Cronky Posted April 8, 2007 Share Posted April 8, 2007 In terms of changing the culture of armed service this decision will have untold repercussions. I can only assume the 'Government' wants to hide other news in the offing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tameelf Posted April 8, 2007 Share Posted April 8, 2007 A very stupid idea...or perhaps just a little bit of softening-up of The Sun and Daily Mail 'proles' to obtain backing for what's going to happen next. In terms of changing the culture of armed service this decision will have untold repercussions. I can only assume the 'Government' wants to hide other news in the offing? spot on albert and cronky Call that humiliation?http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,2047128,00.html No hoods. No electric shocks. No beatings. These Iranians clearly are a very uncivilised bunch Terry Jones Saturday March 31, 2007 The Guardian I share the outrage expressed in the British press over the treatment of our naval personnel accused by Iran of illegally entering their waters. It is a disgrace. We would never dream of treating captives like this - allowing them to smoke cigarettes, for example, even though it has been proven that smoking kills. And as for compelling poor servicewoman Faye Turney to wear a black headscarf, and then allowing the picture to be posted around the world - have the Iranians no concept of civilised behaviour? For God's sake, what's wrong with putting a bag over her head? That's what we do with the Muslims we capture: we put bags over their heads, so it's hard to breathe. Then it's perfectly acceptable to take photographs of them and circulate them to the press because the captives can't be recognised and humiliated in the way these unfortunate British service people are. It is also unacceptable that these British captives should be made to talk on television and say things that they may regret later. If the Iranians put duct tape over their mouths, like we do to our captives, they wouldn't be able to talk at all. Of course they'd probably find it even harder to breathe - especially with a bag over their head - but at least they wouldn't be humiliated. And what's all this about allowing the captives to write letters home saying they are all right? It's time the Iranians fell into line with the rest of the civilised world: they should allow their captives the privacy of solitary confinement. That's one of the many privileges the US grants to its captives in Guantánamo Bay. The true mark of a civilised country is that it doesn't rush into charging people whom it has arbitrarily arrested in places it's just invaded. The inmates of Guantánamo, for example, have been enjoying all the privacy they want for almost five years, and the first inmate has only just been charged. What a contrast to the disgraceful Iranian rush to parade their captives before the cameras! What's more, it is clear that the Iranians are not giving their British prisoners any decent physical exercise. The US military make sure that their Iraqi captives enjoy PT. This takes the form of exciting "stress positions", which the captives are expected to hold for hours on end so as to improve their stomach and calf muscles. A common exercise is where they are made to stand on the balls of their feet and then squat so that their thighs are parallel to the ground. This creates intense pain and, finally, muscle failure. It's all good healthy fun and has the bonus that the captives will confess to anything to get out of it. And this brings me to my final point. It is clear from her TV appearance that servicewoman Turney has been put under pressure. The newspapers have persuaded behavioural psychologists to examine the footage and they all conclude that she is "unhappy and stressed". What is so appalling is the underhand way in which the Iranians have got her "unhappy and stressed". She shows no signs of electrocution or burn marks and there are no signs of beating on her face. This is unacceptable. If captives are to be put under duress, such as by forcing them into compromising sexual positions, or having electric shocks to their genitals, they should be photographed, as they were in Abu Ghraib. The photographs should then be circulated around the civilised world so that everyone can see exactly what has been going on. As Stephen Glover pointed out in the Daily Mail, perhaps it would not be right to bomb Iran in retaliation for the humiliation of our servicemen, but clearly the Iranian people must be made to suffer - whether by beefing up sanctions, as the Mail suggests, or simply by getting President Bush to hurry up and invade, as he intends to anyway, and bring democracy and western values to the country, as he has in Iraq. · Terry Jones is a film director, actor and Python www.terry-jones.net Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted April 8, 2007 Share Posted April 8, 2007 I was reading an old Economist Magazine this evening and it had an article on Iran's relations with the west. It warned that the biggest risk was a miscalculation between the various sides. Over confidence is a real risk. My view of the recent local difficulty is that radicals within the Iranian government decided to test what they could get away with - and descovered they could get away with quite alot. If that's true its set a very dangerous prescident. What were the nod nod wink wink deniable deals done. Iran gets consular access for its captives in Iraq; an Iranian kidnap victim is released - along with denials that the US Defence Department ever held him - well ok, but the defence department isn't the only US operator in Iraq, what about the CIA, and its claimed involvement in his interogation/torture - no comment; then there is the lack of searches currently ongoing in the Shatel Arab - plus its likely that Iran has got consessions on the location of the border - something that was previously opaque in the extreme. I feel this was a victory for the radicals in the Iranian government and they'll feel more confident in the future. I still think its highly unlikely the US will do anything other than sabre rattle while the UN continues to make progress; BUT in my view elements on both sides are spoiling for a fight - it doesn't bode well. There was no way this was a Bay of Tonkin thing - the US and the Brits were caught napping - the people with the advantage were the Iranians. But next time - some people on both sides are looking for trouble. They might very well find it. OUCH Wow - I almost agree with Tamelf - ALMOST! And I totally agree with Terry Jones - the headlines screaming torture really pissed me off. The US has totally destroyed any higher moral ground it had over the treatment of prisoners. That's very sad and a huge self inflicted wound - if ever large numbers of US or Brit troops are captured they will rue their politicians' blith disregard for the Geneva Conventions. Shame on them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted April 8, 2007 Share Posted April 8, 2007 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted April 9, 2007 Share Posted April 9, 2007 ...sell your 'story', priceless! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cronky Posted April 9, 2007 Share Posted April 9, 2007 I shall read the small print of the newspapers carefully this week to see if they are trying to 'bury bad news' behind the hostage saga. Looking out for snippets on ID cards, biometrics, the NIR, Cash for Honours, Bliars departure date and further infringements of civil liberties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Smelly Posted April 9, 2007 Share Posted April 9, 2007 Two words "Guantanamo Bay" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VinnieK Posted April 9, 2007 Share Posted April 9, 2007 The US has totally destroyed any higher moral ground it had over the treatment of prisoners. That's very sad and a huge self inflicted wound - if ever large numbers of US or Brit troops are captured they will rue their politicians' blith disregard for the Geneva Conventions. Shame on them. The officially sanctioned US (mis)treatment of prisoners is a scandal, but I think to say that any future abuse of prisoners of war by Iran will be even partially a consequence of the model set by Guantanamo is too forgiving of the Iranian government. Given that the present diplomatic situation between Iran and the U.S. is so sensitive, it's no surprise that perhaps military prisoners receive better treatment than those imprisoned under the Iranian justice system, since they have a use as bargaining and propaganda tools. In the full glare of war, however, this being the only situation where it's feasible for Iran to have in their possession a large number of US or UK troops, there's little to suggest they wouldn't be exposed to the full brutality that characterises Iran's civilian prison system anyway, regardless of what kind of example has been set by the U.S. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted April 9, 2007 Share Posted April 9, 2007 The war that was based on weapons of mass distraction that were supplied by the USA ? They developed their own, according to Hans Blix some very advanced. That they used on the Iranians and the Kurds. Just how many times do the blinkered anti-war lot have to be reminded of the thousands killed by Saddam's WMDs? A very stupid idea...or perhaps just a little bit of softening-up of The Sun and Daily Mail 'proles' to obtain backing for what's going to happen next. Fine, so what is going to happen next, the invasion of Iran maybe? By whom and with what? Two words "Guantanamo Bay" One word - "tosser" There are some very bad people detained in Guantanamo Bay. If they were my nationals I would be VERY pleased they're held there by the US military which means I don't have to worry about them. There are a lot of worse places people are held, like Iran. SEP suits me just fine. These folks are starting to sound as insular as bible-belt yanks. I mean, do they ever read a real newspaper or do they get all all their "news" from the telly - snippets and soundbites. Colonel Tim Collins OBE has stated how bad it is they can tell and sell their story however it's not the first time the MOD have allowed this. All the MOD is concerned about is when they say "No" then no it is. This is also the same Tim Collins OBE who is available at a fee for Speaking Engagements - about his military experiences! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted April 9, 2007 Share Posted April 9, 2007 Fine, so what is going to happen next, the invasion of Iran maybe? By whom and with what? Here's a Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tameelf Posted April 9, 2007 Share Posted April 9, 2007 i think the buryed news is brown stealing 100k off every ripped off pension holder, aginst the advice of many financial advisors.in my opinion labour has lied and labour will die at the next election.unless somthings in the offing google downing street memos .this was advanced planning pre 911 that iraq was to be invaded all that was needed was 911 google whatreallyhappend.com funny how the media works the summer blockbuster movie pre 911 was pearl harbour remake to prep the population for 911 this year its 300 isreal wont allow another nation to have what it has. iran demands the right to have the same as isreal easy to solve pakistan has it and also has more ties to 911 than iraq. now i see the deterent value something will happen albert and soon usa cant sustain indefinatly its persian gulf war fleet iran does not want war so it will come from our troops or allies. and it will all depend on how the start is sold the it was "them" goverment story. or the easy available evidence on the web Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevie Posted April 9, 2007 Share Posted April 9, 2007 here is the perfect example of the propeganda LIES the mainstream media use over and over again which i have been telling you all about, and exactly how they twist things to suit the establishment. http://xymphora.blogspot.com/2007/04/rewrite.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted April 9, 2007 Share Posted April 9, 2007 Fine, so what is going to happen next, the invasion of Iran maybe? By whom and with what? Here's a Dear me Albert, at least try and keep up.... I would be very surprised if the US carried out an invasion of Iran. Basically it won't happen. However I can see them doing all the planning for an air strike to take out the Iranian nuclear facilities. This strike would then be carried out by the IDF. After all, the US doesn't give them all that cut-price military hardware and tax breaks for donations for nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted April 9, 2007 Share Posted April 9, 2007 Fine, so what is going to happen next, the invasion of Iran maybe? By whom and with what? Here's a Dear me Albert, at least try and keep up.... Or is it? It seems the perfect opportunity to blame Syria and Iran for supporting hizbullah and escalate this to at least punitive actions against Iran. Remember when Duh! You asked the question. You try and keep up. IMO, this is getting closer because Bush and Blair are about to go - and are running out of other (publically backed) options. It's the path that puts the fewest number of people in harms way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted April 9, 2007 Share Posted April 9, 2007 It is amazing that tamelf thinks that 911 happened after the 23 of July 2002. Oh well that's the alternative media for you. And when the US sent two carrier groups through the Taiwan strait - yeah war with China - inevitable. That was the year of American Pie - say no more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.