News Apr 3, 2003 at 4:00 am

ELI SANDERS reports from the Gaza Strip on the death of Olympia's Rachel Corrie--Evergreen student, anarchist, activist, and accidental martyr.

Comments

1
I've heard many people say she was a "hero," but why? How? Rachel Corrie was a fool. She was a propagandist. At best she was a human shield, and for no good reason. Her diary pretty much sums up that she wanted this. All of this. She wanted to be a martyr. She wanted to die. She was proud to be naive. She wasn't a victim, she was an idiot.
4
When you stand in my way, believe it or not, you're going to die.
5
Actually, bulldozers don't run over people by themselves. When you stand in it's way and it's being driven by a a zionist psychopath, then you're going to die.
6
People die every day at construction sites around the US. Were they, too, killed by zionist psychopaths?

Please. It is sad that Rachel Corrie died, but it's nobody's fault but her own. She was a well-intended but naive idiot.
8
She was run over- in essence- twice! The driver bulldozed her...then bulldozed over her...and backed over her again!

Seems to me that- even if you're a competent driver- you'd make sure to not place your blade where it could injure or kill someone!

Either the driver was/is a murderer who should be in jail...or he's incompetent and should be fired!

That's not the point of the story, I believe. But I do find that their description of ISM a little harsh: it's a group which sacrifices its own body to make sure Israelis take a bit more care in their military operations. Beyond that is just personal ideologies which go beyond the scope of the ISM.
9
She lived for her principles and died for them and of course she didn't "have to" in the way the Palsetinians had too but maybe in her heart she had her conscience called her to at least risk her life with other human beings who are our brothers and sisters
10
This is a good article. I was expecting it to be the usual passionate anti-Israel diatribe simply because it's a Seattle paper and journalist. I actually first avoided it and then came back to it. I'm glad I did.
Well researched. Thoughtful. Asking all the right questions. Not propaganda and I know it when I see it.

The only thing is that you've de-emphasized that this is an occupied military war zone, with ongoing active military exercises and activity. 24/7. That's what war is. This isn't civil protest, nor is it analogous to South African apartheid. This is like Vietnam and Sarajevo. The American Civil War between the Confederacy (southern states seceded) and the Union (United States).

My personal opinion -
Atrocities happen in armed conflict. It's the cost of waging war. However noble and heroic it may appear, when uninvested foreigners choose to insert themselves in someone else's war, they are making decisions on who is righteous. And who is not.
I find this shockingly arrogant, but not surprising for "exceptionalist" White Americans and Englanders with a historical reputation for colonialism and dominance.

How nice for the well-fed American "anarchists" to feel such confidence in their philosophical waxing and have such easy ethical choices for their nobility. How great that must feel to be so sure who the 'bad guy' is. What luxury to have the time and financial resource to indulge one's ideologies in someone else's country.

But when you go into a foreign country's war zone, do you _really_ feel the host country should be accountable for your safety? Really?
Hmmm. Lie to authorities, phony up passports and intentions, engage in "civil disobedience" (in a foreign country, that's called illegal subversive conduct for which one can expect to be jailed and deported), interfere with government and military operations, refuse to comply with checkpoints and roadblocks, disobey direction by soldiers, burn flags and scream hostilities.
_But they should be accountable for keeping you safe?_ If an American did the exact same thing in any major American city, they'd be instantly shot by police. If a foreigner did the same on American soil, and called themselves an anarchist, they'd be lucky to be detained and deported.
11
This is a good article. I was expecting it to be the usual passionate anti-Israel diatribe simply because it's a Seattle paper and journalist. I actually first avoided it and then came back to it. I'm glad I did.
Well researched. Thoughtful. Asking all the right questions. Not propaganda and I know it when I see it.

The only thing is that you've de-emphasized that this is an occupied military war zone, with ongoing active military exercises and activity. 24/7. That's what war is. This isn't civil protest, nor is it analogous to South African apartheid. This is like Vietnam and Sarajevo. The American Civil War between the Confederacy (southern states seceded) and the Union (United States).

My personal opinion -
Atrocities happen in armed conflict. It's the cost of waging war. However noble and heroic it may appear, when uninvested foreigners choose to insert themselves in someone else's war, they are making decisions on who is righteous. And who is not.
I find this shockingly arrogant, but not surprising for "exceptionalist" White Americans and Englanders with a historical reputation for colonialism and dominance.

How nice for the well-fed American "anarchists" to feel such confidence in their philosophical waxing and have such easy ethical choices for their nobility. How great that must feel to be so sure who the 'bad guy' is. What luxury to have the time and financial resource to indulge one's ideologies in someone else's country.

But when you go into a foreign country's war zone, do you _really_ feel the host country should be accountable for your safety? Really?
Hmmm. Lie to authorities, phony up passports and intentions, engage in "civil disobedience" (in a foreign country, that's called illegal subversive conduct for which one can expect to be jailed and deported), interfere with government and military operations, refuse to comply with checkpoints and roadblocks, disobey direction by soldiers, burn flags and scream hostilities.
_But they should be accountable for keeping you safe?_ If an American did the exact same thing in any major American city, they'd be instantly shot by police. If a foreigner did the same on American soil, and called themselves an anarchist, they'd be lucky to be detained and deported.
12
Rachel represents global consciousness. Many people think that murderers should be allowed to murder just because live in a place that is not their own or that anything should be allowed to happen in a war zone. Rachel stood in the way of a slow moving bulldozer because she expected it to stop. She had faith that it would stop. Most of the commentators above have no idea what is at stake here. Fix the Jew/Palestinian problem and most of the Arab/Christian problems will go away. Rachel was just an idealistic young girl -- but she had faith. If you think that Rafah or Gaza or the West Bank is a war zone -- go there -- you will see it is not. Unfortunately, the good Jewish people of Israeli aren't allowed to visit Palestine. The bad ones, on the other hand, know what's happening there on a daily basis because it is where they practice their modern weaponry and technology on a daily basis against primitive defenses. They then can use the tests to sell weapons with "proven effectiveness". Pathetic.
13
There is a huge delusion about the Arab Israeli conflict. People view it as the key to peace in the Middle East.
In reality there cannot be peace between the Jewish state and the Muslims.
Muslims think of Israel as "their" land. It was conquered by Muslims, "paid by the Muslim blood" and it therefore belongs to Allah.
According to Islam Jews can only live in "Muslim land" as dhimmies. A position between third class citizen and a semi-slave.
This is obviously not an attractive proposition to the Jews.

The Palestinian "nation" has been invented and manufactured with only one purpose -- to destroy Israel. To keep the conflict alive and gain the sympathy of the world.
The Arab Goliath, manufactured the fake "David" so that the tiny Israel is seen as the "Goliath".

This is a tactics often used by violent gangs. They often send out little kids to assault their pray. The attacked person of course know that if he fight back, not only will he be attacked by the gang, but also that they will be able to claim that they only stepped in to protect the kinds from the brute.
14
Should Israel let the Europeans and Americans interfere with the national security of the Jewish state?

Why?
15
Rachel you were an idiot and the world is better off without you in the genepool. Thank god you didn't reproduce. You were a fool and died for terrorists. You're no better than OBL.
16
Strange the venom expressed in these posts. Yes the Israelis are occupiers and yes they can be brutal. Yes the Palestinians appear to be victims in a proxy war between Arab states that use them for public relations and the Jews who allow their own extremist elements to dictate foreign policy by building illegal settlements. All of this is tragic and there are no heroes. This young woman was afflicted by that disease of the young that engenders impulsive and poorly considered decision making with the best of intentions. What is also true is that she was KNEELING in front of a bulldozer, not standing and the likelihood is that her death was a horrible accident perpetrated by a scared young man who was no psychopath. The tragedy here is that her death taught us nothing: we are still flinging hyperbolic invective rather than trying to understand and to resolve this horror so that no-one must martyr themselves in the cause of self determination. That the Jews must return some of this land is obvious. That neighboring Arab states should provide for repatriation for those desirous is also obvious. That there must be a buffer zone of protection based on the history of conflict is abundantly clear. The United Nations caused this debacle and they should step up to the plate here. Their failure to provide leadership belies their very existence.
17
They played chicken with bulldozers because they believed "white privilege" would protect them? So much for white privilege. White privilege - 0, bulldozer - 1.
18
Rachel Corrie was a fucking idiot.
19
Imho, there was plenty of responsibility for Rachel Corrie's untimely, tragic, needless and preventable death to go around.

The Israeli Govt. was responsible for Rachel Corrie's death, due to continued occupation of Gaza Strip, West Bank and East Jerusalem, in the first place, and in the second place, for allowing soldiers to demolish Palestinian homes with impunity, and, in the third place, for whitewashing Rachel Corrie's death and exonerating the soldier operating the bulldozer that fatally mowed her down, and absolving the Israeli soldier of all responsibility.'

The United States and the West, generally, were also responsible for Rachel Corrie's death by their complicity with Israel's ongoing occupation of the above-mentioned territories, and by not pressuring Israel to end their occupational policies of Palestinian territories, and by not insisting on a proper, thorough investigation of Ms. Corrie's death.

(This may be an unpopular opinion in some circles, but here goes: The ISM (International Solidarity Movement leadership, imho, is also somewhat accountable for her death, in that they should've protected her a little better. Had Ms. Corrie's friends/colleagues in the ISM operated in a larger arena and stood with Rachel between the bulldozer and Dr. Samir's house, instead of merely standing off to the side and allowing Rachel to stand singlely in front of the bulldozer, Rachel would more than likely be alive today, because it would've been much tougher for the Israeli soldier operating the bulldozer to run a whole bunch of people over at once, plus Israel would've been in even greater trouble with the International community than it already is.
20
>>To the average Israeli, he says, "Rachel Corrie was a stupid foreigner who had no business being where she was. In talking to Israelis about the ISM and what they're doing in the West Bank and Gaza, I would say the average Israeli response is to be indignant and to question what right foreigners have to come here, interfere in our country. <<
WHAT BUSINESS DO YOU HAVE COMING TO THE COUNTRY, INVADING IT, AND THE CLAIMING IT AS YOUR OWN??

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.