When I started this thread, I was really amazed that Imus and Co would say that low a level of insult about Jill Carroll, and pissed off about it. I thought twice before posting, but their comments were so vile I thought it deserved notice. Even then, I thought, “Well, maybe just a few idiots loading up the airwaves with misguided crap”
Updike proved to me that those views are seriously taken by some, and really, served to spur others in defending Ms. Carroll, in a far better manner than I anticipated.
There is an article in The Christian Science Monitor that details more of what happened prior to Jill’s release, and the last video she was forced to make before release.
From that article:
Jill Carroll is a brave woman, and survived a terrible situation, and by surviving, can also now give valuable information about how her captor’s operations work, and possibly avoid similar situations. As a young journalist, she could have chosen many easier beats. She chose to go to Iraq, and help the world understand the situation there. The worst then happened to her, kidnapped, and having three months to think that every day she just might be killed.
What angered me most about the idiotic Imus show Har-Dee-Har was their making light of would be an abuse of rape under capture, and winky hints thereof, so, after that, she must be a terrorist sympathizer. Disfuckingscusting… I’ve never heard anyone diss male abductees as “Hmm, bet he had to bend over a bit in his cell, you know how it is, and is now a Terrorist Honey Boy!!”
Guin, it’s not quite as clear as that, but in Jill Carroll’s case she could not be providing aid and comfort because it was not done willingly, and was in fact done under what could be considered extreme duress.
For instance, if I were captured and immediately upon captivity announced that I would cooperate without offering any resistance I would be offering aid and comfort and I would be judged harshly when I got home (in the military there is a conduct review of your behavior in captivity upon repatriation). However, if they put a gun to my head and tell me to do it or else I am, strangely enough, obligated to do it. I have learned techniques that allow me to be able to devalue propaganda footage or “confessions”, but I find it very doubtful that Jill Carroll has had such training. She made the statement, she made it home alive, and she did it without any of the training that I have. Under the circumstances she did everything right, and I admire her for that. I only hope that I could do as well under the same circumstances.
I’m new here, but aren’t you the one that posted a Pit to another member last week that totally fell apart, and in the end pitted yourself? What’s with the disgusting name calling you’re directing at Updike? Dude, step away from the computer!
Do I agree with Updike? Nope. But his post made me think (tried seeing through the eye of an Imus listener- shudder). What’s with everyone bashing the hell out of the guy? Some of you people need to seriously calm down and try debating like adults.
username_taken, huh? Yes, there was a pitting I made of a poster that didn’t turn out the way I hoped, but hey, that happens. I think I learned a little bit from it. As for Updike, he has a history of acting like a dick, and I don’t believe I was too harsh on him. The fact that Airman, who, unlike Updike HAS been in that region, risking his life, and is disagreeing with him should say something. Of course, Updike is too damn pig-headed to accept it.
Hey tough guy, point out the exception in the law, or the Constition, that states that duress is a positive defense to a charge of treason. I’ll wait, but I won’t hold my breath.
This got me to thinking of all the times I’ve thought Imus was a total idiot (I’ve listened to far too much of him thanks to a coworker with a loud radio). As other posters said, his show and his success owe itself to the controversy he creates. He takes cheap, childish shots at people all the time (kind of like what’s occurring here). It’s sad to see all the politicians (and worse) journalists that come on his show and kiss his ass. What the OP quoted is reprehensible, childish, disgusting. Jill Carroll is free (thank God), and to now take swipes at her is sad. BUT, name calling Updike for his post is all sad, and childish. Anywho, figured I’d get that off my chest. I read this site for info and some insight, not to read people trying to get in with the ‘popular’ crowd by doing pile-ons.
I was giving you the benefit of the doubt there but now I can see that you are ignoring on purpose that at the same time the pile on is going on (I can not speak for others but I usually do) we present really insightful examples on why Updike is not an upright citizen.
Please go to General questions, Great debates, Cafe society, In My Humble Opinion or even Mundane Pointless stuff if you look only for more “pure” insightful thoughts.
Have you considered that perhaps people are condemning Updike’s opinion individually, and not as part of some group “let’s all badmouth Updike!” party?
OK, let me make this simple: when you are charged with treason you have a right to a trial. If in the course of that trial it is determined that your statements were made under extreme duress you will not be held responsible for them. As Diogenes said, you will break under torture, and certain allowances are made for that eventuality. Everybody breaks. Trust me. Even if your statement is bullshit you will make one at one point or another if they want you to make one.
It is your overall behavior in captivity that will determine your fate. If you willingly make statements, you will be judged harshly. If they beat it out of you you will not be judged harshly.
I’m curious here. When have you ever read a law that included the word “unless”?
As in, such and such is illegal “unless” you’re under duress. Then it’s A-OK, peachy keen. I don’t think so. “Zaraib” Carroll should go to jail for a long time.
What do you think “adhering to the enemy” means? It means that treason requires the intent to help the enemies of the United States. Saying things that “hurt America” isn’t treason; even saying them with the knowledge that they will hurt America isn’t treason. Only the intent to help the enemies of the United States qualifies as treason.
So of course duress is a positive defense against treason you demagogic fuck.
D’Aquino v. U.S., U.S. v. Vigol, Respublica v. McCarty, other things you can’t read.
If only you would. Let’s face it, you’re made of the kind of staunch material that squawked for help when a couple of message board posts hurt your feelings. Do you not realize how discredited you are when it comes to discussing the level of bravery expected of kidnapped reporters in a war zone?