Iranian students storm British Embassy

[Rochard]

Surprised no one posted this already.... Seems a large group of Iranian students have taken over the British Embassy and other sites in Iran. The Iran hostage crisis was a bit before my time, but I'm guessing a lot of people are pissing in their pants this morning.

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) ? Hard-line Iranian students stormed British diplomatic sites in Tehran on Tuesday, bringing down the Union Jack flag, burning an embassy vehicle and throwing documents from windows in scenes reminiscent of the seizing of the U.S. compound in 1979.

The mob surged past riot police into the British Embassy complex ? which they pelted with petrol bombs and stones ? two days after Iran's parliament approved a bill that reduces diplomatic relations with Britain following London's support of recently upgraded Western sanctions on Tehran over its disputed nuclear program. Flames shot out of a sport utility vehicle parked outside the brick building.

Demonstrators outside the embassy also burned British flags and clashed with police as the rally, which had been organized by student groups at universities and seminaries.

Less than two hours later, police appeared to regain control of the site. But the official IRNA news agency said about 300 protesters entered the British ambassador's residence in another part of the city and replaced British flags with Iranian ones. The British Foreign Office harshly denounced the melee and said Iran has a "clear duty" under international law to protect diplomats and offices.

"We are outraged by this," said the statement. "It is utterly unacceptable and we condemn it."

It said a "significant number" of protesters entered the compound and caused vandalism, but gave no other details on damage or whether diplomatic staff was inside the embassy, although the storming occurred after business hours.

Full article

[Barry-xlovecam]

The grounds of an embassy are sovereign soil to that government under international law.

The territory of the United Kingdom is thus invaded -- that is an act of war.

So, what's next?

[Solace]

With the degree they get fucked around you can't really judge their actions too harshly. They are caged and encircled.

[crockett]

Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam

The grounds of an embassy are sovereign soil to that government under international law.

The territory of the United Kingdom is thus invaded -- that is an act of war.

So, what's next?

Hence the reason they stage it with "college" students.. As they can get away with it that way, although I suspect the whole point is to get the UK to pull out their embassy staff, which will likely be a success.

[pornguy]

Of course they will get out if they are not already out.

Sadly this is an invasion of the embassy sovereign soil. But any country that starts a war of something like this was looking for a war anyway.

[oscer]

Give them Tea and Biscuits ?

[blackmonsters]

Originally Posted by pornguy

Of course they will get out if they are not already out.

Sadly this is an invasion of the embassy sovereign soil. But any country that starts a war of something like this was looking for a war anyway.

It's not like people from the west are threatening to bomb them everyday or something
like that already.

[crash_jackson]

lol... what seems to be a problem now?

[crockett]

Originally Posted by blackmonsters

It's not like people from the west are threatening to bomb them everyday or something
like that already.

Humm do the people from the west threaten to bomb most other countries? Na we don't.. We tend to only threaten or bomb the ones that continuously threaten the world around them.

[blackmonsters]

Originally Posted by crockett

Humm do the people from the west threaten to bomb most other countries? Na we don't.. We tend to only threaten or bomb the ones that continuously threaten the world around them.

Yeah, Gaddafi was threatening the world around him.

[wehateporn]

I can understand them being angry given that there's a big bullseye on their country. Unfortunately this will be manipulated and used against them as part of the propaganda

[wehateporn]

Originally Posted by crockett

Humm do the people from the west threaten to bomb most other countries? Na we don't.. We tend to only threaten or bomb the ones that continuously threaten the world around them.

It's the other way around, but the West have an excellent marketing department

[crockett]

Originally Posted by blackmonsters

Yeah, Gaddafi was threatening the world around him.

Yea I mean he really had no connections to terrorism..Nor did he ever attack out side countries like say Egypt nor did he really continue to support anti-west terrorist groups around the world till the day he was ousted. (umm humm where do you think he got those paid mercenaries so fast? during his civil war)



Na he was just a great guy that didn't abuse his own people and whom country is not a hub for human trafficking even today. Na he was just a great guy that liked to dress funny and kept to his own business. Totally un-excusable for anyone to want to bomb his ass to oblivion.

Now lets think why would anyone want to bomb Iran.. I mean it's not they they often threaten to bomb anyone is it? It's not like there haven't been proven links to Iran with weapons going to insurgent in Iraq. Oh na they are just happy go lucky religiousness nut jobs that want to be left alone in their country but the big bad west wont have that..

[helterskelter808]

Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam

The grounds of an embassy are sovereign soil to that government under international law.

Wrong.

The territory of the United Kingdom is thus invaded

Wrong.

Originally Posted by pornguy

Sadly this is an invasion of the embassy sovereign soil.

Wrong.

[_Richard_]

Originally Posted by crockett

Humm do the people from the west threaten to bomb most other countries? Na we don't.. We tend to only threaten or bomb the ones that continuously threaten the world around them.

it's almost like libya bombed us

[Bladewire]

"In 2006, angry mobs burned the Danish flag and attacked Danish and other Western embassies in Tehran in protest to the reprinting of a cartoon deemed insulting of the Prophet Muhammad in the Nordic country's newspapers."

[porno jew]

Originally Posted by blackmonsters

Yeah, Gaddafi was threatening the world around him.

yes it's not like he funded every terrorist under the sun financially for decades or anything.

his hands are clean!

[_Richard_]

Originally Posted by porno jew

yes it's not like he funded every terrorist under the sun financially for decades or anything.

his hands are clean!

you mean like al qaeda?

some interesting pics of flags above courthouses in benghazi

[you-big-dummy]

Shit is getting way to out of hand with these protesters!

Just open-mutha-fuckin-fire and you can stick your civil rights straight up your ass!

[Rochard]

Originally Posted by pornguy

Of course they will get out if they are not already out.

Sadly this is an invasion of the embassy sovereign soil. But any country that starts a war of something like this was looking for a war anyway.

I thought you were right and agreed with you, until someone below said you were wrong. In the spirit of GFY I researched a bit and discovered that we are both wrong:

Contrary to popular belief, diplomatic missions do not enjoy full extraterritorial status and are not sovereign territory of the represented state. Rather, the premises of diplomatic missions remain under the jurisdiction of the host state while being afforded special privileges (such as immunity from most local laws) by the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. Diplomats themselves still retain full diplomatic immunity, and (as an adherent to the Vienna Convention) the host country may not enter the premises of the mission without permission of the represented country. The term "extraterritoriality," therefore, is often used in this broader sense when applied to diplomatic missions.

[source: wikipedia]

I find it unlikely that it grounds for a war, however.

[porno jew]

Originally Posted by _Richard_

you mean like al qaeda?

some interesting pics of flags above courthouses in benghazi

what does that have to do with ghadaffi's well documented support of terrorist groups for decades?

your logic, reasoning and argument sucks.

[helterskelter808]

Originally Posted by Rochard

I thought you were right and agreed with you, until someone below said you were wrong. In the spirit of GFY I researched a bit and discovered that we are both wrong

Didn't mean anything personal with it, just that it's a very common misconception.

[redwhiteandblue]

The BBC is suggesting this is to do with the new financial sanctions we've imposed on Iran recently.

[Cherry7]

The history of the West involvement in these countries is well documented. They were often colonies like Libya, or the West overthrew their government and installed their own puppets like the Shah.

Of course, a lot of politicians of these countries are not nice, but that is not the reason they are attacked or overthrown, that is just the war propaganda for the masses.

The real reasons are always economic control of these countries.

[_Richard_]

Originally Posted by porno jew

what does that have to do with ghadaffi's well documented support of terrorist groups for decades?

your logic, reasoning and argument sucks.

what does my question have to do with ghaddaffis well documentated-anything?

i was asking if you were referring to a relationship much like what the US enjoyed with al qaeda, and still enjoys? today

where do you see an argument..

[Barry-xlovecam]

Originally Posted by helterskelter808

Wrong.

Wrong.

Wrong.

Notwithstanding the "sovereignty" issue -- it is a violation of intentional law.

Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations
1961

Article 22

1.The premises of the mission shall be inviolable. The agents of the receiving State may not enter them, except with the consent of the head of the mission.

2.The receiving State is under a special duty to take all appropriate steps to protect the premises of the mission against any intrusion or damage and to prevent any disturbance of the peace of the
mission or impairment of its dignity.

3.The premises of the mission, their furnishings and other property thereon and the means of transport of the mission shall be immune from search, requisition, attachment or execution.

Most likely the British will do the same as the Americans did -- nothing ...

Persians ...

[GregE]

The British Foreign Office harshly denounced the melee and said Iran has a "clear duty" under international law to protect diplomats and offices.

Good luck with that.

Asking the Iranian government to "protect diplomats and offices" is like asking a bear to shit in a toilet.

[blackmonsters]

Originally Posted by crockett

Yea I mean he really had no connections to terrorism..Nor did he ever attack out side countries like say Egypt nor did he really continue to support anti-west terrorist groups around the world till the day he was ousted. (umm humm where do you think he got those paid mercenaries so fast? during his civil war)



Na he was just a great guy that didn't abuse his own people and whom country is not a hub for human trafficking even today. Na he was just a great guy that liked to dress funny and kept to his own business. Totally un-excusable for anyone to want to bomb his ass to oblivion.

Now lets think why would anyone want to bomb Iran.. I mean it's not they they often threaten to bomb anyone is it? It's not like there haven't been proven links to Iran with weapons going to insurgent in Iraq. Oh na they are just happy go lucky religiousness nut jobs that want to be left alone in their country but the big bad west wont have that..

Your brain is squeaky clean, because it's been washed thoroughly.

[helterskelter808]

Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam

Most likely the British will do the same as the Americans did -- nothing ...

Why should Britain do anything? What did Iran do to Britain when armed terrorists occupied the Iranian Embassy (edit: in London) in 1980? It's just a bunch of unarmed protesters making a protest; Ahmadinejad has condemned it and the Iranian police are protecting the diplomats.

[Rochard]

Originally Posted by helterskelter808

Didn't mean anything personal with it, just that it's a very common misconception.

No, that's fine man.

I learned a long ago on GFY that you have to be right or you'll get hammered to death. Before I post anything on GFY I research it a little bit, no matter how sure I am. And I'm surely never afraid to admit I was wrong or I learned something new, which was the case today.

[Cherry7]

Originally Posted by crockett

Yea I mean he really had no connections to terrorism..Nor did he ever attack out side countries like say Egypt nor did he really continue to support anti-west terrorist groups around the world till the day he was ousted. (umm humm where do you think he got those paid mercenaries so fast? during his civil war)



Na he was just a great guy that didn't abuse his own people and whom country is not a hub for human trafficking even today. Na he was just a great guy that liked to dress funny and kept to his own business. Totally un-excusable for anyone to want to bomb his ass to oblivion.

Now lets think why would anyone want to bomb Iran.. I mean it's not they they often threaten to bomb anyone is it? It's not like there haven't been proven links to Iran with weapons going to insurgent in Iraq. Oh na they are just happy go lucky religiousness nut jobs that want to be left alone in their country but the big bad west wont have that..

But then before that we have the cause...


Iran Air Flight 655 (IR655) was a civilian jet airliner shot down by U.S. missiles on 3 July 1988, over the Strait of Hormuz, toward the end of the Iran?Iraq War. The aircraft, an Airbus A300B2-203 operated by Iran Air, was flying from Bandar Abbas, Iran, to Dubai, United Arab Emirates, over Iran's territorial waters in the Persian Gulf on its usual flight path when it was destroyed by the U.S. Navy's guided missile cruiser USS Vincennes, killing all 290 passengers and crew aboard, including 65 children,[1] ranking it twelfth among the deadliest disasters in aviation history. It was the highest death toll of any aviation incident in the Indian Ocean and the highest death toll of any incident involving an Airbus A300 anywhere in the world.


So it is unlikely that the Libyans did it. The Iranians had the motive, revenge for an American crime.

[just a punk]

Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam

The territory of the United Kingdom is thus invaded -- that is an act of war.

Not exactly. That can be considered as an act ow war only in case if it was invaded by the government military forces. For example, like Russian peacemakers were attacked by Georgian army in 2008 (so-called 5-day war).

The British embassy was attacked by students. In fact the Iranian police was trying to stop them. So it's just a rude and barbarian act, but not an act of war.

[DVTimes]

its ok

willy has said they were being bad, and to return everything.

so they have been told

[VIXEN ESCORTS]

Those Iranian students have a poor history education, Iranians fucking with Embassies don't tend to live very long.........
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_Embassy_siege

[crockett]

Originally Posted by Cherry7

But then before that we have the cause...


Iran Air Flight 655 (IR655) was a civilian jet airliner shot down by U.S. missiles on 3 July 1988, over the Strait of Hormuz, toward the end of the Iran?Iraq War. The aircraft, an Airbus A300B2-203 operated by Iran Air, was flying from Bandar Abbas, Iran, to Dubai, United Arab Emirates, over Iran's territorial waters in the Persian Gulf on its usual flight path when it was destroyed by the U.S. Navy's guided missile cruiser USS Vincennes, killing all 290 passengers and crew aboard, including 65 children,[1] ranking it twelfth among the deadliest disasters in aviation history. It was the highest death toll of any aviation incident in the Indian Ocean and the highest death toll of any incident involving an Airbus A300 anywhere in the world.


So it is unlikely that the Libyans did it. The Iranians had the motive, revenge for an American crime.

If you want to copy & paste wikipedia how about this..

Gaddafi allegedly had links to the Lockerbie bombing. On 22 February 2011 during the 2011 Libyan civil war, the ex Minister of Justice Mustafa Abdul Jalil stated in an interview with the Swedish newspaper Expressen that Muammar Gaddafi had personally ordered the bombing.

His own appointed minister of justice said Gaddafi ordered the bombing himself. The guy was involved with supporting terrorist all over the world. This is known facts.

[DangerX !!!]

Originally Posted by cyberxxx

Not exactly. That can be considered as an act ow war only in case if it was invaded by the government military forces. For example, like Russian army attacked Georgia (independent country) in 2008 (so-called 5-day war).

The British embassy was attacked by students. In fact the Iranian police was trying to stop them. So it's just a rude and barbarian act, but not an act of war.

I fixed it for ya. And better don't even try argue with me, it won't work.

_____________

[crockett]

I was just reading an article on this @ http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011...ritish-embassy

State TV reported that another group of hardline students had gathered at the gate of the British ambassador's residence in northern Tehran at the same time.

Seems odd that an angry group of students would just happen to form up at both the British embassy & the British ambassador's house at the same time.

That obviously screams pre-planning and not just some angry mob that got out of control. Of course it's not like this stuff hasn't happened in Iran before, where there was pretty clear evidence the govt was behind it.

[KRosh]

Originally Posted by UKVixens

Those Iranian students have a poor history education, Iranians fucking with Embassies don't tend to live very long.........
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_Embassy_siege

I never EVER get involved in these threads, but here I have to say something.

You are talking about operation Nimrod (stupid name if you ask me)

What you have pointed out is a siege of the Iranian embassy in London. This was an Iraqi backed terrorist group that seized the embassy and held Iranian hostages.

Their demands....

"One: we demand our human and legitimate rights. Two: we demand freedom, autonomy and recognition of the Arab people. Three: we demand the release of ninety-one Arab prisoners in Arabistan. If all the demands are not met by noon on Thursday, May 1, the Embassy and all the hostages will be blown up." The terrorist also demanded that negotiators from Iraq, Jordan and Algeria were flown over to take control of the negotiations.



I was there in 1980 and very near this building when the whole thing went down, but that is a whole other story.

[Dvae]

Originally Posted by blackmonsters

Yeah, Gaddafi was threatening the world around him.

Apparently he was. Your boy saw to his demise.

[Cherry7]

Originally Posted by crockett

If you want to copy & paste wikipedia how about this..

Gaddafi allegedly had links to the Lockerbie bombing. On 22 February 2011 during the 2011 Libyan civil war, the ex Minister of Justice Mustafa Abdul Jalil stated in an interview with the Swedish newspaper Expressen that Muammar Gaddafi had personally ordered the bombing.

His own appointed minister of justice said Gaddafi ordered the bombing himself. The guy was involved with supporting terrorist all over the world. This is known facts.

Not believed by the Scottish victims, the Iranians had the motive.

Some of those "Terrorists" are now in power, so maybe he was right in supporting them, just like the Americans supported the IRA.

Do you condemn US terrorism?

[Fletch XXX]

where is pepper spray cop???

[Rochard]

Originally Posted by Cherry7

But then before that we have the cause...


Iran Air Flight 655 (IR655) was a civilian jet airliner shot down by U.S. missiles on 3 July 1988, over the Strait of Hormuz, toward the end of the Iran?Iraq War. The aircraft, an Airbus A300B2-203 operated by Iran Air, was flying from Bandar Abbas, Iran, to Dubai, United Arab Emirates, over Iran's territorial waters in the Persian Gulf on its usual flight path when it was destroyed by the U.S. Navy's guided missile cruiser USS Vincennes, killing all 290 passengers and crew aboard, including 65 children,[1] ranking it twelfth among the deadliest disasters in aviation history. It was the highest death toll of any aviation incident in the Indian Ocean and the highest death toll of any incident involving an Airbus A300 anywhere in the world.


So it is unlikely that the Libyans did it. The Iranians had the motive, revenge for an American crime.

There is a difference between planning an intentional crime and an accident. The US ship thought it was an F15 and blew it out of the sky. The Russians did something similar with a Korean passenger jet - yet no one turned around blew a Russian passenger jet out of the sky.

[DaddyHalbucks]

Wow, it's 1979 all over again.

And, Jimmy Carter is still in the White House.

[Cherry7]

Originally Posted by Rochard

There is a difference between planning an intentional crime and an accident. The US ship thought it was an F15 and blew it out of the sky. The Russians did something similar with a Korean passenger jet - yet no one turned around blew a Russian passenger jet out of the sky.

You will be telling me next that the spraying of Agent Orange over Vietnam, bombing Cambodia and invading Iraq were just accidents.

The US just keeps having them accidents.

[AllAboutCams]

nuke the fucking rag heads

[Rochard]

Originally Posted by Cherry7

You will be telling me next that the spraying of Agent Orange over Vietnam, bombing Cambodia and invading Iraq were just accidents.

The US just keeps having them accidents.

I don't understand your argument here. These items are not intentional crimes or accidents.

Agent Orange was an attempt to defoliate forested and rural land. It hurt the Americans just as much. Bombing Cambodia? I sleep fine with that one; We attacked the enemy where they were hiding. Iraq, clearly that was a huge mistake after they invaded Kuwait.

[Cherry7]

When the Vietnamese spray Agent Orange over your country I have the feeling you might grasp the point that it is a war crime.

The fact that you poisoned you own troops too, just goes to show how criminal the US military is.

The US were the enemy, not the Vietnamese, they just wanted independence.

[DaddyHalbucks]

Originally Posted by Cherry7

When the Vietnamese spray Agent Orange over your country I have the feeling you might grasp the point that it is a war crime.

The fact that you poisoned you own troops too, just goes to show how criminal the US military is.

The US were the enemy, not the Vietnamese, they just wanted independence.

Stopping Communism was the right intent, but.. I think even the people involved in planning the Vietnam War (like Robert McNamara) now agree it was wrong.

Was the Iraq War right or wrong? It's probably too soon to tell. A vicious madman was deposed. Certainly, our military intelligence was faulty, but Saddam purposely deceived the world to appear stronger than he was.

Frankly, I think justification for attacking Iran is much stronger than either Vietnam or Iraq. They have been at war with us since 1979, often fighting with proxies. We've all had enough of their threats.

[sambucas]

Originally Posted by DangerX !!!

I fixed it for ya. And better don't even try argue with me, it won't work.

_____________

Surely! If you base your opinion on hollywood films. Here are the facts however:

from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryan_Grist

Dr.Ryan Grist is a former British Army Captain who was in charge of Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) monitors in Georgia during the breakout of the 2008 South Ossetia war:

"It was clear to me that the Georgian attack was completely indiscriminate and disproportionate to any, if indeed there had been any, provocation,? Grist said. ?The attack was clearly, in my mind, an indiscriminate attack on the town, as a town."

"Georgian rockets and artillery were hitting civilian areas in the breakaway region of South Ossetia every 15 or 20 seconds".

According to Mr. Grist, it was Georgia that launched the first military strikes against Tskhinvali, the South Ossetian capital.

[Cherry7]

Originally Posted by DaddyHalbucks

Stopping Communism was the right intent, but.. I think even the people involved in planning the Vietnam War (like Robert McNamara) now agree it was wrong.

Was the Iraq War right or wrong? It's probably too soon to tell. A vicious madman was deposed. Certainly, our military intelligence was faulty, but Saddam purposely deceived the world to appear stronger than he was.

Frankly, I think justification for attacking Iran is much stronger than either Vietnam or Iraq. They have been at war with us since 1979, often fighting with proxies. We've all had enough of their threats.

How sweet that you believe the propaganda version of history. The Vietnamese were fighting for the Independence from their imperial masters the French, then the Japanese. The US then supported the French. If it was a fight to stop communism spreading and you lost, by your logic communism should have spread.

You Military Intelligence on Iraq was not faulty - it was created to justify an illegal war.
There are even Hollywood films about how the White House faked it all up, hardly a secret for even the stupid. How they exposed a CIA agent, when her husband went the press about the lies being told.

It is illegal to start wars to overthrow people you dislike. (in this case Saddam who the US supported 90% of the time and helped bring to power )

With Iran it has been the West constant interference in the government of their country that has created the hatred of American policy by people in Iran and the whole of the Middle East.