CPT hostages killed unless detainees freed
Initial reports stated that the hostage-takers accused the hostages of being "spies". However on 02 December 2005, in video shown on Al Jazeera, the hostage takers will demand that all detainees held by US and Iraqi forces be freed by today, or the hostages will be killed.
On 08 March 2006, Tom Fox's corpse will be found in Mansour district, showing signs that he had been beaten before being killed.
On 23 March 2006 the remaining hostages will be freed after a raid led by British troops.
Right wing bloggers will object to the way in which the release was treated by media and bloggers alike, specifically, the use of the word "released" as opposed to "rescued", or some other word flattering to the occupying forces in Iraq. Conservatives will send inflammatory emails to the still-grieving friends of the hostages, stating, for example
I hope you quit sending your hippies to WAR regions risking not only their lives but the lives of the soldiers who end up having to secure their "release" by RESCUING them (source).It will later be revealed that one of the informants was a guard holding the prisoners hostage. This person apparently got cold feet when Fox was murdered by other elements involved in the abduction (see also Guardian article).
posted by elendil at 9:30 am
2 Comments:
I want to take some time to research and write a proper response to The Ugly American's points. It's tempting to bang something together now, but it would be inconsistent. If I truly dislike the polarisation of the discourse as much as I claim to, if I believe that science and rationality is humanity's "candle in the dark", then I must act accordingly and apply these principles to myself.
rygnn2, with the benefit of hindsight I see Lieberman did not take Rummy's place. I honestly don't think it matters much who is there, only what they represent.
As to hostage-taking, I don't have any information on Iraqi views of this tactic. I do know that a large proportion of them support the insurgency, even if just passively. I imagine that a large proportion are sympathetic, even if they don't agree with it fully. But I'm guessing here, as I don't have those stats I refer to with me.
I don't know that hostage-taking is a rational process. Certainly they don't gain any sympathy here by doing it, esp. when they take such beautiful people, these true Christ-followers, these Quakers for peace. I am awestruck by these people and their ideals, and as an atheist perhaps just a little envious of their hope and faith in eventual justice.
The hostage-takers won't get their demands. I think they know that. Why do they do it then? I don't know. Perhaps if a rock had consciousness it to would think it was falling of its own volition. It does not seem to me to be a rational thing.
Post a Comment
<< Home