Terrorists, Osama bin Laden...and Garwin Davis JOURNALISTS, AS is to be expected, have joined the debate about whether the United States deserved what the terrorists did to them. You know what I think? As a matter of fact, let's get something straight: The U.S. does not deserve what those terrorists did. No country deserves to be so treated. The World Trade Center is not a military installation. The thousands of civilians who were sent to an early grave are not soldiers on a battlefield. Whatever the U.S. has done comes nowhere close to the dastardly deed that took place in New York and Washington on September 11. There are some questions that journalists should ask themselves. Why didn't the terrorists hijack empty planes? Why didn't they target military installations? Why did they pick a building (the World Trade Center) where so many nationalities are working together? And what are they getting out of it? In fact, 'terrorist' is not the word. This is an oft misused word, even by the Americans themselves and especially by Israel to justify their brutalising of the Palestinians. The butchers of September 11 are anarchists who worship at the altar of chaos. The sooner they are dealt with the better! Garwin Davis
terrorises the Spike And speaking of terrorists, Gleaner journalist Garwin Davis has treated the Spike to a bit of his own brand of terrorism. In a letter which I suspect was long in coming, he threw a few scud missiles at the column. And this Garwin Davis licks hot! Here he goes: "Dear Spike, as a regular reader of your column, I naturally, from time to time, disagree with you on a number of issues as it relates to the journalism profession. This time, however, I am forced to respond to what I felt was a cheap shot at your 'colleagues'. To say that journalists were 'stumbling over each other to see who could report the highest number of casualties during the unfortunate July outbreak of violence in West Kingston', is not only false but is mind-boggling coming from someone who supposedly has been practising journalism for over 27 years. "Sir, the American journalists covering the terrorist attacks on their country did not report the body count because of any particular sense of patriotism as you have asserted. They did not do so because as every responsible journalist can attest, you don't furnish numbers until you are absolutely sure (Journalism 101). "Though it was reasonable to assume that thousands had lost their lives from the attacks, until the bodies were recovered, the journalists had to exercise restraint. This explained why they had to make a distinction between how many people were missing rather than what the death toll was perceived to be. Not as you stated, 'the journalists appeared to co-operate with the authorities and kept that critical bit of news off the air a definite patriotic moment'. As a betting man, I will wager you a small sum that the moment they have a factual count it will be all over the airwaves. And it will be no less 'horrifyingly high' or will 'contribute to a state of national panic'. "Local journalists were not wrong to report the number of fatalities in the West Kingston upsurge they were duty-bound to do so. In case you have forgotten, the first consideration of a journalist, right or wrong, is not patriotism or to be a purveyor of good news. The job of a journalist is to provide information in a timely and factual manner. I find it very disturbing that someone of your calibre continues to bash reporters for doing their job." - Garwin Davis, editorial supervisor, Gleaner Western Bureau garwindavis@hotmail.com. Garwin cannot win this one. He should read the column again and review the events of early July in the sprawling slums of Western Kingston. Recall that there was difficulty recovering dead bodies from the streets. But that did not stop reporters whom Garwin defends from reporting numbers. I say again, the American reporters could have called numbers, but they waited patriotically. And by the way, Garwin, that is not a fair bet. It is one of those "Heads I win, tails you lose" type of bets. Now that the moment of national panic has passed, of course the Americans will give us the numbers. Our journalists did not wait! An inside job Reader Lorna Smith, who describes herself as a Jamaican living abroad, also comments on last week's Spike, but in a different vein. She writes: "Hello Spike, I am a Jamaican living in the United States and one of those who almost lost my sister in the tragedy. I read your commentary and found it very interesting. On one point, however, you mentioned that that the 1993 WTC bombing was committed by those from 'within' and with this I agree, but it was not Americans who committed the act, it was representatives from the Middle East with direct links to bin Laden. They were tried, found guilty and are sitting on death row right now. "After denying that he had anything to do with the bombings back then, bin Laden later admitted it an interview and vowed that next time he would destroy the WTC. As we can see, it has happened and he is denying again, that he had anything to do with it! Why should we believe him and his followers? The events of September 11, 2001 are very sad, tragic and will no doubt affect the rest of the world. "To my fellow Jamaicans who have spouted anti-American views, no matter what they feel America has done in the past, nothing justifies the senseless killing of innocents including children who were on those airplanes when they hit the WTC. Before one finds sympathy for monsters who would commit these acts, imagine one of those buried under the rubble as a family member, see how it feels! And when Jamaica's tourism and everything else is affected, call on the Middle East to help with the debt and layoffs. Let me know the responses you receive! Thank you for your time, Spike." Lorna Smith Lorna.Smith@cingular.com Send spikeables to spike@jol.com.jm; desal@cwjamaica.com or fax to 9260295.
|
