david dissadent
New Member
It is not. That is how intelligence can be gathered in the real world.the iraninan government are scum
claiming a small inflatable dinghy boarding and searching merchant ships is on a secret spy mission is laughable
Report reveals Iran seized British sailors in disputed waters
- Thread starter Barking_Mad
- Start date
Dude, when you start defending a regime like that you find yourself waaaay out in the cold.
I think you should re-read my posts.
I said it is impossible to persecute merely for the fact of being homesuxual and which they don't and I said they are wrong in issuing a death penalty, which is not claiming they do not issue them.
Or is it in your special type of logic possible to criticize while at the same time claiming the subject of your critique doesn't exist?
And by the way: Shari'a Law and Islamic jursidiction is in it stipulations, rulings, let alone in its method not comparable with what you would know from Western legal systems and in addition, the Shi'a legal system doesn't follow the same method as the Sunni.
Logic coming from your side is not visible anywhere in this thread.
salaam.
Explaining is in your worldview equal with defense now too.
OK then. If it makes you happy, why not.
salaam
Fair enough. You are quite right. You weren't defending, just explaining. My comment was ill-founded.
Agreed.
Mooncat
Hug me - I'm vaccinated
El Reg doesn't seem to think they were in disputed waters: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04/22/seized_brit_sailors_times_foi_analysis/
"But, in the end, have the Guard got a leg to stand on here? Certainly not. They blatantly invaded Iraqi territory so as to kidnap some hostages for use in trades with the Americans (and rumour has it they achieved at least some of their aims). It was an illegal opportunistic raid, pure and simple.
Have the Times and the Guardian and the rest got a leg to stand on? After all, this is all technical stuff. Mere scribes can perhaps be excused for not undertanding the difference between low and high water etc.
No, they can't. Because it is all explained on this excellent webpage, and has been for a long time. This wasn't journalism, it was a politically-driven attack on the British government."
"But, in the end, have the Guard got a leg to stand on here? Certainly not. They blatantly invaded Iraqi territory so as to kidnap some hostages for use in trades with the Americans (and rumour has it they achieved at least some of their aims). It was an illegal opportunistic raid, pure and simple.
Have the Times and the Guardian and the rest got a leg to stand on? After all, this is all technical stuff. Mere scribes can perhaps be excused for not undertanding the difference between low and high water etc.
No, they can't. Because it is all explained on this excellent webpage, and has been for a long time. This wasn't journalism, it was a politically-driven attack on the British government."
likesfish
You can't park here sir
maybe but they weren't your get more valuable intelligence from the big gray thing a mile or so away
andrew was thumb up bum mind in neutral and let the Iranians pull a fast one if they hadn't been trying to get some publicity for the royal navy the lynx would have been on station and the Iranians wouldn't have tried anything
Similar threads
