This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Iran Update: Six (Or Eight) UK Embassy Staff Taken Hostage: Iran Contra Redux?
Even more mysterious update #2:
- IRANIAN CENTRAL TV CONFIRMS THAT EIGHT UK EMBASSY STAFF TAKEN HOSTAGE
Mysterious update confirming that something very fishy is going on here:
- IRAN'S MEHR NEWS AGENCY REMOVES REPORT OF HOSTAGE TAKING FROM ITS WEBSITE - NO EXPLANATION GIVEN
Today's developments are rapidly turning into a repeat of Iran-Contra:
- SIX UK EMBASSY STAFF TAKEN HOSTAGE BY PROTESTERS IN NORTHERN COMPOUND OF TEHRAN EMBASSY - MEHR NEWS AGENCY
Expect a very formal, and very forceful UK response imminently.
Once again - got Brent?
»
- 16483 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
So Reagan did not admit it and apologize for it?
Wow, must be ancient history. To clarify.....
The US Embassy hostages in Iran were released on Reagan's Inauguration Day in January 1981, after having spent 444 days as guests of the Iranian "students".
Iran-Contra was Reagan and North's convoluted scheme to trade arms to Iranian backers of Hezbollah in order than a handful of Western hostages held by Hezbollah people in Lebanon might be released. The money the Iranians paid for the weapons was then supposed to be used to fund Contra operations. As part of this history, the Iranians who received the weapons were the same ones who trained and financed the folks who blew up the US Embassy in Beirut and the Marine Barracks in Beirut in 1983. It always puzzled me that Ollie North was viewed as a "patriot" by the Right, and Reagan as some sort of hero, even though both knowingly rewarded the exact same people who had been responsible for the Embassy and Marine deaths.
Thanks Chindit... good to see that not everyone following this thread has forgotten history.
I cringe at every reference to "Iran-Contra" here, including that in the header story. There is an obvious parallel to the US embassy hostage situation here, but none whatever to Iran-Contra exept for the word "Iran".
Different hostages. The Iran-Contra deal was to release hostages held by the Hezbo's in Lebanon. The embassy hostages had been released previously.
Be careful what you think this means.
Iran's Mehr news agency removes report of hostage taking from its website - no explanation givenWWIII bitchez!
libertarian86.blogspot.com
Jimmy Carter just seen boarding a black jet surrounded by highly armed Brits talking into their sleaves. The UK has great hopes the mastermind of another famous hostage rescue has new and improved stragegies!
if the main man jimny dad doesn't take responsibility... mossad probly your best bet...
Rush made the observation first. This is Carter's second term. Damn, how does he do it :)
Smart pills?
Rush is wrong - it's Chimpy W. Bush's third term.
If I were PM or President:
"You got 24 hours to release our people, unharmed, or else the planes are in the air to turn your stinking, filthy, shitbag of a country into a parking lot." What's it gonna be A-mahd?
It is simply time to let loose on these fucktards and their crazy ass ways. Liberals - go fuck yourselves, you got us into this mess with your touchy-fealy bullshit diplomacy for the last umpteenth years.
http://vegasxau.blogspot.com
being as your current chief of staff is called Benjamin santa will surely deliver all your xmas wishes
shitty country with russian anti air defense capability. Plus the ability to shut down the strait, so that 1/3 of the world oil stops moving. Plus making the ships that contain that oil uninsurable, so they never leave again.
Yeah great idea rambo.
Iran can shut Hormuz down, for hours anyway. And we can reopen it within hours by vaporizing what ever they put in the shipping channel to block it. The question is would they close it and would we reopen it, never waste a good crisis. I am thinking it would stay blocked until they can figure out how to keep fuel prices permanently higher than they even are now.
our military forces should all stand down and be returned to their bases here in this country and then disbanded.
sorry, no we couldnt reopen it. The strait is so narrow, sunburn missiles, which require only 1 to 2 men, can take out any ship from the rocky shoreline. WHo is goona insure an oil tanker at that point? no insurance, no ship movement.
You vastly over estimate the US military.
Fact.. US wars games against India 3 years ago, our airforce versus theirs.. guess who won... yeah...India.
plus, vaporzing ships and other things scuttled in a shipping channel, really? and who and how is this going to happen? by way of the superfriends? Supermans eye ray?
(deleted on grounds of irrelevence)
Last time I checked we still had thousands of nuclear weapons, it would take only one to totally vaporize anything blocking the shipping channel. And such use would be done for the simple reason that oil is the blood of modern civilization and Hormuz is the aorta that it has to pass through, as long as the bomb is not used on a populated target it would be permitted. We have such weapons that are low even dial-a-yield with very little radioactive fallout. Not that you would want to be downwind anyway, but still...
If Iran were to decide to close the shipping it would be a well justified war to end their bullshit once and for all. The first missile shot at the first tanker would flat out spell the end of the batteries trained on shipping, we have more than enough assets in the region believe me to make those sunburns be gone within 20 minutes of their use.
You don't like it? Neither do I, but I also do not like paying blackmail to the batshit motherfuckers running that toilet of a country either.
Liberals don't want the world to use oil anyway, so what's the problem? Also, A-Mahd and the mullahs believe in the 12th Imam to come when they usher in the apocalypse, so it's going to eventually happen anyway. Or maybe you believe you can negotiate with these assholes? 'Cause that has worked sooooooo well these last few years. There negotiations start with "you die" and go from there.
Everything you learn in life you learn in kindergarden. Go back to the OWS protest, they miss you.
http://vegasxau.blogspot.com
I thought ZHers were smarter than parroting the left/right farce. Guess I was wrong...
Most of us are hip to the left/right divide and conquer strategy. Vegas is just another kool-aid chugging sheep.
Or a deliberate divider.
NICE!!!!!!!
Bigger hammer always gets the nail.
Call Jimmy Carter - he'll know what NOT to do?
Unfortunately, our British friends don't have a prime minister with Margaret Thatcher's resolve in Downing Street or much of a Navy or Air Force with which to back up any resolve they do have.
It's a job for the Americans and their supercalifragalisticexpialidocious president Bambi, who speaks softly and carries a wet spaghetti noodle.
Time for the '70s song: Bomb, Bomb, Bomb!, Bomb, Bomb Iran!
sorry duplicate post
The Zionist neocon cabal will have their war with Iran.
If dumbassed young Americans would QUIT signing up to fight in these unconstitutional wars, the cabal would have to institute a draft to expand their empire. Draft riots would give our politicans something else to worry about, other than pleasing AIPAC.
Thanks for the -1.
Let your son get his face melted off for Israel if you choose. Maybe he'll win a mirrorball trophy on Dancing With the Stars for his sacrifice.
Website hacked and false info provided to start the ball rolling.
Operation steal Iran Gold
Option 1: Iranian Government-sponsored "demonstration". (Why would the Iranians want to piss off the junior partner in the world's largest genocide machine?)
Option 2: A truly spontaneous action by individual Iranians that spiralled out of control before the Iranian Government could bring it under cotrol. (Yeah... right)
Option 3: Can you say Mossad? Remember that weird menage a trois between Gould, Fox and Werrity?
http://roynelson.blog.co.uk/2011/11/16/gould-fox-and-andrew-werrity-thre...
http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20111126/169055781.html
Iran to stage naval drills in international waters
The hostage takers are the same turds who were beating up people 2yrs ago during the election protests, this has NOTHING to do with israel etc, trust me, I grew up there I know these fking dog wastes
who has the power in iran? who really has the power there? persian people? i think not...............
Absolutely NOT the persian people, it is run by theocracy idealists who 1) are armed by china/russia 2) hate israel's guts
The "persian" values dies 31 yrs ago thanks to pres Carter and Brezhinsky
is the definition of a persian someone who lives presently in iran proper or is it something else entirely? or perhaps, can a persian be of many races of people all living together in one area?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OP2h_DvWobQ
what do you think about things like this? i believe this guy has many things right in this video. i can argue about the efficacy of islam all day long but at this moment , i shall demur from that argument because for all intents and purposes, it is not that important in this realm, per se. i posted a comment on his youtube account about the foundations of islam and who financed its start, and who was muhammad etc but he didn't post it.....imho, the creation of islam in the middle east was at best, at least to me, extremely curious......
10044 didn't go back far enough when he said:
If the US and UK, at the behest of BP, had not overthrown Iran's democratically elected prime minister (Mohammed Mosaddegh) in 1953 and replaced him with a bloodthirsty puppet (Shah Reza Pahlavi), an Iranian theocracy might never have materialized.
Try a google search for Operation Ajax or Kermit Roosevelt Jr. to see what you've been missing.
I like the term STUDENTS....the last hostage senerio was backed by professionals....masking themselves as Students...anyway...that picture tells alot..why was the gate open...?????....Will Britain have the guts.....we will soon see...the Royal Marines do...but do they have ammo....
To nearly all of the above,
Is this the same Jimmy Carter who was the only American president to solve a crisis without going to war, working against an entire nation, and a republican party that was collaborating with the enemy state to prolong the crisis until the next election?
Maybe, your friend and Nobel peace-prize winning president obama will get'em out by november 2012 and then all can vote for him again.
Whoopeeee!!!!! om
Say Whaaaaat?
Jimmy Carter you say solved the hostage crisis without going to war? I have seen some blatant revisionist history here before but nobody over 50 is buying that load of shit because we remember it well enough, and I particularly remember it well because I was stationed at a SAC base at the time.
Jimmy Carter did in fact send in the military for a rescue op (Eagle Claw) but it met with disaster in a um ahem "sandstorm" yeah that the ticket. After that attempt it was made clear to him that any further attempts to liberate our hostages by force would result not only in their deaths but in war. This embassy capture and hostage taking was by international law already an act of war but that pussy Carter, and I am sure he had other reasons we were never told of because our government even then operated in secrecy with little to no input from the people, just decided to wait it out and we were pounded over the head with our own impotence every night for a year which included his own defeat at the hands of Raygun who was a hawk on the issue. He was ready to take office and kick Iran's ass all over southwestern Asia and he meant it.
Some would argue that the new power in Iran, the Mullahs, allowed/planned this in order to keep the USA from trying to restore the Shah who was in exile and still alive. But, what they really did was turn the tide of all history directly being responsible for the election of Raygun. Carter was not really popular before the embassy was taken, the economy was pretty shaken, but Americans do loath to switch horses in the middle of the stream, with the hostage issue though Carter was toast and we all knew it, Raygun won in a landslide and it was just hours before he took the oath of office that the Iranians released the hostages not because of the good will of Carter but because they knew for a fact Raygun would launch a very high profile war if they did not. And he would have too, or do you all not recall him invading Granada over a few medical students that were not allowed to leave the island during a coup there?
As to the attack on the embassy itself and the taking of the staff as hostages that was an act of war and there is no statute of limitations on acts of war. The leaders of Iran never rest when it comes to their ultimate goal, they seek to unite by force if need be, every person and ever acre of Islamic land under one rule originating from Teheran, and then to go on imposing Islam by saber point to add to their dominion. I do not really support Israel much, but I do recognize their right to exist within their 1967 borders. But, Iran is seeking nuclear weapons not for self defense and we all know it, they seek them for conquest and to deny that at this point just makes the denying party look lame, nobody serious thinks that Iran is a peaceful nation, and we all know, have known for years the claim they just want nuclear power for electricity is horseshit.
do you consider yourself patriotic? not trying to start a argument but merely a discussion.
Sorry, Boil
I was trading commodities in LAat the time and the word from one of the 'California Cabinet' of soon-to-bb-president Reagan was that the hostages would not be released until after the election; so, my comment was not from reading the news but from one very close to the Reaganites.
I have friends on all sides of every issue because I like people and this, sometimes is useful,
but I am also used at times so I cannot swear to anything---only spit it out as opinion.
You may be the same as me, I don't know, but I am fairly certain that the Iranians did not want the 400 day ordeal anymore than we did.
As farv as revisionist history---I was there also and really paying attention after The helicopters fell out of the sky.
Did you have any knowledge of that?
let me know please, the whole tale was wacky om
Random bits from my memory...
According to people present in the planning sessions, Carter wanted rescuers equipped with rubber bullets so as not to endanger the "students" ... he was persuaded otherwise.
There were two separate helicopter incidents. First, one was downed by sand blowback from low-altitude flying. (I belive these were National Guard choppers and not desert-hardened.) Then after the aborted rescue, 2 of the surviving choppers collided taking off. Unfortunately left behind was a list of US assets in Tehran, who were later rounded up and executed.
At the time, I gave partial credit for the hostages' release to the Dem's election team, who had painted Reagan as a war-happy madman. Maybe the ayatollahs believed it.
No Oldman, they did not tell us any more than you about the operation to rescue the hostages. Even though going in to get our people would have been justified in international law it still would likely have meant war, and I do not know what to believe of the stories about what really happened in the operation to rescue them, I have become very skeptical of any tales about that region.
You say..."I was trading commodities in LAat the time and the word from one of the 'California Cabinet' of soon-to-bb-president Reagan was that the hostages would not be released until after the election;"
I do not understand why you would think I said otherwise when what I said above was that the hostages were released within hours of Reagan being sworn in, which of course is months AFTER the election. I went on terminal leave Dec. 7, 1979 but when I processed out of the Air Force they reminded us that we had the balance of the six year enlistment as reserves and if we do go to war in Iran we will be recalled. Reagan was already President Elect by then and everyone I knew in the military was expecting a war as soon as he took office, so were the Iranians and that is why they ended the crisis just hours before he became president (actually 5 minutes after but I was on west coast time).
As to "...I am fairly certain that the Iranians did not want the 400 day ordeal anymore than we did..."
They took the hostages and COULD have given them back at any moment of any day of the more than 400 and in fact DID just as Reagan had the presidential power to send them back to the stone age which was one of his campaign promises if the hostages were not released, at least it was in the debate rhetoric.
Nobody in the military at the time believed that cock and bull story about darkness and sandstorms being responsible for the failure of Eagle Claw. There are rumors of course but I doubt we will ever live long enough to know what really happened. I think Iran was tipped off in advance and was waiting for our guys. Back in the seventies there were a lot of Iranians on our bases for training since when Pahlavi was Shah he paid us to train his military, many got stuck here after his fall because they would be dog food if they returned. They were the sons of loyalists for the most part. It seems to me that when you have thousands of Iranians involved with the US military at least a few would have hated the Shah as much as the Ayatollah did, and some knew of the rescue attempt because they spoke flawless Farsi. Like I said we will never know but it is really very doubtful the mission failed just because of darkness or sand.
Dear Boil,
Been on the beach for two days in a remote fishing village---no internet.
Sorry to be so late in getting back, but thank you for clarifying because like you, I doubt all of the stories----so many mouths to feed, no?
I really appreciate your courtesy and candidness---I'm certain that we are on the 'same page' and this is most comforting.
Until next time om
ok ok buying energy.
Interesting response to the blowing up of the missile site though. No? Assume it was the SAS.
i find all of this highly contrived and suspicious...............we have seen this act before haven't we? isn't it amazing how they always drag out the same old plays from the same old play book, time and time again.......
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYYtE42bddQ
dancing with rick perry....
this inconvenient embarrassment took place a couple of years ago i think. a sad state of affairs for texas and for this country and for this world. in this small sequence you will see what is wrong with us and what needs to be done..........
That's a comedy skit, right?
Next move....UK sends boatload of worthless 100 Pound notes to Iran to pay kidnapping ransom...business as usual.
Starting a war is so easy. Just sabotage a few facilities, impose some sanctions, then over-react to the backlash. Congrats Iran, you just stepped right into the trap. Welcome to the beginning of WW3. Maybe the Mayans are going to be right afterall.
sizzup,
I have dobts that any Iranian students could have overwhelmed security at the British Embassy; Maybe, students in 'student' clothing without sheepskins.
Iran did not step into any trap; its foot carefully placed in the trap and then-----CLANG.
They are not out of control----we are out of control----ask your president om
Right on Sizzurp. I hate to get all preachy on everyone's ass, but when that Jesus dude said, "resist not evil" it was this kind of evil (trying to start zionist wars) shit he was referring to. Evil is essentially a self-destructive force. If one is able to get out of the way or redirect the evil along the path of least resistance, the evil devours itself for want of any other sustenance. But if resisted, it feeds on resistance. Independent confirmation of this truism by Morihei Ueshiba. The Iranian's big mistake is in resisting the Zionist evil that spreads like a cancer across the globe. Theoretically, if everyone let the Zionists have whatever they wanted, they would destroy themselves. But one's righteous indignation rises up, and it's almost impossible not to shout, "enough of your evil bullshit!" Which unfortunately, only fuels the dynamic.
WW3, here we come. With the Strait of Hormuz closed, we can say goodbye to the entertainment value of a slow motion economic train wreck, and the diversion of ZH debates over inflation/deflation and gold hoarding. I won't have to write "Peak Oil, bitchez!" ever again, because the man-made oil shortage, and the coincident econmic disaster and nuclear war will make Peak Oil a moot point.
Enjoy your single-malt scotch, microwave popcorn and internet pornography while you can, my friends. I give the World As We Know It about six months, tops.
Let's guess what comes next, maybe a frigate Stark type of deal. Ship ventures a little to close, is attacked, and then it's game on.
The solution is simple. As soon as the protesters have left the embassy, we should just close the embassy and pull our diplomats out, then throw the Iranian diplomats out of the UK.
Very straightforward. No conflict necessary.
These events all seem very contrived, though, don't they? Looks like a war is being set up.
When was that ZH article about Israel striking Iran? Wasn't that in July?
Ah! Here it is: http://www.zerohedge.com/article/cvn-77-ghw-bush-enters-persian-gulf-cia-veteran-robert-baer-predicts-september-israel-iran-w
Looks like everything is going according to someone's plan, anyway.
Hey dog,
How about just beefing up the security or paying attention to the security in place?
Who is going to believe that the Brits could be overrun by some Iranian students?
Are we all just asleep or is this just a joke?
The British Empire ruined by Iran, again?
Who can believe these tales?
good luck to us om
The problem is that no matter what security we have, it would be a bad idea to start shooting the students.
Far better not to escalate things, I think. If we do escalate things, then who's tune are we dancing to? Who's agenda do we serve?
Fuck Iran - if they can't respect our embassy then we should close it and close theirs over here.
I think we should stay the hell out of this whole Iran thing. It really feels like there's an agenda behind all this and - to quote Wargames - "The only winning move is not to play" (in this case).
Pretty fuckin ignorant of history aren't you? Anglo-Iranian Oil Company. fyi.
History isn't the issue here. I know all about the British in the middle east.
Are you saying we should enter into a conflict with Iran?
For fuck's sake, according to that, we still owe Norway a kicking for the Viking invasions.
This issue NOW is not a historic issue.
I'm up for giving Norway a kicking. It might be a laugh.
Danelaw Bitchez.
I feel like I'm living th 70's all over again. Except instead of the Star Wars saga we have Twilight.
I was going to say something off-color about about Kristen Stewart and Carrie Fisher, and then I thought "every idle word..." My accout is already far, far into the red, so I'll shut up.
After the US Embassy in Tehran was taken over in 1979, a group of "students" decided to go after that other "Great Satan", the USSR. Through quiet diplomatic channels, the then Premier of the Soviet Union, Andropov IIRC, fired off a message to Ayatollah Khomeini which read, "If a single Iranian attempts to violate the grounds of the Soviet Embassy in Tehran, Iran will cease to exist as a nation".
The Iranian Government then sent security personnel to the USSR Embassy to prevent any "misunderstanding".
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MK30Ak01.html
Not sure why the reference to Iran Contra? Suggesting the Brits have something Iran wants and they are negotiating privately for it? IC was a boondoggle to transfer weapons to get rid of a president of the US by the neocons, and make a lot of money killing people in another country. Just don't see the connection, yet.
Just saw the video of this over at the Guardian:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog/2011/nov/29/iran-protesters-attack-...
I'm sorry, but it looks so staged! All the dudes just standing on the gate posts waving flags repetitively. Does not look like some of the other protests we have seen recently, when people are out of control with fury. They dont just stand there waving massive flags, so the cameras can get a good shot. They normally run around shouting. I also like the two rather plump 'students' who have to stop half way through climbing the gates because they are out of breath!
They look more like taxi drivers than young revolutionaries!
Why change a playbook when it's worked so well in the past? For anyone who can't see this for what it really is...well, I'm just dumbfounded. Someone out there is really creaming their pants to get WWIII started...sheesh
Iran knows who the greatest satan is, and it's the Queen...or in its stead, the British Embassy. Of course it shouldn't be done against diplomats, but when threatened with imperial war, and the strong chance of unleashing WWII (a thermonuclear war), storming an embassy (to start) shouldn't be unexpected.
The perils of imperial monetarism on full display.
Anybody that doesn't think the queen isn't in the imperial business anymore, is a damn fool. Not only is she, in business, but has controlled the world debate since 9/11. She's pushing for WWIIII all right, her system is toast, and they want depopulation.
Glass-Steagall, the killer of imperial monetarism.
AND... it's over?
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/29/us-iran-britain-embassy-idUSTR...