Last Monday the Seattle Post-Intelligencer published a delirious editorial praising Rachel Corrie. (Corrie was the member of the terrorist-friendly "International Solidarity Movement" who died in the Gaza strip last March when she placed herself in the path of an Israeli military bulldozer that was disabling tunnels used for smuggling weapons). The editorial exalting the American-flag-burning and militantly anti-Israel Corrie as a "peace activist" and a "young woman of uncommon compassion" would have been offensive enough even if it didn't also compare Corrie favorably with PFC Jessica Lynch. (an earlier editorial equated Corrie with the American victims of last year's suicide bombing at Hebrew University)
But the P-I's editors are not content to merely express repugnant opinions. They also invent facts to bolster their sick fairytale that Rachel Corrie "left an impressive legacy" and "put her life on the line for something larger than herself". The occasion for the editorial was to dispute the Israeli military investigation which declared Corrie's death an accident and exonerated the driver of the bulldozer:
But we ought to withhold final judgment. Some statements and photos seem to contradict a military prosecutor's conclusion.As I pointed out earlier, no such photos have ever been published in the P-I or elsewhere. The only published photos related to the incident were taken well before the fatal accident or after the fact, and do not plausibly contradict the conclusion that it was an accident. I e-mailed the P-I's reader representative, Glenn Drosendahl, to express my doubts on the paper's claim about the photos and asked the P-I either to produce the photos or to issue a prompt retraction. Here is Drosendahl's response, which he sent late on the afternoon of Thursday, July 3:
Stefan: Thanks for your message. Our editorial people say they saw three different photos, including the one that prompted the New York Times correction and the Christian Science Monitor clarification. They are not contending that the photos prove Corrie was intentionally killed. In fact, the editorial starts by saying the prosecutor's conclusion could be right. They do, however, think questions remain which is why the editorial says the final report should be released.That is a ridiculous answer. They do not tell us (let alone show us) which photos they're talking about and give no factual basis for the claim that these photos inculpate the bulldozer driver. By the same specious reasoning one could point to this photograph of P-I editorial page editor Mark Trahant, who is responsible for the unsigned editorial at issue:That's our editorial opinion. You may see the same photos and disagree.
Thanks for your interest.
One could say "Mark Trahant might not be a peeping tom, but we have seen photos which seem to suggest otherwise. We welcome a thorough investigation so he can clear his name. That's our editorial opinion. You may see the same photos and disagree."
Yes, that is asinine. But it is no less asinine or insidious for a newspaper editor to fantasize into existence a murder and a cover-up, when the only evidence is of a self-inflicted accident. Of all the causes that Mark Trahant might devote his attention to, let alone damage his newspaper's reputation for, shilling for the sympathizers of Palestinian terrorism is as pitiful of a choice as any.
If you wish to contact the Seattle Post-Intelligencer to ask for a retraction, here is some contact information:
Roger Oglesby, Editor and Publisher, 206-448-8000, rogeroglesby@seattlepi.com
Ken Bunting, Executive Editor, 206-448-8000, kenbunting@seattlepi.com
Glenn Drosendahl, Reader Representative, 206-448-8007, glenndrosendahl@seattlepi.com
Mark Trahant, Editorial Page Editor, 206-448-8387, marktrahant@seattlepi.com
If you choose to contact them, please be courteous. You want to demonstrate to the P-I that its critics have higher standards than the P-I does.
UPDATE: here are just some of the other bloggers who have taken issue with the P-I's editorial: Charles Johnson, Solly Ezekiel, Meryl Yourish, Ted Belman, The Ombudsgod, Solomonia, Horologium, Oliver Kamm and Andrew Sullivan (a link to Oliver Kamm's commentary). Let me know if I've left anybody out.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at July 07, 2003 07:00 AMAs an irregular reader of the PI, I can tell you that they apparently believe that the building and maintenance of those tunnels into Gaza is every bit as important as sniping at our soldiers in Iraq. This editorial is no surprise.
I am glad, however, that you have raised some very troubling questions against Mr. Trahant. I am sure that the PI will cry foul that you have used their own journalistic technique against them.
Posted by: Michael Gersh on July 7, 2003 03:17 AMLast week I submitted a letter to the PI in response to this editorial. I received a non-committal form e-mail response, saying that the P-I "might" run the letter; told me to keep an eye open for the next 10 days.
They indicated that they would not run letters that were published elsewhere, so I won't repost it here...yet.
ISM is very active in Puget Sound, recruiting kids as "human shields" for Hamas and others.
There may be additional local readers in the future who will have the P-I to thank for the deaths of their children to the latest revo-devo Mickey Mouse fad club... and Evergreen College professor Steve Niva's lust to procure fresh meat for the terror mill.
SS,
Great job keeping them accountable. This Sunday's editorials were chock full of bias and illogic.
Did you catch the line about how "fantasies" of Iraqis welcoming us as liberators were "laid bare"?
I would like to see you attack David Horsey's malicious distortions as well.
quelle surprise that the P-I is slanted in its coverage. I saw the same _with my own two eyes_ when the local papers covered the death of someone I knew. Every paper except the P-I reported similar things. The report of the P-I left out anything that described the person; instead, it was as if the reporter/editor team simply made up a report of what they thought might have happened. I suspect that the P-I either didn't really interview anyone, or that the interviewers didn't want to ruffle any feathers in their PC-cocooned--world.
Posted by: steve miller on July 7, 2003 11:55 AMThe P-I says statements indicate otherwise?
http://www.wrrh.blogspot.com/2003_07_01_wrrh_archive.html#105755102624782112
At this site, we've put up a collection of statements on the Corrie accident, all from ISM members. Notice that there are accounts of Rachel sitting, falling, climbing, in the driver's view, out of the driver's view, standing etc.
Posted by: Morris on July 7, 2003 12:06 PMMy email to rogeroglesby@seattlepi.com
I read with interest your editorial praising Rachel Corrie.
I would like to know what statements and photos that seem to contradict a military prosecutor's conclusion. I do not think it is enough to just state that you saw them, and drew a conclusion. I feel very strongly that journalistic integrity is at stake here.
Had this woman died on a bus exploded by a Palestinian suicide bomber, would you feel the same way about her? Well, U.S. teenager Abigail Leitel, 14, was also killed (in the same) week. However she was a victim of a Palestinian. She was not trying to stop anyone from doing anything. She was just riding the bus. In fact, Abigail was on her way to a friend's house from her school when a person stepped on the same bus, looked at her, and decided that it was at that moment that they wanted to murder and maim the people around them.
It is in fact the ongoing Palestinian and Muslim extremist violence against civilians that has driven the cycle of violence for the last 50 years. No doubt, Rachel Corrie wanted to help stop that violence and standing in front of a bulldozer seemed, in her mind, to be the best way. I am sorry that she didn't feel she could teach the values and methods that work so very well in her american culture to the people in Gaza. I am sure she would not recommend that anyone stand in the way of a Swat Team bulldozer as it demolished a crack house in Olympia Washington. I am sure she would not suggest that the best way to stop a drive by shooting in East LA is to kneel in front of a police car.
I do not suggest we forget about Rachel Corrie, but I do feel we need to talk about Abigail Leitel as well. Maybe the best thing we can do is link the two in some way.
">http://www.myfreepress.com/2003/03/17.html
This is even more egregeous:
"Somewhat similarly, Americans understand (better than the Pentagon does) the value of settling questions around Pvt. Jessica Lynch's capture and rescue. But, ultimately, the conclusions won't change the honor due Lynch, who put her life on the line for something larger than herself, as did Corrie.
Comparing St. Rachel to Pvt. Lynch is moral relativism at it's worst.
Dano
Actually, with a slight correction, I'd agree with the statement according to which she "put her life on the line for something larger than herself". She put indeed her life in the way of something larger than herself, that is,a military bulldozer. All I can wish is that many others like her follow her example.
Posted by: nelson ascher on July 7, 2003 04:08 PMMy name is Gary Fitleberg. I am a Poltical Analyst specializng in International Relations with emphasis on Middle East affairs. I am also the receipient of the Sigma Delta Chi, Society of Professional Journalists "Mark of Excellence" award.
My articles have appeared in such publications as the Jewish Journal, Jewish Observer, The Messenger; nationally in the San Francisco Examiner; internationally in La Prensa (Managua, Nicaragua equivalent to the L.A. Times), Pakistan Today, The Iranian amongst many others.
I would welcome the opportunity to write Op-Ed articles for your publication.
Thanks in advance for your anticipated consideration.
Looking forward to working together with you in the future.
Gary Fitleberg
RACHEL CORRIE: A SAD “SOLIDARITY” STORY!!!
By Gary Fitleberg
According to the International Solidarity Movement (ISM) and falsely perpetuated by the vast majority of the media, allegedly "Rachel Corrie was murdered by Israel while she was peacefully protesting against the illegal demolition of a Palestinian home."
American Rachel Corrie was killed in the Gaza Strip on March 16, 2003, when she entered an area where Israeli forces were carrying out a military operation. The incident tragically and unfortunately occurred while IDF forces were removing shrubbery along the security road near the border between Israel and Egypt at Rafah to uncover explosive devices, and destroying tunnels used by Palestinian terrorists to illegally smuggle weapons from Egypt to Gaza.
Corrie was not demonstrating for peace or trying to shield innocent civilians, she was interfering with a military operation to legally demolish an empty house used to conceal one of these tunnels.
A misleading photo published by the Associated Press gave the impression that Corrie was standing in front of the bulldozer and shouting at the driver with a megaphone, trying to prevent the driver from tearing down a building in the refugee camp. This photo, which was taken by a member of Corrie’s organization, was not shot at the time of her death, however, but hours earlier. The photographer said that Corrie was actually sitting and waving her arms when she was struck (Christian Science Monitor, April 02, 2003).
Israel’s Judge Advocate’s Office investigated the incident and concluded that the driver of the bulldozer never saw or heard Corrie because she was standing behind debris that obstructed the view of the driver whose field of view was limited by the small armored windows of his cab. An autopsy found that the cause of Corrie’s death was falling debris (Jerusalem Post, June 26, 2003).
The State Department warned Americans not to travel to Gaza, and Israel made clear that civilians who enter areas where troops are engaged in counter-terror operations put themselves unnecessarily at risk. This was not the first time protestors have tried to obstruct Israeli operations, and the IDF has made every effort to avoid harming them. This case received worldwide publicity in large measure because it was the first such incident where a protestor was killed. In fact, the army had told Corrie and other demonstrators from the anti-Israel International Solidarity Movement (ISM) to move out of the way. "It’s possible they [the protesters] were not as disciplined as we would have liked," admitted Thom Saffold, a founder and organizer of ISM (Washington Post, March 17, 2003).
The death of an innocent civilian is always tragic, and the best way to avoid such tragedies in the future is, first and foremost, by the Palestinian Authority putting an end to violence, and stopping the smuggling operations that have brought huge quantities of illegal weapons into the Gaza Strip. Activists interested in peace should be protesting the Palestinian actions. Activists also have every right to express their views about Israel’s policies, but they should take care to avoid the appearance of siding with the terrorists or placing themselves in positions where they could be inadvertently caught in the crossfire of a counter-terror operation or otherwise endangered by entering an area where military operations are being conducted.
Gary Fitleberg is a Political Analyst specializing in International Relations with emphasis on Middle East affairs.
RACHEL CORRIE: A SAD “SOLIDARITY” STORY!!!
By Gary Fitleberg
According to the International Solidarity Movement (ISM) and falsely perpetuated by the vast majority of the media, allegedly "Rachel Corrie was murdered by Israel while she was peacefully protesting against the illegal demolition of a Palestinian home."
American Rachel Corrie was killed in the Gaza Strip on March 16, 2003, when she entered an area where Israeli forces were carrying out a military operation. The incident tragically and unfortunately occurred while IDF forces were removing shrubbery along the security road near the border between Israel and Egypt at Rafah to uncover explosive devices, and destroying tunnels used by Palestinian terrorists to illegally smuggle weapons from Egypt to Gaza.
Corrie was not demonstrating for peace or trying to shield innocent civilians, she was interfering with a military operation to legally demolish an empty house used to conceal one of these tunnels.
A misleading photo published by the Associated Press gave the impression that Corrie was standing in front of the bulldozer and shouting at the driver with a megaphone, trying to prevent the driver from tearing down a building in the refugee camp. This photo, which was taken by a member of Corrie’s organization, was not shot at the time of her death, however, but hours earlier. The photographer said that Corrie was actually sitting and waving her arms when she was struck (Christian Science Monitor, April 02, 2003).
Israel’s Judge Advocate’s Office investigated the incident and concluded that the driver of the bulldozer never saw or heard Corrie because she was standing behind debris that obstructed the view of the driver whose field of view was limited by the small armored windows of his cab. An autopsy found that the cause of Corrie’s death was falling debris (Jerusalem Post, June 26, 2003).
The State Department warned Americans not to travel to Gaza, and Israel made clear that civilians who enter areas where troops are engaged in counter-terror operations put themselves unnecessarily at risk. This was not the first time protestors have tried to obstruct Israeli operations, and the IDF has made every effort to avoid harming them. This case received worldwide publicity in large measure because it was the first such incident where a protestor was killed. In fact, the army had told Corrie and other demonstrators from the anti-Israel International Solidarity Movement (ISM) to move out of the way. "It’s possible they [the protesters] were not as disciplined as we would have liked," admitted Thom Saffold, a founder and organizer of ISM (Washington Post, March 17, 2003).
The death of an innocent civilian is always tragic, and the best way to avoid such tragedies in the future is, first and foremost, by the Palestinian Authority putting an end to violence, and stopping the smuggling operations that have brought huge quantities of illegal weapons into the Gaza Strip. Activists interested in peace should be protesting the Palestinian actions. Activists also have every right to express their views about Israel’s policies, but they should take care to avoid the appearance of siding with the terrorists or placing themselves in positions where they could be inadvertently caught in the crossfire of a counter-terror operation or otherwise endangered by entering an area where military operations are being conducted.
Gary Fitleberg is a Political Analyst specializing in International Relations with emphasis on Middle East affairs.
i think ISM should called itself PSM, for paslstine solidarity movement.
If it was really acting for PEACE, its members would offer themselves as human shield in Palestine to protect palestinian people from israely army, but also in Israel to protect Jewish people from palestinian kamikaze attacks.
Or better, it should just admit that it fight for the victory of Palestine.