Ransom For Kidnapped Family Members

[Derek 2.0]

Go there and make sure to wipe them (terrorists), all out! Even if we have to hire mercenaries to do it for us.

Money well-spent. You send the message that you don't mess around with Canadians.

200 - 400 Abu Sayyaf members - take them all out - take no prisoners - and do the Philippines a big favor.

That's not realistic to expect Canada to quell a Filipino insurgency alone.......something yet to be achieved by the Filipinos themselves, nor historically the Japanese, Americans or Spanish........

That's not to say Canada shouldn't continue to fight radical Islam, and that there wouldn't be a role for Canadian special forces and the RCMP in aiding the Filipino Government fighting radical Islam.......One could argue, with our weak kneed Government, pivoting away from the fight against radical Islam in the Middle East to one in the Philippines would be an easy sell politically.........and Filipino's are one of the largest migrants groups settling in Canada, all the while, for many, keeping strong ties with friends and family in the Philippines.

And lets not forget, there still is one Canadian hostage being held.

[Big Guy]

That's not realistic to expect Canada to quell a Filipino insurgency alone.......something yet to be achieved by the Filipinos themselves, nor historically the Japanese, Americans or Spanish........

...

And lets not forget, there still is one Canadian hostage being held.

There was an interview with a journalist who had been kidnapped by this group in the past, held for months and ransomed out. She claimed that she had a series of interviews while captive and concluded that they were nothing but bunch of young thugs with weapons with no political or terrorist agenda and were doing what they were doing for the money.

In fact, they planned to leave the Philippines for better living as soon as their "nest egg" created by paid ransoms was large enough.

Sometime one cannot see the forest because of the trees.

[Derek 2.0]

There was an interview with a journalist who had been kidnapped by this group .....

Ces Drilon?

[betsy]

That's not realistic to expect Canada to quell a Filipino insurgency alone.......something yet to be achieved by the Filipinos themselves, nor historically the Japanese, Americans or Spanish........

That's not to say Canada shouldn't continue to fight radical Islam, and that there wouldn't be a role for Canadian special forces and the RCMP in aiding the Filipino Government fighting radical Islam.......One could argue, with our weak kneed Government, pivoting away from the fight against radical Islam in the Middle East to one in the Philippines would be an easy sell politically.........and Filipino's are one of the largest migrants groups settling in Canada, all the while, for many, keeping strong ties with friends and family in the Philippines.

And lets not forget, there still is one Canadian hostage being held.

It is very much realistic to work with the Philippine government! It's not just an "insurgency." It is a terrorist group, as recognized by the Philippine government! This group was funded by Bin Laden, and had pledged allegiance to ISIS!

If it's not realistic to work with foreign governments to deal with the problem of terrorism....then what are NATO nations doing fighting it out with ISIS in the Middle East?

Edited April 27, 2016 by betsy

[betsy]

There was an interview with a journalist who had been kidnapped by this group in the past, held for months and ransomed out. She claimed that she had a series of interviews while captive and concluded that they were nothing but bunch of young thugs with weapons with no political or terrorist agenda and were doing what they were doing for the money.

In fact, they planned to leave the Philippines for better living as soon as their "nest egg" created by paid ransoms was large enough.

Sometime one cannot see the forest because of the trees.

You think ISIS isn't comprised by a number of young thugs?

That's kinda saying drug peddlers are mostly young thugs who dream of the good life.....so you're saying, we should be more understanding, and be sympathetic?

Anyway....how do you know these interviewees weren't pulling her chain....knowing she's a journalist? What do you know of this journalist?

Bottom line: whatever motivation it is behind this, they are still engaging in kidnapping for ransom,

and killing people.

Gee......sometimes one cannot see the forest because of the trees.

Edited April 27, 2016 by betsy

[betsy]

There are a few critical issues that I do not see addressed here. There are a number of countries who do, as a state, pay ransom for kidnapped individuals. At one time, the American government had a position where they warned that they would prosecute Americans who negotiate on their own, pay the ransom required and bring their relative home. That warning or policy no longer exists.

Most international corporations have a clause in the contracts with its executives, as part of their contract, that they will negotiate and try to satisfy kidnappers to get their executive employees back. All kinds of companies have paid ransoms to the Somalians to get their ships back which had been hijacked and held for ransom.

There also seems to be an association between the reason and method of the kidnapping and the paying of the ransom. The young Canadian who decides he wants to hitchhike through Syria and Afghanistan, knowing of the dangers, and gets kidnapped gains little sympathy for Canadians for his plight. The missionary who walks into deepest Africa to convert those terrorists and is kidnapped also gets little sympathy from Canadians. On the other hand, a Canadian soldier or a diplomat, kidnapped by terrorists while performing their duties has the sympathy of Canadians and would receive support for payment (or some other negotiated settlement) for the return of the individual.

Does anybody really believe that the Canadian (or American or ...) do not negotiate and barter the release of people important to that government?

Should the Canadian and or American governments prosecute individuals, or corporations or businesses who negotiate for and pay ransom for kidnapped victims?

If companies or families want to pay ransom....I suppose they should be able to. If I'm not mistaken, some big companies with employees abroad carry insurance for that very reason. But like I've said, there's no guarantee you'll get the kidnapped person back, alive.

I agree with Trudeau on his stance. You get a nation's leader paying ransom, and you officially make it an "open season"

to its citizens abroad!

Just do the math! If we pay ransom for every kidnapped Canadian......how much budget do we allocate for that?

If we pay for one kidnapped person - we should pay for all! Unless you suggest we only pay ransom for the privileged ones.....

.......so how do you decide which ones to pay ransom for, and which ones we leave to die?

And if it's a terrorist group, then we end up funding it with the ransom money. More ammo for them, more dirty bombs!

Talk about you buying the big hammer for the enemy to whack your own head with!

Edited April 27, 2016 by betsy

[Big Guy]

Ces Drilon?

Yes. I looked up her photo. I saw her on a news program last night and did not get her name at the time.

[Derek 2.0]

It is very much realistic to work with the Philippine government! It's not just an "insurgency." It is a terrorist group, as recognized by the Philippine government! This group was funded by Bin Laden, and had pledged allegiance to ISIS!

If it's not realistic to work with foreign governments to deal with the problem of terrorism....then what are NATO nations doing fighting it out with ISIS in the Middle East?

I won't dive into the logic vacuum with you betsy, the Filipinos have been fighting an internal insurgency among themselves since the start of Spanish rule nearly 500 years ago, furthered heightened with the rise of Filipino nationalism near the end of Spanish rule.....radical Islam is but a part of said nationalism........and nowhere did I state its not realistic to work with foreign governments.......you suggested Canada follow Israel's lead........Israel is not a nation that involves itself in multinational conflict, and only came close to wading into such waters once (Suez) in its short history.

[Derek 2.0]

Yes. I looked up her photo. I saw her on a news program last night and did not get her name at the time.

I never heard her account in person, do you remember what program you were watching?

In her case, as you've suggested, it could very much so be the case, as such thugs (akin to Pirates form centuries ago) do dominate certain parts (namely some of the hundreds of Southern Islands) of the Philippines.....of course such thugs would represent just one portion of Filipino discontent......

[betsy]

I won't dive into the logic vacuum with you betsy, the Filipinos have been fighting an internal insurgency among themselves since the start of Spanish rule nearly 500 years ago, furthered heightened with the rise of Filipino nationalism near the end of Spanish rule.....radical Islam is but a part of said nationalism........and nowhere did I state its not realistic to work with foreign governments.......you suggested Canada follow Israel's lead........Israel is not a nation that involves itself in multinational conflict, and only came close to wading into such waters once (Suez) in its short history.

link to emoticon

I'm not saying there are no insurgencies in the Philippines.

I'm saying the Abu Sayyaf was funded by Bin Laden, and and it had pledged allegiance to ISIS.

It is an Islamic terrorist group!

Here are 5 things to know about the terrorist organization:

1. Abu Sayyaf is pushing for a separate Islamic state in the country’s south

Abu Sayyaf, which means Bearer of the Sword, was founded about 25 years ago and is pushing to create an Islamic state with Sharia law in the southern islands of Mindanao and Sulu. The Philippines is five per cent Muslim and 83 per cent Roman Catholic, but most Muslims are concentrated in the south.

2. Canada, the U.S. and the Philippines list Abu Sayyaf as a terrorist group

A local court ruling in 2015 declared Abu Sayyaf a terrorist organization under the country’s anti-terror law, after it declared allegiance to the Islamic State terror group. Canada added the group to its list of terrorist entities in 2003. The U.S. also considers Abu Sayyaf a terror group.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/world/5-things-to-know-about-the-terror-group-abu-sayyaf-1.2874180

I refer to Israel's way of rescuing its kidnapped citizens! You're taking my message out of context!

1976: Israelis rescue Entebbe hostages

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/july/4/newsid_2786000/2786967.stm

I'll go back to ignoring you Waldo, if you don't shape up.

Edited April 27, 2016 by Michael Hardner
added link

[Shady]

May I assume then that if your family member - your spouse, your child or one of your parents - was kidnapped by a terrorist, that you would be comfortable with them taking charge of the "case"?

I would be heartbroken if a family member was killed by kidnappers/terrorists. But I agree with the policy of not paying ransoms. Paying ransoms only incentivizes more kidnapping of Canadians.

[Big Guy]

I would be heartbroken if a family member was killed by kidnappers/terrorists. But I agree with the policy of not paying ransoms. Paying ransoms only incentivizes more kidnapping of Canadians.

I suggest that your position is one that can be negotiated:

Would you pay $100 to ransom your child and save his/her life?

Would you pay $1000 to ransom your child and save his/her life?

Would you pay $100,000 to ransom your child and save his/her life?

Would you pay $1,000,000 to ransom your child and save their life?

Would you pay $10,000,000 to ransom your child and save his/her life?

If you answer "Yes" to any of these conditions then you are not true to your position.

If you answer "No" to all of these conditions then you are a liar.

[Shady]

I suggest that your position is one that can be negotiated:

Would you pay $100 to ransom your child and save his/her life?

Would you pay $1000 to ransom your child and save his/her life?

Would you pay $100,000 to ransom your child and save his/her life?

Would you pay $1,000,000 to ransom your child and save their life?

Would you pay $10,000,000 to ransom your child and save his/her life?

If you answer "Yes" to any of these conditions then you are not true to your position.

If you answer "No" to all of these conditions then you are a liar.

I would personally want to pay any amount. But what I want to do isn't necessarily the right thing. That's the point.

[Big Guy]

I would personally want to pay any amount. But what I want to do isn't necessarily the right thing. That's the point.

I do not disagree with you. I would do the same.

But if what "we want to do isn't the right thing" then why would be consider it to be the "right thing"? That would imply that these rules are OK for others but not OK for us.

[Shady]

I do not disagree with you. I would do the same.

But if what "we want to do isn't the right thing" then why would be consider it to be the "right thing"? That would imply that these rules are OK for others but not OK for us.

That's true. These rules should apply to everyone equally.