<story><title>Did Qatar pay a billion dollar ransom?</title><url>https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-44660369?</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>paidleaf</author><text>So did they or didn&amp;#x27;t they? Are they asking the readers? Is this our homework assignment that we are supposed to answer and turn in to the bbc?&lt;p&gt;Can the news start reporting on facts?&lt;p&gt;Read the article only to find out that we don&amp;#x27;t know who the kidnappers are, if and how much they got, how much cash qatar sent to iraq, etc.&lt;p&gt;Whenever I read articles like this, it leaves me angry and wanting to never read anything from the BBC again. What&amp;#x27;s even more frustrating is that the BBC is government funded and not dependent on advertisers and they have no reason to clickbait.</text></comment>
<story><title>Did Qatar pay a billion dollar ransom?</title><url>https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-44660369?</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>peterlk</author><text>This story reminds me of a book that I read a few months ago called &amp;quot;Never Split the Difference&amp;quot;. It&amp;#x27;s a negotiation book by a former FBI hostage negotiator. I think the context of that book offers some color to this story, and I&amp;#x27;d highly recommend it.&lt;p&gt;EDIT: I think the contextual question that arises from that book is: How does the idea of &amp;quot;the enemy of my enemy is my friend&amp;quot; play out in multi-sided negotiations with such high stakes?</text></comment>