Welcome to PatsFans.com

What a surprise... the Iranian boat story is starting to unravel

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by PressCoverage, Jan 10, 2008.

  1. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,609
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    thank god for independent media... but, perhaps this is all just "knee-jerk" reaction...

    Official Version of Naval Incident Starts to Unravel
    ...

    [​IMG]
    WASHINGTON, Jan 10 (IPS) - Despite the official and media portrayal of the incident in the Strait of Hormuz early Monday morning as a serious threat to U.S. ships from Iranian speedboats that nearly resulted in a "battle at sea", new information over the past three days suggests that the incident did not involve such a threat and that no U.S. commander was on the verge of firing at the Iranian boats.

    The new information that appears to contradict the original version of the incident includes the revelation that U.S. officials spliced the audio recording of an alleged Iranian threat onto to a videotape of the incident. That suggests that the threatening message may not have come in immediately after the initial warning to Iranian boats from a U.S. warship, as appears to do on the video.

    Also unraveling the story is testimony from a former U.S. naval officer that non-official chatter is common on the channel used to communicate with the Iranian boats and testimony from the commander of the U.S. 5th fleet that the commanding officers of the U.S. warships involved in the incident never felt the need to warn the Iranians of a possible use of force against them.

    Further undermining the U.S. version of the incident is a video released by Iran Thursday showing an Iranian naval officer on a small boat hailing one of three ships.

    The Iranian commander is heard to say, "Coalition warship 73, this is Iranian navy patrol boat." He then requests the "side numbers" of the U.S. warships. A voice with a U.S. accent replies, "This is coalition warship 73. I am operating in international waters."

    The dramatic version of the incident reported by U.S. news media throughout Tuesday and Wednesday suggested that Iranian speedboats, apparently belonging to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard navy, had made moves to attack three U.S. warships entering the Strait and that the U.S. commander had been on the verge of firing at them when they broke off.

    Typical of the network coverage was a story by ABC's Jonathan Karl quoting a Pentagon official as saying the Iranian boats "were a heartbeat from being blown up".

    Bush administration officials seized on the incident to advance the portrayal of Iran as a threat and to strike a more threatening stance toward Iran. National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley declared Wednesday that the incident "almost involved an exchange of fire between our forces and Iranian forces". President George W. Bush declared during his Mideast trip Wednesday that there would be "serious consequences" if Iran attacked U.S. ships and repeated his assertion that Iran is "a threat to world peace".
  2. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,609
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    once again... your government earned the skepticism...

    here's Iran's official, much less sabre-rattling take:

    Defense Minister Mostafa Mohammad Najjar called Western news reports that the boats threatened to blow up the U.S. warships "mischief."

    "(Iranian) navy units ... asked them to identify themselves. They responded accordingly and continued their path," the official IRNA news agency quoted Najjar as saying.

    He said the encounter was normal.

    "The identification of vessels passing through the Strait of Hormuz by Iranian navy units is a natural occurrence," IRNA quoted Najjar as saying. "Islamic Republic of Iran navy units always put questions to passing vessels and warships at the Strait of Hormuz and they need to identify themselves. This is in accordance with the normal procedures." ​
  3. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,609
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    i'll acknowledge this source is a Newshogs blogger, but he raised a decent point... the voice doesn't even sound Persian? :

    The section of the released tape which contains the actual threat to "blow up" anyone, as I noted yesterday, comes at the very end and is very much unconnected in any causal sense to the rest of it. The sound is clearer and less cluttered by background noise, while there is no video accpmpanying it - the only such section of the tape - just an ominously black screen. The accent of the alleged Iranian threatener is way wrong. I've known several Iranians well in the UK and their accents when speaking English were all very different from that on the tape - less gutteral.

    Regular reader Amir, an Iranian, writes in comments to my previous post:

    I also listened to the end of the clip. The dialect is not Persian for sure. For my ears it is more an Arab speaking in English. I expect from someone speaking from a small boat sailing in top speed in the open sea and not in a room to speak with trembling voice with lots of noise from surroundings (they are supposed to be sitting in a speed boat). The guy was near one of the most dangerous sea vessels in the world and receiving warning calls and spoke so calm! I don't believe it. ​

    Hooman Majd, an Iranian-American writing at the HuffPo, also thinks the audio chunk at the end of the DoD's release is faked - and again points to the accent.

    the person speaking doesn't have an Iranian accent and moreover, sounds more like Boris Karloff in a horror movie than a sailor in the elite branch of Iran's military. (The tape is also separate from any video.) Any Iranian can immediately identify Persian-accented English, particularly if the speaker has had little contact with the West, as is the case with Revolutionary Guardsmen and sailors. Iranians, you see, have difficulty with two consonants such as "p" and "l" next to each other; even Iranians who have lived in America for years will often pronounce "please" as "peh-leeze", or in this case, "explode" as "exp-eh-lode". On the tape, "explode" is pronounced perfectly, albeit as if the speaker was a villain addressing a superhero.
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2008
  4. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,609
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    Degrees of Confidence on U.S.-Iran Naval Incident
    ...

    Unnamed Pentagon officials said on Wednesday that the threatening voice heard in the audio clip, which was released on Monday night with a disclaimer that it was recorded separately from the video images and merged with them later, is not directly traceable to the Iranian military.​

    ...

    Earlier on Wednesday, a reader posted a comment on The Lede claiming to be a former Navy officer with experience in the Strait of Hormuz and offering an explanation for how easily a mistake could have been made by Navy personnel trying to sift through radio transmissions filled with chatter:

    All ships at sea use a common UHF frequency, Channel 16, also known as “bridge-to bridge” radio. Over here, near the U.S., and throughout the Mediterranean, Ch. 16 is used pretty professionally, i.e., chatter is limited to shiphandling issues, identifying yourself, telling other ships what your intentions are to avoid mishaps, etc.

    But over in the Gulf, Ch. 16 is like a bad CB radio. Everybody and their brother is on it; chattering away; hurling racial slurs, usually involving Filipinos (lots of Filipinos work in the area); curses involving your mother; 1970’s music broadcast in the wee hours (nothing odder than hearing The Carpenters 50 miles off the coast of Iran at 4 a.m.)

    On Ch. 16, esp. in that section of the Gulf, slurs/threats/chatter/etc. is commonplace. So my first thought was that the “explode” comment might not have even come from one of the Iranian craft, but some loser monitoring the events at a shore facility.

    The commenter, who signed his posting “SWO officer,” went on to say, “I hope everybody exercises great caution here and doesn’t jump to conclusions.”
  5. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    19,529
    Likes Received:
    41
    Ratings:
    +43 / 0 / -2

    I thought we're already using all our faked-event dollars perpetuating the myth of the lunar landing...
  6. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,609
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    well, i save mine for stories that have basis, a track record, and verification...
  7. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,609
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    anyhow, while this offering doesn't refer to the specifics, it does offer a bit of perspective to consider in all of the drama:

    Provocation in the Strait of Hormuz
    By Marc Ash
    t r u t h o u t | Perspective

    [​IMG]

    The report in The Times, in fact, tells you everything you need to know, albeit in a conclusionless form. US Warships are in the Persian Gulf. The Strait of Hormuz, through which all warships must pass to enter the Gulf, is the same passage through which all oil-bearing ships must pass bringing oil to the US. And "Oil prices on world markets spiked briefly on the news, which was first reported by CNN." That pretty much says it all.

    US Navy warships are parked a few miles off the coast of Iran. They are there, apparently, to protect oil shipping lanes into and out of the Persian Gulf. Tensions are mounting. If provocation is at issue, those facts must remain front and center. If Iranian warships ever made it as close to the American coastline as US warships now lie to Iranian shores, our military would in all likelihood attack them. Iran is not attacking our warships - parked on their doorstep.

    The US State Department last year warned Iran "not to interfere with US interests in the region." What the State Department did not explain to the American people is what interests average Americans have in the region. The answer to that question is, likely none. That leads to the next question: whose interests is the American Navy protecting in the Persian Gulf? The owners of the oil tankers, apparently. The American people are the end consumers; we pay what's marked on the pump. Bluntly stated, the United States Navy appears to be in the Persian Gulf to protect the interests of US-based oil businesses, not the interests of the American people. Incidentally, the second-largest deposits of oil in the world lie beneath the soil of Iraq, so the same formula applies there as well.

    Could Iranian forces sink an American ship a few miles off the Iranian coast? Yes, although it is highly unlikely that they would say beforehand, "I am coming at you, and you will explode in a few minutes." Would such a sinking take the lives of many good American sailors? Yes, it would. Such a sinking and the attendant loss of life would affect the best interests of the American people. The American armed forces are the true interest of the American people. For too long, the American people have turned a blind eye to their interest: their service members. It's time to bring our soldiers home and let the gas station mind its own business.​
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2008
  8. PatsFanInEaglesLand

    PatsFanInEaglesLand Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2004
    Messages:
    3,716
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    And what you have posted have none of those. I guess we take the official news agency of Iran at face value, now:eek: Un-freakin-believable!

    Huffington Post:rofl:

    EDIT: And now truthout, lol!
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2008
  9. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,609
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    actually, Bushie, i posted an AP story... now, do you have anything to offer regarding the capitulation by the Pentagon that the threatening voice heard in the audio clip was released on Monday night with a disclaimer that it was recorded separately from the video images and merged with them later?
  10. weswelker#83

    weswelker#83 Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2007
    Messages:
    4,535
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0 / -0

  11. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,609
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    the video is what it is... but it doesn't accurately tell what was going on... the audio, however, is laughable to the point of being insulting to the average American in it's lack of plausibility...

    the voice is not Persian, there is no background noise, his voice does not waver one bit, despite powering throught the surf at top speed...
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2008
  12. Holy Diver

    Holy Diver Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,800
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    I declare BS on pretty much anything this administration put out as a trumpet to war with IRAN, butthis one seemed like BS from the jump.

    the fact that Bush is using this as a talking point during his Middle East 'Peace' trip is fukcing hypocritical to the millionth degree.



    BRAVO to our media for not checking this story out, and reporting on it as fact. THREE CHEERS for our network news, newspapers and newscatsers for showing video that should be classified, a day after an event in an attempt to get the american public all excited about a war.

    anyone remeber the gulf war and the reported stories of Iraqi soldiers taking babies from hospital incubators and killing them?

    http://www.prwatch.org/books/tsigfy10.html

    In fact, the most emotionally moving testimony on October 10 came from a 15-year-old Kuwaiti girl, known only by her first name of Nayirah. According to the Caucus, Nayirah's full name was being kept confidential to prevent Iraqi reprisals against her family in occupied Kuwait. Sobbing, she described what she had seen with her own eyes in a hospital in Kuwait City. Her written testimony was passed out in a media kit prepared by Citizens for a Free Kuwait. "I volunteered at the al-Addan hospital," Nayirah said. "While I was there, I saw the Iraqi soldiers come into the hospital with guns, and go into the room where . . . babies were in incubators. They took the babies out of the incubators, took the incubators, and left the babies on the cold floor to die."

    Three months passed between Nayirah's testimony and the start of the war. During those months, the story of babies torn from their incubators was repeated over and over again. President Bush told the story. It was recited as fact in Congressional testimony, on TV and radio talk shows, and at the UN Security Council. "Of all the accusations made against the dictator," MacArthur observed, "none had more impact on American public opinion than the one about Iraqi soldiers removing 312 babies from their incubators and leaving them to die on the cold hospital floors of Kuwait City."84

    At the Human Rights Caucus, however, Hill & Knowlton and Congressman Lantos had failed to reveal that Nayirah was a member of the Kuwaiti Royal Family. Her father, in fact, was Saud Nasir al-Sabah, Kuwait's Ambassador to the US, who sat listening in the hearing room during her testimony. The Caucus also failed to reveal that H&K vice-president Lauri Fitz-Pegado had coached Nayirah in what even the Kuwaitis' own investigators later confirmed was false testimony.






    "Don't believe the hype" -Chuck D. 1988
  13. weswelker#83

    weswelker#83 Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2007
    Messages:
    4,535
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0 / -0


    Seriously , i am not expert , and only experts that own appropriate tools for authenticating those videos and voices .There are people who do that for a living , not me .
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2008
  14. Holy Diver

    Holy Diver Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,800
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    "We viewed it as a provocative act,” Mr. Bush told reporters in the Rose Garden, just hours before he left for a weeklong trip to the Middle East. “It is a dangerous situation, and they should not have done it, pure and simple.”

    after all when has our president lied about anything in the past?
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2008
  15. maverick4

    maverick4 Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2005
    Messages:
    7,669
    Likes Received:
    16
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -0

    StarWarsGeek right now is playing 'earmuffs' with his hands on his ears, both of his eyes closed, saying 'la la la la la la la la'.

    It's kind of sad that our media keeps referencing various propaganda in communist countries, but so many of us can't see the blatant manipulation of the masses in our own country.
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2008
  16. QuiGon

    QuiGon Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    6,123
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Personal attacks are against the rules of this forum. At least that's what the liberal moderator keeps telling me. But they don't seem to mind when you do it.... I wonder why that is...

    I read this report on ABC News and I am not exactly sure what you're getting at here. This is a nothing incident with some minor provocation. No shots were fired, no one was injured. Believe you me, this stuff happens far more than you could possibly imagine. I am surprised it even made the news...

    But for some reason, people in here are quick to take this meaningless incident and declare it another "Gulf of Tonkin". I wonder why that is..? Nevermind, I know why... because there are some people in here that hate America more than they do America's enemies.
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2008
  17. Holy Diver

    Holy Diver Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,800
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    I don't think thats a 'personal attack' ... its a name call, sticks and stones my man.


    having said that....


    I believe that this is such a big deal, not because we can see the same lies leading us to war that happened during vietnam, and now both gulf wars, but THIS PRESIDENT is using this as a launch for his mideast peace talks, and he knows its a fake. THATS the problem here. This is the same guy who claimed that he didn't want to jump to comnclusions about the NIE estimate, because they neede dfurther investigation. noew he turns around in ONE DAY to declare this a dangerous act of war.


    Q: HOW STUPID ARE WE?

    A: obviously very, if we keep eating the $h!t sandos this guy is serving up.
  18. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,609
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    to that i would add:

    if and when our criminal leadership decides to unnecessarily sucker-punch Iran in the next year, instead of coming to the table, and Iran predictably vaporizes a U.S. base or aircraft carrier in the region in retaliation, i would like to ask our resident Bush Leaguers here if they would pontificate to us all how they believe it's was worth it...

    let's not forget something else... Iran, despite our long history of meddling in their affairs, was in our corner immediately after 9/11, and helped us flush the Taliban out of Afghanistan... that is documented... then our dumbass president lumped them into the "axis of evil" strategery of brilliant foreign policy...
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2008
  19. ArmyPatsFan

    ArmyPatsFan Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2007
    Messages:
    285
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Apparently the Iran released tape is editted and does not show the actual speedboats moving...only at idle. Nor does it show the white packages dropped, according to cnn.


    "A U.S. Navy official said the Iranian video "appears to be truthful showing three ships making a transit of the Strait of Hormuz."

    But, he added, "Clearly the video is edited to include only the verbal context the Iranians wanted to include."

    He says the transmissions via handheld radio by the Iranian appear to be standard "hail" messages that ships in the region send each other. But the Iranian video only shows their fastboats at idle and does not show the rest of the encounter, he said."

    According to the Navy website:

    "Five boats, suspected to be from the Islamic Republic of Iran Revolutionary Guard Navy, "maneuvered aggressively in close proximity of the Hopper," the Navy said in a posting on its Web site."

    With regards to the tape, which did seem "odd" to me....

    "It was not clear, however, that the threat was coming from anyone aboard the boats, Cmdr. Lydia Robertson, the 5th Fleet spokeswoman in Bahrain, told CNN. It could have been sent from another ship in the area or from someone on shore, she said."

    And the packages dropped:

    "Although the video does not show it, at least one of the boats dropped five or six objects that looked like boxes into the water, where they floated, she said.

    The U.S. naval commanders did not pick them up "because they did not know what they were," she said"

    Now we all know Iranian TV airs Revolutionary Guard propoganda....and the it seems both videos were heavlily editted. I never heard any official say that the verbal threat occurred during the filming of the video but that they had received the communication and could not verify its origin. I did initially assume that it occured simultaneously....which appears to be incorrect. Boils down to who you believe, Iran reports or US reports. I think the media overplayed this, but I have no doubt that the incident occured and that the pucker factor on the USS Hopper was pretty high. Not sure how this supports the conspiracy theorists...... are you still suggesting it did not occur?
  20. ArmyPatsFan

    ArmyPatsFan Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2007
    Messages:
    285
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0


    Can you point me to the quote about an "act of war" please?
  21. QuiGon

    QuiGon Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    6,123
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Hey I wouldn't mind "sticks and stones" if the rules of this forum were applied fairly and equally. But I have been banned for saying "One knee equals two feet" and all the while moderators completely ignore all the venom and insults sent at me.
    There isn't going to be a war in Iran. HOWEVER, I do believe there will be military action taken sooner or later. But we already have justification for military action in Iran. A minor incident like this isn't going to persuade or dissuade us against doing that.
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2008
  22. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,609
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    what "justification" would that be? the one by which Congress will be lied to again? or the U.N.?
  23. maverick4

    maverick4 Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2005
    Messages:
    7,669
    Likes Received:
    16
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -0

    First of all, I don't believe your lame reason, you were banned because the whole time you've been here you are the crudest most offensive poster on the entire board. Additionally, you should be banned simply for creating a second account.

    The fact that moderators ignore your complaints probably has to do with the fact that you shouldn't even be allowed to post here right now anyways.
  24. QuiGon

    QuiGon Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    6,123
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    That's because you will never read anything that contradicts your world view. Even if you read it, if it doesn't match your pre-defined opinion, you'll ignore it.
    There's your pot and kettle, folks... :rofl:
    Where is the rule stating that that is forbidden...?

    Ya know... I'd like to reason with you... I really would.... but you seem completely disinterested in listening to reason... I challenge you to respond to a single post of mine without venom or vitriol. Are you even capable of such...?

    Fact is that a while ago I was suspended from this forum for some rules violations. I openly admitted that that suspension was deserved and I stayed away for the entire time of the suspension. Then when I came back it was with a much more mild attitude. But eventually a liberal moderator (no, not Patters) decided he didn't like my politics so he grabbed some completely innocent posts of mine from the main forum and reported them as rules violations.

    Everything I have stated in this post is 100% true. I will gladly prove it to anyone who so desires if/when the day comes I can access my PM's.
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2008
  25. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,609
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    the irony is thick here, considering no one is guiltier of that than you...

    of all the cliches, pot/kettle is one you shouldn't ever be using...

    are YOU? ...

    again, language that sounds soothingly foolish coming from the likes of Obi-Qui...

    please... you didn't come back "much milder" in any way, shape or form...

    "100% true?" :rolleyes:
  26. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,609
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    as i mentioned in another thread, i'm suggesting it appears some kind of confrontation occured, but whether or not it was nothing more than a routine ID and acknowledgement check between tightly clustered vessels is highly unclear ... but the audio of the threatening "Persian" voice is a complete fabrication... and that, alone, makes the whole thing highly dubious...

    meanwhile, the infantile C-in-C kicks off his peace tour by ramping up the rhetoric before all the facts are ironed out...
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2008
  27. maverick4

    maverick4 Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2005
    Messages:
    7,669
    Likes Received:
    16
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -0

    They faked the sea tape, what else do people here need in order to finally concede the fact that our government REALLY WANTS to go into Iran and is trying to cook up a reason!?!?

    We have 3 carrier strike groups in that region, we NEVER do this unless it's for war, and they are not there for Iraq.
  28. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    40,315
    Likes Received:
    19
    Ratings:
    +19 / 0 / -0

    Maybe you should go back in the time machine and live during that Viet Nam mess, one day you were having a beer with a bud the next day he was killed in conflict.. then when we found out that most of the reasons we went to war in Viet Nam were fabricated... it makes a rather indelible impression. You seem to minimize the effects of false intelligence.. lets see WMD's in Iraq, yellowcake in Nigeria, the axis of evil.. now this and you wonder why.

    Maybe because I am older and have sons, sons in law and grandsons I do not welcome a hundred year conflict in the mideast. Particularly a conflict based on fabricated information..

    It ain't about tinfoil, it is about all the elected liars inside the beltway who will do anything to appease their benefactors.. not us.
  29. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    40,315
    Likes Received:
    19
    Ratings:
    +19 / 0 / -0

    Liar no you weren't I was, and got a tinfoil award.. remember.

    Gulf of Tonkin Redux...

    Only kidding, do not call names.. back to being a kinder, nicer person.
  30. mtbykr

    mtbykr Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2004
    Messages:
    2,999
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    So Iran releases an obviously edited version of the tape, none of which shows any of the footage that the US showed. Then we find out that the audio on the US tape was heard over the com channel that they were broadcasting on, but the US can't confirm it came from one of the boats, it could have come from someone else in the vicinity...........and somehow we are back to it being Bush's fault, he orchestrated the whole thing, ect...

    You guys believe an edited tape from the revolutionary guard (who are considered terrorist) over one from the Navy.....Wow!

Share This Page