That the people who committed this crime deserve no mercy, and should be hunted down as depraved examples of the lowest elements of humanity goes without saying. If captured alive, they should nonetheless be extradited to America and given a fair trial, for that is one of the great principles that differentiates us from them.

But when viewing this from a newsgathering standpoint, unsettling questions arise.

Dan Pearl was not a ‘stringer,’ (a part-time reporter, working freelance or as an independent contractor); Mr. Pearl was a full-time staff reporter for the Wall Street Journal. And this fact raises some difficult issues. Normally, if a story is being initiated at the reporter’s level, daily newspaper reporters are required to provide their superiors, their editors, with an outline of what they plan to cover, and a schedule. Sometimes, of course, this becomes a question of what came first, the chicken or the egg, because a reporter can become immersed in a breaking story before having any opportunity to discuss it with his or her superiors. But that does not seem to be the case here. Mr. Pearl was apparently seeking for some period to make contact with the world of the Islamic radicals in Pakistan, and had worked to obtain a time and place to conduct an interview with a known radical, fundamentalist Muslim cleric. He was kidnapped en route to that interview.

So it seems reasonable to assume that one of three scenarios took place: a) Mr. Pearl had notified his superiors at the Wall Street Journal of his plans, and was given a green light to pursue the interview. b) Mr. Pearl was given the assignment by a Wall Street Journal editor. c) Mr. Pearl took the initiative without advising his superiors.

The latter possibility seems unlikely, given the portraits that have emerged so far regarding Mr. Pearl’s professionalism. Given that assumption, if Mr. Pearl brought the story idea forward, someone at The Journal either gave specific or tacit approval to the plan. If the idea emanated from the newspaper, then someone gave Mr. Pearl a direct assignment.

The unsettling reality is that if Daniel Pearl was not working autonomously, then the best that can be said is that his superiors at the Wall Street Journal were ingenuous in the extreme. One would not have to be a hardened news executive working for one of the most sophisticated publishing organizations in the world to understand how risky it would be to send a Jewish American reporter into a meeting with Islamic fundamentalists somewhere in Pakistan, particularly on the heels of an American led overthrow of the Muslim fundamentalist government in neighboring Afghanistan. And given that he had been putting out ‘feelers’ for the interview through intermediaries, seeking an agreement to talk and a time and place for the meeting, it is likely that the very approach to generating the story created the idea for the kidnapping in the minds of the Islamic fundamentalists.

All of this becomes even more remarkable with the revelation that Dan Pearl held dual citizenship; he was an American citizen by birth and an Israeli citizen because his Israeli emigrant parents automatically retained their Israeli citizenship, even after naturalization as American citizens. As a child of Israeli parents, he was considered an Israeli by the government of Israel, but Mr. Pearl also, according to the New York Post, formalized his dual citizenship by registering himself with the Israeli government in 1976, when he was a teenager.

In America, none of this is terribly unusual.

Mr. Pearl’s distinguished parents - they are scientists - emigrated to the U.S. in the late 1950’s, became citizens, had children and raised a family. Because of the fact Israel maintains citizenship for those that leave the country, and extends it to their children, it was easy and logical that the young Dan Pearl would formally register and acknowledge his dual citizenship. Given the year he did that, it was probably shortly after his Bar Mitzvah, it was in all likelihood a symbolic gesture regarding his heritage and a reflection of honor to his parents.

But to the radical Islamic fundamentalists this would be terribly unusual.

Here is a representative of a country that they hate – Amreeka, they call us in their communiqués – who is seeking them out as a journalist – a profession they despise and for which they have no understanding or respect – and on top of all of that, the individual is Jewish. Further, it is not unreasonable to assume they found out Mr. Pearl was also an Israeli citizen. That may be why they announced first that he was a CIA agent and later that he was an agent of the Israeli Mossad. To some of them such circumstances could only mean a conspiracy, and to all of them it would mean a justification for any action they might choose to take. In fact, the New York Daily News reported that one of the three fundamentalists now in custody in Pakistan has declared that Mr. Pearl was kidnapped because he "was a Jew…working against Islam."

Nothing, of course, excuses the monstrous acts of the Muslim radicals, yet it certainly appears that common sense was put on hold when Mr. Pearl sought to develop a story involving radical fundamentalists on their own ground. If the story concept was approved in the editorial chain of command, or worse, if the story idea was forwarded as an assignment, then the Wall Street Journal should do more than soul searching; it should thoroughly review and revamp its news policies. If the story was approved or, worse, assigned, The Journal must at least now, belatedly, understand that peacetime journalistic principles no longer apply, and to believe otherwise is naïve and negligent.

If Mr. Pearl was acting autonomously, hoping to develop a good story first and then announce it to his editors, it can only be assumed that he somehow became confused in his world view and believed that as a reporter he would be accorded respect as a neutral party interested in balanced points of view. It’s hard to believe that an experienced international reporter could make such a mistake, especially when working in the Muslim world where even his presentation of credentials to the government might have flagged him for special attention by fundamentalists in the bureaucracy, but it’s still possible that he was that open and trusting. Like most Americans, Mr. Pearl was born here and spent the bulk of his life in America, including his adult professional life; egalitarian views are deeply entrenched in this country, and all the more so in people who practice journalism.

Perhaps the most important lesson that we can take from the events that led up to the vicious and cold-blooded murder of Mr. Pearl is further proof that we are in a state of war with a substantial segment of the Muslim world. At the moment it is, for lack of a better term, The Fundamentalist War, but it is war no matter what it is called, and all of us must recognize that fact.

As a nation, we are hoping, of course, to deny the Islamic fundamentalists their greatest desire, the advent of Armageddon through the creation of WWIII, and therefore we are trying to differentiate between the vast majority of Muslims and those who are already committed as our enemies. But we must remember that in all of history, including our own American Revolution, it was a minority that moved the majority. The Islamic fundamentalists are still a minority, and realistically they are probably far fewer than we think, but they are at war with us and we must reciprocate, physically where possible and intellectually in every way possible.

In journalistically covering Islamic fundamentalists we should look to the policies of the past and begin to cover them the way we covered our enemies in previous wars; that is, as news from and about our enemies, not as an attempt to understand them and their motives. Their motives are clear. They desire the destruction of Western civilization and the recreation of the world in their view of Islamic perfection. We have of course seen an example of their perfection in Afghanistan. It is time to stand against these people and recognize them as our deadly enemies.

Return to top