Posted on 04/01/2007 8:55:57 PM PDT by Flavius
Britain hopes to send a top navy officer to Tehran to deliver a face-saving compromise that will ensure the release of 15 captive British naval personnel, Sunday Telegraph newspaper reported yesterday.
The British government will send the officer to Tehran to promise that the Royal Navy will never knowingly enter Iranian waters without permission, according to a plan cited by The Sunday Telegraph. The compromise, which would involve dispatching a navy captain or a commodore to Iran, was raised at a meeting of a senior government crisis committee on Saturday, the newspaper reported.
Mullah-run television aired new footage of two of the 15 British naval personnel. The two were shown separately on the television's Arabic language channel standing in front of an Iranian chart of the northern part of Persian Gulf waters where the sailors and marines were seized on March 23.
Beckett has said that Britain has replied to a letter from the Iranian embassy in London, which urged the government to acknowledge that the sailors had trespassed and confirm that it would not happen again.
Meanwhile, mullahs' thugs hurled stones and big firecrackers at Britain's embassy in Tehran. No one was hurt by the small explosive devices, which went off with loud bangs and sent clouds of smoke rising from inside the compound. About 100 demonstrators chanted: "British, British, death to you, death to you." Demonstrators, who scuffled with police, included members of the Basij, a hardline religious militia. Protesters called for the embassy to be closed down.
© Iranian.ws
Tony Blair has been emasculated.
its not only him
They wouldn't dare do this to Americans.
Bend over Tony and take your spanking from your master Ahmadinejad.
You know you love it Tony-boy. Just a little whipping will make you tingle all over big boy.
Hostage number 16 reporting for duty.
The most pathetic part of this whole story is the fact that Britain believes this represents "saving face."
The Persian Journal wouldn't lie to us, would it? /sarc
don't be so sure...
I recall our sincere apologies to China as but one example. Now, China and Iran are different bears...
I say this also because of the constant submission to muslim dictates lately. It seems like the West can't submit fast enough....many liberals would willingly behead themselves if it would make muslims feel better.
The Brits will regret this BIGTIME!
I'm going to hurl!
"Tony Bohica"
UN Issues Memo on Hostage Crisis in Iran
In response to Iran’s seizure of 15 British naval personnel in Iraqi waters, the U.N. Security Council issued a statement of “grave concern.” The UN rejected the United Kingdom’s request that the statement “deplore” Iran’s actions.
Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, explained the UN’s criteria for official statements. “‘Deplore’ would be too strong at this point,” Ban said. “If someone had been injured, then we could justifiably ‘deplore’ the action. This would, of course, be escalated to ‘gravely deplore’ if someone had been killed.”
“Now,” Ban continued, “if Iran carries out its threat to put these people on trial we would have to consider a statement of ‘admonishment.’ If, as some in Iran have demanded, any of these captives were executed, we would then be authorized to escalate to ‘grave admonishment.’ As you can see, the language of diplomacy must be properly nuanced to fit the situation. It is not an easy skill to learn. Many of us have devoted a lifetime to perfecting it.”
In related news, Tehran’s Interim Friday Prayers Leader, Ahmad Khatami, mocked Britain as “a ‘has been’ nation that must accept its humiliation by the great and powerful Iran if it hopes to avoid total destruction. They will bow before Islam or they will die. That is their only choice.”
read more...
http://www.azconservative.org/Semmens1.htm
"many liberals would willingly behead themselves if it would make muslims feel better."
eine gut traume!
if only it were true then we'd have no problems
what does this mean?
a) Britain will now tell Iran before it sends any covert (or overt) attack vessels towards Iran's shores.
b) Britain knows that any attacks on, or incursions into Iran will be aerial so they won't have to give away their attack plans.
c) Who's to say whether Britain "knowingly" did or would enter Iranian waters, making it rather moot since they can always claim to have done it unknowingly and therefore not have to get permission for that which they didn't know they done.
(d) It's diplo-speak for saying 'yes we were in your waters and shouldn't have done that'. (notice it doesn't say 'again')
(e) Iran has effectively proven that another superpower doesn't have the balls to stand up to them, and they can pretty much bully their way into any challenging situation they want with little fear of reprisal.
(f) The British are wusses just like the French and US democrats.
(g) All of the above.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
