To attempt to deter America from attacking Iran, in a roundabout, Rube Goldberg sort of way. But the NATO agreement about mutual aid in the event of attacks would throw a bit of a wrench in the works. "Iranian official calls for attack on UK," by Jonny Paul for the Jerusalem Post, October 25:
Fearing a US strike on Iran during President George W. Bush's last months in office, a senior Iranian official has suggested the Islamic regime should target London to deter such an attack.
In an article on the Iranian Web site Aftab last week - translated by the Washington-based Middle East Media Research Institute - the head of the Europe and US Department in the Iranian Foreign Ministry, Wahid Karimi, said that an attack on London would deter the US from attacking Teheran.
"The most appropriate means of deterrence that Iran has, in addition to a retaliatory operation in the [Gulf] region, is to take action against London," Karimi said.
In the article, the Iranian official said that an attack might also stem from the fact that presidents in their second terms are "usually adventuresome."
Citing some examples he said: "US presidents are usually adventuresome in their second terms... [Richard] Nixon, disgraced by the Watergate scandal; [Ronald] Reagan, with the 'Irangate' adventure; [and Bill] Clinton, with Monica Lewinsky - and perhaps George Bush, the sitting president, will create a scandal connected to Iran's legitimate nuclear activity so as not to be left behind."
He speculated that a US attack on Iran could come between next month's presidential election and when the new president enters office in January 2009.
"In the worst-case scenario, George Bush may perhaps persuade the president-elect to carry out an ill-conceived operation against Iran, prior to January 20, 2009 - that is, before the regime is handed over and he ends his presence in the White House. The next president of the US will have to deal with the consequences," he warned.
Bush may persuade the president-elect to carry out an operation against Iran before the president-elect is inaugurated? Or... Bush will ask permission of the president-elect? Alright, then.
Admitting that previous Iranian warnings to paralyze "the Jerusalem-occupying regime" to deter "American adventurism" has not worked, Karimi said that "the most appropriate means of deterrence" for Iran would be to attack London.
Brilliant! Maybe they've managed to extract some information out of those pigeons?
I'm speechless.
Collective insanity = collective guilt.
For the Muhammedans ALL infidels are equally guilty and deserve to be punished for not believing in the imaginary 'Il-alha' and the filthy prophet pretender Muhammad.
If we would apply similar tactics we might be getting somewhere...
In the Iranian pantheon of master-manipulators, it is England, perfidious Albion, that has always had pride of place. Not America, not that late-comer Israel, but England is seen, and not only by the people who run the Islamic Republic of Iran, but also some of those who have fled the Islamic Republic of Iran, see the fine English hand (as the Elizabethans saw a fine Italian hand) behind every bit of mischief, real or imaignary. This helps explain the rightness, the fitness, the plausibility, of such a threat.
In the Iranian view, of leftists and fanatical Muslims alike, the coup against weepy Mossadegh in 1953 may have been undertaken by the Dulles brothers and C.I.A. agents such as Kermit Roosevelt, but the real schemer that persuaded the pliable Americans to get rid of Mossadegh were the British, rescuing the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (and in this particular case, there is truth in the Iranian version of events). And before that, and also after, the British were always to be found. Neither the Great Satan, America, nor the Little Satan, Israel, quite measure up in sheer malevolence and effectiveness, in the vivid Iranian imagination, to Great Britain.
Feels like a very Allah-pundit style headline.
But we are entering an interesting time insofar as the Islamist threat is concerned. They wouldn't dare launch any big attacks that would throw the election to McCain. But if Obama wins, then what? Do they take advantage of that 2 month period when Bush knows anything he starts Obama will have to end? Will it all be peace and love during an Obama administration while they instead try to advance their agenda through the system?
The goon Karimi said
Sure. Go ahead. Worked great for Hitler, too.
Battle of Britain
Oh, and I'm sure Tojo (aka Imadinnerjacket) would have a thing to say about this:
Hiroshima and Nagasaki
I know the zombie dictators and mullahs love to throw this fact back in our faces (that We, the West, were the first to use atomic weapons - thus WE are the evil ones), but again it is the zombies fail to learn the lesson...
Attack London how? With war-trained pigeons carrying invisible weaponry? Is this what these "Senior Iranian Officials" fantasize about?
As long as they don't have access to nuclear capability they're impotent. Pun intended.
The logic of muslims never stops to amaze me. It is always opposite to ours.
So, how will they attack the UK? Car bombs are not big enough, it will only link the attack to Al-Qaida or some other small group. The attack could only be a large scale strike with missiles or perhaps a dirty bomb.
If they do this, all muslims in western countries will be the victims and they will pay for what their muslim brothers are doing to them and us.
I really welcome this, or at least, that this action will be stopped just moments before completion, just to show the world that islam and muslims are on their way out of the public eye. We must defeat this crazy death cult ideology that threatens all of us on our planet – ALL OF US!!!
An executive decision must be made to remove all muslim people from key positions in our society and governments.
We must first defeat political correctness before we can ever defeat islam. This is KEY! Our civilisation will depend on it. It is really time for the world to wake up.
Why is it so hard for people to realize that they will loose their freedom and human rights if islam prevail. Nothing will be the same. The world will stop evolving. We need to know how hard it is to protect freedom instead taking it for granted every day.
They shouldn't be fooled by the Navy gunboat backdown nonsense last year.
Stretched as we are, we'd comprehensively kick their sorry Iranian arses all the way back to the 7th Century - without any help from anyone else.
My prediction is a bit more dim. If there were such an attack, either in the U.K. or the U.S., the response of the attacked infidel public will be not self-defense, but sympathy, toward the resident Muslims who of course "aren't like the terrorists," because "terrorism isn't Islamic."
Crowds will descend upon various restaurants to show solidarity and sensitivity; trembling-chinned college students will enthusiastically wrap their heads in hijab and hold demonstrations, teach-ins and outreach sessions; the newspapers will fill with instructive op-ed essays from Muslims on how infidels must think and behave, even in light of the mass-murders committed by their coreligionists; and political figures from the dogcatcher to the police chief to the senator will posture publicly on their openness and gratitude to their Islamic constituents. Much falafel will be eaten, much halal meat slaughtered in celebration.
Why do I believe this? Because all this has happened, and continues to happen, after each Islamic mass-murder in Western countries.
Meanwhile, the zakat will continue flowing from the "peaceful" mosque to the murderers, and the "peaceful" imam will grin with pleasure, knowing that his "wife's visiting younger sister" is safely locked at home warming his bed, as he writes his Friday khutba.
Hmmm, so Iran decide to attack London.
The threat is out, so any attack on London (or any other part of the UK) would then be attributed to Iran.
This would be seen as an act of open warfare.
The UK would then launch an attack on Iran.
We would most probably be allied with the US and Israel.
Oh, and because an EU member state has had war declared on it - well then it's the obligation of the likes of France, Germany, Holland et al to ally themselves with us as it's actually an attack on the EU itself.
Irans army would probably be defeated in a number of hours/days, much like Saddam's supposedly highly trained (2nd biggest in the world!) armed forces. Their President would be deposed (and arrested) along with their religous leaders who hold the real power.
In the process we can totally obliterate Iran's nuclear powerstations and - ahem - remove their scientists.
When all this is being done Pakistan will be watching - knowing that if THEY step out of line they will be next.
They possess a far greater intellect than we have yet to imagine. We'll continue to turn our backs shaking our heads in disbelief until it's too late, and even then we'll be surprised at the complete insanity of it all...
Why attack Britain when it's already introducing Sharia? Just keep immigrating there and the military option won't be needed.
According to my demographic chart, by the year 2090 Britain will be 59% Muslim, and by 2120 there will be a civil war between Shiites and Sunnis.
Wonder when pubs will be outlawed in Londonistan...
Well, one thing is for certain, Bush has the Iranians nervous. His window of opportunity to attack Iran is running out, and that has Iran 'dancing like a cat on a hot tin roof'.
An attack on Britain by Iran would not deter an American attack, odds are it would guarantee it.
An October surprise by someone should be expected. If nothing happens, Obama can take over and bring peace and prosperity to the world...Allah willing...In this case I'm not to sure he is, unless Islam triumphs...But don't worry, Obama will take care of that also...
l think the Iranian mullahs know the next president wont attack Iran, so their crazy dead prhophet stays put in the well. Also did you hear that Mahmood monkey man from theran is sick, and the world was just told that from the iranian leadership. lol
Jewdog asked :" Wonder when pubs will be outlawed in Londonistan..."
Well it seems that there are many pubs closing in the UK at the moment, supposedly due to the smoking ban in place. Kinda makes you wonder if that was the idea all along, doesn't it?
At the moment our media is trying to instill into everyones minds that alcohol is the blame for all our societies ills. Again, is this to make it easier to begin with the no alcohol areas in towns - which leads to the complete ban of alcohol sales?
The Islamic take-over isn't just "happening" - it's been planned for the last 20 years or so, and our governments are in on it.
Good post VampireJack(October 26,2008 5:18am)
I would be inclined to agree with you there in an ideal world Vampire however the game play has now changed.
The British Government would immediately launch into talks with Iran, followed closely by the EU Prime Ministers and Presidents, into averting this war. This would be first and foremost not because they are against war with Iran, but because they know that they have so many Muslims now in their respective home countries that the chance of 'sleepers' awakening to cause havoc would be exceptionally high. Iran knows this. There are probably around 2 million Muslims alone in London, working in the heart of London in all jobs. The enemy is not just at the gate, it's got in through the back door and masquerading as moderate British Muslims.
Since the Invasion of Iraq(without sounding like a 'lefty', as let's face it, Iraq should never have been touched as they should have attacked Iran and Saudi long before) the government has appeased and given into Islam's every need here in the UK. We have stupidly allowed Muslims into positions of power in our Police Force, government and local council and this has helped them to institute their way of life over ours. That was nothing less than complete madness.
What you have written is very accurate though, but I really can't see the UK, under a Labour Government going to war in Iran with America and Israel. I would like to see an attack by Israel on Iran and British forces being removed from Iraq/Afghanistan to fight alongside the Iranians, but the left wing have complete control of our society now and the chances of another war, against Iran are remote, even if they launched attacks on London. These attacks of course would be dirty bombs, polluting the water supply etc etc as a military attack would be impossible.
However, I just think that Iran is showing bravado, trying to draw in America, Israel and Europe into an attack on it, in order to bring in Russia and China into a WW3.
Jewdog,
You are correct. The Islamic invasion of the UK started in the 70's and after nearly 40 years their population is now very possibly 5million+ in the UK and growing faster than any other demography.
Jewdog & Vampirejack,
Glad to see others have noticed this exceptionally worrying point and well put by Vampire : "At the moment our media is trying to instill into everyones minds that alcohol is the blame for all our societies ills"
The pub, like the church was at the heart of every community within the UK. It was a place where people would meet on a regular basis to discuss. Now we see that pubs are closing down in England at a rate of 36 a week. Churches are being shut and converted into Mosques or flats.
I said before the smoking ban, something I protested to not happen(I'm not even a smoker!) as I believe it a real breach of our liberties, that the drinking ban would follow. People said, never, there'd be riots.. I reminded them - "you mean like the riots after the smoking ban"?
I've been asking myself three things of late:
1. Why is our pig industry collapsing - the bacon sandwich a part of British culture?
2. Why is our pub industry and drinking culture disappearing?
3. Has the above got anything to do with the rise of Islam in the UK and subsequent goverment and local council appeasement?
When discussing with people about the connection they laugh and say nonsense, but then I really wouldn't at all be surprised.
Any-body have a clue about this
October 25, 2008
Several American media outlets reported on Saturday that President George Bush is likely to announce after next month's presidential elections that he intends to restore the diplomatic relations with Iran, almost 30 years after they were suspended.
Quoting U.S. civil servants, the reports said that Bush's decision to postpone the announcement until after the elections was meant to rid the two presidential candidates of having to deal with the controversial move.
In the first stage, the American administration allegedly seeks to appoint a low-level diplomatic delegation, and has already started the recruitment process.
Tehran has already been informed of the initiative, but its view on the matter remains unclear. Similar reports were published a few months ago, but the plan was then put on hold.
Earlier this month, the American Iranian Council, a U.S.-based organization, was banned from operating in Iran. However, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said during a U.S. tour last month that he would consider restoring his country's relations with the U.S.
Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki has said Tehran would favorably consider such proposal, as long as it was to be carried out bilaterally.
U.S. sources said the purpose of the diplomatic effort is to better communicate American messages to the Iranian people, which are largely hostile to the U.S. They said that it does not signal a conciliatory approach to the Iranian regime or any change of policy vis-à-vis the contentious issues that are on the table, namely Iran's nuclear program.
http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m48240&hd=&size=1&l=e
I tend to agree than Britain would fold and hold peace talks should Iran manage to attack them(probably via Hizbollah).
The U.S. under Obama and the Democrats wouldn't be any different given his sympathies with Islam and his dislike of the west and whites. I doubt that Obama and the Democrats would have any problem declaring martial law and deploying the military(what little remains of it) should the people rise up against Muslims atrocities.
Vampire Jack wrote:
Hmmm, so Iran decide to attack London.
The threat is out, so any attack on London (or any other part of the UK) would then be attributed to Iran.
This would be seen as an act of open warfare.
The UK would then launch an attack on Iran.
We would most probably be allied with the US and Israel.
...........................
Jack, his is just what I was thinking--that the U.S. would fly to the aid of their staunch ally Britain. But upon further reflection, I think that the disheartening scenario outlined by poster Marwan's Daughter is at least as likely in today's dhimmified climate.
I'd like to think, though, that you are the one who is right. I know that would be my reaction, and, I think, that of most American readers of JW.
Marwan's Daughter's argument goes to the heart of Islam's greatest strength------it's a religion. Folks in the West are loathe to criticize any religion unless it be Christianity, identified, as it should be, with Western Civilization, which dimwits aplenty in the West, aided by non-Westerners playing (and preying) upon misdirected Western guilt, allow desecration of in a way disallowable for any other major world faith.
I vigorously disagree with all those who post at JW and argue that Islam is not a religion but something else. A rotten something else. These folks could not be more wrong, though well intentioned. Islam is most definitely a religion and gets great traction precisely because it is. BUT, it is the one major religion which is bad, rotten, evil, totalitarian. Trying to describe it as other than a religion just plays into the Muslim hand. Take Islam at face value and devalue it as a religion gone deeply wrong and you will have taken the first step to eradicating a most malevolent ideology from the bosom of mankind.
Take Islam at face value and devalue it as a religion gone deeply wrong and you will have taken the first step to eradicating a most malevolent ideology from the bosom of mankind.
Posted by: Wellington
Devaluing Islam means devaluing multiculturalism.
It won't be done. Not that it can't. It just won't. Too many people have a vested interest in the idea that all cultures are the same. You can say Islam is a religion and not a culture, but the culture has grown up around it. In order to get to the religion you have to fight your way through the culture.
Islam as a religion is treated one way in the West and another way in the Muslim world. Here it is a selection on the menu. In the Muslim world it's what you need to sustain life.
Islam requires you to treat Muslims and non-Muslims differently. Its norms have become the culture. It may have STARTED as a religion but it quickly overwhelmed and destroyed almost all other philosophies.
You cannot avoid linking Islam with Islamic culture. Child marriage, polygamy and many more facets of the Islamic "religion" contribute to the culture. People bring that culture to the West and our "multicultural" norms require us to respect Islam, not condemn it. If you say child marriage is wrong then you will be told that you are condemning another culture AND their religion. We may separate religion and culture but they don't. Western multiculturalism is in what is almost a symbiotic relationship with Islam. If either one is devalued then the other is at risk of dying. Neither will let go of the other.
Wellington wrote: "Islam is most definitely a religion and gets great traction precisely because it is."
Islam is not respected because it's a religion. It's respected because of the black gold that pours from Saudi Arabia, not forgetting the thousands(possibly millions even) of Muslims in the West, who are ready to shout Allah Achbar and wage violent Jihad. In other words the Governments(especially European ones) are scared of Islam. They know that Islam can immediately halt the publishing of any book/film/play or TV production. They know that anything that offends Muslims will have them out in the streets protesting. They know that any heavy handedness on Muslims will result in Law Suits against the Police. They know that any suppression of their Islamist culture will immediately end them up in the European Courts of Human Rights. They know in a Nutshell that Muslims are untouchable, all thanks to their own ridiculous laws and of course political correctness.
The governments are simply trapped in a hole that they've dug and no there's no way out. Islam has run circles around them, using their own tolerance laws to promote their intolerant faith to all.
The amount of crimes here in the UK alone, against no Muslims by Muslims, simply goes unpunished, regardless of how violent. The police have given in because the Criminal Prosecution Service throws all 'racial' cases out court mostly.
It's nothing more than madness
Correction above : When I say respected, I meant to say " has great influence" instead of respect.