December 11, 2000

6:48 AM

Business as usual."Children, the weakest link in our society, are raped, battered, shot, tortured and murdered, while their tormentors go unpunished. Pedophiles roam the globe in search of countries where their offense is viewed as tourist entertainment. Women are beaten and abused without recourse on a daily basis; the cruelty of parents and employers is often dismissed as disciplinary measures necessary in the home or the work place; wars are waged in which women and children are the main victims. We look the other way, or, at best, applaud the launching of well-meaning organisations expected somehow to ease our feelings of guilt at the havoc wrought on innocent and helpless people's lives."

While I find this author quite provocative, I see that later in the article she mentions an alleged lynching that may or may not have taken place. Is this Cassie Bernall revisited?
posted by ethmar (20 comments total)

To clarify, I ask if this is "Cassie Bernall revisited" because the Cassie Bernall story is widely believed to be a myth, and her parents have been accused of trumping up the story a) for self-aggrandizement and b) to push their religious beliefs.

In the case of this article, if the lynching really didn't happen, then Fayza Hassan's telling of this story as fact only serves to push her (or somebody else's) "agenda", no?

I defer to the fine readership of MeFi-land to put me right.
posted by ethmar at 6:58 AM on December 11, 2000

I really hate to say this, but when confronted with the ongoing atrocities in Israeli-occupied Palestine, regardless of the national origin of the perpetrator(s) and victim(s), I always stop and remind myself what I'm reading is probably not true. I'm not saying those atrocities aren't occuring, because obviously they are. But the Media Event that is "The Crisis in the Middle East" (cue thunderous John Williams intro music...) has always been - at least in the West - centered on the heroic, underdog Israelis, surrounded by evil, camel-sucking desert vermin who would drive them back into the sea. Recently - in this latest round of violence, at least - the Palestinians seem to have grasped that the war is being fought at least partially on the television screens and in the hearts and minds of white people far, far away who can bring enormous pressures to bear on the Israelis. For the first time over the weekend, I heard the Isreali Army in the West Bank referred to as an "armed occupational guard."

Is Hassan's story of the swimming pool lynching true? Maybe. Even if it's not strictly true, I'm willing to believe that the thrust of the story is true and that some or all of those detailed events have occurred in the recent past. Is she pushing her "agenda"? From the Brief History of Al Ahram comes this simple summation that ought to settle that question:

Al-Ahram has always been a forum for expressing the views and ideas of leading Arab intellectuals and opinion-makers, and through which they could convey the concerns and aspirations of the great Arab nation.

Better, worse or no different from the Bernalls? IMHO, worse, unless Hassan is also expecting to reap huge profits personally from publishing myth-as-fact.
posted by m.polo at 7:38 AM on December 11, 2000

I always felt like Cassie Bernall's parents promoted that dubious story for reason c) To give their child's senseless death some meaning.
posted by rcade at 7:42 AM on December 11, 2000

I'd be more inclined to buy that, rcade, if it didn't come with a $17 MSRP.
posted by ethmar at 7:54 AM on December 11, 2000

After reading the article, I agree with you. If the lynching never took place, she's just using fiction to add weight to the point she's trying to get across. Does that article from "The Independent" exist?

As for Cassie Bernall, I think she was mentioned on Mtv during the coverage they had of Columbine. It would be really messed up to find out she's nothing but an Urban Legend, and her parents are using the memory of their dead daughter to push religion. I hope that's not the case.

The only other thing I have to add to this is Hassan's final paragraph. I'm not sure I agree with what she says there. She makes it sound as if rape and abuse are fine as long as the victim doesn't create a scene. That's definately strange.

Just my view, even if it is off tangent.
posted by Cavatica at 8:04 AM on December 11, 2000

Another propagada piece in the war in which both sides (Israeli and Arabs) are trying to win the world over to their side. I note that the writer did not mention the terrorist acts that have been taking place well before the intifada reared up again, nor did she mention that there is a growing body of Palestinian mothers who are beginning to talk back to the group leaders who use the young to provlke headlines and who in turn often become victims. I have already seen some protests that mention how thye (the mothers) are called traitors unless they allow their kids to participate in the warfare.
Is there an dend in sight? I doubt it. But after all the killings the Irish are learning that it is smarter to live in peace than in constant struggle with those of other religious views; and the Germans and Japanese are now friendly and democratic and after all the madness of WWII things have changed.
Isreal has a claim on Jerusalem. And the Palestinians would deny this and maintaina that the city is theirs. Yet, when it was controlled by Jordan, Jewish sites were desecrated and Jews not allowed to visit their shrines. No wonder they are reticent to lose control over the city.
As for the occupied lands: Israel ought never to have allowed settlements. But there has never been a giving back of occupied lands (unless for statigic reasons) wnless sthere has first been an agreed upon peace settlement. Never. In this instance, the peace accord was close but now is gone. Israel can walk away and draw the lines of what it plans to keep as a result of the many attempts to exterminate their state. Palestine can on its own declare statehood (and of course end up with much less)...but do not expect anything from either side unless they sit down and work out an agreement.
After all, we forced an agreement upon our enemies in WWII--uncondional surrender--and gave them democracy and an occupation that has lasted since 1945. They do not resent the occupation. It works out in their interest. And incidentally, Syria has occupied Lebanon with some 35 thousand troops and will not leave.
posted by Postroad at 8:29 AM on December 11, 2000

nor did she mention that there is a growing body of Palestinian mothers who are beginning to talk back to the group leaders who use the young to provlke (sic) headlines and who in turn often become victims

Counterpoint.

"Claiming that mothers encourage their sons to fight is giving them credit, however atrocious, where they have none. "

So the same can be said for arguing against fighting.
posted by ethmar at 8:36 AM on December 11, 2000

As for Cassie Bernall, I think she was mentioned on Mtv during the coverage they had of Columbine. It would be really messed up to find out she's nothing but an Urban Legend, and her parents are using the memory of their dead daughter to push religion. I hope that's not the case.

The only living witness to Bernall's murder says that she didn't say anything to Klebold and Harris, according to Salon.

I'd be more inclined to buy that, rcade, if it didn't come with a $17 MSRP.

Do you honestly think that Bernall's parents said to themselves, "Hey, we could really make some money off the myth about our dead kid?"
posted by rcade at 8:43 AM on December 11, 2000

I'll let the book promotion speak for itself.

And I'll pose this question back: If YOUR (hypothetical) kid was killed, is YOUR reaction immdiately afterward going to be "My kid was murdered! I will now write a book about it and promote it vigorously"?

Maybe, maybe not. My contention is that it's awfully suspect that Misty Bernall fired this book off in short order so soon after her daughter died. And YES, the Columbine shooting was a major news event, and YES, perhaps she's 100% legit and merely taking advantage of her unfortunate position in the national limelight to indeed "give meaning to her daughter's death", but I sayeth it's fishy.

Fishier still, that the story IS suspect, so why promote it as fact? (NOTE: I am willing to concede that the Bernall family is NOT doing so, however other entities that should know better are doing so, and that's who that statement is pointed at.)
posted by ethmar at 8:57 AM on December 11, 2000

So Misty Bernall didn't fulfill someone's (ethmar's) standards for how she should mourn and/or remember her daughter, therefore her actions are fishy.

I see.
posted by Dreama at 9:17 AM on December 11, 2000

Therefore her actions are fishy...in the eyes of those who choose to view it that way. Mourn in whatever way you want.

It just happens to seem weird that this book is being sold, based on information that may or may not be true (considering the Salon article posted earlier). I don't think anyone's saying.."Hey, lady. Quit what you're doing, and respect the dead right." If she wants to sell books and keep the memory of her daughter alive in that way, she's every right to. I simply feel (and this is my opinion here) that "She said Yes" is an improper title if that wasn't the case. To me, that's like saying.."Garfield loved Raisins.", when it's known that he doesn't. It looks like a blatant lie right on the cover. A bad comparison, perhaps, but I think it makes sense.

Just my view.
posted by Cavatica at 9:25 AM on December 11, 2000

What Cavatica said.

I don't necessarily question the book in and of itself. I question the timing.

It's not like I'm declaring Misty Bernall to be an accessory to her daughter's death because she does something "fishy" in my opinion. But I am raising the spectre of exploitation. By whom and for what purpose is debatable.
posted by ethmar at 9:34 AM on December 11, 2000

Postroad can you spew more bullshit?

you compare the occupation of Palestine, in which thousands have been massacred, thousands imprisoned without trial, thousands tortured, millions not allowed the right to return to their homes, and the daily humiliation of men women and children to the occupation by the allies after WWII?

After all, we forced an agreement upon our enemies in WWII--uncondional surrender--and gave them democracy and an occupation that has lasted since 1945. They do not resent the occupation. It works out in their interest.

How easy it is to completely overlook the results of hundreds of human rights inquiries. The occupation is wrong and no matter how much you try to justify it, no matter how many false facts you repeat, no matter what lies you tell in the guise of "they all need to sit down and talk," there will be no peace without real justice.
posted by cell divide at 10:48 AM on December 11, 2000

Mozna and Mohammed Imad buried Wael with a bloody gouge between his eyes where the bullet had entered. He still clung to the stone he had been about to throw. The surgeon at Shifa had been unable to free the rock from the rigor mortis in the boy's hand.

(from Time.com)
posted by ethmar at 12:46 PM on December 11, 2000

If YOUR (hypothetical) kid was killed, is YOUR reaction immdiately afterward going to be "My kid was murdered! I will now write a book about it and promote it vigorously"?

I think the Bernalls believed the story at first (everyone else did), and decided that a book and lecture tour about Cassie's religious convictions in the face of death would help people and make some sense out of a horrendous tragedy. By the time that serious doubts were raised about it, they had a lot invested in believing it was true -- the money and attention, of course, but also thousands of people who were inspired by what Cassie allegedly did.
posted by rcade at 6:02 PM on December 11, 2000

He still clung to the stone he had been about to throw. The surgeon at Shifa had been unable to free the rock from the rigor mortis in the boy's hand.

No offense, but I don't buy this at all. Rigor mortis lasts what, 24 hours? This is the sentimental, symbolic detail the media seems to love, whether it's true or not. But in this situation we need truth, not this ever-escalating barrage of coups de theatre. What's next, a baby carriage rolling down the Odessa Steps?


posted by rodii at 7:22 PM on December 11, 2000

postroad: I think the charge of propaganda would serve to describe your post too. I'm sure that the Israeli government couldn't have said it any better for themselves.

ethmar: The author can be criticized perhaps for providing anecdotal evidence for her article rather than citing an independent reference (and preferably one that's on the web).

Nevertheless, there have been a number of violent incidents involving neo-nazi groups in Germany that were directed at immigrants and guest workers from the Middle-East and elsewhere. I accept her argument in the context of these other incidents.

for example: http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/Newsbriefs/9601/01-18/

Jan 18, 1996 LUEBECK, Germany (CNN)

10 immigrants die in Germany fire; neo-Nazis suspected

-- Police in Luebeck, Germany, reportedly suspect neo-Nazis in an arson fire that killed at least ten people in an apartment building early Thursday. Three suspects were arrested.

The apartment building housed African, Lebanese, Syrian, and Polish immigrants, police said. About 50 people were injured.

Officials said more than 100 firefighters battled the fire, which started simultaneously in several places.


posted by lagado at 7:44 PM on December 11, 2000

Also what cell divide said: the postwar allied occupation of Germany cannot be described in even remotely the same terms as the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. Neither can the U.S. "occupation" of Japan.

That's a really bad joke. A far better example would have been the illegal and brutal Indonesian occupation of East Timor or the Chinese occupation of Tibet.
posted by lagado at 7:57 PM on December 11, 2000

Lagado,

I agree with your posts to a point. My concern with the Fayza Hassan article was that she reports an incident as the gospel truth when it's quite possible that it never happened as such. This is not to say that there is NO anti-arab violence anywhere in the world, and that the skinhead movement is a hoax. I am disappointed that a story that seems to be on shaky factual ground is being used essentially as a propoganda tool, in essence saying "look at this horrible lynching! This is what Arabs put up with on a daily basis and nobody gives a damn!" This may be true, but there are probably more horrifying stories that aren't getting the press that this possible urban legend is attracting, with more credibility.

rcade:

Inspired to do what, exactly?

However I do agree with your assessment. It's easy for me to armchair quarterback since I'm not the one with the dead daughter and undescribable grief. I can only empathise, but I certainly cannot know the heartbreak that this family has known, and who knows if my actions would have been any different.

I'm just really down on "revisionist history", as I have seen it happen before my very eyes (the Fox River Grove, IL train/school bus accident). And "urban legends" and "revisionist history" may get a rise out of us collectively, but I feel that they do more harm than good. This is why I'm lumping Fayza Hassan together with Misty Bernall. Each have told a story that is not entirely true, but stirs up feelings in each of us. Indeed, there is power in myth, but is myth more important than the truth?

Or shall I just remember the words of that great philosopher Mason Williams who once said:

This is not a true tale, but who needs truth if it's dull?
posted by ethmar at 8:42 PM on December 11, 2000

Inspired to do what, exactly?

Inspired to stand up for their religious convictions. I don't agree with the continuation of a false story here, and as a longtime newspaper journalist I hate it when something that's untrue becomes accepted as fact. However, I understand the logic of how this took place and why the parents refuse to disclaim it.
posted by rcade at 9:12 PM on December 11, 2000