The BBC AND HAVE YOUR SAY

The BBC run a blog-style comments service on their website called
"Have Your Say", where you post your views on their news items and they get moderated.
Today there is a lot of comment on on 'Can UK and Iran resolve their difference?'
I had a comment which was moderated out. It went something like this:

"Propaganda! Propaganda!

British Diplomats know their job, therefore understand the protocol to apply to this incident between the UK and IRAN.

Comments on 'concern for our captured troops, or a need to see them fit and well for their families, or concern for their families, and admissions under duress, are propaganda from our side, which are published through the press.

We in the UK should be aware we are subject to this propaganda through our news channels as the Iranians are.

Our servicemen are well drilled, and know their jobs.

They carry out their duties professionally.

Whatever their circumstances of capture, you can be pretty sure that they have followed correct procedures during their capture.


Whatever the machinations of our politicians and their use of our press to convey their messages to the rest of the world and to us, we should not doubt our servicemen deserve and need our support. They are from us.


BUT THEIR ACTIONS AND THIS INCIDENT SHOULD NOT BE USED AS A WAY OF CONTROLLING OUR OPINION THROUGH THE MEDIA.

• Stop using our servicemen as propaganda, and support them.


• Stop putting them in the line of fire without giving them the best equipment and support to do their job"

BBC, YOU HAVE COMMITTED AN OFFENSE AGAINST THE PEOPLE YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO INFORM AND EDUCATE, and frankly you have shown the same disregard for our military as the politicians in this. Shame on you. AND OF COURSE SHAME ON ALL THE OTHER BRITISH NEWS CHANNELS FOR FOLLOWING SUIT.

Of course as the original comment was limited to 500 words it was less verbose and detailed, but I have taken its essence and expanded it.

We Come In Peace, Shoot To Kill

Maybe there is something right and proper going on that we aren't privvy to, or else this is the accepted procedure for arbitration on the international stage, or else they are really leading us down the garden path for reasons we definitely would not like, I DON'T KNOW, but I will say that things have taken a predictable turn today.

A littl while ago, we had no aggressive policy tiwards Iran.

Then, we had an incident where the Iranians have APPARENTLY taken servicemen inside Iraqi waters, who were operating beyond the umbrella of their support, and are holding them for interrogation but in good conditions.

You know, the sort of thing that happens every now and again.

And General Blair has decided to rattle the sabre.

They were operating under a UN mandate, so I presume this statement has come through UN Channels.

Are we following a pattern here:

1. Invade Afghanistan on a liberation tour, and now we have the most heroin production from there hitting our streets since ever.
2. Invade Iraq to destroy weapons of mass destruction, which have never been found, and now they have the worst and most bloody violence they have ever known, including under him.
   
3. Find a pretext to snarl at Iran, who have been pursuing a nuclear policy, which of course we had no intention of reacting militarily to - what price will we, or the Iranian people, pay for this course of action?

Just a word of incidental remark.

You ma remember that a year ago the Lancet, a respected medical journal, reported that 650,000 Iraqi civilians had died as a result of the invasion of Iraq. At the time, George Bush himself poo-poohed the figures as ridiculous and based on unfounded methods, and the British Govt (though I can't remember specificall which marionette made the mouth gestures), made similar disparaging remarks, saying we were better off trusting the Iraqi Government official figures of 65,000.

WELL, YESTERDAY GOVERNMENT STATISTICIANS CONFIRMED THE LANCETS FINDING WERE BASED ON METHODS OF VERY CLOSE TO BEST PRACTISE, AND IF ANYTHING THEIR METHODOLOGY MIGHT UNDERESTIMATE THE NUMBER OF IRAQI CIVILIAN DEAD.

So just in case you missed it here it is again: British Government statisticians have confirmed that the Lancets findings a year ago (and don't forget now they are 1 YEAR OUT OF DATE), THAT 650,000 IRAQI CIVILIANS HAVE DIED AS A DIRECT RESULT OF THE U.S.A./BRITISH LED INVASION OF IRAQ, WERE PROBABLY ABOUT AS GOOD AN ESTIMATE AS YOU ARE LIKELY TO GET. NO QUESTION.

That is 500 people per day on average.

Or 2.5% of the population of Iraq.

Just thought you might like to know..

Anyway, as regards the latest "diplomacy" with Iran, how about a show of hands:

Do you think:

1. There is something right and proper going on that we aren't privvy to, OR
   
2. This is the accepted procedure for arbitration on the international stage, OR
3. They are really leading us down the garden path for reasons we definitely would not like, OR
4. They are crazy politicians playing God and JR Ewing's Dallas, OR
5. There is something very noble going on, and God moves in mysterious ways, OR
6. Something else?

DO Let me know...