Corrie vs. Caterpillar -- Redux.

[webfusion]

US Courts asked to re-open the Corrie case:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/880298.html

• "Caterpillar sold this product knowing, or it should have known, it would cause exactly this harm," one of the family's lawyers, Duke University law professor Erwin Chemerinsky told the three judges from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday.

It should be recalled that these giant earthmoving-machines are specially-modified for use in combat as an adjunct to tank operations in war. On the day that Rachel Corrie stood in front of one, she literally challenged it to run her over. The record shows that the IDF was indeed involved in specific combat operations in Gaza at the time, clearing areas that were deemed to be utilized by terrorists as weapons-smuggling routes.

I'm not a legal eagle, but how could the IDF, or Caterpillar, be expected to "know" that a girl would stand in front of a two-story-tall armored mechanized earthmover as it rolled forward relentlessly on its combat mission?

 

[jsiv]

Well, I don't think Chemerinsky is wrong. Caterpillar probably knows exactly what will happen to a human being if it is hit by one of their machines.

Oh, right, that's not what he meant.


I think the moral of the story is to not stand in front of an enourmous armored bulldozer with limited visibility. Another one for Darwin.

 

[Beerina]

One of the oldest psychological truths, well-known to most leaders, is that if you want to stop a behavior, you don't just punish the perp, you also punish the rest of the community for allowing it to happen. As a relatively modern, peaceful society, Israel only implements this up to the point of destroying the family house of suicide bombers. "You'd better consider that before you go off to be a martyr. Your momma will be homeless and destitute."

Anyway, that's what's behind the bulldozing.

 

[casebro]

Aren't "Acts of War" usually beyond personal/corporate responsibility?

You can't hold gun makers responsible for the proper use and function of their products either.

What next? hold Boeing responsible for 9/11? or Bethlehem steel? or the labor unions?

 

[Cleon]

As a relatively modern, peaceful society, Israel only implements this up to the point of destroying the family house of suicide bombers. "You'd better consider that before you go off to be a martyr. Your momma will be homeless and destitute."

Anyway, that's what's behind the bulldozing.

Wrong.

Very few of the houses Israel bulldozes has any connection to terrorism or other violent acts. The majority of them are for "code violations"--Israeli authorities regularly refuse to grant Palestinians building permits, so when Palestinians go ahead and build houses anyway, the Israelis send in the bulldozers.

In this case specifically, the overall operation was supposedly aimed at weapon-smuggling tunnels in the neighborhood, but it remains an uncontested point of record that the house Rachel was defending and its owners had no connection to terrorist activity whatsoever.

 

[Darth Rotor]

In this case specifically, the overall operation was supposedly aimed at weapon-smuggling tunnels in the neighborhood, but it remains an uncontested point of record that the house Rachel was defending and its owners had no connection to terrorist activity whatsoever.

It appears to be a point of record that she was willing to die to defend that point.

Guts, yes. Gambling nature? Absolutely.

Survival instinct? Not so hot.

Ability to deal with the human being controlling the dozer? Nil.

DR

 

[steverino]

I played the Beatles song "Helter Skelter" backwards a hundred times, and damn near slit my wrists. My parents sued Apple. We got millions.

 

[Freddy]

Rachel Corrie is the one responsible for Rachel Corrie's death. I suppose an argument could be made that her parents also deserve a share of the blame for failing to impart the slightest bit of sense to their daughter. If anyone has ever deserved a Darwin award...

 

[Comrade Ogilvy]

It`s probably Bush or Rove`s fault....

 

[webfusion]

I was driving along on the Interstate this morning, and heard a radio news report from NPR:
Palestinian witnesses said Thursday that approximately 10 IDF tanks and two bulldozers backed by helicopters had moved before dawn about 500 meters into farming fields in the Gaza Strip (where missiles are being fired against Israeli towns)

Those bulldozers are CAT D9's.

The IDF force came under relentless fire ---- Arbel Reich, 21, was killed.


Caterpillar sold these mechanized combat bulldozers to the IDF, knowing that they would be used in combatting terrorists and in the pursuit of war.

I have just written a letter to Caterpillar Corporate Headquarters, recalling the name of Arbel Reich who died today defending Israel from islamic terrorists, and expressing my personal thanks and appreciation for CAT making available to the IDF such valuable and useful machinery, and I'm encouraging them to continue to do so, without hesitation.

 

[Beerina]

Wrong.

Very few of the houses Israel bulldozes has any connection to terrorism or other violent acts. The majority of them are for "code violations"--Israeli authorities regularly refuse to grant Palestinians building permits, so when Palestinians go ahead and build houses anyway, the Israelis send in the bulldozers.

Interesting. This I did not know.

The libertarian in me sees it is wrong to make someone get a permit to build a house on land they otherwise legitimately own. Hence I see it, and the subsequent bulldozing, as wrong.

The cynic in me enjoys watching people who love regulation and constantly justify it, wring their hands at the wrongness of regulation being properly enforced.

 

[Dr Adequate]

The cynic in me enjoys watching people who love regulation and constantly justify it, wring their hands at the wrongness of regulation being properly enforced.

Subpar 297.ii.7.b : In the event of a building code violation, all American women in the vicinity shall be squashed.

Now, if you could give us a link to some law-and-order types wringing their hands over this "regulation" being properly enforced, I shall share in your amusement.

Oh, but wait:

The Israeli report also states that the army had not, in fact, intended to demolish a house ...

I wonder which regulation they were properly enforcing.

 

[Darth Rotor]

Subpar 297.ii.7.b : In the event of a building code violation, all American women in the vicinity shall be squashed.

If that had been written "all ugly American women in the vicinity shall be squashed" I expect she'd be alive today. From the pictures, she was an attractive young woman.

Writing regulations demands incredible attention to detail. See what happens when someone gets sloppy?

"When your only tool is a bulldozer, everything looks like a decrepit building."

DR

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

I'm not a legal eagle, but how could the IDF, or Caterpillar, be expected to "know" that a girl would stand in front of a two-story-tall armored mechanized earthmover as it rolled forward relentlessly on its combat mission?

Only in Shysterville could they be expected to know that.

I wonder how that lawyer could even say that with a straight face. It must take a lot of training.

 

[Earthborn]

On the day that Rachel Corrie stood in front of one, she literally challenged it to run her over.

I'll assume that you use the word "literally" figuratively for emphasis (as in "I literally died!") instead of using the word "literally" literally, because any other assumption would require me to conclude that you are talking rubbish.

I'm not a legal eagle, but how could the IDF, or Caterpillar, be expected to "know" that a girl would stand in front of a two-story-tall armored mechanized earthmover as it rolled forward relentlessly on its combat mission?

"Rolled forward relentlessly" ? You are trying to make the IDF look bad, don't you? The IDF claims that Rachel Corrie died because the driver could not see her, not that they instructed him to move forward relentlessly no matter what was in front of the D9. Assuming they are right, the driver would have stopped if he had known where she was and would not have been "relentless".

 

[BPSCG]

I'll assume that you use the word "literally" figuratively for emphasis (as in "I literally died!") instead of using the word "literally" literally, because any other assumption would require me to conclude that you are talking rubbish.

Oh, stop being so literal-minded...

 

[Darth Rotor]

I'll assume that you use the word "literally" figuratively for emphasis (as in "I literally died!") instead of using the word "literally" literally, because any other assumption would require me to conclude that you are talking rubbish.

"Rolled forward relentlessly" ? You are trying to make the IDF look bad, don't you? The IDF claims that Rachel Corrie died because the driver could not see her, not that they instructed him to move forward relentlessly no matter what was in front of the D9. Assuming they are right, the driver would have stopped if he had known where she was and would not have been "relentless".

Let's presume that the IDF is correct, and the driver didn't see her for one reason or another. To Rachel, and to any observer looking towad the dozer as it rolled forward, I expect the picture would be one of the dozer rolling "relentlessly forward" and crushing things in its path, to include Rachel.

DR

 

[geni]

I have just written a letter to Caterpillar Corporate Headquarters, recalling the name of Arbel Reich who died today defending Israel from islamic terrorists, and expressing my personal thanks and appreciation for CAT making available to the IDF such valuable and useful machinery, and I'm encouraging them to continue to do so, without hesitation.

So you betting on the palistians not getting hold of RPG-29s?

 

[Ion]

I disagree with this:

I'll assume that you use the word "literally" figuratively for emphasis (as in "I literally died!") instead of using the word "literally" literally, because any other assumption would require me to conclude that you are talking rubbish.

"Rolled forward relentlessly" ? You are trying to make the IDF look bad, don't you? The IDF claims that Rachel Corrie died because the driver could not see her, not that they instructed him to move forward relentlessly no matter what was in front of the D9. Assuming they are right, the driver would have stopped if he had known where she was and would not have been "relentless".

In the Infidels forum pictures were posted of Rachel dressed brightly, holding a bull horn in front of a bulldozer.

Accounts say that witnesses saw Rachel Corrie and the bulldozer in a half an hour slow struggle of will power:

on one side a protester (like the protester in front of the tank during the riots in China), on another side an attacker in a bulldozer who was doing stop and go with a weapon.

As for the Opening Post's question of whether the manufacturer knew of the bulldozer being a weapon, I wonder if the bulldozer hadn't been modified in blades to be a weapon and this might be the reason for the suit.

As for the stupid Ogilvy's jest comment that it must be Bush or Cheney fault, Bush and Cheney are at fault because they are spineless non-patriots who don't defend American Corrie but allow Israeli attacks like this one.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

In the Infidels forum pictures were posted of Rachel dressed brightly, holding a bull horn in front of a bulldozer.

Why didn't she move?