CARE TAKEN

Further to recent news that Douglas Wood’s fellow captive Ulf Hjertstrom planned to have their kidnappers whacked, the Stockholm Spectator reports:

Hjertström, an oil broker whose career took him to Iraq 25 years ago, makes no bones about the decision to exact revenge on his abductors. “I’ve lived [in Iraq] for a long time. This is how things are done there. It’s nothing new to me,” he says.

Hearty Hjertström “doesn’t want to go into detail” about the bounty hunters, but assures Expressen that they are “the best money can buy.”

“They’re not twiddling their thumbs,” declares Hjertström, revealing that he has “received confirmation that two of [the kidnappers] have already been taken care of.”

UPDATE. Donnah comments: “Was it Allawi again?”

(Via LGF)

Posted by Tim B. on 06/30/2005 at 09:11 PM
    1. “received confirmation that two of [the kidnappers] have already been taken care of.”

      See, the right do care.

      Posted by Nic on 2005 06 30 at 10:18 PM • permalink

 

    1. As long as they didn’t use insensitive language.

      Posted by richard mcenroe on 2005 06 30 at 10:22 PM • permalink

 

    1. Have a look at what’s going on next door in Iran. Can Mr Hjertstrom put any of the embassy hostages in touch with some decent bounty hunters?

      Posted by Young and Free on 2005 06 30 at 10:45 PM • permalink

 

    1. Hey Tim, can you pls tell me how come these mercenaries can find and get rid of the kidnappers in a few days whereas the might of the Coalition and Iraqi forces is taking so long? Perhaps we should have paid for a batallion of mercenaries to fight the war. I’m sure it would be over by now.

      Posted by algiga on 2005 06 30 at 10:49 PM • permalink

 

    1. Not whacked Tim, just tracked down. For Ulf to orgaisne a “whack” would be conspiracy to commit murder.

      Posted by lingus4 on 2005 06 30 at 10:55 PM • permalink

 

    1. lingus4 —  so “taken care of” doesn’t mean “sleeps with the camels…?”

      Posted by richard mcenroe on 2005 06 30 at 11:03 PM • permalink

 

    1. The result may be the same Richard but the intention is merely to arrest and to deliver to the Iraqui authorities for prosecution.

      Should a firefight break out when arrest is attempted there may be unintended deaths but that is life in Iraq at the moment. Lets hope the kidnappers resist arrest.

      Posted by lingus4 on 2005 06 30 at 11:13 PM • permalink

 

    1. Just some suggestions, Algiga: the guys Hjertstrom hired might, just might, have been locals who could move more freely and tap into more info than uniformed troops.  And they don’t have to worry about the Geneva Convention.

      Posted by cuckoo on 2005 06 30 at 11:16 PM • permalink

 

    1. Perhaps the bounty hunters introduced them to the latest in concrete footwear fashions shortly before taking them on a scenic cruise of the Euphrates.

      Posted by Tommy Shanks on 2005 06 30 at 11:25 PM • permalink

 

    1. I was just thinking the phrase “Stockholm Syndrome” is rapidly changing meaning thanks to Hjertstrom. Psychiatrists will have to start referring to the original condition as the “Sgrena Syndrome” for clarity.

      Posted by Tommy Shanks on 2005 06 30 at 11:31 PM • permalink

 

    1. cuckoo: “And they don’t have to worry about the Geneva Convention”

      Why it’s that consarned Geneva Convention that’s causing us to lose this war!!

      Phooey to all those slow-moving, foreign uniformed soldiers and their poor information-tapping abilities.

      Posted by thanasi on 2005 06 30 at 11:40 PM • permalink

 

    1. Tommy Shanks — That’s why organized crime in the Middle East has no class.

      Sticking the guy’s feet in cement and then just… well, leaving him standing there… looks silly.  But it can be a bitch of a commute to the nearest dock…

      Posted by richard mcenroe on 2005 06 30 at 11:52 PM • permalink

 

    1. “…taken care of” – that means they are being provided with food and water and somewhere to sleep everyday. Isn’t that sweet.

      Posted by Ck on 2005 06 30 at 11:58 PM • permalink

 

    1. so “taken care of” doesn’t mean “sleeps with the camels…?”

      Unfortunately no, as they do that on a regular basis while still alive.  (swearing all the while that they’re ‘just good friends’…)

      Posted by tree hugging sister on 2005 07 01 at 12:01 AM • permalink

 

    1. Why are they called ships of the desert?

      Posted by Habib on 2005 07 01 at 12:13 AM • permalink

 

    1. Coz they are full of Arab seamen? (did I spell that right?)

      Posted by SezaGeoff on 2005 07 01 at 12:21 AM • permalink

 

    1. Hjertström, an oil broker whose career took him to Iraq 25 years ago, makes no bones about the decision to exact revenge on his abductors. “I’ve lived [in Iraq] for a long time. This is how things are done there. It’s nothing new to me,” he says.

      Translation: Sod off, jihadi.

      Posted by PW on 2005 07 01 at 12:26 AM • permalink

 

    1. Was it Allawi again?

      Posted by Donnah on 2005 07 01 at 12:26 AM • permalink

 

    1. We’re not “losing this war,” thanasi. Unless you are actually on the other side, in which case, I guess you are losing this war.

      Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2005 07 01 at 12:34 AM • permalink

 

    1. Sigh.

      Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2005 07 01 at 01:03 AM • permalink

 

    1. I agree with your earlier posts on this, The_Real_JeffS. Although we might get some visceral satisfaction from thinking about Mr Hjertstrom exacting revenge on his tormentors, if doing so complicates the task of restoring order in Iraq by the Iraqi forces and their coalition allies then that is likely to be counter-productive in the long term.

      I’d rather see Mr Hjertstrom put aside or delay his revenge rather than add another difficulty to the tasks of the forces fighting to end the insurgency so that the Iraqi people can have a decent and peaceful future.

      Posted by Tempo on 2005 07 01 at 04:50 AM • permalink

 

    1. I can’t imagine that a little home-grown jihadi-whacking is going to slow the or complicate the big picture restoration of order, Tempo.

      Now, is it just me, or does “whack the jihadi” sound like a euphemism for something?

      Posted by R C Dean on 2005 07 01 at 07:27 AM • permalink

 

    1. You mean like bop the baloni?

      Posted by blogstrop on 2005 07 01 at 07:56 AM • permalink

 

    1. Or “punishing the one-eyed mullah”?

      (Apologies to Jonah Goldberg.)

      Posted by Rob Crawford on 2005 07 01 at 08:12 AM • permalink

 

    1. You may well be right R C Dean, but I’d rather respect the opinion, and trust the judgment, of some-one who is close to where the action is, and who shares the responsibility for getting the job done on our behalf, than take a different view which, in my case, would be less informed than his.

      Posted by Tempo on 2005 07 01 at 10:21 AM • permalink

 

    1. I wonder if they take Paypal donations…

      Posted by Patricia on 2005 07 01 at 11:24 AM • permalink

 

    1. I assumed from the start that most of the kidnappings were done by criminals as opposed to terrorists.  The crims then sold the kidnap victims to terrorists. I wonder if some of the money is not getting through to the people who pay the crims for the terrorists.

      I would sugest that there is little deterent effect to arresting and placing kidnappers in prison. These people know the restraints placed upon coalition forces.

      I agree with Mr. Swede. Kill the kidnappers wherever you find them.  The lack of intelligence will be be more than offset by the deterent effect.

      Posted by davod on 2005 07 01 at 01:09 PM • permalink

 

Page 1 of 1 pages

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.