|
FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
Topic Review (Newest First) |
Apr 13th, 2007 09:11 PM | ||||||||
Courage the Cowardly Dog |
The funny part is now Iran is saying "you owe us a favor on the political spectrum, perhaps supporting our nuclear program?" Kidnapping sailors in disputed waters and manipulating them is a HUGE favor. And I don't want any Iranian favors any time soon. |
|||||||
Apr 7th, 2007 12:25 PM | ||||||||
KevinTheOmnivore |
Sloth, thank you for pointing this out. You beat me to it... So, GEGGY, what do you make of the sailors' claims that they were under tremendous pressure, blind folded and manipulated? Hmm? |
|||||||
Apr 6th, 2007 01:32 PM | ||||||||
sloth |
The released personnel have spoken about what happened in Iran: Royal Navy personnel seized by Iran were blindfolded, bound and held in isolation during their 13 days in captivity, the crew have said. |
|||||||
Apr 5th, 2007 05:10 PM | ||||||||
KevinTheOmnivore |
update .............................. .. .................... ................ Geggy only chooses to listen to everything the administration says when it happens to suit his narrow view of the world. update ............... ....... . . . ....................... Geggy can't understand why the U.S. has to take a firm position stating that the two aren't linked, lest we legitimize this kind of behavior from Iran. |
|||||||
Apr 5th, 2007 03:52 PM | ||||||||
Ant10708 | I asked you a fucking question Geggy. | |||||||
Apr 5th, 2007 03:17 PM | ||||||||
Geggy |
update .................................................. ...... Washington said however there was no link between the sudden granting of consular access to five Iranians held in Iraq, and the release of 15 British naval personnel. "There is no link whatsoever. Neither we nor the British nor anyone else, as far as I know, has made that link," State Department spokesman Tom Casey said when asked if there was a connection. |
|||||||
Apr 5th, 2007 11:18 AM | ||||||||
Ant10708 | Geggy don't you find your views slightly biased since you already assume the united states government wants war with iran? | |||||||
Apr 5th, 2007 10:58 AM | ||||||||
El Blanco |
Quote:
Jesus, Geggy, do you ever read your shit before posting it? |
|||||||
Apr 5th, 2007 10:45 AM | ||||||||
Geggy |
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||||||
Apr 5th, 2007 10:30 AM | ||||||||
Geggy |
Quote:
I started to lean more on the fact the video may be propaganda once I found out recently that it was aired to the public with no sound. I hadn't had any idea in the first place. But I guess we'll never know for sure. Quote:
Quote:
|
|||||||
Apr 4th, 2007 12:48 PM | ||||||||
KevinTheOmnivore |
So the 15 sailors will thankfully be released tomorrow. So Geggy, I'm a little confused about a couple of things... If this incident was staged by "The West," why are these sailors being released? Where's the invasion? Where's the Gulf of Tonkin? Also, if this was truly just the Iranians protecting their coastline, why are they releasing these Brits now that they're getting access to five Iranian "diplomats" being held in Iraq? Any connection? What say you, oh truth seeker? |
|||||||
Apr 2nd, 2007 12:45 PM | ||||||||
Ant10708 |
I love how everyone mentions the US and our government policies as if we were actually directly involved in this incident TOTAL SETUP BY THE US AND BRITISH ON THEIR OWN TROOPS |
|||||||
Apr 2nd, 2007 11:21 AM | ||||||||
KevinTheOmnivore |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
1. You have absolutely NO proof that this is what they've done, and infact admit to it later on in your post. 2. You have yet to show us where PNAC even states these plans; and 3. Your middle friggin name is INANE. Not only does your argument have no credibility, but YOU have absolutely no credibility here. If you think your arguments are so damn sound, you had better do a better job of supportin them. Quote:
YES, I can blame them for it, because it violates international law if they took them in Iraqi waters. The British had been doing those routine sweeps, under UN approval, for months. This was a premeditated attempt to create an international incident, and you damn well know it. Quote:
Quote:
And speaking of cowardice, I'd love to see how you wet your pants in the situation those sailors are in, while you try to "weasel" your way out in order to "comply" with the Iranians. I'd give you about 10 seconds before you went native and were praising Allah, you little toad. NO, I don't pay any credence to those confessions. I disregard them, just as I disregard 99.9% of the things you say. Quote:
|
|||||||
Apr 2nd, 2007 10:36 AM | ||||||||
Geggy |
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||||||
Mar 30th, 2007 04:33 PM | ||||||||
Ant10708 | They do look similar but it still could easily be someone else. | |||||||
Mar 30th, 2007 12:52 PM | ||||||||
Abcdxxxx |
|
|||||||
Mar 30th, 2007 12:49 PM | ||||||||
Abcdxxxx | You're talking about a man who hasn't changed his members only jacket once since he got into office. Strong hair roots? | |||||||
Mar 30th, 2007 12:20 PM | ||||||||
El Blanco | You don't think in 30 years he tried a new haircut? | |||||||
Mar 30th, 2007 12:02 PM | ||||||||
Abcdxxxx | Sure as hell looks like him. There's another shot where he's holding what looks to be an Uzi, that's been posted side by side with a current shot of him, and the resemblance is uncanny. | |||||||
Mar 30th, 2007 11:02 AM | ||||||||
El Blanco | He was deffinatly in the movement, pretty low on the totem at the time, but its never be proven he was actually at the embassy. | |||||||
Mar 30th, 2007 10:40 AM | ||||||||
KevinTheOmnivore |
I remember that being an issue when he got elected, but wasn't it disproven? I know the CIA dismissed it, although I guess some of the hostages still say it was him. Either way, he was a big proponent of the '79 embassy kidnappings. THese are the kind of methods he supports. The revolutionary guard showed up armed to the teeth in no time. THe whole thing was premeditated, which seems clear to anyone but Geggy and Rosie. |
|||||||
Mar 30th, 2007 10:24 AM | ||||||||
Abcdxxxx |
http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/new...p?storyid=2699 Quote:
|
|||||||
Mar 29th, 2007 08:17 PM | ||||||||
KevinTheOmnivore |
Geggy, could you maybe post a 100 page dossier with no bearing on the conversation in order to challenge all of this info? Thanks. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle1582544.ece March 29, 2007 How Britons were conned by Iranian gunboat trick The speed and cunning shown by the Revolutionary Guards suggests that their action was premeditated Dominic Kennedy The British sailors and marines being held by Iran were ambushed at their most vulnerable moment, while climbing down the ladder of a merchant ship and trying to get into their bobbing inflatables. Out of sight of their warship and without any helicopter cover, their only link to their commanders was a communications device beaming their position by satellite. That went dead as they were captured. One theory is that it was thrown overboard to prevent the Iranians getting hold of the equipment and the information it contained. The Ministry of Defence released the coordinates of the searched vessel yesterday to prove that the Iranian Revolutionary Guards made an unprovoked and improper attack in Iraqi waters. The Iranians also blundered in diplomatic talks by giving the British their own compass reference for the place where they said the 14 men and one woman had been seized. When Britain plotted these on a map and pointed out that the spot was in Iraq’s maritime area, the Iranians came up with a new set of coordinates, putting the seizure in their own waters. The speed and cunning shown by the Revolutionary Guards has raised suspicions that their action was premeditated. A senior military officer described it as “deliberate”. It took only three minutes for the Iranians, moving at 40 knots, to move from their legitimate positions monitoring shipping in their waters to come alongside the British last Friday morning. The sailors and marines from HMS Cornwall were in the Gulf, working under a United Nations mandate to protect Iraq from smuggling and threats to the oil industry, when an Indian-flagged vessel came under suspicion. It was in shallow waters and the Cornwall was unable to go alongside without grounding. A boarding party jumped into two ribbed inflatable boats, or RIBs, and set out to investigate. A helicopter hovered to observe the boarding but, after confirming that the Indian vessel was peaceful and friendly, returned to the ship. The Cornwall stayed in contact with the two launch boats via a communications link providing a GPS satellite position. After the successful boarding of the innocent Indian vessel, the Britons began returning to their RIBs. At that moment one Iranian patrol vessel came alongside, adopting a friendly posture. As a second Iranian vessel arrived, the Revolutionary Guards turned aggressive. HMS Cornwalllost communications with the launch boats and sent up the helicopter to investigate. The air crew watched as the small British inflatables were forced towards Iran. By now, up to four Iranian Revolutionary Guard vessels were swarming round the Britons. Although the seizure has been widely linked to the taking of five Iranians by US forces in Iraq, Iranian diplomats have ruled this out. They say that there is no relation between the Britons’ seizure and any other bilateral, regional or international issue. From the start, the Iranian Ambassador to London gave British diplomats a set of coordinates for the location of the confrontation. Margaret Beckett, the Foreign Secretary, told the Iranian Foreign Minister that these compass points actually indicated a spot clearly in Iraqi waters. She tried to give Iran an exit route by suggesting that it might all be a misunderstanding that could be resolved by an immediate release of the captives. On Sunday, the helicopter from HMS Cornwall flew back over the Indian vessel, which was still anchored and had drifted only slightly. A photograph was taken of an airman holding a GPS device. The coordinates on this picture, the MoD insists, prove that the Britons were comfortably within Iraqi waters when captured. On Monday, Iran surprised Britain by coming up with a “corrected” set of coordinates. “The two Iranian positions are just under a nautical mile apart, 1,800 yards or so,” Vice-Admiral Charles Style, a Deputy Chief of the Defence Staff, said yesterday. Mrs Beckett told the Iranian Foreign Minister that she could not accept the Iranians’ version of events. She told MPs in the House of Commons that it was “impossible to believe, given the seriousness of the incident, that the Iranians could have made such a mistake with the original coordinates, which after all they gave us over several days”. Outgunned — The two Iranian patrol ships that seized the Britons were equipped with rocket-propelled grenades and heavy machine guns, enough for a small sea battle. By contrast, the Britons go lightly armed on vessels they search in the Gulf. Each man is issued with a rifle or a pistol — The Iranians struck at a vulnerable moment when the Britons were climbing down a ladder to jump into their inflatables — The Royal Navy does train its men in the techniques needed to fight at just such a dangerous stage. “They had all the rights available to act in self-defence under law,” a senior military officer said. But they were in an “almost impossible position” — A similar decision to hold fire was taken by the six Royal Marines and two sailors captured by Iran in 2004 in similar circumstances. Scott Fallon, a former marine, said they did think about shooting their way free but knew it would be hopeless. He told BBC Radio 4: “They had antiaircraft guns. We would have stood no chance” |
|||||||
Mar 29th, 2007 08:12 PM | ||||||||
kahljorn |
you might need to point out "chapter 5" for geggy ;o cause it's so long and stuff. |
|||||||
Mar 29th, 2007 03:26 PM | ||||||||
KevinTheOmnivore |
http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/De...raqiWaters.htm MOD briefing shows Royal Navy personnel were in Iraqi waters 28 Mar 07 The Ministry of Defence has presented evidence which shows that the fifteen personnel detained by Iranian authorities on Friday 23 March 2007 were operating in Iraqi waters when they were seized. [img]http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/Te...pg&maxSize=210[/img] Picture shows GPS location of the incident, as seen from a Royal Navy helicopter over the merchant vessel after the event [Picture: MOD] The briefing, at defence headquarters in London, was given by Vice Admiral Charles Style, Deputy Chief of the Defence Staff (Commitments). Vice Admiral Style, who is responsible for providing strategic advice to operational commanders, explained in detail where the Royal Navy personnel were located when they were seized: "The aim of this brief is to provide a factual account of the incident during which fifteen Royal Naval personnel were seized by the Iranians last Friday. By way of background, HMS CORNWALL was in charge of the coalition force, which - alongside the Iraqi Navy - is operating in the Northern Persian Gulf. "This force maintains the sovereignty and integrity of Iraqi territorial waters under UN Security Council Resolution 1723, and with the approval of the Iraqi Government. The ship – and others in the coalition - maintain a presence patrolling there. They are also charged with protection of the Iraqi offshore oil infrastructure – economically very important - and the security of merchant vessels.[img]http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/Te...PG&maxSize=210[/img] Picture shows position of HMS Cornwall on Friday 23 March 2007 [Picture: MOD] See Slide – chart of Northern Persian Gulf >>> "On 23 March a boarding team consisting of seven Royal Marines and eight sailors - who were embarked in two of HMS CORNWALL's boats - conducted a routine boarding of an Indian flagged Merchant Vessel which was cooperative throughout. They investigated this vessel after witnessing her unloading cars into two barges secured alongside. Since early March the force has conducted 66 routine boardings. So the one that I'm talking about was entirely routine business, and conducted in a particular area where four other boardings have been completed recently. "As shown on the chart, the merchant vessel was 7.5 nautical miles south east of the Al Faw Peninsula and clearly in Iraqi territorial waters. Her master has confirmed that his vessel was anchored within Iraqi waters at the time of the arrest. The position was 29 degrees 50.36 minutes North 048 degrees 43.08 minutes East. This places her 1.7 nautical miles inside Iraqi territorial waters. This fact has been confirmed by the Iraqi Foreign Ministry.http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/Te...axSize=210</a> Picture shows first Iranian reported position [1] and corrected Iranian position [2] [Picture: MOD] See Slide – Iranian claimed positions >>> "The Iranian government has provided us with two different positions for the incident. The first we received on Saturday and the second on Monday. As this map shows, the first of these points still lies within Iraqi territorial waters. We pointed this out to them on Sunday in diplomatic contacts. "After we did this, they then provided a second set of coordinates that places the incident in Iranian waters over two nautical miles from the position given by HMS CORNWALL and confirmed by the merchant vessel. The two Iranian positions are just under a nautical mile apart – 1800 yards or so. It is hard to understand a reason for this change of coordinates. We unambiguously contest both the positions provided by the Iranians. "I should just explain at this point that the boats remained connected at this point. One of the seaboats was connected via data link, which communicated its position continually to the ship where it was displayed, superimposed on an electronic chart, on a purpose built console. During the boarding this console was constantly monitored and indicated, throughout, that the boats had remained well within Iraqi territorial waters. "Our boarding started at 0739 local time and was completed at 0910 with the merchant vessel having been cleared to continue with her business. Communications were lost with the boarding team as the boarding was finishing … at 0910. HMS CORNWALL's Lynx helicopter, which had been covering the initial stages of the boarding, immediately returned to the scene to locate the boarding team. "The helicopter reported that the two seaboats were being escorted by Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Navy vessels towards the Shatt 'Al Arab Waterway and were now inside Iranian territorial waters. Debriefing of the helicopter crew and a conversation with the master of the merchant ship both indicate that the boarding team were ambushed while disembarking from the merchant vessel. Both boats were equipped with a GPS chart plotter.http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/Te...axSize=210</a> Vice Admiral Charles Style, Deputy Chief of the Defence Staff (Commitments) [Picture: CPO Colin Burden] "On Sunday morning, 25 March, HMS CORNWALL's Lynx conducted an overflight of the merchant vessel, which was still at anchor, and once again confirmed her location on Global Positioning System equipment. Her Master confirmed that his vessel had remained at anchor since Friday, and was in Iraqi territorial waters. "Ladies and Gentlemen, my primary message is clear. HMS CORNWALL with her boarding party was going about her legal business – in Iraqi Territorial waters, under a United Nations Security Council Resolution, with the explicit approval of the Iraqi government. "The action by Iranian forces in arresting and detaining our people is unjustified and wrong. As such it is a matter of deep concern to us and the families of the people who have been taken. We continue not only to call for their safe, but for their safe and speedy, return, and we continue to seek immediate consular access to them as a prelude to their release." |
|||||||
This thread has more than 25 replies. Click here to review the whole thread. |