of course, typical propaganda effort, done over and over in the middle east by arab countries. but the brits have been treated well. we'd look like hypocrites if we'd complain, after considering the way we do biz in guantanamo/abu graib, using redention and torture.
They were paraded on TV and publicly humiliated, the female British sailor was forced to wear headscarf. I am not sure this qualifies as a good treatement, let alone the fact that it's a clear violation of the Geneva convention. Moreover, while I tend to agree with you on Gitmo/Abu Graib abuses, you should keep in mind that Gitmo/Abu Graib prisoners are presumed to be enemy combatants - people who had actively attacked and killed american troops. The british sailors can't be considered enemy combatants by any stretch of imagination. I am certainly not trying to justify the treatement of prisoners in Abu Graib but the comparison with the treatement of the UK sailors in Iran is not valid.
geneva conventions apply to war, we are not in war with iran [yet]. the vast majority of gitmo prisoners and moreover abu graib's are normal folks and peasants not terrorists, imprisoned after they were up for sale by the northern alliance, that was only after money, not concerned at all in capturing real terrrorists. infact they were caught by the media rounding up innocent folks from their houses. still, i rather be humiliated than waterboarded and having my testicles electrocuted.
geneva conventions apply to war, Nice technicality. As we're not technically at war with Iraq either I suppose we are then allowed to parade captured Iraqis on TV and you won't object, right? And we're not at war with Iran so the american government would be justified to parade Iranian people captured in Iraq on american TV in yarmulkas making forced confessions of crimes and violations. You would not mind, would you? the vast majority of gitmo prisoners and moreover abu graib's are normal folks and peasants not terrorists, And can you prove it? I am sure some are and as I said I disagree with the treatement of prisoners in Abu Graib/Gitmo, but claims that "the vast majority" of them are innocent peasants is baseless, anti-american garbage.
omfg, how many got let free without charge. its the lawyers saying it's not me. drop that anti-american crap. you paraded prisoners on hoods, of course the hoods are just to protect their identity, isn't it. talking about false confessions, i guess u also bought ksm confession when he claimed he targeted a building that hadn't even been built when he was free, of course after taking responsibility for everything from jfk-jfr-mlk deaths, the sinking of the maine to the gulf of tonkin, lmao, you are a total hypocrite and a pathetic fucking prick, its you talking absolute garbage and attacking everyone that disagrees with you. get bent
"And can you prove it? I am sure some are and as I said I disagree with the treatement of prisoners in Abu Graib/Gitmo, but claims that "the vast majority" of them are innocent peasants is baseless, anti-american garbage." Uhhh, in a country were we assume innocence until guilt is actually proved, the proud neoklans assume guilt forcing others to prove innocence before a military tribunal where they don't have proper representation or a verdict based on the evidence as determined by their peers.... Classic neoklan rationalizations... ...and if someone doesn't agree with them they are anti-American. Totalitarian thinking is anti-American...
I am not disputing this (or at least parts of what you said) but the US was widely condemned and criticized for their treatement of Gitmo/Abu Graib prisoners and similar actions. People like you and Z10s of the world were among the loudest critics of these actions, yet now you are desperately trying to explain, justify and excuse criminal actions of the Iranian government. Take your excuse that the Geneva convention is only applicable to prisoners of war for example - that's exacty the kind of bogus excuse that the Bush administration has been using regarding Abu Graib and Gitmo prisoners, they also claimed that they were not prisoners of war. And their point is as valid as yours unless of course you can specify what army these prisoners belonged to and what country's uniform they wore. So who is a hypocrite? I equally condemning the actions of American and Iranian government or you bashing this country day in and day out and yet bending over backward to justify the actions of the Iranian and many other muslim/arab rogue regimes?
but the brits were not prisoners of war, while the gitmo folks technically are since they were supposedly fighting against american troops...sorry, u got this all backward. you cant compare the two episodes, nobody was tortured in iran, they have been humiliated of course but also treated very well. it's a far cry from been subject to torture and a far cry from be a criminal action. it was propaganda, period. and i dont bash the country, i bash the government...that's far from be anti-american, it should be considered patriotic to keep politicians and their actions in check...that's how bad the situation got over there, patriots now are usualy bashed and called anti-americans for not supporting the war or for been critical of this administrtion. typical of repressive regimes and a sorry state of affairs. look what happend to rosie o'donnel, i am not saying you should agree with her but she's got the right exercise her freedom of speech yet she's been painted as anti-american and media attack dogs went as far as saying she should be hanged.
"... yet now you are desperately trying to explain, justify and excuse criminal actions of the Iranian government." If trading doesn't work out for you, you can always get a job writing hyperbole and fantasy for Limbaugh, Coulter, Hannity, Fox News, etc.