Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Jill Carroll Released

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

Could you elaborate?

"It shows the difference between the mujahedeen and the Americans, it shows the mujahedeen are good people fighting an honourable fight while the Americans are here as an occupying force treating the people in a very bad way," she said.

This is what I mean. My fears are substantiated. I think she was, possibly, an agent of theirs from the get-go. I don't think she was "kidnapped" I think she was "home." Seriously, I don't think there's a way a NON-MUSLIM AMERICAN WOMAN would live through that ordeal. All Muslim extremists think she should die. Why did she live, and why was she not harmed? Clearly, she showed support for the insurgents, and I'm betting they saw the PR value in that.

While EVIL, the muslims are not stupid. They know the US is torn by this war and actions like this make the moral water even more murky. It's much easier to win a war if you can convince everyone else that you're a "freedom-fighter" and we're the bad guys. They take the moral high ground. I just think this was planned from the start. I.e. she agreed to it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I take back my happiness at seeing her released. Throw her back.

I'm hardly a fan of Jill Carroll, but she actually had little choice in the matter:

In a videotape posted Thursday on the Internet, made before her release, Carroll denounced the U.S. presence in Iraq and praised the insurgents.

I'd be praising the 'insurgents' as well if I was in her shoes... Which makes one wonder why your article boldly states this:

Freed US hostage says mujahideen are more clever and better than all the people US army has in Iraq.

The biased reporters (more likely terrorist supporters) conviniently omit the fact that she made the statement with a gun pointed at her head...

Edited by Eternal
Link to post
Share on other sites
Why did she live, and why was she not harmed?

I'm not willing to take the fact that she survived as evidence of her guilt as an agent of the insurgency. This seems way to close to conspiracy theory to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are tons of hostages who have been released unharmed.

I'm hardly a fan of Jill Carroll, but she actually had little choice in the matter:

I'd be praising the 'insurgents' as well if I was in her shoes... Which makes one wonder why your article boldly states this:

The biased reporters (more likely terrorist supporters) conviniently omit the fact that she made the statement with a gun pointed at her head...

Yeah, I heard about this on the news. Assuming that she's telling the truth, which I suspect that she is, I retract my former statement wishing that she be thrown back.

Edited by Moose
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yahoo has a story from the AP:

Carroll Disavows Statements Against U.S. By MATT MOORE, Associated Press Writer

.....

But in a statement Saturday, she said the recording was made under threat. Her editor has said three men were pointing guns at her at the time.

"During my last night in captivity, my captors forced me to participate in a propaganda video. They told me I would be released if I cooperated. I was living in a threatening environment, under their control, and wanted to go home alive. So I agreed," she said in a statement read by her editor in Boston.

"Things that I was forced to say while captive are now being taken by some as an accurate reflection of my personal views. They are not."

.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Those fighters of freedom who were holding Jill Carroll hostage show some excellent forethought and maturity with the schemes they mastermind.

Take a woman hostage, force her to praise your cause at gunpoint, then let her go home so that she can renounce the praise and point out how it was coerced under threat of death?

Brilliant! People will be flocking to their cause now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"HG," you make it seem as if you're dissapointed that the so-called "freedom fighters" aren't coming up with better strategies to promote their cause. What is their cause and why do you support it, if you do?

I could think of more fundamental points to criticize these people for--like for example that they are barbarians. That seems to be overlooked in your sarcastic remarks over the way in which they are trying to promote their cause.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure she was just criticizing them for being idiots. I had actually thought of that too. It's kind of dumb to promote your cause by forcing someone to participate in propaganda, then releasing them so they can tell the world about how they were threatened into doing it.

It goes without saying that they are barbarians. However, they usually aren't this stupid. In fact, they're usually pretty smart. I see nothing in any of my/her statements that would imply support for the jihadist cause.

She did refer to them as "fighters of freedom," by the way.

Link to post
Share on other sites
There are tons of hostages who have been released unharmed.

Yeah, I heard about this on the news. Assuming that she's telling the truth, which I suspect that she is, I retract my former statement wishing that she be thrown back.

As I do mine. When I read the former article, I thought it said she made those statements AFTER being released. My bad.

"HG," you make it seem as if you're dissapointed that the so-called "freedom fighters" aren't coming up with better strategies to promote their cause. What is their cause and why do you support it, if you do?

I could think of more fundamental points to criticize these people for--like for example that they are barbarians. That seems to be overlooked in your sarcastic remarks over the way in which they are trying to promote their cause.

Maybe I read it wrong, Felipe, but I think she was sarcastically pointing that very thing out. If she responds, we'll know then.

Link to post
Share on other sites
As I do mine. When I read the former article, I thought it said she made those statements AFTER being released. My bad.

Well, she did give an interview afterwards in which she said some very similar things. But, once out of Iraq, she said she still felt threatened. I can't say I blame her for that...if her kidnappers had seen her renounce her previous statements, while she was still in Iraq, they very well may have attacked her again.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Take a woman hostage, force her to praise your cause at gunpoint, then let her go home so that she can renounce the praise and point out how it was coerced under threat of death?

Brilliant! People will be flocking to their cause now.

The way I see it the propaganda videos will have a similar effect to that of child molestation allegations; even if proven false the acccused has to live the remainder of his days with the stigma attached to his name.

She can renounce her statements all she wants back home, the words are out there and the damage has been done.

Many people, particularly in the middle east, will hear her declarations in the videos and come away thinking "this woman was held captive by these guys for months and still thought they were fine fellows. Maybe she's right." It might not be a perfect, bulletproof plan but it will influence minds.

Besides, I'm sure there is host of idiots out there who will claim she only recanted due to pressure from US government--and Israel.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Many people, particularly in the middle east, will hear her declarations in the videos and come away thinking "this woman was held captive by these guys for months and still thought they were fine fellows. Maybe she's right." It might not be a perfect, bulletproof plan but it will influence minds.

Excelent point. Why would they video tape the comments and then let her go knowing she would tell the truth? Because they are not trying to influence 'us.' It is to influence the Muslims in the Middle East. After all, how many of the state controlled news agents in the Middle East published Carroll's retraction (which I believe fully) in the same amount they published her gun-forced lies? Then again, how many of ours gave the same amount of time on both?

A good rule of thumb with hostages; never believe what they say. Even if they are safe, in their minds they do not realize they are safe, or while we think they are safe they may know from experience that they are still under the point of a gun. Think back to Galt's responce at the end of Atlas when he was the 'guest' of the state. What was his reaction when they said 'say this?' (BTW, I'm not one to usually pull out Rand quotes, but I think this one really accents the point)

Link to post
Share on other sites

My remark was fully sarcastic criticism of the idiocy of these supporters of extremist Islam.

To clarify where I stand: I am an American woman who enjoys living in a mostly secular, mostly capitalist republic. I have read the Quran. I have no reason to support Islam, and especially no reason to support extremists of it who take every word of the 'prophet' and Imams literally. I also have no sympathy for a member of a group of people who readily forfeit their lives for promises of pie in the sky when they die.

I think Mandrake and Samoht make good points, about the goals of the captors. Thinking people of any culture should likely view any such propaganda with skepticism, but it is more likely to have an effect in the Muslim world, where media is biased and controlled to the fullest extent that it can be.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...