quote:Op maandag 2 april 2007 15:01 schreef IRAKEES-NL het volgende:
[..]
Het maakt idd niets uit of je nou een sjiiet, soenniet of jood bent.. we zijn allemaal mensen.
Het is maar goed dat je de Mujahedeen Khalq niet steuntHopelijk worden ze binnenkort uit Irak getrapt vanwege hun misdaden tegen het Iraakse volk onder het bewind van Saddam.
En als we de westerse propaganda over Iran zouden moeten geloven dan denken we allemaal dat Iran een groot woestijn is vol met achterlijke mensen.Van mij mogen de onwetenden dat geloven hoor, ondertussen gaat het wel steeds beter in Iran
En ipv dat de V.S een regime change in Iran willen kunnen ze beter de bron van terrorisme aanpakken door een regime change in Saoedie Arabië Saudi Arabie en Amerika te bewerkstelligen![]()
Thanks Eric, maar je mag het ook als Saoedi Arabië opschrijvenquote:
ben je in irak geboren of in nederland als ik vragen mag....quote:Op maandag 2 april 2007 15:15 schreef IRAKEES-NL het volgende:
[..]
Thanks Eric, maar je mag het ook als Saoedi Arabië opschrijven![]()
Als ik ergens goed in ben, dan is het wel met spellen![]()
Ik ben in Bagdad geboren maar heb tot mijn 6de in Teheran gewoondquote:Op maandag 2 april 2007 15:20 schreef persian2008 het volgende:
[..]
ben je in irak geboren of in nederland als ik vragen mag....
zozo dat is leuk om te wetenquote:Op maandag 2 april 2007 15:28 schreef IRAKEES-NL het volgende:
[..]
Ik ben in Bagdad geboren maar heb tot mijn 6de in Teheran gewoond
Kan juist ook in het voordeel werken.quote:Op maandag 2 april 2007 09:48 schreef Gijsje het volgende:
[afbeelding]
Ben toch echt benieuwd of Amerika het aan durft om ooit Iran aan te vallen, misschien niet door de dreiging van kernwapens maar meer doordat de oorlog dan vanuit drie landen gevoerd moet worden. Irak en Afghanistan grenzen beide aan Iran, dit kan nog wel een grote problemen opleveren als Amerika Iran aanvalt.
Inderdaad het was een automatisme door het met een u te schrijven, niet een spellingneukerijquote:Op maandag 2 april 2007 15:30 schreef IRAKEES-NL het volgende:
Eric, ik heb je tekst nogmaals gelezen en je doelde vast niet op mijn spelling, hehe.
Jij wil dus een regime change in de V.S? Verklaar je nader![]()
Het probleem met de Amerikaanse inmenging in het Midden-Oosten is dat ze de dictaturen steunen en sommige zelfs in het zadel hebben geholpen. Als alle dictaturen die ze steunden op die van de Verenigde Arabische Emiraten zouden lijken dan zou ik ze zelfs prijzen maar om nou een smerige dictator als Saddam te steunen en dan op sympathie van de Irakezen te rekenenquote:Op maandag 2 april 2007 16:39 schreef EricT het volgende:
[..]
Inderdaad het was een automatisme door het met een u te schrijven, niet een spellingneukerij![]()
Ik doelde dus op een regime change in Amerika, eigenlijk een mentaliteitsverandering. Zolang Amerika denkt de baas te kunnen spelen over de oliereserves in het midden oosten en ten alle tijden het israelische regime blijft steunen, zal het een gigantische chaos blijven in het midden oosten.
mijn mening dus![]()
rusland is heel erg onbetrouwbaar. ons nucleair programma moest al in 1999 voltooid zijn. we hebben de russen meer dan genoeg betaald.quote:Op maandag 2 april 2007 18:43 schreef Mr_Memory het volgende:
Wat me opvalt in dit topic, dat Rusland een rare rol in het geheel speelt.
- Rusland bouwt kerncentrales in Iran.
- Rusland weigert opeens alle steun aan de kerncentarles in Iran.
- Rusland die Iran oproept om aan alle VN eisen tevoldoen.
- Russische bronnen die vermelden dat er oorlog opkomst is met Iran.
Zomaar een paar dingen die mij opvallen in dit topic, wat is nou het ware gezicht van Rusland in deze kwestie?![]()
Rusland speelt een spelletje de vijand van mijn vijand is mijn vriend. Alleen wisselen die rollen enigszins.quote:Op maandag 2 april 2007 18:48 schreef persian2008 het volgende:
[..]
rusland is heel erg onbetrouwbaar. ons nucleair programma moest al in 1999 voltooid zijn. we hebben de russen meer dan genoeg betaald.
Ik heb veel liever de V.S als de nr.1 superpower dan de K-Russen.quote:Op maandag 2 april 2007 19:31 schreef Kaalhei het volgende:
[..]
Rusland speelt een spelletje de vijand van mijn vijand is mijn vriend. Alleen wisselen die rollen enigszinds.
Volgens mij is dat inderdaad beter. Je moet je geloof ik de Nederlandse uitspraak aanhouden (Net als Istanboel ipv Istanbul) en niet de Engelse. Ik heb al bedacht dat ik me daar niet meer druk over ga maken. net als Osama Bin Laden of Usama Ben Laden... of Al Qaida... of Al Kaidaquote:Op maandag 2 april 2007 15:15 schreef IRAKEES-NL het volgende:
[..]
Thanks Eric, maar je mag het ook als Saoedi Arabië opschrijven![]()
Als ik ergens goed in ben, dan is het wel met spellen![]()
Precies Rusland heeft echt niks met moslims (ze hebben er alleen maar last van, al die islamitische sovjetrepublieken die los willen enzo) maar als je ze kan gebruiken om de Amerikanen te bokken dan graagquote:Op maandag 2 april 2007 19:31 schreef Kaalhei het volgende:
[..]
Rusland speelt een spelletje de vijand van mijn vijand is mijn vriend. Alleen wisselen die rollen enigszinds.
quote:American reported missing in Iran
Story Highlights
- Missing man reportedly working as author/producer, trying to set up interview
- Man went missing on Kish Island, free trade zone under Iranian control
- State Department working through Swiss diplomats to get information
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The State Department is investigating a report of an American citizen missing in Iran, spokesman Sean McCormack said Monday.
"We don't see any linkage whatsoever between this case and any other ongoing cases that may have been in the news recently," McCormack said, apparently referring to the 15 British sailors and marines who were seized by Iran more than a week ago.
The American -- described as older and retired -- is believed to have been in Iran working for an independent author/producer, trying to set up an interview, several senior U.S. officials said.
The State Department said the man has been missing for more than a week and hasn't been in touch with his family or his employer.
Officials said the man went missing on Kish Island off the southern coast of Iran. The island is part of a free-trade zone under Iranian authority. Under most circumstances non-Iranian nationals do not need a visa to visit Kish.
The State Department is in touch with the man's family and is in the process of sending a message to the Iranians through the Swiss government, the officials said. The message is a "welfare and whereabouts inquiry," which is a request for information about a missing American citizen.
At this point, McCormack said, U.S. officials have no indication the man is being held by any Iranian entity.
Find this article at:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/02/iran.missing/index.html
misschien hadden zijn ouders wel recht op asiel en is zoonlief geradicaliseerd door jou domme reacties?quote:Op maandag 2 april 2007 20:57 schreef Kaalhei het volgende:
[..]
Je mag ook gewoon zeggen dat je een politieke economische vluchteling bent die met verschillende uitkeringen lekker aan het radicaliseren is. Je bent een schande voor je land en de mensen die wel een asiel nodig hebben. Ga anders fijn terug naar die theocratie toe, lui fundamentalistje.![]()
quote:Iran, Britain signal ways to end standoff
TEHRAN, Iran (AP) -- Iran and Britain signaled Monday possible ways out of the standoff over 15 detained British sailors, with Tehran saying it wants to resolve the crisis through diplomacy and Britain expressing willingness to discuss ways to avoid future boundary confusion in the Persian Gulf.
The somewhat conciliatory tones from both capitals raised hopes the 11-day standoff might be solved soon.
But it remained unclear how long the crisis might drag on. Optimistic signs have emerged before, only to be followed by a hardening of positions and tough rhetoric.
Iran's chief international negotiator said Monday that his country wants to resolve the crisis through diplomacy, and there was no need to put the crew on trial.
Ali Larijani said Iran's priority "is to solve the problem through proper diplomatic channels."
"We are not interested in letting this issue get further complicated," he told Britain's Channel 4 television news.
Earlier Monday, an Iranian state-run television station said all 15 British sailors and marines had confessed to illegally entering Iranian waters.
However, Iranian state-run radio said the confessions would not be broadcast because of what it called "positive changes" in Britain's negotiating stance. The radio did not elaborate on the changes.
In London, a British official, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue, said Prime Minister Tony Blair's government had agreed to consider ways to avoid such situations in the future.
The official insisted that Britain was not negotiating with the Iranians and still wanted the captives freed unconditionally.
The Britons were detained March 23 by naval units of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards while patrolling for smugglers near the mouth of the Shatt al-Arab, a waterway that has long been a disputed dividing line between Iraq and Iran.
Tehran says the crew was in Iranian waters. Britain insists its troops were in Iraqi waters working under a U.N. mandate.
In Tehran, the head of the Iranian parliamentary committee on foreign policy and national security, Allaeddin Broujerdi, said Britain should send a representative to Tehran to discuss the alleged incursion.
"The only solution is for them to send an official to find out the reason for the invasion," Broujerdi told state radio. "There is a need for a bilateral agreement to prevent such an event in the future."
It was not immediately clear whether Broujerdi had government backing for his proposal.
This weekend, The Sunday Telegraph newspaper of London reported that Britain was considering sending a senior Royal Navy officer to Tehran to discuss the return of the service members as well as discuss ways to avoid future incidents.
The renewed diplomatic efforts followed tough rhetoric last week from both sides, which prompted each government to dig in its heels.
Britain suspended all other diplomatic contacts with Iran, froze work to support trade missions and stopped issuing visas to Iranian diplomats.
The British also sought help from other countries, including Turkey, to press Iran to free the captives.
Those moves prompted Iran to suspend plans to free the only woman captive, Seaman Faye Turney, and to suggest that the Britons might face trial.
To reinforce their claims, the Iranians also broadcast video footage that showed four of the crew saying they were captured in Iranian waters. In footage Sunday, two of the sailors used maps to show the alleged location where they were seized.
That enraged the British, who said the confessions were clearly made under duress.
"The Iranians know our position, they know that stage-managed TV appearances are not going to affect our position," Blair's official spokesman said on condition of anonymity in line with government policy. "They know we have strong international support."
quote:
Call that humiliation?
No hoods. No electric shocks. No beatings. These Iranians clearly are a very uncivilised bunch
I share the outrage expressed in the British press over the treatment of our naval personnel accused by Iran of illegally entering their waters. It is a disgrace. We would never dream of treating captives like this - allowing them to smoke cigarettes, for example, even though it has been proven that smoking kills. And as for compelling poor servicewoman Faye Turney to wear a black headscarf, and then allowing the picture to be posted around the world - have the Iranians no concept of civilised behaviour? For God's sake, what's wrong with putting a bag over her head?
quote:allowing them to smoke cigarettes, for example, even though it has been proven that smoking kills
quote:Op dinsdag 3 april 2007 04:53 schreef NorthernStar het volgende:
Terry Jones (Monty Python) over de 'mensonterende manier' waarop de Britse gevangenen door Iran worden behandeld.
[..]
Het hele stuk staat hier: The Guardian
Het is/was ook een uitgelezen kans voor Iran om het er flink in te wrijven natuurlijk.
[afbeelding]
Shocking. Ze weten hoe ze er een moeten maken en kunnen het technisch, alleen men weet niet wanneer. Datzelfde geldt voor nog honderd andere landen, ofzo. En de Verenigde Staten verwachtten pas in 1954 een Sovjetbom? Leuk, in de jaren zeventig en tachtig dachten ze dat de Sovjet-Unie veel meer militaire kracht had dan in werkelijkheid. Wat zegt dat nou? Non-bericht.quote:Op maandag 2 april 2007 18:06 schreef persian2008 het volgende:
"From a scientific point of view of course they could create nuclear weapons," Velikhov, president of Russia's Kurchatov Institute, told reporters. "When they could do it is a more difficult question."
"If you remember, U.S. scientists expected the Soviet Union would only be able to create a nuclear bomb by around 1954 at the earliest," he said.
"They were rather surprised when we created one in 1949," he said with a chuckle. Velikhov trained under Igor Kurchatov, the leader of the Soviet atomic bomb project.
quote:Damascus airport has become the hub for thousands of Hizballah, Hamas, Jihad Islami fighters heading out to Iranian training camps
According to DEBKAfile’s military and intelligence sources, in the last several weeks, Damascus international airport main has become the main transport hub for a stream of Lebanese and Palestinian terrorists heading for Revolutionary Guards installations in Iran. Hence Israel military intelligence chief’s pessimistic briefing to the Israeli cabinet Sunday, April 1. (See separate item on this page) Damascus airport is also the transit point for returning terrorists to gather and pick up their assignment for various Middle East countries, as well as Lebanon, the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. Syrian military intelligence and Iranian RG officers have set up a joint depot at the Syrian airport for directing the incoming and outgoing traffic - much of it ferried by Syrian Airways.
A high-ranking Western intelligence source in the Middle East told DEBKAfile that the number of such terrorist-trainees commuting between Damascus and Tehran has grown to more than three times the volume of Muslim and al Qaeda fighters heading out from Syria into Iraq. This source calculates Iran is running a crash program to prepare an army of trained terrorist strength to retaliate for a potential US attack on its nuclear installations. That will be the signal for these men to ignite a regional war of terror across Iraq, Lebanon, Israel, the Gaza Strip, the West Bank and out to Sinai and Egypt.
Four Iranian command centers have been set up at home, in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon, to coordinate the movements of fighting men and the arms consignments that are being shipped through marine smuggling routes to their various destinations.
According to our intelligence and military sources, new training methods are employed for the new intake of terrorists. They are no longer being trained at special facilities provided for them at the camps run by the Al Quds Brigades, the RGs international branch. From the beginning of 2007, they have been integrated in regular RG training facilities and are taking basic training along with Iranian recruits in line with a revised Iranian military doctrine. The entire Middle East is deemed henceforth a single integrated line designed to defend the ayatollahs’ regime in Tehran in case of American attack. This line will be manned entirely by units which underwent training in the same combat tactics and operate the same weapons systems and communications.
Syria’s high command and military intelligence are pivotal to the construction, administration and control of this new fighting-terrorist machine. The personal say-so of president Bashar Assad would have been necessary for this project. Damascus airport facilities are a pivotal link in the mechanism wiring Tehran to the terrorist groups and transporting them from training centers to operating bases ready to fight for the Islamic Republic. Without Damascus’ aid, the operation would have taken much longer.
Israel’s AMAN chief, Maj. Gen. Amos Yadlin views this burgeoning war-cum-terror machine as a dangerous element that could tip the region over into a full-blown conflict without prior warning. No one outside Iran, even seasoned military intelligence observers, can know for certain when, why or for which location, some high-up in the wildly-radical Revolutionary Guards will decide to push the button to activate it.
http://news.independent.c(...)t/article2414760.ecequote:A failed American attempt to abduct two senior Iranian security officers on an official visit to northern Iraq was the starting pistol for a crisis that 10 weeks later led to Iranians seizing 15 British sailors and Marines.
Early on the morning of 11 January, helicopter-born US forces launched a surprise raid on a long-established Iranian liaison office in the city of Arbil in Iraqi Kurdistan. They captured five relatively junior Iranian officials whom the US accuses of being intelligence agents and still holds.
In reality the US attack had a far more ambitious objective, The Independent has learned. The aim of the raid, launched without informing the Kurdish authorities, was to seize two men at the very heart of the Iranian security establishment.
Better understanding of the seriousness of the US action in Arbil - and the angry Iranian response to it - should have led Downing Street and the Ministry of Defence to realise that Iran was likely to retaliate against American or British forces such as highly vulnerable Navy search parties in the Gulf. The two senior Iranian officers the US sought to capture were Mohammed Jafari, the powerful deputy head of the Iranian National Security Council, and General Minojahar Frouzanda, the chief of intelligence of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, according to Kurdish officials.
Want ? Terry Jones is het blijjkbaar eens met Guantanamo Bay: als je conventies hebt geschonden mag je niet zeuren als ze worden geschonden als je zelf gevangen bent.quote:
Dan heb jij toch wat moeite met engels sarcasmequote:Op dinsdag 3 april 2007 12:39 schreef CeeJee het volgende:
[..]
Want ? Terry Jones is het blijjkbaar eens met Guantanamo Bay: als je conventies hebt geschonden mag je niet zeuren als ze worden geschonden als je zelf gevangen bent.
Misschien kan hij volgende week grappen maken over de gevangenen in Guantanamo Bay.quote:Op dinsdag 3 april 2007 12:49 schreef EricT het volgende:
[..]
Dan heb jij toch wat moeite met engels sarcasme![]()
Ja, dat denk ik ook.quote:Op dinsdag 3 april 2007 12:39 schreef CeeJee het volgende:
[..]
Want ? Terry Jones is het blijjkbaar eens met Guantanamo Bay: als je conventies hebt geschonden mag je niet zeuren als ze worden geschonden als je zelf gevangen bent. heeft blijkbaar een hekel aan de dubbele moraal.
Is dat zo ? Zijn hele redatie is erop gebaseerd dat Britten niet mogen klagen over hun behandeling die tegen internationale wetten is omdat hun bondgenoten gevangenen diezelfde wetten breken.quote:Op dinsdag 3 april 2007 13:04 schreef Monidique het volgende:
Tsja, hij bericht op een sarcastische wijze over de hypocrisie van Groot-Brittanië en het Westen in het algemeen. Hij heeft natuurlijk gewoon gelijk.
quote:Op dinsdag 3 april 2007 12:34 schreef Monidique het volgende:
[..]
http://news.independent.c(...)t/article2414760.ece
Tsja... Dat krijg je ervan.
http://www.theglobeandmai(...)y/International/homequote:But Britain's delicate diplomatic efforts were set back by U.S. President George W. Bush, who made a statement Saturday in which he characterized the imprisoned sailors as “hostages” — a phrase that Britain has been carefully avoiding to prevent the crisis from becoming a broader political or military conflict.
“The British hostages issue is a serious issue because the Iranians took these people out of Iraqi waters, and it's inexcusable behaviour,” Mr. Bush said in response to a reporter's question during a press conference at the Camp David retreat.
He had reportedly promised not to raise the issue of the sailors, as British officials worry that the entry of the United States into this crisis could cause it to escalate into an irreconcilable confrontation.
Other U.S. officials have been even less amenable to the British approach. John Bolton, who until recently was Mr. Bush's ambassador to the United Nations, has appeared on British TV describing the British approach as “pathetic.”
Mr. Bush stressed that the United States would not turn over Iranian officials it had arrested in Iraq earlier this year on accusations that they were supporting insurgents, saying he supported Prime Minister Tony Blair's view that “there were no quid pro quos. The Iranians must give back the hostages. They're innocent, they were doing nothing, and they were summarily plucked out of water.”
But British officials say that a prisoner exchange has never been offered or suggested by Iran, and that Mr. Bush's words could cause harm by putting the Iranians in a position from which they cannot back down if it becomes a major confrontation with their long-time enemy, the United States.
quote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6522113.stmquote:An Iranian diplomat kidnapped in Iraq in February has been freed, Iran's official news agency, Irna, says.
There has been no word on who was holding him, or the circumstances of his release.
Iranian officials had previously blamed the US for the abduction, saying Jalal Sharafi was taken by an Iraqi army unit that worked closely with the Americans.
US officials denied any involvement in the kidnapping and said they did not know about the diplomat's release.
Mr Sharafi, second secretary at the Iranian embassy in Baghdad, was abducted from his car in February in the city's central Karrada district by men wearing Iraqi army uniforms.
He was released on Tuesday and returned to Iran later on Tuesday, Irna said.
Hoe pakken we dit aan zonder gezichtsverlies?quote:Op dinsdag 3 april 2007 14:30 schreef Monidique het volgende:
[..]
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6522113.stm
Toevallig.
quote:Blair: next 48 hours 'critical' to Iran standoff
Iranian TV has been showing footage of four of the 15 British service personnel held captive. Photograph: Getty
The next two days would be "fairly critical" to resolving a diplomatic standoff between Britain and Iran over the capture of 15 British sailors and marines, Tony Blair said today.
Moments after the prime minister made his remarks, Iran's first vice-president, Parviz Davoudi, said Iran was hopeful that the deadlock would end soon.
Iran is hopeful the standoff with Britain over the detention of 15 sailors will be resolved "soon" but London must recognise that its forces illegally entered Iranian waters, Mr Davoudi said, according to the AFP news agency.
"London has changed its attitude for several days now and is acting on the basis of negotiations," Mr Davoudi told reporters in the southern city of Bushehr, where he was opening a new installation at Iran's first nuclear power station.
"London must give guarantees and say that there was a violation and there will be no other errors in the future. I think that the problem is heading in this direction and, God willing, will be resolved soon."
In his remarks, Mr Blair told Glasgow-based Real Radio: "The next 48 hours will be fairly critical. I've read the transcripts of the interview [the secretary of the supreme national security council] Ali Larijani gave and that seems to offer some prospect, but the most important thing is to get these people back ... If they want to resolve this in a diplomatic way, the door is open."
The latest developments came as Iran's official news agency reported an Iranian diplomat kidnapped two months ago in Iraq had been released.
Jalal Sharafi, the second secretary at the Iranian Embassy in Baghdad, will return to Tehran later today, the Islamic Republic News Agency reported.
Mr Sharafi was seized early last month when his car was intercepted by vehicles carrying armed men in the Karradah district of Baghdad. The gunmen, who wore Iraqi uniforms, forced him into one of their vehicles and sped away.
Iran said he had been taken by an Iraqi military unit commanded by US forces, and said it was holding the Americans responsible for his safety. The US authorities denied any role in his disappearance.
The seizure of Iranians in Iraq has contributed to heightened tension between Tehran and the west, which are also at loggerheads over Iran's nuclear programme.
US forces are still holding five Iranians who were taken in northern Iraq in January after the US accused them of having links to a network backing armed Shia groups.
Last night, Mr Larijani told Channel 4 News that Iran wanted to see a diplomatic solution to the crisis and called for a delegation to review the alleged violation of Iranian waters and an assurance that such an incident would not be repeated.
Mr Larijani said that if it was found the British naval personnel had crossed into Iranian territory, they would be released following an apology.
Lowering the temperature after days of angry exchanges, he adopted a more conciliatory tone, saying the Iranian government was not interested in putting the detainees on trial, but warned that might change if Britain attempted to impose more international pressure on Tehran.
"We are not interested in this issue getting more complicated," said Mr Larijani. "Our interest is in solving this problem as soon as possible. This issue can be resolved, and there is no need for any trial. There should be a delegation to review the case ... to clarify whether they have been in our territorial waters or not."
Mr Larijani did not specify whether the delegation he was requesting should be British or international, but he did say the issue should be solved "bilaterally".
His remarks could be a response to an offer by Britain to send a team of naval experts and diplomats to discuss how to avoid a repetition of the crisis. The Foreign Office said that, while some differences remained, the government shared Mr Larijani's preference for early discussions to find a diplomatic solution.
A Foreign Office spokeswoman said last night: "We are still studying Dr Larijani's remarks. There remain some differences between us, but we can confirm we share his preference for early bilateral discussions to find a diplomatic solution to this problem. We will be following this up with the Iranian authorities tomorrow, given our shared desire to make early progress."
However, British officials are adamant that the team of experts would not be negotiating the captives' release, and would focus on the future rather than on the incident that triggered the crisis. They said proposed talks would ideally improve the current atmosphere but would not include acceptance of Iranian claims that the British patrol had entered Iranian waters.
Iranian state TV claimed that all 15 of the captured personnel - 14 men and one woman - had now admitted intruding into Iranian territory. Britain remains adamant that they were in Iraqi waters when they were seized and were being detained against their will.
The group were captured after conducting a routine early morning anti-smuggling check on a merchant vessel on Friday March 23.
bron
Ik snap niet dat degenen die er altijd op hameren dat de Conventies Van Geneve, principe van onschuld en internationale wetten altijd onveranderlijk op iedereen van toepassing zijn nu opeens de mening van de Bush regering delen dat eerdere daden slechte behandeling rechtvaardigen.quote:Op dinsdag 3 april 2007 14:08 schreef NorthernStar het volgende:
[..]
[afbeelding]
versus
Tony Blair said "parading" crew in this way would only "enhance people's sense of disgust with Iran".
UK Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett described the latest footage as "quite appalling".
[bbc]
Snap je het nu ?
ik denk het niet. ik kijk al de hele tijd naar de iraanse zenders. ze zenden de hele dag voetbal uitquote:Op dinsdag 3 april 2007 16:15 schreef venomsnake het volgende:
Volgens SKY komen er nieuwe beelden/foto's? van de gevangen genomen Soldaten op de Iraanse tv.
Lees je ergens goedkeuring voor wat Iran doet dan? Misschien kun je het even aanwijzen want dat heb ik gemist dan.quote:Op dinsdag 3 april 2007 16:08 schreef CeeJee het volgende:
[..]
Ik snap niet dat degenen die er altijd op hameren dat de Conventies Van Geneve, principe van onschuld en internationale wetten altijd onveranderlijk op iedereen van toepassing zijn nu opeens de mening van de Bush regering delen dat eerdere daden slechte behandeling rechtvaardigen.
Foto was net te zien op SKY, het gaat om een foto waar je de soldaten in burgerkleding op de grond ziet zitten.quote:Op dinsdag 3 april 2007 16:22 schreef persian2008 het volgende:
[..]
ik denk het niet. ik kijk al de hele tijd naar de iraanse zenders. ze zenden de hele dag voetbal uit
Forum Opties | |
---|---|
Forumhop: | |
Hop naar: |