| Return to
opening page |
. |
|
Kidnapping2006-03-11In emotional terms Islamic terrorists are often regarded as the worse progenitors of this crime though in terms of numbers the US is generally regarded as the main offender – see also: Rendition Rendition - facilitating torture? Fortunately, kidnapping is not a crime with which many of us come into contact. That said I would recommend that all aid workers and indeed UK forces in places such as Iraq and Afghanistan have a small chip implanted in them as per the article ‘chips to fight kidnapping’. Similarly, I would recommend that all undergo some basic learning in the art of surviving a kidnapping. The article ‘Islamic View on Hostage Taking’ does provide a theological framework’ but if kidnapped it would not be sensible to enter into such theological debate. The article ‘Is the Kidnapping of CARE’s Margaret Hassan a CIA-Mossad Op?’ may be an intellectual exercise – very doubtful if rational people grant such articles credit but then again this type of writing is becoming increasingly widespread – and believed by many. IAMS Vigorously Condemns Kidnapping, Killing Civilians The Islamic View on Hostage Taking Is the Kidnapping of CARE’s Margaret Hassan a CIA-Mossad Op? KIDNAPPED! (Some basic advice) Chips to fight kidnapping CAIRO, September 26 - The International Association for Muslim Scholars (IAMS) vigorously denounced on Sunday, September 26, the kidnapping and killing of civilians as an aggression against others, calling particularly for the swift release of all civilians taken hostage in Iraq. “We state that it is forbidden to kidnap any human being in any situation other than open warfare, when the person kidnapped becomes a prisoner of war who must not be killed. Indeed, he must eventually be released,” the IAMS said in a statement, a copy of which was sent to IslamOnline.net. “It is forbidden to kidnap anyone who is opposed to a war launched against us, or is sympathetic to us, such as the two French journalists. We denounce all cases of kidnapping where the victims have nothing to do with the occupation of Muslim land. They must be released immediately.” Two French reporters, Christian Chesnot and Georges Malbrunot were abducted August 20 by a group calling itself the Islamic Army in Iraq which demanded that France rescind its ban on the headscarf in state schools. “We also denounce the kidnapping of two Italian women working for a humanitarian agency at the same time that we condemn the Italian government’s policy of alliance with the US aggression against Iraq. All such incidents are unlawful from the Islamic point of view,” the missive added. It also condemned taking school children hostage in a school in North Ossetia, which led to a shocking massacre . The IAMS was launched on July 11 in the British capital of London as an independent body and a reference for all Muslims worldwide. The Dublin-based Association brings together 200 Muslim scholars, Sunnis and Shiites, from the four corners of the world. Uncivilized The IAMS said the Iraqi resistance should not sink to the uncivilized practices of the US occupation forces in Iraq through kidnapping civilians who have nothing to do with the war. “It is contrary to Islamic ethics to sink to the uncivilized level of the occupation forces in Iraq, which has so far killed thousands of Iraqi civilians, including large numbers of women, children and elderly people, under the pretext of fighting the resistance to their occupation.” The statement stressed that Islam urges for not punishing people who are not responsible for mistakes made by others. “It is unlawful from the Islamic point of view to take enemy civilians as hostages and threaten to kill them in retaliation for any action committed by anyone else, when they are not responsible for such an action and cannot prevent it.” “One of the basic principles of justice is that no one should be held accountable for someone else’s action or offence.” Not Permissible The IAMS statement further urged for releasing the foreigners taken hostage in Iraq and to treat them in accordance with the merciful teachings of Islam, drawing a line between soldiers and non-combatants. “In the case of war, it is not permissible to kidnap innocent or enemy civilians who must not be made target of any act of war. From the Islamic point of view, civilians are all those who are non-combatants, such as women and children, as well as elderly men who have no role in the fighting, and priests,” it made it clear. The Association added that, in accordance with Islam, captives must be released, either by an act of grace that requires nothing in return, or in return for ransom which could be monetary, or through prisoner exchange, or in the form of a service they render to the Muslim community. “On the basis of the foregoing, we say that a captive can only be killed in exceptional circumstances, by an order of the head of the Muslim state made on the basis of a court sentence,” it stressed. IAMS Chairman Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi has vehemently opposed kidnapping and killing of innocent civilians. “Islam deals strictly with such a matter of bloodshed. It forbids the killing of innocent people who have nothing to do with wars,” he said. A Statement by the International Association for Muslim Scholars (IAMS) The Islamic View on Hostage Taking The following is a statement issued by the International Association for Muslim Scholars (IAMS) regarding the recent incidents of kidnapping and hostage taking. The IAMS was founded in London, July, 2004, by Sunni and Shiite scholars with the aim of forming an international Muslim juristic consensus that goes beyond sectarian affiliations. The IAMS is headed by Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi. Kidnapping and hostage taking are not an invention of our particular times. They go back long in history. But they have become so frequent these days because of the grave injustice suffered by weak and oppressed communities at the hands of powerful countries seeking to impose their will on them. Moreover, these oppressed communities seldom have adequate means and resources to repel aggression. Since some Muslims resort to such methods, at an increasing rate, thus going beyond the limits of what is lawful, we wish to clarify the Islamic perspective related to the matter. This ruling, or fatwa, sums up all the Islamic rules that apply to such acts: 1.Kidnapping is an aggression against others, be they Muslims or non-Muslims. It is a type of transgression which God has prohibited, as the Qur’an reads: [Surely Allah enjoins the doing of justice and the doing of good (to others) and the giving to the kindred, and He forbids indecency and evil and rebellion] (An-Nahl 16:90). It is well known that the order to ensure justice, extend kindness and be generous to one’s kindred is not limited to Muslims only. Similarly, the prohibition of what is shameful, reprehensible conduct and transgression applies to all humanity. Even though man, by nature, tends to fight any aggression inflicted upon him, God permits the repelling of aggression by parallel, proportionate means only. This is stated in the Qur’an: [Whoever then acts aggressively against you, inflict injury on him according to the injury he has inflicted on you and be careful (of your duty) to Allah and know that Allah is with those who guard (against evil)] (Al-Baqarah 2:194); [And fight in the way of Allah with those who fight with you, and do not exceed the limits, surely Allah does not love those who exceed the limits] (Al-Baqarah 2:190). God also makes it clear that religious differences do not justify aggression against anyone, even though they may reach the stage of open conflict: [Let not hatred of a people—because they hindered you from the Sacred Masjid—incite you to exceed the limits] (Al-Ma’idah 5:2). 2.Taking prisoners is an act done in warfare. If it could be exceptionally permissible during war, it is totally forbidden in all other situations whatsoever. In his commentary on the Qur’an, At-Tabari quotes the following hadith: “The Prophet came to Makkah to perform `Umrah. Some Companions arrested some local people, taking them as prisoners while they were unaware. The Prophet ordered their release.” We see that the Prophet did this, releasing unbelievers who were taken prisoner, because he did not consider himself in a state of war with the unbelievers, as his purpose was to offer the `Umrah. Similarly the Prophet did not sanction what one of his Companions, Salamah ibn Al-Akwa’, did when he kidnapped four unbelievers after the signing of the peace treaty at Al-Hudaybiyah. Salamah did so thinking that the unbelievers had already violated the peace treaty. The Prophet, however, said, “Leave them so that they will be the ones who initiate evil and repeat it.” Initiating aggression is not a part of Muslim ethics. It must never be characteristic of Muslims. Muslims may repel evil with a similar measure, but their purpose in doing so is not to retaliate; rather, it is to bring evil actions committed against them to an end, attempting to end evil against all humanity. The Qur’an demonstrates that the best method to ensure the prevention of evil is to call upon people to pursue forbearance and forgiveness—as the best way to fight animosity: [And
not alike are the good and the evil. Repel (evil) with what is best,
when lo! he between whom and you was enmity would be as if he were a
warm friend] (Fussilat 41:34). [Repel evil with that which is best]
(Al-Mu’minun 23:96). Muslims are described in the Qur’an as those who
[repel evil with what is good] (Ar-Ra`d 13:22 and Al-Qasas 28:54).
Based on that, therefore, we declare that is it is forbidden to kidnap any human being in any situation whatsoever, other than in an open warfare situation, when the person kidnapped becomes a prisoner of war—and even in that case—he must not be killed. Indeed, even a prisoner of war must eventually be released, as the Qur’an states [either set them free as a favor or let them ransom (themselves) until the war terminates] (Muhammad 47:4). Needless to say, it is forbidden to kidnap anyone who is opposed to a war launched against us, or is sympathetic towards us, such as the two French journalists. We denounce all cases of kidnapping where the victims have nothing to do with the occupation of Muslim land. We demand an immediate and unconditional release of all people taken as hostages. 3.Even in the case of war, it is not permissible to kidnap innocent people or civilians, who must not be a war target, to begin with. From an Islamic point of view, civilians are all those who are non-combatants, such as women and children, as well as the elderly who have no role in the fighting, and men of any religion. The Prophet has given an express order “not to kill women and children.” He also said, “Do not kill any young person.” In an order to Khalid ibn Al-Waleed, the army commander, he said, “Never kill a child or a labor worker.” This last order includes anyone employed in non-combat capacity, such as factory workers, medical personnel, and the like. The Prophet also made clear the prohibition of killing any elderly man, priests, or hermits dedicated to worship. The same prohibition of killing elderly men is confirmed by Abu Bakr. Moreover, Jabir ibn `Abdullah, one of the Prophet’s Companions, is quoted as saying that Muslims “did not kill the merchants among the unbelievers.” The majority of scholars in the Hanafi, Maliki and Hanbali schools of Islamic law extend this prohibition, on the basis of analogy, so as to include other non-combatants, such as those who are physically or mentally handicapped, those who lock themselves in a house or a church, laborers, farmers, and other tradesmen and craftsmen. Imam Ash-Shawkani has formulated a clear rule of analogy on this particular issue. This rule makes clear that “it is unlawful from the Islamic point of view to kill anyone who is of no benefit to the enemy and cannot do the Muslims any harm.” Therefore, we denounce taking school children as hostages in the school in North Ossetia, leading to a horrific massacre, despite the fact that we believe the Chechens have a just cause and that the Chechen people should be able to exercise their right to self-determination. We also denounce the kidnapping of two Italian women working for a humanitarian agency at the same time that we condemn the Italian government’s policy of alliance with the US aggression against Iraq. All such incidents are unlawful from the Islamic point of view. In addition, such incidents do not serve the interests of resisting the occupation of Iraq. We should remember in this connection that when the Quraizhah Jews committed a horrific act of treachery, violating their peace treaty with the Prophet and allying themselves with the aggressors who had declared their aim of annihilating the Muslim community, such treachery did not cause the Muslims to kill Jewish women and children or expose them to any danger. Should taking prisoners take place during war, those who are imprisoned become prisoners of war and must be treated according to the relevant Islamic rules, which can be summarized as follows: A.Prisoners of war must be handed over to the Muslim authorities to determine what is to be done with them. Those who actually take them as prisoners or keep them do not have any authority over them and cannot determine their fate. B.It is an important Islamic duty to treat prisoners of war kindly and gently, be hospitable to them, and provide them with food and clothing. They must never be subjected to ill-treatment or torture. The Qur’an says, [And they [i.e., the believers] give food out of love for Him to the poor and the orphan and the captive] (Al-Insan 76:8). The Prophet gave this general order: “Be sure to treat the captives kindly.” He is also reported to have said “Be kind to your prisoners, and let them have their afternoon rest, and provide them with water to drink.” He is also reported that the Prophet ordered that the prisoners should not suffer from the heat and the tiresomeness of carrying their arms to battle. After the Battle of Badr, the Prophet ordered that those unbelievers who were taken captive should be treated kindly. Complying with his order, the Companions of the Prophet gave the captives their food before they themselves ate. C.Eventually, according to Islam, captives must be released, either by an act of grace that requires nothing in return, or in return for ransom, which could be monetary, through prisoner exchange, or in the form of a service they render to the Muslim community. The Prophet asked some of those taken prisoner at the Battle of Badr to teach some Muslims reading and writing in return for their release. That prisoners of war must be released is clearly stated in the Qur’an: [So when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners, and afterwards either set them free as a favor or let them ransom (themselves) until the war terminates] (Muhammad 47:4). The Prophet put the instructions contained in this verse in practice until the end of his life. Indeed, scholars rule that it is forbidden to kill a war captive in principle. In his book, Bidayat Al-Mujtahid, Ibn Rushd says, “A number of scholars say that it is not permissible to kill a captive. Al-Hasan ibn Muhammad At-Tamimi says that it is the unanimous view of the Prophet’s Companions.” In his commentary on the Qur’an, Ibn Kathir states, “Scholars say that the Muslim ruler’s only choice is to set captives free, either as an act of grace or in return for ransom, but it is prohibited to kill a captive.” Al-Alousi says, “The apparent meaning of the Qur’anic verse is that it is forbidden to kill a person after taking him prisoner. This is also the ruling expressed by Al-Hasan.” Based on the above, we say that a captive can only be killed in exceptional circumstances, by an order of the head of the Muslim state made on the basis of a court sentence. The groups operating within the armed resistance to the occupation of Iraq or elsewhere do not have the right to exercise the power of the head of a Muslim state. Moreover, killing captives is bound to have adverse effects on the resistance to the occupation, and dishonors the cause of the Iraqi people and their struggle. We, therefore, condemn the killing of the Nepalese workers and other captives who did not take part in the war. If it were true that they provided service to the occupation forces, even so, such service does not justify their killing. 4.It is unlawful from the Islamic point of view to take enemy civilians as hostages and threaten to kill them in retaliation for any action or inaction carried out by someone else, especially when the hostages are not responsible for such an action and cannot prevent it. This applies to the case of the school in North Ossetia where school children and teachers were held hostage. This prohibition is based on two factors: A.One of the basic principles of justice is that no one should be held accountable for someone else’s action or offence. This cardinal Islamic principle is emphasized in several verses of the Qur’an, such as [and no soul earns (evil) but against itself, and no bearer of burden shall bear the burden of another] (Al-An`am 6:164); [No laden soul can bear another’s load] (Al-Israa’ 17:15); [Whoever does good, it is for his own soul, and whoever does evil, it is against it] (Fussilat 41:46); [Whoever does evil, he shall be requited with it] (An-Nisaa’ 4:123). The Prophet emphasized this in several traditions, such as “Anyone who commits an offense will be the only one to bear its consequences.” “No one shall bear responsibility for another’s crime.” A number of statements by the Prophet make clear that non-Muslims who have a treaty with Muslims must never be killed, such as “Whoever kills a man bound with a treaty, without valid cause, shall never be allowed even the smell of Heaven.” B.In war time, it may happen that some civilians are killed as a result of some operations, as in the case of a raid launched against an enemy concentration resulting in the death of some people nearby. Scholars say that this is acceptable provided that it is unintended. But to deliberately kill civilians is certainly forbidden. How, then, can the murder of captives in cold blood be justified when enemy civilians may not be targeted even in war time? As Muslims we should take the upper moral grounds and not lower our ethical conduct into the wanton level of the occupation forces in Iraq, which has so far killed thousands of Iraqi civilians, including large numbers of women, children, and elderly people, under the pretext of fighting the resistance to their occupation. It is incumbent on all Muslims to observe the Islamic rules summarized above. Allah, majestic in His praise, knows best. The International Association
for Muslim Scholars
Sha`ban 1425, September 2004 It makes absolutely no sense. Margaret Hassan, director of the humanitarian group CARE International, who has joint British-Iraqi citizenship, was kidnapped yesterday morning in Iraq. Although nobody has claimed responsibility for abducting Ms. Hassan, the immediate assumption is she was grabbed by the Iraqi resistance or al-Zarqawi, the latter accused of all manner of barbarity, including beheading kidnap victims. But why would the resistance kidnap somebody who has provided humanitarian assistance to the people of Iraq for 25 years? Is it possible the Iraqi resistance wants to deny the Iraqi people humanitarian assistance? Of course not. In America, the corporate media answers the above question every day—the Iraqi resistance is fanatical, murderous, nothing more than a loose confederation of terrorists, criminals, Islamic madmen, demented sadists who blow up car bombs in crowded market squares and kill women and children, their own neighbors. However, there is another possible explanation: the kidnapping of Margaret Hassan is part of a counterinsurgency operation devised to make the resistance look bad and thus turn world opinion against it. Before you tell me to don my tinfoil hat, consider the following: as crack investigative journalist Seymour Hersh reported in June, Mossad is busily at work in Iraq, primarily in the Kurdish areas of the country. A senior CIA official confirmed this, according to Hersh. In April, the Canadian National Post reported the existence of U.S. military special operations troops in civilian clothes, “illegally hunting down civilians and government figures, sabotaging civilian facilities and arming selected local thugs to execute reprisals, flouting the international laws of war,” as Henry Michaels of WSWS characterized it. Michaels notes the following: Citing
intelligence sources, United Press International reported last week
that the unsuccessful bombing operation to murder Saddam Hussein and
his family and cabinet ministers on March 20 was preceded by intensive
infiltration of CIA agents into Baghdad, the recruitment of Iraqi spies
and the insertion of special operations troops into the capital. … The
people of Najaf [as reported by the Financial Times on April 5] were
introduced to their new government this week a virtually unknown
opposition group that claims to represent all Iraqis, cruises around
the streets on US special forces vehicles, and is doing its best to
present itself as part of a spontaneous ‘intifada’ against the
Iraqi regime. … Members of the group, called the Iraqi Coalition for
National Unity (ICNU), rarely stray from their US vehicles and special
forces minders, grinning broadly for cameras from atop Humvees and
raising their weapons in victory…. Co-ordination between ICNU and US
ground forces in Najaf is tight, handled by special forces and CIA
operatives. (My emphasis.)
Consider, as well, the appointment of John Negroponte as the Bush administration’s ambassador to Iraq. Negroponte played a key role in Reagan’s illegal contra war against the Sandinista government in Nicaragua. “Honduras became the main staging ground for attacks on Nicaragua by the right-wing contra army,” writes Lance Selfa. “A huge increase in military aid turned Honduras into a virtual U.S. base. Meanwhile, the Honduran military used its power to suppress not only those in the country who opposed the contra war, but also virtually anyone who fought for human rights and workers’ rights.” (Note: CARE does not specifically bill itself as human rights group, but rather a “humanitarian organization fighting global poverty.") “Negroponte will be Washington’s man in Baghdad just as he was Washington’s man in Honduras,” Selfa predicts, “organizing ‘private contractors’ and shadowy militias into death squads against ‘insurgents.’ Or directing the torture of suspects in Iraq’s military prisons. Or turning the U.S. embassy into the biggest nest of spies in the region.” CIA covert operations have a long and sordid history, going back to the founding of the organization in the late 40s. On June 18, 1948, the National Security Council issued directive 10/2 authorizing “propaganda; economic warfare; preventive direct action, including sabotage, demolition and evacuation measures; subversion against hostile states, including assistance to underground resistance movements, guerrillas and refugee liberations [sic] groups, and support of indigenous anti-Communist elements in threatened countries of the free world.” The CIA has conducted “thousands of operations over the years,” writes John Stockwell, a former CIA agent, and “there have been about 3,000 major covert operations and over 10,000 minor operations… all designed to disrupt, destabilize, or modify the activities of other countries.” In addition to sabotage and “demolition,” the CIA has a track record of killing innocents with suicide bombs. On March 8, 1985, 80 people were killed and 200 injured when a car bomb exploded in Beirut, Lebanon. “The bomb went off outside a block of flats and close to a mosque as worshippers were gathering for Friday night prayers in a densely populated Shia Muslim suburb … near the home of a leading fundamentalist Shia Muslim cleric, Sheikh Muhammad Husain Fadlallah,” explains the BBC. Reagan and his CIA director, William J. Casey, according to the Washington Post, were responsible for planning and executing, along with the Saudis, the terrorist attack against Fadlallah. More than a few of the kidnappings in Iraq appear to be CIA, military intelligence, or Mossad operations. For instance, when Simona Pari and Simona Torretta of the Italian humanitarian organization Bridge to Baghdad were kidnapped recently, witnesses described the kidnapping as “extremely professional” and said a well-dressed man wearing a suit and tie had led the operation, according to the Guardian. Of course, it is possible the Iraqi resistance, or a criminal gang interested in ransom, pulled off the kidnapping of Pari and Torretta, but the question remains: why are so many kidnappings directed against humanitarian organizations, obviously not the preferred target of a resistance determined to drive the United States out of Iraq? It simply does not make sense—unless the kidnappings and bombings are designed to foment chaos and portray the resistance as murderous nihilists and cold-blooded criminals. Since it is obviously impossible for the United States to defeat the Iraqi resistance, it makes perfect sense for the CIA—possibly in alliance with other covert intelligence operations, for instance the documented Mossad operation in northern Iraq—to covertly engage in terrorism, which the White House and the corporate media subsequently blame on the resistance. In fact, Mossad and other Israeli intelligence organizations have a well-documented history of doing precisely this sort of thing—from the Lavon Affair to funding Hamas and deceiving the United States into bombing Libya. The motto of Mossad is: “By way of deception thou shalt do war.” According to former Mossad agent Victor Ostrovsky, Israel has supported radical fundamentalist Muslim groups for years (see previous link). Ostrovsky also claims Mossad “trained both sides in the bloody ongoing civil unrest in Sri Lanka: the Tamils and the Sinhalese, as well as the Indians who were sent in to restore order.” Is it possible Mossad and the CIA are also responsible for the creation of the elusive super-terrorist al-Zarqawi and have planned and executed suicide, car bombings, and beheadings? Finally, for those who harbor doubts the United States would organize, front, and unleash terrorist groups against innocent civilians, consider Operation Northwoods, a terrorist operation against Cuban civilians designed to be blamed on Castro, as proposed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff in 1962. “The terror campaign could be pointed at Cuban refugees seeking haven in the United States,” suggests the declassified memo sent to then Secretary of Defense, Robert McNamara. “We could sink a boatload of Cubans enroute to Florida (real or simulated). We could foster attempts on lives of Cuban refugees in the United States … Harassment of civil air, attacks on surface shipping … Hijacking attempts against civil air and surface craft.” Luckily, for innocent Cubans, McNamara and Kennedy rejected Operation Northwoods, although they were hardly admirers or Cuba and Fidel Castro. Is it possible Iraqis are not so lucky? Anyone may be kidnapped or have a member of their family kidnapped. Unfortunately, most people don't know how to deal with kidnappers or how to survive the ordeal if they themselves are kidnapped or taken hostage. There's a simple procedure for dealing with kidnappers: forget everything you've ever seen in the movies and go to the authorities for help. (They don't do that in the movies or novels because it makes the plot too simple.) In real life, the experts know how to deal with kidnappers and can track them down. The authorities can get the kidnap victim back if it is possible to do so IF you contact them right away at the first sign of trouble. If you're in your home country, contact the local police (they'll know where to go from there) and if you're in a foreign country, contact your embassy. Children need to be taught to be cautious and to be a little suspicious of strangers (care must be taken, of course, not to turn your child into a paranoid). The goal of most parents is to get their child to be outgoing and friendly with strangers; this can be a big mistake. Teach your child to be careful. Too many parents leave children alone in the house or in an auto- mobile. While this practice was relatively safe ten years ago, it no longer is. Care should be taken when picking out baby sitters; a baby sitter has a lot of responsibility. You should consider things other than the cost of the sitter when you're hiring someone to look after a child. Older children are not always good baby sitters; find out about a baby sitter BEFORE you leave your children with them. Some parents seem to be trying to have their children kidnapped. The children wander or play along the streets totally unsupervised. Don't allow children to go to questionable areas of the town or city you're in, and be sure they are always supervised when outside. If they're small, don't let children play in the yard where you can't watch them and be sure the bedrooms for each of your family members are well out of an area where a person could easily break into it (having your bedrooms on the second story of a house makes a lot of sense). The rich are more apt to suffer from a kidnapping which is designed to generate a ransom. If you are rich or famous, then the chances are better than average that you or a member of your family may be a kidnap victim. Keep a low profile and don't let newspapers, magazines, or TV crews get pictures of you or family members (such pictures make it easy for would-be kidnappers to identify you). On the job, you should be careful not to have your name displayed on reserve parking areas and you should try to vary your schedule and route that you take to and from work. If you are in danger of being kidnapped, you should be cautious about being in areas where you are unprotected and vulnerable. Don't jog on roads or in a park (unless you can afford a body guard); avoid being on the streets by yourself. Get your exercise in a private area and drive whenever possible. Any threatening phone calls or letters should be reported to the police even if they appear to be a hoax. Even if the person who is harassing you is only perpetrating a hoax, he should be caught and punished. Many such hoaxes are often unstable and may become dangerous if they aren't helped. Kidnappers and killers of well-known people have a history of mental problems and often have made numerous threats before actually carrying one of them out. Often family members of a kidnapping victim only learn of a kidnapping when the criminal calls to make his demands. If this happens to you or your family, it is essential that the person answering the phone learn as much as possible. Any clue may speed up the rescue of the kidnap victim. The person answering the phone must pay careful attention and take notes immediately before they forget any details (having a note pad by the phone is a good idea). If the victim of the kidnapping has any special medical conditions, be sure the kidnappers know about them (it may be impossible to convey this information, but try). Do not demand to talk to the person that has been kidnapped. That's Hollywood again. You may succeed in getting a family member beat up while you listen. Trying to force the criminal to do something when he's keyed up is a good way to create more problems. Stay calm, get as many details as possible, and don't make any threats or promises. After the criminal has finished calling, get in touch with the police. After they have been contacted, try to reach the family member that the caller said was kidnapped. You may find that the call is a hoax or there might have been a foul-up that prevented the family member from being kidnapped. If you are able to reach the family member, he or she must take measures to get into a safe area since the kidnappers may have made an error in timing and might still attempt the kidnapping. Calling the family member may give them a warning and time to thwart the soon-to-be-attempted crime. Shortly after being contacted, the police will arrive at your home to ask an array of questions which will aid them in saving your family member from harm. Again, remain calm and try to answer their questions to the best of your ability. When speaking to the police in your home, exclude any servants, maids, etc., from the discussion (probably the police will do this, but if not, then try to do so yourself). If the hired help has seen suspicious persons, etc., the less the hired help hears in the way of other's descriptions, the less likely they are to have their memory of what they've seen changed and influenced. Any descriptions they have will be more valuable to the police. Too, the less each of the people who work for you knows about the police plans, the better. since it is remotely possible that one of the hired hands may be working in concert with the kidnappers. Keep any "inside" criminal involved in the kidnapping from sitting in on the plans being made by you and the police. In hostage and kidnap situations, time is on the side of the victim. The longer a victim remains alive, the better his chances of surviving the ordeal (provided negotiations don't break down). The first few minutes are often the deciding factor. Chances of surviving are improved if the victim engages the kidnappers in small talk, etc. This will cause the criminals to see the victim as a person rather than a thing. Later on, this will make it harder for them to kill the victim if things get down to that. Getting on a talking basis could save the victim's life. Kidnapping victims should forget the tough-guy Hollywood acts they've seen and avoid antagonizing criminals; needling them will only make things worse and may ruin a chance to escape later on. Better to act the part of the "slave" rather than to go into a Dirty Harry routine. The kidnapping victim should keep track of what is going on, what the kidnappers are doing, what they call themselves, how many of them there are, etc. This information may be needed to help in the victim's escape or to later identify the kidnappers. The kidnapping victim should not tell the criminals their demands can't be met (nor should those who speak to the criminals during the initial phone call). Telling them that may make them panic and kill their victim! While the victim should act passive, he should be careful that he doesn't pass up a chance to escape if it presents itself. Usually after the initial first hours of the kidnapping the criminals will become careless if the victim has shown no signs of trying to escape. Unless the kidnapping victim is in immediate danger, he should bide his time and wait for a slip-up among the criminals and then use the opportunity to escape. Victims of a kidnapping sometimes start identifying with the criminals after being around them for a while. Work to combat this bonding if you are a victim of a kidnapping. If you and/or your family work with the police, you should be able to get a family member back unharmed and capture the criminals as well. Sometimes a hostage situation will occur during a crime or a terrorist attack. Though the chances of this happening to a person are very, very remote, it doesn't hurt to know what to do. Your chances of surviving the ordeal are excellent provided you survive the first hours of the situation. You may find that you are having to keep the hostage takers calm if you are a hostage. Again, being a "tough guy" is a good way to get killed in a hostage situation. Stay calm, don't make trouble, and let the authorities bring in the people who are trained to deal with terrorists. If you can just keep a hostage taker from doing anything crazy the first few minutes of the situation, you can probably survive it. You should try to remain a part of the group that is being held hostage. Don't stick out or you may be singled out. If you have a lot of money or are famous, don't let the hostage taker know it or he'll try to use you for a bargaining chip. Sometimes hostages over-powered the criminals involved. This is certainly admirable, but also quite dangerous. If you are going to try such a self-rescue, be sure that you know how many criminals there are and be sure you can overpower them. Things could get a little tense if you try to overpower them and fail. Unless you are in danger of being killed momentarily, it is usually better not to try to overwhelm a group of terrorists. If the hostage takers start making threats on the lives of the hostages or acting in a bizarre manner, you should start thinking about ways to run for freedom and try to keep as far as possible from the members of the terrorist group. This will help keep you from "being there" if a terrorist vents his anger and will also keep you out of the line of fire if the authorities come in shooting or have a sniper end the situation. If a rescue is attempted, hit the floor unless the authorities instruct you to do otherwise. Don't try to pick up a criminal's weapon or pull out one of your own if you have one concealed on your person. Doing so will get you killed; teams trained to rescue hostages have to operate by reflex. Anti-terrorist teams are trained to shoot anyone with a weapon without trying to otherwise identify them. You'll be mistaken for one of the criminals and will undoubtedly be shot if you're standing there with a weapon. You can survive being a hostage or kidnap victim IF you are careful and know exactly what to do Duncan Long
An US company is considering producing electronic implants that could be used to keep tabs on kidnap victims via satellite. Originally Applied Digital Solutions had intended to market its VeriChip to patients who wanted to keep their medical records under their skin. But recently the firm has caved in to pressure to include tracking devices. "If a market demand exists for an implantable GPS (Global Positioning Satellite) device of some kind, which now seems to be the case, the company will try to meet that demand," said a spokesman for Applied Digital Solutions. "There seems to be a pressing need for this kind of product to stem the tide of kidnappings in Latin America. So we're very interested in responding to this demand and to help save lives," he said. Big Brother worries The VeriChip is not yet available as it is pending US Government approval. But as chip implants designed for medical uses mutate into tracking devices, the debate about how good the technology will be for us is being reopened. Once the technology has been developed it will not be easy to stop it being used for surveillance purposes believes Ian Pearson, BT's futurologist. "You can't put the cat back in the bag. It depends on whether governments want to increase surveillance rather than on the technology," he said. For head of Privacy International, Simon Davies, the closer relationship between the body and technology is not a happy one. "The intimacy between technology and the flesh crosses a line," he said. "My instinct tells me this is an entirely unnecessary and dangerous technology." Available technology But some may see tracker chips as a positive development. After 11 September, many western governments have become paranoid about security and want to keep a closer eye on citizens with schemes such as national ID cards. "You can't get a better ID card than one you can put under your skin," points out Mr Pearson. The technology necessary to locate a person geographically is not particularly sophisticated. It has been around for years in the chips that are implanted beneath the skin of pets. Sensational chips But chips are set to get a whole lot more complicated. Chips that monitor blood chemistry are already being made, as are ones that can be connected to the nervous system to allow movement in limbs that have been damaged. The next stage would be making chips that can interpret sensations and connect people that are physically removed from each other. "There is no reason why you couldn't shake hands across a network or make love to your boyfriend," said Mr Pearson. |
||
| meditations |
top |
|