Sauron

Bullshit, Loren.

1. She was there just a minute ago. Now she isn't - even though all the rest of the international peacekeepers were still there, busily protesting away. Why would anyone assume that she had retreated at all, when obviously the fellow protesters were all standing their ground?

2. "Scared into retreating"? Where was she supposed to be retreating *to*, Loren? There was no place to retreat to, that would have taken her outside the scope of the driver's vision.

3. This also doesn't change the fact that the driver would have been *assuming* that she wasn't there - instead of making sure, before proceeding. If he thought she "retreated", then why didn't he see her retreat? He doesn't know where she is, and he did NOT see her actually leave the scene. He didn't see her in the act of retreating. And he doesn't see her *after* the retreat, wherever she (allegedly) chose to move to, in order to get out of his way. Yet he went ahead and ran the dozer anyhow, even though he had no idea where she suddenly disappeared to.

4. Assuming, of course, that he didn't already realize she was there. That's actually a likely scenario; the drivers of these bulldozers tend to be ex-Israeli army tank commanders. They bring a lot of "baggage" with them, when they are assigned the job of knocking over Palestinian homes. Not the best choice of someone to do this job in the first place.

I realize that you just make this shit up as you go, but you might spend at least a *little* time in making it halfway believable.

Sauron

1. Nonsense.
2. Doesn't justify the action.

See my earlier response.

Sauron

Yes. Part of the "baggage" that such bulldozer drivers bring to the job, since these sorts of positions typically go to ex-Israeli Army tank commanders.

Not exactly the kind of person who should be hired for such work in the first place. Sort of like giving an alcoholic a job in a liquor store.

You don't know that.

It isn't obvious at all, Loren. In the Rachel Correy situation, a good case can be made for the driver wanting to "show those protesters a lesson" and then it getting out of hand.

Your point is *not* valid.

1. If a person would be visible while sitting down, then they would also be visible if they had just fallen. Both positions fall within the same scope of vision.

2. If the driver did not know where she was, then he should have stopped to make sure, before proceeding.

Sauron

Stupid response. REALLY stupid response.

1. You're saying that the lack of soldiers proves that snipers were there? Sorry; you're going to have to substantiate that - especially when all the eyewitnesses say otherwise (i.e., that no such sniping had been done in that area).

2. Then, you can explain why the Israelis would allow a bulldozer driver to enter that area and start demolition totally vulnerable and unguarded. I mean, the bulldozer driver would also have been a valid target for these mysterious "Palestinian snipers" you're talking about. I'm sure that they would have loved to have shot such a house-destroying s.o.b. as a bulldozer driver. And since there weren't any Israeli soldiers around (according to your newest excuse), then these snipers could have killed the guy with impunity.

So please, Loren, *do* enlighten us: why did the Israelis let a bulldozer and driver go into this area, totally unprotected from these mysterious "Palestinian snipers"?

Sauron

Crikey, it's EE-van-JELLY-on!

Glad you're enjoying the floor show. Let us know what the final score is for both sides, willya?

Sauron

I'm just reminded of something that many of you might be too young to remember.

Back during my college days (mid-1980s), there was a movement on campus to divest the university from its holdings in South Africa, due to the racist policy of apartheid. I remember one foreign student, an Afrikaner from South Africa, trying his best to defend the policy in one of my Poli Sci classes.

It didn't matter that the blacks in South Africa were treated like cattle and herded into townships; why, that was because white South Afrikaners *loved* and *cared for* their less-privileged black neighbors. "Bishop Tutu met with communists, did you know that?" "We have a right to the land!" Etc. etc. etc.

It was absolutely *astounding* the kinds of reverse-rationalizations that this young fellow pulled out of his ass. Many of them were probably just things he had been told since he was very young, and had repeated mindlessly all his life. But he sincerely believed them, in spite of mountainous evidence to the contrary.

Sound like anyone you know, Loren?

Evangelion

Hi there!

Well, it sure beats watching paint dry.

You can count on it.

And be warned - I'll be checking the rulebook, too!

Dr Rick

Just a reminder: Keep it cool and civil, please.

Thanks

Farren

I was there. They were all around me. And I'm getting deja vu.

Buddrow_Wilson

Far as I'm concerned both sides are in the wrong. I personally don't think Israel should have ever been created at all, but its there and thats not going to change. The world community needs to get serious about making this stop.

As far as Rachel Corey goes, yes I find it likely the driver knew what he was doing. However, her actions did not make it a clear-cut case for murder imo. I also think she must have been a lunatic to go running halfway across the globe to risk her life for something that didn't involve her at all. Sure I feel bad for the situation, but I wonder what do you people expect. Tempers are high, things get out of hand. Murders have occurred on both sides. It seems inevitable that events like this will happen.

I'm not "apologetic". I am so tired of that word being thrown about these days.