Author Archive

Twitter gained breaking news on Osama bin Laden death in Pakistan

Twitter, Facebook, You Tube, Storify all different types of social media vas the media channel for the breaking news of Osama bin Laden death to thousands citizens around the world. Not only in the USA, but also across the globe, the historic news came through the social media platforms.

It was Twitter, not traditional media, that broke the news of Osama bin Laden’s death – is the article title of Eric Degans from St. Petersburg Times. The power of twitter was that every detail, from “9:47 p.m. announcement that President Barack Obama would speak to the nation, to confirmation from a CBS News producer at 10:32 p.m. that Bin Laden was dead and his body as in U.S. custody, happened first on Twitter”, wrote Degans.

The breaking news delivered via social media underline the question – whether Twitter’s role was above that on the traditional media, especially cable broadcasters. What really happen?

“Text message, email and alerts from Twitter and Facebook, in many instances before the details had been reported by the cable television networks”, reported Cory Dade in NPR article On social media, American react to bin laden death. “Helicopter hovering above Abbottabad at 1 AM ( is a rare event) was the tweet of Shohaib Athar, who blogged the Osama raid without knowing it.

One of the twits of Athar was: Bin Laden is dead. I didn’t kill him – Let me sleep now.

The annoying sound of the helicopters under his house was the first sign to tweet on the breaking news and without knowing on its importance. As the news went around the world, the number of Athar followers rise up to 14,000.

There is no doubt – a new media revolution is coming with the social media, especially in the part of the breaking news and supporting the broadcast content to deliver key messages. Facebook and Twitter brought last and this year many important breaking news from the rescue of Chilean miners, revolutions in Egypt and other African countries to the breaking news of 2011 – death of Osama bin Laden.

A Mighty Heart movie review

Stevo Pendarovski my Pen – Pal from University American College from Skopje has been skeptical about “the movie industry’s potentials to portray realistically event in the war-torn countries, simply because no movie has ever come close to life”.  He explains that “numerous articles have been written on the contradiction between the organizational cultures of military and journalism, sharpening in the times of crises”.

But, the look upon the third element, very potent on the battlefield – mentality of terrorists is often absent from the analytical triangle.  “My basic point of departure is that regardless of the known differences between the soldiers and journalists, their symbiosis is necessary for confronting the common opponent”, said Pendarovski.  According to him, “embedded journalism is a must for uncovering the truth in the war zones and for up-close and personal human stories, as well”.

Although, “for investigative journalist to be “embedded” in the hostile terrorist environment it certainly asks for securing back-up from military intelligence whose core is fundamentally different, but not hostile to journalists”.

Pendarovski believes “it is very difficult to imagine successful penetration of journalists up to the inner terrorist circles without overt/covert support by the intelligence agencies. In my view, the operational key is providing alignment by the so-called friendly services because they have the ownership over the processes on the local level”. Unfortunately, “loyalty to their ethic kin is often stronger then achieving strategic goals for their country or reaching out to liberty and democracy”, comments Pendarovski on the topic of the movie A Mighty Heart.

Despite the promises of the USA President Barack Obama to close the Guantanamo Bay Detention Center on Cuba on March this year, he signed new executive order to continue with the military trials at the Navy base. Number of detainees currently held in Guantanamo is 172, according the 28 February, 2011 fact sheet Guantanamo by numbers of the nonprofit organization Human Right First that works on implementation and promotion on universal human rights and freedoms.

Khalid Sheikh Mohhamed is a Kuwaiti in the USA custody in Guantanamo for alleged acts of terrorism, mass murder of civilians and he is among 172 prisoners of Guantanamo Bay Detention Center. After his imprisonment at Guantanamo, Khalid Sheikh Mohhamed confessed that he organized and beheaded the Wall Street Journal, reporter Daniel Pearl in January 2002, Miami Herald published on their on line page Associated Press article Report faults Pakistan’s Pearl murder investigation by Ashraf Khan and Nahal Toosi.

They wrote that “he is held at the Guantanamo Bay U.S. military prison, and the confession is believed to have come during interrogation that included waterboarding”.  AP article posted on January 20, 2011 in Miami Herald online page brought the findings and results of the Pearl Project that “four men imprisoned for killing Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl were not present during his beheading but were convicted of murder because Pakistani authorities knowingly relied on perjured testimony and ignored other leads”.

The investigative effort called Pearl Project is joint result of the commitment of his former colleague Asra Q. Nomani, students and professors from George Town University and Washington D.C. and the Center for Pubic Integrity. The genuine idea to combine professional and academic work on serous journalism investigation of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl in Karachi in 2002 was modeled by the three decade ago old investigative reporting project into the murder of Arizona Republic reporter Don Bolles.

Nomani and Barbara Feiman Todd, the director of journalism at Georgetown University visited Phoenix in 2007 to attend annual conference of Investigative Reporters and Editors, the world’s largest association of investigative journalist and to copy from the Arizona project for Don Bolles. She recalls on the Web page of the project the conference was convenient because of the presence of Randall Bennet, formerly the regional security officer for the State Department at the U.S. Consulate in Karachi, was going to be stateside in Phoenix.

“Randall and I had gotten to know each other during the horrible weeks after Danny had been kipped. Randall was a compelling figure, straight out of central casting, the kind of guy who comes to mind when you hear words like “swagger,” and in fact, he had been portrayed in Hollywood’s version of Danny’s story. I wanted Barbara to meet him”, recalls Nomani.

In spite of the Hollywood emotional movie portraits of  the last days of Daniel Pearl in Pakistan before he was kidnapped – the investigative journalism in the Pearl Project discovers other elements important to what happened In Karachi with the former WSJ journalist and reporter.

The Pearl Project findings disclosure problems of criminal justice system in Pakistan and question, sometimes, the high level of trust that the USA officials have in Pakistan authorities. “From one isolated murder case”, Pearl’s friend and colleague, Nomani, admits the project grow up “to a study of various important issues”.

The truth left behind, inside the kidnaping and murder of Daniel Pearl Web page prepared by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalism brings key findings and continues the work on Pearl’s investigation in Pakistan before his kidnaping. Nomani gives the importance of the Pearl’s Project to “uncover and untangle militancy, Islamic extremism, and terrorism in Pakistan, with foreign policy implications much larger than we imagined when we first began”.

There is an important story in the case of Daniel Pearl investigative work in Pakistan. “Years later, Danny’s case offers important lessons to the Obama administration as it grapples with its policy toward Pakistan as a safe haven for Taliban, Al Qaeda, and militant fighters that U.S. forces face in the war in Afghanistan. Danny’s case was a harbinger of the issues U.S. national security officials are grappling to understand today”, emphasized Nomani.

Wall Street Journal online page dedicated to their former reporter and journalist kidnaped allegedly by the Al-Qaeda members in Pakistan gives the facts on the case. Daniel Pearl “ disappeared in the southern Pakistani city of Karachi on Jan. 23 after embarking for what he believed was an interview with a prominent figure in the country’s Islamic movement”.

After four days, a new group “The National Movement for the Restoration of Pakistan Sovereignty” introduced the requirements “for release of Pakistani nationals being held by the U.S. at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, in the wake of the military campaign in Afghanistan, as well as Pakistan being detained in the U.S. as terrorism suspects”.  The group that was not known of the USA authorities asked “for the U.S. to turn over F-16 fighter jets purchased by Pakistan in the late 1980s but never delivered because of U.S. sanctions related to Islamabad’s nuclear-weapons program”.

The death of relevant journalist from the influential newspaper, his Jewish origin, politics, terrorism, Guantanamo, Taliban’s, dysfunctional judicial system in Pakistan – enough intrigues for Hollywood. A Mighty Heart movie from 2007, directed by the English director Michael Winterbottom with Angelina Jolie, Dan Futterman and Irfan Kan in a manner of speaking tell us on franatic search of Mariane Pearl, to locate his husband Daniel Pearl. Winterbottom drives the movie with the emotions and portraits the Wall Street reporter through the eyes of his wife and her book on Pearl dedicated to their children.

However, one of the closest associates to Pearl, Nomani wrote an article in the Washington Post on June 24, 2007 titled A Mighty Shame. “For me, watching the movie was like having people enter my home, rearrange the furniture and reprogram my memory. I’d known it was a gamble when I agreed to help with a Hollywood version of Danny’s kidnapping, but I’d done it because I thought the movie had the potential to be meaningful”, admits Nomani in the Washington Post article.

This article was the reason Nomani to receive a call in late June 2007 from Marian Crompley from the Oklahoma City based Ethics and Excellence in Journalism Foundation with the offer to support financially the Pearl Project.

Couple of years latter, the findings of this investigative journalism project reveals “serious issues that have relevance today to U.S. policy and America’s war in Afghanistan: the emergence of a “Punjabi Taliban, made up of militants from the Pakistani province of Punjab; the role of Karachi, Pakistan’s largest city, as a safe haven for militants; and the nexus between the Pakistani militancy and Al Qaeda”.

Work Cited:

1.http://www.miamiherald.com/2007/11/27/322461/by-the-numbers.html

2. http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/01/20/2024799_p2/report-faults-daniel-pearl-murder.html#ixzz1K94rQM9M

3. A Mighty Shame. (2007, June 24). In The Washington Post. Retrieved April 20, 2011,fromhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2007/06/22/AR2007062201673.html

4. MORE ON DANIEL PEARL Read the prepared statement from Wall Street Journal Publisher Peter Kann and Managing Editor Paul Steiger. • Read a chro. (2002, February 24). In The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved April 20, 2011, from http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/pearl-022102.htm

5. The truth left behind. (n.d.). In The Pearl Project. Retrieved April 20, 2011, from http://treesaver.publicintegrity.org/daniel_pearl

6. The Pearl Project. (n.d.). In The Pearl Project George Town University. Retrieved April 20, 2011, from http://pearlproject.georgetown.edu/index.html

Reporting and investigating in the crisis regions – Daniel Pearl Case

Stevo Pendarovski my Pen – Pal from University American College from Skopje has been skeptical about “the movie industry’s potentials to portray realistically event in the war-torn countries, simply because no movie has ever come close to life”.  He explains that “numerous articles have been written on the contradiction between the organizational cultures of military and journalism, sharpening in the times of crises”.

But, the look upon the third element, very potent on the battlefield – mentality of terrorists is often absent from the analytical triangle.  “My basic point of departure is that regardless of the known differences between the soldiers and journalists, their symbiosis is necessary for confronting the common opponent”, said Pendarovski.  According to him, “embedded journalism is a must for uncovering the truth in the war zones and for up-close and personal human stories, as well”.

Although, “for investigative journalist to be “embedded” in the hostile terrorist environment it certainly asks for securing back-up from military intelligence whose core is fundamentally different, but not hostile to journalists”.

Pendarovski believes “it is very difficult to imagine successful penetration of journalists up to the inner terrorist circles without overt/covert support by the intelligence agencies. In my view, the operational key is providing alignment by the so-called friendly services because they have the ownership over the processes on the local level”. Unfortunately, “loyalty to their ethic kin is often stronger then achieving strategic goals for their country or reaching out to liberty and democracy”, comments Pendarovski on the topic of the movie A Mighty Heart.

Despite the promises of the USA President Barack Obama to close the Guantanamo Bay Detention Center on Cuba on March this year, he signed new executive order to continue with the military trials at the Navy base. Number of detainees currently held in Guantanamo is 172, according the 28 February, 2011 fact sheet Guantanamo by numbers of the nonprofit organization Human Right First that works on implementation and promotion on universal human rights and freedoms.

Khalid Sheikh Mohhamed is a Kuwaiti in the USA custody in Guantanamo for alleged acts of terrorism, mass murder of civilians and he is among 172 prisoners of Guantanamo Bay Detention Center. After his imprisonment at Guantanamo, Khalid Sheikh Mohhamed confessed that he organized and beheaded the Wall Street Journal, reporter Daniel Pearl in January 2002, Miami Herald published on their on line page Associated Press article Report faults Pakistan’s Pearl murder investigation by Ashraf Khan and Nahal Toosi.

They wrote that “he is held at the Guantanamo Bay U.S. military prison, and the confession is believed to have come during interrogation that included waterboarding”.  AP article posted on January 20, 2011 in Miami Herald online page brought the findings and results of the Pearl Project that “four men imprisoned for killing Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl were not present during his beheading but were convicted of murder because Pakistani authorities knowingly relied on perjured testimony and ignored other leads”.

The investigative effort called Pearl Project is joint result of the commitment of his former colleague Asra Q. Nomani, students and professors from George Town University and Washington D.C. and the Center for Pubic Integrity. The genuine idea to combine professional and academic work on serous journalism investigation of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl in Karachi in 2002 was modeled by the three decade ago old investigative reporting project into the murder of Arizona Republic reporter Don Bolles.

Nomani and Barbara Feiman Todd, the director of journalism at Georgetown University visited Phoenix in 2007 to attend annual conference of Investigative Reporters and Editors, the world’s largest association of investigative journalist and to copy from the Arizona project for Don Bolles. She recalls on the Web page of the project the conference was convenient because of the presence of Randall Bennet, formerly the regional security officer for the State Department at the U.S. Consulate in Karachi, was going to be stateside in Phoenix.

“Randall and I had gotten to know each other during the horrible weeks after Danny had been kipped. Randall was a compelling figure, straight out of central casting, the kind of guy who comes to mind when you hear words like “swagger,” and in fact, he had been portrayed in Hollywood’s version of Danny’s story. I wanted Barbara to meet him”, recalls Nomani.

In spite of the Hollywood emotional movie portraits of  the last days of Daniel Pearl in Pakistan before he was kidnapped – the investigative journalism in the Pearl Project discovers other elements important to what happened In Karachi with the former WSJ journalist and reporter.

The Pearl Project findings disclosure problems of criminal justice system in Pakistan and question, sometimes, the high level of trust that the USA officials have in Pakistan authorities. “From one isolated murder case”, Pearl’s friend and colleague, Nomani, admits the project grow up “to a study of various important issues”.

The truth left behind, inside the kidnaping and murder of Daniel Pearl Web page prepared by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalism brings key findings and continues the work on Pearl’s investigation in Pakistan before his kidnaping. Nomani gives the importance of the Pearl’s Project to “uncover and untangle militancy, Islamic extremism, and terrorism in Pakistan, with foreign policy implications much larger than we imagined when we first began”.

There is an important story in the case of Daniel Pearl investigative work in Pakistan. “Years later, Danny’s case offers important lessons to the Obama administration as it grapples with its policy toward Pakistan as a safe haven for Taliban, Al Qaeda, and militant fighters that U.S. forces face in the war in Afghanistan. Danny’s case was a harbinger of the issues U.S. national security officials are grappling to understand today”, emphasized Nomani.

Wall Street Journal online page dedicated to their former reporter and journalist kidnaped allegedly by the Al-Qaeda members in Pakistan gives the facts on the case. Daniel Pearl “ disappeared in the southern Pakistani city of Karachi on Jan. 23 after embarking for what he believed was an interview with a prominent figure in the country’s Islamic movement”.

After four days, a new group “The National Movement for the Restoration of Pakistan Sovereignty” introduced the requirements “for release of Pakistani nationals being held by the U.S. at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, in the wake of the military campaign in Afghanistan, as well as Pakistan being detained in the U.S. as terrorism suspects”.  The group that was not known of the USA authorities asked “for the U.S. to turn over F-16 fighter jets purchased by Pakistan in the late 1980s but never delivered because of U.S. sanctions related to Islamabad’s nuclear-weapons program”.

The death of relevant journalist from the influential newspaper, his Jewish origin, politics, terrorism, Guantanamo, Taliban’s, dysfunctional judicial system in Pakistan – enough intrigues for Hollywood. A Mighty Heart movie from 2007, directed by the English director Michael Winterbottom with Angelina Jolie, Dan Futterman and Irfan Kan in a manner of speaking tell us on franatic search of Mariane Pearl, to locate his husband Daniel Pearl. Winterbottom drives the movie with the emotions and portraits the Wall Street reporter through the eyes of his wife and her book on Pearl dedicated to their children.

However, one of the closest associates to Pearl, Nomani wrote an article in the Washington Post on June 24, 2007 titled A Mighty Shame. “For me, watching the movie was like having people enter my home, rearrange the furniture and reprogram my memory. I’d known it was a gamble when I agreed to help with a Hollywood version of Danny’s kidnapping, but I’d done it because I thought the movie had the potential to be meaningful”, admits Nomani in the Washington Post article.

This article was the reason Nomani to receive a call in late June 2007 from Marian Crompley from the Oklahoma City based Ethics and Excellence in Journalism Foundation with the offer to support financially the Pearl Project.

Couple of years latter, the findings of this investigative journalism project reveals “serious issues that have relevance today to U.S. policy and America’s war in Afghanistan: the emergence of a “Punjabi Taliban, made up of militants from the Pakistani province of Punjab; the role of Karachi, Pakistan’s largest city, as a safe haven for militants; and the nexus between the Pakistani militancy and Al Qaeda”.

Work Cited:

1.http://www.miamiherald.com/2007/11/27/322461/by-the-numbers.html

2. http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/01/20/2024799_p2/report-faults-daniel-pearl-murder.html#ixzz1K94rQM9M

3. A Mighty Shame. (2007, June 24). In The Washington Post. Retrieved April 20, 2011,fromhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2007/06/22/AR2007062201673.html

4. MORE ON DANIEL PEARL Read the prepared statement from Wall Street Journal Publisher Peter Kann and Managing Editor Paul Steiger. • Read a chro. (2002, February 24). In The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved April 20, 2011, from http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/pearl-022102.htm

5. The truth left behind. (n.d.). In The Pearl Project. Retrieved April 20, 2011, from http://treesaver.publicintegrity.org/daniel_pearl

6. The Pearl Project. (n.d.). In The Pearl Project George Town University. Retrieved April 20, 2011, from http://pearlproject.georgetown.edu/index.html

Is The Ignorance Real Enemy? – Debate On Three Cups Of Tea Author Humanitarian Work In Pakistan In American Media

Greg Mortenson work in Pakistan under the media investigation of CBS “60 Minutes” news program. ABC air and published the content of Mortenson email he wrote to its supporters, defending the work of the Central Asia Institute.

Greg Mortenson, author of Three cups of tea is in the focus of American media this week. After CBS “60 Minutes” questioned his humanitarian work in Pakistan, he answered with an email to its supporters, that was published in the ABC online article.
CBS “60 Minutes” almost one year investigation includes complaints from former donors, board members, staffers, and charity watchdogs about Mortenson, the way he is running his non-profit organization.
CBS Web article on “60 Minutes” investigation questions over Greg Mortenson’s stories, told they found “serious questions about how millions of dollars have been spent, whether Mortenson is personally benefiting, and whether some of the most dramatic and inspiring stories in his book are even true.
“As those of you who know me and have supported my work over the years will recognize, the story being framed by ’60 Minutes’ to air in a few hours today — as far as we can tell — paints a distorted picture using inaccurate information, innuendo and a microscopic focus on one year’s (2009) IRS 990 financial, and a few points in the book ‘Three Cups of Tea’ that occurred almost 18 years ago,” Mortenson wrote in the email today, published on ABC Web page article today.
ABC Web page article Three cups of tea author denies “60 Minute” publish segments of Mortenson email for CBS News program on its work in Pakistan. In an e-mail sent today to its supporters, Mortenson writes CBS “60 Minutes“ program on his work “distorted picture using inaccurate information”, explains ABC in the online article written by Kevin Dolak and Dean Schabner.
They wrote that CBC “60 Minutes” aired today alleged “ that the story is a fabrication and that Mortenson uses his charitable organization as a “private ATM machine”.
Mortenson wrote in its e-mail “The Board of the Directors and I made the very difficult decision to not engage with “60
Minutes” on camera, after they attempted an eleventh hour aggressive approach to reach me, including an ambush in front of children at a book signing at a community service leadership convention in Atlanta”.
According to CBS News, Mortenson dismissed their “initial request for an interview last fall, and our follow-up messages and e-mails over the past two weeks have gone unanswered. So we decided to seek him out at a speaking engagement and book- signing in Atlanta”.
In the ABC online article of today, Mortenson wrote: “It was clear that the program’s disrespectful approach would not result in a fair, balanced or objective representation of our work, my books or our vital mission”.
CBC “60 Minutes’ included various sources to support their question mark on Mortenson humanitarian work and building the schools in Pakistan and Afghanistan. They include the opinion of Daniel Borochoff the president of the American Institute of Philanthropy.
Borochoff explains, “The Central Asia Institute’s financial statements show a lack of transparency, and a troublesome intermingling of Mortenson’s personal business interests with the charity’s public purpose.
According to the documents, the non-profit spends more money domestically, promoting the importance of building schools in Afghanistan and Pakistan than it does actually constructing and funding them overseas.
CBC “60 Minutes” investigation on Mortenson work questions the number of schools its foundation Central Asia Institute build in Pakistan and “found that several principals of a number of schools allegedly build and founded by CAI where empty or built by others, while several school principals said they had not received money from CAI in years”.
According to the website of the Central Asia Institute, co – founded by Mortenson and Jean Hoerni, “the non-profit has established more than 170 schools and helped educate more than 68,000 students, with an emphasis on girls’ education”.
Three cups of tea by non-profit activist Greg Mortenson and globetrotting journalist David Oliver Relin is an extraordinary and inspiring book that gives example of individual engagement and fight against terrorism in the remote parts of Pakistan.
It brings a simple story about complicated Pakistan history and even more perplexing present days. Mortenson visited Pakistan because he wanted “to scale K2, the summit most climbers consider the toughest to reach on Earth, and leave his passed away sister Christa’s necklace there at 28,267 feet”, wrote in the book introduction Oliver Relin.
“After a failed 1993 attempt to climb K2, Mortenson arrived in Korphe exhausted. In this impoverished community of mud and stone huts, both Mortenson’s life and the lives of northern Pakistan’s children changed course”, wrote co-author of this book David Oliver Relin.
While recuperating in the Korphe, Mortenson saw that this village was “far from the prelapsarian paradise of Western fantasy” because nearest doctor was a weeks walk away and out of every three Korphe children died before reaching their first birthday”.
It was more than promise when he said he would build a school without realizing that this will change his life more than detour from K2 Mountain.
This promise was given long before the start of the war on terror but gradually become the essential part of Mortenson personal fight against radical Islam in the tribal areas of Pakistan through education.
For Morthenson, the only way to defeat terrorism is to “build relationship with these people, to draw them into the modern world with education and business”. He challenges religious vs. balanced education and “goes to war with the root causes of terror every time he offers a student a chance to receive a balanced education, rather than attend an extremist madrassa”.
By 2001, is indicated in the Three cups of tea, World Bank study estimated that at “least twenty thousand madrassas were teaching as many as two million of Pakistani students on Islamic based curriculum”.
The rise of extremism in the Taliban populated area in Pakistan is a consequence of madrassa education. According to the Lahore based journalist Ahmed Rashid who is writing on the links about madrassa education and the rise of extremist Islam “estimates that more than eighty thousands of these young madrassa students became Taliban recruits.

Mortenson and Oliver Relin find that “15-20 percent of madrassa students were receiving military training along with curriculum that emphasized jihad and hatred of the West at the expense of subjects of like math, science and literature”.
In the Three cups of tea, two authors give explanation on the Wahhabism and define it as a “conservative fundamentalist offshoot of Sunni Islam and the official state religion of Saudi Arabia’s rulers”.  “Wahhabi” means “generous giver” in Arabic, one of Allah’s “many pseudonyms”.
“And it is this generous giving” – the two authors compare and conclude “the seemingly unlimited supply of cash that Wahhabi operations smuggle into Pakistan, both in suitcases and through the untraceable hawala money – transfer system-that has shaped their image among Pakistan’s population”.
The large amount of money that comes from the oil finished in the “most virulent incubator of religious extremism – Wahhabi madrassas”, mention Mortenson and Oliver Relin.
Mortenson criticized the Western media for running for the exclusive stories on Taliban and looking for “local color to fill out their stories about bland press-conferences”. “I tried to talk about root causes of the conflict-the lack of education in Pakistan, and the rise of the Wahhabi madrassas and how that led to problems like terrorism-Mortenson says in Three cups of tea.
He is disappointed that the real cause of the conflict rarely is on the front page of newspapers and other media. “But that stuff hardly ever made it important. They only wanted sounds bites, about the top Taliban leaders so they could turn them into villains and run up to war”, concludes Morthenson.
What this book is praised for is the message that education is a powerful tool for the poverty as a recruiting ground for terror.  Mortenson has strong belief that “literate Mullahs control vast swaths of rural, illiterate Pakistan and Afghanistan and their edicts remain supreme. As soon as a society is literate, the Mullah is disempowered and cannot disseminate false information”.
I often tell people, “The Mullah is not afraid of the bullet, but fears the pen”, comments Mortenson. I can agree that Mortenson activities in Pakistan are important and he is giving the opportunity through his non-profit foundation to the children of Pakistan to have balanced education as the best way to get out of poverty.
Education could be more powerful way to fight terrorism and religious radicals and that is the key message that I extracted from the Three cups of tea book. “If we try to resolve terrorism with military might and nothing else-Mortenson argued to Parade’s readers, “then we will be no safer than we were before 9/11. If we truly want a legacy of place for our children, we need to understand that this is a war that will ultimately be won with books, not a bombs”, advises Mortenson.
Three cups of tea book is also a good source of information for life, culture and habits of people in Pakistan.
My Pen Pal, Stevo Pendarovski from the University American College in Skopje has a dilemma about fruitfulness of the individual efforts in the fight against radical Islam. He states that “personal commitment is praiseworthy and unfortunately it could be too lengthy and too ineffective at the end”.
Pendarovski has no doubts that “education is the best possible way to counter keeping the people ignorant and voiceless”.
Despite personal efforts a need of systemic and sustainable way is needed “to pull out the people out of darkness”. Pendarovski analyses that “Pakistan is not doing that properly”. According to him, “Turkey is much better when approving the curriculum and checking on the personalities of the religious teachers”.
Having Macedonia as example, my Pen Pal looks back few years ago when we had “an attempt of establishing religious education in the primary schools, but state has badly failed in the early stages”.
“Government has deliberately sidelined itself in the process of selecting the teachers who were proposed directly by the religious authorities”, says Pendarovski. He comments, “What we got during the courses was a process of “producing” believers in their early ages instead of introducing the kids to the main religions in the world”.
“Fortunately, the Constitutional Court have annulled the law and restored secularism”, concludes Pendarovski on the presence of the religion education in Macedonia educational system.


Pen Pal Cooperation: Facebook Or Tomahawk Revolutions?

My Pen Pal is Stevo Pendarovski – assistant professor of International Security, Foreign policy and Globalization at University American College – Skopje.

He researches and writes on International Relations, Intelligence and National Security, US Foreign Policy. He was National Security Advisor to the two Presidents of the Republic of Macedonia. Pendarovski writes a weekly column in the newspaper “Dnevnk” where he brings global issues to light for its readers in Macedonia.

For the blog of Terrorism and Press class, we exchanged our opinions on the airstrikes in Libya and editorial article posted on www.haaretz.com, the online edition of Haaretz Newspaper in Israel. The editorial West’s intervention in Libya may undermine future civil revolts” focus is the dilemma about the legitimacy of revolutions in those African countries, especially in Libya. The editorial extrapolate that peacekeeping action equally needs peace building efforts.

Pendarovski wants to be a bit cynical and according to him ”the above mentioned dilemma about the nature of revolutions is not real since both Facebook and Tomahawk missiles are preeminently western products.

“What should be the right approach in my opinion is judging on presence or eventual lack of democratic credentials on the part of the local anti-regimes movements and their legitimacy amid their nations. But what about the “quality” of revolution if there is certain percentage of “imported” legitimacy let says from USA, France or Israel”, asked Pendarovski.

Libyan rebels react on the frontline of the outskirts of Ajdabiya in eastern Libya

Credits for photo and photo info: Anja Niedringhaus/AP Photo/March 21, 2011

My response is that the editorial of Haaretz.com concludes wealthy states should support and invest in the building of the societies after the revolution period. It is not that important who is behind the scene of those revolutions and whether those are Facebook or Tomahawk revolutions.

What is important is the post-revolution period and helping people to rebuild the state. The Western coalition Odyssey Dawn operation in Libya should protect the civilians. The protection of the civilian population is in the focus of the UN Resolution 1973, which establish no-fly zone and enable the action against pro-Gaddafi forces. However, this could be changed soon with the possibilites to use NATO in order to overthrow the Gaddafi regime, as BBC is reporting today in their article “Libia crisis: Allies thrash out NATO role”.

We will see in the following day how the situation will develop in Libya. However, I agree with the Haaretz’s editorial “West’s intervention in Libya may undermine future civil revolts” point of importance to rebuild the states where the revolutions are taking place. This has equal importance for the citizens of those states as the military action support.

BLOODY TIMES

This is the Bloody Sunday movie reflection of my Pen Pal, Stevo Pendarovski from University American College from Skopje

I have always been suspicious about the real impact of the time flow upon our lives and it is proving correct time and again whenever going back to the vital parts of the “Troubles” on the island just “opposite to Europe”.

Unfortunately, we have witnessed frequently the same kind of troubles in the Balkan history, not to mention “troubles” going on “in live” nowadays from North Africa.

The general matrix is recognizable in at least two stages: first, on the spot and in the immediate unfolding of the chain of events, second, later on, in accelerated nation-wide political and security dynamic affected by the initial clash on the ground.

Up close perspective will expose so common and ugly elements of the picture so familiar: army against unarmed demonstrators, indiscriminate killing of civilians and state supporting openly the culture of impunity.

Consequences in the mid to long-term are also well known: scenes of spilled blood and dead bodies directly contribute to amassing the people’s revolt and recruitment of paramilitary units.

Undemocratic regimes had never been fans of the “lessons learned” seminars, hence their repetition of the same mistakes: instead of critical analyses on and the sanctions for the operational misconduct they are stepping up political rigidity and violence.

So-called “interment without the trial” which followed the Bloody Sunday has made definitive rupture between the state and part of the population that started looking for alternative political authority.

In addition about the soldiers: even in the decades of the bipolar world engaging the army for internal security has always indicated misbalanced civil-military relations. Although that lesson (at least on the continent) has been grasped much later, soldiers of today are in the barracks or in the peace-keeping missions abroad. Instead, multiethnic police boots are on the ground.

Movie in question is hard to watch, some scenes are utterly realistic. It sound cynical, but, it has always been much easier to follow pictures on the home screen, than facing a fraction of them in reality. However, despite of our “soft” or “hard” stomachs, historical events of this proportion to all of us extend a simple wisdom: small individual contributions on a daily basis can prevent humiliation and ultimately make our world better.

Using words instead of weapons will spare lives of innocent people. And of course, will spare future Governments efforts to extend apologies for the misdeeds of their predecessors. Is anything wrong with apology? No, it might be valuable for the future cohabitation, but in a specific case, it means virtually nothing to so many people.

Bloody Sunday Movie Reflection – The Only Winner Was IRA

Northern Ireland today is the example of reconciliation of the communities that were for years divided because of the religious and political issues.  In 1998 the government of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and Government of Ireland signed the Good Friday Agreement to end over three decades of conflicts between Protestant and Catholics. The conflict between the Ulster Unionist, and the Nationalist are centuries old. The Protestant Unionist, appealed to remain a part of the United Kingdom, while the Catholics liked to assemble with Republic of Ireland. This conflict included not only the political disputes, but brought the violence and terror to the streets of Northern Ireland. Bloody Sunday is a recent history incident that occurred on 30th January 1972, when British army soldiers killed thirteen civilians in Londonderry during the civil rights march against the internment without trial. The Government of Northern Ireland introduced special Power Act in August 1971 that allowed arrests and detention without judicial process.

According to World Socialist Web Site article Saville inquiry continuous cover up of Bloody Sunday massacre “under the Special Powers Act, mass arrest began and by-mid January 1972 there were 600 internees”. Such a brutal response created wage of revolt that explode in the civil right struggle.  “The brutal response of the British bourgeoisie in Northern Ireland was conditioned by the fear of an emerging challenge to their rule, not just in the north, but throughout the UK”, suggested Chris Marsden from the editorial board of World Socialist Web Site. (Marsden, C. 2010, June 18)

The glimpse of the violence that happened in 1972 is portrayed in the movie Bloody Sunday directed by Paul Greengrass. The movie tells the story on Ivan Cooper who was prominent figure of the civil rights movement and founder member of nationalist SDLP. As BBC stated in the movie review of January 30th2002, “Ivan Copper is not the name of the lips of many people.”  BBC in 2002 movie review Bloody Sunday leader finds fait in film wrote the Greengrass “remains a self-confessed idealist who came to politics because he believed in the notion that Catholic and Protestant working class could be united”. (Bloody Sunday leader finds faith in film 2002, January 30)

Despite the central role Copper had in the Bloody Sunday movie, an official report published last year rejected his claims that the journalist from the Sunday Times did not interview him.

For years and in the second official inquiry for Bloody Sunday that was initiated by the former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, Cooper blamed that his interview to Sunday Times journalist John Berry was fabricated. Still, the role and opinion of Greengrass is important because of his stands that use of force of British paratroops helped only IRA to increase its membership and to involved Northern Ireland in deadly violence for more then two decades.

“Before Bloody Sunday, I believe there were no more than 30 to 40 IRA volunteers in Derry. They had a very small base, small amounts of hardware and, most important, very little support”, remarked Copper for BBC in 2002. Not only the actors and eye – witnesses of Bloody Sunday events hold the position that the bloody victory belongs to the IRA movement. Jenny McCartney who writes a social and political analysis for the online edition of the British newspaper Telegraph stated that the after Bloody Sunday events IRA gained more supporters among “radicalized young Catholic man”.  “I was not yet a year old on Bloody Sunday: I grew up in Northern Ireland under its long toxic shadow. Its sole beneficiary was the IRA. There was only one Bloody Sunday, but thereafter the IRA and the Loyalist paramilitaries ensured that civilian blood flowed every day of the week”, underscored McCartney. (Bloody Sunday: The only winners were the IRA 2010, June 12).

In the 5,000 – page document that was coordinated by the Lord Saville and prepared for dozen years, he assessed that “What happened on Bloody Sunday strengthened the Provisional IRA, increased nationalist resentment and hostility towards the Army and exacerbated the violent conflict of the years that followed. Bloody Sunday was a tragedy for the bereaved and the wounded, and a catastrophe for the people of Northern Ireland.”

The presence of the IRA members in the movie is almost invisible, but the viewers should be culpable to identify they strengthened their position in Northern Ireland after the British soldiers killed unarmed civilians. The Saville report described that Official IRA and Provisional IRA was among the civil rights protesters on 30th January. “What we have concluded, however, is that there is no evidence that suggested to us that any member of the Provisional IRA used or intended to use the march itself for the purpose of engaging the security forces with guns or bombs”, was suggested in the Saville report.  The report, nevertheless, notified that “Martin McGuinness was armed with a Thompson sub-machine gun on Bloody Sunday and we cannot eliminate the possibility that he fired this weapon after the soldiers had come into the Bogside”.  (Report of Bloody Sunday Inquiry. 2010, June 15)

This lead as to crucial and dramatic moment in the movie Bloody Sunday and that is the action of the British soldiers against the civilians at the protest. Catholic community disputed the report conducted by Lord Widgery who reported, “Paratroopers firing had “bordered on the reckless” and concluded “the soldiers had been fired upon the first and some of the victims had handled weapons. Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the new inquiry for the Bloody Sunday events in 1998.  The report was published on 15th June last year followed by the statement of current British Prime Minister Gordon Brown. In a statement to the House on the Saville Inquiry, Brown affirmed the findings of the report. “What happened on Bloody Sunday was both unjustified and unjustifiable. It was wrong”, appraised Brown. (PM: Statement on Saville Inquiry. 2010, June 15)

Then, Brown expressed what Lord Saville concludes on the balance of used armed force against civilians at the protest.  “None of the causalities shot by soldiers of Support Company was armed with a firearm”, appraised Lord Saville in his report. Even though, the Saville report does not indicated the responsibility of the authorities for toleration or encouragement of unjustified lethal force, still recognized the lack of discipline among armed forces.

The contrast between civilians and British armed force is apparent in the movie Bloody Sunday. It was filmed with the documentary approach to make the events of Northern Ireland history more closed to the viewers. I can agree with the approach of the director Greengrass used in the movie to catch at least a glimpse of a personal and collective memory drama of Northern Ireland history. It took more than two decades for the British Government to apology for the Bloody Sunday.  The revision of the past and the collective memory is something that every nation should face in their history. The use of documentary approach and showing the drama in the last minutes of its film, Grengrass opens the possibility to every viewer to seek for its true of the Bloody Sunday happenings. The role of the press and media is only a small part in this TV docudrama from 2002. It showed only BBC reporter asking why the military attacked unarmed civilians. However, Grengrass does not touch the role of the Sunday Times in the aftermath of Bloody Sunday because the movie ends shortly after the killings of civilian protesters. The 250 interviews conducted by Peter Pringle and Philip Jacobson for The Sunday Times Insight File of Bloody Sunday was pivotal material to “the longest-running inquiry in British history”.   (Times Newspapers Limited. 2010, June 13)

However, the key issue and the right of peaceful protest are recognized in the Bloody Sunday movie.  The importance of civil rights and the free expression of the opinion is the cornerstone of every democracy. In the light of news from Libya and the protesters that are killed it is important to underline that every government should investigate the killing of civilians. What is the difference between United Kingdom and Libya? British government undertook the investigation and finally apologized for the Bloody Sunday. Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi asked from NATO and EU to investigate how the people in Libya were killed, accusing for conspiracy towards Libya. In a democracy, the society is prepared to confront itself with every misuse that might occur against the civilians and their right of protest. The negligent behavior after the Bloody Sunday event in 1972 exactly lead Northern Ireland in the violence driven by mixture of politics and terror. While we follow the news from Libya, we should ask: how many civilians will suffer in the anti and pro – Gaddafi protest? 

Work cited:

1.Chairman, D., Beams, N., Dias, W., Grey, B., Hyland, J., Jones, K., & Marsden, C. (2010, June 18). Britain: Saville Inquiry continues cover-up of Bloody Sunday massacre. In World Socialist Web Site. Retrieved March 6, 2011, from http://www1.wsws.org/articles/2010/jun2010/bloo-j18.shtml

2. Bloody Sunday leader finds faith in film (2002, January 30). In BBC News Online. Retrieved March 6, 2011, from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/1791090.stm

3. Bloody Sunday: The only winners were the IRA (2010, June 12). In The Telegraph. Retrieved March 6, 2011, from   http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/northernireland/7823559/Bloody-Sunday-The-only-winners-were-the-IRA.html

4. Report of Bloody Sunday Inquiry. (2010, June 15). In The Bloody Sunday Inquiry. Retrieved March 6, 2011, from http://report.bloody-sunday-inquiry.org/volume08/chapter147/

5. PM: Statement on Saville Inquiry. (2010, June 15).  In www.Number10.gov.uk. Retrieved March 6, 2011, from http://www.number10.gov.uk/news/statements-and-articles/2010/06/pm-statement-on-saville-inquiry-51888

6.  Times Newspapers Limited. (2010, June 13). Return to Bloody Sunday. In The Sunday Times. Retrieved March 8, 2011, from http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article7148889.ece

7. Saville inquiry dismissed evidence of Ivan Cooper. (2010, June 20). In SundayTribune. Retrieved March 6, 2011, from http://www.tribune.ie/article/2010/jun/20/saville-inquiry-dismissed-evidence-of-ivan-cooper/

What is terrorism?

The worldwide public shows immanence interest for the terrorism after September 11, 2001.Terrorism may be the most influential buzzword of the decade”, suggested political sociologist Ziad Munson in his article Keywords Terrorism published in Sage on line journal. Having in mind this, what is my definition on terrorism?

Encyclopedia Britannica defines terrorism as systematic use of violence to create a general climate of fear in a population and thereby to bring about a particular objective.  Even though, there is no universal definition of the terrorism, the United States Department of Defense defines terrorism as “unlawful violence to inculcate fear and to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are political, religious, or ideological”. Then, the FBI uses the following definition to explain terrorism. “Terrorism is the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.”  The U.S. Department of State definition of terrorism is that it is “premeditated politically-motivated violence perpetrated against non-combatant targets by sub-national groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience”.

United Nations definition of terrorism from 1992 articulates “an anxiety-inspiring method of repeated violent action, employed by (semi-) clandestine individual, group or state actors, for idiosyncratic, criminal or political reasons, whereby – in contrast to assassination – the direct targets of violence are not the main targets.”

Considering the fact, that there is no universal definition of terrorism, my opinion on it will be that it is use of violence to achieve political, religion or other goals. Having no universal definition on terrorism can influence how the media cover and frame not only the terrorism, but also the terrorist attack.

Munson underlines that “research after the wave of terrorism in the mid-1980s showed the important role the media play in dramatizing terrorism and making it an effective means of communication”. He recommends that understanding the basic mechanism responsible for its social constructions can help us put the threat in proper perspective. I can agree with Munson that proper perspective can give more information on what can be labeled or not as terrorism act. Furthermore, the fear of terrorism should not justify how the governments create and frame the terrorism and present that picture in the media.

Work cited:

1. Munson, Z. (2008, September). Keywords Terrorism. In Sage journal on line. Retrieved March 6, 2011, from http://ctx.sagepub.com/content/7/4/78

2.  What is terrorism? (n.d.).  In Terrorism Research. Retrieved March 8, 2011, from http://www.terrorism-research.com/

MUNICHS OF OUR NATIONS

Stevo Pendarovski – University American College – Skopje

It is probably true that each nation has more that one “Munich”. Clear winners usually do not emerge whenever and wherever life and death meet each other. But, understood as a crossroad of politics and morality, this kind of events has potential to turn inward the face of the nation. Who and when is authorized to apply controversial principle “an eye for an eye” in a world being more and more laid upon the global rules and mutual solidarity?

In democracies Government has upper hand over the intelligence, but, some of later consider (or even act) to obtain prime influence. Honestly: is it possible to merge two different organizational cultures of “shadowy” and “sunny” poles of the world, ones of Governments and secret services? Who in essence creates policy and tailors national interests: first group of people with undisputed electoral legitimacy or latter one, which is put in power by the former?

What if “impossible” happens: political leader and intelligence chief fully agree on the content of retaliation having in mind the same set of values? It might be a difficult guess on the kind of values which reside in the minds of Iranian Grand Ayatollah and the boss of notorious paramilitary organization Basij? Will their reaction in urgency be in compliance with the globally accepted civilization norms, when two years ago they have been opposed to the half of their own population?

Media plurality and political interests make the danger of treating both sides (terrorists and law-enforcement agencies) as morally equal, to be very realistic. But, much more important is the question: in a fragmented world what is supposed to be a response of the post-modern citizens against the barbaric acts of the pre-modern ones? Robert Copper in 2000 said that applying proper instruments should be the order of the day, when contemplating the use of force as a last resort. Nevertheless, how many people are ready to accept this principle a decade later?

Media exposure of terrorist acts and anti-terrorist activities alike should be wisely balanced not to install fear among the average viewers or promote evil people as role models for the wider audience, thus helping recruitment process of youngsters. Unfortunately, TV dramas of this kind are business as usual: prejudices recycled, stereotypes sustained, good people praised, bad people punished. What is wrong with the last two points? Nothing, but the passports of those people. Good characters are always members of our nation, since we routinely avoid having anything in common with the nasty boys. They are anyhow coming from the “different and distant” cultures.

Pen Pal Cooperation

Guns And TV-Munich Massacre Messages Unfolded By Steven Spielberg

Aleksandra Dukovska

The press and its standpoint on terrorism are not in the initial focus of Steven Spielberg Munich movie from 2005. Spielberg showed the press, reporter views and reports on terrorist attack at the Olympic Game in Munich as a part of the big picture to confront Israeli nation with its history and reluctance from the past.

Instead of focusing the viewer’s attention to the reflection of terrorist attacks on the Israeli athletes during the 1972 Olympic games in Munich, Spielberg is showing archive footages of two notable American journalists who reported on the Munich massacre for ABC TV network. Spielberg used the archive TV reports for the first shoots in the Munich movie and made effective introduction to its story on the event that unfolded the news of international terrorism globally. How experienced Hollywood film director framed the press in the Munich and what can we conclude from it?

The public perceived the story and sharpened their views on already existing Israeli and Palestine conflict via mediators – journalists who reported from the Munich Olympics massacre.

As movie unfolds with the reconstruction of the horrible attacks in Munich, Spielberg shows archive TV broadcast of ABC sport commentator from the games, Jim McKay, who made 16-hours long coverage ending it with the words: “Tonight our worst fears have been realized. They are all gone”.

In an atmosphere of TV presence everywhere – at the hotel where the hostage drama occurred to the room of Israeli Prime minister Golda Meir, Spielberg continues with ABC’s youngest anchor and reporter Peter Jennings archive TV broadcasting materials.

This was the first breaking news story for Jennings. Journalist Sandra Martin from Canadian daily The Globe and Mail asked whether “his live reporting provided the context for Americans who were unfamiliar with the Palestinian group”. Such reporting was not approved by Israeli and pro-Israeli supporters.

The pro-Israeli groups criticized Jennings reporting and the wordings he used to refer to the members of Black September. According to the Web page Honest Reporting that claims itself as Israeli defender from bias reporting “in 1972, as a reporter covering the Palestinian murder of Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics, Jennings would not refer to the murderers as ‘terrorists’ and instead he called them ‘guerrillas’ and ‘commandos.’

The question is whether the reporting from Munich prepared the viewers in the USA and the world for the justification of Black September attacks on Israeli athletes. Spielberg in his movie Munich eschewed to portrait the media as focus element of his film.

He rather gave the space each viewer to construe his own opinion. By showing the archive of live TV coverage and close up shots of the members of Black September, Spielberg refers to the ways the press framed the terrorists.

We can hear the voice of Jim McKay summarizing the words of Jennings on the laws as obstacle for the German army to intervene and help to the German police. That can lead to the conclusion of the difficulties that Germany faced as a host of the Olympic games, brutally interrupted with this terrorist attack.

The whole atmosphere present in the movie tends to explain the complexity of actions that triggered secret Israeli operation to eliminate eleven Palestinians who organized the attacks. For the first time, Spielberg who devoted his career to explain complicated Jewish history made the movie and tried to find explanation for Palestinian demands for homeland. Through the main character Avner (Eric Bana) Spielberg challenges “an eye for an eye” actions of Israeli state after the Munich massacre. Back in 2005, this created different views and opinions among Israeli representatives and Israelis in the USA.

Journalist Anthony Berznican in his USA Today’s article ‘Messages from Munich’ from December 2005 asked for various Israeli opinions on the movie.  He wrote that “the Israeli consul general in Los Angeles, Ehud Danoch, attacked the movie in The New York Times, saying it tried to create “equivalency” between the Olympic terrorists and the Israeli government.

Berznican used the view of Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, who praises Munich and doesn’t see it as an indictment of Israel’s action. “Did it in fact bring about an end to violence? No,” Foxman says. Berznican wrote the statement of Calev Ben-David, director of the Jerusalem-based public advocacy group The Israel Project, who said Spielberg ‘is perceived as an American who may be appropriating Israel’s struggles as a way to comment on post-9/11 America.

“I can’t escape speculating that this film is as much, if not more, about 9/11” than it is about Israelis and Palestinians, said Ben-David, who wants to see the film but has not yet been invited to a screening. “This was a safe way for him to deal with 9/11 without risking a real kind of backlash. “Would he make a film where he has an al-Qaeda terrorist talk about the reasons why an attack on America was justified? It could be that a filmmaker would make it. But it would have to be a filmmaker braver than Spielberg — or at least less commercially oriented.”, commented Ben-David.

Spielberg made this movie thirty years after the Munich massacre that should be enough time to look at it without emotions. Maybe this is not sufficient time to heal open wounds for Israelis caused by the Munich massacre. Framing the terrorism, terrorist groups and describing the complexity of those events can leads to various interpretations of events.

In their book Framing the Terrorism, Pippa Norris, Montague Kern and Marion Just stated that the “essence of framing is selection to prioritize some facts, images, or developments over others thereby unconsciously promoting one particular interpretation of events”.

With carefully chosen archive press video materials highly mixed with the main storyline in the screenplay, written by Tony Kushner and Eric Roth and highly visualized by the director of photography Janusz Kaminski, Spielberg is creating ethical interpretation of post Munich events. It is almost like you are watching Shakespeare drama play, but in a context of 21st century. Some questions never dies no matter of ticking clock.

To summarize this essay I still have the dilemma whether the “bombs eliminate targets and terrified terrorist” or the legitimacy of the cause could justified the means used to achieve those goals. Spielberg doesn’t give that answer in Munich too, but brings up on the surface little bit of how the press is covering the terrorism. The journalists are there as mediators and they shaped the public opinion. If a terrorist attack such as Munich happens today some questions will be the same. But the media will be different. New media will spread the news and tell the story to the world.

Works cited:

1. Peter Jennings. (n.d.). In Wikipedia. Retrieved February 18, 2011, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Jennings

2. Peter Jennings: The ABCs of Bias. (2003, February 6). In Honest Reporting. Retrieved February 18, 2011, from http://honestreporting.com/peter-jennings-the-abcs-of-bias/

3. Breznican, A. (2005, December 22). Messages from ‘Munich’. USA TODAY. Retrieved February 18, 2011

4. Norris, P., Kern, M., & Just, M. R. (Eds.). (2003). Framing terrorism: the news media, the government and the public (p. 6). London, Great Britain: Psychology Press. Retrieved February 18, 2011, from http://www.hks.harvard.edu/fs/pnorris/Acrobat/Framing%20terrorism/Chapter%201%20Introduction.pdf

Return top

Terrorism and the Press

This blog is an integral part of a special section of Honors 394 Spring 2010, Arizona State University. Rather than a routine history course this dynamic, interactive seminar explores the interplay between terrorism and television, and other media sources on-line and in print. 26 students and their global pen pals comprise the bloggers. We welcome all to share their opinions, pertinent observations, insights, comments, feedback. Please post in a responsible manner.