April 30, 2004

APPEASEMENT ON THE MARCH

Terrorists demanded a demonstration, and they’ve got what they wanted:

The families of three Italians held hostage in Iraq led a march near St. Peter's Square on Thursday after the abductors threatened to kill the captives unless Italians carried out a "huge demonstration" against the war.

Not that anyone at the march admitted they were reacting to the terrorists’ demands; oh, no. This demonstration was entirely unrelated to any threat:

The relatives described the march as a peace rally and said they were not giving in to the captors.

"This protest is for peace and nothing else," said Patrizia Oliano, of Pompeii, who brought her family to the march. "We're not giving in to blackmail."

"Obviously, nobody likes to be told what to do," said [Jane Reynolds]. "But we don't consider this giving in to blackmail."

So don’t demonstrate at all. Even better, march against terrorism. Or does that idea only ever occur to Iraqis?

Posted by Tim Blair at April 30, 2004 06:50 AM
Comments

If this is not clear evidence that the terrorists are waging their war in the press, I don't know what is. And I do not understand why people continue to fall for it.

Posted by: Rebecca at April 30, 2004 at 07:16 AM

How did so many of our Western nations end up being so wimpy?

Terrorist: "JUMP, you infidels, JUMP!!"

Westerners: "How high? (If we jump too high we'll be unable to kiss your feet.)"

Posted by: Chris Josephson at April 30, 2004 at 07:20 AM

A few thousand Italians bringing shame on the memory of Fabrizio Quattrocchi.

Posted by: Jan Haugland at April 30, 2004 at 07:20 AM

Now, looking at europeans behaviour, you understand how we fell into the hands of dictatorships 60 years ago, and consignet to those hands our Jews. Fear, weakness, cowardice and desire to stay far from troubles (refusing again to acknowledge of already having them at home). Dulcis in fundo we disguise these refusal to see and to fight under ethical garments, in a sad comedy of good feelings.

Posted by: Paolo at April 30, 2004 at 10:19 AM

Give the families a break.

Give the terrorist-appeasing know-nothing peaceniks all you've got, but having a go at the families of the hostages is low. You can't expect them to be rational when they're under such emotional strain.

Their behavior is understandable and forgiveable.

Posted by: Adam at April 30, 2004 at 10:27 AM

Adam,

The actions of the families are understandable but not forgivable, for they have increased the risks for ALL of us.

I recall that many years ago, the head of one Australian government department left specific instructions that if he was kidnapped on any of his overseas travels, under no circumstances was any ransom to be paid for his release.

The best course of action for Australia would be for the government to announce that in the event of the kidnapping of any of its ministers, no bargains would be entered into for their release and for all MPs, as a show of solidarity and principle, to sign a declaration to the same effect.

This would give a lead to the nation and to the world.

Posted by: Antony at April 30, 2004 at 11:22 AM

Blackmail? What has any of this got to do with blackmail? This is about threats.

Posted by: Nathan at April 30, 2004 at 11:38 AM

I thought it was standard policy not to pay ransom because
A) it arms your enemy (eg the situation in the phillipeans)
B) it puts a price on your citizens heads (or your MP's heads)

Posted by: Scottie at April 30, 2004 at 12:06 PM

But a few waved banners, with one saying, "With the Resistance in Iraq, for the Intifadeh in Palestine."

Argument over.

Posted by: ilibcc at April 30, 2004 at 12:19 PM

Nathan, this is how threats and blackmail are related in this case (from dictionary.com):

blackmail: a. Extortion of money or something else of value from a person by the threat of exposing a criminal act or discreditable information. b. Something of value extorted in this manner.

Posted by: JeffS at April 30, 2004 at 12:21 PM

I find it interesting that the Green Party are acting as stringers for Al-Jazeera...

To coincide with the march, the left-wing opposition Green Party said they sent a video of recent anti-war demonstrations in Italy to the London office of pan-Arab television channel Al-Jazeera.

"The Italian people have been fighting for a long time against the war and for the withdrawal of our soldiers from Iraq — as you can see from these images," said a text accompanying the video.

Al-Jazeera said they intended to broadcast the video, probably on Friday, said Green Party spokesman Andrea Alicandro.

On Thursday, Al-Jazeera broadcast images of the march for about a minute, then ran a headline on the demonstration.

Posted by: Timothy Lang at April 30, 2004 at 02:03 PM

For Adam, from earlier today: if I'd ever been taken hostage during my military career, I'm confident that my family would never have done a terrorist's bidding. Since they'd all done some service themselves, they would have known the harm such demonstrations would've done to my own morale personally, and the harm such actions would do to the cause I was fighting for in general. March against terrorism, yes. A march for "peace" sounds more like appeasement.

Benjamin Franklin: "We must all hang together, or we will surely hang separately." Or words to that effect...

Posted by: geezer at April 30, 2004 at 02:10 PM

You've just shot down your own argument, Jeffs.

As you wrote: Blackmail involves exposing a criminal act or discreditable information.

If I say, "Give me $1,000, or I'll tell your husband about your antics with the tennis coach."
That's blackmail.

If I say, "Give me $1,000, or I'll shoot your husband." that's extortion.

Posted by: peggy sue at April 30, 2004 at 02:12 PM

Hmm...BBC reported "hundreds" protesting:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3671945.stmhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3671945.stm

Posted by: Timothy Lang at April 30, 2004 at 02:19 PM

...Hale asked for a Bible, but his request was refused. He was marched out by a guard and hanged upon an apple-tree in Rutgers’s orchard. The place was near the present intersection of East Broadway and Market Streets. Cunningham asked him to make his dying “speech and confession.” “I only regret,” he said, “that I have but one life to lose for my country.”

Captain Nathan Hale, age 21.

http://www.ctssar.org/patriots/nathan_hale.htm

Posted by: Sandy P at April 30, 2004 at 02:22 PM

Sandy P: Hoo-ah/HOO-ah/URR-rah!... take your pick, I love them all.

Posted by: geezer at April 30, 2004 at 02:58 PM

Peggy sue, you said If I say, "Give me $1,000, or I'll shoot your husband." that's extortion.

Now, please read the definition again. I copied it below for your convenience. Note the change in emphasis.

blackmail: a. Extortion of money or something else of value from a person by the threat of exposing a criminal act or discreditable information. b. Something of value extorted in this manner.

I didn't shoot down my own argument. You agreed with me. Or we agreed that blackmail and extortion are equivalent. It really doesn't matter.

The difference may be of value to a Boston lawyer, but for this discussion, the point is that a bunch of terrorists are trying gain something of value (i.e., getting the Italians to respond in some fashion) by force (i.e., threatening to kill their hostages).

Blackmail or extortion....who cares? Some Islamofascists are trying to run the rest of the world to their benefit and our loss.

Posted by: JeffS at April 30, 2004 at 03:24 PM

Oy! Yuz agree already, OK?

Now somebody tell me if "MXC" was any good tonite, cuz I missed it with all this posting here!

Posted by: geezer at April 30, 2004 at 03:43 PM

Er, Jeffs,
I have copied your copy of the definition.

blackmail:
a. Extortion of money or something else of value from a person
by the threat of exposing a criminal act or discreditable information.
b. Something of value extorted in this manner.

As the definition says,
there are TWO elements to blackmail:
(1) extortion
and
(2) threat of exposing a criminal act &c.

All cows are animals, but not all animals are cows.

All blackmail is extortion, but not all extortion is blackmail.

Posted by: peggy sue at April 30, 2004 at 08:09 PM

Peggy Sue, if you divert this comment thread into a nitpicky semantics argument I will delete all your co*mments. (Asterisk included to divert MT-Blacklist.)

Posted by: Andrea Harris at April 30, 2004 at 08:36 PM

Andrea, you are certainly not an appeaser! Unlike some people that we watch and read about on the news.

Giving terrorists what they want is simply positive reinforcement. They are encouraged to engage in similar atrocities.

And that is what appeasement results in. Not peace, not victory. More terrorism. It's a lose-lose situation.

Posted by: JeffS at May 1, 2004 at 12:57 AM

I'd hold a small protest, then hold a large support gathering later. Probably track down the kidnappers and pay their families a visit.

Posted by: aaron at May 1, 2004 at 01:30 AM