The danger however had not passed, nor has it yet, even though as I write this (April 4, 2007 1:30 p.m. EDT) Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has just announced the release of the detainees. The likelihood of an imminent quid pro quo release of the British detainees was presaged by the release on April 3rd of Jalal Sharafi, second secretary of Iran's embassy in Baghdad, who was kidnapped in Baghdad on February 4. “An Iraqi government official said at the time he was seized that Sharafi was snatched in Baghdad's central Karrada district by 30 gunmen wearing the uniforms of a special Iraqi army unit that often works with US military forces in Iraq.”
“Ahmadinejad's announcement came after Iran's official Islamic Republic News Agency reported that an Iranian envoy would be allowed to meet five Iranians detained by U.S. forces in northern Iraq.”
“A U.S. military spokesman in Baghdad said, however, that American authorities were still considering the request. The spokesman, Maj. Gen. William C. Caldwell, said an international Red Cross team, including an Iranian, had visited the prisoners but he did not say when.”
Despite these positive developments there is still no indication that the British, American and Israeli war parties have abandoned their agenda because of this one apparent setback. Quite the contrary they have worked for many months to put Iran dead centre in the crosshairs and there is every indication that they are on the verge of unleashing the ‘dog of world war’ on the citizens of Iran and the world.
Little if any analysis has been devoted to the background of the tempest which has engulfed the fifteen British swabbies. The Media’s generally tight focus on their detention and release distorts and obscures the broader context of the event and elicits emotional rather than thoughtful responses from the public.
This is an intended consequence of the Mainstream Media’s presentation of the story. Lacking any substantive understanding of the background the public responds in kind to the media’s pejorative and inflammatory language about the “captured”, “ambushed”, “hostages”, when speaking of the British sailors, and “detainees” when referring to the five Iranian diplomats illegally seized by the American army in Arbil in Iraqi Kurdistan on January 11, who according to State Department spokesman Sean McCormack “…are being treated as any other security detainee in Iraq” – God help them if this is true - remember Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay because that is what “being treated like any other detainee” implies.
An editorial on the Islamic Institute for Services website makes this case in an editorial commenting on the release and treatment of the British military personnel, pointedly noting that for the detainees there was “No orange jump suits, no barbed wire, no hoods, no electric shocks, no dogs let loose on them, no sodomy, no rape, no wild and threatening statements and no steroid fed soldiers leading them on a leash! Contrast that with Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo and Baghram in Afghanistan and you can see which culture is civilised.”
1) The newly freed British sailors wave following their release in Tehran (AFP Photo)
2 Prisoners in Guantanamo Bay
The comparison is a difficult one to avoid, as well as the questions it should raise in our minds about our supposedly democratic western governments, our leaders, and our complacent acceptance of the atrocities that are being committed daily around the globe by our governments in our name.
This being the case it is quite understandable that Tony Blair and George Bush are infuriated by the Iranian video broadcasts of the detainees, which shows them to be healthy relaxed and not fearful. They do not want us being reminded of these comparisons and asking questions as to which of our two societies, Bush’s epithet “axis of evil”, properly applies. The hypocrisy of our leaders knows no bounds.
It is also no wonder the US (is) evasive over the fate of five Iranians seized in Iraq. I am more than a little suspicious given the proven and admitted record regarding the American and British use of extreme torture during incarceration (excuse me, detention) and interrogation (er, questioning) that it will take considerable time to put the Iranian detainees back together emotionally, mentally, and physically, before they can be released for public view, and even then it is unlikely we will see anything matching the photos we saw to-day of the 15 smiling and relaxed British sailors.
When people lack substantive information on an issue affecting their security they are easily manipulated into unquestioning adoption of the stances of their leaders. Blair speaking outside his No. 10 Downing St. office after the release of the British detainees said, ‘Throughout, we have taken a measured approach, firm but calm, not negotiating but not confronting, either." Ignoring Blair’s veiled threat of March 26 that “Iran has only a few days to find a diplomatic solution to the escalating crisis” the directly involved British government was in large part much less confrontational during the crisis than their U.S. coalition partner. The U.S. Government's aggresive posture during the confrontation led 'Time e-zine' to ask in an article of March 29th, “Is a U.S.-Iran War Inevitable?” It notes that;
"The Bush Administration is doing nothing to allay Tehran's paranoia. With the largest buildup in the Gulf since the start of this Iraq war, it's actually fanning it. You have to wonder if Bush is counting on the Iranians' overreacting the way they did when they seized our embassy in 1979. And lest we forget, this was driven by paranoia that we were plotting to destroy the revolution."
U.S. Navy Cmdr. Kevin Aandahl "declined to specify when the Navy planned the exercises." ... ...
“What it should be seen as by Iran or anyone else is that it’s for regional stability and security,” Aandahl said. “These ships are just another demonstration of that. If there’s a destabilizing effect, it’s Iran’s behavior.”
Coming Up Next: Gulf Daze 3: (Iran in the Crosshairs)
- Why is the Jerusalem Post reporting that the “US (is) ready to strike Iran on Good Friday” ?
- Is either Good Friday, April 6 from 6 A.M. to 6 P.M. or from 6 P.M Good Friday to 6 A.M. Saturday, April 7 (666) a candidate for the commencement of overt hostilities against Iran if the Jerusalem Post is correct about Good Friday ? - 12 hours of "Shock and Awe", “Operation Gulf Daze”
No comments:
Post a Comment