Rachel Corrie, a student at The Evergreen State College in Olympia, was protesting in front of a Palestinian home in a refugee camp in Rafah, near the Egyptian border, in March of 2003. She was an activist, trying to prevent the destruction of Palestinian homes in the area. Apparently, a bulldozer operated directly or indirectly by the Israeli Defense Forces, who were clearing Palestinian homes from the land, plowed over her. She was killed.
Certainly this is a tragedy.
So - who do you sue?
A. The Palestinians, for negligently building homes in an area they knew, or should have known, was claimed by the Israelis
B. The Israeli Defense Force, for plowing over a woman instead of real estate
C. The estate of Yasser Arafat, for Arafat’s role in creating this dangerous tension
Didn’t even need to look. This whole thing had a thread a while ago.
Personally, I blame the parents who raised an idiot. Nothing against the deceased, but standing in front of a bulldozer - an armored one in this case - is hella dumb.
And merijeek, why in the hell did you bring american party politics into this? Maybe you should find a hobby.
I’m going to answer before I follow the link. I believe the rules of this game are:
Sue someone with some money. Sue someone you can realistically beat, or at least maneuver into a settlement. Enlist other potential targets as your allies in exchange for your going after someone else.
The answer is therefore D) the bulldozer manufacturer. They have money, they can be beaten easier than a govt. entity, and your other parties will be quick to turn on them if it means they will not be targets.
The one with the biggest tits? Oops, sorry, that’s the punch line to a joke. How about -the one you have the best chance of getting money from? How’d I do?
You’re a lawyer. You know very well that lawyers follow the money and it was most likely one of your colleagues who advised the Corries to file against Caterpillar.
Physician heal thyself.
Of course if the allegations in the suit are true that the company “violated international and state law” why shouldn’t they be fined at least?
I think that is his/her hobby
Are we going to see bulldozers redesigned with soft rubber blades, or just big red warnings written on the blade “Danger, this is a bulldozer”
B seems like a good option at least to me. Operating a bulldozer and running over someone seems to me like a negligent action or a bizzare accident. I’ll take the safe bet and say that some sort of negligent action took place here.
C isn’t a half bad choice but the lack of Israeli leadership on your list smacks of a not so hidden agenda.
