Skip to main content

The Wall Street Journal's "Best of the Web" loves dead activists and jokes about dead activists:
A Well-Deserved Award
Little Green Footballs has given out its second annual Robert Fisk Award for Idiotarian of the Year. This year's winner: Rachel Corrie, the terror advocate who died in a bulldozer accident last March. Corrie picked up 28.8% of the vote in the 10-candidate finals, edging out Michael Moore (26.7%), who also finished second (behind Jimmy Carter) in 2002. Moore, who we hear dedicated his most recent "book" to Corrie, is the Susan Lucci of idiotarians. As one LGF commenter writes, "Michael Moore has to be crushed he didn't win."
Nice.

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Tue Jan 13, 2004 at 07:15 PM PST.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Terror Advocate? (none)
    They called her a "terror advocate?"  Personally, I'm not sure that what she was doing was either smart or effective.  But ... a "terror advocate?"
    •  letter to the WSJ w/ email addresses (4.00)
      Forwarded Message
      From: Ottoe
      Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 16:46:42 -0600
      To: <opinionjournal@wsj.com>, <wsj.ltrs@wsj.com>, <edit.features@wsj.com>

      Subject: Tastelessness

      Dear Mr. Taranto,

      Opinion Journal online has a section called "taste"; apparently staffers such as Elizabeth Crowley need to brush up on that virtue. It has been a long time since I have seen a mainstream media outlet repeat anything as tasteless as the following item picked up from a fringe website in "Best of the Web Today" 1/13/04:

      [item pasted in]

      And of course saying this marks a new low is really saying something, given the WSJ Opinion page's sorry history of tastelessness.

      Whether or not there is an argument for considering Ms. Corrie a "terror advocate" (and I doubt there is), to simply pass along such accusations while laughing at her death itself counts to me as the worst kind of idiocy.

      I would like to hear back from you that someone has been fired for running this item.

      Yours Sincerely,

      Ottoe

    •  are you kidding me? (2.50)
      someone has got to stand up for the rights of palestinians.
    •  TERROR ADVOCATE?! (4.00)
      FUCK YOU, Wall Street Journal.

      FUCK YOU.

      •  The Fucking WSJ is a "terror advocate". (none)
        Wow they really are low, are'nt they? I would have expected at least a thin or transparent veneer of "civility" but we don't get THAT from them.
      •  Sure (1.20)
        Sure, I bet you feel like this is really personal and you have every reason to trust the ISM over the full Israeli investigation.  This disingenuous rage is disgusting.  This place is meant to represent the future of the Democrats?
    •  Here's mine (4.00)
      To the Editors:

      The "Opinion Journal" web site on January 13, 2004 describes Rachel Corrie as a "terror advocate", review if you please here: http://www.opinionjournal.com/best/?id=110004551

      The offensive text reads: "Little Green Footballs has given out its second annual Robert Fisk Award for Idiotarian of the Year. This year's winner: Rachel Corrie, the terror advocate who died in a bulldozer accident last March."

      This is a profoundly offensive, defamatory, and outright incorrect assessment of Ms. Corrie's activities and views when she was alive. Rachel Corrie was a peace activist. She practiced the non-violent teachings of M.K. Ghandi and taught impoverished, despairing, and angry Palestinians the same.

      For what you apparently deem an evil and despicable crime - caring about the plight of the Palestinian people, and going to that land in protest and to help the poor, nothing less - you smear Corrie as a "terror advocate", and then go on to cheer for a crude, sick "Idiotarian" award which seems to take pleasure from Corrie's horrible death.

      If you have any standards whatsoever, you will publicly retract that statement and apologize to Corrie's family and friends. Until then, you wear a badge of shame for what you have done. Shame on you, shame on you, shame on you.

      Sincerely,

      •  Thanks for posting that (none)
        Great letter.

        I was shocked by the WSJ/LGF's telltale passive wording: that Rachel Corrie "died" in a "bulldozer accident" -- as if dying was her gaffe and no one was driving the bulldozer -- obscuring the fact that the Israeli Army killed an unarmed pacifist, civilian non-combatant knowing full well that that was her status.

        The WSJ/LGF deception is an extension of the pro-Sharon, pro-Likud skewing in headlines that report that Palestinians "died" (no fault, no onus on the killers but rather the killed) but Israelis "were killed" or "were murdered" (fault on onus on the killers). Routinely issembling death that way is simply despicable; that anyone would laugh at Corrie's murder was beyond my imagination until I read the WSJ piece.

        An article link to BBC documentary proves Israeli army murdered Rachel Corrie and other reports of the IDF's appalling actions against an unarmed peace activist are at the Rachel Corrie Memorial Site.

        I'm just speechless.

      •  Got a reply from James Taranto (none)
        This is Mr. Taranto's reply to my email:

        Dear [Els] --Just for the record, I am the author of the column. Elizabeth Crowley helps compile Best of the Web Today, and the other names listed are readers who've contributed tips to the day's column. Cheers, James

        Guess he isn't going to apologize, huh?

        •  I suppose not ... (none)
          He probably agrees with what he published.
        •  It ain't over (none)
          Corrie's family and friends will certainly want a better explanation from the WSJ. I'm curious to know how this appalling segment got past the editors. (I wrote to the paper too, but haven't received a response yet.)
        •  I got the same Reply (none)
          Taranto gave me the same exact bullshit reply. So I responded, not happy just to let it go:

          Dear Mr. Taranto:

          Thanks for clearing the record. So it seems I can address you. Are you not ashamed for mocking a dead woman who stood up for what she believed in and never hurt anybody? Whether or not you agree with her beliefs, do you not still retain at least a miniscule amount of dignity and decorum? So its not okay to compare a president to a dictator but it is okay, and to be applauded, when someone stomps on the grave of an innocent dead woman. Thats some logic.
          I hope you enjoy looking at yourself in the mirror tomorrow morning, if you can.

          Cheers,
          Daniel

    •  Michael Moore (none)
      How can Michael Moore be an idiotarian when he has an academy award for best documentary with Bowling for Columbine, not to mention Roger and Me?  These were real stories, not some quasi-journalism we see in the papers and on the evening news.  I don't see how middle class Americans can hate a guy who's not afraid to walk up to a corporate CEO and sarcastically embarrass him for his never-ending greed.

      If you like Dennis Kucinich's stance on marijuana, you'll love my marijuana blog.

      by dopies on Wed Jan 14, 2004 at 10:52:23 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I didn't know it was an accident. (3.80)
    The dozer driver's actions were more like

    "And then I shot him accidentally. 6 times."

    Yep, leave it to LGF to make light of a terrible death. And leave it to the over-paid, underwhelming mental midgets of the WSJ to publicize it.

    •  Tacitus (none)
      will be happy.

      That was an ugly campaign of his agaisnt a dead woman.

      MecHa did beat it however, considering the focus was alive. And involved an entire people the way he spun it. Last time I dragged myself thru the sludge there. (Sorry if I have offended sensibilities, that focus in his campaign smears on Bustmante was the end)

      •  The gates of hell (none)
        The Right embraces a culture of death. You could even call it a deathstyle.

        "So instead of getting to heaven, at last-- I'm going, all along."

        by Marshall on Tue Jan 13, 2004 at 07:25:27 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  he said it was a mistake (none)
        Tacitus eventually said he made a mistake there.  I forget what thread it was in, but I saw him write it.

        "Just because we were whipped a thousand years ago is no reason to stop trying now." --Harper Lee, To Kill a Mockingbird

        by paradox on Tue Jan 13, 2004 at 11:37:48 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Darwin awards (none)
    This is how I feel about the Darwin awards (without the "activist" part, of course).  Both are in poor taste.
    •  No, this is far worse (none)
      The "Darwin Awards" may be in poor taste, but at least they only poke fun at people's stupidity, a trait most everyone would agree is undesirable.

      This is piling onto a murder victim because LGF doesn't like her politics.  That goes way beyond "poor taste."  That is reprehensible.

      It's more like one of us Kossacks posting a diary entry expressing regret over John Hinckley's poor aim. (For you younger readers, John Hinckley is the mentally deranged man who shot President Reagan.)  Although we generally detest Reagan's politics, none of us believes he deserved to be shot.

  •  They should all be very proud. (none)
    Elizabeth Crowley helps compile Best of the Web Today. Thanks to Nathan Dewey, Barak Moore, Doug Levene, Ted Barszewski, Robert LeChevalier, Scott Yenor, Edward Schulze, Yehuda Hilewitz, Peter Shalen, Paul Cooper, Tom Linehan, Darren Gold, Chris Stetsko, Richard Miniter, Charlie Gaylord, Cesar Canizales, Michael Segal, Kyle Dubbert, Jim Naso, David Skurnick, Heidi Huettner, Tom Harris, Philip Lindquist, Henry Hanks, Kurt Schneider, Tim McClellan, Napoleon Cole and Carl Sherer.

    Write us at opinionjournal@wsj.com, and please include the URL.

  •  Don't forget Bill O'Lielly (none)
    Hey, the bare-knuckles straight talker chuckled at the near-death experience of a woman from Kentucky, if I remember correctly.

    No wonder they're so happy that soldiers are dying in Iraq.

    "So instead of getting to heaven, at last-- I'm going, all along."

    by Marshall on Tue Jan 13, 2004 at 07:23:37 PM PST

  •  Pot, meet kettle. (none)
    They call us the angry, hateful ones. They have no shame.

    Let's do them a favor and make them the minority party again — it'll do wonders for their sense of righteous indignation, not to mention Rush Limbaugh's ratings.

    "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." - Mohandas Gandhi

    by Mike on Tue Jan 13, 2004 at 07:25:06 PM PST

    •  hate vs. anger (4.00)
      hate and anger are quite different emotions and they are certainly of a different political order.  we would do well to make this distinction over and over again.

      there's a bigger picture issue here: the way in which the meanness --the surface level hurt/response--also works to diminish the reality of the politics beyond the partisan nastiness.  Calling criticisms of Bush "hate speech" doesn't just deflect criticism, it disrespects and adds insult to injury of real incidents of hate speech and the what people who are subjected to it must endure.  Ridiculing Rachel Corrie doesn't simply reinforce the crass disregard for a young person's life or complete disrespect for that woman's family; it diminishes what this kind of courage is, what the power to act can actually be and how it is really a matter of life and death.  

      There are other political outcomes that it accomplishes, too.

      •  cheapening rhetoric (3.85)
        This is one of the most persistent strategies of the current right-wing in this country. They consciously cheapen the political rhetoric in an attempt to strip it of all meaning and power. It, in effect, debases the political life in this country to a point were politics means nothing and people tune out.

        They are also trying to steal the civil rights language. All critics of the neo-cons are "anti-Semitic." The Democrats opposing Estrada were anti-Hispanic, against Pryor, anti-Catholic. Criticizing Bush is "hate speech." They are actively trying to rob the left of its linguistic power by overusing the terminology. This is no accident.

  •  WSJ (none)
    I tried to get through that WSJ page, really I did.  Just about threw my computer out the window in the process.
  •  that's sick (none)
    Just when I was feeling good about my faith in humanity...

    It's really unpleasent to watch people celebrate death.

    This is an instance where telling someone to fuck off isn't enough. I wish I could look these people in the eye, take a deep breath, and evenly as possible tell them, "you're not a very nice person."

    That tends to get through, you know.

    Politics is the art of controlling your environment. Participate! www.musicforamerica.org 1-800-MFA-6835

    by Outlandish Josh on Tue Jan 13, 2004 at 07:27:41 PM PST

  •  creepy (none)
    Man, it's weird to deal with sociopaths in power.
  •  Trash bins (none)
    Totally unrelated, except for the fact that it was also mentioned in the WSJ:

    http://desmoinesregister.com/news/stories/c4789004/23241598.html

    Apparently, the Dean campaign aren't the best neighbors. Maybe someone can tell them to start cleaning up after themselves?!?

    Dean's Blog -- because he's talking fricking sense.
    Bush: not compassionate, not conservative.

    by maxomai on Tue Jan 13, 2004 at 07:31:24 PM PST

    •  Some people seem to take pleasure in lying (4.00)
      Apparently, the Dean campaign aren't the best neighbors.

      Except that this whole incident was apparently a mixup over the ownership of a dumpster.

      The neighbor would rather call police instead of talk to the campaign or affix a sign.

      So who's the bad neighbor here?

      After they got the word, the situation (if there ever was one) was resolved.

      Maybe someone can tell them to start cleaning up after themselves?!?

      Except that there's not mention of not "cleaning up after themselves". They used the wrong dumpster that was nearby, thinking it was the campaign's.

      Sheesh.

  •  WTF? (none)
    This is unbelievably crass and in poor taste.  I can't believe the WSJ would put its imprimatur on this.
  •  Rachel Corrie slur (none)
    James Taranto deserves a public whipping.
  •  raise a stink (none)
    The WSJ could be sensitive to the accusation of poor taste. Pointing out stuff like this is the Dem equivalent (or close enough, anyway) of the Repubs jumping all over the MoveOn ad (which was also, in my opinion, in poor taste). The Dems need to do the same to get their message out, and to show that tastelessness exists on both sides.
    •  The difference (4.00)
      The difference between this and the MoveOn.org ad is as follows:

      MoveOn.org didn't sponsor the Hitler ads; they were entries in a contest to find the best anti-Bush ad, which MoveOn.org admits were let through their screening process as a mistake. They weren't written by MoveOn.org, and with the exception of being contest entries, they weren't published by MoveOn.org. (The ad that was eventually chosen, by the way, is quite tasteful, and is set to be aired during the Super Bowl at considerable expense. Good for them.)

      The Wall Street Journal, on the other hand, let that column pass through their editorial staff and spent more money than you probably make in a year to print it up and deliver it to door steps and news stands everywhere.

      Democrats might exhibit tastelessness, but Republicans have raised it to the level of high-brow political discourse. That is not acceptible.

      Dean's Blog -- because he's talking fricking sense.
      Bush: not compassionate, not conservative.

      by maxomai on Tue Jan 13, 2004 at 08:04:48 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  College Republicans (3.50)
    I'm constantly reminded of college republicans when I learn of things like this. I guess this is what becomes of them.
  •  Taranto (none)
    I found a page listing three email address for Taranto, though it should be noted that the page is from October 12, 2002:

    james.taranto@wsj.com
    james.taranto@dowjones.com
    taranto@panix.com

  •  Opposing (none)
    I read that and it made me feel physically ill.  What can we do to oppose the WSJ in this case besides tut-tut and make snarky comments?

    We have to frame our arguments to build new support in 2004.

    by tunesmith on Tue Jan 13, 2004 at 07:38:24 PM PST

  •  I feel like vomitting (3.66)
    I haven't felt this ill about something on the web since I orginally saw this web site:

    Rachel Corrie Pictures

    I would add a comment, but I am completely at a loss for words.

    Dancers For Dean - Dean makes the music, we make the movement

    by hazletok on Tue Jan 13, 2004 at 07:38:54 PM PST

  •  in other news, the sky is blue (none)
    Citing the Wall Street Journal Opinion pages for puerile right-wing attacks is like getting mad at Bush for throwing money at millionaires. Outrageous, yes. Surprising, no.
  •  Opinion Journal Asked for Tips, sooo.... (3.75)
    Dear Elizabeth Crowley, Nathan Dewey, Barak Moore, Doug Levene, Ted Barszewski, Robert LeChevalier, Scott Yenor, Edward Schulze, Yehuda Hilewitz, Peter Shalen, Paul Cooper, Tom Linehan, Darren Gold, Chris Stetsko, Richard Miniter, Charlie Gaylord, Cesar Canizales, Michael Segal, Kyle Dubbert, Jim Naso, David Skurnick, Heidi Huettner, Tom Harris, Philip Lindquist, Henry Hanks, Kurt Schneider, Tim McClellan, Napoleon Cole and Carl Sherer,

    Yes, I have a tip. Don't go around denigrating young dead women. Agree or disagree with Rachel Corrie's actions, she died an horrific death. You all should be ashamed and disgusted with yourselves for pointing out Little Green Footballs' disgusting Idiotarian Award. To my mind you guys and LGF deserve that one hands down.

    Thanks for your time.

  •  Just when you think the Right can't sink any lower (3.33)
    "Terror advocate" ... "Bulldozer accident" ... It's utterly astounding that these people think they're supporting Israel.
  •  Lisa Schiffren, idiot (none)
    For an idiot award, Wall Street Journal need look no further than its OpEd pages. The following excerpt is from a Maureen Dowd piece last year after the Mission Accomplished extravaganza


    Lisa Schiffren, a Quayle speechwriter who wrote the "Murphy Brown" rant, gushed in a Wall Street Journal piece entitled "Hey, Flyboy" that President Bush in a flight suit was "really hot . . . as in virile, sexy and powerful."
  •  My comment to WSJ (3.84)
    The section "A Well-Deserved Award" is the most disgusting display of callous disregard for one's fellow man I've seen published by a major news organization in quite some time.

    Rachel Corrie's action's may have been ill-advised, but to call her a "terror advocate" is way over the line. Many people of divergent viewpoints in the international community have condemned the Israeli practice of bulldozing the homes of suicide bombers' families. Corrie was taking a principled stand against a practice she abhorred. Corrie was an activist for peace, which runs directly counter to your glib assertion that she was a supporter of terror.

    You guys weren't so flippant when Daniel Pearl was murdered by zealots. It would be nice to see a little more magnanimity shown to those who experience a similar fate, even if they happen to harbor different political views. Rachel Corrie was someone's daughter. She was someone's sister. Those people mourn her. Her friends and family grieve for her. You mock her.

    To read your publication, one would think it was those on the left who harbor a monopoly on anger and spite. I see now that it isn't so. Shame on you.

    Switch to Clark? Switch to Dean? Whatever...but in July, we're all going to switch to <insert Democratic nominee> anyway.

    by Devin on Tue Jan 13, 2004 at 07:56:22 PM PST

  •  wow (3.66)
    i am really appalled.
    that is fucking sickening.
    what assholes.
  •  "she slipped on a banana skin" (none)
    died in a bulldozer accident

    talk about a euphemism!!!!!

    www.nornsisland.com

    by n69n on Tue Jan 13, 2004 at 08:02:59 PM PST

  •  My 2 cents (4.00)
    Perhaps Elizabeth Crowley doesn't follow the news and was unaware of exactly what happened to cause the death of Rachel Corrie.  That is the only excuse I can find for including this item on your `roundup'.  It was in remarkably poor taste.  Ms. Crowley owes a public apology to the family of Rachel Corrie, as does her editor.  I can't imagine how the Wall Street Journal could possibly think that running this piece was appropriate, especially under the crass and offensive headline "A Well Deserved Award."

    Sincerely,

  •  Most Delightful! (3.75)
    Lest we forget, Rachel Corrie was killed by a bulldozer driver who was at the time engaged in a home demolition - a clear breech of international law, no "ifs", "ands" or "buts".

    Amazing that our congress choose neither to publicly condemn this action nor push for a real investigation.

    I guess it really is a "special relationship".

  •  seriously guys (2.20)
    if this elizabeth crowley was here right now, i'd fucking beat her to death. then i'd write an article about how it was richly deserved and see how her colleagues react.

    corries family should fucking sue.

    Vermin Supreme '04 Strong Teeth for a Strong America!

    by skaiserbrown on Tue Jan 13, 2004 at 08:22:23 PM PST

    •  Just a Moment (none)
      Sick as this is, resorting to violence (or threats of, even in hyperbole) is exactly the sort of thing we don't want to do. We're the calm, rational ones, remember? Get angry. You should. Make certain your voice is heard. You should. Don't threatedto or fantasize about--again, even in jest--killing the object of your anger.

      We're the ones who are supposed to be above that.

      Bush/Cheney 04--Standing Up For What's Right (for us)!

      by Severian on Tue Jan 13, 2004 at 08:48:25 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  oh, i know (none)
        but it makes me livid. and if the author had been here, when i wrote that post, i would have taken a swing at her.

        now, i'm more likely just going to work a bit longer. and at the end of the night i'll fire of an angry but rational email.

        Vermin Supreme '04 Strong Teeth for a Strong America!

        by skaiserbrown on Tue Jan 13, 2004 at 09:18:31 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  When does it cross the line? (none)
        I'm not a calm and rational one.  Speak for yourself.
        •  Not Trying To Put Words In Anyones Mouth (none)
          Or course they've crossed a line here. But does that merit our descending to their level? I don't actually believe anyone was seriously advocating violence, but wasn't there a great deal of anger here directed toward someone who said they'd like to hit Hillary Clinton in the head with a tire iron? Granted, she wasn't making fun of dead people, or horribly misrepresenting their viewpoints, but I think advocating violence, even in hyperbole, accomplishes nothing and just makes us look bad.

          "Calm," perhaps, isn't the word I'm looking for, and I'm not trying to put words in anyone's mouth. Getting angry, and making sure everyone knows why, is perfectly acceptable. My point was just that the message gets lost, and the messenger loses credibility, if you go to far.

          Bush/Cheney 04--Standing Up For What's Right (for us)!

          by Severian on Tue Jan 13, 2004 at 09:53:26 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Fair enough (none)
            I just don't like the whole "calm and rational" line of thinking and I thought you maybe didn't choose your words very well.  To be honest, it sounds like Dukakis.  I hear a lot of talk about violence and from the right these days, and not just the lunatic fringe.  WSJ even mentioning this makes me sick.  Ann Coulter invokes a deep, primal rage from the pit of my gut.  And so on.  It's not something that can be reasoned with.  I don't know what the proper response is, but my faith in political reason these days is limited.  
        •  Guess again (none)
          I don't know if you've been paying attention; but the time for being calm and rational has long since passed...our sociopathic shadow government is planning to put WMD in space while returned the masses to indentured servitude.

          WAKE UP.

          I remember Solzhenitsyn saying something in The Gulag Archipelago along the lines of...if'd we'd known what they were planning, we would have resisted with everything we had, but who could be believe that was necessary; no, better to just go along and calmly and rationally explain the situation - they're reasonable people,surely they'll see the mistake that they've made.

          Now is the time to resist with everything you have, soon it will be too late.

    •  it's called defamation (none)
      and the rightwing commentators have treated Rachel Corrie with a degree of contempt and sick enjoyment at her death that shows every bit how cheap, low, and venal they really are.

      a lawsuit over this kind of crap is long overdue

      "terror advocate", indeed. FUCK YOU, Taranto. FUCK YOU.

  •  The Tarantoad Beneath The Harrow (none)
    Toady indeed.
  •  Hey, WSJ: (4.00)
    I remember reading Rachel Corrie's heartfelt emails to her mother (reprinted postumously in Harper's a few months back). She wrote eloquently about the people she met. She brought them to life in her dispatches.

    She went to find out first-hand what was happening far away from her home and with only the best humanitarian intentions. She got to know these people and feel a kinship with them despite the fact they weren't American (fancy that), and felt the need to defend them from arbitrary violent retaliation.

    To see her memory denigrated so shamelessly is disgusting and barbaric.

    WSJ, maybe you should just stick to covering Wall Street?

  •  this is getting out of hand (none)
    it's insulting enough that rachel's death was never investigated and the people responsible for it never questioned.  it is quite outrageous when they brag about it, calling an idealistic young woman who was willing to risk her life for what she believed in, an idiot.
    i mean, come on, there has to be some limits to how low you can go.  go after michael moore, he is alive and kicking, and can very well defend himself, and has said his share of outrageous things.  but a dead girl, killed by a bulldozer?
    damn..
    •  bragging.. (none)
      I don't know if the Israelis are really bragging about it. I don't read their newspapers so I don't know...but it does seem that right wingers in this country, most of them with no connection to Israel that I can determine, seem to love celebrating her death.

      I think this is less of an Israel-Palestinian thing than a "left-wing activist" thing. Right wingers just love to beat up left-wing activists. It's easier than thinking.

  •  Write to the WSJ (3.00)
    I wrote the WSJ in an approving tome, emulating the original website.  Maybe if they hear from more supposed bottom feeders, they'll let their guard down, and really let us know what they think of America.

    The WSJ dogs are revolting.    

  •  Little Green Footballs = pyschopath killer blog (none)
    It doesn't surprise me the original source. I went to that site a long time ago and I had to throw out my monitor because I couldn't get the stench off.

    Whoever is "responsible" for it is a very, very, VERY sick person. Psychotic doesn't even begin to describe it. A lot of serious talk of nuclear bombing the West Bank and Gaza, starving people out, biological warfare against Palestinians.

    You know, just the usual genocide stuff.....

     

    meet the new boss, same as the old boss

    by galaxyy on Tue Jan 13, 2004 at 08:44:59 PM PST

  •  man, i took a look at their blog.. (3.00)
    warning, the site below may be harmful to those with heart conditions, and those with weak stomachs.  not recommended for people under age of 18.

    i almost threw up at what is being said there BY EVERYBODY;  i feel like it is a parallel universe, where everybody has lost their minds.

    http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=9598

    at your own risk.

    •  Oh, they haven't lost their minds (none)
      They just revel in hatred is all.  Reading threads like that remind me that my mushy, liberal way of stubbornly insisting on looking for the good in most people can be extremely tough..  But I was raised Christian, WTF do I know.

      On the other hand, I also don't get why they don't see that it's strategically useful to not come off like a bunch of rabid lunatic assholes.  

      "The actual term ... is short for Web log. And, you know, you drop the W and you get the blog."

      by daria g on Tue Jan 13, 2004 at 10:14:10 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Reveling in hatred is not all they do (none)
        Charles Johnson (the guy who runs LGF) provides a useful service by highlighting news on moslem extremism that would otherwise be ignored.

        Unfortunately, he has no problem encouraging and hosting some of the most disgustingly racist and hate-filled comments I have ever seen.

        More disturbing, these people truly believe they are good and right, and that everyone of us who has posted our disgust at their corruption are the enemy.

        They use overt fascist rhetoric to define the conflict between the people who support Bush's war in Iraq and those of us who criticize it.

        That the WSJ chooses to transmit LGF's amusement to a wider audience is very disturbing. It marks a new low in the coarsening of public discourse.
        •  I realize (none)
          Yes, I have read occasionally over there to catch up on terrorism/security issues, and I appreciate that, but the tone he's encouraging on that site is horrendous, really.  What terrifies me is the fact that relatives of mine (Democrats! liberals!) have somehow, some way got it in their heads that all Muslims are our enemies, basically.  I did not have the heart to tell them that I have several close Muslim friends and figured this was also not the best time to talk about my brilliant colleague from Lebanon.

          I wish there was a leftist site that covered the same issues, minus the hate speech.  I'm worried about this, in a big way.  I recall being shocked that racist groups had to be banned in many European countries, and that there was fear that extreme right-wingers actually would come to have some serious influence on the public (Le Pen..). I thought to myself, we don't have to ban anybody in America because such a thing would never happen.  

          Well, I don't advocate censorship, I do think we all need to pay attention to what's going on out there and speak up against hate.  I love the open source politics of the internet and the way sites like Kos can bring folks together for discussion.. and the way bloggers like Tacitus can spark such interesting debates.. but what are we going to do the day an extreme militant right-wing organization springs from the netroots and appears on the national stage with millions of followers?  Don't tell me it won't happen.

          "The actual term ... is short for Web log. And, you know, you drop the W and you get the blog."

          by daria g on Wed Jan 14, 2004 at 02:34:01 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  You have GOT TO BE KIDDING ME!!! (none)
          "....provides a useful service by highlighting news on moslem extremism that would otherwise be ignored."

          That's like saying Goebbels provided a useful service by highlighting jewish extremism that would otherwise be ignored.

          That site is a sick, genocide-advocating abomination and the only "useful service" it provides is exposing the WSJ as a bunch of heartless assholes and paradoxically also exposes zionist (oops there goes that word now I'll be called anti-semitic) extremism that would otherwise be ignored.

          meet the new boss, same as the old boss

          by galaxyy on Wed Jan 14, 2004 at 12:30:50 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I'm not kidding. (none)

            I appreciate your disgust. You also make my point better that I did. It's a good place to keep tabs on those you disagree with.

            LGF was the first place I saw the really crazy shit that General Boykin said in his lectures. (Something about Satan appearing in a cloud over Mogadishu.) You don't get that kind of alarming detail in the corporate-controlled press.

            I think all religious fundamentalism is a threat to our freedoms and way of life, whether it's moslem, christian, jewish, or hindu fundamentalism.

            If Johnson chooses to approvingly publicize this kind of crazy-talk, it's just one more benefit of free-speech.

            •  So it's like Drudge (none)
              Except by murderous lunatics?

              Well, I suppose I can't stomach surfing the white supremacy blogs either and kudos to the Southern Poverty Law Center for doing that dirty task.

              meet the new boss, same as the old boss

              by galaxyy on Wed Jan 14, 2004 at 04:31:42 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

  •  You all have my admiration... (4.00)
    ...for the thoughtful, calm missives sent to the Wall Street Jackals.
    Me, I couldn't contain myself.  I wrote:

    Yeah, people being run over by bulldozers always cracks me up.  I've got a tip for you:  You're full of shit.

    Sorry.  Couldn't help myself.

    Re-defeat Bush in 2004

    by jazzmaniac on Tue Jan 13, 2004 at 09:30:29 PM PST

    •  Perfectly understandable (none)
      My mental first-draft of my reply to them was full of more f-bombs than every Tarantino film combined.

      Sometimes, you just need to get it off your chest.

      Switch to Clark? Switch to Dean? Whatever...but in July, we're all going to switch to <insert Democratic nominee> anyway.

      by Devin on Tue Jan 13, 2004 at 11:51:48 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  the LGF site scum (none)
    What upset me most is:

    how unbelievable it is that WSJ gave this unbelievably sick site/award coverage

    and

    if yuo have the stomach to read through the comments page attached to that award, people there are seriously contemplating sending the 'award' to Corrie's parents along with pancake making parephenalia (they call her "St Pancake") and a detailed explanation of why she deserved to die and why they deserve no sympathy.

    My only hope is that these sum-scuking bottom-dwelling nematodes won't have the guts to do it, but it's anonymous enough and the WSJ coverage is probably enough to encourage them to go through with it.

    I'm sick to my stomach

  •  beneath contempt (none)
    Well, I think this very vividly illustrates the character of the people (and I use the term loosely) that we are up against.

    We can take comfort from the fact that one of the primary measures of a man is the character of his enemies.

  •  My "tip" to WSJ opinionjournal@wsj.com (4.00)
    Here's a tip,

    Crawl back in your holes.  The next time one of you smug, self satisfied sociopaths see something on the web that you think is funny, run it past a real human being with a beating heart before you inflict it on the rest of the world.

    With the family and friends of Rachel Corrie still in mourning, you think it's funny to publish a twisted, moronic joke about her. Here was a young woman with the strength of character to actually do something to stop what she thought was a cruel injustice.

    How about jokes about civil rights protesters who were murdered trying to bring an end to segregation in this country?  I'll bet you've got a lot of them, too.

    I'm absolutely shocked that as influential publication as the Wall Street Journal would publish such a hateful, insensitive, arrogant, perverse, sick piece as "A well Deserved Award".  It's truly shameful.

    "Loyalty to the country always. Loyalty to the government when it deserves it." - Mark Twain

    by jexter on Tue Jan 13, 2004 at 10:03:20 PM PST

    •  Sorry, wrong draft! (4.00)
      Here's a tip,

      Crawl back in your holes.  The next time one of you smug, self satisfied sociopaths see something on the web that you think is funny, run it past a real human being with a beating heart before you inflict it on the rest of the world.

      With the family and friends of Rachel Corrie still in mourning, you think it's funny to publish a twisted, moronic joke about her. Here was a young woman with the strength of character to actually do something to stop what she thought was a cruel injustice, and you mock her, misrepresent her, and make a joke about what must have been an agonizing death.

      How about jokes about civil rights protesters who were murdered trying to bring an end to segregation in this country?  I'll bet they would get a big laugh around  your office, too.

      I'm absolutely shocked that as influential publication as the Wall Street Journal would publish such a hateful, insensitive, arrogant, perverse, sick piece as "A well Deserved Award".  It's truly shameful.

      "Loyalty to the country always. Loyalty to the government when it deserves it." - Mark Twain

      by jexter on Tue Jan 13, 2004 at 10:21:14 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Dead activist (none)
    On that somber note, I just got an email alert that Tom Hurndall, a young British activist with the ISM who was shot in the head by an Israeli soldier while helping children flee the shooting, died this evening.  His family had taken him off life support.  
    •  Absolutely (1.50)
      That is what the ISM said.  Is there an alliance now, between the Dems and the ISM?  Can anyone point out the most balanced view that has been expressed here?  It all seems very childish, petulant and utterly insensitive.  Rachel Corrie died doing a stupid thing which, IMO, was also profoundly wrong.  If you feel it was good of her it would not account for the ignorance and insensitivity of the right-bashing here, unless there really is no such thing for you as stooping to the level of the other team.  Strictly I'm left of center, although I've always found it a puerile way to assess my views' a priori, as in 'what a lefty thinks about this'.  I guess you guys are a bit more left.  A lot of evil can come from the left, you know, there's no monopoly on common sense.  I'll be interested to see over the coming months if your views are widespread among Democrat 'activists'.
      •  What is this Troll 101? (none)
        "ignorance and insensitivity of the right-bashing"

        "Strictly I'm left of center, although I've always found it a puerile way to assess my views"

        Christ, why don't you just change your user name to "Former Dean Supporter" or "Long Time Democrat" or any of the other names that are designed to have us say - wait a minute - why did we lose him?  You are not fooling anyone here. You are a Right Wingnut.

        •  Rightwing nuts (2.00)
          No, if you have to be like that you are a hellbent nut.  I'm a lefty.  I don't see the connection with the take on Corrie, but I'm not for mocking her - there was the one tasteless comment, and I've explained as much as I should have to, if you really are a sensitive guy.
      •  no subject (none)
        A lot of evil can come from the left, you know, there's no monopoly on common sense.  I'll be interested to see over the coming months if your views are widespread among Democrat 'activists'.
         

        I don't know if you are addressing me personally or some collective "you", but I can tell you right now that my views are not widespread among Democratic (you are hardly "left of center" if you make this grammatical error that isn't grammatical but political)'activists', nor do I expect it to be.  This does in no way diminish my viewpoint, however, since democracy really isn't a popularity contest, as much as our simplified little hearts and souls want to pretend that it is.  

        So, you don't have to wait.  But you might want to refresh your understanding of what "left" stands for and remember that being to the left of the current administration is no where close to being "left of center".  

  •  Terror advocate Michael Kelly... (none)
    ... who died in an offroading accident...

    Imagine the self-righteous whining from these folks if a left-leaning publication had fun at the expense of that particular dead scumbag.

    •  There's a death that didn't bother me. (none)
      I probably should be ashamed to admit it but I was glad when Michael Kelly died.  I figured that if anyone had to die in this clusterfuck they called Operation Iraqi Liberation, by rights it should be those who wanted it to happen.  All the liberal Hawks, the entire staff of the New Republic, and of course the lovable neocons and their scruffy little mascot David Brooks.  Yes in my view these are the proper stuffing for transfer tubes.
      •  Not gonna rate the post but.. (3.00)
        In my own opinion yes, I think you should be ashamed.  I strongly and firmly disagree with the liberal hawks and the neocons but I still assume that they had their reasons for supporting this war which somehow, some way, included what they thought were the strategic interests of the United States.  Now, we can have a debate about ideology blinding people to the facts, but to wish them dead for it seems to be.. beyond the pale.

        "The actual term ... is short for Web log. And, you know, you drop the W and you get the blog."

        by daria g on Wed Jan 14, 2004 at 02:45:45 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Thanks (none)
          Daria,

          Right on. Saying something like that makes you no better than the people at LFG. You might not have agreed with Kelly (I didn't) but show some respect. It is this respect that makes liberals what they are - and not like the LGF gang.

          Ben P

          PS - By the way, did you know Sullivan links to that site all the time? I've stopped reading Andy cause he got real predictable, but I think I should point this out, cause others here probably read him.

          Liberalism: not the left, but the vital center

          by Ben P on Wed Jan 14, 2004 at 02:55:08 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I've stopped reading Andy (none)
            since he declared the Governator's serial assaults on women 1) were only an issue of concern to feminists and 2) could not be criticized because some feminists defended Clinton for a consensual affair.  F(*k you Andy, I'll still stand up in support of gay marriage even though you stabbed me in the back there.

            "The actual term ... is short for Web log. And, you know, you drop the W and you get the blog."

            by daria g on Wed Jan 14, 2004 at 03:26:30 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

  •  WSJ Slur (none)
    The American right once used Orwell's slogans against the left; still do:

    War is Peace.

    Ignorance is Strength.

    Freedom is Slavery.

    They can now add:

    Gandhiism is Terrorism.

    This is one example of how they have forfeited all right to complain about the misuse of the language (not that they will stop).

  •  WTF... (none)
    All I can say is if I were one of her relatives the author of that story would have to worry about being terrorized.  

    Feel free to disagree-- it's your right to be wrong!

    by Asak on Tue Jan 13, 2004 at 10:44:11 PM PST

  •  WSJ editorial page address (none)
    For those interested, I think you need to send your comments to opinionjournal@wsj.com

    Liberalism: not the left, but the vital center

    by Ben P on Tue Jan 13, 2004 at 11:23:54 PM PST

  •  RIP (4.00)
    It will come, I hope, as some comfort to Rachel Corrie's friends to know that she was very much on the right side of history, and Taranto and the WSJ are on the wrong.

    Taranto and his ilk are as wrong as Thomas Blanton and Bobby Frank Cherry, as wrong as Cecil Price, and as wrong as Bull Connor and his dogs. They are as wrong as wrong can be, and they and their evil will be, finally, remembered, as well as those I have mentioned; which is to say not at all, once those such as I, old and not inclined to forget, have passed.

    Rachel Corrie, though, will live on, as long as a single human heart beats. She will live as Goodman Cheney and Schwerner live, as Denise McNair, Addie Mae Collins, Cynthia Wesley and Carol Robertson will live on forever, for they live on in our hearts, which never forget, and not just in our minds, which often do. She will live as a flame that cannot be extinguished; she will live as a sign of eternal love, the power of redemption, and the peace that lives in forgiveness.

    This is a long road, my friends, but Rachel Corrie will not be forgotten, long after Taranto is dust under our feet. This is a long road, friends, and there will be setbacks, but the narrow-minded cheering for death, the hate and hateful ignorance displayed every day in the Wall Street Journal and on selected web pages; this will be seen, finally and certainly as the pitiful scrabbling of dying creatures of the night, before the pure sweet light surrounds them. As surely as day follows night, health follows sickness; as certain as mother love and the kindness of strangers she will live on.

    She will live on not just because she was loved, and stood for love, peace, and reconciliation, but paradoxically through the very efforts of those who would destroy her. For they too carry her memory in their cold hearts. As much as they would like to erase her, they cannot. It is this unsatisfied desire that forces them to scorn her, and all their avowed laughter and derison is hollow. The truth is that if Rachel Corrie did not matter, she would be forgotten, but you see? Even her enemies remember, and as they cannot forget her goodness, nor shall I. Not for as long as children laugh, birds fly, and snow falls. Not forever, even longer than that.

    •  Wow. (none)
      That nearly made me cry, and little does. I hope you sent it to her family (email found on her memorial site, www.rachelcorrie.org)
    •  Thanks (none)
      This is beautiful.  Brought a couple tears to my eyes.

      Also, thanks to everyone that has written in on this thread.  Dammit, but it's hard not to lose faith in people's ability to care for one another and rise above the animalistic urges to solely look out for the big #1.  Back when I heard about Rachel Corrie's death, I think my hope for the world hit a low, and while it is still dwelling in the basement, knowing there are like minded people around helps me make it through.

      Dancers For Dean - Dean makes the music, we make the movement

      by hazletok on Wed Jan 14, 2004 at 12:13:00 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Just remember... (4.00)
    ... they are so threatened by the memory of a murdered 23-year-old girl that they have to make fun of her.
  •  Wait a minute! (none)
    As a scum-sucking bottom-dwelling nematode, I resent being compared to the WSJ, much less Little Green Footballers!

    "Time wounds all heels."

    by grouchomarxist on Wed Jan 14, 2004 at 12:40:29 AM PST

  •  a new low (none)
    I don't find dead-baby jokes funny but I can appreciate them on a visceral level when they show some cleverness. The posters at Little Green Footballs didn't even have that going for them. They were just mean, stupid, and hatefilled. But apparently it makes them happy to be so.
  •  WSJ (4.00)
    In the "Best of the Web Today" feature on January 14th, I was pleased to see you mentioned Rachel Corrie receiving the Idiotarian of the Year from the following website: http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=9598_The_Envelope_Please.  The mention itself along with the accompanying link to the actual website truly does reflect the best of the web and, I would argue, the best of the right-wing movement in this great country.  Furthermore, the Opinion Journal should feel no shame in spotlighting what some might consider "political hate speech" of the worst kind.  There is no shame in glorifying a human being's murder, so stand proud.

    Thank you.
    Glenn Rehn

    •  Corrie. And bear in mind I plan to vote Dean. (1.50)
      The opposing view is that her death was accidental, she was trying to climb rubble mounting in front of a moving, huge bulldozer on an operation which, far from displacing innocents, had to bulldoze a terrorist facility, through which bombs were smuggled.  I wrote this already but it has been censored.  Nice one.  Considering this, the award is not a joke but a chance to make light of the tremendously vague attempts ever since, by the Palestinian ISM (it is managed by Palestinians, not the volunteers), whose job it is to impede the operations and act as shields, to portray Israel as an outlaw.  Evidence to the contrary is plain shoddy, and if this is how you play politics, smearing pro-Israelis as heartless, you are seriously bankrupt.  The ISM defends the tunnels, defends the bomb caches, defends the terrorists, spoils basically any attempt to save Israeli lives.  That Corrie died is upsetting, but that does not make criticism redundant.  Whoever so blindly parrots this anti-Israel rubbish wears sheer malice on their sleeves.  Israel faces an existential threat every day.  Rachel Corrie was not funny at all, but she was certainly stupid.  Terrorist enabler is accurate, and from the pictures I've seen of her at Palestinian rallies, she was a young idiot who gloried in her incitement.  And I do not doubt she had the best will in the world.  Her death is not being celebrated, her legacy is being challenged.  She was no saint.  People can insult her by all means.  People are murdered because of those guys.  She was not.
      •  So (none)
        Even if there were tunnels on the border between Gaza and Egypt, what was the IDF doing there to begin with. It's not as if they were policing their own country. If people in Salvador want to build tunnels going to Honduras, I don't think the US would go there and mow the whole place down.

        But then, with your misuse of definition, Tom Paine would be a terror activist.

        •  Thick. (1.42)
          That is so thick.  Tunnels everywhere, for smuggling bombs like the one strapped to a young lady sent directly by Fatah - which because you're so thick I'll tell you is the Palestinian leadership - killing four Israelis and seriously wounding ten.  Relatively fortunately the line she had at a checkpoint was suspicious - about a metal plate in her leg possibly setting off an alarm - and she exploded as she was detained, so did not reach an urban area.  You say 'so what?'  And that exposes why you cling to Rachel Corrie but negate real terrorism.  Sick.
          •  Well (none)
            The problem, for the IDF, is that she's far from the only one to have been killed during similar events. Not to mention some trigger-happy (though hopefully few) troopers shooting randomly at cars. Last year, they nearly shot an ambassador who had the bad idea of heading towards the West Bank.

            But I err, the real point is terrorism. And indeed the list is long.
            Tito: terrorist
            Jean Moulin: terrorist
            the Czech who shot Heydrich: terrorists
            George Washington: terrorist
            Begin: terrorist
            Ben Gurion: terrorist
            Lawrence of Arabia: terrorist
            Boudicca: terrorist
            Vercingetorix: terrorist
            Giap: terrorist
            Armed Shah Massoud: terrorist
            Leonidas: terrorist

            (yep, I like to pull people's legs, particularly since they can't tell to which extent I'm really serious)

      •  Supertrolls for Dean! (none)

        I love how just about the only comment by this SUPERTROLL that survives on this board is the one in which he professes his affections for Dean. The magic words!

        But at least here he's approaching a reasoned argument.

        I have no doubt that there's a case to be made that Corrie was misguided. But I am just as sure that mocking her (as Abuali does in most of his posts) is totally uncalled for.

        If the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is ever going to be ameliorated, each side is going to have to respect the dignity of the other side's engagement.

        And the IDF is going to have to recognize that bulldozing people's houses is wrong, full stop. No less wrong than blowing up bombs in public.

        •  OK (1.14)
          I made a sick joke in one comment and it does reflect a contempt.  I'm easing off, I've spelt out that my intention isn't to mock and made a simple case.  It's not a whole thesis but at least credit me with meaning it - I'm furious at the responses, they are full on attacks.  Ottoe, don't slander me, I made my point and I'm not coming back to haunt the site.  Pretending this is about respect is what I call disingenuous.  Stay on a high horse if you must, bunch of angry kids.

          I will say this:  there is more hate here, and in Democratic/radical left sites like this, than in the websites I frequent.  I know when I'm talking to a bunch of dicks so, make what you want of it.

          •  Oh (1.20)
            Very last comment - I note the comment in question, along with perfectly reasonable points that I made, has been hidden.  So as to save to pointless hostile analysis.
          •  Oh (1.50)
            Very last comment - I note the comment in question, along with perfectly reasonable points that I made, has been hidden.  So as to save pointless hostile analysis.
          •  Lesson Learnt (none)

            I don't know what sites you frequent, but I imagine that there too new posters there who introduce themselves with a sick joke get chased away.

            And as this email from you shows you can only keep an even tone for a few sentences before you start cracking again on "angry kids."

            Two or so of the 100 plus posts here go over the line (and I gave them zeroes too), but that's remarkable considering how hateful the WSJ piece was. Meanwhile have you looked at the Little Green Footballs threads on their awards?

            If you want your comments to stick around here, keep out the offensive, flame-war starting language. And supply some evidence for your assertions.

            •  i got me a zero! (none)
              and i deserved it :)

              Vermin Supreme '04 Strong Teeth for a Strong America!

              by skaiserbrown on Wed Jan 14, 2004 at 07:48:52 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  alright (none)

                That's the spirit. I understand why you were driven into such a rage ... but fair is fair, and I had to spread the love around in the course of chasing abuali off the board. And I was thinking too about our not wanting to give Taranto grist for his mill should he try to convert our letter campaign into a smear of dailykos for his blog.
  •  I've met James Taranto (none)
    I was, en toto, displeased with the experience.

    I'm not talking about the content of his talk, which you can judge for yourself, but with the actions of the human being who wore the name James Taranto.

  •  Go WSJ! (none)
    Actually, considering how much mainstream press the Corrie story received, we should thank the WSJ contributors who voted to put Corrie's name in the minds of 100s of thousands of twits.
  •  Idiotarian of the 20th Century (4.00)
    I guess, extending out the LGF logic of their website, that they would choose Martin Luther King, Jr. for the American Idiotarian of the 20th Century.
    •  Probably (none)
      Gandhi may come close second, but not being involved with the USA or their close allies, he wouldn't have any chance of winning.
      Of course, if they made the "biggest idiotarian ever", that guy called Jesus would win hands down, considering their reasoning.
  •  Not the only one (none)
    As tragic as Rachel's story is, she is not the only one.

    Shot British peace activist dies
    Wednesday 14 January 2004, 10:20 Makka Time, 7:20 GMT
    Hurndall was a volunteer for a Palestinian peace movement
    A British peace volunteer who was shot by Israeli occupation forces has died in a London hospital.
    Tom Hurndall, who was hit in the head and critically wounded by sniper fire in the Rafah refugee camp on 11 April, had spent nine months in a vegetative state.

    Hurndall, 22, was a volunteer with the International Solidarity Movement (ISM), a group of pro-Palestinian activists who engage in non-violent action to protect civilians in the West Bank and Gaza.

    His family have called for a vigil outside the British prime minister's residence in London on Wednesday to mark his death.

    Tom's mother, Jocelyn, has criticised Tony Blair for not condemning the Israelis for wreaking violence upon the innocent.

    Israeli soldier arrested

    Palestinian medics and witnesses said Hurndall was trying to pull two Palestinian children out of danger when shots were fired from a nearby army watchtower.

    An Israeli soldier was recently arrested in connection with his death.

    The unnamed soldier had initially claimed he returned fire at a man armed with a pistol.

    "However, following an intensive investigation by the military police of the Southern Command, the soldier admitted to shooting in proximity to an unarmed civilian in order to deter him," an army statement said.

    "At this stage, the criminal investigation of the incident is still continuing," it added.

    Independent investigation

    Hurndall spent nine months in a
    vegetative state
    But the ISM has said it wants an independent investigation, charging that one undertaken by the army "will not be impartial".

    And Tom's mother, Jocelyn, told Aljazeera.net last month she wanted "the Israeli soldiers responsible for harming Tom to know that they can't shoot people with impunity.

    "We want to pave the way for Palestinian people to have some legal redress when they are shot and injured by the Israeli army just like my son was".

    She added her family had little confidence in the probe and had taken matters into its own hands by personally investigating Tom's shooting.

    Several ISM activists have been wounded by the army in the course of the Al-Aqsa Intifada.

    Rachel Corrie death

    An army investigation into the death of 23-year-old US national and ISM activist Rachel Corrie concluded her being crushed to death by an Israeli bulldozer had been an "accident".

    It said it would not take any disciplinary action against the soldiers involved.

    Corrie had been trying to prevent the demolition of a Palestinian home.

    In both Hurndall's and Corrie's cases, witnesses insisted they had been easily identifiable by their fluorescent orange jackets.

  •  Activist dies after IDF bullet put him in coma (none)
    The psychopaths at WSJ/LGF will no doubt enjoy the knee-slapper of pacifist Tom Hurndall's murder by the IDF. The soldier who shot the unarmed peace activist in the head while he was shielding children from gunfire claimed that Hurndall had a gun. Another soldier lied to back up the bogus claim. Hurndall has been in a coma for months and his family and friends paralyzed with grief. Presumably these additional details will only increase WSJ/LGF's glee over not only at another pointless death in the occupied territories, but the much more important issue of fodder for their juvenile stance on war.

    British Activist Shot in Israel Dies

    Wednesday January 14, 2004 AP

    "A British peace activist who was shot by an Israeli soldier as he tried to protect Palestinian children from gunfire in a Gaza refugee camp died last night in a London hospital.

    Tom Hurndall succumbed to pneumonia. He had been left in a persistent vegetative state after being hit by a bullet at the Rafah camp in April.

    The 22-year-old died hours after the soldier who shot him was charged with aggravated assault in a rare prosecution of a member of the Israeli military for harming a civilian.

    But the military judge handling the case told the family's lawyer in Tel Aviv that the charge was likely to be revised to murder or manslaughter after Mr Hurndall's death.

    The soldier, who has not been named, has also been charged with obstruction of justice for first shooting the activist through the forehead and only afterwards seeking permission from his commander to kill Mr Hurndall on the fabricated grounds that he was carrying a gun.

    A second soldier is under arrest for allegedly corroborating that account. ..."

  •  We Can Be Nasty, Too (none)
    e.g. Robert Bartley, Michael Kelly,.... heh, heh
  •  Rachel Corrie (none)
    Israel: the only "ally" we have that we allow to murder our citizens with impunity. To me that's the next most egregious outrage after the murder itself. I mean, you'll always have sadistic assholes who celebrate and laugh about the extermination of the weak by the strong, but where are our spineless leaders? Oh yea, they're busy cheering Israel on.

     As an American, it makes my blood boil that I'm forced to help fund Israel's murderous subjugation and disposession of the Palestinian people.

     Rachel Corrie had more courage and humanity in her little toe than the lot of these warmongering, atrocity-applauding scum.

  •  Voldemorte had nothing (none)
    on these guys....I call them and their ilk Death Eaters.
    They are just plain bad.
  •  Diary (none)
    I have posted in my diary all the emails I received from my friend while she was doing relief work in occupied Palestine.

    My friend was there just prior to Rachel Corrie.  In fact, it was my friend's position that Rachel took when she left.

    I think these letters give a perspective on the Arab-Israeli conflict that is not often reported, and illuminates the role of American activists in that struggle.  Though worth reading all the way through, it is a very long post.

    Letters from Palestine

  •  Sickening (none)
    The WSJ editorial staff has become a Zionist propaganda bully pulpit, reveling in the deaths (murders) of peace advocates.  It is beyond reproach.  
     
    •  exactly (none)
      That's why I recently canceled a gift subscription my girlfriend gave me to the WSJ: because I was sick of the warmongering, crackpot, Likudnik editorial page where Shrub is exulted as a strong, visionary leader, where Palestinians don't exist except in terrorist form, where Israel can do no wrong, and where people who make so little they don't have to pay federal income taxes are "lucky duckies". They are beneath contempt.

       

  •  Liberal Media (none)
    If I didn't have Ann Coulter to keep reminding me, crap like this would make me forget that liberals controled the media.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site