Bulldozer driver: I didn't realize I crushed Rachel Corrie

[oberliner]

The bulldozer driver who ran over Rachel Corrie in Gaza in 2003 said Thursday he did not realize he had trampled the American left-wing activist to death until he heard what had happened over the radio network.

The driver, whose name has not been released, testified during a Haifa District Court hearing on a civil wrongful-death lawsuit filed in March by the activist's parents, Cindy and Craig, against the State of Israel and Defense Ministry. The driver testified from behind a wooden partition to keep his identity secret.

The 23-year-old Corrie was run over and killed by an Israeli bulldozer while attempting to prevent Palestinian homes from being demolished along with other members of the International Solidarity Movement. The driver said he did not see her, and her death was ruled an accident by the IDF.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3973144,00.html

[slackmaster]

1. How terrible for him

You have to stay out of the way of heavy equipment.

[uppityperson]

2. How terrible for her. Heavy equipment operators have to be very aware of what they are doing. nt

[ProgressiveProfessor]

48. SOP for the IDF is to have a spotter for the combat dozers

These units are modified with armor which even further limits visibility. Its pretty clear with this and other statements that the operator did not and could not see her.

[ixion]

3. worse for her, really... and heavy equipment drivers need to know what's in front of them

so his 'my bad' is disingenuous, at best.

[slackmaster]

8. Every machine has blind spots

Except for bicycles.

[ixion]

9. That matters not. You are still responsible for knowing what is going on around you.

Period.

[slackmaster]

10. People are also responsible for their own safety

Intentionally placing one's body in front of a bulldozer is unwise.

[ixion]

19. Only if the bulldozer driver is a sociopath, or inept...

[slackmaster]

38. Throwing yourself in front of it is not the safest way of making that determination

:hi:

[ProgressiveProfessor]

49. If you look at the sight lines, its pretty clear that he could not see her

They armor the dozers which further limits visibility. IDF normally has spotters work with operators. They did not in this case.

[mediaman007]

4. For an amateur running heavy equipment, especially "defense-equipped" bulldozers,

would be difficult. On the other hand, this guy was a professional. I suspect he knew what he was doing. I would guess that he was ordered not to stop.

I hope the truth comes out!

[kenny blankenship]

5. "I thought I was just tickling her a little."

[azurnoir]

6. ok I'll accept that statement

he (the bulldozer driver) was not aware of her name nor did he know she had died

[aranthus]

7. Assuming this is true, there are still many questions.

If he couldn't see Corrie from his driving position and her position on the ground, then there's a blind spot to the bulldozer. You'd think the driver and the people directing him would know this. Also, they had to have known that Corrie was in the area. Was there anyone in front of the bulldozer directing it? If not, why not? If there was, why didn't that person see Corrie? If they thought that she had moved, why didn't they confirm where she was? Granted she shouldn't be lying in front of a bulldozer to begin with, but that is no excuse for not seeing her.

[shira]

13. Corrie was knee deep in a trench and couldn't be seen. n/t

[aranthus]

14. By anyone?

I understand that the driver may not have been able to see her, but what about people outside the dozer?

[oberliner]

15. They weren't outside the dozer

The Israeli army commander of the Gaza Strip said in an interview broadcast on Israeli television that on the day of Corrie's death, soldiers had to stay in their armored vehicles and were not able to direct the bulldozer or arrest the protesters, because of the threat of Palestinian sniper fire.

[Ken Burch]

16. There were ISM volunteers pounding on the dozer's windows trying to get his attention.

He should have just stopped and checked.

There was nothing THAT urgent about destroying THAT house at THAT precise moment. Especially since it was owned by a pharmicist who had nothing whatsoever to do with the militants.

[shira]

17. That's just more BS, along with the photoshop showing Corrie protecting a home. Here's video...

...showing she was knee deep in a trench protecting a weapons tunnel and no one was around pounding on the bulldozer.

http://www.stoptheism.com/

[azurnoir]

26. Everyone should watch the video really really

its got cardboard cutouts film of an IDF bulldozer out in the desert just every bit of proof that is needed to prove something

[aranthus]

18. Thanks. I did not know this. n/t

[azurnoir]

21. That's the claim made on Israel Matzav well except the video

is no longer available then there is the claim she was sitting on the ground by yet another blog and the claim that she purposely "martyred" herself presumably to make Israel look bad oh and you forgot my favorite claim from stopthetsm that she was actually smuggling weapons, really you should get the latest story straight donncha' think

[shaayecanaan]

22. Again, this is completely false

and contradicted by the testimony of the dozer driver during the Rachel Corrie trial:-

The driver's evidence painted an at times confusing and contradictory picture which exposed apparent deviations from statements made by witnesses – including himself – to a Military Police investigation.

While two soldiers had said she was buried while standing on the far side of a mound of earth – away from the approaching bulldozer – YB declared: "I am absolutely certain that she was between me and the pile."

He said that with protective armour on the front of his 66-ton bulldozer, he had a "dead" area of vision which meant that he could see ground only from about 30 metres in front of him. When he was reminded that he had told the military police that the dead area was only three metres, he insisted: "It's not three or four metres. It's more."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/bulldozer-driver-insists-he-did-not-see-rachel-corrie-2113346.html

[shira]

24. She was knee deep in a trench and here's the video proving it...

http://www.stoptheism.com/

[shaayecanaan]

32. That simply doesnt prove any such thing...

the video shows the dozer approaching from a long distance (some twenty metres or more, well outside the blind spot of three to four metres). Corrie is shown standing on the near side of a short mound.

The driver of the dozer has stated:-

"I am absolutely certain she was standing between me and the mound."

There is no mention of a trench.

[shira]

34. Here's a pic....

They're in a trench, the entrance of a weapons smuggling tunnel that Corrie was protecting.

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=&imgrefurl=http://u2r2h-documents.blogspot.com/2009/09/my-name-is-rachel-corrie-theatre-play.html&usg=__Us0l9aPgFuoMxViOM4f00_3lFkA=&h=330&w=500&sz=42&hl=en&start=0&zoom=1&tbnid=pUK5Ps-TEE3CoM:&tbnh=127&tbnw=193&prev=/images%3Fq%3Drachel%2Bcorrie%2Bdirt%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dsafari%26sa%3DN%26rls%3Den%26biw%3D1267%26bih%3D611%26tbs%3Disch:1&um=1&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=836&vpy=91&dur=839&hovh=182&hovw=276&tx=161&ty=90&ei=0-TATPjINsaAlAf69LD1CQ&oei=0-TATPjINsaAlAf69LD1CQ&esq=1&page=1&ndsp=18&ved=1t:429,r:4,s:0

In the actual footage, Corrie didn't flinch. She was completely motionless up to a second before impact appearing to be suicidal.

[shaayecanaan]

36. They are simply not in a trench...

they are not in anything that resembles a trench. The dozer driver (who is the one who should know, by the way) approached Corrie as she stood on the near side of a short mound.

The IDF has tried to state that Corrie was obscured by the mound - they have never claimed she was lying in a trench. The dozer driver in his testimony has contradicted the IDF version by stating that Corrie was on his side of the mound.

By all indications, Corrie was clearly in his field of view until about 3-4 metres from impact when he would have lost sight of her under the scoop. I don't think he intended to kill her. I think he presumed that she would jump away in time, but she didnt.

[ProgressiveMajority]

11. Lying POS. All reliable witnesses indicate there's no way he could have missed her

But sadly I don't think there will be any justice in this case.

[shira]

12. Can you explain to me why the ISM lied by photoshopping fake pics of Corrie's death?

[shaayecanaan]

20. Because that allegation is complete bullshit

the media asked the ISM for photos after the Rachel Corrie incident and the ISM provided a number of pictures on their website. Some of the photos were of previous encounters with bulldozers but were picked up by the media who ran them thinking they were pictures of the incident that led to her death. No doubt the media felt burned when this wasn't the case - however, there is no evidence that any of the photos were faked or photoshopped.

After the photos were aired some right-wing blogs (St Pancake, etc) claimed that the ISM photoshopped the images by purporting to show shadow anomalies on the pictures, amongst other things. Those claims were false, as shown by liberal bloggers who demonstrated that the right-wing bloggers in question did not know how to analyse shadows properly and that the images would have been almost impossible to photoshop.

Again, this shows your obvious predilection for reading and parroting right-wing blogs, but not much else.

[shira]

25. Look at the video and you'll see the poor photoshop effort that was on the PSM website.

And sorry, but when you defend the ISM for doing Hamas' dirty work - when Hamas is about as freeper Rightwing as it gets - you don't get to accuse anyone of being righwing.

Reminds me of Leftists for Castro and Chavez who never object to Venezuelan and Cuban ties to Iran and their freeper Rightwing leadership.

:eyes:

[shaayecanaan]

31. You wouldn't know a poor photoshop effort if it jumped out of your arse

This is the alleged fake photo. And its not a fake.

http://stratfordpact.wordpress.com/2010/10/22/rachel-corrie-photo/

[shira]

33. Um, look at the photo and Corrie's shadow. Where's that guy's shadow, and feet? n/t

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[shira]

37. No they're not. His shadow should lie in the same direction as hers. He isn't even in the video.

Come on now.

And the only rightwingers are those in the ISM (or cheerleaders of the ISM) for collaborating with some of the most far Rightwing freepers (like Hamas) on this planet. Tell me how this works....cheerleaders for the most extreme settlers are Rightwingers but the ISM are not? How does that work?

:shrug:

I can't say I've read even 2 articles from LGF in my lifetime.

[Name removed]

39. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[shaayecanaan]

40. Fine, we'll try that again...

his shadow is in the same direction as hers - directly behind him. The same can be said for the shadow of the bulldozer cabin, and the twigs in the foreground. The confusion arises because the right-wing bloggers thought the shadow in the foreground was the shadow of Corrie, whereas it is actually the shadow of the scoop.

The photo is of an incident prior to the one leading to Corrie's death. It was taken from the ISM's website by Reuters. The ISM from the outset have never claimed that it was a photo of the same incident and that Reuters should have checked with them before using or captioning the photo.

[azurnoir]

23. that same unfounded claim was made quite recently on HuffPo

and a few other sites must be the new meme

[shira]

27. got a link to that? n/t

[azurnoir]

28. you've already posted the vid from another site 2 tmes in a space of a few minutes n/t

[shira]

29. oh, I thought you meant it was from HuffPo. n/t

[azurnoir]

30. Sorry I edited the post

did not realize you replied debating dinner with the SO distracted

[ProgressiveProfessor]

50. The sight lines say otherwise. There should have been a spotter according to IDF SOP

[azurnoir]

41. an "interesting" discrepancy

from this OP

The Corries are demanding $324,000 from the State, which claims the activists endangered IDF soldiers and were in a closed military zone at the time of the incident.

from jpost

The Corries, unwittingly drawn into Mideast affairs by their daughter's death, are seeking a symbolic $1 in damages plus trial costs and travel expenses for themselves and witnesses, which they have estimated at $100,000.

http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=192271

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[oberliner]

43. Suing for $324,000

Al Jazeera:

Rachel Corrie, whose family is seeking $324,000 in damages from the defence ministry, was one of several foreign activists killed in confrontations with Israel in occupied territory in the past decade.

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2010/03/201031042646747585.html

Reuters:

Corrie's family is suing Israel for $324,000 in the case, being heard by a court in the northern port city of Haifa. They say they hope their lawsuit will spur both Israel and the U.S. government to further investigate their daughter's death.

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/LDE6291XT.htm

Electronic Intifada:

Hussein Abu Hussein, the Corrie family's lawyer, said they were seeking $324,000 compensation for specific costs related to Corrie's death, including the funeral, legal expenses and flights.

http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article11124.shtml

[ConsAreLiars]

44. extra for mass murdering and court costs and punitive damages for being utterly evil

is in addition to the original suit, Lawyers add expanses. But the original claim was symbolic.

[oberliner]

45. I would appreciate an apology for your previous remarks

Thanks in advance.

[ConsAreLiars]

46. Quoting Oberliner: "Please note that they are suing for $1 in damages"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=124&topic_id=334567&mesg_id=334917

Forgot it was you who made that observation in order to insult the family, and then edited out the more revealing comments that followed. Apologies. Sometimes I think you wear your not-crazed mask more consistently than you actually do.

[oberliner]

47. "Suing for $324,000??? What a bunch of wholly invented garbage."

That was what you typed in this thread.

I assume you aren't going to apologize to me for the remark stating that my post was an intentionally deceptive piece of blatant propaganda" which was "up to (my) usual standards" in spite of the fact that there are numerous other articles which contain the same figure from sources such as Al-Jazeera, Reuters, and Electronic Intifada as indicated above.

Will you at least acknowledge that you were wrong and that the figure was not wholly invented garbage?

I certainly will admit my mistake with respect to the post you cited from the other thread. Clearly I was going off of what turned out to be erroneous information from the article.