FleaInNYCbanner.jpg

? Bauhaus: Bela Lugosi's Dead | Main | Rammstein: Sonne ?

April 02, 2007

Comment 93

You stupid bitch.

Seriously, if anyone yet doubts we are also at war with our own morons as much as we are with the seventh-century, please refer to this Popular Mechanics response to Rosie O'Donnell's latest embarrassment of Reason. My favourite comment summarizes the problem.

After reading this carefully, I am flummoxed. Who are we supposed to believe: a host of physicists, demolition experts, and FEMA officials or a big, fat, stupid, loudmouth lefty comedienne on a dopey chick talk show? I'm stumped; really, really stumped.

Commentary at Chasing Vincezo via Agent Bedhead from whence the first link.

Posted by Ghost of a flea at April 2, 2007 07:27 AM

Comments

I hate that damn Rosie.

Almost as much as I hate Oprah.

Posted by: agent bedhead [TypeKey Profile Page] at April 2, 2007 11:43 AM

It seems pretty clear from the majority of mainstream news reports that this was a deliberate straying, and hence a provocation to the Iranian government.

I myself was suddenly on the receiving end of some friendly in-person affection from the "scholar" Reza Aslan, who while posing as some sort of moderate or even liberal has been trumping up the case for invasion of Iran on the Colbert Report and other fun televised American entertainments for over two years before the staged seizure of the British subjects. He also happened to know all about an FBI file I have from protesting plant closing in my very Goth-friendly hometown of Detroit. I myself did not know this until the famous Mr. Aslan referred to it. He knew because he is on the Federal payroll for trumping up the case against Iran.

This little creep is spying on his civilian friends and lying on television for pay. It was this alarming event that led me to see the lengths to which the U.S. and its allies are going to cover up their real intentions.

Nearly everything we see these days is completely contrived.

I can see that your pain and anger are real, but in the future I think you may find a more nuanced view of who is responsible for putting your countryment in danger--namely your country.

It's sad and it's infuriating, but Rosie, I'm afraid, is right.

Posted by: Theresa Duncan [TypeKey Profile Page] at April 3, 2007 03:05 PM

Hi Theresa. Thank you for your level-headed response to my rather hyperbolic post. I cannot imagine, however, what mainstream news sources you might be referring to. Everything I have seen suggests the Iranians violated Iraqi sovereignty - again - and the United Nations mandate under which the British were acting.

Posted by: Ghost of a flea [TypeKey Profile Page] at April 3, 2007 03:09 PM

Here's a British Royal Navy Commodore saying that the map was faked by Blair in the UK's Daily Mail. I'm looking for some major U.S. Newspaper reports I have read over the past week that say the same:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/newscomment.htmlin_article_id=445896&in_page_id=1787&in_a_source=

Posted by: Theresa Duncan [TypeKey Profile Page] at April 3, 2007 03:36 PM

From Sunday's New York Times:
The question of the Britons’ location at the time of their arrest has been further clouded by arguments here and in the United States about whether there is a clear maritime frontier between Iran and Iraq. As the dispute escalated, both sides produced nautical charts purporting to show a clear demarcation of territorial waters, and the locations of the British boats when they were seized.

But Craig Murray, a former British diplomat and Foreign Office specialist on maritime affairs, said, “There is no agreed maritime boundary between Iraq and Iran in the Persian Gulf. Until the current mad propaganda exercise of the last week, nobody would have found that in the least a controversial statement.”

In postings on his Web site, www.craigmurray.co.uk, Mr. Murray referred to charts shown by the Royal Navy to reinforce its argument, saying: “The Iran-Iraq maritime boundary shown on the British government map does not exist. It has been drawn up by the British government.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/world/middleeast/01iran.html?hp

Here's more, with URL sources:

Confusion reigns about Iran’s claim that UK service personnel were captured in Iranian waters
Following research and a careful construction of the median line between the two charted coastlines, one academic specialist at the International Boundaries Research Unit of Durham University in the U.K. has posted an analysis, with a map, of the Iran-Iraq maritime boundary on this site:
http://www.dur.ac.uk/ibru/resources/iran-iraq/

The issue is also being hotly debated on this blog:
http://www.craigmurray.co.uk/weblog.html
The author of this blog, Craig Murray, writes: “I might even know something about it myself, having been Head of the Maritime Section of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office from 1989 to 1992, and having been personally responsible in the Embargo Surveillance Centre for getting individual real time clearance for the Royal Navy to board specific vessels in these waters. As I feared, Blair adopted the stupid and confrontational approach of publishing maps ignoring the boundary dispute, thus claiming a very blurred situation is crystal clear and the Iranians totally in the wrong. This has in turn notched the Iranians up another twist in their own spiral of intransigence and stupidity.
Both the British and the Iranian governments are milking this for maximum propaganda value and playing to their respective galleries. Neither has any real care at all for either the British captives or the thousands who could die in Iran and Basra if this gets out of hand…

http://www.un-truth.com/?p=373

Posted by: Theresa Duncan [TypeKey Profile Page] at April 3, 2007 03:44 PM

I believe you are referring to this article (your link directed me to a non-existent page):

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/newscomment.html?in_article_id=445896&in_page_id=1787&in_a_source=

You will notice the claim being made is that the Ministry of Defense "faked" the border. Once again, this would place the MOD in line not only with No. 10 but with the United Nations mandate under which the search was being conducted and the more recent United Nations Security Council resolution expressing grave concern over this clear Iranian provocation. Not to mention subsequent repeated violations of the Geneva Conventions by Iran in threatening to prosecute uniformed sailors and marines as "spies", parading them before the press and issuing "confessions" under duress. Not to mention forcing a British sailor to wear a tea-towel on her head.

But then somehow none of this seems to matter to you. I could be mistaken. Perhaps you reserve some tiny opprobrium for the fascists running Iran and some vague sympathy for yet another woman forced to endure the conditions hundreds of millions of "muslim" women endure for their entire lives.

Posted by: Ghost of a flea [TypeKey Profile Page] at April 3, 2007 03:45 PM

"But Craig Murray, a former British diplomat and Foreign Office specialist on maritime affairs..."

I note the New York Times does not think it is worth mentioning Craig Murray was recalled from his diplomatic post for issuing visas in exchange for sex and was subsequently charged with gross misconduct. But any source is good enough for the Times if it can be spun against the British. And the hell with liberty including the liberty of tens of millions of Iranians desperate to be rid of their Dark Ages government.

Posted by: Ghost of a flea [TypeKey Profile Page] at April 3, 2007 03:51 PM

Off topic: I think your blog is brilliant, btw, though I doubt we are going to see eye-to-eye on this subject.

Posted by: Ghost of a flea [TypeKey Profile Page] at April 3, 2007 03:54 PM

Well, the British are generally beloved by New Yorkers to an absurd degree, truth to tell.

And I do find the current Iranian rulers to be creepy fascists.

As a woman I find the head scarf thing frightening and oppresive.

That said, being spied on and lied to by my own government trumps these all in the shocking and infuriating category. Because, you know, I'm paying for it.

Sex scandals don't affect borders, but a liar and a crook is often a liar and a crook in more than one category, I agree.

Love your blog too, BTW.

Peace,
TD

Posted by: Theresa Duncan [TypeKey Profile Page] at April 3, 2007 04:11 PM