"bb - Why do you keep saying, "Local fisherman states the Brits were in Iraqi waters." when I have already linked a source (Globe and Mail) that says otherwise?"

Because I have already given the source that said so, and shown how your link does not state anything of the kind- It stateds that the Iraqi official did not know they Brits were there, and WONDERED if they were in Iraqi or Iranian territory.

Try reading posts before you complain about them.

"Shaming me is a waste of breath. Guilt isn't something that works well on me. I am not defending evil. Quite the contrary. I'm trying to get to the truth by questioning all accounts of this incident. I know that there are two sides to every story. "

It helps to actually look at what BOTH sides have said, not just the side you seek to justify.


"I do not think you or anyone else can make any judgement based on a video clip that was a few seconds long. It was blurry, quick and edited. Besides that, it is quite possible that it was digitally enhanced. "

This was the Iranian video clip? Why would they have digitally enhanced it? Could it be they have some false claim to make????


Hard to understand what you are saying:

"In fact, I am proud of my ability to stand back and look at the situation objectively which is more that you or bb can do."

"I don't think you can draw any firm conclusions when the media accounts are contradictory and there is so much that has been omitted, filtered and revised. I do not think you or anyone else can make any judgement based on a video clip that was a few seconds long."

"I think its pretty obvious that the U.S./Britain have been itching for a battle with Iran and have created an incident by overstepping their boundaries in an area that has been disputed for decades. Nothing else really makes sense."

How can you look at both sides, say there is not enough evidence to decide, and THEN decide?