Radio: Rachel Corrie play on NPR, AIPAC 101 on KALW
Posted on March 27 2007 by Cecilie Surasky under AIPAC.NPR just did a feature on the controversy surrounding the Rachel Corrie play which is now debuting in Seattle. Read the transcript, or listen to the show.
STEVE INSKEEP, host:
Another hot button issue led to charges of censorship. That was the accusation against the New York Theater Workshop when it indefinitely postponed a play called, “My Name is Rachel Corrie.” It’s about a young woman from Olympia, Washington, who died while opposing the Israeli military in the Gaza Strip.
Critics saw the postponement as evidence of pro-Israel bias. Now the first homegrown American production of the play has premiered at the Seattle Repertory Theatre.
You can also listen to today’s “AIPAC 101″ show on Your Call on San Francisco’s KALW featuring Salon’s Gregory Levey, who wrote Inside America’s powerful Israel lobby, and M.J. Rosenberg of the Israel Policy Forum. (Read Jewish Voice for Peace policy director Mitchell Plitnick’s different analysis in which he argues that AIPAC’s role in striking the Iran language from the Iraq spending bill has been over-estimated.)
Get Muzzlewatch delivered fresh daily
Print This Post
March 27th, 2007 at 2:03 pm
Another day…another thread…another echoing silence regarding Jewish Voice for Peace’s lawsuit to shut up its political enemies (a subject they strangely don’t want to talk about on thier own Muzzlewatch Web site).
While we’re waiting, here’s what I had to say last year regarding the behavior of those who create a martyr out of a young girl they themselves threw onto the pyre:
http://www.somervillemejustice.com/rachels.html
Jon
March 27th, 2007 at 3:33 pm
unfortunately, the NPR reporter didn’t mention that the ISM, for which Corrie was volunteering, took its directions from known Hamas and Islamic Jihad leaders in the West Bank and Gaza, functioning essentially as a terror-support network. Not that many idealistic volunteers like Corrie knew about that. But ISM leadership does, and has refused to condemn any acts of terror, claiming that such “resistance” is legitimate.
And in any case, why (in the esteemed and all-knowing judgment of JVP) is the pro-Israel community NOT allowed to have free speech to demonstrate outside the theatre? Does free speech only extend to anti-Israel activists? I assume that JVP’s answer to that one would have to be a “yes”, since it is involved in a lawsuit attempting to muzzle free speech in Boston regarding the Islamic Society of Boston, its leadership, and its plans for a giant mosque. And why has there not been any response whatsoever from any JVP members about this blatant hypocrisy?
March 27th, 2007 at 3:47 pm
Accidents happen when you have a heavily armed army of 21-year-olds who have been trained to kill a population of people have been demonized, with their humanity taken away. This is how armys and work and wars are conducted.
Nothing new here and nothing specific to Israel.
But I sometimes wonder why it is that there is so much coverage on Rachel Corrie and nothing on the murder of other volunteer of the ISM, Tom Hurndall, shot in the head at as he was shepherded or escorting Palestinian shool kids on a road. The defense was that the shot to his head was only meant to scare him. (But why would there be a need to scare him as he was walking along clearly marked as a volunteer children’s crossing escort?)
Was there a pattern of lethal intimidation against the ISM?
Even Diplomats in Israel said the only reason the case even was questioned or came to trial was the persistence to get the facts by Mr Hurndall’s family. Had his family been simple people with no resources, or if there were no witnesses, the facts of the murder never would have come out.
Or why James Miller, a civilian British film maker, was shot dead by Israeli soldiers in Gaza. We do not hear about this in the US. The details of his death are scant.
And, I think, not one of these cases have been prosecuted, but only investigated by the army? Why is that? What is going on?
March 27th, 2007 at 3:55 pm
Mike,
How do you know that the “ISM, for which Corrie was volunteering, took its directions from known Hamas and Islamic Jihad leaders in the West Bank and Gaza, functioning essentially as a terror-support network.”
Where are the facts supporting this claim? This grave accusation?
Is this accusation a justification for murder of some college kids?
You know what, when I think about it, this reminds me of the justification of the execution of Hans and Sophie Scholl in Munich in 1943. They, too, were accused of aiding terrorist. They were also shot.
March 27th, 2007 at 4:27 pm
Mike’s comment has a lot of disinformation.
The ISM is an internationally respected non-violent movement that protects civilians under occupation, documents human rights abuses, and publicizes what is happening in Palestine under the Israeli occupation. The fact that it is Palestinian-led does not make it a terror organization. Though anyway none of this is relevant to the fact that Rachel Corrie was murdered by an Israeli bulldozer while protecting a civilian Palestinian home.
In addition to mis-information about the ISM, Mike seems to be purposely misinterpret the point of the post. No one is objecting to anyone’s free speech rights. The objection is that the play, which opened to great acclaim in London, was not staged in New York because the theater received pressure that it was too “political.” That is surely an example of muzzling–people missed an opportunity to see a work of art because of its politics.
March 27th, 2007 at 4:45 pm
The ISM is largely “respected” by people who share the pathological hatred of Israel harbored by its members.
The ISM is an extremely dishonest organization. After Ms. Corrie died, it immediately rushed to put up photographs of the incident which allegedly proved that the bulldozer operator was far enough away to see her. It turned out that the various photos were taken at different times of the day and misleadingly juxtaposed to create this false impression.
But if enough people repeat a lie, it becomes perceived by some a a truth. So our former ISM commentor repeats the absurd allegation that Ms. Corrie was intentionally murdered and hopes that he can perpetuate the campaign of dishonesty.
March 27th, 2007 at 5:09 pm
The ISM is largely “respected” by people who share the pathological hatred of Israel
lol, i actually enjoy the exposure of drama queens.
Pathology (from Greek pathos , feeling, pain, suffering; and logos , study of; see also -ology ) is the study and diagnosis of disease through examination of molecules ,cells ,tissues and organs . The term encompasses both the medical specialty which uses tissues and body fluids to obtain clinically useful information, as well as the related scientific study of disease processes.
ouch! nothing like packing punch w/the allegations of hatred.
March 27th, 2007 at 5:29 pm
absurd allegation that Ms. Corrie was intentionally murdered
wow, i haven’t been coming here very long but one certainly doesn’t have to rely on the original post to find evidence of muzzling. all you have to do is read the comments. i always wonder about posters who have the time and energy to hang out on websites whose fundemental premise is one they disagree with and then hang around and insult.
where i come from these people are called trolls.
i wasn’t there, so i don’t really know what happened, but what i do know is that the only way this could be construed as anything other than murder is to just say ‘oops, a mistake’
i do happen to notice israel has notched up a lot of ‘mistakes’. also, when you consider the ‘mistakes’ as being completely devoid of responsibility or intention then you don’t have to look further to examine why or how or ascertain any blame or fault. perhaps it is just some issue of someone driving a bulldozer who didn’t happen to notice a political firestorm going on around him because he was prossibly listening to his ipod or something? now what reasonable person wouldn’t consider this.
well, an entire slew of people across the globe that’s who. people who aren’t idiots and can see that this woman gave up her life for something she believed in, not because of some hatred for israel, but for the hope and chance of peace.
and hopes that he can perpetuate the campaign of dishonesty.
guilt, the gift that keeps on giving. you can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but once people start seeing a pattern of abuse, the chance of intimidating them into submission can only occur when they are in a state of despair.
March 27th, 2007 at 6:04 pm
I find it odd how the majority of an article apparently only tagged AIPAC is taken up with a play about Rachel Corrie. Perhaps it’s to jerk a tear before attacking anyone who supports Israel. Maybe a better title would be: Really cool but somewhat biased radio talks about annoying ISM activist Rachel Corrie, and then more about how AIPAC is a piece of slime and JVP is the true representation of the Jewish population.
March 27th, 2007 at 6:42 pm
Interesting how my comment on this thread (the first one posted) somehow disappeared between when I posted it this afternoon and when I got home. Ah well. Let’s all assume this was just a technical glitch, and not an attempt of Muzzlewatch to “disappear” opinions it finds uncomfortable.
As I was saying before this “glitch,”:
… another thread, another accusation, and still not a word about why a site dedicated to criticizing others for allegedly “muzzling” its views feels free to stifle the free speech of others via a lawsuit. One week plus and still waiting for an explanation of that one.
In the meantime, I did have some thoughts on the Corrie Affair from last year which appear here:
http://www.somervillemejustice.com/rachels.html
Responses are welcome (although I expect this thread to be abandoned for a new set of accusations once the Muzzlewatchers realize that, once again, they can only demand answers, never provide them).
[ MODERATOR’S NOTE: As stated before, we do not delete comments based on the political perspectives of posters. Mr Haber’s comments have never been deleted.
While we do not make it a practice of telling readers what we are planning on writing about in the future, in response to Mr Haber’s admirable tenacity, we felt it worth sharing that Muzzlewatch editors have been working on a story about the Islamic Society of Boston and the David Project which will be posted in due time. Mr. Haber and any other readers will have ample opportunity to respond in the comments section, per usual.]
March 27th, 2007 at 7:40 pm
here’s the source for info about the ISM, which is heavily referenced with information both from ISM itself and interviews they have done in the media in which their leadership admitted to taking direction from known terrorist leaders. Yes, Hamas and Islamic Jihad are terrorist groups. This report was done BEFORE the Rachel Corrie incident.
http://home.comcast.net/~jat.action/ISM_essay.htm
March 27th, 2007 at 8:38 pm
Thanks to Mike for the information about the JAT web site. I did check it out and was rather fascinated to see the way the authors of the “information” put together disparate facts and interpreted them to mean what they wanted them to mean. I simply don’t have the time or energy to quote the many parts of the long text that would demonstrate my point…sorry, perhaps I will do so when I have more time. But I do think it’s worth noting that one of the major accusations the JAT folks make about the ISM is that in their insistence that the Palestinians have a right to “resistance”, they are condoning terrorism. (The ISM folks use the word “resistance”; the JAT folks equate that term with terrorism.) But on the JAT home page, I was presented with a link to the following interesting quote by their guru, Rabbi Soloveitchik:
“At a Mizrachi convention I cited the view expressed by my father and master (Rabbi Moses Soloveitchik) of blessed memory, that the proclamation, “The Lord will have war with Amalek from generation to generation” (Exodus 17:16) does not only translate into the communal exercise of waging obligatory war against a specific race but includes as well the obligation to rise up as a community against any people or group that, filled with maniacal hatred, directs its enmity against Keneset Israel. When a people emblazons on its banner, ‘Come, and let us cut them off from being a nation: that the name of Israel may be no more in remembrance’ (Psalms 83:5) it becomes, thereby, Amalek.”
I take this to mean that the Jews are entitled to resistance of any sort against those whom they perceive as their enemies, but that this same right does not apply to those who perceive the Jews as enemies.
I’m not a huge fan of the ISM myself — I’m ever wary of people who tend toward fanaticism on EITHER side of this conflict –but Rachel Corrie was an honest and idealistic young woman, and there is no excuse for what happened to her.
March 27th, 2007 at 10:58 pm
Actually annie, the number of “mistakes” reported by Israel is relatively low. It’s just that, whenever civilian casualties occur, they are magnified in the case of Israel. An errant tank shell becomes a case for a war crime. The failure of a bulldozer operator to, just once, fail to stop on a dime when college kids play “chicken” with it repeatedly turns into an accusation of “murder.”
Heck, even when Israel investigates and finds its soldiers guilty and punishes them, the haters find fault with it. Tom Hurndall’s mum was disappointed because it turned out her son’s killer was an Israeli Arab. This obviously shattered her preconceptions, so she had to insist that actually, the Arab soldier was ALSO a victim, a victim of the nefarious IDF that ordered the shooting.
This isn’t necessarily a bad thing to an extent. Israel has always had a strict code of conduct, and a free press and public exposure makes sure that the military’s excesses don’t get out of hand. That doesn’t mean that the hypocrisy and the dishonesty of the critics should also be exposed.
How many “mistakes” have Palestinians committed? None, because when they kill Israeli civilians, it is ALWAYS the intended result.
Caveat: I can think of one exception, when a Palestinian sniper killed an Israeli Arab civilian who was taking a jog in the French Hill section of Jerusalem. The killers apologized, saying they meant to kill a Jew, not an Arab.
March 28th, 2007 at 2:56 am
Once again, JVP makes a claim of “muzzling” when in fact it is that they wish their perspective to be the only one.
“My Name is Rachael Corrie” was slated to be performed at a NY theatre, but the theatre owner insisted that this overt propaganda piece be placed in context via either handouts or discussion. The show’s producer, Alan Rickman, refused and pulled the show.
Why must the anti-Israel viewpoint be the only one presented?
March 28th, 2007 at 3:01 am
> James Miller, a civilian British film
> maker, was shot dead by Israeli soldiers
> in Gaza. We do not hear about this in the
> US. The details of his death are scant.
This was documented in the movie “Death in Gaza” shown on HBO. It occasionally gets brought up, usually by people ignorant of the situation. Fortunately, the producers of the movie had the integrity to leave the shooting in the film.
You can clearly see the filmaker approaching Israeli tanks during a combat situation. You can clearly see the filmaker yelling in English at the tanks with no way of knowing if the Bedouin Arab soldiers could hear them or if the soldiers even spoke English. You can clearly see the Israeli troop firing warning shots. You can clearly see the film crew advancing anyway. Then the soldiers started shooting and that is when Miller is killed.
What would you do under similar circumstances?
Watch the movie. It is very clear what is happening.
March 28th, 2007 at 6:55 am
to clear up these eternal mysteries about rachel, see the following: http://www.rachelswords.org/2006/10/14/rachel-corrie-myths-and-facts/
March 28th, 2007 at 9:31 am
Quick all you lovers of truth of how US citizen Rachel Corrie died, call your congressman and demand Israeli conduct a througough, credible, an transparant investigation into Rachel’s death, unless you are satisfied with the IDF version over US objection, for some “dual loyalty” reason incomrehensible to us mere loyal Americans. Surely, you don’t think Israel has something to hide?
In response to inquiries from the Corrie family regarding the Israeli Military Police investigation, in a letter dated June 11, 2004, Colin Powell’s Chief of Staff, Lawrence B. Wilkerson, stated, “Your ultimate question, however, is a valid one, i.e., whether or not we view that report to have reflected an investigation that was ‘thorough, credible, and transparent.’ I can answer your question without equivocation. No, we do not consider it so.”
March 28th, 2007 at 9:49 am
[ MODERATOR’S NOTE: As stated before, we do not delete comments based on the political perspectives of posters. Mr Haber’s comments have never been deleted. While we do not make it a practice of telling readers what we are planning on writing about in the future, in response to Mr Haber’s admirable tenacity, we felt it worth sharing that Muzzlewatch editors have been working on a story about the Islamic Society of Boston and the David Project which will be posted in due time. Mr. Haber and any other readers will have ample opportunity to respond in the comments section, per usual.]
Well thanks for clearing that up. Regarding my “admirable tenacity,” I think you will discover that no “tenacity” (admirable or otherwise) is required if you take time to respond to readers questions in a timely way, rather than ignoring the questions others pose while continuing to post new questions and accusations on a daily basis. Given that you portray yourself on this site as an honest voice that has allegedly been squelched, stonewalling on issues central to the alleged mission of this site do not reflect well on either JVOP or MW.
Given that time constraints mean we must wait for you to provide us answers on the subject of the ISB lawsuit, I wanted to make you an offer that could both help readers understand this issue, and demonstrate that members of Muzzlewatch practice what they preach. So far, the two categories of alleged “muzzling” of your opinion you’ve presented on this site include (1) people exercising their free speech rights to criticize your arguments; and (2) people exercising their right of assembly to determine who can and who cannot “share the stage.” Given this, I suggest that Muzzlewatch let me post a write up of the ISB conflict in Boston and that once you find the time to write up your own response to this issue, that this be added as a comment (or set of comments) to my original essay. That would certainly demonstrate your willingness to share your own platform, rather than just criticize others when they refuse to share theirs.
Given that my day job as a reviewer of coloring and dot-to-dot books for various children’s Web sites gives me approximately 23.5 hours of free time per day, I’m more than ready to put the time into this, even as the rest of you struggle with schedules that prevent you from providing your readers this critical information in a timely manner.
No need to thank me. Just let me know if and when you accept this offer and we can arrange a way to get my material posted on the home page of your site in a timely fashion.
March 28th, 2007 at 9:56 am
While I’ve avoided joining in the fray regarding the nature of the ISM, it strikes me that writers like Norbert and Steffi have an obvious way of demonstrating the true nature of that organization. To date, you have already told us that Israel performed an investigation of the Corrie affair, and pointed us to a number of references to that investigation. While you are not happy with the results of that research, one cannot deny that such an investigation took place. I also believe that Caterpillar, at ISM instigation, also performed an investigation into the matter.
The only group involved with the death of Rachel Corrie who does not seem to have looked into their own role (as far as I can tell) is the ISM itself. After all, it was ISM that recruited Rachel, helped her get into Israel on false pretences, provided her guidance on how to stage her protests and assigned her where to stand in the Gaza strip. Certainly, a group that laid out these footprints for Ms. Corrie to follow must have undergone tremendous soul searching regarding their activities before beginning the process of creating a martyrdom myth around their deceased former comrade.
If you can point us to the investigation ISM undertook to determine its own level of culpability in this affair, that would go a long way to demonstrate that, at the very least, the organization takes the deal of Rachel Corrie at least as seriously as the Israeli government and the manufacturer of tractors.
March 28th, 2007 at 10:19 am
jon, go ahead and call for an ISM investigation; it has nothing to hide; apparentley the IDF and Congress do, as Israel’s supporters defeated a demand for an independent investigation. but you won’t say where you stand on that.
In her writing[23] and a videotaped interview[24] from Rafah, Rachel Corrie lucidly depicted the daily events in the lives of ordinary Palestinians in Rafah. Rachel’s accounts of destruction in Rafah generally correspond with the descriptions and conclusions of respected third party organizations like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International.
Rachel traveled to Rafah with the International Solidarity Movement (ISM), a Palestinian-led movement committed to resisting the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land using nonviolent, direct-action methods and principles.[25] ISM works with Palestinian communities that are undertaking nonviolent direct action. The ISM’s positions on Israel/Palestine correspond with international law.[26]
The mandatory two day ISM training in Palestine that Rachel attended included intensive nonviolence training, and discussion of the real possibility that the ISM trainees might be seriously wounded or killed.[27] During their training, all ISM volunteers, including Rachel, sign a form saying that “I realize I could be detained, imprisoned, taken hostage, injured or even killed.” An October 17, 2003 Seattle Times article reported, “She knew the risks of going, her friends said… from the beginning, the danger is never undersold, say those who have gone through the ISM training.”[28] In 2002, nine ISM volunteers performing peaceful activities were seriously injured by Israeli settlers[29] and soldiers.[30]
March 28th, 2007 at 10:30 am
Norbert - Are you telling us that ISM has never reflected on or investigated its role in the death of Rachel Corrie? Obviously, if I have to call for such an investigation, then that would mean the group has never undertaken such soul searching itself, even during the many years its demanded that others do so, then criticized them for not reaching the conclusions that ISM wanted.
If this is the case, that ISM has yet to spend even a minimal amount of time and resources asking itself whether or not its actions and strategies led to the death of one of its members, this is an extraordinary admission, or at least omission. Can we take your request that I must call for such an investigation as confirmation that ISM has not, to date, done anything in this regard?
March 28th, 2007 at 10:48 am
John Haber, I have no idea. I know ISM has discussed her death many times. Read the eyewitness accounts on Electronic Intifada. I think ISM, like anyone with a brain, concludes Rachel was run over with an IDF bulldozer. The US state dept finds Israel’s investigation into her death insufficient. The State Dept. did not conclude ISM’s “soul searching” to be insufficient. Why dont you contact the State Dept and blame lack of reflection on ISM’s part. Tell me how far you get, I’m curious to know.
March 28th, 2007 at 10:56 am
Thanks, “norbert.”
Peaceful, non-violent civil disobedience is not without serious risk. Didn’t the people who marched and staged sit-ins in our own country in the 1960s and 1970s accept the fact that they would be fire-hosed, beaten with clubs, and even murdered in their homes?
The goal of peaceful, non-violent civil disobedience is to force the authorities to show their essential brutality for all the world to see. The “rest of the story” is that the disobedient ones are willing to be the brutalized ones.
And even if there is only one who is brutalized or murdered, the rest of us should see that some in the Israeli military are senselessly brutal.
March 28th, 2007 at 11:00 am
Most people don’t dispute that Ms. Corrie was killed by the bulldozer.
However, the evidence also demonstrated that ISM “peace activists” were regularly running right up to the bulldozer and on to the pile of debris that the buldozer would create as it moved. The evidence also demonstrated that the bulldozer drivers were repeatedly stopping to avoid actually running over the “peace activists.”
Given this, it seems in fact highly unlikely that Ms. Corrie’s death could be considered a murder. The IDF repeatedly tried to AVOID running over the ISMers, even though the ISMers were clearly trying to provoke a confrontation by running right up to the bulldozer. So while no one can read minds, the most logical conclusion was that Rachel’s death was a very sad accident. One that occurred because ISM decided to play chicken with the bulldozers.
March 28th, 2007 at 11:24 am
Joshua, i only hope is was an accident. the fact that the IDF had not allowed a “transparent, thorough” investigation makes me wonder if it has something to hide. considering that “accident” marked a few weeks open-season on internationals — James Miller, Brian Avery, and Tom Hurndall after Rachel, and considering how little forthcoming it was about those “accidents, ” I harbor my doubts about rachel’s death.
March 28th, 2007 at 11:25 am
Norbert - I know ISM has repeatedly talked about the death of Rachel Corrie, but only in so far as it reflects what you are saying: that they blame the whole thing on Israel (with a little bit of blame thrown to Caterpillar for good measure) - end of story. While asking who in the organization organized the specific tactics on the ground in Gaza (i.e., whether or not playing chicken with a bulldozer is a good idea) seems like a good start, I would think a reflective organization that actually cares about its members would also have investigated and discussed whether the specific education it provided people like Corrie, the steps it took to get her into Israel under false pretences, the decisions it took to undertake this specific project of confronting bulldozers in this particular areas were good ideas (at least in order to determine how to avoid getting another one of its members killed).
I guess what you’re saying is that ISM has shown no interest in any of these subjects (or at least no interest demonstrated in any communication you and I have seen) and has been only too happy to rev up the martyrdom machine, rather than reflect even briefly on how its decision and choices may have led to Ms. Corrie’s death. To tell you the truth, I think this very subject would serve as a much better basis for a drama than the martyrdom play currently being performed in Seattle.
March 28th, 2007 at 11:45 am
I can’t help you, Norbert. I dont know what was said in those discussions. ISM had no choice but to tell Rachel how to get into the airport — although it is not against international law for Palestinians to invite internationals to come and protest with them, Israel routinely turns such people away at the aiport. it seems a smaller crime than occupying and colonizing another people and stealing their lands.
It is unfortunate you did not take me suggestion to call for a “thorough, transparent” investigation into Rachel’s death, as the US State Dept. calls for, but I guess you’re more loyal to Israel than to the US.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:21 pm
Actually, I believe you are Norbert, Norbert. And while you seem to have boiled ISM involvement in the death of Rachel Corrie down to giving her directions to the airport, I think most readers would agree that if you (1) fill someone’s head with a specific storyline of good vs. evil (2) explain to that young person how to lie your way into the country of allegedly evil people (3) drive her to a dangerous area and tell her to stand in a certain place; and (4) watch as she gets killed by doing what you just told her to do that you would bear at least a little responsibility into the death your choices helped cause.
Yet all we hear from ISM (and you) is that only one party and one party alone bears all responsibility for an action that took place at the end of a long chain, each link of which bears the ISM’s fingerprints. It’s as if ISM had left a loaded gun in a room, and once one person shot another with it, they rushed into the room demanding the right to be judge, jury and executioner of the person who pulled the trigger. Forgive me if I fail to see the virtue in such a position, or the organization (or people) that takes it.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:52 pm
read the story line again, john, she was no naif, no matter how much that suits your purpose of absovling Israel.
In her writing[23] and a videotaped interview[24] from Rafah, Rachel Corrie lucidly depicted the daily events in the lives of ordinary Palestinians in Rafah. Rachel’s accounts of destruction in Rafah generally correspond with the descriptions and conclusions of respected third party organizations like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International.
Rachel traveled to Rafah with the International Solidarity Movement (ISM), a Palestinian-led movement committed to resisting the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land using nonviolent, direct-action methods and principles.[25] ISM works with Palestinian communities that are undertaking nonviolent direct action. The ISM’s positions on Israel/Palestine correspond with international law.[26]
The mandatory two day ISM training in Palestine that Rachel attended included intensive nonviolence training, and discussion of the real possibility that the ISM trainees might be seriously wounded or killed.[27] During their training, all ISM volunteers, including Rachel, sign a form saying that “I realize I could be detained, imprisoned, taken hostage, injured or even killed.” An October 17, 2003 Seattle Times article reported, “She knew the risks of going, her friends said… from the beginning, the danger is never undersold, say those who have gone through the ISM training.”[28] In 2002, nine ISM volunteers performing peaceful activities were seriously injured by Israeli settlers[29] and soldiers.[30]
March 28th, 2007 at 12:55 pm
If you know the name “Rachel Corrie” but have never heard the name “Marla Bennett, then;
1. You have a hint as to the extent and expense of the propaganda blitz by the ISM
2. You are a victim of the media and need to learn more about whats really going on
March 28th, 2007 at 1:09 pm
So let me make sure I have this clear Norbert. As far as you’re concerned (and we’re just talking about you now, not the ISM in general, since I think it’s clear where they stand), the International Solidarity Movement - despite every committed or omitted act that they were involved in between first meeting with Rachel Corrie and her death on one of their assignments - bears absolutely no responsibility whatsoever for her death. Not even one, tiny infinately small smidgen. Nada. In your opinion, everything is the fault of Israel (and maybe Caterpillar), everything.
If this is the attitude that permiates ISM and its supporters, then I certainly hope anyone contemplating joining such a group understands what little concern they have over their well being, or even life or death (other than an eagerness to turn the people whom they lead to death into martyrs).
This has been a very revealing conversation Norbert. I thank you.
March 28th, 2007 at 5:56 pm
everyone knows that ISM and other pro-palestinian groups repeatedly said that they needed someone like rachel to die for them to get attention. they sacrificed her for the cause. they’re good at sacrificing people.
but seriously, getting your history from the Rachel Corrie Play is like getting your history from Oliver Stone Movies. Not only is it one sided, and forced down your throat, it’s based on lies. it’s bad art AND bad history. but there’s no accounting for taste…
March 28th, 2007 at 6:09 pm
Marla Bennet (a dear young woman) was tragically and horribly killed with others in an attack by a terrorist — fueled by mindless hate and revenge.
The same motives that killed a Rachel Corrie and attempted to hide the details of her death.
The terrorism that murdered Marla were open to the ugly truth. (I am still sad about her death.)
The terrorism that murdered a Rachel and others like her (regardless of what we may think of the person and her motives) were hidden and diffused by the Israeli government. A chain of dishonesty and disgraceful behavior.
That is the point.
March 28th, 2007 at 7:31 pm
I call them the Chatty Cathy Trolls. Every discussion group has them unfortunately. I’d welcome thought-through opposing arguments, but alas, trolls don’t grasp the concept. Reminds one of the Monty Python skit where the fellow pays for an argument but instead gets some git who can only ‘automatically gainsay’ any point he makes.
M: I came here for a good argument.
A: No you didn’t; no, you came here for an argument.
M: An argument isn’t just contradiction.
A: It can be.
M: No it can’t. An argument is a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition.
A: No it isn’t.
M: Yes it is! It’s not just contradiction.
A: Look, if I argue with you, I must take up a contrary position.
M: Yes, but that’s not just saying ‘No it isn’t.’
A: Yes it is!
M: No it isn’t!
A: Yes it is!
M: Argument is an intellectual process. Contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying of any statement the other person makes.
(short pause)
A: No it isn’t.
Our trolls are wordy, yes, but they don’t seem to be able to form ‘a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition.’
Gets old, doesn’t it?
March 28th, 2007 at 9:20 pm
Yehudi,
Who is everyone? Can you show me one reference where you can prove that someone from ISM said that they needed someone to die in order to get attention?
Give me one name and if you can’t you should stop spewing such drivel.
As for the play — it is taken from Rachel’s eperience. It is her experience. No matter how you try to malign her and re-write any other part of history, you cannot re-write hers. And why are you so invested in tearing her and the play down anyway?
Exactly what in it is incorrect according to you?
March 28th, 2007 at 9:28 pm
Ellen,
There actually wa a lot of coverage of the murder of Tom Hurndall. It just wasn’t covered in the US.
The real reason that his family was able to obtain justice was the fact that some in the British media continued to cover the story and ask questions. This continued to keep public pressure on British officials to support the family in its quest for justice.
Finally there was justice, however little.
In the case of Rachel Corrie, neither the media or the government is the least bit interested in seeking answers, truth or justice. Therefore there was no pressure on Israel for a thorough investigation and there was no pressure to even release the findings of the shotty investigation that was conducted.
March 28th, 2007 at 9:36 pm
I suggest that Muzzlewatch let me post a write up of the ISB conflict in Boston and that once you find the time to write up your own response to this issue
jon, it occurred to me that it is so easy (and free!) to start your own blog, perhaps you might consider communicating your ideas on your own blog and then leave the link here. that way anyone interested in learning about the issue (i have no idea what it is) prior to muzzlewatch posting their thread, can go over to your blog and read it.
i must say, my curiosity is peaked by your frequent commenting. i look forward to the thread and am surprised. sometimes people engaged in lawsuits do not share intricate details prior to trial and negotiations.
It’s just that, whenever civilian casualties occur, they are magnified in the case of Israel.
really? in the msm?? how odd. i rarely read articles critical of israel in the US msm. maybe i am just reading the wrong papers. usually for any kind of balanced critism of israel i read the israeli press.
the number of “mistakes” reported by Israel is relatively low.
hmm. what comes to mind off the top of my head is that poor family picnicing on the beach. very sad. wasn’t that during some ceasefire or something. well, think of the mayhem that ensued as a result of the attacks that followed.
The failure of a bulldozer operator to, just once, fail to stop on a dime
well, now that is an interesting viewpoint. something tells me there may have been more of a warning than ‘a dime’. certainly rachael was larger than “a dime’.
Heck, even when Israel investigates and finds its soldiers guilty and punishes them, the haters find fault with it.
the haters? what about people who do not hate israel. do you think the logical response to a situation like this is to simply find no fault?
Israel has always had a strict code of conduct, and a free press and public exposure makes sure that the military’s excesses don’t get out of hand.
oh please. let’s be rational. are we talking about the same country that just pulverized lebanon? the same country that left behind 100,000’s of cluster bombs that just keep on killing long after the cease fire? i seriosly doubt israels press could have stopped that invasion. maybe it kept the situation from turning into a full blown nuclear attack (what would the national community think??) but i really don’t think a free press or public exposure are going to deter the agenda, otherwise things like attacks on the electric grid and the slow starvation tactic of submission would be subdued.
That doesn’t mean that the hypocrisy and the dishonesty of the critics should also be exposed.
i don’t think we have to worry bout this. doesn’t aipac have (like dude) $100,000,000 annual operating budget or some absurd amount. one would imagine they could counter this play if they wanted by writing their own. my guess is the less news the better from the ‘examine the victims blame’ crowd.
you know for that ‘balanced view’ you could do what fox does. totally examine every angle. every step she took prior to being run over by a bulldozer, all the way back to her childhood. take a deep look into what makes a person be so irrational as to try to confront a world superpower, one that could, although unlikely, just slaughter her for daring them.
i wonder if she was breast fed.
then , one could also examine the history of that soldier who didn’t stop on the dime.you could examine the outfit that sent him on that bulldozer. examine the mission of destroying homes to prevent or punish, or punish to prevent, the relatives or something.
and instead of creating art based on rachael’s reality let’s look at it balanced.
rachael vs the superpower. misbegotten looser directed by radical terrorist organization mistakenly gets squashed by totally clueless soldier wearing ipod on his way to demolish terrorist harboring homes!!
March 29th, 2007 at 12:30 am
tuneses, the web site has already been posted earlier in the thread: http://home.comcast.net/~jat.action/ISM_essay.htm , with plenty of citations.
and i don’t want to tear her or the play down. i want to tear down that people who wanted to use her when she was alive, and who now want to use her death as a way to demonize israel.
i’m sure the play is tear-jerking in a very sentimental, superficial way. it’s not hard to do. it’s also really bad theater, and even worse history. but the show must go on!
and as was also pointed out, there have been numerous official investigations, some by the israeli government, but no accounting of the ISM’s complicity.
March 29th, 2007 at 5:36 am
[i always wonder about posters who have the time and energy to hang out on websites whose fundemental premise is one they disagree with and then hang around and insult.
where i come from these people are called trolls.
I call them the Chatty Cathy Trolls.]
I have similarly wondered about people who set up a Web site or forum (such as Muzzlewatch) which is fundamentally based on an accusation (that censorship is keeping their opinions from being embraced by a majority, if not the law of the land), who carefully select the evidence they choose to display, dumping all contradictory information down the memory hole, who then sneer at and condemn anyone who has the audacity to question or challenge their assumptions.
If you’d prefer a monologue, then just get rid of your comments section (you’re not required to have it). If you prefer to only read comments you agree with, then limit those who can comment to just those who are already in full agreement with the opinions reflected on this site. You have these options, but please don’t spend weeks and months ignoring fact-based challenges to the assumptions on this site, then turn around and pretend that each and every critical comment is actually an insult or accusation of anti-Semitism. To paraphrase your Monty Python routine:
Commenter: I’d like to respond to the latest piece on Muzzlewatch.
MW: Stop accusing me of anti-Semitism!
Commenter: Who’s talking about anti-Semitism, I just wondered why a site that claims its voice is being squelched is so loudly heard in key American constituencies, such as the universities and many newspapers (including editorials posted directly on your site).
MW: How dare you call me an anti-Semite! You’re trying to shut down debate with your insults!
Commenter: So far, you’re the only person who has brought up anti-Semitism. I was just asking some questions, such as why several people on a site claiming to favor unlimited free speech have celebrated the censorship of people with whom you disagree?
MW: I’m being muzzled! I’m being muzzled!
Commenter: By who? Am I the one responsible for Jewish Voices for Peace joining a lawsuit to shut up their political rivals, or are you just trying to kill the messenger.
MW: Chatty Cathy Troll! See, I told you the other side can’t do anything but hurl slurs of anti-Semitism. Why can’t they just face facts that we own this site and can say what we want. Go start your own site if you feel otherwise!
Commenter: By the way, can I borrow those earplugs.
March 29th, 2007 at 9:13 am
I’ve met Ms. Corrie’s parents — who for years now have devoted themselves to calling attention to their daughter’s death among American Christians — I found their dedication totally credible — but now I suppose we’re to believe that these totally middle-class Americans whose lives have been turned political by what their daughter was and and how she died — that they are just dupes or tools of Hamas or someother Israel hating group. I think the facts are that many, many American Christians — I am one of them — are becoming increasingly disenchanted with Israel both because of the actions of the IDF and because of the rabid quality of its defenders in this country.
March 29th, 2007 at 11:24 am
I will not presume to speak for the Corrie’s or read into their behavior any specific motive. As a parent myself, I can only imagine the grief of losing a child, so can’t begin to understand the range of reactions one might have to such an enormous event. I will say, however, that there are a lot of other grieving family members of other Rachels, see:
http://www.somervilleMEjustice.com/rachels.html
Unless you are willing to suspend your judgement and immediately accept whatever opinions the loved ones of these Rachels have on the Middle East conflict as unassailable, I suggest we remove the emotion-laden subject of grieving families from what should be an objective discussion.
I have not brought up Hamas or other groups until now, despite the fact that they are responsible for more than their fair share of Rachel killings. All I have asked is why a company that made bulldozers, and an army that bought them have all performed investigations into their roles in the death of Rachel Corrie, while the organization that was responsible for every step in the process up until bulldozer struck person seems to be the only one that cannot manage to reflect on its own responsibliity for a tragedy, rather than lashing out and blaming others as their one and only response.
March 29th, 2007 at 3:19 pm
Ellen,you are quite wrong and in fact quite dangerously mis-guided. Marla Bennett was an innocent Cal Berkeley student, who was intentionally murdered by Palestinian terrorists while she was having lunch on July 31, 2002 in the Hebrew University cafeteria. Rachel Corrie was accidentally killed while playing “chicken” with an armoured bulldozer in order to protect terrorists’ arms smuggling tunnels at the behest of the ISM. Her ISM companions stood by and video taped her death instead of warning her, or the bulldozer or even trying to saveher. She was sacrificed by theISM to their diety “Propaganda.” Afterwards, it was quite openly said that she was worth more to the ISM dead than alive. Pay attention, the ISM would sacrifice you as well if it furthered their aims.
March 29th, 2007 at 8:27 pm
John Haber, I enjoyed your dialogue, much more original than my pinching of Python. I have a version from my interpretation of the history of this Comments secion:
MW: It seems that a private school in California has disinvited
Commentator (not necessariy you): Jew hater.
MW: Umm, has disinvited a speaker after they learned
C: Anti-Israel.
MW: after they learned that the speaker was an intern in the occupied
C: Oh!!! Who’s being muzzled NOW?
MW: (clears throat) an intern in the occupied territories
C: Hater.
As I said, I don’t see much sharing of others persectives with evidence. I see a lot of gainsaying and name calling… no, you know what? It isn’t even that. It’s just verbal grafitti.
March 29th, 2007 at 11:41 pm
So many times when I come in contact with ISM activists, they lie about what is right in front of us both. They look me right in the eye and lie about somethihng that we both just saw! It is incredible! And this is NOT in Israel/Disputed Territories!
And then they want me to believe their “observations” of what happens in the territories? They want me to believe their statments?
March 30th, 2007 at 6:26 am
For some perspective on Rachel’s death, check out the British documentary “the Killing Zone.”
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5863204188744026936
March 30th, 2007 at 8:59 am
Alan - Regarding the types of exchanges on this site (Pythonesque or otherwise), I’ve said my piece on the subject as a comment to the latest post on the home page regarding cordiality. Feel free to respond there.
April 4th, 2007 at 11:31 am
Theater won’t stage controversial drama
BY CHRISTINE DOLEN
My Name Is Rachel Corrie, the controversial play about a young American activist who died after she was run over by an Israeli-operated bulldozer in the Gaza Strip, has been pulled from the lineup at Plantation’s Mosaic Theatre after protests from some of the theater’s subscribers and outside individuals…
Miami Herald, Apr 3 2007
http://www.miamiherald.com/213/v-print/story/61685.html
April 4th, 2007 at 2:23 pm
Thanks for the video link, Norbert. A good question is posed in the first minute… if foreigners are being killed in Gaza, what’s happening to the people who are living there? It’s understandable, but sad also, that we in the U.S. only seem to get upset when a U.S. citizen is killed overseas.
If it takes the death of a young American woman to get us upset about what life is like for the people who live in Gaza, then Rachel Corrie was willing to risk her life.
It is instructive that we in the U.S. would rather blame the ISM than the ones who actually did the killing. Did Rachel did in vain?
April 12th, 2007 at 2:21 pm
“if foreigners are being killed in Gaza, what’s happening to the people who are living there? ”
you’re right, it’s terrible for the people living there. there is daily fighting between hamas and fatah, there is horrendous treatment of women, including honor killings, there is violence done to the christian minority every day. really, the palestinian government, such as it is, should get their act together and take care of their people better.