While hearing about this yesterday, I happened across a consertavative radio show host who was blaming this tragedy on… wait for it… the college Rachel Corrie attended. In his spewing vitriol, he accused the college of being too liberal (of course), there only for the purpose of propping up a liberal agenda “in the guise of academia,” and finally of “brainwashing” Corrie and other students into that liberal agenda, causing her to go to Gaza and be killed.
Of course, we blame the college. Not the driver of the bulldozer, not even Corrie herself. The college. :rolleyes:
It sickens me to see how different people are already using this circumstance to score points for their particular agenda. The real tragedy here is simply this: a girl was killed for what she believed in. Whether the driver could see her or not, whether she was to blame or not… these things are debatable, but making accusations and snide comments about her (see Malthus’ post above) is inexcusable.
It’s obvious that you have a good heart tclouie, and further, this matter is a very passionate one to you.
I would offer some advice however… (and yes, forgive me for offering unsolicited advice too…)
It’s a most unwise decision to pin blame on Ariel Sharon - in isolation. And to then, by extension, pin blame on President Bush. Such a policy on your part seems destined to marginalize your position I rather think.
Moreover, the cyclical pattern of violence and recrimination starts long before Ariel Sharon rose to power. Long before the Munich Olympic massacre. Long before the 1948 war.
The first ever recorded “organised” violence against Jews took place in 1929 in a dispute over shared access to the Wailing Wall - and over a hundred civilians on both sides were killed.
To imply that “ALL OF THESE PROBLEMS” have only recently manifested themselves since September 2000 is disingenuous it seems to me, and weakens your arguement.
That being said, my prayers go out to Rachel and her family. As they do to all persons who are in the wrong place at the wrong time in life.
Ahhh, but did the college sponsor this event? Did it allow the ISM to recruit kids such as Rachel on its property? If so, it shares at least some of the blame.
If this were something that Rachel and her friends did without any input or consent from the college, then yes, the radio guy is off. But if the college were connected in any way, then the administration can’t just wash its hands and wish it away. It shares some of the responsibility.
Why? They didn’t truss her up and send her to Gaza in a shipping crate, nor (to my knowledge) was anyone from the college driving the bulldozer that killed her. If you have a cite that disproves either of these suppositions, please offer it up.
If not, then how is the college culpable at all? Because they allowed an organization to meet on its campus? I’ve not heard that Evergreen State College sponsored the Gaza demonstration at all, but again, if you have a cite that says otherwise, please show it.
About the closest thing I could find was this article, written by an Evergreen State College professor, which supports a peaceful resolution to the conflict. However, to go from that to a culpability on the part of the college is somewhat of a leap, don’t you think?
Note that the radio host I heard yesterday was, similarly, going on apparently no hard facts about the college, only his own suppositions and obvious prejudices. This is the kind of thing that annoys me about these situations; people using a tragic event to “prove” something they already believed.
Please point out what “accusations and snide comments” I made that you found so objectionable, let alone “inexcusable”?
I said I was not sure that “peace activist” was really an accurate description of her role.
And I am not. Based on the picture and (brief) article I found. It looks to me as if she was an advocate of a rather extreme political position, not a “Gandhi” or a “M.L. King” - type figure at all. I can’t picture either of those two gentlemen teaching kids how to express their hatred for America by burning flags - can you?
Of course, I could be wrong. I only know what I have read. Could all be out of context, or faked.
However, slinging insults rather than facts will not demonstrate that I am wrong. It will convince me that you are one of those attempting to “score points” off of this tragedy - though for what cause, I don’t know. But then again, you had know idea what cause I purport to serve, when you chose to vent your spleen on me.
Did Gandhi send Nathuram Godse an invitation?
Did Dr. King wear a bullseye target around his neck?
Did Christ taunt the Governor of Palestine by preaching, "take from Caesar what he doesn’t deserve?
The fact is the former two were assassinated in cold blood & the latter is a different debate entirely. I see no connection or any metphorical similarity…Martyred apples and starry-eyed oranges.
I’m checking my watch in anticipation of other comparisons.
How long until someone in the media compares the ill-advised tactic of trying to stop a 5 ton bulldozer with a 120# body with the Kent State massacre?
Are we going to once again see that famous image of that anonymous student in Tiananmen Square standing in the way of the the Red Chinese tank.
Those comparisons don’t hold much water either. Rachel Corey’s actions are more in line with suicide.
Here’s an important thing to know, which I haven’t seen mentioned - Do these protestors have a habit of standing in front of bulldozers, and then moving out of the way at the last minute?
If so, then this was probably an accident. In fact, this is a classic situation in which accidents happen - people do unsafe things, and get away with it. So they keep on doing it. They get more and more careless about it, until something happens they didn’t expect, and by then everyone is so relaxed about it that something tragic happens before people wake up and realize something horrible has gone wrong.
Looking at the size of these bulldozers, it seems clear that, while the driver can probably see the protestor when he’s 100 feet back, by the time he’s close she wouldn’t be visible behind the blade.
I wouldn’t be surprised if both sides were ‘negligent’, in the sense that the 'Dozer operator was probably told, “Just keep going - they’ll get out of the way”, and in the past they have. And the protestors got more and more aggressive and put themselves in more risk - because they’ve managed to jump away in the past. So this time a pile shifts, a foot gets caught, and a tragedy happens.
I’d also add that a compounding factor is that the bulldozer operators are in a very dangerous environment. They can’t just stop and get out to see if someone’s in front of the blade, because a sniper could shoot them. In fact, stopping for any reason is probably dangerous - molotov coctails though the armored slit would ruin your day.
So… It’s a high stress environment, with both sides being aggressive and reckless. Classic situation for an accident. But I see no evidence of murder.
I’ve worked around heavy construction equipment before as well. They can move very quickly, and very unexpectedly because close-range visibility is not necessarily the best. Construction workers are killed every year in heavy equipment accidents in the United States, and they’re trying not to be in the way of the damn things!
Thinlk about this: If you’re foolish enough to try and stand in the way of a bulldozer and you trip and fall, how are you going to get the operator to stop? Yell, “Stop?” Just like you’ve been doing for hours to begin with? (This assumes the operator can even hear you. All the equipment operators I observed wore hearing protectors because the equipment is LOUD!)
Unless your best friend is named Ford Prefect, you best not make an effort to stand in front of a bulldozer.
I just have to say that I knew that young woman and I wish she had been a little more concerned about her own life. She had a lot to offer. I think she knew she was taking a risk, but I believe the other protestors who felt the driver was willing to drive over her. It was truly an awful thing. One of many awful things that are about to happen in the next few days to people I will never meet due to a war I cannot stop.
I frankly am not moved by the people who are shocked by her burning an american flag. I have seen those on other message boards who have said she deserved it. If I had time I would start a pit thread about it.
Anyone who can think of a line like that for a thread like this deserves my personal welcome to the board. Great to have you here, patchbunny! No doubt you’ve brought your towel.
I’m absolutely stunned at some of the responses in this thread. And sickened by them.
Will some kindly poster show me proof that Dr. Samir Nasrallah’s house should have been rightfully demolished? What, no can do?
Then I say Rachel was in her rights to protest the demolition. Along with their detailed (ahem) explanation, I do hope they (the Israelies) give the evidence for the need to bulldoze Dr. Nasrallah’s house.
Furthermore, if the bulldozer operator’s intention was to demolish the house, why did he stop after running over Rachel? If he didn’t realize that he had run over a protester, wouldn’t he have continuied to demolish the building? He didn’t raze the house, but stopped short. He stopped, then reversed over Rachel’s body without lifting the blade.
No, Sam Stone the protesters general stay infront of the bulldozers, as the drivers do usually stop. I see people making historical comparisons, the best one is the famous image of the student who stood infront of the tank at Tiananmen Square to stop it getting past.
Having worked around heavy equipment, I’ll echo the sentiments of the people who have already said that merely being around that equipment is dangerous. There is no way to work safely around a piece of machinery that weighs fifty or a hundred tons. The best you can do is be aware, stay as far out of range as you can, never turn your back on the equipment and don’t trip. Heavy earth moving equipment is extremely loud and dangerous to begin with, and this Rachel Corrie was foolish at best to go into that situation in the manner she did.
We wore flourescent orange vests, orange shirts, orange hard hats, and our vests had big strips of light reflective green plastic on them, but we were still damn near invisible to anyone in a bulldozer if we were less than 20 yards in front of it. Everyone on site had to wear hearing protection because the equipment was loud enough to damage a person’s hearing, so even with a bullhorn, it’d be nearly impossible for the operator to hear someone on the ground, and that’s in a bulldozer that doesn’t have a cab surrounded by a bulletproof Lexan material. The equipment is so heavy that running over a person, particularly one covered in dirt, probably wouldn’t be noticed until it was too late. Even then, I could see the dozer operator backing up when he suddenly realized ‘I haven’t seen that orange thing in a while’. It’s also possible that he backed up because he had built up a dirt mound and with the treads of the bulldozer on a mound and not a level surface, razing the house would’ve risked dumping the dozer on its side. Why he stopped and backed up when he did isn’t immediately apparent, and it can’t be assumed that the only reason was his desire to kill Rachel Corrie.
It’s a pity that this woman who’s been described as being so ‘bright’ didn’t have the wits to realize that when a human being who weighs less than 200 lbs plays chicken with a piece of heavy machinery that weighs over fifty tons, the human’s either going to get out of the way, or lose.