# CDN Hostage James Loney Rescued by SAS in Iraq



## vonGarvin (23 Mar 2006)

Great to hear that the three surviving hostages from the Christian Peacekeeper Team were freed.  RIP to the poor US citizen who was murdered.
Quote from Jack Straw, UK Foreign Secretary:
"It is the result of a team effort involving military and civilian personnel from a number of countries, including, let me say, Canadian personnel who I was able to meet when I was in Baghdad last." 
(things that make you go "hmmmm")


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (23 Mar 2006)

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2006/03/23/1501453-ap.html


----------



## Patrolman (23 Mar 2006)

The sad point about this great day is the response of the Cristian Peacemakers. They are using this opportunity to criticize the forces in Iraq. The same forces responsible for freeing their colleagues. Their spokesperson makes it sound as if they were simply let walk away by their captors,which is highly unlikely since the American hostage was tortured  and killed last week.
 Things that make you go hmmm. The media is saying that the Canadians involved were the RCMP. Not likely in my opinion since it was a military OP.
 In summary it is too bad that the military is being slammed in the media by Christian Peacemakers. It would be nice if they would just be thankful to the men and women in uniform and leave their views at home for a while.


----------



## vonGarvin (23 Mar 2006)

Patrolman said:
			
		

> Things that make you go hmmm. The media is saying that the Canadians involved were the RCMP. Not likely in my opinion since it was a military OP.


Hey, it could be the RCMP.  After all, they too have battle honours 

But, perhaps it was some sort of diplomatic involvement?  Just speculation on my part.  Perhaps even Harper himself showed up? ;D


Anyway, kudos to those fellows, and since that Christian Peacemaker dude wasn't even "over there" at the time of the rescue, well, I could probably give a just as accurate account of what happened


----------



## Devlin (23 Mar 2006)

Patrolman said:
			
		

> The sad point about this great day is the response of the Cristian Peacemakers.
> In summary it is too bad that the military is being slammed in the media by Christian Peacemakers. It would be nice if they would just be thankful to the men and women in uniform and leave their views at home for a while.



Not an exact line of comparison but this is my 2 cents on the response of the Christian Peacemakers....

A Canadian Soldier was attending some university courses between deployments. He had completed 2 tours in Bosnia, and just returned from Afghanistan. One of the courses had a professor who was an avowed atheist. 

One day the professor shocked the class when he came in. He looked to the ceiling and flatly stated, "God, if you are real, then I want you to knock me off this platform. I'll give you exactly 15 minutes." 

The lecture room fell silent. You could hear a pin drop. Ten minutes went by and the professor proclaimed, "Here I am God. I'm still waiting." It got down to the last couple of minutes when the Soldier got out of his chair, went up to the professor, and punched him; knocking him off the platform. The professor was out cold. The Soldier went back to his seat and sat there, silently. The other students were shocked and sat there looking on in silence. 

The professor eventually came to, noticeably shaken, looked at the Soldier and asked, "What the hell is the matter with you? Why did you do that?" The Soldier calmly replied, "God was too busy today protecting Canada's Soldiers who are protecting your right to say stupid things and act like a moron, so He sent me."


----------



## noneck (23 Mar 2006)

Patrolman- Who better to conduct hostage negotiations than those that practice it on a regular basis. The only negotiator course that I am aware of in Canada is the one run by the Canadian Police College. Several RCMP negotiators have been decorated, for past operations conducted in Central/South America. 

Last week on Ex Cougar Salvo, police negotiators were utilized during the Relief Convoy scenarios. The divide between law enforcement operations and military operations in both domestic and international settings is growing closer very quickly. One only needs to look at the involvement of the RCMP with the present PRT in Kandahar to view it in real time.


----------



## Patrolman (23 Mar 2006)

I am not saying that the RCMP were not involved in some way. What I am saying is I doubt they were involved in the actual raid to free the hostages. I guess right now no one really knows the full story. Some media sources say they were released others say they snatched in a military operation. Time will tell! 
 So others don't take me the wrong way I will clarify something. I myself am a devout Christian,I in no way think that the Christian Peacemaker teams are wrong in their mission. The problem I have is that their spokesman spent most of his news conference condemning the Allied forces in Iraq. I feel that he could be a little more thankful towards the military, at least for today.


----------



## tomahawk6 (23 Mar 2006)

They are an anti-war outfit. They would have criticized the military no matter what happened.


----------



## Cliff (23 Mar 2006)

Happy to hear that the hostage situation is resolved and that they are no longer in the hands of fanatics. My condolances to the family of the American  hostage.


----------



## Franko (23 Mar 2006)

Devlin.....

That's an oldie but a goodie, it's been around for a few years now.  

It originally started as an American....but it still makes me chuckle   

As for the hostages, glad to see they got out in one piece...too bad about their colleague.

I stated earlier in another post that they were as good as dead....I'm glad I'm wrong.

*sounds of chewing*

My...that crow is some good today.  

Now preliminary reports earlier this morning...as in 0400 ish EST said that it was the _Brits _who did the deed.

I'm sure we'll find out by end play today.

Regards

Regards


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (23 Mar 2006)

CBC is reporting that the CF was involved, but obviously for OPSEC reasons there won't be a lot more in the way of detail.  Henry Champ is on the tube right now saying that the Yanks are reporting it as a "joint UK/Canadian SF operation".  FWIW.

http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2006/03/23/hostages060323.html

CPT had called for no military rescue early on, so I find it somewhat ironic that they're in the media this morning crowing about the "release".  I have zero sympathy for these "activists", who chose to enter a war zone to conduct political activity and who have used the rescue as yet another means to pass along their rather dubious viewpoint.

TR


----------



## Franko (23 Mar 2006)

Wow....criticizing the forces that rescued their comrades, during their pompous.... holier than thou speech.

Next time...let 'em get out on their own.

Regards


----------



## scoutfinch (23 Mar 2006)

Can't we send 'em back????


----------



## George Wallace (23 Mar 2006)

Just a quick trip back to this comment:



			
				vonGarvin said:
			
		

> "It is the result of a team effort involving military and civilian personnel from a number of countries, including, let me say, Canadian personnel who I was able to meet when I was in Baghdad last."
> (things that make you go "hmmmm")



That statement, doesn't necessarily mean that they were physically in Iraq.  I am sure numerous Police Agencies, Interpol, and Intelligence Agencies were involved in numerous countries.  End result as witnessed today.  

As for the CPT....well...that is gratitude for you.   :


----------



## DSB (23 Mar 2006)

I do not support the Iraq war.  

I’m also very much against these sorts of peacemaking civilian organizations running into war zones.  They knew the risk walking in; we’ve seen and heard of many beheadings and murders.  I think it's BS that other people, (soldiers), have to get evolved with these operations and  risk their lives to save people like this.

DSB


----------



## vonGarvin (23 Mar 2006)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Just a quick trip back to this comment:
> That statement, doesn't necessarily mean that they were physically in Iraq.  I am sure numerous Police Agencies, Interpol, and Intelligence Agencies were involved in numerous countries.  End result as witnessed today.
> As for the CPT....well...that is gratitude for you.   :


Ah, but it does.  Jack said he met them when he was in Iraq.  Unless, of course, he was on the border with say Kuwait, standing on one side, they on the other


----------



## Whiskey_Dan (23 Mar 2006)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Just a quick trip back to this comment:
> 
> That statement, doesn't necessarily mean that they were physically in Iraq.  I am sure numerous Police Agencies, Interpol, and Intelligence Agencies were involved in numerous countries.  End result as witnessed today.
> 
> As for the CPT....well...that is gratitude for you.   :


Actually, CBC seems to be reporting differently, might want to take a read. I couldn't believe it myself.


Dan


----------



## Daniel San (23 Mar 2006)

Latest developments :

"Maj.-Gen Rick Lynch said no kidnappers were at the house when multinational forces entered to release the hostages.

Members of Canada's top secret commando unit, Joint Task Force 2, had been in Iraq working in tandem with British troops, said officials. It's not clear how many were in Iraq, but they have been in the country for some time."

Found it on the cbc website:

http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2006/03/23/hostages060323.html


----------



## George Wallace (23 Mar 2006)

Daniel San said:
			
		

> Members of Canada's top secret commando unit, Joint Task Force 2, had been in Iraq working in tandem with British troops, said officials. It's not clear how many were in Iraq, but they have been in the country for some time."
> 
> Found it on the cbc website:
> 
> http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2006/03/23/hostages060323.html



Exactly.  I will not confirm, nor deny, the fact that we may have 'people' in Iraq, in 'some capacity'.  Whether or not they were physically at the location of the Rescue, is not stated clearly.  They could have been partaking in the Rescue, from as far away as Ottawa or 'somewhere in Virginia'.  The 'end product' is what is relevant.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (23 Mar 2006)

I wonder what the NDP will have to say about Canadian Military allegedly being in Iraq.

http://sympaticomsn.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060323/hostages_freed_060323

Canadian, British peace hostages freed in Iraq 
CTV.ca News Staff

Two Canadian aid workers and a British colleague held hostage in Iraq for nearly four months were freed Thursday during a multinational military operation involving Canadian special forces.

The freed aid workers include Canadians James Loney, 41, and Harmeet Singh Sooden, 32, and Briton Norman Kember, 74. 

CTV News has learned that Canada's elite Joint-Task Force 2 was involved in the rescue in western Baghdad. 

"We're told that Canadian special forces and British special forces played a very key role," CTV's Robert Fife told Newsnet.

The Defence Department refuses to confirm Canadian military involvement in the operation.

British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, speaking in London, said the Mounties were also involved in the rescue, but an RCMP spokesman would not confirm that.

The three aid workers -- all members of the Christian Peacemaker Teams -- had been held hostage since late November, when they were kidnapped at gunpoint. 

Loney's brother, Ed, speaking this morning on CTV's Canada AM, said he was "elated" by the news of their release. 

Also kidnapped was American Tom Fox, 54, whose bullet-riddled body was found on a Baghdad street on March 10, just days after his captors released a video in which he was ominously missing.

"It's a bittersweet joy for us as we also grieve the loss of Tom Fox," said Doug Pritchard, co-chair of the Christian Peacemaker Teams.

The military operation

The operation to free the three aid workers was carried out early Thursday. U.S. and British forces broke into a house in western Baghdad and freed the hostages, according to Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch.

The hostages were freed without a shot being fired, Lynch added. They were bound, and held together. Their captors were not present. 

Lynch said the operation to free the three hostages in Iraq was based on information from a man who was captured by U.S. forces last night.

Only three hours passed from the time rescuers learned the exact whereabouts of the hostages and when the raid took place, he said.

However, Straw said planning for the operation had been in the works for "weeks and weeks" but gave few details.

"I'm delighted that now we have a happy ending to this terrible ordeal," Straw said.

Terrorism expert Alan Bell said most likely special forces would have been involved in this rescue.

"Hostage rescue technique is a very fine process, and only highly-trained people can perform this," Bell told CTV Newsnet.

"Although it turned to this was a lot less sort of hostile then was probably originally anticipated, the fact is you can't send unseasoned people in to do this type of operation."

Family 'elated'

The families of the hostages appealed several times for the release of the men. They relied on a series of videotapes broadcast on the al-Jazeera network to keep hope alive. Then today, word finally came of their release.

Ed Loney said his parents called him at around 1 a.m. to let him know that his brother was safe.

"I thought it was a dream, and I kind of shook my head for a second. I realized that, no, it really is true. He's coming home. That's how that all played out -- in a really beautiful dream for once."

Prime Minister Stephen Harper said he has spoken with the two Canadian hostages, and said their release is "wonderful news."

"The safe return of these men is what we all sought, and I want to thank all those here in Canada and around the world who have worked so tirelessly to secure their safe release."

He also offered his condolences to Fox's family.

Straw, who announced the release of the hostages earlier today, said Fox's death is "a matter of great sorrow to everybody that he was killed a little while ago."

The freed hostages are at the British Embassy in Baghdad's Green Zone. 

The kidnapping

The four aid workers were kidnapped Nov. 26. Just a few days later, a previously-unknown group calling itself the Swords of Righteousness Brigades claimed responsibility for the abduction in a videotaped aired on the al-Jazeera television network.

In a second videotape released Dec. 2, the group threatened to kill the hostages by Dec. 8 if all Iraqi detainees were not released from U.S. and British detention facilities by Dec. 8.

The deadline was later extended to Dec. 10, but it passed without word on the fate of the aid workers.

The last time the four hostages were seen together was in a silent videotape broadcast on al-Jazeera on Jan. 28. A voice-over on the tape called it the "last chance" for authorities to release Iraqi prisoners.

A videotape broadcast on al-Jazeera on March 7 did not show Fox. The other three aid workers were shown apparently calling on their governments to help them.

At least 235 foreigners have been taken hostage in Iraq and nearly 40 have been killed over the past two years. Most have been released, although a number are still missing.

With files from The Canadian Press


----------



## Lost_Warrior (23 Mar 2006)

I just watched on CTV News Net that JTF-2 was also part of this rescue.  Has anyone else heard anything about their role in it?


----------



## AJFitzpatrick (23 Mar 2006)

CNN Reports the forces involved in the rescue as US and British Forces whereas BBC reports the forces involved as multi-national forces. 
Whatever the truth is, I am thankful that the hostages have been freed. Condolences to the friends and family of Tom Fox.


----------



## Lost_Warrior (23 Mar 2006)

Yea, CNN has never been one to acknowledge anyone but the US (on most ocasions).  When the Canadians were hit with the IED awhile ago, I saw a blurb on CNN about it.  Never once did they mention Canada.  All they simply said was "US Lead Coalition Forces had their convoy hit with an IED near Kandahar"...as if it would be some sort of chore to actually say "Canadians" and acknowledge our presence there...  :


----------



## Lost_Warrior (23 Mar 2006)

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060323/hostages_freed_060323/20060323?hub=TopStories



> CTV News has learned that Canada's elite JTF-2 special forces played a role in helping to rescue the three aid workers, held captive in Baghdad.




Well, there it is..


----------



## UberCree (23 Mar 2006)

This will definitely be a moral boost for the CF.  
Expect to see lots of young keen recruits walking into recruiting offices say "I want to be in JTF."


Good stuff.


----------



## Haggis (23 Mar 2006)

UberCree said:
			
		

> This will definitely be a moral boost for the CF.
> Expect to see lots of young keen recruits walking into recruiting offices say "I want to be in JTF."



Recruiter: "Sure, kid.  Sign here." 

Applicant: "Sergeant, what is a Meaford?"

Recruiter: "Don't worry kid, that's where they train JTF troops in the very beginning."

Applicant: "How long before I get to JTF, sergeant?"

Recruiter: "So, how about them Senators, eh?" 

 :crybaby:


----------



## HDE (23 Mar 2006)

I can't seen too much of a problem even if our military was involved.  Canadian citizens were being held hostage in Iraq and so it seems pretty reasonable that our military would/should be involved.  No doubt the usual suspects will claim that this is "real proof" of something or other.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (23 Mar 2006)

I would like to believe you and I do agree with what you said however there are tin foil hat wearing people of voting age out there that don't operate on logic.


----------



## Bobbyoreo (23 Mar 2006)

Well ..dont really care who did it.....but good job!!!!


----------



## monika (23 Mar 2006)

HDE said:
			
		

> I can't seen too much of a problem even if our military was involved.  Canadian citizens were being held hostage in Iraq and so it seems pretty reasonable that our military would/should be involved.  No doubt the usual suspects will claim that this is "real proof" of something or other.



I'm at work and don't have time to dig through Google news archives right now, but I would swear on a tray of Double Doubles that a couple years ago Canada had sent RCMP  and Military Police into Iraq. I don't think anyone should be surprised that Canada had a contingent there.



			
				Haggis said:
			
		

> Applicant: "Sergeant, what is a MeafordMudford?"


----------



## aluc (23 Mar 2006)

How ironic !  The very people these hippies despise saved their asses. ;D I visited their web site and there is no mention of the rescue. They maintain that they were released...released by who, give me a break. I also have no sympathy for these missguided  tree huggers. If they want to go over there and assist, put on a helmet and rifle. There are no trees over there to hug! All the hugs, kisses, and love ins in the world would not have gotten them released. I may come off as being cold, but I don't feel sorry at all for their American colleague either. With the current situation over there they all fully well understood what would happen to westerners. What these people are doing over there is  farcical at the least. ( I wonder if they were happy to be rescured by allied armed forces. )

Good work over there boys


----------



## vonGarvin (23 Mar 2006)

Haggis said:
			
		

> Applicant: "Sergeant, what is a Meaford?"


ROFLMAO!  That was hilarious!  Thank you!
 :rofl:


----------



## monika (23 Mar 2006)

aluc said:
			
		

> How ironic !  The very people these hippies despise saved their asses. ;D I visited their web site and *there is no mention of the rescue. They maintain that they were released..*.released by who, give me a break.



I found the bolded part to be quite shocking so I went to the site and read it for myself. Please, don't shoot the messenger! 

Maybe I'm old fashioned or something but someone literally saves my life I'd like to think I'd have the human decency to say "Thank you."


----------



## QV (23 Mar 2006)

Excellent news.  I had figured those hostages were pretty much finished after all this time.  Good to hear that the DHTC fellas may have had a part in it.  Has this been confirmed?  I mean they are saying it on the news but ..... media does not always = accuracy.

On my way home today I was listening to CBC radio news and they only mentioned that the RCMP had taken part in this op.  Something tells me that if there was any door kicking to be done in Iraq it would not have been done by a civilian police agency.  

Media...pfffft.... Figures.


----------



## Five-to-One (23 Mar 2006)

hmmm.... think about it. Can anyone else here name some religious organizations that refuse to acknowledge any good work done by western militaries?


----------



## RangerRay (23 Mar 2006)

BZ to all to were, and may or may not have been, involved!


----------



## blacktriangle (23 Mar 2006)




----------



## MikeM (23 Mar 2006)

Good on em!


----------



## vonGarvin (23 Mar 2006)

QV said:
			
		

> Something tells me that if there was any door kicking to be done in Iraq it would not have been done by a civilian police agency.


Who do you think did Canada's domestic anti-terrorist "door kicking" role prior to the JTF-2?


----------



## JSR OP (23 Mar 2006)

TMM said:
			
		

> I'm at work and don't have time to dig through Google news archives right now, but I would swear on a tray of Double Doubles that a couple years ago Canada had sent RCMP  and Military Police into Iraq. I don't think anyone should be surprised that Canada had a contingent there.



Close, very close.  Canada did send RCMP to train the Iraqi police, but they are doing it in Jordan, not Iraq.


----------



## QV (23 Mar 2006)

vonGarvin - SERT (RCMP), key words - prior to JTF2  

I wonder:  If SERT still had that mandate would they have been used outside of Canada?

Anyone know?


----------



## vonGarvin (23 Mar 2006)

QV said:
			
		

> vonGarvin - SERT (RCMP), key words - prior to JTF2
> 
> I wonder:  If SERT still had that mandate would they have been used outside of Canada?
> 
> Anyone know?


Though I have heard of, and used the acronym "SERT", I didn't know that.  Thanks!

^5


----------



## GO!!! (23 Mar 2006)

<knock knock>

"Hello?"

"Good afternoon ma'am, I'm a representative of DFAIT, DND and The Office of the Privy Council, this is for you"

<takes envelope>

"What is it?"

"It is a bill for 12 million dollars, the approximate cost of the co-ordinated effort to locate and rescue the imbeciles from your organisation, Christian Peacemakers, from near certain death. We will also be confiscating all of your passports indefinitely to prevent further unpleasantness"

"Good day"


----------



## Flatlanders (23 Mar 2006)

Just so the record is updated - thought you might like to see this post from the Christian Peacemaker Teams website;

 March 2006, 9 p.m. ET 
     We have been so overwhelmed and overjoyed to have Jim, Harmeet and Norman freed, that we have not adequately thanked the people involved with freeing them, nor remembered those still in captivity. So we offer these paragraphs as the first of several addenda:
     We are grateful to the soldiers who risked their lives to free Jim, Norman and Harmeet. As peacemakers who hold firm to our commitment to nonviolence, we are also deeply grateful that they fired no shots to free our colleagues. We are thankful to all the people who gave of themselves sacrificially to free Jim, Norman, Harmeet and Tom over the last four months, and those supporters who prayed and wept for our brothers in captivity, for their loved ones and for us, their co-workers.

Whether you agree that they are effective or not (and I think they are a little naive) - its a sincere thank you I think?


----------



## Marauder (23 Mar 2006)

They're probably just pissed that the durka-durkas didn't play ball and martyr the other three so they could really put on the holier-than-thou piety. Or even better for them, if their brothers in Jesus got waxed while those big meanie gun loving atheists kicked the door trying to save their sorry hippy arses.


----------



## vonGarvin (23 Mar 2006)

GO!!! said:
			
		

> <knock knock>
> 
> "Hello?"
> 
> ...


Now THAT'S funny!!!!!!!  

Thanks


 :rofl:


----------



## big bad john (23 Mar 2006)

http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/MilitaryOperations/BritishForcesspearheadedIraqHostageReleaseConfirmsReid.htm

British Forces "spearheaded" Iraq hostage release, confirms Reid
23 Mar 06 
Defence Secretary John Reid has confirmed that British Armed Forces personnel played a prominent role in the Multinational effort which resulted in the successful rescue of three hostages held in Iraq - Briton Norman Kember and two Canadians.


In a statement to the media shortly before noon on Thursday 23 March 2006, Mr Reid said:

"All I am prepared to tell you is that this was several weeks in the planning, it was an operation that was rolling, in the sense it went on for some time. It finished around 5 am this morning. It involved forces from a number of nations, the multi-national coalition, but it was spearheaded by British troops. 

"I'm delighted as I'm sure everyone is for the families of Norman Kember and his colleagues. We remember of course the family of Tom Fox who was killed which reminds us all of the barbarism against which we're fighting.

"Above all I think today is a day just to express our pride in the courage and determination of our British Armed Forces who so often in such difficult circumstances risk their own lives that others may be protected. And in this case it's been successful and I'm delighted for everybody involved.

"I'm not prepared to discuss any other aspects of the operation for reasons that I'm sure you'll perfectly understand."


----------



## Devlin (23 Mar 2006)

I have to say I am a little conflicted here. On the one hand it's good to hear that these numpties didn't end up getting beheaded live on Aljazeera. On the other hand if they hadn't gone over there to spread the word...they would not have endangered themselves, gotten their American co-worker killed, and endangered the lives of the troops who had to go in and bail their rear ends out of a pretty tight spot.

I guess we all have our own ways of "changing the world" we live in. 

But I have to say if it comes down to flowers or firepower....I'll take firepower any day of the week.

Hey civvies stay in your lane...Certain Canadian journalist who get themselves "kidnapped" you too.


----------



## Patrolman (23 Mar 2006)

One thing that I found refreshing about all of this was Jack Laytons response. He said that the bottom line was that two Canadians were free. No nasty comments about Canada being involved in the rescue mission, no questions on why we were in Iraq, no negativity whatsoever. I think most people would have thought he would be all over the Conservatives with questions of why,who, how many, how long, why,why. It is good to see he is just grateful they are free regardless of how the deed was done.


----------



## MikeM (23 Mar 2006)

Wait for it...


----------



## Rodders (23 Mar 2006)

Marauder said:
			
		

> They're probably just pissed that the durka-durkas didn't play ball and martyr the other three so they could really put on the holier-than-thou piety. Or even better for them, if their brothers in Jesus got waxed while those big meanie gun loving atheists kicked the door trying to save their sorry hippy arses.



Or maybe they're actually grateful.

I sometimes get the sense that there's not a lot of respect for attitudes that aren't military in philosophy here. I mean, I don't hold the same view as these Christian groups, but it's not like they're being subversive. 

I certainly support the actions of the military/police forces involved in this matter, and I am certainly not a pacifist. What the heck would I be doing at this board if I were? But not every problem requires a military response. This situation did in my mind, but your condescension and denigration of everything that doesn't fall within your scheme of how the world should be bothers me. Not everything on the right is right, and not everything on the left is wrong. Absolutism is for fools.

I'm not trying to pick a fight. I just get sick of some of the scathing generalizations that are sometimes used on a board that I consider to be probably the most intelligent and ... mature board I visit. I just think the way you've written the above is potentially insulting and very derogatory.

Thanks


----------



## GO!!! (24 Mar 2006)

Rodders,

The televised "thank you" on CTV this morning from Christian Peacemakers thanked the soldiers that released these two, and then (once again) condemned the "occupation forces" of the US and the "innocent prisoners" in US jails.

If it had not been for the very military they so despise, they would be dead, yet still they bash, WTF?

What are we to think?


----------



## monika (24 Mar 2006)

Patrolman said:
			
		

> I think most people would have thought he would be all over the Conservatives with questions of why,who, how many, how long, why,why. It is good to see he is just grateful they are free regardless of how the deed was done.



I've met Layton a couple of times and I am not at all surprised by his response.


----------



## gnplummer421 (24 Mar 2006)

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2006/03/23/canadian_role060323.html

This story tells some of the tale. If you read between the lines, JTF2 is/was likely working/embedded with SAS and US Special ops. I say likely because as civilians we do not and should not know, we can only speculate. Maybe some RCMP pers and operatives of CSIS where there as well.

This is all very possible considering that two of the hostages were Canadian. I can only imagine what the treehuggers and bleeding hearts will think of our troops having (maybe) participated in the OP.

Gnplummer


----------



## Good2Golf (24 Mar 2006)

QV said:
			
		

> vonGarvin - SERT (RCMP), key words - prior to JTF2
> 
> I wonder:  If SERT still had that mandate would they have been used outside of Canada?
> 
> Anyone know?



The RCMP Special Emergency Response Team (SERT) was a domestic Tier 1 HR capability only.  Once disbanded in 1993, many members moved on to A Div ERT and/or the EDPS (Embassy, Diplomatic Protection Service) in the local Ottawa area.  Had the unit still been operating today, I highly doubt that they would have conducted an international hostage rescue directly.  On the other hand, I have heard (but not been able to confirm) that the FBI HRT has conducted hostage rescue operations outside of the continental U.S., so it would seem that some nation's domestic national police forces have operated beyond home borders. 

Good on all those involved in the Op!  

Cheers,
Duey


----------



## monika (24 Mar 2006)

gnplummer421 said:
			
		

> This is all very possible considering that two of the hostages were Canadian. I can only imagine what the treehuggers and bleeding hearts will think of our troops having (maybe) participated in the OP.



This one says  

Not too many hostage situations are resolved without a single shot fired. I don't think it was dumb luck that had them show up when the kidnappers were gone; I think it was someone doing thier homework.


----------



## Michael Dorosh (24 Mar 2006)

GO!!! said:
			
		

> Rodders,
> 
> The televised "thank you" on CTV this morning from Christian Peacemakers thanked the soldiers that released these two, and then (once again) condemned the "occupation forces" of the US and the "innocent prisoners" in US jails.
> 
> ...



Who said they despise the military? They oppose US presence in Iraq and have concern for those being held illegally.  Where does that become 'despise the military?'  Maybe they do, maybe they don't, I don't know, but one doesn't equate with the other.


----------



## Michael Dorosh (24 Mar 2006)

gnplummer421 said:
			
		

> http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2006/03/23/canadian_role060323.html
> 
> This story tells some of the tale. If you read between the lines, JTF2 is/was likely working/embedded with SAS and US Special ops. I say likely because as civilians we do not and should not know, we can only speculate. Maybe some RCMP pers and operatives of CSIS where there as well.
> 
> ...



I think its kind of neat not to ever know of JTF was involved; I hope we never find out.  Wouldn't kill us to have a team which achieves a level of mystique comparable to the Mossad; could be very handy.


----------



## a_majoor (24 Mar 2006)

From Mark Styen:

http://corner.nationalreview.com/06_03_19_corner-archive.asp#093206



> CHRISTIAN "PEACEMAKER" TEAMS [Mark Steyn]
> 
> Kathryn, you let off those pitiful Christian "Peacemaker" Teams way too easily. If you go to their website you'll notice the headline reads: "CELEBRATE THE PEACEMAKERS' RELEASE"
> 
> ...


----------



## Big Red (24 Mar 2006)

TMM said:
			
		

> I'm at work and don't have time to dig through Google news archives right now, but I would swear on a tray of Double Doubles that a couple years ago Canada had sent RCMP  and Military Police into Iraq. I don't think anyone should be surprised that Canada had a contingent there.



4 or 5 times I've seen Canadian soldiers in Iraq. I believe they are on exchange.


----------



## The Bread Guy (24 Mar 2006)

Presented in accordance with the "fair dealing" provisions, Section 21, of the Copyright Act, http://www.cb-cda.gc.ca/info/act-e.html#rid-33409

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060324.wxhostagesottawa24_art_2230_3/BNStory/National/home

The hostages are rescued Free, with help from Canada 
Covert ops team worked for months on ground in Iraq

JEFF SALLOT With a report from Michael Den Tandt OTTAWA The work of a secret team of Canadian soldiers, police officers, spies and diplomats in Baghdad came to a successful conclusion yesterday in a raid that rescued two Canadians and one Briton who had been held hostage for almost four months, federal officials say.

*Mounties and members of a Canadian special forces unit joined British and U.S. troops, who led in the rescue.

The entire Canadian team, numbering at times more than 20, has been on the ground in Baghdad, working quietly since shortly after the kidnappings on Nov. 26.

In addition to members of the RCMP and the military's special forces, the team included diplomats and intelligence officers, Foreign Affairs Minister Peter MacKay said.*

"We were there with our very best," Mr. MacKay said in an interview.

"We had everyone fully engaged in this operation from Day 1." The extraordinary effort, he said, sends a message: *"Canada should not [be], and is not passive when it comes to its own citizens and the protection of their lives."* British troops led the final phase of the delicate operation that unfolded yesterday morning in a neighbourhood in Baghdad.

The international team found Canadians James Loney, 41, Harmeet Singh Sooden, 33, and Briton Norman Kember, 74, in a building. They were bound. Their captors were not around.

Mr. MacKay said joy at the rescue was tempered by the fact that the operation came too late to save the life of one of the hostages, American Tom Fox. His body was found two weeks ago.

All four men came to Baghdad last year to work for a pacifist organization, the Christian Peacemakers Team. They were taken hostage by a group demanding the release of Iraqi prisoners held by U.S.  forces.

Mr. MacKay said yesterday's rescue involved close co-operation between the governments of Britain, the United States and Iraq.

The final raid was led by the British.

*Canadian intelligence officers involved at various times included specialists from the Canadian Security Intelligence Service and the Communications Security Establishment, a secretive branch of the Defence Department that intercepts international telecommunications.*

*The Foreign Affairs Department combed its ranks to find staff who had experience with these types of situations, The Canadian Press reported. They dispatched a team in early December that included foreign officers, workers from the Jordanian embassy and some RCMP officers.*

That team stayed in Baghdad through Christmas and into this year.

Liberal MP Dan McTeague, a former parliamentary secretary responsible for Canadians abroad, said the group discreetly made inquiries around Baghdad about the disappearance.

They also communicated again and again that the hostages were Canadian, they were humanitarian workers and that Canada was not party to the war.

"This was a remarkable international effort involving our allies, the Americans, the British and the Iraqis," Mr. MacKay said. "This is certainly a great day for Canadians." But *the new Conservative government is keeping a tight lid on operational details on the advice of federal security experts. They warn that talk of Canadian military activity in Iraq can make Canadians targets for terrorists.*

*The security experts also say that they want to keep techniques secret that might be needed again if another rescue operation ever has to be mounted.*

Prime Minister Stephen Harper hinted broadly at Canadian military involvement at a news conference earlier in the day. "I'm not free to say more than that because of national security." He also denied a suggestion that any ransom had been paid. "Not that I'm aware of." Now that the hostages are free, the Canadians will pack up and leave the Iraqi capital, he said.

(...)


----------



## KevinB (24 Mar 2006)

> Now that the hostages are free, the Canadians will pack up and leave the Iraqi capital, he said.
> 
> (...)



Notice he did not say leave IRAQ...


----------



## George Wallace (24 Mar 2006)

Presented in accordance with the "fair dealing" provisions, Section 21, of the Copyright Act
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2006/03/mil-060323-usia01.htm

Coalition Forces Rescue Three Kidnapped Peace Activists in Iraq
23 March 2006

Operation based on intelligence from insurgent detainee, says U.S. general

By David I. McKeeby
Washington File Staff Writer



Washington -- Coalition forces successfully freed three kidnapped Western aid workers who had been held by Iraqi insurgents for four months, U.S. Major General Rick Lynch announced March 23.

“I am happy to report that all three are in good condition; they have had a medical screening and are anxious to reunite with their families,” Lynch said during a press briefing in Baghdad.

Based on intelligence received from a detainee captured the night before, coalition forces raided a rural home west of Baghdad, where they found the hostages bound and abandoned by their kidnappers, Lynch reported.

“The key point is that [the rescue] was intelligence-led and it was information provided by a detainee,” he said, adding that an important aspect of coalition detention operations is obtaining actionable intelligence.

On November 26, 2005, a group of kidnappers calling itself the Swords of Righteousness Brigades abducted four members of the Christian Peacemaker Teams, a Chicago-based international organization of peace activists.

The freed men, Canadians James Loney and Harmeet Sooden, and Briton Norman Kember, were seen on several videotapes produced by the kidnappers and broadcast widely in the international media in recent months.

On March 10, the body of the fourth kidnapped member of the group, American Tom Fox of Virginia, was discovered in a rail yard in western Baghdad.

During the briefing, Lynch also reported that insurgents detonated two car bombs that killed 21 people and wounded more than 50.  The first exploded near a police facility as part of a series of attacks on Iraqi security forces.  The second exploded outside a Shi’a mosque in southwest Baghdad.

For more information, see Iraq Update. [Link available on this site: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2006/03/mil-060323-usia01.htm ]


(The Washington File is a product of the Bureau of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)


----------



## zipperhead_cop (24 Mar 2006)

I would be very interested in knowing what the time frame was between the hostages being "abandoned" and the raid being executed.  If these crap rags were holding the hostages in a remote area, and all of a sudden there is a wing of attack and troop helo's inbound, I would think the common sense thing would be to get the hell out.  

Now lets sit back in morbid fascination and wait for the hostages to say that they are going back to Iraq to finish the important work they had started.   :threat:


----------



## vonGarvin (24 Mar 2006)

zipperhead_cop said:
			
		

> If these crap rags were holding the hostages in a remote area, and all of a sudden there is a wing of attack and troop helo's inbound, I would think the common sense thing would be to get the hell out.


According to a thing I saw on TV, their location was in "western Baghdad".  Don't know if that's accurate or not, but I'm fairly certain that their approach would have been a bit more stealthy.


----------



## hardcorewannabe (24 Mar 2006)

its amazing that all the christians for peace thanked God and their prayers for the "release"  of the hostages, rather than the well trained, well armed soldiers for thier "rescue".

How ironic that those condemning militaries and the use of force were eventually saved by it.


----------



## CSA (24 Mar 2006)

It is sad that these folks and their organization condemn the military and their involvement in their rescue,
 and all of us, civvies, military and ex-military can sound off on those "ungrateful hippy-tree hugging, love your fellow man, yadda-yadda" christian peacemakers not giving credit and thanks where it is due - but then again those special ops personnel involved in their rescue didn't do it to "make the news" or to be given a parade or medals or for hero worship-they did it to help people who have the right to believe in what they believe in regardless of what we all think. they helped these hostages who could not help themselves in gaining that precious commodity known as freedom.

It reminds me of a paragraph from a poem written by a special operator years ago that I have hanging in my office, it goes;

"_I seek neither fame nor glory.
 I seek neither medals nor praise
 I seek only the acknowledgement of my Brother Operators
 For they alone can judge me
 And to be counted amongst them is my greatest honor_."


Well done lads!


----------



## William Webb Ellis (24 Mar 2006)

"Harmeet, Jim and Norman and Tom were in Iraq to learn of the struggles facing the people in that country. They went, motivated by a passion for justice and peace to live out a nonviolent alternative in a nation wracked by armed conflict. They knew that their only protection was in the power of the love of God and of their Iraqi and international co-workers. We believe that the illegal occupation of Iraq by Multinational Forces is the root cause of the insecurity which led to this kidnapping and so much pain and suffering in Iraq. The occupation must end."

http://www.cpt.org/iraq/response/06-23-03statement.htm

I wonder if they were "moved" to add this 

"Addenda 
23 March 2006, 9 p.m. ET 
We have been so overwhelmed and overjoyed to have Jim, Harmeet and Norman freed, that we have not adequately thanked the people involved with freeing them, nor remembered those still in captivity. So we offer these paragraphs as the first of several addenda: 

We are grateful to the soldiers who risked their lives to free Jim, Norman and Harmeet. As peacemakers who hold firm to our commitment to nonviolence, we are also deeply grateful that they fired no shots to free our colleagues. We are thankful to all the people who gave of themselves sacrificially to free Jim, Norman, Harmeet and Tom over the last four months, and those supporters who prayed and wept for our brothers in captivity, for their loved ones and for us, their co-workers."


----------



## Cliff (24 Mar 2006)

Son of Eve said:
			
		

> How ironic that those condemning militaries and the use of force were eventually saved by it.



Not sure what you mean, but I don't that those that were saved were against the military.The main problem is that most missionary types have minimal training in targeted violence or threat accessment, so they often become easy targets.



[EDIT for Code Problem with Quote.]


----------



## tomahawk6 (24 Mar 2006)

CTV article.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060323/canadian_aid_hostages_060323/20060323?hub=World

I think JTF2 and SAS led the op because their citizen's were being held. Mission accomplished.


----------



## Patrolman (24 Mar 2006)

In regards to who kicked the door. It is a known fact that the JTF work hand in hand with both the SAS and Delta force in Afghanistan in military actions. Thy did this by attaching members to SAS and DELTA assault teams for various operations,so why not in Iraq where the situation involved Canadian citizens.
 Also if every thinks back to the capture of the two supposed SAS members in Basra last year there was a lot of controversy on whether or not they were JTF personnel and not SAS. They carried C-7  rifle variants and if you remember seeing the photos they were wearing MEC pants. A local judge said since they were carrying Canadian weapons and to him did not seem to be British or American was going to try them as spies had they not been rescued. So who is to say Canada is not in Iraq!


----------



## vonGarvin (24 Mar 2006)

William Webb Ellis said:
			
		

> "We believe that the illegal occupation of Iraq by Multinational Forces is the root cause of the insecurity which led to this kidnapping and so much pain and suffering in Iraq. The occupation must end."


They can believe whatever they wish; however, don't blame the "Multinational Forces" as the cause of both their kidnapping and release, IMHO.  They went over, of their own free will, into a den of savages who lop off heads without batting an eye, and they condemn those who are trying to keep the world safe from such savages *sigh*
To each their own, I suppose.


----------



## tomahawk6 (24 Mar 2006)

The people making the anti-military comments were NOT the freed hostages. Let's see if they follow the party line or say something different.

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_PrintFriendly&c=Article&cid=1143154016563&call_pageid=970599119419


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (24 Mar 2006)

Patrolman would happen to have these pictures?


----------



## Weinie (24 Mar 2006)

Also if every thinks back to the capture of the two supposed SAS members in Basra last year there was a lot of controversy on whether or not they were JTF personnel and not SAS. They carried C-7  rifle variants and if you remember seeing the photos they were wearing MEC pants. A local judge said since they were carrying Canadian weapons and to him did not seem to be British or American was going to try them as spies had they not been rescued. So who is to say Canada is not in Iraq!


Before you go down the road of having Canada in Iraq based on what you wrote above, remember that Diemaco sells weapons all over the world, including the British. There is no "grassy knoll" here.


----------



## bboyintown (24 Mar 2006)

Congratulation to the men and women involved in the rescue of three hostages in Iraq.  On a related note, the Christian Peacekeepers that speak out against the war in Iraq succeed in not only raising the ire of those who are fighting on the ground, they also challenge every Canadian to get involved.  Get informed and stand behind your Canadian Forces around the world as they go in harms way.  They go willingly because they believe in the obvious good they do on the ground with ordinary Afghans or Iraqis, or any other innocent civilian.


----------



## Bobbyoreo (24 Mar 2006)

"Also if every thinks back to the capture of the two supposed SAS members in Basra last year there was a lot of controversy on whether or not they were JTF personnel and not SAS. They carried C-7  rifle variants and if you remember seeing the photos they were wearing MEC pants. A local judge said since they were carrying Canadian weapons and to him did not seem to be British or American was going to try them as spies had they not been rescued. So who is to say Canada is not in Iraq!"


SAS uses m16,c7,c8,c9,c6...all those and more. So I would't go off that but none the less...I bet a few Double Doubles that JTF are out there as their are Canadian troops in American units out there and Im sure Canada would like to have a few of its SOF out there in these units as well....just if needed!!! 

I really dont know what the big deal is about who got them.....the point is they are heading home with their heads!!!

Good work to all involved!!!


----------



## GO!!! (24 Mar 2006)

Big Red said:
			
		

> 4 or 5 times I've seen Canadian soldiers in Iraq. I believe they are on exchange.



I've heard the number 22 batted around, mostly exchange officers. One (LCol Mills) was on the National a few months back.


----------



## Britney Spears (24 Mar 2006)

CFL: I kept the ones with the weapons, dunno about the MEC pants though, never noticed that on the first go around. 













In any case it is well know that the Brit L1192 or whatever they call it is a C8 with fancy sights and stuff so it just proves that they are Brits.


----------



## monika (24 Mar 2006)

GO!!! said:
			
		

> I've heard the number 22 batted around, mostly exchange officers. One (LCol Mills) was on the National a few months back.



Thanks gentleman. Nice to know I wasn't having some weird dream from falling asleep and hearing Coast to Coast after the game!


----------



## Patrolman (24 Mar 2006)

Here is a picture of the two captives I mentioned earlier. The guy on the right is wearing what appears to be MEC pants. I am aware that other countries use C-7 variants but are they are they stamped with Canada like ours?I searched for the exact article with the quotes by the Iraqi judge saying they were Canadian(because the weapons said Canada). Anyways I will continue my search and if I can find it I will post it.


----------



## GO!!! (24 Mar 2006)

I figure the only way that we will ever find out is if we take these pix to someone from the hill, and see if they will ID them. IMHO, not very likely.

Bet they got crappy PERs though!!   ;D

"_MCpl **** displayed poor concealment and evasion skills when he was captured by the Iraqi police. His subsequent rescue necessitated the destruction of a civilian prison, and made headlines worldwide. Assessment : "Developing"_


----------



## tomahawk6 (24 Mar 2006)

Viewing the photos it would appear that at least two soldier's in the photo looked american. Does JTF wear that type of helmet ? 

http://www.specwargear.com/images/helmet-newsweek-2.jpg

http://www.specwargear.com/images/helmet-newsweek-3.jpg

SEAL Helmet

http://www.specwargear.com/images/Update%20Sept/helmet-seal-protec-1.jpg


----------



## Britney Spears (24 Mar 2006)

If Delta wants to wear Oakleys, that's their business........


----------



## Murneydevil6 (24 Mar 2006)

QV said:
			
		

> Excellent news.  I had figured those hostages were pretty much finished after all this time.  Good to hear that the DHTC fellas may have had a part in it.  Has this been confirmed?  I mean they are saying it on the news but ..... media does not always = accuracy.
> 
> On my way home today I was listening to CBC radio news and they only mentioned that the RCMP had taken part in this op.  Something tells me that if there was any door kicking to be done in Iraq it would not have been done by a civilian police agency.
> 
> ...


----------



## Murneydevil6 (24 Mar 2006)

I meant to quote the first part not the second part defending the RCMP's combatant status.


----------



## QV (24 Mar 2006)

Murneydevil6 said:
			
		

> I meant to quote the first part not the second part defending the RCMP's combatant status.



I was gonna say "Whoa! I didn't say ALL that!" but hey you covered it.  If you are not subject to the Code of Service Discipline then you are a civilian, if you are subject to it you are a service member (dependants posted overseas w/sevice mbr are also subj to it but thats another story).  That is not diminishing their status here in anyway.  I work and train with mounties all the time and I am a Public and Police Safety Instructor for the RCMP (Use of Force) so I have a grasp of what they do.  It is good to see someone jump to the defence of a police force for a change though - however unnecessarily.  Anyway this thread is about the Iraqi hostage rescue so lets keep on track...


----------



## Murneydevil6 (24 Mar 2006)

Yah I guess so, I didnt mean to offend you. But I mean just from experience with members they generally take offence to being referred to as civillians. But  I do see what you mean by if your not subject to the code of disipline you are a civie. But they have their own code as well. But its all good. Yah I learned that the RCMP members their were from the National Capital Regions ERT team and that they did take place in the raid. So thats pretty cool. But Id say the JTF-2 Boys and the SAS crew were doing the kicking in of the doors and the mounties were probley just watching haha! But apparently they were on the scene during the raid. But I mean most of this is just stuff thats trickled down from Ottawa right. So we'll probley never know for sure'. I still think the RCMP should have been allowed to retain the Special Emergency Responce Team, good for espirt de corps. But I mean if JTF-2 can do the job cheaper and better and since the RCMP and the CF are the only ones it seems to know whats best for this country and are partners in that theirs no shame in the CF taking that role away from them. I wonder if this action in Iraq by the RCMP and in Afganistan would go on their Guldion?' If anyone knows that it would be cool.


----------



## Patrolman (24 Mar 2006)

Something I heard today about the raid that I found interesting  was that the assault teams took taxis' to the target area so as to maintain a low profile. I guess it worked.


----------



## The Bread Guy (24 Mar 2006)

A few more details, shared in accordance with the "fair dealing" provisions, Section 21, of the Copyright Act.

(UK) Army's top general attacks Kember for failing to thank SAS rescue team
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,7374-2102543,00.html

Highlights:

"General Sir Mike Jackson, the head of the British Army, expressed the unhappiness of the military last night when he told Channel 4 News that he was “saddened that there doesn’t seem to have been a note of gratitude for the soldiers who risked their lives to save those lives”. "

(...)

"CPT has always made it clear that its members did not want force to be used to rescue them if they were kidnapped or held hostage."

(...)

"But, in the event, the coalition devoted huge resources to securing their release. The SAS, special forces from the US and Canada and military intelligence officers spent months trying to locate them. 

"A force consisting of SAS troopers backed up by about 50 paratroops and Marines spearheaded the task force that rescued them. US and Iraqi troops were also involved in the mission. Relaxed and rested after his 36-hour stay at the fortified British Embassy in Baghdad, Professor Kember was flown out of the green zone by military helicopter yesterday to begin his journey home. He then boarded an RAF military transport at Baghdad airport for the short flight to neighbouring Kuwait. From there he was being flown home."

"Maxine Nash, of CPT in Baghdad, said that the organisation had not paid for his flight back to Britain. She said: “He elected to go through the Embassy, they arranged it. We did offer to pay for commercial flights for everyone but that can be difficult because it means driving through dangerous areas.”   She admitted that the pacifist hostages had mixed feelings about being rescued by the military. She said: “Our mandate is violence reduction so this was a tough call. *Before they were kidnapped both Tom and Jim had said they didn’t want to be rescued.” * Ms Nash said that the group was now considering leaving Baghdad. “After what has happened we’re going to spend some time thinking about what to do.” "

(...)

*"Diplomatic sources let it be known that the three men did agree to face further questioning yesterday from intelligence agents trying to hunt down the group who held them for 118 days.  An intelligence source said: “They gave what help they could. They recognise that there are other hostages, including Westerners, still in captivity who we believe were taken by the same group.”  "*

"The source added that Professor Kember had “privately expressed his thanks to his rescuers” though he did not meet them. The activists explained that they could not be of much help with descriptions of their captors as the group kept their faces covered."

"RESCUE FIGURES 

The hunt for Norman Kember and his fellow hostages involved 
*250 men from the Task Force Black US/British/Australian counter-kidnap unit 
100 men from Task Force Maroon, the Paras and Royal Marines backing special forces 
15 men in helicopter crews 
AND tens of thousands of pounds spent on helicopter and transport aircraft flights" *


----------



## UberCree (25 Mar 2006)

Patrolman said:
			
		

> JTF work hand in hand with both the SAS and Delta



I didn't know SAS and Delta airlines flew there?  Hmm, interesting.


----------



## c_canuk (25 Mar 2006)

a picture is worth 1000 words http://www.uclick.com/client/nyt/gm/


----------



## zipperhead_cop (25 Mar 2006)

milnewstbay said:
			
		

> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,7374-2102543,00.html
> 
> "Maxine Nash, of CPT in Baghdad, said  “Our mandate is violence reduction so this was a tough call. *Before they were kidnapped both Tom and Jim had said they didn’t want to be rescued.” * Ms Nash said that the group was now considering leaving Baghdad. “After what has happened we’re going to spend some time thinking about what to do.” "
> *
> ...


*

So the guy is bent about getting rescued, and he is more worried about how it will look to his fellow jagoff peace protesters by being publicly grateful?  Am I the only one who could spare a few bucks to send this a$$hat back to do some more "work for justice"?  If these dinks want to be martyrs so badly, stamp their visa's and ship them back! :threat:*


----------



## Patrolman (25 Mar 2006)

Just a quick update on Tom Fox that I heard on CBC today. Apparently American officials are now saying after examining his remains ,that his wounds are not consistant with execution type wounds. The theory now is that he died in a failed escape attempt.


----------



## Shadowhawk (26 Mar 2006)

A reluctant Thank you and lack of cooperation ... WTF are these people thinking? Or perhaps they are not thinking... GRRRRR.



http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,18614074%255E2703,00.html


* Edited to remove my stupid ranting comments.


----------



## tomahawk6 (26 Mar 2006)

Uk article today.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-2104343,00.html


----------



## CSA (27 Mar 2006)

after the weekend, and checking out the news, I came up with an idea-perhaps some will find it petty-but I'm hoping that it will not be thought of as that.

what should be done in my opinion, is the EXACT same thing that Parks Canada does after they rescue someone who is dumb enough to wander into the mountains to hike or climb and end up getting themselves in a horrible situation. They are rescued and once the initial trauma of the situation, the are sent a bill to cover the cost of the logistics of the rescue opreation that saved their a**es!

Maybe if these Christian Peacemakers were sent a bill from each of the goverments involved it would help this organization understand not only the incredible risks they take with their own life when travelling to their"select"countries to do their work, but also the risk of the operator's lives and the financial risk these governments took in order to bring them home with their heads intact!

just my two cents.


----------



## Fraser.g (27 Mar 2006)

Now that is an outstanding idea!
They were warned about the hazards, they still went into an area which was known to be dangerous. They had to be extracated from that situation.

They should be made to pay the bill.


----------



## Franko (27 Mar 2006)

Then we look like the jerks    :

Ummm no...I like it the way it is right now. They look like the one's who are irresponsible.

Regards


----------



## Britney Spears (27 Mar 2006)

They didn't ASK to be rescued, especially not in a violent manner and none of their friends asked for them either, so why should they have to pay anything? They went into the country knowing fully the risks involved, I don't see anything intellectually inconsistent with their actions. 

The whole rescue was to poke a stick at the anti-war movement anyway, to "make them look like jerks" as Franko says, and judging by the reactions here and that cartoon, it looks like a fairly succesful piece of propaganda.


----------



## tomahawk6 (27 Mar 2006)

You're right as always Britney. Should have just left them to the tender mercies of their captors.


----------



## William Webb Ellis (27 Mar 2006)

Have I just not been paying attention or was this the only rescue or attempted of hostages in Iraq?  Have there not been a number of other hostages taken, ie: press, and other workers.....It does seem strange these fella's ranked a rescue

BTW, I agree, they should have been left to there own devices. I am sure the hostage takers were open to discussions with other devoutly religious persons.


----------



## CSA (27 Mar 2006)

Franko and Britney very good points the both of you made and I understand where you are both comming from,  but I still think that if a bill was sent to them for a six-figure rescue op that maybe it would give a definate wake-up call to organizations like the Christian Peacemakers. Maybe by billing them for the rescue operation, it would make them realize that their actions have consequences when they are irresponsable enough to think that "God will save them" when they end up in trouble, as this seems to be their mandate whenever they send their people off to certain "select" high-risk countries.


----------



## monika (27 Mar 2006)

I know that Foreign Affairs issues "Travel Advisories" warning people not to go to certain parts of the globe. Has the government ever outright banned Canadians from travelling to certain antions, a la US/Cuba?


----------



## warrickdll (28 Mar 2006)

William Webb Ellis said:
			
		

> Have I just not been paying attention or was this the only rescue or attempted of hostages in Iraq?  Have there not been a number of other hostages taken, ie: press, and other workers.....It does seem strange these fella's ranked a rescue
> .....



As a conspiracy theory it isn’t without merit, but there are a few factors working against it. 

	- I would think that all the hostages are considered a liability to the UK and US efforts. The news organizations can cover the story with very little expense: the kidnappers provide footage of the hostages and the local media provides interviews with the families; leaving several broadcast leads being constantly about how unviable the conflict in Iraq is.

	- There would be an equal amount of good press for the US/UK coalition regardless of the particulars of any coalition hostages rescued.

	- The murder of the US hostage by the kidnappers does not translate into increased support for the coalition, so if they could have performed a rescue earlier they would have. The reports list new information as the breakthrough that led to the rescue – not PR considerations.

As for just leaving them… - The advisory was for Canadians not to go to Iraq (or to leave immediately if they were already there), which leaves it up to the company they worked/volunteered for to get them released, the same as you would expect if they were working for an oil company. I don’t mind some minimal services being provided by the Canadian government, but that is all. 

I prefer the conspiracy theory where they had hoped to be kidnapped to further their goal of undermining the US/UK coalition – martyr wannabes of the Human Shield variety.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (28 Mar 2006)

Check this one out:

Former hostage 'reacquainted with freedom' 
Loney thanks U.K. soldiers, Canadian officials for rescue 

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060327.wxhostage27/BNStory/National/

At least the Canadian guy is being grateful to the right people.


----------



## The Bread Guy (28 Mar 2006)

I hear all of ya' saying we should make CPT pay the bill, but if you believe what the media are saying, the Task Force Black that the Brits set up just after a couple of UK hostages in 2005 was doing int work not just on hostages, but on Iraqi war criminals.

If that's the case, do you bill CPT just for the car rentals & chopper fuel for their rescue, or do we figure out a percentage of the int work being done by TF Black to charge as overhead?  

And as for insurance before they go - riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.  The groups'll be fundraising just to cover that.

BTW, thought you woudn't mind another perspective on thanking the troops...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,1740358,00.html

"(D)o those responsible for such rescues get upset when hostages appear ungrateful? The SAS are reputed to be a pretty tough bunch. Perhaps they don't feel too wounded by Kember's supposed snub."


----------



## aluc (28 Mar 2006)

http://www.torontosun.ca/News/Columnists/Worthington_Peter/2006/03/27/1507469-sun.html

By PETER WORTHINGTON

	   	
   	
PEACEMAKERS ARE MISGUIDED INGRATES


Pardon me if I don't cheer for the three survivors of the Christian Peacemaker Teams (CPT) freed in Iraq, whom I consider misguided, arrogant and foolish and who cause more problems than they solve.

Of course, I never wished them dead and, like everyone else, am relieved they were rescued from a situation they brought on themselves. Four of them were kidnapped in Baghdad Nov. 26. Their American colleague was murdered because of his nationality.

Nice guys.

Not all of the 400 or so who've been kidnapped in Iraq escaped so lightly. In Sault Ste. Marie, Jim Loney's mother calls his rescue "a miracle," while Loney's pastor says, "God saved them."

Sorry, folks, it was soldiers who saved them -- the very soldiers scorned by the CPT.

CPT co-director Doug Pritchard's reaction is both idiotic and churlish. "They knew their only protection was in the power of the love of God and of their Iraqi international co-workers," he said.

What nonsense.

Their salvation was American, British and Canadian soldiers, working with the RCMP, who risked their lives to rescue these clots who seem to despise their liberators.

Mr. Pritchard added: "We believe that the illegal occupation of Iraq by multinational forces is the root cause of the insecurity which led to this kidnapping, and so much pain and suffering in Iraq."

Not a word of thanks or gratitude to the soldiers who carried guns and were prepared to shoot or be shot to save them.

Not a word about Saddam Hussein, who, more than any, is the "root cause" of misery in Iraq. Not a word about the suffering Saddam inflicted on Iraqis -- the mass graves, genocidal bio-chemical attacks on Kurds, wars against neighbouring countries, torturing Iraqis, homicides and fear that was imposed.

Christian Peacemakers didn't protest the 30 years of Saddam's imposed "insecurity ... pain and suffering." Why?

Because they'd have been gobbled up, that's why.

In their initial reaction, Loney's family expressed sorrow that Fox had been murdered, but "we don't bear any grudge or ill-feeling towards (the captors)."

Oh? What sort of people are these "Christian" zealots? Do they suppose the Swords of Righteousness Brigade assassins who kidnapped their loved ones are just ordinary Iraqi patriots who want to live quiet lives and praise Allah?

The CPT philosophy is selective -- and oriented towards anti-Americanism and anti-Western values wherever possible. Great injustices are tolerated, but American involvement must be protested, just as they protest Israel's defensive measures.

CPT's motto of "Get in the Way" boomeranged for them in Iraq. In Canada, CPT protests mostly on behalf of Indians in disputes in Ontario, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and B.C. Any opposition is branded "racist."

SHOULD HOSTAGES PAY?

Now that the two Canadians and a Brit are rescued, one can safely note that CPT's presence in Iraq encourages violence, resistance and even suicide bombings against the "occupiers" who are their rescuers. That verges on betraying their country.

A CTV poll asked the question whether hostages should be required to pay the costs of their rescue if they were kidnapped in a country they'd been advised not to visit. Of the first 6,479 responses, 74% said they should pay, 26% said they shouldn't have to.

On a CBC radio phone-in show, a caller opined that the hostage ordeal was phony and that the U.S. military had the individuals in custody so as to garner publicity when they were released. The host didn't demur -- par for CBC.

Now we'll have to endure the inevitable book honouring the Christian Peacemakers and a movie glamourizing them. But reality remains: They are imprudent and foolish pacifists consumed with their own righteousness who depend on those they disparage to rescue them when they get into trouble.


----------



## tomahawk6 (28 Mar 2006)

In a real touch of class PM Harper called Bush to thank him for the help the US provided in the rescue of the two Canadian hostages.


----------



## ArmyRick (28 Mar 2006)

Here is my 2 cents...

To the US, Brits and Canuck forces involved in the rescue of the hostages, Bravo and well done  

To Mr Loney, let your actions and future words be the real tone of your appreciation. In other words, stay the f&ck away from IRAQ, as the journalist I listened to yesterday on the news said, it was very arrogantly naive of the CPT to go ther in the first place.

To the Christian Peacemaking Teams, GET THE F#CK out of here and live in the real world. I HAVE NOTHING BUT DISGUST FOR YOUR RIDICOLOUS COMMENTS ABOUT HOW THE HOSTAGES WERE FREED AND ITS THE COALITION FORCES FAULT THE KIDNAPPINGS TOOK PLACE. 

Lets get real, you sent your people over there without any real understanding of what was going on.  Some facts..

(1) The world has GOOD and EVIL people
(2) The US and UK are NOT there to control Iraq for their own purposes, this is a country that has for long time been waiting to blow up. Sadam did not keep peace, he kept Oppression...
(3) Wishing the world was free of violence and trajedy will not solve anything, Deeds not words as the JTF2 say.

Rant Out


----------



## Cloud Cover (6 Apr 2006)

Reproduced under the Fair Dealings Provisions fo the Copyright Act.
from Canoe: http://calsun.canoe.ca/News/Columnists/Robinson_Ian/2006/04/01/pf-1515910.html

Looks like a Calgary Sun article, but that is not explicit in the header..


*April 2, 2006 

Pacifist group revealed as moral imbeciles 
By Ian Robinson*
When the three Western hostages were rescued by coalition forces in Iraq last week and returned to Canada, was I the only one who was disappointed? 

Was I the only one who thought: Dear Lord. Is THIS what all the fuss was about? 

These smarmy, international busybodies, the Gladys Kravitzes of the Iraq occupation, peering out at the world from behind the curtains with their pursed little disapproving lips? 

These sanctimonious, reality challenged little creeps? 

And even after the release, the organization to which they're attached was still taking metaphorical shots at the coalition of troops who rescued them. 

"As peacemakers who hold firm to our commitment to non-violence, we are also deeply grateful that they fired no shots to free our colleagues," their press release said. 

What would the hostages have done if shots had been fired? Voluntarily returned to captivity? 

If ever a group wasn't worth the effort and risk to free them, it's these guys. 

NOTE TO CHRISTIAN PEACEMAKER TEAMS: For the love of the God you claim to follow, hire a public relations consultant. 

Otherwise, the next freed hostage of yours might turn up and say what James Loney did, that: "After this, I'm going to disappear for a little while into a different kind of abyss -- an abyss of love." 

An abyss of love. Loney, you silver-tongued devil, you. 

A report out of Baghdad also indicated these self-involved, self-righteous morons declined to provide valuable intelligence about their kidnappers to the British, U.S. and Canadian soldiers who saved their lives! 

See, members of Christian Peacemaker Teams are pacifists and they don't co-operate with men with guns who might use the information to track down kidnappers and/or terrorists and shoot them in the head until they agree to stop kidnapping and/or terrorizing people. 

Pacifists don't believe in violence and refuse to use it or abet its use. Pacifists are therefore moral imbeciles. 

They're like the guy at the party who won't kick in for the pizza but sneaks a slice when he thinks nobody's looking. 

Pacifists are the same. 

They're thieves who enjoy the protection offered by those they morally despise but aren't willing to get their hands dirty themselves. 

They walk down our safe Canadian streets, enjoying that safety. 

Never mind the only reason our streets are safe is because criminals are hunted down by men and women called "police officers." 

Criminals don't co-operate with police and go meekly to the holding cells because criminals are nice people. They co-operate with police because if they don't, they'll get pepper-sprayed in the face or thumped with a baton or shot in the head, depending upon the degree of their non-co-operation. 

We have a functioning government in this country even when the Liberals are in power --although it pains me greatly to admit it, 

Taxes are paid and used to fund various projects which are, technically, for the good of all. 

I personally would not volunteer to pay income taxes because I am a greedy libertarian. 

I pay my taxes because if I don't, men with guns in the service of the state will come to my house and drag my sorry butt to the slammer for evading income taxes. 

We live in a civilized society -- in which wimpy pacifist losers can walk around safely -- because we live under constant threat of socially sanctioned government violence. 

It's the reason I don't speed (too much), rob banks, use heroin, enslave the weak so I never have to do my own laundry again, or hunt down the teachers who annoyed me in high school to cover them in Hershey's chocolate syrup and stake them out on the nearest red ant hill in the hot sun. 

(Yeah. Right. Like you've never thought about what you'd do if Parliament accidentally repealed the Criminal Code for a day.) 

Pacifists such as Loney have never accomplished anything in this world and never will, and they've certainly never created what they purport to love: Peace. 

They believe violence never solves anything when, in fact, the judicious use of violence solves many of the large problems. 

South Korea is free because men -- real men, not pacifists -- sacrificed to stop the North Koreans from enslaving it. Ditto for Nazi and Japanese aggression during the Second World War. Violence ended black slavery on this continent. 

All of those achievements were won by men with guns, not the wimps on the sidelines praying and feeling smug about occupying the moral high ground.


----------



## vonGarvin (6 Apr 2006)

Listening to "As it Happens" the other night, they had on not Loney, but the dude who went to New Zealand.  It was ridiculous what he was saying.  He said that "it was obvious that the whole thing was staged".  When asked why he thought that, he waffled, saying he had "no evidence" but wished he had "more evidence", but something just "seemed odd".  I guess the odd thing was that he wasn't used to guys with guns NOT threatening him?????


----------



## monika (6 Apr 2006)

vonGarvin said:
			
		

> Listening to "As it Happens" the other night, they had on not Loney, but the dude who went to New Zealand.  It was ridiculous what he was saying.



I couldn't handle hearing that guy blather on any more! Staged? Right. Several military forces and governments put aside diffences to "stage" the rescue of these three, because they had all the time and resources in the world with which to do it?

Can the rescued be charged for not providing info on their captors? How stupid.


----------



## scm77 (6 Apr 2006)

A little bit of humour.  

*Anti-War Hostages Air-Dropped Back into Iraq*
The British military announced today that they had air-dropped former hostages Norman Kembler, James Loony and Harmeet Singh Sooden into the Iraqi desert, just a week after their rescue from a house west of Baghdad. The men had been held by insurgents for four months.

Since their release, the three men, all from a Christian Peacemaker team, have spoken with deep admiration and respect for their captors, while not offering any degree of gratitiude to the British commandos who risked their lives to save them.

“We realize now that we made a huge mistake,” said Captain Ian Coates of the British Army, “and it was time to return these men to the people they love and respect."

Coates wistfully related the story of how the former hostages were told of the decision to reunite them with their brethren in Iraq.

"To keep it a surprise, we used our commandos to gather the men in the middle of the night," he said. "They were so surprised and excited that we needed to duct tape their mouths and tie them up. But there was no doubt that they were overjoyed to be returning to Iraq. Their eyes were as big as saucers, and Kembler even wet his jammies in excitement!"

The men were whisked by military jet back to a British Military base in Kuwait, and flown by helicopter into Iraq at dawn. Captain Coates struggled to keep his composure as he described the reunion.

“The air drop was a remarkable moment, something I was honored to see,” he said. “The men were writhing around, screaming and crying with joy. There wasn’t a dry eye in the helicopter as we rolled them out.”

The British Military was concerned that the men would not be picked up quickly, leaving them to wander in the dessert. So each man was given a bright red parachute emblazoned with one of the famed Danish Mohammed cartoons.

“The cartoons really did the trick,” said Captain Coates. “As they drifted downward, you could see the insurgents gathering to welcome them. Some had even set fires to help guide them as they landed. We could hear the chants of welcome even over the whir of the rotors. Did you ever see Born Free? It was like that, but better.”

http://potfry.blogspot.com/2006/03/anti-war-hostages-air-dropped-back.html

 :rofl:


----------



## GAP (6 Apr 2006)

This mental image is just beautiful!!! :cheers:


----------



## Michael Dorosh (6 Apr 2006)

Amusing, but does no one really think that there is a difference between enduring captivity as part of their beliefs, and desiring that captivity?  If they truly seek a world without conflict, I think that's admirable, and if their faith is so strong that they managed to get through 4 months of captivity unconvinced of the need for armed intervention to "save" them, I frankly envy them a little.

How long is the military going to whine about not having three people respect what they did, when the military - evidenced by posts here - clearly has no respect for what they do in return?

Let's all just let it go.  I would say next time, don't bother rescuing them. But ridiculing people for having strong non-violent beliefs  hardly paints anyone in a favourable light.


----------



## George Wallace (6 Apr 2006)

The question has to be asked:

Do we spend a few million on troops and stores to rescue hostages, or do we spend a few million to pay off kidnappers who will probably kill the hostages in the end anyway and pour more funds into Terrorist organizations?


----------



## Michael Dorosh (6 Apr 2006)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> The question has to be asked:
> 
> Do we spend a few million on troops and stores to rescue hostages, or do we spend a few million to pay off kidnappers who will probably kill the hostages in the end anyway and pour more funds into Terrorist organizations?



The answer is neither. Anyone who wants to go to a place like Iraq does so with no guarantees of personal safety. If their faith in God permits them to operate there, so be it. They don't need "us" to help them if they get in a bad spot.  If it is in our interests to provide help, well, then we back it up with soldiers like in Afghanistan. Otherwise, I say wash our hands of individuals who choose to risk their life and limb on non-government sanctioned missions. There should be no grey area.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (6 Apr 2006)

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> The answer is neither. Anyone who wants to go to a place like Iraq does so with no guarantees of personal safety. If their faith in God permits them to operate there, so be it. They don't need "us" to help them if they get in a bad spot.  If it is in our interests to provide help, well, then we back it up with soldiers like in Afghanistan. Otherwise, I say wash our hands of individuals who choose to risk their life and limb on non-government sanctioned missions. There should be no grey area.



I agree completely.  You made your bed, have fun sleeping in it.  I would also suggest that a general press release be made, advising future "do-gooders" that they are on their own, so they shake off the "have my cake and eat it too" line of thought.  
I wonder if early Christians went out of their way to be "allowed" to participate in the Colosseum events.  "Oh, I think with a bit of love and understanding, we can bring the lions around".   :


----------



## GO!!! (6 Apr 2006)

Michael, ZC,

Good points.

Perhaps a public memorandum of understanding published by DFAIT, stating that any Canadian Citizen who goes to Iraq (or any other war) without being a part of an officially sanctioned Canadian government mission/activity, must either;

1) Assume full, complete and unlimited liability for their actions. There will be no effort, diplomatic, military or otherwise to secure their release, or the capture or punishment of their captors/murderers unless;

2) They post a 5 million dollar bond, payable to the Canadian Government, per person, out of which the real cost of any efforts made on their behalf, should they require it, will be deducted. 

This would absolve the Canadian public purse and national conciousness for the actions of a few religious zealots, should another group of religious zealots act on demonstrably credible threats to do them harm. 

I buy car insurance in case I have an accident - to protect myself and other drivers - what makes CPT so special that I, the taxpayer must assume responsibility for their actions?


----------



## Cliff (6 Apr 2006)

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> The answer is neither. Anyone who wants to go to a place like Iraq does so with no guarantees of personal safety. If their faith in God permits them to operate there, so be it. They don't need "us" to help them if they get in a bad spot.  If it is in our interests to provide help, well, then we back it up with soldiers like in Afghanistan. Otherwise, I say wash our hands of individuals who choose to risk their life and limb on non-government sanctioned missions. There should be no grey area.


The only reason not to wash our hands of these individuals is because there are citizenship issues involved. It it isn't the first time the military had to rescue citizens that had no business in a particular region. But it goes with International protocol. These particular hostages don't represent my views as a Christian = yet I would not feed them to the lions...so to speak.


----------



## Michael Dorosh (6 Apr 2006)

Cliff said:
			
		

> The only reason not to wash our hands of these individuals is because there are citizenship issues involved. It it isn't the first time the military had to rescue citizens that had no business in a particular region. But it goes with International protocol. These particular hostages don't represent my views as a Christian = yet I would not feed them to the lions...so to speak.



Your viewpoint is certainly legitimate, and I believe represents the status quo.  I just don't happen to agree with it; avalanche victims who were skiing of the trail, etc., are a similar occurence.  There has been talk of charging persons in those circumstances for the cost of a rescue helicopter etc. - don't know much about it personally but sounds a lot like GO's suggestion.

Hey, everyone travelling abroad gets a passport, so you make part of that process the signing of a waiver, right? Simple to implement.

There are some obvious pitfalls, I will concede.


----------



## Cliff (7 Apr 2006)

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> There has been talk of charging persons in those circumstances for the cost of a rescue helicopter etc. - don't know much about it personally but sounds a lot like GO's suggestion.



Sounds like a winner to me. Since the activists created the situation they should pay.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (4 Jun 2006)

Well, it didn't take too long for this half wit to scramble back to his ungrateful roots:

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/04062006/2/national-ex-iraq-hostage-james-loney-joins-protest-march-muslim.html

*Ex-Iraq hostage James Loney joins protest march for Muslim security detainees  Sun Jun 04, 11:06 AM EST
By Colin Perkel
TORONTO (CP) - A Christian activist who garnered international headlines as a hostage in Iraq is joining a protest march against Canada's system of detaining suspected foreign terrorists indefinitely without charge or trial. 
James Loney, who spent four months in captivity in Iraq, planned to catch up with the "freedom caravan" in Belleville, Ont., on Tuesday. 
In an interview, Loney told The Canadian Press that he feels both an obligation to, and kinship with, the Muslim men currently detained as threats to national security. 
He said he was especially grateful that three of the detainees wrote an open letter in early December, just days after he was kidnapped, urging his captors to free their hostages. 
"That was a gesture of solidarity that moved me very deeply," said Loney. "So, I feel personally obliged to speak out for them." 
Loney was one of four members of Christian Peacemaker Teams snatched off the streets of Baghdad in late November, one of whom was later shot dead. 
Three of the activists, who sought to highlight the plight of thousands of Iraqis detained without charge by American and British forces in Iraq, were rescued at the end of March by coalition forces. 
Loney said he felt there were "parallels" between his situation as a hostage and the suspected terrorists, who have languished in detention for between four and six years. 
"I didn't know when I was going to be freed (or) know really why I was being held," said Loney. 
"It was an unjust deprival of my liberty in the same way that someone who's in jail in Canada . . . without charge."  The protest march began Saturday in Toronto and will end June 10 in Ottawa, where a week-long vigil will take place. 
The vigil will coincide with Supreme Court of Canada hearings on the constitutionality of the national security certificates and indefinite detention. 
Five Muslims are currently designated as threats to national security. 
Three of the men - Mohammad Mahjoub, Mahmoud Jaballah and Hassan Almrei - are being held without charge. 
A fourth, Adil Charkaoui, has been released under severe bail conditions, while the fifth, Mohamed Harkat, was granted bail under house arrest but remains in jail while the government appeals that ruling. 
Protest co-ordinator Matthew Behrens, of the Campaign to Stop Secret Trials in Canada, said it's important to draw attention to the injustice of the security certificate regime. 
"We have an issue of national importance which is being discussed at the Supreme Court," said Behrens. 
"We feel that it's really crucial to spend a lot of time on the road going from community to community sharing the story of what's been going on with secret trials." 
Loney said he would also take part in the protest planned for Wednesday outside the new Kingston immigration holding facility in Millhaven, Ont., where the detainees are on hunger strikes. 
"They're being held without charge, without access to the evidence against them (and) being held indefinitely, without the possibility of appeal," Loney said. 
"It's just unconscionable."*

Okay, seriously.  How do we go about arranging a bag job on this guy and get him back to the cranium optional jagoff country that he loves so much?  
And no one wants to hear Stockholm Syndrome trotted out.  :


----------



## Michael Dorosh (4 Jun 2006)

zipperhead_cop said:
			
		

> Okay, seriously.  How do we go about arranging a bag job on this guy and get him back to the cranium optional jagoff country that he loves so much?
> And no one wants to hear Stockholm Syndrome trotted out.  :



You honestly don't see the parallels between his situation and that of the detainees? Or at the least understand why he might see them?


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (4 Jun 2006)

Not in the friggin' slightest.....


----------



## J.J (4 Jun 2006)

1-The terrorist are detained for a lawful security certificate, argue if you want, but it is issued by a court of law

2-"_Loony_" went to Iraq and was kidnapped, he was not committing any criminal acts, he is just a "do-good-er" that lives in the same fantasy world you seem to also reside in Michael  :


----------



## Michael Dorosh (4 Jun 2006)

WR said:
			
		

> 1-The terrorist are detained for a lawful security certificate, argue if you want, but it is issued by a court of law
> 
> 2-"_Loony_" went to Iraq and was kidnapped, he was not committing any criminal acts, he is just a "do-good-er" that lives in the same fantasy world you seem to also reside in Michael  :



Why the personal attack? That's usually evidence of a bankruptcy of logic. 

The detainees are being held "indefinitely" without hope, apparently, of a legal trial, the same as the "loony" in question had been.  I would suggest that is a very big similarity.

Whether or not the detainees in US hands commited criminal acts is not yet known; but given the lack of due process, that may be a permanent condition.


----------



## Infanteer (5 Jun 2006)

Michael makes a good point.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (5 Jun 2006)

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> The detainees are being held "indefinitely" without hope, apparently, of a legal trial, the same as the "loony" in question had been.  I would suggest that is a very big similarity.



..and I call bullshit of the highest order. How dare you compare our way of treating ANY prisoner in our justice system to what kidnap victims go through.

Michael, 
I know you like to play the "game" but this is going way too friggin' far........your post is vile and disgusting.

EDIT: Infanteer,...what part?


----------



## J.J (5 Jun 2006)

+1 Bruce

You took the words out of my mouth


----------



## Cloud Cover (5 Jun 2006)

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> The detainees are being held "indefinitely" without hope, apparently, of a legal trial, the same as the "loony" in question had been.  I would suggest that is a very big similarity.



The detainees held under a security certificate have the certifcate reviewed regulary by the court issuing the order, or an appellate court on appeal, or on motion before the court by lawyers for the accused. As far as I know, the detainees are treated well, better than most prisoners in the system, and they have access to all the lawyers they could possibly need.  The alternative is a plane flight to Bulgaria for rendition- as far as I'm concerned they can take their pick. 

Anyway, the Supreme Court is set to rule on the Charter validity of the security certificate system in a few weeks. All bets are that they will rule the process invalid, and then the civil lawsuits will begin. Another present to lawyers courtesy of the Chretien era. They are not going to decline the opportunity to make a few bucks on this one.  

Cheers,


----------



## Michael Dorosh (5 Jun 2006)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> The detainees held under a security certificate have the certifcate reviewed regulary by the court issuing the order, or an appellate court on appeal, or on motion before the court by lawyers for the accused. As far as I know, the detainees are treated well, better than most prisoners in the system, and they have access to all the lawyers they could possibly need.  The alternative is a plane flight to Bulgaria for rendition- as far as I'm concerned they can take their pick.
> 
> Anyway, the Supreme Court is set to rule on the Charter validity of the security certificate system in a few weeks. All bets are that they will rule the process invalid, and then the civil lawsuits will begin. Another present to lawyers courtesy of the Chretien era. They are not going to decline the opportunity to make a few bucks on this one.
> 
> Cheers,



Thanks for the informed post, whiskey, that was a refreshing change of pace.  

I'm struck by Prime Minister Harper's words on TV tonight - when he spoke at the swearing in ceremony, he said (paraphrasing) "they hate us because of who we are and how we live - freedom, democracy and the rule of law."

If we define ourselves by rule of law, I think it behooves us to live by it. I may have waded in unthinkingly here - I was thinking of the US detainees in Cuba rather than Canadian prisoners. Sorry for the confusion.


----------



## Blue Max (5 Jun 2006)

Are not soldiers of two sides of a given conflict that are captured held indefinitely until hostiles cease?  I believe there have been historical instances where the captured soldiers have been paroled back to their sides even before hostilities have fully ended, but this was based on the said soldier signing with honour his intent to not participate any further in said conflict. Obviously in the post WW1 conflict's this is less likely to be allowed by the powers to be on all sides (Total War).

Considering you have signed up for Jihad would you expect any less if captured, ie indefinite prison, or would you prefer a rusty blade sawing your head off, within  one year of capture.  Mr Looney is as his name implies Loony, with no connection to reality, IMHO.


----------



## warrickdll (5 Jun 2006)

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> The detainees are being held "indefinitely" without hope, apparently, of a legal trial, the same as the "loony" in question had been.  I would suggest that is a very big similarity.



There is no similarity. Canada does not want these people in Canada and would gladly send them home - they do not wish to go home. This is exactly opposite to the situation you are trying to draw a parallel to.

The courts will not allow Canada to return them due to the punishments they would receive for their terrorist links. At the same time, the courts say that even the 2 that were granted bail (I believe one is back in pending appeal) are indeed security risks. In no way should this impasse be resolved be allowing terrorist (or their sympathizers) to be allowed safe haven in Canada.

Bringing them to trial in Canada would be my preference, but this has several downsides.
	- It may expose sources we are not ready to lose
	- Not all foreign obtained evidence may be allowed into a trial
	- I can not see them being imprisoned for life even if they were convicted


----------



## Michael Dorosh (5 Jun 2006)

Iterator said:
			
		

> There is no similarity...



You misread me; I was discussing the situation in Cuba with American "detainees", not Canadian prisoners. In fact, when I see the word "detainees" I automatically think of the situation there, where their detainees - dubbed "illegal combatants" - have been kept for years. I'm not familiar with the Canadian "detainees" but was associating them more with prisoners of war.


----------



## warrickdll (5 Jun 2006)

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> You misread me; I was discussing the situation in Cuba with American "detainees", not Canadian prisoners. In fact, when I see the word "detainees" I automatically think of the situation there, where their detainees - dubbed "illegal combatants" - have been kept for years. I'm not familiar with the Canadian "detainees" but was associating them more with prisoners of war.





			
				zipperhead_cop said:
			
		

> Loney said he felt there were "parallels" between his situation as a hostage and the suspected terrorists, who have languished in detention for between four and six years.
> "I didn't know when I was going to be freed (or) know really why I was being held," said Loney.
> "It was an unjust deprival of my liberty in the same way that someone who's in jail in Canada . . . without charge."



The article also mentioned detainees held by the US and the UK (which was one item of Loney's agitation in Iraq) - but my comments were only on the Canadian Security Certificates (which seems to be Loney's focus in the article). 

Perhaps the ambiguity could explain the tone in the previous half-dozen-or-so posts (I offer no guarantees ).


----------



## Kirkhill (5 Jun 2006)

> If we define ourselves by rule of law, I think it behooves us to live by it.



And die by it too I suppose.....when the wrong person gets back into circulation.

My problem with the entire debate over Guantanamo and the  Illegal Combatant/PW issue is that everybody seems to keep forgetting that Prisoners of War require a War and a War can only be declared between two states.  PWs are held, essentially as guests, until the cessation of hostilities.  Their detention has nothing to do with whether or not they have done anything illegal.  PWs are supposed to be treated as honourable opponents according to the Geneva rules. They are just being kept out of circulation until the War ends.

When somebody rises up against their own government then they are committing an illegal act.  Then it becomes courts and jails.....unless of course they end up on the winning side which ultimately means the complete abrogation of the rule of law.

The problem with the Guantanamo types is that there was no War between States because the Taliban weren't recognized as a government, and the fighters weren't recognized as an army.  Who do you negotiate with to arrange repatriation?  And when does this occur?  And if the answer is the Afghan government what do you do when it considers them criminals?


----------



## zipperhead_cop (5 Jun 2006)

I can only pray that this is another circumstance where the SCC decides that yes, the Charter is being breached but it is worth it.  It could be an "if you are doing x, y, z, then you forfeit your rights", which they have done in the past.  The legal system has been so devoid of common sense for so long, it is time for us to get a "nod" for a change.  Keep it simple.  Don't get hung up on defining conflict or combatants, lawful military status and other such word games.  Bad person wants to hurt us.  Bad person gets taken out of circulation.  Period.  
However, I would fully support the bag being shipped off to his country of origin after he has been suitably pumped for information, and let the chips fall where they may.   :bullet:


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (5 Jun 2006)

...and of course, once again it all falls back to that group of appointed hackmen/women [ no no, the _other_ group ] of the supreme court potentially CHANGING the laws brought in by our elected politicians.......while democracy weeps.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (5 Jun 2006)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> ...and of course, once again it all falls back to that group of appointed hackmen/women [ no no, the _other_ group ] of the supreme court potentially CHANGING the laws brought in by our elected politicians.......while democracy weeps.



Bruce, I think you are forgetting the most powerful legal tool in Canada which has been proven to stop crime in its tracks:

*THE STERN JUDICIAL REBUKE*

OOOOO...nothing more terrifying than a dour look and a strongly worded lecture from a middle aged white guy to sort out the bad guys.  

What?  The rest of you think I'm kidding?  (sarcastic, yes)  Go check out the arrogance in a court room near you some time and see how stuck on themselves these people are.  Watch the criminal asshat nod in mock contrition, then follow them out of the court room and listen to them laugh their asses off and use a mock Judges voice "the next time I see you in my court, blah, blah, blah".  Yeah.  The next time you see them in your court you will be just as useless as you were this time.  Judges actually think that criminals really give a crap about their opinion.  Amazing, but true.  
And we are supposed to trust them with the fabric of our society.


----------



## George Wallace (5 Jun 2006)

OK.  Other than being "HELD", there are no other similarities.  

On on side we have 'detainees' being held according to rules of law, on the other side we have 'hostages' held for ransom, with no guarantees of freedom or even escaping with their lives.  On one side we can see the legal system at work, and on the other we can see torture, starvation, death by 'rusty knife', mutilation of body, etc.  There are very obvious differences between being held and facing legal imprisonment for life, and being held and facing decapitation at the hands of Muslim Fundamentalists.

Yes, I would say that the differences are quite drastic in their scope, between the Islamic 'Terrorists' and the Western 'police' forces and agencies.  (NATO Forces, US Forces, etc would be considered as part of "Western 'police' forces".)


----------



## KevinB (5 Jun 2006)

Lesser Evil...

Secondly
Personally I think Treason should come back as a capital offence.


Lastly - I think the Gitmo (and alledged Eastern European) prison is self defeating.  IF these people have committed crimes they should have been sentenced -- if they have not all we have done by incarcerating them is increase their dislike/hatred of us so they will do something anti-coalition if/when they are released.


----------



## vonGarvin (5 Jun 2006)

Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> Personally I think Treason should come back as a capital offence.


A very BIG  *+1*   on that one.


----------



## The Bread Guy (18 Nov 2006)

Shared in accordance with the "fair dealing" provisions, Section 29, of the Copyright Act.

*Ex-hostage shuns poppy's symbolism*
James Loney's controversial stance challenged at U of G lecture
Laura Thompson, Guelph Mercury, 11 Nov 06
Article Permalink - Media Analysis of Rescue Op (113KB .pdf)

Despite his gratitude to elite British troops for rescuing him from his captors in 
Iraq, James Loney says he can't wear a poppy on Remembrance Day.

"They (military forces) believe in what they're doing, and more than that, 
they're risking their lives. . . . That is an amazing gift," he told a University 
of Guelph audience yesterday.

"And that's what we are trying to remember and think about on Nov. 11. 

"But having said that, I still can't wear a poppy." 

His statement, coming on the eve of Remembrance Day, was timely 
and controversial.

After his hour-long talk at the U of G's Peter Clark hall, a couple of 
members of the audience stood up to explain the importance of pinning 
the red flower on one's lapel.

For most, it's a symbol of the Remembrance Day maxim -- lest we 
forget. It's also a small way to recognize the sacrifice of veterans.

But for Loney, the poppy represents something entirely different. It 
represents military preparedness to engage in war.

"It says we have to be ready for the next time," he said. "Vigilance."

Loney and two other members of Christian Peacemaker Teams were
rescued from an abandoned house near Baghdad on March 23.

The pacifists, who were in Iraq to learn about human rights abuses 
and bring attention to the plight of Iraqis, had been kidnapped and 
held hostage since Nov. 26, 2005.

A fourth hostage, American Tom Fox, had already been executed. His 
body was found on March 9 in Baghdad.

Loney told the Guelph audience that during his roughly four months as 
a hostage, he came to see the room he was held in as a tomb.

But that feeling didn't dissipate when soldiers rescued him and his two 
fellow pacifists.

Loney said he was moved from his captors' makeshift prison into a 
tank, which brought him to an American base, also host to coalition 
forces, in Baghdad. 

"I felt like I had moved from one tomb into another tomb," he said. 
"I didn't feel free from the world of the gun until I got out of the RCMP 
car (in Canada) and into my own home," he said.

In his address, Loney conceded the irony that he and his fellow 
Christian Peacemaker Teams hostages were rescued by British 
troops -- members of the same military force he has spent his life 
opposing. 

"My standing here right now is something of a paradox," he said. 
"Our captivity was resolved by British Special Forces.

"I'm profoundly sad it was the war machine, really, that was able 
to resolve the crisis in the end."

In the 118 days he was held captive in Iraq, Loney thought 
constantly of escape. He played out exit strategies in his head, 
imagining different ways to outsmart his captors.

He thought of trying to smash an object over one of their heads, 
like they do in the movies. But being a pacifist, he dismissed the idea.

Instead, he prayed to stay grounded in the present moment while 
he tried to understand his kidnappers' motives.

He also worked through the fear, anger and boredom he felt most 
days.

It was never easy, but there were moments of reprieve, like when 
he and the other hostages watched Hollywood action films with 
their abductors. 

The plots were always the same -- good guys versus bad guys. 
The abductors cheered the good guys on. That's how they 
perceived themselves. 

Following his return to Canada on March 26, Loney stayed 
for two weeks with family in Sault Ste. Marie, where he was 
born and raised.

After that, he returned to Toronto with his partner, Dan Hunt, 
who stayed silent during Loney's captivity. Family members 
did not reveal Loney is gay out of fear for his safety.

"Here I am. I'm free today. It's very possible if there hadn't 
been a military rescue I would have been killed," he told the 
U of G audience.

Still, Loney said the experience made him realize the "tomb" 
in which he was held captive belonged not to rescuers nor his 

captors.

"The tomb is really violence itself," he said. "That is the logic 
of violence. You have to go all the way, because when you start, it's 

kill or be killed. It's dominate or be dominated. And you can't stop."

And so for Loney, it's the poppy or peace. He chooses peace and 
wears a Christian Peacekeeper Teams button instead.

It's his choice not to wear a poppy, said Maurice Ferris, president 
of the Royal Canadian Legion Branch 234, adding that Loney 
misinterprets its meaning.

"The poppy is the symbol of remembrance, to remember people 
who gave their lives," the veteran said.

"When you look at terrorism, pacifism doesn't work. He found 
out firsthand."


----------



## Trinity (18 Nov 2006)

Some people just get the idea of the poppy.
Some people learn the hard way.
And... sadly.. some people just don't learn (even after the hardway)


Too bad for him.  He is sad because military intervention saved his life?
No.. he's sad because it proved his values and beliefs failed him and
yet he still won't admit it.

That's what is sad.    

(of course... the poppy isn't pro war.. its pro remembrance)


----------



## The Bread Guy (18 Nov 2006)

What I find interesting in this and other coverage of the chap in question is how, while captive, he wrestled with the desire to be escape (especially when the guards were lapsing in their duties) with the discomfort at being a pacifist having to use force to break away.  At least he had some honour in also thinking (if media accounts are to be believed) that if he got away, his remaining buddies would probably face bigger problems.

I think the Legion gentleman said it best:  "When you look at terrorism, pacifism doesn't work. He found 
out firsthand."


----------



## cobbler (19 Nov 2006)

And to think some brave men risked thier lives to save his.

Brave men who have lives and families of thier own, put all that on the line to save the life of a man they had never met, and that man now won't honour the memories of thousands more before them who sacrificed thier lives doing similar duties.


----------



## midget-boyd91 (19 Nov 2006)

Our military is fighting and dying so people can express personal opinions about war. Our military and foreign militaries rescued the hostages in Iraq to give them a new lease on life. And his thick head is still unable to see that if it weren't for our militaries doing what they are doing now... he would not have the freedom to think what he does..he also would not have a life.


----------



## proudnurse (19 Nov 2006)

I do not even have to finish, reading what he had to say, and I honestly do not want to. Maybe he should spend some time and read the files from the Nazi Camps and what happened to those people! If it was not for the millions of men and women that gave their lives, not just in WW2 but other wars, he would not be here today to say what he was saying. 

My 6 yr old daughter Felicia, wore a Poppy this Nov 11th and laid a wreath at the Cenetaph for her Great Grandfather. At her young age, she understands more about what that means than he ever will! 

Rebecca 

Oh yes, and if it was not for those Brave Soldiers that saved his @## when he was in Iraq, he would not be here to spread that verbal diarrhea!


----------



## RHFC_piper (19 Nov 2006)

James Loney said:
			
		

> "I'm profoundly sad it was the war machine, really, that was able
> to resolve the crisis in the end."



I defy anyone to name one crisis, that has already escalated into conflict, that has ended without the use of force.  Name one revolution, that helped free people, where there was no fighting.
Freedome has to be one by people willing to fight and die, not by people who want to talk.  'cause there are always people willing to kill for what they believe in. 
As much as these people (Pacifists) have good intentions, they take their lives into their own hands more so than soldiers, but do it with naivete. They believe no one will harm them if they preach peace and don't defend it. 

The people they think they're trying to help and fix with words know nothing but violence, and as much as we believe violence isn't an answer, they don't share that oppinion. Besides that, they already despise westerners and have vowed, to their beliefs, to kill the 'infidels', so going to them with talk is like walking into a Lions den after it has been starving for a week, after you've been soaking in stake sauce and marinade, and expecting the Lion to cuddle up to you an purr and not eat you.

Had I been at this 'disscussion' at U of G (and I wish I was), I would have simply asked what his goals were, if he had reached any of them, and was it worth the torment and loss of life.  Then I'd compare that to the positive outcomes of WW1 and 2 thanks to the efforts and sacrifices of soldiers in the face of tyrany and oppression.... or how about peace being reached in Bosnia after a generation of fighting... or how about Kosovo.  I could go on.

Which leads me to issue number two with this well intentioned fool; I defy him to state that he and his fellow pacifists have not benifited directly from past conflicts and military interventions. (besides the rescue...which is Ironic.)
I would like him to say that the world would have been better off with Hitler at the helm.  I would like him to say that womens rights, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and the right to go to school are unimportant to the people in Iraq and Afghanistan.  I would also like him to say that genocide is alright in the Balkans and Africa, simply because peaceful intervention isn't and wasn't possible... What would he have done? Protested as a dictator incinerated hundreds of thousands of people because of their beliefs? He would have joined them. And I'm sure he would have been hanged or decapitated if he tried to reason with Sadam... He got a minor taste of the hard life and the struggle for freedom and decided to insult the very people who not only provide him freedom at home, but saved him abroad. For shame.

The poppy isn't for war, its for who gave us peace. For who was willing to die to defend our freedom.

When ever I read something like this, or hear about people like this, I feel nothing but sadness. I think about my recent experience and weep for friends I've lost in the persuit of a cause we felt was just; peace and freedom.  All I can think is that I hope one day the people of Afghanistan and Iraq (and everywhere else in the world) can have this much freedom to be able to slag the very people who helped them... 

Sorry I turn every post into a rant.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (19 Nov 2006)

Try not to let asshats like this get you worked up.  Personally, I feel that it makes all soldiers look better to have an ungrateful jagoff like this chiming away.  That we can do what we do despite the love and appreciation of all of the people we do it for speaks to the professionalism that is the hallmark of the Canadian soldier.  
Nobody hoists proctologists on their shoulders either, but we still count on them to do the crap jobs.  (pun intended   )


----------



## APOLLOVet (19 Nov 2006)

Agreed. The US Special Forces has it right - "Quiet Professionalism".

We will never change the minds of those who have their minds closed. We are better off with the knowledge that we are the ones who permit them to have these opinions. I, for one, would rather be counted amongst those who do what is needed to allow people to try what they think is right, than be counted amongst those who just say "It's not my fight."


----------



## couchcommander (19 Nov 2006)

Trinity said:
			
		

> No.. he's sad because it proved his values and beliefs failed him and yet he still won't admit it.



Bang on Trinity, bang on.


----------



## Fyuri (19 Nov 2006)

This ungrateful bastard thinks HE has a paradox in his hands? How about the sorry souls who risked their lives to save him, only to be slapped in the face by him? I know he must have gasped in horror, and pleaded with the forces who rescued him NOT to take him out of this torment, to wait until his captors decided to throw down their arms and resolve this peacefully, so that he could be satisfied that his presence there was warranted in the first place. To think that men and women in the service give their lives for sorry bastards like this makes me sick somewhat, and yet, it is what they do. It really is a no-win situation, considering the very freedoms given these individuals are abused, and taken for granted. His rescuers should have turned to him, said "Sorry for the disturbance, sir", and marched right out on his ass. DAMN this makes me mad, and yet, for some reason, it's the ONLY way it can be. If he didn't have the freedom to bitch and gripe about all this, then all the sacrifices made by our people would be for nought. It would be nice, if not a bit Utopian, to think that EVERYONE who received a favour, let alone a second chance at life, would be grateful for it. My blod is boiling, yet somehow, I know our servicemen and women are succeeding, by the fact that he is ABLE to complain about all this. Wow.


----------



## Zell_Dietrich (19 Nov 2006)

There are some people out there who are so set in their values and beliefs that they loose all perception on how their actions affect others. "I can do no harm because I am right" the calling card of the wrong. And on a side note, I thought the poppy is one of the most powerfull anti-war symbols ever. For most Canadians it is as powerfull as "Nie Wieder" is for most Germans.

I wish him well,  he isn't doing anyone other than himself any harm.  Maybe one day he'll understand,  hopefully soon.


----------



## 043 (19 Nov 2006)

Do you guys know that within 30 minutes of being captured, this pansy was left unguarded and unshackled, all alone in the building???


----------



## The Bread Guy (19 Nov 2006)

2023 said:
			
		

> Do you guys know that within 30 minutes of being captured, this pansy was left unguarded and unshackled, all alone in the building???



Really? If you have an open-source link, I'd appreciate seeing it.  If not, PM me.

Like I said earlier, what makes me shake my head is his conflict between "I want to be free" and "I'd have to use even a little bit of force to be free"....


----------



## NL_engineer (19 Nov 2006)

His just a waist of air and space.  At least no SF guy was killed in his rescue   .


----------



## armyvern (19 Nov 2006)

Thank God for the soldiers.


----------



## niner domestic (19 Nov 2006)

Couple of things come to mind over this event. 

 I am wondering why members of the press have not mentioned that information was suppressed at their reporting his homosexuality for fear of his captors executing him immediately.  In an age where the press demand their rights to print anything irrespective of the consequences to those who are subject of their "information sharing",they are silent on this.  In Loney's case his organization, family and partner asked the press to withold information with respect to his homosexuality so that his captors could not read about it. Where are/were the out cry from the press at how dare anyone ask to suppress information? 

Which then makes me wonder about how true to ones beliefs and morals does one have to stray from or put aside when one faces great peril?  Where were his beliefs then? Denying his partner existence and a lifestyle/genetic hardwiring seems to me to be a much greater departure from Loney's belief system than the wearing pf a poppy could ever create.  I'll be a peace loving, gay, pacifist as long as my total beliefs are safe but I'll hide or deny parts of my identity when I am threatened - because I am a coward - period.   Not a coward because of his pacifism but because he allowed and participated in denying his homosexuality in order to save himself because that aspect of his belief system would have got him executed as quickly as his comrade James Fox was.  

Then I wonder at the cost of Loney's rescue and the recent discussions of private citizens expecting to gain access to the resources of the military when a "crisis" is facing them.  Whether it's picking up sticks in an ice storm, shoveling snow in a major city, sandbagging the banks of a river, firefighting in the mountains of BC, providing disaster assistance in the wake of a brutal tsunami, loading quasi Canadians into commandeered vessels to reach safety or launching a rescue of a civilian who was warned of dangers of heading into the area the military it seems is expected to pick up the price tag for the follies of the civilians in their failure to be prepared.  In Loney's case, I say send the organization and his family the bill for the rescue.  They can always fundraise to pay for it by selling white poppies.  

What I don't wonder about is the quiet resolve of members of the military to practice what they believe in without fail or denial.


----------



## armyvern (19 Nov 2006)

Niner D,

Your reasoning is a little flawed WRT the press and withholding of information.

Make no mistake, they have also done this on behalf of our fallen soldiers, with-holding their names from  public consumption until NOK and familes have been fully notified.

They also do this when minors may be at risk as in the case of child molestation. This is not a new thing, and most certainly is not a bad thing when someone's life is depending on it.

I may not like Mr Loney, or even agree with him, but he is alive. Do you honestly think he would be had the press released that info? One must be very careful when treading the line here, slamming the press for not releasing this would be akin to slamming them for not publicizing that "XXX soldier kidnapped by insurgents yesterday is a Jew." I imagine that would't go over very well either for the soldier.

When people's lives are in immediate danger, and can be prolonged by the withholding of certain facts, I have no problem with it and I don't think there is anything remotely ethiclly or morally wrong with it.


----------



## vonGarvin (19 Nov 2006)

He won't wear a poppy.  Big deal.  I couldn't honestly care less about this guy.

I do wish, however, that people would stop paying attention to him, inviting him for speeches, etc.   THOSE people who invite this *cough* *hack* "hero" to speak are the useless twits (delete the "i" and insert an "a" to get my true feeling)


----------



## GO!!! (19 Nov 2006)

I think the biggest travesty in this whole story is that the press continues to give this guy air time.

I mean really, what credentials does he have, as a misguided pacifist who was kidnapped as a result of his own stupidity? Is he a learned academic with coherent and defensible positions? Is he a soldier who participated in conflicts? Of course not. 

His sole claim to fame is that he was kidnapped in the execution of a monumentally stupid task and imprisoned by a group of inept terrorists, only to be rescued by the same military machine he so fears and opposes. He did'nt _do_ anything to earn his right to speak on the national media, it all happened _to_ him, he is a leaf in the wind.

I fully agree with 9D on the release of information issue as well. The press reports all of the grisly details of savage rapes, murders and molestations with a blithe commitment to "journalistic integrity :" regardless of all of the harm it does to the victims and their families. 

They also detail such helpful information as how to steal identities, break into buildings and evade drug tests in the name of "investigative journalism", but the sexual orientation of James Loney cannot be released because it _may_ bring him harm? Give me a break. The truth, the *whole* truth....


----------



## armyvern (19 Nov 2006)

They also withhold critical evidence from publication when it assists LEOs with the capture of those murderers.

I'm talking what they do _while the life is in immediate danger_. What they do afterwards is a whole different topic. I'm sure you'd agree that we don't need the media broadcasting every detail they know one one of our operations in Afghanistan prior to the fact or even during it? That's why we have OPSEC. Sometimes, *the safety of soldiers and citizens and their preservation of life  * does in fact outweigh "_the right to know_" when a life is in immediate danger.

And if that same media pre-broadcast one of our raids or patrols and it's location, you'd be up at the front of the line complaining about how they are risking soldiers lives by doing so.


----------



## The Bread Guy (19 Nov 2006)

GO!!! said:
			
		

> Is he a learned academic with coherent and defensible positions?



Some would say thay's oxymoronic on a NUMBER of levels (my partner is an academic, and she can attest to this, too)....


----------



## GO!!! (19 Nov 2006)

The Librarian said:
			
		

> And if that same media pre-broadcast one of our raids or patrols and it's location, you'd be up at the front of the line complaining about how they are risking soldiers lives by doing so.



The difference of course being, that I am not a wannabe public figure with an agenda, who relies upon media attention to keep my name in the news, eagerly reporting my ridiculous statements.

If the media can resist such a juicy tidbit as James Loney's penchant for men while in captivity, surely it can edit his disdain for remembering our veterans from our newspapers on the only day of the year dedicated to them, under the same prudence.


----------



## TN2IC (19 Nov 2006)

I am just thinking his ego is ruined so he places a wall up against the military as before, to hide himself. To hide what he truly feels. The poppy represents the fallen, not the war. Now to image he must be some sort of "hero" in the protesting world. Just cause he of what happened to him. Shame on him. I think his mother didn't love him enough. Drama queen sounds more like it for him. Waste of air and resources. Heck I am am getting in a knot over this clown. I am going for a jog now to blow off some steam.


TN2IC Out


----------



## armyvern (19 Nov 2006)

GO!!! said:
			
		

> The difference of course being, that I am not a wannabe public figure with an agenda, who relies upon media attention to keep my name in the news, eagerly reporting my ridiculous statements.
> 
> If the media can resist such a juicy tidbit as James Loney's penchant for men while in captivity, surely it can edit his disdain for remembering our veterans from our newspapers on the only day of the year dedicated to them, under the same prudence.



Like I said, what the media does after the life is out of immediate danger is a totally different topic.


----------



## Zell_Dietrich (19 Nov 2006)

I do have to disagree with the notion that he is being hypocritical because he was not openly gay when he was being held by the terrorists. He went into the closet the second he steeped on Iraqi soil.  He knew that if he was discovered for who/what he was it would be the swift end of him.  I respect the level of courage it must take to go to a war zone, unarmed, to do humanitarian aid - especially knowing most of the people there would take you to the edge of town and stone you to death as their religious texts say to do. For him to be a hypocrite he needs to have encouraged others to do what he didn't.  I don't recall him ever telling anyone to come out of the closet when there is a gun to their head on principle.  He is following his principles.  I believe they are tendentiously formed and ultimately self defeating, but from what I've seen he is true to them. (I don't watch that closely though)

Yes there was a concerted effort to not let this information out and frankly if one of us who is gay is also captured we would likely do the same.  If one of us who was gay was captured and the media let it out, I honestly believe it would be a rather nasty (even for that lot) video posted on line.  The media has, on more occasions than I think can be counted, withheld information to ensure the safety of our military operations.  Yes the media also has exposed some really nasty things as well that have hindered the military.  How do they justify it? Simple, that is their job.  The media is a necessary component of a free society,  its job is to hold a mirror up to us so we ca see the truth,  not just what we want to see. When larger issues are at stake, like the use of torture or the total disregard for the lives of soldiers, a local celebrity who wont wear a poppy or the lack of equipment (or equipment that is the wrong colour) they will publish it. When it is about individual effects, their response is often measured (such as a weak spot on a tank, the sexual preference of a hostage or the name of a fallen soldier before the family has been informed). Without a free press we could easily fall into dictatorship or have worse things happen.

Now with all that said,  What is the big deal?  So he doesn't know the real meaning behind the poppy so he doesn't want to wear it.  He only makes himself look foolish. Which is hard for a guy that goes to a war zone without a gun. In that conflict they don't really recognise neutrals, so no one is safe there.


----------



## Jarnhamar (19 Nov 2006)

Would it be rude of me to mail this guy a rainbow coloured poppy?



> My standing here right now is something of a paradox," he said.
> "Our captivity was resolved by British Special Forces.
> 
> "I'm profoundly sad it was the war machine, really, that was able
> to resolve the crisis in the end."



Better luck next time James.


----------



## warspite (19 Nov 2006)

While everyone is entitled to their opinion......
Pacifists are a bunch off fools. I've never seen a more unrealistic philosophy. They truly are a waste of precious oxygen.


----------



## Fyuri (19 Nov 2006)

He makes it sound as if soldiers ENJOY war. I'm sure most people would MUCH rather do without it, but it's a reality, and our soldiers are the ones who are brave and dedicated enough to do anything about it. Conflicts don't get resolved by waving white flags.


----------



## Zell_Dietrich (19 Nov 2006)

Fyuri said:
			
		

> Conflicts don't get resolved by waving white flags.



Well, ... if both sides do ... 

The trouble is that sadly there are still groups and individuals who think they can benefit from the use of force.


----------



## Trinity (19 Nov 2006)

Zell_Dietrich said:
			
		

> The trouble is that sadly there are still groups and individuals who think they can benefit from the use of force.



Exactly...* and because of that we have no choice to continue to maintain an armed forces in order to
protect ourselves and our interests.  *

It's like the Simpson's episode when Lisa asks for no more violence or guns.... and the aliens
come down and take over because we were stupid enough to have no means of protection.
Until of course, we chased the aliens away with a board with a nail through it  ;D

But.. I'm preaching to the choir here.


----------



## vonGarvin (19 Nov 2006)

Trinity said:
			
		

> Exactly...* and because of that we have no choice to continue to maintain an armed forces in order to
> protect ourselves and our interests.  *
> 
> It's like the Simpson's episode when Lisa asks for no more violence or guns.... and the aliens
> ...



Trinity, trinity, trinity!  All little Lisa asked for was World Peace, not for no violence or guns.  I found it amusing that Moe deposited a weapon's vault worth of "toys" into the incinerator.  Then, Kodos and Kang laughing maniacally at the "peace symbol" across North America.  Then, of course, the board with a nail in it had Kodos and Kang laughing, because we'll just build a board with in a nail in it so big that we would destroy ourselves!


HAHAHAHAHAHAHA


----------



## GO!!! (22 Nov 2006)

Zell_Dietrich said:
			
		

> The trouble is that sadly there are still groups and individuals who think they can benefit from the use of force.



MODS,

At what point does tripe like this qualify as trolling?

Zell,

You are on a website known as "Army.ca" which is populated nearly exclusively by soldiers, sailors and airmen who make the judicious use of force their business, because we believe it to be right, and the society we live in provides all of the substantiation required. 

Force applied to the right people at the right time is the reason we have the freedoms we do today - including your right to sit smugly behind a computer high handedly declaring any use of force "sad".


----------



## Zell_Dietrich (22 Nov 2006)

GO!!! said:
			
		

> including your right to sit smugly behind a computer high handedly declaring any use of force "sad".



I think you interpreted it differently than the way I intended.  There is a big difference from using force to defend oneself and to protect others and using force for personal gain.  Until some unforeseen future where no one or country feels that the use of force/violence for personal gain is advantageous we will need to use force to defend ourselves and others. Trinity got the implication of my comment exactly the way I intended.

I do find people who use violence or the threat of violence for personal gain sad.  The bully on the play ground, the mugger or the nation that invades another for "breathing room". I don't feel the same way about the kid who finally stands up to the bully, the policeman or the army fighting of the aggressor nation. One takes from others, the other serves others. I guess in my previous posting I implied a meaning assuming that this was presumed by all.  I think I offended you,  if so I apologise.  I'll try to be clearer with my meanings.


----------



## vonGarvin (22 Nov 2006)

davidhmd said:
			
		

> and the most evil German of all time, Kaiser Wilhelm.



"Sure, the Germans have made some mistakes in the past, but that's why pencils have erasers!"

Boy, talk about a thread hijack


----------



## Zell_Dietrich (22 Nov 2006)

davidhmd said:
			
		

> And here's my favorite of all time...
> 
> "Hey, there's nothing in this book from 1939 to 1945!"
> "Nothing happened, we we're all on vacation!"
> ...



http://www.familyguyquotes.com/characters/brian-quotes.html

(Brian and Stewie are on a German tour bus.) 
German Tour Guide: You vill find more on Germany's contributions to ze arts in ze pamphlets ve have provided. 
Brian : Yeah, about your pamphlet... uh, I'm not seeing anything about German history between 1939 and 1945. There's just a big gap. 
Tour guide: Everyone vas on vacation. On your left is Munich's first city hall, erected in 15... 
Brian : Wait, what are you talking about? Germany invaded Poland in 1939 and... 
Tour Guide: We were invited. Punch vas served. Check vit Poland. 
Brian : You can't just ignore those years. Thomas Mann fled to America because of Nazism's stranglehold on Germany. 
Tour guide: Nope, nope. He left to manage a Dairy Queen. 
Brian : A Dairy Queen? That's preposterous. 
Tour guide: I vill hear no more insinuations about the German people. Nothing bad happened. [size=12pt]*Sie werden sich hinsetzen. Sie werden ruhig sein. Sie werden nicht beleidigen Deutschland*[/size]. You will sit down. You will shut up. You will not insult Germany. (Throws his hand up in a Hitler salute.) 
Brian : Uh, is that a beer hall? 
Tour guide: (Snapping out of it) Oh yes, Munich is renowned for its historic beer halls. 


-----

Now onto the guy who wont wear a poppy,  ... lame,  he just doesn't understand, but he has a different outlook than most of us .... which isn't a crime (yet  :rage  warstory: kidding)


----------



## Brad Sallows (22 Nov 2006)

>But for Loney, the poppy represents something entirely different. It represents military preparedness to engage in war.

*shrug*  By his own admission he's made up his own interpretation.  You can believe anything you want in la-la land.


----------



## rregtc-etf (22 Nov 2006)

All this guy is doing is milking his "pacifism" for all it's worth and turning it into a business.  So, a little controversy can't hurt on the university lecture circuit. No doubt other like minded fools are already lining up to here about his heroic exploits.  

These people are living proof sheep and parrots f*ck.


----------



## ArmyRick (23 Nov 2006)

Mr Loney, where ever you are, a word of gratitude would be the LEAST you could do.


----------



## Wookilar (23 Nov 2006)

Well,............

I do agree with just about everyone else here (mostly) regarding the delusions of pacifists and non-poppy wearers.

BUT,

At least this guy and his buddies have the (misguided) balls to put their lives on the line. Yes, I know the good guys risked their lives to pull their fat out of the fire. Yes, I know they accomplished absolutely nothing except risking lives of good soldiers. As I said above, I agree.

However, you don't see our good friend Jack going to A'stan (or even Pakistan or SA) to talk with anyone with any connections to anyone actually involved in the conflict in country.

Wook

I think Mr Loney may be deluded into thinking we all live in a ST:NG episode, but not a hypocrite. The NDP, on the other hand ..... hypocrites.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (24 Nov 2006)

Maybe he was just worried about the stark red colour clashing with his usual selection of pastels?  I liked the rainbow poppy idea.  
BTW, in as much as we have issue with the media paying attention to this dink, we now have four pages of posts for him as well.  It is November 24.  Perhaps lock it and bury it?


----------



## The Bread Guy (12 Apr 2011)

The latest on James Loney's new book here, via the _Globe & Mail_:


> .... It has long been rumoured that just before the commandos arrived, the captors were called on their cellphones and told that it was in their best interests to leave – and very quickly.
> 
> Mr. Loney writes he doesn’t know if those rumours are true. But he is clearer on the aftermath.
> 
> ...



So far, Amazon.com's only got the new book in Kindle format.


----------

