Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe finally heading back to UK

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by pip08456

Paying a ligitamate debt is a ransom?

Iran's Shah paid up front for 1,750 Chieftain tanks and other vehicles, only 189 tanks were delivered.

It was a deal between us and the Shah, not the Islamist Revolutionary administration that deposed the Shah.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by pip08456

Paying a ligitamate debt is a ransom?

Maggy seems to think so...

---------- Post added at 19:49 ---------- Previous post was at 19:48 ----------

Originally Posted by Pierre

It was a deal between us and the Shah, not the Islamist Revolutionary administration that deposed the Shah.

The shah's personal cash was it?

---------- Post added at 19:50 ---------- Previous post was at 19:49 ----------

Originally Posted by ianch99

So, in summary, this poor woman has been in prison for the last how many years because our Government would not pay what they were legally obliged to. Nice ..

And bozos lazy comments only added fuel to the fire

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

The shah's personal cash was it?

Of course not, but if I agree to sell you a car, and to be fair you pay me for it. Then before I deliver it to you, someone attacks you when you’re walking home from the pub and beats you to death and robs your house and bank accounts.

Then claims that the car should be his because he now has your house and bank accounts, I’m not going to be inclined to give the car to you.

Originally Posted by Pierre

Of course not, but if I agree to sell you a car, and to be fair you pay me for it. Then before I deliver it to you, someone attacks you when you’re walking home from the pub and beats you to death and robs your house and bank accounts.

Then claims that the car should be his because he now has your house and bank accounts, I’m not going to be inclined to give the car to you.

Except this debt wasn’t owed to an individual, but to the State of Iran, and while we may not initially have recognised the revolutionaries as the legitimate government of Iran, it has been many years since we did. It might have seemed to have been a principled moral stand to keep the money and the tanks out of the hands of the mad mullahs, but at the same time we ought to have been more alive to the risks they posed. The clue’s in the name.

While I admit it might be in poor taste to even ask this, I do wonder what travel advice for British citizens was in place in 2016 and whether the lady in question was known to be at greater risk being a dual national. Obviously she’s never now going to go back to Iran. I wonder whether she really ought to have gone back even in 2016.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Pierre

Of course not, but if I agree to sell you a car, and to be fair you pay me for it. Then before I deliver it to you, someone attacks you when you’re walking home from the pub and beats you to death and robs your house and bank accounts.

Then claims that the car should be his because he now has your house and bank accounts, I’m not going to be inclined to give the car to you.

It wasn't his car either then and they didn't kill him, they deposed him because he was a murderous, torturing, tyrant who killed up to 100000 people a year for disagreeing with him besides which they didn't want the car, they wanted the counties money back

Originally Posted by Chris

Except this debt wasn’t owed to an individual, but to the State of Iran, and while we may not initially have recognised the revolutionaries as the legitimate government of Iran, it has been many years since we did. It might have seemed to have been a principled moral stand to keep the money and the tanks out of the hands of the mad mullahs, but at the same time we ought to have been more alive to the risks they posed. The clue’s in the name.

While I admit it might be in poor taste to even ask this, I do wonder what travel advice for British citizens was in place in 2016 and whether the lady in question was known to be at greater risk being a dual national. Obviously she’s never now going to go back to Iran. I wonder whether she really ought to have gone back even in 2016.

The U.K. Gov relaxed the advice about travel in 2015.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/ir...n-risk-in-iran

The British government relaxed its advice against all but essential travel to Iran in July 2015 after the landmark nuclear agreement.

Originally Posted by ianch99

So, in summary, this poor woman has been in prison for the last how many years because our Government would not pay what they were legally obliged to. Nice ..

Governments - its been ongoing since the 1990's.

Still, I suppose I shouldnt be surprised you blame our "government", instead of Iran.

In the meantime what recompense if any will she and her husband receive for a situation not of their making?

[Sephiroth]

Anyone tracking on ADS-B Exchange might care to filter on

AWC601

which is en route from Muscat/Oman to the UK. If it lands at Brize Norton, bingo. As I write this, the plane is over the Nuremburg area.

[Julian]

Cross reference with Flightradar24 and that flight is indeed landing at BZZ in 1h 12

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Julian

Cross reference with Flightradar24 and that flight is indeed landing at BZZ in 1h 12

Looking at when it landed in Muscat, 14-March, her release was in the bag.

BREAKING: Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe has touched down on UK soil for the first time in 6 years after being held in Iran.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Paul

Governments - its been ongoing since the 1990's.

Still, I suppose I should be surprised you blame our "government", instead of Iran.

Indeed, the UK government's hands are clean here, the Iranians should have written that money off the moment winning arbitration, two court victories and overcoming the numerous obstacles placed by a UK government department proved fruitless.

This was so needless and that poor woman and her family should never have suffered this.

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by Paul

Governments - its been ongoing since the 1990's.

Still, I suppose I shouldnt be surprised you blame our "government", instead of Iran.

Since the UK lost its legal case to not pay the monies in 2009, then yes I do blame this Government.

The new defence secretary Ben Wallace, who as a backbencher campaigned for the payment of the debt, also secured a breakthrough when he was given authority to write in September 2020 to the lawyers of Richard Ratcliffe, the husband of Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe, to say that the UK had a debt that had to be paid.

I shouldn't be surprised that you do not blame this Government's deliberate policy of not repaying a legally sanctioned debt and so prolonging the imprisonment of an innocent woman.

[GrimUpNorth]

Originally Posted by Pierre

It was a deal between us and the Shah, not the Islamist Revolutionary administration that deposed the Shah.

I wonder if we can use that excuse in the UK when we have a change of government - nowt to do with us mate, it was them lot on the opposition benches who borrowed it. I suppose it would stop our national debt getting bigger as no-one would lend us anything else, well maybe Iran would as they know how good we are for the money!