Jewish World Review May 17, 2004 /26 Iyar, 5764
We must make distinctions between Berg, Abu Ghraib
Let's stipulate that the abuses of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison outside Baghdad were as serious as the pictures suggest. But America now has images of a different kind to absorb.
In a video posted on the Web site of Muntada Al-Ansar, a militant group with links to al-Qaeda, you see a young man sitting on the floor. He is wearing what appears to be an orange jumpsuit, something a prisoner might wear. Behind him stand five men clad in black who are wearing head scarves and black ski masks.
The young man is an American, as you learn when he reads this statement: "My name is Nick Berg, my father's name is Michael, my mother's name is Suzanne. I have a brother and sister, David and Sarah. I live in ... Philadelphia."
The video then shows Mr. Berg sitting in a chair in front of his captors. One reads a statement in Arabic. He claims that they offered to swap Mr. Berg for several detainees at Abu Ghraib but that American officials declined. He urges revenge by Muslims for the abuses of Iraqi detainees.
"We tell you that the dignity of the Muslim men and women in Abu Ghraib and others is not redeemed except by blood and souls," says the man reading the statement. "You will not receive anything from us but coffin after coffin slaughtered in this way."
"This way" is about to be demonstrated: The men shout "Allahu akbar," which means "God is greatest," before pulling Mr. Berg to his side and putting a large knife to his neck. You see the hacking start. You hear screaming. You see the butchery completed as the five men hold up his bloody head, delighted with their deed.
This is, or should be, a moment for clarity in thinking about the war on terrorism. "There is," President Bush said on Wednesday, "no justification for the brutal execution of Nicholas Berg - no justification whatsoever." Of course there is no justification, for there can be no justification of murder.
The obvious apparently must be stated: Mr. Berg, who went to Iraq with the hope of winning a contract to help rebuild the country, had nothing to do with the abuses at Abu Ghraib. But even if he had, those who stood over him in the video had no jurisdiction.
Indeed, they had no public authority at all. They committed murder in a most savage way, showing no human feeling. And it made no difference that they believed they were doing the will of Allah. Plenty of Muslims will tell you that the killers of Mr. Berg were wrong in their understanding of Islam. Murder is murder and can't be excused by religion or ideology.
There are people who are failing to make necessary distinctions between the abuses at Abu Ghraib and the murder of Mr. Berg. Responding to the latter, U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan said he condemned "all killings of innocent civilians in Iraq [just] as he condemns all abuse of prisoners." Both are to be condemned, yet not without observing that those who abused prisoners are subject to laws that respect human rights, while the murderers of Mr. Berg aspire to a world in which there are no such laws and no regard for human rights.
For more than two weeks, the nation has been shamed by the disgusting pictures from Abu Ghraib. But the barbaric killing of Mr. Berg is a jolting reminder of the kind of people who declared war on the United States and who now, in Iraq, aim to prevent the development of a free society. Their intention, as Mr. Bush pointed out, is "to shake our will" to complete the mission in Iraq. May the story of the gruesome murder of Nick Berg have the opposite effect.
Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in Washington
and in the media consider "must reading." Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.
JWR contributor Terry Eastland is is publisher of The Weekly Standard.Comment by clicking here.
05/11/04: College costs rise with students' expectations
04/30/04: A country's declining birthrate into oblivion
04/26/04: Dems escalate the judicial war
04/09/04: Bush was right to permit Rice to testify on 9-11
03/25/04: Colleges doing away with their racially exclusive programs
03/02/04: What does a conservative beat mean for The New York Times?
12/31/03: America is right to press for religious freedom worldwide
10/22/03: Case involving pledge should be easy for justices to decide
10/15/03: Dean places political considerations ahead of national security
08/28/03: Colleges creating policies that discourage intellectual exchange
08/14/03: Progressive reform could end up limiting government
07/30/03: Congressman, please consult Miss Manners
07/23/03:Words reveal much about Bush: Maybe there is a reason he won't retract sentence
07/08/03: Justices also said affirmative action must end
06/25/03: Court's law school ruling isn't persuasive
06/24/03: Whatever the Lynch story, everyone wants it
06/18/03: A judge shows he can set aside his strong views
06/04/03: Boston church becomes politically important again
05/28/03: YWCA names culture warrior as its new head
05/23/03: Washington steps in to help teach history
05/13/03: It may take another election to change filibuster rules
05/07/03: Paige works to improve education from inside out
04/30/03: Iraqis have choice to make regarding religious freedom
04/16/03: Is it acceptable for an education secretary to state a personal preference for religious schooling?
04/08/03: University officials must put academics ahead of athletics
04/02/03: Support for our soldiers means support for their orders
03/27/03: 'Free Iraqi Forces' underscore Bush's sincerity
03/18/03: Dems misunderstand judge's job
03/13/03: Justices show right restraint in ruling on anti-crime measures
03/05/03: America's imperial intentions
02/25/03: The weakness of Dems' stated reason for their filibuster makes you wonder whether it is the real reason
02/19/03: Administration fine-tunes religious rights in public education
02/12/03: France and Germany need to be reminded of the necessity of a strong, even predominant America
02/06/03: Judiciary's 'balance' -- or lack of it -- is our doing
01/29/03: The child who almost wasn't
01/21/03: President decides to punt on affirmative action case
01/14/03: Bush's faith has influenced his conduct in public office
01/07/03: Dems need ideas, not more microphones
12/17/02: Gray Lady should learn that times have changed
12/10/02: Will High Court be guilty of activism?
12/03/02: The missing facts in news accounts of Saudi Princess Haifa's putative 'charity'
11/26/02: Americans don't have to be worried about Big Brother
11/19/02: Texas' reputation for flamboyance may be revised
11/11/02: Bush now can repair confirmation system
11/05/02: Dems shouldn't believe too strongly in history
10/30/02: Snipers had lots of motives
10/23/02: No one should be shut out of marketplace of ideas
10/15/02: Open hearings that could imperil the nation
10/08/02: Debating the clear and present danger
10/01/02: A great awakening in China?
09/25/02: Abortion, again? The settled but still unsettling law of Roe v. Wade
09/18/02: A relevant presidency--and irrelevant U.N?
09/10/02: Ashcroft's obtuse judicial statement
09/04/02: The Education Gadfly stings again
08/28/02: So then let the president declare war
08/21/02: Will Bush finally 'fix' affirmative action once and for all?
08/06/02: President must take up cause of Egyptian democracy warrior
07/31/02: With each war, civil liberties are curtailed less
© 2004, Terry Eastland