So how, at just 23, did Rachel Corrie become a Palestinian martyr?

Full Title: She was a girl from small-town America with dreams of being a poet or a dancer. So how, at just 23, did Rachel Corrie become a Palestinian martyr?

<snip>

"It is impossible to underestimate quite how much life for Rachel Corrie's family has changed since she was killed by an Israeli army Caterpillar D9 bulldozer in the Gaza Strip on 16 March 2003. As Rachel's elder sister Sarah puts it: 'What was normal doesn't exist for us now.'

'After Rachel was killed.' When I meet the Corries, it swiftly becomes clear that there is a great deal they want to speak out about, but it is these four words, heavy with loss, that they have repeated most over the past five years.

Before Rachel was killed trying to prevent a Palestinian home in Rafah from being demolished, they were a pretty ordinary West Coast American family. It has been said in the past that she came from a left-leaning, alternative background, but this is not strictly accurate. Craig Corrie is an insurance executive, who has spent 24 years of his career working for the same firm. Cindy Corrie is a musician and teacher. Since the mid-Seventies they have mostly lived in the same slate-grey house in Olympia, a small town with many coffee shops an hour's drive out of Seattle, and it was here that they raised their three children, Chris, Sarah and Rachel. True, the Corries liked to debate politics around the kitchen table. They also liked to talk about the cats and the chickens, going skiing at the weekend, the vegetable plot, the family holiday cottage in Minnesota. Whenever the conversation did turn towards the Palestinian issue, Craig and Cindy's sympathies would instinctively fall on the Israeli side.

After Rachel was killed, life changed abruptly. Over the past five years they've had to deal with the loss of their youngest daughter, at the age of 23. Cindy, a quietly spoken woman not given to over-statement or, indeed, self-pity, describes a period of mourning that will never really end."

much more

not much has changed for the better for the Palestinians or Israelis.

Anybody that says Rachel Corrie is not a hero is just plain wrong. That girl was amazing.

and you are correct - amazing...

(including a few on this board) defend the Israelis' actions and refuse to acknowledge any blame for this murder.

Why is that so?

or that Rachel Corrie deserves some of it?

Just a thought....

and a request that no one alert the post I am replying to, it should stand as an example of the attitude of some towards opposition even if it is nonviolent.

and see post 21

"deserve" it.

On the other hand, she was running around in a war zone playing "chicken" with heavy machinery with a limited degree of sight. It's a minor miracle no such incident had previously occured.

The ISM volunteers kept interfering; every time they were removed, they came back. As I noted, this wasn't the first time they'd try to run in front of the bulldozers. I think that when she dropped, the driver assumed she'd gotten out of the way (again) and given they'd been at it all day, got careless and didn't make sure that was the case before proceeding.

If my assumption of the course of events is correct, the driver was negligent in not doing so; the commander was negligent in not ensuring that no-one was in the area (in his shoes, after the second time they came back, I'd have cuffed them all and parked them somewhere until the end of the operation) and Corrie and her friends were negligent in their conduct.

Clear enough for you?

innocent civilians from the IDF in their immoral act. Someone has to stand up for them. I'm always amused when Israel's defenders get going. Anyway, the account of the observers that day speaks for themselves. I'd take their words over the blind defense of the IDF killing innocent civilians any day of the week.

Since you're apparently running both sides of this conversation, I'll just bow out and leave you (and azurnoir) to it.

"cleaned up" one way or another

prefer to blame the victim?

She was on land that does not belong to those who murdered her. By what right, by what standard do they deny her life?

It should be cross-posted in GD...

And, mind you, the speed of a bulldozer is not great.

But she thought she was so special. She thought she knew the world so well that just her magic presence would SAVE THAT HOUSE.

So you venerate her as a saint.

Let me know when you spare a thought for the poor jerk who was driving the bulldozer. Let me know when you ask one question about that human being's life before or after.

I detest kneejerk adoration.

There has never been any evidence of malice aforethought, one of the required elements for 1st degree murder on the part of the operator.

I've seen lots of claims on both sides and at times polemics. She was doing what she thought was right and for that has my respect. I am yet to see that there was a particular conspiracy to kill her, just destroy homes.

Rachel Corrie was a young woman who died tragically while doing what she thought right. Whether one agrees with her actions or not, she should be respected and mourned.

However, that doesn't mean that she was murdered - and there seems to me to be no convincing evidence that she was. 'Innocent until proved guilty' should apply to all accusations of murder.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

destroy homes and water wells and the very means of living for Palestinians, and Palestinians themselves.

To quote an Israeli leader, they are bringing "the shoah on the people of Gaza".

And you have reduced that individual to a faceless, mindless cog in a machine. Not one thought, not one word have I ever read about the human being that kept driving that slow machine while that sanctimonious, pampered child stood there in her complete arrogant certainty that she knew her world and the driver would stop.

Was it a man? A woman? Was it someone who lost people in a Palestinian bus or market bombing? Was it a college student full of his own arrogant certainty? An old man with numbers on his arm? Who was it? What happened to that person after that deed? Not one of you has ever cared to ask. So much for your caring humanity.

Please, tell us where he lives? Perhaps he has a daughter Rachel's age. What was it like for him to kill someone like that? Did he feel he was just doing his job?

Please, tell us why he destroyed homes. Please tell us why he hurt people on a routine basis.
Please tell us why he killed a young woman. I want to know more.

Why did he allow himself to be a cog in the Israeli military machine?

Here is the testimony, heard on Israeli TV, from another Cat driver, who worked in Jenin:
An Israeli bulldozer operator explains:

"For three days, I just demolished non-stop. The whole area. Any house they fired from came down. And to knock it down, I tore down some other houses. were warned by loudspeakers to get out of the house before I come, but I gave no one a chance. I didn't wait. I didn't give just one push, and wait for them to come out. I would just ram the house with full power, to bring it down as fast as possible. I wanted to get to the other houses. To get as many as possible. ...I didn't give a damn about the Palestinians, but I didn't just ruin with no reason. It was all under orders.”

From an interview with a Cat' driver, who under orders of his Israeli military superiors, operated a giant Caterpillar D-9L bulldozer and helped make 4,000 camp residents homeless in Jenin refugee camp, April 2000.

we should be worried about her killers feelings? fuck that.

bulldozed by an occupation army?
You don't believe in human rights like that?

Corrie herself wrote about the people who were running the bulldozers. They often waved to one another.
Maybe you should get a copy of the book when it comes out.

The Palestinians send murderers and rockets into Israel. Israel attacks a building. Without people in them. Empty building attacked by a bulldozer.

Damn, that's cruel.

You prefer that the Palestinians have the right to kill Israelis at will and the Israelis just sit and take it as God's will?

you don't think people live in these "buildings"
such an cold way of saying what they really are
These are homes!

I hate violence, including the violence against Palestinians you embrace.

great restraint and respect for human life, and the Palestinians' disregard for same . . . . . .

Give it a &*($ing rest. Nobody who pays attention to current events believes that nonsense, except perhaps the Israelis themselves.

extreme than many Israelis. Many Israelis saw the wrongness of destroying Palestinian homes. They want talks with Hamas and see that as the solution, rather than just war and more war.

that keeps making my opinion of the state of Israel go further and further and further down.

the sad fact is the American pro-Israel crowd is more hawkish than the average Israeli, and why not they can sit in the relative safety of the US and stump for a war that they themselves will never fight, or be a victim of. Of course you will hear the usual about "brotherhood" and "solidarity" but with rare exception not one will ever actually live in Israel they'll visit send jr for the obligatory summer in safest kibbutz money can buy, donate lot's, but live with the proverbial bullseye on their backs????? Hell No

There are a couple of polls posted on threads in this forum that show a majority of Israeli's are not for more violence and in fact believe the government should talk to Hamas.

have brave souls stand up for injustice? Look around at happens when people stand idly by as shit happens.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

demolition of homes?
Why do you worship war? Why do you worship violence?
I would not compare you to bush and sharon... they had more compassion.

would have been shot on sight, and you damn well know it.
That is how the Israeli military operates.

Palestinian lives mean less than the life of a squirrel under their rules of engagement.

matter much to Israel. It's a smart move to have Americans try to stand up to them. In this case, what we are seeing is that Israel will do what it wants regardless of who the have to step on along the way.

The poor jerk who was driving the bulldozer? Give me a fucking break. Don't break your back apologizing for that shit.

What a horrid person the poster above is. Just ugly.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

and they continue to defend violence and brutality.
the demolition of homes that defy international law.

our consolation is that they are increasingly a minority, even in the democratic party.

link:

http://www.rachelswords.org/2006/10/14/rachel-corrie-myths-and-facts/

snip):

"MYTH: The bulldozer driver could not see Rachel.

FACT: Eyewitnesses testified that the bulldozer blade created a large mound of earth as it advanced, and that Rachel climbed atop that mound to a level high enough to make eye contact with the bulldozer driver.<6> Earlier that same afternoon, bulldozers had driven dangerously close to international activists on the scene but stopped before harming them.<7> This time, the driver continued forward, pulling Rachel under the blade.

MYTH: The Israeli military conducted a thorough, credible and transparent investigation into Rachel Corrie’s death.

FACT: On March 17, 2003, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon assured President Bush that the Israeli government would undertake a “thorough, credible, and transparent investigation” and would report the results to the United States. On March 19, 2003, Richard Boucher, spokesman for the State Department, noted: “When we have the death of an American citizen, we want to see it fully investigated.”<8>

In response to inquiries from the Corrie family regarding the Israeli Military Police investigation, in a letter dated June 11, 2004, Colin Powell’s Chief of Staff, Lawrence B. Wilkerson, stated, “Your ultimate question, however, is a valid one, i.e., whether or not we view that report to have reflected an investigation that was ‘thorough, credible, and transparent.’ I can answer your question without equivocation. No, we do not consider it so.” <9>"

"Independent, third party observers like the Israeli human rights organizations B’Tselem have strongly criticized Israeli military investigations of civilian deaths.<11> Human Rights Watch said that most Israeli investigations “have been a sham.”<12> As a result of pressure by the British government, Israeli soldiers have been found responsible for the killings in Rafah of ISM activist Tom Hurndall on April 11, 2003,<13> and British reporter James Miller on May 3, 2003<14> despite initial Israeli army investigations absolving the Israeli military of any responsibility."

(snip):

MYTH: Rachel was a naïve young woman who was exploited by the International Solidarity Movement, an extremist group that supports terrorism. Rachel did not understand the context she was in or the dangers she was facing.

FACT: One article that has fostered this myth and others is “The Death of Rachel Corrie” by Joshua Hammer, published in Mother Jones.<21> However, Phan Nguyen proved that Hammer’s article was littered with errors, and that important parts were culled from right-wing websites with little credibility.<22>

In her writing<23> and a videotaped interview<24> from Rafah, Rachel Corrie lucidly depicted the daily events in the lives of ordinary Palestinians in Rafah. Rachel’s accounts of destruction in Rafah generally correspond with the descriptions and conclusions of respected third party organizations like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International."

link:

http://www.rachelswords.org/2006/10/14/rachel-corrie-myths-and-facts

.

link to the full HRW report on the Death of Rachel Corrie:

http://www.hrw.org/reports/2005/iopt0605/8.htm

"Over the next two hours, the eight foreigners shouted at them through megaphones, raised a banner, and stood in front of the bulldozers as they approached the structures to destroy them. They followed a routine, crouching as the bulldozer approached, then standing on the approaching wall of earth until the bulldozer stopped or the activist moved.257 The bulldozers demolished telephone poles, house foundations, a water tank, a low wall, and part of a garden shed. The IDF twice used tear gas, once fired a set of warning shots, and also shouted at the activists. Both groups of people, the ISM eyewitnesses said, were highly aware of one another: one of the soldiers in the tank even called to Corrie by name, shouting obscenities in broken English.258 She was wearing an orange fluorescent jacket.

Human Rights Watch interviewed separately three eyewitnesses to Corrie’s death and visited the site. All witnesses gave consistent testimony. By 4.45 p.m., the bulldozers and tank had moved closer to the Nasr Allah house. Corrie had moved with them. She was walking some fifteen to twenty yards from her closest colleagues, who were scattered around the area. The ground was flat. Thomas Doyle was standing at the corner of a pile of rubble, with a direct line of sight. Doyle saw one of the bulldozers turn to face the Nasr Allah house. He told Human Rights Watch:

Rachel moved forward, walking. She saw the bulldozer and crouched, and at the point she did that the bulldozer was relatively far, about twenty meters away. The bulldozer kept advancing towards her with a massive mound of earth rearing up in front of it, and the blade stuck on the ground . The earth came quite close, within a few meters, and she stood up.259

Corrie stood and balanced on the rising mound. The bulldozer continued without changing pace, and Corrie tried to get down.

She seemed to be turning to the side – she really had to do it, she started to turn around to get down, but slid instead into the pile of earth. When she was standing on top she was standing quite high, so when she slid down she slid on her side and her right calf was out of view. She slid and then she fell and the earth went vooomsh. . . totally over her.

At the point where her calf disappeared and she disappeared, everyone was going crazy, yelling, shouting, motioning, screaming. I had my megaphone. The driver would have had a pretty good full view if he was looking at us... The bulldozer kept going on, forward, and then stopped a few meters after she disappeared. Her point of disappearance was underneath the cockpit. The bulldozer waited for what seemed like some time but was probably a few seconds, and then started to withdraw.260

Doyle’s account is corroborated by that of Nicholas Durie, who told Human Rights Watch:

Rachel was kneeling on one leg. She got up on the rubble as the bulldozer approached, five miles per hour, at a steady pace. It did not change. Rachel probably noticed it would not stop, and she tried to get off the mound. Her foot caught in the mound, and she was carried over frontaways onto the ground, and the earth was piled on top.

The bulldozer moved forward another five meters or so, despite us shouting and being visible to the others, and never lifted its blade or altered its course. It reversed at a steady pace, not lifting its scoop, and moved back some twenty to thirty meters, a bit further than its original distance.261

Corrie came into sight again as the bulldozer reversed. Her companions ran to her; she said, “My back is broken.”262 Some gave first aid, others called an ambulance and took photographs. The bulldozer and two tanks left shortly afterwards without attempting to communicate. Corrie was evacuated to al-Najjar hospital in a local ambulance, and died shortly afterwards.

The news and photographs of Corrie’s death received wide international publicity.263 President George W. Bush raised the case with Prime Minister Sharon the following day. Sharon reportedly promised that a “thorough, credible and transparent” investigation would take place.264 The IDF described the death as a “very regrettable accident,” adding, “We are dealing with a group of protesters who are acting very irresponsibly, putting everyone in danger - the Palestinians, themselves and our forces - by intentionally placing themselves in a combat zone.”265 "

link to link to HRW report on the Death of Rachel Corrie:

http://www.hrw.org/reports/2005/iopt0605/8.htm

----------------

And here are the affidavits from three Eyewitnesses (Durie, Carr, Hewitt) which were prepared by the Palestinian Center for Human Rights, 3 July 2003 and posted on EI by permission of the PCHR:

http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article1675.shtml

link:

http://www.hrw.org/reports/2005/iopt0605/8.htm

"In addition to the “operational investigation,” the IDF also opened a Military Police investigation into Corrie’s killing. The behavior of the Military Police investigators reveals how problematic IDF procedures can be even when responding to high priority cases.

The Palestinian Center for Human Rights Gaza (PCHR) was one of many groups that formally requested that an investigation be opened. It obtained detailed testimony from all eyewitnesses. Palestinian lawyers in the Occupied Palestinian Territories cannot practice in Israeli, nor can they travel outside of the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Because of these restrictions, when the Military Police began their investigation, the PCHR contacted Orna Kohn, an experienced Israeli lawyer with an Israeli-registered human rights group, Adalah. Kohn agreed to act on behalf of the witnesses to Corrie’s killing for the PCHR.

Kohn dealt with the head of the special investigations team of the Southern Command CID, Shalom Mikhaili. She contacted Mikhali to give him witness details and stipulated that the witnesses would be accompanied by a lawyer, the interviews would be given and written in English, and copies of all written documents would be given to the witnesses before leaving the interview. Mikhaili objected, saying “his is unusual. They do not have this as an automatic right.” Kohn said:

Mikhaili was very surprised about the terms and it was very clear it was very unusual, but I said take it or leave it. He was upset, but the next day he agreed. It was very clear that he had been ordered to facilitate the testimony whatever the price. They could not look like they had blocked it.274

Kohn was troubled by the investigators’ behavior and seeming lack of preparation.

I had expected that they would be prepared, that they would ask questions, would show each witness a map or a photo to ask them to place the incident location. But they had nothing. I have the impression that they had heard the soldiers and believed the soldiers. There was even a rude comment from one of the investigators. It was April 1, so when he started taking something from the first witness, swearing them under oath, saying “you have to tell the truth” and so on, he added “But this is April Fool’s day, so why bother?” He told the translators not to translate it.275

In addition, the investigators asked what Kohn considered to be hostile and irrelevant questions, such as “So you know by being there you were breaking the law under X or Y. You do understand that you can be indicted for this?” Kohn reminded them that they were taking testimony from the eyewitnesses to a crime and threatened to end the proceedings. The commander eventually told the investigators to drop the questions. Kohn suggested several times that the Military Police officers ask witnesses to draw maps, but they did not – a potentially crucial omission.

A week or so after the testimony, Kohn received a call from Mikhaili. The investigators now needed to get the witnesses to define incident locations on a map, so they could check the bulldozer driver’s field of vision. Kohn explained that some of the witnesses had already left Israel and attempted to arrange an interview for the others in the Rafah area. This failed because she was not permitted to enter Gaza, and the investigators would not consent to the presence of a local lawyer. Mikhaili then said he would send Kohn a copy of the witness affidavits and a map, and Kohn would ask witnesses to indicate the relevant locations and return them to him. Kohn agreed, but never heard from Mikhaili again, nor did he return her calls. “My feeling is that he got orders not to finish it. To leave something unclear on the testimonies, because to clarify them would not be in the interests of the army.”276

Human Rights Watch interviewed separately three witnesses to Rachel Corrie’s death who gave testimony to the Military Police. They described the incident in a manner similar to Kohn’s. One described it as “…slapstick. They did not seem very interested. Their investigators kept getting told off by their boss because their questions were inappropriate. It was mostly accusatory, such as did I know Hai al-Salam was a frequent area for sniper fire and our work obstructed their work?”277 Another witness described it as “…banal. They did not really seem to care.”278

The Military Police investigation was reportedly closed shortly before July 1, 2003.279 No wrongdoing or negligence was found. No one outside the IDF, however, is able to evaluate the quality of the investigation: neither the family nor the U.S. government has received a copy of the full investigation report. In March 2004, Corrie’s mother wrote:

Despite promises of a transparent investigation, only two American Embassy staff members in Tel Aviv and my husband and I were allowed to "view" the full document. While it refers to evidence gathered by the Israeli military police, no primary evidence is included. Commenting on the report on July 1, 2003, Richard LeBaron, U.S. Embassy deputy chief of mission in Tel Aviv, stated, "there are several inconsistencies worthy of note."

For our family, the report raises questions and fails to reconcile differences between Israeli soldiers who say they could not see Rachel and seven international eyewitnesses who say she was clearly visible.280

Human Rights Watch’s own research indicates that the impartiality and professionalism of the Israeli investigation into Corrie’s death are highly questionable. "

link:

http://www.hrw.org/reports/2005/iopt0605/8.htm

.

link: http://www.hrw.org/reports/2005/iopt0605/8.htm


The Israeli military quickly opened an “operational investigation,” conducted by the Southern Command. Within ten days, a copy of the findings - reached without contacting any witnesses – was given to the U.S. ambassador to Israel. The U.S. government, unsatisfied, asked for additional information.266 When the summary findings of the “operational investigation” were released to the media on April 15, a State Department spokesman said, “We do not consider this matter closed with the reception of the internal IDF report. We are going to press for a full and transparent investigation.”267

Human Rights Watch obtained a copy of the summary of the IDF “operational investigation” into Corrie’s killing. Like other investigation summaries seen by Human Rights Watch, the document is laden with generalities and emotive commentary, and contains major factual errors. Chief among these is the statement that “no signs substantiate assertion that Ms Corrie was run over by a bulldozer,” a statement apparently based on a highly selective interpretation of the preliminary autopsy report.268

The report concludes:

Contrary to allegations, Ms. Corrie was not run over by a bulldozer, but sustained injuries caused by earth and debris which fell on her during bulldozer operation. At the time of the incident Ms Corrie was standing behind an earth mound and therefore obscured from bulldozer crew’s view, whose line of sight was inherently limited. The irresponsible and dangerous conduct of ISM activists blatantly refusing IDF warnings to leave the area and purposely putting themselves in harm’s way is a major factor leading to the tragic result of this incident.269

The report found that there had been no wrongdoing or negligence, and took no measures against the bulldozer crew. The army announced it would make operational changes to reduce the possibility of future incidents. These findings were again widely reported.270

The claim of the “operational investigation” that Corrie was not killed by a bulldozer is directly contradicted by the findings of the final autopsy report, conducted only four days after Corrie’s death released on April 24 at Israel’s National Center of Forensic Medicine. The author of the autopsy report stated:“Based on the results of the autopsy which I performed on the body of RACHEL ALIENE CORRIE, age 24, I hereby express my opinion that her death was caused by pressure on the chest (mechanical asphyxiation) with fractures of the ribs and vertebrae of the dorsal spinal column and scapulas, and tear wounds in the right lung with hemorrhaging of the pleural cavities.”271

Eyewitnesses interviewed by Human Rights Watch, other human rights organizations, and the media stated that the bulldozer crew could and did see Corrie. They noted that two other incidents had taken place on the same afternoon in which ISM members had been at the point of serious injury, but the bulldozer drivers had stopped at the last moment – indicating they could see the activists even when in close proximity, balancing on the rising earth that the bulldozers pushed before them.272 They said that the activists had regularly had eye contact with the bulldozer driver in the last moments before jumping off the earth mound. One ISM member described it thus:

To stop them, what we would do would be to stand on mounds. There was visual communication – he would signal I was crazy with his hands. I was trying to look in the driver’s face, eyes very directly and communicate I would not leave. I was fighting, feeling really sad . . . I didn’t want to be there, but I had no choice. I could see a blurry face and could make out facial expressions, but I’m not really good at describing people’s faces.

This is kind of going on, repeating, I am trying to communicate with him that I’m not going to move, standing in various places and then he stops. Basically we have to scramble up the sand as he pushes this big load of sand in front, you have to scramble up it to stay in the same place. So you scramble up and rise to the top and you can then look over the huge blade, look him in the face, and then he’ll stop. 273

The possibility that the bulldozer operator could not see Corrie cannot be ruled out, however. Thomas Doyle and Nicholas Durie, as noted earlier, both said that she had been crouching or kneeling when the bulldozer was twenty meters away and that she stood up after the machine had come closer. This uncertainty is precisely why a credible and impartial investigation into this incident is essential. "

link:

http://www.hrw.org/reports/2005/iopt0605/8.htm

"The possibility that the bulldozer operator could not see Corrie cannot be ruled out, however. Thomas Doyle and Nicholas Durie, as noted earlier, both said that she had been crouching or kneeling when the bulldozer was twenty meters away and that she stood up after the machine had come closer"

It's also interesting how all the witnesses are now in agreement, when in interviews immediately after the incident they gave at least six different versions of Corrie's position relative to the bulldozer.

Joseph Smith's testimony:



Greg Schnabel's testimony:



Richard Pursell (same site):



Tom Dale (same site):



(Note that the sources above are not particularly "Israel-friendly")

Ali al-Shaar:




The discrepencies are not sufficiently different to suggest a conspiracy, given that eyewitness accounts often differ in the details. However, by the time HRW got involved it seems the testimonies dovetailed much more closely, suggesting that they mutually reinforced each other's accounts*, potentially harming their accuracy.

*people have a tendency to "edit" their memories according to what they think happened.

The various interviews also show a pattern of reckless behavior by the ISM volunteers, of playing "chicken" with the bulldozers throughout the day. Furthermore, judging by some of the accounts above, if Corrie had tried to dodge the bulldozer rather than try to climb on it she wouldn't have been killed - the D-9 didn't have the speed to catch her even if it was trying.

http://www.archive.org/download/Rachel_Corrie__IDF_Footage/RachelIDFFootage.mpg

A person (Rachel Corrie, ostensibly) can be seen kneeling, on or around the top of the pile of debris.

The bulldozer approaches the person atop the mound quite quickly, I would estimate the speed to be around 8 kilometres an hour. The bulldozer does not change pace as it approaches the person.

The video cuts out just as the scoop is about to touch the mound. I have not seen the rest of the video on any website. You would think that the remainder of the video would provide a good indication of whether Rachel Corrie was swept under the scoop, or not.

The video is consistent with eyewitness accounts that the bulldozer approached from around 20 metres away. Rachel was on or near the top of the mound, as it approached. It is hard to envisage a bulldozer having such extremely limited visibility that the operator would have been oblivious to her being there, particularly at the start of its approach. Additionally it was not contested that both the bulldozer and Rachel Corrie had been in the area for some time.

Personally, I would agree with the US State Department that the Israeli report and its conclusions were not particularly credible.

How sure are you the video is of this incident? While I admit it's been a long time since I last saw one, the D9 in the picture doesn't quite look like the dozers which you can see in the various pictures of the incident floating around on the net (granted, the picture quality is far from ideal). Also, some of the witness statements claimed she climbed on the rubble as the 'dozer approached, but here whoever it is on the mound is motionless.

And in any case, you might want to read the scenario I posited in post #21. You might note that according to the video, the 'dozer is not moving so fast that it couldn't be dodged easily.

How sure are you the video is of this incident?

Given that it was on major news networks at the time of the release of the report, and given that is still available on a few dozen websites (google "Rachel Corrie IDF footage"), and given that none of the self-appointed media watchdogs have jumped all over it decrying it as a hoax, fairly sure.

Also, some of the witness statements claimed she climbed on the rubble as the 'dozer approached, but here whoever it is on the mound is motionless.And in any case, you might want to read the scenario I posited in post #21.

Most of the witnesses (not all) tended to say that Corrie was lifted both by the action of the scoop and possibly by her climbing the mound as the dozer started to impact with the mound. Again, it would be useful to see what happens next, but the IDF havent released it the rest of the footage.

You might note that according to the video, the 'dozer is not moving so fast that it couldn't be dodged easily.

No one claimed she was trying to dodge the dozer. The very point of her presence is that she was intentionally standing in the path of the dozer.

At the end of the day, I find it very hard to believe that the dozer operator did not know she was there. If indeed, he drove the dozer straight over the top of her (the video cuts out, but that it was it is implied), then he is guilty of murder.

There is nothing in there that backs up the claims made at all to state that it is even close to fact. Much of the sources claimed as fact are biased, contradictory and or nothing more than irrelevent second hand subjective opinion heavily laden with spin and half truths.

There were many contradictory statements made by the eyewitnesses and the ISM and one of the witnesses who took pictures tried to use photo trickery. Witnesses stated the driver may not have been able to see her. One of the ISM leaders admitted that her training was not up to par



Was it murder? Corrie's colleagues believe that it was. "I never dreamed it'd be like this, the intentional crushing of a human being," ISM eyewitness Joe "Smith" wrote in an affidavit filed with Palestinian human-rights attorneys. "I do believe it was intentional. I saw it, and I know he saw her, I know he did, and I know he knew she was still under the bulldozer when it backed up without raising its blade. I don't know if he wanted to kill her, or if he was just focused on doing his work and didn't care if he killed her or not, I don't know which is scarier." Five other activists testified that the driver must have seen Corrie before mowing her down. A damning sequence of photographs shot by ISM activists and almost immediately released by Reuters appears to show Corrie standing before the bulldozer and addressing the soldiers with her megaphone seconds before being crushed.

Yet "Smith" later gave an interview in which he acknowledged that the bulldozer operator could well have lost sight of Corrie after she tumbled down the dirt pile. And the infamous photo series turned out to be misleading. In fact, the megaphone photo was taken hours before Corrie's death; she had handed the loudspeaker to a colleague some time before she was run over, and she was kneeling, not standing, in front of the machine when she was killed. As newspapers ran corrections, the activists claimed that Reuters had "miscaptioned" the photographs. The episode probably did more to mute anger over Corrie's death than anything else. The ISM activists were widely dismissed as frauds. In reality, they were probably just too young and inexperienced to know that if the media feels burned, it'll turn on you, or worse, ignore you.

"Dooby," the army reservist who ran Corrie down, is a Russian immigrant with long experience as a bulldozer operator. On Israeli TV he insisted that his field of vision was limited inside the D9 cabin and that he had no idea Corrie was in front of the machine. "You can't hear, you can't see well. You can go over something and you'll never know," he said. "I scooped up some earth, I couldn't see anything. I pushed the earth, and I didn't see her at all. Maybe she was hiding in there." The idf compiled a video about the Corrie incident that includes footage taken from inside the cockpit of a D9. It makes a credible case that the operators, peering out through narrow, double-glazed, bulletproof windows, their view obscured behind pistons and the giant scooper, might not have seen Corrie kneeling in front of them.

http://bsd.motherjones.com/news/feature/2003/09/ma_497_...


Rachel Corrie Facts

On March 16 2003, Rachel Corrie, as part of her activities with the International Solidarity Movement (ISM), had gone to Rafah on the Egypt-Gaza border to prevent IDF demolitions of arms smuggling tunnels. ISM activists had repeatedly interfered with these operations, standing in front of the bulldozers and then leaping out of harm’s way. In this case, the IDF was bulldozing shrubbery that camouflaged the tunnels. Rachel apparently thought she was protecting the nearby home of a Palestinian pharmacist. She knelt in front of the bulldozer behind a pile of dirt.

The ISM claimed the bulldozer intentionally ran her over and killed her. After extensive investigation, the IDF concluded that the driver could not see her and that her death was an unfortunate accident. The IDF Judge Advocate’s Office concluded: “The driver at no point saw or heard Corrie. She was standing behind debris which obstructed the view of the driver and the driver had a very limited field of vision due to the protective cage he was working in.” An autopsy revealed that the bulldozer never rolled over Corrie: she was killed when debris dislodged by the bulldozer struck her head.

The ISM claim was based on two photos it released: one of Rachel standing in a bright orange flak jacket, a bull horn in her hand, with a bulldozer only yards away; the second of the fallen Rachel, the bulldozer just behind her. ISM claimed these photos were taken within minutes of each other. However, it quickly became apparent that the photos had not been taken sequentially, but probably hours apart. The first photo showed a morning sky; the second photo showed an afternoon sky. The bulldozer in the first picture was not the same one shown in the second picture. The first picture did not fit initial eyewitness reports that Rachel did not have a bullhorn in her hand at the time of the accident nor did it show the mound of earth repeatedly described. ISM bystanders said no photographers were present before the accident occurred. The IDF concluded that Rachel was sitting on a mound of dirt and could not be seen by the driver. When he continued his operations, she could have rolled away but instead tried to climb to the top of the mound but the digging drew her downward, causing the accident. Later autopsy reports revealed that the cause of death was blows to the head, probably from the heavy debris dislodged by the bulldozer.

More here with pictures and links
http://rachelcorriefacts.org/Accident.aspx



more info with links on the photos and contraditions

The Death of Rachel Corrie
http://www.peacewithrealism.org/corrie.htm


Idealist Rachel Corrie Was Misled, by Gilead Ini
Seattle Post-Intelligencer, April 4, 2006
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/265324_corrieresponse04.html

Was This House Worth Her Life? by Eli Sanders
The Stranger, April 3, 2003
http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/Content?oid=13822

Peace Activists in the Middle East: Out of Their Depth by Judy Lash Balint
Jerusalem Diaries, April 3, 2003
http://www.jerusalemdiaries.com/article/83


When Reuters Miscaptioned a Photo, They Changed an Accidental Death into a Murder
By David Bedein, Israel Resource Review, March 21, 2003
http://israelbehindthenews.com/Archives/Mar-21-03.htm

http://www.honestreporting.com/articles/critiques/Rache...

good info .....

These houses should have been demolished and evacuated a long time ago … Three hundred meters of the Strip along the two sides of the border must be evacuated … Three hundred meters, no matter how many houses, period.
—Major-General Yom-Tov Samiya, former head of IDF Southern Command1

I built homes for Israelis for 13 years. I never thought the day would come when they’d destroy my house. … They destroyed the future. How can I start all over now?
— Isbah al-Tayour, Rafah resident, former construction worker in Israel 2

Over the past four years, the Israeli military has demolished over 2,500 Palestinian houses in the occupied Gaza Strip.3 Nearly two-thirds of these homes were in Rafah, a densely populated refugee camp and city at the southern end of the Gaza Strip on the border with Egypt. Sixteen thousand people — more than ten percent of Rafah’s population — have lost their homes, most of them refugees, many of whom were dispossessed for a second or third time.4

As satellite images in this report show, most of the destruction in Rafah occurred along the Israeli-controlled border between the Gaza Strip and Egypt. During regular nighttime raids and with little or no warning, Israeli forces used armored Caterpillar D9 bulldozers to raze blocks of homes at the edge of the camp, incrementally expanding a “buffer zone” that is currently up to three hundred meters wide. The pattern of destruction strongly suggests that Israeli forces demolished homes wholesale, regardless of whether they posed a specific threat, in violation of international law. In most of the cases Human Rights Watch found the destruction was carried out in the absence of military necessity.

In May 2004, the Israeli government approved a plan to further expand the buffer zone, and it is currently deliberating the details of its execution. The Israeli military has recommended demolishing all homes within three hundred meters of its positions, or about four hundred meters from the border. Such destruction would leave thousands more Palestinians homeless in one of the most densely populated places on earth. Perhaps in recognition of the plan’s legal deficiencies, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) are not waiting for the government to approve the plan. Ongoing incursions continue to eat away at Rafah’s edge, gradually attaining the desired goal.

This report documents these and other illegal demolitions. Based on extensive research in Rafah, Israel, and Egypt, it places many of the IDF’s justifications for the destruction, including smugglers’ tunnels and threats to its forces on the border, in serious doubt. The pattern of destruction, it concludes, is consistent with the goal of having a wide and empty border area to facilitate long-term control over the Gaza Strip. Such a goal would entail the wholesale destruction of neighborhoods, regardless of whether the homes in them pose a specific threat to the IDF, and would greatly exceed the IDF’s security needs. It is based on the assumption that every Palestinian is a potential suicide bomber and every home a potential base for attack. Such a mindset is incompatible with two of the most fundamental principles of international humanitarian law (IHL): the duty to distinguish combatants from civilians and the responsibility of an Occupying Power to protect the civilian population under its control.

This report also documents—through witness testimony, satellite images, and photographs—the extensive destruction from IDF incursions deep inside Rafah this past May. In total, the IDF destroyed 298 houses, far more than in any month since the beginning of the Palestinian uprising four years ago. The extent and intensity of this destruction was not required by military necessity and appears intended as retaliation for the killing of five Israeli soldiers in Rafah on May 12, as well as a show of strength.

More here:
http://www.hrw.org/campaigns/gaza/

The home had inhabitants. You can see their photo here:
http://www.olywip.org/site/page/image/2007/05/01/04.html

Tens of thousands of other homes were demolished in a very short time. This brought incredible hardship to the people of Gaza, and together constituted a war crime. The world was silent.

Rachel refused to be silent.
It is true that Rachel thought, because of her US passport, that she at least would not be targeted by the Israeli military machine. She was wrong on that count.

Tom Hurndall did nothing more than walk with a Palestinian child, and he too was shot in cold blood by the Israeli military machine. "Everyone who goes there is shot at" said the soldier. Including children. I suppose we are to hear they are not worth saving either?

Are they "children of a lesser god"?

Tom and Rachel are not only heroes for the Palestinian people, they are heroes for peace. Some day, in what i hope is not the too-distant future... they will be honored across Israel and Palestine.

They were looking for tunnels and clearing brush the terrorists used for cover

:kick: