SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: epicure who wrote (51753)6/22/2002 12:46:33 PM
From: Lane3  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 82486
 
Richard Cohen had a column on that subject the other day, as well.

Window on the Enemy

By Richard Cohen

Thursday, June 20, 2002; Page A23

Some years ago, commenting on the trial of William Kennedy Smith, I wrote a column urging newspapers to lift their ban on revealing the names of rape victims. As is often the case, a TV show called -- would I come on to discuss the issue? Yes, I said, but only under one condition: I would not debate a rape victim.

In somewhat the same vein, it is with the greatest reluctance that I take issue with Judea Pearl, the father of Daniel Pearl, the reporter for the Wall Street Journal who was lured to his death this year in Pakistan. A video of his murder is now available on the Internet.

I cannot recommend it. I will not even tell you where it can be found, although it is easy enough to locate. It is a gruesome piece of footage, and it is understandable that Mr. Pearl would protest its circulation. He did precisely that in a New York Times op-ed article. It is an unemotional essay and makes no plea for special consideration for the Pearl family. Nonetheless, it breaks your heart.

Ironically, it was that article that piqued my curiosity -- that and the suggestion of a colleague that I view the video. I did so with trepidation, and I will tell you that, last night, when someone asked me what I would write about today, the images of the murdered Pearl came back to me. I am pretty good at denial. Last night, my gift failed me.

Maybe that's because I, too, am a journalist who has traveled in the Islamic world. Maybe that's because I, too, am Jewish -- and Pearl was made to say that he was a Jew, that his parents were Jewish and that he has familial connections with Israel. This, clearly, was by way of explaining to the audience why he was about to be murdered. Shots of him are intercut with scenes of the intifada. We see violence in the West Bank. We see Ariel Sharon.

We see the severed head of Daniel Pearl.

But the video shows something else as well. It shows that Daniel Pearl was a human being -- not a name, not a headline, not this impersonalized entity we call "a victim." We hear him talk. We hear the sound of his voice and when, quickly, we see his head being held by some unknown hand, horror and anger and pity and sorrow and revulsion well up within us only to be followed by a sickening realization or reaffirmation: Oh, so that's what we're up against.

I mean that as an indictment. The video was made not for me or you but to recruit others in the Islamic world to the anti-Israeli, anti-American, anti-Jewish cause. It has reached a wide audience, we are told, and an approving one. The New Republic called it a "commercial," and it is right about that. The product being sold is hate and the murder of innocents by people who think no Jew, no American, could be innocent.

When Dan Rather first aired non-graphic portions of the video, CBS was criticized by the State and Justice departments. Now that others -- the Boston Phoenix, in particular -- are offering links to the entire video, they too are coming in for criticism. The most poignant, of course, came from Judea Pearl. He argued that "displaying this murder undermines efforts to fight terrorism and anti-Semitism."

Not for me it doesn't -- and probably not for you, either, if you view the video. Instead, you will sense the presence of the enemy -- an unseen but keenly felt evil. You will appreciate the nature of this war and the enormous cultural gap that leads to the production of a video that sickens us and yet thrills others. I do not mean to generalize. I am speaking now of terrorists and their sympathizers, not the entire Muslim world.

With rape victims, I did not want a debate because I knew the journalistic conviction in disclosure, in specificity, in how one fact can lead to another, would be no match for the pain of a victim. With Daniel Pearl's family and his colleagues at the Wall Street Journal, I feel a similar constraint.

But for someone who never met Daniel Pearl, who knew him as a picture, a name -- a victim among the several thousand since Sept. 11 -- he has now emerged as a human being. The video, both on the Internet and in my memory, has had its effect. Mr. Pearl, I will never forget your son. Nor will I ever forget those who killed him.

© 2002 The Washington Post Company