Appalling: British Female Hostage Shown In Veil On Iranian TV

by admin on March 28, 2007 · 9 comments

Do you like this story?

Take a good look Brits, this may be your future:

hostage in veil

Its appalling and entirely unacceptable (anyone ever heard of the Geneva Conventions?) to show images/video of hostages on television, but I wonder if anyone in the UK will make a big deal out of this? Showing the one female hostage on TV, forced to wear a veil, forced to say they are guilty of trespassing into Iranian waters, and forcing her to say how awesome the Iranians are should be enough to enrage the Brits into action. We’ll wait and see what Blair, et. al. do, but I won’t hold my breath waiting for the appropriate response.

MEMRI has the video of the female sailor:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnVJzcbrVcE[/youtube]

How can they be friendly and warm if they are holding her hostage? All it takes is one look at her face to know how she really feels.

From NRO:

Anyone remember that video of Saddam visiting the western hostages in the run-up to Desert Storm? Saddam made the bad mistake of sitting a British child on his knee; the child looked terrified, and the British public woke up the next morning ready for war.

Hot Air commenters are debating the issue of saying whatever the hostage wants, so you can be freed, and making sure you don’t embarrass your country or put other soldiers in harms way (which is the U.S. code of conduct, paraphrased). Obviously propaganda in favor of Iran harms soldiers, but how effective is this propaganda? Does anyone really believe anything she’s said has NOT been coerced?

From an interview with a British Admiral, via Neo-Neocon:

These particular people would not be trained in counter-interrogation techniques because they are not expected to be captured. But I think our guidance to anyone in that position would be to say what they want you to say, let’s not be silly about it. Don’t tell them secrets, clearly, but if they tell you: ‘Say this’, well if that’s going to get you out, then do it. It means absolutely nothing, what they say, to be honest.

Its hard to watch the female sailor saying the things she’s obviously only agreed to say in order to gain freedom, but it is understandable none the less.

Finally, this letter to the London Times today, via NRO:

Having served with the Royal Navy in the Gulf, during peacetime and war, I wish to express my anger and frustration regarding the situation that has been allowed to develop with our kidnapped Service people in Iran. If, as now seems apparent, we are putting our people in harm’s way with no commitment to back them up should things take a turn for the worse, then we should cease the policy of stop-and-search in the Gulf immediately. At the time of the abduction, HMS Cornwall must have been aware of the approach of the Iranians, using her onboard sensors and those of the Lynx helicopter which was on the scene at the time. Yet apparently no effort was made, either by the heavily armed warship or the Lynx, usually armed at this time with light and heavy machineguns, to protect their sailors or prevent their capture. I know that the Marines would have hated to have given up, and would only have done so because they were directed to by their own commanders. This is another example of this Government’s willingness to commit our people to dangerous operations without the backbone or even the means to back them up.

Related posts:

  1. 15 British Sailors Captured By Iran
  2. Liberal but not a Lunatic – "No Excuse for Terror"
  3. Ramadi: Soldiers Under Fire
  4. Living In Fantasy Land Until The Bitter End
  5. Dennis Miller: Moving Right After 9/11
  • Jeff Davis

    I (as usual) am just too angry too post my thoughts other than I will pray for the
    British soldiers. G-d help us all when we cower to the enemy.

  • Pingback: Headscarves and Outrage : The Crimson Blog

  • Infidelesto

    I think the last part of the post really summed it up quite nicely:

    “At the time of the abduction, HMS Cornwall must have been aware of the approach of the Iranians, using her onboard sensors and those of the Lynx helicopter which was on the scene at the time. Yet apparently no effort was made, either by the heavily armed warship or the Lynx, usually armed at this time with light and heavy machineguns, to protect their sailors or prevent their capture. I know that the Marines would have hated to have given up, and would only have done so because they were directed to by their own commanders. This is another example of this Government’s willingness to commit our people to dangerous operations without the backbone or even the means to back them up.”

  • Sistainfidel

    Interestingly, I read last night that Blair was discussing the British rules of engagement, and his comments led one to believe that had the Cornwall defended these troops and attacked, they would have been under full authority to do so. It seems the backbone was lacking in the Commander of the Cornwall.

  • Gum Boot

    To blow the approaching vessels out of the water would have made the Iranians the victims. This would have festered outrage from the leftist media. A quote describes where Journalistic shame has brought us to, today! “The more Liberals try to CURE THE HUMAN CONDITION the more they FAIL”. Who ever came up with that line was right on. Look at us, Pelosi and her surrender monkeys will act horrified about Abu abuse but never ask the surviving family members of 911 would you have preferred your dad been water boarded or jumped from the 47th floor of the twin towers as he did. The party of pro choice wants us to choose to piddle like a pup. Thank the lord we had ancestors who fought for what we have today.

  • Sistainfidel

    Lots of good points, however, I doubt what was needed was to blow them out of the water, reports today show that the Iranians were hardly a formidable force with only two boats. The point is to protect your soldiers, so they know when they are put in harms way that they have back up.

    Besides, who cares if the lefty’s are outraged? Should we really be evaluating our actions (or should the UK, in this case) based on what the lefty’s will think, or based on what is right? They will always be outraged, there’s really no point in trying to avoid it.

  • http://seniorspeaks.blogspot.com Senior

    I wish to make one thing clear. The position of the UK people doesn’t doesn’t reflect the position of our government. There are a lot of people, and I don’t mean lefty Guardian/independent readers, who want us to declare war on Iran. I happen to believe we should drop bombs on and fire missiles at the country, even if that course of action doesn’t ensure the release of our sailors. They couldn’t defend themselves, because they didn’t have decent enough equipment and their position meant the Iranians would have easily won. That fact though, is a result of our navy not being given the resources it needs in order to carry out its missions safely.

  • Infidelesto

    I’m glad you frequent here, Senior. It’s nice to get a sane British perspective on things, and see it from a different angle, such as yours. I hope all is well with you in the UK.

  • Pingback: The Madman’s Rant « A Defending Crusader…