Kidnapped WSJ reporter a friend of Muslims

UPI | 2/01/02 | SHAHID IQBAL

[kattracks]

KARACHI, Pakistan, Feb 01, 2002 (United Press International via COMTEX) -- The kidnapped Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl was a friend of Arabs and Muslims and often supported their cause, says a former editor of the Asian edition of the newspaper.

"You have got the wrong guy," said Kenneth Neil Cukier, in an article published in Pakistani newspapers on Friday. "Freeing him unharmed is in your interest."

Appealing for his release, Pearl's former boss said "the Arab and Muslim world has no greater in American media than Danny Pearl."

The 38-year reporter is newspaper's bureau chief in Bombay, India, but had moved to Karachi, Pakistan, temporarily after the Sept. 11 attacks to report on the U.S.-led war on terrorism.

"In his reporting, he's uncovered cases where U.S. foreign policy and military intervention has been misguided, with terrible consequences on the lives of people. Rather than being a spy, as he is wrongly accused of by his captors, Pearl's reporting at times has cast the U.S. in a negative light," Cukier wrote.

"In a series of major front-page articles in 1998 Pearl ... suggested that the U.S. bombing of a factory in Sudan that the U.S. claimed made chemical weapons was unfounded. Evidence that Pearl discovered suggested the plant made pharmaceutical drugs, and that America had acted wrongly."

Cukier described it as "ironic" that would be considered a CIA spy because "his work was critical of U.S. actions, not congratulatory."

He said Pearl was kidnapped last week from Karachi while "seeking to interview leaders of Islamic groups -- trying to publicize the views of the Muslim world."

His captors, a group called "The National Movement for the Restoration of Pakistani Sovereignty," boasts that he is being treated inhumanely, to protest the conditions of around 150 Taliban and al Qaida prisoners detained by the U.S. in Cuba.

The U.S. government considers them "unlawful combatants" rather than "prisoners of war," which would give them certain rights under the Geneva Convention.

But by kidnapping Pearl, Cukier said, the group undermines its own objective as it would bring negative publicity and damage their cause.

"Pearl's reporting gave publicity to the perspectives of groups like The National Movement for the Restoration of Pakistani Sovereignty. Now, the group, and their complaint, looks illegitimate," said Cukier.

"Pearl revealed cases of U.S. errors and the issues facing the Middle East not because he has a grudge or self-interest, but because he is objective and wishes to tell stories that need to be told. He is not a spy, but a neutral observer seeking to reveal the truth."

Meanwhile, Pakistani authorities have taken the father of one of the suspects, Mohammed Hashim, into custody.

He told authorities that his son couldn't have been involved, because he had already been killed in Afghanistan when he was to arrange a meeting with Pearl. Police say they are investigating his claims.

Also, Mubarak Gilani, head of Jamaatul Fugra, has turned himself into authorities. He said he had no role in Pearl's disappearance and that is group was not a terrorist group, but a religious organization.

By SHAHID IQBAL

Copyright 2002 by United Press International.

[SuziQ]

So, you think we did the right thing when we bombed the aspirin factory in Sudan? Something wrong with Pearl pointing out the fallacy of clinton/albright declaring the place a chemical weapons plant? Read and think.....read and think.....read and think.....

Thank you, OldFriend, you beat me to it. Did these folks NOT READ the article? Daniel Pearl's complaints about the abuses of US Foreign Policy are the same ones WE registered about x42's overseas forays. His foreign policy was all about saving his sorry white rear end; he would launch missles to deflect news coverage of his fun with Monica or his money grubbing.

What is interesting is the timing of this; these articles don't reflect Pearl's animosity toward the US as much as the fact he hated the abuse of our foreign policies. This article may be a way to entice these folks into letting him go by convincing them he's on their side when he actually may not be.

[Diamond]

To transpose the commands of God for ancient Israel into the present is to completely rip them out of historical context. Please DO NOT put words in my mouth that "the JEWS are terrorists".

Cordially,

[skeeter]

Thanks for the scriptural history lesson.

How about some passages advising contemporary christians on how to conduct their lives? Something relevent today?

[Sloth]

To transpose the commands of God for ancient Israel into the present is to completely rip them out of historical context.

That is exactly correct. To use such passages to paint Christians (or Jews) as violent or terroristic is a complete misapplication of them. But why am I not seeing any desire to treat the Koran similarly? Why is context relevant in interpreting the Bible but not in the Koran? It's meaningless to pick out individual verses and try to build a case on them if no attempt is made to show that they are representative of the overall theme. If we Christians do not want people to twist or abuse the Bible, we should reciprocate by being honest in our approach to others' beliefs.

[Dick Bachert]

...proving once again that no good deed goes unpunished.

[dagoofyfoot]

"his work was critical of U.S. actions, not congragulatory."

"I was only kidding Mr. Rumsfeld, now can we get a little help down here Mr. Rumsfeld? Mr. Rumsfeld are you listening? I'm running out of time down here Mr. Rumsfeld! Hurry! Mr. Rumsfeld?...WAAA HAAA WAAA...

[mikeIII]

....and that's it? No other forms of terrorism? No Timothy Mcveigh, no IRA, no ETA?"

None of these perpetrates terror in the name of religion. Not even the IRA, as some would like to point out. If it were, Catholics universally would be taking up the struggle against Britain!

[Diamond]

So then we would agree that context determines meaning, and that a text without a context is a pretext. I would only say that it is present day Islamists themselves that interpret such passages of the Koran as their instruction manual. There are probably hundreds of thousand, if not millions of Moslems who interpret such passages strictly and very literally. So why is context relevant in interpreting the Bible but not in the Koran? Ask the violent Islamist that question. (But stay far enough away from him when you ask that he cannot kidnap or kill you.)

Cordially,

[a_witness]

we should reciprocate by being honest in our approach to others' beliefs.

Precisely, now why do Islamic states support terrorism ? Is the Islam they preach and practice a cause or simply a contributing factor ?

[BenF]

Shame on you.

Hmmmm....you're right, I suppose. My apologies for my insensitivity and lack of humanity for this person....despite his alleged lack of fundamental human decency. I shouldn't have sunk to his level.

[BenF]

I used to love Doc Savage....you know he was written in the 30's as a serialized set of novels, don't you?

[ValerieUSA]

The kidnappers sent their pictures of Pearl and demands via e-mail. Did Carnivore work? Is Carnivore going to protect Americans against real terrorists, or just protect the government from Americans who don't always say the most "correct" things?

[mikeIII]

Apart from the fact that these references are few and far between in the Bible, there's the New Testament which represents Christianity today. The Old Testament, from which you quote (Exodus, Proverbs, Samuel) is mostly referred to in an historical context. There is no church anywhere today that uses those verses to define Christian behavior or preaches any form of violence whatsoever against non-believers.

[GHCubana]

Muslims can have non-Muslim friends...

So they can kidnap and kill them? With friends like those who needs enemies! Now that Daniel Pearl has seen who this "peaceful muslims" really are, the more reason the savages have to cut his throat. I bet Daniel is dead already, poor man.

[Sloth]

See #44.

[Diamond]

See 48.

Cordially,

[mikeIII]

See #44.
See #48.

Ok. And Ok. Let's acknowledge for now that both the Koran and the Old Testament have references to Violence and Hatred, disregarding the intensity of these in each. The question is, which of the two preaches and practices it today?

[Diamond]

The question is, which of the two preaches and practices it today?

Bingo!

Cordially

[nopardons]

It makes me fed up to the teeth, with bleeding hearted journos, who are pro all of OUR enemies, and think that they can never be harmed by them.

Besides, there is something VERY wrong with this whole setup. It smells.

And what, pray tell is WRONG with you ? Bet you didn't read the article , or are a bleeding heart yourself. Johnny Jihad is an American citizen too. I bet you love him, and think that he is just a " poor , misguided youth "; don't you ?

[Howlin]

Didn't Fiske get beaten up?