The Israeli court validated suspicions that  Rachel Corrie was not a peace activist, but rather an activist for something that is the contrary to peace.

By Hagai Segal

Rachel Corrie grew up in an eloquent family. Last week her parents addressed the court’s ruling that they were not entitled to any compensation for their daughter’s death by an Israeli bulldozer along the Philadelphi Route. This is a “black day for human rights,” they said with impressive western restraint and the talent of seasoned propagandists.

Photo credit for both pictures used: International Solidarity Movement/AP

On the other hand, it was a great day for the truth. The court validated suspicions that the late Rachel Corrie was not a peace activist, but rather an activist for something that is the opposite of peace.

The verdict determined that the International Solidarity Movement Corrie belonged to “abuses the human rights discourse to blur its actions which are de facto violence.” It further said that Corrie and her associates acted as human shields “to protect terrorists” and disrupt IDF activity.

And yet, the newscasts continued to refer to Corrie as a “peace activist.” Once again it was proven that political correctness is more powerful than justified court rulings. This is what makes it possible for someone to throw stones at IDF soldiers in Bilin or Na’alin and publicly support suicide bombings and still be considered a peace activist. Actually, most of the hostile acts against us in the 21st century were carried out by peace activists. Terrorists and Israel-haters are long gone – only human rights activists remain.

Here is another example. UN chief Ban Ki-moon, the no.1 human rights activist in the world, was a visitor of the enemy of the Jews Ahmadinejad last week. In every other speech the host vows to destroy the State of Israel as soon as possible, but Ban does not consider this pledge to be a good enough reason to refrain from visiting Iran.

The UN chief was even insulted a little when Netanyahu leaked to the press that Israel requested that he shun the summit in Tehran. He does not see any contradiction between the UN’s peace-related challenges and Iran’s nuclear program. He will undoubtedly be very angry with us if we destroy it. He may even demand compensation, just like the Corrie family.

View original Ynet publication at: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4276229,00.html