S.F. Festival Under Fire Over Plan To Screen Rachel Corrie Film

[Purveyor]

SAN FRANCISCO (J. Weekly) -- If the Academy handed out an Oscar for community turmoil, the Rachel Corrie flap at this year’s San Francisco Jewish Film Festival would win handily.

Dissension in the local Jewish community continued unabated over the festival’s upcoming screenings of “Rachel,” a film that investigates the death of anti-Israel activist Rachel Corrie, and the festival's invitation to her mother, Cindy Corrie, to speak afterward.

On July 20, festival board president Shana Penn resigned from her post, citing “healthy differences on how to approach sensitive issues,” with five months left on a two-year term.

This came as a pro-Israel speaker was hastily added to the July 25 screening in San Francisco and as some sponsors criticized the festival’s program. Penn will continue to serve on the board. Vice president Dana Doron, a marketing and product development executive, has assumed the post of president.

“Rachel” is a sympathetic portrait of the American pro-Palestinian activist who was killed in 2003 in Gaza while protesting a home demolition in front of an Israeli bulldozer.

MORE...

http://jta.org/news/article/2009/07/23/1006756/sf-festival-under-fire-over-plan-to-screen-rachel-corrie-film

[proud2BlibKansan]

1. Oh no doubt the Israelis and their sympathizers will HATE this film

Rachel was murdered in cold blood. You bet they don't want more people here in the US to know this.

[Jim Sagle]

2. Actually, she got killed through her own stupidity. The accusation of murder is a blood libel.

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

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

[proud2BlibKansan]

8. Yes humanitarian work is so stupid!!

:sarcasm:

[Behind the Aegis]

21. Of course it is, that why he said it.

:sarcasm:

[Violet_Crumble]

23. He does appear to detest humanitarian work for Palestinians amongst other things...

And as Donald pointed out, he's totally misusing the term *blood libel*. Let's hope he reads Donald's post where the term has been explained....

[Donald Ian Rankin]

10. You ought to look that phrase up.

"The blood libel" is the accusation that Jews use the blood of Christian children in our religious ceremonies, especially passover. It's not a generic phrase for "accusation of murder leveled at anyone Jewish".

[Ken Burch]

17. Thank you for posting that, Donald Ian.

And it's a phrase that's NEVER been appropriately used in this forum.

[Ken Burch]

19. The stupidity was in the home demolition program itself

Destroying Palestinian homes achieved nothing and drove more Palestinians to support groups like Hamas and the Al-Aksa Martys Brigade.

Face reality. The iron fist doesn't work.

[Ken Burch]

15. Some Israelis, NOT all. And not all pro-Israeli people

More than are given credit for it saw through the hate campaign against Rachel's memory.

[cosmicone]

3. Here is a video of her death

http://www.youtube.com/v/WME495PWWJE&hl=en&fs=1&

[Ken Burch]

16. That's a video of a Billy Bragg song ABOUT Rachel

I don't think her actual death is shown in the video.

[Violet_Crumble]

24. A Billy Bragg video? That makes this thread worth reading!

Were you able to open the link? I started using Firefox yesterday and it's playing up on me, so I don't know if it's my L-plates doing it or whether there's something wrong with the url....

[Ken Burch]

25. I was able to open the link

Billy updated the old Dylan song "The Lonesome Death Of Hattie Carroll".

[Violet_Crumble]

26. I resurrected my old browser and it worked...

..though I was quickly distracted by other Billy Bragg stuff there, and now by a logical progression, I'm sitting here turning bits of Blur songs into ringtones for my phone :)

[Ken Burch]

37. Well, thats a worthwhile activity for a Sunday(Is it Sunday where you are?)

n/t.

[shaayecanaan]

40. That would have thrilled Bob Dylan...

he's on record as a supporter of Meir Kahane.

[Ken Burch]

41. "would have thrilled"? Er...you were aware that Dylan's not dead, right?

Granted, in his more recent photos he looks not far from it, but old man Zimmerman's boy is still around.

[shaayecanaan]

43. He's merely comatose I suspect...

I say fugger the both of them, Bragg had two good songs in him (A New England and Northern Industrial Town), evidently no more since, and Dylan had none.

[OutNow]

5. The truth? You can't handle the truth.

Yes, Rachel Corrie's murder is a proper subject subject for a Jewish Film Festival. Is it a "sensitive issue". Yes, all the more reason to screen the film and have a discussion. I'm sure some will justify her murder as they justify settlements, occupation, and other actions of the Israeli government. But there are others that disagree.

For a more complete understanding, see the Rachel Corrie Foundation

http://rachelcorriefoundation.org/site/.

[azurnoir]

7. If the film is as false as some here claim perhaps

the opposing view could be aired as well otherwise it could appear to be fearful censorship

[Sezu]

9. Yeah you always see venues who show

such things CLAMOURING for balancing views.
:sarcasm:

[ProgressiveProfessor]

11. There are websites that poke holes in each sides claims

At this point I do not think it was intentional on the part of the operator

[proud2BlibKansan]

12. If he was deaf and blind, no it wasn't intentional

Since Rachel's friends were standing there waving and yelling at him to stop, if he saw and/or heard them, it was intentional.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

13. You must not have spent any time around combat hardened earth movers

From a Mother Earth article in late 2003: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2003/09/death-rachel-corrie

"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.

I tend to believe the operator. I could see that someone above him allowed the situation to come to the point that such an accident was quite possible.

[proud2BlibKansan]

14. A good friend of mine was there with Rachel

He and several others waved at the driver. He waved back. They held up their hands to stop him. He waved them off. Then he went forward. He knew she was there. His orders were to run her over.

I tend to believe my friend who was an eye witness and held Rachel in his arms as she died.

[Behind the Aegis]

22. Do you just like making things up to suit your needs?

"He knew she was there. His orders were to run her over."

Any proof those were his orders or he knew she was there?

Oh, your proof is your friend said it happened that way. No agenda there. :eyes:

[proud2BlibKansan]

28. Ok, we'll do it your way

He ran her over because he was a sadistic son of a bitch who wanted her to die.

Is that better?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

30. What about the way other observers have said, she either knelt or slid down of the mound and the

driver could not see her?

There is no direct evidence that the bubba in the cab had orders or intended to kill her. There are some indications that the situation was set up to allow an accident to happen. There is nothing out there to indicate intent on the part of the driver.

[proud2BlibKansan]

31. I'll go with what my friend who was an eye witness says

Thanks anyway :hi:

[ProgressiveProfessor]

32. An emotionally involved participant is far from the best witness

Occams Razor, the Mother Jones article, and others provide more than enough to conclude that the driver did not intend to kill her.

The lack of a safety crew, required under IDF SOP and the subsequent shootings in the same area lead me to believe instead that its was most likely a contrived situation with predictable results.

[Dick Dastardly]

36. Which friend was that, because of all directly involved only the ISM and its tools

were shown for cetain to be knowingly engaging in lies and deceptions. The so called witnesses and ISM's pattern of lies on deception included changing stories, contradictory stories, some used multiple aliases, they engaged in fauxtogaphy, tried to pass off photos taken much earlier as part of a sequence of photos taken at the time of the accident to make it look like something that it wasnt and they engaged in various other lies and deception

They posted false and misleading photos with false captions that to my knowledge continues to this day even though they have been proven irrefutably to be false and deceptive. They gave these to the media who have since retracted them.

Some of the eyewitnesses said she had slipped and fell at a time when the driver may have been looking behind him. Obviously since this doesnt fit the agenda it is something that is ignored.

They claim they are an impartial non violent humanitarian group. The ISM and their tools have protected, aided and supported terrorists and their weapon smuggling. The International Red Cross even through them out of their building for it.
What kind of non violent humanitarian group does that? Its the kind with an anti Israel agenda that is not non violent or humanitarian, the kind that has no problem using lies and deception to further their agenda. Only someone who clearly shares their anti Israel agenda or is completly clueless would put any stock in anything the ISM and its tools say.


Its tragic she lost her life but it was not murder, it was an accident. She was a young misguided adult who got into something way over her head and put in a dangerous position she was not trained or experienced to handle by a twisted radical group. The ISM holds responsibility for her death.
I think she was a person who thought she was trying to help someone but who held distasteful morally skewed beliefs that blinded here to reality and whats really right and wrong.

Forgive me if I choose to not to go with agenda driven proven liars who aid and support terrorists.

[subsuelo]

71. Since peace activists in Israel are hated so much

we do have a motive for murdering them, don't we

[ProgressiveProfessor]

73. Why do you want to murder them

Or was that the royal we?

[proteus_lives]

78. Not surprising.

The ISM are nothing more then the camp followers of Hamas.

[Behind the Aegis]

33. So, still making things up to suit your needs? Good to know.

Not unexpected. Because now, you have gone from knowing his orders to knowing him. Impressive. :eyes:

[proud2BlibKansan]

34. As I said earlier

I'll go with my friend who was an eye witness.

BTW, he is in this movie: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2451908450811690589

[Behind the Aegis]

35. Oh, so a slight change...you will go with what others made up!

Gotcha.

Is he the one who told you it was on orders of the IDF to kill her? Or was that you own clever twist?

[Ken Burch]

18. Then he should have just STOPPED the freaking D9 and got out to see what they people pounding on the

window were trying to get his attention about. There was no reason that the house had to be demolished THAT VERY SECOND.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

27. Have you even looked at the pictures of the armored D9?

[Ken Burch]

20. Why can't you just admit the driver was wrong not to STOP the D9

What did he have to lose by stopping and seeing what the people banging on the windows were trying to tell him?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

29. Which accounts have people banging on the window of the D9 just before Corrie was hit?

While you are looking for that, consider the physical situation...could they reach the windows while the D9 was in motion?

[Ken Burch]

48. The accounts that were posted upthread.

There was no reason that house HAD to be destroyed that very minute.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

49. There was only one link outside of the OP and the videos

and it was to the the Rachel Corrie Foundation home page. Have a direct cite that claims that people were pounding on the cab of the D9? I suggest you look at & to get an idea of just how hard that would be to do.

[Dick Dastardly]

58. I saw no accounts of people banging on the windows. Could you please point them out?

The reality is that if that was even claimed, it would be an almost impossible feat for a group to bang on the windows or an individual for that matter, especially considering the accident occurred in a matter of seconds. That is aside from being absolutely reckless endangerment. You have to climb pretty high over moving track to get to them. It ain't a Yugo. I think you would be hard pressed to get to the windows and bang on them in the seconds they had even if the D9 was on ideal ground, level, turned off and in a non threatening environment. Even if you could actually get up there there is a real possibility the driver would not hear you or see you immediately because of how loud they are, the exhaust and dust they spew and the extremely limited visibility with small thick armored glass windows with a steel barred cage.

You look at these photos and tell me if you think its honestly possible for a whole group to climb up and bang on the windows in a matter of seconds







I dont think so


You asked earlier why did he not get out to see why they were banging on his windows. The ISM was constantly screaming,yelling,waving them down and using many disruptive tactics to get them to stop. Besides the fact they would never get anything done which was the ISM's goal,that is the border area where snipers were shooting. Why the fuck would he get out of a perfectly good sniper proof armored vehicle when snipers were shooting just to check out what would seem normal tactics to disrupt him. Its a classic example of the boy who cried wolf too many times. You can bet your ass I would not get out of my armored vehicle with snipers about at the behest of my enemies.


btw
He was not knocking a house down he was clearing a hill of debris that was part of a tunnel system snipers and terrorists were using to hide in for cover for attacks.

[azurnoir]

60. Really interesting stuff especially that bottom picture

what is your purpose there to ah compare the size of the tread to a man or is it a crude attempt to incite antisemitism? Not to mention your claims that terrorist work at the behest of ISM who you refer to as the enemy, it says oh so much about your mind set

You asked earlier why did he not get out to see why they were banging on his windows. The ISM was constantly screaming,yelling,waving them down and using many disruptive tactics to get them to stop. Besides the fact they would never get anything done which was the ISM's goal,that is the border area where snipers were shooting. Why the fuck would he get out of a perfectly good sniper proof armored vehicle when snipers were shooting just to check out what would seem normal tactics to disrupt him. Its a classic example of the boy who cried wolf too many times. You can bet your ass I would not get out of my armored vehicle with snipers about at the behest of my enemies.

BTW it is against forum rules to post pictures but I will not alert it

[ProgressiveProfessor]

62. Self Delete

[Dick Dastardly]

86. Anti-semitism??? wtf are you talking about?

Please show me where I said anything about anti-semitism. Hell I very rarely even deal with the subject and usually only when it is used as some sort of preemptive claim tactic as you do here The tactic of claiming to be called an anti semite when there was none , saying things like "I am sure I will be called an anti semite" or "here come the anti semitism charges" or some other variant is used more than the charge of anti semitism is itself. I posted commentary and was very clear on why I posted them but obviously since you could not counter the argument you used some ridiculous tactic
I dont even know how that pic would incite anti semitism as you say


I never claimed terrorists work at the behest of the ISM. Nice try at twisting what I said. You are on a roll with using fallacious argument tactics.
The poster said the driver should have got out and talked to the ISM because they were screaming waving their hands and such, but as I said why should he have as that is their normal tactic and they would never get anything done if they did that and added that besides it was the border area where snipers were so why get out with snipers around at the behest of your enemy and their normal behavior.
The ISM is their enemy, what else would you call someone who gives aid, comfort and support to your enemy? A good friend?. The Red Cross even kicked the ISM out of their offices because of their activities.

[Scurrilous]

38. ‘Rachel’ draws passionate crowd to S.F. Jewish film fest

<snip>

"After weeks of community discord, the controversial "Rachel" documentary screened to an audience often inhospitable to divergent viewpoints.

“What happened to two Jews, three opinions?” asked Laynie Tzena, standing in the Castro Theater after Saturday's screening at the San Francisco Jewish Film Festival. “What happened to respect for dissent?”

Despite festival director Peter Stein’s plea not to interrupt or disrespect any element of the screening, including speakers before or after, many audience members hissed, booed and shouted at those whose opinions clashed with their own.

The booed opinions nearly always were supportive of Israel.

“What bothered me was not the movie, though I didn’t like it, but the audience -- there was no respect for the speaker before the film, and offensive comments were made during the movie,” Tzena said. “You cannot shoot people down because you don’t agree (with them)."

more

[oberliner]

39. It's a shame they were so rude to the pro-Israel speaker

From the article:

Harris faced a tough audience before the screening. When he called Corrie’s death an accident, a collective hiss was heard from the crowd. A few shouted “lies.” One man said, “Get off the stage, you’re not welcome.”

<End of excerpt>

More open mindedness on all fronts might yield positive results.

[Ken Burch]

42. Then again, they knew the pro-Israel guy was just gonna say

"It's all Hamas' fault-it's the rockets-it's the bombs-Palestinians have no reason to be angry about anything-and there's no such thing AS a Palestinian-and anyone who criticizes ANYTHING Israel does is just like the Nazis"

The he was just gonna end with the "only democracy in the Middle East" shticklach.

We've all heard it all before.

[oberliner]

44. Actually that is not what he said at all

He said that there were many "Rachels" who have died in this conflict including several Israeli girls and women who have been killed in suicide attacks and that all of those who died including Rachel Corrie ought to be alive today.

[Ken Burch]

46. That was still a way inflammatory thing for the guy to say

Rachel's who purpose was anti-violence. Phrasing it like that implied that Rachel and the ISM were TO BLAME for what happened to those Israeli girls. The fact is, the home demolitions achieved no positive result. Even if the people in the house happened to be related to a "terrorist", it was wrong to make THEM homeless. When a person commits a crime, you don't punish that person's entire family. It's not like the family could have stopped the crime.

[oberliner]

51. I don't think that was implied

Obviously anyone is free to interpret the remarks however one likes, however, it seems to me that his point was that something very different. In my view, he was characterizing Rachel Corrie as an innocent victim much like the numerous other innocent victims, including those on the Israeli side, who have died as a result of this ongoing conflict.

The Israeli government perspective is that this was an unfortunate accident and that is also what this person stated, apparently leading to shouts and hisses from some in the audience.

The point you make about home demolitions would have made for a good starting point for a discussion about some of the issues surrounding this incident. That would be the kind of back and forth that could potentially be productive. Certainly moreso than the caricature you presented in your previous post which is no more accurate than similar caricatures presented of the other side.

[Ken Burch]

52. I suppose I was a bit over the top

But that's more or less the way the anti-Rachel people in various message boards had phrased it.

[oberliner]

53. I get where you are coming from

I just wouldn't lump everyone who is "pro-Israel" together that way.

I do agree with you that some people (especially anonymous ones on internet message boards) have posted some pretty unpleasant (to say the least) things about her.

[Ken Burch]

55. I've wondered if the Rachelphobia is worse because she happened to have blonde hair and fair skin?

And whether some people, possibly out of newsreel sense memory, just subconsciously pegged her as "Aryan" because of that, even though most people in Europe who were blond and blue eyed, such as the British, the Dutch, the Norwegians, the Russians, the Finns(and I could go on)actually fought like hell AGAINST Hitler.

People have got to accept the fact that Rachel was NOT an "enemy of the Jews". And that she wasn't a Nazi. She was just a young idealist trying to stop some suffering. It's truly warped that anyone would be enraged by that.

It's always good to talk to you about these things, oberliner. You're one of the most civil and fair-minded people in the whole I/P forum.

[Dick Dastardly]

64. Just because your a young idealist does not make you automatically correct or have a good moral

compass. History is full of idealists who's idealism and or actions were wrong, morally repugnant and depraved, causing great suffering. This is not to make any moral comparisons at any level but just for the sake of an idealism example. The Nazis were full of sincere idealists who were convinced of the correctness and morality of their cause and there still are some who do now. The same goes for Lenin and his gang. Both tried to stop the suffering of those they in their demented minds thought important in their own demented ways. Both are morally repugnant to me and most people, despite their being idealists in their cause, because their ideals themselves are repugnant.
Am I or anyone warped for being enraged by them?

Rachel was no Nazi as you correctly say but one does not need to be a nazi to be an enemy of someone, not all are. She was certainly no friend of Israel and if she was not an enemy she was as close as you can get without being one as she aided and supported Israels enemies. In my book that would make someone my enemy if they aided and supported mine. I in no way think of her like I do Nazis or anywhere near the same level, but her ideals and actions are representative of a morally skewed compass to me and are distasteful to me. Do I think she is an evil person?, no I dont but she is very naive and misguided

[Dick Dastardly]

45. Is this what you know is all he said or did you just make it up.

Can you please show me where you found it? I am sure you will ignore providing anything to support your claims as you usually do.


In any case they probably did know what he was going to say and since its the truth, the anti Israel crowd doesn't like it because inconvenient facts that run counter to the lies and propaganda that make up their view is not what they like to hear. Facts make it hard for them to remain in blissful ignorance or spread the crap that we all know they will say.

[Ken Burch]

47. I thought he hadn't actually spoken

I assume he left without actually speaking. However, the man had to have known, given the insane hatred "pro-Israel" people have poured on Rachel Corrie's memory, that he probably wasn't going to be well received with an inflammatory and demagogic comment like the "many Rachels" line. He knew that would make the crowd freak, and I strongly suspect that's what he wanted.

The other point is, why did there HAVE to be a person at this event ATTACKING Rachel? Isn't it enough that the Likudniks have done that everywhere else?

Face it, Rachel didn't deserve to be killed and she never deserved anyone's hatred.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

50. Accidents happen and are more likely when one intentionally places ones self at risk

[TimesSquareCowboy]

54. Right, cuz that's the problem - no open minds. Not bulldozers, for example.

In this case, the problem is being forcefed opinions you don't agree with. If I go see a movie, why should I be forced to listen to an opposing viewpoint? All the information I need is available to me on the Internet any time I want it. I'd be quite pissed off if I were treated like a child the way that audience was, by not giving them enough credit to arrive at informed opinions on their own.

[subsuelo]

56. I remember when they murdered her

Now some right wingnuts are upset about a film sympathizing with her?

Some people have no sense of humanity, that's about all I can say.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

57. She was killed, murder requires intent, something that is doubtful at best

[azurnoir]

59. Well first degree murder does, but all killings need intent

to be called murder and yes I do understand the rhetorical need to bring it to the most extreme to make your point

[ProgressiveProfessor]

61. Accidents, including accidental deaths are by definition devoid of intent

There can be various levels of negligence, sometimes rising to the criminal level.

By many accounts Corrie was kneeling/behind a mound/had fallen. The visibility out of the IDF D9 units is miserable. Its why normally they have a spotter with a radio working with them. Another DUer sent me this photo which shows how limited visibility is.


Picture also illustrates why the claims of people pounding on the cab were clearly specious.

[azurnoir]

63. tht all may be but

still and none the less IMO it was negligent homicide o the part of the driver

even considering the limited vision at some point the driver had to have seen her standing on the pile isn't it logical that he should have stopped?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

65. The Mother Earth and other analysis have pretty well shown the driver most likely did not see her

The protesters by all accounts were moving around and had previously gotten out of the way. Corrie may have been making a stand by kneeling or stumbled. We will never really know. IDF claims they polygraphed the driver who passed. Other statements by the driver also back that up. If you read his history or watch the interview (I did shortly after it happened), he is your basic blue collar immigrant and was clearly upset that he hit her. From his seat (literally) it was an accident. Its where the preponderance of the facts lie, hyperbole on both sides not withstanding.

A key point to me is the IDF *normally* requires a spotter since vision, especially forward vision is so poor directly ahead of the D9. There was not one there at the time.

Claims that the D9 was flattening a house at the time or that other protesters were pounding on the cab are clearly nonsensical from the undisputed pictures.

[subsuelo]

70. and what's your excuse for the murder of Tom Hurndall?

Ever notice it's the peace activists that get "accidentally" murdered killed? Gee now why would that be

[Ken Burch]

72. He was protecting openly Palestinian children who might, possibly, perhaps

years later, depending on what events occurred around them, do bad things, and thus HAD to be killed right then and there.

:sarcasm:

[ProgressiveProfessor]

75. His killer was also convicted. Ever find any documentation of people banging on the cab of the D9?

Still waiting on that one.

[Ken Burch]

76. Eyewitness account of Tom Cooper

TOM DALE EYEWITNESS ACCOUNT

British Citizen from Lichfield, Birmingham, born 17 August 1984.

Many of you will of heard varying accounts of the death of Rachel Corrie, maybe others will have heard nothing of it. Regardless, I was 10 metres away when it happened 2 days ago, and this is the way it went.

We'd been monitoring and occasionally obstructing the 2 bulldozers for about 2 hours when 1 of them turned toward a house we knew to be threatened with demolition. Rachel knelt down in its way. She was 10-20 metres in front of the bulldozer, clearly visible, the only object for many metres, directly in its view. They were in radio contact with a tank that had a profile view of the situation. There is no way she could not have been seen by them in their elevated cabin. They knew where she was, there is no doubt.

The bulldozer drove toward Rachel slowly, gathering earth in its scoop as it went. She knelt there, she did not move. The bulldozer reached her and she began to stand up, climbing onto the mound of earth. She appeared to be looking into the cockpit. The bulldozer continued to push Rachel, so she slipped down the mound of earth, turning as she went. Her faced showed she was panicking and it was clear she was in danger of being overwhelmed.

All the activists were screaming at the bulldozer to stop and gesturing to the crew about Rachel's presence. We were in clear view as Rachel had been, they continued. They pushed Rachel, first beneath the scoop, then beneath the blade, then continued till her body was beneath the cockpit. They waited over her for a few seconds, before reversing. They reversed with the blade pressed down, so it scraped over her body a second time. Every second I believed they would stop but they never did.

http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article1263.shtml

(An eyewitness is an eyewitness)

The account shows that they were doing everything that possibly could be done to get the driver's attention and that he could have seen her.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

77. So your prior claim of pounding on the cab was not true (it wasn't physically possible)

Unfortunately numerous others, some distinctly unfriendly to the IDF, reached a different conclusion than those actively involved in the situation as protagonists WRT to visibility and Line of Sight (LOS). Also there is no way the ISM would have known about radio comms or the lack their of. ISM pictures do not show a house in the immediate vicinity. As Gil Grissom has pointed out, eyewitnesses are often the most unreliable evidence

[Ken Burch]

79. You're hairsplitting.

They were doing everything they could to get the driver's attention. Even if he didn't get out, he could STILL have stopped. There was no reason the houses had to be destroyed that very day.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

81. Then admit your errors...I am just living up to my .sig

[Ken Burch]

82. Fine. I made a trivial mistake, one that does not discredit the point I was making

And it was never worth you hounding me on it.

It still remains that the guy should just have stopped.

There was no reason the houses had to destroyed THAT VERY DAY.

And in the end, the home demolition program didn't do any good.

It didn't stop anyone from doing what the Israeli government called "terrorism"
And, in all liklihood, it drove people who wouldn't have done anything violent into taking a darker path.

[shira]

83. from Ken: "what the Israeli government called "terrorism""

:eyes:

what is it then, if not terrorism?

I can't wait for this one.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

84. Far from trivial and it discredits you and your argument

The difference between an accident and murder hinges on facts. You ignored the physical realities and made false claims which would drive that decision and then call it trivial? Your approach trivializes many things, including Corrie's death, and marginalizes your points here and elsewhere. Next time pay more attention to the facts.

You assertion of "that day" is equally specious. If the IDF had done it the next day, would there have been in real changes in behavior from either side?

I tend to agree that the home demolitions were not value added to the situation for either side.

[Ken Burch]

85. The fact remains that the man knew people were trying to get his attention

And he knew that it was at least strongly likely that someone would be in his path.

And, facts of this specific case aside, this whole debate wouldn't still be happening had not the insanely wrongheaded home demolition policy been put in place.

Finally, I only mentioned "that day" because the decision to go on and destroy the houses that day hinged on some mistaken belief that this was vitally urgent. Has anyone ever even heard of a situation in which somebody on the Palestinian side actually said "they went ahead and destroyed Abdul's house today with his grandmother in it. That settles it, I better pack it in and accept the status quo"? The fact is, if somebody has reached the stage in which he or she has decided to join the Al-Aksa Martyrs or some similar group, that person isn't processing consequences on a rational, logical level. In fact, that person might actually take the demolition of her or his home as VINDICATION-that is, if what he or she is doing pisses off the IDF THAT much, they must really be getting somewhere.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

87. The fact remains that they had been waving and using a loud hailer all day

You can argue the validity of the destruction of the buildings on the border, the real issue was mixed use, which was also common in OCL

[ProgressiveProfessor]

74. The same Tom Hurdall who's killer was convicted for manslaughter?

One was an accident, the other was not.

[shira]

80. did a little fauxtography research and found these 2 links

http://www.peacewithrealism.org/corrie.htm
http://israelmatzav.blogspot.com/2008/02/how-rachel-corrie-really-died-hint-not.html

the ISM lied big time here.

there was no one near Corrie screaming for the tractor to stop and she wasn't anywhere near a house. She was protecting a weapons tunnel.

[Scurrilous]

66. ‘Rachel’ screening in San Francisco shows a growing movement tired of being censored about Israel

<snip>

The following is a report from the screening of the film Rachel at the The San Francisco Jewish Film Festival this past Saturday. The screening had been controversial, and opposition to it focused on the fact that Cindy Corrie would be speaking at the event, and that two of the co-sponsoring organizations were Jewish Voice for Peace and the American Friends Service Committee. This opposition included a scathing and misinformed statement from the the Koret and Taube Foundations, two funders of the festival. A speaker from the right wing San Francisco Voice For Israel was added at the last minute to calm critics. The Castro Theatre, which holds around 1,400 people, was reportedly packed to capacity.

"The flap around the film about Rachel Corrie shown at the San Francisco Jewish Film Festival on Saturday, July 25 is simply another incident in the cycle of controversies that accrue to individuals and organizations who advocate for Palestinian human rights.

The Koret and Taube Foundations are part of a wide spectrum of individuals and organizations, Christian and Jewish, who attempt to enforce the axiom: there shall be no public criticism of Israel. This platitude ironically goes hand in hand with the view that ‘Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East.’ Over the past several decades, self-appointed watch dogs of appropriate Israel discourse have spent hundreds of millions of dollars and poured out enormous doses of vitriol upon any individual or organization that dares to expresses even a drop of sympathy with the plight of Palestinians.

The fact that the vast majority of people in the crowd at the Castro Theatre would not let the Voice of Israel representative speak his mind without interruption reflects growing frustration with the use of pubic slander, character assassination, cancellation of speakers, firing of faculty and demand for resignations by the so-called defenders of Israel. Since when are people with views that differ from AIPAC, for instance, invited into mainstream circles to speak for five minutes before a pro-Israel speech or film? The representative of Voice of Israel was not there to dialogue. Only to chastise. The crowd refused to be chastised. When the impassioned proponent of Israel mentioned JVP and AFSC in order to condemn them as virulent anti-Semites, the crowd burst into cheers and applause to honor them instead.

The crowd at the Castro represents a growing movement of individuals and groups who believe that peace between Israelis and Palestinians can never be achieved without addressing and redressing the issue of Palestinian human rights. Resistance is sometimes rowdy. Naturally, the side of privilege and status quo demand politeness from resisters in order to maintain decorum. Well, politeness isn’t always the best way to go in a situation where you have never been given a voice in the first place. While I am a proponent of compassionate listening, I learned from people of color that interrupting the language of hatred and racism also has a place."

more

[azurnoir]

67. So now the Quakers are "virulent" antisemites?

those making such claims should be ashamed

[Ken Burch]

68. And all this time I thought being a Quaker meant not being virulent about anything.

(Well, except for THIS Quaker, who was just plain virulent)
(graphic image warning)


(and most of the Quakers I know don't really count him as one of theirs.

[azurnoir]

69. Obviously he was a "backslider" : )