Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: dervish
"But if Ms. Pearl is toying with the idea of becoming the latest liberal cause celebre, she might want to consider the trajectories of the rest of them." - Ann Coulter

"Why is Coulter preemptively smearing the widow of Daniel Pearl?" - dervish

I trust Ann's instincts on this one.
As Ann has noted previously, in her "doctrine of infallibility" analysis, the Left LOVES to use "victims" to present their side of an issue, in the hopes that no one on our side will counter them.
It is not (yet) clear if Mrs. Pearl is a WILLING accomplice in this instance, but it certainly appears that the Left is TRYING to exploit her story for their purposes.
59 posted on 08/16/2007 6:14:19 AM PDT by RonDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies ]


To: All
It is not (yet) clear if Mrs. Pearl is a WILLING accomplice in this instance, but it certainly appears that the Left is TRYING to exploit her story for their purposes.
See, for example, this rather harsh review (from the conservative film site Libertas) of the recent Angelina Jolie movie about the Daniel Pearl story:
LIBERTAS Review: A Mighty Heart

 photo_hi_5570.jpg

By now everyone’s certainly familiar with the horrific story of Wall St. Journal reporter Daniel Pearl’s beheading at the hands of jihadists in 2002. It’s a seminal moment in the ongoing War on Terror and was at the time a sobering reminder of the cold, efficient, madness found in the determined enemy we face. It’s not unreasonable to question Pearl’s judgment in choosing to leave his five-month-pregnant wife behind to follow a dangerous lead regarding "shoe bomber" Richard Reid, but it will always come down to that videotape and the sound of a husband, son, and father-to-be screaming in agony.

A Mighty Heart is based on a book by the same name written by Daniel’s widow Mariane (Angelina Jolie) about the aggressive spiderweb of an investigation that kicked in hoping to find her kidnapped husband before he’s executed...

-- snip --

...The only "terrorist" behavior shown on screen is done by our side. Our government teams up with the Pakistan anti-terrorism squad to find Pearl and along the way the "good" guys torture, threaten, and even talk about how much they enjoy it. We only see Daniel Pearl through photographs sent by his kidnappers. Their treatment of him is never dramatized and Winterbottom doesn’t even bother to let us hear Pearl’s execution videotape, much less see it. The camera is on the horrified faces of those watching. (Hey, at least its not on their backs.)

Is it unreasonable to wonder if the failure of A Mighty Heart is due to an agenda-driven approach to the film? What else explains the conscious decision to not let us feel something for Daniel Pearl? For Mariane Pearl? To not dramatize his ordeal or let us get a sense of his suffering? To only show our side brutalizing others?

It’s all so cold and efficient you have to wonder if the people involved in crafting it weren’t so worried about ginning up support for the War on Terror that they decimated their own film by ripping  any human emotion from a story that should’ve been filled with it...

CLICK HERE for the rest of that review

60 posted on 08/16/2007 6:31:30 AM PDT by RonDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson