July 29, 2004
It's in the P-I
Steve Niva, one of the Evergreen State "College" "professors" who instructed Rachel Corrie to throw herself in front of a moving bulldozer, wants us to believe that he and Yasser Arafat care more about Israel's security than do the millions of Israelis who feel safer with a large impermeable barrier between themselves and the next potential grocery store suicide bomber.
The essay is as ludicrous as any op-ed that has appeared in the P-I since, well, since the last time we checked.
So why would the Seattle Post-Intelligencer waste so paper in order to bring Steve Niva's urgent message to the world? You have to wonder what the P-I's editors hate more -- Jews or trees?
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at July 29, 2004 12:26 AM
The proof of the pudding is in the eating. How many Israeli AND Palestinian lives have been saved so far this year?
Perhaps it would be more palatable if it were stressed that it is saving Palestinian lives also.
I think a fitting memorial to Rachel would be a wall. It is the Israeli wall that will eventually reduce the level of this conflict. Had the wall been up earlier, then maybe Rachel would not have died protesting the conflict. Maybe we could build a really big memorial wall around Evergreen State College. That way we could protect future Rachel's from ever leaving the brainwashing compound.
How many incorrect statements are there in that pathetic article? Here's a few:
1. The Berlin Wall wasn't built for security.
2. The Great Wall of China is indeed remembered as a monument to lasting peace and security. That's why it's the country's national symbol.
3. Thousands of barriers are currently providing security: gated communities, fenced-in storage areas, some schoolyards, etc.
I'm particularly annoyed by his weasel word "lasting." He says walls never provide lasting security. Well, if the wall in Israel provided security for only ten years, it would still add up to hundreds of lives saved.
A wall? Surrounding Evergreen State Terrorism Collge? An inspired idea. And how about inscribing it with the names of all the terror victims? And a Caterpillar 'dozer next to it, on permanent alert.
I was thinking more along the lines of putting razor wire on top of the wall, and never letting the criminal professors out to spew their anti-semitic philosophy (which ends up brainwashing kids into becoming martyrs for the cause.)
"The Great Wall of China is indeed remembered as a monument to lasting peace and security."
Actually, the wall was a dud. See the following from (search 'great wall')
"Successive invasions of China from the north demonstrated that the Great Wall had little military utility."
Parts of the wall were reconstructed recently, and the concept romanticized, to give inspiration to the Chinese people, and for tourism. I've walked on the wall, and it is indeed awesome.
Let us hope the present life-saving wall will not be needed for long.
Clarification of above:
See the following from - historychannel.com (search 'great wall')
New comments may be posted only from the 'Comments' links at the bottom
of each entry on the blog home page
Of course it would be better if the wall were not needed. Since that would mean that suicide bombers were dissuaded from ever strapping on in the first place.
Paradoxically, the more frequent suicide bombers killed innocent Israeli's, it no longer became a headline grabber with extended coverage, but rather it becomes just a common news blurb of 5 seconds. The TV watching public that has no personal identification with Israel's security becomes immune to the horror. The wall is making suicide bombings less frequent. So we can expect the media to play up each bombing.
I don't think this will at all effect the decision to go forward with the wall since I suspect local politics has a lot to do with how the wall is built.