It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ahmadinejad talks with Syrian ally before journey to U.S.

page: 3
18
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 03:50 AM
link   
reply to post by mayabong
 


I think if they wanted to use it as a media toy it would have been a bit more sensationalized than it is. They wouldnt report the 2 men being in good health and spirit, it would be all torture and beheadings. I think this media gold nugget belongs to the Iranians trying to make themselves look not so bad.




posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 04:15 AM
link   
reply to post by poet1b
 


You must understand, Iran needs SOME leverage. If they just give them all the hikers, they have nothing to bargain with. Look at North Korea. One day we send Bill Clinton over there with smiles and open arms with hopes to release prisoners, which we did achieve, and 3 days later we slam them with sanctions. Iran is not as stupid, they show their willingness to exchange prisoners by giving 1, and if the US is willing to play along, I would guarantee Iran would be considerate enough to release the remaining prisoners.



posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 04:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by mayabong
LOL @ "HIKERS"



ROFL
Noted
for
correct
funniness



posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 04:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Mercenary2007
 


Are you suggesting Iran took these three hikers/spies in to custody because they wanted $500,000?


Rap star Tupac Shakur released from prison on $1.4 million bail in sexual assault case.

Ransom, ops I mean bail..

Once again, non of them have been convicted of anything, but all of them were charged.

Once again, it is a fact that the US has imprisoned many Iranian nationals. The problem is, the US can do what ever it wants without any controversy, there is a reason why the US wants to toned down this incident, because it knows that many Iranians are in American custody.. But hypocrisy is the trademark of arrogance, when we say US... hypocrisy is never far behind.

First the nuke rhetorics, now this
US must be up to something



posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 06:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by mayabong
LOL @ "HIKERS"



I endorse this post


The idea that 3 young 'journalists' were simply wandering around the Iran/Iraq border and got 'lost' is so incredibly disingenuous - also the way it was reported in the MSM, that their mums were worried about them - made them sound like teenagers, when in fact they were between 26 and 31 yrs old.

These were certainly spies, and the fact they didn't get water boarded etc by Iran is worth contrasting to what one might expect to happen to any Iranians detained inside the US who were suspected of espionage.



posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 02:41 PM
link   
reply to post by oozyism
 


no i'm just saying that Iran saying they released her for humanitarian reasons is BS! if you release someone for humanitarian reason there isn't a condition that someone must pay a ransom to have them released. and if Oman wouldn't have paid the ransom sorry i mean bail then she would probably still be in an Iranian prison.

Iran is notorious for requiring "bail" on foreign nationals that they take into custody. By demanding a ransom damn sorry requiring a bail for their release, they skirt international law because such ransom i mean bail does not violate the U.N. Sanctions in place against Iran.

And no its not just American citizens that Iran demands ransom i mean bail from. they demand it for any western citizen.

Edit to add. And lets be honest here. The other 2 hikers that remain in Iran are going on trial next month. do you really believe they have a chance of being found not guilty? I DON'T. In Iran's eyes these 3 were guilty of whatever Iran decided the second they crossed the border.

.


edit on 9/19/2010 by Mercenary2007 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 12:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Mercenary2007
 


It is humanitarian reason because she was released, not because the bail bond had been paid. Even with the bail bond, if convicted she wouldn't be released. In that sense, she was released for humanitarian reasons, because she doesn't have to face a trial.

Get it??



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 08:06 AM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


I wonder what the talk was about? You know this reminds me of another President who was incompetent, Who allowed for American Embassy worker to be held Hostage for 400 Days....



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 08:34 AM
link   
reply to post by oozyism
 

if she doesn't have to face trial then there is no need for bail. that's the whole purpose of bail, you are putting up money or property as a promise you will return to answer the charges against you! Thus since a bail was still required before she was released she wasn't released on humanitarian grounds. and since bail was posted for her Iran can later demand that she be returned to Iran to face trial to answer to the charges against her that required bail.

I know i know next your going to say Iran dropped the charges against her right? WRONG. if they dropped the charges they wouldn't have required bail to be paid and they would have just released her and deported her from the country!

So lets be honest here. Either she still has charges against her in Iran and bail was required for her release, or the charges were dropped and Iran held her hostage and demanded a ransom for her release. either way this her being released on humanitarian grounds is complete and utter BS!

If Iran released her on humanitarian grounds her release wouldn't have been on the condition that bail or ransom be paid before Iran would release her!

DO YOU GET IT NOW? Probably not



edit on 9/20/2010 by Mercenary2007 because: (no reason given)




edit on 9/20/2010 by Mercenary2007 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 09:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Mercenary2007
 


So how many potential perps are on bail in the USA, rough guess 500000, does that make the USA the biggest extortion racket in history, NO, many other actions of the USA do though.



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 10:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Mercenary2007
 



If Iran released her on humanitarian grounds her release wouldn't have been on the condition that bail or ransom be paid before Iran would release her!


That alone says that becuase Bail was set they still intend to have a case.
Do they have a case?



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 02:27 PM
link   

Thread Update





Released American prisoner Sarah Shourd wants Iran to give her fellow hikers freedom. . Follow us on twitter at



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 05:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Thepreye
 


and out of all those people in the U.S. that are out on bail, still have charges against them? and how many of them either return to court to face the charges or except a plea deal? The point is Bail is required as a promise you will return to answer the charges against you. If Iran released her on humanitarian grounds they wouldn't have required bail and the charges against her would have been dropped! But since bail was a condition of her release then the charges are still there, and she wasn't released on humanitarian grounds. And Iran can at a later date demand she be returned to Iran to face trial.

So your attempt to try and twist it around fails miserably!



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 05:15 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


I don't Know Slayer. all we have is her word and Iran's word. so who do we believe? Iran says they have a case against her she says she's not a spy and that the 3 hikers didn't cross the border. But in the same breathe she says the border in that area wasn't marked or was poorly marked. so in all honesty she doesn't really know if they crossed the border or not.



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 05:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Mercenary2007
 



Great point.

We don't know, Nobody knows for sure.
There is a lot of circumstantial evidence but that only carry's so much weight.



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 06:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Mercenary2007
 




if she doesn't have to face trial then there is no need for bail. that's the whole purpose of bail, you are putting up money or property as a promise you will return to answer the charges against you!


Did 2pac go back to face the charges when his boss paid over a million for his bail?

That is an interesting question to answer.



Iranian authorities said last month spy charges were pending against the Americans – Shane Bauer, Sarah Shourd and John Fattal, but the comments from the Iranian Foreign Minister were the first indication that a trial might be imminent.


Just to add, so that the counter part doesn't get confuse, the humanitarian ground was the fact that she was released, the charges will continue, because she is on bail. That means if she has nothing to fear, she will go back and face the charges, and who ever paid the money, can get it back. Riiiiight ??




edit on 20-9-2010 by oozyism because: add extra detail



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 06:37 PM
link   
reply to post by oozyism
 


Star for you oozi.
I star anyone who mentions 2pac



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 07:52 PM
link   
Tehran and DC are playing their games using Oman as the go-between. Let's not paint Shourd's release as simply a humanitarian gesture and nothing more. It was a political move.


"The Americans discovered the Omanis can be a good go–between, especially when there's a human dimension," said Mustafa Alani of the Dubai–based Gulf Research Center. "Tehran always opens its door to the Omanis."



Shourd's attorney, Masoud Shafiei, told The Associated Press (News - Alert) in Tehran that a "foreign individual paid the bail in Muscat" and insisted it was "neither a government nor an embassy," though he did not know the identity of the benefactor.





ed: link


edit on 20-9-2010 by LadySkadi because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join