Google saves man's life

Lusankya · Post by **Lusankya** » 2004-10-20 10:45pm

The Advertiser wrote:IRAQI militants who kidnapped and threatened to kill an Australian journalist "Googled" his name on the Internet to check his work before releasing him.

John Martinkis, a veteran freelances, was released on MOnday, a day after he was taken hostafe by four Sunni militants and ex-Iraqi army officers.

Martinkus was filming for SBS's Dateline.

SBS executive producer MIke Carey said yesterday the captors had investigated his background online and saw he was "harmless". "They Googled him, they checked him out and got on to his own website or his publisher's website and saw he was a writer and journalist," Mr Carey said. "Modern technology probably saved his lice," he said.

Good ol' Google.

Rogue 9 · Post by **Rogue 9** » 2004-10-20 10:47pm

Saved his lice?

Lusankya · Post by **Lusankya** » 2004-10-20 10:56pm

oops. typo. It was in yesterday's paper... I probably should have prood-read it better, considering there's no edit button in this forum...

Lusankya · Post by **Lusankya** » 2004-10-20 10:56pm

crap.

aerius · Post by **aerius** » 2004-10-20 11:11pm

Note to self - In case I'm kidnapped by Islamic militants, I need to get google to somehow link to a page that says I'm a harmless journalist person.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-10-20 11:34pm

Don't count on that to protect you. Journalist credentials didn't save Daniel Perle.

Rogue 9 · Post by **Rogue 9** » 2004-10-20 11:54pm

Darth Wong wrote:Don't count on that to protect you. Journalist credentials didn't save Daniel Perle.

Daniel Pearl was also a Jew. They weren't about to let him go no matter what his profession.

The Cleric · Post by **The Cleric** » 2004-10-21 12:05am

So who wants to host me one? Or start making them for as many people as you can find over there?

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2004-10-21 01:09am

In Google we trust!

Lusankya · Post by **Lusankya** » 2004-10-21 01:27am

I think part of it might have been because Google also showed that he did not support the war in Iraq.

John Martinkus wrote:"I was well treated ... I was not hurt and treated with respect once they established my credentials as an independent journalist who did not support the occupation,"

Evidently he was lucky enough to be picked up by militiants who recognised that killing people who are on your side is not a good thing.

pellaeons_scion · Post by **pellaeons_scion** » 2004-10-21 03:25am

Google: The fast food of researching

Seems the terrorists are at least technologically savvy enough to employ means like that to identify targets.

Interesting how they deemed him 'harmless' though, but have executed others who were possibly equally as harmless.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-10-21 03:33am

pellaeons_scion wrote:Google: The fast food of researching
Seems the terrorists are at least technologically savvy enough to employ means like that to identify targets.

Interesting how they deemed him 'harmless' though, but have executed others who were possibly equally as harmless.

I don't think most westerners understand how the insurgents define the enemy. As you see it, there are soldiers (understandable targets) and civilian workers employed by contractors (innocent people). But as they see it, the war in Iraq was fought in order to hand the assets of Iraq to a lot of powerful American corporations, and these "civilian contractors" work for those corporations. Ergo, they're the real occupiers. Think about it.

pellaeons_scion · Post by **pellaeons_scion** » 2004-10-21 03:37am

Never thought about it that way. It does make sense. But if thats the case, why do they take hostages of aid workers and the like? Or is that just to try and damage the morale of the west? I mean, they go there to try and aid the people there, not to help in conquest or exploitation.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-10-21 03:49am

pellaeons_scion wrote:Never thought about it that way. It does make sense. But if thats the case, why do they take hostages of aid workers and the like? Or is that just to try and damage the morale of the west? I mean, they go there to try and aid the people there, not to help in conquest or exploitation.

I figure they just don't believe their claims of purely charitable intentions. After all, the US military itself has been blurring that line by having soldiers participate in humanitarian projects.

Julhelm · Post by **Julhelm** » 2004-10-21 03:54am

Or they see all non-arabs as the enemy purely by race.

Post by **Broomstick** » 2004-10-21 05:58am

No, the aid workers are coming under fire due to the US government delibrately blurring the lines between military operations and charitable operations - which some of the neo-cons have even admitted to doing as a delibrate strategy. A lot of folks question whether aid workers are truly non-governmental or not. This has all sorts of repercussions, including fundy whackjobs in Nigeria bringing a halt to polio vaccinations last year because they didn't trust that form of "Western medicine", and the distrust of many Muslims for Christian-based charities, some of which have used religious co-ercion along the lines of "convert and we'll feed you and provide mediine, if you don't we won't". This gets even more nasty when you consider that there are several MENA countries where a Muslim converting to another faith is punishable by death, and receiving charity from a Christian organization can lead to suspicions you are apostate.

CJvR · Post by **CJvR** » 2004-10-21 07:56am

Darth Wong wrote:I don't think most westerners understand how the insurgents define the enemy. As you see it, there are soldiers (understandable targets) and civilian workers employed by contractors (innocent people). But as they see it, the war in Iraq was fought in order to hand the assets of Iraq to a lot of powerful American corporations, and these "civilian contractors" work for those corporations. Ergo, they're the real occupiers. Think about it.

Also a successful reconstruction effort will effectively kill the chances for the Baathists and Islamists to take over. A desperate population in a devestated nation is a much better situation for them. So anyone working on rebuilding Iraq or improve the conditions for the Iraqi people is an enemy. A reporter though, who mainly report on how bad things are, is an asset and an ally.