Britons speak out about captivity in Iran

[rebel with a cause]

Source: Associated Press

ROYAL MARINE BASE CHIVENOR, England - The 15 British sailors seized by Iran were kept blindfolded, bound and in isolation by their Iranian captors who threatened them with seven years in jail, they told a news conference Friday.

Lt. Felix Carman said the crew faced harsh interrogation by their Iranian captors and slept in stone cells on piles of blankets.

"All of us were kept in isolation. We were interrogated most nights and presented with two options. If we admitted that we'd strayed, we'd be on a plane to (Britain) pretty soon," Carman said. "If we didn't, we faced up to seven years in prison."

<snip>

(speaking about Leading Seaman Faye Turney) Air said she was singled out for propaganda purposes, held in solitary confinement and told the others had gone home.


Read more: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17980167/

---

They had it so rough sleeping on piles of blankets. Wonder if they got to keep their clothes on? Sorry about the sarcasm, but we all know how the media will paint this and ignore what we are doing to our prisoners. I'll bet those prisioners held by the U.S. and England really feel bad for them. Again, I apoligize for my sarcasm.

Just how long was it before Seaman Turney turned up on tv. By the way, I don't blame the seaman for doing what they had to do, just coming back and talking the talk for the government. Guess they are still just doing what they have to do.

[Robbien]

1. Freepers are upset these guys had it so easy

What a bunch of WIMPS.

Seriously... I mean I don’t begrudge that they broke down and gave the Iranians every PR victory they wanted.

I just wish they had the guts to at least force the Iranians slap them around a bit to get it... test just how serious they are about ‘escalating’.

If it were random civilians I could see them freaking out and just giving up because they are scared...but not enlisted people... should not be simply mean words and ‘aggressive’ questions being used... which apparently was enough for them to completely submit.

freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1813154/posts

[rebel with a cause]

2. Who would expect any less from the freepers.

I am more upset at them for what they are doing now. But I guess it is all in the name of country and glory.

I updated the OP, but it did not let me do so. So I will add another bit of the peice that I found interesting.

"Britain insisted the crew was on a routine operation when seized -- but Sky News reported Thursday that Air said in an interview days before his capture that his crew was gathering intelligence on Iran during their patrols. Sky said it held the interview because it thought it could hamper the crew's release."

[Crunchy Frog]

48. Well, at least they're consistent.

I honestly thought they would get all indignant about this cruel and inhuman treatment, but they apparently have not stooped to that level of hypocrisy. I've honestly gained some respect for them.

[arbusto_baboso]

3. Those who spout-off about how they would've "toughed it out" in captivity...

Don't know the realities. When I was in SERE training for Army SF, we were taught that our first duty was survival, not trying some "name rank and serial number" hero bullshit.

In fact, I'll never forget what one instructor told us: "If you're interrogated, you'll break. EVERYONE breaks eventually. If you can just hold out for 72 hours, none of the tactical intel you have will be useful anymore. So just try to hold out for 72 hours."

These Brits weren't SF and likely didn't have equivalent training to SERE. They did the best they could in the situation and deserve more sympathy from us.

[theoldman]

6. It's easy to talk tough when you are safe at home. It's even

easier if you are not in the military.

[rebel with a cause]

14. Not talking tough.

Talking about the way the press and the government will spin it.

[Kagemusha]

8. Seriously, I doubt they had any intel worth interrogating them for.

The Iranians were after PR, and got PR, which is, they humiliated the hated British, and the British let them.

[arbusto_baboso]

10. Likely not, but that wasn't my point.

I was just saying that this ain't an old black and white war movie. If pressure is applied, usually the intended result is achieved.

In this case, the Iranians wanted the Brits to admit they violated Iranian territorial waters. The Brits confessed to it. Even though the world knows the confession was coerced, it will still be used.

And the Brits couldn't have resisted indefinitely. Iran would've held them until they DID confess.

[anotherdrew]

17. OH REALLY - SO YOU'RE SAYING TORTURE _DOES_ WORK?

and is an effective way of getting information?

[Kagemusha]

21. He's saying it's an effective way of getting confessions.

And this is true.

And torture is an effective way of breaking people. This is also true, and is not in serious dispute.

It's not a good way of getting information. This should not be in dispute, but thanks to jerks like Dick Cheney, it is.

[arbusto_baboso]

27. Bingo. I couldn't have said it better myself!

[anotherdrew]

40. ok just wanted to check on that

makes sense to me

[rebel with a cause]

11. I am not critisizing the seaman.

I am sarcastic about the way it is going to be reported. How they are going to be portrayed as being treated by the Iranians when the press has given an almost free pass to our government and the treatment of our prisoners. If I was taken prisoner under these circumstances, I would tell them anything the wanted. In fact, I would give them the address of Tony Blair and george w bush and instructions on how to get there.

[arbusto_baboso]

12. I understood you.

I was unleashing a little of my venom on those fuckwit freepers. Not a single one of them would serve any useful purpose in a uniform. Not one. Ever.

[rebel with a cause]

19. thank goodness.

It seems everytime I post a peice, I get flamed and I just thought this was another time of it. I will take a few breaths now. sigh.

[ShortnFiery]

46. Yes, and we were also taught that if we were in fear of breaking to

have another "believable cover story" to help pass time while they were attempting confirmation. That way the torture would stop and after the time sensitive information was useless, to go ahead and slowly leak it - by then the action had already been completed.

What amazes me is that far too many Americans BELIEVE that the military is trained to only give their Name, Rank and Serial number. Sure, in a perfect world and with captors who follow The Geneva Conventions to the letter, it's great. Newsflash: We live in an imperfect world and captives will be interrogated.

As an undergraduate during the late 70s, I researched the torture techniques of the North Vietnamese. Any former POW will tell you, the only persons who did NOT break down, died during the interrogations. Yes, it's sad, but we are only HUMAN. Torture will break everyone down.

The way to survive torture or coercive interrogation techniques is to SLOWLY give information, and if necessary "fluff it up" with cover story information that can't be confirmed in order to buy time.

I wasn't trained for SF but the little league "interrogation exercises" were quite enlightening. Even such training, e.g., play acting the role of a captive can result in some significant insights and emotionally laden learning experiences. :wow:

On Edit: I think after even a few weeks of mere coercive interrogation techniques, I'd (and most others - who are SMART) would admit to "tar and feathering" The Easter Bunny if it meant that I could get on a plane back to my home country. :blush: It is NOT nearly as easy to resist as one would think from the outside looking in.

[iamjoy]

55. Thank Hollywood For The Myths

you know, the good guys (the heroes) in television and movies don't break, no matter how horrible the torture.

So, we come to expect the same from our people in real life.

I'm a coward and whimp. Hit me once with the threat to do it again (or worse) and I'll confess to anything too. I'll profess belief in whatever religion you want me to as well.

Anyway, this was a PR Battle and Iran won. They got their confession and they get to look magnanimous for releasing the detainees. Furthermore, the treatment of these detainees was not as bad as it could have been. I'm not saying it was "good" but it could have been worse.

[theoldman]

4. My guess is that these sailors were told what to do if they were

captured. We still think that prisoners should only give their name, rank and serial number. The bottom line is that the truth may never come out or it will be at least 50 years from now.

[Kajsa]

5. I would like to see how

those who criticize the British hostages
handle themselves under the same conditions.

It's real easy to be judgmental when
not the one in that position.

[rebel with a cause]

16. If you are talking about me, then let me make this clear again.

I was not critisizing the seamen except if they were now saying what they were told to say. If they did it in Iran, I understand that. But if you read the article, they were interviewed before this incident and admited they were spying (gathering intelligence) on Iran. What are the chances that they may have strayed accidently into Iranian waters?

[Kajsa]

44. No, I wasn't referring to you.

This is more directed at the Freepers.

I do have a question regarding your last question, though.

Why would they risk capture and worse, by intentionally
crossing into Iranian waters? They aren't idiots nor are
they stealth,i.e, their chances of being caught are extremely
high.

[CJCRANE]

7. I take a different view.

I watched the press conference and I was impressed by their restraint. They called the situation a "media circus" but they didn't directly badmouth Ahmedinajad or the Iranian people. After what they've been through I think that's pretty admirable.

[William769]

9. using sarcasm only looks bad on you and others who use it in this situation.

Just because the U.S. does it, doesn't make it right and with so many Iran apologists here, I don't yet if you are one or not.

I'll say it again right is right and wrong is wrong.

[rebel with a cause]

13. Excuse me but my sarcasm is for the press!

If it makes me look bad, then so be it. At least I am being honest.

Again - I am sarcastic about the way it is going to be reported. How they are going to be portrayed as being treated by the Iranians when the press has given an almost free pass to our government and the treatment of our prisoners. If I was taken prisoner under these circumstances, I would tell them anything the wanted. In fact, I would give them the address of Tony Blair and george w bush and instructions on how to get there.

[Forkboy]

26. Sarcasm is horrible.

[ronnie624]

52. "Just because the U.S. does it, doesn't make it right..."

If by "it", you mean torture and murder, you can say it as many times as you want, but it will make little sense under these circumstances. The Iranians released their captives unharmed, after a mere two weeks. The US on the other hand, has imprisoned hundreds if not thousands for years, in internment camps all over the world, many of whom have been tortured and murdered. Surely you have seen the photographs. There are even allegations from very credible sources, of the rape of children.

Comparing the Iranian government's treatment of these British captives, to that which has been dealt to the Muslim captives in US custody, is quite disingenuous, and perhaps more than a little foolish.

[William769]

60. Your right I didn't mention that they (Iranians) kill Homosexuals

Stone women to death, just to mention a few things But I think you get my point. Like I said and I will say it again because people don't want to hear it right is right and wrong is wrong, no matter who the boogie man is.

[ronnie624]

63. The oppression of women

and homosexuals in Iran, are issues that the Iranian people will have to address, and have nothing to do with the capture and detention of these British sailors, which is why I said, "under these circumstances".

[bluedog]

15. I say its ..........None Of Our Business!

they are not our soldiers........they had the right to do what they see fit when taken captive..........Iran says in their waters.....maybe.....were they spying?...maybe........

What would the U.S. have done........worse than what Iran did......hear of Gitmo?

We have no room to judge what these Brits did...at least they are alive and well........

[rebel with a cause]

18. I give up. I will never put up an opinion again.

I don't care what the brit seamen did. What I care about is the way it will be portrayed to the world now. That what Iran did was horrible and what we have done is justified. That is the reason for my sarcasm, not what the seaman did. Like I said, I give up.

[Kagemusha]

23. It's a stressful time.

Walk away, take a deep breath, look at things later. I've certainly needed to do so a few times lately.

[rebel with a cause]

28. Yes, I did that.

I feel better but think I'm going to take a break for awhile. Don't know how long, but..well, time will tell.

[William769]

24. Where you seem to lose people here, who here said we were ever justified?

That arguement don't hunt and thats why your sarcasm is taken the way it's taken.

[rebel with a cause]

29. Ha ha ha

Oh william....whatever.

[William769]

30. Thats the response I was expecting, thanks.

[Psephos]

20. Kidnapped, stripped, isolated, made to rebuke their own country for propaganda

And everyone is commenting about freepers.

Freepers will always be freepers, so what else is new. Let's not forget who the actual bad guy is here. Iran deserves excoriation in world opinion, else they'll rightly conclude there's no reason not to keep on with this kind of bullshit.

I'm not advocating military action in any way. That's not appropriate. I *am* advocating calling a spade a spade. If I was one of the mullahs who was calling the shots, I'd be smiling right now. They broke international law, abducted sailors who were operating under UN mandate, and flouted the Geneva conventions by putting their prisoners on television and making them lie. Iran itself supplied geo-coordinates that showed the Britons were in international space, then when U.K. pointed out that those coordinates absolved any problem, the Iranians said oops, sorry, heh heh, here are the actual coordinates.

What am I missing? If someone disses me on the street, I don't turn my eyes down, slink away and hope they won't do it again. Cuz they will. Human nature 101.

Peace.

[Kagemusha]

22. My view is the US seizure of diplomats in Arbil isn't one bit more legal

and that's still ongoing. The Iranians may be the bad guys *here*. They are not the only sinners in the congregation, though.

[Psephos]

25. I couldn't agree more n/t

[kryckis]

43. No, but

I fail to see what that has to do with anything? Should we just hold all countries to the standard of the most flawed or something? Because then we can all look to China, North Korea, or any other dictatorship, and cancel out all human rights violations everywhere.

The US has nothing to do with this.

[Kagemusha]

49. The US hits Iran, Iran hits the US' closest ally, and the US has nothing to do with it?

That's a very interesting piece of logic. I politely disagree.

[IsItJustMe]

50. Yes it does because of standards we have been setting for the least six years.

[azurnoir]

31. So the British Royal Marines

operate in Iraq under UN mandate? Wow I must have missed something, and to put these Brit sailors through the stress of isolation, my our civilized country would never do anything that barbaric. The five Iranian diplomats visiting Iraq which is a sovereign country being kidnapped by foreign military, is different how? Both acts were of questionable legality.

[William769]

32. Theres goes that meme again.

:eyes:

[azurnoir]

33. What meme? n/t

[William769]

34. Because the U.S. did it, they can do it.

Good thing that policy wasn't in effect during WWII. And countless other times.

[Joe Chi Minh]

36. But the thing is, it was nowhere NEAR as bad as our treatment of

prisoners, nor likely would have been.

It virtually amounts, not so much to a difference in degree, as to a difference in kind. It's apples and pears. Or hadn't you noticed?

[William769]

37. Does not matter!

Right is right and wrong is wrong. Is that so difficult to understand?

One day, and I hope it is in my lifetime the wrongs that the Bush cabal have leashed upon the world will have been righted.

When we (the U.S.) or anybody else does something that is not right I will be one of the first to speak up, and I will also be one of the first to call people on their bullshit apologies.

[Joe Chi Minh]

41. Well that's true. Right is right and wrong is wrong. But I'd rather

have an interrogator try to slash me to ribbons with a blade of grass than water-board me.

You'll find its important in life to maintain a sense of proportionality, of perspective.

[KiraBS]

59. At one point they were lined up against a wall

blindfolded, with the sound of guns being cocked, they thought they were going to be executed, one of the was sick with fear, they were then put into isolation.
When they put on their suits they were blindfolded until they were told they were to be released, they were blindfolded again until the press conference and the meeting with Amadinajad, then blindfolded again. They must have feared it was a game and that their release would be delayed until they boarded the plane.

[Joe Chi Minh]

61. In the scale of what our lot have been doing in Iraq, that is very small beer.

I knew lads who had the same tricks pulled on them by sadists in the military prison they were sent to - just for fun! (Incidentally, one - with some of his fellow-inmates - was made to shuffle around naked on his hands and knees, with his hands in his shoes, repeating "Baa Baa Black-sheep, have you any wool?"). I hope that doesn't give any ideas to any of your Dimmest and Worst.

Not that they were in fear of their life all the time or kept in isolation, like these young service people. That makes a big difference, of course. But Abu Ghraib or a British military prison in Iraq, it wasn't. An Iraqi civilian died in one of our prisons with 63 wounds, adn the soldiers responsible, from the highest to the lowest, lionised by degenerate hacks of our press because they'd been under a lot of stress! I'm not aware that any of our people suffered any physical violence at all at the hands of their Iranian captors.

[otherlander]

71. We cannot justify actions with the actions of enemies.

Our government has done far worse things but making people believe that they're about to be executed isn't excusable.

[Psephos]

45. You speak for me, too, William

In a left-handed way, it is just as nationalistic and dogmatic to refuse to criticize another country's wrongs as it is when freepers refuse to criticize U.S. wrongs.

We'll never fix what's wrong in this world if we can't damn an evil act when we see one.

Peace.

[azurnoir]

39. I said both acts were wrong

or of questionable legality, it was more of a glass house comment. I don't think anyone hear said that. Not casting Iran as a despicable villain is not OKing that action, there is some dispute as to where the Brits were at the time, but as I have posted before the whole thing was the result of the ratchet up of tensions on both sides.

[ronnie624]

53. This "UN mandate" meme,

has been circulating frequently of late, with regard to British activities in Iraq. Those who use it, seem unable to provide any further information.

[Igel]

56. It's from Wikipedia.

Ultimately it's from UNSC res. 1546 (from 2004). I can't link to it directly, it's a query that has to be generated from a UN page (it seems); you have to go to http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/unsc_resolutions04.html and click on the link to the pdf yourself.

The resolution's been extended a couple of times and the premise for the authorization has changed, but the authorization for the coalition forces to stay in Iraq remains.

(21) relates to arms; it says that Iraq and the multinational force should be sure to implement the measures necessary to stop arms from being shipped to anybody in Iraq other than to the government. Since smuggling is often by water, and the Iraqi navy is pretty much a non-entity this has been taken as a mandate for some multinational force to patrol the waters; it's Britain's area, at least for now.

It took a few minutes (but no more than 5) to track the info down (and that included having to figure out how to get to the link Wikipedia intended to work). I figure that critical thinking requires evaluating the other person's argument, even if s/he isn't going to fill in all the details. I have this tendency to go and do a little footwork when somebody makes a very specific claim and doesn't bother to back it up. General claims, no, they're messy. But very specific claims, esp. those that are easily Wikipedic in nature (and referenced well enough there), are really simple to look up. (I'm reading this really neat book about Jozef Dobrovsky and the Igor Tale in which the author does precisely this: He has to understand the other person's argument, and that involves uncovering the presuppositions in the argument ... even if the other person doesn't.)

[ronnie624]

62. I'm not sure about what your saying.

It isn't my responsibility to flesh out someone else's argument, and repeating memes like, "...and the British were under a UN mandate", just doesn't provide much information.

Resolution 1546 stipulates that the Iraqi government take a lead role in providing for its defense and security. I don't remember hearing of any Iraqis being involved in the incursions and "patrols" into disputed territory in the Persian Gulf. It also calls for the full restoration of Iraq's sovereignty, and the complete withdrawal of "coalition forces" by June, 2005, a deadline long past. In addition to that, the resolution demands, that the Iraqi nation be the recipient of all proceeds generated by its oil production. I guess we all know how that turned out.

Not to worry however, because a resolution can alway be "extended" and the "premise for the authorization" changed. How convenient.

1546 was passed under a campaign of coercion by the US government, which was widely reported at that time. It was designed as an enabler to US military dominance in the region, and attempts to cloak the illegal invasion, occupation and exploitation of Iraq under after-the-fact legality. In my opinion, it possesses no moral legitimacy what so ever.

So much for the "UN mandate".

[Psephos]

65. Finally, a poster who understands how important critical thinking skills are to discussion

Regardless of which opinion such skills lead one to. Which is the whole point.

BTW, what's the title of that book you mentioned? Sounds like a great read. :)

[Joe Chi Minh]

35. No. We're the bad guys: the US and UK. We have no right to deploy

our forces in foreign countries, uninvited. The Iraq government could scarcely be viewed as a bona fide government, and perhaps won't be the minute the US withdraws. So an invitation from them - as if the US would wait on such an invitation - wouldn't be worth a cracker, even if it were.

The thing is: if the premise is false, it inevitably puts everything else out of kilter. There never WAS a justification for the West to interfere in Iraq. And now they've started raids on Iran, apparently. And you're painting the Iranians as the villains. Not that they were all angels of light of course.

With America's history in South America, the Phillipines, etc, any and every country appears whiter than white in comparison. Certainly the former Communist countries.

[ronnie624]

54. "Kidnapped, stripped, isolated,

made to rebuke their own country..."

Your point is so weak, that you must exaggerate, in order to make it.

"kidnapped"- Surely British sailors are prepared for the possible eventuality of being captured or "kidnapped", especially when conducting "patrols" in territory that is known to be in dispute - and further - in dispute by a country which is the target of hostilities by the British and US governments.

"stripped"- And then promptly provided with "pajamas", according to at least one source.

"made to rebuke their own country"- Perhaps true, but just a bit on the melodramatic side.

The treatment of the British captives by the Iranian government is far from what could be objectively considered torture. Now, within two weeks, they have been released in good health and, apparently, no worse for the wear. They are doing far better than hundreds, if not thousands of captives, interned by the US government. Keep in mind, there are still unanswered allegations of torture, rape and murder, against those acting on behalf of the US government, an issue which seems to have plunged down the memory hole.

And could you please provide some information regarding this "UN mandate" I keep hearing about? Thanks in advance.

[Psephos]

64. Fish. Barrel. Trigger.

Your point is so weak, that you must exaggerate, in order to make it.

I'm glad to hear your opinion, but noticed you offered nothing except your own condescending opinion to support it. Weak. Here's how to strengthen it:

"kidnapped"- Surely British sailors are prepared for the possible eventuality of being captured or "kidnapped", especially when conducting "patrols" in territory that is known to be in dispute - and further - in dispute by a country which is the target of hostilities by the British and US governments.

Here's the dictionary definition. My usage was correct.

kid·nap (kĭd'năp') pronunciation
tr.v., -napped or -naped, -nap·ping or -nap·ing, -naps or -naps.
To seize and detain unlawfully and usually for ransom.

The sailors were seized. The seizure was unlawful, as was the following false imprisonment. A ransom was paid, in the form of a prisoner exchange.

" 'Let me make this clear — irrespective of what was said in the past, we were inside Iraqi waters,' Lt. Felix Carman told a news conference attended by 5 of the 15 British sailors and marines held in Iran for nearly two weeks. 'We were 1.7 nautical miles from Iranian waters,' Carman told the news conference." Carman's assertion matches the original coordinates supplied by the Iranian ambassador at the outset of the incident. Iran later changed the coordinates it supplied once it was apparent those coordinates located the British sailors well within Iraqi waters.
(ABC News)
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=3015628&page=1

" Lieutenant Carman and Royal Marine Capt. Chris Air, 25, described how two Iranian speedboats closed on two British inflatable patrol boats after the personnel had boarded an Indian-flagged vessel, seeking contraband. Theirs was the first direct explanation of why the Britons did not resist capture.

" 'Some of the Iranian sailors were becoming deliberately aggressive and unstable,' Captain Air said. 'They rammed our boat and trained their heavy machine guns, R.P.G.’s and weapons on us. Another six boats were closing in on us,' he said, referring to rocket-propelled grenades by their initials.

" 'We realized that our efforts to reason with these people were not making any headway. Nor were we able to calm some of the individuals down.'

" 'It was at this point that we realized that had we resisted there would have been a major fight, one we could not have won, with consequences that would have had major strategic impact. We made a conscious decision to not engage the Iranians and do as they asked. They boarded our boats, removed our weapons and steered the boats towards the Iranian shore.'

" 'Let me be absolutely clear,” Captain Air said. “From the outset it was very apparent that fighting back was simply not an option. Had we chosen to do so then many of us would not be standing here today. Of that I have no doubts.' "
(NY Times)
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/07/world/europe/07britain.html?ex=1333598400&en=3abff35638cb5289&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

"stripped"- And then promptly provided with "pajamas", according to at least one source.

"The sailors said that after their arrest in the Gulf, they were taken to a prison in Tehran. 'We were blindfolded, our hands were bound, we were forced up against a wall,' they said. They were 'stripped and dressed in pyjamas … we were kept in stone cells, approximately eight feet by six, sleeping on piles of blankets. All of us were kept in isolation.' "
(Reuters)
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSL3169193320070406

"Once captured the personnel were subjected to 'constant psychological pressure' during their time in captivity and agreed to comply with their captors wishes in order to win their freedom. At one point they were lined up against a wall while weapons were cocked, making them 'fear the worst.' The statement was read out by their two most senior members, Lieutenant Felix Carman, 26, and Royal Marine Captain Chris Air, 25."
(U.K. Telegraph)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/04/06/wiran406.xml

"Their greatest scare, they recalled, came on the second day, when they were flown to Tehran, blindfolded and backed up against a prison wall while their Iranian captors fiddled with weapons, cocking rifles and making them fear for their lives.

" 'We thought we were going to the British Embassy but we got taken to a detention center,' said Royal Marine Joe Tindell, 21, one of 15 British sailors and marines seized by Iranian Revolutionary Guards in disputed waters in the Persian Gulf on March 23.

"At the detention center, the mood turned drastically, as their captors changed from military dress into all black, their faces covered.

" 'We had a blindfold and plastic cuffs, hands behind our backs, heads against the wall,' Royal Marine Tindell said in an interview with the BBC. 'Someone, I’m not sure who, someone said, I quote, ‘Lads, lads, I think we’re going to get executed.’

" 'After that comment someone was sick, and as far as I was concerned he had just had his throat cut. From there we were rushed to a room, quick photo, and then stuffed into a cell and didn’t see or speak to anyone for six days.' "
(NY Times)
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/07/world/europe/07britain.html?ex=1333598400&en=3abff35638cb5289&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

Full text of the sailors' statements can be read here:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/04/06/wiran506.xml

Doesn't sound like quite the cozy evening at home in pajamas you implied with your carefully-chosen wording.

"made to rebuke their own country"- Perhaps true, but just a bit on the melodramatic side.

"Perhaps" true? I'm sorry you don't own a television or a computer (you must be posting from the library, right?) Anyway, I do. I heard the statements, and read them, too. No "perhaps" about it. It clearly pains you to admit, though, judging from your wording. Why? What's uncomfortable about condemning coerced statements from abducted sailors that will be used for propaganda? Isn't speaking against the abuse of power *what we stand for*?

" It was the beginning of days of psychological pressure that would ultimately extract televised “confessions” from some of the Britons that they had strayed into Iranian waters. The admissions tempered for some the joy at their safe return home to their families, with some military analysts expressing dismay that the sailors and marines had capitulated to their captors’ demands.

" 'It was highly damaging that all of them apologized publicly for something they had not done,' said Sir Max Hastings, a military historian and former newspaper editor, in a BBC radio interview on Friday, comparing the Britons unfavorably to American pilots who withstood much crueler treatment in North Vietnam for much longer.

"But the captives defended their decision to play along with their captors, saying they were subjected to a determined campaign of psychological intimidation. They were separated, stripped, put in pajamas and placed in small stone cells in complete isolation — not permitted even a whispered word with a fellow captive, they said. The lone woman among them was tricked into believing the men had all been released."
(NY Times)
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/07/world/europe/07britain.html?ex=1333598400&en=3abff35638cb5289&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

Meanwhile, melodrama is characterized by exaggerated emotions, stereotypical characters, and interpersonal conflicts heightened beyond the range of normal experiences. I've already dealt with the exaggeration claim. Where's the stereotyping here? I see unfortunate sailors who were abducted and psychologically abused, used as pawns in an intergovernmental conflict. Being abducted, threatened with imprisonment and/or death, and coerced to lie on international television, calls for strong language and condemnation.

Unless, of course, it's politically inconvenient.... In that case, thugs get a free pass.

Putting one's politics ahead of the welfare of unpowerful people is the *antithesis* of progressive thinking. It's how I sort the actual progressives from the merely anti-Repuglicans.

[ronnie624]

66. You sure wasted a lot of time and effort

on a post that doesn't say much of anything, and again, you must use exaggeration and even a little deceit to make your point.

"Doesn't sound like quite the cozy evening at home in pajamas you implied with your carefully-chosen wording."

I'm really not that concerned with these sailors and their two weeks of discomfort. They're all home now, safe and sound, and they all have a good story to tell their grandchildren.

"I see unfortunate sailors who were abducted and psychologically abused, used as pawns in an intergovernmental conflict. Being abducted, threatened with imprisonment and/or death, and coerced to lie on international television, calls for strong language and condemnation."

Poor things. It's almost as if they had been tortured or murdered or something. :eyes:

"Putting one's politics ahead of the welfare of unpowerful people is the *antithesis* of progressive thinking. It's how I sort the actual progressives from the merely anti-Repuglicans."

I'm sorry, but I haven't the slightest idea, what this means.

[Psephos]

70. Is that all you got?

lol

[ProudDad]

58. Maybe your missing the possibility

that the crossed over an imaginary line in the sea.

The border is still in dispute in that part of the gulf.

The British and U.S. Navy have been playing a game of chicken for decades, first with the USSR and now, I'm sure, with Iran -- getting close to the line to get Intel on Iranian Naval responses.

They might have been over the line and the Iranians finally decided to catch them.

The Brits may have broken the "law" first and the Iranians busted 'em.

We're supposed to believe Tony Blair's "coordinates"? No vested interest there :sarcasm:

[2Design]

38. happy they got out of this without torture that the usa does to people

They are very lucky they only had to write crap to get out of this compared to what the brits and usa have done to similar people -

[Eugene]

42. Crew Says Iran Singled Out Woman Captive

Source: Associated Press

Crew Says Iran Singled Out Woman Captive

Friday April 6, 2007 10:01 PM

AP Photo XAG117

By TARIQ PANJA

Associated Press Writer

ROYAL MARINE BASE CHIVENOR, England (AP) - The Royal Navy boat team held
captive by Iran rallied around the only female sailor in the group Friday, praising
Leading Seaman Faye Turney for maintaining her dignity while she was singled out
for Tehran's propaganda.

Turney, a 26-year-old mother whose television appearances and purported letters
were widely aired by Iran, was kept isolated from her crew mates, a colleague said.

“She was under the impression for about four days that she was the only one there,”
Royal Marine Capt. Chris Air said at a news conference. “She coped admirably and
has maintained a lot of dignity.”

-snip-

Royal Navy Lt. Felix Carman, commander of the captured boat crew, said the group
of eight sailors and seven marines had learned that “special treatment” was inflicted
on Turney.

-snip-

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-6538724,00.html

[Crunchy Frog]

47. Sounds like they were treated according to currently accepted standards.

I don't think that anybone with any standing has a leg to stand on to complain about this treatment. They should just be grateful that they weren't waterboarded, though that would have been within acceptable parameters as well.

This is what happens when you throw international law out the window.

[IsItJustMe]

51. Yep, we have definitely set some new international standards for the treatment of foreign detainees

as of late. What goes around comes around. Sounds to me the Brits should be thanking god right about now.

This sh!t is going to back to us some day, in spades. Just seems to be the way things work.

[ProudDad]

57. Great cartoon from DU post

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x598544

[Iceburg]

68. Touche!

[ronnie624]

73. Poignant.

My country shames me.

Both the government and the people.

[Simonft]

67. Thats odd...

We are getting mad at them for using similar techniques on western prisoners that we use on Iranian prisoners. I guess that is really no surprise.

[pokercat999]

69. Exactly they are only pawns and have no lasting value

TO EITHER SIDE!

When will we learn, our "leaders" use us to war against one another when the real answer is to eliminate THEM!

[ProudDad]

72. Or even better

just don't show up!

As we used to say during Vietnam, "what if they gave a war and nobody came?"

Think about it, visualize it, believe in it!

The only real solution is that nobody goes along with their madness! That's how eastern Europe actually liberated themselves as did the Zapatistas en Mexico.

If we don't make the Earth uninhabitable for mammalian life, maybe we'll all evolve enough to boycott all such nonsense.

I already chose to boycott ALL wars in '64 when I quit the Navy. Come join me.

[Occulus]

74. So... Iran *didn't* threaten to torture them?

Am I reading correctly?