Iran 'jails US hikers for eight years for spying'

[Gerald]

Two US hikers accused of spying and illegally entering Iran have been jailed for eight years by a court in Tehran, reports say.

Iranian state TV's website said Shane Bauer and Josh Fattal each received three years for illegally entering Iran and five years for spying.

The two men deny the charges, saying they unknowingly crossed into the country while hiking in July 2009.

Fellow hiker Sarah Shourd was freed on $500,000 (£314,386) bail last year.

She was freed on humanitarian and medical grounds in September 2010 and flew back to the US. She did not return to face trial, saying in May she had suffered from post-traumatic stress and would find a return "too traumatic".

The trial began in February 2011 and Mr Bauer and Mr Fattal, both 28, pleaded not guilty. Ms Shourd - Mr Bauer's fiancee - pleaded not guilty in absentia. The trial ended on 31 July, on the second anniversary of their arrest.

"In connection with illegal entry into Iranian territory, each was given three years in jail and in connection with the charge of co-operating with American intelligence service, each was given five years in jail," the website reported, quoting an informed judiciary source.

The report said "the case of Sarah Shourd, who has been freed on bail, is still open," AFP news agency says.

The men are said to have 20 days in which to appeal against the sentence. Their lawyer, Masoud Shafii, has told news media that he has not been informed of any verdict.

The trio - all graduates of the University of California, Berkeley - said they had been hiking in Iraqi Kurdistan and did not intentionally stray over the border with Iran, where they were arrested by soldiers.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-14602835

Note: 20 August 2011 Last updated at 14:15 GMT

[Dowly]

Hiking in Iraq? What a brilliant idea! I mean, apart from the good chance
of getting your throat slit, what could go wrong, eh?

Idiots.

[Gerald]

Yes, you can actually seek out problems, if you want, as they now stand to answer for, and Iran of all countries ...:nope:

[CaptainHaplo]

Iran can claim what it wants....

The reality is they just got 8 years for either exactly what Iran has claimed, or for sheer and abject stupidity.

[Gerald]

As you make your bed, so you must lie!

[MH]

As you make your bed, so you must lie!

Yoda could not have said it better.:D

[Platapus]

I suspect they will be released in a few months. :yep:

And then they will rake in the millions on their book and interviews.

This appears to be the fast track to fame and fortune - do something really publicly stupid and then people will pay to read about it or watch you on TV. :nope:

[Gerald]

I suspect they will be released in a few months. :yep:

And then they will rake in the millions on their book and interviews.

This appears to be the fast track to fame and fortune - do something really publicly stupid and then people will pay to read about it or watch you on TV. :nope: I remember the conversation we had, when I posted the thread a year ago or so.... and the woman who was released from bail later .....

[Anthony W.]

Places I would love to go hiking...

Nepal...
Switzerland...
And, oh yeah, not Iran :D

[Madox58]

Yea. Let's do stupid and get paid Millions later.
:nope:

I often regret not getting caught doing dumb stuff years ago.
I could be sitting in a much better place after a few years in stir.

Instead? I worked my whole life at honest jobs.
Stayed mostly out of trouble and NEVER EVER got caught hacking some really secure places.
What a dumb Arse I am for getting away with things.
:haha:

[Anthony W.]

Yea. Let's do stupid and get paid Millions later.
:nope:

I often regret not getting caught doing dumb stuff years ago.
I could be sitting in a much better place after a few years in stir.

Instead? I worked my whole life at honest jobs.
Stayed mostly out of trouble and NEVER EVER got caught hacking some really secure places.
What a dumb Arse I am for getting away with things.
:haha:

You should try it - I hacked my school's firewall just to prove to my teacher that I could (REALLY easy - like - no security at all). They payed me to be their new "tech dude"

[Gerald]

You see, the "easy money" :D

[Madox58]

You should try it - I hacked my school's firewall just to prove to my teacher that I could (REALLY easy - like - no security at all). They payed me to be their new "tech dude"

I burned my 'favores' long ago.
I did alot of work on County Networks years ago.
Lawyers and Judges systems were my payday.
:D
After a few years and a few, umm, 'things' shall we call them?
I was told point blank!
"You have burned up any considerations this Court owes you!"
:haha:

I took that to mean that any future cases would result in jail time.
(Which it did result in for a few days since)
:hmmm:
So being one who does not like those bars around me?
I'm a pretty self hidden kind of Guy now.

[Jimbuna]

Hiking in Iraq? What a brilliant idea! I mean, apart from the good chance
of getting your throat slit, what could go wrong, eh?

Idiots.

Never thought of that...best cancel next weeks planned hiking trip in Iran :DL

[Madox58]

It was planned for Iraq!!
Not Iran!!
:haha:
Now another thought I had.
Around my property I have signs that say
http://neatplates.com/SIGN_WARNING_TRESPASSERS_WILL_BE_SHOT.jpg

Where were the warning signs for a Whole freaking Country?
:hmmm:

I've seen the stuff between Mexico and the U.S.A.
If Iran is so uptight?
What's the deal?

[MH]

It was planned for Iraq!!
Not Iran!!
:haha:
Now another thought I had.
Around my property I have signs that say
http://neatplates.com/SIGN_WARNING_TRESPASSERS_WILL_BE_SHOT.jpg

Where were the warning signs for a Whole freaking Country?
:hmmm:

I've seen the stuff between Mexico and the U.S.A.
If Iran is so uptight?
What's the deal?

The "will shot again" is very useful against lawsuits my guess:D

[Madox58]

The "will shot again" is very useful against lawsuits my guess:D
I don't see that but once taken down?
Who's doing the lawsuit?
:haha:

[Jimbuna]

It was planned for Iraq!!
Not Iran!!
:haha:
Now another thought I had.
Around my property I have signs that say
http://neatplates.com/SIGN_WARNING_TRESPASSERS_WILL_BE_SHOT.jpg

Where were the warning signs for a Whole freaking Country?
:hmmm:

I've seen the stuff between Mexico and the U.S.A.
If Iran is so uptight?
What's the deal?

I was in Iran in 77, a place called Khorramshahr during the reign of the Shar (my boy still has my documents with the stamp of the peacock throne) and I must admit the locals looked suspiciously on us....heaven only knows what it's like now :hmmm:

I'll never forget their port authorities boarding our vessel and innoculating us in case we brought any diseases with us :doh:

[Gerald]

Viewing on your construction drawings are OK! Until Monday,:haha:

[Jimbuna]

Here's a spare for you Jeff :03:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-mbWh5tpOM2U/TbdcdOtJuQI/AAAAAAAAABQ/8dOD4Ki2IDA/s1600/shot-sign.jpg

[TLAM Strike]

There was a time when the unjustified and illegal imprisonment of American citizens was Casus Belli.

But we are now in the kinder gentler "post-imperialism" age, where any warlord or barbarian chief can kill or imprison Americans as they wish with no threat of retaliation.

:nope:

[Dowly]

There was a time when the unjustified and illegal imprisonment of American citizens was Casus Belli.


Spying or not, they did enter Iran illegally.

The "we didn't know" is pretty weak excuse IMHO. One would think that if
people are going to go hiking to an unknown area, they would study the maps
of said area, which, I could bet my balls, would show such things as borders
of another country.

And if they had no clear bearing as to where they were, then how were they
planning on finding back anywho? :DL

[Tribesman]

There was a time when the unjustified and illegal imprisonment of American citizens was Casus Belli.

How can it be illegal and unjustified?

[Jimbuna]

There was a time when the unjustified and illegal imprisonment of American citizens was Casus Belli.

But we are now in the kinder gentler "post-imperialism" age, where any warlord or barbarian chief can kill or imprison Americans as they wish with no threat of retaliation.

:nope:

Well I honestly thought there was a fair chance the US would retaliate if there were a reasonable chance of success....I'm thinking of Bin Laden and that naval Captain in the lifeboat with his Somali captors as two recent examples.

[Madox58]

One can not be viewed as Strong if one is unwilling to kick teeth in.
On a personnal level?
You mess with my people?
I WILL see that you suffer great harm in many ways.
In some ways the panty waste Laws in the U.S.A. force this.

I may not be allowed by Law to kill you if you break into my home as I sleep.
But a few smokes will insure you never see the streets again.

When justice is forced through subchannels?
There is something majorly wrong!

[TLAM Strike]

Spying or not, they did enter Iran illegally.

The "we didn't know" is pretty weak excuse IMHO. One would think that if
people are going to go hiking to an unknown area, they would study the maps
of said area, which, I could bet my balls, would show such things as borders
of another country.

And if they had no clear bearing as to where they were, then how were they
planning on finding back anywho? :DL


There was a time when sailors who became lost or shipwrecked on a certain chain of islands would be robbed or killed by the locals because they feared foreign ideas. It was not the sailors fault they got lost and wrecked, charts can be wrong and storms can force ships off course. The US sent four of its most advanced warships to this island's capital and explained that they could no do this and expect no retaliation, and that America was a better friend then enemy. They agreed that anyone who came to their islands by mistake would be allowed to repair their ship and go on their way. This country was of course Japan. ;)

[Tribesman]

One can not be viewed as Strong if one is unwilling to kick teeth in.

Willingness to kick teeth in can also get you viewed as being very weak depending on the circumstances, patheticly weak even.
Like a scared animal that thinks it is cornered and just wants to lash out blindly as it knows nothing else and cannot see.
Some people out of kindness would suggest putting such a weak creature out of its misery.

[TLAM Strike]

Willingness to kick teeth in can also get you viewed as being very weak depending on the circumstances, patheticly weak even.
Like a scared animal that thinks it is cornered and just wants to lash out blindly as it knows nothing else and cannot see.
Some people out of kindness would suggest putting such a weak creature out of its misery.

When it comes to nations, those who prey on those they see as weak do no do it out of mercy. In fact those are the governments who need to be "put down". :stare:

[Madox58]

Willingness to kick teeth in can also get you viewed as being very weak depending on the circumstances, patheticly weak even.
Like a scared animal that thinks it is cornered and just wants to lash out blindly as it knows nothing else and cannot see.
Some people out of kindness would suggest putting such a weak creature out of its misery.
I would suppose the IRA felt that way?
:hmmm:

[joea]

These days one can easily obtain a reliable gps unit for cheap. :yep: Dummies. :shifty:

[MH]

One can not be viewed as Strong if one is unwilling to kick teeth in.
On a personnal level?
You mess with my people?
I WILL see that you suffer great harm in many ways.
In some ways the panty waste Laws in the U.S.A. force this.

I may not be allowed by Law to kill you if you break into my home as I sleep.
But a few smokes will insure you never see the streets again.

When justice is forced through subchannels?
There is something majorly wrong!

As far as ME its very true.:rotfl2:
All abour showing respect and kicking in the balls from time to time.

[Randomizer]

There was a time when the unjustified and illegal imprisonment of American citizens was Casus Belli.

But we are now in the kinder gentler "post-imperialism" age, where any warlord or barbarian chief can kill or imprison Americans as they wish with no threat of retaliation.

:nope:
There was a time when an American warship violating Iranian territorial waters shot down an Iranian airliner operating under ICAO rules in an internationally recognized airway and killing some 290 civilians.

Some countries have long memories and it is really doubtful if, despite the $130 million USD blood money quietly paid to Iran, this disaster will continue to haunt US-Iranian relations for decades. Particularly since the USA never even acknowledged any responsibility for the shoot down. One can assume that the mullah's give thanks to allah whenever dumb Americans deliver themselves to the Revolution.

I suppose that two Iranian hikers illegally entering the USA from Mexico because of a "navigation error" would be treated with reason and understanding by the US justice system and sent back to Iran... Not.

These people were stupid; you can't fix stupid but you can let the idiots take responsibility for being stupid. A casus belli here would be worse than that used to fight the Soccer War of 1969.

While I am not entirely adverse seeing the Islamic Republic covered in green radioactive glass with sufficient cause, the application of firepower should be proportional to the offence and in this case I believe Iran is acting entirely in accordance with international rules and conventions.

[CaptainHaplo]

Centuries ago, if you were a Roman citizen you could go anywhere, and no one would touch you. They feared retribution.

As the Empire weakened, so did the protection Roman citizenship offered.

Yet there is a sense of balance that needs to be maintained. If we expect people from other nations to respect our laws while on our property, then we have to be reasonable and respect their laws when on their property.

Illegal immigration is a huge problem in this country. Many of us here in GT want to hold fast to the law and have it followed for those here illegally.

So how can we not expect and respect another country for following their law? How can we demand they ignore their laws without having a double standard?

If you put yourself into situations or places where bad stuff can happen, then it should not surprise anyone when bad stuff DOES happen. Hiking... in Iraq - as civilians... Yea - I don't blame the Iranians for thinking they had to be (really stupid) spies. No one with any sense would want to take a trip just to hike there. So either they are really stupid, or they were involved in something more that we don't know. Either way, we must respect the laws of others in their land, otherwise we have no right to demand that ours be respected.

[Tribesman]

@TLAM
When it comes to nations, those who prey on those they see as weak do no do it out of mercy. In fact those are the governments who need to be "put down".
So are you saying your nation needs to be put down?

@Privateer
I would suppose the IRA felt that way?

What a strange comment.
Though the IRA did feed on Britains willingness to lash out violently and blindly, they were pretty much finished until Britain decided it was time to kick some teeth.
BTW to bring it to a personal level as a prime illustration, did you go to the sausage festival and kick some teeth or did you stay at the house and enjoy a few beers.

@MH
As far as ME its very true.
Actually its a prime example of the opposite.
All abour showing respect and kicking in the balls from time to time.
Assad is having people shot as he is very weak, same all across the middle east, Israel when it decided to kick lebanon in the balls again just showed how much it was further weakened than the previous time it chose to kick Lebanon in the balls and show its own weakness.

What you three don't seem to understand is that anyone can show a willingness to kick some teeth in, it doesn't mean they are strong or weak. That only comes from when they choose to kick some teeth in or to not dependant entirely on the situation in question and all the possible choices.

[Gerald]

Are not these comments a bit off topic ...;)

[TLAM Strike]

@TLAM

So are you saying your nation needs to be put down? No my country is the one who duty is its to put others down. :stare:


There was a time when an American warship violating Iranian territorial waters shot down an Iranian airliner operating under ICAO rules in an internationally recognized airway and killing some 290 civilians.

Some countries have long memories and it is really doubtful if, despite the $130 million USD blood money quietly paid to Iran, this disaster will continue to haunt US-Iranian relations for decades. Particularly since the USA never even acknowledged any responsibility for the shoot down. One can assume that the mullah's give thanks to allah whenever dumb Americans deliver themselves to the Revolution. Funny the Iranians never paid us for the damage to the Samuel B Roberts of for the injuries to her sailors.

Sea Mines are strategic weapons, you conduct strategic warfare you receive strategic warfare. Transnational communications (ie air and sea travel) are strategic targets.

I suppose that two Iranian hikers illegally entering the USA from Mexico because of a "navigation error" would be treated with reason and understanding by the US justice system and sent back to Iran... Not.
No they would be allowed to stay and go to state college and receive medicaid! :haha:

These people were stupid; you can't fix stupid but you can let the idiots take responsibility for being stupid. A casus belli here would be worse than that used to fight the Soccer War of 1969.

While I am not entirely adverse seeing the Islamic Republic covered in green radioactive glass with sufficient cause, the application of firepower should be proportional to the offence and in this case I believe Iran is acting entirely in accordance with international rules and conventions.
What Iran has done could be considered violations of Articles 9, 11.2 and 13.2 of the UDHR.

[Tribesman]

Are not these comments a bit off topic ...
How?

No my country is the one who duty is its to put others down.
Really , yet you said that when it comes to nations that picks on the nations they view as weak it is those nations which really are the problem, So it must be that every time a nuclear armed superpower preys on any nation that isn't a nuclear armed superpower then it is the one that needs to be put down.

But its OK TLAM I understand your position, it is wrong when a country picks on a weaker country...unless it is my country that is picking on the weaker one because then it is miraculously right because logic reverses due to national exceptionalism.

What Iran has done could be considered violations of Articles 9, 11.2 and 13.2 of the UDHR.
No, no and no.
9 It wasn't arbitary.
11 It was covered by law at the time and the punishment is within the permitted legal range for those offences.
13 Doesn't even apply
But you are right, they could be considered violations .... until you look and actually consider them:yeah:

[MH]

Assad is having people shot as he is very weak, same all across the middle east, Israel when it decided to kick lebanon in the balls again just showed how much it was further weakened than the previous time it chose to kick Lebanon in the balls and show its own weakness.


Good point but not entirely true.
As for the weakness yes it was VERY painful screw up which had put things into right proportion....
Lets not go off topic though.

[Randomizer]

TLAM Strike wrote:
Funny the Iranians never paid us for the damage to the Samuel B Roberts of for the injuries to her sailors.
Iran did not specifically target Samuel B Roberts, the USN intentionally shot down Flight 655. Roberts was a warship doing a warship's job in a war zone and taking a warship's chance. Flight 655 was a commercial flight engaged in legal and pre-planned commercial activity. There is zero moral equivalence and I must say that I'm disappointed that you played this card.

Arresting foreign nationals caught in country illegally is hardly arbitrary so UDHR Article 9 is non-applicable and so nullifying the provisions of Articles 11.2 and 13.2.

At least these people were charged and tried under Iranian law complete with lawyers and while that might seem oxymoronic to some Americans, these clowns got more due process than those awaiting trial in Guantanamo Bay detention.

Risking war to save fools is in itself foolish.

[Torplexed]

Funny the Iranians never paid us for the damage to the Samuel B Roberts of for the injuries to her sailors.


Funny how at the time we were content with an apology from Saddam Hussein for some errant pilot slamming two anti-ship missiles into the Stark in 1987. But as long as he was at war with Iran I guess it was an understandable mistake.

http://www.bobhenneman.info/photos%20for%20website/Battle%20damage/Post-WWII/stark.jpg

[TLAM Strike]

Iran did not specifically target Samuel B Roberts, the USN intentionally shot down Flight 655. Roberts was a warship doing a warship's job in a war zone and taking a warship's chance. Flight 655 was a commercial flight engaged in legal and pre-planned commercial activity. There is zero moral equivalence and I must say that I'm disappointed that you played this card.

If they did target the Roberts it would have been legal, an act of war but legal. The Iranians targeted neutral (American Flagged in this case) shipping with undeclared minefield. That is against international law:

The Hague Convention VIII:
Art. 2. It is forbidden to lay automatic contact mines off the coast and ports of the enemy, with the sole object of intercepting commercial shipping.

Art. 3. When anchored automatic contact mines are employed, every possible precaution must be taken for the security of peaceful shipping.
The belligerents undertake to do their utmost to render these mines harmless within a limited time, and, should they cease to be under surveillance, to notify the danger zones as soon as military exigencies permit, by a notice addressed to ship owners, which must also be communicated to the Governments through the diplomatic channel.

The Vincennes incountered an aircraft that took off from an air base known to be used by military forces in a area where US forces had been attacked by said military forces previous and then engaged an aircraft that failed to respond to radio calls 10 times from two ships. The Captain of the Vincennes believed his ship in danger; the Captain of the mine layer Iran Ajr wanted to kill merchant seaman, which should not be too surprising given the actions of Captain Abdollah Manavi and his Sabalan previous.

Arresting foreign nationals caught in country illegally is hardly arbitrary so UDHR Article 9 is non-applicable and so nullifying the provisions of Articles 11.2 and 13.2. They were arrested as spies they were guilty of accidentally entering Iranian territory. The Iranians saw they were Americans therefore they are spies, that is arbitrary.

Risking war to save fools is in itself foolish.
14 Amendment, all Americans are protected by the US and its agents equally, be they stupid or not.

Funny how at the time we were content with an apology from Saddam Hussein for some errant pilot slamming two anti-ship missiles into the Stark in 1987. But as long as he was at war with Iran I guess it was an understandable mistake.

http://www.bobhenneman.info/photos%20for%20website/Battle%20damage/Post-WWII/stark.jpg

At least Saddam said he killed the pilot. SOB lied but at least he said sorry. I imagine all the Iranians said was "Allah Akbar!"

[Tribesman]

They were arrested as spies they were guilty of accidentally entering Iranian territory. The Iranians saw they were Americans therefore they are spies, that is arbitrary.
No, they were arrested for entering the country without a visa by a border patrol, they were charged with both entering the country illegaly and engaging in espionage. Nothing arbitary in the arrest or detention at all.

14 Amendment, all Americans are protected by the US and its agents equally, be they stupid or not.

Yes they are entitled to diplomatic representation the same protection for any citizen, in this case they got the same protection as any US citizen would but with the slight difference that due to diplomatic issues America lets Switzerland do its work in Iran.

[kraznyi_oktjabr]

The Vincennes incountered an aircraft that took off from an air base known to be used by military forces in a area where US forces had been attacked by said military forces previous and then engaged an aircraft that failed to respond to radio calls 10 times from two ships. The Captain of the Vincennes believed his ship in danger; the Captain of the mine layer Iran Ajr wanted to kill merchant seaman, which should not be too surprising given the actions of Captain Abdollah Manavi and his Sabalan previous.1. You forget that Bandar Abbas is both military and civilian airport. Same thing as in U.S.
2. Vincennes called Flight 655 in emergency channel only. Aircrafts do not have endless amount radios available usually just two. In case of Flight 655 they were in ATC channels appropriate to area. Those channel's frequencies are not top secret information. They are available in normal aviation maps which Vincennes at my understanding had.

[Gerald]

The information in most cases is well encrypted to minimize the risk of trouble.

[Platapus]

Perhaps now the United States' government is realizing the stupidity of not having diplomatic relations with Iran. This situation might have had a different ending.

When, oh when, will our foreign policy stop being dictated by emotions? :nope:

[Tribesman]

Perhaps now the United States' government is realizing the stupidity of not having diplomatic relations with Iran.
Are you saying that having America talk to Iran via Switzerland and Iran talk to America via Pakistan might not be the best way for two countries to deal with each other?

[kraznyi_oktjabr]

Are you saying that having America talk to Iran via Switzerland and Iran talk to America via Pakistan might not be the best way for two countries to deal with each other?:har:

[Jimbuna]

Perhaps now the United States' government is realizing the stupidity of not having diplomatic relations with Iran. This situation might have had a different ending.

When, oh when, will our foreign policy stop being dictated by emotions? :nope:

Probably as soon as one or two other countries (I suspect) come to the same conclusion.

[Gerald]

Perhaps now the United States' government is realizing the stupidity of not having diplomatic relations with Iran. This situation might have had a different ending.

When, oh when, will our foreign policy stop being dictated by emotions? :nope: Maybe never ...:roll:

[Gerald]

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton says she is "deeply disappointed" by the jail terms given to two US citizens found guilty of spying in Iran.

Shane Bauer and Josh Fattal were sentenced in Tehran on Saturday to three years for illegally entering Iran and five years for spying.

The men deny the charges, saying only they may have accidentally entered Iran while hiking in Iraq in July 2009.

Their lawyer has said they intend to appeal against the verdict.

"We have 20 days to appeal and I will try my best to use all legal means to annul the sentence," said Masoud Shafiee.

"It was my belief, and still is, that they are innocent and I have not seen any evidence that shows they are guilty."

Mr Bauer's fiancee Sarah Shourd, who was arrested along with the two men, was freed on $500,000 (£314,386) bail last year.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-14608290


Note: Update Record,21 August 2011 Last updated at 14:28 GMT

[Jimbuna]

You tell em Hillary....I'm sure they're listening :hmmm:

[Platapus]

The problem is that if they were engaged in espionage, it would only be natural that they would deny it.

The second problem is that if they were engaged in espionage, it would only be natural that the State Department would deny it.

Therefore the denials of the people and the State Department don't really reduce uncertainty.

That's the wacky thing about espionage. If you are innocent, everything you do is the same as what a guilty person would do. So how does one prove they are NOT committing espionage?

Ya can't.

[Tribesman]

Ya can't.
Ya can.
Offer to not swap an Iranian "spy" for them, after all if they were really spies you would offer the swap:03:

[Gerald]

U.S. can not do much in this situation, their hands are tied behind its back, and from a diplomatic standpoint, it's trouble anyway between countries.