Rachel Corrie died for her sins!
Rachel Corrie died a victim of stupidity
Old News
Rachel Corrie Remembered
For those of you who aren't news junkies: a couple of weeks ago, an American protestor was run over by a bulldozer in Palestine. Very sad, although no more sad than countless other deaths in the Middle East. Still and all, she's been made a martyr by some, a symbol of peace-protest stupidity by others. Me? I think she was an idealistic young girl who, in the heat of passion, accidentally killed herself by jumping onto the blade of a gigantic bulldozer driven by a guy who couldn't see her.
John Sutherland, a writer for The Guardian, says that webloggers have brutalized her. Oddly enough, he points to The Shark Blog, whose messages are not particularly nasty on this subject. He also fails to mention Bigwig's extensive report, which was widely linked to by many bloggers, and is very intellectually honest. He also seems to concentrate on some random comments left on some weblogs, not saying at all where he found them. Very interesting omission, that.
There are two pictures of Rachel Corrie I'll always remember. Both are from Bigwig's report: the one of her crumpled, bloodied body, and the one taken before her death, her face twisted in hatred and rage toward Israel (the one that Sutherland claims "looked, to some expert eyes, doctored," although he doesn't bother to say whose eyes those are.)
Old News
Rachel Corrie Remembered
For those of you who aren't news junkies: a couple of weeks ago, an American protestor was run over by a bulldozer in Palestine. Very sad, although no more sad than countless other deaths in the Middle East. Still and all, she's been made a martyr by some, a symbol of peace-protest stupidity by others. Me? I think she was an idealistic young girl who, in the heat of passion, accidentally killed herself by jumping onto the blade of a gigantic bulldozer driven by a guy who couldn't see her.
John Sutherland, a writer for The Guardian, says that webloggers have brutalized her. Oddly enough, he points to The Shark Blog, whose messages are not particularly nasty on this subject. He also fails to mention Bigwig's extensive report, which was widely linked to by many bloggers, and is very intellectually honest. He also seems to concentrate on some random comments left on some weblogs, not saying at all where he found them. Very interesting omission, that.
There are two pictures of Rachel Corrie I'll always remember. Both are from Bigwig's report: the one of her crumpled, bloodied body, and the one taken before her death, her face twisted in hatred and rage toward Israel (the one that Sutherland claims "looked, to some expert eyes, doctored," although he doesn't bother to say whose eyes those are.)
posted by Ibrahamav at 3:09 PM
63 Comments:
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Ib the 2nd and Ron haven't learned their lesson. Spam will be removed. Learn to live with it.
Just because you hate the truth is no reason to spam it.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Carter Book on Israel 'Apartheid' Sparks Bitter Debate
By Karen DeYoung
The Washington Post
7 December 2006
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/
12/06/AR2006120602171.html
A veteran Middle East scholar affiliated with the Carter
Center in Atlanta resigned his position there Monday in an escalating controversy over former president Jimmy Carter's bestselling book on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The book, "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid," traces the ups
and downs of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process
beginning with Carter's 1977-1980 presidency and the
historic peace accord he negotiated between Israel and
Egypt and continuing to the present. Although it
apportions blame to Israel, the Palestinians and outside parties -- including the United States -- for the failure of decades of peace efforts, it is sharply critical of Israeli policy and concludes that "Israel's continued control and colonization of Palestinian land have been the primary obstacles to a comprehensive peace agreement in the Holy Land."
Kenneth W. Stein, a professor at Emory University, accused Carter of factual errors, omissions and plagiarism in the book. "Being a former President does not give one a unique privilege to invent information," Stein wrote in a harshly worded e-mail to friends and colleagues explaining his resignation as the center's Middle East fellow.
Stein offered no specifics in his e-mail to back up the charges, writing only that "in due course, I shall detail these points and reflect on their origins."
A statement issued by the center yesterday in Carter's
name said he regretted Stein's resignation "from the
titular position as a Fellow" and noted that he had not
been "actively involved" there for the past 12 years.
Carter thanked Stein for his advice and assistance "during
the early years of our Center" and wished him well.
While acknowledging that the word "apartheid" refers to
the system of legal racial separation once used in South Africa, Carter says in his book that it is an appropriate term for Israeli policies devoted to "the acquisition of land" in Palestinian territories through Jewish settlements and Israel's incorporation of Palestinian land on its side of a separating wall it is erecting.
He criticizes suicide bombers and those who "consider the killing of Israelis as victories" but also notes that "some Israelis believe they have the right to confiscate and colonize Palestinian land and try to justify the sustained subjugation and persecution of increasingly hopeless and aggravated Palestinians."
Accusing the Bush administration of abandoning the effort
to promote a lasting peace, he calls for renewed
negotiations on the basis of security guarantees for
Israel and Israel's recognition of U.N.-established
borders.
Formally published three weeks ago, the book quickly
became a bestseller. Carter has been prominently
interviewed in the media and has been mobbed at book appearances around the country.
Speaking Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press," he said he was
glad the book had raised controversy. "If it provokes
debate and assessment and disputes and arguments and maybe
some action in the Middle East to get the peace process,
which is now completely absent or dormant, rejuvenated,
and brings peace ultimately to Israel, that's what I
want," he said.
Criticism of the book, primarily from Jewish groups and leaders, began even before it was published, and it became an issue in the midterm elections last month. The New York-based Jewish Daily Forward noted in October that Democrats were trying to distance themselves from its reported contents as Republicans were seeking to widely disseminate Carter's views in an effort to win Jewish votes.
Speaking to the Forward about Carter, Republican Jewish Coalition executive director Matthew Brooks said the coalition had "not shied away from shining a light on some of his misguided and outrageous comments about Israel in the past. . . . So far, there's been nothing but silence on the part of the Democratic establishment in terms of holding Carter accountable."
Rep. Steve Israel, a Democrat from New York, told the
Forward that the "book clearly does not reflect the
direction of the party."
Since then, the controversy has only grown. In a widely published commentary last weekend, Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz wrote that Carter's "use of the loaded word 'apartheid,' suggesting an analogy to the hated policies of South Africa, is especially outrageous."
In a statement issued Monday, the Simon Wiesenthal Center
in Los Angeles contended that Carter "abandons all
objectivity and unabashedly acts as a virtual spokesman
for the Palestinian cause."
In a telephone interview yesterday, Stein said that Carter
had "taken [material] directly" from a published work
written by a third party but that legal action was being contemplated and he was not yet at liberty to make the details public. He said accounts in the book about meetings he had attended with Carter between 1980 and 1990 had left out key facts in order to "make the Israelis look like they're the only ones responsible" for the failure of peace efforts.
Hey punk, here I am!!!
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
What's wrong punk, can't take it. Can't you nazi zionists handle it. Parrots like you are a joke.
Hey punk, your slipping, you didn't disable your comments here. be back to add some. HaHaHa
Nablus - Ma'an – The spokesman for Palestinian police in Nablus, Abdul Jawad Salawda has stated that Israeli settlers from Shilo settlement abducted a young man from Qusra village, south of Nablus city, late on Friday. Ma'an's correspondent in the city reported that a gang of settlers abducted the Palestinian, Firas Ismael Odeh, 27, while he was in his chicken farm, near the settlement.
The spokesman said that the Palestinian police informed the Israeli authorities about the abduction, and has not received any answer.
Local sources said that the settlers abducted the man, after many cars were stolen from the settlement.It is known that the settlement of Shilo and the nearby settlement of Migdalim were built on the lands of the Palestinian villagers of Qusra in the early 1980s.
Spam left by typical antisemites and islamofascists will be deleted. But antisemitic and islmofscist comments will remain, regardless of how sick they are, because free speech is important.
Post a Comment
<< Home