Re: Daniel Pearl
Date: February 22, 2004
A personal recollection too many family members can identify with.
"My
fight for Danny's memory
Daniel Pearl was murdered in 2002 while reporting for the Wall Street Journal
in Pakistan. For his wife, Mariane Pearl, the lonely battle for justice continues
17 February 2004
I made a friend in Pakistan. I nicknamed him "Captain" because of
his authority; I couldn't tell if it came naturally to him or was the result
of decades spent in the Pakistani army. But when my husband, Danny Pearl, was
kidnapped in Karachi two years ago, Captain became the second most important
man in my life. He told me: "I will bring your Danny home." It took
another four weeks for us to find out what had happened to my husband.
During this time, Captain got to know Danny. He met me, he met Danny's friends,
his bosses, his writing. He saw Danny's mandolin lying there, in the house that
had become the headquarters of our search. Captain even saw Danny's unmatched
socks. "Danny," Captain concluded, "is the best of America."
After the first three sleepless nights following Danny's kidnapping, there was
no sense of time in our house and only one reality. Captain's only aim was to
save Danny, because I was there, because I was pregnant, because Danny was innocent,
because Captain was a Muslim and a patriot who felt deeply ashamed by those
who kept him in captivity. When it was learned that Danny was dead, it was Captain
who had to tell me. Because he said so, I knew it was true, the same way I knew
what he said next to be true. It was another pledge: "I will pursue those
who did this and bring them to justice, even if it is going to take a lifetime.
My lifetime."
I only wish others who promised their resolve at that time - including Danny's
employers at the Wall Street Journal - had kept their word, too.
On the first anniversary of Danny's kidnapping, 23 January 2003, Captain and
I sat on the top floor of the World Financial Centre, right across from Ground
Zero. I took him with me to meet Danny's bosses at the Wall Street Journal.
Captain was the behind-the-scenes man, the one who had donated his time and
his efforts. The hero.
We wanted to know why the Journal had not sent anyone to court to represent
Danny as the Pakistani authorities began prosecutions for his kidnapping and
murder. One of those on trial included Omar Said Sheikh, who had confessed to
masterminding the operation. It was Omar who had lured Danny into a trap, pretending
he was the disciple of a source Danny was trying to interview. Ever since I
had left Pakistan the year before I had been trying to persuade the Journal
to send someone. "We were advised not to send a white American to a Pakistani
court," Journal chiefs told us.
Not only had the paper not sent a white American, it had sent no one. The trial
was held in a tiny, windowless "court" in the prison where the men
were being held. Transparency sounded like wishful thinking. I had ended up
paying a Pakistani lawyer a very large sum to represent Danny, and the Journal
eventually reimbursed me a small fraction of his fees.
Eventually, the Journal promised to do what Captain suggested: put pressure
on President Musharraf to make sure the judicial process would continue. In
July 2002 Omar was sentenced to death, and the other three men were given life
sentences. The paper's bosses promised they would find and pay a lawyer in Pakistan
to represent Danny in subsequent trials.
Omar's appeal has since been delayed nine times, mostly for the simple reason
that his lawyer doesn't show up in court. It's all far from over. Even behind
bars, his influence is thought to remain great. Some reports have suggested
that he helped orchestrate the recent assassination attempts on President Musharraf.
There have also been reports in the Pakistani press that one Sardar Naeemullah
Shahani, the Punjab sports and culture minister who was kidnapped in January,
would be offered to the government in exchange for Omar Sheikh and the three
others, although government officials have denied this.
Far-fetched, you say? Not for Omar, who was freed from an Indian court in 1999,
where he was serving time for a failed kidnapping plot, in exchange for the
safe release of passengers aboard a hijacked Indian Airlines flight. It's also
important to understand that the forces within the Pakistani government that
have so destabilised the Musharraf regime - the intelligence agency (ISI) and
the military - are those to whom Omar had at least passing ties before his arrest.
This powerful conflict within the Pakistan government could be seen in Musharraf's
handling of the government's corrupt nuclear program. Just three weeks ago,
after it was revealed that Pakistan had given nuclear secrets to Iran, Libya
and North Korea - a story that Danny had been pursuing - Musharraf called the
scientists involved "enemies of the state". But then, last Wednesday,
Musharraf seemed to cave, pardoning Abdul Qadeer Khan, the father of Pakistan's
nuclear programme who had taken responsibility for the leaked information. By
doing so, Musharraf avoided a battle with government hard-liners, who deified
Khan for turning Pakistan into a nuclear power. It illustrates how rough the
justice in this part of the world can be, and why it helps to have as many witnesses
as possible.
In addition to Omar's appeals, the trial of the four men who held Danny captive
is yet to take place. All four are Pakistanis - the last one, Naeem Boukhari,
was finally captured after a bounty of 1 million Pakistani rupees ($17,450)
was placed on his head. Their trials are to follow the Pakistan Supreme Court's
decision on Omar's appeal case. The Wall Street Journal's interest in proceedings
has seemed to wane. It remained remarkably dedicated until we found out for
sure, nearly a month after his kidnapping, that Danny had died. The Journal
set up a financial trust for our son Adam and me, to which hundreds of people
have contributed thousands of dollars. Afterwards, at the Journal, I could tell
his co-workers really liked Danny. I could tell everyone was traumatised by
what had happened to him, just four months after the September 11 events had
sent them running for their lives from their own offices. I could tell a lot
of things, but still not why Danny died and who killed him.
In May 2002, a lawyer for Dow Jones (the parent company of the Wall Street Journal)
levelled with me. It was during Omar's trial, and as I tried to follow its proceedings
I persisted in asking what the Journal was doing. They did not hire a lawyer
in Pakistan and there was no transparency in any of the proceedings.
"It is your case, not ours," the lawyer eventually told me. I hung
up. The moment that followed, when I looked at myself, too pregnant to go to
Pakistan and represent Danny on my own, was one of the loneliest I've ever had.
Months later, I wrote the Journal a letter.
"I am very well aware of the difficulties posed by the trial and investigation,
as I have been facing them alone for the past ten months. But the murder of
Danny was like a hijacked plane sent to explode in the heart of your company.
I simply cannot understand how you can turn your back and fail to seek the truth...my
determination to pursue these two goals reflects my own loyalty to the values
I shared with Danny. My loyalty is stronger than the obstacles I have and will
encounter."
I asked to meet them again, preferably without a company lawyer present, which
led to my visit with Captain a year ago. Since then, not much has changed. I
still rely on Yahoo for my updates about the case. From the Journal, all I've
heard is the sound I've learned to dread the most: silence.
© 2004 Independent Digital (UK) Ltd"
Peruse More InterNetwork Notices
Peruse Older InterNetwork Notices
DISCLAIMER:
The content of this message is the sole responsibility of the originator.
Posting of this message to the POW-MIA InterNetwork© does not show AII
POW-MIA endorsement. It is provided so you may make an informed decision.
AIIPOWMIAI is not associated in any capacity with any United States Government
agency or entity, nor with any non-governmental or private organization.
COPYRIGHT NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U. S. C. Section 107, any copyrighted
work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment
to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information
for nonprofit research and educational purposes only. [Ref. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
]
Archive ©AII POW-MIA