What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
436 Comments
- drlha, on 10/12/2007, -23/+209"Iran was well within their rights to arrest the sailors."
Actually no. According to well establish maritime law, you cannot just arrest people for crossing into your waters. You are supposed to warn them and get them to leave your waters first. What the Iranians did was illegal, whether or not they were inside Iranian waters. - wideawakewesley, on 10/12/2007, -57/+172Iran wasn't within their rights to kidnap these people, because their ship never went into Iranian waters. Even Iran admitted this before they decided to change their story.
- theblooms, on 10/12/2007, -95/+206@scratt
These are Radical Islamists that have theses prisoners captured. They operate on the direct authority of the Iranian Mullahs. These are the same kind of people that captured Daniel Pearl, Nick Berg, Kim Sun-Il, Paul Marshall Johnson ,Eugene Armstrong, Jack Hensley, Kenneth Bigley, Shosei Koda, Margaret Hassan and Seif Adnan Kanaan.
Did you also know that American POW's GAIN an average of 13 pounds while in Gitmo? This confirmed by Amnesty International and reported by Slate magazine, not exactly right-wing organizations.
You may not like the war. Fine. You may not like the President. Fine. You may not like America's foreign policy. Fine. But to suggest that Radical Islamists treat their captured better that the United States does goes OVER THE LINE. You, sir, are a blinded by seething partisan rage. Step back and really reexamine what you wrote.
You SERIOUSLY need to re-think the Kool-Aid that has been handed to you by all those far-left blogs you have been reading. - forceflow2, on 10/12/2007, -20/+118@roosterjm2k2
Um...technically it was the same on both sides except for Iran lying. The UK stated they were at a certain position within Iraqi waters. Iran stated that they were at a certain position in Iranian waters...except the position was in Iraqi waters...Iran, after having this pointed out to them, completely changed what the position was to make it inside Iranian waters. Hmm...yeah. - Junkyarddawg, on 10/12/2007, -88/+168It is *conceivable* she's been tortured, using those kinds of methods are not below the iranians, but what is *certain* is that those are not her own words.
- roosterjm2k2, on 10/12/2007, -43/+121The problem with this story, is that the news/press overreacted far more than any government...but of course everyone just assumes war.
If you haven't noticed, the US and UK have both been very diplomatic with Iran to this point. It's honestly not nearly as hostile a relationship as the press has you believing. Yes, strong language is used, as it has to be. When you're working diplomatically, language is your best weapon, well chosen and intimidating language can stop these things before they happen.
Iran was well within their rights to arrest the sailors. Their treatment of them, though, better be acceptable.
We would do the same to them if we found an Iranian military vessel in our waters.
All of that said, the validity of her statement should still be in question. She could be speaking on her own behalf, or could be being forced to say it...we don't know. For now, we take it at face value. We hope its true.
Lastly, why is it that so many diggers cant respond to a story without spouting anti-bush/blair/usa/uk rhetoric. Its tired, its unoriginal, its not even unique anymore. I challenge all of you, who cant see past your hatred for these things to actually gather a few of the brain cells that arent being spent on supporting your blind hate, and actually make a relevant, original argument. Please.
Im not saying dont question our govt or that you have to like and agree with bush, im just saying please, please, please come up with your own arguments. Get away from the groupthink and look at facts, make your own opinions. I personally dont agree with the state of things either, but the crybaby attitude coming from alot of you guys is making anyone who doesnt agree with bush or the war or any of this all look bad. It would be different if you were actually doing something about it...but your just sitting behind a keyboard shooting off at the mouth, for no other reason than "you can". - mrneutron, on 10/12/2007, -22/+99Let's make sure to use the correct contemporary vocabulary. It's not "torture" anymore, it's "coercive interrogation".
I oppose it when the Iranians do it, and I oppose it when we do it. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -80/+156So when will she be converting to Islam? lol jk
Anywayz I don't know, how would you feel if a damn Iranian boat were to sneak around off the coast of Florida? This whole country would go into panic mode. So its ok for us to brings our battle ships into the Persian Gulf, (which is about the size of lake Michigan). How can we expect them not to be threaten by it? - paulrus, on 10/12/2007, -39/+108To the jackasses who are siding with the Iranians. My wife's EX is Iranian and she lived there for about a year. Anyone who thinks that the president of Iran is just a good guy should MOVE there and see for yourself what it's like. If you think for one second that that entire country does things like the west and treats prisoners as well as we do - MOVE THERE. See how well your free speech goes over when you actually LIVE there.
These soldiers are being threatened with their lives. This isn't like our exotic resort paradise down in Cuba where all the prisoners are actually gaining weight because of the quality of food their getting (while the US soldiers eat crappy govt food). These prisons are worse than being locked up in Tijuana.
You bunch of white, uninformed, smart-ass college kids need an education in the real world. Do us all a favor and STFU unless you actually know something about what you're talking about instead of just parroting what your former drugged out hippie professor has fed you.
The world doesn't work the way you WANT it to work. People aren't all simply waiting around to hold hands and sing kumbaya with each other if the US would just get out of the way. Get your heads out of your asses and for once actually think for yourselves. - iceperson, on 10/12/2007, -14/+79"personally I would rather be 'detained' by the Iranians than by any US personnel."
Wow.
http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=1770
Hope you enjoy your stay... - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -189/+247Ah yes- it's wholly inconceivable to you, having been so thoroughly brainwashed by Limbaugh and his ilk, that the *enemy* could be anything short of evil incarnate.
And, of course, this woman was saying as they told her for fear they might detonate the bomb they surely implanted in her head.
Run along now- go fellate Ann Coulter. - floorman56, on 10/12/2007, -20/+72Wow nothing on Digg about the violation of Geneva Conventions
Where is the red cross?
Article 13): "...Prisoners of war must at all times be protected, particularly against acts of violence or intimidation and against insults and public curiosity."
That means you can't put them on TV and show them off.
About the Gulf of Tonkin BS this would would end now if Iran let the people go. Then take CNN out to the gulf to prove the U.S. and the U.K. are in violation of there waters. But no they are doing this because they think the U.S. and the U.K. are weak and that no matter what they do the left will say the U.S. and the U.K. are wrong........It seems Iran is right about this - Junkyarddawg, on 10/12/2007, -25/+77As a long-time critic of the Bush administration and its policy on torture and imprisonment, it is a bit weird to see people actually believe that a blood-soaked religious dictatorship like Iran is some sort of model for the Geneva Convention and humane treatment of prisoners.
It would seem the criticism against the Bush administration, although well-deserved, has been TOO effective. - blqysmg, on 10/12/2007, -23/+74For all those who are arguing whether the British sailors crossed into Iranian waters - unless you were there, you don't know what you are talking about. We are told by the British that they did not cross into Iranian waters. We are told by the Iranians that they DID.
I expect that the Iranians told the sailors that the reason that they were arrested was that they strayed into Iranian waters. The sailors were in inflatable boats, on a short ride out from a British warship. They would not have been doing any navigation on their own, trusting to the helmsman on the warship to know where they were. It would be easy to convince them that they were a mile too far east, so her "admission" that she was in Iranian waters was not really valid. It's just what she'd been told.
Also, when one has been captured by a country with a history of kidnap, beheadings, and torture, one would do well to remain reasonable. They have been apparently treated fairly well, as a soldier or sailor should be if one makes a tactical mistake and strays into foriegn waters. I'm not saying that's what happened, just that if it did, one would expect the arresting government to treat the sailor with respect.
So, all in all, the only thing we really know is that the sailors were close to the line (on one side or the other) when they were captured. The Iranian navy could have simply warned them they were too close, or had crossed into territorial waters. They wanted to make a political statement, however, and arrested them.
The public letter is part of that political statement. It's been done countless times by people of their culture. Kidnap (or arrest) someone, force them to make a public statement admitting guilt. At least, in this case, they have not put her on camera with two black eyes and physically abused to force her to read the statement with a gun to her head. I'm guessing that's because the sailors were told that if they were ever captured, go ahead and cooperate with their captors to avoid torture.
It's easier on everyone if they just say, "Oh, you say we crossed the border? Oops, we're sorry, we didn't know. Sure, I'll appologize in public. Can I have another plate of eggs?"
And, by the way, for all those who are spewing hate for Bush on this one, get a grip. The idea that Bush forced Blair to put his own sailors at risk, that he KNEW the Iranians would capture or kill British sailors in a rubber dingy because they came close to or crossed an invisible line in the sea by a few hundred feet, is really going overboard. For people who hate Bush, this is giving him way too much credit.
It seems the hate Bush crowd can't decide if Bush is stupid or not. If this was planned by Bush or his advisors, it's genius. If it was his advisors, are they the same ones the hate Bush crowd are calling idiots in the handling of the Iraqi Civil War? Or, perhaps, Dick Cheney tricked the Iranians into believing that the border had moved, and provoked them into attacking sailors of one of our allies? It's all a vast, right-wing conspiracy! - swrostmore, on 10/12/2007, -34/+84If its a verifiable fact, post a source. The most relevant example from the past would be the last time Iran captured british sailors in the 90's, there was no mention of them being tortured. I believe you are simply trying to push your agenda by demonizing a people you believe to be "the enemy."
That being said, its likely that this woman was reading lines provided to her by armed Iranian MPs, implicitly threatening her life if she did not comply. - kooft, on 10/12/2007, -102/+148If Iran had reason to believe that these boats were plotting an attack (sources can't be revealed as it would risk Iranian national security) then of course they'd have the right to capture (rendition) these potential terrorists (either you're with them or against them) and convince them (waterboarding) to give up their secrets.
Didn't Khalid Shaikh Mohammed 'admit' to a bunch of stuff recently? How much did torture play a part in his 'admission'? If Iran _did_ torture this woman then her 'admission' is just as valid as Khalid Shaikh Mohammed's. - theblooms, on 10/12/2007, -20/+62@drlha
Which uniformed soldiers, fighting under which flag, have we not given FULL Geneva Convention rights too? Name ONE. - Scruffydan, on 10/12/2007, -48/+80wait i thought torture was now ok... or was it that torture is ok but only when the US does it
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -8/+37@swrostmore :
"If its a verifiable fact, post a source."
From http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=1770 :
"Her entire body carried strange marks of violence," Dr. Azam said. "She had a big bruise on the right side of her forehead stretching down to the ear. The ear drum was intact, but the membrane in one of her ears had recently burst, and a loose blood vessel could be seen. Behind the head, on the left-hand side, was a big, loose swelling. Three deep scratches behind her neck looked like the result of nails digging into the flesh. The right shoulder was bruised, and on the left hand two fingers were broken. Three fingers had broken nails or no nails."
Dr. Azam's account of his examination, which he intends to describe at a press conference in Ottawa today, goes on to describe severe abdominal bruising, "stretching over the thigh down to the knees." Though male doctors in Iran are not allowed to carry out vaginal exams, Dr. Azam's emergency-room nurse thoroughly examined Ms. Kazemi and found the bruising to be the result of "a very brutal rape."
The nurse told him that "the entire genital area had been damaged," Dr. Azam said.
There was also evidence Ms. Kazemi had been whipped.
"The backs of both legs where the skin had come off indicated flogging, five marks on one leg and seven on the other. The big toe on the left leg was crushed," he said."
Defend that you apologist scum. - pintomp3, on 10/12/2007, -21/+50sonofdy1: you seem awfully convinced that she was gang raped and tortured despite any evidence. if they didn't torture her and treated her humanely, would it shatter your the world that you've constructed in your mind where we are saints and they are the spawn of satan? is your alternate reality that skewed and fragile? if so, you really should reconsider your sources of news and information.
- Masterbaiter, on 10/12/2007, -32/+60here;s source: http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=1770
iran also has pretty nasty way of killing women.. http://digg.com/world_news/Hanged_from_a_crane_aged_16_Justice_Iran_style - glock22ownr, on 10/12/2007, -14/+40I bet they didn't bother to pan the camera out to show the guy with an AK pointed at the side of her head. ***** like this was done in the Vietnam war with pilots. Hope those sanctions cripple their effing economy.
- spyd3rweb, on 10/12/2007, -3/+29theres problems on both sides, but we can only fix the ones on our side.
- dracostimpy, on 10/12/2007, -22/+48Iran said they're releasing her tomorrow I believe, so I doubt they even got to the point of threatening to torture her. They probably just said "hey, read this on TV and we'll let ya go", and that was plenty good enough for her since few troops left over there believe they're fighting to "spread freedom" or whatever the hell. I imagine they'll release the rest after playing their admissions as well. Nice PR move by Iran, especially in light of the recent KSM confessions. We can't even cry "coercion" without looking like a bunch of asshat hypocrites.
- saigumi, on 10/12/2007, -15/+41dlrha - I dugg you back up to 1. Seems like some people don't understand how maritime law works.
Seriously, Iran should have just put out a warning and done something after that. - jacko1990, on 10/12/2007, -11/+33What a world it has become when so many people are prepared to trust the word of the Iranians over that of the USA/UK.
Bush really does have a a hell of a lot of explaining to do.
I don't know if these people have been tortured. Possibly, possibly not. But this woman did look afraid.
In any case the idea that she is not speaking from a script and is freely speaking her mind is really quite preposterous.
At the very least it is a case of 'say this and we may let you go free early.'
But anyway the amazing thing is the way so many people here are prepared to buy into it.
I never imagined cheap propaganda tricks like this worked.
Clearly I was wrong. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -14/+35So it's inconceivable to you that the Iranian navy kidanpped these sailors from Iraqi waters?
- aitozed, on 10/12/2007, -10/+29http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/03/28/mod_iran_seizure_gps_photo/
- adarkmethod, on 10/12/2007, -17/+34Facts:
Iran would have to be retarded to think imprisoning "Coalition" troops for any reason beneath murder and NOT releasing them quickly was a good idea.
Bush and Blair are itching for a reason to hit Iran
The timing of this incident is all too convenient for Bush and Blair
The female soldier was obviously requested to read her statement, if she wasnt, it wouldnt be public
That being said, this is being blown WAY out of proportion. The discrepency in where the ship was at the time of the arrests is less than 2 Nautical miles by the admission of both sides. This is not a huge distance, under 3 terrestrial miles. Even if the ship was on the edge of the border, Iran has good reason to be suspicious and take defensive action. Unless proof of mistreatment of the detainees is provided, or Iran holds then for an absurd amount of time without further cause, then there is absolutely no reason whatsoever that this cant be resolved without conflict. Honestly, I just have trouble giving a ***** about this situation in general. How many people are the US and Britain holding without due process in the name of defense right now? 380+ in Guantanamo Bay alone. So, in the grand scheme, who the ***** cares about 14 soldiers who no one can show are being harmed in any way, and who the releases of are being discussed. Yes, i understand that these soldiers are probably going through a lot right now. Tough, thats what being a soldier means. When your country takes a stance that makes it seem as if you want to attack a country, and then you put your boat right on that countries border, you'd have to be stupid not to expect something like this. Until more information is avilable or Iran does something that is undeniable unreasonable, get over it. - kitsimons, on 10/12/2007, -6/+23A confession made whilst in custody... well that settles it (sarcasm). I'm sure the captives are being well treated, but the fact remains the Iranians picked them up while they were in Iraqi waters whilst they were searching an Iraqi ship. GPS co-ordinates and eye-witnesses confirm this. The Iranians even gave co-ordinates in Iraqi waters initially (they changed their assertion to co-ordinates within Iranian waters when the British pointed this out to them).
Justifying the Iranian position by pointing to the ills of the UK/US in inexcusable - two wrongs don't make a right. As it stands, Iran is playing into the hands of the parts of the US administration that are looking for any excuse to remove the Iranian government.
More to the point, the British personnel should be released immediately. Before the SAS get involved and all hell breaks loose. - paulrus, on 10/12/2007, -11/+27You're right on the money masterbaiter.
Here's more samples of what you're talking about. Dispatching with women in Iran is not a pretty thing:
http://www.iran-e-azad.org/stoning/
I seriously wish that you anti-Americans would just take 6 months to go over to Iran to see what life is really like. See how you're treated. Try to speak freely about politics. Try to discuss how you're an atheist and don't believe in Muhammad. That'll really go over well.
Put up or shut up. If you think they're right - do like Sean Penn and GO there. - kaemaril, on 10/12/2007, -5/+21computergod : or, possibly, they searched her and found a photo, they read the UK press, etc ...
- doyadigg, on 10/12/2007, -4/+20Wait a minute...this is from a video of people currently being held by their captors saying that their captors are nice guys and that they are in the wrong...and you guys believe this???
Are you kidding me? First of all, she would never comment on her actions being wrong even if she felt that way. These people are clearly just doing whatever their captors tell them to do or they'll be harassed or tortured. I mean this is no friendly government doing this, this is Iran for god sakes. Don't you guys remember when they held US CIA agents for 444 days in the late 70s?
Some people on digg need a history lesson. - Tr33fiddy, on 10/12/2007, -9/+24Also, don't forget that all the news coverage, GPS denials by the Navy etc. have been going on when the soldiers have almost certainly been locked away and IF they have seen the news, it certainly wouldn't have been Sky or the BBC...
I don't believe for a second they have been mistreated in any way. Iran knows the eyes of the world are on them and this is almost certainly a PR stunt by them to gain either leverage or to show how much better they treat detainees than the States. I also believe our navy that they were taken from Iraqi, not Iranian waters. - Markus123, on 10/12/2007, -2/+17The majority of them ARE teenage boys. The ones I know (8 of them) that have been taken are only 18 and 19.
As for the video... as you say, it's so obvious she's been forced to say that, I'm not quite sure why everybody is being dugg down for saying so. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+20Anyone who is taking the side of Iraq or disparaging the US or British military here, needs to check their hate of George Bush at the door. 15 young men and women have been taken hostage, by a country that has pulled stunts like this in the past. We should be praying for their safe return and hoping that this incident doesn't escalate. These sailors are just like you and me, except for one thing; they actually have the balls to go fight for what they believe in, instead of hiding safely behind a keyboard and spewing hateful rhetoric. I can't believe that our young men and women are out there fighting to protect vile scum like you.
- adarkmethod, on 10/12/2007, -8/+22I dont recall claiming that they were being treated as kings. I simply reminded you that the Us and UK arent exactly angels themselves. I dont give a flying ***** who you are, imprisonisng someone for 2 years without charging them with a crime... is a god damn crime. And we're(the US) is beginning to get a bit of a reputation for that. Sure, they get around to charging some of them... eventually, but thats no excuse. If you can hold someone for that long.. there needs to be atleast one charge filed against them
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -16/+30@ blqysmg:
"For all those who are arguing whether the British sailors crossed into Iranian waters - unless you were there, you don't know what you are talking about. We are told by the British that they did not cross into Iranian waters. We are told by the Iranians that they DID"
And the "proof" provided by the Iranians showed the DIDN'T, dumb-ass. - adarkmethod, on 10/12/2007, -9/+22and to some, like you, it is easier to ignore the overly abundant and overly apparent corruption and ineptitude of your government. This "War on Terror" has been mismanaged and mishandled in more ways than one could fit on this page. That doesnt mean that this country or government is evil. But there are quite obviously people running things with questionable morals or judgement at best, and unerlying intentions at worst. How many members of this administration are currently under investigation for lying? How much money has Cheney made off this war? Sure... it was all in OUR best interest, i know im glad to have friends and members of my family fighting someone elses civil war.
- computergod, on 10/12/2007, -18/+31@swrostmore
Jeez, they have cells with ***** meat hooks in them, what do you think those are for? - bobbknight, on 10/12/2007, -20/+33I wana see the GPS data!!!!!
- allan17, on 10/12/2007, -9/+21Why is masterbaiter being dugg down? Should we just ignore these facts?
I wouldn't believe anything any soldier said while being held another nation. I don't know who to believe, but do you think Iran would let her say Iran was wrong in arresting them, and that they were in Iraq waters? - yfph, on 10/12/2007, -4/+16Darn it, and here I am about to submit the NYTimes article that shows the same picture. Anyways, here is the article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/29/world/europe/29britain.html?hp - Jesty, on 10/12/2007, -9/+20The actions of some soldiers are by no means representative of the country. There are nice soldiers, and there are stereotypical "death to westerners" soldiers. Now, I find it hard to believe that she would say these things without prompting - but that doesn't mean they aren't necessarily true, and there is no reason to jump to the conclusion she has been tortured.
- nodream, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14...and they shoot you 10 min after CNN airs that piece.
- scratt, on 10/12/2007, -19/+30No more stupid than invading a Sovereign Nation with no plan of what to do after... That seems like a bigger mistake than being in the wrong place at the wrong time in contested territory, whilst trying to help the region, rather than bathe it in blood. But hey call me old fashioned.
- adarkmethod, on 10/12/2007, -12/+23Irrational hate for Bush? I dont like being ***** lied to. I don't like underhanded profiteering jack asses using misinformation to push my country into a war. I dont find that irrational at all. They've ***** up on record on more levels than any other administration in history. clinton got god damned impeached over lying about a ***** blowjob, but you'll idley sit by after being "misinformed" about the situation in Iraq and go on and on about how its all for the greater good. I dont like my ta dollars being spent on someone else civil war, which is exactly what we're in the middle of now. It was one thing for Bush to go after our terrorist attackers in Afghanistan, but to justify overthrowing an unconnected government, who had absolutely ***** to do with the attacks of 9-11 and tell me that its for my own defense is absolutely ***** ludicrous.
- kicken18, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13Being English, I'm following this story at bit, and I don't have anything against the Persians, or anything like that, but come on, if you where in that position, you would say that. You're going to be tired and scared *****-less. The Guardian (newspaper) had a good story on this, this morning, and as far as we know, we English are sure they where in Iraqi waters by GPS co-ordinates etc, so its either a mistake, or the Persians are lying. They did say the water borders are out of date etc, but if that's the case, and they really think that, then just a simple ok, we are both in the wrong, lets sort the maps out. But all this "give us an apology" and getting some girl (notice it was the women not any of the men) on TV to say stuff that of course she would say as she wants to get home ASAP, really does ***** all.
All in all, even if they where in Iranian waters, who gives a *****, what does it really matter. Its ***** water, its not like they where doing anything against the Persians in the first place. - Seal, on 10/12/2007, -5/+15To kooft especially, and all those that think that the UK crossed Iranian waters based on this confession alone:
She is saying this while still being detained in Iran. If she were to say it in the UK, or outside of Iran: I'd believe her. The reason I don't believe her words are genuine as she remains in captivity has to do with the fact that Iran has a history of forcing captives to confess to what they chose.
So please spare us of your talk that we're "Ann Coulter" wannabes by believing that there is a very real possibility that her speech was disingenuous. - est1979, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12this woman will (hopefully) be released in a few days, when she is back on British soil, i think we will hear her true opinion on what happened to her and her shipmates.
i can not believe that anyone would take such a staged confession as true. I'm sure she was also about to say "i love this head wrap, i think it flatters my eyes."
be serious, have we not seen the exact same types of confessions by many other hostages.... and then they cut your head off.
WAKE UP. -
Show 51 - 100 of 441 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is