I am curious how much "in the know" CAM is/was. Maybe the FBI kept everyone ignorant for safety reasons, which is possible.
My uninformed speculation, would be that CAM leadership was likely divided and thus unable to move beyond their no ransom payment policy. I think usually that when a group is divided on a matter, the status quo is perpetuated. In this case the status quo would be the policy. I suspect that CAM soon got to the place that once a ransom payment was obviously in the cards with or without them, CAM might have purposely chosen that the less CAM knew about it, the better it would be for CAM. In other words, my guess is that there isn't a lot about the situation that CAM controlled or knew about (that isn't public now), and probably even less about the ransom details.
But again, I'm just guessing. I think that CAM really soon got to a place of not wanting to know.
steve-in-kville wrote: ↑Mon Jan 03, 2022 8:29 amI am curious how much "in the know" CAM is/was. Maybe the FBI kept everyone ignorant for safety reasons, which is possible.
My uninformed speculation, would be that CAM leadership was likely divided and thus unable to move beyond their no ransom payment policy.
My understanding is that the only point of disagreement was on whether to give food parcels to the kidnappers. The local director was telling the kidnappers that they could apply for food parcels just like anyone else. Others at CAM thought giving food parcels was the least they could do and was not really paying a ransom as it in no way met their demands. I think we all know how such differences of opinion come up in church life, and the same can be expected in missions.
Wise decision I suspect. Gunfire would have brought a lot of people running and I doubt you want to get into a gun battle with an armed criminal gang with just one weapon.
Sounds like often, the daytime guards would only have about one old pistol, an old junky shotgun with the forearm held on with a zip tie and also a bent barrel, and this AR that they left laying around.
I’m sure gun fire would have brought more. But I expect that many rural Americans such as these captives, would have been able to put up a fight with one AR. Sounds like these guards barely knew their way around a firearm, and one of their bosses had to call out the guards and warn them that white people generally do know their way around a rifle. Right or wrong.
The weapon might not even have been loaded then. So grabbing it would have been even more futile. Then what do you do? Use it as a club?
I bet it was loaded. These kidnappers didn't sound like they were the type to be bothered with loading and unloading guns. I suspect that the gun was loaded all of the time. Fumbling shotgun shells while trying to chase off a passing airliner, to keeping the pistol tucked in their underwear, to leaving their rifle unattended, these guys don't sound like they ever took an NRA basic firearm training course, or anything like that. I'm sure the gangsters subscribed to the belief that an unloaded weapon is no good. As you pointed out, an unloaded weapon might as well just be a club.
If you have a patent that will need vigorous legal defense, but you are a Mennonite that subscribes to non-resistance, what do you do? It’s simple. You sell the patent to your attorney. They can now file legal action and lawsuits as needed, passing on the costs as generic “Legal Services”. Brilliant! You wash your hands of it. You plead ignorance. “No, I have no idea. That’s them, not us. They don’t tell us what all they do.”. Like I said, brilliant.
No, not hypothetical. That’s real.
It would be pretty easy for CAM to have gone down a similar route.
ragpicker wrote: ↑Mon Jan 03, 2022 10:06 am
No, not hypothetical. That’s real.
It would be pretty easy for CAM to have gone down a similar route.
Many local conservative owned/operated companies have hired a non-conservative person to be their HR dept. Basically a hired gun if a personnel issues arises. Get them to do their dirty work.
ragpicker wrote: ↑Mon Jan 03, 2022 10:06 am
If you have a patent that will need vigorous legal defense, but you are a Mennonite that subscribes to non-resistance, what do you do? It’s simple. You sell the patent to your attorney. They can now file legal action and lawsuits as needed, passing on the costs as generic “Legal Services”. Brilliant! You wash your hands of it. You plead ignorance. “No, I have no idea. That’s them, not us. They don’t tell us what all they do.”. Like I said, brilliant.
No, not hypothetical. That’s real.
It would be pretty easy for CAM to have gone down a similar route.
Or in this case they wouldn't even need to. Plenty of private donors showed up who were happy to pay ransoms directly to the kidnappers - no involvement with CAM at all.
As I expected, rumour has it payment of the ransom didn't result in the hostages being let free.
ragpicker wrote: ↑Mon Jan 03, 2022 10:06 am
No, not hypothetical. That’s real.
It would be pretty easy for CAM to have gone down a similar route.
Many local conservative owned/operated companies have hired a non-conservative person to be their HR dept. Basically a hired gun if a personnel issues arises. Get them to do their dirty work.
Can a non-conservative person not fire bad employees?
ragpicker wrote: ↑Mon Jan 03, 2022 10:06 am
If you have a patent that will need vigorous legal defense, but you are a Mennonite that subscribes to non-resistance, what do you do? It’s simple. You sell the patent to your attorney. They can now file legal action and lawsuits as needed, passing on the costs as generic “Legal Services”. Brilliant! You wash your hands of it. You plead ignorance. “No, I have no idea. That’s them, not us. They don’t tell us what all they do.”. Like I said, brilliant.
No, not hypothetical. That’s real.
It would be pretty easy for CAM to have gone down a similar route.
Or in this case they wouldn't even need to. Plenty of private donors showed up who were happy to pay ransoms directly to the kidnappers - no involvement with CAM at all.
As I expected, rumour has it payment of the ransom didn't result in the hostages being let free.
And so what is the point of CAM's stand if they are going to look the other way when ransom gets paid? All the same disadvantages to paying ransom that you have pointed out still exist. It still encourages future kidnappings because if you kidnap Americans then ransom gets paid one way or the other. But CAM's hands are clean? Does that actually count for anything meaningful?
I figured from day one that some sort of ransom was eventually going to be paid somehow. If not through official channels, then through the families. Once you get into a position where children are being held ransom your options narrow pretty quickly.
0 x
A fool can throw out more questions than a wise man can answer. -RZehr
ragpicker wrote: ↑Mon Jan 03, 2022 10:06 am
No, not hypothetical. That’s real.
It would be pretty easy for CAM to have gone down a similar route.
Many local conservative owned/operated companies have hired a non-conservative person to be their HR dept. Basically a hired gun if a personnel issues arises. Get them to do their dirty work.
Can a non-conservative person not fire bad employees?
Unsure if they are uncomfortable letting someone go or what, honestly. You typically see it when the next generation takes over and they start hiring outside of their own church circles as the business grows.
