The big red newspaper vending boxes for the Seattle Post-Intelligencer display the slogan "It's in the P-I". But that is only the first half of the correct statement "It's in the P-I, so it's probably wrong". Friday's P-I carried a story with the headline Israelis cleared in activist Corrie's death. This refers to the conclusion of the investigation into the suicidal accident of Hamas supporter Rachel Corrie, which cleared the bulldozer driver of wrongdoing. But the P-I shamelessly focuses on Corrie's father's unfounded refusal to believe that his daughter died in an accident.
In March, Corrie died while trying to block the demolition of a Palestinian physician's home. The army said it destroyed the homes in the Rafah refugee camp to create a "buffer zone" to prevent smuggling from Egypt.The P-I's report included a copy of this photograph, which is also on the website of the PLO front group "International Solidarity Movement"Shortly afterward, the Israel Defense Forces reported that the driver of the bulldozer had not seen Corrie and had not intentionally run over her. A report conducted by the military police told the same story.
Neither report, [Rachel's father] Craig Corrie said, seemed credible. Other members of her group, the Palestinian-led International Solidarity Movement, and other witnesses said Corrie stood 100 feet in front of the bulldozer and was in the driver's sight as he moved closer.
"The reports don't jibe with anything eyewitnesses said," Craig Corrie said. And they don't match the results of the Israeli government's autopsy, which concluded her "death was caused by pressure on the chest from a mechanical apparatus."
A photograph published by newspapers showed her in front of the bulldozer just before her death.
Here is what the "eyewitnesses" from the ISM had to say about Corrie's death
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.The P-I makes it sound like the displayed photograph "showed her in front of the bulldozer just before her death ", as if implying that it contained evidence of a crime itself. But the photograph is not consistent with any "just before death" moment in the "eyewitness report". Where is the pile of dirt and rubble? The ISM website also posts this picture, presumably of Rachel immediately after she was struck by the bulldozer.
You'll notice that in the first picture she is facing the bulldozer on the driver's right. But in this picture she is lying in the ditch on the the driver's left side. Also, there is no pile of dirt and rubble. The ISM also includes this photograph, presumably of the wounded Rachel being comforted by her friends
That would have to be a mighty big hole for her friends to have dug her out of. And it doesn't appear to be consistent with the top picture. No signs of the remains of the fence, for example.
I don't believe there is any dispute that Rachel Corrie stood in front of a bulldozer and that she was killed after the bulldozer struck her. But the P-I's photograph doesn't seem to have been taken "just before" Rachel's death, and it doesn't seem to offer any evidence of any kind that her death wasn't an accident. So why would the P-I choose to mention this photograph, adjacent to Craig Corrie's unfounded doubts about the investigation into his daughter's death, as if to imply that it contained some information that the investigation chose to ignore?
UPDATe: Note the comment from "Bird Dog" who links to several articles that help debunk the photograph story. KL duPre's comment mentions a report by ISM member Joseph Smith on the events leading up to Corrie's death. That report may be found here
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at June 28, 2003 09:02 AMThe photo in the PI is the same one that accompanied reports on 17 March of Ms. Corrie's death the day before. This photo was incorrectly attributed to Reuters and said to be moments before the event. However, the photo actually was taken up to three hours before Ms. Corrie's death by Mr. Joseph Smith, an International Solidarity activist from Evergreen, the same school here in Washington that Ms. Corrie attended. He is quoted in various sources including Honestreporting.com and Jewish World Review as saying that the photo in question was taken between 2 and 4PM. Eyewitnesses say Ms. Corrie was struck around 5PM. Viewing all the photos available online in various locations clearly shows the shorter shadows and bright sunlight in the PI photo, and the long shadows and growing darkness at the time Ms. Corrie is shown recumbent and cradled by her comrades. Perhaps most importantly, the above sources, as well as the New York Times correction, state that the bulldozer shown in the photo in question does not show the actual bulldozer that did, indeed, strike Rachel Corrie.
The photo was definitely taken hours, not moments, before her death. Good synopses are found here, here, here, here and here.
"other witnesses said Corrie stood 100 feet in front of the bulldozer and was in the driver's sight as he moved closer."
WTF?! It must have taken like 20 minutes to get to her.
Posted by: Colt on June 30, 2003 03:11 PM