An interesting pattern continues: The criticism of jihad-friendly elements in Islamic communities has been alleged to beget more of the same. Fighting "terrorism" (i.e., jihad), is "war-mongering against Islam," and also supposedly creates more of the same.
Similarly, Iran will not suspend its uranium enrichment program until the UN drops the threat of sanctions aimed at convincing that country to suspend enrichment, and acknowledges Iran's "right" to "nuclear fuel technology," i.e., uranium enrichment. And then the Iranians would "consider ... a two-month halt in enrichment."
One might call it Circular Argument Jihad. And it has been allowed to become a spectacularly successful tool for buying time. From AFP:
VIENNA - Iran has set a list of conditions in offering to consider a two-month suspension of uranium enrichment, but the United States on Monday welcomed progress made in weekend talks between the EU and Iran.
Top Iranian nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani and European foreign policy chief Javier Solana held talks here at the weekend to try to find a compromise to reopen talks on Iran’s disputed nuclear program and avoid threatened UN sanctions.
In the closed-door meetings Iran "had a long list (of conditions) including (a) complete and total halt in activity at the UN Security Council, an absolute stepping down from going for sanctions and that Iran would have the right to nuclear fuel technology on its soil," a Western diplomat told AFP.
"In return for this, Larijani said the Iranians would consider, consider not actually carry out, a two-month halt in enrichment. It was all very conditional," the diplomat said, in relating a briefing from Solana.
The Iranian offer first revealed Sunday had raised hopes of a breakthrough in the international standoff over Iran’s nuclear ambitions but the diplomat said that Larijani’s conditions dashed these hopes.
But the conditions are "unacceptable" to the six world powers who have offered Iran talks on a package of trade and other benefits because they would guarantee Teheran the right to sensitive nuclear fuel work and protect it from any punitive UN action, said the diplomat, who asked to remain anonymous due to the confidentiality of the information.
Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States want a full and unconditional suspension of uranium enrichment to start the negotiations, the diplomat said.
[...]
The United States and European countries fear Iran is trying to develop a nuclear bomb, but Teheran says its program aims only to produce energy.
Iran has refused, however, to suspend enrichment and defied a UN Security Council August 31 deadline for it to freeze the strategic nuclear fuel work or face possible sanctions.
The United States is expected to begin work as soon as this week on a draft UN resolution imposing sanctions on Iran, even though Russia and China are reluctant to move towards a confrontation.
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on Monday did not rule out accepting the possible offer from Iran to temporarily halt uranium enrichment, but insisted a suspension be in place and verifiable before any negotiations on resolving the deadlock over Iran’s disputed nuclear program.
Rice, during a visit to Canada, sidestepped whether the United States would accept a temporary suspension, but pointed out a halt to enrichment work would bring about the halt to sanctions efforts that Teheran desires.
"If the Iranians are in a state of suspension, then we would be prepared not to have activity in the Security Council. But there has to be suspension if there is going to be any negotiations," she said.
Rice’s remarks indicated a willingness to let talks play out between Iran and Solana even as Washington pushes for UN Security Council action against Teheran.
"From our point of view, we’ve got nothing to lose by, as we work toward the sanctions resolution, having Javier Solana explore with the Iranians whether there is a way to get to the negotiations," she told reporters.
Solana and Larijani are expected to meet again this week.
Rice noted there has yet to be a formal offer on halting enrichment, and warned Teheran had to move quickly as the United States won’t allow it to stall UN action.
"The time is coming very soon when we’re going to have to adopt a Security Council resolution," Rice said.
The time is coming very soon when we’re going to have to adopt a Security Council resolution," Rice said
What time:
a) When Iran launches nuclear bombs into Israel.
b) When Mo, Larry and Curly are appointed advisers to the Bush administration.
c) After the bureaucrats in the UN decide how taking such a stand will affect their economic positioning.
d) When Abu Hamza is elected British prime minister.
e) When all Hell breaks loose
Iran doesn't need two months to CONSIDER a two-month halt in enrichment.
Give me a break.
Iran is playing a cat and mouse game with the United States.
"The time is coming very soon when we’re going to have to adopt a Security Council resolution," Rice said.
Oooh! That will do it. Yes, a Security Council resoultion. That's what we need. I'm sure that the mullahs are quaking in their boots at the very prospect.
"The time is coming very soon when we’re going to have to adopt a Security Council resolution," Rice said
This is unbelievable. How many lines in the sand have to be drawn, before the UN can generate another useless document, which will be ignored anyway?
Can anyone out there tell me what benefit the United States derives from being a member of this ridiculous collection of people who mostly dislike the US, and oppose it's policies because it's the PC
thing to do (unless they are getting paid).
Tomahawks should be flying into facilities all across Iran. The fact that they aren't speaks volumes about the lack of will in the United States. Shall we dance and dance some more for the United Nations, until such time as the Iranians can export nuclear weapons to the highest bidder? Shall we wait for the explosions to knock us from our beds?
Enough warnings.
While Rice is drafting elegant prose for the next resolution, the Shia of Iran and Iraq are entering into http://www.iraqupdates.com/p_articles.php/article/9872 ">oil field drilling agreements.
"I don't think the Americans would oppose," the daily Sharq quoted Mohammad-Hadi Nejad-Husseinian, deputy oil minister in charge of international affairs, as saying when asked about possible Washington opposition to the joint development of their oil fields.
I think its time for Condelesa to go back to Stanford.
sorry...
http://www.iraqupdates.com/p_articles.php/article/9872
The problem is that we don't submit to Islam.
If our enlightened leaders would listen to Ahmed-in-jihad, Al Zawahiri & OBL and their ilk, we wouldn't have to worry about being nuked!
Simple solution: Why don't we all just surrender and give them what they want? It seems there are plenty of lefty looney moon-bats on both sides of the big pond who are over-eager to submit.
Don't you all remember the slogans of the sixties "Better red than dead"... etc? Todays slogans are "STOP RESISTING ISLAM NOW"- (my personal favorite) apart from "your holocaust is on the way" and "your women will be war booty"-( this last one, strangely, seen on a rally in London, was paraded around by Mohammedan females!)
No. Appeasement & PC-multi-culti-delusions are our own, home-made catastrophe and will lead to our destruction.
We have to bomb the Iranian facilities until nothing is left of it, otherwise the price we will pay will not simply be in the trillions of dollars, but we will see millions of our own people dead.
No more appeasement! Lets take 'em on!
"The time is coming very soon when we’re going to have to adopt a Security Council resolution," Rice said.
Rice just just makes me nauseus.
How about this for conditions: you come clean immediately with all your nuclear ambitions, cease and desist all nuclear activity, destroy all your nuclear hardware and MAYBE we let you live.
Rice was fit for the days of the Soviet threat, and may be useful for the Korean problem. I cannot believe that any leaders of the Islamic world respect her at all.
I don't know if anyone from the west will be taken seriously by these fanatics, but maybe we should have someone credentialed in Middle Eastern culture at least.
From Stanford University’s Electrical Engineering Class 183 Advanced Logic Design Laboratory
“Various tools will be used to help the processs (sic) such as Xilinx Foundation, Synopsys FPGA Express and Xilinx Spartan II Field Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGA's).”
http://www.stanford.edu/class/ee183/
…to which I’d add: if the enemy of my enemy is my friend, the friend of my enemy is my enemy.
There is quite a bit of chatter today about a nuclear attack within the US during the Muslim holiday Ramadan--October? 2006. Brain Ross's FBI Blotter, Michelle Malkin and others . . . revolving around a plot to either smuggle materials from Mexico across the border or to use a dirty bomb. Part, but not all, of this talk originated with one Hamid Gul(Kar?) who was the only known journalist to interview UBL both before and after 911. Probably alarmist bs, but the FBI is trying to get their hands on an Al Queda guy who lived and educated within the US and it 'their' supposed nuclear expert. Malkin links to this chatter.
Maybe it's not that alarmist. First the 'call' to conversion. Then the threat(s). Then a well connected Pakistani journalist raises the alarm. To tie it to Ramadan also makes sense from the Islamist perspective.
But would they be so dumb, brazen to openly advertise what is coming? On the surface, no, but they were quite open via chatter etc about 'good news coming' prior to 911.
We all know that Russia and China won't go along with a UNSC resolution. It'll come down to another Coalition of the Willing. I dunno if Blair will still be in power by then, since his departure timetable is up. I don't know how strong an action the US can undertake, without key allies like Britain. It may come down to just the US and Israel.
"The time is coming very soon when we’re going to have to adopt a Security Council resolution," Rice said.
Saddam received (and ignored) 18 UN resolutions over 12 years and yet, the UN wouldn't authorize force.
Lebanon has already received (and also ignored) 2 resolutions to disarm Hizballah and still, the UN will not authorize force.
The UN is like a toothless old dog and Ahmadinejad is just playing with it. Too bad the dog doesn't realize the midget madman is planning to euthanize it.
The West is showing once again that UNSC resolutions mean little to it. It is willing to see such resolutions broken time and again, as in the case of SC res. 1559 mandating the disarmament of Hizbullah. If the UN and the West [particularly the EU and USA] don't demand enforcement of their own UNSC resolutions, then why should anyone have respect for them anymore? Apparently, the only resolutions that the EU wants to enforce are those that are punitve towards Israel.
Speaking of SC 1559, it has been superseded by SC 1701. None of the important parts of that resolution are going to be enforced. That is, no disarmament of Hizbullah, no stopping of bringing weapons into Lebanon for the Hizbullah, no release of Israeli prisoners unjustly held by Hizbullah.
As Robert has often said -- "1938 alert!!"
by the way, in the 1930s, Nazi Germany left the League of Nations. Today, the contemporary counterparts of Nazi Germany [Iran, Hizbullah] are comfortably ensconced within the UN and nearly everyone there hastens to comfort and assuage them.
Suggestion everyone.
Every once in a while, we get a jerk on the board whose only purpose is to try to get people worked up.
We listen to their threats day in and day out.
BLAH BLAH BLAH
Most Americans own guns. When they show up at my house, a spray of lead is going to end up in their hide.
When the likes of the KKK show up in a town to upset people and to get press coverage, the media is always stupid enough to cover their hate...which was their purpose for coming to that town.
My suggestion is that when we get a moron ranting and blah blah blahing about how they are going to take over the country or making pathetic threats, we should agree to completely gnore them.
After all, we are ABOVE them and too intelligent to bother with their backwards, uneducated, barbaric, 3rd world, 15th century, camel poop behaviour. (May they have bacon for breakfast every day in hell).
Agreed? Lo)
two words for Iran: NO DEAL
on michael savage's radio show last night, he had on an author who said some iranian has snuck into the US via mexiancan border, and has placed nukes in several cities, and waiting for the word from iran. and said if the US hits iran, nukes go off in wash. dc. nyc, boston, etc. now the its told the FBI know who this guy is, michael savage went off nutty, wanted to know the fbi did not have some poster to locate this guy. the author said to find him, just look in mosques. plain and simple. well iran needs to be brought down real fast.
This is why we should never have helped the Iraqis. We have created a Iranian friendly enclave in the region and it only cost $5B and 2700 American lives.
"Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, right, shakes hands with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki, duing an official welcoming ceremony for him, in Tehran, Iran, Tuesday, Sept. 12, 2006. Iraq's prime minister received a red-carpet welcome at the Iran's presidential palace on Tuesday at the start of his first official visit to the Shiite Muslim country since taking office in May, state-run television reported."
This story is accompanied by a picture, which I can't paste to here.
what's our plan for Iran?
Invade now? Resources spread too thin
Bomb now? No guarantee of complete destruction
Promote Insurgency: Conflicting reports as to the success of insurgency groups in Iran. I personally hold out little hope for this.
Demonise: This is going well, with the Iranian President helping with his fatalistic / apoclyptic statements.
Here are some suggestions:
Bolster US troop levels in southern Iraq. Seal the Iraq / Iran border, move US troops to the border (war footing).
Remove UK troops from Basra, refit them, then deploy to Afghanistan.
Establish Refinery based sanctions against Iran (they have limited refining capacity).
Make deal with Sunni insurgents in Iraq, and use them to destabilize the Shia expansion.
Set firm (close) deadline for Iranian disbanding of nuclear project, wait for them to fail to meet said deadline, and then use bunker bombs on recognized locations.
Wait for US based Iranian retaliation..and then use as a pretext to invade.
I think blowing up the gasoline supplyline from Turkey, Mining the Iranian Ports, and complete economic sanctions and freezing of all Iranians assets found would create a significant emotional event in IRan.
And creating a no fly zone in Iran.
The eagle flies if and when Rove gives the OK, likely after November.
Bolton will not let up.
"An interesting pattern continues: The criticism of jihad-friendly elements in Islamic communities has been alleged to beget more of the same. Fighting "terrorism" (i.e., jihad), is "war-mongering against Islam," and also supposedly creates more of the same."
There is a great deal of projection in this kind of mind, as well as deliberate deception. This mind-set reminds me of Hitler's allegations of aggressive intentions by "the Jews" in the 1930's. The best way to deal with this kind of mind is to keep a cool head and hammer and hammer and hammer away with the facts. Islam is the only "religion" on earth with a "holy book" that mandates (as direct orders from God) the deception of unbelievers and the killing of unbelievers. As people understand this, Jihad and deception are easily put in context.
The most troubling aspect of this kind of mind is its propensity to miscalculation since it usually is bad at reading reality. This kind of mind reads patience and restrained power as weakness. (Nasralla, the Iranian gang and Hitler are of a similar type of mind. At some point nuclear war in the Mideast is inevitable.)
"It's the theology of Islam, stupid."
They will not change their mind. That's reality. "True Islam" mandates deception and violence against unbelievers. We have to deal with that.
I think this is good. We should want islam to get those nukes. Then they will use them. And then... then we will have the both the motivation and the moral clarity, and the legal right, to nuke them in return.
Don't you want to see Tehran nuked? I do. Well, that is not going to happen until they nuke us first. Face that fact.
Let them have their nukes, hope they get them soon, use them, and then let us finish them off once and for all. Before the Iranian hostage crisis in November, 1979, I remember I was watching Battlestar Galactica on ABC. I never saw the series finale. Most likely distracted by the hostage crisis news. That was a great series. Before there was Starbucks, there was Starbuck.
Additionally, Tehran's attack on us and its consequent destruction, it will serve as a warning to other islamic states. Nuking Mecca is best, but we will have to wait for Saudi Arabia to nuke us for that, and I don't think that will happen.
So I hope Madhat gets a few nukes soon. Twenty-seven years is a long time. Rice talks about "Iranian suspension". What about my suspension? What about your suspension? As we all would, I would like to pick up my life where I left off before we were rudely interrupted by Khomeini and his gang of misfits. Late '70s TV was a golden age overshadowed by islamic nutcases. I also missed the final episode of the Rockford Files.
The bottom line is that eventually, Iran will have nuclear weapons. When they get them and when they use them, every single diplomat involved in this farce should be held accountable, whether U.N. or State Department or whatever. The diplomatic desire in these people for more dialogue, appeasement, and moral equivalence is despicable and downright sickening. The lessons about the Iranian regime should have been learned back in 1979. Time to remove the bastards.
The most troubling aspect of this kind of mind is its propensity to miscalculation since it usually is bad at reading reality. This kind of mind reads patience and restrained power as weakness. (Nasralla, the Iranian gang and Hitler are of a similar type of mind. [...]
posted by: Frank
agreed... faith in an alternate version of reality and THE TRUTH, having decisions rest in the hands of the Supreme Leader & his men and having no self-correcting mechanisms in places ( as in checks & balances ) leads to millions dead and the destruction of those places foolish enough to follow men like this. It's a lethal mistake, as suicidal as swallowing the kool-aid at the command of Jim Jones down in Guyana.
People, being what they are will never learn soon enough or will never take the action needed before the catastrophe. History shows this over and over. The redeeming thing in all of this for the free world rests in the self-correcting mechanisms we have in place. It is a slow, creaking process to be sure, but was designed that way. The rule of the mob is the same as the rule of a capricious tyrant or the rule of allah, for that matter.
Recently the fact that British and American military and political systems were indeed more efficient than those of Nazi Germany is comforting. The fact that millions will pay the ultimate price because we still haven't gotten our shit together is tragic. When will we ever get there?
When Good negotiates with Evil, Evil Always wins.
Talk away until all the Jihad supporters come out of the woodwork.
The military calls this a target rich environment. If we can get the enemy to separate themselves from the general population long enough to get a clear shot, it is better for everyone. We are safer, the general population is less likely to be killed or injured by accident, and we can speed up Mo's faithfuls on their date with the "virgins". It is a win-win situation for all concerned.
Please feel free to wear the headscarves for identification.
Cheers.
ZenaWarriorPrincess
on michael savage's radio show last night, he had on an author who said some iranian has snuck into the US via mexiancan border, and has placed nukes in several cities, and waiting for the word from iran. and said if the US hits iran, nukes go off in wash. dc. nyc, boston, etc. now the its told the FBI know who this guy is,
michael savage went off nutty, wanted to know the fbi did not have some poster to locate this guy. the author said to find him, just look in mosques. plain and simple. well iran needs to be brought down real fast.
Posted by: ZenaWarriorPrincess September 13, 2006 07:23 AM
I heard most of this program also. The person that was on the show was Paul Williams. I did a quick search on the internet and found these. It looks like the internet has lots of info and Paul Williams is a person well educated in investigative work;
From Jihad Watch
June 06, 2006
Bravo, Paul Williams!
When Canadian law enforcement authorities busted a Toronto terrorist plot with al-Qaida connections, they acted with the benefit of briefings and research developed by American investigator Paul L. Williams....
From WorldNetDaily
Posted: September 3, 2005
WND Exclusive WEEKEND Q&A
Paul Williams details 'American Hiroshima'
Al-Qaida plotting nuclear attack with weapons already in U.S.
Posted: September 3, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern
Paul L. Williams is a former consultant to the FBI on organized crime and terrorism. Since then, he has become an award-winning investigative journalist and written several books. In his new book, "The Al Qaeda Connection," he claims Osama bin Laden has obtained nuclear weapons and smuggled them into the U.S. through Mexico for use in a plot known as "American Hiroshima."
Savage may sound to some like a radical. Having listened to him for a long time, I have the opinion he tired of all this PC, lying news media, lying politicians, and governments not doing anything to solve any of the problems. Just the opposite - they all seem to appease the terrorists and make it easier for them to pursue their agenda. I think if there were people like him in government, there wouldn’t be all this whinning about negotiating with criminals and terrorists.
Just my opinion
Foehammer writes:
No. It speaks volumes about a) how screwed up our intelligence community is; and b) how untenable the strategic position of our army in Iraq has become.
Do you really want to blow up some more aspirin factories? Our CIA is broken and will take years to fix. Our HUMINT capabilities in the Middle East suck; the Mossad is much better but even they couldn't be sure where Iran has secreted all their nuclear facilities. A cruise missile strike is the last refuge of an incompetent Commander-in-Chief; it looks good on CNN but strategically it accomplishes nothing. Because there's no way to conduct an independent Battle Damage Assessment without boots on the ground.
And if we did strike Iran, Hezbollah would retaliate against our army in Iraq, and send our forces there into retreat. Today's announcement of a deal between Iran and the new Iraq government
means that we can't even be sure that Iraq itself wouldn't turn on us if we struck Iran. Iraq is majority Shiite too, yes?
If you want to fight Iran, then we must either disengage from Iraq or vastly reinforce our troops there, so they won't be sitting ducks for Hezbollah and other Shiite terrorist attacks.
"Hezbollah would retaliate against our army in Iraq, and send our forces there into retreat."
If you think those goddamned mohammedan savages can send American forces into a retreat, you're seriously deluded.
Whatever shit it is you're smoking, I suggest you desist before posting.