The Jawa Report is banned in Iran for reporting on things like public lashings and the hanging of 16 year old girls for crimes such as making love, or fighting back against your rapist. Heh, the moderate Muslim State of Iran, looks like a repressive dictatorship to me.Via The Daily Mail:
His face covered by a balaclava, an official brandishing a cane repeatedly lashes the back of a man found guilty of breaking Iran's morality laws.
Two police officers hold the legs of 25-year-old Saeed Ghanbari and another his arms to ensure there is no escape from the punishment of 80 lashes handed down by a religious court.
Traffic was brought to a halt in Qazvin, 90 miles west of the capital Tehran, as more than 1,000 men gathered behind barricades to watch the public flogging...
...One police officer held his hands together beneath the bench, two others gripped his legs to ensure there was little movement.
Two police officers stood-by, their faces covered with balaclavas - each to administer 40 lashes.
Both men then lashed Ghanbari, taking the cane back behind their heads to guarantee maximum impact, each stroke leaving a distinctive red mark and bruising on his back.
Several wounds began to bleed.
It was unclear exactly what his offence had been as the country's strict morality laws cover many areas, but it was reported he had been convicted of abusing alcohol and having sex outside of marriage.
Somehow I fail to find much about Sharia law that is in any way moderate. But there is resistance amongst the people of Iran against the hard line religious regime. See this video for example.
Iranian Hostage Haleh Esfandiari Freed!Thank God! Dr. Haleh Esfandiari (right) of The Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars had been held hostage on trumped up espionage charges by the Iranians since Dec. 30th of last year. It is not immediately clear if she will be allowed to return to her home in the U.S. or will be prohibited from leaving Iran pending trial on these trumped up charges.
Two other Americans are being held hostage by the Iranian government. They are Parnaz Azima from the U.S.-funded Radio Farda and UCI Professor Ali Shakeri. A third American, Kian Tajbakhsh of the Open Society Institute (above), is barred from leaving Iran.
I call them hostages because it has been clear from the beginning that these Americans lives were being to be used as leverage in the ongoing dispute over Iranian nuclear ambitions.
Iran TV Shows American HostagesI think it is proper to call Dr. Haleh Esfandiari, of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, and Kian Tajbakhsh, a respected Urban planner, hostages and not political prisoners. Is there really any question as to why the Iranian regime has trumped up charges of treason and spying against them?
Leverage in Iraq and leverage in negotiations over the nuclear issue.
Iranian TV has shown the first pictures of two Iranian American academics - Haleh Esfandiari and Kian Tajbakhsh - who have been held in Iran since May.
The footage was a trailer promoting a programme to be aired later this week.
Another American, a journalist named Parnaz Azima, is also accused of spying.
The Ayatollah Needs A Dentist
My anti-mullah friend emails:
Hi Vinnie, This article reports three more agents of the Mullahcracy as having been detained (June 24th 07) by the coalition in Iraq.
This is a significant kick in the Mullahs' teeth; since not only have they not succeeded in securing the release of their
five agents arrested a few months back, they've lost three more.
I'm glad to see them kicked in the teeth, my friend, but I'd rather see them kicked square in the nuts.
1
Are we beginning to see good things. No wonder the lefturds have been so quite lately.
Posted by: greyrooster at June 26, 2007 07:05 AM (KtHtq)
2
Give him the THREE STOOGES dentestry plan FILL MOUTH FULL OF CEMENT DRILL A HOLE AND POKE IN A STICK OF DYNIMITE LIGHT THE DYNIMITE TAKE COVER AND KABOOM no more tooth ache problems
Posted by: sandpiper at June 26, 2007 11:07 AM (Dutrh)
"Children of Allah Influenced by International Imperialism"
This is what oppressing your population while blaming external forces to bolster support for a collapsing and failed regime reallylooks like. Right and Left wing conspiracists, Truthers, and Democratic partisans take note.
1
Excellent point Rusty, but I don't think you spelled it out in small enough words, or big enough letters for thier little minds to grasp. Of course, I'm not really sure how small the words have to be, or how big the letters have to get, before the wackos can actually read them with comprehension. Anyway, at least the rest of us can ad this to our mental stockpile of reasons to make fun of 'truthers' etc.
USA, all the way!
Posted by: Michael Weaver at May 25, 2007 01:23 PM (2OHpj)
2
Meanwhile we sit off their coast with the two most powerful carrier groups in the history of the world. We could change all this a one day.
Posted by: Greyrooster at May 25, 2007 01:35 PM (YnEfg)
3
But Rusty...It's done in LOVE..........They just want their children to grow up to be well adjusted healthy adults.
Missing American in Iran being "Detained": The Spying, Antisemitism, or Counterfeiting Connection?
Iranian sources are indicating that an American missing in Iran, Robert A. Levinson, isn't really "missing", he's being "detained". I'm willing to bet that he was detained because he is a) American b) has a Jewish sounding name. Press TV (a pro-regime source) via a hat tip in the comments from Rodger Morrow:
The truth of the matter is he has been in the hands of Iranian security forces since the early hours of March 9, and his inability to communicate with his family or his company, has raised the alarm about his health, safety and whereabouts. Speaking to PRESS TV on condition of anonymity the sources made clear that aside from the obvious inconvenience, the person is being well looked after.....
The sources also said that the matter, though routine, has been complicated by the mounting tensions stemming from repeated American threats against Iran, actual ongoing covert actions within Iran run by the Americans and the particulars of the man's background with the FBI.....
His visit to Kish was supposed to be a one day affair but drew the attention of the security forces because his Iranian national host registered in the same hotel room as he did and local police thought they had discovered some discrepancy in the Iranians identification papers routinely handed into the hotel....
It is a case of ordinary business running into extraordinarily bad circumstances. It is expected the matter will be over in a few days time.
It mentions that he was "detained" during a time when U.S. - Iranian tension were high and when "ongoing covert actions within Iran run by the Americans" were happening. This suggests he was picked up because he was suspected of being a spy. But later the Iranians try to explain his detention as asimple mix up. But the mix up theory still doesn't explain why the local police were interested in him in the first place, other than the fact that he was an American.
But I'm willing to bet that the one thing which led police to suspect he was "spy" had nothing to do with his FBI past. How could it? There's no way the Iranians knew this about his former life with the FBI at the time of his initial detention. No, being an American was probably enough.
But having the last name of Levinson sealed the deal. Because in Iran, being a Jew makes you automatically suspect. Jews in Iran today are forbidden from even calling Israeli relatives on the phone.
That is, if there even was a reason for picking him up. Sounds to me like this could be yet another case of the Iranians capturing a Westerner and then acting as if they are being benevolant by letting him go. The closest American might do just fine.
You know: Ignore the gun we're holding to your head. The fact that we haven't pulled the trigger is proof that we're the good guys.
Seems to be a common theme coming out of the regime these days.
We hope, as the article suggests, that he will be released ASAP.
Brian from Snapped Shot has another angle on this. He speculates that maybe Levinson was in the country working on the connection between the Iranian financing of Hezbollah through counterfeit U.S. currency. Interesting theory, I've no idea. Most accounts, though, suggest he was there in a private capacity.
more...
London Protest at Iranian Embassy Tonight
There will be protest tonight in front of the London embassy of the Islamic Republic of Iran at 6:45. Info here. Maybe some New Yorkers should think of doing the same thing in front of the U.N.?
The Secret Hot War Against Iran: A pattern of hostage taking in Iraq by Iran
Has the hot war against Iran already begun, but we just didn't notice? Yes. Are the 15 British soldiers the first victims of Iranian attempts to take Coalition in Iraq forces hostage? No.
I think it is fair to say that there are several wars going on in Iraq. One of them is against Salafist (Sunni) jihadis--the war against al Qaeda and their fellow-travellers. But another front is against Shia millitia who's loyalty is not so much to Baghdad as it is to Tehran. This is a proxy war of the U.S. (and its allies) vs. Iran. This proxy war is just an extension of the Cold War between the Khomeinists and the West that has been ongoing since 1979.
The taking of the 15 British hostages should be seen in this light. Maneuvering by Iran to gain advantage in this Cold War game. Unlike most of Iran's acts of war against the West over the past 4 years, this one was not done by a proxy army. The benefit of getting a proxy to do your dirty work for you, as Iran is doing with Shia militia in Iraq, is that there is always a level of plausible deniability built into the relationship.
To commit troops with your nations flag to an act of war means something dramatic has changed. The nation no longer feels that it needs to hide behind its proxies. So, what has changed? The two main lines of thought are that either a) Iran needs some leverage in the conflicts over its nuclear ambition; or b) Iran needs leverage over the West due to information coming from the capture of 1) Iranian Quds agents helping al Qaeda linked terror organizations in Kurdistan 2) Iranian Quds agents behind the kidnapping and killing of American soldiers in Karbala 3) the possible defection of several high ranking Iranian general.
Either of these explanations work under the assumption that British hostage situation is a reaction to recent events.
But what if Coalition forces were already in a hot war with uniformed members of Iran's military? What if there was already a low-level shooting war going on between the U.S. and Iran in Iraq? And what if the 15 British soldiers were just the latest attempt by Iran to capture Coalition forces and hold them hostage?
Thanks to Scott, this Time article describes a firefight between U.S. and Iranian soldiers in Iraq on September 7th of last year:
Everyone seems to sense the possible consequences of revealing that a clash between U.S. and Iranian forces had turned deadly.....
A short Army press release issued on the day of the skirmish offered the following information: U.S. soldiers from the 5th Squadron 73rd Cavalry 82nd Airborne were accompanying Iraqi forces on a routine joint patrol along the border with Iran, about 75 miles east of Baghdad, when they spotted two Iranian soldiers retreating from Iraqi territory back into Iran. A moment later, U.S. and Iraqi forces came upon a third Iranian soldier on the Iraqi side of the border, who stood his ground. As U.S. and Iraqi soldiers approached the Iranian officer and began speaking with him, a platoon of Iranian soldiers appeared and moved to surround the coalition patrol, taking up positions on high ground. At that point, according to the Army's statement, the Iranian captain told the U.S. and Iraqi soldiers that if they tried to leave they would be fired on. Fearing abduction by the Iranians, U.S. troops moved to go anyway, and fighting broke out. Army officials say the Iranian troops fired first with small arms and rocket-propelled grenades, and that U.S. troops fell further back into Iraqi territory, while four Iraqi army soldiers, one interpreter and one Iraqi border guard remained in the hands of the Iranians.
The official release says there were no casualties among the Americans, and makes no mention of any on the Iranian side. U.S. soldiers present at the firefight, however, tell TIME that American forces killed at least one Iranian soldier who had been aiming a rocket-propelled grenade at their convoy of Humvees.
The implication seems to be that the Iranians wanted to abduct U.S. soldiers as early as last September--at least if the soldiers interviewed were correct in their perceptions. Since this was very near to the border with Iran, would the Iranians have made the claim that the American soldiers had wandered into Iran?
One is left to wonder if this was an isolated case? Or if other firefights have broken out between U.S. and Iranian troops?
In addition, the operation against U.S. forces in Karbala on January 20th also seemed to have hostage taking as the goal. Four U.S. soldiers were abducted by people suspected to be linked to Iranian al-Qods forces. Those four soldiers were later murdered as they were transported in seperate cars away from the scene. The cars were found abandoned with the bodies of the victims. Speculation, at the time, was that those responsible had ditched the cars and hostages when they got nervous about getting caught.
Let's also not forget that an American soldier, Spc. Ahmed K. Altaie, was abducted by Shia militia in the home of his Iraqi wife's family in October of last year. At first it was believed he would be ransomed for money as part of a criminal hostage-taking ring. But later a video emerged of the American soldier which had the all too familiar demand of America leaving Iraq. There is now speculation that Altaie has been taken to Iran.
Add to all this the fact that the abduction of the British soldiers was videotaped--which suggests the operation was planned in advance-- and we seem to have a pattern emerging.
September: Uniformed Iranian military attempt to capture U.S. soldiers. At least one Iranian killed.
October: American soldier kidnapped by Shia militia. Either held by proxy agents of Iran or has been moved to Iran (if still alive).
January: Four American soldiers kidnapped by suspected Iranian agents, and then murdered. Presumably because there was a hot pursuit.
March: 15 British sailors abducted by Iranian forces.
If all of these events are part of an orchestrated attempt by Iran to take U.S. or other Coalition soldiers hostage, then it would seem that recent events were not the motivation. Instead, these hostage takings should probably be seen as part of Iran's larger Cold War strategy.
For some reason, which is hard to fathom, Iran believes that taking hostages is a good tool to gain leverage over the West. Imagine. That.
This is not to say that the recent defections or events in Irbil and Karbala aren't the proximate cause of the present hostage crisis. Only that since it looks like Iran was already engaged in similar operations around Iraq that there might be an underlying cause. The best candidate for that underlying cause is that Iran wants leverage in its ongoing struggle to show that it is the only regional power capable of "standing up" to the West.
Iran's proxy war with Israel last summer was a different manifestation of the same underlying cause. They wanted to show Muslims in the region that its proxies in Hezbollah could "stand up" to the perceived U.S. proxies of Israel.
The underlying cause was this Cold War between the West and the Khomeinsts. But the proximate cause of that war, if you'll remember, was the kidnapping of two Israeli soldiers.
But if I am right that Iran has been attempting to take uniformed hostages since last September, then what was the real proximate triggering event? Was there something that happened in late August or early September? That's not a rhetorical question. I'm open to suggestions.
1
Is it possible they already have nuclear weapons and are looking for an excuse to use them?
Posted by: Heroic Dreamer at April 01, 2007 07:03 PM (xTpGM)
2
So what. The libturds are in charge. If the troops fight back they will lose their funding. Then we will not be able to have more generals and admirals than sgts.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 01, 2007 07:03 PM (1Y2o3)
Posted by: Kevin at April 01, 2007 07:18 PM (/ndDU)
4
The whole world is in a cold war between western enlightment at it's best, and the forces seeking the west's reduction/destruction, which are at thier most pervasive. We moving from cold to hot war like ice thaws. It would be nice if America was united to withstand this threat, and prevail. USA, all the way!
Posted by: Michael Weaver at April 01, 2007 08:21 PM (2OHpj)
5
If Mrs Thatcher was still in charge this hostage situation would be sorted and Iran would get its mongrel ass whipped. Remember the Falklands. Rule Britannia death to the corrupt Iranians and all other muslim vermin.
Posted by: Jester at April 01, 2007 08:30 PM (iwtIO)
6
Here are a few things I found doing a Google search for "Iran news August 2006":
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=CHO20070401&articleId=5247 <blockquote>Since last August, the US has conducted a number of military exercises in and around the Persian Gulf. From September through December, a major war games simulation entitled Vigilant Shield O7 was conducted. The stated enemies are Irmingham (Iran), Churya (Chian), Ruebek (Russia) and Nemesis (North Korea).</blockquote>
Russia's changing Iran policy <blockquote>Russia has a history of being targeted by US sanctions, designed to forestall arms sales to Iran. Among others, in August 2006, the US imposed sanctions against two of Russia's major arms exporters, Rosoboronexport and Sukhoi, for arms deals with Iran. The sanctions fall under the Iran-Syria Non-Proliferation Act. Moscow dismissed the sanctions as the practice of "dishonest competition."</blockquote>
February IAEA votes to report Iran to the UN security council. Iran resumes uranium enrichment.
August UN deadline for Iran to halt work on nuclear fuel passes.
2007 February IAEA says Iran has missed deadline to suspend uranium enrichment, exposing Tehran to possible new sanctions.
IRAN'S SUICIDE BRIGADES <blockquote>Lebanese Hezbollah's abduction of two Israeli soldiers on July 12, 2006, provided another press opportunity for Iranian suicide brigades. On July 17, 2006, Arya News Agency reported an expedition of two "martyrdom-units," one consisting of eighteen and the second consisting of nine "martyrdom-seekers," to Lebanon.
At demonstrations in Tehran and Tabriz ten days later, sixty Iranian volunteers declared their readiness for holy war. There was also a rally in Rasht, capital of the Caspian province of Gilan, on July 29. But despite the bravado, Iranian police stopped a caravan of self-described "martyrdom-seekers" at the Turkish border. </blockquote>
Posted by: Vicki at April 01, 2007 08:45 PM (KNd6y)
7
Yea Thatcher was my kind of woman. England needs more like her.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 01, 2007 10:06 PM (yIWcV)
8
In sept there was a lot of talk about sanctions, speciffically gas embargo, Iran imports almost 50% of its gas, this would be another financial failure for Iran.
Can't think of anything else that is publicly known that would piss them off.
I think there are easy places to snatch. And the Brits were in one of those easy places.
Some of those incidents were accidents. And they wouldn't allow regular troops to do this sort of op.
It could even be something they heard through back channels.
Arab king recently told Iran USA war ships were not there for VACATION. 8>
Bill
Posted by: gerald at April 01, 2007 10:53 PM (h0BrM)
Yes that king would be Saudi Arabia’s king and Iran's president nutjob told him to fuck off. Iran fought Iraq for eight years and was barely able to hold Iraq off and now they think they go some bowling ball sized nuts, shame they didn’t notice that Iraq lasted what 4 whole days against the United States.
1
It's appropriate that it shows the appeaser in this parody as being female. I think a nice little curly tail, snout and pointed ears would of done more added to the 'baby'. Never hurts to hit twice with the same strike, that's Serak Professor.
Posted by: wb at March 30, 2007 11:20 AM (L3O5+)
2
wb, Did you know you can kill with 'pepper spray' ? That baby is giving a full wide shot down the lungs, if only the nice lady was packing! It doesn't look like she can use her shoes for weapons either, but maybe. Now the thingy in her hair could be used to gouge the eyes, and maybe before that, she could chuck the necklace down its throat when it's inhaling. If she can't kill it outright, maybe while its crying bloody tears, and coughing up pearls, she can push it into the path of an oncoming truck! Or down an open manhole. That is what I would call hitting. As it sits, it looks more like she is saying "My, what big teeth you have ..." Disgusting! USA, all the way!
Posted by: Michael Weaver at March 31, 2007 03:59 AM (2OHpj)
Posted by: Michael Weaver at March 31, 2007 04:00 AM (2OHpj)
4
Those are all nice gimicks Professor, but all require something other than what you have in your hand already. I would just call it a need for retroactive birth control. I like the truck idea, maybe a Swifts' pork truck......
Posted by: wb at March 31, 2007 05:15 PM (0HmJb)
5
wb, sometimes you only have what you have
Always be ready to turn some object near you into a weapon, even if it's only the enviroment around you. A pork truck would be justice
USA, all the way!
Posted by: Michael Weaver at March 31, 2007 10:53 PM (2OHpj)
6
Tell me dear Professor, do you think driving around tehran in a Swift's Pork truck might be.... too obvious?
(Video) Full Video of Hostage Faye Turney on Iranian TV
Full video of Iranian state television's broadcast of British hostage Faye Turney and her "confession".
Where are the human rights organizations for this intentional breaking of the Geneva Conventions which explicitly forbid this kind of public display of P.O.W.'s?
Here is the text of the letter, allegedly written by Faye Turney:
Dear Mum & Dad,
I am writing to you from Iran where I am being held.
I will try to explain to you the best what has happened.
We were out in the boats when we were arrested by Iranian forces, as we had apparently gone into Iranian waters.
I wish we hadn't because then I'd be home with you all right now.
I am so sorry we did because I know we wouldn't be here now if we hadn't.
I want you all to know that I am well and safe.
I am being well looked after. I am fed three meals a day and have a constant supply of fluids.
The people are friendly and hospitable, very compassionate and warm.
I have written a letter to the Iranian people to apologise for us entering into their waters.
Please don't worry about me, I am staying strong.
Hopefully it won't be long until I am home to get ready for Molly's birthday party with a present from the Iranian people.
Look after everyone for me, especially Adam and Molly.
I love you all more than you will ever know.
All my love,
Faye
Update: It looks like the vid was uploaded by Shawn Wassan to Liveleak, who adds, "Clearly These Statements Were Made Under Duress".
Britain called the broadcast "completely unacceptable" and said it was concerned that the statements from sailor Faye Turney were coerced. The British government earlier released what it called proof the boat crews were seized in Iraqi waters, and said it was freezing all contacts with Iran except negotiations to release them....
Before the video was broadcast, a Blair spokesman said any showing of British personnel on TV would be a breach of the Geneva Conventions.
"It's completely unacceptable for these pictures to be shown on television," the Foreign Office said after the broadcast. "There is no doubt our personnel were seized in Iraqi territorial waters."...
The Foreign Office said it had "grave concerns" about Turney's state of mind when she spoke on video.
"I am very concerned about these pictures and any indication of pressure on or coercion of our personnel," said Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett. She added that Britain had "comprehensively demonstrated today that our personnel were operating inside Iraqi territorial waters."
1
All I am saying is that if these were SAS guys who were captures, or American troops, there would be no forced confession like this. No "I'm sorry to the people of Iran for our injust entry into their waters" spoken with eyes that say "Please let me go!"
4
I am disgusted this with this woman. Betraying her oath, her comrades, and her country. Makes me think some troops really do deserve to be spat upon.
Posted by: wooga at March 28, 2007 01:28 PM (t9sT5)
5
She doesn't say anything harmful, does she? She just tells the truth, it seems. They're treating me well, we didn't know we were in Iranian waters, etc. Give her a break. She's being held hostage for Chrisake.
She's not praising the Mullahcracy and ranting against the Zionist-infidel pigs.
Posted by: Rusty at March 28, 2007 01:31 PM (JQjhA)
6
Agree with Rusty - she is being held against her will. I haven't studied the video closely, and frankly wouldn't know what I would be looking for, but do the British have an equivalent "signal" like we do for "I am saying this under duress, and don't believe it"? Like crossed fingers, etc.?
Posted by: TXEric at March 28, 2007 01:44 PM (ghsFT)
7
Parading them on video, false confessions. I did notice how fast one soldier was eating like he hadn't eaten for 3 days. I wondered if she was a smoker but it did show she inhaled. What is going to happen next? She gave a (apparant false) confession and didn't they say they would put them on trial? Notice how they scanned her letter. I maybe wrong but I don't think she is going to be released.
Posted by: allahahachew at March 28, 2007 02:00 PM (BrndJ)
8
I sure hope to Allah those were halal meals they were given!!
Posted by: mrclark at March 28, 2007 02:16 PM (MEa82)
Let's see how much of a bad ass your are with a pistol aimed at your head.
That statement was made under duress. Do you even know what that word means?
Posted by: Dick at March 28, 2007 02:36 PM (XlQVK)
10
You bet your a$$ there won't be any American troops held by Iran (only attacked) - obviously propaganda since they know the UK wont do a damn thing. The last time this happened it was the same story, same country's troops. After their release we'll hear about what really happened to them while in 'custody'.
Posted by: tbone at March 28, 2007 02:37 PM (HGqHt)
11
I'd be curious to hear whether the Brits are treated better or worse than the prisoners at GITMO.
You know, the guys who were captured fighting us, out of uniform, hiding behind civilians.
Where's the International Committee of the Red Cross? Where's Amnesty International?
Posted by: Lurking Observer at March 28, 2007 02:42 PM (/ZD7V)
12
Rusty said: "She doesn't say anything harmful, does she? She just tells the truth, it seems." However, she wrote, "I have written a letter to the Iranian people to apologise for us entering into their waters."
This not the truth. She has no business apologizing to the Iranian people. I'm not calling her a traitor (as she did not praise the mullahs), but she is still a failure as a sailor. None of the men have apparently caved so quickly (or else we would have heard/seen their 'confessions'). It's a horrible sign of weakness. She should have at least had the backbone to suffer the torture of being deprived a cigarette before capitulating.
If you can't at least take a beating before you give in to the enemy, you have no business being in a combat zone.
Posted by: wooga at March 28, 2007 03:01 PM (t9sT5)
13
Point taken about the apology, but, as far as she knows, she was in Iranian waters. Since all her information is coming from the Iranians, then she may well believe that they had mistakingly went over the imaginary line. Happens all the time.
Posted by: Rusty at March 28, 2007 03:40 PM (JQjhA)
14
How do the British train their military personnel? Are they given instructions if captured? This broad uses the term "arrested" as opposed to "captured" which suggests her words are not hers. Maybe her politically correct world has taken a right turn and after she crapped in her bloomers she decided living was better than dying...so she sold out, knowing that as a woman her fellow British citizens would understand her "feelings" when she returns. We need more women like her in all democratic armies...so sensitive towards others, especially our enemies, both real and imagined. She makes me puke...but it is not her I am angry toward, it's her officers who placed such an idiot in that boat that didn't know where it was...yea sure they were lost in Iranian waters. They were captured after being given surrender orders from their Mother Ship...it's the command structure with the political structure who are running this stupid game.
Posted by: RJ at March 28, 2007 03:45 PM (yyxO/)
15
The US has had its share of Iranian hostage taking. The same "students" ie akmadinnerjacket is in control now as well a coldmania How long were our people held? Who was in power? The Iranians are bolden because diddly squat has been done to them in taking hostages. Go ahead bash the female soldier. Do you know what is going on behind the scenes? The picture of her is worth a thousand words. She is wearing a muslim head scarf. She is not with her fellow commrades. It is prohibited in islam unless they are her family. This is not a female issue but a hostage issue. A commentor on another board said during vietnam the hostages didn't look into the camera when speaking to send a message. She did not look into the camera. Our anger needs to be placed against the Iranians not our allies. She is being used as a scape goat and some of you are falling for it.
Posted by: allahahachew at March 28, 2007 03:47 PM (BrndJ)
Hey Allahahachew...soldiers fight to die a glorius death. What valor is there in surrender? I am not angy at this broad, it is her senior officers...they surrendered to the political leaders... Five days of capture and this broad is coughing up "arrested" etc. You want to offer her our feelings of understanding because she may have had a gun pushed into her ear and cocked? Oh please, don't be so easy to wash away your guilt for not enlisting on such dribble. This is war, not some poli sci class. Do you think the Cruiser from which those boats belong didn't have radar intercepts on the Iranians? They had time to call home to the politicians, therefore they had time to load a few rounds into the 5 incher and make a little love with the Iranian boats coming closer! War is not pretty, it is real, and very very ugly, that's why PTSD is an active part of true combat vets. I want America to win, the Islamofacists to lose...everything they've got!
Posted by: RJ at March 28, 2007 04:02 PM (yyxO/)
17
Ahmadinejad whined that the movie "300" portrayed the Persians of 2500 years ago as "savages." How little things have changed over the milennia. Mahmoud must be put to death. Soon.
18
Those of you trashing this broad STFD and STFU. Replay it. Watch the body language as she takes a hit off her smoke. Watch the eyes stare down the muzzle, you pussilanimous little pukes. Jeebus!
Posted by: Herr Morgenholz at March 28, 2007 05:36 PM (tM5S2)
19
And by the way, where is the condemnation of the Iranians for making this western, Christian woman wear the headscarf indicative of submission to the Religion of misogyny, perpetual outrage, and anal goat sports? Can't hold enemy combatants in an actual POW camp, but THEY can make POWs bow to a false G-d. Fucking barbarians.
Posted by: Herr Morgenholz at March 28, 2007 05:41 PM (tM5S2)
20
I'm with wooga. She should shut up. Being held captive, being well fed and cared for is not a reason to praise the Iranians. Truth is is that she isn't being tortured. She is merely a weakling. She doesn't say a thing about the other troops going home with presents from the Iranian scumbags. Just thinking of herself. Not her country or her fellow prisoners. She should shut up and act as one of the group.
Posted by: greyrooster at March 28, 2007 08:20 PM (LXuMj)
21
Shit rolls down hill. Weak officers and COWARDLY brass put this set of boobs on the iranian gong show. Rooster is right, she should not of been there in the first place. I just don't believe in putting women in harms way. At least if it had been rozy odonnalphant green peace would of put up a save the gay whales fight. Nope, the fault lies at the top and with the correctness that put her there. Every moment of inaction is another moment the enemy grows stronger in the eyes of those on the fence, don't forget, the arabs have never been on the losing side in a war.
Posted by: wb at March 29, 2007 05:22 AM (D4E90)
22
In the past, women in service (WW2) freed up a man to go be in heavy combat. As for the capture I will say I'm furious with command structures which allow this sort of thing. Even on the Enterprise 'D' they showed more spine than this. On treatment of hostages in general, she may have been told what would happen to the men with her, if she didn't speak up, and that would be a prety hard threat to ignore. For a good person, it is not easy to risk the life of one teammate. Fear for a friend can do what a beating might not. Rather than dog on the lady, lets pray that giant leeches crawl up all of the Mullah's asses! USA, all the way!
Posted by: Michael Weaver at March 29, 2007 12:47 PM (2OHpj)
23
"arabs have never been on the losing side in a war." Not that they ever seem to remember. Charles Martel, and el Cid should get a modern interpretation. Acted out for real. USA, all the way!
Posted by: Michael Weaver at March 29, 2007 12:49 PM (2OHpj)
I'd suggest to Tony that he tell all non-Muslims to get the f#ck out of Iran, 'cause he's about to start dropping nukes on their major cities unless the sailors are released unharmed and with a formal apology. Since it's war they want, we might as well get it over with while we're still the only ones with nukes.
Posted by: Duex at March 29, 2007 09:24 PM (7z6ZK)
25
Many of you are very prompt at attacking the sailor shown in the video. As far as I'm aware, she is following her instructions in case of capture: As a member of the Royal Navy, her number 1 duty is to stay alive and to keep her team members alive. If need be, try to buy time. A dead sailor is no use to anybody. If any of them makes it back, then they might be able to give crucial intelligence information. The letters are obviously being dictated. She is wearing a headscarf, etc. If this is what it takes so that her companions avoid torture and murder, then she HAS to do it. If she refuses to be paraded and write letters, then her team mates and herself will be killed and the entire point of their mission lost. There is no honor or lack of honor involved in a situation like that. She is obeying her orders 100%. If you don't find it to your taste, then don't look, but bear in mind that wars aren't just fought with guns and bayonets.
Posted by: redjackbonney at March 30, 2007 09:34 AM (xg3Zv)
26
Its typical for iran morons to parade prisoners in front of cameras with forced confessions. Blair is right this just makes the public more discusted in iran than they already are. So when iran is pounded with holes from bombs, nobody will have any sympothy.
So take that pathetic rag off Faye's head. Save it for your slave arab.
Posted by: Jordan at March 30, 2007 11:13 AM (gw7O2)
27
redjack, I think you're right. the issue about her being there in the first place is moot now anyway as she is a hostage just like the rest. But...... this never should of taken place to begin with and your leaders are only making it more costly with each hour that passes without a full and devastating response. groveling in front of the un is yet even more dispicable when they should be blasting the ever living shit out of the irainian leadership with no let up until they cry out. Only after the exact same apology and begging of their leaders to spare them internationaly broadcast should the onslought cease.
THAT is how you project power.
Posted by: wb at March 30, 2007 11:20 PM (L3O5+)
28
Redjack: Now I know what happened to what was once the bravest nation on earth. Honor has been forgotten. Somethings are bigger than life. Like the future of your grandchildren.
Posted by: greyrooster at March 31, 2007 02:02 AM (LDOOz)
29
Faye Turney is a traitor and a complete sellout, she should be shot, not welcome home with open arms. She said what she had to to stay alive, but forgot all about oaths to county. This is why woman so be in the kitchen and on their backs instead of combat. They cave in under pressure.
Posted by: Michael Huy at April 05, 2007 01:04 PM (H9sIo)
American forces in Iraq now hold some 300 prisoners tied to Iran’s intelligence agencies, Pajamas Media learned from both diplomatic and military sources.
This is believed, by both sources, to be a record number of prisoners tied to Iran. Virtually all were captured in the past two months.
This week’s seizure of 15 British sailors by Iran in the contested waters of the Shattab al-Arab, the ship channel that divides Iraq and Iran, may have been payback for the capture of record number of Iranian operatives inside Iraq. “It may be a bargaining chip,†one diplomatic source said.
Well, well, well. You laughed when I said that perhaps, just maybe, the Iranians intentionally planned the seizure of 15 British sailors. But are we now seeing the underlying motivation here? Vicki reported the 'bargaining chip' angle yesterday, but the 300 number puts a whole new spin on it.
But, the worst part? The U.S. State Department:
The Pentagon received “considerable pressure†from officials in the State department and CIA to release some or all of the Iran-linked prisoners to facilitate discussions between Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Iranian officials.
Lord, is there anything the State Department ever gets right?
State's incompetence gives me a good lead into posting this editorial cartoon by Ronny Gordon. He calls it "Frankenstein peace" or "Condi re-animates the peace process", and its intended to be commentary on moves to reignite the Israeli-PA talks, but I think its apt here as well.
So, why now? JPOST confirms the details of the PJM report above, but adds this:
According to the official, Iran was worried that its detained people would leak sensitive intelligence information.
2"Well, well, well. You laughed when I said
that perhaps, just maybe, the Iranians intentionally planned the
seizure of 15 British sailors. But are we now seeing the underlying
motivation here? Vicki reported the 'bargaining chip' angle yesterday, but the 300 number puts a whole new spin on it."
Rusty.. I'd never laugh at you....
Well maybe if you were flying the codepink colors and prancing around in a tutu, but other than that...
And yes...regarding the 15 Brits 'disappeared' coinciding with Amadimjihad's trip to the UN...I question the timing....
Also sad how the Iranians are trying to ride the coattails of one of the best movies out right now..(300)...
Posted by: mrclark at March 25, 2007 09:20 PM (MEa82)
3
He doesn't fly the Code Pink colors, but that is the color of his tutu.
I have photographic evidence.
Posted by: Vinnie at March 26, 2007 12:33 AM (BH1E/)
Well, of course it is! I suspect IRGC had been monitoring the allied interdiction operations in those waters biding their time for the opportunity to kidnap coalition servicemen.
"..The Pentagon received “considerable pressure†from officials in the
State department and CIA to release some or all of the Iran-linked
prisoners..."
Isn't this the same State Department that robbed Israel of its victory in Sinai 40 years ago, and again robbed Israel of a full victory against Hizbullah last year? "...to facilitate discussions between Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Iranian..."
For G_d's sake what's there to discuss? This regime openly states that exists for the sole purpose of subjugating the whole world under Islam; and that destroying Israel is merely the first step to conquest of the West and then the world. Force is the only these f**kers understand.
Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at March 26, 2007 07:36 AM (j97MF)
5
Why the hell is it that every time a guy comes home after a hard days work, cracks open a beer, takes out a cigar and puts on a tu tu they call it freakin "prancing"? The correct resonse should be 1000 cruise missles that take out everyone in the leadership and most importantly the mullas. Then ask again by saying please, let our sailors go in 10 minutes. @ 10:00:01 drop tactical. Next....... damnit! Tutu is pinching again, I gotta lay off these fried oysters.
Iran Funding Attacks in Iraq
Color me unsurprised. Personally, I'd hold out for $1,000 a month. But I guess the labor market for would-be infidel bombers is pretty much flooded these days.
Garduneh Mehr e-mails this piece from the The Australian:
IRANIAN agents are paying local Iraqis around the southern city of Basra as much as $500 a month to carry out attacks on coalition forces.
British Lieutenant Colonel Justin Maciejewski said contact with locals suggested that the “vast majority†of violence against British troops stationed in the city came from outside Iraq. ...
Lt-Col Maciejewski, who is the commanding officer at the British base at Basra Palace, went on: “Local sheikhs and tribal leaders here in Basra - who are desperate to prevent this violence escalating - are telling us that Iranian agents are paying up to $500 a month for young Basrawi men to attack us.
You know what would raise demand? A shooting war, rather than a proxy war, between Iran and the infidels......
1"... A shooting war, rather than a proxy war, between Iran and the infidels ..."
Well, yeah! You see, these guys (and by that I mean not only the Mullahcracy but the entire Islamo-fascist Ummah) know that in open warfare they don't stand a chance against the West. So, instead they opt for these proxy wars, as ways of draining the U.S. in particular and the west in general of blood, treasury and resolve. Of course I know absolutely nothing of military arts, but it seems to me that you always want to take the initiative away from the enemy by employing weapons, methods, times and places that best suite you, rather than merely responding to the enemy. For this reason I favour open warfare against Jihadi's in general and against the Mullahcracy in particular.
May I ask the readers/bloggers with military education to educate the rest of us in this?
Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at March 23, 2007 02:07 PM (j97MF)
2
Basra ?? I thought things were pretty cool down there, only one KIA so far this month for the Brits.
Posted by: John Ryan at March 23, 2007 02:58 PM (TcoRJ)
Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at March 23, 2007 08:42 PM (j97MF)
4
they could more than that from murtha kerry kennedy schumer & pelosi if they could make President Bush look bad. Maybe that's kind of the same thing when you defund our troops.
Hostage Crisis: Iran Captures 15 British Sailors & Marines
What's old is new. Iran is insisting that the 15 marines and sailors were in their waters, the British claim they were in Iraqi waters. The truth? Come on. Do you really have to ask? Unless, of course, the Iranians now consider Southern Iraq an extension of Iran. Which may not be too far off the mark.
Fifteen British Navy personnel have been captured at gunpoint by Iranian forces, the Ministry of Defence says.
The men were seized at 1030 local time when they boarded a boat in the Gulf, off the coast of Iraq, which they suspected was smuggling cars....
The Ministry of Defence said: "The group boarding party had completed a successful inspection of a merchant ship when they and their two boats were surrounded and escorted by Iranian vessels into Iranian territorial waters.
"We are urgently pursuing this matter with the Iranian authorities at the highest level.
"The British government is demanding the immediate and safe return of our people and equipment."
Another update: Given that embassies in Tehran were making evacuation plans yesterday.....er, I hate to place the tinfoil hat on here, but what are the chances that this was a planned operation?
Allah provides video of the last time Iran took British personell hostage and says:
Iran can’t have meant to do this, not with Ahmadinejad set to address the Security Council tomorrow about the nuclear program and not to the British, who’ve been adamant in opposing any military action on Iran.
Maybe, and in my heart of hearts I'm a Realist--which posits that nations are rational actors that act in their own interests. But rationality is constrained by culture and what may seem rational in Tehran may seem crazy-insane to the rest of us. Case in point: all of Iranian history since 1979.
Anyway, I agree that they'll probably be let go unharmed. And it's far more likely that Allah is right and that this is probably nothing more than a bunch of Iranian sailors working from the cuff and egged on by years of propaganda, but never completely write off the crazy. Especially when you're dealing with Iran.
If our resident Persian expert, GM, is around, I'd like to hear your thoughts.
UPDATE exctracted from the comments of Garduneh Mehr:
Thanks Dr. S., I don't know for sure but I suspect this transgression like the last one (mentioned above by Randman) has been committed by the naval branch of the IRGC (the idealogical terrorist army that's the mullah's main prop). And again I speculate that they've done this so as to dissuade the coalition from aggressively inspecting ships which would make it easier for the IRGC to smuggle arms and/or terrorists into Iraq. Looking at the bigger picture, it seems to me that the terrorist acts in Iraq are basically a proxy war conducted on behalf of the IRGC and the Mullahcracy's ministry of intelligence VEVAK. Ken Timmermann had a very insightful article on this recently. As for removing the gloves vis-a-vis the Mullahcracy, that is long long over due. There is one more thing I'd like to mention. These IRGC/Basiji types are basically thugs and bullies; when it comes to dealing with them one most forget all niceties and ceremonies and courtesies of international law because the IRGC/Basiji/VEVAK do not represent a nation. As they themselves will tell you, they represent an idealogy. In brief, I believe the Royal Navy ought to have made quick work of the f**kers.
1
I'm sure the Iranians will release the Brits as soon as the Queen gives them some British soil and water as sign of their loyalty. I am having trouble envisioning Prince Charles kicking the Iranian envoy down a well.
Posted by: BohicaTwentyTwo at March 23, 2007 08:25 AM (oC8nQ)
2
Hey...for the most part I really appreciate the Brits but they have been kind of wimpy towards the Iranians when the Iranian military violated the border in the area under British control.
Posted by: Randman at March 23, 2007 08:38 AM (Sal3J)
The greater question is why didn't the skipper of HMS Cornwall engage the Iranian vessel(s) and attempt to recover his men?
Obviously the Iranian vessel(s) were comitting an act of Piracy, if not an act of war, and committed this act outside their own waters.
The Commanding Officer should have engaged the hostile vessel at once, rather than standing by while members of his crew were kidnapped. That he did not do so, should be cause for his immidieate release from command of the vessel, and a Court of Enquiry should be assembled at once to consider the matter, both in regards to the officer's conduct, and as an example to other officers of the vigilence and determination required when placed in command of a warchip, and other men's lives.
As a former Navy man, I find his conduct reprehensible, and dangerous, in light of the prescedence it sets for protecting one's own crew.
Respects,
Posted by: Gwedd at March 23, 2007 09:24 AM (SfKUJ)
6
Thanks Dr. S.,
I don't know for sure but I suspect this transgression like the last one (mentioned above by Randman) has been committed by the naval branch of the IRGC (the idealogical terrorist army that's the mullah's main prop).
And again I speculate that they've done this so as to dissuade the coalition from aggressively inspecting ships which would make it easier for the IRGC to smuggle arms and/or terrorists into Iraq.
Looking at the bigger picture, it seems to me that the terrorist acts in Iraq are basically a proxy war conducted on behalf of the IRGC and the Mullahcracy's ministry of intelligence VEVAK. Ken Timmermann had a very insightful article on this recently.
As for removing the gloves vis-a-vis the Mullahcracy, that is long long over due.
There is one more thing I'd like to mention. These IRGC/Basiji types are basically thugs and bullies; when it comes to dealing with them one most forget all niceties and ceremonies and courtesies of international law because the IRGC/Basiji/VEVAK do not represent a nation. As they themselves will tell you, they represent an idealogy. In brief, I believe the Royal Navy ought to have made quick work of the f**kers.
Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at March 23, 2007 09:31 AM (j97MF)
Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at March 23, 2007 09:36 AM (j97MF)
8
I just noticed my typo! That was meant to read "... one must forget all niceties..." Sorry about that!
Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at March 23, 2007 09:38 AM (j97MF)
9
I just flipped off CNN becuase they are already running cover for Iran. MFrs up there saying "our sources are telling us that these units are probably revoultionary guard forces and they may not be under control of the central government of Iran".
That is such blatant BS propoganda. Then after that they switch to some girl reporting the deputy vp attempted assasination with a opening statement "this just proves how deadly it is in Iraq there is no safe place" had wonder if this was CNN or AQN.
Posted by: C-Low at March 23, 2007 09:56 AM (esMSg)
10
Gwedd, there may be other unknown factors as to why this was let to happen, but I hate to say that the Royal Navy reaction does seem a bit timid. Wiki says the HMS Cornwall is armed with a 4.5 inch naval gun as well as two 20 mm close range guns and Harpoon and SeaWolf anti-ship missiles.
Posted by: BohicaTwentyTwo at March 23, 2007 09:59 AM (oC8nQ)
Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at March 23, 2007 10:03 AM (j97MF)
12
I can't wait for the video of Ahmedinejad frog marching these sailors, blindfolded, away to the dungeons, just like he did the U.S. Embassy people in 1979. WWJD, What Would Jimmy Do? (Nothing)
Posted by: n.a. palm at March 23, 2007 10:20 AM (37fy1)
13
n.a., Jimmy would do something, like ordering an underpowered rescue attempt, resulting in a helicopter crash in the desert, and then he'd run away and blame the joos. As Homer Simpson said, "we elected the wrong Carter."
I'm with Gwedd on this one.
Posted by: wooga at March 23, 2007 11:02 AM (t9sT5)
If the Iranians believed that the US, British and French naval forces in the gulf were a real threat this would never have happened. They are calling a bluff by publicly humiliating the British.
The hardliners need to do this to show other Iranians that their aggressive (nuclear, terrorist) strategy is not putting Iran in any real danger and is getting them what they want. The inevitable passive response by the West will prove the hardliners correct. Indeed, I suspect that they will get a few of their IRGC (Qods) officers back as consideration returning the Brits.
We always hear that acting aggressivly towards Iran shores up the hardliners. This is an good example of why the opposite can be true.
Posted by: Cruiser at March 23, 2007 11:05 AM (cJ5eN)
15
Yep, Cruiser, it's the "strong horse, weak horse" argument of Osama. I always thought that it was more applicable to the cultural and behavior pattern of Arabs rather than Persians, though. I gave up trying to figure out Persians a couple years ago. Now I just assume "crazy and unpredictable."
Posted by: wooga at March 23, 2007 11:29 AM (t9sT5)
The Brits are reaping the reward for their government's public statement (was it Jack Straw?) that war with Iran is "unimaginable". If you preemptively emasculate yourself, don't be surprised when others push you around like a little girl.
This same thing goes for the Bush admin. to some degree, especially Robert Gates, who has talked too much instead of letting actions speak for him. We should not be telling the Iranians that the naval movements are designed to pressure the Iranians - they should at least be left to wonder whether they are there to strike, now. A threat must be credible to work. The administration has fallen all over itself to explain, essentially, that it is all for show. If you are going to talk like that - don't even bother wasting the effort to send the ships.
I recognize that some of the overt weakness is a result of political limitations the President faces. But again, if you can't make the threat credible you are better off trying a different tack or you risk humiliating bluff calls like we are seeing today.
Posted by: Cruiser at March 23, 2007 11:59 AM (7PR+I)
17
I would like to know if the Brits are merely going to take this as the Democrat Jimmy (peanut) Carter did when they took 400 Americans hostage. The fact that we didn't bomb the shit out of them back then probably makes them think they can get away with it any time they feel like it. ARE ALL DECISION MAKING POLITICIANS PUSSY?
Posted by: greyrooster at March 23, 2007 09:14 PM (jNRRK)
18
Time for a few british bombers to bome tehran into a pile of smoldering rubble
Posted by: sandpiper at March 26, 2007 09:31 AM (uTBPj)
Iran Cracking Down On Dissenters
My anti-mullah friend emails again:
Hi Vinnie,
Here is a report from Radio Isreal's Persian service: [My comments are enclosed in square braces.]
There are reports of unrest in the city of Andi'meshk in the province of Khuzestan [south west corner of Iran].
On Sunday a group of Andi'meshk residents who are dissatisfied with the current [economic and political] situation
engaged in demonstrations. However, they were violently set upon by the state security forces who still
[The report is dated Tuesday March 6th, 2007] prevent people from congregating even in small numbers.
The residents of Andi'meshk who are mostly from the under-privileged Arab minority claim that on Sunday
five or six demonstrators were killed by the security forces, and that these deaths have further angered
the youth of the city resulting in even more attacks on the SSF's.
In Tehran, the SSF's attacked a peaceful meeting of Iranian women arresting a number of them. Those arrested are still in prison, although
there is talk of releasing seven of the women described as journalists.
Incidentally with the Iranian Spring and New Year festivals approaching,
I just remembered that during last year's festivities,
one of which traditionally involves jumping
over bundles of burning deadwood, many Iranians were using pages of the Qoran as kindling to light the fires.
They would purposely scatter half-burnt pages of the Qoran in the streets to let the regime know
what they think of it and the Arabic religion that it holds so dear. Heh heh heh heh heh heh
I wished I had saved a few of the photographs; I think you would've liked them.
I'm looking forward to seeing what happens this year.
1
We can blame this behavior on the moolas, but the moolas aren't the ones doing the killing. It is the plain, ordinary, everyday muslim.
Posted by: greyrooster at March 08, 2007 07:36 AM (wTIrf)
2
The above statement could only be made by someone with the same intelligence as a rooster, or someone that fucks roosters. Any bird could just walk on a keyboard and type some incoherent bullshit like the above post.
The email itself is very good and informative, unlike many posts and comments in this forum.
Posted by: Bobby Boeche at March 10, 2007 03:14 PM (kaMd2)
3
Bobby Blowme. Perhaps a worm like you can't comprehend the message in the comment.
Posted by: greyrooster at March 11, 2007 01:40 PM (SKtGv)
I Call Quagmire In Iran
My anti-mullah friend sends another dispatch:
Hi Vinnie,
The same two websites as before (Radis and [Redacted, mullahs don't like blogs - Vinnie]), report clashes between certain groups and the agents of the Mullah regime.
But this time the clashes have taken place in the south-east corner of the country in the province of Baluchistan. (Baluchistan straddles the borders of Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan.)
There is a slight difference between the two reports, though. Radio Israel reports 2 government agents killed by the Baluch and 4 more captured.
The other website reports 4 governments agents killed and 4 taken prisoner.
Also FYI, Iranians have a co uple of festivals coming up one on March 14 and another on March 20th. The mullahcracy has for the past 27 years done everything it can to suppress these as the festivals are truly Iranian and completely non-Islamic.
So, I'll probably have reports of clashes between the regime and the people around that time.
The more you tighten your grip, the more star systems slip through your fingers...
Iranian Kurds: Just Doing The Jobs Americans Won't Do (Yet)
My favorite anti-mullah source sends this:
Hi Vinnie,
I thought you might be interested in this snippet of news.
Two days ago in northwest Iran, the Iranian Kurds brought down a chopper belonging to the IRGC (the main prop of the mullahcracy) killing 14 "Pasdaran" including two of their battalion commanders. The regime of course blamed inclement weather for causing the crash.
My sources are the links below (unfortunately in Persian)
1. http://radis.org/ Radio Israel Persian service
2. [redacted for obvious reasons - Vinnie] an Iranian anti-Mullah blogger who quotes Reuters as claiming the chopper was brought down by ground fire by a Kurdish group called "Pezhak". Even the mullah regime admits that there have an increasing number of clashes between the IRGC and what they call "the criminal and anti-revolutionary element" in that region. This blogger makes the interesting speculation that the Kurds may have used shoulder-fired ground-to-air missiles provided to them covertly by the coalition.
I wouldn't be surprised if the coalition or Israel did provide Iranian Kurds with anti-aircraft weapons in retaliation for the Islamic Republic and/or Syria providing anit-aircraft missiles to the terrorists in Iraq and to the Hizbullah of Lebanon.
Posted by: Mike at February 27, 2007 08:14 AM (vixp+)
2
I would not be surprised if some of the missiles the Iraqi Sunni insurgents use made it back to Iran. In my opinion the claim that we supplied them is just to cover up the fact they got shot down with their own missile. Karma....
Posted by: Darth Odie at February 27, 2007 09:16 AM (YHZAl)
3
Darth Odie, Your speculation is feasible in that the missile(s) may have been the ones taken from the bad guys in Iraq and passed on to the Kurds. Now wouldn't that be sweet :-)
Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at February 27, 2007 01:44 PM (vixLB)
4
Darth Odie, Call me a cynic but whether it's the bad guys offing bad guys or the good guys offiing the bad guys; I'd like to take it as good news as long as the bad guys are being sent to h_ll. Nevertheless, I agree with you that the enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend.
Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at February 27, 2007 06:16 PM (vixLB)
Iranians Supplying .50 cal Sniper Rifles to Iraqi Insurgents
SeeDub sent me a link to a post of his about tunnels across the U.S. border. Good find. But right underneath is, what I think, an even more important story.
If you've ever seen the kind of damage a .50 cal can do, you don't need to ask why this is a huge problem. They were developed to take out lightly armored vehicles, but can also be used against people. If you get hit by one of these, there is no hope for survival.
1If you get hit by one of these, there is no hope for survival.
Er... not exactly. The Steyr HS .50 sniper rifle is nothing more or less than a single-shot version of the venerable Browning M2 fifty-caliber machine gun. It fires the same old basic 0.50-cal jacketed round that's been in use for eighty years. Put in the right place, it can indeed kill a typical unarmored or light armored vehicle. And it's much more effective against humans than against machines. Any head or body hit from one will be lethal. A hit anywhere else will probably kill if medical aid is more than a couple of minutes away. But "no hope for survival" is a wee bit of an overstatement.
Posted by: wolfwalker at February 13, 2007 11:41 AM (MWfz5)
2
No mention anywhere how the Government of Austria thought that shooting suspected drug runners was an acceptable way of fighting the 'drug trade'.
I guess they are only against the death penalty if these drug runners are actually caught AND Austria does not receive $15 million in blood money!
Imagine the uproar from Europe if the US started shooting suspected drug runners on its borders (with non-Austrian sniper rifles).
Maybe the US should bomb the hell out of the Austrian rifle factory. Maybe that will send the right message. If not, how long before the lawyers of American dead bury this Austrian company in lawsuits.
Posted by: Fred Fry at February 13, 2007 01:17 PM (JXdhy)
3
Well. On the upside that's one twelve percent less rifles we will have to deal with when we go into Iran.
Posted by: mike at February 13, 2007 01:53 PM (0eCEh)
4
The "drug trade" claimed purpose by Iran kind of fits with the recent reported mini-uprising (within past couple weeks on here) which was smashed and dismissed as a "drug raid."
Whatever the Iranian version of the DEA is, it sounds like a fat little slush fund.
Posted by: wooga at February 13, 2007 02:22 PM (t9sT5)
5
By G@d I said these sniper rifles would turn up inside Iraq last year! Does anyone remember? With armour-piercing rounds these things can pentrate 4 cm of steel armour at a distance of 1000 meters. (Sorry guys I grew up on metric and Canada is metric). And the IRI does in fact make this munition itself. When the allies objected to the Mullahcracy purchasing these from Austrian, the IRI claimed they wanted them for drug interdiction operations. Remember that!?!?!?!? Isn't this the epitome of the "smoking gun"? How much more evidence of the IRI interference does one need? Time to haul some Austrain arses to court! And time to start bombing concentrations of IRGC and Basiji. Also time to put VoA-Persian Service "Radio Farda" under CENTCOMM
[Dr. S., please forgive the rant!]
Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at February 13, 2007 02:30 PM (vixLB)
My unit had to amputate a man's soldier girdle and a half a woman's pelvis that were hit by .50 cal fire. They looked like they had been hit with a big ice cream scoop when we were done.
Posted by: y7 at February 13, 2007 03:15 PM (yYph9)
7
.... I meant the IRI makes armour-piercing rounds that can be used with the Steyr 0.5 cal sniper rifle.
Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at February 13, 2007 03:18 PM (vixLB)
8
I thought CNN said Iran was not supplying weapons? ROFL
Posted by: DAT at February 13, 2007 07:02 PM (KPQyo)
9
Either the serial number(s) of the captured weapon(s) match those the Austrians sold or they don't.
And the way the Mullahcracy tries to attribute everything to drug-traffickers is ludicrous in a stupid and childish sort of way.
One of the ways they finance Hizbullah is by pushing drugs. To wit, a significant number of narcotics arrests made in Australia were of Shi'ah Lebanese. The bastards do the same in Canada. And of course Hizbullah is just one facet of Mullah's terrorism. The IRGC itself in addition to its terrorist activities is a drug-trafficking gang, but one with military organization
Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at February 13, 2007 07:35 PM (vixLB)
10
Dr. S., I thought you might like to see this. The following link is to the text of a letter written a year ago by an Iranian anti-IRI activist to the Austrian government warning them about the IRI's true intentions. http://activistchat.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=7617
Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at February 13, 2007 07:45 PM (vixLB)
11
The cartridge was developed as an anti tank round in WWI. The rifle was developed as a "Gee, Whiz! What a neat toy!" for civilians, by civilians, more recently.
Posted by: Phillep at February 14, 2007 11:04 AM (FIYwe)
Well, this is the Jawa Report, and we know people. And those people know people, some of whom live inside Iran.
A reader sent this on Feb. 3rd:
This morning I had a phone conversation with some people in the city of Isfahan which is the
capital city of the province with the same name.
They couldn't say very much since the phone conversations with the outside world are monitored
by the regime. But they did confirm the news of clashes reported by the Aryamehr blog
and that even in the city of Isfahan itself (not in Aryamehr's original report) there were clashes taking place
and that gunfire could be heard.
They just said: "Please pray for us!"
The only other thing I could find out was that unknown craft were seen flying over the cities of Qazvin, Alvand
and the industrial city of Alborz for about 90 minutes; these crafts were probably surveillance UAV's.
Sounded promising at the time to me, but, alas, all of our hopes were dashed when our intrepid reporter sent this:
I think that situation may have unfortunately fizzled out.
From what I can gather the event summary is that the regime's Basiji agents harassed and murdered four tribesmen.
The tribesmen then started retaliating by going village to village and attacking the regimes elements killing at least 14 of them and wounding a whole bunch more. In the city of Isfahan as a show of sympathy with the tribesmen some people clashed with security forces.
The people I know in Isfahan are older folks and certainly aren't able to participate in such things themselves and their children were forced to flee the country some twenty years ago.
Inicidents like this have been happening every year in the past few years. But the regime keeps coming back on top.
One incident in the province of Sistan involved people attacking AhmadiNezhad's motorcade and killing one of his body guards.
And a couple of years ago people attacked and killed the commander of the so-called Qods force of the IRGC (you've probably seen the name of the Qods force mentioned in connection with the recent arrests of Iranian agents in Iraq).
Although this obviously didn't indicate the start of a revolution to overthrow the mullahs, it still is important, because, if you remember, the state-run media of Iran painted this as a battle against drug smugglers.
If they're willing to do that, then they know that they are in a race against time. It's people like these tribesmen that faced down the British in the Boston Massacre.
Here's why, also from our inside source:
First a bit of background: The primary resistance seems to have come from
the Qashqai and the Lor and other (semi-migratory) tribes men who live off their cattle which they herd between their (fixed) summer and winter quarters every spring and fall. They are simple folk who don't take shit from anyone. Also, they've always insisted on owning firearms (mostly old double-barrel shotguns) to protect themselves and their livelihood against wolves and packs of wild dogs and other pests.
So while the uprising I'd hoped for didn't happen, the pot certainly simmers.
We can only hope that the Iranians do for themselves what the Iraqis could not, or would not.
1
Now you understand my lack of imterest in the report. Getting an Iranian to stand up? Doubt it.
Posted by: greyrooster at February 09, 2007 08:03 AM (ap7th)
2
Don't expect some grand uprising in Iran at this time, the freedom fighters there know they would be crushed immediately. Widespread attacks by small units and their survival to fight another day brings enough pressure on the government for now but there will be more and there will be larger attacks in the future.
Posted by: Buzzy at February 09, 2007 05:43 PM (CXz7T)
Kicking off 10 days of celebrations to mark the 28th anniversary of the 1979 Islamic revolution that brought hard-line clerics to power, Ahmadinejad said Iran will celebrate next week "the stabilization and the establishment of its full right" to enrich uranium at the facility.
Well, I'd like to commemorate the 28th anniversary of the invasion of our Iranian embassy too. I won't enrich uranium, but my celebration just might include using pages of the Koran as toilet paper and lots of target practice.
What would be even better, if this nation could actually come together to confront the common enemy, would be Take An Iranian Hostage Week. Every year, at this time, Special Forces could run in and snatch some Iranians and hold them for 444 days.
Problem with that, of course, is that most of the snatched wouldn't want to go back.
Anyway, with that being said, I found the last paragraph of the linked article to be quite telling:
"The general policies of the system are made by the Exalted Supreme Leader, and the government is required to carry them out," the state news agency quoted Ahmadinejad as saying. "The president, as the head of the country's executive body, pursues and announces the nuclear position."
The "Exalted Supreme Leader" isn't Mahmoud, it's Ayatollah Khamenei. I bring this up because various accounts I've read claim that the Ayatollah and his supporters are at odds with Mahmoud and his.
I don't buy it. Ahmaretardforjihad wouldn't be where he is without the tacit support of the "Exalted Supreme Leader."
Posted by: Vinnie at
11:47 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 270 words, total size 2 kb.
Iran Orchestrated The Karbala Attack
According to no-linky Drudge:
NBC NEWS confirms a secret U.S. military report that says 'Iranian Agents' may be behind a deadly ambush in Karbala, Iraq that left five American soldiers dead. The report also claims the Iranian revolutionary guard is providing intelligence on U.S. and Iraqi military to Shiite extremists, in addition to sophisticated weaponry. Developing...
As the Jawa Report's official Iranophobe, I'll follow no-linky Drudge's developing developments, if he has any.
1
Iran does not want to be invaded. So why would they do something as obvious and heavy-handed as the Karbala attack? The answer is, they would not. Karbala was done by an interested third party to blame on Iran, to justify the coming invasion.
Posted by: Humour Dude at January 31, 2007 08:53 AM (rGgwA)
2
Keep living in your dreamworld Humour (sic) Dude.
Your assessment of Iran is incorrect. If it were correct, Iran wouldn't be interfering in the affairs of its neighbor.....and that's putting things nicely.
The correct answer (if you're even looking for one and not simply babbling because you have BDS) is that Iran has designs on being the dominant force in the ME (if not a global "goto guy" for Anti-Americans everywhere).
You obviously know NOTHING about the mullahs of Iran nor the current President and their beliefs. They believe that through their actions they will bring the hidden the 12th imam (Muhammed Mahdi) out from hiding and he will bring about the destruction of Israel and 'the West'. As such, they believe that they are somehow immune to reprisal by us "infidel" (I hope that word can be used in the plural..) and feel justified in carrying on with their goal of Islamiscising the world in the worst way.
Sorry for having to be so curt with you....but I have little time to correct youts such as yourself or the uninformed and as such have to fulfill my own idiosyncratic selfish desire for "the smackdown" at the same time.
Posted by: mrclark at January 31, 2007 09:12 AM (tY7kt)
3
Humourless Dude:
Why would they do something like be involved with the Karbala attack. Simple: because they have their heads up their asses. Just like you.
Posted by: greyrooster at January 31, 2007 10:00 AM (w+w6p)
4So why would they do something as obvious and heavy-handed as the Karbala attack?
Iran can act with impunity because they know the West is infested with Leftard fifth columnists like you who will apologize for and defend them against the eeeeevil Bushites.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 31, 2007 10:06 AM (8e/V4)
5
"revolutionary guard is providing intelligence on U.S. and Iraqi military to Shiite extremists"
Vinnie, A couple of years ago the Islamic Republic paid the Russians to launch a sattelite for them with the express purpose of spying on coalition troops in Iraq and on the IDF. So, I wished the US would knock that satellite out with a Pegasus missile or something.
"in addition to sophisticated weaponry" This one is nothing new. They've been doing this for at least two years.
More importantly I think it's about time the SAS and/or their American counterparts conducted revenge raids (covertly or overtly) against the revolutionary guard corps bases IRGC ("Pasdaran") inside Iran to kill at least a dozen of them for each coalition casualty.
Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at January 31, 2007 11:18 AM (vixLB)
6
"interfering in the affairs of its neighbor," mr clark? of course, the US is interfering in the affairs of its non-neighbor, and the Iraqi
Shias find that more objectioable, by and large.
Posted by: Ken Hoop at January 31, 2007 07:24 PM (7GYBH)
7
uh.. Ken Hoop..I think you mean the 'Iranian' shiia.
You're reference to any Iraqi shiia wanting us out bears the ring of truth when applied to those controlled by the mullahs of Iran....which of course makes them "Iranian" shiia by default..
I have a dollar for you...I suggest you use it to buy a clue.
And, I'll have you know...the citizens of the US will interfere with the plans of any neighbor or non-neighbor when said party presents a danger to our citizens....
end of line.
Posted by: mrclark at February 01, 2007 12:32 PM (z91gt)
Sure, he said that we have no intention of invading Iran, but Bush lies, right? As a matter of fact, you're protesting against an invasion that isn't happening.
Of course, you're not protesting the invasion of Iraq by Iran.
Now is the time for all good Susan Sarandon's to come to the aid of our enemy.
1
heh...hey, the moonbats got out of Baghdad when the getting was good and poor Saddam hung for it, Soranden and Spicolli will do the exact same to their idiot in Tehran if it escalates that far.
(ps. the "poor Saddam" thing was for theatrical effect only)
Posted by: mrclark at January 30, 2007 08:36 AM (tY7kt)
2
Soon all these moonbats will be able to put their money where their mouth is and sign up for human shield duty. For surely if they're passionate enough about peace to troll rightwing blogs, then they must be chomping at the bit to enlist as human shields? But methinks they won't, preferring to fight the Man from the safety of their keyboards.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 30, 2007 09:41 AM (8e/V4)
Vinnie, If the U.S. and the coalition bombard and decimate concentrations of the main props of the Islamic Regime, namely the "Pasdaran" (IRGC) and the "Basiji"; ordinary Iranians would do the rest of the job themselves. And by bombard, I mean unrelenting round-the-clock bombardment.
Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at January 30, 2007 10:14 AM (EdIIN)
4
Bush isn't lying. We are not going to invade Iran. Soon, we realize the importance of bombing the shit out of them and who gives a shit what happens to them. No more ground wars with people to cowardly to fight. Blow them into submission and leave. It they start the same shit again, blow the shit out of them again. Sooner or later even a dumb ass muslim will get the message.
Posted by: greyrooster at January 30, 2007 06:27 PM (w+w6p)
Israel and the United States will soon be destroyed, Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Tuesday during a meeting with Syria's foreign minister, the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB) website said in a report.
"Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad… assured that the United States and the Zionist regime of Israel will soon come to the end of their lives," the Iranian president was quoted as saying.
The Iranian news agency Mehr reported that in light of the increasing U.S. presence in the Persian Gulf, and the continuing Iranian nuclear crisis, Iranian Expediency Council Secretary Mohsen Rezai has said that "the Iranian nation will strike 10 slaps to the face of America, in such a way that it will no longer be able to get up on the stage."
1
Nimitz sailing to the middle east. I like it. Hey! the dems are right. We should pull our troops out of Iraq and into Iran. I been saying this for years. Iraqis religious nuts can only kill each other. This good. We have trained many Iranian assholes and they are more of a threat to us.
Posted by: greyrooster at January 24, 2007 12:34 AM (w+w6p)
If we decide to play rough with Iran, instead of trying to dance all 'formal' like, they DO NOT HAVE A SNOWBALLS CHANCE IN HELL OF BEATING US! Not that I want to see a lot of innocent people die, but if we get enough provocation just one carrier group can take their oil trade off the map. I know a lot of people would doubt this, but it is simply true. No boots have to touch the ground.
If we up that to two or more carrier groups with land based air support, and if we really have taken our gloves off, then we can take apart every peice of their economy, and production, and all they can do is try to wait us out in holes in the ground. They won't be able to sell stuff, they won't be able to move stuff, they won't be able to build stuff, and they won't be able to make trouble in Iraq.
If they give us a good enough reason. And still no boots on the ground.
We CAN just leave them to crawl through their own ruins, and not help rebuild. We CAN just bomb there production, and distribution, leave, come back and bomb whatever they rebuild, and leave, etc. If we want to. We don't get anything from Iran but trouble, so we don't need to be nice if THEY PICK A FIGHT!
We can't avoid it for long anyway, so we might as well be talking about it realistically. Iran's leaders WILL start a war, and they WILL be responsable for the human tragedy that follows.
Isolationists NEVER understand that the world is now to small for us to just leave things alone. They don't realize that the internet, and telephones, and TV, and radio, and rapid global transit make this all one big neighborhood. Isolationism in the modern world is the same thing as satying in your house with your curtains pulled shut, hoping the local gangers don't come knocking in the middkle of the night.
We can't look to the UN for a global police force, cause they can't do it, and if they could, most of them ARE the gangers anyway. They are more like a city council made of mostly mob bosses, with their stooges. The honest citizens poorly represented, and unable to do anything. There are a few cops, like the UK, and USA, who get things done despite the mobsters. I'm glad we're the cops, because I'd sure hate for it to be the Saudi's.
And that really is the final mark of isolationist failure. The Saudi -Wahabbist Islam is still coming here to the USA, and would continue to do so if we brought our people home from all around the world. Someday, we will have to scrub the Saudi peninsula of it's sick, terror exporting culture, and that will most definitley not be an act of 'isolationism' though tit will surely qualify as self defense in the national interest.
If anyone thinks the wuss neo-commie left, can leave us to the task with out trying to sabotage it, think again. The 'LEFT' is the danger that weakens us against all other dangers. It is becoming increasingly clear that we will have some sort of civil war in this country soon. I don't know who will start it, but we are at least as divided a nation as we were at the start of the previous civil war.
You remember your history? There were some people who didn't want to uphold the basic American ideal that "All men" were created equal. They so disagreed with that concept, that rather than accept it, they tried to break the country in two. After nearly a million American deaths, the nation was saved, along with it's soul. All men were equal by law. The Democratic party could only pervert, what they coudn't stop. They still do what they can to screw with 'equality'.
Now we have people, many of them 'Democrats' who are so busy trying to serve their own agendas, that they once more threaten the very life of this Republic. They aid our enemies, and they undermine our warriors, pandering to the lowest common denominator of the selfish, and lazy in the process. They have managed to convince soem 'Republicans' that serving the short sighted selfish is smarter than serving those who are self sufficient, and hard working, moral people. We are in dire circumstances.
So as far as Iran is concerned, if they start the war soon enough, we can finish it BEFORE our own civil war, and I for one, think that is much better than trying to deal with Iran during, or immediately after such a crises. If we have to deal with Iran while we are busy with a civil war, we will have to nuke them, at least a little bit.
So I know this is a long comment, but everything is connected.
Nothing affecting our national security is happening that isn't influenced, or influencing some other thing. The Democrats are squarely in opposition to nearly everything that protects our soverignty, and the security that is part of that. THEY HAVE DUPED ENOUGH OF US THROUGH THE BIASED MEDIA, that we are now either deciding not to vote against them, or worse, we are voting for them. The last election is an example, and our Republic is in great danger as a result.
So what are you doing today to change things? It's all the same neighborhood. Do the gangers win? Do the enemies in our midst get a pass, when we COULD denounce them, and spread the truth? How long before we turn the Wahabbists into compost?
How long before this comment is finished ???
USA, all the way!
Posted by: Michael Weaver at January 24, 2007 03:29 AM (2OHpj)
If you listen quietly you can here the whine of turbines in Knob Noster MO, and there is nothing that Iran can do about it.
Posted by: Billmil at January 24, 2007 07:11 AM (CMpbs)
7
10 slaps heh. I hate the idea that we might need those 10 slaps to wake up people. I take solace in the knowledge that the 10 slaps will probably happen against 10 cities that are strongholds of liberal/left lunacy. My pick (not my choices) for the 10 slaps: NY, Boston, Philadelphia, DC, Atlanta, Chicago, Houston, Miami, Los Angeles and San Francisco.
We only need one ballistic missile for targets in Iran. Even if some weapon sites survive, getting in or out of them would be lethal.
There is a storm coming and turning your back to it does not make it go away. The left has turned their back to our nation (and some from the Republican party have joined them).
Posted by: Tracy Coyle at January 24, 2007 09:13 AM (OfzFL)
I used "Notepad" to save the original text, and then I copied from Notepad, and the formatting was copied also. It seems to work for me. I figured it out by trial and error. I don't know why formatting here doesn't seem to work like it did.
USA, all the way!
Posted by: Michael Weaver at January 24, 2007 09:18 PM (2OHpj)
Top Iranian Detained in Iraq?
That's what the anti-establishment Iran Press Service is reporting. Abbasi is apparently a big fish among the powers that be in Iran. Oh, and he also helps run paramilitary operations for the Mullahs.
However, the English version of the state run IRNA has nothing on the Abbasi's alleged detention. So, we'll have to wait and see if the reports pan out.
Based on unconfirmed received reports from reliable sources in Iraq, Hassan Abbasi was among those who was arrested in the Thursday, January 11th early-morning raid in the Iraqi town of Erbil.
Hassan Abbasi known by his friends as "The Dr. Kissinger of Islam," is the guru of the Islamic Republic's revolutionary guard corps which puts volunteers and recruits through rigorous training in four camps funded and run by the Revolutionary Guard....
1
... Also on somewhat related news, debkafile speculates that the explosions in Khuzistan that we talked about yesterday may have been US assaults on terrorist training camps near the town of Khorram-Shahr which faces the Iraqi city of Basra. Again according to debkafile the Khorram-Shahr to Basra link is the primary route by which the Mullah's so-called Revolutionary Guard Corps infiltrates weapons and Shiite terrorists into Iraq.
Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at January 12, 2007 02:26 PM (vixLB)
2
Is it possible these "arrests" could be defectings?
Posted by: Editor at January 12, 2007 02:46 PM (adpJH)
Report: Nuclear Explosion in Iran (UPDATE: 3 explosions)A major explosion is being reported in the Iranian desert. It said to be a nuclear explosion. In the general area of one of Iran's nuclear testing sitees.
The alternative theory is that a UFO crashed. That is what one Iranian blogger is reporting, anyway. Anti-Mullah:
Reports emanating from Iran on Wednesday indicate a huge explosion - reportedly NUCLEAR - from the Kerman area at the edge of the Kavir Lut (major desert).
I waited to get confirmation of the event that was felt a 100 kilometers away but apart from on the ground phone reports, the local Islamic Iranian news media reported that an UFO had crashed and blown up to explain the incident.
The explosion took place at what would be the Islamic Regime's testing ground for an atomic weapon.
Since even North Korea tested its nuke underground, I'm guessing that the even the Iranians aren't stupid enough for an above ground test.
Which leaves the UFO theory. Kerman: Iran's Roswell. Now excuse me while I go feed my pet sasquatch.
But GM seems to think that the explosion might have been a detonator test. My guess is that this is just rumor compounded by fear.
1
Dr. S., The "antimullah.com" blogger is actually an American. He goes by the pen name Alan Peters. He says he used to work in Iran during Shah's regime and talks about having had access to all levels of the old Iranian government including the King himself. Alan is perfectly fluent in Persian.
As for the explosion itself, if it is a nuclear test then the road is cleared for eradicating the filthy suhuman mullahs and their regime. Best /GM
Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at January 11, 2007 03:19 PM (vixLB)
Posted by: Kuffar at January 11, 2007 03:35 PM (ohkta)
5
Perhaps someone accelerated their plans and caught them sleeping. Wouldn't that be nice?
Posted by: Al at January 11, 2007 03:38 PM (dDG8P)
6
Good Lt., What you say about the area being prone to earthquakes is quite correct; however, wouldn't that make the region ideal for testing a nuclear device? I mean, when the seismometers in neighbouring countries record the impact, people are likely to dismiss it as just another tremor.
I'll be listening to Radio Israel's Persian service for any mention of this. Radio Israel gets a lot of tips from ordinary Iranians by phone and their account is essentially first hand. Best /GM
Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at January 11, 2007 03:39 PM (vixLB)
7
Kuffar, Even if they have successfully detonated a device it doesn't mean that they can immediately weaponize it. However, it would expose what their true intentions have been all along so plainly that even the Euro-idiots and raving liberal lunatics wouldn't be able dismiss the threat posed by the Mullahs.
Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at January 11, 2007 03:50 PM (vixLB)
8
Dr S., I don't believe that's a Sunni area. But then again I've never been to that part of the country.
Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at January 11, 2007 04:14 PM (vixLB)
Maybe a bolide ( like Tunguska ) or meteorite impact ??
Guess we'll have to wait and see.
Posted by: memphis761 at January 11, 2007 04:38 PM (YHZAl)
12
The only good news that could come of this is that Israel or America eradicated the entire iranian population with a sustained nuclear attack.
Peace in the middle east can only be achieved by removing the arab and islamic persians.
Posted by: James Jay Fistro at January 11, 2007 04:51 PM (DCZ7U)
13
GM, I agree that if it were a nuke test even the euros would have to recognize the Iranians' intent all along. The only problem is that, given their track record, the cartlidge their spines are made of would disolve entirely, so there would be no realy situational change.
Posted by: Ranba Ral at January 11, 2007 04:53 PM (VvXII)
14
Dr. S., I'm under the impression that the explosion near Kerman (central Iran) was exceptionally powerful. The three explosions in the Arab area of Khuzistan (the south west corner of Iran) were relatively ordinary bombs. There is quite a distance between the two areas. In the past couple of years Khuzistan has been the scene of clashes between the Arab minority and the regime's thugs including a few bombings.
Isn't it interesting that the same AhmadiNezhad who cries rivers for Arab terrorists of Palestinian areas, subjects the Arab minority of Iran to torture and execution.
Posted by: Garduneh Mehr at January 11, 2007 05:12 PM (vixLB)
15
Man, the MSM is sure quiet on this. Can't wait for the scoop, hopefully there was a nice body count (of Jihadi Idiots, not collateral, of course)!
Posted by: TXCrawDaddy at January 11, 2007 05:57 PM (VC00/)
16
If this is true, then the gutless cowards who lead the west have waited to long.
USA, all the way!
Posted by: Michael Weaver at January 11, 2007 06:09 PM (2OHpj)
17The only good news that could come of this is that Israel or America
eradicated the entire iranian population with a sustained nuclear
attack. We can't do that. We need those delicious pistachios! Now go back to writing your crappy music Moby.
Posted by: wooga at January 11, 2007 06:45 PM (t9sT5)
18
USGS is not showing anything above 4 in Iran other than a 4.6 on 1/7. The NoKo dud from last year was about 4.4, IIRC. Color me skeptical.
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at January 12, 2007 03:43 PM (kuCYZ)
Iranian Students Protest For FreedomOnce 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 “students’ dayâ€, students and brave Iranians who were informed about today’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 “Death to despotism†and “death to the dictators†they were battered by herds of the regime’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 regime’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 “Yaar’eh Dabestaani†(old schoolmate) they began chanting slogans:
“Death to despotismâ€
“Death to the dictatorsâ€
“Political prisoners must be freedâ€
“Students with stars wear them like a medal of honorâ€
“Freedom, equality, boycott the electionsâ€
“Students 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 Ayatollahs’ 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 don’t want the west to have to come and solve your problems. They don’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...
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 don’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)
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)
Posted by: Howie at December 08, 2006 04:47 PM (YdcZ0)
10Amir 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)
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)
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+)
17That'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)
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)
Thank God! Dr. Haleh Esfandiari (right) of The Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars had been held hostage on trumped up espionage charges by the Iranians since Dec. 30th of last year. It is not immediately clear if she will be allowed to return to her home in the U.S. or will be prohibited from leaving Iran pending trial on these trumped up charges.
USA, all the way!
Always be ready to turn some object near you into a weapon, even if it's only the enviroment around you. A pork truck would be justice 
A major explosion is being reported in the Iranian desert. It said to be a nuclear explosion. In the general area of one of Iran's nuclear testing sitees. 
Once again the TJR is bringing you the news no one else seems to notice.
