Iran Arrests 20 Over Bombing Blamed on UK

"We have no reason to be believe that Britain was not involved in the attack."

In other words, unless evidence is found to the contrary, Britain is automatically suspect.

We have no reason to be believe that Britain was not involved in the attack."

Cornelius is right...I have no reason to believe Santa Claus was not involved in the attack. In fact I have no reason to believe that Santa Clause and Michael Moore aren't the same person. That naturally means that I have no reason to believe that Michael Moore did not carry out these attacks himself. Any reasonable person would consider him a suspect...

So the president of Iran is openly declaring that a state of war exists between the UK and Iran. If so, it means that the prepositioned Muslim guerilla units in the UK now have the green light from the Iranian head of state to begin the execution of long-planned military operations directed at civilian soft targets in the British Isles. Perhaps the British Foreign Office can get some clarification from the Iranian president on this statement.

Ahvaz is the main city in Arab-populated Khuzistan. The Islamic Republic of Iran apparently is not counting completely on Islamic solidarity, but has been moving in ethnic Persians to dilute the Arab population. It is fascinating to realize that Arab Shi'a live in the area under which lie non-Arab Iran's main oil deposits, just as Arab Shi'a live in the area under which lie non-Shi'a Saudi Arabia's main oil deposits. The possibility for troubles arising is great. That no one has seen fit to think of ways to encourage those troubles disturbs.

Now that the authorities have gathered up a selection of the usual suspects, we will read in the next couple of days how some of these suspects have confessed to the crime while acting under orders of British Intelligence.

Iran's starting to play nasty with "America's poodle" and it certainly begs to ask the questions of why? And why now? Is it Britain's stance on the Iranian nuclear issue? Is it an attempt to deflect attention from a growing internal insurgency and externalize this threat?
Is it because the British military have some hard evidence that Iran is actively involved in the Iraqi insurgency? I suspect it's a combination of the above but one thing is clear, a new chapter is opening in the WOT and promises to be interesting.

Oh, and I certainly wouldn't be surprised if one of the UK's loony left media demand an investigation into these taped 'uncoerced' confessions.

The Iranians use the Stalinist Pravda as their propaganda model, they are perhaps the most Orwellian of regimes on earth..(literally, it is their forte).

I happen to watch English language translations of two of their stations everyday, (al Alam and Irib2), and they blame the murder of Shi'ite in Iraq on Americans, Brits and Mossad. Despite the fact that they are supplying munitions, weapons and ammo to the Badr Brigade, who is kidnapping and murdering Sunni's.

Of course it is Sunni Jihadis (aka "foreign fighters), Ba'athists and criminal elements all engaged in the bombings and terrorism misnomered "insurgency", but the Shi'a won't or can't admit that it is the Sunni's, for that would be tantamount to admitting that they are not a happy home of Islam.

Of course on the one hand they want America and Britain to hang on wasting our blood and money, until they can get their own religous police/national guard trained and up and running, but will enjoy and benefit from the propaganda that they generate that the bombings and murders are all the responsiblity of the Ameriki and Britti.

And in Muslim logic, it is, for the first rule of Islam is that Islam is never wrong, 2nd rule is Islam is never the aggressor, and by extension no muslim is ever wrong or the aggressor.

If an Infidel were to be killed rescuing a musim from a house fire, rest assured it would be the infidels fault for entering the house without permission and for violating sacred muslim space.

I don't believe these Iranian news reports of explosions in Iran, but if there is anything to them it is from an Iranian Resistance, either the fed up students, or the MEK (Mujahideen e Khalq) has returned to Iran from Iraq, now that the protection of Saddam is gone.

The MEK is a fanatical Islamic Marxist group, who was engaged in a war against the mullahcracy, because the Mullahs were corrupt and worse than the Shah.

The idea of Islamic Marxists might be strange to some, but it isn't, if one understands that theoretically Islam is not classicist and does not hold that property can be owned privately. (Real Property is owned by the Ummah and administered by so called rightly guided "holy men", and a person and his family can occupy the land, so long as it is productive, in reality this has turned (especially in Shi'a Islam) mullahs into landlords, and made mullahism a lucrative profession.

"The idea of Islamic Marxists might be strange to some, but it isn't, if one understands that theoretically Islam is not classicist and does not hold that property can be owned privately. "

Its not strange - I've met an ex Iranian politcian who said when the Mulla's swept to power they sounded very socialist/Marxist in terms of what they promised the people (that's what he got into trouble for - reminding the local Mufti that the promises made in the revolution to the local people were not being fullfilled. The result? A death sentence).

Fortunately there are No Jews left in Iran to be rounded up as "Usual suspects" so one would expect that the new "usual suspects' would be spun as Mossad agents. But No, the Iranians have gone for the Brits.
So what next? attacks on the British embassy, or british residents?

The maniac mullahs attempts to declare war on a post modern state like Britain wil fall on deaf ears.

Even if they nuked Manchester, kidapped Blair and paraded him in TV with underpants on his head, Iran would merit nothing more than a condemnation from number 10 and threat of referral to the UN Security Council.

It must be very frustrating for Ahmadinejad

3RD TIME LUCKY: "Its not strange - I've met an ex Iranian politcian who said when the Mulla's swept to power they sounded very socialist/Marxist in terms of what they promised the people (that's what he got into trouble for - reminding the local Mufti that the promises made in the revolution to the local people were not being fullfilled. The result? A death sentence)."

Indeed, the Marxist Mujahadeen el Khalq, the Communist Tudeh and almost all Iranian Leftist groups supported the Islamic Revolution. In some respects, the Mujahadeen were the shock troops of the revolution, attacking and taking key military bases in the final days of Bakhtiar's regime, presaging the return of Khomeini.

After the revolution was consolidated, the moderate Left represented by the Provisional gov't (led by Medhi Bazargan) was cast aside and Iran was largely governed from Qom. The street demonstrations of the Left protesting the ominous turn of the revolution were met with a violence unmatched during the Shah's desperate attempts to remain in power. Demonstrator's were not just fired on, but were pursued as they fled and mowed down in an orgy of killing.

There would be no more street demonstrations. The leadership of the Mujahadeen either fled the country or were arrested and executed. Show trials were orchestrated for the leaders of the Tudeh. In a bizarre replay of Stalin's show-trials of the 30s, the Iranian Communists eagerly and remorsefully confessed to all manner of treasonous activity. Hopes for clemency were in vain. They were all hanged.

We can look at the fate of the Left in Iran as a blueprint for what could someday transpire in Europe.

"We have no reason to be believe that Britain was not involved in the attack."

In other words, unless evidence is found to the contrary, Britain is automatically suspect.

Sort of like the logic applied by people who still claim Iraq had WMD's by the time the war started.

If that was a dig at me Crusher, I've never claimed any such thing...(by the way, a slow-witted female who wanted to obfuscate her presence here might choose just such a nic as crusher).

I do think it was very possible that chemical weapons stockpiles might have been clandestinely moved to Syria in the weeks leading up to the war. I have no proof of this and offer it only as speculation based on intelligence reports indicating heavy truck traffic along the border at a critical juncture preceeding the war and the temporary replacement of border guards with Republican Guard units. How accurate those reports are I have no way of knowing.

I do maintain that although there is no evidence of WMD stockpiles found in Iraq, there is plenty of evidence indicating Saddam's WMD programs were only in hiatus and were to be re-activated the day sanctions were lifted. This is based on interviews with Iraqi scientists involved in the programs.

If Irans "thug in Chief" actually had any evidence he would get one of his New York minions to sit in the annex of Kofi Annans office
waiting to deliver it.

Then, if the evidence stacked up, we may see the farce of decades of sanctions against Britain leading up to full scale, UN approved regime change with French, Syrian & Iranian troops all in Blue Helmets heading across the Channel.

The more Jack "man o'" Straw opens his mouth were Iran is concerned, the more emboldened they become.

They view Straw as an utter weakling, with no authority at home or abroad to thwart the Iranian Islamic Revolution spreading out across the ME.

They also know he has a tenuos grip on geo-political history. (to say the least).

I actually believe that Iran was behind the invasion of Iraq - you just have to see the benefit they have gained from it to realise that the only winner in this utter mess is Iran.

They will get a Greater Iran in the South of Iraq.

They will acquire nuclear weapons unchallenged.

Both of these items were unthinkable & unreachable for them before the invasion.

The British troops they illegally snatched late last year was a test. They were testing our metal. Once they saw that we would respect their borders no matter what they did, they knew they could have us. It was only a matter of time before they started arming certain Iraqi based groups - hell, why not? Just what is Britain going to do about it with "man o'" Straw at the helm?

The Iranians would never enter into provocative action against Britain if Thatcher was still in power - & certainly would not have dared arm any insurgents to kill British Troops.

They knew what they would have got.

Sounds like an Iranian bomb making factory had an accident and they need someone to blame it on. The Americans? The Jews? Hey! How about the Brits! We haven't balmed anything on them in a long time!

It’s common for Islamists to project their motives onto their opponents, and accusing others of doing what they are doing.

Thus, Islam, an inherently imperialist warrior ideology, is ignored as they yell America is an imperialist warmonger. Hate – pure nihilistic irrational hate - is in epidemic proportions in the Islamic world; but they accuse everyone else of so-called "Islamophobia."

Now, they are accusing Tony Blair of infiltration and sabotage ... which, of course, they are doing in southern Iraq.

They must be laying the groundwork for future actions.