Liberal Dutch female journalist kidnapped and raped by Taliban she went to interview in Afghanistan bears no hard feelings.

[Ought Six]

f:

"Stop wasting your breath. There is something in this story that does not compute."

If you expect perfect logic from an emotionally traumatized person that has been through something like that, then your expectations do not compute.
----------

"First of all, Brusselsjournal is a conservative site. Second they are reporting a speech by Wilders, this is all Third hand stuff."

Wilders perfectly accurately reported what she said in her own book (her reporter's notebook?) about the ordeal, so your typical kneejerk out-of-hand dismissal of 'conservative' news sources is typically wrong. But now, De Rijcke is changing her tune and contradicting herself. I think she has finally realized just how crazy her comments sounded, and has decided that she "really meant something else". This kind of revisionism is not unusual when people are trying to make sense of a severe trauma they recently experienced, and odd behavior exhibited in the immediate aftermath.

================================================== =============

Raped Journalist Furious with Wilders and Taliban


NIS News
30/05/09

THE HAGUE -- Journalist Joanie de Rijcke stressed Friday she does feel angry with the Taliban fighter who raped her in Afghanistan. She was reacting to Party for Freedom (PVV) leader Geert Wilders, who in the Lower House called her alleged Stockholm syndrome symbolic of the leftwing elite in the Netherlands.

The PVV leader succeeded for the umpteenth time in attracting all the media attention for a debate to himself during Accountability Day - the cabinet defending its policy of the past year - by appropriating the rape of De Rijke and her reaction to this as a metaphor for the way in which many Dutch politicians and journalists look at Islam. "This entire elite suffers from the Stockholm syndrome" - developing sympathy for one's kidnappers - according to the MP. "They are blinded by their own ideology of multiculturalism."

De Rijcke, 43, was kidnapped in November in the town of Sarubi, some 50 kilometres from Kabul. She was kept prisoner for six days and raped repeatedly by a Taliban leader, Ghazi Gul. But she wrote in a book; "I do not want to portray the Taliban as monsters, nor am I angry with Ghazi Gul. After all, he allowed me to live."

De Rijcke now sounds a different note. "I am indeed very angry with the perpetrators. I am furious with my abductors and rapists. All the things Wilders is saying are completely wrong," said De Rijcke in Algemeen Dagblad Friday. "It is very, very painful. I am trying to recover from my trauma."

Wilders on Thursday had termed the journalist's reaction a typical example of the moral decline of the elite in the Netherlands. Virtually all parties and particularly leftwing Green leader (GroenLinks) Femke Halsema furiously rejected Wilders' metaphor. Premier Jan Peter Balkenende also called the comparison "extremely painful and tasteless."

De Rijcke's employers are the Belgian men's magazine P-Magazine and publisher Think Media Magazines. They paid a ransom of 100,000 euros for her release.

[sandyd]

expect perfect logic from an emotionally traumatized person

Agree. It's hard to cope with all the shades of gray in the world and even harder in an event that affects someone personally. And, sad to say, she opened up to the public and now all kinds of "this is how you should feel/think and this is how you should not think/feel" will be coming at her...as if she didn't have enough of her own internal crap to deal with about it.

[Ought Six]

She bought it upon herself. She was incredibly stupid, and got herself kidnapped. Then, instead of shutting up, she made a bunch of bizzare public statements that led to even more controversy and publicity. She is a reporter, and she tried to use her self-inflicted situation to get more ink. I sympathize with what she went though, but she has handled the whole thing idiotically from start to finish. She paints herself as the victim of Wilders and circumstance, when in reality she is largely the victim of her own boneheaded mistakes.

[lilly]

She sounds like a naive woman.

She did something so foolish, for anyone to do, who has any idea of Afghanistan and the Taliban that it boggles the mind.

First of all you prepare by finding out something of the cultural disparities between your world and that world you are intruding on. And she was intruding. The misogany of the Taliban is so obvious, and they are so harsh with their own, much less outsiders, which she is.

There are places in any country where you do not go. As far as I'm concerned, as a female, all of Afghanistan would be off limits, even in a burka.

They were probably just as happy to get rid of her as she was to be ransomed. She was nothing but an impediment.

No one deserves to be raped, male or female. But they are. She is making hay while the sun shines on her misfortune.

To say your rapist respected you is bizarre.

[Fiddlerdave]

Originally Posted by Ought Six

She bought it upon herself. She was incredibly stupid, and got herself kidnapped. Then, instead of shutting up, she made a bunch of bizzare public statements that led to even more controversy and publicity. She is a reporter, and she tried to use her self-inflicted situation to get more ink. I sympathize with what she went though, but she has handled the whole thing idiotically from start to finish. She paints herself as the victim of Wilders and circumstance, when in reality she is largely the victim of her own boneheaded mistakes.

I see her pretty much fighting the same kind of battle I do, which is the gross generalizations and aspersions cast upon a group for a political agenda of portraying them as "monsters". Our dear Mr. Wilder puts it most succinctly "do not irritate the Muslims". Not even "The Taliban", just Muslims, and it is typical in his writing.

The lack of any refinement in attitudes about Muslims is a very crippling weakness. How many Americans would wish to ally themselves with someone who described the Castro and Chavez as "Christians", and typified some of their behavior as "Biblically based"? Reagan accomplished some of the same in describing our pet terrorists in Nicauraugua as "Freedom Fighters", as they attacked public buildings, farmers, local civil officials and raped and murdered many, including priests and nuns?

The whole "Stockholm Syndrome" in advance whacked out theories are even worse. We all should just jump up and down, want to kill all "towelheads", or we have "given up in advance". Phooey.

The point here is do we want to try to deal with particular extremists, wor do we want to continue to make Muslims, almost all of whom are decent hard-working people no more threatening than anyone else, feel very nervous about trusting us in any way,and very possibly reluctant to support our otherwise common goals out of fear for replacing one tyrant for another.

This journalist is doing nothing but trying to respond to the people who want to her to portray everyone who calls themseves Taliban as "monsters, doesn't she hate them and want to kill them ALL!", and thus she gets quoted contradictorily trying to moderate hysterical pressure from those who want a good monster quote.

BTW, Wilders' rather offensive quote as well that "One would expect: a woman is raped and finds this unbearable". It would seem he has some disappointment in a woman who is a survivor and deals with a violent act against her in a powerful way. She has her work, and this incident is not going to get in the way.

[Ought Six]

Fd:

"The lack of any refinement in attitudes about Muslims is a very crippling weakness."

Agreed. The Jihadis are the dangerous ones, and the rest of the Islamists support the Jihadis among them. The vast majority of Muslims are not Islamists, much less Jihadis.

Now if you could only work on your lack of any refinement in your attitude about conservatives....