http://rt.com/usa/187728-sotloff-parent ... osecution/The parents of murdered journalist Steven Sotloff, who was killed by Islamic State extremists, were warned by the White House that they could face criminal prosecution if they paid a ransom to free their son, the family spokesperson told Yahoo News.
Они и не могли сказать ничего иного. Другое дело что если была возможность для родителей собрать деньги и спасти сына, то нужно было это делать несмотря на предупреждения и последствия. Делай что считаешь правильным, и будь что будет.Ruger wrote:US govt warned Sotloff's parents of prosecution if they paid ransomhttp://rt.com/usa/187728-sotloff-parent ... osecution/The parents of murdered journalist Steven Sotloff, who was killed by Islamic State extremists, were warned by the White House that they could face criminal prosecution if they paid a ransom to free their son, the family spokesperson told Yahoo News.
Это настолько гадко, что я просто не на хожу слов чтобы выразить свои чувства.
Amto2011 wrote:Они и не могли сказать ничего иного. Другое дело что если была возможность для родителей собрать деньги и спасти сына, то нужно было это делать несмотря на предупреждения и последствия. Делай что считаешь правильным, и будь что будет.Ruger wrote:US govt warned Sotloff's parents of prosecution if they paid ransomhttp://rt.com/usa/187728-sotloff-parent ... osecution/The parents of murdered journalist Steven Sotloff, who was killed by Islamic State extremists, were warned by the White House that they could face criminal prosecution if they paid a ransom to free their son, the family spokesperson told Yahoo News.
Это настолько гадко, что я просто не на хожу слов чтобы выразить свои чувства.
Почему не может? По-моему именно так и есть..worldCitizen wrote: не может же быть цельная администрация настолько неадекватной...
Странно, что сами представители из Белого Дома говорят совершенно другое, что не угрожали никому, лишь только сказали, что лучше так не делать. Один раз заплатишь, потом будут красть людей из материального интереса. Кстати сказать особенно тех, кто ездит за границу часто, как например новые граждане из бывших иммигрантов.perasperaadastra wrote:Отцы-основатели не хотели, чтобы американцы вступали в переговоры с исламскими террористами. Это оскорбительно, что семья Сотлова не понимают таких вещей. Их необходимо лишить гражданства и выслать из страны.
Скорее уж из тех стран, что их бомбят.zigzag wrote:Еще интереснее зачем террористы упрямо продолжают красть людей из тех стран, которые с ними не договариваются?
Если именно про террористов, то , они, конечно, хотят наделать шуму. А если про тех, кто делает на этом деньги ( к примеру в Африке), то они стараются не брать заложников из стран, которые не договариваются, но если случайно берут, то сразу убивают безо всяких youtube videos.zigzag wrote: Еще интереснее зачем террористы упрямо продолжают красть людей из тех стран, которые с ними не договариваются? Наделать шуму хотят, показать себя, чтобы потом ими всех пугали? И под шумок взять деньги на вооружение?
Правда, за него потребовали заоблачную сумму, которую было нереально собрать.It's very easy to have these theoretical policies about not paying a ransom until you're faced with the real life-and-death situation. Personally — and I know I speak for the Foleys as well — we would've paid a ransom. We were working very hard to raise the money. We had extensive conversations about this with branches of the United States government, with legal counsel. We were well schooled in the law and what was permissible for the family to do. So I had no problem with it. I can understand, giving money to these evil people is a very hard thing to do. I would judge no one who felt that it was entirely improper. But speaking for myself and for John and Diane Foley, we were prepared to do it if we could raise the money.
Вместе с Фоли держали ряд людей из других стран, и их отпустили домой (как предполагается, после выплаты выкупа).The correct information is 100 million euros. That is the demand in the e-mail from the captors that we received in November of 2013. So, obviously by current currency standards, that's more than 130 million U.S. dollars. We - I mean, we never expected that the United States government would pay a ransom or assist us in paying ransom. And I can tell you, Terry, that we never took the 100 million euro demand seriously. It was a sum that no one could meet. I mean, the government obviously could meet it. We have, you know, extensive knowledge of the ransoms that were actually paid for the European hostages who were released. And those sums were dramatically less. So when we strategized about what it would take to raise the money to have a ransom to free Jim, we had much different figures in mind.
GROSS: Like what?
BALBONI: We assumed it would be in the range of $5 million.
Washington Post wrote:Officially, most governments subscribe to this theory. But while the United States and Britain appear to be consistent in their refusal to pay ransoms, many other nations seem to find loopholes. “While France claims that it does not pay ransoms directly, it seems that the money is funneled through to the employer of the hostage, who is then responsible for the payment," Martin Michelot, program and research officer at the German Marshall Fund's Paris office, explains. "This keeps the facade alive.”
According to a recent New York Times investigation, France has funneled $58 million in ransom payments since 2008, the most of any country. It was followed by Switzerland at $12.4 million and Spain at $5.9 million, the Times found. There may be repercussions for these countries — last year, there were more French hostages around the world than any other nationality, though this may also be a result of French intervention overseas in places such as Mali and Libya (At least one French hostage was held with Foley, incidentally).
In countries that may pay ransoms, there appear to be mixed feelings about the practice: Last year French President François Hollande told families of hostages being held in Africa's Sahel region that no more ransoms would be paid, though a few months later there were reports in French media of more money paid out. Germany also has questioned its own payments to terrorists. "We need to ask ourselves whether or not we can live with the fact that the money we are paying in ransom for hostages," a German government security expert said in a 2007 newspaper interview, "could be used to buy weapons that could kill our soldiers in Afghanistan."
Countries where hostages are taken have sometimes complained about ransoms, too. "Yemen constantly rejects handling the release of kidnapped hostages through the payment of ransoms to kidnappers," Yemen's foreign minister, Abu Bakr al-Qirbi, said in an interview with Saudi Arabia's Asharq al-Aswat newspaper last year. "We do not want this conduct to expose many foreigners in Yemen to abduction as other kidnappers would seek to receive a ransom," Qirbi explained.
So why pay ransoms at all? The horror of Foley's death is why. Few politicians want to explain to a family that they could have saved a hostage but didn't. The political fallout also could be huge.
Получается что требовали чисто номинально, зная заранее что не получат. Хотя кто знает. Возможно расчитывали на то, что его организация раскошелится.bulochka wrote:В первом случае точно требовали, я слышала беседу с CEO организации, на которую работал Foley.
...............
Правда, за него потребовали заоблачную сумму, которую было нереально собрать.
Ссылка на английский источникСША не станут спрашивать у Сирии разрешения на удары по террористам «Исламского государства» на её территории. Об этом заявила на брифинге для журналистов представитель госдепартамента Мари Харф. При этом она проигнорировала вопрос, не считают ли США возможные удары по Сирии без разрешения правительства этой страны актом агрессии.