Skip to content or view screen version

British marine admitted that captured patrol was spying on Iran

Chris Marsden | 07.04.2007 03:53

Captain Chris Air, the man in charge of the 15 marines and sailors captured by Iranian revolutionary guards and released on April 4, told Sky News that they were on an intelligence-gathering mission.

The admission, made five days before he was seized in the Shatt al Arab waterway, was suppressed until after the Royal Navy personnel were released, according to Sky, “so it would not jeopardise their safety.”

Of course, the embargo placed on the story also served to deceive the public and sustain the propaganda campaign portraying Iran as having carried out unprovoked aggression against a blameless British force.

The joint Five News and Sky News interview was recorded on March 13 aboard HMS Cornwall.

Air informed Sky that his team was on an “Interaction Patrol,” during which they board various fishing dhows—ostensibly to search for contraband but also to gain intelligence on Iranian activity.

“This is what’s called an IPAT,” he told Sky’s Jonathan Samuels: “An Interaction Patrol whereby we come alongside or even board the fishing dhows and basically interact with the crew.

“Basically, we speak to the crew, find out if they have any problems, let them know we’re here to protect them, protect their fishing and stop any terrorism and piracy in the area.

“Secondly, it’s to gather int [intelligence]. If they do have any information, because they’re here for days at a time, they can share it with us. Whether it’s about piracy or any sort of Iranian activity in the area. Obviously, we’re right by the buffer zone with Iran.”

“It’s good to gather int on the Iranians,” he added.

When he was asked whether there were “any dangers,” Air replied, “At the moment, we haven’t encountered anyone who’s been anything other than compliant....

“We are capable of doing non-compliant boardings as well,” he added, “however, I think they’d be a bit stupid to start being aggressive with us because obviously we’ve got seven armed Marines....”

The gathering of intelligence is an integral part of the combined operations of the US and Royal Navies involving two aircraft carrier battle groups patrolling the waters off Iran. The naval presence has been built up against a political background of United Nations sanctions imposed on Tehran over its uranium-enrichment programme and allegations that it is arming and funding the insurgency in Iraq.

Preparations for a possible military attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities—either by the US or Israel—have been extensively leaked to the press by sources in America’s security services.

Under such circumstances, the dispute over whether or not the British vessels were in Iranian or Iraqi waters when their boats were boarded is somewhat academic, given the admission that they were there to spy on Iran. At the very least, it further undermines the credibility of Britain’s denials of hostile intent.

The official response of the Blair government to the belated broadcast of Sky’s self-censored report was to portray Air’s remarks as uncontroversial.

Defence Secretary Des Browne told Sky News that “Modern military operations all have an element of gathering intelligence.” He further insisted that “The UN mandate would clearly empower the military taskforce to gather information about the environment in which they were working.”

But the government’s attempts to claim that the admission of spying has no significance are belied by the categorical denial issued by First Sea Lord Admiral Sir Jonathon Band.

In the midst of an extended defence of the 15 from complaints by ex-military top brass and the right-wing media that the sailors should not have made admissions of having strayed into Iranian waters and even should have “fought back” to evade capture, Band denied that they had been involved in intelligence-gathering operations against Iran. “We are certainly not spying on them,” he said. “The Iranians in that part of Iraqi territorial waters are not part of the scene.”

“They weren’t on combat operations,” he added.

The report was all but ignored by the British media after it was made public. The Daily Mirror ran an article, but with no editorial comment.

In the aftermath of the sailors’ release, the government and the armed forces have sought to reinvigorate their efforts to turn Iran into a pariah state and to justify their military aggression in the Gulf.

As the freed sailors arrived back in Britain, Prime Minister Tony Blair utilised the death of four British soldiers, including two women, killed in Basra by a roadside bomb, to reiterate his claim that Iran is arming insurgents.

“Now it is far too early to say the particular terrorist act that killed our forces was an act committed by terrorists who were backed by any elements of the Iranian regime, so I make no allegation in respect of that particular incident,” he stated.

“But the general picture, as I said before, is that there are elements, at least, of the Iranian regime that are backing, financing, arming, supporting terrorism in Iraq and I repeat that our forces are there specifically at the request of the Iraqi government and with the full authority of the United Nations.”

On Friday, a press conference was organised by the Ministry of Defence at the Royal Marines Base at Chivenor, north Devon, attended by six of the sailors. A prepared statement was read out by Captain Air and Lieutenant Carman accusing the Iranians of extracting confessions by psychological torture such as being kept blindfolded, held in isolation and threatened with seven years in prison.

When questioned by the media, Carman said that one detainee had been hit but not very hard.

There is no way of verifying the accounts now being provided by the sailors. But one can safely predict that this will not stop the British and US media from launching into outraged—and utterly hypocritical, given the torture inflicted upon detainees held by the US and Britain in Iraq—comment over the coming days.

Air was asked a question by only one Independent Television News reporter regarding his earlier admission to Sky News that his unit was engaged in spying, and responded that his statement had been misinterpreted.

Chris Marsden

Comments

Hide 3 hidden comments or hide all comments

Channel 4 News a joke too...

07.04.2007 10:24

On Thursday Evening Channel 4 News' lead story was under the heading 'TORTURED', referring to the 15 RN staff. When the commanding officer of the group was interviewed the 'TORTURE' was '"apparently" one of my collegues was hit while on the floor screaming "we're all going to die" (I kid you not).

When asked how hard he was hit he then said, 'he's a Marine, it's all soft to him' - so in two sentences we have completely contradictory statement - one,the man was so shit scared he became hysterical, and had to be slapped. Two, Marines are very hard indeed.

Anyway, that is what justified C4 news proclaiming "TORTURE" - an event that is far less brutal and degrading than the basic training royal marines go through. Anyone remember the video of senior officers beating recruits until they passed out? Now that's torture.

UK people need to read and watch the news from other countries more to realise what a complete joke this country is to the rest of the world - All ITN, Sky and BBC do is make UK people think they live in a good and decent country - which is of course complete bollocks.


unknown


But the RULES are different

07.04.2007 11:55

This is NOT entirely unlike when many years ago the Iranian "Revolutionary Guards" grabbed the US embassy folks because "they were spying".

The "rules" ALLOW them to spy (you can kick them out -- but otherwise ambassodors are SUPPOSED to be immune).

Spying on land and on the sea have different rules too. Or had different rules, because maybe (and I'll come back to this) we have abandoned the old rules and have entered an era of no agreed rules. A naval vessel (a "man-o-war") wasn't considered to be in violation until 24 hours had passed (they couldn't STAY in another's national waters but could enter without prior permission).

OK --- back to rules in general. Everybody has made a big deal about the Geneva rules of war and the prisoners being held improperly, etc. Have you ever READ those rules? They provide protections for soldiers in service of some STATE. Long ago "states" claimed a monopoly on war and declared all "private" armies forbidden. I agree, according to the rules the US should NOT be holding these folks in Guantanamo -- BUT (a very big but) according to the rules, they could, if a military court found them "caught in arms but not in service to a NATIONAL state" (includes irregulars as long as some badge worn) stand them up against a wall and shoot them. In other words, the Geneva accords, etc. do NOT provide protection to "soldiers of G-d" (or any other non STATE entity.

We perhaps need new agreed rules. I don't deny that. What I am saying is that we appear to have left the era of "rules".

Mike Novack
mail e-mail: stepbystpefarm mtdata.com


same rules apply

07.04.2007 14:09

The old rules are fine, they have just only been enforced on the weak. The UK media is full of the Iranian 'volte-face' - ie U turn - in releasing these sailors. No mention of what the marines volte-face in suddenly claiming 'torture'. 'cause you know, unless we beat a quick retreat, these aren't the last soldiers who are going to be held in Iranian custody. These people could justifiably have faced a death-penalty for spying given recent reports. And for these marines suddenly to shit on the iranians just to cover their own arses, well it is short-sighted at best. Other UK troops will pay the price if we can't get them back where they belong.

I'm not blaming those 15, they are being 'prompted what to say today as surely as they were prompted what to say last week. Until they realise they are still pawns they will carry on placing their comrades at further risk. The UK has the worst intenational CV to try and police the Shatt al-Arab. If you have been terrified by terrorism then how about policing the English Channel and the North Sea ?

orca


legal and authorized

07.04.2007 15:20

The UN mandate would clearly empower the military taskforce to gather information about the environment in which they were working.

Well that makes it simple. By law it was legal and authorized.

Kofi


Hey, troll, I'll bite

07.04.2007 16:00

I'm doing nothing better anyway.

So the RETROSPECTIVE UN resolution allows UK forces to patrol Iraqi waters ? The same resolution imposes duties of care upon Iraqi civilians that haven't been met, like healthcare and basic provisions and security. So the British forces are acting illegally. And that resolution was only passed to recognise the facts on the ground after an invasion which didn't have a UN mandate. So the British forces are acting illegally. And the UK and Iran and Iraq have never recognised the border the UK now claims to have imposed - so the British forces are acting illegally.

Law isn't just for the victors you know, it cuts both ways. And law doesn't imply morality.

Scotlands favourite word is Numpty. It is our favourite word due to a long history of dealing with bawheids like you.

orca


No So American

07.04.2007 16:08

You know, I remember the good ol' days when NSA trolls were AUTHORISED to learn the linguistic basics of the country they were trolling in. I guess your schools are just too poorly funded to fool anyone these days.

orca


Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

The aussies

07.04.2007 16:23

think the marines spilled their guts

Pommy


NSA??????????

07.04.2007 22:55

What on earth are you talking about?

MOOSHOO


Never heard of the NSA ?

07.04.2007 23:26

They've heard of you.

Don't click on the link if you are on your own PC and genuinely don't know who they are. Do a search elsewhere.

orca
- Homepage: http://www.nsa.gov/


the ship was engaged in collecting information on the Iranians

08.04.2007 08:34

Air confirmed the ship was engaged in collecting information on the Iranians from passing shipping traffic. 'It's partly a hearts and minds type patrol,' Air said. 'Secondly, it's to gather int [intelligence] if they do have any information, because they're here for days at a time. They can share it with us whether it's about piracy or any sort of Iranian activity in the area, because obviously we're right by the buffer zone with Iran.'

guardian
- Homepage: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,2052588,00.html


MOSSAD and the NSA

08.04.2007 15:50

The UN mandate would clearly empower the military taskforce to gather information about the environment in which they were working

Legal and authorized. Seems simple enough for the tinfoil hat brigade if you ask me and my friends at MOSSAD and the NSA.

Imperatus


contradictory stories

08.04.2007 18:18

"The problem with the Ministry of Defence giving permission is they are going to be blamed for what comes out and they probably won't have control over what comes out, when they say they give release it doesn't mean they've got control over what is said and what is said will be contradictory. You are going to have contradictory stories out there and just imagine how this is going to sound abroad. At the moment the Iranians must be saying 'we are very glad we released them because actually the British are going to self destruct on this one'."

Col Bob Stewart, ( of the tin foil hat brigade ?), obviously sees the risk of letting the arrestees talk to the press without 'getting their story straight'.

orca


What If Iran Had Invaded Mexico?

08.04.2007 19:21

"The UN mandate would clearly empower the military taskforce to gather information about the environment in which they were working"

We have no evidence they were working in Iraqi waters. We have testimony from the Iraqi Brig Gen charged with controlling Iraqi waters that they were outside Iraqi waters. We have testimony from Craig Murray who was once in charge of these operations that nobdoy knows where the border is. And we have no agreed border treaty anyway, just several old claims that the British have inconsistently supported.

So for an American to post here using the old 'tinfoil' smear, claiming never to have heard of the worlds largest security agency while still 'knowing' they were legal and authorized (sic), forgive me if I yawn in your face.

However, here is an American worth listening to on the subject :

This "debate" is a typical illustration of a primary principle of sophisticated propaganda. In crude and brutal societies, the Party Line is publicly proclaimed and must be obeyed -- or else. What you actually believe is your own business and of far less concern. In societies where the state has lost the capacity to control by force, the Party Line is simply presupposed; then, vigorous debate is encouraged within the limits imposed by unstated doctrinal orthodoxy. The cruder of the two systems leads, naturally enough, to disbelief; the sophisticated variant gives an impression of openness and freedom, and so far more effectively serves to instill the Party Line. It becomes beyond question, beyond thought itself, like the air we breathe.

The debate over Iranian interference in Iraq proceeds without ridicule on the assumption that the United States owns the world. We did not, for example, engage in a similar debate in the 1980s about whether the U.S. was interfering in Soviet-occupied Afghanistan, and I doubt that Pravda, probably recognizing the absurdity of the situation, sank to outrage about that fact (which American officials and our media, in any case, made no effort to conceal). Perhaps the official Nazi press also featured solemn debates about whether the Allies were interfering in sovereign Vichy France, though if so, sane people would then have collapsed in ridicule.

In this case, however, even ridicule -- notably absent -- would not suffice, because the charges against Iran are part of a drumbeat of pronouncements meant to mobilize support for escalation in Iraq and for an attack on Iran, the "source of the problem." The world is aghast at the possibility. Even in neighboring Sunni states, no friends of Iran, majorities, when asked, favor a nuclear-armed Iran over any military action against that country. From what limited information we have, it appears that significant parts of the U.S. military and intelligence communities are opposed to such an attack, along with almost the entire world, even more so than when the Bush administration and Tony Blair's Britain invaded Iraq, defying enormous popular opposition worldwide.

The results of an attack on Iran could be horrendous. After all, according to a recent study of "the Iraq effect" by terrorism specialists Peter Bergen and Paul Cruickshank, using government and Rand Corporation data, the Iraq invasion has already led to a seven-fold increase in terror. The "Iran effect" would probably be far more severe and long-lasting. British military historian Corelli Barnett speaks for many when he warns that "an attack on Iran would effectively launch World War III."

What are the plans of the increasingly desperate clique that narrowly holds political power in the U.S.? We cannot know. Such state planning is, of course, kept secret in the interests of "security." Review of the declassified record reveals that there is considerable merit in that claim -- though only if we understand "security" to mean the security of the Bush administration against their domestic enemy, the population in whose name they act.

Even if the White House clique is not planning war, naval deployments, support for secessionist movements and acts of terror within Iran, and other provocations could easily lead to an accidental war. Congressional resolutions would not provide much of a barrier. They invariably permit "national security" exemptions, opening holes wide enough for the several aircraft-carrier battle groups soon to be in the Persian Gulf to pass through -- as long as an unscrupulous leadership issues proclamations of doom (as Condoleezza Rice did with those "mushroom clouds" over American cities back in 2002). And the concocting of the sorts of incidents that "justify" such attacks is a familiar practice. Even the worst monsters feel the need for such justification and adopt the device: Hitler's defense of innocent Germany from the "wild terror" of the Poles in 1939, after they had rejected his wise and generous proposals for peace, is but one example.

orca
- Homepage: http://www.campaigniran.org/casmii/index.php?q=node/1826


Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

UN Mandate is legal enough for me

08.04.2007 19:57

The UN mandate would clearly empower the military taskforce to gather information about the environment in which they were working

Legal and authorized. Seems simple enough for the tinfoil hat brigade.

Kofi


Location, Location, Location

08.04.2007 20:37

That's how advertising works - repetition, repetition, repetition. You repeat yourself and refuse to address counterpoints. And to make PR into propaganda, you introduce the 'smear'. Tin-foil hats, tin-foil hats, tin-foil hats.

The UN never mandated UK forces to work in Iranian waters. The UK forces weren't in Iraqi waters according to the Iraqis, the Iranians and the only trustworthy British experts. That is why the UN failed to condone the UK propaganda stunt. That is why you have nothing to add but repetition and smear.

Since you've never heard of the NSA, I suggest you look at your pay-slip for once. And learn to spell 'authorised', you yanker.

orca


Do you see the NSA in your cornflakes?

08.04.2007 21:41

The UN mandate would clearly empower the military taskforce to gather information about the environment in which they were working

Legal and authorized. Seems simple enough for the tinfoil hat brigade if you ask me and my friends at MOSSAD and the NSA.

MOSSAD and the NSA


nip nip nip

08.04.2007 23:23

"Legal and authorized" "tinfoil hat" Yeah, i got that the first five times. "MOSSAD and the NSA" ah, so suddenly you know who the NSA are ? And who brought up Mossad again ? Doubtless the 'tin-foil hat man'. It's like being mauled by to death a Yorkshire terrier.

Do you really earn much for disrupting Independent Media in such a half-arsed fashion ? Cos you know you haven't earned it. It's encouraging in a way that the best the NSA / MI5 an cough up are a bunch of illiterate retards draining the agencies of funds. It gives me some hope that the worst I am facing is a moron like you. Go on once more, explain it again, was it legal ? Was it authorized(sic) ? And who the fuck are the NSA anyway? Gawd knows.

Doughball. Get a real job, loser. Something you are better at.

orca


Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

Some of the UK's dumbest

09.04.2007 01:08

The UN mandate would clearly empower the military taskforce to gather information about the environment in which they were working

Legal and authorized. Seems simple enough for the tinfoil hat brigade if you ask me and my friends at MOSSAD and the NSA.

kofi


Live at the Witchtrials

09.04.2007 09:43

You know, just to take the piss out of your crap PRopaganda last night, I briefly thought I'd repeat your post again under your name. I decided not to. I didn't think anyone here would believe you were so stupid as to avoid the issues so repetitively. But you did. You aren't big on irony in the States are you ? You aren't big on argument. But you get fed a line and you sure can repeat it.


Right noise.
We're gonna get real speedy
We're gonna wear black all the time
You're gonna make it on your own.
Cos we dig
Cos we dig
We dig
We dig repetition
We dig repetition
We dig repetition in the music
And we're never going to lose it.
All you daughters and sons
who are sick of fancy music
We dig repetition
Repetition in the drums
and we're never going to lose it.
This is the three R's
The three R's:

orca


and another thing...

09.04.2007 09:47

Repetition, Repetition, Repetition
Oh mental hospitals
Oh mental hospitals
They put electrodes in your brain
And you're never the same
You don't dig repetition
You don't love repetition
Repetition in the music and we're never going to loose it
President Carter loves repetition
Chairman Mao he dug repetition
Repetition in China
Repetition in America
Repetition in West Germany
Simultaneous suicide
We dig it, we dig it,
we dig it, we dig it
Repetition, repetition, repetition
There is no hesitation
This is your situation
Continue a blank generation
Blank generation
Same old blank generation
Grooving blank generation
Swinging blank generation
Repetition, repetition, repetition....

orca


dumbing down

09.04.2007 09:58

But was it legal and authorized(sic) for them to be in Iranian waters ? Go on, tell me once more cos I a little stoopid and need to be told what to believe. I am lucky to have such a kind, patient American on hand to tell me what the facts are over and over. Somebody should be paying you for all your good work.





For example, a propagandist may seek to influence opinion by attempting to get a message heard in as many places as possible, and as often as possible. The intention of this approach is to a) reinforce an idea through repetition, and b) exclude or "drown out" any alternative ideas.
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda

We're all well acquainted with the ideas of propaganda, repetition and the Big Lie as outlined by Josef Geobells, the Nazi Minister of Propaganda: basically any lie, repeated often enough, will be believed. A corollary is that you may has well make it a big lie.
 http://www.articlestree.com/politics/propaganda-rhetoric-and-repetition-tx151442.html

Propaganda in favor of action that is consonant with enlightened self-interest appeals to reason by means of logical arguements based upon the best available evidence fully and honestly set forth. Propaganda in favor of action dictated by the impulses that are below self-interest offers false, garbled or incomplete evidence, avoids logical argument and seeks to influence its victims by the mere repetition of catchwords, by the furious denunciation of foreign or domestic scapegoats, and by cunningly associating the lowest passions with the highest ideals, so that atrocities come to be perpetrated in the name of God and the most cynical kind of Realpolitik is treated as a matter of religious principle and patriotic duty. - Aldous Huxley


See also:

 http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Repetition

The Propaganda Value of Repetition
 http://india.indymedia.org/en/2003/03/3856.shtml

orca


Cavendish a spy?

09.04.2007 10:40

Unlike the other 14 servicepeople, Chief Petty Officer Gavin Cavendish's name wasn't released until -after- they were all freed. Even then it came with no biographical details. Unlike the others, the only photo we have is with the other 14 lined up at the airport, possibly because they could hardly get away with a line up that was one short!

Cavendish is, on paper, the 3rd highest ranking of the group, yet he didn't appear at the press conference or in any later publicity. All this seems rather obvious, but no mention at all in any newspapers I read. One to keep an eye on!

PJB


Brilliant journalism

09.04.2007 12:02

Well done. I get distracted by propagandists and you get to the heart of the matter. The most publicised troops in the British army ever, and zilch about this guy. I'd love to read hisStory. Doubt I will though. Did you notice one of Prince Whatshisnames closest freinds who just died in Iraq was 'intelligence' too ? Doesn't he know who killed his mum ?



CHIEF PETTY OFFICER GAVIN CAVENDISH

No further information is available about CPO Gavin Cavendish, of the Royal Navy.

 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6518203.stm

orca


ORCA/Editor should give it a rest

09.04.2007 15:13

Doesn't he know who killed his mum ?

Ok tinfoil hat boy, who did kill his mom, besides the poor driving of a drunk?

friggin amused


friggin' right you are !

09.04.2007 18:25

"Ok tinfoil hat boy, who did kill his mom, besides the poor driving of a drunk?"

Hey, suddenly wants to argue about something. What is wrong, got bored with your own repetion? That can happen. I thought that would give you something to attack. Did ya know Diana launched the Cornwall ? Did ya ? You checked this argument out with your superiors ? You sure you want to argue rather than just repeat ? Have you finally found a way to distract from the balls-up in the Persian Gulf ? My bad.

Cos you know I can't be arsed at the moment, go fuck yourself. Now you are biting instead of just repeating let's talk about the sailors and the marines cos that is amusing. Did you see Des Brown has slapped an order temporarily banning any other British troops from releasing their stories ? Sound the retreat men ! The Grand old duke of York indeed. No more selling out in case it bites NuLabs arse. ( To save you some time, that is British for 'ass').

What a debacle, what an international disgrace this has been.

"friggin amused"

Ah, it's good you learned one British word. Eventually. Me too though, I am friggin amused at the shithole you lot have dug for yourselves. Now how would history have changed if Sid Vicious had joined the navy and americanised twats like Gavin Cavedish went straight into their daytime TV roles? Not much I'm guessing.

The Royal Navy and the Marines today are a bunch of little weepy kids - and now the whole world knows it. Oh and where was the Captain of the F99 when he was getting his people arrested ?

The captain of this lugger
He was a dirty bugger
He wasn't fit to shovel shit
From one place to another

Friggin' in the riggin'
Friggin' in the riggin'
Friggin' in the riggin'
There was fuck all else to do


How about a demo outside the MI6 building demanding better spooks ?
I used to pay taxes, some of you probably still do. And yet look at the balls-up in the Gulf.
And look at poor Kofi here, he obviously hasn't learned a thing since Goebbells death.

Can't they keep up ? Okay, I personally don't pay taxes but that fact should be embarrassing enough for them. They are shooting Brasilians in the streets, mistaking them for arabs cos they are darker than us. Doh. They have idiots trying to smear and repeat like its still 1943. Duh. I read the news today...why didn't MI5 ?

C'mon, I know virtually every branch of the UK government is incompetent but the security services are meant to be the cream, they are well paid - shit rises too of course. It is nice that they surveille me, quaint even. But I have earned better than this half-arsed intrusion into my privacy. Look at the quality of my posts, I stick to the facts but I still stick it to their employers. I thought all their employees were meant to have degrees ? Maybe they should be checking those CVs out cause you lot are dough-balls.

It is demeaning as an anarchist avowed to overthrow a corrupt corporate state that they assigned morons to watch over me . I want some quality represssion, not this half-arsed recycled nazi stuff. Still outsourcing to Loyalist gangsters ? That is so 1970's. I've earned it and they have failed to deliver. Do I really have to RPG the OxBridge boat race to get someone with half a brain on my case ?

How about sending an undercover American tourist around to my house ? Maybe I will take them in and trust them like a long lost friend ? Whoever thought that one up should be sacked on the spot. How about having a pseudo squaddie who claims to be part of an international brotherhood of paras and SAS try and infiltrate my group ? That's convincing. Not.

No joy ? Jesus Fucking. It takes all the fun out of it for us lot. There has to be somebody in the security services that isn't stuck in the past and has half a brain. I want them assigned to me, I worked hard for them. To my eternal hame, I once paid taxes nd now i want ome return. Why not try to recruit someone like Oscar Beard ?

hahhaa

I personally think those of you who still pay taxes should go on a tax strike, and demand some kind of entrance exam in the security services. We are being disrespected by our spooks, and the cretins assigned to us are merely annoying and dangerous, they have shit between their ears.

orca


Woah Orca lay off the lager and get a life

09.04.2007 18:55

What is with your paranoia about the US. Just to set the recored straight, I do not work for the NSA, I do not live in the US and I am not a US citizen.

Nice profanity laced reply(?). Anyway, answer the question Moonbat, who killed Diana. I can't wait to read your conspirtorial BS.

not Orca


Frggin A

09.04.2007 19:30

"What is with your paranoia about the US. Just to set the recored straight, I do not work for the NSA, I do not live in the US and I am not a US citizen."

So why do you refuse to spell authorised with an S ? Did you learn your English in Germany squaddie ? Who is paying you btw ? You know I know a supposed squaddie who not only spells in american-english, posts right-wing posts here since 'day one' over-uses the sad smear 'tin foil hats' - and yet still is infiltrating Trident Ploughshares. Coincidence upon coincidence. And I know you aren't getting paid by the NSA Richard. So who is funding you ?

"Nice profanity laced reply(?). "
Shucks, us punks do like the word friggin. You used it first doughball. Or is doughball profanity too ? Would you prefer numpty or keech or dunderheid or sheister or you know, just stick to one name on any thread and I'd call you that.

"Anyway, answer the question Moonbat, who killed Diana. I can't wait to read your conspirtorial BS"

Moonbat, that is lovely. I'd love to be a bat on the moon - is that as profane as you can get ? Poor you. Cos the Diana thing, that was just to draw a troll in from their endless repetition, a red herring if you will. What I'd really like to talk to you about is the recent debacle with the marines in Iranian waters. You know, the main article you seem programmed to ignore ? Want to start discussing that debacle ? Actually, no, there has been some really good journalism here and I refuse to allow you to use me to distract from that. Good night, sweet prince - you are too fucking obvious to merit my attention.

maybe...maybe we should discuss Dianna on a thread that is a serious expose of the prositute-marine story..


Nah.

orca


And you are not Donald Rumsfeld either, are you ?

09.04.2007 19:58

Now you've taught me the technique...


"Persia Gulf PR, int balls up, cowardly marines"
"Persia Gulf PR, int balls up, cowardly marines"
"Persia Gulf PR, int balls up, cowardly marines"
"Persia Gulf PR, int balls up, cowardly marines"
"Persia Gulf PR, int balls up, cowardly marines"
"Persia Gulf PR, int balls up, cowardly marines"

Great Britain? Do you know what Great means ? It means not having untrained americanised arseholes like you in positions of power.

You and your political superiors should be on trial for treason. Arseholes. I can laugh in your face, for good reason, and all you can do is wince and splutter.
I mean fucking hell, with eejits like you lot manning the ship, we couldn't even take the Falkland Islanders never mind the Argentinians.


Or, in the immortal words of that RN shanty:
"You are not fit to shovel shit from one place to another"

You know, some of my uncles died on 'the Atlantic Run'. The idiots thought they were dying for freedom, against fascism. Never again. One of my uncles died before that in Spain - now he had the right idea. And I'm going to die taking you self-serving liars out of power, just to restore the family honour.

orca


Propaganda: Then and Now

09.04.2007 22:28

Goebbels used to say that "Domination of the street [was] the first step to state power."

Goebbels used to say, "Propaganda means repetition and more repetition!" "Repeat it until even the densest has got it."

Goebbels used to say, "Denials alone won't work. You've got to counterattack."


I think everyone - the propagandist nazis and the anarchists alike - should read the short article I got these quotes from. And then reread this thread.

orca
- Homepage: http://www.swans.com/library/art7/ga120.html


Hide 3 hidden comments or hide all comments