Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Fri 08/31/2007 View Thu 08/30/2007 View Wed 08/29/2007 View Tue 08/28/2007 View Mon 08/27/2007 View Sun 08/26/2007 View Sat 08/25/2007
1
2007-08-31 China-Japan-Koreas
South Koreans turn anger at hostages
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by tu3031 2007-08-31 16:01|| || Front Page|| [3 views ]  Top

#1 When are they going to get around to blaming America for the entire snafu?
Posted by Zenster">Zenster  2007-08-31 16:47||   2007-08-31 16:47|| Front Page Top

#2 They've already done that too.

Funny how EVERYONE is to blame EXCEPT for the fargin' iceholes who actually TOOK hostages.
Posted by Abdominal Snow BlameGameMonster 2007-08-31 17:46||   2007-08-31 17:46|| Front Page Top

#3 In the early eighties, Hizbollah was able to seize hostages from non-governmental morons who insisted on staying in a hot area. My attitude then and now: other than use of normal diplomatic channels through lawful governments, they are on their own. Exactly how much useful work can be done by a Christian missionary in Islamofascist Afghanistan?
Posted by Ulomoth Squank7617 2007-08-31 18:43||   2007-08-31 18:43|| Front Page Top

#4 I have profound respect for the Korean missionaries. Two of them died for their beliefs, they died for simply preaching to anyone willing to hear the Good News.

Islam is usually defined, correctly it seems to me, as "Submission". Fervent Muslims refer to themselves as "slaves for Allah". Faithful slaves , serving a long history of Islamic governments that employed slave armies (as a dodge against religious proscriptions forbidding Muslims to kill their co-religionists), it seems worthwhile to compare the violent reaction to Christian missionaries in most Muslim countries to the reception given to abolitionists in the pre-Civil War South (and in some parts of the North, too).
Posted by mrp 2007-08-31 19:38||   2007-08-31 19:38|| Front Page Top

#5 They went to resupply and support an orphanage and school, if I recall correctly, not to proselytize. It's illegal in Muslim countries, and in India, for Christian missionaries to proselytize -- rather they show by their example of loving kindness what Christians are and do because of their beliefs. Conversions come from those that proactively seek answers to the questions the contrast raises... and it sounds like there is enough of that to make the Muslim religious leaders insecure.

But the minister that brought the group over had been warned, from what I've been able to gather, of the likelihood of exactly what happened, and he brought those women along anyway. Had he gone on his own as he'd done the previous two trips I would have sympathized. But because of him another died, nineteen women suffered, and his country's government was put in a very difficult position... and because of what many assume was their response, Koreans around the world will be put at risk.

Having good intentions does not excuse idiocy.
Posted by trailing wife 2007-08-31 20:34||   2007-08-31 20:34|| Front Page Top

#6 there is enough of that to make the Muslim religious leaders insecure.

I think we can safely say that even a single individual remotely considering the mere existence of an alternative to Islam is enough "to make the Muslim religious leaders insecure".
Posted by Zenster">Zenster  2007-08-31 20:40||   2007-08-31 20:40|| Front Page Top

#7  But because of him another died, nineteen women suffered, and his country's government was put in a very difficult position... and because of what many assume was their response, Koreans around the world will be put at risk.

No, it wasn't because of him that he and his fellow missionary died. It wasn't because of him that nineteen others suffered. They were kidnapped by the Taliban. They went to Afghanistan knowing the consequences, and dis so in service to a higher cause. Tell me, do Korean Christians live and travel at greater risk of persecution than US agnostics/atheists? Was their mission less worthy than Daniel Pearl's?

I'm getting fed up with people saying we shouldn't do this, or say that, or go there because Others don't approve. The lists of things we can say, the things we can do, and the places we can go are getting shorter every day. Muslim intolerance is rewarded when governments curtail the freedoms of their own citizens. Heaven forbid that the SK reined in their Christian missionaries because of that country's near-total dependence on foreign oil supplies.
Posted by mrp 2007-08-31 20:56||   2007-08-31 20:56|| Front Page Top

#8 There are places where those without training/experience simply shouldn't go, mrp. F'r instance, I don't wander around bad neighborhoods alone at night, where no doubt you'd be just fine. I'm apparently not aware of bad people... or even a drug deal that took place as I walked past with my brother many years ago (his youth was somewhat wilder than mine, it seems). Likewise, while the missionary and perhaps an aide or two would have likely been just fine travelling in Afghanistan as he'd done at least twice before, taking along a bunch of nice, middle class, middle aged ladies, who apparently had not been warned of the risks -- to a country where kidnapping foreigners has a long tradition and recent successes -- was simply not smart. Equally, when a neighbor of mine sold the family business to a Fortune 500 company, there were guards keeping watch over the house and his wife and child until the deal was consummated, because there really are people who'll kidnap a toddler for ransom, even in an outer suburb of a third tier city in the middle of America. (Some months later they moved to a big Victorian in a much more expensive neighborhood, but that's not germane to the issue.)

It's not about being told where you can't go, nor of the value of the endeavor, but exercising judgment about the risks involved. Daniel Pearl was tortured to death, after all. But he chose to take that risk alone, not bring along his wife.
Posted by trailing wife 2007-08-31 21:25||   2007-08-31 21:25|| Front Page Top

23:42 Zenster
23:33 Frank G
23:29 Pappy
23:21 Rambler
23:16 Rambler
22:22 JosephMendiola
22:18 JosephMendiola
22:14 JosephMendiola
21:54 Redneck Jim
21:32 Zenster
21:29 JosephMendiola
21:29 Zenster
21:28 gorb
21:27 Zenster
21:25 trailing wife
21:13 N Guard
21:10 Ebbeting the Anonymous9645
21:01 trailing wife
21:00 trailing wife
20:56 mrp
20:56 JosephMendiola
20:41 trailing wife
20:40 Zenster
20:40 trailing wife









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com