´óÏó´«Ã½

Just done

Comments

1. At 01:01 PM on 05 Apr 2007, witchiwoman wrote:

   Arrived where?? :) Its not pitched up in Cornwall yet!!

2. At 01:07 PM on 05 Apr 2007, The Stainless Steel Cat wrote:

   Eddie,

   Please, please, please don't have that patronising military dinosaur Bob Stewart on again.I heard him on something this morning (Today?) and then again on the Jeremy Vine Show on R2 just now.

   I'm not surprised the 15 are looking less happy than yesterday if their superiors are telling them the same things the media's rent-a-soldier talking heads are saying. Apparently they did the wrong thing by saying whatever the Iranians wanted them to say, though it seemed perfectly sensible to me, and I can't see what harm it's done.

   Do you think there are people in Britain saying: "Wow. They've just said they *were* in Iranian waters. It must be true! I'm off to Iran to join their army right away! They might give me one of those natty suits too!"

   Or maybe it's because they gave away military secrets. It seems that one of the sailors referred to his ship not by name but by its callsign.

   Gasp!

   That's appalling isn't it? Because the Iranian military are too stupid to monitor the radio messages of the forces on their borders and match up callsigns with the dirty great grey lumps of unmissable metal floating there...

   Sorry, my time off work hasn't curbed my enthusiasm for sarcasm. I'll go and relax in the sun for a while and try not to think about the possibility of Des never-answer-a-question Browne being on the programme tonight.

3. At 01:09 PM on 05 Apr 2007, admin annie wrote:

   Well my newsletter hasn't arrived. still that's hardly important in the light of the breaking news. As I listen to TWAO Tony Bleaaggh is once again hogging the airwaves - how that man does get on my nerves these days. Anyone else wince as he said yesterday that the families of the hostages 'had been enjoying a time of distress and anxiety'. I know that talking off the cuff leads to this sort of unintended blunder, but perhaps the message is that talking off the cuff in situations like this just isn't a good idea.
   Or am I being too picky.

4. At 01:11 PM on 05 Apr 2007, witchiwoman wrote:

   PS sorry, on reflection that was a little insensitive. Apolgies to the families of the soldiers.

5. At 01:20 PM on 05 Apr 2007, Aperitif wrote:

   I'm bracing myslef for that Eddie -- I know it's important to hear and so I do want to listen, but I can't say I'm exactly looking forward to it.

6. At 01:30 PM on 05 Apr 2007, Paul Gledhill wrote:

   13:30, Opened Outlook Express, clicked Tools, chose Send and Receive, Receive All ... and no newsletter. Ah well, back to work.

7. At 01:41 PM on 05 Apr 2007, Vyle Hernia wrote:

   At 13:43 it hasn't arrived in sunny Tewkesbury.

8. At 02:16 PM on 05 Apr 2007, wrote:

   SSCat;
   The principle of not aiding your opponent still exists. It used to be the classic 'Name, Rank and Serial No.'. And people might regard this as only applicable in time of war, but it doesn't.

   Our military stays out of politics, especially at the operational end of the job, if not in Whitehall. By doing what they have done they have become active political tools for the Iranian regime. They amounts to giving succour to our opponents (N.B. not enemy).

   At the same time it might have occurred to them that co-operating would be more likely to delay their return home.

   So it's a difficult judgement to make. All the same I wish that they had kept their peace and not allowed themselves to b paraded by the Iranian regime as they were.

   Being held captive they were entitled to Consular contact or Red Cross / Red Crescent access, which was seemingly denied them. Lacking the freedom to come and go as they pleased they were effectively imprisoned without trial. One hopes that no collective punishments were hinted at, although that may come out in due course.

   All of these are breaches of the Geneva Conventions and therefore International Law.

   Si.

9. At 02:17 PM on 05 Apr 2007, whisky-joe wrote:

   It hasn't arrived at Bowmore either. Still the suns out. ;-)

10. At 02:44 PM on 05 Apr 2007, Paul Gledhill wrote:

    Sent at 12:30 and arrived at 14:20. Has it stopped for refreshments on the way?
    

11. At 02:44 PM on 05 Apr 2007, Aunt Dahlia wrote:

    Isn't it odd, (probably not at all) but the tenor of news reporting has moved from outrage that our service personnel have been captured and held, through joy that they have been released to and ever shabbier implication of music to be faced on their return. Is it possible that the angle of this news is being manipulated - that it's all their fault, that it was civil servants who did it, that no politician is ever responsible for making a decision that has a deleterious effect on anyone.
    I think I feel sickened, but very thankful they are back, and safe, and that they were doing the dirty end of a nasty job whatever the false premise that led to them having to be there.

12. At 02:53 PM on 05 Apr 2007, Big Sister wrote:

    The rusty track down which the newsletter slithers to Sussex has clearly seized up again.

    No sign of it here, either.

13. At 03:26 PM on 05 Apr 2007, Anne P. wrote:

    Newsletter arrived in Derbyshire 14:17

14. At 03:35 PM on 05 Apr 2007, nikki noodle wrote:

    It arrived here ages ago!

    Great read!

    nikki

15. At 03:43 PM on 05 Apr 2007, Vyle Hernia wrote:

    Paul (1) Mine arrived a minute earlier, not allowing for margin of error.

16. At 03:53 PM on 05 Apr 2007, whisky-joe wrote:

    Thanks Eddie,

    Your newsletter has arrived.

17. At 10:33 PM on 05 Apr 2007, Val P wrote:

    Mine arrived at 14.08, but I've only just read it. I did hear the programme all the way through again (stuck in yet more traffic, no dog this time), some kind of record this week.