The ransom rumor

If you've been watching the news at all, certainly you heard all about the dramatic release of 15 hostages (including 3 Americans, and Ingrid Betancourt, a former Columbian Presidential candidate) that were held for many years by FARC, a communist rebel group that is also involved in drug trafficking.

The Columbians claim that the hostages were freed by infiltrating the group and tricking the kidnappers that they were being moved to a new location. They boarded a helicopter and flew to freedom.

But something doesn't quite sound right with that. If the Columbians knew where the hostages were, why not raid the compound? Freeing the hostages is only half the victory. The other half is capturing/killing the kidnappers. Also, wasn't using a helicopter rather suspicious? FARC doesn't operate aircraft.

There are rumors that they were actually freed by paying ransom demands, which does sound a bit more credible. So what's the difference? Either way they were freed, right? Betancourt's reaction:

a report by a Swiss radio station that a ransom of US$20 million had been paid has prompted reporters to ask Betancourt what she thinks.

She dismisses the suggestion. However, her first reaction Saturday was: "If it were true, so much the better. Why not?"..."I suffered terribly,"

The "why not" is that $20 million rewards the kidnappers for the crime. It also gives them millions of dollars for weapons and equipment so they can plan their next kidnapping or terrorist act. Paying ransoms only fuels more kidnappings, which is why they are abhorrent and should be banned by international law. The world needs to unite to demonstrate that the paying ransoms is counterproductive and immoral.

For more info on this topic, read here.