Please take a look at the photos of rachel corrie below

They show:

Alive

Dying

DEAD

NOW EXPLAIN AGAIN HOW SHE WAS ENDAGERED BY THE ISM AND NOT BY ISRAELI FOREIGN POLICY.

Who drove the buildozer?

An Israeli soldier.

Who gave him his orders?

The Israeli minister of defense.

Who put him in charge?

The Israeli ELECTORATE.

There are two sorts of people in the world:

Those that want a better world for themselves,
Those that want a better world for everyone else.

WHICH ARE YOU?

"Those that want a better world for themselves,
Those that want a better world for everyone else.

WHICH ARE YOU?"

A good starting place for a philosophic discussion about Ethics. Those who want a better world for everyone else (including themselves?) might indeed be worthy of praise. But we need to consider whether it is OBLIGATORY to have that desire. Keep in mind, we might praise somebody who jumps into the water and attempts to rescue a drowning person at the risk of his or her own life BUT WE DO NOT CONDEMN SOMEBODY FOR FAILING TO DO SO. There might be no clear requirement to want for more than themsleves, just limitations on their actions in that regard which actively harm somebody else (and AREN'T things like mere existence).

And of course it might be fair to ask the previous commentor whether the Israelis are people in the "everyone else" category also. In other words, is the ISM working for a better world for the Palestinians AND the Israelis or only one group of people. In which case it would appear to be simply a matter of free choice which side's survival to prefer.

At first glance a look at the 3 photos make it look like she was standing there and got run over but this is at second glance isn´t the case as the digger is different and has changed colour! Are you trying to deceive or is there a simple answer to this?

Why is the person in picture 2 wearing different clothes to the person in picture 1? Are we to assume that, as she lay dying (in your own words) she swapped tops? I don't think I'm colour blind, but to me the person in picture 1 is wearing red and the person in picture 2 is wearing blue. Now, either your descriptions of the pictures are inaccurate, or some/all of the pictures aren't anything to do with Rachel Corrie at all.

Except for the last picture. I think of Rachel Corrie, who died because of her own recklessness, being wrapped in the American flag by the people who watched her die. Then I think of the photo of her burning that crude replica of the American flag, her face contorted with hatred. I wouldn't wish death on anyone. More than that, I wouldn't want anyone to die and for their memory to be thoroughly raped for propaganda, and poor quality propaganda too.

I presume the bit of red underneath the person in blue is Corrie - sorry for misinterpreting. It seems strange that there were so many people who watched her die in that muddy wasteland; what was she protecting there, exactly? She didn't need to die, and she would still be alive today if she hadn't been so reckless. That doesn't justify what happened of course, but some people won't take responsibility for their own lives.

I know this may seem confusing since the claim was that she was protecting a Paletsinian HOUSE from being bulldozed. And of course the bulldozer is still working out in the field far from any house. But there IS an explanation.

She was INDIRECTLY protecting the house. See, the bulldozer is out in that field in between the house and the border with Egypt looking for smuggling tunnels.Being very heavy, if it drives over a tunnel there would be a cave in. When the Israelis find one of these smuggling tunnels they don't just cave it in in one place -- they follow it to see if it leads to a house and if so they destroy the house also.

So by attempting to prevent the Israelis discovering a smuggling tunnel in that field she was protecting somebody's house. Get it?

... according to "My Mistake".
So are people supposed to do nothing and just let the world go by? If you are active in any cause, especially an anti-establishment one, your chances of being killed, injured or imprisoned are far greater than if you are inactive.
There has been a greater trend towards repression in recent years, in most of the world, and increasingly affecting North Americans and West Europeans. Rachel Corrie's death is one example but there are others.
I think "My Mistake's" idea of "responsibility" is that you never deviate from what society has set out for you and you never put your life, health or liberty at risk. So in Israel you would either be a Zionist or you would keep your mouth shut, in Nazi Germany you would either be a Nazi or you would keep your mouth shut, and so on. It's the kind of "responsibility" that tyrants would applaud.

There's a difference between putting your health, life and liberty at risk and recklessly endangering your life to the extent you're effectively committing suicide. You don't have to be utterly stupid to be an activist, and you don't have to have a death wish either. Still, at least Corrie died for a noble reason - to protect a shitty little tunnel used to smuggle weapons to murderers. Of course, helping militants to kill children is much better than trying to improve the everyday lives of the Palestinian people by peaceful means.

Thanks for putting words into my mouth though Crimson - in Nazi Germany you would have been at home in Goebbels' office, helping him to think up new ways of twisting the truth and beating all dissent out of the population.

Well obviously Rachel Corrie died deliberately just so as to make the Zionist state look bad (not a very difficult feat to achieve). And all those Palestinian dead in Sabra and Chatila courted death at the hands of Lebanese Falangist allies of Israel just so the reputation of the Israel "Defence" Force would be sullied. And all those Jewish (and Communist) dead at Babi Yar etc. were just trying to drag Nazism's good name through the mud.
While it existed, apartheid South Africa was one of the Zionist state's few friends in the world. A Goebbels-like distortion, or the bitter truth?

On March 16, 2003, an activist with the International Solidarity Movement was run over by an Israeli bulldozer attempting to 'tear down a Palestinian house'. Her name was Rachel Corrie.

It was not long after when many began to accuse Israel of “murder” of an “innocent peace activist”. The ISM chose to misrepresent photos to fit their agenda, give several conflicting accounts of her death, and gave a new meaning to “guilty until proven innocent”.

She was portrayed by a "peace activist" who was trying to stop a Israeli bulldozers from destroying a house of a "Palestinian doctor". The truth was that she defended "martyrs", the bulldozer was not intended to destroy the house, but merely some shrubbery meant to conceal a weapons smuggling tunel on the Gazan-Egyptian border, and the group she belonged was later found to be hiding a suicide-bomb recruiter, and their connections to two British suicide bombers who killed 3 Israelis in April have yet to be established (they, as usual, deny it).

[this was true when this article was published, but the ISM have since admitted to associating with the bombers]

THE MEGAPHONE PHOTO

One of the things used most was to ‘prove’ that Rachel was intentionally murdered was a photo of her in front of a bulldozer with a megaphone. Many took that out of context to believe that that was the bulldozer she was hit by, and she was in that position while hit. Michael Rivero of What Really Happened claimed that the photo was taken “moments” before she was hit (he has since removed the claim, without issuing a correction/apology of any sort).

The ISM, however, never claimed the photo was taken moments before, but did absolutely nothing to solve the confusion. The photo was labeled by them as “A clearly marked Rachel Corrie, holding a megaphone, confronts an Israeli bulldozer driver attempting to demolish a Palestinian home.” Notice that the caption never says that she was hit by this bulldozer, and even says “an Israeli bulldozer”, not “the Israeli bulldozer”.

The bulldozer she was hit by is clearly a different one, as this photo reveals:

Joe Smith, an ISM activist and a friend of Rachel Corrie, chose to reveal the truth, which is not stated on ISM’s website. "Smith said that no one was on the spot with a camera before Rachel Corrie was mauled by the bulldozer, and that the picture of Rachel with the megaphone had been taken many hours earlier.”

The Christian Science Monitor also claims that it is “moments before”.

The photo could not have been taken moments before she was hit, as a camera was not present at the scene until she was hit. The photo was taken hours, not moments before she was hit.

CONFLICTING STORES

For such a clear case of murder as the ISM is presenting it, their seems to be a lot of confusion over how Rachel Corrie died. Here are several conflicting accounts of how she died (all from members of the ISM).

She was sitting in the path of the bulldozer. The bulldozer saw her and ran over her. She ended up completely underneath it," fellow activist Joseph Smith told AFP. ( http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/03/17/1047749690343.html)

"Rachel had been staying in Palestinian homes threatened with illegal demolition, and today Rachel was standing with other non-violent international activists in front of a home scheduled for illegal demolition. According to witnesses, Rachel was run over twice by the Israeli military bulldozer in its process of demolishing the Palestinian home. Witnesses say that Rachel was clearly visible to the bulldozer driver, and was doing nothing to provoke an attack." ( http://www.palsolidarity.org/rachel.htm)

According to the ISM activist, Corrie was wearing a bright jacket and climbed onto the bulldozer shovel-plow and began shouting at the driver. "There's no way he didn't see her, since she was practically looking into the cabin. At one stage, he turned around toward the building. The bulldozer kept moving, and she slipped and fell off the plow. But the bulldozer kept moving, the shovel above her. I guess it was about 10 or 15 meters that it dragged her and for some reason didn't stop. We shouted like crazy to the driver through loudspeakers that he should stop, but he just kept going and didn't lift the shovel. Then it stopped and backed up. We ran to Rachel. She was still breathing." ( http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=273498&contrassID=2&subContrassID=1&sbSubContrassID=0)

From ISM Media Coordinator Michael Shaikh in Beit Sahour:

"The confrontation between the ISM and the Israeli Army had been under way for two hours when Rachel was run over. Rachel and the other activists had clearly identified themselves as unarmed international peace activists throughout the confrontation. he Israeli Army are attempting to dishonour her memory by claiming that Rachel was killed accidentally when she ran in front of the bulldozer. Eye-witnesses to the murder insist that this is totally untrue. Rachel was sitting in the path of the bulldozer as it advanced towards her. When the bulldozer refused to stop or turn aside she climbed up onto the mound of dirt and rubble being gathered in front of it wearing a fluorescent jacket to look directly at the driver who kept on advancing. The bulldozer continued to advance so that she was pulled under the pile of dirt and rubble. After she had disappeared from view the driver kept advancing until the bulldozer was completely on top of her. The driver did not lift the bulldozer blade and so she was crushed beneath it. Then the driver backed off and the seven other ISM activists taking part in the action rushed to dig out her body. An ambulance rushed her to A-Najar hospital where she died." ( http://www.wbai.org/artman/publish/article_87.asp)

So let’s get this straight. She was “clearly visible” to the bulldozer driver, although she was “sitting”, and at the same time “slipped and fell off the plow”. The ISM Media Coordinater says that eyewitnesses say that it is not true that she was sitting in front of the bulldozer, although Joseph Smith, an eyewitness, said she was. Joseph (or Joe) Smith later expanded on the story:
"The earth started to move under her when the bulldozer digs in. You have a couple of options you can roll aside-you have to be very quick to get out of the way. You can fall back, but she leaned forward to try to climb up on top. She got pulled down, and the bulldozer lost sight of her. Then, without lifting the blade, he reversed and she was underneath the blade"."

Smith, an eyewitness to Rachel’s death, seems to portray it as some sort of accident, while the ISM, officially, calls it a “murder”. Why? Does their hatred of Israel seem to run so deep that they are willing to negate the testimony of an eyewitness for their own purposes? Or is it a misunderstanding? A look into the history of Rachel Corrie and the ISM certainly leaves one to choose the former.

WHY AND HOW?

One of the possible reasons she was run over was because a false sense of security. Joseph Smith described it in a Jerusalem Post article:  http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/A/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1047874558468

Smith, originally of Kansas City, Missouri, .... said the fact that the IDF had previously taken pains not to hurt the group made him feel safe. It is precisely because the group has so much experience playing a game of chicken with the bulldozers that it understands this was not an accident. Many members have stood in front of a bulldozer as Corrie did and then climbed up the mound of dirt, precisely so that the driver could see them. "You look into their eyes and they stop," Smith said. Also, for a person who has just been “crushed” by a bull dozer, twice, she seems quite intact, and is even able to talk.

A PEACE ACTIVIST?

Rachel Corrie was a well-intentioned woman who sought the protection of Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza. Yet looking at only one side of her and calling her a “peace activist” is not only irresponsible, but quite possibly untrue, as it ignores what actions she took. She took action against Israel, which included trying to prevent them from uncovering a weapons tunnel, defended murderers as "martyrs" ("Referring in February to "fighters" who "killed two of the illegal occupying force," Corrie wrote that "more Martyrs are ready to defend the honor of Palestine." - FrontPageMag), and refused to condemn suicide bombings. Her organization supported "peace" for Palestinians and felt that they had a "right to armed struggle", despite the ISM claiming to support non-violence. Photos show her burning a mock flag of the United States.

The organization which Rachel belonged to, the International Soliditary Movement (ISM), was even criticized by extreme left-wing Israeli journalist Amira Hass for refusing to publicly condemn suicide bombings.

“Those international activists emphasize that they support nonviolent civil disobedience. Their connection with Palestinian activists is based on belief in universal, trans-nationalist values, the solidarity of the oppressed. But those same Palestinian social and civil activists, including academics and others identified with the Palestinian intellectual elite, don't dare go to their publics and start an educational campaign against the rite of death and killing. Many of them say in private conversations that not only must the attacks be condemned on pragmatic grounds, since because of the attacks the shocked international community forgets the Israeli occupation and its horrors, but on moral grounds, the universal grounds of humanity.”
Also, little has been said about who the house she was defending. HonestReporting notes that “The bulldozer was part of an operation to eliminate tunnels used by Palestinian terrorists to illegally smuggle weapons from Egypt into Gaza.” Surely Rachel would have known this, as she was willing to “sit” in front of a bulldozer for them.”

It has now been established, a month after the fact, that the bulldozer was not being used to destroy a house at all, but rather to remove some shrubbery around the house that was being used to conceal an entrance to a smuggling tunnel for transporting guns and drugs, among other things. Doesn’t really sound like something a “peace activist” would die for (or even protest for), does it?

And now, the “peace activists” at the ISM have been caught hiding a senior member of the Islamic Jihad, Shadi Sukia, who’s primary duty was to recruit suicide bombers and other kinds of attackers. The story was picked up by other organizations, such as the JTA.

ADDITIONAL READING

When Reuters Miscaptioned a Photo, They Changed an Accidental Death into a Murder
 http://israelbehindthenews.com/Archives/Mar-21-03.htm

'Peace' Activists (sic) in the Middle East: Out of Their Depth
 http://www.jerusalemdiaries.com/article/83

Huge Discrepancies in the Rachel Corrie Story
 http://www.btnhboard.com/~scrub/<<img src="/img/extlink.gif" border="0"/> http://chronwatch.com/editorial/contentDisplay.asp?aid=2156

Terrorist Martyr, American Style
 http://www.frontpagemag.com/articles/Printable.asp?ID=6966