Former hostages allege Iran's new president was captor

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Former hostages allege Iran's new president was captor

Postby human » Thu Jun 30, 2005 2:55 pm

<!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Former hostages allege Iran's new president was captor</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br>Thursday, June 30, 2005 Posted: 1638 GMT (0038 HKT)<br><br><!--EZCODE IMAGE START--><img src="http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2005/WORLD/meast/06/30/iran.president/story.split.iran.pres.jpg"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END--><br><br>NEW YORK (CNN) -- A quarter-century after their 444-day ordeal at the U.S. Embassy in Tehran, several former hostages say Iran's hardline president-elect, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, was one of their captors.<br><br>"As soon as I saw the face, it rang a lot of bells to me," Don Sharer, of Bedford, Indiana, told CNN. He had served as the embassy's naval attache when the hostage-taking occurred.<br><br>"...Take 20 years off of him. He was there. He was there in the background, more like an adviser."<br><br>The November 4, 1979, embassy takeover followed protests demanding that the United States return the shah to Tehran for trial. He had been overthrown by the Islamic revolution 11 months prior and was receiving cancer treatment in New York at the time.<br><br>The embassy seizure resulted in a botched rescue mission that left eight U.S. soldiers dead and the severance of U.S.-Iranian ties ever since.<br><br>The Associated Press reports the White House is taking the allegations seriously.<br><br>"I think the news reports and statements from several former American hostages raise many questions about his past," White House press secretary Scott McClellan told the AP. "We take them very seriously and we are looking into them to better understand the facts."<br><br>"I saw his picture in the Washington Post on Saturday morning, recognized it immediately and then sent an e-mail out to some of my former colleagues ... telling them what I thought and seeing what kind of responses they might have to it," said William Daugherty, a former CIA officer who now lives in Savannah, Georgia.<br><br>Iranian officials deny Ahmadinejad took part, and members of the student group involved in the takeover -- some of whom now support reformist President Mohammed Khatami -- told CNN that Ahmadinejad was not part of it.<br><br>The AP, in its archives, has a series of photographs showing a student hostage-taker that some of the former hostages believe to be Ahmadinejad.<br><br>But Iranian officials deny it, and, while there is a resemblance, that resemblance is not definitive.<br><br>Ahmadinejad's official biography says that as a student at the University of Science and Technology, he was a member of the Office for Strengthening Unity, the student organization that planned the takeover.<br><br>Ahmadinejad joined the Revolutionary Guards in 1980 and served in the Iran-Iraq war.<br><br>Daugherty said he remembers "seeing him acting in a supervisory or leadership capacity during the first ... 2 1/2 weeks (but) on the 19th day, I was moved into solitary confinement and had limited contact with even my Iranian guards after that."<br><br>Sharer said he was 99 percent sure Ahmadinejad was involved.<br><br>"In one incident he just called (Army attache Col. Charles Scott) pigs and dogs and we deserved to be locked up forever," he said. "When you're placed in a life-threatening situation of that nature, you just remember those things."<br><br>The AP reports that one person who did not recognize Ahmadinejad as a captor was senior defense attache at the time, Col. Tom Schaefer. The AP reported him being more concerned about the return to power of hardliners in Iran than by the thought Ahmadinejad might have been a hostage-taker.<br><br>Asked about Schaefer's recollections, Daugherty and Sharer said memory works different ways for different people.<br><br>"We were all in different circumstances," Daugherty said. "We were exposed to some of the Iranians more than others. So, you know, if Tom was actually quoted correctly in saying he didn't remember, again that's not the same thing as the guy not being there."<br><br>The hostage crisis ended after intense negotiations. Minutes after Ronald Reagan was sworn in as U.S. president on January 20, 1981, the 52 hostages were released.<br><br><!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/06/30/iran.president/">SOURCE</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--> <p></p><i></i>
human
 
Posts: 169
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 3:21 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

---

Postby human » Thu Jun 30, 2005 2:57 pm

he worked with em then...<br><br>he works with them now.<br><br><br><br>any conflict is staged my friends. <p></p><i></i>
human
 
Posts: 169
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 3:21 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

The news spin

Postby sparkinthedark » Thu Jun 30, 2005 4:48 pm

Just saw some idiot reporter girl on CNN say "well of course, Bush is a war president, so he could not deal with this man as he is a terrorist". Well of course Bush is a war president because he STARTED the war with a stinking lie. They are ramping up again....... <p></p><i></i>
sparkinthedark
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 8:54 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Wow.

Postby Jerky » Thu Jun 30, 2005 6:42 pm

Another slip-up by The Powers That Be?<br><br>Will he blow the October Surprise wide open? <p></p><i></i>
User avatar
Jerky
 
Posts: 2240
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 6:28 pm
Location: Toronto, ON
Blog: View Blog (0)

The Burden of Proof

Postby antiaristo » Thu Jun 30, 2005 6:57 pm

Same old same old song.<br>It's up to the wogs to PROVE {insert} was not there.<br><br>America is a legalistic society, here are the rules. Where a witness is found to have lied, the remainder of his testimony is held to be worthless.<br><br>If America can provide hard proof, then maybe we have a debate.<br><br>Otherwise the PEOPLE of the world are with the Iranian people. The PEOPLE of America would be wise to take note. <p></p><i></i>
antiaristo
 
Posts: 2555
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 9:50 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

huh?

Postby human » Thu Jun 30, 2005 7:15 pm

the PEOPLE of America? vs. the PEOPLE of the world?<br><br>how can one make such a distinction?<br><br><br>obviously, much like Osama Bin Laden & Saddam Hussein, this new Iranian president has been working with the Bush PEOPLE for a long time now...<br><br>whats that got to do with international solidarity?<br><br>it says to me that the Iranian PEOPLE have gotten duped again... and that any conflict is a staged operation.<br><br>from BOTH sides working together, false left right paradigm as per usual....<br><br>one<br>human? <p></p><i></i>
human
 
Posts: 169
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 3:21 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

huh?

Postby antiaristo » Thu Jun 30, 2005 7:31 pm

"the PEOPLE of America? vs. the PEOPLE of the world?<br><br>how can one make such a distinction?"<br><br><br>human,<br><br>That is exactly my point. Do the American people accept the principle of natural justice or not? <p></p><i></i>
antiaristo
 
Posts: 2555
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 9:50 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

re: huh?

Postby anon » Thu Jun 30, 2005 7:53 pm

"Do the American people accept the principle of natural justice or not?"<br><br>Bad question. Some Americans do, some don't. Just like people of other nations. <p></p><i></i>
anon
 
Posts: 106
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 7:27 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

heh

Postby human » Thu Jun 30, 2005 7:55 pm

<!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>That is exactly my point. Do the American people accept the principle of natural justice or not? </em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--><br><br>um, the "American" "people" have a variety of ideas about everything, quite the reflection of the world in general...<br><br>whats natural justice?<br><br>i dont get your point..<br><br> <p></p><i></i>
human
 
Posts: 169
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 3:21 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

What's natural justice?

Postby antiaristo » Thu Jun 30, 2005 8:18 pm

human,<br><br>Part of natural justice is that the burden of proof lies on the acuser. If the acuser has hard evidence, and given Powell's UN performance it will have to be hard, then we have the debate about what it means.<br><br>Note that CNN wants to have it the other way around. <p></p><i></i>
antiaristo
 
Posts: 2555
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 9:50 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

okay

Postby human » Thu Jun 30, 2005 8:33 pm

so, seems to me we have a eye witness.<br><br>a hostage said this dude took me hostage...<br><br>so, we then look at the October Suprise & Iran Contra and infer that the new President of Iran is a "enemy" of Bush & Co. much along the same lines as Osama Bin Laden & Saddam Hussein. thus the PEOPLE of the world ought to take note that its a big scam. <br><br>my point is, you will get absolutely nowhere blaming the American "people" for any of this. it is a INTERNATIONAL crime syndacite, or probably SUPRANATIONAL is a better word...<br><br>to make the distinction of PEOPLE of the world vs PEOPLE of America invalidates any kind of ideas you have of PEOPLE of the world as incomplete.<br><br>its as if all of a sudden Bush invented imperialism.... lol. and as if he represents the American "people".... (i mean he does.. the dark side.. but not just of America, of the world..)<br><br>so let me get this straight... had they been better liars, it would have been okay to invade Iraq? or if it had been Koffi Anon lying to us about WMD's the Iraq war would be naturally justified?<br><br>im still missing the logic.<br><br>one<br>human?<br><br><br><br> <p></p><i></i>
human
 
Posts: 169
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 3:21 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

btw

Postby human » Thu Jun 30, 2005 8:45 pm

i do think there is a distinction to be made...<br><br>the American PEOPLE vs. the American Govt. Media etc...<br><br>the PEOPLE of this country are exactly, and when i say exactly i mean EXACTLY the same as the PEOPLE in every other country around the world.<br><br>same families, same jobs, same loves, same same same same....<br><br>PEOPLE are PEOPLE everywhere, and a real PEOPLES struggle must take note of that before even trying to spell the word revolutionary.<br><br>of course the CNN line of thought is bullshit! that we dont disagree. but its dangerous to fall into the us vs. them, because from a worldly perspective ive seen that its all just us.<br><br>one<br>human? <p></p><i></i>
human
 
Posts: 169
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 3:21 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

.

Postby antiaristo » Thu Jun 30, 2005 8:45 pm

human,<br><br>The American people are responsible for the actions of their government. <p></p><i></i>
antiaristo
 
Posts: 2555
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 9:50 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

hmmm

Postby human » Thu Jun 30, 2005 8:57 pm

i hate to break it to you, but there is no government here.<br><br>there is a occult crime syndacite that calls itself a government, but the Republic is long gone my friend.<br><br>check the patches on the troops. reversed American flags... those troops dont represent our will at all.<br><br>and what im saying is that the occult crime sydacite that masquerades as the US Government, is a supranational organization with no national loyalty whatsoever.<br><br>they pretend to be American, British, Iranian, Muslim, Communist, etc. whatever suits the agenda.<br><br>a real PEOPLES international will recognize that.<br><br>one<br>human?<br><br> <p></p><i></i>
human
 
Posts: 169
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 3:21 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: What's natural justice?

Postby wolf pauli » Thu Jun 30, 2005 9:38 pm

<!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>Part of natural justice is that the burden of proof lies on the acuser.</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--><br><br>For what it's worth, the issue of burden of proof doesn't enter into "the principle of natural justice", which is normally understood as the conjunction of the statements <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>nemo judex in causa sua</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> (no one shall judge his own case) and <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>audi alteram partem</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> (the other side shall be heard), i.e. judicial impartiality and fairness.<br><br>At any rate, for reasons mentioned by anon and human, it's pointless to ask whether the "American people" believe in judicial impartiality, fairness, <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>or</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> the principle of burden of proof you mention. We don't even know how Don Sharer or William Daugherty feel about it -- they weren't speaking in a judicial context, let alone as judges or jurors.<br><br>As to the claim that "The American people are responsible for the actions of their government", that goes for the government they <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>elect</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END-->; Bush & Co. appear to lack that attribute.<br> <p></p><i></i>
wolf pauli
 
Posts: 122
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 8:20 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Next

Return to Middle East

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest