US House Silent on British Hostage Crisis - Why?

Just a hint for you Justanother, when you hear something always try and find a link to a soucre that backs up what you are saying. Yes we know they lie but when they lie you have to be able to prove it first or someone might label you a disinformation agent. No I am not saying you are just pointing out things that will help to prevent assumptions by others

Depends who you are reffering to?

I kniow whom Im going with, and it certainly is not Iran....................

Geeze I leave to go to a movie, and Bush commented on the matter! Blast! Oh well, it's not like I really missed anything

I've said it once, and I'll say it again...

The gears of war are ready to run once again.

it was on cnn earlier thats ussually where my tv stays i dont look up news on the internet googles tainted and no i cant prove that either but ive never trusted google cause its not a real word

I can see how you can come to that conclusion, if you put aside the 20+ years Iran has lied about its nuclear ambitions.


[edit on 31-3-2007 by crisko]

Come on man, what credibility do they have now?

They Iran Ist of all hand over co - ordinates to the UK Which put those sailors marines in Iraqi waters, then only 2 - 5 days later, change their mind and say no these are the correct co-ordinate....

The they show on tv letters supposingly which has been writtenby the female held in captive, (which has been disputed by proffessional hand writters) and a ex Iraqi prisoner who in captive, during the first gulf war...

Wouldnt you go along with what they say, if they told you that you would be freed shortly?

To me anyone scared thinking they are gonna be freed will go along with what ever someone else says........

I was under the impression that you were saying Iran wouldn't lie.

Ums where in my comments have I Said that Iran wouldnt lie????

I would like for you to show prove first of all....

I have never posted comments such as that .......

I'm sorry, I must need reading glasses. The US was involved before this episode in some items that put into question our respect for the Geneva Convention. I balked because it was wrong, and personally, because it was my country that I was proud enough of to know that we were better than that.

After the United States of America (the epitome of truth and justice worldwide) decided to crap on the Geneva Convention, and talk the talk of how they don't have to listen to certain parts anymore, why can't any country do it? It doesn't make much sense to cry foul on the other team, when they were doing what you have been doing during the whole game.

As for Congress, well what did you expect? They are no more useful to the general population than the last party was, because they serve their own interests. It's all a game to both sides, and that, imo, is really all it boils down to. They get elected to play a game, and sometimes they can play for blood.

I follow the markets a bit, and tend to adhere to the adage that concerning major political strategies...in the final analysis:"it's about the money--stupid!"...me, not you.

Along with honoring a request from the UK, which allows them the dignity to deal publicly with this issue themselves ( I think most would agree that it's appropriate for them to walk point on this one)...I'm motivated to consider the immediate economic consequences of a hard line from the White House.

After losing 400+ points in February...news of the British hostage story saw oil to spike to a 6 month high...the Dollar falter, and the market began to sputter again on inflationary concerns.

I believe that ANY involvement from the White House (language...soft, or strong) on this issue, will be interpreted by the market as a step closer to US conflict with Iran...and an already insecure market, is sure to respond immediately to the negative.

While I don't believe that this is the only reason for the 'silence'...and that much is taking place behind the curtain, I do think that current US economic vulnerability is worthy of consideration here. It kinda makes sense that the administration would like to see the situation resolved short of direct, public US involvement....at least for the moment.

Am I completely whacked over here? If so , maybe the good people of ATS can pull me back to center on this one.....

Peace &
Good Fortune
OBE1

EDIT: 3rd time...kant spel berry wel...make that 4.



[edit on 31-3-2007 by OBE1]

Simply because they cant make it obvious, how much this plays into their plans so perfectly.

I mean look at him, could he of planned this any better?

That photo is on CNN, today April 1st 2007.

HIs men are dying daily,
His nation is suffering globally,
His economy is struggling,
and he's facing a potentially devestating conflict thats engulfing a region.

Does he really look like a leader who' facing tough decisions?
Or a business man who's about to pull of the greatest business deal in hisotry.

[edit on 31-3-2007 by Agit8dChop]

Looks like a guy with a BAD hangover to me...

Peace &
Good Fortune
OBE1

Looking at the new thread on the Current Events Forum "Bush calls on Iran to free U.K. sailors"...guess we'll find out come opening bell.

Peace &
Good Fortune
OBE1

[edit on 31-3-2007 by OBE1]

Yesterday or the day before the EU blasted Iran today it is Canada. Way to go Canada

Canada blasts Iran over hostages

Mean while the US with the exception of Bush is silent how pathetic is that?

Shots... you never read the source I porvided that explicitly says that the UK has asked the US to not make comments? The US was (rightly so) asked to remain quiet while they sort it out. You asked for the source, I provided it. THAT is why we're being quiet... at the moment.

I recall reports on the BBC suggesting that the British Government has asked the US to keep the rhetoric to a minimum on this one so as not to push the Iranians into doing something irrational. If this is the case then the US is doing a pretty good job at honouring the UK's request so far (aside from the President's outburst today Did anyone else think he hesitated slightly before saying it, as if he was thinking he knew he shouldn't but he really had to get across what he thought?)

Rest assured, behind closed doors I'm sure the denunciations (amongst other things) are coming thick and fast

It now seems that the British embassy in Tehran is at risk of being compromised by rioters. As you may recall, this happened to the Americans in 1979. Does anyone know if the British military garrison at that embassy will engage, or will they surrender if the compound is breached?