|
At the same time, you'd think that Jill Carroll would know a little something about the IIP, and whether she was being held by the IIP in their main offices on behalf of her kidnappers. This sounds like some desperate ideological scrambling to throw doubt on her statements while they desperately try to debrief her.
Here's the real tinfoil: The insurgents kidnap her, for the precise purpose of treating her well, then releasing her. They take her to be something of a straight shooter on Iraqi matters, so they don't see her automatically adjusting her reports to fit the US interests, as many other journalists in a similar situation would do without thinking. She doesn't have to be in on a conspiracy; she merely does what she has been trained to do: tell the story straight. And ta da, you have a minor PR disaster for the corporate media types and administration, because the news can't fail to report that she has been freed (the insurgents knew that a kidnapped American woman, sacred of sacreds, would be news, period, the insurgents not being, as so many assume, benighted ignorants), but along with that must report on her story as she tells it. Hell, if I were an insurgent planner looking at long-term media strategy, I'd love to stumble across an idea like this.
|