Daniel Pearl

Discussion in 'World Events' started by goofyfish, Feb 22, 2002.

  1. goofyfish Analog By Birth, Digital By Design Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,331
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Yes! Registered Member

    Messages:
    15
    No! That isn't scary, or intimidating, or brave

    All that is, is amazingly sad .
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. goofyfish Analog By Birth, Digital By Design Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,331
    As I continue to watch this story, a few thoughts. First, It behooves us to remember that for all the grousing about the biased media, there really are some brave, if perhaps foolish, souls who risk all to get us the story. In this case too, does this mean fewer risks taken by reporters in this part of the world? Do reporters have reason to feel they may become targets more so than in the past? Will this lead to any change in how some reporters view terrorist groups? (i.e. referring to them as "militants" as opposed to terrorists, etc.) Overall, what's the fallout from this crime? How will this impact the status of Muslims worldwide? It is possible that future reporters will deem too dangerous to cover the Muslim point of view, for rear of interacting with people who do not see the difference between symbols and living humans?

    He was killed in a particularly savage and personal way. I cannot help but wonder if Danny Pearl was kidnapped and horridly slaughtered not because he was a journalist, but because he was an American and a Jew.

    Peace.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. goofyfish Analog By Birth, Digital By Design Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,331
    I was just involved in a rather lengthy conversation on IRC regarding the Daniel Pearl case. Specifically: should the video of his execution be released into public domain? The opposing view was that the video might provide the general populace a window with which to view the brutality at which his captors operated, or even perhaps lead to clues in the investigation. She also felt it might help motivate people to oppose terrorists, and that the government shouldn't be restricting what we can see.

    I agree that it could certainly renew a sense of outrage over terrorists and their sympathizers. However, I don't think that's a good thing. Thoughtful, aware people are already opposed to terrorism. It's enough to know about yet another barbarous killing, without seeing it happen.

    The sorts of people who need to SEE a killing to get fired up are exactly the sort of people that make me cringe. That tape would whip these morons into a frenzy and I fear we'd be treated to such glorious acts of "patriotism" like the torching of Pakistani-owned businesses here in the U.S., eggs hurled at women in headscarves and ignorant chest-thumping about the need to show "them foreigners" you don't treat Americans like that. (All from people who've never read the Wall Street Journal, and who probably couldn't find Pakistan on a map, even if you offered them a six-pack of Old Milwaukee.)

    Other opinoins?

    Peace.
     

Share This Page