Malacañang is steadfast on its no ransom policy, so we're not going to change that. But we hope that the local efforts there would succeed in order that we bring home safely these people who are being held against their will."This is in reference to an ultimatum issued by Abu Sayyaf leader Nur Hassan Jamiri, for a one million peso ransom payment by Tuesday (tomorrow) for the release of four Basilan Electric Cooperative linemen - two pairs of brothers Alberto and Emilberto Singson, and Paul and Ian Helwig--kidnapped last June 26 near Tuburan, Basilan. This was just a few weeks after ABSCBN News anchor Ces Drilon was ransomed for an acknowledged amount of 5 million pesos near Indanan, Sulu.
Of course, absolutely no credibility can possibly be accorded to a statement like this by Mr. Dureza considering the shameless record of Gloria Macapagal Arroyo in paying off kidnappers for hostages like her billionaire buddy Reghis Romero during the infamous ASG Dos Palmas raid (10 million pesos) Angelo de la Cruz in Iraq ($6 million); her "peace negotiator," Gen. Benjamin Dolorfino (450,000 pesos for "board and lodging") in 2007 and Italian priest Fr. Giancarlo Bossi (12 million pesos?) in 2007.Now some in the audience may think such payoffs are somehow worth it since undoubtedly the lives of the above mentioned persons were spared from the Abu Sayyaf Group, whose formal name is Al-Harrakatul al-Islamiya (The Sword of Islam), even as millions in ransom were paid with the full knowledge and complicity of persons like Dureza, Gen. Rodolfo Garcia and other "peace advocates."
But do a Google Search like this one on "Beheadings in the Philippines" which yields over a hundred thousand references to dozens of instances in which hostages have indeed lost their heads, usually AFTER one of these ransom payments have been made. You will discover that in contrast to the above high-profile personalities for whom millions are paid in ransom, euphemistically called "board and lodging", the victims of the terrorist axe are usually poor unknown persons unfortunate enough not to mean much to the Palace, the Press, the Peace Negotiators or the Priesthood!
In May, 2001, we have Nine Christian hostages beheaded by the infamous Commander Robot (a darling of the local broadcast and newspaper media who glamorized and glorified his exploits by giving him unlimited air time and front page coverage).
Let's not forget those 15 Marines ambushed by the Moro Islamic Liberation Front/ASG with ten of them beheaded last year, and robbed of cell phones (used to taunt their relatives) and wedding rings, were in Basilan looking for the aforesaid Fr. Bossi, who was later miraculously rescued (not ransomed) according to DILG Sec. Ronnie Puno in a "brilliant sting operation" on his ASG captors. In this instance, the Basilan Regional Trial Court issued arrest warrants against over a hundred suspects and the police were about to serve those warrants, when into the fray steps Peace Negotiators Jess Dureza and Gen. Rodolfo Garcia, insisting on a "special independent investigation" of the incident, whence the warrants were suspended and nothing has actually come of the whole bloody incident! Their report was never released and no one knows to this day whodunit. No arrests have been made. No one has been brought to justice for that heinous and savage crime. (Why? because many of those about to be arrested were their "partners in the peace process" from the MILF!).
It's not of course just American tourists like Jeff Sobero, or Philippine Marines that are beheaded by the Abu Sayyaf, or Christian women hostages raped and beheaded by the brave mujahedeen, there are also these seven impoverished summer-time workers trying to earn enough for tuition, who lost their heads to the courageous freedom fighting swordsmen, whom Philippine Daily Innuendo columnist Jose Ma. Montelibano calls "our Tausug brothers in Sulu".
Nota bene: Please notice that after each of these atrocities is committed, the President usually orders an "all-out war" to "resolutely crush the terrorists", after which the peace advocates take their cue for headlines, editorials and opinion columns and "peace lectures" usually somewhere in the safety of the Republic of Diliman.
Today, the two pairs of brothers who may indeed get their heads lopped off during the next 24 hours (unless of course Colombian President Uribe magically flies in on his white helicopter) are ordinary electric coop meter-readers who happen to be working for an outstan
ding electric coop, Baselco (via the Mindanao Examiner).
The Philippines is indeed the true decapitation capital of the world, not Iraq, or Afghanistan, having by far the greatest number of sawed-off, hacked-off heads. But only if you are poor and unknown, not rich, powerful, famous or an acquaintance of the peace negotiators and peace lecturers.
22 comments:
DJB,
This is all exactly true. I'll add one other point that is obvious and follows directly from your own points above...terrorists wouldn't bother kidnapping if it didn't pay well. The risk is high, but so is the reward. If they never got rewarded for it, then it's not worth the trouble. All of these past ransoms ('room and board' or whatever euphemism the politicians and press want to spin it as), indicate to the terrorists that this is a great way to fund their activities. Thus, they will do it again and again.
Also, of course, I agree about the fact that 'room and board' is seldom paid for ordinary citizens...which is fine with the terrorists...a few hacked (non-elite) heads sends the message that they are capable of the crime, if anybody wants to doubt it...
...'pour encourager les autres'.
So we have PDI and the Philippine media, GMA, Puno, Dureza, Gen. Rodolfo Garcia, Randy David and other "peace advocates" all making a monster mess a lot messier, and then there are the killers -- the Commander Robots Muslim terrorists bandits kidnappers murderers, the members of the MILF who beheaded the Philippine Marines, the Al-Harrakatul al-Islamiya.
Is this no ransom policy something you would like for all kidnap cases ?
You think it will put an end to kidnap for ransom activities once and for all?
How many lives are you willing to sacrifice to make kidnappers realize you mean business?
mb,
so are you for putting up a ransom fund where we automatically pay kfr gangs whatever they demand?
DJ,
The answer to your question is NO.
Now answer my questions. Stop changing the topic. Show your readers that your position is well thought out and not just a parroting of war of terror rhetoric.
MB,
The answer to your question is: NONE BUT THEIRS!
"Is this no ransom policy something you would like for all kidnap cases ? "
The answer to your question is: NONE BUT THEIRS!
"You think it will put an end to kidnap for ransom activities once and for all? "
The answer to your question is: NONE BUT THEIRS!
"How many lives are you willing to sacrifice to make kidnappers realize you mean business?"
The answer to your question is: NONE BUT THEIRS!
Polly wants a cracker. awk! awk!
oh grow up, boom. it's a cruel world out there. live with it.
mb: you mean there should be an exception to a no ransom policy? i guess not. in reality, there is: if you have the money, you may pay. if you are poor, you have no option but to leave your fate to the mercies of the kidnappers. is that acceptable to you? i guess not. solution: there should be disincentive to kidnapping, not more incentives (ransom payment), if you want to stop it.
mb,
Simple test for you..it's called the 'what's more likely test'...If you drink water fro the toilet bowl on the theory this will cause you to crap gold nuggets...and you do this over and over, but instead of gold nuggets, you just keep getting diarrhea...how many times do you do this before you decide the result of drinking water from the toilet bowl is diarrhea and not gold nuggets..assuming you are a rationa1 human being? One, if you have average intelligence...maybe two if you are a drooling moron...and perhaps three if you are a masochistic jihadist...but the pavlovian response will always kick in at some point around the IQ of a common dog.
another solution to the KFR Muslim gangs is for the PNP/AFP to catch some.
If not that, then for GMA-admin and the media to talk about other problems (either a malfunctioning traffic light in Cubao or the rice harvest) while the number of US special forces operating in Philippine territory is allowed to quadruple.
Dave,
The disincentive is knowing you won't get away with it. What's the use of a 5 million dollar ransom if you know that you will not get to spend it?
Well the only good thing about the no ransom policy is that everyone, rich or poor, gets to leave their fate to the mercy of the kidnappers.
Richard,
So how come you keep feasting on that piece of shit war on terror? Don't you think it's time you pulled your head out of Bush's ass?
Just say no didn't work for Nancy's war on drugs, it won't work on terrorists.
The only disincentive is not to let them get away with it. That means bringing kidnappers to justice.
"So how come you keep feasting on that piece of shit war on terror? Don't you think it's time you pulled your head out of Bush's ass?"
First, I just knew I would get a response like this from you, mb. First, as a BDS sufferer, you seem to exhibit the symptom of tourrette's syndrome and ad-hominem-itis...most leftist commenters on blogs seem to have this, so you aren't alone there. It's caused by the cognitive dissonance associated with being completely FACTUALLY WRONG! Thus the need to attack the messenger with vulgar language and insults to distract from the fact that you have nothing else to say.
Second, since you can't admit it (and neither can your fellow travellers in the US press), AQ in Iraq has almost been completely wiped out and Iraq is now well down the road to political stability...the US has not had a terrorist attack since 9/11...Afghanistan, though still struggling, is now a democratic nation...if all of this is up 'Bush's ass', I'd much prefer to stick my head up his than yours.
Finally, there's this brilliant analogy:
"Just say no didn't work for Nancy's war on drugs, it won't work on terrorists."
Why yes, mb..sure, those two things are exactly alike, aren't they? The mind verily boggles..I'll explain why they are different, since you dont' have a clue. The war on drugs based on a destroying an illegal black market...drug dealing is not idealogically based and, though extreme violence can be a consequence sometimes...IT IS NOT THE ENTIRE POINT OF THE EXERCISE! Kidnapping and murder and random acts of extreme violence by Islamic Terrorists are the means of destroying the society it has targeted...not a way to live the good life. Ask yourself this...If you promised to give the leaders of a drug cartel all of the money they wanted in exchange for peace...and do the same with Islamic Terrorists, who do you think would leave you in peace...answer, the drug cartel. Geez!
mb,
You are the gift that keeps on giving, my friend:
"The disincentive is knowing you won't get away with it. What's the use of a 5 million dollar ransom if you know that you will not get to spend it?"
First, why do think they do it if they know they won't get away with it, Einstein? Especially if they got away with it in every example DJB just cited in his blog post.
Second, you do know that money is fungible right? Gee, do you think the black marketers will ask them for their ID when they buy their AK-47s and RPGs and turn them into the police if they suspect they are terrorists? Do you think the guys who have been identified as the perps will buy a first class ticket to Manila to pick up some chemicals for home made explosives?
Very persuasive points you have there..
Richard,
So it's not kidnapping per se that you're against. It's kidnappng by Muslims that you don't like.
But let me point out something about money that you missed : Money as fungible as it is won't get to be enjoyed in jail or in a grave.
That's why my argument for law enforcement rather than Just Say NO is a better solution to ALL kidnappings, Muslim or otherwise.
It is realistiv as opposed to something torn out of the pahes of the neocon cathechism
mb,
"So it's not kidnapping per se that you're against. It's kidnappng by Muslims that you don't like."
Nope, you still don't get it...law enforcement does not work when you are dealing with people outside of an organized polity..who don't even recognize the society that creates the laws being enforced. Law enforcement, by definition, cannot deal with an existential threat...these people don't even acknowlege the laws they are being charged with breaking...the only laws the recognize are religious laws of the koran (and, with the understanding that most muslims don't even accept their interpretation of the koran). So, no..anybody who kidnaps and threatens to destroy, in the most heinous manner possible, defenseless people, in an effort to undermine and bring down an entire legitimate, democratic society for their own interpretation..and not the majority interpretaton...of a religious (or any other) belief...deserve only a military response..and a very swift and lethal one at that.
mb: precisely. and there are many forms of these disincentives. you kill them, you bring them to the courts, you lock them up and throw away the key, etc. but correct me if im wrong: you seem to think its fine to pay ransom, for as long as you run after them later. now that's tricky. i dont think so. no ransom, period.
Dave,
There are two sides to every kidnapping. One is the policy or general rule side. The other is the personal or the family side.
The personal will always trump the impersonal because who is willing to sacrifice a member of his family just to teach kidnappers a lesson? So from the personal side, you do what the Orneas did. You pay the ransom you get your loved one back and then you gp after the kidnappers with everything you've got.
The no ransom policy is just words. It hasn't worked because first of all everybody breaks it. Secondly, who wants to sacrifice the life of their loved one.
So the other disincentives you mentioned are the only realistic disincentives because they say "you will never get to enjoy that ransom you took."
So we disagree on effectivity and to each his own, I guess.
richard,
law enforcement does not depend on the consent of criminals.
Kay nga enforcement ang tawag.
mb,
"law enforcement does not depend on the consent of criminals."
You are right, but I didn't make that point...my point was that these guys aren't criminals...they are a threat to the national polity...they are extorting money to bring about a change in the structure of government against the will of the people.
BTW, anybody heard anymore about the fate of the unforunate souls? Were they beheaded or just no news at all? I suppose the deadline passed without any response at all from the Government...
Post a Comment