The terrible death of anti-Israel activist Rachel Corrie beneath an Israeli bulldozer was plainly an accident - an impassioned demonstration that got out of hand - and no fair-minded observer would doubt the thoroughness and fairness of the Israeli army's investigation. But that won't stop unfair-minded observers from using Miss Corrie's memory as a tabula rasa on which to write their own myths.

The Seattle Post-Intelligencer, taking a proprietorial interest in the city's late resident, graciously allows:

"Israel has concluded that the death of a peace activist from Evergreen State College was a total accident. That could be."

Yes, it could, couldn't it? Because 'could' in this context is one of those weasel words that allow incompetent journalists to hint at what they mean without being tied down to saying it. If the Seattle Post-Intelligencer believes a plausible alternative explanation for Miss Corrie's death exists, then it should say so plainly rather than engage in knowing insinuation. And while it's cleaning up its language it 'could' usefully engage in journalistic research rather than idle cliche:
[Couldn't agree more. The sly use of "could" is a favorite device of biased media.]

"It's clear that this was a young woman of uncommon compassion, committed to fairness for Palestinians. However she died, she left an impressive legacy, as the Evergreen State students made clear in remembering her at what should have been her June 13 graduation."

Unlike the authors of this slush, I would not claim to know Miss Corrie's motivations, but it is no more accurate to describe her campaigning as 'an impressive legacy' than it is to refer to her as a 'peace activist'. The International Solidarity Movement is not an advocate of peace: it explicitly states on its home page:

"[W]e recognize the Palestinian right to resist Israeli violence and occupation via legitimate armed struggle."

What it means by 'legitimate armed struggle' is disclosed in a diary written last week by an ISM activist from the UK (who would benefit from the services of an editor to cure him of both his verbal incontinence and his presumably unwitting admissions):
["verbal incontinence" - that's a good one!]

"The movement is non-violent, and trains people in that practice. Tonight I sleep in a martyrs [sic] house, which is a practice used to try to stop them being knocked down by the Israelis."
["Martys house" must be Hamas code for terrorist location. Do these clueless kids have any idea what a self-parody they are?]

By 'martyr', the writer means someone who detonated a bomb intending to kill as many Jewish civilians as possible - on a bus, in a shopping mall, at a discotheque, in a restaurant, or in some other populous place. It's difficult to conceive of the callousness and lack of imagination of someone who can employ such a laudatory epithet casually, unthinkingly and without a trace of compassion, uncommon or otherwise, for the victims of urban terror. Yet this is the movement under whose auspices Rachel Corrie agitated.

The Seattle Post-Intelligencer, having thus neatly romanticised the abhorrent, has one final insult to administer to the notion of public service:

"Somewhat similarly, Americans understand (better than the Pentagon does) the value of settling questions around Pvt. Jessica Lynch's capture and rescue. But, ultimately, the conclusions won't change the honor due Lynch, who put her life on the line for something larger than herself, as did Corrie."

Leave aside the notion that a thoroughly debunked story about Jessica Lynch might still have life in it, and consider the comparison. One of these young women served bravely under the American flag in a coalition to liberate an imprisoned nation and remove a military threat. The other, who would have been in no danger of death or injury at all if she had simply got up and walked away, tore up the American flag while putting on her special compassionate expression for the cameras. It may be common practice to gloss over the character deficiencies of the recently-deceased, but that's no reason to blaspheme.