Who killed Daniel Pearl?

http://www.jrep.com/UpFront/Article-5.html

Up Front: Daniel Pearl?s Defender
Netty C. Gross

It was clear something important was taking place inside the Hebrew University?s packed Mexico auditorium on May 18 when university vice president Moshe Arad and his wife were initially barred from entering by security guards; there was no room.

The occasion was a lecture by French icon Bernard-Henri Levy, the 54-year-old Algerian-born Jewish writer, philosopher, filmmaker and activist who is lionized in France, where intellectuals are celebrities. A critic of the French left and right, and a Zionist, Levy has his share of enemies. BHL (as he?s known at home) is also handsome, rich (the wealth is inherited from his late father Andri?s lumber business) and, after years of glorying in being a self-professed “libertine,” has been married since 1993 to glamorous, non-Jewish French actress-singer Arielle Dombasle.

But today?s appearance is all work, no play. BHL jetted in earlier in the day from Morocco (where he owns an 18th-century palace) to be hosted by the Hebrew University and talk about the recent publication of his latest bestseller, “Who Killed Daniel Pearl?” a 537-page investigation into the brutal murder of the 38-year-old Wall Street Journal journalist last year in Pakistan.

In an earlier press conference, Levy told journalists that Pearl had three strikes against him, each of which could have caused his kidnapping and murder in a country where, “being Jewish is not an identity, it?s a crime ; being an American is the embodiment of evil; and being a journalist is to be an agent for the Mossad or CIA.” But Levy believes that Pearl was killed, in fact, by Pakistan?s secret service. Pearl was about to expose a link between government-employed Pakistani nuclear physicists, themselves Islamic fundamentalist “holy warriors of the earth” who believe “the bomb belongs to the whole Islamic nation,” and Al-Qaeda.

In recent years, BHL has written about conflicts in Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Bosnia and Afghanistan. But nothing, he says at the press conference, quite matches up to what is happening in Pakistan these days, where he spent a year researching the Pearl story, with visits to other Muslim countries. Far worse than Saddam Hussein?s Iraq, it?s a “land of evil,” a “state of apocalypse,” where Islamic fundamentalists happily hawk videotapes of Pearl?s torture, humiliation (“I am a Jew, my father is a Jew…”) and decapitation, outside religious schools; where despite the complete absence of Jews, the anti-Semitism is so rabid that he found himself becoming physically ill after listening to the vituperations of a top police commander.

Levy also analyzed the motives of Pearl?s murderer, Omar Sheik, a wealthy, Western-educated Pakistani turned fanatic. He tries to understand what happened to “these natural children of the Occident and Islam.” His conclusion is beyond grim. Islamic fundamentalist terror, said Levy, is not a movement springing from post-colonial poverty. Rather, it?s a worldwide criminal enterprise, a billion-dollar mafia run by a tight politburo of power-crazed, sex-obsessed, fundamentalist gangsters (“their libido for dominance is greater than any Koranic desire”), who make their money, among other ways, trafficking in “drugs, girls, virgins”; who run “kamikaze factories” in Pakistan and send agents to negotiate with parents for their sons and daughters to become suicide bombers. “We?re looking at an utterly sordid madness, an economy of death,” he says, which stretches from Dubai to Karachi where it is headquartered.

But BHL?s book is also an emotional odyssey into the life of Pearl – he calls him Danny – with whom Levy felt a deep kinship. Like himself, Levy says in his Hebrew U. lecture, Pearl was a universalist, a “citizen of the world,” married to a non-Jew. The book, he says, was a “paper tombstone for this posthumous friend.” Levy says he was in Kabul, in the office of Afghanistan?s President Hamid Karzai, when he learned of Pearl?s fate. Karzai received notification and turned pale; BHL immediately flew to Pakistan where he found the cassette of Pearl?s murder for sale and tried to imagine the “fanatic, holding the video camera” and filming Pearl?s final agonies, “later showing it as a trophy at the mosque.” He compares this to the Nazi soldiers who sent home postcards to loved ones in Germany showing how they?d tortured terrorized Jews.

“All in the name of God. What greater horror could there be? A Jewish beheading in the 21st century? I knew I was facing a significant event,” an affair that revealed “the very heart of modern anti-Semitism.”

Levy says Pearl in his final moments actually foiled the executioners? determination to humiliate him. In the full tape of the terrible scene, Levy says Pearl “confesses” that he is a grandson of “the Zionist Chaim Pearl” and mentions that there is a street named for him in Bnei Brak. “Why did he go out of his way to mention Bnei Brak?” asked Levy. “Because he wanted to say, I belong to a family which built a beautiful Israel and an advancing civilization, while you are wicked barbarians.”

Levy has been sharply critical of Israel?s settlement policies – he interrupted the Pearl book after Operation Defensive Shield began last April and flew to Jenin to investigate charges of a massacre. He later defended Israel in the French media against those charges. “I feel Israel?s pain, its isolation,” he says. Much as he feels Daniel Pearl?s pain, personally.

^^ and now even Bush knows about it!

Isn't that scary?

[quote]

"being Jewish is not an identity, it?s a crime ; being an American is the embodiment of evil; and being a journalist is to be an agent for the Mossad or CIA."

[/quote]

Oh please! How many Pakistanis believe this statement to be true?

"Because he wanted to say, I belong to a family which built a beautiful Israel and an advancing civilization"

Oxymoron!

who cares now? he is dead. gone.

**

[quote]

Levy has been sharply critical of Israel?s settlement policies -- he interrupted the Pearl book after Operation Defensive Shield began last April and flew to Jenin to investigate charges of a massacre. He later defended Israel in the French media against those charges. "I feel Israel?s pain, its isolation," he says. Much as he feels Daniel Pearl?s pain, personally

[/quote]

**

but he doesn't feel the pain of palestinians, their isolation and humiliation through the hands of isrealis. if isreal indeed was not involved in a massacre, then why it did not allowed insternational and UN teams to come and investigate. they sure were quick to let this stupid come in and investigate as much as he likes. and surely enough he came out with an outcome completely aligned with isreals' liking. :)

Zionists are very smart people. They never let any opportunity lost to cry civilized and beautiful, and, of course, intellectual. It's quite evident that while some of the stuff he said in the article have logical grounds and reality to it, he quite appropriately put in tid bits here and there to contrast the Zionist regime (which is, of course, beautiful) to that of rest of Islamic world and wrap the latter one under one big umberella of fundementalist terrorism. He did not say the exact words but the backdrop is painted full of it.

i watched a video of his execution that was in circulation all over the internet. i cant be very sure if it was Daniel Pearl or whether it was real or not. it was crazy and sick.
whoever did it, Allah will punish the wrongdoings.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Madhanee: *
537 pages to figure out who killed Pearl? I could have done it in one sentence. ISI and Al-Qayda are lovers, and everyone knows about it.
[/QUOTE]

Awh! Not again...! it was a few terrorists posibly having links with Alqaeda, thats agreed. Why pull the ISI in!?

^ madhnee knows, he is the link between the two :)

it is not proven newayz. and c'mon he's a jew as well just like pearl was and he'd support him obviosly. i'd expect him to use this murder to create more anti pakistan sentiment within the western world.

Who ever killed pearl, was a terrorist a killer and someone who took and husband and father away from his family... We should all stand up forget our religion, creed, nationality and differences and destory this new threat to ever one on earth.,.. After all hindu, jew, christian, buddhist or Muslim.. We were all made by ALLAH and therfore if a muslim kills a Jew or Hindu, he will answer to GOD.. Vice Versa...

Terrorisim, what good is it anyway??

http://www.pbs.org/now/images/sub_top_row2.jpg

Bernard-Henri Levy was on PBS two days back on NOW with Bill Moyers. This is what he said with regards to Daniel Pearl murder.

MOYERS: President Bush came to New York this week to ask the U.N. for money and troops to help out in Iraq.

The U.N. turned a cold shoulder.

While here, Mr. Bush met with the president of Pakistan, Pervez Musharraf, supposedly a close ally.

But there are complaints in Washington that Musharraf is not doing enough to round up the terrorists in his own country, with its huge population of radical Muslims.

Our next guest knows Pakistan well, from many trips there over the years.

Bernard-Henri Levy is a diplomat, journalist, and philosopher, the author of 30 books.

His latest is about the ghastly murder of Daniel Pearl, the WALL STREET JOURNAL reporter whose throat was slit by terrorists in Karachi.

As Levy investigated the killing, he learned some surprising things.

Earlier today, Bernard-Henri Levy talked with NOW’s David Brancaccio.

BRANCACCIO: Mr. Levy, thank you for joining us on NOW.

LEVY: Thank you.

BRANCACCIO: You’ve been following the visit to North America of the Pakistani President Musharraf. Before the UN he had this quotation, “Pakistan will remain in the forefront in the war against terrorism.” Any comments when you hear him say that?

LEVY: My comment is that it is big news because until now, Pakistan was the core of terrorism.

BRANCACCIO: The core of…

LEVY: The core, of course. It gives… Pakistan gave shelter to the biggest terrorists in the world.

I know Pakistan. I spent… I know it since a long time, since 30 years. And I spent one year in this country on the footsteps of Daniel Pearl. I went in Karachi when I visited the seminary on Binori Town where you have some terrorists who are trained and who are spiritually built in order to hate Western world and Muslim democracy.

I went in Peshawar where you have a real big place of terrorism also. We know and I know, I have very strong evidence that Osama bin Laden, for instance, took medical care in Binori Town where I was and in a military hospital in Islamabad. So Pakistan was until this day maybe, until the day before yesterday, Pakistan was the very shelter, the very center, the very core of international terrorism. So maybe this is a big news we have to follow up.

BRANCACCIO: This is why I want to talk to you. Thirty years going back and forth to that region of the world. You’re a card-carrying French philosopher yet you’re proud to say that you’re a journalist. You’re a Frenchman who says that America in many ways is correct when it talks about its war on terrorism. And you conclude that Pakistan is where the next tragedies will hatch. What do you mean by that?

LEVY: I mean that the risk of nuclear proliferation exists in Pakistan. I mean, that Pakistan, that’s what I show in my book. It is not just ideas.

I made the very accurate, precise, modest investigation of this point. The point, for instance, on which Daniel Pearl also that you have two big scientists in Pakistan who are great scientists linked to al-Qaeda and who have been convicted of being on the point to trade some nuclear knowledge, nuclear know-how to groups linked to al-Qaeda.

So this is Pakistan today.

BRANCACCIO: In fact, you contrast the full bloom of extremism, the fresh extremism that you found in Pakistan with something very different in Iraq. Something almost from the last century.

LEVY: That is the reason why it I was so strongly opposed to the war in Iraq. Saddam Hussein was a dictator, no doubt about this. But he was a dictator in his autumn. In his old age. But it was an exhausted dictatorship.

In Pakistan it is a blooming one. I saw that and I tell it in the book again.

What I discovered during this long investigation is that the real, the sole clash of civilization is inside Islam, inside the Islamic world between the moderate Islam and the radical Islam.

I was in some demonstration in the streets where you had 100,000 of people shouting their hate not only of North America, not only of the Western world, not of moderacy in general and shouting also, for instance, that the nuclear bomb of Pakistan should belong not only to Pakistan but to the entire community of believers which means in their mind Osama bin Laden. You have huge demonstrations of people demanding that.

It’s very difficult for you to have operated at all in Pakistan.

It was less difficult than it would have been for an American journalist. By chance, for my fortune I was French. And I was a writer which meant that I was a little more protected than if I had been an American journalist.

But what is true is that when I spent, for instance, this night in the very hotel where Daniel Pearl first met his executioner and which I happened to discover it was a sort of basis, a sort of informal headquarters of ISI.

BRANCACCIO: The I.S.I., which is the Pakistan Intelligence Service.

LEVY: I was nervous. It was not the best night I spent in my life. When I came inside the Binori Town Seminary where I think no journalists went before, no Western journalists went before, where I knew that Osama bin Laden had been a few weeks before had received medical care and so on, it was a strange moment also. It was like if you were in the very room of the belly of the demon. I don’t like these words, of course. But…

BRANCACCIO: But on the key topic, if, indeed, the clash of civilizations is within Islam itself, within the people of Pakistan, how can an American expect to get involved in that debate? The Bush Administration is dealing with Musharraf. It has no choice.

LEVY: I think we have choice. We made the bad choice since 20 years. We chose the radical against the moderate.

We chose… we, you, American, us French, both of us, Bush and Chirac in the same basket. We chose the Taliban against Massoud. We chose Saudi Arabia against the democrats of the Arab world. We chose that because we wanted peace. Because we thought that we had to make alliance with the most powerful. Because we thought that our main enemy was the Soviet Union.

Because we are lazy. Because the Americans and the French diplomats often are intellectually lazy. They continue to work on old schemes. They have to change their minds today.

BRANCACCIO: And what should they do going forward then? We screwed up.

LEVY: To arrange force to support much more than we do the moderate Muslims all over the world. There are a lot even in Pakistan. I met so many intellectuals, democrats, women who don’t understand why we support so much without any tie, without any condition the regime of Musharraf which is on the one side military, on the other side Jihadist. Which is on the one side the regime of repression, dictatorship as Saddam Hussein in a way.

And in another side a fanatic one. You have the local people inside Pakistan who pray us, who urge us, who admonished us to put some conditions on our aid to Musharraf.

BRANCACCIO: But not to pull back, for instance?

LEVY: Not to pull back the alliance. Of course not. You have morale and you have politics. Maybe we have to give money to Musharraf. But please when Musharraf comes in New York and when he says in the New York Times in an interview when he’s asked, “Have you… do you… are you sure to have control on your atomic assets?”

And when he says, “Oh, I don’t know. I have no evidence. I have no proof that there can be any risk of proliferation.” What is this language? I have no evidence? I have no proof? If this the chief of state responsible with whom we can have this serious alliance. Mr. Musharraf is not in control of his country.

He’s a king without a throne. He’s a sovereign without territory.

BRANCACCIO: So you argue conditional aid.

LEVY: Right. Yes.

BRANCACCIO: Put conditions on it. But if we get this wrong, Musharraf could get toppled, and Pakistan would be run be extremists, possibly.

LEVY: Pakistanis already half run by extremists. We must know and the people who hear us must know that one of the man convicted to have channeled the money to Mohammed Atta was no other than the number one of Pakistani Secret Service, Mr. Mahmoud Ahmad (PH). And he was fired. He was dismissed a few days before the attacks.

BRANCACCIO: Listen, you have to explain this because I was reading this book and this is one of the points that just stops me in my tracks.

You’re saying that the head of Pakistani intelligence around the time of 9/11 funneled $100,000 through an intermediary to Mohammed Atta, perhaps the most famous of the 9/11 hijackers?

LEVY: Yes, of course. Of course. This is one of the thing which might surprise myself the most when I made this investigation.

I was in Dubai. In Dubai, I discovered that one of the financial man of the September 11th was the Chief of the secret services of the country allied to America.

BRANCACCIO: Mr. Levy, I want to ask you something else.

LEVY: Please.

BRANCACCIO: You’re a…

LEVY: I’m sorry to get a little angry. But you cannot have spent, as I did, all this time, all this year, making this investigation, walking in the footsteps of such a great man, and support to see this comedy. It is comedy.

The visit of Musharraf in New York was just a comedy. It was a mockery. And even if I am a moderate, and a calm man, it put me out of my temper.

BRANCACCIO: The book is called WHO KILLED DANIEL PEARL? Bernard Henri-Levy, thank you very much.

LEVY: Thank you.

Re: Who killed Daniel Pearl?

CM putter, you don’t have to read that long article to find out - it 100% RAW. I have no doubts these Hindu Kafirs are trying to disrupt peace and tranquility of our cute and peaceful Pakiland.