Wednesday, February 4, 2009

Father of Slain Wall Stree Journal reporter, Daniel Pearl on Contemporary Terorism

Wall Street Journal 2/3/09


[Commentary] Reuters/Corbis

Jimmy Carter.


















StGuyFawkes said...

I don't understand how Hamas and Hesbollah can even speak of an "occupation" anymore. Have not all or most of the territories which were "occupied" after the '67war now been released?

In the mouth of Hamas doesn't "occupation" really refer to the State of Israel proper?

I take "end the occupation" to mean dissolve the State of Israel.

Or am I oversimplifying?

Deborah Lipstadt said...

You are right and your are wrong. Israel still sits on the West Bank and the Golan Heights. So that is very much considered an "occupation."

You are right in that when Hammas says "end the occupation" they mean end the state of Israel... I really believe that.

Charles M. Kunz said...

Thank you for a very well written and yet very sad article. As the only Jewish person at my company (1 of 104) articles like these help me deal with the ignorance that can surround us all.

Frank said...

My heart goes out to the Pearl family and I am still angry that folks in this country tolerate this behaviour.

Roman Werpachowski said...

Another captive has been killed by the Talibans recently, a Polish engineer who worked in Afghanistan. The western press has largely ignored his fate...

tiffinwalla said...

I think I mentioned watching "the Piano" every year. Although that is a good fulm, of course I meant to say Roman Polanski's "The Pianist".

tiffinwalla said...

This article is poorly argued in that it equates criticism of Israeli policies with an endorsement of terrorism. The author seems to think that if you believe Israel is in violation of human rights in Gaza, then you must also agree that Hamas' acts of terrorism are justified. It is not at all logically inconsistent to be against acts of violence, no matter who the perpetrator. In this case, Israel has an overwhelming economic and military advantage, not to mention an internationally recognized government, giving them ample opportunity to present their side of the debate. For an academic institution like UCLA to examine the claims of those without such advantages hardly seems like terrorist sympathizing to me. This by no means should be read as an endorsement of Hamas' brutal agenda.
By the way, I first arrived at this blog through some research I have been doing on David Irving, and I think your exposure of Holocaust deniers is truly God's work. I have been heartened by the stories of those like Sophie Scholl who were brave enough to speak truth to power and will never tire of hearing stories from those who endured the unspeakable inhumanity of the camps. It is a chapter in history that should never be forgotten, let alone denied. I have formed the tradition of watching "The Pianist" on Nov 9th the past few years, in observance of Kristallnacht. Its my small way of remembering the millions of victims of Nazi ignorance and celebrating the acts of courage of those who dared to resist them.
Having just read Richard Evans' splendid book "The Coming of the Third Reich", I find myself believing that the seeds of the Holocaust were planted when economic disaster was combined with an unquestioning allegience to party or nation. When a person decides to deny the humanity of his fellow citizens "for the good of the nation", then he becomes capable of all manner of barbarous acts. Its my fear the many try to view the Palestinian/Israeli conflict through this lens. There have been indefensible actions on both sides of this issue, and I hope that we as global citizens will have the courage oppose them, no matter what our politics.