Talk:Jill Carroll

Biography

 * Uh, maybe it's just me, but it really feels like there is nothing on this page except her abduction--nothing on her life prior to or post-kidapping, except a few sparse details like what year she was born (not even the date) and where she went to school. Is there no official biography on the Christian Science Monitor website or something? It just feels very uninformative for a "biography" page, and I suspect this page will get a lot more hits now that her series is running in newspapers.

chances of her survival

 * I had the opportunity to meet and work with Jill for a few weeks in December. She was at a Civil-Military Operations Center in Husaybah following the Marines around as they patrolled (I am a Marine combat correspondent). On a personal note, I find it very disturbing that this person that I know (however tenuously), talked to, ate meals with, has been abducted by these monsters. I can only hope she will return home -- safe or otherwise. 192.156.58.34 20:12, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

What do you think are the chances of her survival?-EKN &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by EKN (talk • contribs).


 * NOt sure but previously, female captives have been set free regardless of kidnappers' demand. __earth (Talk) 15:26, 18 January 2006 (UTC)


 * gentle cough except Margaret Hassan, whose 'kidnapping and death' did not follow any precedent, and showed captors that were later doubted by some to be Muslims...can you say October Surprise? ;) Alright, I apologise for my POV, but honestly, the more people who at least examine the official story of why a sweet old lady was uncharacteristically kidnapped and murdered by unknown assailants, just weeks before an election that would likely decide the course of the war.  See? Even I can be a nutcase sometimes *frowns at self* Sherurcij (talk) (Terrorist Wikiproject) 17:55, 18 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Or, just as likely, terrorists are fanatics that have neither integrity nor character and will resort to whatever means are necessary, random acts of violence included, to affect the most significant emotional response in their intended target. I think the desired result was far more likely to be an opinion of, "Oh my God, how can Bush let a sweet little old lady be killed?!?! I'm --68.61.199.248 18:52, 31 January 2006 (UTC)voting for Kerry!" Fortunately for the world, this backfired. This is, of course, my opinion, but I would be interested in seeing some citations for your proposition that there have been doubts cast as to the nationality of the terrorists in this individual case. Ehidle 14:42, 30 January 2006 (UTC)


 * ...you're aware Hassan wasn't American, right? ;) And I don't think anybody in the world is naive enough to think that Americans would pull out of Iraq if a "sweet little old lady" were killed.  I know better than that, Osama knows better, and so do the Iraqi insurgents. :P Sherurcij (talk) (Terrorist Wikiproject) 20:17, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

She survived, Allahu Akbar!.

Ref
Why is a link to The Guardian, a clearly leftist publication, used as the first reference for this article?

I'll acquiesce with any other reporting outlet, but a link to The Guardian is hardly acceptable.

Haizum 22:46, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Would you prefer Fox News or Free Republic?

I'll take Fox News over The Guardian any day, but I'm not here to get into a pissing match over liberal versus conservative.

Your guess is as good as mine - it was already there when I posted the MSNBC link (though I agree with you on the Guardian). Mhking 22:54, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

someone inserted the phrase "triggering angry protests from Sunni Muslim towel heads". I don't think that's appropriate. Just thought I'd let someone know.

I have heard Delta Force raided they building where she was and got her back, but nothing has been officaly said. Any truth behind this?

the interpreter
Salon mangazine identifies the slain interpreter using a different name. He is also mentioned in the blog of Riverbend (http://riverbend.blogspot.com) as being a friend of hers and a local shopkeeper (and fixer). Ancawonka 22:15, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

lip reading
Why haven't the medias tried to read her lips in that video? I wouldn't think it would be so hard. Anybody else thinks this is weird? --Cramer 01:09, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Any special reason the photo links are included (both from the same series of shots of Carroll), as opposed to an actual photo? Mhking 22:57, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

I read in the recent AP article that Al Jazeera doesn't play the sound in these videos because the voices of the captives are too "disturbing". Presumably, though, they have the sound, so we should be able to know what she actually said. Ancawonka 17:48, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Image / Reasoning
I remember reading a MSNBC article that mentioned that wives of suspected terrorists were taken to pressure them to turn themselves in. I'm speculating that one such terrorist wants his wife back.

I have uploaded an enhanced picture of her taken from the terrorist video and heavlily laced it with Fair Use notices. &mdash;This user has left wikipedia 08:41 2006-01-31


 * What, in case the terrorist group sues us? --68.61.199.248 18:52, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Brigades, Revengence, Vengeance
I noticed that people are changing the name of the terrorist group from Revenge Brigades and Brigades of Vengeance. Is this a translation issue, or what? Ancawonka 20:41, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

High school
I changed the reference from Huron class of 1995 to Community class of 1996 per this article in the Ann Arbor News (Ann Arbor's mainstream daily newspaper of record). If this is wrong, please correct it.

http://www.mlive.com/news/aanews/index.ssf?/base/news-16/113690761414580.xml&coll=2

Community High is an alternative school, so I believe that it would be possible to start at Huron and transfer to Community while maintaining the same residence.


 * Huron's website indicates she was a 1995 graduate, so I changed it back. I found three MLive references to her being at Huron, as well, so your one is an outlier. (Odd that the school doesn't have some sort of yellow-ribbon campaign going ...) --Dhartung | Talk 07:18, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
 * And here's an interview with Huron classmates. Looking definitive. --Dhartung | Talk 07:22, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

I was the one who changed it to "Commie 96." Good job, Dhartung, and and sorry for the confusion.

Someone else who might have gone to school with her: ["http://www.crackpotpress.com/html/jill_carroll.html "Jill Carroll and the Christian Science Monitor"] (I moved this from the main page) Anca 18:07, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Anca: the author of the article you linked to is a musing about the Christian Science religion, and whether Ms. Carroll, who the URL's author, "Mike Crackpot" aka Mike Miller HAS NEVER MET is an adherent. It provides no information whatsoever about Ms. Carrol. Mr. Crackpot/Miller could have answered most/all his quesions about Ms. Carrol by quickly reading this page: she went to Ann Arbor public high school (which was never in doubt), so she almost certianly didn't attend his boarding school, and attended Amherst, not a Christian Science college in Indiana. Given the Monitor's reputation for unbiased journalism, a person's employment with the Monitor says nothing about his/her religious beliefs. I'm really not sure why anyone would think that Mr. Crackpot/Miller's article was relevant or worth linking.


 * I don't know who the author is. I would guess that he posted the link on the Jill Carrol page himself.  I didn't think it had anything to do with Jill Carroll, so I moved it here just in case someone else thought it was worth linking to.  At least this way, if it shows up on the main page again, it will be summarily deleted.  Anca 17:44, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Potential Rescue
I'm putting together a crack team of Wikipedians to go over to Baghdad and rescue Ms. Caroll. We are specifically looking for users with extensive contributions to Wikipedia in the fields of 'explosives', 'Kurdish' and 'ESP'. Causualties are to be expected, so plan accordingly.

Are all three videos of the same woman?
Is it just me, or does the woman who appears on the first silent videotape (a frame of which appears in the Wiki article) look different from the subsequent videos and earlier static photographs? The gal who appears in the first video looks different from this photo of Jill Carroll taken in September 2005. In the first silent video, the size of the nose is smaller at the tip, and the bridge of the nose is much narrower, comapared with the photo. In the second video, where the woman is wearing the headscarf, the chin looks slightly larger. If somebody had showed me the pictures without captions and out of context of the story, I would have concluded they are different people. Anybody else feel the same way? 4.228.213.2 00:24, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, I'll defer to the fact that nobody who knew or worked with her has suggested this. The photo has her smiling and wearing glasses, and probably the video shows her pale from spending time inside and puffy from lack of exercise. These sorts of things have been said about hostages in the past, probably for similar reasons. --Dhartung | Talk 23:39, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedian?
"She is a well known Wikipedian and has made several contributions to the site in the fields of Judaism and aeronautics."

I've removed the above statement that was added by an unregistered user in this edit since it's not sourced and I'm not aware of any evidence of it being true. Does anyone have more information on this or is it just a false statement? Angela. 12:26, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

WHY do they keep stalling?
It seems that every time the terrorists have new demands, nobody gives word on Carroll's condition! I liked your comment of putting together some Wikipedians to go out to Baghdad and rescue her. That had me laughing out loud.

I'll be glad when this is over (if she's ever freed). I spent all last week typing all over my Wikipedia user page telling a story of my life, and the 2006 section talks about how I felt about this situation. This Jill Carroll thing has been bugging me for the past few months now!

Here's what I thought over the weekend, but most of you might not agree: Maybe one of the terrorists holding her hostage probably turned into a pacifist like Jun Kazama from Tekken 2 (sorry, couldn't resist--her name's littered all over the 2006 section of my page) and had second thoughts.

I can't exactly see what Jun Kazama has to do with Jill Carroll, but I was just trying to make you laugh (and pray that there's hope and a light at the end of the tunnel), that's all.

D.F. Williams 17:50, 28 February 2006 (UTC)WTGDMan1986

Beheading or pistol shot?
Although I fervently hope that Ms. Carroll winds up being freed, I think it's a foregone conclusion that she will be killed (if she's not dead already) considering what generally happens to al-Qaeda hostages, and especially since Ms. Carroll is an American and a reporter for The Christian Science Monitor. Such as it is, I was wondering if her abductors had specified whether they would shoot or behead her? Margaret Hassan was shot but, as the Iraqi government is growing stronger, I've read that the terrorists are becoming more desperate in their actions and are beheading women and children now.

For her sake, I hope they just murder her with a pistol shot like they did Hassan. That may sound terrible, but Islamic terrorists don't behead their victims with a single stroke from a sword or machete the way old timey executioners would. The jihadi favor lengthy, unimaginably agonizing "sawings" with serrated knives. Maybe they'll have enough compassion in their black hearts to do her quickly and cleanly. ChildeRolandofGilead 09:11, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Reply to above: No I think they just chop off your head with a powerful blow.


 * Um... she was just freed today, unharmed.

release
she's been released. Saw it on Bloomberg just now and Bloomberg says that the report has been confirmed by Al-Jazeera and Reuters. __earth (Talk) 11:30, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Expanded the section, citing Reuters Kether83 11:51, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Yipee! :D--KrossTalk 14:13, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Great news! I think everyone is very happy. Wallie 19:25, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

She's been released, and in good condition, and spoke fondly of her kidnappers' treatment, maybe under mental pressure for now, but only time will tell. Anyway, Everybody's much happier now :)

Question about headscarf
I'm wondering if that means she converted to islam because of the millitants.


 * No, it means "when in Rome, do as the Romans do". One or the reasons why Ms. Carroll was such a rallying cry to so many people around the world was because of her tolerant attitudes and attempts to blend in and get to know Iraqi culture.  If you look at pictures of her in Iraq before her kidnapping, you'll find that she wears the hajib as well, as a sign of respect to the culture.  She also learned Arabic, apparently, when she first went out there.  I think these reasons and her overall respectful attitude might have had some contributing factor in her release.

Deception Program
I wouldn't count on the mainstream reporting that the supposed "abduction" of Miss Carroll was the work of REAL Iraqi insurgents. As far as I know, Iraq is a free-for-all melee of a country, where many pose as insurgent 'freedom fighters' are actually mercenaries. The fact that Miss Carroll was released unscathed is unprecendented (to tell you honestly, she look as if she just had a vacation). Not that I wanted her harmed in anyway. But just consider, a few days before her release, American and Iraqi military conducted an armed operations against insurgents in Samarra where many Iraqis including top politicians condemned.

This simply was not right. Her release digressed from the usual pattern of atrocity on both sides.

In the past, a strike opeartions by the Americans was automatically followed by a counter-attack by Iraqi rebels. Just think of the cases in Fallujah, Najaf and others. The killing of past American, European and Japanese victims was in large part conducted as a retaliation. This was and still is the behaviorial dynamics of Iraqi rebels.

It is very curious to think that after a MAJOR crackdown on insurgents in Samarra, Jill Carroll was strangely released. It simply does not fit.

The question to ask, therefore, is: Is there a possibility that Jill Carroll's abduction was planned and programmed? I say yes and to be sure Ms Carroll might not even know that her abduction was rehearsed.

Abducted by whom? at this point, possibilities are endless. Iraqi politicians who want to get public and American approval. Americans who wish to conduct a very good psywar effort to parcelize insurgents. the jihadist Revenge Brigade could be a military creation - a deception op to establish their reputation before undertaking future infiltration activities on REAL jihadist and insurgent groups in Iraq. Big Business afraid that Ms Carroll might discover something fishy in the way war profitters are reaping the windfall in the ongoing insurgency. And countless other possibilities. Definitely, her abduction have already caused a chilling effect on freelance journalists deployed in Iraq. —This unsigned comment was added by Dopong ulupong (talk • contribs).


 * Wikipedia is not a soapbox. However, I'd like to say, there have been released by kidnappers before. Remembers the two Italian aid workers? And you seem to forget that her translator was killed. And also, you see too many spy movies/conspiracy theories. __earth (Talk) 05:32, 31 March 2006 (UTC)


 * This is all very interesting. But... Who would benefit from this? And it would indicate that Jill is not a genuine person, which she clearly is. Can we not for once take things at face value, and rejoice that a nice person has been freed by her captors. As far as her treatment is concerned, the Islamic code of hospitality to others is well documented. Wallie 06:56, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Thank you Wallie to acknowledge something good about Muslims. I do not know why it is difficult to believe that what she said could be right? Mr. Dopong it is always good to think on different ideas so please continue asking questions and thinking. I also have a Question: Let say, if she continue to stand behind what the video said. Then will she be labeled mentally sick always? Or she be held for speaking against US war? Do you think that someone will believe her? Faisal 21:56, 1 April 2006 (UTC)


 * That's OK. Much of what is said about Muslims (negative) at the moment is just propaganda. As they say, when war begins, truth goes out the window. Wallie 10:58, 2 April 2006 (UTC)


 * She's already said that the video was shot under pressure, and that she only did that in order to facilitate her release, as the militants did request her full cooperation in order to release her. The question is, where's the truth, and when was the pressure applied, was it during her abduction? or was it after her release? if she's the kind of person who would play along for the sake of freedom, might she be saying that as to be left alone? In other words, did someone tell her to say that she was lying on the video, and that she was under pressure and threat, also under some kind of pressure?

Here's my take on it, and what I think is the real reason the right wingers are irritated with her for making anti-American statements and then recanting them: It's because (1) they would dearly loved to have had her be just another left-wing "anti-American" journalist; and (2) her willingness to tell the kidnappers what they wanted, and reverse herself soon after being released, supports the argument that torture actually serves no useful purpose, thus undercutting the administration's position on the subject. Wahkeenah 01:57, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Wahkeenah, a) I'm a right winger, and I think Jill is an outstanding journalist, 10x smarter than her captors, and, well, adorable. b) The administration's position on torture is that it shouldn't be done. 12.144.20.254 16:20, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

__earth, since someone deleted my acerbic comment... it is totally unintelligent to label someone as obsessed with conspiracy theory when he proposes an alternative view. If you must know, a staple action in counter-insurgency program is called pseudo-operations. Here is a link to real academic article detailing the use of pseudo-operations in war. The article is written by Dr. Lawrence Cline, a former US Army intelligence officer that had been with the CIA and the DIA. - DOpong_ulupong

Too Many Sections
There are a great deal of sections containing only one or two paragraphs and I feel that they should be merged together to clean up the article. -- Fearfulsymmetry 01:05, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Terrorists, not "armed group"
A few days ago I changed the innocuous sounding terms of "militant group," "armed group," etc. Some moron changed it back. If whoever did that does it again, I will keep changing it back to the appropriate terms. The people who abducted Jill Carroll were terrorists! If you have any questions, please refer to Islamic extremist terrorism, or terrorism.
 * 'Tweren't me. However, the term "terrorist" is a subjective, politicized term. Keep in mind that we invaded their country. Better prepare yourself for an Edit Jihad. Wahkeenah 00:45, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
 * How does "we" include her Iraqi translater and driver, who were murdered simply because they were accompanying an American?


 * Also, why are you hiding behind an anonymous login? Wahkeenah 00:46, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
 * It was me. There are agreed standards of what a "terrorist" is.  The use of "armed group" or "militant group" doesn't accurately describe the group in question.  "Terrorist" more accurately describes the group that committed the abduction. --Findpeace 01:06, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Agreed among those who use the term as we do, anyway. Many Palestinians regard the Israelis as terrorists, and they have a point. It seems to me that "kidnappers" would suffice, especially since (as far as I know) the specific group that captured her is unknown at present. However, you can fight your Edit Jihad with others on this site, I don't have the energy for it. The one thing that gets under my skin, though, is right wingers criticizing her for doing what they told her to do, to avoid getting killed. However, I don't think that viewpoint has gained much ground, thankfully. Franklin Graham and Pat Robertson have given radical Islamists way more verbal ammunition than Jill Carroll did. Wahkeenah 01:15, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm the "moron" that reverted the change. Hey, now I've done it again!  How can we call them "terrorists" when we're not even exactly sure (1) who they are or (2) what other actions (if any) they've taken?  They're obviously militants.  They're obviously armed.  It might be POV to say they're part of the Iraqi insurgency.  However, it's certainly POV to say that they are terrorists when we have no idea who they are. -  Jersyko · talk  02:54, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
 * It probably depends on how broadly the term is used. I don't recall the so-called Symbianese Liberation Army of the early 1970s, which kidnapped Patty Hearst, being called "terrorists". Rather, they were kidnappers and bank robbers. It is also possible that Jill Carroll's kidnappers will be proven to be "terrorists" in the narrower sense, but I don't know that that has happened yet. Seems to me there was a recent story about a kidnapping ring being run by an Iraqi official, purely for profit. That's not terrorism, it's just crime. Until we know who Jill's captors are, it's an iffy proposition to invoke that term. Wahkeenah 03:01, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I still think that this group classifies as a terrorist organization. Oh well.--Findpeace 21:23, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
 * It is my believe that the kidnappers are terrorists as well. Kidnapping of civillians as hostages is a crime against international law. This is fact. Any insurgent group or nation-state that practices hostage taking is committing a war crime. Since threatening a political response by an act of violence not in accordance to the rules of war is terroristic, I believe that the group that captured Carroll should be correctly termed terrorists.

"Hoax" argument
User:RepublicanVet and an anon, presumably the same user, have edited this text into this article several times tonight. The edit is obviously violative of WP:OR, WP:V, WP:NPOV, and probably half a dozen other policies, but it probably does not qualify as vandalism, which creates a WP:3RR dilemma for me, as I have reached my 3RR quota for the day for this article. Can I get the thoughts of other editors here, please? - Jersyko · talk  02:24, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
 * The editor removed the edit. - Jersyko &middot;talk 15:35, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Ask for a semilock. It's usually the best thing against anon. __earth (Talk) 16:40, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

red hair
Did she say anything about why she dyed her hair red? She seems to be letting it grow out now. 71.199.123.24 08:21, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Question
Does one need to be a Christian to work for the monitor?


 * No, the Christian Science monitor was founded by the Church of Christ (a christian science church), but it really does not implement those beliefs in its journalism. It was simply founded on those beliefs, but is a secular media outlet.

Question
Does anyone else find her incredibly annoying? It seems as though she is trying to draw as much attention to herself as she possibly can, and quite frankly, I can't believe a word that comes out of her mouth.
 * No. And I can't see how she is trying to bring as much attention to herself as she can.  Obviously she had nothing to do with the publicity surrounding her capture while she was still a captive, and aside from a couple of statements that were released right after she was let go, she didn't talk to the press for *months*, and even now is just doing a series for her own paper.  So, frankly, I don't know what the hell you're talking about.


 * What I find annoying is someone removing someone else's valid comment and replacing it with a rhetorical question. Her response to some of this unrational attitude against her (kidnapping was faked, she's a publicity seeker, etc.) would convince most logical people. --MarsRover
 * Here here :) · j e r s y k o   talk  · 20:48, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Recent Marine Raid
According to Military.com the Marines had recently captured several Iraqis suspected to be responsible for the kidnapping. http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,109323,00.html?ESRC=dod.nl

Salary
Why is Jill Carroll's salary important for an encyclopedia? I've never seen an entry on anyone that includes a salary. Perhaps it's part of the journalism project, which I have perused but never really studied carefully. It just seems odd and a bit creepy to me to post a private individual's salary; public employees, maybe, but journalists? I just don't get it. 24.211.161.146 (talk) 01:40, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, that salary is her salary as a public employee, a Fairfax County Fire and Rescue Department Fire Trainee. The template has a line for it so I filled it in. --Daysleeper47 (talk) 02:55, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

question...
Over on the Village Pump there is a discussion on the senior wikipedia insiders covertly cooperating with a NYTimes initiative to suppress coverage of the kidnapping of NYTimes reporter David Rodhe.

In that discussion there is an assertion that similiar informal blackouts had been in place for the kidnapping of Jill Carroll and Melissa Fung. But I don't see any mention of it. Geo Swan (talk) 06:23, 30 June 2009 (UTC)


 * If it happened, it hasn't been reported (yet) and therefore, isn't worth mentioning. If a reliable source can be found, it can certainly be added. --Daysleeper47 (talk) 17:23, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Jill Carroll. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060406181031/http://www.csmonitor.com/earlyed/earlyWO0331a.html to http://www.csmonitor.com/earlyed/earlyWO0331a.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060418012154/http://csmonitor.com/slideshows/2006/homecoming/ to http://www.csmonitor.com/slideshows/2006/homecoming/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060327110820/http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=16583 to http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=16583
 * Added tag to http://www.csmonitor.com/specials/carroll/0330b/index.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050925012631/http://blogs.csmonitor.com/notebook_iraq/ to http://blogs.csmonitor.com/notebook_iraq/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060721162617/http://www.adnki.com/index_2Level.php?cat=Terrorism&loid=8.0.256531528&par=0 to http://www.adnki.com/index_2Level.php?cat=Terrorism&loid=8.0.256531528&par=0

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:54, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Splitting
I'd like to propose that the parts of this article related to her kidnapping be split into a separate page called Kidnapping of Jill Carroll. Carroll herself seems notable enough to me as a journalist to keep her page based on the little bit of research I've done already, but currently most of it is devoted to her kidnapping which really deserves its own page. Assuming there are no objections to the split, I can work on improving both her page and the new page afterwards as well, since right now it's undersourced. Thanks. Shuri42 (talk) 17:49, 8 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Ok, after doing more research I think I've changed my mind, for now anyway. It's probably best to keep as one page since I can't find much info on her not related to the kidnapping outside of a few sources. Shuri42 (talk) 22:10, 15 October 2021 (UTC)