UK captives tell of ill treatment

What I'm about to say is related to the Incident in Iran because it's all connected. If it's not this incident in Iran it will be something else they will try to pull off to server their agendas.


I ask everyone of you who reads this to just consider for a second to not view the world as different countries and try to realize what is actually going on.

There are wars in the world but saying it's to protect your freedom is a complete lie.

With out us individuals support there would be no wars, they could not try to take over the world if they didn't condition certain people to think certain ways.

When i see people say, oh look what Iran did, it's time we bomb them good!!! I just feel sick to my stomach that a person would be that brain washed...

WE ARE ALL THE SAME, THERE SHOULDN'T BE ANY DIVISIONS.

THERE IS NO COUNTRIES THERE IS ONLY THE WORLD, PLEASE DON'T SUPPORT THE ELITES WHO TRIES TO DICTATE YOUR LIVES.

I LOVE YOU ALL AND I KNOW YOU LOVE EVERYONE AS WELL.

No divisions only unity.

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
what an absolute hoot shots
How can you honestly say, while holding you chin up that it was ruthless.

Real easy Old Chap. You see I happen to believe the version the sailors gave over the Irainian version it is as easy as that. You can pass it off as whatever you want but that will not change anything and I along with others could care less

Originally posted by selfless
You can't say it's different for the British Soldiers then the people held at Gitmo simply for the fact that there were innocent people released from Gitmo and there will continue to be innocent people being CAPTURED and kept HOSTAGE in Gitmo even though some of them are INNOCENT.

See that is where you are absolutely wrong. When the police and the authorities have good concern that some individual is a terrorist collaborator or is in possession of some knowledge that would help them prevent massive death toll. They have every right to detain and interrogate him. They can take him to any place and that place in Gitmo. Unlike the British Sailors who are shanghaied on the high seas and held as hostages for diplomatic gain.
Moreover, if and when the authorities at Gitmo are satisfied that they have no longer cause to hold someone they are let go. Only those people who do not cooperate and act difficult with the authorities are taken to gitmo. It's just like any ongoing police investigation. Suspects are detained and questioned. If they refuse to co-operate they are taken into custody. Its all perfectly legal.

Basically, if you are a Muslim walking down the street and you like life and want peace in the world and you get grabbed by the military and you are taken to Gitmo for the sake of national security, you won't see the people who were outraged at the British people being held captive in Iran be outraged so what does that say about these people? It says they are hypocrites.

Rubbish again.
If that were the case there should be no muslim in the US. All of them should be locked up in some prision or the other. Only those "moslems" who involve themselves with shady elements and fanatical sects find themselves being 'picked-up'. Then if they refuse to cooperate with the authorities and try to be heros with misguided attempts to be heros, they are sent to Gitmo for further interrogation lest their colleagues in terrorism come to bail them out.

What is hypocritical is the people who blame the US for the disgraceful capture of British sailors and the further cowardice they exhibited on television for all the world to see.


[edit on 7-4-2007 by IAF101]

Originally posted by IAF101

Rubbish again.

[edit on 7-4-2007 by IAF101]

No way!

How can it be rubbish if there are known cases of prisoners from Gitmo who were released due to proven innocent?!!?!?!?!?!?

You are just basically saying anything just to defend the actions of Gitmo.

I'm not saying what Iran did is right but it's not as bad as it could have been.

I don't want any countries to capture anyone, i don't even believe in countries, there is only the world.

[edit on 7-4-2007 by selfless]

Originally posted by IAF101

What is hypocritical is the people who blame the US for the disgraceful capture of British sailors and the further cowardice they exhibited on television for all the world to see.


[edit on 7-4-2007 by IAF101]

What is hypocritical is the people who gets all mad for 15 British soldiers who were held for 2 weeks with out being tortured and then released back but yet when there are INNOCENT people who are held at Gitmo for months and TORTURED for real, they don't even care.

You sir, are the hypocritical one.

Originally posted by subz

Originally posted by pavil
Just a simple question, were any of the people that are in Gitmo captured in full military uniform, clearly marking them as members of a Nation's armed forces? It's a yes or no question by the way.

Do I not get an "I don't know" option? I don't know the specifics of every single detainee in Gitmo. Neither do you for that matter.

No, you don't get an "I don't know option". If they were identified at members of a nation's military and were wearing a uniform and ID then they would not be at Gitmo. A uniformed, ID'ed military personel would be treated in a different manner.
Here you can read up on some of the Gitmo detainees statements, you do know they are all just innocent victims of being in the wrong place at the wrong time right? It's a long read but worth it.
www.dod.mil...

POW's are a seperate classification under the Geneva Convention and as such afforded more and better rights then enemy combants captured on the battlefield. You may not agree that they should have different sets of rights but they do and international law acknowledges those differences.

The British were in full uniform with Identification on a UK flagged boarding ship when they were surrounded in non Iranian waters by Iranian navy boats.

Explain to me once again how the Iranian action's were acceptable?

Originally posted by pavil

The British were in full uniform with Identification on a UK flagged boarding ship when they were surrounded in non Iranian waters by Iranian navy boats.

You don't know if they were in none Iranian waters, you just choose to assume.

Originally posted by subz
Have you not heard of the civilians who were kidnapped and sent to Gitmo for things as varied as mistaken identity to having the audacity of carrying a mobile phone charger onto an aeroplane. They have since been released may I add, but not after undergoing the interrogation/mistreatment I outlined earlier.

An misleading assumption. Are all the people who get caught with mobile phone chargers on airplanes sent to Gitmo ?? Some times there is a case of mistaken identity but even then the situation can be easily be resolved unless the person refuses to co-operate with the authorities and they determine that this person is hiding something. Thousands upon thousands of muslims travel on US airlines. Are we to beleive that half or more of them end up at interrogation chambers ??
That is ridiculous and absurd. Only those people who are deemed to be uncooperative or those who exacerbate the situation end up at Gitmo. As for their mistreatment. That is their world against the people in Gitmo. No one can prove one way or the other. If any such practices that are deemed to be excessive have been observed they have been inquiry's to determine their causes and make sure they dont happen again. There is a system and a method in place in Gitmo. The same cant be said of Iran, with their attempts to take any and all foreign nationals hostage to gain some political advantage with a castrated EU and Britain.

Ignoring the assumption that universal declaration of human rights carried a caveat of "this doesn't apply to terrorists" for a moment, you do realize that the Taliban was in charge of Afghanistan whether you like it or not. They constituted a government and a defence force and were legally allowed to defend their country from invasion from Allied forces.

Again, a misconception. The Universal declaration of human rights is a guideline and not a statuatory agreement that binds US policy or those of its members. Also the US has taken exception to the declaration when it signed saying that it would not be binding upon its internal law and its foreign policy.
Also the US has also mentioned that it would not respect these laws if these laws are not respected by other nations whom they are dealing with.
You can look this up for yourself at the UN website.

I back up the fact that they were a government by citing the occasions whereby the US government invited the Taliban to the United States in 2000 to try to broker a natural gas pipeline through their country and to the Bush administration demanding from the Taliban that they give up Osama Bin Laden. If you're the United States government you do not negotiate trade access with terrorists and you don't make demands of terrorists whilst threatening entire nations; you do so with governments, of which the Taliban was.

Again wrong. The US government's trade relations are no way an indicator of formal recognition of a particular group. The US government calls many groups and people to negotiate trade and diplomacy with them. It doenst mean that they are all seen as legitimate powers. The US has never recognized the Taliban as the legitimate government of Afghanistan. It deals with them just as it deals with the military junta of Myanmar. As a group in charge. Also the demand to hand over Bin laden was not negotiation or a demand. It was an ultimatum. The US government only gives ultimates to terorist groups. There is nothing saying that the US govt cannot give terrorists ultimatums. Trade can be negotiated with any group that is seen as able to facilitate an agreement. This doent mean they have to be a government. They can be a company or a village chief. Trade negotiations do in no way legitimize a group or its position. All such decisions are made by the US legislature and executive.

Originally posted by selfless
What is hypocritical is the people who gets all mad for 15 British soldiers who were held for 2 weeks with out being tortured and then released back but yet when there are INNOCENT people who are held at Gitmo for months and TORTURED for real, they don't even care.

You sir, are the hypocritical one.

Absurd. Neither you nor anybody else in this world can prove that there are indeed acts of torture taking place today in Gitmo in a court of law. You are just blindly taking the word of those who have been released and mixed with other hearsay and hyperbole have conjured up some grim image of what the place is. In fact it is better than most prisons in Britain or the US with comforts and security they receive.

Iran on the other hand has signed the Geneva Convention and has captured soldiers of another nation ( soldiers who are marked with uniforms and carry weapons openly mind you!) yet subjects them to public curiosity and other televised interrogation, which is forbidden by the Geneva Conventions.
Also the Geneva Convention applies in this case since Britain is a signatory and follows the convention and it is not optional in this case.

Ok so if there was a law for Anyone other then Iran to torture someone with out being stopped and then Iran would do it they would be stopped? cause that's basically what you are saying...

I'm sorry man but you are biased and it's obvious.

Why not take the side of the world instead of just one country?

[edit on 7-4-2007 by selfless]

Originally posted by selfless

You don't know if they were in none Iranian waters, you just choose to assume.

So the Indian merchant ship's crew, the UK navy GPS coords and the first GPS data released by Iran are all wrong?

Based on the majority of the facts out there, are you contending that the UK boats were definetely in Iranian terrortorial waters? I base my statements on multiple pieces of data from different sources, including the Iranians, what do you base your statements on?

Originally posted by pavil

Originally posted by selfless

You don't know if they were in none Iranian waters, you just choose to assume.

So the Indian merchant ship's crew, the UK navy GPS coords and the first GPS data released by Iran are all wrong?

Was the testimony of the Iraqi sailors discredited? They also said that they were in Iranian waters, as I recall.

[edit on 4/7/2007 by Togetic]

Originally posted by selfless

Originally posted by IAF101

Rubbish again.

[edit on 7-4-2007 by IAF101]

No way!

How can it be rubbish if there are known cases of prisoners from Gitmo who were released due to proven innocent?!!?!?!?!?!?

I hadn't heard that, can you give me a source? I would like to read about that.

Originally posted by selfless
Ok so if there was a law for Anyone other then Iran to torture someone with out being stopped and then Iran would do it they would be stopped? cause that's basically what you are saying...

I'm sorry man but you are biased and it's obvious.

Why not take the side of the world instead of just one country?

I tend to agree with his sentiments. But I can explicitly say that things like Abu Ghirab need to be nipped in the bud and stopped.

Originally posted by Togetic

I hadn't heard that, can you give me a source? I would like to read about that.

Well i posted a few in this very thread a few pages down and some links.

Originally posted by pavil

Originally posted by selfless

You don't know if they were in none Iranian waters, you just choose to assume.

So the Indian merchant ship's crew, the UK navy GPS coords and the first GPS data released by Iran are all wrong?

Based on the majority of the facts out there, are you contending that the UK boats were definetely in Iranian terrortorial waters? I base my statements on multiple pieces of data from different sources, including the Iranians, what do you base your statements on?

You misunderstood me, i do not have a statement that the boats where in Iranian waters and i do not have a statement that they were in Iraqi waters.

My statement is that it's unproven so i will remain open to both possibilities.

However, this does not change my position on this issue and that position is that i don't root for any side, i root for peace and everyone.

Originally posted by selfless
You don't know if they were in none Iranian waters, you just choose to assume.

Perhaps not .

Another member posted that the crew of the other ship insisted they were in Iraqi waters also.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by malganis
When coalition forces kidnap Iranians they aren't exactly nice to them, so why should Iran be nice to coalition forces?

Originally posted by Peyres
because we aren't at war! Duh

Uhh. Exactly.

So... why are we allowed to kidnap Iranians and rough them up?

Originally posted by shots
I just had to post that portion because it clearly shows how ruthless they were with the British Prisoners.

Those bastards! Using blindfolds! What an outrage! I hear there's a law trying to be passed to outlaw this ruthless practice from birthday parties, especially pin the tail on the donkey.

Blindfolds...ruthless...oh dear shots you are completely lost.