Quote:
Originally posted by Nic Name
A person's rights, dead or alive, to control the use of one's personal image is not greater than the people's First Amendment rights to free speech and freedom of the press, and neither the preferences of the FBI nor an act of Congress can abridge that.
|
Unfortunately the request (with force) to quash those pictures is not based upon rights. It is based upon some silly moral issue.
When Liza Thomas Laurie and Jim Gardner (two local gossip TV reporters) show you a car crash, are they providing useful facts? Do we learn something? They don't tell us how to avoid the crash, why it happened, what the vehicles are, or even if they have Firststone/Bridgestone tires. They show it for hype and emotion - and not for a single reason logical. Where are the moralist when Action News wastes good broadcast spectrum with hype and emotion?
How many people participated in the killing of Daniel Pearl? Were his hands behind his back? From his eyes, did he really know what was to happen next? What was he wearing - still his old clothes? What kind of tools did they use - religious implements or military weaspons? What was the killer(s) wearing? Religious garb, military uniforms, or just rags? Detailed facts we don't have but could have been provided by those pictures.
Details so important now that the current government is hiding everything in the name of national security. Hiding everything, in part, because they are mismanaging government. Those little details go a long way to discover, for example, if this right wing government is telling us truths.
For those who want to see Daniel Pearls death for a thrill, instead go block traffic rubbernecking at some car crash. But because those people exist is no reason to censor facts from those who thrive and demand facts. The film of Daniel Pearl is public domain information. Our representative - our WSJ reporter - was killed seeking information for us. Indeed we should know the details to know why and how our enemies killed our man.
Those are 1st Amendment rights. Those rights would only be trumped if information on that video had to be kept secret to expedite the capture of his murders. Clearly that is not the case. Details of his death are public domain information that only moralist would supress to impose their morality on us. Moreso, we all should be seing his murder's fact as if it was America's Most Wanted.