jawa.mee.nu

December 08, 2006

Iranian Students Protest For Freedom

Once again the TJR is bringing you the news no one else seems to notice.

Iran Press News: Despite unprecedented security plans and repressive measures by the fascist regime of the Islamic republic to prevent the gathering commemorating the occasion of â€œstudentsâ€™ dayâ€, students and brave Iranians who were informed about todayâ€™s protests showed that the university is still alive and despotism against religious tyranny blazes on.
According to received reports, today on this anniversary more than 4000 students of the Tehran University were able to gather; as they chanted slogans such as â€œDeath to despotismâ€ and â€œdeath to the dictatorsâ€ they were battered by herds of the regimeâ€™s agents and disciplinary guards. The number of intelligence and security agents is reported to have been more than 5000.
The students who are enraged by censorship and suppression of the universities, clashed with the regime guards and broke down the gate of the technical school of Tehran university and entered.
The regimeâ€™s officials, agents and guards had put their security measures in place and had surrounded the entire area since early in the morning, bringing the campus under siege. Students had been threatened and told that if they gathered and continued their protest, they would be arrested. But student activists ignored the threats and escalated their protest.
After singing the popular student anthem â€œYaarâ€™eh Dabestaaniâ€ (old schoolmate) they began chanting slogans:
â€œDeath to despotismâ€
â€œDeath to the dictatorsâ€
â€œPolitical prisoners must be freedâ€
â€œStudents with stars wear them like a medal of honorâ€
â€œFreedom, equality, boycott the electionsâ€
â€œStudents would rather die than to accept further abjectnessâ€

Mr. Ahmadinejad, are you a puppet of the theocracy? As the president you have an obligation to work for the future of the Iranian people. How can you do the business of Iran if you cannot even spend time with other leaders without losing a year of your term? They are interfering in your work. You need to stand up to them.

If you continue on the path the religious leaders have laid out for you these students will be the ones who die in the Ayatollahsâ€™ mad scheme. And, as already proven, if they are displeased with judgments you make in the execution of your duty then they will dispose of you too.

You could use the support that is there to set Iran on a new road, a road that leads to a better life in Iran. Or you can continue the puppet dance you are doing. These people donâ€™t want the west to have to come and solve your problems. They donâ€™t want to die trying to create a new Persian Empire and destroy Israel.

They want to solve thier own problems, They want a future for themselves and their children in a free Iran. Give it to them or else continue to live as a coward in the shadow of the religious zealots who control your every move. more...

Posted by: Howie at 11:10 AM | Comments (25) | Add Comment
Post contains 634 words, total size 5 kb.

1 All that country needs is a push from America, and the pissed off people there will take care of the rest. A little strategic bombing would probably be enough. Even the police refuse to carry out many of the repressive orders given by the mullahs, (who lead ostentatious lifestyles while they grind the country into poverty.)

Bush has two more years. Will he do it?

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at December 08, 2006 01:54 PM (bLPT+)

2 I doubt ameninuijhad will but since he talks to me like to challenge him. I like to point out to him he is a little muppet.

Posted by: Howie at December 08, 2006 02:00 PM (YdcZ0)

3 Yeah, he's a puppet of the "Supreme Leader" alright. (Not much room for debate with a supreme leader.) That's probably why he's only 4 ft tall. It makes it easier for the mullahs to shove their hands up his little ass and dance him around in their puppet show for the gullible Euroweenies and corrupt UN, who enjoy the fiction of a functioning government in Ayatollahland.

I bet Iranian security agents do read websites like this. Hey Mahdi. You still dreaming about a nuclear Christmas? Send Bush your Christmas list. He could light your country up real nice. Say hi to your wife and my kids.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at December 08, 2006 02:08 PM (bLPT+)

4 "They donâ€™t want to die trying to create a new Persian Empire and destroy Israel."

That's right, they just want their country back. And not only do they not wish the destruction of Israel, in fact, they wish for a renormalization of relations with Israel a country with whom we have been friends for more than two thousand and five hundred years.

Many Thanks Howie

Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at December 08, 2006 02:28 PM (vixLB)

5 Garduneh Mehr:

What proportion of the police, military, and even religious clerics do you think will side with the public in the inevitable revolution?

Amir Taheri makes a good case for America taking a more robust and coordinated posture on the economic, diplomatic, political, and moral fronts against Iran. He argues that an American military campaign against the mullahs would allow the Iranians to overthrow them.

I think Bush is going to do it as soon as troops draw down from Iraq, before Hillary Clinton can get into office and surrender to the UN.

What do you think?

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at December 08, 2006 03:21 PM (bLPT+)

6 You are welcome Garduneh. I pray Freedom come to Iran one day. And Thanks for your help on the post. I hope it is to your satisfation. I was a bit long winded.

Posted by: Howie at December 08, 2006 03:38 PM (YdcZ0)

7 Howie, excellent post!

Posted by: tbone at December 08, 2006 04:35 PM (HGqHt)

8 You will have to excuse this comment. My parents were hippies.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-u6-EOlgbsg

http://www.stlyrics.com/songs/y/youngrascals16192/peoplegottobefree440526.html

Posted by: Howie at December 08, 2006 04:46 PM (YdcZ0)

9 Thanks tbone.

Posted by: Howie at December 08, 2006 04:47 PM (YdcZ0)

10 Amir Taheri makes a good case for America taking a more robust and
coordinated posture on the economic, diplomatic, political, and moral
fronts against Iran. He argues that an American military campaign against the mullahs would allow the Iranians to overthrow them.

Excellent idea, Bargholz, let's all line up behind the Iranian Richard Perl. And by year four of THAT open-ended war, hopefully the freed Iranians will be rallying 'round us better than the freed Iraqis. Then on to Syria, and back to Lebanon. It's fun and easy to be Patton from the sidelines!

Posted by: Gleep! at December 08, 2006 04:49 PM (LxyIe)

11 Creep!:

Iran is nothing like Iraq, but then, moonbats like you think every country is like Vietnam when it comes to American involvement. Not that any of you know what Vietnam was like then or now.

How does someone as retarded as you even remember how to breath? Do you carry around an air-flow chart? Does your mom slap you on the back once a minute?

Don't work so hard to convince everyone that you're a moron.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at December 08, 2006 08:09 PM (bLPT+)

12 Yea the Iranian students. Weren't they the ones who took the Americans hostage? Trust them if you wish. I'd rather get some payback. ABOVE ALL ELSE IRANIANS ARE MUSLIMS. Some never learn.

Posted by: Greyrooster at December 08, 2006 09:10 PM (ezJiI)

13 Jeff Bargholz,
I believe the most thorough answer to your questions can be found in an article by Mr. Alan Peters at the link below.
http://noiri.blogspot.com/2006/08/iran-justified-final-solution.html
Mr Peters is an American blogger who used to work in Iran in 1970's and was personally acquainted with the King and His Cabinet. My own impression is that the security/police forces really want to join the people. As for the regime's main prop the IRGC, most of them are essentially profiteers; they will support the regime ONLY as long as it is in their own financial interest. Otherwise, they themselves will turn on the Mullahs.

Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at December 08, 2006 09:23 PM (vixLB)

14 Assholz,
Oh my god, now you're going to tell us all about Vietnam. Does your expertise never end? You're off your meds again I see.

Iran is like Iraq insomuch as any one country is like any other: "liberate" them and nationalism takes over, rallying the populace to fight the invaders, augmented by outside suppliers fighting their proxy battles. And then you're in for a fight.

This IS what happened in Vietnam, it's what happened to a lesser degree in Iraq (no China or USSR proxy), and it will happen with the next country we invade, especially in the Middle East, where all these sand traps assume we're coming for the oil.

Hard for neo-con-nazis like Perl, Cheney, Wormser, Wolfowitz, Feith and yourself to believe, I know, but the whole goddam world isn't waiting for us to come to their rescue. And they're pissed when we get their and decide to do it anyway.

Posted by: Gleep! at December 08, 2006 09:30 PM (LxyIe)

15 Invade Iran, we should not. Stand up to Iran's government and support the people we can. If there is to be war, start one they will..

Posted by: Darth Odie at December 08, 2006 09:41 PM (YdcZ0)

16 Creep:

Oh my god, now you're going to tell us all about Vietnam. Does your expertise never end? You're off your anti-pedophile meds again I see.

The invaders in Iraq are terrorists, "augmented by outside suppliers fighting their proxy battles." America isn't in for a fight, they're in to inflict further spankings. The Iraqis are already spanking the terrorists to great effect on a daily basis.

This isn't what happened in Vietnam. In Vietnam, your commie forebears convinced America to surrender after winning the war. More than 3 million people were murdered horribly as a result. An uncountable number were brutalized or disappeared.

The Middle East isn't a golf course. America has changed that shit-hole for the better more in the last 3 years than it changed itself in the preceeding 5000 years.

Show how America is "trapped" in Iraq, you cretin.

So anyone who isn't an imbecile like you is a dirty Jew ("neocon.") Why am I not surprised, Achmed? You're an obvious jihadi. I could smell your camel dick-breath right through the internet. It reeks that bad.

"We" don't represent America. I do. The rest of the world resents American superiority. No real man gives a shit. The real "we" don't base our decisions on dickless envy. We base it on the national interest. You don't figure into the equation at all. That's because turds don't matter. They're forgotten before they're flushed.

Swirl on down, you steaming pile. You're irrelevant in any discussion.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at December 09, 2006 12:39 AM (bLPT+)

17 That's right, they just want their country back. And not only do they not wish the destruction of Israel

I'll believe it when I hear it directly, and see actions to the same. Until then, it's so much taqqiya (sp?)

ABOVE ALL ELSE IRANIANS ARE MUSLIMS. - Greyrooster

Indeed.

Posted by: MegaTroopX at December 09, 2006 09:18 AM (v5fbO)

18 Indeed!

Posted by: Greyrooster at December 09, 2006 06:30 PM (ezJiI)

19 That's really a crazy idea, to think that bombing the country would help. People generally don't like being bombed. You know, if you read Lebabon's blogs this summer, almost all of them were very much anti-Hezbollah three days into war, but they hated Israel more than Hezbollah (or almost as much as) three weeks later.
Besides this, this would serve as a good pretext for mullahs to break down dissent. You know, "kill all those blame-Iran-first traitorous bastards, we're at war".

Posted by: Nikolay at December 09, 2006 07:48 PM (mS6dz)

20 Garduneh Mehr, I don't understand your take on Iran. What gives you your sense that Iran wouldn't be 'pro-jihad' under another, non-Ayatollah government? I would like to know your reasoning.

As a general comment, I will say that I think if the Ayatollah government produces hardsghip, by way of a standoff, or defeat in the gulf, the suppressed classes may depose the Ayatollahs. I don't know what the long term consquences would be, but they would be off our back for a short bit anyway.

USA all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at December 09, 2006 08:07 PM (2OHpj)

21 Nikolay, Russian history may (may) provide an example. WW1 weakened Russia, aiding the revolutionaries. I don't know how things would end up, but it is likely a regime depending on oil will lose its edge if the oil flow is cut off.

Or it could be like North Korea.

USA all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at December 09, 2006 08:12 PM (2OHpj)

22 Well, Russian revolution is a very complicated story. In fact it worked thanks to militarization of the country, with army, eventually, turning on Czar. I don't think it could work this way in Iran, but who knows. And nobody wants the Russian revolution repeated anyway, I'm sure.
North Korea is, unfortunately, more likely. On the other hand, Iran is in fact a very complicated country, with various competing factions and interests. Personally, I hope that all this Ahmadinejad nonsense is temporary.

Posted by: Nikolay at December 09, 2006 08:32 PM (mS6dz)

23 If my Iranian people insist on adhereing to Islam, then they don't deserve to be free; ever!

Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at December 09, 2006 10:51 PM (EdIIN)

24 Islam is the religion of the Arab aggressor. It has nothing to do with Iran and Iranians except having been imposed on my people by the sword. Case in point, Mohmmad's son-in-law bragged about having decapitated in a single day hundreds of Iranians who refused to give up their own pure faith of "Good Thoughts, Good Words and Good Deeds" for the misanthropic barbaric pseudo-religion of the barbaric Arab brutes.
Incidentally, the Islamo-Arab barbarians have exactly the same design for the Western civilization. For instance, they openly admit that for them the destruction of Israel (a wish which they'll take to their graves) is merely a stepping stone on their way to conquering Europe.

Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at December 09, 2006 11:01 PM (EdIIN)

25 Nikolay:

Who cares if the Lebanese and Iranians hate us? Just so long as they fear us.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at December 10, 2006 09:12 PM (bLPT+)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

December 06, 2006

More Convert Or Die Diplomacy

My friend Linda has a chilling look at Iran's latest actions in its 27 year-long war with us.

Don't kid yourself or be mislead by the MSM. This is economic warfare, pure and simple.

It's funny. I caught a snippet of Robert Byrd questioning the new SecDef in his confirmation hearing. Byrd asked Gates if we were going to attack Iran, or if he supported an attack on Iran.

Not once did he ask if Gates thought Iran would attack us. Maybe it's a moot point, they already have more than once.

Posted by: Vinnie at 09:27 PM | Comments (9) | Add Comment
Post contains 97 words, total size 1 kb.

1 I think they are dead.

Posted by: Gabriel Logan at December 06, 2006 10:36 PM (gF3rB)

2 When Bush became President the dollar was worth more than the euro, about 82 cent equaled one euro (Nov 2000) Now it takes 1.33 dollars to buy one euro.
If you were any foreign nation would you prefer to be paid in a currency, that would be worth more the next day, or one that would be worth less the next day ?
During this time we also went from record surpluses to record deficits.

Posted by: John Ryan at December 07, 2006 12:09 AM (TcoRJ)

3 Some will obviously view the drop of the dollars worth as a prelude to the "Amero" and it may or may not be but I think there is ample evidence that Bush abandoned the "strong dollar" prior to 2004 and is using the weak dollar to raise the price of imported goods while hoping to encourage the sale of domestic goods. There is also speculation that a weakened dollar might cause the Chinese to sell off some of the record number of greenbacks they own.

Did I hear that the Republicans withdrew a bill this week to allow drilling in those huge oil reserves offshore in the Gulf? Doesn't surprise me in the least.

I too wonder what happened to those conservatives in Congress who balanced the budget and gave us those record surpluses during the Clinton years. We sure could use them now but it looks like the big pork / big deficit boys are still in power (on both sides of the aisle).

Posted by: Buzzy at December 07, 2006 02:10 AM (CXz7T)

John Ryan. record suprluses? actually I thought we have been maintaining a deficit, plus or minus some percentage since 63? I guess my favorite economists on NPR have it all wrong.

http://www.npr.org/templates/topics/topic.php?topicId=1006

Posted by: DAT at December 07, 2006 08:00 AM (VxXTk)

5 Troll, I mean err "John",
When Bush assumed the Presidency Al-Qaeda had been actively attacking US interest's for the better part of ten years. Due to the Clinton administrations failure to seriously address this issue we suffered an attack on 9/11/2001 that was big enough to get world wide attention.

Left with no choice but to commit to an all out attack on Al-Qaeda and it's sympathizers the Bush administration, with the blessing of the Senate and Congress, committed the United States to a plan called the "War on Terror". This plan mainly consisted of taking the fight to the enemy and the Democratic party of the US promptly withdrew their initial support of this action for political gain.

The "record surplus" you speak of (while being no such thing) was created by the Clinton administrations gutting of the top of the line Cold War military forces that the US had maintained for decades. While a force of that size was no longer needed the downsizing was too fast and the cuts too deep. The end result on the budget was reflected as "look at all this surplus money we have" (taken from National Defense budgets). The end result on the Armed Forces was devastating, leaving a force too small to conduct a world wide conflict. Pumping money into the behemoth that is the Armed Forces in an effort to make it War ready is where your "record deficit" comes from. You think "up-armoring" HumVees is free?

Nice try though.

Posted by: blackflag at December 07, 2006 09:39 AM (Mq5jS)

6 My Econ teacher, who was a flaming liberal, even said there was no actual surplus. According ot him, blackflag is dead on. There was all this money from the canceled parts of the defense budget that was reallocated, giving the impression of a surplus.

Granted, there was a projected surplus...but that would have assumed we would have been in the same situation 50 years from now as we were when that calculation was made.

Posted by: Ranba Ral at December 07, 2006 12:33 PM (VvXII)

7 John Lyin:

Currency rates fluctuate, and the European Union is going bankrupt paying for its socialist welfare programs. It costs a lot of money to feed, shelter, clothe, and reward its own freeloaders, much less the muslim vermin who have infested the continent.

The dollar is in much higher demand than the euro, so the rest of the world disagrees with you. Even your terrorist idols prefer the dollar.

Feel free to trade your savings in for Euros, comrade Muhammad. (*Hypocrite alert!*)

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at December 07, 2006 11:55 PM (bLPT+)

8 As for people doing business with Iran, it would take about three days playing nice, and about 15 minutes playing serious, to take Iran's trade off the global map.

They are only a threat if we tolerate them, and their little death cultists that they export.

Iran needs to move its oil out to be able to sell it. If they can't move it, they have nothing. We can ruin them in a very short time, and so it all comes down to death cultists with nukes.

If we keep them from getting nukes, the nation of Iran is not a global economic player unless we let them be. If they get nukes, we will have to deal quickly, and completely with that reality. Otherwise, we have a luxury of power that is often overlooked. Our navy could ruin the Iranina economy by itself. We don't need troops on the ground.

Lets not get to distracted by 'oil bourses' or whatever you call them. Their production is an egg shell, and we have a big hammer.

USA all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at December 08, 2006 09:21 PM (2OHpj)

9 John Lyin: Bullshit. The economy is at its highest ever.

Posted by: Greyrooster at December 11, 2006 06:03 AM (ezJiI)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

The Diplomacy Of Convert Or Die

It seems that Mahmoud Ahmagonnameetallah has responded to the Iraq Study Group's calls for diplomacy:

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has warned Western leaders to follow the path of God or "vanish from the face of the earth".
"These oppressive countries are angry with us ... a nation that on the other side of the globe has risen up and proved the shallowness of their power," Ahmadinejad said in a speech in the northern town of Ramsar, the semi-official news agency Mehr reported Wednesday.
"They are angry with our nation. But we tell them 'so be it and die from this anger'. Rest assured that if you do not respond to the divine call, you will die soon and vanish from the face of the earth," he said.
The outspoken president also maintained Iran's defiance over its controversial nuclear programme, saying it was on course to fully master nuclear technology.
"Thank to God's help, we have gone all the way and are only one step away from the zenith.
"We hope to have the big nuclear celebration by the end of the year (March 2007)," Ahmadinejad said, echoing comments he has made on numerous occasions in recent months.

No further comment necessary.

Posted by: Vinnie at 06:54 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 207 words, total size 1 kb.

December 05, 2006

Feel The Love, Israel

It seems Mahmoud Ahmagonnameetallah has a soft spot after all. And not just for some corpse who's done been finished rotting for a 1000 years or so at the bottom of a well.

Mohammadi rejected any suggestion the conference would encourage anti-Semitism, calling discrimination against Jews a "Western phenomenon." The proof of Iran's lack of animosity toward Jews, he said, was Iran's 25,000-strong Jewish community.

Call me cynical, but using the word "strong" after "25,000" in a nation with a population estimated at over 68 million is a tad bit over-enthusiastic, don'cha think?

Posted by: Vinnie at 10:16 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 97 words, total size 1 kb.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad: Evil Girl Watcher

Yes, Ahmadinejad is in trouble for watching unveiled women sing and dance at the opening ceremony at the 2006 Asian Games held in Qatar.

The Guardian: President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran, who flaunts his ideological fervour, has been accused of undermining Iran's Islamic revolution after television footage appeared to show him watching a female song and dance showâ€¦
â€¦Women are forbidden to sing and dance before a male audience under Iran's Islamic legal code. Officials are expected to excuse themselves from such engagements when abroad but TV pictures showed Mr Ahmadinejad sitting with President Bashar Assad of Syria and Ismail Haniya, the Palestinian prime minister, during last Friday's ceremony in Doha.

Behold, the evil unchaste images of unchaste women singing, dancing.

No Ed, itâ€™s not just you, radical Islamists do deeply fear women, empowered women especially. more...

Posted by: Howie at 12:46 PM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 211 words, total size 3 kb.

1 I bet Ahmadinejad is just afraid to play that girl from Kazakhstan. He's no bigger than a minute. She would stuff him repeatedly.

Posted by: Howie at December 05, 2006 02:27 PM (YdcZ0)

2 The guy would probably c$m in his pants before the action really got started anyway...

Posted by: newyank at December 05, 2006 02:29 PM (l1tqC)

3 Women have powers and abilities far beyond those of mortal men. They are an awsome secret weapon. I hope the Mullahs crap their pants when miniskirts become common in Tehran.

Women are more proof God exists! (c'mon lefties, laugh here, its a joke)

They are at least evidence for intelligent design. I mean can you improve on them?

Anyway, its a good posting, and thanks for sharing.

USA all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at December 05, 2006 03:06 PM (2OHpj)

4 Comrades,

    Is that "Evil Girl" watcher, or Evil "Girl Watcher"? Or perhaps both?

    Those Mullahs are such marooons. Hard to take thems eriously when they are afraid of one of God'e own creations.

     Respects,

Posted by: Gwedd at December 05, 2006 04:30 PM (pDOVp)

5 This may be a good tactic. Just get pros to video chop their leaders into the backgrounds of female sports and dance events, and watch their administration fall.

If you want to start a revolution, chop them in looking in a window or something in a porno.

Posted by: Ranba Ral at December 05, 2006 04:39 PM (VvXII)

6 I propose a match. The Kazak girls will play Ameninutijhad and the Ayatollah. The girls willwear sweats and a hijab, hell veil too if they want. These girls will then stomp them 15-0, 15-0. Come on Mahmoud, you chicken or just can't reach the net?

Posted by: Howie at December 05, 2006 05:17 PM (YdcZ0)

7 Ranba Ral your briliant!

We could do it. photoshop (purely for parody) all these mullahs in (E'hem) interesting company.

We could call it ...

" Allah yer fakes are belong to us. "
Hee hee!

USA all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at December 05, 2006 05:44 PM (2OHpj)

8 Devistating to find out even St. Ahmadinejad has a little Clinton in him.
He was like...perfect to you libs before this disgrace, right?

Posted by: Brad at December 05, 2006 09:31 PM (Ignlt)

9 Democracy, Whiskey, Sexy!

Posted by: Liberrocky at December 06, 2006 07:39 AM (kIbPk)

10 Flash!

Iran has announced it will be joining a Muslim Women's Beach Volleyball League. All countries' representative teams will be clad in burqas while on the courts, with elastic anklets to avoid exposure of female flesh to male spectators. The League will draw representatives from Iran, Iraq, Syria, Kazakhstan & Uzbekistan in 2007, but will most likely be joined by other sand monkeys in later years.

Posted by: Alienated at December 06, 2006 06:07 PM (MYChe)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

December 04, 2006

Iran Bans Major Websites.

No word yet if The Jawa Report is banned but we sure hope so. The Guardian Via Michelle Malkin.

Iran yesterday shut down access to some of the world's most popular websites. Users were unable to open popular sites including Amazon.com and YouTube following instructions to service providers to filter them.
Similar edicts have been issued against Wikipedia, the internet encyclopaedia, IMDB.com, an online film database, and the New York Times site. Attempts to open the sites are met with a page reading: "The requested page is forbidden."

What kind of does Iran want to suppress.?

Maybe Maryam Namazie's speech to the UN? Or Maybe this one, entitled Save Nazanin & Kobra from Execution? Or Possibly this series about the hanging of a 16 year old girl from â€œcrimes against chastityâ€ Or maybe just the hangings and exposure of their religious propaganda.

Iranâ€™s Mullahs fear the truth almost as much as they fear women.

Posted by: Howie at 12:53 PM | Comments (62) | Add Comment
Post contains 158 words, total size 2 kb.

December 01, 2006

A Call for Action Against Death Fatwa

Blogger Ali Eteraz is issuing a Call to Action against the fatwa recently issued calling for the death of writer Rafiq Tagi. He is encouraging fellow Muslims to contact the Grand Ayatollah who issued the fatwa and request a reconsideration.

We wish him the best of luck.

Posted by: Ragnar at 09:58 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 54 words, total size 1 kb.

November 30, 2006

Michelle : The Next Salman Rushdie

She's got the story on writer Rafiq Tagi here.

Posted by: Ragnar at 08:16 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 15 words, total size 1 kb.

Iran Accuses Canada of Spying

(Tehran, Iran) Since the Iranian Parliament has no final authority for anything, one wonders where the accusation is coming from. It's speculated that Canada's assertiveness in the UN to have Iran condemned for human rights violations is at the root of the seemingly false accusation.

From TheStar.com:

In a sign of chilling relations between Iran and Canada, Iranian lawmakers have labelled Canada's embassy in Tehran a "den of spies" and called for a probe that could shut it down.
"The Canadian embassy represents the 'den of spies' and this is unacceptable for Iranians," said hard-liner Hamidreza Hajbabai, one of a group of parliamentarians accusing Ottawa of plotting with the United States, a long-term enemy of Iran.
Another lawmaker, Javad Arian-Manesh, said the Majiles (parliament) would investigate the Canadian embassy for espionage, "and if it is proven, (we are) determined to shut down the mission."

In a lapse of Islamic tolerance and diversity, one sneering Iranian foreign minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, said, "Canada is no big deal in global politics. We all know Canada is acting on behalf of other countries and only after full co-ordination with London."

Canadian officials called the charges baseless and rhetorical. Nonetheless, they add to the decreasing level of peacefulness and tolerance between the two nations. An interested observer might even call the charges an act of belligerence.

Posted by: Mike Pechar at 08:14 AM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 224 words, total size 2 kb.

November 21, 2006

Fatimaâ€™s Love For Sale

Interesting article, my opinion is that a culture that treats women as property of men encourages pimping and prostitution. Also the failure or Iranâ€™s government to properly address economic issues also contributes.

Asia Times: Wars are won by destroying the enemy's will to fight. A nation is never really beaten until it sells its womenâ€¦
â€¦To understand Iranian politics, cherchez les femmes: the fate of Iranian women sheds light on the eccentricity of President Mahmud Ahmadinejad. By Spengler's Universal Law of Gender Parity, the men and women of every place and every time deserve each other. A corollary to this universal law states that the battered Iranian whore is the alter ego of the swaggering Iranian jihadiâ€¦
â€¦Nothing is more threadbare than the claim of Islamists to defend Muslim womanhood. Islamist radicals (like the penny-a-marriage mullahs of Iran) are the world's most prolific pimps. The same networks that move female flesh across borders also provide illegal passage for jihadis, and the proceeds of human trafficking often support Islamist terrorists. From Jakarta to Kuala Lumpur to Sarajevo to Tirana, the criminals who trade in women overlap with jihadist networks. Prostitutes serve the terror network in a number of capacities, including suicide bombing. The going rate for a Muslim woman who can pass for a European to carry a suicide bomb currently is more than US$100,000. The Persian prostitute is the camp follower of the jihadi, joined to him in a pact of national suicide.

Or it could be the â€œSubhumanâ€ status of women in Islamic nations that robs them of their pride and makes prostitution seem logical? If a woman is treated as a piece of meat then should she not use that to feed her childâ€™s hunger? If she were "human" or an equal to men she might make another choice. She just lacks the opportunity. The following video has had only 9 views on youtube. It deserves many more.

Video below the fold more...

Posted by: Howie at 02:04 PM | Comments (12) | Add Comment
Post contains 356 words, total size 3 kb.

1 There are no prostitutes in Iran. The Muslim custom of temporary marriages sees to that.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at November 21, 2006 03:12 PM (vBK4C)

2 You forgot the role of the crains and the noose Bluto.

Posted by: Darth Odie at November 21, 2006 03:21 PM (D3+20)

3 I've spent to much time chasing, and appreciating women to not feel a deep sense of tragedy over this.

Women are beautiful wonderful things, and its disgusting how they can be so dehumanized over there.

It is sad.

USA all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at November 21, 2006 04:03 PM (2OHpj)

4 Those are for sluts, not whores.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at November 21, 2006 04:03 PM (vBK4C)

5 Culture not religion is the overriding force.
The effect of a religion say for instance christianity in the United Syaes is less powerfull than is our culture.
And of course divorce is highwst in the "bible belt"

Posted by: john ryan at November 21, 2006 04:34 PM (TcoRJ)

6 Well Jeep Thang sometimes christians tell similar fibs

Posted by: john ryan at November 21, 2006 04:40 PM (TcoRJ)

7 Wait.. I was under the impression that islam was the perfect religion..

Someone lied to me... probably a muslim.

Posted by: JeepThang at November 21, 2006 04:40 PM (yZQoS)

8 Divorce highest in the bible belt? where is the belt and where are the stats that say this divorce rate? or is it all just a slippery slope!

Posted by: DAT at November 21, 2006 06:40 PM (HYYQD)

9 Culture not religion is the overriding force.

Culture, government and religion are intertwined in Islam more so than any other faith.

And of course divorce is highwst in the "bible belt"

Nevada is in the bible belt?

Posted by: Randman at November 21, 2006 11:16 PM (Sal3J)

10 Not sure what your on about john ryan, ever notice how christians treat women here in the states? Ever listen to conservative talk radio? Its the religion. And Islam is an even more dangerous religion.

Our best long term strategy for Iran is the exportation of feminism, by suporting appropriate femenist scholars here in the U.S. Just a few really powerful American-Iranian anti-Islamic feminist authors will could set Iran on a course for abandoning Islam, much as the west has abandoned christianity. People fear Iran since its quite advanced technologically, but this its religious leadership's greatest weakness too.

Posted by: Mr. C at November 22, 2006 02:52 PM (cYBtu)

11 John Ryan, senile though he may be, never met a scumbag he didn't like.
I bet he takes his vacations in Thailand where he molests little kids
for a few bucks a shot.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at November 23, 2006 01:51 PM (v3I+x)

12 John Ryan thinks California is in the bible belt.

Posted by: Greyrooster at November 26, 2006 10:32 PM (aghaS)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

November 20, 2006

Persecution of Christians in Iran

It is with sincere thanks to our reader, Garduneh Mehr, who spent the time and effort to translate the following article from Persian for the other readers of the Jawa Report, that I post the following:

[This is a translation of a Persian article entitled â€œPersecution of the Church in Iranâ€ from http://www.hra-iran.blogfa.com/post-257.aspx The translatorâ€™s notes are enclosed in square braces.]

In the Name of Liberty
In recent months we have witnessed persecution of religious minorities in Iran, including threats, [unlawful] arrests and murders. Our Christian compatriots are constantly targets of torment and harassment. The following describes a small portion of the murders, threats and arrests that Christian Iranians have been subjected to:
Murders:

In
2005, Mr. Ghorban Tarani
a Christian missionary was murdered under strange circumstances in the
town of â€œGonbadâ€.

Arrests:

In the
town of â€œGorgaanâ€ a church custodian was
arrested and imprisoned on the charge of being a Christian. During his
imprisonment he was subjected to constant interrogation.

One of
the parishioners of the Church in the town of â€œ class=SpellE>Hamadanâ€ by the name Dr. class=SpellE>Mehrdaad along with his wife and eight year old child
were arrested and imprisoned by the agents of the government Ministry of
Intelligence.

In
2004, four parishioners of a Church in the town of style='mso-spacerun:yes'>Â â€œChaa-Loosâ€
were arrested by the agents of the regime and tried in â€œRevolutionary
Courtâ€; some were handed death sentences. The
four were freed only after international pressure was brought to bear on
the regime.

In the
town of â€œChaa-Loosâ€ a
Christian family including their children ( Hour="13">one thirteen class=GramE> year old and an eighteen year old) were arrested by
the [regimeâ€™s] ministry of intelligence.

In the
town ofÂ â€œ class=SpellE>Mashhadâ€ Ms. Freshteh
Dibaaj daughter of Rev. Mehdi
Dibaaj was arrested while in Church along with
her husband and imprisoned by the [regimeâ€™s] ministry of
intelligence. The two were interrogated for more than two weeks. The
reader is reminded that this is the same â€œhome Churchâ€ that was run by
Rev. Sayâ€™yed Sudmand
who himself was put to death for his faith. [â€œ class=GramE>home churchâ€ refers to people converting their homes to
churches and holding services there. It is worth noting that the
prefix Sayâ€™yed in the name of Rev. class=SpellE>Sudmand signifies that he is actually descended from
the family of Mohammad and was convert to
Christianity.]

In the
town of â€œSanandajâ€ Mr. Ghane
a parishioner of a home Church who had been repeatedly harassed and
threatened by the agents of the regime was arrested; nothing is known
about his fate.

In the
town of â€œShahin-shahrâ€ the spouse of one of our
Christian compatriots was arrested and imprisoned where he was subjected
to torture which result in him being hospitalized.

Families who inquire about their imprisoned children [and loved ones] are either told nothing or are threatened by the ministry of intelligence.
Some of the ways in which Christians are harassed are as follows:

The
agents of the regime videotape and photograph parishioners entering and
leaving church services.

Carrying
more than one Bible with you is considered a crime.

Importation
and printing of religious texts are forbidden by the regime; and anyone
involved in such activities is arrested.

Active
individuals receive threatening phone calls.

In the past years many of our Christian compatriots [Iranians] have, as a result of persistent persecution, been forced to abandon their homes and homeland and seek refuge in foreign lands.
[It is worth noting that the â€œThree Wise Men from the Eastâ€ who foresaw the birth of Christ and worshipped the newly born Jesus were Iranian Magi. The Magi were the cast of the learned whose social function was to literate their fellow citizens in material and spiritual matters. Their line was brought to a brutal end by the Islamo-Arab hordes who believed that the only thing worth
learning is the Qoran.]

Posted by: Ragnar at 08:56 PM | Comments (13) | Add Comment
Post contains 490 words, total size 6 kb.

Bomb Bomb Bomb Bomb Bomb Iran

WE MUST bomb Iran. Thatâ€™s the opinion of Joshua Muravchik at the LA Times.

It has been four years since that country's secret nuclear program was brought to light, and the path of diplomacy and sanctions has led nowhere.
First, we agreed to our allies' requests that we offer Tehran a string of concessions, which it spurned. Then, Britain, France and Germany wanted to impose a batch of extremely weak sanctions. For instance, Iranians known to be involved in nuclear activities would have been barred from foreign travel â€” except for humanitarian or religious reasons â€” and outside countries would have been required to refrain from aiding some, but not all, Iranian nuclear projects.
So if sanctions won't work, what's left? The overthrow of the current Iranian regime might offer a silver bullet, but with hard-liners firmly in the saddle in Tehran, any such prospect seems even more remote today than it did a decade ago, when students were demonstrating and reformers were ascendant. Meanwhile, the completion of Iran's bomb grows nearer every day.

I doubt we will bomb Iran. Itâ€™s not really a very good idea. Bombing without boots on the ground accomplishes little more than making a big mess.

If you are not willing to put a couple million boots on the ground and win the right way, then the Iranians would probably rally and rather than weaken the Mullahâ€™s control it would probably do the opposite.

I feel the proper action is to ignore the nuclear issue. What? Yes ignore the nuclear issue at least in public. The nuclear issue is a card they play to distract from their oppressive totalitarian regime.

We should make some sort of mad type policy. If a nuclear bomb is used that traces back to Iran, Iran becomes a giant glowstick night light for the middle east. If Iran attempts to "wipe Israel from the face of the earth", we will wipe Iran from the face of the earth. A sweet and simple policy that Iâ€™m sure even Ameninutijhad can grasp.

Afterward we point out all the other things, like the oppression of the Iranian people and press. The oppression of women. Point out the terrible economic problems and lack of upward mobility.

Iran is a nation with plenty of oil that has to import gasoline. While the regime plays, glow in the dark, with nuclear power the nation still cannot refine itâ€™s own oil in sufficient quantities.

Yes the leadership of Iran has its priorities all F^cked up. It focuses on external issues to draw attention from its failings. We need to undermine the Mullahs support with the truth and settle in for a long cold war with Iran.

If not we shouldâ€¦.

Ace says,"Do it!"

There's never been such a vile, violent, racist, mannichean enemy in our past, so it can't happen in our future.
Except... the one problem is... it did happen before. And it's not exactly a secret. There have been like five or six books written about it and everything.
And that war didn't stop until more than sixty million people were dead.
An atomic weapons were only invented at the end of that war.

One more thought. The best ckeck we have against Iranian power is to hang tought in Iraq and Afghanistan. And should war with Iran ever occur those two nations are indespenseable, no matter how long it takes.

Discuss.

Posted by: Howie at 09:11 AM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 569 words, total size 4 kb.

1 Ace also says "Bad thoughts on Iraq"
how about a link to his most recent post?
http://ace.mu.nu/

Posted by: John Ryan at November 20, 2006 12:24 PM (TcoRJ)

2 I have serious doubts that the United States would use nuclear weapons against a foreign nation, even if it were obvious that a vile nation like Iran supplied a bomb to a terrorist organization. Invade and "liberate"? Perhaps (before the recent elections I would have said "certainly"). Bomb with nuclear weapons? I doubt it.

I hope and pray that I am wrong about this. If there is no realistic possibility of American nuclear response, then the liklihood of a nuclear attack will raise dramatically. But the American use of a nuclear weapon may be increasingly unlikely in light of the liberal policy of "no longer going to war with nations or peoples" but with "governments", as well as the idea of war for liberation rather than elimination of threat or punishment for evils done (evils like September 11...for those who care to remember the most savage and evil attack on civilians in American history). Any nuclear strike will kill many civilians, and the enemy knows this. How can America, with its flawed policy of "liberation" ever justify destroying a city and a million inhabitants? They know that too. [as an aside, America should IMO have used tactical nuclear weapons in Afganistan, both as a method of eliminating cave complexes/killing many Taliban, AND more important as a message that slaughter of innocent Americans will NOT be tolerated]

Those who live in these tyrannies should be held responsible for preventing their terrorist governments from using nuclear weapons. They must rise up and fight their oppressors. Yes there will be casualties. But they cannot sit idly by while those governments murder innocent Americans and Israelis (perhaps even entire cities of people in the future) and then remain idle while American soldiers fight and die to "liberate" them. Why is the life of an American soldier considered less valuable than an apathetic Iranian citizen? Their silence is consent, and they should be held equally responsible should nuclear terrorism strike America or any other innocent nation.

As for Iran, North Korea, et al - America had better make it very, VERY clear that ANY nuclear attack on America will be met with a nuclear strike on the offending nation(s), regardless of the "civilian" casualties that will inevitably occur among the enemy.

Posted by: PN at November 20, 2006 12:53 PM (t2Nda)

3 http://jedimeditations.blogspot.com/2006/09/quote.html

Posted by: JeepThang at November 20, 2006 03:13 PM (yZQoS)

4 OK.. heres some info about the Nuclear Threshold.

Posted by: JeepThang at November 20, 2006 03:14 PM (yZQoS)

5 Do we bomb Iran? I have a hard time answering that.

Please don't hate me till you read the whole thing. I really do love people.

I think we will have to nuke Iran at some point. I would rather we didn't have to. I am not anxious to think of the millions who are but slaves, who would be killed.

I think it must be true that Iranian grandfathers can tell a good joke. That Iranian grandmothers can cook heavenly meals. That little Iranian children can be cute as all get out. That Iranian teenagers are falling in love. That Iranian mothers, and fathers are proudly expecting the newest addition to their family.

I think it must be true that just like the very human beings that were killed at Hiroshima, we will have to kill some very human Iranians. In a bad way. In a way that says 'You are defeated!' In a way that would prevent any sane survivors from wanting to keep fighting. In a way that will make the occupation, and rebuilding actually possible.

Ugly, no-nonsense, no way out, no get out jail free card, no insurgents, no hope, no glory, no martyrs funeral. No one to watch the tape, and no VCR to watch it on. Dead babies, dead mommies, dead pets, dead teachers, dead doctors, dead trees, dead grass. Dead bugs.

When a culture believes in martyrdom as its highest, purest path to heavenly bliss, you can't give them the option to revel in it. It must be ugligfied, deglorified, and the idea itself poisoned and burned beyond all desire of association.

God must be proven to NOT be on their side. He must refuse to save them from themselves, and it must be made obvious to the world.

We also have to do it in a way that says 'Don't ever, EVER, mess with us, cause we are done playing the game of war! From now on you want a war, you get one. A REAL one!

There needs to be ashes like Berlin, and Tokyo. The Dear Leader needs reminded that he is mortal. China needs to consider why it is better to get along, than get in a fight. They can even help rebuild Iran. They could use the oil. We haven't been using it, so who cares about it anyway. We need to crush them, rebuild them, and walk away. We need to crush them first. Crush.

Now I expect that I have horrified No Fear, and quite a few others. But give me a break, and tell me what do you think I would have rather had for options.

Some of you have had violence done to you personally, and you know what it is like to be attacked.

I had my eyes gouged once, outside my door, by someone I thought was not dangerous. Before he attacked me again, I got one of my guns. I couldn't see well, but I could see well enough. I knew I might have to shoot. With my one half clear eye, I aimed right at the shape of his head.

It was not the choice I wanted. It was the choice I was stuck with. I was on the brink of passing out, in the presence of someone who had just tried to blind me. Do I shoot, or do I risk being crippled, or worse?

You don't have to believe me, because it sounds pretty wild. At least do me the honor of respecting the metaphor then. Anyway ...

In a half second I would have fired but he turned away, and at the exact same pace he kept going. He did return again a moment later, but he had a bit of a change of heart.

I didn't get any help that night because when I made it inside I passed out. Its a longer story, but you get the idea. Sometimes you have life and death choices, and no good options.

Do we bomb Iran?

Nobody reading this really prefers all the ugly details that option involves. If another real choice was offered, I think everyone here would be willing to try it. It must be a real choice though.

Submission is not a real choice, for those who don't know that yet. Neither is pretending to be tough, or proceeding with fake diplomacy that gives evil confidence. We can't have that.

If you can't pull the trigger, don't point the gun. If you can't use the gun, when it really matters, you are dead already. If your enemy thinks he can kill you, and he wants to, he will.

Can anybody think of a way to get Iran to be good, and behave without violence? Please?

If not, then violence must be aimed at the shape of (Irans) head, and we must be able to pull the trigger. You cannot risk in incomplete result. You can still lose if your foe is only wounded. Look at Iraq.

So yes, we will have to nuke Iran, not that I like the idea, but we still have eyes to see, don't we? At least I still do.

USA all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at November 21, 2006 12:55 AM (2OHpj)

6 I don't believe we should use nuclear weapons. But we should bomb the shit out of their government and military. A lesson needs to be taught. A hard lesson that says you cannot act like backward trouble makers and treaten your betters without getting your ass kicked. They will understand this.

Posted by: Greyrooster at November 21, 2006 05:56 AM (Mgy1K)

7 hehe...US is losing big time in Iraq and you're talking about attacking iran

very funny stuff...

Posted by: Matt at November 21, 2006 06:56 AM (XPTTM)

"US is losing big time in Iraq" Wrong my empty-headed friend. The morons of Iraq are losing big time.

Like you I want us OUT of that shit hole ASAP. Of course I want that so that they can greatly increase the pace at which they kill each other. We're just slowing them down now.

"hehe..." & "

" - are you gay or retarded? Or both?

Posted by: Max Power at November 21, 2006 12:37 PM (94Rrz)

9 Matt doesn't get it. We are flicking our enemies with our pinky, and he thinks we are getting whipped. The simple truth is we aren't even trying to win, in a traditional sense. Only we can beat us.

USA all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at November 21, 2006 04:47 PM (2OHpj)

10 How can we be losing in Iraq when we have their president under death sentence and have destroyed their armed forces?

Posted by: Greyrooster at November 26, 2006 10:00 PM (aghaS)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

November 15, 2006

The Nose Knows

Last year there were several pics that claimed to show Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was present during the hostage crisis at the American embassy in Tehran in 1979. Those images were inconclusive. But these images via Texas Rainmaker leave me with little doubt.

Inka Dinka Doo! more...

Posted by: Howie at 09:03 PM | Comments (12) | Add Comment
Post contains 49 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Wow...pretty solid

Posted by: Texag03 at November 15, 2006 09:16 PM (s+8EU)

2 So, what, Ahmadinejad hasn't aged since 1979?

Posted by: Rusty at November 15, 2006 10:08 PM (JQjhA)

3 oopps posted the wrong picture url but here is the close up for the nostril curve
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v62/screamslikegirl/c.png

Posted by: tarzan at November 15, 2006 11:17 PM (dz4G5)

4 Not possible.

The diminutive fucker used to be a female.

Like all Iranian women, s/he was exceedingly hirsute and eventually decided it would be easiest to stop shaving and wear baggy dyke suits.

Ahmadinejad prefers men sexually, and is pictured here sucking some hairy man's face.

Greg is beating his meat to this, no doubt.

Posted by: Dill Doe at November 15, 2006 11:25 PM (HSkSw)

5 man the picture of him on the stool shaking hands makes me think "bosth bosth de plane de plane"
Ahmedinejads size explains everything fucking little Napoleon bastard.

Posted by: tarzan at November 15, 2006 11:50 PM (dz4G5)

6 tarzen raises a good point about his size, if he was pictured on a stool, would he be as tall against a wall with a door in it, in the picture ?

Posted by: davec at November 15, 2006 11:58 PM (QkWqQ)

7 Howie, my friend, the picture is bleeding into the post below.

And, do my eyes deceive me? Or is he actually holding an Israeli made Uzi in the left-hand photo?

Posted by: Vinnie at November 16, 2006 01:05 AM (/qy9A)

8 On closer examination, no, it's not an Uzi.

But damn, that would have been priceless.

Posted by: Vinnie at November 16, 2006 01:07 AM (/qy9A)

9 He is holding an HK, or a knock off of same.

My guess is he is holding an HK53 (in production 1975+)HK's MP5's are related, but I think based on the magazine width it must be an HK53. I doubt this is of much use as speculation goes.

The magazine looks straight to me. Straight magazines for the MP5 were standard until curved magazines were introduced in 1977. They may have been standard for HK53's when they first came out.

MP5's in .40SW also use a stright magazine, but that variat wasn't available till the 90's.

Half my books are in storage, but I may be able to find out more, if anyone cares.

Looking at his nose, it could be a photoshop. I think we can agree that doesn't make killing him any less of a good idea?

USA all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at November 16, 2006 03:14 AM (2OHpj)

10 I do see some age differences. Between the brows and anround the eyes. The nose thing could be shadow. Seems to me last time it was the nose that did not quite match. This time the nose does match. Don't forget the 8 eyewitnesses.

Posted by: Howie at November 16, 2006 09:55 AM (D3+20)

11 OK I am going to commit.

He is holding a H&K G3A6 Assault rifle.

He is definitly holding the weapon at an angle to his body, with area behind his elbow that can't be clearly seen. The angle he is holding it at would reduce the percieved length. The true length would be about 40 inches.

The biggest issue regarding the weapon size is I'manutJobs scawny hide. The weapon seems like it should be bigger in relation to him.

The G3A6 was built in Iran under license. Also the G3 rifles used in Iran at the time, had the same indentations in the fore end portion of the stock.

I believe a photo caption characterizing this weapon as an SMG is incorrect.

If I were a liberal congressman from California I would just ban the bunch of them cause they all look scary.

USA all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at November 19, 2006 03:44 PM (2OHpj)

12 Are all these muslims dog ugly?

Posted by: Greyrooster at November 21, 2006 08:20 AM (Mgy1K)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

October 14, 2006

Leaving Iraq. The Tulip or the Star?

I was unable to post this earlier for some reason, so am trying again. The basic situation here is that, like Rusty, I'm not sure what comes next. Rusty asks:

So, is leaving the answer? Or is there something else we should be doing?

Possibly both?

I think we have to leave for two reasons. One is that we ultimately have to draw-down until we disappear, so that the credit and legitimacy associated with victory over the Islamofascist insurgency in Iraq accrues to the new government. They need it, just as all newly formed governments need legitimacy. The other reason is that we now have other materializing challenges.

Note: I'm assuming that far from the MSM's conclusion that we're losing and that Iraq is a quagmire, we've essentially won. Barring some miracle the Sunni version of Islamofascism will be ejected, eventually. They're at a strategic disadvantage, and judging from their own communiques they know it.

But that leaves us with a dilemma.

Since I'm a bicycle enthusiast I've chosen to illustrate the dilemma as analogous to Lance Armstrong's choice of whether, and how, to allow Marco Pantani the win on the Mont Ventoux stage of the Tour de France in 2002. Armstrong's "big idea" was that by making a magnanimous gesture he'd create a strategic ally in his overall effort to win the Tour. But it didn't work out that way. The problem was that he didn't pull up soon enough, so Pantani (and more importantly Pantani's fans) knew that the victory had been gifted. Had Armstrong been more clever he'd have made the arrangement far less obvious, and still have won Pantani as an ally.

So, borrowing from this analogy we need to leave early enough that any final victories won't be attributed to the US. That's the bitter pill we must swallow in service of a larger goal.

I think the best way for us to accomplish this tricky transition, without sacrificing our own reputation and appearing weak (which would help Islamofascist recruitment like nothing else), is to simply move on to another military mission, or at least clear the decks so that we can be ready should we need to act. We can rightly say that we didn't leave because we were defeated, but because we had pressing concerns somewhere else. The draw-down probably should be gradual, but still faster than would have seemed prudent a few months ago. Maybe the Baker Commission will give us some cover?

And where should the next engagement be? The tulip or the star?

Tear it up.

Posted by: Demosophist at 12:03 PM | Comments (33) | Add Comment
Post contains 433 words, total size 3 kb.

1 Syria?

Posted by: garrett at October 14, 2006 04:19 PM (zBUou)

2 I figure Israel can handle Syria, no?

Posted by: Demosophist at October 14, 2006 04:20 PM (hSo4/)

3 I think... no, scratch that; I know that a great deal of our collective problem with the whole "us vs. the world" thing, is that we have no one who is willing and able to effectively communicate with the world as did the Gipper; he is gone, and his like no longer walks the earth. These are dark days indeed; descibed to us by a man who can't seem to get his tongue out from behind his eye tooth long enough to see what he's saying. Regardless of the sincerity of his message or the fortitude of his integrity, if he is not easily understood, he is not easily believed, and thus a vital trust is lost. It is far more advantageous to be a clever liar than an honest bumbler, as Bill Clinton can well attest, because it is bad enough to endure punishment when caught in the wrong, but it is far, far worse to be punished for trying to do what is right. The fact that Clinton is internationally adored while Bush is universally reviled is very telling about the state of the world in which we live.
If we could only communicate our good intentions to the world, we might drown out a good deal of the rabid, anti-American hysteria, but no; there is no one. Our enemies know the value of a good pep talk, and harangue their people constantly, and shower them with lies, outrages, absurdities, and tales so unbelievable as to make many in the West doubt that such a thing could be possible, because obviously nobody would be so stupid as to believe such things, and thus the entire story must be completely made up by those mean ol' wingnuts who are all fat, white, racist Christians, and live for the singular purpose of seing brown people suffer.
But the skeptics are limited in their perception of reality by their jaundiced outlook, through rose colered glasses no less; and so the skeptics, whom we know as "liberals" or more appropriately, "those people who practice self-loathing as religiously as their hated enemies, the odious Christians, practice love and forgiveness". Well, the skeptics are generally out of touch with reality, and live in an upside-down world where the minority rules and free expression is far more important than mere human dignity, and where shame is a vice and shamelessness a virtue. Reality is a poison to them, and so they try to destroy it by working toward getting everyone in the world to proclaim that freedom is slavery, the truth is a lie, and ignorance is strength. They cannot be trusted to behave in a sane, rational manner, as history clearly has recorded, and thus must be counted as dangerous at least, if not as enemies.
So, if the liberals get what they want, and American power is diminished in the world, or destroyed altogether, the world will be engulfed in a war that will never end until the last person is enslaved to islam or dead. Marxism and islam were once blood enemies, but the Left has now embraced islam, and support them in their short-term goal of bringing down America, because they think the muslims are going to win anyway, and so the liberals think they've saddled a winning horse, which they intend to ride to global dominance throught the UN. An overwhelming lust for power, sandwiched between cowardice and delusion, causes people to do strange things, but that's the long and short of it; thus we have gays siding with those who will hang them at the first opportunity, women siding with those who will stone them to death at the slightest provocation, such as say... breathing too loud, and various "brown people" who hate "Evil Whitey" so bad that they will willingly become the slaves of islam to see the West fall.
So, to come back to my original point; if we don't get someone who loves and believes in America, and who can speaky the English, to start talking to us and the world, and drown out our enemies, and I mean muy pronto!, we're going to start coming apart at the seams, because I don't think too many people trust the government much anymore, regardless of party affiliation, and that does not bode well at all. I fully expect a shooting war on our own soil pretty soon, if only because nobody is showing any inclination to resist our enemies' attacks, which is mainly because anyone who dares fight back is in greater danger from our own government than any enemy, but I doubt that We the People will put up with that much longer.

I dearly hope we won't.

We can't afford to.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at October 14, 2006 04:31 PM (v3I+x)

4 IM:

"Regardless of the sincerity of his message or the fortitude of his integrity, if he is not easily understood, he is not easily believed, and thus a vital trust is lost. It is far more advantageous to be a clever liar than an honest bumbler, as Bill Clinton can well attest, because it is bad enough to endure punishment when caught in the wrong, but it is far, far worse to be punished for trying to do what is right."

Not to make too much of it, but I think this was the thesis of Plato's Republic, so the issue has been around for awhile. Fortunately the other side is often no more elequent.

"So, if the liberals get what they want, and American power is diminished in the world, or destroyed altogether, the world will be engulfed in a war that will never end until the last person is enslaved to islam or dead."

That's probably the future. It's about time, however, that some charisma were invested in the effort to forestall that future. I nominate Newt. Don't know anyone who could more eloquently express
the required ideals, unless it's VDH... and he's not running.

Just about any price is worth paying now to prevent paying that back end price. When will we get that?

Posted by: Demosophist at October 14, 2006 06:37 PM (hSo4/)

5 I would not pay any attention to Rusty's defeatist hand-wringing.

Posted by: Darth Vag at October 14, 2006 06:47 PM (HSkSw)

6 I don't think Rusty's being defeatist. Except, of course, about the diminishing possibility of retaining control of congress. That situation looks pretty grim.

And there's no one to blame, really, except the Republicans. They've had plenty of opportunities to get this right, but they're not really very adept at politics. I hope to eat those words, but fear I may go hungry.

Posted by: Demosophist at October 14, 2006 06:52 PM (hSo4/)

7 leave iraq, then blow it to he**.

Posted by: sparkey308 at October 14, 2006 07:01 PM (DqWBf)

8 This is funny:

8 "Agree with jumping the shark ... seems every headline that is negative drives the jawas head over heels over the next shark. So it will be how low can they go before the last jawa drowns."

Professor Shackleford used to be funny. He used to be a cheerleader for the good guys. Now, too often he sounds like Lady Macbeth wringing her hands.

Posted by: Darth Vag at October 14, 2006 09:20 PM (HSkSw)

9 Darth Vag:
Talk about man bites dog too!
I'm not sure why you're calling a contributor here a pig, and a Liberal Plant, but then to bash the guy who runs the blog as a 'hand wringer' is fucked up. don't like it? go read elsewhere.

Posted by: davec at October 14, 2006 10:17 PM (QkWqQ)

10 Darth:

Might be time for you to go somewhere and cool down. Final warning.

Posted by: Demosophist at October 14, 2006 10:58 PM (hSo4/)

11 Impy:"If we could only communicate our good intentions to the world..."

You mean your wish to eradicate Islam?
Your heartfelt sincerity is touching.

Posted by: Greg at October 14, 2006 11:13 PM (PnoGS)

12 It's usually possible for a matador to kill a bull by deftly sidestepping, and then driving the sword through the head and neck, into the heart. Makes a lot more sense than getting on all fours and charging the bull like an animal.

We've had a successful military strategy in Iraq (contrary to what the MSM claims), and but what's left is a move that puts the enemy (rather than us) off balance. If it happens to look like something else, so much the better. In war, victory often goes to the side that is better at misdirection and deception. Well almost always, in fact.

Posted by: Demosophist at October 14, 2006 11:17 PM (hSo4/)

13 Actually greg, the option of exterminating the muslims will be the only
one left to us solely because we chose to not fight back for so long,
and have let the enemy become strong enough to threaten us, which was,
and is, mainly because lefturds like you jump and and scream racism
every time someone does suggest actually exercising our right to self
defense. We could have prevented all this decades ago, but people
like you have made so much noise that you have kept gutless politicians
from performing their sworn duties, and you're happy about it. You are
a piece of shit traitor and deserve nothing more than a bullet to the
back of the head and an anonymous spot in the landfill, and your
opinion means exactly nothing.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at October 15, 2006 08:25 AM (v3I+x)

14 Impy,
You whining milksop.
You have the House, you have the Senate, you have the Presidency, you have SCOTUS. Your ilk has won every vote, been granted every appropriation, neutered your frightened political opposition with charges of treason. Stripped the Bill of Rights with the Military Commissions Act. This is your mess. Stick your nose in it. Taste it. Suck it. Slurp it. Gargle it. Choke on it. Describe the bouquet for us.

Posted by: Greg at October 15, 2006 10:01 AM (PnoGS)

15 Greg:
I think we should get Congress to write the Bill of Rights for Terrorists, and agents of a Foreign Power Act instead.
The reason being is it might help little scared liberals like yourself sleep at night without evacuating their bladder in their bed sheets at night. You guys all think you're so important to the Government, and a "threat" because you "know the truth", so when the Government doesn't specifically address the wording of a Bill to only apply to a specific enemy, you all think you're getting wrangled into concentration camps ran by those two evil capitalists Walmart & Haliburton.

Posted by: davec at October 15, 2006 10:42 AM (QkWqQ)

16 I was a fool to give money to this website.

Posted by: Fool at October 15, 2006 11:47 AM (HSkSw)

17 So look, anyone interested in discussing the topic?

Just watched a couple of former CIA analysts on FOX who felt that the NoKo sanctions, although watered down, were actually pretty damaging to Kim. They claimed that he won't be able to pay his generals, so may be in deep doodoo in a couple of months. That's sort of a nice thought, huh?

Posted by: Demosophist at October 15, 2006 02:24 PM (hSo4/)

18 There is no other issue more pressing than our pressence in Irag. Personally I agree with Vag and Rusty's hand wringing. And yes I did send money to this site. So if you want to ban me, I will put my own banner on my pathetic little site saying banned by jawa.

There is no win loss equation to this. We already won. We are now simply standing the new boss.

Too late for federalism. But it has to be settled by the Iraqis. The longer we as an occupier are in the middle, we will be inhibiting the process.

But withdrawing is not right either except to the borders. Just like an old school yard fight.

Posted by: SeeMonk at October 15, 2006 04:06 PM (n4VvM)

19 Apparently some can't read the "posted by" part of the post. I
ve been considering this. It comes down to is America qilling to do what it takes to win. Freedom is a function of security to a certain extent. Certain ecomomic and solial rules must be in place for it to work. Otheriwise it becomes anarchy. America is not realy willing t do what it takesto win. We should have crwled all over Iraq nd disarmed the whole place leaving the beheaders nohting but sporks. Really clamped down hard. This seems antithetical to freedom but in the long term it's not. Once people are fed and violence is under control they cam breath a bit and you can relax restrictions more and more as things get better. As it stand the Iraqi's will have to fight it out. We can't leave for the simple matter of credibility., We have to support Iraq. To abanodon it is to make out word worthless. However our interest is to see the Iraqis step up. Be may have to put more into it. I see an America who deoesn't understand what it takes anymore or who is unwillig to really sacrafice today for a better tomorrow. They will spend but not put everything into it. This may be the correct lng term strategy actually but it sure hurts in the short term winning the hearts and minds. But we also said we would leave so we shouldtake any opportunity we have to contract or downsize. It's a bit late to do it the way it should have been done now. So now we must both stay and leave to keep our word. It's a problem

Posted by: Darth Odie at October 15, 2006 04:28 PM (D3+20)

20 Who wants to Ban Cmunk. Not noticed anyone saying anything about banning seemonk?

Posted by: Darth Odie at October 15, 2006 04:36 PM (D3+20)

21 This post was going fine until Darth the fart chimed in. Asshole can't even understand what SeeMonk said. It's a gay thing.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 15, 2006 08:04 PM (syuk5)

22 But Greg - you have Lauro Chavez, Jessee MacBeth and Niaz Kahn. Stick your nose in them. Taste them. Suck them. Slurp them. Gargle them. Choke on them. Describe the bouquet for us.

Fucking idiot...

http://www.shitthrowingmonkeys.com/coolmyballs.html

Posted by: Max Power at October 15, 2006 09:43 PM (aMi4b)

23 Ah, but Max, those people, having been debunked as fakes, are
disadvantageous to gregturd's position, and so they simply do not exist.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at October 16, 2006 03:41 AM (v3I+x)

24 I would say we focus on N.K. for purely geo-political reasons in order to block China's further expansion. It's a weaker opponent, anyway.

Posted by: tbone at October 16, 2006 11:42 PM (XDUhP)

25 Leave Iraq? Are you out of your minds? The US should be building huge freaking bases on each of Iraq's borders just to remind Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia and Turkey that Uncle Sam is watching them. After all, the US still has bases in Germany and Japan a half-century after WW2 ended. Where better to keep the IslamoFascists off-guard than in heart of the Middle East? The message should be that the US is in the Middle East for the next century or so until every freaking Jihadist is dead and buried.

Posted by: pat at October 17, 2006 11:42 AM (bAzHs)

Yeah. That's what we need now is weaker opponents. As we re-enact the draft and include women, handicapped and sanitation workers. Unless we throw the bums out and fight war the right way. Divide and conquer is how I remember it being said ..... and when the war crimes tribual comes blast them too!

Posted by: Last gasp Larry at October 18, 2006 06:38 PM (Dd86v)

27 Neverseen sex webcam
http://xxxcam-1.best-free-hosting.com/

Posted by: Xcam-1 at December 30, 2006 10:47 AM (oTEV/)

28 Naughty cam here
http://xxxcam-1.best-free-hosting.com/

Posted by: Xcam-1 at December 31, 2006 10:49 AM (zW/Zg)

29 My site for wooman: http://villasincrete.net/girl
Girls Welcome
http://villasincrete.net/girl
hoja1
http://arachno.name/t/161719

Posted by: crazy_girl at January 18, 2007 03:55 AM (YuVtd)

30 Nice works, Admins.
http://villasincrete.net/hardcore
http://villasincrete.net/hardcore
wpzi8
http://arachno.name/t/161712

Posted by: hrad at January 19, 2007 08:15 PM (YuVtd)

31 All information about porno: http://villasincrete.net/porn
http://villasincrete.net/porn
jaz0w
http://arachno.name/t/161712

Posted by: porn at January 28, 2007 03:26 PM (YuVtd)

32 Hi!
http://villasincrete.net/my_italy
bs6vo
http://arachno.name/t/161712

Posted by: tren at January 30, 2007 03:05 PM (YuVtd)

33 jonny4

Posted by: jonny18 at February 22, 2007 10:34 AM (AF4+W)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

September 21, 2006

The Real El Diablo

Actually I think Hugo Chaves did smell brimstone at the UN the other day. But it didnâ€™t come from Bush. The stink of evil came from Hugoâ€™s #1 buddy Iranian president and Chavesâ€™ fellow servant of Shaitan Mahmoud Ahmedinajad.

BBC: On 15 August, 2004, Atefah Sahaaleh was hanged in a public square in the Iranian city of Neka.
Her death sentence was imposed for "crimes against chastity".
The state-run newspaper accused her of adultery and described her as 22 years old.
But she was not married - and she was just 16...
...In terms of the number of people executed by the state in 2004, Iran is estimated to be second only to China.
In the year of Atefah's death, at least 159 people were executed in accordance with the Islamic law of the country, based on the Sharia code.
Since the revolution, Sharia law has been Iran's highest legal authority.
Alongside murder and drug smuggling, sex outside marriage is also a capital crime.

Sex? A capital crime? Funny how Sharia works for little sawed off dictators like Amenishrimpidad. Women like tall men so in order for him to actually score he either has to support Sharia or marry a pigmy.

Only China executes more people than Iran. Adjust that for population and per capita Iran becomes one of the most oppressive murderous regimes on the planet.

Of course Ahmadinejad is upset by the truth.

CNN: Bush told Iranians their rulers "have chosen to deny you liberty and to use your nation's resources to fund terrorism and fuel extremism and pursue nuclear weapons."
Ahmadinejad responded by saying he didn't know what the president "is actually thinking when he makes remarks like that."
"This is not the kind of language you speak talking with a great nation. It is an insult to a great nation," Ahmadinejad said.

But then Muslimes are always upset. Moolah Filthy has compiled a nice list of things that Upset the ROP. Never a sunny day in Islam indeed.

Also see Rush Limbaugh.

RUSH: Let me go back to Ahmadinejad, his speech last night. First thing I saw was a couple of wire reports. One from the Associated Press: Iran Tells UN Nuclear Program Peaceful. I read the piece, and compared to what Ahmadinejad actually said, they leave it out! They leave out the main thing that he did. The primary message in his appearance last night.

Posted by: Howie at 11:57 AM | Comments (12) | Add Comment
Post contains 399 words, total size 3 kb.

August 25, 2006

Iran's Ties with ElBaradei

The following comes in from an emailer wishing to remain anonymous. The emailer is a research analyst whose work crosses the path with the IAEA.

It is said that the hostilities between Israel and Hizballah were initiated by Iran in order to divert international attention from the Iranian nuclear file. This diversion of public attention paid off when the Security Council's decision of 31 July, 2006 - that demands Iran suspend its enrichment activities - did not receive media coverage corresponding to its importance. However, Iran is not the only one profiting from the absence of public focus on its nuclear entanglement. Someone else also gained from the situation - the IAEA director, El-Baradei.

The Security Council resolution determines that El-Baradei must report to it by 31 August 2006, on the extent that Iran has complied with its resolution. If Iran has not complied, which is the current situation, this would give unprecedented legitimacy to the Security Council to impose sanctions on Iran according to Clause 41 of Section 7 and for the first time to significantly undermine Iran's efforts to achieve nuclear weapons. Lacking significant media coverage on the issue, El-Baradei can once again defend Iran, as he has done in recent years, produce a feeble report that conflicts with the reality of inspectors' findings and give Iran the time it needs to progress towards producing a nuclear weapon.

This is not a prophecy of doom or cheap demagoguery. There are many who agree with this gloomy picture I describe, including inside the IAEA itself.

In my line of work I have come into contact with people in the IAEA who naturally are afraid to express their views in public. In conversations with them a short while ago, there was cautious optimism after the German newspaper 'Die Welt' published details about the dismissal of Chris Charlier, one of the senior IAEA inspectors in charge of the Iranian nuclear issue, simply because his conclusions were unsympathetic towards Iran. These people hoped that the details revealed in the media would force the IAEA to set its house in order, despite the person at its head, and thereby expose the relationship between Iran and El-Baradei, who has on too many occasions been Iran's savior. But nothing has come of this affair. On the contrary, El-Baradei did his utmost to prevent sullying Iran's name and to conceal the affair as quickly as possible. The resentment of my colleges in the IAEA and their astonishment only grew when it came out that in recognition of El-Baradei's conduct Iran sent him 'gifts' - including extremely expensive traditional carpets of the highest quality (one Persian carpet could be valued as high as 50,000 euros.)

And what of the IAEA's reaction to El-Baradei's actions? There is no reaction. Because there is no one to demand a reaction. In the absence of an appropriate reaction, El-Baradei can continue to compliment Iran about its insignificant gestures and won't let the facts confuse him when he comes to writing up his conclusions and presenting them to the Security Council.

We cannot force the media to cover these issues (free media and the right to know is not something clear for a journalist who is exposed to the IAEA pressures) but we can demand answers from the IAEA. I call on you to approach the IAEA and demand clear answers about El-Baradei's improper actions. Can the Nobel Prize that El-Baradei received continue to serve as his fig leaf forever?

Is it the news concerning Chris Charlier, the former lead inspector in Iraq before Iran asked ElBaradei to fire him, that is most troubling to me. After Die Welt published the account, there was no coverage elsewhere. It was as if news that the lead inspector in Iraq coming to the conclusion Iran was building a bomb and before being pushed out by Iran is not actually news. Now what of the added gifts presented to ElBaradei? I have very little trust for the IAEA because of its head.

Posted by: Chad at 11:40 AM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 671 words, total size 4 kb.

1 Inept Apes European Association

Posted by: Last gasp Larry at August 25, 2006 12:35 PM (gLMre)

2 This information isn't going to suprise anyone - especially those in government. El Baradei doesn't own the IAEA - he was appointed as head. If the appointment can be given to him, it can be revoked. Like everything else in this nuclear Iran mess it's just a matter of which country (or rather group of countries, since this is a global issue) is going to stand up and do what needs to be done.

Posted by: Graeme at August 25, 2006 01:32 PM (pqvLC)

3 Isn't putting El Baradei in charge of this like the old saying putting the fox in charge of watching the hen house?

Posted by: SeeMonk at August 25, 2006 02:27 PM (7teJ9)

4 El-Baradei is quoted in Wikipedia as saying:

"We must abandon the unworkable notion that it is morally reprehensible for some countries to pursue weapons of mass destruction, yet morally acceptable for others to rely on them for security - and indeed to continue to refine their capacities and postulate plans for their use."

That should be all we need to know.

As if those who pursue them would not continue to refine their capacities and postulate plans for their use?

Posted by: Oyster at August 25, 2006 02:45 PM (p386K)

5 This is definately news that could use more coverage (unlike all the tabloid-like coverage of John Mark Karr I'm seeing lately...)

Posted by: CanForce 101 at August 25, 2006 04:41 PM (BMrv8)

6
The west is not yet able to realize that what the soviets sought may indeed be coming. An end to history, only this will be due to Islam. Islam is the most deadly foe we have ever seen. Political correctness and 1st amendment rights do not apply to Islam. Our refusal to look up the phrase â€œparadigm shiftâ€ and Groking Geststalt it is crazy. It is as if a sick Buddhist refused medicine because it would harm the infection.

Posted by: Massachusetts Republican at August 25, 2006 09:45 PM (TiKv7)

7 Right on Mass Rep. This friggin war is not about civil rights It's about our very existence and the future freedom of our children and grand children. The problem is how do you re-educate the academic meatheads who insist we remain politically correct? Yea RUSTY. That includes you.

Posted by: greyrooster at August 28, 2006 06:46 AM (bBOoy)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

August 22, 2006

Iran Attacks Romanian Oil Rig

Okay, so maybe a loon or two in Iran are taking this 8/22 thing a little too seriously? But, in my book, it's sheer coincidence. Since when have the mad mullahs ever needed an excuse to act irrationally?

Bloomberg:

Iran attacked and seized control of a Romanian oil rig working in its Persian Gulf waters this morning one week after the Iranian government accused the European drilling company of ``hijacking'' another rig.
An Iranian naval vessel fired on the rig owned by Romania's Grup Servicii Petroliere (GSP) in the Salman field and took control of its radio room at about 7:00 a.m. local time, Lulu Tabanesku, Grup's representative in the United Arab Emirates said in a phone interview from Dubai today.
``The Iranians fired at the rig's crane with machine guns,'' Tabanesku said. ``They are in control now and we can't contact the rig.'' The Romanian company has 26 workers on the platform, he said.

Hat tip: Patrick

UPDATE: Apparently the oil rig was being run by.....wait for it...Halliburton. So, I guess the Iranians are the good guys after all?

Posted by: Rusty at 07:51 AM | Comments (11) | Add Comment
Post contains 184 words, total size 1 kb.

1 A statement from oil rig company executive here:
http://www.thenewamericancitizen.com/2006/08/22/today-is-the-era-of-thoughts-dialogue-and-cultural-exchanges/

Posted by: Agent Meatball at August 22, 2006 09:39 AM (30FRH)

2 It wasn't really the Iranians of course; it was - wait for it - da JOOOOOOOOOOoooooooozzz!!!

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at August 22, 2006 10:16 AM (v3I+x)

3 From an elevated position they could not fire back? What a bunch of pussies.

Posted by: Leatherneck at August 22, 2006 02:46 PM (D2g/j)

4 So attacking property owned by an American Corp. makes these camel humpers the good guys in your book??? I hope you remember saying that when you're bowing 5 times day to Mecca you scumbag.

Posted by: Jeff at August 22, 2006 03:06 PM (/mMZW)

5 I have not seen any mention of this at any other news outlets.

Posted by: SeeMonk at August 22, 2006 03:17 PM (7teJ9)

6 Jeff have you ever heard of the word sarcasm?

Posted by: Howie at August 22, 2006 03:26 PM (YdcZ0)

7 Jeff, He was trying to sound like the left. We call it making fun of, and some call it trying to sound as insane as the left.

You should write I am sorry for that post. If you don't, you are not a man, but a little shit head that just drives by yelling stupid crap.

Posted by: Leatherneck at August 22, 2006 03:42 PM (8uWFo)

8 Quit beating around the bush Letherneck; tell us how you really feel.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at August 22, 2006 07:41 PM (v3I+x)

9 I don't think this is a random act, or an act of insanity.

This happened a few hours before Iran delivered its response to the UN regarding its nuclear program.

Since this is not getting any significant play in the US yet, here is some other stuff you might like to know. For starters, bloomberg news reports:
The U.A.E.-registered drilling company had signed a preliminary contract with Halliburton Co. after winning an estimated $310 million contract to develop phases 9 and 10 of Iran's offshore South Pars gas reservoir.

This rig is not the one that is the subject of Iran's legal dispute with GPS. It was being removed from Iranian waters when they took it by force. I suspect that Halliburton et al, were interested in removing the rig in anticipation of hostilities. The idea being to move it to safe harbor until the shooting stops so they don't freeze your assets.

This attack "sends a message that Iran can project its power and could interfere in oil production," according to one analyst. Kish is in southern Persian Gulf not far from the Straits of Hormuz. 20% of the world's oil passes through that choke point.

This move at this time is very good if you want to do the following:
a) make a military statement without directly attacking an Arab neighbor
b) muddy the water by attacking a private asset belonging to a company associated with a NATO country government
c) make a statement that will get immediate attention at the White House
d) leave lots of room to escalate.

Is it me, or is it getting hot in here?

Posted by: 8ackgr0und N015e at August 24, 2006 12:01 AM (t4Rmq)

10 I don't think this is a random act, or an act of insanity.

This happened a few hours before Iran delivered its response to the UN regarding its nuclear program.

Since this is not getting any significant play in the US yet, here is some other stuff you might like to know. For starters, bloomberg news reports:
The U.A.E.-registered drilling company had signed a preliminary contract with Halliburton Co. after winning an estimated $310 million contract to develop phases 9 and 10 of Iran's offshore South Pars gas reservoir.

This rig is not the one that is the subject of Iran's legal dispute with GPS. It was being removed from Iranian waters when they took it by force. I suspect that Halliburton et al, were interested in removing the rig in anticipation of hostilities. The idea being to move it to safe harbor until the shooting stops so they don't freeze your assets.

This attack "sends a message that Iran can project its power and could interfere in oil production," according to one analyst. Kish is in southern Persian Gulf not far from the Straits of Hormuz. 20% of the world's oil passes through that choke point.

This move at this time is very good if you want to do the following:
a) make a military statement without directly attacking an Arab neighbor
b) muddy the water by attacking a private asset belonging to a company associated with a NATO country government
c) make a statement that will get immediate attention at the White House
d) leave lots of room to escalate.

Is it me, or is it getting hot in here?

Posted by: 8ackgr0und N015e at August 24, 2006 12:03 AM (t4Rmq)

11 Well now, the 'baddy' Iran storms another country's oil rig & opens fire - AND THERE ARE NO MAINSTREAM NEWS REPORTS ABOUT IT???

Something is not quite right here. From <a href="http://www.menareport.com/en/business/202033">here</a>,
"The rigs were hired by Dubai-based Oriental Oil Co. and without the consent of GSP ...
GSP later discovered that the Dubai-based company had never existed and it was never registered with the Dubai Chamber of Commerce and Industry (DCCI)."

Now the the Dubai-based company 'Oriental Oil Company' (that never existed and was never registered with the DCCI), is same as the Oriental Oil Kish, referred to in the report
<a href="http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=3040">here</a>, & linked to Halliburton & the Iranian Nuclear negotiators.etc.

"Other senior executives of the oil company facing charges include managing director Mohammad Madani, Chief Executive Officer Ali Matin Nejati, and operations director Ahmad Salari.

The Tehran-based daily Kayhan reported that investigators had discovered one million dollars in cash at the home of one of the detained oil executives. â€œPowerful figures have been exerting pressure to secure his release, but Judiciary Chief Ayatollah Mahmoud Shahroudi has insisted that the case be prosecutedâ€, the daily wrote, adding that it would uncover â€œa chain of corruption and embezzlement scamsâ€.

Oriental Oil Kish first blipped on the international mediaâ€™s radar screen in January, when it was announced that the company had subcontracted parts of the South Pars drilling project to Halliburton Products and Services registered in the Cayman Islands.

â€œNasseri, a senior Iranian diplomat negotiating with Europe over Iran's controversial nuclear programme is at the heart of deals with US energy companies to develop the country's oil industryâ€, the Financial Times wrote."

Something is afoot & the news reports are steering clear of things..........

Posted by: barry at August 24, 2006 03:16 AM (HHpsa)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

August 21, 2006

It's Already 8/22 In Tehran

Has been for hours. Tomorrow is today. Funny how those time zone thingies work that way.

And yet the Hidden Imam is still hidden, Tel Aviv is still not suffering radiation afterglow, Hizbollah sleeper cells still have not bombed Detroit, Stotch still has regular moral dilemas, and Vinnie is still passed out drunk in his bomb shelter where he dug in awaiting the end of times.

Posted by: Rusty at 05:27 PM | Comments (17) | Add Comment
Post contains 71 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Your right, nothing happening yet. Maybe they can't read clocks only the ones on their bomb vests.

Posted by: Wild THing at August 21, 2006 05:33 PM (tj1zH)

2 I think you meant 8/22. 9/22 is next month.
BTW, it's 8/22 where I am as well, for almost 11 hours.

Posted by: Vel at August 21, 2006 05:48 PM (8q9BI)

3 Maybe someone from NBC's "Heros" discovered something today and we're all going to be okay.

Posted by: Editor at August 21, 2006 05:58 PM (adpJH)

4 I envner make mackstakes!

Posted by: Rusty at August 21, 2006 06:10 PM (JQjhA)

5 Could be the plane bombing was part of it. Maybe the precursor. Without that, a nuke in Tel Aviv would look aggressive to the rest of the world.

Posted by: SeeMonk at August 21, 2006 06:26 PM (n4VvM)

6 Party Pooper! You know you could try and help out this 12th Imam end of the world crap by posting a picture or two of their boy Mo. on his winged horse drinking beer, and eating pork skins. They will go ape shit over that.

Who knows, maybe you will get a Fatwa.

Posted by: Leatherneck at August 21, 2006 06:37 PM (D2g/j)

7 SeeMonk,

This is a Shia thing, and the London plot was definitely Sunni.

Posted by: Rusty at August 21, 2006 06:39 PM (JQjhA)

8 Party Pooper! You know you could try and help out this 12th Imam end of the world crap by posting a picture or two of their boy Mo. on his winged horse drinking beer, and eating pork skins. They will go ape shit over that.

Who knows, maybe you will get a Fatwa.

Posted by: Leatherneck at August 21, 2006 06:44 PM (D2g/j)

9 In Mad Hatter's eyes 8/22 is a non-event. He will choose to ignore the date and sluff it off. By acknowledging the date he would be giving more power to his enemies.

Posted by: Last gasp Larry at August 21, 2006 06:52 PM (gLMre)

10 I've got a big foam finger with John 3:16 on it and I'm waving it around.

Posted by: Darth Vag at August 21, 2006 06:55 PM (+nlyI)

11 That's it, Vag, you're back on the shit list.

Just came up for a look around and to grab the last few drops of that sweet, sweet, 33 year old Glenlivet.

Posted by: Vinnie - Editor In Chief at August 21, 2006 07:14 PM (/qy9A)

12 In case of rapture tomorrow that 33 year old Glenlivet will be unmanned.

Hey Zeus, yo quiero la Glenlivet!

Posted by: Darth Vag at August 21, 2006 07:30 PM (+nlyI)

13 Islam preaches misdirection to infidels, so stay on your toes and keep looking over your shoulders.

Because one of these days...POW...

Don't say I didn't warn you.

Papa Ray

Posted by: Papa Ray at August 21, 2006 07:42 PM (B6ERo)

14 Rusty, my comment was tongue in cheek. However, now that you point that out, with the release of UBL's son(?)from an Iranian prison, would it seem more and more that Sunni's and the Iranian Shiites may be more ammenable these days? Aren't the Syrian majority Sunni? I believe the Govt is Baathists correct? If this is all correct, then it really seems the fighting in Iraq is really an internal issue, and AQ may be backing off now.

You have probably noticed I believe al-Sadr is the primary Shiite agitator. At the same time there is one of Saddams henchmen driving a Sunni contingent. It doesn't take more than these two power hungry individuals to do exactly what is happening today. That is why I say again, Pull the US troops out. Put them on the border. Let the Iraqis sort it out amongst themselves.

Posted by: SeeMonk at August 21, 2006 09:06 PM (n4VvM)

15 I have a big foam finger with the thumb extended that says Islam sucks, and I am waving it around

Posted by: SeeMonk at August 21, 2006 09:09 PM (n4VvM)

16 Rusty, you are the blog father. In the time you replied to me, my website doubled in hits. Not that this was too hard to do, but it set a record for hits in a day. You are the man.

Posted by: SeeMonk at August 21, 2006 09:37 PM (n4VvM)

17 Remember that Shiism doesn't go down if this doesn't happen. This is only one sect.

Posted by: Some Dude at August 21, 2006 09:49 PM (Iq9PC)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

August 14, 2006

Kossacks : 'Mike Wallace was totally rude and a jingoistic idiot'

While many commentators have roundly criticized Mike Wallace for letting the Iranian President walk all over him in the recent 60 Minutes interview, the reality-based community at Daily Kos is upset that Wallace was so terribly rude to Amadinnerjihad:

The comments to the poll are here. This is a fun one:

Ahmadinejad seemed to be more in touch with reality than our Dear Leader....

* MORE BELOW * more...

Posted by: Ragnar at 11:23 PM | Comments (27) | Add Comment
Post contains 412 words, total size 3 kb.

1 "In my view, Iran NEEDS nuclear weapons, if only to hold the US at bay - a government which has made clear threats against Iran, has a previous history in overthrowing Iran's democracy, and a recent history in waging unprovoked war against one of Iran's neighbors. Further, Iran is now bordered on two sides by the military forces of that same government."

What the hell is this? There have been many more threats coming out of Iran and the U.S. has never overthrown Iranian Democracy. Iran has never had Democracy.

This the an even decent size voting bloc within the U.S.? So. Very. Sad.

Posted by: Chad Evans at August 14, 2006 11:50 PM (Zt3ks)

2 Gotta agree. Mike Wallace came across as a frothing jackass, while Ahmadinejad remained calm, civil and rational throughout--even as he endured Wallace's incredible rudeness. Even my 63-year-old father-in-law thought Wallace was a jerk, and he voted for Bush. Mike Wallace did the right's propaganda machine a grave disservice this weekend.

Posted by: Mark F at August 15, 2006 01:25 AM (Lnuna)

3 Gotta agree. Mike Wallace came across as a frothing jackass, while Ahmadinejad remained calm, civil and rational throughout--even as he endured Wallace's incredible rudeness. Even my 63-year-old father-in-law thought Wallace was a jerk, and he voted for Bush. Mike Wallace did the right's propaganda machine a grave disservice this weekend.

Posted by: Mark F at August 15, 2006 01:26 AM (Lnuna)

4 Gotta agree. Mike Wallace came across as a frothing jackass, while Ahmadinejad remained calm, civil and rational throughout--even as he endured Wallace's incredible rudeness. Even my 63-year-old father-in-law thought Wallace was a jerk, and he voted for Bush. Mike Wallace did the right's propaganda machine a grave disservice this weekend.

Posted by: Mark F at August 15, 2006 01:26 AM (Lnuna)

5 Wow. Sorry for the multiple posts. Your BB gave no indication that my post was going up--just sat there doing nothing.

Posted by: Mark F at August 15, 2006 01:28 AM (Lnuna)

6 Hello, you human filth. I would like to direct this to whom ever started this pathetic blog. First, your opinion counts for shit. Second, A blog with "Star Wars" connotations? Puh-lease. This is the most pathetic pile of dog feces I have ever seen in my life. Third, let's take a little time to get to know each other. You first, OK I'll describe you, then you tell me if I am correct. Can your miniscule brain handle that you fucking proto-human? My guess is that you had inappropriate relations with your own sister or mother. Your mother didn't set the proper boundaries for you sexually, so that completely messed you up during your adolescence. I don't know if you are a he/she/it so if you are a female this still applies, it just makes you a lesbian. Anyway, I grow weary of this so let's just end with this. Somebody in your family sexually molested you, probably your father. On an aside, do you know Leshawn Barber? That chick is whack, I can't believe a black chick would ever be brain washed enough to join the republican cult. She must of blown somebody and then received a hefty allotment for said blowjob. Anyway she sucks too. Both literally and figuratively. TTFN

Destroy ole boy,
Jara sang

Posted by: Jara sang at August 15, 2006 02:01 AM (AVl7c)

7 Looks like a Kossack got out and is spreading that so called tolerance to us.

Didn't realize tolerance could sound so much like racism and bigotry.

Posted by: Mr. Mxyzptlk at August 15, 2006 03:02 AM (Nv6CM)

8 Let the Kossaks sputter.

Their boy in CT is done in Nov, so they're charting a course back to irrelevance. They're just angry that they aren't the story, and refuse to believe that there are bigger and more important issues to deal with than what a bunch of high-school wanna-be keyboard punks think and feel regarding things they know nothing about.

Entertaining, though!

Posted by: Good Lt at August 15, 2006 05:51 AM (yT+NK)

9 Sara Sang: Yea, the posters haven't been doing to great of late. Our subject matter used to be much better. I think it's because Rusty hasn't really been running things. Now if they disagree with your comment they either threaten to delete it or delete it.
Sort of like the friggin muslims do.
Come back some time and we will talk about it.

Posted by: greyrooster at August 15, 2006 08:23 AM (y5dGS)

10 Why is it when they decide to troll all over a comment section, they immediately start describing sexual acts. Is it because they believe we are so naive that we will blush and melt into a corner?

Anyway, I missed the interview. I decided I would not give the miniature mouth from Iran a forum. I will comment on the KOS crap though. Nobody needs nukes. Nobody does. Israel doesn't need them. They want them as a deterrent, and they have probably worked to some degree. A country with leadership like Iran will use them as an offensive threat, and more or less as a defensive deterrent. Needless to say, the offensive threat is what worries the world the most.

Posted by: SeeMonk at August 15, 2006 08:28 AM (7teJ9)

11 >>>>Hello, you human filth.

We got us a real flower child here. I'm basking in his Liberal love and tolerance. It's just like the 60s.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at August 15, 2006 09:24 AM (8e/V4)

12 The Left isn't for peace, they're just for the other side.

Posted by: dcb at August 15, 2006 09:40 AM (8e/V4)

13 could you IMAGINE people comparing Reagan to Leonid Brezhnev in 1982? i frankly think that's bush's fault more than anything else. but generally, a comment post at kos is no more meaningful than at lgf.

Posted by: milowent at August 15, 2006 09:47 AM (xpzPb)

14 I have to agree that Mr. Wallace did nothing but re-inforce the world's view that Americans are a rude, impatient lot. Sad. They should have had someone like Barbara Walter's doing the work! Madhatterdinnerjacket on the other hand was impressive and composed. Wallace kept waving his hands in the Mad Hatter's face and asking him stupid questions like " are you vain? " It was funny how there was a comment about the jacket Mad Hatter was wearing. Made me wonder if it was an Iranian stab at humor.

Posted by: Last gasp Larry at August 15, 2006 09:52 AM (gLMre)

15 Our clumsiness and rudeness is to the Iranians as the Soviets and Chinese clumsiness and insensitivity is to us.

Posted by: Last gasp Larry at August 15, 2006 09:55 AM (gLMre)

16 I think Wallace did exactly as he planned to do; he made Alphabet look good, and he made Americans look bad. He is a piece of shit traitor who should be shot.

Oh, and please don't delete the lefturd's comments above, because they just show why the lefturds deserve no mercy.

Posted by: Impobulus Maximus at August 15, 2006 10:11 AM (v3I+x)

17 jara sang is a good candidate for deportment to the shithole he/she/it came from. We are going to have to deal with this scum pretty soon I think. And deal with them harshly.

Posted by: jesusland joe at August 15, 2006 10:44 AM (rUyw4)

18 Mike Wallace is a traitor and a liar and a usial liberal left-wing news journalists when can we send him to outer siberia?

Posted by: sandpiper at August 15, 2006 02:30 PM (aoHRB)

19 Notice the second place winner on the poll at 29%? Here, ladies and gentlemen, is the true winning response.

Posted by: grinnel at August 15, 2006 06:27 PM (u8Vo9)

20 >>>Notice the second place winner on the poll at 29%?

grinnel,

must be another one of those "moral victories" you Libs are so famous for. Back in the day that was called losing.

Posted by: dcb at August 15, 2006 07:38 PM (8e/V4)

21 dcb, you are SO sage.

Posted by: grinnel at August 15, 2006 08:12 PM (u8Vo9)

22 Wow, when I jokingly call the site Nedbollah it turns out I am closer to reality than I really want to be. Scary stuff.

Posted by: mark at August 15, 2006 08:36 PM (Nf33P)

23 The world can rid itself of nuclear weapons only after all nations are democracies.

If even one dictatorship has nuclear weapons, the democracies need them for balance. It's just too dangerous to trust a secretive, unaccountable regime with atom bombs, with no deterrence on the other side.

If we want to get to disarmament, we don't want to see more nations, and particularly not dictatorships, with nukes. We especially don't want nukes in the hands of a suicidal fanatic who publicly calls for the destruction of other nations and who doesn't care if his nation goes down with him in a blinding flash.

Posted by: Frank Warner at August 15, 2006 11:03 PM (dZ1Kx)

24 Why is democracy the magical cure-all? What about Palestine whose democracy voted in Hamas?

Posted by: Last gasp Larry at August 16, 2006 11:18 AM (gLMre)

25 As a native Iranian, I think the ones who have a pure heart can find who was right! and will find out all the bad things have been said about our president in news are big lies! Just think about it!

Posted by: Reza at August 16, 2006 12:52 PM (fQvYm)

26 Reza: Sorry Charlie. We don't have time to pamper a bunch of backward, barbaric animals who kill people in the name of God. What we need is Iranians in Iran. Then we can protect our people. They can cure their problems or we get rid of their problems for them.
Iranian with a pure heart? Where do you hide them.

Posted by: greyrooster at August 16, 2006 01:22 PM (vCjBd)

27 Jara Sang: What is it with you people. All the sex, sex, sex thing. Do you assholes ever get laid. Something weird here. They breed like rabbits then worry about the sex life of others.

Posted by: greyrooster at August 16, 2006 01:26 PM (vCjBd)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Iran Building Cars in Belarus

(Tehran, Iran) I was somewhat surprised that Iran is outsourcing a portion of its industrial base. I think that's what is happening.

From Xinhuanet.com:

A new assembly plant for Iranian-designed cars has been inaugurated by Iranian Minister of Industries Ali-Reza Tahmasbi in the Belorussian capital of Minsk, the official IRNA news agency reported on Saturday.
The assembly line for "Samands," a model of passenger car of Iran's Khodro Industrial Group, the biggest automobile manufacturing company in the Middle East, was inaugurated in the Unison Company in Minsk on Friday.
The plant will assemble up to 1,000 Iranian-designed "Samands" car by year's end, and up to 6,000 by next year, according to the report.

Frankly, this is all news to me. I didn't know that Iran had a car design and manufacturing company and I didn't know that Belarus, according to Tahmasbi, has "valuable car manufacturing experience."

Nevertheless, I propose that the Belorussian/Iranian venture will likely not be a big success. There is a large element of contrariness between the warmed-over communist kleptocrats of Belarus and the authoritarian Islamist mullahs of Iran. I don't foresee a smooth working relationship.

Companion post at Interested-Participant.

Posted by: Mike Pechar at 10:51 PM | Comments (18) | Add Comment
Post contains 195 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Oh, but the Mullahs are also kleptomainacs.
I suspect this is just a front for an illegal arms deal between the two klepto's.

Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at August 14, 2006 11:05 PM (Bp6wV)

2 Actually, Iran has a very fast-growing auto industry. Iran Khodro Co is the 20th biggest automotive producer globally and has a joint-venture with Daimler-Chrysler, produces Mercedes-Benz engines.

Posted by: hass at August 15, 2006 01:02 AM (aPEAT)

3 Actually, Iran has a very fast-growing auto industry. Iran Khodro Co is the 20th biggest automotive producer globally and has a joint-venture with Daimler-Chrysler, produces Mercedes-Benz engines.

Posted by: hass at August 15, 2006 01:03 AM (aPEAT)

4 Belarus has a long history with the MAZ (Minsk auto works) - (typical soviet stuff simple, crude but effective etc.) trucks and tractors.

Did someone say "front"? MAZ made mostly military vehicles in the old days of course, and I believe that MAZ just happened to make the Transporter Erector Launchers for the SCUD missile on the MAZ 543 8x8 truck chassis.

Posted by: Fellow Peacekeeper at August 15, 2006 01:11 AM (ngdcZ)

5 Over a milion of these Samands are plying the road all over Iran and many other countries.Iran is not that backward economy and industry portraited by the western media.

Posted by: Hossein at August 15, 2006 02:35 AM (XHXQF)

6 So true Hossein! But then again, they are NOT ARABS but Persians. If the Iranians can ever extract themselves from this crap that has plaqued them since '79, then they can probably achieve great things again the world can admire.

Posted by: hondo at August 15, 2006 04:59 AM (XrexX)

7 They can do things the world admires now and they don't need your permission, Hondo. In 1979, they stopped being a US puppet.

Posted by: hass at August 15, 2006 07:08 AM (aPEAT)

8 Two basic option packages - "standard", and "exploding"...

Posted by: EricInTexas at August 15, 2006 08:09 AM (u4yg1)

9 Mike: Belarus brand of tractors happens to be a big seller in the US. Cheap to begin with, then they stick you with a
$800.00 clutch plate.

Hossein & Hass: If its such a pretty picture there. Why did you leave and learn English? Words are nothing compared to actions.
Islam will prevent Iran from ever becoming a 1st rate country.

Posted by: greyrooster at August 15, 2006 08:37 AM (y5dGS)

10 Greyrooster

There are effective English language courses all throughout Iranian students' school curriculum. Lots of Iranians can read and speak English, without needing to get out of the country.

Posted by: Reza at August 15, 2006 09:05 AM (paEFt)

11 Why did we learn english? To piss off people like you. FYI English is distantly related to Farsi. I also speak French - is that OK with you?

Posted by: hass at August 15, 2006 09:07 AM (Jbh0D)

12 Our enemies no longer have an Iron Curtain, but they still hate us, and will make alliance with any other enemy we have. Putin sold the lives of those children killed in Beslan for a cese-fire with the muslims, (Haven't heard of any attacks in Russia lately, have we? Also, they let the Russian have Shamil Basayev.), and now Russia and Iran are allied against us.

Posted by: Impobulus Maximus at August 15, 2006 10:15 AM (v3I+x)

13 OT: For some reason, possible from reading the idiocy of the lefturds et al, I've been misspelling my name. Or I could blame Bush and the JOOOOoooooozzz.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at August 15, 2006 10:18 AM (v3I+x)

14 Actually my intention was to insult arabs and islamic fundamentalism - Iranians are not arabs, and oddly enough, fundamentist islam does not have strong roots in Persian history - current situation is something of an exception and an enigma.

Greyrooster has an excellent point - if you are indeed Iranians - then why are you not in Iran enjoying the fundmentalist paradise?

BTW - the Iranian economy and industry (once growing, interesting, and the only real nation in that entire region with a real diverse economy with great potential) has been in the toilet for the past 2 decades! Unemployment is staggering - industrial development is at a standstill. Seems the mullahs enjoy having their incompetent hands in most industrialization in Iran. In another couple of decades they will succeed in reducing Iran to a nation of small shopkeepers and rug merchants - all in keeping with their vision of an islamic society.

Wow! Just answered my own question as to why you all are not there.

Posted by: hondo at August 15, 2006 12:49 PM (XrexX)

15 But they will be there sooner than they think, hondo. The next attack against the US is going to be a worse disaster for Muslims living in the US. We held back last time, but the next time I guarantee you that the citizens of the US are going to take care of the Muslim problem here in the US. Whatever it takes, beginning with deportment, and ending when all Muslims are the hell out of the US and back to the hellholes they came from, or their families came from. If you do not believe this, ask the Japanese what we can do when we get really pissed.

Posted by: jesusland joe at August 15, 2006 07:55 PM (rUyw4)

16 JJ

I actually worry about next time. We have been batting a 1.000 since 9/11 which is tough to maintain. They have been batting 0.000 since then which is also tough to maintain even for the dumbest freakin' collection of camel jockeys this side of a sand dune.

But my worry is a lil' different.

Muslims want to strike at imagery for the folks back home - which is why the WTC, specific tunnels and bridges etc. are high value targets to them (not to me - I know better).

The overwhelmingly number of these "image" targets are in blue state/localities.

If a big one gets thru I worry that (in this polarized climate) that many of you may tell a place like NYC or Boston to fuck off - and they will be seeing K Rove or Cheney's finger on the button and imagine in their tinfoil minds people out there in America dancing in the streets like those idiot Palestinians did.

That's not exactly a healthy thing.

We are fortunate in a strange way that our enemy are muslims and they are morons.

I'll give you some idea of "real" value targets ...

Across the Mississippi are hundreds of rail and auto bridges. A mere handful are at choke points tied into the Interstate Highway system. If a couple of them go down it would wreak havoc for months not only with our economy but with the critical supply of necessary goods to our nation and peoples in various regions.

Refineries produce different fuels during different times of the year. Not all refineries produce all fuel types. Jet fuel (JP4) is not kept in vast storage supply because it is the most dangerous and explosive, and breaks down faster, and its shipment is virtually all thru exclusive pipelines for same reason. If you knew the schedule and choke points you could cripple US Aviation for months. Most of it originates down you way.

25% of all gasoline used on much of the Eastern seaboard (and some localities 50% & higher) originates (processed) from a handful of refineries located in the US Virgin Islands. A successful strike at the key loading facilities alone would cripple the Eastern US and devasate the US economy.

You never heard this before because the MSM are morons who don't do their homework and wait for someone to tell them so they can then fake like they're "informed".

Don't worry - those who count know.

Why to you think many blue state politicians bitch about their DHS funding levels and areas they never heard of receiving funds.

Hell, here in NY, Schumer was demanding to know why we spend 10s of millions of dollars in the Virgin Islands - when NYS/NYC were getting modest cuts.

Posted by: hondo at August 15, 2006 11:23 PM (XrexX)

17 Reza: If Iran is better then why learn English? I know of no Americans learning Farsi. You speak French because all cowards do.

Hass: You ignorant piece of pig shit. Lets put you muslimes in perspective. In the last 20 years exactly 21 international pattens have been applied for in all the middle east. Hewlitt Packard averages 9 per day. Shows the difference between muslimes and civilizaton. No wonder you wish to piss us off. JEALOUS. Oh yea, Iranian nutcases didn't have anything to do with inventing the computer you are using. Now back to your carpets and camel dung and stay out of the grown up world.

Posted by: greyrooster at August 16, 2006 09:56 AM (vCjBd)

18 No comeback? Piss on Iran.

Posted by: greyrooster at August 17, 2006 08:45 AM (W1CgA)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

August 02, 2006

Iran Frees Terrorist Saad bin Laden

Iran it is thought is cooperating with al-Qaeda in western Syria to create terror cells to operate in concert with Hezbollah.

Via ABCNEWS: Aug 2, 2006 â€” BERLIN (Reuters) - Iran has freed a son of al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden from house arrest, a German newspaper reported on Wednesday.
Die Welt said the Iranian Revolutionary Guard released Saad bin Laden on July 28 with the aim of sending him to the Syria-Lebanon border. It linked the reported move to the outbreak of war between Israel and Lebanese-based Hizbollah.
"From the Lebanese border, he has the task of building Islamist terror cells and preparing them to fight together with Hizbollah," Die Welt said, quoting intelligence information.

Iran is supporting terrorism. Nations that do so must be held accountable. Preffrably not by sanction or UN "peace Keepers". No peace to keep. An international ass kicking force is more like it.

Others: Thomas Joscelyn and Shines for All.

Posted by: Howie at 03:28 PM | Comments (30) | Add Comment
Post contains 161 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Ahame, Yes I know what happened Hisbollah started a damn war and now they are eating lead. Seems pretty damn fair to me. How can it be that kidnapping Isrealis is OK. But let the Isrealis capture a few Hisb, Allah terrorists and you whine like babies. Pussy.

Posted by: Howie at August 02, 2006 04:06 PM (D3+20)

2 Hey dumbass, you onwy need one quick to post heaw.

Posted by: Howie at August 02, 2006 04:08 PM (D3+20)

3 hey you,are you sleeping or close your eyes on everything that happen in lebanon .
maybe you dont know about Israel crime in lebanon , maybe , shame on you

Posted by: sam at August 02, 2006 04:08 PM (AEwwE)

4 Post one more time and they all go...

Posted by: Howie at August 02, 2006 04:09 PM (D3+20)

5 yo Sammie, everything that has happened in Lebanon for the past three decades is due to Hizbullah's/Iran's/Syria's actions there. They could have stopped the attacks on Israel a long time ago and let Lebanon become the nation it once was.

Posted by: memphis761 at August 02, 2006 04:43 PM (D3+20)

6 It actually says that rockets wre regulary launched from there but not on that day.

Posted by: Howie at August 02, 2006 05:01 PM (D3+20)

7 It is starting to appear Israel chose the kidnapping of it's men to wipe out Hizballa. They can not be sitting on the north border if, or when Iran's nukes sites are bombed.

Posted by: Leatherneck at August 02, 2006 05:03 PM (D2g/j)

8 Shoot, things in the middle east are so screwed up, I'm agreeing with leatherneck! Surely he'll immediately change his mind. But I agree--this was an assault long planned, waiting for the right moment, the right provocation, just as Sharon 1982 invasion was awaiting the right moment, and got it with the assassination of an Israeli ambassador. That does NOT mean that Israel doesn't have the right to respond to the kidnapping with force. Just that this is a very strategic move by them, not a lashing out in anger. It may be the wrong move, but it is not an unconsidered move.

Posted by: jd at August 02, 2006 05:40 PM (aqTJB)

9 Howie,
You might recall I did mention in my comment to Rusty's post "African Taliban" that the filthy Arabic TAAZI regime of Mullahs was harbouring OBL's son.
Eradicating the Mullah regime is of greatest immediate urgency, for it would also result in the following:
a) the Hizbullah leeches will run out of funding,
b) Syria will lose its only ally,
c) Paletinian parasitic groups like Islamic Jihad won't be able to drain the blood of the hapless Iranian.
d) Chechan rebels will no longer be able to train in Iran.
e) Numerous Islamist media like Al-Manar will lose funding.
f) At one point the mullah regime had thousands of troops in the Sudan, and I suspect that's what emboldened the Islamists of Africa.

Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at August 02, 2006 06:01 PM (Bp6wV)

10 Leatherneck, jd,

the haphasard way in which Israel has conducted itself since the kidnapping does not suggest Israel pre-planned this. On the contrary, Israel has been hoping Hesbollah would disarm and the Lebanese army would come down to the border as per res. 1559.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at August 02, 2006 06:05 PM (8e/V4)

11 Howie, regarding this worthless Arab Mo-slime "Greg" bin-Khinzir:

Note how he and his Arabic kind (whom we Iranians disdainfully call TAAZI) all support the Islamic Clerical Regime of Iran; while nearly all Iranians whom you meet despise Islam and Mohammad and the Islamic Regime of Iran and love freedom! The explanation is that the Mullah Regime of Iran is the "Arabic rule of Iran by Arab-lovers and Arabs for the sake of the Arab and his demonic pseudo-religion."

Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at August 02, 2006 06:13 PM (Bp6wV)

12 Vinnie,
You fucking pussy.

Posted by: Greg at August 02, 2006 06:25 PM (q5wwn)

13 We have spotted katyushas in this area.
All innocent people head North immediately.
Take cover.
Howie, that means you.

Posted by: Leaflet Dropper at August 02, 2006 06:33 PM (q5wwn)

14 Zebra Tango Niner
Zebra Tango Niner...
Escalate, code red.
Execute, Operation Enduring Hemorrhoid.

Posted by: Agent Jones at August 02, 2006 06:36 PM (q5wwn)

15 Homebase,
This is Zebra tango Niner.
Please repeat and validate.

Posted by: Agent Davis at August 02, 2006 06:38 PM (q5wwn)

16 Zebra Tango Niner...
Repeat...
Escalate, code red.
Execute, Operation Enduring Hemorrhoid.

Validation sequence:824162NinerDelta Execute//

Affirm

Posted by: Agent Jones at August 02, 2006 06:40 PM (q5wwn)

17 This is Zebra Tango Niner, Homebase.

Affirmative.

Angels away.

Posted by: Agent Davis at August 02, 2006 06:42 PM (q5wwn)

18 Vinnie,
You fucking pussy.
Iâ€™m going to bomb your terrorist ass.

Posted by: Twitchy-Fingered Greg at August 02, 2006 06:45 PM (q5wwn)

19 jd, are you off your meds? For you to agree with me must hurt a bit. For the record, I am not a racist, I am just tired of the B.S. some folks say about the man holding folks down. I lashed out.

J.C., that is a very good point. I agree it started slow, but is in full gear now. Why? Bolton told Iran the clock is ticking. Soon America, and Israel will have nothing to lose. They will have tried everything, and then I think Iran will be sent back 50 years. I have been wrong before, and I hope I am wrong now. But, I am going to stock up on wine, beer, and BBQ stuff just in case I am right.

Posted by: Leatherneck at August 02, 2006 06:55 PM (D2g/j)

20 jd, are you off your meds? For you to agree with me must hurt a bit. For the record, I am not a racist, I am just tired of the B.S. some folks say about the man holding folks down. I lashed out.

J.C., that is a very good point. I agree it started slow, but is in full gear now. Why? Bolton told Iran the clock is ticking. Soon America, and Israel will have nothing to lose. They will have tried everything, and then I think Iran will be sent back 50 years. I have been wrong before, and I hope I am wrong now. But, I am going to stock up on wine, beer, and BBQ stuff just in case I am right.

Posted by: Leatherneck at August 02, 2006 06:57 PM (D2g/j)

21 Heh. Lefturds are so stupid they're funny.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at August 02, 2006 07:02 PM (v3I+x)

22 F**k Greg and his entire ilk

Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at August 02, 2006 07:31 PM (Bp6wV)

23 What the hell? Is it moon god worshippers, or some 14 year olds writing smack? Surrender? Yea, I will surrender when I am dead.

Please come by for some porkchops, and beer, and we will talk about why your mother droped you on your head when you were little.

Posted by: Leatherneck at August 02, 2006 07:56 PM (8uWFo)

24 Howie: If you made the posts posted as Howie I don't wish to hear more about my spelling.

Posted by: Greyrooster at August 02, 2006 08:06 PM (XqAoh)

25 Greg: I have always been against banning and deleting. You have me re-thinking. Child shit. Knock it off.

Posted by: Greyrooster at August 02, 2006 08:35 PM (XqAoh)

26 Rooster. No, not me, I only put down my own spelling. Spoofer?

Posted by: Darth Odie at August 02, 2006 08:37 PM (D3+20)

27 Iran is the key to the majority of the problems. They finance Hezbollah, they created Hezbollah, they support Hezbollah, they arm Hezbollah. Who knows who and what else.
They cannot be allowed nuclear weapons. They are the very worst of Islam. I pray the world will rid itself of this cancer soon.
They are also a ugly people. I mean dog ugly.

Posted by: Greyrooster at August 03, 2006 06:47 AM (XqAoh)

28 This makes no sense.

"From the Lebanese border, he has the task of building Islamist terror cells and preparing them to fight with Hezbollah," the paper Die Welt said, quoting intelligence sources.
"Apparently, Tehran is counting on recruiting Lebanese refugees in Syria for the fight against Israel, using bin Laden's help,"

Sunni is to al-Qaeda as

Shi'ite is to Hezbollah

Posted by: The Curmudgeon at August 03, 2006 10:38 AM (DOhEM)

29 I hate to differ, but I was informed that muslimes are butt ugly!

Posted by: Last gasp Larry at August 03, 2006 12:45 PM (gLMre)

30 OK: Dog butt ugly.

Posted by: Greyrooster at August 03, 2006 04:46 PM (XqAoh)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

August 01, 2006

Iranian Dissident Dies in Prison.

Akbar Mohammadi was on hunger strike. He succumbed after only five days according to official Iranian sources. His friends however claim it was closer to 30 days. Iranian authorities claim they attempted to feed him medically but he refused. One has to wonder just how concerned they were and how hard they tried. I was going to put this in the roundup below but a manâ€™s death deserves his own post. Letâ€™s pray for this manâ€™s family and for all those opposing the Iranian Mullahs.

Radio Free Europe: PRAGUE, July 31, 2006 (RFE/RL) -- The Student Committee of Human Rights Reporters of Iran reported Mohammadi's death in a statement released today.

The news was soon confirmed by Sohrad Soleimani, the head of Tehran Province's prison authority.

Soleimani told Iran's ISNA student news agency that Mohammadi fell ill while showering with other inmates, then died during his transfer to the prison infirmary.

Soleimani did not elaborate on the cause of death, saying coroners have not yet reached a conclusion...

...Reports suggest Mohammadi had been on hunger strike since July 23. But a fellow inmate -- another former dissident student -- told Reuters today that Mohammadi launched his protest in May in a bid to secure his release.

Mohammadi's lawyer, Nemat Ahmadi, told Radio Farda today that his client sounded resolute about not letting his determination falter:

Posted by: Howie at 02:45 PM | Comments (13) | Add Comment
Post contains 229 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Howie, why can't people see beyond the left and right? Don't they know that by putting economics aside, all dictatorships are the same? People in this country need to reevaluate what they reallly are. Many anti-gay people in this country don't care that Iran executed two gay teenagers and people would have executed them if given the chance.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4725959.stm

Posted by: anarchistmanifesto at August 01, 2006 05:05 PM (YsTfk)

2 I can hear the Iranian Prefect of Police now. "I was just filling out the report. We haven't decided yet wether he commited suicide or was shot rying to escape..."

Posted by: Cybrludite at August 01, 2006 06:15 PM (nWKBU)

3 Hell, he should have requested a transfer to GITMO. At least we would have gotten two hots, and cot, with ocean view.

Posted by: Leatherneck at August 01, 2006 06:20 PM (D2g/j)

4 Howie,
We Iranians have a simple prayer for people like that brave man; we say: "May his spirit be blissful [in Heaven], and may his name be eternally honoured."
I say the same prayer for all the service men and women of all allied nations who have died in the War on Terror.

Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at August 01, 2006 06:29 PM (Bp6wV)

5 Hopefully this will spark a revolution. A very very sad day.

Posted by: Some Dude at August 01, 2006 07:47 PM (WW510)

6 I dunno Anarchist. I only have two rules about gay people. I'm not so please don't touch me and the marriage issue, no sorry.

Posted by: Howie at August 01, 2006 08:25 PM (D3+20)

7 Oh and I thought this guy dying just after being in the shower was suspicious.

Posted by: Howie at August 01, 2006 08:26 PM (D3+20)

8 Anarchist, you're kind of all over the place. Let me try to get this straight; you're a pro-gay, neo-fascist, anti-Jewish, pro-islamist, social democrat?

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at August 01, 2006 08:47 PM (v3I+x)

9 IM - let's condense that some...

He's an ASSHOLE.

Posted by: Barney Coppersmith at August 01, 2006 09:15 PM (2BOvC)

10 Howie,
Here are a few lines I've translated from the transcript of a conversation between a reporter and an older brother of the victim who managed to escape the Mullahs:
Reporter: "Sir, how exactly did your brother die?"
Reza M: "They forced some drug in his mouth; and returned him to his prison cell. His clothes were drenched in blood. After a half hour he passed away."
Reporter: "Did you contact your brother's lawyer?"
Reza M: "Yes, we've been in touch with his lawyer but the regime arrested the lawyer too, since apparently he had intended to write a letter to the UN Human Rights Commission."
Reported: "How did you learn about the stuff they put in his mouth and the bloody clothes?"
Reza M: "From other prisoners we know."

Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at August 01, 2006 09:20 PM (Bp6wV)

11 Akbar Mohammadi, a 36 year-old pro-democracy activist who was on a hunger strike to protest his own detention and call for the release of all political prisoners, died in the Evin Prison in Tehran

Posted by: nima at August 02, 2006 05:57 AM (aP/dL)

12 IM it seems to me he is being exacly what he says anarchist. Anarchism is fun becuase you can drop all those term you used into a hat, mix em up and whallah. Any way the wind blows.

Posted by: Howie at August 02, 2006 08:29 AM (D3+20)

13 Please don't run the little guy off. He's funny.

Posted by: Greyrooster at August 02, 2006 03:38 PM (XqAoh)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

July 26, 2006

Simple Math...

Current market price of crude oil: $74 / bbl

Annual oil income to Iran's mullahs at current prices: $108,040,000,000 (est.)

Iran's annual support to Hizb'Allah: $100,000,000 (est.)

Iran's promised support to Hamas: $250,000,000

The freedom to tell the mullahs they can choke on their f**king oil: PRICELESS

Posted by: Ragnar at 12:47 AM | Comments (65) | Add Comment
Post contains 49 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Wish I could blame the cost of oil on Iran. In truth America now holds the highest crude oil reserves since crude was 20 a barrel. The price is high to do spectulators. Mostly American spectulators. Even pension plans are into the market for 33% returns. The India/China/lack of refineries is all pure bullshit. The Government needs to interfer with this greed that hurts all. It will not. Unfortunately, its us conservative republicans who hold most of that wealth. Must take the bad with the good.

Posted by: Scott at July 26, 2006 05:20 AM (69hsc)

2 Yup, it's time to tap Anwar and start developing 'green' energy, because when the Arabs tell the world to either eat shit or pay more for gas, the world opens its mouth and starts swallowing.

Posted by: goesh at July 26, 2006 08:07 AM (vX0fY)

3 The Government needs to interfer with this greed that hurts all.

Scott would like a Government ran Oil industry like China, Venezuela etc?
Any other Corporation making too much money for you Scott, Microsoft? Verizon? Starbucks? Perhaps we should ask the Government to interfere with their profits too? Actually why don't we make sure the Government always owns a large part of any U.S Corporations! and just have one star on our new Red Flag!

Posted by: davec at July 26, 2006 08:19 AM (voZp6)

4 If the US boycotts Iranian oil, does the cost per barrel go up, or down? Not gas, oil. If that much oil is left on the market, I would expect the price to plummet. ANWR isn't going to help us at this time. if it had been tapped when Bush first wanted it, we could tell the mullahs to pound sand.

Posted by: Cmunk at July 26, 2006 08:26 AM (7teJ9)

5 Scott -

You raise interesting points about these 'spectulators' I have to admit I don't know much about 'spectulators' and their effect on oil prices. It sounds like the combination of a speculum and a regulator. I'm generally wary of additional regulation, particularly any type of regulation likely to involve a speculum. I hope they stay far, far away from me and 'spectulate' somebody else.

You, my friend, need to stop worrying about the 'spectulators' and take some f**king responsibility, here. Like it or not, the locus of blame for current oil prices falls squarely on YOUR shoulders. High oil prices mean psychos like Ahmadinejad are swimming in extra cash. That means YOU are helping the mullahs to purchase those katyushas and suicide bomber jackets currently being used to kill innocent men, women and children. If I were you, that'd give me pause.

Posted by: The All Seeing Eye at July 26, 2006 08:47 AM (I9YKk)

6 Scott, doesn't Saudi Arabia have the largest proven oil reserves, followed by Canada? Please explain what you mean by "oil reserves," because I'm under the impression the industry definition refers to oil in the ground. Maybe you're referring to what's stored in tanks? Or maybe you're referring to refining capacity?

Posted by: Venom at July 26, 2006 08:53 AM (gyr2M)

7 Quoth Ronald W Reagan:

"government doesn't solve problems, government IS the problem......

Wake up and smell the coffee, Scott.

Posted by: n.a. palm at July 26, 2006 08:55 AM (/Xwon)

8 Then we can tell North Korea to shove those nukes up their asses and rape themselves! Yeah!!!!!!!!!! Liberate North Korea!

Posted by: Some Dude at July 26, 2006 09:06 AM (llVQM)

If the US boycotts Iranian oil, does the cost per barrel go up, or down?

All other things being equal, the answer would theoretically be "down," but all other things are never equal, and the price to Iran is likely unaffected absent a rigid boycott of "downstream" goods (i.e., products made from or using Iranian oil). I believe the US is already boycotting Iranian oil (at least as regards direct purchases), but in a world market, a boycott by one country or even a number of countries has little, if any, effect on the price paid to the boycotted country for its crude oil so long as there are some thirsty buyers.

If that much oil is left on the market, I would expect the price to plummet.

If there was a fat surplus of oil on the market, that's 100% correct. Unfortunately, there's no excess production on the market, and there are plenty of thirsty buyers (e.g., China, India) standing in line ready to buy up Iranian oil at (essentially) market prices.

ANWR isn't going to help us at this time. if it had been tapped when Bush first wanted it, we could tell the mullahs to pound sand.

If ANWR is indeed a huge reservoir of oil just waiting to be tapped, I'm fine with leaving it where it is for now. There's likely to be a time in the not-too-distant future when oil under U.S. soil may be critical to our economic survival.

I don't have the numbers in front of me for expected production from ANWR, but I know it's nowhere close, even at peak capacity, to replacing current US imports. Whether it could produce enough excess oil to drive oil back down to $23/bbl (its traditional price over the last 50 years) involves a lot of complicated math that makes my brain hurt. I'm skeptical, though, that this would be the case.

Posted by: The All-Seeing Eye at July 26, 2006 09:18 AM (I9YKk)

10 That means YOU are helping the mullahs to purchase those katyushas and suicide bomber jackets currently being used to kill innocent men, women and children. If I were you, that'd give me pause.
Posted by The All Seeing Eye at July 26, 2006 08:47 AM

And by "you" you mean Scott. Scott as an international market force significant in determining the price of oil.

Even if you could contemplate it, which you cannot, there is no consumer trend or bilateral embargo that will make this Mastercard reference here make sense.
Decide unanimously today as a population today to tell Iran where to stick their oil. The reply will be why would they stick it anywhere but on Chinese markets at a premium as Asia has always been willing to pay above what the US has ?

But even something that pointless is unthinkable. So no A.S.E, you choke on it. Like you have been doing and like you will continue to do.

Posted by: Tank at July 26, 2006 09:19 AM (aOeXm)

11 That means YOU are helping the mullahs to purchase those katyushas and suicide bomber jackets currently being used to kill innocent men, women and children. If I were you, that'd give me pause.
Posted by The All Seeing Eye at July 26, 2006 08:47 AM

And by "you" you mean Scott. Scott as an international market force significant in determining the price of oil.

Even if you could contemplate it, which you cannot, there is no consumer trend or bilateral embargo that will make this Mastercard reference here make sense.
Decide unanimously today as a population today to tell Iran where to stick their oil. The reply will be why would they stick it anywhere but on Chinese markets at a premium as Asia has always been willing to pay above what the US has ?

But even something that pointless is unthinkable. So no A.S.E, you choke on it.
Like you have been doing on Saudi oil financing terorrism and like you will continue to do.

Posted by: Tank at July 26, 2006 09:21 AM (aOeXm)

12 That means YOU are helping the mullahs to purchase those katyushas and suicide bomber jackets currently being used to kill innocent men, women and children. If I were you, that'd give me pause.
Posted by The All Seeing Eye at July 26, 2006 08:47 AM

And by "you" you mean Scott. Scott as an international market force significant in determining the price of oil.

Even if you could contemplate it, which you cannot, there is no consumer trend or bilateral embargo that will make this Mastercard reference here make sense.
Decide unanimously today as a population today to tell Iran where to stick their oil. The reply will be why would they stick it anywhere but on Chinese markets at a premium as Asia has always been willing to pay above what the US has ?

But even something that pointless is unthinkable. So no A.S.E, you choke on it. Like you have been and you will continue to.

Posted by: Tank at July 26, 2006 09:24 AM (aOeXm)

13 Tank -

The Scott is not just an international market force. The Scott is a universal force, period.

The Scott is an energy field created by all living things. It surrounds you and penetrates you (much like a 'spectulator'). In short, the Scott binds the galaxy together. It is truly meaningless, however, to speak of fully "contemplating" the Scott.

Although even I cannot fully comprehend the mysteries of the Scott, I am confident that even you, Tank, can grasp the basic principles of macroeconomics. At first it may seem, much like your early sexual experiences, like a lot to swallow. Stay with it and don't rush it and you'll do just fine.

I encourage you to enroll in a course, perhaps at your local community college. Pay particular attention to the part about "supply" and "demand". These are separate, but related, concepts.

After you have managed to get your mind around these challenging concepts, move forward to the general effect that "supply" and "demand" have on "market pricing."

After you've mastered all these things, return to me to further your training. There are many things they will not teach you of in college.

Posted by: The All Seeing Eye at July 26, 2006 09:42 AM (I9YKk)

14 What if we boycott Iran and Venezuela? Venezuelan oil is high in sulphur anyway. It costs more to refine and pollutes more. I say ban Citgo from US soil. Boycott Iranian and Venezuelan oil. Buy BP only. They use only non arabian/gulf oil. For my part. I will park my Rumble Bee and ride a bike to work and back. Or perhaps carpool. I am a little too out of shape to ride a bike 30 miles a day. But I still say boycott terrorist oil the way we are supposed to avoid the blood diamonds of Africa.

Posted by: Cmunk at July 26, 2006 10:02 AM (7teJ9)

15 Davec: Read my post again. I don't believe I said government run. The government regulates many things. Interest rates, etc:

All seeing idiot: Who knows WTF he's babbling about. While telling others to take courses this guy just chases his tail round and round. I do know one thing. While he's taking these courses he sure isn't watching the news (this AM) and he sure isn't involved in oil commotities.
In fact when discussing oil he knows nothing. He needs to take a course in fiance himself.

By oil reserves I am talking about tank holding facilities at refineries. They have more than ever. They are gutted and must sell oil to receive more.
At this time China and India haven't any effect on the world price. What spectulators bid months ago controlls what we are paying now.
Again for those to slow to understand. The price of gasoline here in the states is based on what the refineries pay for it. The distributors pay for it and what the retailers charge for it. If the refineries pay $70.00 per barrel the ammount on the market means nothing. They will not sell for less than they pay. Regardless of supply and demand.
Yes the middle east sellers and making killing. So are the spectulators that set the price and companies like Exxon who are experiencing the highest profits in history. If one doesn't understand the market. Not my problem. Stay uninformed like all seeing idiot.

Posted by: Scott at July 26, 2006 10:05 AM (69hsc)

16 Davec: Sorry buddy, but I would hate to guess how much of your dollars are spend by Microsoft in court with the government. Not just ours, but in Europe also.
Walmart demands that its vendors deal with China and other Southeastern countries. Simply because they can buy cheaper and make more profits. Putting more and more Americans out of work. All at the call of free enterprise. I believe in free enterprise, free speech but controls are neccessary when they hurt the country.

Posted by: Scott at July 26, 2006 10:13 AM (69hsc)

I keep learning new words and phrases from The Scott. He doesn't provide any definitions, so I'm forced to compose my own:

Commotities (n.): the breastal regions of women living under Stalinist/Bolshevist dictatorships. Usage: "Wow! Check out that Cuban girl! Nice commotities!"

"In fact when discussing oil he knows nothing."

I know I like it when a commochick rubs oil on her commotities.

"He needs to take a course in fiance himself."

I advise caution, my friend. My buddy dabbled around with a course in fiance and ended up with a degree in wife.

Posted by: The All-Seeing Eye at July 26, 2006 10:18 AM (I9YKk)

18 For those who like to spout numbers. Like Iran's est income from selling oil being 108 billion. That is income become taking out productions costs.
NOW HEAR THIS. Exxon's PROFITS, not income before production costs, will exceed 108 billion this very financial year. I wouldn't dare guess at the profits market speculators will make this year.
Once again all seeing idiots twisted view fails.

How easy it is to look at one side only.

Posted by: Scott at July 26, 2006 10:22 AM (69hsc)

19 ROFL! Im glad I respond only to limited areas of my own knowledge.. like why muslims are not compatible with the rest of the world anymore.. things like that.
I have a BS degree in business but I couldnt balance my checkbook if my life depended on it. Prolly shouldve got a degree in something I can really grasp.. like computer games and firearms. /shrug.

Posted by: JeepThang at July 26, 2006 10:24 AM (0411H)

20 Americans demand too much in pay for jobs that can be done cheaper overseas. It's just that simple. We won't mention a certain segment of the population who would rather collect their entitlements instead of working a job that is below their status.

Imaging the look on a man or a womans face in the early 1930's if we told them there was a whole segment of society who chooses not to work. Back in the day 50 bucks a week and a bowl of bean soup a day was a good living.

There is a public housing developement across the street from the King center in Atlanta. It is Govt subsidized because these folks cannot afford traditional housing for various reasons (overbreeding, drugs, alcohol and any combination thereof). But they all have sattelite TV.

How did I get here? Oh yes, what is considered manual labor, low paying work, sweat shop work, menial labor, is hugely different here in America, land of the free and home of the brave, than what you will find in the third world where they will work any job that is better than standing knee deep in a snake filled rice paddy. Don't blame Wally world if they would rather farm out their business where it is cheaper. Only a fool buisnessman spends more for their products when it can be had for less elsewhere. That is buisness 101.

Posted by: Cmunk at July 26, 2006 10:28 AM (7teJ9)

21 All-Seeing Eye,
Your estimate of Mullahs' contribution to the Hizbullah is on the low side the figure is more than twice that 250 Million dollars U.S. annually.
Yes, the subhuman Mullhas' have been draining the blood of the hapless Iranian so as to fatten their pet leeches Hizbullah.
This is something the likes of Abu-Scott El-Islami do not want you to know.

Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at July 26, 2006 10:35 AM (Bp6wV)

22 Scott, that's a very obtuse description about how the price of oil is determined. You make it sound as if refineries are going to arbitrarily pay a price and then pass it down to the consumer, completely ignoring the fact that the price of oil is determined by refining capacities, drilling costs, exploration costs, and all of the overhead associated with any of these activities (including a myriad of other tasks that companies have to perform before it even gets into the hands of your local gas station). And to completely ignore the effects on prices by supply and demand is, in a word, dumb. It sets the price of oil a lot more than "what the refinieries pay for it."

Not only that, but to completely disregard - intentionally - the effect that emerging powerhouses like China and India have on a commodity is idiotic. It's not that hard to figure out: if there's a fixed amount of something, and a lot of people want a lot of it, it's going to have an impact. Sure, there are some speculators out there, but there are speculators for all commodities. There are speculators on pork bellies, but we don't see that commodity at record levels. Same goes with a plethora of other commodities. Assuming that the price of oil is based solely on speculators is being ignorant.

I'm completely for the idea of reducing the dependence on foreign oil. In fact, I'm completely for the idea of reducing the dependence on oil, period. But, your "analysis" on how the price of oil is arrived at leaves a lot to be desired.

Posted by: Venom at July 26, 2006 10:37 AM (pYHpB)

23 Garduneh: You're probably right about that. It's probably closer to $250 million. But hey, what's $150 million between friends?

Posted by: The All Seeing Eye at July 26, 2006 10:46 AM (I9YKk)

JeepThang: I think you lost me. (I was distracted by those oiled-up commotities.)

Posted by: The All-Seeing Eye at July 26, 2006 10:47 AM (I9YKk)

25 "Scott:" Do you speak English as a first language? I'm being serious, here. I'm not trying to be a dick by asking. If you didn't grow up speaking English, I shouldn't have made fun of your spelling & grammar. (I may be a dick, but I'm selective about it.)

Posted by: The All-Seeing Eye at July 26, 2006 10:56 AM (I9YKk)

26 Vemon: I said what they pay for oil. What they pay includes all other costs.
Intentionally disregard China, India. I said they are not affecting the price. NOW. All refineries have full holding capacity NOW.
Ignorant: Stupid liberal ass.

Posted by: Scott at July 26, 2006 10:58 AM (69hsc)

27 Scott: I wonder if a simple economic principle called "Supply & Demand" has anything to do with it?

Demand: Highest it as ever been.
Supply: +/- low percent, unchanged.

It is estimated 1/20 people have cars in China, wait till that becomes 10/20 you'll see prices you would not believe.

Posted by: davec at July 26, 2006 10:59 AM (voZp6)

28 --- oh and maybe some REAL war for Oil too.

Posted by: davec at July 26, 2006 11:00 AM (voZp6)

29 All-Seeing Eye,
I told you this Scott guy is an Arab Muslim. I mean look at his barbaric conduct; his inability to discern facts, to say nothing of his superlative command of the English language. I myself didn't know a word of English untill I was fifteen.

Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at July 26, 2006 11:00 AM (Bp6wV)

30 Mehr: You little name calling jew prick. If they are all like you, time to join the Storm Front and cheer Hezbollah on.

Posted by: Scott at July 26, 2006 11:01 AM (69hsc)

31 I agree. When 10/20 people have a car, the cost of aluminium is going to go through the roof. Imagine what the cost of car airfresheners is going to be then. I don't even what to think about the price of Armour-All

Posted by: Cmunk at July 26, 2006 11:03 AM (7teJ9)

32 So now we know where he's from at least. It's Greg's alter ego or cousin or somthing.

Posted by: Howie at July 26, 2006 11:04 AM (D3+20)

33 Abu-Scott,
Good job exposing yourself. You Muslimes were neve too smart.

Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at July 26, 2006 11:09 AM (Bp6wV)

34 Looks like ASE has a troll stalking him. I want a troll too! They're so cut with their fuzzy colorful hair.

Posted by: Cmunk at July 26, 2006 11:16 AM (7teJ9)

Garduneh: I think you're right. I notice "Scott" completely ignored the question & related comments.

Posted by: The All-Seeing Eye at July 26, 2006 11:18 AM (I9YKk)

36 Cmunk: Aren't they, though? I thought I had two, but "Tank" may have just been a sock-puppet to back up "Scott"...

No, I take that back. Looking back on the posts, Tank's English is a lot better than Scott's. Unless he did that on PURPOSE just to throw us off...

Posted by: The All-Seeing Eye at July 26, 2006 11:22 AM (I9YKk)

37 35 comments! Dude you are rockin! ASE is the king of this blog site!

Posted by: Cmunk at July 26, 2006 11:24 AM (7teJ9)

38 Get your SUV's ready for storage or for semi-permanent shelter as the government will need every last drop of oil to fuel the war machinery for World War III !

And I see an idiot is right! It is all your fault! LOL

Posted by: Last gasp Larry at July 26, 2006 11:26 AM (gLMre)

Cmunk : 35 comments pales, of course, in comparison to the number of comments Darth Rusty's posts routinely generate. For now, I can only watch & (try to) learn something from the Sith Masters...

Posted by: The All-Seeing Eye at July 26, 2006 11:34 AM (I9YKk)

40 BTW, where did my troll go?

Posted by: The All-Seeing Eye at July 26, 2006 11:35 AM (I9YKk)

41 Scott, the fact you think India and China aren't affecting the price of oil now is another example of being ignorant of the facts. The demand for oil from these two countries hasn't slowed and isn't forcasted to slow for the next few years, hence a big reason for the current price of oil. Again, why you think supply and demand don't have an impact is beyond me, but maybe you're used to tunnel vision.

Time to take off your tinfoil hat and join the rest of your leftist friends.

Posted by: Venom at July 26, 2006 11:36 AM (pYHpB)

42 The troll is dead, Long live the troll!

Posted by: Cmunk at July 26, 2006 11:46 AM (7teJ9)

43 42 comments so far. Hmmm, Hey who will pitch in for me so I can get a blog at mu.nu?

Posted by: Cmunk at July 26, 2006 12:02 PM (7teJ9)

44 Well I'm back so here we go.
(1) I only finished high school and english is what the candy asses and fairies we used to beat up were best at.

Apparently, People still can't comprehend the word NOW and apply it to today. The market changes daily.

Tank you have disagreed with the piece of shit all seeing idiot. Therefore you are ignorant.

Mehr: You're nothing but a stupid little cry baby jew. A good example of why your race has so many enemies. Last I hear you jews came from the same stock as the Arabs. A sniveling little shit like you causes pain for descent Jews. Who would want a jew like you for a neighbor?

Vemon: You turncoat democrat garbage heap. Tell the truth asshole you voted for Kerry and was a liberal shit on this very blog less than two years ago. Perhaps, the all seeing idiot and the little kike don't remember, but I do. So now you are kissing the asses of the same people who ran you off.

Posted by: Scott at July 26, 2006 01:33 PM (69hsc)

45 Yeah Vemon whomever that is.

Posted by: Howie at July 26, 2006 01:46 PM (D3+20)

46 Davec: Why would we go to war for oil? When the price gets high enough people will look at the middle east with a different view. Why should Americans suffer for another country? Make friends with the Muslims with oil and mind our own business. Money will talk and Israel will walk. Then all will be well. Opec will start pumping. The price will drop. Coca Cola, Harley Davidsons, Levis and country music will conquer the minds and hearts of the Arabs. America will once again be the good guy of the world. We just have to get rid of a little pain in the ass baggage.

Posted by: Scott at July 26, 2006 01:47 PM (69hsc)

47 That should tighten the sniveling little yids asshole.
Ha, Ha.

Posted by: Scott at July 26, 2006 01:50 PM (69hsc)

48 Hahaha Scott, that's awesome. Nah, never voted for Kerry, sorry bud. And I don't think I appeared as a liberal a couple of years ago - sure I argued a lot with Greyrooster, but few here haven't. And ran me off? Please, I never left. Looks like you're batting 0.000 today. Wrong about the way oil trades and is priced, wrong about how supply and demand works, wrong about so many things. But Scott, keep reaching for that rainbow!

Posted by: Venom at July 26, 2006 02:06 PM (gyr2M)

49 Haywood and the better half are filling the tank twice, heading up to Oshkosh and watch more folks burn fuel foolishly.

BTW, the cheapest gas around these parts is at them Venezuelan guvmint run stations. I hate driving past the gluttonous (help me scotty) u.s. and euro petropowers to save about two bucks a tank.

...are you gonna eat those tots?

Posted by: haywood jablowmi at July 26, 2006 02:07 PM (VUmVc)

50 Scott:
I don't believe I said "America" will go to war for Oil, now did I? There are other countries with significant interests in foreign oil that are already cementing ties with failed states, and despots in order to assure their supply.
It seems reasonable to me, that when a resource is vital, and in short supply and you cut off access to that resource [either militarily or economically] there will be a War ~ an example would be cutting off steel supplies to Japan before America was attacked at pearl harbor.

Posted by: davec at July 26, 2006 02:07 PM (voZp6)

51 Iranians give Hezbollah 250 million. Yada, yada, yada. America gives Israel billions.

Posted by: Scott at July 26, 2006 02:19 PM (69hsc)

52 Davec: No arguement there. But nothing new either.

Posted by: Scott at July 26, 2006 02:26 PM (69hsc)

53 Rain, rain and boring sniveling little Iranian Jews. 5 more days and I'll be at my job offshore for a month. If we see any Iranian Jews we hang them from the rig.

Posted by: Scott at July 26, 2006 02:29 PM (69hsc)

54 We are givers, ya know. Iran is a cheap old man skinflint cespool of hatred and lies. They aren't arabs, they are persian shitbags who smell of currey and goat. Let them keep their oil.

In case everyone just woke up, we have already fought a war over oil. Back in the mid 20th century, Japan turned the Pacific on it's ear for oil. (you guys thought I was going to mention Desert Storm and Iraqi Freedom didn't you)Lets be honest. Noone here is any smarter or dumber just because they cannot spell, or don't fully grasp what causes the price of commodities to rise and fall. But you dumb to argue over it. I mean it's not like some goofy bim is wrapping her nekkid ass in the American flag now is it?

Posted by: Cmunk at July 26, 2006 02:36 PM (7teJ9)

55 I'm sensing a great disturbance in The Scott...

A barrage of logic, or too much roughage? Difficult to tell...

Posted by: The All-Seeing Eye at July 26, 2006 02:36 PM (c/4ax)

56 May the elevator hit you in the head. Let me guess Chain hand 3 fingers.

Posted by: Howie at July 26, 2006 02:37 PM (D3+20)

57 Actually there is a very small minority of Jews living in Iran. Why I cannot possibly fathom.But then Madmandinnerboob doesn't say he hates Jews. He just hates having them in Israel.

Posted by: Cmunk at July 26, 2006 02:42 PM (7teJ9)

58 Cmunk,
There are probably more than one hundred thousand Jews living Iran. As to why they chose to live there, the answer is found in the Old Testament Ezra 1:1-11 and Isaiah 44:28 and again Isaiah 45:1-13.
They've been living there is the BEST, the most patriotic and always unswervingly loyal citizens and subjects. The current president of Israel in fact traces was born in Iran and traces his ancestory in Iran as far back as 2500 years.

Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at July 26, 2006 03:04 PM (Bp6wV)

59 Cmunk:

I agree with you. The lack of proper usage of the English language isn't necessarily a sign of low brainpower. Neither is a lack of logical thinking skills or knowledge of economic principles. Proper use of English, logical thinking and economic understanding are all learned skills. Unfortunately, our furry little troll possesses none of the above, and I'm not willing to give him a pass on it, especially not at this point.

Perhaps if & when he learns a little humility, he could learn something around here. Until that point, our troll deserves to be beaten repeatedly over the head with a dense metaphysical bagel of inescapable logic. If he's lucky, it may be wrapped in the pink lox of factual enlightenment.

Posted by: The All-Seeing Eye at July 26, 2006 03:08 PM (c/4ax)

60 Logic. Shit for brains you wouldn't know what it is. Stay shut in and don't go out to the real world. You won't make it out there. Just live off the tax payers and do nothing for your pay. To me, stealing time you are paid for is still stealing. A thief and a parasite. Nothing more.

Posted by: Scott at July 26, 2006 03:57 PM (69hsc)

61 CMUNK: Do I detect some racism here? OK with me. I'm racist to. I hate Iranians. They are scum of the earth. The most filthy people in history. Cannot trust any of them. Total slim bags. Spawn of the devil. They are a ugly race. Hairy like the animals they are. Stupid, cruel, barbaric with honor. I piss on them.

Posted by: Scott at July 26, 2006 04:08 PM (69hsc)

62 I notice the troll turns a pinkish-red color when you agitate it...

Posted by: The All-Seeing Eye at July 26, 2006 04:17 PM (c/4ax)

63 Scott, I mean Abu-Scott El-Islamil
Are you still trying to pass yourself off as a white Christian?
Look you've been exposed for the Muslime that you are; so just come on out and admit that you are a Muslim Arab hook-nose.

Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at July 26, 2006 09:55 PM (Bp6wV)

64 deleted

Posted by: Scott at July 27, 2006 12:40 PM (69hsc)

65 "Tank ... I encourage you to enroll in a course, perhaps at your local community college. Pay particular attention to the part about "supply" and "demand". These are separate, but related, concepts.
After you have managed to get your mind around these challenging concepts, move forward to the general effect that "supply" and "demand" have on "market pricing."
After you've mastered all these things, return to me to further your training. There are many things they will not teach you of in college.
Posted by The All Seeing Eye at July 26, 2006 09:42 AM"

One of those things they won't teach you in college is how your Mastercard reference makes sense.

You outlined how oil prices increase the wealth of Iranian leaders which in turn funds terrorism. You suggested somebody had the freedom to tell Iran to choke on it's oil.

You didn't suggest who would be forgoing purchases of Iranian oil (not even US interests), that anyone expects oil prices to sink significantly (they've acually increased due to this Iranian sponsored conflict), nor how their terrorism funding coffers would be in any way effected by anything.

Learning about supply and demand appears to have done fuckall for you in terms of understanding so I think I'll give it a miss chump. Meanwhile the coffers of the Iranians, Hamas and Hizbollah grow larger by the day due to a price spike due to the actions of Iran's proxy. Yeah... tell us all again how I'm the one missing the point. Idiot.

If the idea is you can pretend you aren't funding both sides of a war for the second time since the US civil war write another one like that about Saudi Arabia's mullahs. Then continue funding their terrorism coffers to.

Posted by: Tank at July 29, 2006 06:11 AM (aOeXm)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

July 25, 2006

Report: Iranian Special Forces Fighting IDF

Maybe you're like me and couldn't figure out why only small units of Israeli special forces would venture into Southern Lebanon when the stated Israeli goal has been to find and elimnate all rocket and missile attacks. Those initial search and destroy partols were ambushed by Hezbollah, but how does Hezbollah ambush an elite, trained group of special forces soldiers? Yes, it could happen and Hezbollah is certainly trained, but there's more to the story.

Israeli forces trying to root out militant Hezbollah fighters from southern Lebanon have uncovered sophisticated "Viet Cong-style" tunnel networks and encountered fierce resistance they say indicates the presence of Iranian military advisers. In its latest report on the fighting, British-based security and intelligence journal Jane's Defence Weekly cites a "senior defence source" who claims that what the Israeli army is facing in Lebanon is not a militia force but "rather a special forces brigade of the Iranian army".

I previously posted upon Iran shipping back their war dead in a war that the government of Iran claims they are not a part of in any way, but now we learn more about what the IDF has faced in Southern Lebanon and yet again, the hands of Iran are firmly entrenched.

But with all of this in mind, and there's more mind you, there are still certain so-called pundits who claim this is an Arab-Israeli war even though the vast majority of Arab nations have publicly supported Israel and wish Hezbollah would just flee to Tehran. The Iranian hands on this entire mess have left fingerprints all over, but are these fingerprints enough to call it rock-hard evidence? I don't know, but I am not in a position to do anything about it even if they were. All I can do is shed a black light upon those fingerprints.

Posted by: Chad at 09:37 PM | Comments (20) | Add Comment
Post contains 309 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Of course the Mullahs ruling Iran are involved. As I mentioned before Hizbullah is the conception of these filthy subhuman Mullahs. Here is a picture of an anti-tank weapon captured by the IDF. The markings on it consist of the Islamist regime symbol followed by the words "Ministry of Defence and Support for the Armed Forces".

23/07/2006

Iranian Rocket

An
RPG rocket found in Lebanon, which contains an Iranian military
industry symbol, was presented during a briefing given by the Head of
the Intelligence Branch.
Photo: Anna Brosh, IDF Spokesperson.

Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at July 25, 2006 09:54 PM (Bp6wV)

2 Oops, thought I could post graphics. But here's the IDF URL. Right at the bottom of the page there are four pictures one is labelled "Iranian Rocket". In my previous comment I translated the words on the marking.
http://www1.idf.il/DOVER/site/homepage.asp?clr=1&sl=EN&id=-8888&force=1

Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at July 25, 2006 09:56 PM (Bp6wV)

3 the "vast majority" of Arab governments have publicly supported Israel?

What drugs are you on? This degrades the credibility of everything else you say. Give me ONE Arab government that has publicly supported Israel. True, they aren't leaping to Hezbollah's defense, but every Arab government that has spoken to the issue has called for an immediate ceasefire. That's what Israel desperately wants to avoid, and that is what Hezbollah and the Lebanon government wants.

What support for Israel are you referring to? Can you back that up?

Posted by: jd at July 25, 2006 10:25 PM (DQYHA)

4 Yeah Jd,
It is foolish to regard the disagreement between the Sunni's of the Arabian Peninsula and the Shiite's of Lebanon as support for Isreal. These two factions are cut out of the same piece of cloth and are simply competing for market share, so to speak, of Mulim allegiance.

Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at July 25, 2006 10:32 PM (Bp6wV)

5 Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia have publicly blamed Hizballah for the mess. While that's indirect support of Israel, and each has a Sunni majority so their condemnation of Hizballah reflects a fear of growing Iranian influence in the region, these condemnations would have been inconceivable not so long ago.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at July 25, 2006 10:41 PM (vBK4C)

6 I also believe Iran is driving this and the region towards some point that the nutjob president of Iran believes is his destiny. But here is something to salve the soul. Jim Mcdermot is watching your back.

I am especially troubled by the fact that H.Res 921 goes far beyond
reaffirming our unwavering commitment to Israel by declaring unlimited
support for potential military action anywhere in the region. The resolution
says we: "support Israel's right to take appropriate action to defend itself,
including to conduct operations both in Israel and in the territory of nations
which pose a threat to it." (emphasis added)

I cannot link or blog roll as I am a neophyte. Bear with me as I learn. I saw this jackass on C-span and could not believe my ears.

Posted by: Cmunk at July 25, 2006 10:42 PM (n4VvM)

7 Thanks, Bluto, for helping a brother out. To deny this as even tacit support for Israel is simply negating the facts. In no way did I imply Saudi Arabia, whose top religious figure even issued a fatwa against Hezbollah less than one week ago, was sending soldiers to fight alongside Israel. As much hatred as there is for Iran within the Middle East, and these public announcements are further evidence of this, there is still a deep hatred for Israel. What has happened though, or apparently, is that these governments have sided with the lessor of two evils as they see it.

As far as what drugs I am on, the last time I even took even a Tylenol was well over a year ago if then. But thank you for asking and implying since I didn't specifically spell everything out for you that I must be on medication of some kind.

Posted by: Chad Evans at July 25, 2006 11:12 PM (+0rMT)

8 EVEN THE UN KNOWS ABOUT THE "COWARDLY BLENDING" OF THE HELLSBULLAS

Posted by: QC at July 26, 2006 12:56 AM (dIfqQ)

9 Sorry.

There is a world of difference between Arab countries "supporting Israel" versus not actively condemning Israel.

The Shias hate the Sunnis and vice versa. Most Arab countries hate various other Arab countries.

The one and only thing they can all agree on, is that they hate the Jews. That surpasses any other agenda.

Posted by: Dan Lew at July 26, 2006 01:17 AM (mkqrZ)

10 This Jewish Arab thing is going on too long by now. I would suggest to put a deadline on them to end this shit in a year otherwise the western community takes over the responsibilities of creating peace! That means palatine/Israel will be under Christian control. Just like the days when it was under Roman control!

Boneheads!

Posted by: Dan at July 26, 2006 05:20 AM (Z2OsI)

11 Good idea Dan. But who wishes to do the police work. While willing to stick my neck out for America I wouldn't be happy to die for another people. Vietnam was a lesson learned for me.
Only way to control them would be to issue a death sentence for anyone caught with a weapon of any type. Which isn't a bad idea. A quick hearing and boom.
Ah! But the libs, the ACLU, the Naacp, all would be screaming and our liberal Supreme Court Judges would shit in their robes. I think the biggest enemy we have is. WE.

Posted by: Scott at July 26, 2006 05:34 AM (69hsc)

12 Mehr: You stupid little propagandist. If all jews where like you I'd send Iran a donation.

Posted by: Scott at July 26, 2006 05:43 AM (69hsc)

13 It doesn't stop at Iran. The chain is, from Hezbollah, to Syria, to Iran, to China. Thats right folks China is supplying rockets and other weapons to Iran. Chinas biggest supporter? Walmart. Should the Jews bomb China, and Bentonville, Arkansas like they are bombing Beirut?

Posted by: Scott at July 26, 2006 05:49 AM (69hsc)

14 "Most Arab countries hate various other Arab countries."

True enough, but there is more at work here than that. It is important to remember that Iran is NOT an Arab country. It is Persian; though there are Arabs and Kurds who live there, the power is in the hands of the majority Persians.

Posted by: Charlie at July 26, 2006 07:43 AM (DwY9A)

15 Bomb Bentonville, Arkansas? Forget that, I'm too damn close to there right now. Wait until I get my work finished and I get back in Texas before you give Israel any more targets, Scott. I'm one of the regular commenters here, didn't you know that, or are you just trying to use the war in the ME to get me? Are you jealous of my standing? Haha!

Posted by: jesusland joe at July 26, 2006 10:25 AM (rUyw4)

16 To the worthless Arab Muslim who tries pathetically to pass himself off as a white Christian American Abu-Scott El-Islami.
From your conduct it's quite clear that you are a Muslime
For your information I am IRANIAN and I DO SEND donations to the people of Israel my ancient friends and allies.
Go back to your lizard infested desert Arab; go and take your filthy Allah'u'Akbar with you; go and have sex with your camel girl-friend.

Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at July 26, 2006 10:28 AM (Bp6wV)

17 Right on Charlie: The tie is Islam and not Arab/Persian.
Islamic nuts support each other. Every muslim nation would love to see Israel destroyed. Even those that are supposed to be our ally in the war against terror. It is a focal point that brings them together. A focal point that we cannot remove so this muslim/Jew thing will go on and on and on. I see no end to it short of destruction of one or the other.

Posted by: Scott at July 26, 2006 10:30 AM (69hsc)

18 I hope one day to aspire to the exalted status of JJ. It is difficult living in JJ's shadow, but I am up night and day posting and am determined to be rewarded for my efforts. /sarcasm/positive

Anyhow, it is written that Israelites are the chosen people and will prevail against all foes ...

/deleteguard/active

Posted by: Last gasp Larry at July 26, 2006 11:43 AM (gLMre)

19 Jesusland Joe: I wouldn't do that. I only sttack those that attack me. You're alright with me.

Posted by: Scott at July 26, 2006 02:00 PM (69hsc)

20 Mehr: You think I did'nt know you were a Iranian/Jew? What you are is a piece of shit. Your people are also shit and a pain in the ass to the civilized world. Jew/Middle Easterner. No difference to me. Just big pain in the asses for the last 1000 years. You backward shits are a curse on the world. All the trouble in the world today is caused by you monkeys. Never been a scumier people in history. I respect the Arabs more than you.

Posted by: Scott at July 26, 2006 02:08 PM (69hsc)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

July 14, 2006

Psychic Howie

Yesterday I said, "Ted when you get there(NPR) you need to put a foot up a few asses." Turns out Koppel just interviewed Hezbollah just last week.

Koppel Last night on All Things Considered:

Iran is playing a very dangerous game...The goal is to remove Israel.

Heh, I'm freaking psychic. But I had read the President of Iran's last statement so it wasn't that big a deal. Except for the erie coincidence about Koppel being in Lebanon.

Israel National News: All the conditions for the removal of the Zionist regime are at hand,â€ Ahmadinejad told an Arab Conference of Iraqi Neighbors meeting on Saturday. For the first time, he employed the Arabic word ezaleh, which is used to describe the irreversible removal of body hairs.
â€œNations in the region will be more furious every day. It wonâ€™t take long before the wrath of the people turns into a terrible explosion that will wipe the Zionist entity off the map,â€ Ahmadinejad told the foreign ministers of Jordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Turkey, Bahrain and Egypt. The heads of the Arab League and the Islamic Conference were also present, in addition to a special United Nations representative.
None of the foreign ministers present, including Jordan, Egypt or Turkey - commonly regarded as Israelâ€™s friends in the Arab/Muslim world - objected to the call for annihilation.

Posted by: Howie at 01:06 PM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 222 words, total size 2 kb.

328kb generated in CPU 0.1932, elapsed 0.4204 seconds.
56 queries taking 0.2543 seconds, 652 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.

Search Thingy

December 08, 2006

December 06, 2006

December 05, 2006

December 04, 2006

December 01, 2006

November 30, 2006

November 21, 2006

November 20, 2006

November 15, 2006

October 14, 2006

September 21, 2006

August 25, 2006

August 22, 2006

August 21, 2006

August 14, 2006

August 02, 2006

August 01, 2006

July 26, 2006

July 25, 2006

July 14, 2006

Recent Comments