Jewish World Review Sept. 12, 2002 / 6 Tishrei, 5762
Against moral confusion / 9-12-2002
A year and a day later, it is striking how quickly the moral clarity that followed the attacks was beset by moral
Not everywhere, of course. This time around, The New York Times did not mark Sept. 11 with a celebration of
terrorism -- as opposed to Sept. 11, 2001, when the front of the paper's Arts section featured an affectionate profile of
former Weather Underground bomber Bill Ayers. "He still has the ebullient, ingratiating manner . . . that made him a
charismatic figure in the radical student movement," reporter Dinitia Smith bubbled. These days, The Times takes a
different view of terrorists.
But there are other voices -- elite voices, influential voices -- that still cannot quite bring themselves to condemn
unreservedly the deliberate slaughter of civilians. To this day, the Reuters news service will not use the words "terror" or
"terrorists" (except in quotations) when referring to the horror of September 11. "We all know," its global news editor has
explained, " that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter."
Such fastidious nonjudgmentalism does not reflect careful journalistic objectivity. It reflects a broken moral compass,
and it leads to a debased judgmentalism of its own. Last week, Reuters transmitted a six-month-old photo of the attack
site in Lower Manhattan, and described it with this grotesque caption:
"Recovery and debris removal work continues at the site of the World Trade Center known as 'ground zero' in New
York. . . . Human rights around the world have been a casualty of the US 'war on terror' since September 11." It is hard
to say which is more contemptible: The mocking quotation marks around "War on Terror" or the assertion that that war --
the chief effect of which so far has been the liberation of Afghanistan from the Taliban -- has harmed "human rights around
the world." But that is where you end up if you begin from the premise that there is no moral difference between a
freedom fighter and Osama bin Laden.
Americans reacted to the attacks last fall with a tremendous upwelling of patriotic feeling. Love of country, like the
country's flag, was on display everywhere. And rightly so.
For most of us instinctively understood that the savagery of Sept. 11 was not the result of some injustice we had
committed. It could not have been prevented by diplomacy. The hostility of bin Laden and his acolytes, and of the violent
strain of fundamentalist Islam that produced them, was not an unintended byproduct of US foreign policy. Like the Nazis
and the Communists, the jihadis despise us for what we are, not for what we do. We are the society that has extended
more freedom, more tolerance, and more prosperity to more people than any other society in history. That is what they
hate. And that is why the mushrooming of American flags last September was exactly the right symbolic response to their
But not everyone thought so. "My daughter, who goes to Stuyvesant High School only blocks from the World Trade
Center, thinks we should fly an American flag out our window," wrote Katha Pollitt in The Nation, a leading leftist
journal. "Definitely not, I say: The flag stands for jingoism and vengeance and war."
Pollitt is hardly alone. On CNN the other night, Walter Cronkite avowed that US policy abroad "very definitely . . .
could have caused" the massacres in New York, Washington, and Pennsylvania. The organizers of a 9/11 tribute at the
University of California at Berkeley planned to exclude "The Star Spangled Banner" and "God Bless America" as "too
patriotic . . . too centered on nationalism." (Under the pressure of nationwide ridicule, campus officials eventually
There is little point debating the Pollitts and the Cronkites and the Berkeley organizers and all those who thought that the
important question after Sept. 11 was "Why do they hate us?" There are people for whom it is an article of faith that
America is always guilty, and if their minds weren't changed when theocratic fascists sent 3,000 innocents to their deaths,
their minds will never be changed.
But the rest of us must be able to see through their moral fog and remain clear on why and with whom we are at war.
Our enemies are the totalitarians who plunged Afghanistan into the Stone Age and who yearn to do the same to America.
They are the people who want to stone that young mother in Nigeria, who ordered a Pakistani woman gang-raped as a
point of "honor," who drove those Saudi girls back into a burning building because their heads were uncovered.
They are the kind of people who smash ancient statues to prove their piety, who fill the madrassas with poison, who
publicly implore Allah to "destroy the usurper Jews and the vile Christians." The kind of people who can shatter buildings
but not build them. Who can crush life but not enrich it.
In the war to destroy these people and their evil ideology, our moral clarity is as indispensable as our Special Forces
and our F-16s. Let us resolve not to lose it.
Like this writer's work? Why not sign-up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.
Jeff Jacoby is a Boston Globe columnist. Comment by clicking here.
09/03/02: With 'eternal friends' like these
08/30/02: Enriching survivors was a costly mistake
08/26/02: John Kerry's absent passion
08/23/02: Bonnie, get your gun
08/19/02: A screenwriter's remorse
07/29/02: The real abortion extremists
07/26/02: Another round of Kemp-Roth
07/19/02: Jews among Arabs, Arabs among Jews
07/15/02: Musings, random and otherwise
07/12/02: The new civil rights champions
07/03/02: Riding the rails
07/01/02: The prerequisite to peace
06/24/02: Frisking AlGore
06/17/02: Offense, not defense, is the key to homeland security
06/14/02: Looking at the horror
06/07/02: The cost of a death-penalty moratorium
06/03/02: Executing 'children,' and other death-penalty myths
05/29/02: A real threat?
05/24/02: The message in Arafat's headdress
05/20/02: (Mis)playing the popularity card
05/10/02: Outspoken, Muslim -- and moderate
05/10/02: The heroes in Castro's jails
05/06/02: The disappearing history term paper
05/03/02: Musings, random and otherwise
04/29/02: The canary in Europe's mine
04/15/02: Powell's crazy mission
04/12/02: The slavery reparations hustle
04/08/02: Peace at any price = war
03/26/02: Decency matters most, Caleb
03/22/02: The U.S. embargo and Cuba's future
03/19/02: The keepers of Cuba's conscience
03/15/02: A walk in Havana
02/26/02: Buchanan's lament
02/12/02: What 'peace' means to Arafat
02/08/02: STEVEN EMERSON AND THE NPR BLACKLIST
02/05/02: Antismoking: Who pays?
02/01/02: Turn the Saudis
01/25/02: Making MLK cry
01/21/02: Ted to tax cut: Drop dead
01/18/02: Musings random and otherwise
01/14/02: An ultimatum to Saudi Arabia
01/11/02: Friendship, Saudi-style
01/07/02: Shakedown at Harvard
01/04/02: More guns, more safety
01/02/02: Smears and slanders from the Left
12/28/01: Congress gives to others -- and itself
12/24/01: The littlest peacemakers
12/20/01: How to condemn terror
12/18/01: Greenland once was
12/14/01: Parents who never said ''no''
12/11/01: Wit and (economic) wisdom
12/07/01: THE PALESTINIANS' MYTH
12/04/01: The war against Israel goes on
11/30/01: Tribunals, motorcycles -- and freedom
11/19/01: Friendship and the House of Saud
11/12/01: The Justice Department's unjust monopoly
11/09/01: Muslim, but not extremist
11/02/01: Too good for Oprah
10/29/01: Journalism and the 'neutrality fetish'
10/26/01: Derail these subsidies
10/22/01: Good and evil in the New York Times
10/15/01: Rush Limbaugh's ear
10/08/01: With allies like these
10/01/01: An unpardonable act
09/28/01: THE CENSORS ARE COMING! THE CENSORS ARE COMING!
09/25/01: Speaking out against terror
09/21/01: What the terrorists saw
09/17/01: Calling evil by its name
09/13/01: Our enemies mean what they say
09/04/01: The real bigots
08/31/01: Shrugging at genocide
08/28/01: Big Brother's privacy -- or ours?
08/24/01: The mufti's message of hate
08/21/01: Remembering the 'Wall of Shame'
08/16/01: If I were the editor ...
08/14/01: If I were the Transportation Czar ...
08/10/01: Import quotas 'steel' from us all
08/07/01: Is gay "marriage" a threat?
08/03/01: A colorblind nominee
07/27/01: Eminent-domain tortures
07/24/01: On protecting the flag ... and drivers ... and immigrants
07/20/01: Dying for better mileage
07/17/01: Why Americans would rather drive
07/13/01: Do these cabbies look like bigots?
07/10/01: 'Defeated in the bedroom'
07/06/01: Who's white? Who's Hispanic? Who cares?
07/02/01: Big(oted) man on campus
06/29/01: Still appeasing China's dictators
06/21/01: Cuban liberty: A test for Bush
06/19/01: The feeble 'arguments' against capital punishment
06/12/01: What energy crisis?
06/08/01: A jewel in the crown of self-government
05/31/01: The settlement myth
05/25/01: An award JFK would have liked
05/22/01: No Internet taxes? No problem
05/18/01: Heather has five mommies (and a daddy)
05/15/01: An execution, not a lynching
05/11/01: Losing the common tongue
05/08/01: Olympics 2008: Say no to Beijing
05/04/01: Do welfare mothers a kindness: Make them work
05/01/01: Another man's child
04/24/01: Sharon should have said no
04/02/01: The Inhumane Society
03/30/01: To have a friend, Caleb, be a friend
03/27/01: Is Chief Wahoo racist?
03/22/01: Ending the Clinton appeasement
03/20/01: They're coming for you
03/16/01: Kennedy v. Kennedy
03/13/01: We should see McVeigh die
03/09/01: The Taliban's wrecking job
03/07/01: The No. 1 reason to cut taxes
03/02/01: A Harvard candidate's silence on free speech
02/27/01: A lesson from Birmingham jail
02/20/01: How Jimmy Carter got his good name back
02/15/01: Cashing in on the presidency
02/09/01: The debt for slavery -- and for freedom
02/06/01: The reparations calculation
02/01/01: The freedom not to say 'amen'
01/29/01: Chavez's 'hypocrisy': Take a closer look
01/26/01: Good-bye, good riddance
01/23/01: When everything changed (mostly for the better)
01/19/01: The real zealots
01/16/01: Pardon Clinton?
01/11/01: The fanaticism of Linda Chavez
01/09/01: When Jerusalem was divided
01/05/01 THEY NEVER FORGOT THEE, O JERUSALEM
12/29/00 Liberal hate speech, 2000
12/15/00Does the Constitution expect poor children be condemned to lousy government schools?
12/08/00 Powell is wrong man to run State Department
12/05/00 The 'MCAS' teens give each other
12/01/00 Turning his back on the Vietnamese -- again
11/23/00 Why were the Pilgrims thankful?
11/21/00 The fruit of this 'peace process' is war
11/13/00 Unleashing the lawyers
11/17/00 Gore's mark on history
40 reasons to say NO to Gore
© 2002, Boston Globe