Reuters: Freed Italian Hostage Says Iraq Rebels 'Justified'

[hasan]

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=6389252

ROME (Reuters) - An Italian aid worker held hostage last month in Iraq said guerrillas there were right to fight U.S.-led forces and their Iraqi "puppet government."
In comments that were bound to annoy Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi's government, Simona Torretta also called on Rome to withdraw the troops it sent to Iraq to support its U.S. ally.

"I said it before the kidnapping and I repeat it today," she told Corriere della Sera newspaper in an interview published Friday.

"You have to distinguish between terrorism and resistance. The guerrilla war is justified, but I am against the kidnapping of civilians."

Torretta and her Italian colleague Simona Pari, both of them 29, were freed Tuesday, three weeks after being snatched from their Baghdad office. Berlusconi has brushed aside widespread reports that his government paid a ransom of up to $1 million.

Describing the administration of Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi as "a puppet government in the hands of the Americans," Torretta said elections planned for January would have no legitimacy: "During my days in detention ... I came to the conclusion it will take decades to put Iraq back on its feet."

Torretta, who lived in Iraq before, during and after the U.S.-led invasion, said she wanted to return despite her ordeal -- but would not do so as long as U.S. troops were there: "I've got to wait until the end of the U.S. occupation," she said.

She said she did know whether Italy bought her freedom from the kidnappers: "If a ransom was paid then I am very sorry. But I know nothing about it ... I believe that (the kidnappers) were a very political, religious group and that in the end they were convinced that we were not enemies."

She also said they were treated well and with respect.

http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsPackageArticle.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=594275&section=news

May I repeat her words?
"You have to distinguish between terrorism and resistance. The guerrilla war is justified, but I am against the kidnapping of civilians."

 

[gh0st]

haha... pretty mixed up fellow.

"During my days in detention ... I came to the conclusion it will take decades to put Iraq back on its feet."

i wonder why that might be. i wonder if it would perhaps get on its feet FASTER if there werent terrorists killing iraqi civilians and american soldiers all the time. just foor for thought. her words arent credible, god knows what they made her say

"You have to distinguish between terrorism and resistance. The guerrilla war is justified, but I am against the kidnapping of civilians."

interesting, since thats just about all these terorrists do. oh, and other charming tactics like beheading aid workers and destroying food convoys

 

[clarky003]

Puppet government , couldnt of said it any better.

 

[hasan]

The point is, she was kidnapped, yet she justifies the resistance. She was actually in Iraq and knows alot more than you, an american sitting at home watching cnn or fox or msnbc.
When she says you gotta differentiate between resistance and terrorism, she knows what she is talking about.
She is not trying to promote kidnapping, she was kidnapped herself.

 

[gh0st]

The point is, she was kidnapped, yet she justifies the resistance. She was actually in Iraq and knows alot more than you, an american sitting at home watching cnn or fox or msnbc.
When she says you gotta differentiate between resistance and terrorism, she knows what she is talking about.
She is not trying to promote kidnapping, she was kidnapped herself.

several of my close and distant family members are in iraq with various military branches. its beside the point, many victims of kidnapping find emotional attachment with their kidnappers. its nothing new, so i dont particularly trust her word. its good that she was released anyway.

 

[CptStern]

several of my close and distant family members are in iraq with various military branches. its beside the point, many victims of kidnapping find emotional attachment with their kidnappers. its nothing new, so i dont particularly trust her word. its good that she was released anyway.

oh come on! you cant even admit there's even the slightest chance she may be telling the truth, she's either brainwashed or a liar according to you. Blinders are set to stun I see

 

[hasan]

several of my close and distant family members are in iraq with various military branches. its beside the point, many victims of kidnapping find emotional attachment with their kidnappers. its nothing new, so i dont particularly trust her word. its good that she was released anyway.

Yes yes, because all iraqis who were kidnapped *cough* imprisone by the americans showed emotional attachment to the americans
Dude, evey single Iraqi who got in the dark prisons of the occupation and came out said the americans treated him like an animal; like a dog.
Some of them changed thier views 180 degrees, they were for the american invasion at first, they thought the americans would liberate them, but after their prison experience, they totally changed, some of them even joined the resistance.

 

[gh0st]

oh come on! you cant even admit there's even the slightest chance she may be telling the truth, she's either brainwashed or a liar according to you. Blinders are set to stun I see

its not an issue of truth, its her judgment. the truth is relative. my truth is that the insurgency isnt justified at all. she may have felt an emotional attachment or somesuch while she was in captivity, if she things the war isnt justified thats her problem and her opinion. the thing is fishy anyway. youre kidnapped in a foreign country by militant forces (known for killing whoever the hell they feel like), yet somehow you just forgive and forget, then publically announce your support for them.

Yes yes, because all iraqis who were kidnapped *cough* imprisone by the americans showed emotional attachment to the americans
Dude, evey single Iraqi who got in the dark prisons of the occupation and came out said the americans treated him like an animal; like a dog.
Some of them changed thier views 180 degrees, they were for the american invasion at first, they thought the americans would liberate them, but after their prison experience, they totally changed, some of them even joined the resistance.

we dont kidnap aid workers or execute civilians. obviously mistakes probably were made, and "prison" isnt meant to be a nice place though harassment and other illegal activity there is wrong, and fortunatly the parties involved int he most notorious one will be heading to jail (most likely).

haha.. "dark prisons of the occupation." hasan why dont you grab an ak and go fight for the glorious freedom of the iraqi people over there. in fact, why are you even bringing up these prisons? totally irrelevant.

 

[CptStern]

its not an issue of truth, its her judgment. the truth is relative. my truth is that the insurgency isnt justified at all.

sure it is, there are invaders occupying their land: wouldnt you do the same for your country? You have to seperate the people fighting the coalition army and the people blowing up children; they are not the same people.

 

[hasan]

youre kidnapped in a foreign country by militant forces (known for killing whoever the hell they feel like), yet somehow you just forgive and forget, then publically announce your support for them.

look I'll tell you something, a person's judgment of any issue is influenced by his perception of that issue.

You think it's fishy, she was kidnapped by terrorists, yet she praises them?

You agree with me that there is something wrong, am I correct?
well, the thing that is wrong is your perception of the resistance, it's right in your post
"known for killing whoever the hell they feel like"
apparently, the resistance is not like you imagine.
sorry to spoil it for ya, but the resistance is actually justified.

EDIT:

haha.. "dark prisons of the occupation." hasan why dont you grab an ak and go fight for the glorious freedom of the iraqi people over there. in fact, why are you even bringing up these prisons? totally irrelevant.

It's totaly relevant, you know why? I'm comparing the way americans treat thier prisonors and the way Iraqis do. Although kidnapping them was a mistake in the first place, but they apologized (I don't think the italians acepted the apology, if you read the reuters report she said "I don't know") but the point is, they admitted their mistake, they treated them well, with alot of respect.
compare that to treating you like an animal .. that's how americans treat Iraqis, like animals.

You don't see Iraqis coming out saying "I was treated with respect", do you?

 

[gh0st]

sure it is, there are invaders occupying their land: wouldnt you do the same for your country? You have to seperate the people fighting the coalition army and the people blowing up children; they are not the same people.

i would do the same for my country. because right now my civil liberties and freedoms are upheld and protected, and i have the right to live my life however i see fit. newsflash: the people blowing up children are the ones fighting the coalition. it boggles my mind that so many of them dont want the freedoms we have. i can totally agree with them fighting off some kind of an invader, but do they not see the benefits we try give them? granted we've made mistakes (abu ghraib, civ deaths, etc). that doesnt explain the vehemant reaction these insurgents have. if they would just adapt a democratic stance and work with the new government im sure many great things could come from this situation, yet they are causing more civilian deaths, more fighting, and more destruction.

sorry to spoil it for ya, but the resistance is actually justified.

i disagree, and i doubt youll convince me otherwise. i recall this argument from a different thread, so lets leave it where it lies.

 

[hasan]

newsflash: the people blowing up children are the ones fighting the coalition.

I would replace newsflash with foxflash

no they are not the same people.

 

[Mechagodzilla]

i would do the same for my country. because right now my civil liberties and freedoms are upheld and protected, and i have the right to live my life however i see fit. newsflash: the people blowing up children are the ones fighting the coalition. it boggles my mind that so many of them dont want the freedoms we have. i can totally agree with them fighting off some kind of an invader, but do they not see the benefits we try give them? granted we've made mistakes (abu ghraib, civ deaths, etc). that doesnt explain the vehemant reaction these insurgents have. if they would just adapt a democratic stance and work with the new government im sure many great things could come from this situation, yet they are causing more civilian deaths, more fighting, and more destruction.

Yes, you can live your life however you see fit, but would you want to live your life the way others see fit? That's what's going on in Iraq. Whatever good America is trying to introduce, it's being introduced literally at the point of a gun.

For some reason, the Iraqis are suspicious of the government set up by the people who attacked them.

And, to the contrary, abu ghraib and civilian deaths explain the outrage pretty clearly. What if someone tried to mess up your government, and the result was thousands of civilian deaths?

Actually, it did happen.

But, even though America's intentions were infinitely more noble, the effect is the same. There are 11 000 civilians dead now that weren't dead before the US showed up, and that's what the iraq people are going to focus on.

Would even the most perfect government in the world be worth more than three WTC attacks worth of civilian casualties? A huge chunk of the people in Iraq are saying: no, it's not.

Add the torture onto that, and you can see why the Iraqis just might be pissed off.

 

[gh0st]

There are 11 000 civilians dead now that weren't dead before the US showed up, and that's what the iraq people are going to focus on.

i wonder how many would be dead in an equivilent amount of time under saddam

 

[CptStern]

i wonder how many would be dead in an equivilent amount of time under saddam

I bet not as many women and children

 

[CyberSh33p]

I bet not as many women and children

Why must you seperate the sexes and age groups? We should kill equally and without prejudice.

 

[gh0st]

I bet not as many women and children

yeah, i imagine plenty more of those would be suffering under the oil for food or other "helpful" programs.

 

[Dem0nEgg]

Well, this all just sounds like a classic case of Stockholm Syndrome to me.
Google it if you are unsure as to what that means.

Some people need to stop seeing things in Black and White, and accept that the everything in the world is shades of gray - and that everybody sees these differently.

Btw, there is nothing wrong with being able to see other people's viewpoints. Being able to see the resistance as "freedom fighters" does not make you a "terrorist". If the situations were reversed by some miracle, I'm sure you would defend you country, even long after the actual "victory" over your homeland. I know I would.

The real problem is that the actual terrorists, and radical islamic militant groups have begun to make links and contacts with some of these resistance movements.

This war has infuriated many muslims around the globe, providing a growing base of angry and religious people from whom the terrorists can now more easily add to their own ranks. So the lines do truly become blurred...

She is wrong to support these groups if she directly supports the killing of coalition soldiers, they are only doing their job out there. But if she opposes the policies themselves and not the troops, the you should realise that there is nothing wrong with that. Simply saying something is justified is not saying you are 100% behind something anyway.

 

[Mr-Fusion]

The resistance fighters are fully justified in their cause!! They're allowed to defend their lands against invading forces.

The capturing and beheading of civillians is not justifiable though.

Fight the American invaders but do not kill civillians who have no political agenda.

That's my only problem with the situation.

 

[hasan]

I don't want to go into discussing the nature of the occupation or debating the justification of bush's war. This has been discussed many times, it's been exhaustd, nothing new will emerge out of the discussion.

But I would like to draw attention to the fact that this lady, who was kidnapped, says rather "nice" things about the resistance. Ofcourse this is contradictory to the image drawn by the media about the nature of the resistance. I want people to think "Wait, something is wrong; maybe I have the wrong idea about the situation".
let me repeat it, and sorry for the repetition, but this is rather cruical:
"You have to distinguish between terrorism and resistance. The guerrilla war is justified, but I am against the kidnapping of civilians."
What she said wouldn't make sense unless you distinguish between the resistance and terrorism. They are infact done by different groups.
If you think "how is it justified to kill 37 kids?" then you don't understand, this is terrorism. but hey, if you insist on thinking that way, why don't you also think about all the innocent people the americans killed?
If you are going to say that the Americans didn't kill any innocent people, then you are living in a great deciet.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

Yes yes, because all iraqis who were kidnapped *cough* imprisone by the americans showed emotional attachment to the americans

Well, its a victims mentality.

When armed men surrender and are taken into custody, if the atmosphere of their captors show no air of atrocities to be, what are those captured to fear or become emotionally traumtized by?

They dont attach, because were not forcing them into a life or death demand that they become or associate with us, nethire do we hold them to life or death demands that they assimilate or help bribe others into their release.

Dude, evey single Iraqi who got in the dark prisons of the occupation and came out said the americans treated him like an animal; like a dog.

Its also what American Soldiers said when they were captured by Iraqi fighters early into the war.

Its also what the Israeli soldiers said about Palestinian raids, and being victim to their custody.

Its also what the remnants of the German 6th Armee reported after being captured and shiped up to Kolyma. Look up GuLAG and Kolyma, you'll find some interesting information.

In short Hasan, all armies share this viewpoint about their captors. Wether or not the environments are true on these claims, has yet to be reviewed by a nuetral board of decision. For all we know, these captors could be complaining simply because the guard did'nt have anymore cigarettes to give away...

My Opinion:

Most of these anguishes and angerfelt emotions come out of being captured, and embarassed infront of the nation they were fighting for. Its the guilt of failure, or allowance to let yourself surrender. Its not limited to Iraqi Soldiers too--all soldiers have this instant guilt.

Most people fear internment, because its the thought your captors can do anything they want as of that point that bothers them. Some capturee's feel vunerable after being captured, and are in a constant torrent of misunderstandings and emotional changes whilst being freed.

Being behind bars, or being guarded itself, is an emotionally breaking thing.

Some people have been beligerent and openly said their treatment was horrible, but for the topic of those released from US Prisons, the state of prison or the culture of the guards could be whats upsetting capturee's.

Just some thoughts.

Some of them changed thier views 180 degrees, they were for the american invasion at first, they thought the americans would liberate them, but after their prison experience, they totally changed, some of them even joined the resistance.

Thats why hardly anyones been released from PoW camps. PoW Camps translate into a longer term:

Prisoner of War Camp.

There is a War going on, and when you've got prisoners, you dont release them to the enemy. Either side, or either place. To do that, would leave an option like you stated:

"but after their prison experience, they totally changed, some of them even joined the resistance.

its not an issue of truth, its her judgment.

I have'nt had quiet the time to review the source Hasan got it from, so I cant say entirely it was her judgement to begin with.

youre kidnapped in a foreign country by militant forces (known for killing whoever the hell they feel like), yet somehow you just forgive and forget, then publically announce your support for them.

If any of you got Cable, look into HBO on demand, and go into the documentaries section.

Start watching, "Children of War".

She might be sharing her forgive/forget viewpoint, because she still feels vunerable to a capture or beheading.

look I'll tell you something, a person's judgment of any issue is influenced by his perception of that issue.

She might have gained a beggars perception while being in the custody of these extremists. Threatened with death, you've dissappeared off the map...many would crack under those conditions.

I dont think anyway, they'd want to execute a woman to begin with. Its just bad publicity, and better if you kill men anyway.

Beggars Perception. ..and when they gave her life back, she had a beggars thank you. A long and extensive one, and this in theory, could be whats in effect now. Would you view the men as lenient if they let you live, Hasan?

Then make the other man next to you, die? You'd feel pretty good you got released. But you'd also feel pretty vunerable too.

well, the thing that is wrong is your perception of the resistance, it's right in your post
"known for killing whoever the hell they feel like"
apparently, the resistance is not like you imagine.
sorry to spoil it for ya, but the resistance is actually justified.

We can debate the resistance's justification, but what is not debateable is the attrocities they've commited. That just degrades their image further, and its happened. Plus, its been documented by others and those extremists.

I can goto any website for random videos, and find pretty much every execution video made.

Unfortunate the American people made themselves victims by watching these videos. Trying to convince them there is a different in morality and skill between the resistance and beheaders, is like trying to convince a Concentration Camp survivor some of the abusive guards were, "good men".

Dont get my position wrong, im not pulling a double whammy, but for the circumstances one is vunerable and put into horrible conditions or even, witnesses or becomes apart of an attrocity, you have no idea the damage that is delt.

Or how it shatters any "Human" image, surrounding the names we associate most with its action. For World War II, it was the SS. For "Mess-o-po-tamia", its the resistance. They've beheaded or executed around 100 people, and there are multiple videos up for show. You cant exactly start convincing people otherwise, when both militias of resistance coincide a work together, despite the others attrocities.

It's totaly relevant, you know why? I'm comparing the way americans treat thier prisonors and the way Iraqis do.

The difference is attrocity.

But lets compare!

Americans (MOST): Pose prisoners in a sexually disturbing positions while attaching electrodes to the genitals of those posing. Pictures taken.

Americans (Minor): Trial prisoners for having possible involvement in resistance.

Iraqi Resistance (MOST): Behead their prisoners on Video-tape, ship it to Al-Jazeera, post it on the intraweb, and wait for critics to give rave reviews!

Iraqi Resistance (Minor): Release prisoners. But only thus far, based on the criteria of:

1. Not American

2. Not Male

3. Shows sympathy to Resistance cause.

So that pretty much narrows it down to when the MOST effects will occur (Beheadings will happen if):

1. Person captured is American

2. Person Captured is Male

3. Shows no sympathy

Besides, the demands of these people are just to give them reason to kill prisoners. With or without a reason, the beheadings over extent the prison embarassments, if your willing to play a game of, "tit-for-tat".

compare that to treating you like an animal .. that's how Iraqis treat Americans like animals.

Lets compare the ethics.

We tortured the prisoners lightly, but embarassed their religion and namesake by posing them in stupid human orgy pyramids, then photographing them.

That gets a 1 or 3 in the bad ethics department.

They pinned down their prisoners, shot or sawed off their heads, while recording it on video, and later, post pictures and host videos of the executions on militant websites.

That gets a 7 or 9 in the bad ethics department.

It explains why the Muslim world is loosing respect for them.

You don't see Iraqis coming out saying "I was treated with respect", do you?

Well we have'nt exactly seen any American come out and say anything for a good seven months. Most of the time, because their beheaded or executed.

Too bad, because that crime speaks for itself, in that it shows no respect at all.

Whatever good America is trying to introduce, it's being introduced literally at the point of a gun.

No its not actually. Since their freedoms Iraqis have openly protested the war in a democratic fashion. Where'as under Saddam, they could'nt do that.

Whats even better, is we dont shoot them. Or hold them at gunpoint to protest the war. They're doing that, themselves.

For some reason, the Iraqis are suspicious of the government set up by the people who attacked them.

Care to share that third party point?

Would even the most perfect government in the world be worth more than three WTC attacks worth of civilian casualties?

So I guess nobody cares about the WTC attacks anymore...instead they use it to pose imagery in people's minds that whats going on now in Iraq, is similiar to the WTC incident.

Both are quiet different, and I think by using the WTC Incident as a provoking thought is insulting to its victims, and the 10,000 victims in Iraq now.

Is it worth this many civilian casualties in Iraq, to, "liberate them?" Time will tell of its worth.

Add the torture onto that, and you can see why the Iraqis just might be pissed off.

But does attrocity warrant attrocity?

Do beheadings warrant tortures, and do tortures warrant beheadings?

I bet not as many women and children

But plenty of men. Infact, that took some of highest toles during 1982 and 2001 for Saddams leadership. But Children were caught in the crossfire.

Well, this all just sounds like a classic case of Stockholm Syndrome to me.
Google it if you are unsure as to what that means.

Some people need to stop seeing things in Black and White, and accept that the everything in the world is shades of gray - and that everybody sees these differently.

Btw, there is nothing wrong with being able to see other people's viewpoints. Being able to see the resistance as "freedom fighters" does not make you a "terrorist". If the situations were reversed by some miracle, I'm sure you would defend you country, even long after the actual "victory" over your homeland. I know I would.

The real problem is that the actual terrorists, and radical islamic militant groups have begun to make links and contacts with some of these resistance movements.

This war has infuriated many muslims around the globe, providing a growing base of angry and religious people from whom the terrorists can now more easily add to their own ranks. So the lines do truly become blurred...

She is wrong to support these groups if she directly supports the killing of coalition soldiers, they are only doing their job out there. But if she opposes the policies themselves and not the troops, the you should realise that there is nothing wrong with that. Simply saying something is justified is not saying you are 100% behind something anyway.

This was my thought exactly.

I dont care if she does'nt like the policies, but if she's supporting these terrorists, then thats way out of line.

Stockholme Syndrome is exactly what I was looking for. Its a perfect example.

But I would like to draw attention to the fact that this lady, who was kidnapped, says rather "nice" things about the resistance.

Of course you have'nt mentioned the possibility of Italys Prime Minister paying them off. Plus, she did'nt say anything noticabley nice. Seemed pretty typical for a released captor.

Want to know why she cant go back to her offices while the US is occupying? Because if she does, she'll be captured again and beheaded. Kinda like when Nick Berg did'nt get the clue.

I want people to think "Wait, something is wrong; maybe I have the wrong idea about the situation".

Look below, and remember his point here. (But also remember his point for making this thread):

compare that to treating you like an animal .. that's how americans treat Iraqis, like animals.

who was kidnapped, says rather "nice" things about the resistance.

May I repeat her words?
"You have to distinguish between terrorism and resistance. The guerrilla war is justified, but I am against the kidnapping of civilians."

How are we to take your opinion of the terrorist/resistance serious, when you dont take our opinion of the US or kidnappings seriously?

 

[Sprafa]

I'm amazed with Kerberos

 

[CptStern]

he also thought Hasan and I were the same person ...he tends to jump to conclusions based on little to no facts. I absolutely love this stupid statement:

"Of course you have'nt mentioned the possibility of Italys Prime Minister paying them off"

ya payed her off to talk nice about the resistance :rolling:

 

[K e r b e r o s]

Well I cant claim to be, buddy-buddy, but thanks for trying. ^^

Least someone will read it and contribute their opinions, I was'nt just exacting to get yours. But glad to see your in a good mood.

 

[Bad^Hat]

Why must you seperate the sexes and age groups? We should kill equally and without prejudice.

Bump for the awful truth.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

ya payed her off to talk nice about the resistance

Thats hardly what your article suggests:

In comments that were bound to annoy Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi's government, Simona Torretta also called on Rome to withdraw the troops it sent to Iraq to support its U.S. ally.

widespread reports that his government paid a ransom of up to $1 million.

Its not only showing up in your article, but on the morning news aswell. Even your own article was'nt debating they paid her to say that, but paid for her release. (Which is what I was suggesting) In addition, the demands to bet met in order for her release to occur, would be the petitioning of a leave from Iraq by Italy.

 

[ductonius]

It's called Stockholm Syndrome people. It happens to people who have been forcebly confined when they try to form relationships with thier captors in order to gain thier sympathy. There have been several cases where victims have been kidnaped by various rebel groups, been rescued, ended up defending those groups and later joined them.

It tends to happen more to women than men. The fact that these victims are defending the Iraqi's is not entierly surprising nor unexpected.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

It's called Stockholm Syndrome people. It happens to people who have been forcebly confined when they try to form relationships with thier captors in order to gain thier sympathy. There have been several cases where victims have been kidnaped by various rebel groups, been rescued, ended up defending those groups and later joined them.

It tends to happen more to women than men. The fact that these victims are defending the Iraqi's is not entierly surprising nor unexpected.

Thank. You.

Its precisely whats going on.

 

[CptStern]

Thank. You.

Its precisely whats going on.

so did jessica lynch fall in love with her captors? What about Shoshanna johnson? did she become a resistance fighter? or is the stockholm syndrome only applicable to the enemy?

 

[ductonius]

so did jessica lynch fall in love with her captors? What about Shoshanna johnson? did she become a resistance fighter? or is the stockholm syndrome only applicable to the enemy?

A single data-point does not a sample make.

If you're trying to use these examples to discount the possibility that these Italin women are suffering from Stockholm Syndrome you can save your breath. Mentioing two people who were captured, who dont seem to be suffering from SS says absolutly NOTHING about anyone, other than those two people specifically.

Although it dosent always happen and it isnt always clear when it does, Stockholm Syndrome is a known phenomenon with many, many clear cut recorded cases. These Italian women definitily show the patterns of behavior that indicate they have SS. They were well treated by thier captors, formed relationships with thier captors, and defend and justify thier captors behavior after thier rescue.

If you bothered to do any research on the subject at all, or read what I wrote you would know that it happnes when a prisoner tries to form relationships with his/her captors and becomes sympathetic to them. In Jessica Lynch's case, there was little time to become sympathetic to her captors between the beatings and possible rape. Shoshanna Johnson was known to be subjected to similar treatment by her captors.

 

[hasan]

In Jessica Lynch's case, there was little time to become sympathetic to her captors between the beatings and possible rape. Shoshanna Johnson was known to be subjected to similar treatment by her captors.

loooool, so you dmit the treatment of the Italians wasn't bad

dude, I love how you mix up all things. Wait, I lied, I don't love it.

For your information, the Iraqis in the american prisons ar not militiant, they are just ordinary normal people. I still don't know why any of them hasn't sufered from SS? huh? why? just give me one example of an iraqi with SS? why don't you see them? cuz they don't exist.

Would you view the men as lenient if they let you live, Hasan

Every single Iraqi who was released had his life saved, how did he view the Americans?

I love how your logic only applies to non-Iraqis.

dude, take everything you've said to try and explain the Italians position, and apply it to the released iraqis, and it doesn't apply. why? because it doesn't even apply to the Italians, because it's false logic.

Ofcourse, the Italians are psychos because they are supporting the resistance, yea ya ... that's a good way to explain it "OMG! TEHY ARE TEH PSYCHOOS!".

We tortured the prisoners lightly, but embarassed their religion and namesake by posing them in stupid human orgy pyramids, then photographing them.

That gets a 1 or 3 in the bad ethics department.

You disgust me :angry:

I have'nt had quiet the time to review the source Hasan got it from, so I cant say entirely it was her judgement to begin with.

I see, you don't have enough time, that's why you got such a long reply.
Why'd you bother to post if you haven't even read them?

Its also what American Soldiers said when they were captured by Iraqi fighters early into the war.

lol, how would you expect Saddam to treat them? "Welcome my American friends to Iraq, have a nice day!"

For your information, There are many cases where they released captives, the crateria is pretty simple:

Do you work with invaders or not?

If you remember the first three japanese journalists (they were journalists weren't they?) they were released after calls from "Muslim Cleric(sp?) Association". Many Many people were released, seven chinese were released, 6 egyptians were released, and there are others.
Yes there was an american who got released, the lebanese-american guy, he was even a soldier.

If they find the captive is hepling the occupation, they kill him. It's a war, our enemy takes pows, hell he takes innocent people as pows. You can't tell me the resistance can't take pows.

The difference is, the resistance actually checks on the pow, and if they find they are innocent, they release them. Where as americans just throw iraqis in there and forget them.

No its not actually. Since their freedoms Iraqis have openly protested the war in a democratic fashion. Where'as under Saddam, they could'nt do that.

Whats even better, is we dont shoot them. Or hold them at gunpoint to protest the war. They're doing that, themselves.

Yes, you even let them form resistance groups, you see, there wasn't any resistance in saddam's time becuae he didn't let them, but now because of the freedeom we gave them, they could form militias.

Stop watching Fox, it's better for your health and your brain.

maybe I can remidn you how the resistance started: when the amricans shoot protesters in Fallujah who were protesting because the americans took an elementary school and turned it into a military base.

 

[ductonius]

loooool, so you dmit the treatment of the Italians wasn't bad

The Italian hostages were treated with "respect", by the victims own words. I have never argued that these hostages were treated poorly.

http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsPackageArticle.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=594275&section=news

In the link provided above
She added that they were treated with "respect", perhaps because they were women -- the first Western women taken hostage in Iraq since the U.S.-led invasion.

dude, I love how you mix up all things. Wait, I lied, I don't love it.

Mixed what things up?

For your information, the Iraqis in the american prisons ar not militiant, they are just ordinary normal people.

Niether you nor I know what those poeple have or have not done. The fact that some of them may not be insurgents does not in any way prove or disprove anything about any of the other prisoners.

I still don't know why any of them hasn't sufered from SS? huh? why? just give me one example of an iraqi with SS? why don't you see them? cuz they don't exist.

You are assuming that since you have not heard of any Iraqi prisoners with SS that they do not exist. You are also assuming that since there is not a ready example, that no examples exist. Both of these assumptions are baseless and working with them will lead to conclutions that are most likely false.

In addition, the status of the Iraqi prisoners - having or not having SS - has *absolutly no* bearing on the status of the Italian hostages.

Your arguments here are, at best, a weak attempt at a "straw man" argument, and at worst, totally irrelivant to the conversation.

In any case, the evidence - her "respect[ful]" treatment, relationships with the hostage takers, attitude toward her captors after - suggests that the Italian hostages endorsement of the Iraqis that kidnaped her suggests she is suffering from Stockholm Syndrome.

 

[CptStern]

In any case, the evidence - her "respect[ful]" treatment, relationships with the hostage takers, attitude toward her captors after - suggests that the Italian hostages endorsement of the Iraqis that kidnaped her suggests she is suffering from Stockholm Syndrome.

I disagree:

the evidence - her "respect[ful]" treatment, relationships with the hostage takers, attitude toward her captors after - suggests that the Italian hostages endorsement of the Iraqis that kidnaped her suggests she is suffering from Telling-The-Truth Syndrome

 

[ductonius]

I disagree:

the evidence - her "respect[ful]" treatment, relationships with the hostage takers, attitude toward her captors after - suggests that the Italian hostages endorsement of the Iraqis that kidnaped her suggests she is suffering from Telling-The-Truth Syndrome

Since you have not specified as to what the victims are supposedly telling the truth about, please provide examples of statements that the Italian hostiages made that you beleive are telling the truth. Please be careful to avoid statments that are a matter of the victims opinioin.

In addition, please make a reply to my response to your post on the bottom of page 2. http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showthread.php?t=40533&page=2&pp=15

 

[hasan]

sorry, I was talking to kerboros, but I said it under a quote from you, I messed up; my mistake.

You are assuming that since you have not heard of any Iraqi prisoners with SS that they do not exist. You are also assuming that since there is not a ready example, that no examples exist. Both of these assumptions are baseless and working with them will lead to conclutions that are most likely false.

They don't exist because the way the Americans treat them leaves no space for SS.
Trust me, if they existed the media would rush for them to show you that the Americans treat the prisoners nicely (especially Fox).

If I'm not mistaken, kerboros is arguing that the Italians were treated badly, but they are somehow greatful because they survived.

 

[gh0st]

If I'm not mistaken, kerboros is arguing that the Italians were treated badly, but they are somehow greatful because they survived.

he acknowleges they were treated well, and this is the basis for stockholm sydrome - an emotional attachment to the kidnappers.

 

[ductonius]

sorry, I was talking to kerboros, but I said it under a quote from you, I messed up; my mistake.

They don't exist because the way the Americans treat them leaves no space for SS.
Trust me, if they existed the media would rush for them to show you that the Americans treat the prisoners nicely (especially Fox).

Unfortunatly, you nor I know how specific Iraqis were treated. We know how SOME specific Iraqis were treated, but not all or even a good portion. You cannot therefore say that "the way the Americans treat them" is responsible for the lack of SS since you do not know how all, most of even many specific Iraqis were treated.

The fact that we have not heard of many, if any Iraqis who were detained, treated well and released after a short period of time does not mean that they dont exist.

The fact that "the media" has not rushed to show Iraqis with SS is similarly not evidence that they dont exist. It is as possible that they do exist, and no one cares than it is that they dont exist and people are looking.

In addition, I would like to reiterate that the treatment of Iraqi prisoners has nothing to do with the mental status of the Italian hostiges.

If I'm not mistaken, kerboros is arguing that the Italians were treated badly, but they are somehow greatful because they survived.

In that case, it's a good thing I'm not kerboros.

 

[hasan]

Unfortunatly, you nor I know how specific Iraqis were treated. We know how SOME specific Iraqis were treated, but not all or even a good portion. You cannot therefore say that "the way the Americans treat them" is responsible for the lack of SS since you do not know how all, most of even many specific Iraqis were treated.

what's the difference between "specific Iraqis" and "some specific Iraqis"? that doesn't make sense.
Like I said, if there was another way Iraqis were treated, there is no reason that they don't appear on the media.
Infact if there were, they would definetly appear on the media.
Maybe you havn't read alot about this subject, but I did, and all testimonies describe basically the same thing.
Maybe because the american media deals with the isue from a different angle.

 

[ductonius]

what's the difference between "specific Iraqis" and "some specific Iraqis"? that doesn't make sense.

Sure it does. It makes perfect sense.

Specific Iraqis: Any Iraqi.

Some specific Iraqis: A few particular Iraqis.

Like I said, if there was another way Iraqis were treated, there is no reason that they don't appear on the media. Infact if there were, they would definetly appear on the media.

There is no reason they neccisaraly *would* appear in "the media" either.

You're assuming "the media" would jump all over any stories of good treatment if they existed. There is no basis for this assumption.

I would say that it is the opposite in fact. The phrase "if it bleeds, it leads" exists for a reason. I think its safe to say that newspapers and television news outlets have a history of presenting news that is more shocking over news that is blander and less exciting. The news that a new raw sewage treatment plant was opening in Iraq only made headlines after terrorists blew up 35 children attending the opening. If that hand not happened, do you think we would have heard about the new raw sewage treatment plant? I dont.

The fact that we have not been hearing about well and fairly treated Iraqis being released from custody is not evidence that no Iraqis have been treated well and fairly. In fact, from the history of newspapers and TV news channels, one would expect not to hear about them since they would more likely be dropped in favor of more exhiting news.

Maybe you havn't read alot about this subject, but I did, and all testimonies describe basically the same thing.
Maybe because the american media deals with the isue from a different angle.

I wouldnt know anything about the American media past what I occasionally see on CNN (which I rarely watch becaue thier world news sucks). Up here in Canada, you have to pay extra if you want to get American papers and TV channels.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

Its pretty solid right now.

Oh, to answer your question Hasan, on why Jessica Lynch did'nt suffer from Stockholmes, is because she was'nt threatened on being beheaded or killed.

Plus, she was rescued. Its also good to hear in the first moments, your army miles away battling it off in the distance.

Unfortunately for these Italian Aid workers, noone was coming to fight for them, or nobody had any idea on where these guys were to rescue the aid workers.