Amanpour commands my utmost respect, though, for shining megawatt-rich spotlight on the spine-chilling events of the Jewish Holocaust, and all subsequent genocides of Cambodia, Iraq, Rwanda, Bosnia and Darfur. But, unfortunately, she failed to generate a mere milliwatt of fleeting light on the first genocide of the century: The Armenian genocide.
Nonetheless, the indefatigable CNN reporter did some good -- though, not quite enough -- by informing the general public about the roles of those courageous heroes who saw and understood evil -- and 'screamed bloody murder' to the deaf ears of international leaders to heed their call for action.
Amanpour, by the power of her camera and microphone, breathed life to the screaming voices of the forgotten activists, and deservedly amplified the "bloody murder" calls of the moral few, such as: Eli Wiesel, Father Francois Ponchaud, Peter Galbraith, Richard Holbrook, Romeo Dallaire and other unsung heroes, but Amanpour chose dead silence instead to the screams of Henry Morgenthau, the US Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire at the time of the Armenian Genocide -- Morgenthau too, 'screamed bloody murder.' Give that honorable man some credit and the 1.5 million Armenian victims some respect.
You see, Amanpour's failure to mention the "screams" of Henry Morgenthau and others is an unfortunate continuum of a political play. Even worse, when a reputable reporter such as Amanpour chooses to silence the calls of equally deserving fine men, then it does create the ultimate hypocritical human-rights rat's nest that no one could ever get out of unscathed. The timing of this matter is specially significant and doubly important as the reporter tries to bring attention to genocides on the occasion of the 60th anniversary of the adoption of UN Convention of Genocide and Human Rights, which, by the way, was authored by Raphael Lemkin who coined the word "genocide."
Amanpour's approach to subtractive journalism in her "Scream Bloody Murder" is flawed and it is a little disrespectful to the legacy of Raphael Lemkin who gave us the word "genocide." Hello, the man was describing the systematic slaughter of the Armenians, repeat, the slaughter of the Armenians, not some imaginary people nor a hypothetical race when he coined the word "genocide."
So, if the death of 1.5 million Armenian victims could have given birth to a word named "genocide," just as Lemkin did to legally define holocaust. Then, how could they not apply that "word" back to its source where it belongs? just as Lemkin had done and intended. Amanpour's report, unfortunately, could have, just as easily, been titled "Bloody Shame Whisper" without missing a beat.
Hypocrisy and muddy moral standards in matters of genocide-justice has never worked (as demonstrated by their frequency) -- brace yourselves, as there is an ongoing genocide in Darfur as we speak and I'm sure many more are likely to happen soon.
No comments:
Post a Comment