Iran Spoiling For A War

[silver fox]

She is a citizen of Iran and the UK

She was charged with " plotting to topple the Iranian government" and received 5 years in September 2016

Johnsons comment;

"When we look at what Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe was doing, she was simply teaching people journalism, as I understand it, at the very limit" commenting on what the Iranians had accused her of,

was made in November 2017.

Johnson's comments came precisely when this country and others were negotiating for the lady's release, progress was being made at the time and there were in fact considerable hopes that she would be released and home for Christmas 2017, blunder mouth stopped that in it's tracks, now we will never know if Iran would have followed up on it's at the time statements, but Johnson justified their charges, you keep up this shout at others for justifying Iran, in their twisted logic Johnson did that.

[AdmiralAckbar]

Nothing he said should be used to give credibility to the reasons for holding her captive.

Iran loves people like you,justification for their heinous actions flows from your ill thought comments.

Saying he didn't help is comparative to victim blaming.

She and he are blameless for her jailing.

Iran should get no succour from any reasonably minded person whilst they lock people up so freely.

Think before you write.

Best laugh I've had in a while this, cheers!

Addressing each sentence in turn ...

Nothing he said should be used to give credibility to the reasons for holding her captive.

Nobody here is saying it's right, but the Iranians are using what he said to justify their actions.

Iran loves people like you,justification for their heinous actions flows from your ill thought comments.

People like me? You are getting mixed up again - it was Mr Johnson who mentioned she was teaching journalism (which is what she was being detained for), not me ... and it was the Iranians who used his comments a few days later to justify their actions. Not my comments, but his.

She and he are blameless for her jailing.

This is the best bit - you can't have it both ways!

She is alleged to have broken a law in that country, regarding teaching journalism.

At a time when her case appeared to be under review, a few days before she was due back in court Johnson commented "she was simply teaching people journalism", backing up what her accusers were saying. When she then re-appeared in court, those comments were used as justification for her sentence.

So either she wasn't teaching journalism so she didn't break any laws in that country OR Johnson was right and she was teaching journalism like he said, so she was breaking a law and got jailed for it ... try as you might, you can't have it both ways.

Iran should get no succour from any reasonably minded person whilst they lock people up so freely.

I can't see anyone on this website condoning Iran's actions - all I can see is deflection on your part defending your true love from any criticism.

Think before you write.

You should write that on a post-it and stick it on your keyboard.

[Toodles McGinty]

Again why do you give support to the Iranians, she has done nothing any reasonable minded country would find her guilty of.

How many times do we have to say that nobody on here is supporting Iran? Your assertion that criticising Johnson means supporting Iran simply defies logic. The two points of view are not mutually exclusive. Nobody is saying his words put anyone in jail. However, it was widely reported that Johnson's words gave the Iranian regime legitimacy in their assertion that Ratcliffe wasn't just visiting her family. And no, they didn't need that, they are despicable. But they stated emphatically that they used Johnson's statement against her.

It is perfectly possible to condemn the Iranian regime and condemn Johnson for his sheer stupidity.

At least I hope it was stupidity, but given your assertion that he has this colossal intellect, then he either acted maliciously, or he was too lazy or arrogant to listen to his team or prepare for the committee.

Or perhaps he's quite fond of murderous regimes. He did write in support of Bashar Al-Assad, after all.

[local]

How many times do we have to say that nobody on here is supporting Iran? Your assertion that criticising Johnson means supporting Iran simply defies logic. The two points of view are not mutually exclusive. Nobody is saying his words put anyone in jail. However, it was widely reported that Johnson's words gave the Iranian regime legitimacy in their assertion that Ratcliffe wasn't just visiting her family. And no, they didn't need that, they are despicable. But they stated emphatically that they used Johnson's statement against her.

It is perfectly possible to condemn the Iranian regime and condemn Johnson for his sheer stupidity.

At least I hope it was stupidity, but given your assertion that he has this colossal intellect, then he either acted maliciously, or he was too lazy or arrogant to listen to his team or prepare for the committee.

Or perhaps he's quite fond of murderous regimes. He did write in support of Bashar Al-Assad, after all.

Your words no doubt bring great comfort to Iran,

engaging in linguistic gymnastics to separate your condemnation of Johnson and by obvious default your support for Irans actions will no doubt be music to their ears.

The fact that Nazanin's fate was decided a year before he spoke seems to be a modest thorn in your Iran appeasing bigoted Boris bashing.

He said nothing that any reasonably minded person would think deserved or contributed to a prison sentence of any length.

[Toodles McGinty]

Your words no doubt bring great comfort to Iran,

engaging in linguistic gymnastics to separate your condemnation of Johnson and by obvious default your support for Irans actions will no doubt be music to their ears.

The fact that Nazanin's fate was decided a year before he spoke seems to be a modest thorn in your Iran appeasing bigoted Boris bashing.

He said nothing that any reasonably minded person would think deserved or contributed to a prison sentence of any length.

My words "As hideous as Iran is", "Iran has a deplorable regime", and "they are despicable" bring great comfort to Iran? How very odd.

I doubt they are browsing the Southport pages of Q Local, but if the Revolutionary Guard are, and they find those words comforting, they probably should also use an online dictionary to define 'hideous', 'deplorable' and 'despicable', as they obviously mistranslating them.

I'd have a quick look at the definition of 'support' as well, if I were you. Hideous deplorable and despicable aren't usually words painted on banners by 'supporters' at a pro-Iran rally. In fact, I'd hazard a guess that Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei might take exception to them.

Again, nobody on here is stating that Johnson (or 'Boris' to good friends and bum-snogging sycophants) either put Ratcliffe behind bars, nor extended her sentence. What most people are saying, both on here and in the big wide world, is that Johnson's statement was yet another example of complete self-absorbed arse-holery in a huge catalogue of arse-holery.

For any Iranian regime members who might be looking in, 'arse-holery', along with 'deplorable', 'hideous' and 'despicable' means 'not good'. In fact, if you consult a dictionary regarding 'arse-holery', a picture of Boris Johnson might pop up.

[local]

My words "As hideous as Iran is", "Iran has a deplorable regime", and "they are despicable" bring great comfort to Iran? How very odd.

I doubt they are browsing the Southport pages of Q Local, but if the Revolutionary Guard are, and they find those words comforting, they probably should also use an online dictionary to define 'hideous', 'deplorable' and 'despicable', as they obviously mistranslating them.

I'd have a quick look at the definition of 'support' as well, if I were you. Hideous deplorable and despicable aren't usually words painted on banners by 'supporters' at a pro-Iran rally. In fact, I'd hazard a guess that Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei might take exception to them.

Again, nobody on here is stating that Johnson (or 'Boris' to good friends and bum-snogging sycophants) either put Ratcliffe behind bars, nor extended her sentence. What most people are saying, both on here and in the big wide world, is that Johnson's statement was yet another example of complete self-absorbed arse-holery in a huge catalogue of arse-holery.

For any Iranian regime members who might be looking in, 'arse-holery', along with 'deplorable', 'hideous' and 'despicable' means 'not good'. In fact, if you consult a dictionary regarding 'arse-holery', a picture of Boris Johnson might pop up.

Thats ok you delude yourself that condemnation of Johnson is not tacit support for Irans actions.

Hide behind a few adjectives to appease yourself you have been objective.

Forget the timeline its fine as long as your Tory bashing you will feel better about yourself and your coterie of fellow Tory haters will like you.

Nazanin can stay banged up, Iran will be pleased with you and your bigoted ilk writing reams of similar supportive tosh.

Iran will say "We must be right about locking her up look how many in her own country say its their Foreign Secretary's fault not ours."

[seivad]

Deliberately obtuse answers make people:

[AdmiralAckbar]

Thats ok you delude yourself that condemnation of Johnson is not tacit support for Irans actions.

Hide behind a few adjectives to appease yourself you have been objective.

Forget the timeline its fine as long as your Tory bashing you will feel better about yourself and your coterie of fellow Tory haters will like you.

Nazanin can stay banged up, Iran will be pleased with you and your bigoted ilk writing reams of similar supportive tosh.

Iran will say "We must be right about locking her up look how many in her own country say its their Foreign Secretary's fault not ours."

Ok, lets try and simplify this to aid your comprehension - I can see others have tried unsuccessfully but I'll give this a go myself ...

No-one here wants the woman in jail in Iran - even if she did break some local law, it's not a crime in our country so we should be trying to help orchestrate an early (if not immediate) release.

The Foreign Secretary is in a position to influence our dealings with foreign countries.

Whoever is in that role, they can either contribute or keep out of it.

If they were to contribute, wouldn't it be best if they said something that might help the situation, and get the woman released a bit quicker?

Do you think his words helped the situation? It's a simple question.

[local]

The Iran appeasers bus will be along soon so you can all get on board.

Nothing he said even a year after her sentence contributed to her jailing.

She was already there wrongly.

Nothing he said added to her sentence, that was already set, he neither helped nor hindered.

The fact that the bigoted press chose to attach blame to Boris Johnson is the problem,

the fact that the short thinkers both on here and elsewhere picked the story up and elevated it is a problem.

You appease the bullies by clearly implying any comment about her case can legitimately be used to support her incarceration.


100% of the fault behind her jailing is Iran's no one else's.

[Hamble]

The Iran appeasers bus will be along soon so you can all get on board.

Nothing he said even a year after her sentence contributed to her jailing.

She was already there wrongly.

Nothing he said added to her sentence, that was already set, he neither helped nor hindered.

The fact that the bigoted press chose to attach blame to Boris Johnson is the problem,

the fact that the short thinkers both on here and elsewhere picked the story up and elevated it is a problem.

You appease the bullies by clearly implying any comment about her case can legitimately be used to support her incarceration.


100% of the fault behind her jailing is Iran's no one else's.

The Lady herself took an enormous risk visiting Iran using her Dual Nationality which Iran does not recognise.

Iran always takes advantage of Nationals as if they were state property
to frame on any nasty charge.

[Toodles McGinty]

Thats ok you delude yourself that condemnation of Johnson is not tacit support for Irans actions.

Hide behind a few adjectives to appease yourself you have been objective.

Forget the timeline its fine as long as your Tory bashing you will feel better about yourself and your coterie of fellow Tory haters will like you.

Nazanin can stay banged up, Iran will be pleased with you and your bigoted ilk writing reams of similar supportive tosh.

Iran will say "We must be right about locking her up look how many in her own country say its their Foreign Secretary's fault not ours."

It's a logically fallacious argument. Although the way you drool over dePiffle, it might be logically fellatious. It's a false equivalence:

IF you think Johnson could have harmed Ratcliffe's case with his ill-timed and erroneous statement THEN you support a murderous regime.

Talk about a straw man argument, you should be skipping down the yellow brick road with Dorothy, asking the great Boz for a brain.

Then you trot further down that yellow road by claiming it is a 'Tory hating' issue. It isn't. It's a 'Johnson is a complete and proven bell end and isn't fit to be PM issue'. And despite several posters tying to hammer home the same point, you simply refuse to accept it. 'It doesn't matter what you say, I'll stick my fingers in my ears and sing la la la', because I'm right. Are you 5?

I read an excellent quote yesterday:

"The problem with Johnson is that he's a stupid person's idea of a clever person."

In the words of an old Post Office advert, I saw this and thought of you.

[said]

How many times do we have to say that nobody on here is supporting Iran? Your assertion that criticising Johnson means supporting Iran simply defies logic. The two points of view are not mutually exclusive. Nobody is saying his words put anyone in jail. However, it was widely reported that Johnson's words gave the Iranian regime legitimacy in their assertion that Ratcliffe wasn't just visiting her family. And no, they didn't need that, they are despicable. But they stated emphatically that they used Johnson's statement against her.

It is perfectly possible to condemn the Iranian regime and condemn Johnson for his sheer stupidity.

At least I hope it was stupidity, but given your assertion that he has this colossal intellect, then he either acted maliciously, or he was too lazy or arrogant to listen to his team or prepare for the committee.

Or perhaps he's quite fond of murderous regimes. He did write in support of Bashar Al-Assad, after all.

I support Bashar Al-Assad too! The Americans really tried to stitch him up until Russia became involved. All because the USA wanted to regain access to the cheap oil which Assad's predecessor had allowed them.

By the way - I have just been reading the most popular newspaper in Iran, and it has nothing about the woman at all. They are more concerned about the drop in their stock markets. Among these concerns they quote:'Simplify price, or product simplicity' Otherwise - life a usual.

[Toodles McGinty]

I support Bashar Al-Assad too! The Americans really tried to stitch him up until Russia became involved. All because the USA wanted to regain access to the cheap oil which Assad's predecessor had allowed them.

By the way - I have just been reading the most popular newspaper in Iran, and it has nothing about the woman at all. They are more concerned about the drop in their stock markets. Among these concerns they quote:'Simplify price, or product simplicity' Otherwise - life a usual.

Without Googling, so I might be wrong on this, but wasn't Assad's predecessor his father? I thought he was tight as you can be with the Russians.

I'm not surprised the average Iranian knows little about Ratcliffe. Murderous regimes aren't known for putting the truth out there. I doubt most people will have heard of her, much less aware of the circumstances which led her to be imprisoned. Consider the way the truth is often distorted in the mainstream media here. I can't imagine there's much of a free press in places like Iran.

Even if their journalists apparently get some excellent training.

[local]

Its such a bore to hear again from the Iran appeasers looking to squirm around their tacit support for Irans actions.


You get the almighty feeling that the Labour Party has a whole section of them probably the one and the same anti Semitic rump that infects them.


The words wouldn't have raised an eyebrow if they weren't from Johnsons lips.

Still having a bit of collateral damage in the get the Tory Toff campaign will be fine by them.

There is some 10 years old stuff in the weary media today perfectly placed to stir up the country.

As long as they "get the Tory Toff" in their tired remoaner class warfare they won't care.

Best wishes to you Nazanin some of us think whats happening to you is wrong.

[AdmiralAckbar]

Its such a bore to hear again from the Iran appeasers looking to squirm around their tacit support for Irans actions.


You get the almighty feeling that the Labour Party has a whole section of them probably the one and the same anti Semitic rump that infects them.


The words wouldn't have raised an eyebrow if they weren't from Johnsons lips.

Still having a bit of collateral damage in the get the Tory Toff campaign will be fine by them.

There is some 10 years old stuff in the weary media today perfectly placed to stir up the country.

As long as they "get the Tory Toff" in their tired remoaner class warfare they won't care.

Best wishes to you Nazanin some of us think whats happening to you is wrong.

Do you think his words helped the situation? It's a simple question.

So is that a yes or a no then? With all the squirming, name calling and deflection, I just can't see your answer.