Rachel was killed! As though you were there! Amazing!
    Lewis, I do not believe that you were there.
    If you can produce any evidence that backs up the serious accusations you express here against Rachel, please tell us what it is. If you cannot back up all of these accusations, we will just have to conclude that you are a sad, sad person so consumed with hate that you are prepared to disseminate quite unsubstantiated libels against a person who had dedicated her life to the pursuit of nonviolent means of social change.
    What does that tell us about you? What does it tell YOU about you, Lewis? Do you like to be such a person?
    Until I see your presentation of your evidence, I will stick completely with the views expressed by Gila Svirsky, someone whom I know and trust.

  3. Helena – I can back everything up, although I am not sure why I would have to be there to comment. Were you there?
    Obviously, you have no desire to know the truth, so I will not bother elucidating. Feel free to engage in ad hominem attacks on me if that makes you feel good – it doesn’t make you any less of a terrorist supporter.

  4. Lewis– the world still awaits your presentation of the sources of your evidence. “I can back everything up” doesn’t quite seem to cut it…

  5. Helena – I will back up my points, not for your sake but for those people reading your site who might have only heard one side of the story and who are open minded enough to hear the other.
    Point 1: “Rachel Corrie died trying to protect tunnels”
    For anyone wanting to read about the nature and extent of the tunnels under Rafah, this link is a good place to start: http://www.idf.il/newsite/english/TunnelChronology.stm
    Rachel lavishes praise on the suicide bombers in her diary entry of February 10: http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0302/S00049.htm
    … so it should come as no surprise that she would want to help them out…
    The IDF has on several occasions pointed out that the operation on March 15 was to to uncover explosive devices and destroying smuggling tunnels. It is entitled to do this under the Oslo accords.
    I have no reason to doubt the IDF’s putative reasons for the bulldozer operations. Do you have any evidence to the contrary?
    There are differing reports as to whether the IDF was attempting to remove shrubbery or trying to destroy the house of a Dr Samir Masri. What is interesting is that when Dr Masri was asked whether in fact there were tunnels underneath his house, his response was ‘you can’t ask that’. http://www.thestranger.com/2003-04-03/feature.html
    One would have imagined that a denial would have sufficed.

  6. Point three: “Rachel was not crushed underneath the bulldozer” – This is clear from all autopsy reports on Rachel. Do you have any evidence to the contrary?

  7. Point four – “Rachel died … as a result of her own sheer stupidity”. What would you call playing chicken with a bulldozer?

  8. Lewis, thanks for the effort you went to find sources to corroborate your accusations.
    I went to the first website you cite. It’s an IDF site titled “Exposure of Smuggling Tunnels: A Chronology”. Amazingly, it includes no entries for March 2003.
    In fact, it includes no entries at all relating to tunnel discoveries between February 11, 2003 and September 17, 2003.
    I went to the second site you cited, which contains excerpts from somethng that may or may not have been Rachel’s diary. Nowhere there did I find anything that resembles what you claim: Rachel lavishes praise on the suicide bombers in her diary entry of February 10. Can you or anyone tell me the part where she does that?
    Regarding Dr. Masri’s denial, obviously if he is guilty (and we don’t know that) then he has a right to remain silent. It is up to his accusers to prove any “case” against him. But you cite none, Lewis! Not even that IDF website titled “Exposure of Smuggling Tunnels: A Chronology”, as I just noted.
    If that is really the best you can come up with as “evidence” for your sad accusations, why don’t you just admit you have none, and apologize to Rachel’s grieving family for your really sad attempts to defame her character and her idealism?

  9. If there are any other specific points that you would have me address, feel free to ask. However, for those who don’t know the real Rache Corrie and who were doubting my comments on her teaching Palestinian children to burn the US flag, look at these photos (taken by an AP photographer a couple of days before Corrie died): http://www.honestreporting.com/graphics/articles/corrie.jpg
    Look at her face in these pics, if you want to see hate-filled venom, a sad, sad person so consumed with hate. What a lovely non-violent person she was… Helena: Res ipsa loquitur

  10. Helena – As for you accepting verbatim the words of Gila Svirsky as if they were mannah from heaven, perhaps I might make a few comments about her…
    – She can be relied upon to be anti-Israel in pretty much every position that she takes.
    – She cares so little about the people of Israel that she held a protest rally the day after the Dolphinarium attacks which killed many Israeli teenagers (whose blood was still warm).
    – Who has worked together with the ISM on numerous occasions.
    – She is an American who (based on her own admissions) hates Israel, notwithstanding that she lives there.
    – She is a lesbian who (to my knowledge) has not once criticised the Palestinian (or any arab country’s) treatment of homosexuality or homosexuals.
    I could go on…
    You treat her as if she is a definitive source, whereas I have no reason to believe a word she says. Indeed, her ‘article’ on Corrie is a parody of itself.

  11. Rachel Corrie, a visionary? I think of her more as an adventure tourist, getting caught up in a conflict she knew nothing about. Like all young leftists who join ISM and travel to Israel to be where the action is and change the world, she failed to realize that the Palestinian terrorists are the real enemies of peace. Although she and her little friendies at ISM, had ner’ a bad word for Hamas and its spiritual leader Ahmed Yasin who uses religion to justify the hatred and killing of Jews and their military leader, Dr Death Rantisi, both of whom I am glad to say have since expired, victims of what israel does to people who try and perpatrate atrocities against Jews.
    I feel sad for Rachel Corrie since she hadn’t a clue what she was doing on a pile of rubble in Rafeh. She didn’t understand the consquences of her actions.

Comments are closed.