Attack on UK embassy in Iran 'had support of the state'

Attack on UK embassy in Iran 'had support of the state'

www.bbc.co.uk

The ruling regime in Iran are likely to have supported an attack on the UK's embassy in Tehran, the British ambassador to the country has said

(visit the link for the full news article)

Seems to me it's all just getting worse
Take note he say's it is "likely" so he has no proof, I dunno about this maybe My Goverment are just making it up to drum up support for future military action.
I for one will march for peace (Like I did with the Iraq war) I always think there are other options than war. Like talking and compromise.

www.bbc.co.uk

This bit interested me also..
The move followed a report by the UN's nuclear watchdog that said Iran had carried out tests "relevant to the development of a nuclear device" ....anyone else heard about this test?

Mohammad Mohammadian, a representative of Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, praised the attackers, saying they had targeted the "epicenter of sedition."

Link

That tells me it was supportive of it.

reply to post by sonnny1


I take it you don't actually know what embassies do with their time and resources. "Nothing beneficial to anyone" is the short answer. The rest you are probably better off not knowing.

reply to post by CosmicEgg


I dont care what they do in an embassy.

I do wonder how supportive Iran would be,if people destroyed Iranian embassy's?

Was there ever any doubt?

Nothing like this happens in a totalitarian state unless the overseers approve of it.

Its like that old joke about the US diplomat and the Chinese diplomat: An American diplomat complains to his Chinese counterpart that the US film industry has been lobbying the US government to pressure the Chinese into taking action to combat intellectual property piracy. The Chinese diplomat says he’s sympathetic and that while Beijing is doing everything it can, DVD piracy is just too hard to stop. The US diplomat responds that if these shops were publishing Falun Gong propaganda or newspapers from Taipei, they would have been permanently put out of business in 10 minutes.

In a couple of days Obama will probably be announcing a that a NATO No-Fly Zone has been set up over Iran. I really didn't think we would start another war, but it seems almost certain now.

reply to post by diddlydo


I think that would cause all out war...

reply to post by CosmicEgg

I take it you don't actually know what embassies do with their time and resources. "Nothing beneficial to anyone" is the short answer. The rest you are probably better off not knowing.

Yes most of the work done is on the behalf of their national interests not particularly of benefit to the locals, that is their function, aside for assisting national citizens on location.

So they do benefit someone, of course countries like USA, France, UK, Britain, Japan, Germany, Israel, Russia and China also use it for spying cover that involves corruption of local government and infiltration, that has more value to Corporations and gaining commercial advantages that to serve the common citizen, in fact this type of competition puts the common citizen at risk without providing him any direct real benefit

Only major international economies can venture in those moral ambivalent actions since if they are caught no major repercussion will ensue, since it would be more damaging to the one being spied upon. With the strange paradox of Israel that gets lots of spies captured in the USA and even if it costs the USA a lot in terms of direct support and bad karma they do net get any significant reprisal for their abuses.

What we could say...

Attack on World Trade Centers in the US 'had support of the state'.
Attack on UK train station in UK 'had support of the state'.
Attack on military installations in Iran 'had support of the British state'.

See, me too I can make statements like that.

reply to post by sonnny1



The word "likely" is the operative word in that post. Likely does not proof make. It is like saying; "There are likely WMD's in Iraq". While it sounds true to an untrained reader it is patently not true as written. Hence NO PROOF.

Using the word "likely"; does however give the agency or person releasing that statement an "out" in the event it is proved that the Iran Government had nothing to do with it whatsoever.

reply to post by diddlydo


No it doesn't!

This is just a diplomatic spat that, in the end, won't have benefitted Iran at all and will just cement the general opinion that they're a loose cannon.

There won't be a no-fly zone or anything else without either a UN resolution or cast-iron proof Iran is involved in something it shouldn't be that results in deaths.

reply to post by Panic2k11


Yeah, hello. I worked in an embassy for nearly a decade. I can tell you it gets a lot more nefarious than just that. It doesn't matter what country the embassy represents, they are cesspools. We would be well-served in ending the whole charade.

Originally posted by Vitchilo
What we could say...
Attack on World Trade Centers in the US 'had support of the state'.

2nd

reply to post by CosmicEgg


I for one knows from experience that we need them because when I was stuck in India with no money (Robbed) no passport and nothing but the clothes on my back, the one place that helped me was the British embassy I even got the best cup of tea I have had in 3 months, they got me sorted out and got me home
So long live the embassy the safe haven for the unfortunate traveller.

Originally posted by SkyMuerte
reply to post by sonnny1

 

The word "likely" is the operative word in that post. Likely does not proof make. It is like saying; "There are likely WMD's in Iraq". While it sounds true to an untrained reader it is patently not true as written. Hence NO PROOF.

Using the word "likely"; does however give the agency or person releasing that statement an "out" in the event it is proved that the Iran Government had nothing to do with it whatsoever.

That's the BBC putting words into his mouth.

He said: "Iran is not the sort of country where spontaneously a demonstration congregates and then attacks a foreign embassy. That sort of activity is only done with the acquiescence and the support of the state.

"And there are a number of reasons why, with the benefit of hindsight, it's very clear that this was a state-supported activity."

The interview is featured on Newsnight at 10:30pm BBC2, for those in the UK.

reply to post by boymonkey74


That's the Consular Section, not the embassy proper. You can have a Consulate without an Embassy. I know all about your foreign service. I worked specifically in the British Embassy. I did work for Consular Section as well, but I was in what they glibly called "Defence Diplomacy".

I want to mention also that they resent having to help out nationals in distress. They will pat themselves on the backs during meetings but in the canteen you can be sure they were whinging about the noob travelers.

Diplomatic, Consular, Technical, and support staff change every three to four years, depending on the sort of posting they got. It can be shorter too. They do that for a number of reasons. I met very few genuinely nice people during that time. Even so, I wouldn't have trusted them to hold my place in a queue, let alone something important. Know this now: They are not nice and they are not interested in your problems in the least.

reply to post by CosmicEgg


My bad soz fella

Originally posted by CosmicEgg
reply to post by boymonkey74

 

That's the Consular Section, not the embassy proper. You can have a Consulate without an Embassy. I know all about your foreign service. I worked specifically in the British Embassy. I did work for Consular Section as well, but I was in what they glibly called "Defence Diplomacy".

I want to mention also that they resent having to help out nationals in distress. They will pat themselves on the backs during meetings but in the canteen you can be sure they were whinging about the noob travelers.

Diplomatic, Consular, Technical, and support staff change every three to four years, depending on the sort of posting they got. It can be shorter too. They do that for a number of reasons. I met very few genuinely nice people during that time. Even so, I wouldn't have trusted them to hold my place in a queue, let alone something important. Know this now: They are not nice and they are not interested in your problems in the least.

edit on 2/12/2011 by CosmicEgg because: flesh out the info

This ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

One thing that I have thought about but do not fully understand its implications is why do EU countries still have embassadors and embassies in other EU countries. This function should be shared by the local services or a general EU embassy.