Australia:
http://au.news.yahoo.com/070405/2/1307z.html
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Thursday April 5, 01:03 PM
<b>Muslim speaker 'not a security threat'</b>
The federal government has defended its decision to allow British firebrand Yvonne Ridley, who has reportedly praised suicide bombers as martyrs, to enter Australia.
Organisers of the first annual Australian Islamic Conference have chosen to hold the gathering in Melbourne during the Easter long weekend.
Ms Ridley, a Muslim convert known for her outspoken views, has been given the all-clear to enter Australia and address the conference on Saturday.
Opposition immigration spokesman Tony Burke said on Thursday Ms Ridley had previously praised the Chechen leader of the Beslan school massacre, Shamil Basayev, as a martyr, and urged Muslims in Britain not to co-operate with police.
She is also alleged to have described suicide bombings as "martyrdom operations".
Mr Burke said the government should investigate the comments to verify their authenticity, and kick Ms Ridley out of the country if necessary.
"If the quotes are accurate, her visa should be cancelled immediately," Mr Burke said.
He questioned how Ms Ridley could have passed the character test required for a visa.
Immigration Minister Kevin Andrews said Ms Ridley had been allowed to enter Australia because there was nothing to suggest she was a security risk.
"In the case of Ms Ridley, she was judged not to be a threat to the national security of Australia," Mr Andrews told ABC Radio.
"There is a vast distinction between allowing somebody into Australia whose views you may not like, and somebody who is a threat to national security."
The immigration department this week decided not to allow another controversial figure, Sheik Bilal Philips, into Australia.
Sheik Philips, who was to be the keynote speaker at the conference, has been linked to the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Centre in New York.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
On another matter entirely, some good news:
http://au.news.yahoo.com/070404/23/1303t.html
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Thursday April 5, 08:16 AM
<b>UK Navy hostages released from Iran</b>
By 7News
British Prime Minister Tony Blair has welcomed Iran's release of 15 navy personnel.
Iran's president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad pardoned and freed the 14 men and one woman ,during a news conference.
He labelled his decision a "gift to the British people", and then met the sailors who were dressed in suits.
The sailors were captured almost two weeks ago in the Persian Gulf by Iranian coast guards who claim they trespassed into their waters.
The personnel will fly home tonight to be reunited with their families.
The news is a welcome relief to the British Government and the crew's families.
One of the Sailor's Grandmother, April Rawsthorne, said the families had been absolutely devasted in the past 13 days.
"It's just been one of the longest of my life. But I'm just so happy today," she said.
The sailors will fly home tonight.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Just a couple of days back, the news showed how Iran complained that the British marines had entered Iranian waters, while the Brits claimed they had only been in international waters. The US even came into the fray with Bush insisting Iran ought to let the British <i>hostages</i> go.
<b>EDIT:</b> Googling has still not given me support for something else I wrote here that I believe I also saw in the same news report. If I find it, I will repost my scrawl.
Meanwhile:
If those British marines were in Iranian waters/waters that have long been disputed between Iran and Iraq, then they <i>were</i> hostages but they were also tresspassers...
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?con...&articleId=5216
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>British Marines Captured by Iran: Fake Maritime Boundaries</b>
by Craig Murray
Global Research, March 28, 2007
Craig Murray Web SiteÂ
I have been unpopular before, but the level of threats since I started blogging on the captured marines has got a bit scary. It is therefore with some trepidation that I feel obliged to point this out.
The British Government has published a map showing the coordinates of the incident, well within an Iran/Iraq maritime border. The mainstream media and even the blogosphere has bought this hook, line and sinker.
But there are two colossal problems.
A) The Iran/Iraq maritime boundary shown on the British government map does not exist. It has been drawn up by the British Government. Only Iraq and Iran can agree their bilateral boundary, and they never have done this in the Gulf, only inside the Shatt because there it is the land border too. This published boundary is a fake with no legal force.
B) Accepting the British coordinates for the position of both HMS Cornwall and the incident, both were closer to Iranian land than Iraqi land. Go on, print out the map and measure it. Which underlines the point that the British produced border is not a reliable one.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/IC29Ak06.html
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Mar 29, 2007Â
THE ROVING EYE
<b>British pawns in an Iranian game</b>
By Pepe Escobar
[...]
Western corporate media overwhelmingly take for granted that the British were in Iraqi or "international" waters (wrong: these are disputed Iran/Iraq waters). Tehran has accused the British of "blatant aggression" and reminded world public opinion "this is not the first time that Britain commits such illegal acts" (which is true). Tehran diplomats later suggested that the British might be charged with espionage (which is actually the case in Khuzestan province in Iran, conducted by US Special Forces).<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Seems a more motivated article, but some of this I know to be true.
Here's a hint to the west. Catch the Iranians on one of their Shia-j-hadi terrorism or hostage-taking or whatever. <i>Not</i> on their justified defense of the sovereignty of their borders or their taking action to teach the non-innocent transgessors not to do it again. Grief. No one gets my sympathies by tresspassing and then whining that they got caught for it and did a little (possibly scary?) time.
http://au.news.yahoo.com/070405/2/1307z.html
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Thursday April 5, 01:03 PM
<b>Muslim speaker 'not a security threat'</b>
The federal government has defended its decision to allow British firebrand Yvonne Ridley, who has reportedly praised suicide bombers as martyrs, to enter Australia.
Organisers of the first annual Australian Islamic Conference have chosen to hold the gathering in Melbourne during the Easter long weekend.
Ms Ridley, a Muslim convert known for her outspoken views, has been given the all-clear to enter Australia and address the conference on Saturday.
Opposition immigration spokesman Tony Burke said on Thursday Ms Ridley had previously praised the Chechen leader of the Beslan school massacre, Shamil Basayev, as a martyr, and urged Muslims in Britain not to co-operate with police.
She is also alleged to have described suicide bombings as "martyrdom operations".
Mr Burke said the government should investigate the comments to verify their authenticity, and kick Ms Ridley out of the country if necessary.
"If the quotes are accurate, her visa should be cancelled immediately," Mr Burke said.
He questioned how Ms Ridley could have passed the character test required for a visa.
Immigration Minister Kevin Andrews said Ms Ridley had been allowed to enter Australia because there was nothing to suggest she was a security risk.
"In the case of Ms Ridley, she was judged not to be a threat to the national security of Australia," Mr Andrews told ABC Radio.
"There is a vast distinction between allowing somebody into Australia whose views you may not like, and somebody who is a threat to national security."
The immigration department this week decided not to allow another controversial figure, Sheik Bilal Philips, into Australia.
Sheik Philips, who was to be the keynote speaker at the conference, has been linked to the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Centre in New York.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
On another matter entirely, some good news:
http://au.news.yahoo.com/070404/23/1303t.html
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Thursday April 5, 08:16 AM
<b>UK Navy hostages released from Iran</b>
By 7News
British Prime Minister Tony Blair has welcomed Iran's release of 15 navy personnel.
Iran's president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad pardoned and freed the 14 men and one woman ,during a news conference.
He labelled his decision a "gift to the British people", and then met the sailors who were dressed in suits.
The sailors were captured almost two weeks ago in the Persian Gulf by Iranian coast guards who claim they trespassed into their waters.
The personnel will fly home tonight to be reunited with their families.
The news is a welcome relief to the British Government and the crew's families.
One of the Sailor's Grandmother, April Rawsthorne, said the families had been absolutely devasted in the past 13 days.
"It's just been one of the longest of my life. But I'm just so happy today," she said.
The sailors will fly home tonight.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Just a couple of days back, the news showed how Iran complained that the British marines had entered Iranian waters, while the Brits claimed they had only been in international waters. The US even came into the fray with Bush insisting Iran ought to let the British <i>hostages</i> go.
<b>EDIT:</b> Googling has still not given me support for something else I wrote here that I believe I also saw in the same news report. If I find it, I will repost my scrawl.
Meanwhile:
If those British marines were in Iranian waters/waters that have long been disputed between Iran and Iraq, then they <i>were</i> hostages but they were also tresspassers...
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?con...&articleId=5216
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>British Marines Captured by Iran: Fake Maritime Boundaries</b>
by Craig Murray
Global Research, March 28, 2007
Craig Murray Web SiteÂ
I have been unpopular before, but the level of threats since I started blogging on the captured marines has got a bit scary. It is therefore with some trepidation that I feel obliged to point this out.
The British Government has published a map showing the coordinates of the incident, well within an Iran/Iraq maritime border. The mainstream media and even the blogosphere has bought this hook, line and sinker.
But there are two colossal problems.
A) The Iran/Iraq maritime boundary shown on the British government map does not exist. It has been drawn up by the British Government. Only Iraq and Iran can agree their bilateral boundary, and they never have done this in the Gulf, only inside the Shatt because there it is the land border too. This published boundary is a fake with no legal force.
B) Accepting the British coordinates for the position of both HMS Cornwall and the incident, both were closer to Iranian land than Iraqi land. Go on, print out the map and measure it. Which underlines the point that the British produced border is not a reliable one.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/IC29Ak06.html
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Mar 29, 2007Â
THE ROVING EYE
<b>British pawns in an Iranian game</b>
By Pepe Escobar
[...]
Western corporate media overwhelmingly take for granted that the British were in Iraqi or "international" waters (wrong: these are disputed Iran/Iraq waters). Tehran has accused the British of "blatant aggression" and reminded world public opinion "this is not the first time that Britain commits such illegal acts" (which is true). Tehran diplomats later suggested that the British might be charged with espionage (which is actually the case in Khuzestan province in Iran, conducted by US Special Forces).<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Seems a more motivated article, but some of this I know to be true.
Here's a hint to the west. Catch the Iranians on one of their Shia-j-hadi terrorism or hostage-taking or whatever. <i>Not</i> on their justified defense of the sovereignty of their borders or their taking action to teach the non-innocent transgessors not to do it again. Grief. No one gets my sympathies by tresspassing and then whining that they got caught for it and did a little (possibly scary?) time.