Thanks, but No Thanks?
March 24th, 2006 at 12:18 am
March 24th, 2006 at 12:18 am
HT: Drudge
The New York Times reports:
Spurred by a tip from a detainee, a multinational military force stormed a house in western Baghdad early today and rescued two Canadians and a Briton who had been held hostage by a shadowy guerrilla group for nearly four months. (emphases mine)
From the statement from “Christian Peacemaker Teams,” who funded the presence of these civilians in a war zone:
Our hearts are filled with joy today as we heard that Harmeet Singh Sooden, Jim Loney and Norman Kember have been safely released in Baghdad. Christian Peacemaker Teams rejoices with their families and friends at the expectation of their return to their loved ones and community.
“Have been safely released” by whom, the rescue team? Is this what passes for irony nowadays:
- An organization funds an operation to send people to Iraq to protest a war…
- The protesters are kidnapped by the people the protesters are supporting
- The kidnappers kill one of the protesters
- The protesters are rescued by the people they are protesting
No wonder these guys “did not address the media.” I wonder if they share a sentiment different from their organization now. Sometimes the enemy of your “enemy” is NOT your friend.

March 25th, 2006 at 1:01 pm
I think their sentiment was expressed in a 1996 “statement of conviction” posted on the LittleGreenFootballs blog site (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=19779_Christian_Peacemaker_Teams_in_Hebron&only). Here’s some excerpts:
“We reject the use of force to save our lives should we be caught in the middle of a conflict situation or taken hostage. In the event that we die as a result of some violent action, we reject the use of violence to punish the people who killed us….
“People with guns who kill other people should be removed from society for that society’s protection.”
So, did the hostages resist being forcefuly rescued?