« So There I Was... | Main | Collusion »

thinking out loud. again.

Quick rush of a post, more blogging later after this busy morning winds down. [Thanks to everyone who answered my questions on this post about the planes. You were all most helpful and informative.] I'm just sitting here wondering why there is an American in Saudi Arabia whose captors claim they will kill him today unless their demands are met and no one is really talking about it. I'm sure if there were thirty people being held hostage it would be all over the news. And I'm doubly sure that if it was an American holding a prisoner hostage in Baghdad, we would have wall to wall coverage. But no, just one American guy set to be killed by terrorists. No big deal. I don't know about you, but I consider the threat of killing even one captive American a terrorist attack. Does it take 3,000 dead people to make some of you feel threatened? Does it take a whole slew of Americans held hostage for over 100 days? Do you need big numbers to see the fine print? Again, no clue. No freaking clue. If you're the praying type, pray for Paul Johnson, Jr.

Comments

This may sound callous, but it's probably a good thing that Mr. Johnson's situation isn't being given wall to wall coverage in the media.

That in itself is one of the major reasons he was grabbed.

Positive thoughts for his safe deliverance.

Good point. I was referring to some blogs as well, though.

I think it's because he's in Saudi Arabia. If he'd been kidnapped in the US--or even a normal country like Germany--it would be more shocking.

You can't help but feel for the poor guy and his family.

Mark Levin, the Landmark Legal Foundation president and WABC Radio host, had this suggestion: Every time the terrorists kill an American, we trot out 10 terrorists from Guantanamo Bay and kill them.

That probably wouldn't work, even though many of the terrorists could probably be convicted of death penalty offenses under U.S. law.

Let's see what Saudi intelligence can do; they don't have the same ugly, second-guessing political climate on this stuff that the Bush Administration has, so it might be worth watching how they handle it.

You know, you're right about bloggers leaving this alone for now. I'm one of them.

I suppose my reticence is due to really wanting this to be different. You see, in many ways I feel like his fate has already been determined, since both al Qaeda AND Saudi Arabia don't bargain. This is in addition to the fact that they have NEVER let any of their video taped captives go. So, instead of posting those facts all over my blog, I am silently hopeful for this man and his family. I WANT to wrong about this.

Additionally, I don't feel threatened when this scum of the universe kills...I feel ANGRY. That's not usually the best motivational tool with which to write something coherent. I ended up quoting a lot of other people when it came to Nick Berg because I was so incensed I could barely type.

Again, I want to be wrong about what I feel will happen. Avoiding the topic publicly is my way of not putting negative thoughts about this out into the universe when positive thoughts are more valuable at this time.

I had the same feeling, Linda - like he's already as good as dead. And I'm hoping I'm wrong, but with no great conviction.

For one thing, I'm still thinking the Saudi approach here is just gonna be "round up the usual suspects." It's been pointed out that the Saudis don't want to look bad (and thus would make serious effort to find the bad guys), but I figure it'd look even worse if they caught the bad guys and it turns out they're the same guys who the Saudis allowed to escape in the terrorist attack a few weeks ago.

Those of us working in Saudi have been abandoned by our governments (US, UK,etc.,).

We are "advised" to get out of the country, i.e. resign our jobs and f@#k off. The terrorists threaten our lives and our right to earn a living. We're getting screwed from both sides.

The Saudis will not permit us to arm ourselves for self defence.

Our governments' advice is the counsel of cowardice, defeatism and surrender.

Rather than advising us to run (and thereby grant to the terrorists precisely the victory they seek) they should pressurise the Saudi government to permit expatriates to bear arms in self defence.

Irrespective of the question of the competence of Saudi security forces, if we are unarmed we are absolutely defenceless in the period between an initial assault and the time security forces can contain an attack. If we're armed, we can respond instantly. Maybe we lose and die, maybe we kill the terrorists. Either way they have a fight, we have a chance where now we don't.

Regrets for anonymity, it's necessary.

MM is right on arming, with the added advantage that even if an attack leaves all the targets dead it makes terrorist more leary about mounting the next.

I am sick at heart that the Bush administration refuses to take the gloves off. No prisoners. There is no conceivable application of the Geneva Convention or "international law" to kidnappers and murderers.

It doesn't matter if one person is held hostage or a thousand. You fight.

or...if you're not the praying type...cross all your fingers. hey it worked for Michelle's house.

"Does it take 3,000 dead people to make some of you feel threatened?"

Going by history, not even that really wakes some people up.

Fox is reporting that they beheaded him.

Wouldn't they get their 72 virgins quicker by beheading each other?