In the past 6 months, people from various background and nationalities got captured, ransomed and in most cases that we know of, gruesomely executed (except the latest case, where the outcome has not yet been confirmed - but the past have left little room for optimism).

Many of those captured are journalists. And while it is true that they knew what the risks they are taking (looking at the video statement by the Japanese journalist in the latest case), they also have the heart in the right places, and I can't help but be sympathetic towards them. The problem is that it doesn't change the fact that if captured, the government have a tough decision to do, the family, even knowing that they made the decision go, will probably have nightmares over this. A lot of job put people at risk. The military being obvious, but so are fire-fighters, law enforcements and more. But there is a particularly violent element to a filmed execution is makes it even more traumatic to the families.

I can't help but wonder what drive those people to take on those jobs, and whether it is better not to have any reporters there. I can't help but think it is a death trap. The problem is that without those people there to at least show one facet of the truth, it becomes -even harder- to anyone accountable for anything that happens that should not happen. And I am talking on all sides here.

The other thing is that I wonder how the victims are selected. The Japanese journalist thought he would be fine, being neither British or American and to be honest, while we can never be sure, I would've thought so too. Japan, while allied to the US especially in the pacific sphere, only played humanitarian role in the Middle East as far as has been reported anyway.

On the other hand, a German reporter did manage to get a safety guarantee which was kept. So it seems that while being a journalist in the region is not an automatic death-sentence, it is still a very high risk.