Freed Hiker Summoned For February Trial in Iran

[Gerald]

TEHRAN, Iran -- Iran has summoned an American woman to return to the country and stand trial on Feb. 6 along with two other Americans still in custody and accused of spying after crossing the border from Iraq, a judiciary spokesman said Monday.

Their families say the Americans were just intrepid travelers out on a hike in northern Iraq's scenic -- and relatively peaceful -- Kurdish region when they were arrested on July 31, 2009. The only woman among them, Sarah Shourd, was released on bail in September and returned to the United States.

The U.S. government has denied the charges against them and demanded their release. Their lengthy detention has added to tensions between the two nations over issues like Iran's disputed nuclear program.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/01/31/iran-summons-american-woman-february-trial/

Note: Published January 31, 2011

[UnderseaLcpl]

Damn! The Iranians have uncovered our top-secret, state-of-the-art intelligence-gathering effort to send professional spies dressed as US tourists deep into the fringes of their borders!:damn:

[Platapus]

Damn! The Iranians have uncovered our top-secret, state-of-the-art intelligence-gathering effort to send professional spies dressed as US tourists deep into the fringes of their borders!:damn:

Would not be the first time. Besides one can't assume they were spying for the US or only for the US. :nope:

[Gerald]

Right!

[Betonov]

Damn! The Iranians have uncovered our top-secret, state-of-the-art intelligence-gathering effort to send professional spies dressed as US tourists deep into the fringes of their borders!:damn:
clever, clever, thats why our inteligence agency couldnt find any american spies

[Jimbuna]

If it wasn't so potentially serious for the individuals involved I would have Lol'd :nope:

[Matador.es]

Crap, be honest, you have to be stupid to go out hiking, as a women, in Iraq at the first place. Above all, hiking close to the boarder of Iran is seriously stupid. Especially (dont shoot me frau kaleun) for a woman.....

It recalls me to the time i have tried to explain my wife, on the phone, which way to walk to and using the shaddow as a direction tool and still she walked the wrong way, that must have been it!

[AngusJS]

I wonder if this could turn into a Return to Paradise (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0124595/) scenario where the woman has to choose whether to put herself in harm's way to help her companions.

[August]

I wonder if this could turn into a Return to Paradise (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0124595/) scenario where the woman has to choose whether to put herself in harm's way to help her companions.

It is that scenario I think. Her two male companions will pay more than they already will if she doesn't return.

[Skybird]

She should not go. It is a staged political propaganda coup designed to ridule the hilariousness and weakness of the Westerners anyway; you also do not hand over hostages voluntarily to hostage-takers.

Let's kidnap an Iranian ship or airplane and take the crew and passangers hostage, then exchange their two hostages against our 20 or 200.

I mean the game the Iranians play is a game that can be played by two, right?

[AngusJS]

Let's kidnap an Iranian ship or airplane and take the crew and passangers hostage, then exchange their two hostages against our 20 or 200.

I mean the game the Iranians play is a game that can be played by two, right?Yeah, let's make regular Iranians suffer by committing an act of terrorism. That'll show em.

:doh:

[Kaye T. Bai]

Damn! The Iranians have uncovered our top-secret, state-of-the-art intelligence-gathering effort to send professional spies dressed as US tourists deep into the fringes of their borders!

Is the CIA SAD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Activities_Division) really that incompetent? :O:

[Platapus]

The Iranians released the girl on a humanitarian bail agreement. The Iranians have to "officially" request her return. I doubt anyone in Iran seriously thinks she will come back. :nope:

[Skybird]

Yeah, let's make regular Iranians suffer by committing an act of terrorism. That'll show em.

:doh:
I think somebody in Iran's government went first with thinking: yeah, let'S make regular Americans suffer by committing an act of terrorism. That'll show them.

Sometimes I am a great fan of giving the change in the currency the other has chosen. Currently, 2 regular Americans are suffering. And 30 years ago, it were 53 - for 444 days.

Plus the hijacking of British commandos on the gulf some years ago.

Could it be a pattern I see there? Established becasue everytime they get away with it?

If you get away with it, than the method you have chosen is successful. I hate our enemies being successful. I want to see them failing.

BTW, a woman with Dutch passport who was arrested during the revolt, has been hanged some days ago for staged accusation over drug crimes. So much for the trustworthiness of the Iranian legal system. Stoning women for hilarious charges, and hanging opposition members for demonstrating not mentioned.

[Jimbuna]

The Iranians released the girl on a humanitarian bail agreement. The Iranians have to "officially" request her return. I doubt anyone in Iran seriously thinks she will come back. :nope:

I agree...your probably right.

[Skybird]

Do you guys really not see the point? Of course it is not meant as a serious demand. It is a calculated provocation. The offense lies in that they imply that Western nations and Western people could be so weak or stupid as that she would return indeed.

And if she does not come they score in the propaganda war again: the corrupt, decadent West preaches equality but does not honor Iranian laws and rules etc etc etc.

[darius359au]

The Iranians released the girl on a humanitarian bail agreement. The Iranians have to "officially" request her return. I doubt anyone in Iran seriously thinks she will come back. :nope:
Of course ajaminabadnutjob will use the fact she doesn't return as proof they really were spying.

[DarkFish]

I think somebody in Iran's government went first with thinking: yeah, let'S make regular Americans suffer by committing an act of terrorism. That'll show them.It's not terrorism. She didn't have a visa, so she was simply trespassing on Iranian territory. The Iranians are not really being nice, but as far as I'm concerned they are in their right. She committed a criminal act (crossing the border without visa), now she just has to face the consequences.

[Skybird]

Ah, it is being legal then, because their law says so. Well, by their laws the m,urdering of that Dutch women some days ago also was "legal", then. So was the torturing and killing of the Nazis - they did it becaseu they were authorised by laws.

When your laws are arbitrarily designed and used, like in Iran, and when government and RG interfere with justikce system, and the state has a known history of hijacking hostages and absuing them for propaganda - then this is what makes it state terrorism indeed.

[Tribesman]

It's not terrorism. She didn't have a visa, so she was simply trespassing on Iranian territory. The Iranians are not really being nice, but as far as I'm concerned they are in their right. She committed a criminal act (crossing the border without visa), now she just has to face the consequences.
Yes.
Do you think Sky would be singing a very different tune if it was one of the evil muslims from the despotic cess pit of global muslim land who had violated european civilised territory by entering without the correct paperwork?

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

Ah, it is being legal then, because their law says so. Well, by their laws the m,urdering of that Dutch women some days ago also was "legal", then. So was the torturing and killing of the Nazis - they did it becaseu they were authorised by laws.

When your laws are arbitrarily designed and used, like in Iran, and when government and RG interfere with justikce system, and the state has a known history of hijacking hostages and absuing them for propaganda - then this is what makes it state terrorism indeed.

That may well be, but the right of countries to restrict who may enter them (through the issuing of visas) is commonly accepted. If she didn't have a visa as she crossed the border, the West is obliged to follow the rules it laid down and hand her over.

[Skybird]

We would be stupid to hand her over to a regime that is totally arbitary in implementing its laws. I again remind of the assassination of the Dutch woman just days ago.

No, I do not see at all that obligation you claim. That wopuld be like handing over Jews to the Nazis, because the Third Reich had according laws.

In both cases it is totally unacceptable.

Juristic rules of a legal system basing on injustice, are evil, injust juristic rules. Injutrsice remains injustice, no matter whether legitimated by laws or not. Laws can be explicity tailored to be injust, and to protect the interests of those abusing them. When we rate bureaucracy as ranking higher than basic ethical imperatives and moral values defending human dignity, human rights, human freedoms, than we in fact declare unethical behavior and imorality not only as acceptable, but as a collective duty. And then we are not any different from the fascist regimes of the past indeed.

[Tribesman]

No, I do not see at all that obligation you claim.
Thats not surprising.:har:

That wopuld be like handing over Jews to the Nazis, because the Third Reich had according laws.
errrrrrrr....no:88)
The comparrison would be handing over Jews to the third reich because the country also had its own version of the nazi laws.
It is quite hard to see the subtle difference, there are border laws and visa laws which lots of countries have in common, then there was the law which said people who had 1 jewish grandparent were sub humans which your country had.
I can see how its confusing to tell the difference as after all immigration laws and nuremburg laws both have the word law.:know:

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

We would be stupid to hand her over to a regime that is totally arbitary in implementing its laws.

They may be arbitrary in some cases, but in this case, it seems that the woman did break a law, and not some Sharia-specific law but one that Western countries would agree is a violation of sovereignty (entry into state w/o permit). Regardless of what you think about them, to not hand her over in this case says more about YOUR hypocrisy and arbitrariness than theirs.

To use your Jew and Nazi example, if the Jew DID (at least probably) murder someone in Germany and the Nazis demanded his return, the fact he happened to be a Jew or the government happened to be Nazi is no barrier to handing him back.

[DarkFish]

No, I do not see at all that obligation you claim. That wopuld be like handing over Jews to the Nazis, because the Third Reich had according laws.Nope, it would be more like a Jew sneaking into Germany at the height of Hitler's power, and then being shocked and playing crybaby when the Nazis arrest her. She really should have seen it coming. If you don't want to get arrested, don't trespass into Iranian territory. It's her own damn fault.

[Skybird]

To use your Jew and Nazi example, if the Jew DID (at least probably) murder someone in Germany and the Nazis demanded his return, the fact he happened to be a Jew or the government happened to be Nazi is no barrier to handing him back.
No? Even today most civilised Western states have laws forbidding to hand over suspects to states where they are threatened with torture or death. For example Europeans do not hand over suspects to the United States if they are threatened with possible death penalties there.

And the women in question here did not commit any murder in Iran. The threat to her due to propaganda interests of the regime is in no relation to her "guilt". But maybe you also find it a defensible case that a 11 year old pay gets life because he was caught the second time stealing in a shop (example from the US, 2 or 3 years ago, but there were many others quoted as well).

You do not hand over people to arbitrary justice systems that are not justice but state-run terror. Currently they are executing people in Iran because they demonstrated, and the regime has demoinstrated repeatedly its willingness to abuse foreigners for propaganda purposes over constructed charges.

You may find that a system worth to be respected and obeyed. But that says more about you than about the issue.

Legal consequence and offence must have a reasonable relation to each other. This is not the case here. There also must be trust that the law will faithfully be implmeented and left unman ipulated and no politcal interest interfering. This aloso is not the case here. The threat to the women by far outweighs the small and minor offence that she may have become guilty of.

[Tribesman]

But maybe you also find it a defensible case that a 11 year old pay gets life because he was caught the second time stealing in a shop (example from the US, 2 or 3 years ago, but there were many others quoted as well).


Is that a fictitious example sky is inventing ?
You can find an 11 year old at the time being the youngest facing life for a double murder or an earlier 11 year old being the youngest at the time getting life for doing a murder while he was stealing.
But life for a second offence of shoplifting????? must be the 3 strikes and you're out policy for people who can't do numbers:rotfl2:

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

You may find that a system worth to be respected and obeyed. But that says more about you than about the issue.

I will say that you judge depending on the individual case rather than on whatever your perception of the general system is.

If this woman is innocent (in that she never violated the border), sure don't hand her over. But apparently you agree this is not the case. The Iranian court will no doubt find her guilty, but since she did violate the border, regardless of politics it is the correct decision. The only role politics has to play here is to distort justice, to allow this woman to escape punishment using humanitarian issues as a smokescreen.

I also have little doubt the Iranians will execute her. You might find this disproportionate. But the value of sanctity of border varies widely amongst nations, and IMO this is one of the points where (as opposed, to example, to stoning woman for not wearing a veil over their face) other positions are quite valid. The right to intrude into another country is not some kind of fundamental human right. To demand that the women not be trialed on excuse of perceived dis-proportionality is to insist on extraterritorial rights - if a country doesn't already hate you, surely such arrogance will make them so.

[August]

To demand that the women not be trialed on excuse of perceived dis-proportionality is to insist on extraterritorial rights

You mean like extradition? :hmmm:

[Skybird]

Kazuaki,

so you seriously argue that we shall actively assist in the assassination of a women (you said they would execute her) over charges describing a total bagatelle, in a regime that massively influences the justice and runs a known agenda to abuse justice for its own propaganda (whioch makes it an injust system not only by its laws, but its arbitrariness.

Lovely.

Please stay far away from me, I do not wish people getting the impression we would have anything in common.

We could also start extradicting woman that fled from iran becausue there they would be stoned for having been raped, or their families try to kill them for being not slavish enough. And the European habit of not extradicting criminals wanted in the US for crimes thjat could earn them death penalty, also is unacceptable for you then, eh?

Oh that pressure respect of yours for barbaric culture!

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

Kazuaki,

so you seriously argue that we shall actively assist in the assassination of a women (you said they would execute her) over charges describing a total bagatelle, in a regime that massively influences the justice and runs a known agenda to abuse justice for its own propaganda (whioch makes it an injust system not only by its laws, but its arbitrariness.

The system may be arbitrary, but the judgment in this case is correct. If we deny them this, the West are the arbitrary ones, not them.

We could also start extradicting woman that fled from iran becausue there they would be stoned for having been raped, or their families try to kill them for being not slavish enough.

I did not say that, did I.

And the European habit of not extradicting criminals wanted in the US for crimes thjat could earn them death penalty, also is unacceptable for you then, eh?

I'll say that the Death Penalty may be argued on its effectiveness merits, but is well within the Western zeitgeist's "permissible range".

In any case, IMO while one may very fairly dispute what are crimes. So no it is no problem to not extradite the women you said above, or for that matter a "political criminal" back to China.

IF, however, it is something that both moral system agree are crimes, be it murder or border violation, it is great cultural arrogance to not permit extradition because you think the punishment is too great.

[Gerald]

Three Americans accused of spying and illegally entering Iran have gone on trial in Tehran, with the proceedings being heard behind closed doors.

Sarah Shourd, Josh Fattal and Shane Bauer were arrested in 2009 as they were hiking near the Iran-Iraq border.

Ms Shourd was released on bail in September and returned to the US. She was not in court.

The trial comes at a time of tensions between the US and Iran, partly because of a row over Iran's nuclear programme.

The two men were said to have pleaded not guilty at the start of the trial, Reuters news agency said, quoting state TV.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12375575

Note: Update Record, 6 February 2011 Last updated at 15:04 GMT

[Skybird]

The system may be arbitrary, but the judgment in this case is correct. If we deny them this, the West are the arbitrary ones, not them.



I did not say that, did I.



I'll say that the Death Penalty may be argued on its effectiveness merits, but is well within the Western zeitgeist's "permissible range".

In any case, IMO while one may very fairly dispute what are crimes. So no it is no problem to not extradite the women you said above, or for that matter a "political criminal" back to China.

IF, however, it is something that both moral system agree are crimes, be it murder or border violation, it is great cultural arrogance to not permit extradition because you think the punishment is too great.

They hiked. Man, come back to your senses. You should know what is to be expected of their legal system. The lawyers of the two men still there have been excluded from the first day of trial, and they have been denied access to them in the days before the trial. And you know damn well that for the Iranians this is not about law and justice, but poltical propaganda scorings.

You are defending an injust and inhumane regime that does not know independent justice and commits murder and torture against its own people, where rape victims get stoned for their offence and virgins in prison got gang-raped by prison guards so that death penalty could be executed on them, for now they were no more virgins. I give piss for such laws and moral standards, and I tell everybody right in his face that he is a barbar and a hypocritical primitive thug if he defends stuff like this.

And you Scherzkeks want to debate hairsplitting details of the mutual relation between respect for laws and justice systems...?

Man, come back to your senses. Volksgerichtshöfe do not deserve any respect and loyalty - not the past German ones, and not the present Iranian ones.

On the other hand, an iditoic pseudo-artist from germany, who declared the mass murder of 9/11 a piece of art whose stunning symbolism is second to none, got rewarded a peace award today from some German gremium. So maybe ridiculing and zynism like his and yours are en vogue for the modern present indeed, and I just live in the wrong time.

BTW, it does not matter whether or not states agree on suspects that are wanted for being extradicted actually being criminals. Eurppean states can agree that a suspect is a criminal and offender - but when he is being threatened with death penalty or torture, he nevertheless would not get extradicted: not to the Us and not to anyone else. Many states also have laws prohibiting the extradiction of own nationals, no matter their crimes. But these things are just formalities.

[gimpy117]

I don't see why we can even think the charges are anything but crazy. We find people hiking in our deserts all the time illegally. We catch them and deport them. We don't charge them as spies and threaten death.

[ETR3(SS)]

I think the real question in all of this is this. What American in their right mind knowing the current political climate not only in Iraq but also in Iran, would go hiking near the Iran-Iraq border?:nope: Personally I say leave them there and send the woman back too. Three less stupid people in the US then.

[Tribesman]

They hiked. Man, come back to your senses.
They hiked on a border where cross border shelling is a regular occurance and is littered with terrorists:doh:
Come to your senses:har:

We don't charge them as spies and threaten death.
Its up to 10 years they are threatening isn't it.
The last case got 8 years which then was reduced to a 2 year suspended with a 5 year ban on re-entering the country.

Personally I say leave them there and send the woman back too.
Yes, not sending the woman back will just screw up any bail prospects for the next westerner who ends up as a bargaining chip.

[Platapus]

I don't see why we can even think the charges are anything but crazy. We find people hiking in our deserts all the time illegally. We catch them and deport them. We don't charge them as spies and threaten death.

But we could. That's the right of any sovereign nation. Just because we choose not to, does not mean that we can't nor does it mean that others can't either.

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

They hiked. Man, come back to your senses. You should know what is to be expected of their legal system. The lawyers of the two men still there have been excluded from the first day of trial, and they have been denied access to them in the days before the trial. And you know damn well that for the Iranians this is not about law and justice, but poltical propaganda scorings.

That you don't care about the sanctity of your border is one thing. Don't think everyone else thinks likewise, or that your position is a fundamental right. I can easily say, without condoning any of the stuff in your Para 2, that the Iranians are well within their rights on this one.

On the other hand, an iditoic pseudo-artist from germany

When did we suddenly start discussing Germany?

BTW, it does not matter whether or not states agree on suspects that are wanted for being extradicted actually being criminals. Eurppean states can agree that a suspect is a criminal and offender - but when he is being threatened with death penalty or torture, he nevertheless would not get extradicted: not to the Us and not to anyone else.

Leaving torture aside for a moment, this is actually a form of cultural arrogance.

Many states also have laws prohibiting the extradiction of own nationals, no matter their crimes. But these things are just formalities.

And this is a demand for extraterritoriality, a remnant of imperialist thought.

[Gerald]

Sarah Shourd, will obviously not go back the other two are the subject of political maneuvering, and will be released in due course

[Skybird]

In this case I am proud to be a culturally arrogant imperalist, then - feels much better to my conscience. :yeah:

When did we suddenly start discussing Germany?

When I compared two relativists to each other, him and you. Both of you excuse evilness, barbarism and inhumane crime, and call for it to be respected - the one claims distorted artistic meaning, the other claims distorted respect for the laws that legalise the bad guys.

[Platapus]

Sarah Shourd, will obviously not go back the other two are the subject of political maneuvering, and will be released in due course

I think you are right. :yep:

[Jimbuna]

Sarah Shourd, will obviously not go back the other two are the subject of political maneuvering, and will be released in due course

I think you are right. :yep:

I sincerely hope you are both right.

[Tribesman]

That you don't care about the sanctity of your border is one thing.
But he does care about the sanctity of borders, he complains that the Turks don't do enough, he moans that the greeks need help, last week he complained that the libyans wanted more funding for their detention facilities and that they were not doing enough to secure borders.
But as this topic is just Iran its muslims involved which with Skybird is the same as Terreblanche talking about blacks, any semblance of reason goes straight out the window.

[Krauter]

Without taking in the whole debacle about whether we should give her back and all that...

What the hell were they thinking!?

It'd be the same thing as a South Korean hiking near the DMZ, or an American sailing near Libyan waters.

What the hell is going through these peoples minds? Obviously if there is political tension between the two countries that would mean that that area is one where they should not be around. Bloody hell, last time I checked Iraq is still considered a warzone in my book. Why the hell are there tourists hiking in Iraq, much less near Iran, one of the most widely known countries that supports terrorism and the like.

:nope: People these days.

[Gerald]

Without taking in the whole debacle about whether we should give her back and all that...

What the hell were they thinking!?

It'd be the same thing as a South Korean hiking near the DMZ, or an American sailing near Libyan waters.

What the hell is going through these peoples minds? Obviously if there is political tension between the two countries that would mean that that area is one where they should not be around. Bloody hell, last time I checked Iraq is still considered a warzone in my book. Why the hell are there tourists hiking in Iraq, much less near Iran, one of the most widely known countries that supports terrorism and the like.

:nope: People these days. What the Hell Were They Thinking!? It was precisely what they did they hitchhiked and visited countries, as they well knew that this must be avoided, to put your feet if you want to avoid trouble now the damage is done, so now all that remains is the help from the consulate or the equivalent in order to get free bill or perhaps "a lot of money"

[Jimbuna]

This issue still has the capability of transforming into a bigger crock of sh!t :hmmm:

[Gerald]

This issue still has the capability of transforming into a bigger crock of sh!t :hmmm: A real statement!

[Jimbuna]

Oh I meant it :yep:

[Gerald]

Oh I meant it :yep: I believe in what you say, :agree: