November 29, 2005
UPDATE: Jawa Report Exclusive--names of hostages released. Names, images, and video of the hostages here.
The Christian Peacemaker Teams (CPT) organization has confirmed to The Jawa Report in an e-mail that Norman Kember, an unidentified Canadian, and two unidentified Americans were abducted from that group's Iraq peace delegation.
The Christian pacifist organization declined to name the three other hostages at this time.
In a seperate statement released today by the organization, the CPT said:
CPT has been present in Iraq since October, 2002. The Team's work has focused on documenting and focusing public attention on detainee abuses and connecting citizens of Iraq to local and international human rights organizations. Iraqi friends and human rights workers have welcomed the Team as a non-violent, independent presence and asked that the Team tell the stories of Iraqis.So, the CPT would stand on principle and allow their representatives in Iraq to die rather than risk the lives of the terrorists that took them in a rescue operation? A perverse sense of Christian morality in my book.In a "Statement of Conviction," the long-term Team members stated that they "are aware of the many risks both Iraqis and internationals currently face," and affirmed that the risks did not outweigh their purpose in remaining. They express the hope that "in loving both friends and enemies and by intervening non-violently to aid those who are systematically oppressed, we can contribute in some small way to transforming this volatile situation."
CPT does not advocate the use of violent force to save our lives should we be kidnapped, held hostage, or caught in the middle of a conflict situation.
Advice to CPT from a long-time hostage activist: trying to convince the hostage takers that you are on their side may work, depending on what type of group abducted your representatives. Arab nationalist, non-Salaafist jihadis, and Shia jihad groups may be convinced using this method but only if a simultaneous public campaign from clerics is undertaken. To do this you must release the names of the other victims.
Of course, if this was simply a criminal act then the above should be undertaken in addition to ransom negotiations. Many criminals who engage in hostage taking of Westerners do so with the justification (backed by certain Islamic traditions) that the ransoming of infidels is permitted. Shame from influential clerics can go along way in convincing criminals to release hostages.
However, if it was Zarqawi's al Qaeda in Iraq, Ansar al-Sunna, or any related Salaafist jihad organization then this will have no effect. The only hope would be a rescue. Fortunately if the hostages are located a rescue will be attempted, even over the objections of CPT.
UPDATE: Via Captain Ed, we learn that Norman Kember was a family friend of blogger Hammerswing. As mentioned in our earlier post, we join Hammerswing with our prayers for Kember, even if we think he was a misguided idealist.
Posted by: Rusty at
09:04 AM
| Comments (19)
| Add Comment
Post contains 495 words, total size 4 kb.
As wrote if these are insurgents or Iraqi criminal elements you may have a chance to negotiate, if this is the terrorists a rescue is the only chance they have.
If previous hostage statements of torture are anyting to go by they'll probably be thankful a QRF put two in the heart, and one in the head of Team Jihad.
Posted by: dave at November 29, 2005 09:29 AM (CcXvt)
Posted by: Rusty at November 29, 2005 09:54 AM (JQjhA)
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at November 29, 2005 10:04 AM (0yYS2)
Posted by: Rusty at November 29, 2005 10:12 AM (JQjhA)
He and the other morons are either willing dhimmis trying to help the enemy by staging their kidnapping, or they're simply too stupid to be trusted with their own welfare; either way, they should be left with the kidnappers. People have to learn that actions have consequences.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at November 29, 2005 12:06 PM (0yYS2)
Posted by: A friend of Norman's at November 29, 2005 12:42 PM (z2MBG)
I don't normally disagree with you, much but:
If someone puts themselves in harm's way without cause, and without regard for the hardship it would cause for others, i.e. their families and those who would have to come rescue them
The left would argue that applies to people working in the warzone, like Roy Hallum, or Black Water operators that I talked about the other day, unfortunately motives are interchangable from each side of the coin.
Friend of Norman:
Let's not forget, it was military action in Iraq that made Norman go, and military action that made the place so much more unstable.
Ah yes, I remember the Iraqi children flying kites, and the outdoor coffee shops!
Oh, and something to do with torturing nationals with Sulphuric acid, and people being hung on meathooks, but my goodness though the kites! and coffee!
I think you've mistook Iraq for a romance novel, Iraq was kept stable by Saddam Hussein killing whole families, and his usage of the secret police to spy and kill any suspected dissidents.
Posted by: dave at November 29, 2005 01:33 PM (CcXvt)
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at November 29, 2005 02:07 PM (0yYS2)
As to the helpful remarks about Augustine, Anabaptist theologies reject Augustine, pleading the New Testament as their only creed.
Posted by: Jenny at November 29, 2005 04:09 PM (ywZa8)
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at November 29, 2005 05:26 PM (0yYS2)
After reading your comments it's pretty easy to see how gullible people could be suggested to go to Iraq, to preach "peace" and catalog "atrocities".
Let's dissect:
cataloging the tortures, secret murders, and other abuses that went on in Iraq - first under Hussein and then under the Coalition - what George Bush refers to as "collateral damage".
Can you show an example of willful targetting of civilians? Wars always have civilian casualties. All the JDAM's and the laser guided missiles we have cannot avoid it, but it sure beats the "blanket" bombings of WWII, and Vietnam era though right? The fact the United States and most of the coalition have built weapons to minimize civilian deaths is evidently lost on you, I'm sure you prefer the enemies weapons, indiscriminate and murderous.
They also assist in aiding Iraqi families find their loved ones that the coalition troops "disappear", which could be anybody suspectd of nationalism or simply of having a little money they want to confiscate.
Robbery eh? did you base that on the documentary you watched entitled "Three Kings" ?
but to those of us who oppose robbery, torture, and murder, it is worthwhile.
You know if this was a democrat site, and people said they believed in the war, they'd ask why if you believed in it so much, why are you not there?
Do you not oppose this "robbery", "torture" and "murder"
fortunately you're not, so I'll take it at face value and ask
What does making yourself a target, and endangering the lives of coalition forces, and Iraqi nationals accomplish?
If the U.S Special forces found your "friends" tomorrow, and wished to rescue them, you wouldn't want them rescued if it meant killing those whom wished them harm?
That to me is unbelievable, although it is very easy to be cavalier with your comrades lives, when your neck is not on the block, so to speak.
Posted by: dave at November 29, 2005 06:44 PM (CcXvt)
Oh, like the U.S. military then, who were already prosecuting the criminals who engaged in the practices photographed long before the bed-wetters in the press got their hands on the photos.
Posted by: Jim in Chicago at November 29, 2005 06:45 PM (sTciT)
What were they doing in Iraq? Helping our troops???????????
Sometimes when you make your own bed you have to lay on it.
Posted by: greyrooster at November 29, 2005 06:50 PM (ZaAd/)
Posted by: Angered at November 29, 2005 08:49 PM (z2MBG)
Good luck on the oppose the notion of someone pointing a gun at their heads.
With the people that's holding them, they will inevitably need it. Either way, United States citizens will have their ass on the line to rescue them, even if they "appose" that too.
Posted by: dave at November 29, 2005 10:10 PM (CcXvt)
He is a fool, nonetheless. As for his sincerity, I never had a doubt. But they will negociate with a tyrant ad infinium while the people are being murdered, gassed, mutilated, raped, tortured, and humiliated.
In other words, they are totally ineffectual. They accomphish nothing but put others at risk, for what? They would better spend their time praying. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much. This is where they could be effective, but alas, this is just my belief.
Posted by: jesusland joe at November 29, 2005 10:15 PM (rUyw4)
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at November 29, 2005 11:33 PM (0yYS2)
Be careful, Improbulus. That entire argument is so easily reversed if you choose to classify the US military as "murdering scum" which, I assure you, the Iraqi insurgents do. How many innocent men, women, children, and soldiers must die before YOU get it? That's the trouble with "us vs. them" dichotomies and debates about good and evil. You inherently place yourself on the "good" side. Well, guess what - Al Qaeda thinks of themselves as the good guys, too. If the only way to confront "evil" is with force, then we're all doomed because every last one of us somehow ends up being somebody else's evil. You might as well launch the nukes now and put this world out of its misery. Oh, and by the way, make sure you point one at you and yours because my gerbil thinks you're evil.
Norman and his group present an alternate solution. One where we don't all die. Sadly, it took a threat to his life for you to read this. I'm not sure what it will take to make you understand.
Posted by: Rob at November 30, 2005 08:08 PM (Wl7Nx)
IF this is so, look for very public and nasty executions when the (intentionally) impossible demands are not met by Dec.8th.
Posted by: Val at December 02, 2005 08:52 PM (OF00N)
34 queries taking 0.0693 seconds, 174 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
