The language sounds like a Britian Asian guy -

"in order to see [how] diligent the American people is [in preserving] its life"

Posted by: Pass It On at March 12, 2006 9:09 AM

Hot air, designed to get more dhimmitude from various countries.

Or

If not. Do they really think we Won't strike back, just because their organization is scattered around the world?

When it is all said and done, there won't be anyone to comprehend it- in the ME.

I keep hoping they aren't that stupid :(

Posted by: Gary at March 12, 2006 9:13 AM

any sort of attack here should be met with a nuclear bombing of mecca. subsequent attacks will be followed by nuclear bombings of medina. and so on and so on.

Posted by: alahuakbar at March 12, 2006 9:14 AM

From the article:

"Your country is comprised of many states that should not have anything to do with Muslims'

---

Well we quite agree! Get the hell out!

End of problem.

Posted by: Gary at March 12, 2006 9:19 AM

You just have to compare the courage of those who make anonymous or pseudononymous threats like this or who behead some poor foreign worker hiding behind a balaclava, to those who openly dare, to not hurt anyone islamic physically but to verbally criticise islam or the violent acts of Muslims, and so earn a fatwa.

I was looking through a radical islamic website in the UK and there was someone there criticising their comments about killing nonMuslims and doing so carefully and sensibly. However, he was totally ignored as you would expect, as their house of cards cannot withstand even a puff of truth, but you (could see that he was getting under their skin. they were complaining because no one yet knew who Ibn Warraq was and where he lived).

As it is their website he(of the comments) will probably just go "missing" one day and fail to return home from work. The backstab or the mob bash are pretty typical of muslims in general and arabs in particular.

Posted by: Zathras at March 12, 2006 9:21 AM

Earlier articles have said that this website (Global Islamic Media Front) is somewhere in the city of Toronto,Canada.

Posted by: Mackie at March 12, 2006 9:23 AM

Sounds like a lot of nonsense to me.

Posted by: DrWolffenstein at March 12, 2006 9:26 AM

If they succeed in another attack I would suspect they are going to hit Las Vegas, which was already scouted out years ago by Mohammed Atta.

If that is the case, there should be no more restraint or 'fear of backlash' on behalf of the US: Internment and mass-deportations and massive retaliation, preferably on the centers of the cult, like Mecca & Medina would be the proper modus operandi.

Interesting times indeed!

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at March 12, 2006 9:30 AM

Sorry that this is not directly on point or not on point at all, but why are there no websites or people calling for a boycott of Arab goods? First, we can boycott arab oil by forcing gas stations to identify where they get their oil from. American, Venezuelan, Mexican, Russian and other oil is available in the US. I bet a few people would be willing to pay extra few cents for a gallon if they know they are not supporting their own murder. Surely, we can boycott Arab fruits, sweets, spreads and etc. Does anybody know what they produce besides oil and suicide bombers?

Maybe the problem is that they "produce" nothing but oil. Regardless, we can destroy the other part of their economy, turning them into just an oil well until we invent something that will completely replace oil. God, I can't wait for that moment. Just to see their malls with armani and versachi stores turn into deserts.

Boycott Arab goods, including those made by local Muslims. Don't patron restaurants owned by muslims.

P.S. You can still buy shiscobob and fillafel from mexicans. Fuck hummus, that shit stinks like camel ass.

Posted by: mosmike at March 12, 2006 9:38 AM

Mosmike even if we boycott arab oil, the Chinese, India, other countries will fill in the gap. no we need to drill in our own areas, and fast technology for energy replacement. we did it once before when Europeans were forced to look for other trade routes for China and India,etc. we left the arabs in the desert dust!
it must be a derranged Westerner, a real woman hater to become muslim. they only read the parts of peace be with you.. dont they look further? so l therefor e know they are losers, and unable to live in the modern world. l am always dismayed when l listen
music from CatStevens, his music was so great, l cannot understand how he went so backwards into this cult. oh Cat cant you see how Iran is so evil! but now you cannot leave, as your life would be imperilled!

Posted by: Lulu at March 12, 2006 9:47 AM

lulu,

Hope you got the cartoons.

Posted by: PRCS at March 12, 2006 9:57 AM

I am not proposing to boycott all arab oil because it would be impossible. But consumers should be given a choice to boycott it. This choice can be provided by a statutory requirement that gas stations identify where they get their oil from, just like I can check where my milk comes from.

Moreover, let the arabs sell their oil to China and India and when these countries will have to deal with them. We should switch our oil consumption to Russian and Venezuelan oil. It's much better to make friends with a communist and a Czar, instead of a terrorist. Why continually talk shit about these two countries and try to create an overthrow of their regimes, as America is doing? Saudi Arabian oil can be replaced with russian oil. By the way, Lukoil is a russian oil company, so you can buy your oil from them. They have a bunch of them in NJ and NY. (Although I am not sure where the oil you pump actually comes from.)

Overall, why support Bosnia when that place breeds terrorists? Why push for independent Kosovo, a small afganistan in the middle of the Balkans? The entire foreign policy is misplaced, likely due to personal business interest of government officials. A boycott will energize average people to realize and popularly dissapprove of misplaced foreign policy in general.

Boycott arab goods and restaurants! Replace arab food with Greek and Armenian.

Posted by: mosmike at March 12, 2006 9:58 AM

Congressman Tancredo suggested that we at least begin a public dialogue on the subject of holding Mecca and Medina hostage in an Islamic variation on the MAD doctrine, an idea that is straight out of Sun Tzu and von Clauswitz. Just put out the word that any major attack on civilian Western targets by any Muslims will result in a disproportionate strategic strike on Mecca and Medina. In order to work, it must be credible. In order to be credible, because we live in a pluralistic democracy, it must be a public choice that is supported by the median voter. Thus the need to begin the public discourse.

The Cold War taught the West how to play this brinkmanship game well. So if that is the path that the Muslim world wants to go down, there are many in the West who will be happy to oblige them. Muslim clerics often ask their audiences at every Friday's khutba to envision a world without Israel. So the counter-concept would be now to envision an Islam without a single trace of Mecca and Medina. How would they perform hajj or umra? The dust of the ka'aba would be scattered by high altitude winds for thousands of kilometers.

Posted by: DrMack at March 12, 2006 10:01 AM

Is this a nuclear threat?

The statement: 'The threat suggests the attack will be far greater in magnitude than Sept. 11, 2001, because following this one, "there will be no one to analyze and investigate, because the mind and the heart will be unable to comprehend it. ...'
suggests that such may be the case.

After 9/11, I can comprehend just about anything they can throw at us....except a nuclear strike. I would have a tough time dealing with that.

Also, only two operations. By an operation, do they mean a group of small, simultaneous, but widely scattered attacks, or one large strike. How they would conduct a single strike larger than 9/11 is difficult to comprehend, unless it is nuclear.

Scary stuff.

Posted by: Elad at March 12, 2006 10:11 AM

I love this. He is trying to say a massive attack is going to happen, you can’t stop it because we will speed it up. It will be so massive you will be unable to retaliate, blah, blah, blah. The big kicker is a westerner will conduct the attack.

My translation:
A massive attack is going to happen, you can’t stop it because we will speed it up.
(Please don’t try and stop it, I really want this to work)

It will be so massive you will be unable to retaliate, blah, blah, blah.
(If this works I will be as famous as UBL or Z man)

The big kicker is a westerner will conduct the attack.
(The stupid bungling Arabs can’t pull off another attack without the help of a westerner)

This clown is basically a child looking for attention. His threats are designed more to announce his presence to his islamonutjob buddies than to us. He will get credit for any attack that happens in the states now no matter who conducts it. The MSM now has his name and will make it known in every household if an attack is actually carried out or is even attempted. I can see the headlines now “New terrorist leader is a westerner” “UBL replaced as leader of Al Qaida” and for California papers “New freedom fighters makes major inroads into stopping western imperialism.”

There are some real cries for help from this clown. He needs recognition and actively seeks it. He understands a threat will cause a reaction, increased security, increased news coverage etc. If the attack is not carried out he still spreads his name and fame. Well buddy let me break this down so simply even you can understand it. Threats do not enforce power. Power is telling all the fighters in an Iraqi town we are coming and daring the dumb asses to await their fate. Power walks down the street in formation ready to take on all comers. Power is not falling for vague threats from unknown and unidentified members of an illegal and dying organization. Power is conducted and enforced by professional military members with proper training and adult leadership. You do not have power and never will. Killing and murdering innocents doesn’t make you special or powerful, just sick. My last piece of advice to you little man; is to stop calling yourself a soldier. You have to earn that title and you sir are no soldier. Keep playing in the big boys’ game and you will shortly meet a soldier up close and personal.

Posted by: Ronin at March 12, 2006 10:15 AM

you know sometimes l think what would " Pres.Ronald Regan" do in this climate of terrorism.

Posted by: Lulu at March 12, 2006 10:15 AM

Ronin--

California newspaper reads: “New freedom fighters makes major inroads into stopping western imperialism.”

I use to be from California, I really disapprove with the fact that you’re telling every one the truth.
Actually, I moved out because they were so liberal I can't believe they didn't manage to choke on their own bullshit. Now I live in good old super-republican Kansas.

Posted by: billybob at March 12, 2006 10:37 AM

When the career beaurocrat in the state department stop acting like 'citizen of the planet' and start acting like Americans(and pigs fly) when G'dubya stops acting in the interest of his cronies in the oil industry and the MSM stop advancing their socialist blame America 1st agenda maybe we get started on weaning(in a big way) our country(and it is OUR country) off it's "addiction to foreign oil". Hell, all the technology already exists we don't need "research" that's a smokescreen and a stalling tactic to keep us sleeping, at the cost of about 3 tanks of gas per vehicle we could convert almosty all US cars and trucks to Flex-fuel and run E85(ethanol 85% gas 15%) . This would put our farmers back in business and Eliminate Our Dependance on the arabs. No research. Converting cars and trucks is a matter of installing new fuel lines and a "chip" reprogramming, that's it. Filling stations, well all they would have to change is the TAG ON THE PUMP!!!! Brazil is doing it, why not US? I'll tell you. The oil companys that's why. Since they don't own the land, they wont make the billions and billions of dollars a year we give them. A heroin dealer will sell crack too, pot, pills whatever... But since the 'big oil' cant farm they would basically be out of business with the only logical plan we have. Think the most powerful companys on the planet(and lobbysBTW) are gonna let that happen? Not a chance! Not until they own all the production infrastructure(farmland) involved in e85 production. For now, SUNOCO is one oil company that does'nt import from the middle east buy gas there. Im pretty sure there are one or two others but start there for now don't buy exxon, gulf, citgo....buy sunoco and F' the F'ing F'ers. How we let it get this far.....who cares now. What happens tommorrow? Who knows. Today I'll buy Sunoco and any other Gas that doesn't come from arab wells. Maybe someone else here could do the research on non arab oil and share with the rest, I for one would welcome the alternative to enriching our enemies.........

Posted by: WIDEAWAKE at March 12, 2006 10:39 AM

Yikes, Are all of you that keep refering to "arabs" aware that islam is an ideology rather than a race? I have since moved, but once frequented a place with great humus that happened to have a cross above the door.

Posted by: maccusgermanis at March 12, 2006 10:52 AM

The more I read and hear the more I say Wafa Sultan for president....."You can worship stone if you wish, just don't throw them at me". That lady is SQUARED AWAY! Lets let HER address Congress. What a wake-up call That would be to the world. She's a World Treasure, her voice and those of her fellow Arab 'heretics' are the primer cord for the demolishion charges needed to collapse Islam. That's the attack I want to see, how about you all?

Posted by: WIDEAWAKE at March 12, 2006 10:52 AM

I work on a soybean farm in Kansas when I'm not in college, and honestly, it takes farmers about ten years of farming to pay for their equipment, which last only about 10-15 years before they have to buy new ones. Ethanol is the only thing that is going to save us farmers. But because it technically doesn't exist I'm force to go to college instead of doing something I enjoy (driving big equipment that cost more and has more power then Ferraris).

Posted by: billybob at March 12, 2006 10:56 AM

I really wish they would get the hell on with it so we can get enough people up in arms to kick them out. Americans have become fat, lazy, apathetic, and to an extent - cowardly, and it's about damn time for a change. Any loyal American citizen should own a rifle and plenty of ammuntion, because when the time comes, the government won't be on our side, but will instead be even more dhimmified than it already is.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 12, 2006 11:08 AM

Maccusgermanis, I do know the difference between muslims and Arabs, I also know without Arab money most muslim terrorism couldn’t spread. I don’t remember a muslim from Kenya, Sudan or Ethiopia flying any plane on 9/11. I am against all radical ideology as a general rule but I also know Saudi Arabia (Arabs) and their extreme wahabbi views are going to have to be dealt with. Anyone want to guess how many mosques are funded by our friendly house of Saud? It’s not a race issue just an ideology but start from the source we can hunt the ash and trash later.

Posted by: Ronin at March 12, 2006 11:10 AM

Billybob I feel your pain, I live in Tampa this place is a gathering place for liberals from NY/NJ to come and die. Any mention of the words Bush or republicans incites violent outbursts from old men and women. I am the off spring of farmers, I was taught to respect the elderly so I just yes ma’am and move away. I’m glad to see you escaped California. If and when this fight comes to America it will be us country folk who teach Al Q about loyalty to God and country. I have always said, we will never give up what we hold dear. The right to watch sports, listen to music, eat pork and other lessor forms of bbq, are sacred. I can think of other reasons to protect this great land but I’ll stick with I just like beer and pulled pork BBq sandwiches, plenty of reason for me. The muslims might someday try and Impose sharia on me but don’t be surprised if they have a problem with enforcement.

Posted by: Ronin at March 12, 2006 11:25 AM

I sincerely believe all this shit can be stopped if we do not buy their oil. We will have no need to cooperate with those countries or to appease them. Moreover, special interest of oil companies will not need to lobby the government for favors benefiting arabs.

By the way, I drove through Iowa and filled up there few years ago. They had fuel that had some part of ethanol, I am not sure if that is the 85% type. I have a 97 Nissan and I filled up and did not feel any difference. Plus, it was like 20 cents cheaper. Why have I only seen this in Iowa. Even if ethanol is some part of the fuel, why not have it everywhere? I just do not understand. Companies that will benefit from ethanol need to advertize more and raise public awareness. I would even tie it to fight against terrorism. F-ing Bush, I just hate him.

Boycott arab products and "Arab-American" stores and restaurants!

Go in into a store and "accidently" drop local Arab products on the floor so the Arab business does not get paid for it.

Posted by: mosmike at March 12, 2006 11:28 AM

Well, we've been pumped and primed for a catastrophic attack. "Not if, but when".
We're being played by our masters.

They plant the idea that it can't be stopped in our consciousness, therefore this "foolproof" plan, and/or helplessness on the part of D.H.S., is to blame. Certainly if such an attack happens, the total-police-state will be brought out into the open. Even if it is a hoax, it's a reminder, and a suggestion that will still, to a lesser degree, imply the need for more internal control and oppression.

Even if it's genuine, and it happens, the true cause(New World Order-Globalization-3rd Way-Oligarchy Collectivism, symantic games of Elitist enslavement of the world) of it will be glossed over.

Posted by: kentim at March 12, 2006 11:35 AM

"I really wish they would get the hell on with it so we can get enough people up in arms to kick them out."

Read your post and totally relate to your view point.

Also, I believe our government is wanting a nuclear attack in order to round up every person who is practicing the religion of Islam. If our government fails to outlaw the practice of Islam in America after such an attack.......that is when the above Average American who is not politically correct......takes this Religious CRAP on........and that will not be a pretty day for those who constantly apologize for the teachings of Islam...............citizen or politician alike!

Posted by: rumoret at March 12, 2006 11:48 AM

"Well, we've been pumped and primed for a catastrophic attack. "Not if, but when".We're being played by our masters."

Also agree with your position on the New World Order Masters playing this chessgame. But even if we understand this........that alone will not keep the American people from standing up and taking matters in to their own hands.....if government refuses to take care of the matter. And that of course.....could be what the New World Order Masters want......so they can round not only followers of Islam....but to disarm and outlaw all religions in this country.......setting up their heavy control of the American People.

Posted by: rumoret at March 12, 2006 11:53 AM

I agree with the MAD approach. The only exception would be if San Francisco is the first attack site. Then we might have to rethink what to retaliate with...maybe paintballs instead of nucs.

Posted by: sammy small at March 12, 2006 12:26 PM

Does anyone actually believe this piece was written by a native speaker of English? Look more carefully at the full text-there are all kinds of signs that at least a portion of it was written by a non-native speaker. To me, it looks like it was pieced together or written by at least two writers-one fully versant in English, including slang and phrasals, and the other struggling with basic verb conjugation and sentence construction.

Posted by: guiltfree at March 12, 2006 12:36 PM

Billybob--Glad to know there is another farmer type out there--here in Idaho we have a program starting to use wheat straw to make fuel--experimental start up program at this point. Keep on harvestin'.

Posted by: bobalharb at March 12, 2006 12:41 PM

There is a growing amount of evidence that The Prophet Mohammed, peace be upon Her, was a woman. I recall talking to my young niece, a strong believer in the Prophet, peace be upon Her. My niece became very excited and exclaimed, “You mean that the Prophet, peace be upon Her, is a chick?” Yes I replied. I also said that the Prophet, peace be upon Her, would probably prefer being called a woman, not a chick.

http://mohammedpeacebeuponherisawoman.blogspot.com/

Posted by: Mohammed, peace be upon Her, was a woman at March 12, 2006 12:42 PM

We could use recent history as an example of what the Islamic mind considers a devastating attack.

The insurgents in Iraq used the attack of the golden dome mosque as a tactic to try to insight civil war.

The recent attack on the Hindu holy sight of the Sankat Mochan Temple.

The Palestinians attack of the Church of the Nativity in Israel in 2002.

Some estimates are as high as 20,000 churches attacked or destroyed in the Middle East in the last four years.

So using what appears to be their playbook, do we proclaim that we will destroy or capture Mecca, Medina, or the Dome of the Rock in retaliation for any future attacks.

It took the nuclear devastation of Hiroshima and Nagasaki to make the Japanese realize that price was too heavy to continue the war with the U.S. Will it take the same to bring Islam to the same conclusion?

In my opinion attacking any major Islamic population would have no effect other than to incite them further. Their belief system seem to hold no real value of human life, and all I have seen is the glorification of all the innocent lives taken to this point.

The only option that would reach out and touch the core of the population would be the threat of losing something that would shake their very foundation…. The Islamic holy sights. This appears to be the only real option short of wiping out an entire “civilization”.

Rat

Posted by: Desert_Rat at March 12, 2006 12:46 PM

If they succeed in another attack I would suspect they are going to hit Las Vegas, which was already scouted out years ago by Mohammed Atta.
Posted by: sheik yer'mami at March 12, 2006 09:30 AM
-----------
Wasn't there a Stephen King book and film about Vegas being the place where all of the evil people gathered after the great loss of life due to like the bird flu and Vegas was nuked to wipe out the evil???
Is this an analogy with Mecca???
----------------

Well, we've been pumped and primed for a catastrophic attack. "Not if, but when".
We're being played by our masters.
if such an attack happens, the total-police-state will be brought out into the open.
Posted by: kentim at March 12, 2006 11:35 AM
----------------
Be prepared for nukes going off in America. Remember in 2005, the one day newspaper account about our federal government's surveillance for nukes at mosques and other muslim sites. Our federal government has not been searching for nukes inside America for just grins. Have a plan ready to do what you need to do to protect your family and country once the nukes go off in America.
The conquering of America may be more difficult than the world thinks due to the 180,000,000 armed Americans.
---------------

The war with Islam is inevitable.

Know where the mosques are, where muslim businesses are and where muslims live in your area.

Prepare, be armed, be ready.

Keep your powder dry.

The Texican.
Freedom, the only choice at any cost.

Posted by: Texican at March 12, 2006 12:54 PM

The only option that would reach out and touch the core of the population would be the threat of losing something that would shake their very foundation…. The Islamic holy sights. This appears to be the only real option short of wiping out an entire “civilization”.
Posted by: Desert_Rat at March 12, 2006 12:46 PM
----------------

If the choice is the survival of your family and country or Islam, what do you choose???

The Texican.
Freedom, the only choice at any cost.

Posted by: Texican at March 12, 2006 12:57 PM

Hi rumoret,

I'm not sure they really want to outlaw all religions, control of the substance and content(interpretation)I think fits into their plans better(pacification and thought-control).
Their main thing I think is to get people to be deficient in reason, logic, and language skills, in other words, remove the tools that lead to truth and reality.
They prefer the herd to be trapped by emotionalism(conformism), which is a dead-end.

Both believers and non-believers can make use of the knowledge contained in these two sources. The hostility towards metaphysical ideas(including(but not only) belief in God) could be overlooked/ignored because there is still much valuble info that can be turned against those who would enslave us. Those who seek domination promote arbitrary, subjective truth and reality amongst the population, and in that context ACTUAL truth cannot exist.
But the Elites know these things.
L.P. was supposedly discarded by the 70's, coincedentally during the counter-culture revolution. But I have seen there is a solution to the main flaw of it, and that is to call the "unprovable" premise/theory that it is based on a DEFINITION.
Regardless, it helps cut through the crap either way.
Logical Positivism/Empericism:
http://murzim.net/LP/LP02.html
Tarski's "Semantic Conception of Truth":
http://www.jfsowa.com/logic/tarski.htm

Nothingness is illogical- therefore creation can be debated logically.

Posted by: kentim at March 12, 2006 12:58 PM

More lies, more taqiyyah, more sabre rattling, like the barking of stray dogs in the night. Empty threats made by impotent cowards who know they have already lost.

Posted by: Bohemond_1069 at March 12, 2006 1:13 PM

billybob:
I hate to burst your misconceptions about California. Ronnie (the greatest Pres in the 20th cent) was from here. The John Birch society National HQ was here, We passed prop 187 when the rest of the country didnt give a crap about illegal immigration. I guarantee you there are a lot of conservatives here.
The problem we have is there are a lot of liberals that live within 15 miles of the coast and with motor voter and amnesty, non-citizens vote in an every higher numbers every year. It takes some real guts to stay and stand up for your beliefs. I do apologize, however, for the damage that my fellow Californians have brought to the the US by the election of the likes of Barbara Boxer and Ron Dellums to congress.

Posted by: GrimReaperxxx at March 12, 2006 1:24 PM

Jacketsfan

Comment is totally vulgar and unnecessary. Sounds like you belong at a porn site, not here.
Robert, could you please remove this post?

Posted by: treehugger at March 12, 2006 1:29 PM

One of the main things we have been discussing in my Terrorism class is the use of a W.M.D Weapon of Mass Disruption. A good W.M.D would contain somthing nuclear because if you expose a neighborhood to it the panic wouldn't stop. I firmly believe the terrorist will go for our soft targets, the children. Malls, schools, Theme Parks are all on the radar for attack. As previously stated Las Vegas would be ideal for an attack becuase it represents everything that Islam is against. If and when the attacks happen we shouldn't "nuke" Mecca or any other place sacred to Muslims (Well, maybe Iran). If we would do that then we wouldn't be any different than the Thug-in Chief in Iran who said "We will wipe Israel off the map." We should not be scared, we should be aware. We should be asking ourselves the following questions:

1. What possble ways can these Islamic terrorist get ahold of a nuclear devices? Maybe from an x-ray machine from a hospital? Maybe they are watching one of our nuclear disposal sites looking for a dent in the armor? Maybe they already have it from friends sympathetic to the cause (cough-cough....Syria, Iran, Pakistan, cough....)

2. What has Usama bin Laden said? Even though this whole thing is much bigger than Usama and Al-Qaeda we can still learn alot from his speeches.

3. Where is the greatest population of children located at? Set up more security measures in those areas ricky-ticky.

We should also keep a close eye on gangs like MS-13 and the Russian Mafia. Both have alleged ties to smuggling Islamic terrorist into the United States. We should remember the terrorist are only in it to kill the most people they can. Think big numbers. Afterwards the mouthpieces will call for the West to adopt Sharia, pay the jizya, and hang demonic strucutres in our churches.

Posted by: Patriot_1/17 at March 12, 2006 2:04 PM

Nuclear holocaust is unthinkable; yet, life under Sharia is even less comprehendible. Truly, it would be better for the world to not exist at all. Never will my children live this way. Islam has unexpectedly upped the ante.

Posted by: MissKetz at March 12, 2006 2:11 PM

Grimreaperxxx--Apology accepted--understand your problems, do the best you can.

Posted by: bobalharb at March 12, 2006 2:20 PM

I for one think at some point a crackdown on islam will happen. Another 9/11 style attack and I would not want to live anywhere close to a muslim. They don't have the numbers to survive here in the states and it doesn't seem as if they have many friends. Islams rain of terror may just be nearly over. I'm going to miss them, they are like a rash once it is gone you still feel dirty. I love to hear the spokemen "I am muslim and proud" of what? You have not helped mankind at all, not once in 1400 years of trying. I still find it amazing they show their faces in public. Oh, wait half of them hide it. We don't have to hunt them, deport them or lock them up, just tell the truth and the will be crushed under it. Nothing good can be said about islam it brings nothing but death.

Posted by: Ronin at March 12, 2006 2:20 PM

I believe our government is wanting a nuclear attack in order to round up every person who is practicing the religion of Islam.

I would like to believe that, but I don't have that much faith. I believe Bush would come out spouting more crap about the "religion of peace", and tell us to go back to sleep.

If our government fails to outlaw the practice of Islam in America after such an attack.......that is when the above Average American who is not politically correct......takes this Religious CRAP on........and that will not be a pretty day for those who constantly apologize for the teachings of Islam...............citizen or politician alike!

Amen brother; I'm locked, cocked, and ready to rock.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 12, 2006 2:22 PM

We need to be ready to limit the trade and freedom of movement of Islam until they become civilized and stop teaching jihad.Dusting the Kaab with radioactivity as an example of the fruits of Jihad might be a start, followed by jamming all their communication capabilities.

Posted by: Walter E. Wallis at March 12, 2006 2:30 PM

Rat, Ronin, et al -

One should never go to war worrying that one might enflame the enemy. The enemy's anger is the enemy's problem, not ours. In fact, the enemy's anger might be to our advantage: anger provokes an overt taking-of-sides. This simplifies targeting.

The fear of angering islam is a major source of Pr. Bush's ineffectiveness in the war on terror - he cannot accept the idea that the problem is islam, and cosequently fears provoking all of islam. All the while, it appears that the problem really is islam, in its entirety! It is not possible to wage war effectively and fear making people angry at the same time.

On the subject of the ports, UAE, and the fear of losing the UAE's port facilities in the ME ... this is more of Pres. Bush's disjointed thinking in evidence: When we are at war, we do not grovel for cooperation. If we need the port facilities, we take them - with, or without, UAE permission. If the UAE were to deny that permission - doing so is an act of war against upon us. It would be clarifying.

And, I just wanted to say this: "Pres. Bush is a rut-thinking SOB. (PBUH)" Hope it won't upset him too much, if he should hear my charge. On the other hand, it might be clarifying.

Posted by: Havoc at March 12, 2006 2:31 PM

Havoc, I agree 100% One should never go to war worrying that one might enflame the enemy. One look at my support Denmark shirt tells the local muslim population which side I am on. We have a bunch here in Tampa. So far none have said anything about my shirts or bumper stickers. I'm not sure they ever will, they tend to be on the small side and I'm not a small guy. I don't want a war with anyone but before they go nuts and start torching cars (or my beloved truck) I'd open a can of something. I'm sure if a major attack happens I'd be recalled to active duty. I have only been out a few years and I'd do what I had to do.

Posted by: Ronin at March 12, 2006 2:44 PM

"I believe our government is wanting a nuclear attack in order to round up every person who is practicing the religion of Islam.

I would like to believe that, but I don't have that much faith. I believe Bush would come out spouting more crap about the "religion of peace", and tell us to go back to sleep.

If our government fails to outlaw the practice of Islam in America after such an attack.......that is when the above Average American who is not politically correct......takes this Religious CRAP on........and that will not be a pretty day for those who constantly apologize for the teachings of Islam...............citizen or politician alike!

Amen brother; I'm locked, cocked, and ready to rock."
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus
------------------------------------------

You wish the "government" is "hoping" for a nuclear attack so they can round up the muslims???

You are fricking insane.

Posted by: kentim at March 12, 2006 2:44 PM

Kentim:

"I'm not sure they really want to outlaw all religions, control of the substance and content(interpretation)I think fits into their plans better(pacification and thought-control). Their main thing I think is to get people to be deficient in reason, logic, and language skills, in other words, remove the tools that lead to truth and reality.
They prefer the herd to be trapped by emotionalism(conformism), which is a dead-end."

Yes.....your position is stated much better...and I do agree with what you are saying. It does make better sense to have the people pacified and more willing to go along with the social controls.....like nice little sheep. Thanks for the links!

Posted by: rumoret at March 12, 2006 2:55 PM

I think this is the 5th or 6th last warning we have received...

Why should Muslims be allowed to have more "final warnings" than everybody else...? Sometimes Islam just seems so unfair to me...

Posted by: jsla at March 12, 2006 4:13 PM

Posted by: Patriot_1/17 at March 12, 2006 02:04 PM
If and when the attacks happen we shouldn't nuke Mecca or any other place sacred to Muslims (Well, maybe Iran). If we would do that then we wouldn't be any different than the Thug-in Chief in Iran who said "We will wipe Israel off the map."
---------------------
If America is attacked with nukes, America shouldn't nuke Islam because that would make us like Islam. You are full of it. If America is attacked with nukes, America should nuke all of Islam starting with all of the holy sites and continue to nuke all majot cities until Islam unconditionally surrenders and moves all of its followers back to the ME.
---------------------
1. What possble ways can these Islamic terrorist get ahold of a nuclear devices? Maybe they already have it from friends sympathetic to the cause (cough-cough....Syria, Iran, Pakistan, cough....)
-----------------------
How about purchased from Russia who has over 100 suitcase nukes not accounted for.......
-----------------------

Patriot_1/17,

We are in a fight for the very survival of America and the civilized world and you want to play like a good guy.

There are no good guys in war only victors and loosers and I damn well intend on being a victor with Amnerica against Islam.

The Texican.
Freedom, the only choice at any cost.

Posted by: Texican at March 12, 2006 4:21 PM

lets stand back and say its NOT a fake - that it really is an al-qaeda threat.

in fact , me discussing this is playing right into their hands - jihadwatch is playing right into their hands.

why?

re-read their statement.

they are playing with the very nature of our free society, and free discussion.

i know that Jwatchers will blame the terrorists - but the 50% odd of Americans will point to this jwatch article , or others to say - "hang on - we got a warning - and it wasnt acted on"

so ,in other words , the old al-qaeda method of the surprise attack out of the blue has moved on - to a divide and conquer style of strategy.

if you get my thinking on this one.

of course, this all assumes that it isnt a fake.

my feeling is that its a fake. but theres a 1 per cent of me , nagging me in the background , that just says, "well, what if it isnt?"

Posted by: archduke at March 12, 2006 4:50 PM

A Attack of nuclear, or other WMD weppons in the U.S. would take the kid gloves off. The U.S. has yet to focus fully on this, but a attack of major size would get a matching responce.

How about the capture and taking of M.E. oil production? And the Islam holy sites? By taking control, it captures the heart of Islam.

One can feel a major attack is comming, and our goverment knows this as well. The proper counter is called for, and will be delivered.

Posted by: Islofob IS-1 at March 12, 2006 4:53 PM

"How about purchased from Russia who has over 100 suitcase nukes not accounted for......."

my reading is that the suitcase nuke is a bit of a myth. i think it was invented by the KGB to scare the shit out of us during the Cold War.

but - REAL rogue nukes , that could fit into a truck, are a potential problem - i dont discount that. not by a long shot.

"America should nuke all of Islam starting with all of the holy sites and continue to nuke all majot cities until Islam unconditionally surrenders and moves all of its followers back to the ME"

the nuclear radioactive fallout would immediately affect one of our friends, and allies against Islam - the Hindus of India - carried on the west-to-east jetstream.

not a good idea in other words.

Posted by: archduke at March 12, 2006 4:56 PM

"How about the capture and taking of M.E. oil production? And the Islam holy sites? By taking control, it captures the heart of Islam. "

doubtful - and al q nuke attack will have western leaders running around wondering what to hell to do. i like dubya and all that - but he's not Churchill material. lets be honest about it.

as for blair? forget it.

Posted by: archduke at March 12, 2006 5:00 PM

Ronin, what area of Tampa do you live in? The only area I know of with a high muslim population is Temple Terrace, which is a/k/a Temple Terrorist. No known mosques in my area (just east of you).

Posted by: Just_Linda at March 12, 2006 5:01 PM

Kentim posted : I would like to believe that, but I don't have that much faith. I believe Bush would come out spouting more crap about the "religion of peace", and tell us to go back to sleep.

That is also my fear. We will be counselled yet again ( Bali, Bali, Beslan, Madrid, London, Varanasi), to excercise restraint - small minority blah, blah. The government will rush troops to protect mosques and the muslim community, which has had the foresight to live in a closed community.

Posted by: DP111 at March 12, 2006 5:01 PM

Ronin,
Thanks for responding, I should have been more specific in my comment, as you can see

Mosmike persists in calling for a boycot of "Arab-American stores and restuarants" when I know many of them in Birmingham,Al to be owned by parishioners of St. George or St. Elias.

Posted by: maccusgermanis at March 12, 2006 5:03 PM

The nice thing about taking out mecca and medina you'd only get muslims as infidels aren't allowed in those cities. Muslims appear to feel that allah protects those cities. So, realistically speaking, what sort of religion would they have left?

As for the one or ones making the latest threats.... babble on.

Posted by: fireangel at March 12, 2006 5:42 PM

You bring up some provocative points, Archduke -- Nevertheless -- I am somewhat fatalistic about this and all threats from the various Muslims. Our leadership has said honestly and ominously that we can't forestall all eventualities -- and that at some time in the future they will succeed...

I subscribe to the idea that we will fight amongst ourselves endlessly and the attacks will continue until we are either undermined and destroyed as so many have been before us, or until we identify MUSLIMS for the enemies they are and ISLAM for the enemy's ideology that it is...

As such -- we will be attacked and attacked and attacked until we either fall or fight. This is one reason I consider the defeat of moral relativists and those who refuse to see the direct role of Islam and the presence of Muslims on our soil to be as important as our fight against Muslims and Islam upon our soil.

They work hand in glove -- if we're attacked, and Americans once again flock to protect mosques and Muslims as they did in the aftermath of 9/11, then we'll be attacked again and again and again until we learn. If we don't learn as a culture to stand up against an alien culture which want to destroy us -- then, sadly -- we deserve as a culture to receive attacks until we are erased. Such a culture is doomed. If not the Muslims, then some other opportunistic enemy would emerge to take full advantage.

I viewed the 100,000s of marchers after 9/11 and before the war in Iraq to be nearly actionable traitors -- after another attack - there will be no question in my mind what such persons are, and I will be convinced of their threat against my future well being -- What's to be done with them/to them? That will largely depend on the "collective" response to any new attack, and the reactions which it illicits from our population.

One thing, though. The USA isn't Spain. Take comfort in that.

Posted by: jsla at March 12, 2006 6:01 PM

"The USA isn't Spain. Take comfort in that."

well, the Spanish people didnt want to go into the war in Iraq in the first place - their government ignored public opinion.

so , the portrayal of the Spaniards withdrawing after the 7/7 bombings as being cowardly, misses the point - the Spanish people did NOT want to get involved in the first place.

i mean - nobody is running around complaining that the Swiss arent in Iraq , are they?

"the defeat of moral relativists"
i agree. and indeed i agree with the rest of your post. but the problem is , is that in free society you will always have moral relativism. that IS the nature of free discussion and free thought. some will blame Bush, some will blame Bin Laden, others the Saudis, others the Israelis.

so, how does one square a free society with the need for full on war?

you have to remember that Britain or America were NOT free societies during WW2 e.g. all Germans were imprisoned by the British, and the Americans had camps for Japanese-Americans.

In todays 24x7 media, that would be an impossible thing to do politically again.

So, the coming response to an Al Qaeda WMD attack will be utterly different to what has gone before. and i have no idea what it will be.

Posted by: archduke at March 12, 2006 6:12 PM

(I also fervently hope I am not "there" wherever that is when they get lucky -- and I fervently hope they never succeed! By being fatalistic -- I mean to say that I haven't seen we have the resolve yet to truly address the poisoners responsible for all the sickness we're suffering -- and it isn't Islamophobia -- it isn't racism -- it isn't intolerance (on our part) or our past supposed transgressions... Responsibility resides squarely upon Muslims and their creed of Islam for all the heinous horror - until they are held accountable for all of Islam's heinous crimes, and for their revolting failures as a people, as an agglomeration of Islamic cultures, or as a "religious", political, and social creed, we are doomed to suffer at their bloody hands...)

Posted by: jsla at March 12, 2006 6:14 PM

I will be convinced of their threat against my future well being -- What's to be done with them/to them? That will largely depend on the "collective" response to any new attack, and the reactions which it illicits from our population.
One thing, though. The USA isn't Spain. Take comfort in that.
Posted by: jsla at March 12, 2006 06:01 PM
-----------------

If I was a Muslim living in America, I believe that I would probably sell everything that I had an take an extended vacation in South America or other potentially safe locale and would lose the head wrapping and burkas.

How many Muslims are currently selling their homes and businesses and have applied for visas and passports?????

The Texican.
Freedom, the only choice at any cost.

Posted by: Texican at March 12, 2006 6:17 PM

Agree with fireangel...have read that muslims believe allah with always protect their alleged holy cities. When they see Mecca and Medina (or at least the mosques) destroyed by infidel missiles, what will this fact say about their religion ? :

1. There is no God, or
2. There is a God but Islam is a false religion.

Would muslims risk such a scenario ?

Posted by: PAS at March 12, 2006 6:20 PM

WWII, Americans had camps for Japanese-Americans.
In todays 24x7 media, that would be an impossible thing to do politically again.
Posted by: archduke at March 12, 2006 06:12 PM
-------------

Archduke, you under estimate the reslove and venom of Americans if we are attacked again by Islam. There will be no innocents anda the only safe place for those that attack us will be in camps or in the Middle East.

The Texican.
Freedom, the only choice at any cost.

Posted by: Texican at March 12, 2006 6:23 PM

Indeed "you have to remember that Britain or America were NOT free societies during WW2 e.g. all Germans were imprisoned by the British, and the Americans had camps for Japanese-Americans...."

Such is the nature of War -- those who have failed to notice that we are at war with Muslims in our midst are missing in action -- possibly guilty of desertion...

I complain about the Swiss not being with us, along with the French and the Germans and the Spanish and ALL people who should rightly be intervening widely and aggressively against what the Muslims are perpetrating across the globe and yet whom are missing -- insanely, and perhaps criminally missing in action...

We will either recognize that we are at war, or we will not. Our enemy isn't hampered by this kind of ambivalence.

And if moral relativism isn't expunged from a society while it wages war for its survival -- then it may not survive.

I agree that internment or expulsion is currently unthinkable -- but how meek mild and altogether humane that will appear at some future date if we don't stop their onslaught against us!

I believe an all out WMD attack will galvanize us -- and Muslims shouldn't be too confident in America -- I'm not celebrating this notion -- One of the things I resent most about Islam is the idea that we will have to become somewhat like them in order to defeat them... That our only recourse to survive their enmity and their attacks is to become as intolerant of them, and hateful towards them as they are towards us -- if not more so --

This is the true crime against our culture and our civilization which was revealed on 9/11 -- America was RAPED by Islam on 9/11 --

Muslims corrupted us -- defiled us -- dirtied us as the rapist defiles and sullies his victim -- this disgusting reality -- this HEINOUS truth -- hard to absorb for any American -- is the truth about that blazing day in September -- NY -- DC -- America was raped by a beast -- a filthy slouching savage creature who only knows hatred and corruption -- who worships evil and spreads despair...

We have not yet tallied the destruction -- we don't know yet the full extent of the damage caused to us and ours...

Posted by: jsla at March 12, 2006 6:34 PM

"Our enemy isn't hampered by this kind of ambivalence."

indeed , that is correct. and certainly there is an ambivalence at the moment.

"you under estimate the reslove and venom of Americans if we are attacked again by Islam."

i certainly dont doubt that - i just doubt that political elites would be able to convert that venom into military action.

of course, i could be proved wrong. maybe dubya will turn out to be a churchill.

Posted by: archduke at March 12, 2006 6:52 PM

Sorry DP111, but the quote you posted was not actually mine. It was a cut and past of another poster.
I included the source at the end of it, I should have put it at the beginning.
----------------------------------

Thank you rumoret, and you're welcome.

Posted by: kentim at March 12, 2006 6:57 PM

This will take longer, and require much more effort than we have yet seen from the non-Muslims if we are to succeed. 7/7 was hardly a 9/11 -- and even 9/11 convinced every American of the necessity to view this as a war... And those who saw it as a war -- largely have failed to see it as all out war. What will it take? Will we ever realize it collectively?

So comments like "of course, i could be proved wrong. maybe dubya will turn out to be a churchill" are very nice and very glib... But such comments reveal the fact that it will take more attacks and a toll which will be eventually viewed as unacceptable before some are woken from their idylls... or not.

If 9/11 didn't do it -- if Beslan and Bali didn't do it -- if 1300 years of horrors and destruction and rape and annihilation didnt' do it -- I'm not sure what will -- but perhaps "todays 24x7 media" will make the difference? Who knows -- We shall certainly SEE...

Posted by: jsla at March 12, 2006 7:03 PM

the thing is - we arent going after the islamist ideology root and branch.

we're just going after "bin laden" , or "al zaqwari" or decks of cards... thats all i'm trying to say.

we're in a war - but we're not at the same time.

Posted by: archduke at March 12, 2006 7:09 PM

Are we being played?

""Loose Change 2nd Edition" is the follow-up to the most provocative 9-11 documentary on the market today."
http://www.policestateplanning.com/loose_change_ii.htm

Is it just "propaganda"??
"The Globalists and the Islamists:

Fomenting the "Clash of Civilizations" for a New World Order"

http://www.redmoonrising.com/Ikhwan/Clash.htm
---------------
Of course, it's "crazy".
Do any flaws destroy the whole hypothesis?

Posted by: kentim at March 12, 2006 7:10 PM

The United States and Iran: Intelligence Wars
By Fred Burton

There has been a clear uptick in tensions between the United States and Iran recently. The most obvious aspect of this -- but the least interesting, in our view -- has been the escalation of rhetoric concerning Iran's nuclear program. Much more intriguing, from an intelligence perspective, is a series of lower-level events -- including the continuation of a spate of bombings in Khuzestan province, some creative blame-throwing by Iranian leaders over those bombings and over the recent explosion at the Golden Mosque in As Samarra, and the creation of a new Iran office at the U.S. State Department that will place special emphasis on a democratic transition in Tehran.

The public rhetoric is only one part of a much larger game that is always being played, and in which much of the action occurs in the shadows. It long has been our view that the nuclear program is not an end in itself for Iran; if Tehran really wanted to develop nuclear weapons, it would do so with utter secrecy. Rather, it is a mechanism that can be used as political leverage as Tehran pursues other goals. Like North Korea, Iran has found discussion of its nuclear program useful for cranking up or turning down tensions with West, and, in this case, for managing the way it is perceived within the Muslim world. To the extent that the matter is publicly discussed, the nuclear issue is basically a sideshow.

But Iran, like all nation-states, has other tools as well -- and its intelligence apparatus is an important one. Whether friends or enemies, states are constantly collecting intelligence against each other. Given certain geopolitical realities -- including the situation in Baghdad, where Iranian influence is strong but certainly not as strong as Tehran has dreamed it might become, and Iran's support for Hezbollah -- there is every reason to believe at this juncture that intelligence collection is being stepped up on both sides. What is intriguing about Tehran's reactions to the mosque bombing in Iraq, the attacks in Khuzestan and other events is that its statements on these events convey the mindset of the regime -- both its fears and what it sees as its options -- more clearly than the highly public and carefully orchestrated exchanges over the nuclear program.

In short, it appears the stage is being set on the tactical side for a covert intelligence war. If history serves as any guide, the implications of such a shift could be far-reaching: Following the 1979 revolution, Iran engaged in an assassination campaign that targeted Iranian dissidents around the world as well as Western and Jewish diplomats and businessmen, sometimes in retaliation for what it viewed as strikes against Iranian interests by Western intelligence agents. Certainly the rules of the game have changed significantly for the post-9/11 world, but a covert campaign, particularly of the sort that has been successful in the past, well could remain a viable option if an embattled Tehran feels the need to start pushing back at the West.

A History of Covert Campaigns

Western intelligence agencies first became aware of Tehran's covert campaign against its enemies soon after the revolution. The first targets were Iranian monarchists in exile, who were trying to foment a counterrevolution in Iran. Later, after many of these opponents had been eliminated and the threat brought under control, the Ministry of Information and Security (MOIS) shifted its sights to target exiled dissidents and other opponents of the regime. Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, influential leaders of these groups were targeted and assassinated in a sophisticated campaign that spanned the globe.

It is interesting to note the tactics that were used in these strikes. Although Hezbollah pioneered the use of suicide bombings during the 1980s, and certainly was acting for Iran's interests at that time, there was a very different signature to MOIS assassinations. These frequently employed stealth and deception to get the assassins within close range of their targets -- close enough to kill them with pistols or knives, often in the target's home. Though many Iranian agents were caught in time, most escaped serious consequences. Meanwhile, dozens of the ayatollahs' political opponents were killed or injured in France, Italy, Germany, Turkey, Pakistan, the United Arab Emirates and other places.

Iranian agents also engaged in more overt attacks, including kidnappings, highly public shootings and grenade attacks in public places, and bombings. Hezbollah was quite active on this front; notable actions included the abductions of CIA station chief William F. Buckley in 1984 and U.S. Marine Lt. Col. William R. Higgins in 1988 (both men died in captivity) and the 1992 bombing of the Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires, Argentina. That strike was in retaliation for the death of a Hezbollah leader, Abbas Musawi, who was killed by Israeli forces in an ambush.

Another significant action, never publicly linked to the Iranians, was a well-planned strike in 1995 against U.S. consulate employees in Karachi, Pakistan. A van shuttling the employees to the consulate was ambushed and blockaded by three vehicles: a "blocking car" that cut the van off in traffic, another that boxed it in from behind, and a command-and-control vehicle from which observers never emerged. Gunmen from the first two cars slowly and methodically paced the sides of the consulate van, taking careful aim at the passengers before opening fire with their assault rifles. Two consulate employees were killed, and a third was wounded. It is believed that the MOIS staged the Karachi attack in response to the killing of an Iranian agent, for which the United States was blamed.

Covert campaigns of this sort are an important tool for a country like Iran, which has a sophisticated and highly disciplined intelligence service but which could not afford to risk an overwhelming military strike by the United States. Kidnappings and assassinations, carried out with sufficient deniability, have proved an effective way of eliminating enemies and leveraging the country's geopolitical position without incurring unacceptable risk.

Intelligence Tactics

This history of operations has had significant implications for intelligence missions on both sides of the fence.

For the United States, intelligence efforts would include maintaining databases on every known Iranian diplomat around the world, seeking to identify which ones are also MOIS agents. These files would be continually updated with information about the officials' personal lives, travel patterns and meeting partners. The nuclear program and potential links between Iran and militant groups in other countries also would be areas of focus. The United States could expect assistance with collections from Israel's Mossad, which has always had a robust collection operation on Iran, and from friendly Arab services such as the Jordanians and Egyptians.

Technical means of collection also would be brought to bear: satellites, unmanned aerial vehicles and communication intercepts. All U.S. national assets, including signals intelligence (sigint), imagery intelligence (imint) and human intelligence sources (humint), would be used to correlate information flowing in, in order to form as complete a picture as possible of what the Iranians are doing and what they are likely to do next.

Given its connections to militant groups like Hezbollah, Iran has shaped its collection efforts in the past toward gathering information on potential targets and planning possible retaliatory attacks. In today's setting, collections likely would be conducted by MOIS as well as by Hezbollah agents and Iranian proxies active in Iraq. If strikes were to be carried out, they likely would consist of easily deniable one-off hits and possibly attacks against the assets of governments allied with Washington or American proxies in the region. Strikes against U.S. and British troops in Iraq also would be a possibility. Target selection would be tied to what types of attacks would send the most appropriate signal to the West. It would be imperative that Iran's involvement in the action was not immediately obvious, but could be revealed to or discovered by Western intelligence after the fact.

The Game Today

All of which brings us back to recent developments and what it is that Iran seems to be thinking.

First, there was the Feb. 22 bombing of the Golden Mosque in As Samarra, a highly significant Shiite shrine. One of the interesting things about the attack was that Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei very quickly, and very publicly, blamed the United States and Israel for the bombing, while urging Iraqi Shia not to retaliate against their Sunni countrymen. The statement was attention-getting, considering the degree to which the United States and Iran were cooperating on Iraqi matters prior to the Iraqi elections in December 2005. Khamenei clearly was reiterating to Washington something that has been said before: Iran, with its influence over the Shiite majority, has the means to create considerable problems for the United States in Iraq if that should become necessary. The fact that others have said this as well -- notably senior diplomat and former President Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani -- signals the level of unease that Tehran has in its dealings with Washington.

Iran also has continued to blame "foreigners" for a continuing string of bombings in Khuzestan province, in the oil-producing southwestern region just across the Shatt al Arab from Iraq. The attacks began last summer, around the time of Iran's presidential elections, and ethnic Arab separatists -- the majority group in the province -- have claimed responsibility for some of the bombings. Given Khuzestan's economic significance to Iran, Tehran is particularly sensitive to any instability there. And at least partly because of Khuzestan's proximity to the part of Iraq occupied by British forces, Tehran suspects that dissidents in the province are receiving covert support from MI6 -- which, from an intelligence perspective, is virtually synonymous with the CIA.

IPB Image

In recent weeks, Tehran has shown itself capable of some truly spectacular contortions in its claims about the activities of Western intelligence units. Among other statements, Iran's interior minister recently claimed that Tehran had "specific intelligence" proving that U.S. agents have infiltrated al Qaeda and now are ordering terrorist attacks as part of their attempts to prove their bona fides. During the same speech, the minister -- Mostafa Pour-Mohammadi, who had a long career with Iran's secret police and intelligence agencies -- said that large amounts of explosives found in one of Khuzestan's cities indicated that "there was an extensive plan to deal a blow to the Islamic Republic." Though he did not supply details, the statement itself would seem to indicate that Tehran fears -- or wants to generate fears of -- an escalation in what has been a relatively low-level bombing campaign up to this point.

Iranian media also have carried several claims during the past year that Western agents have been caught spying inside Iran, that U.S. reconnaissance unmanned aerial vehicles and manned aircraft have overflown its airspace, and even that the British have erected towers on the Fao Peninsula to collect sigint from Khuzestan province.

The claims, or at least the fears behind them, are not illogical. Certainly, Tehran is not deriving any comfort from the fact that the U.S. State Department is now creating an Office of Iran Affairs and publicly has stated that one of its purposes will be to promote a democratic transition in Tehran. Up to this point, the State Department has treated Iran as part of a larger bloc of Persian Gulf states; there are only a small number -- less than a dozen -- countries that have their own regional "office" in this sense. The move reflects the importance the Bush administration is placing on Iran as a long-term priority. Or, from Tehran's viewpoint, Washington is stepping up the pressure as well.

With this in mind, it is noteworthy that there have been reports of more executions in Iran of late. According to Amnesty International, Tehran carried out 29 executions in January and February -- nearly one-third of the total (94) in the entirety of 2005. By itself, of course, this statistic means little; Amnesty's reporting could be wrong, or the rate of executions might drop off later in the year, and so forth. And, of course, executions in Iran can be carried out for a wide variety of crimes, and the number of political dissidents among the total is not known.

Nonetheless, this is an indicator worth monitoring. As history has shown, political dissidents are among the first to be targeted when the Iranian regime feels threatened. That is no accident, as it is members of dissident groups who are most likely in Tehran's eyes to be working with foreign intelligence agents seeking to destabilize the regime.

Should Iran's true level of tensions with the West continue to escalate, it is possible that Tehran might return to tactics it has used successfully in the past to safeguard its interests. The movement, then, would not come in the public sphere of nuclear discussions and rhetoric, but in other, much quieter ways around the globe.

Distribution and Reprints This report may be distributed or republished with attribution to Strategic Forecasting, Inc. at www.stratfor.com. For media requests, partnership opportunities, or commercial distribution or republication, please contact pr@stratfor.com.

Posted by: tc399 at March 12, 2006 7:11 PM

OT :

http://www.bloggerheads.com/archives/2006/03/_the_legislativ.asp

if you American Jihadwatchers are worried about the UK being the "weak link in the chain" in the war on terror, then you should read the contents of the link above.

Posted by: archduke at March 12, 2006 7:20 PM

"Of course, it's "crazy".
Do any flaws destroy the whole hypothesis?"

kentim -> if you look for patterns , you'll find them. human beings are hard wired to find patterns - remember the "face on mars", and then it turned out that it was just a lump of rock when higher resolution images were taken?

muslim media does the same - looking for patterns and eventually concluding that the Jews run the world and are behind every terrorist bombing. in their minds, each and every suicide attack in iraq is a mossad operaton.

there just comes a time when you have to stand back and say - hang on a minute - where is the whistleblower? even though the X-Files was kinda cool at the time, ochams razor says that whats more likely is that there WASNT a conspiracy or inside job on 911- more of an intelligence FUBAR for which nobody has been fired.

in a way, the conspiracy stuff diverts folks away from the sheer incompetence - despite billions spent, the twin towers fell. THATS a bigger queston for the U.S. taxpayer. and if i was american i'd be seriously angry about that.
i'd be looking for firings - massive one.

a stalinist kind of purge so to speak - "hey you guys failed - you are fucking fired."

but that didnt happen, because the conspiracy stuff kept everyones attention away from that.

Posted by: archduke at March 12, 2006 7:35 PM

The amorphous Anti-Globalism which seems to attract kentim is suspicious and is on the wrong side in our struggle against Islam: it is part of the Green-Red-Brown Axis analyzed by Alexander Del Valle (Green = Islam; Red = neo-Communist; Brown = neo-Fascist -- all three increasingly coalescing under one nebula, sharing certain presuppositions, among which is the idea that "Globalism" is evil).

Posted by: Dr. Pepper at March 12, 2006 7:47 PM

Re: Islamic websites carry al-Qaida's 'last warning'

Is that a promise?

Posted by: Frank at March 12, 2006 7:48 PM

GrimReaperxxx---

I still love California, just not what has happened to it. After I finish engineering school I'll be force to move back in order to work at NASA's JPL. We'll just have to see if I don't hang myself, maybe I can talk NASA into moving JPL elsewhere, maybe Iowa that place sounds normal enough.

Posted by: billybob at March 12, 2006 7:57 PM

Ronin, what area of Tampa do you live in? The only area I know of with a high muslim population is Temple Terrace, which is a/k/a Temple Terrorist. No known mosques in my area (just east of you).

Posted by: Just_Linda

Linda I didn’t mean my neighborhood had a bunch of muslim’s I was speaking about Tampa in general. I do see a bunch when I go over to the James Haley. I also see a bunch at walmart it is somewhat of a muslim magnet. For the most part they seem happy to isolate themselves, that will help us round them up if it comes to that. As far the posters who think the country will not rally and fight, don’t sell our youth short. Before the war I thought our country was in a world of hurt I wouldn’t have dreamed our young soldiers could do the things I saw them do. They are as good as any generation of warriors we ever produced. They will get the job done.

Posted by: Ronin at March 12, 2006 8:01 PM

I recently read a funny email (I wish I wrote it) about Hillary but have changed the name to Williams for this post--

Rakan Ben Williams was invited to address a major gathering of the Indian Nation on the invention called the Internet. He spoke for an hour. At the conclusion the Tribes sent Rakan Ben Williams an email with a virtual plaque inscribed with his new Indian name - Walking Eagle.

The proud Rakan Ben Williams emailed back that he would always cherish the award. A News reporter inquired to the group of chiefs how they came to
select the new name given Williams. They explained that Walking Eagle is a name given to a bird so full of shit it can no longer fly.

Posted by: Frank at March 12, 2006 8:12 PM

You sure like that word "nebula" Dr. Pepper.
Your "Red-Green-Brown axis" hardly describes the people who are Pro-Constitution/Sovereignty like myself. You can believe what you want. I could probably trace this Del Valle person to a Globalist source.
-----------------------------

Archduke,
If the cause was incompetence or accident they would do the right thing once in awhile. Therefore the "pattern" points to a deliberate pursuit of a common goal based on a common reality-perspective. It does not matter if they are a "cabal" or not, what matters are the words and deeds.

Globalization obviously is resulting in the destruction of our soveriegnty and treaties are superceding the Constitution.

Posted by: kentim at March 12, 2006 8:25 PM

Frank--

Your walking eagle joke sounds more like a Muslim apologist then a terrorist. I suppose a "liberal hippy douche" (from southpark) also fits in nicely. Thanks for sharing, that’s going to be a good bar joke.

Posted by: billybob at March 12, 2006 8:39 PM

And Ocham's Razor is not a determinant of truth. It's just an attempt at a shortcut, a timesaver, an attempt at efficiency.

So all any body has to do is complicate and confuse and; wallah!!!! "I just conned you!". Easy, easy. It's also called "baffle 'em with B.S.".

Posted by: kentim at March 12, 2006 8:51 PM

And another thing, I did not start out with a "presupposition", the fact that I voted for Bush twice and donated money to the "Republican" Senator in my state, who got elected, and have donated to Horowitz hardly points to someone who wishes to believe in what I am saying.

Posted by: kentim at March 12, 2006 8:59 PM

the fact that I voted for Bush twice and donated money to the "Republican" Senator in my state, who got elected, and have donated to Horowitz hardly points to someone who wishes to believe in what I am saying.
Posted by: kentim at March 12, 2006 08:59 PM
---------------

Agreed.

I have voted Republican all my life and for Bush twice besides donations of money to the cause. Informed the RNC that the money was overwith until they fix the problems with our borders and terrorism.

Told my Sentors and COngressmen, no more money and no votes if Dubia went through and guess what, with the efforts of the COmmon American, it has failed.

It is now time to increase the heat on Congress about terrorism and the border.

The Texican.
Freedom, the only choice at any cost.

Posted by: Texican at March 12, 2006 9:43 PM

I voted for Bush and I normally vote Republican but I think this time I will look for someone who I think will stand up for the Americans before the rest of the world. Greedy, you bet, but I'm not a rich, live in a gated community type. It is time to look after jobs, security and the regular joes who make this wheel spin.

Posted by: Ronin at March 12, 2006 10:00 PM

The problem with voting for somebody that looks after the "regular joes" is those people never have the power and money to be a presidential candidate, or their guaranteed not to win. Your best bet is to vote for the lesser of the two or three evils.

Posted by: billybob at March 12, 2006 10:16 PM

Ronin:

Your statements are so true and should be repeated countless times and especially to our politicians.

It is time to take care of America and the Common American or neither will survive.

Maybe with the grace of God, there will be another Reagan step up and led America through this.

The Texican.
Freedom, the only choice at any cost.

Posted by: Texican at March 12, 2006 10:18 PM

Winston Churchill: "Democracy is the worst form of government expect for all the forms that ceded it.

Posted by: billybob at March 12, 2006 10:22 PM

The full story on WND is even more astonishing! Make sure you read it so you can experience first-hand how outrageous these people are - and how stupid they think WE are!!

Rid ourselves of the Jews - not a chance!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: champ at March 12, 2006 10:26 PM

"Maybe with the grace of God, there will be another Reagan step up and led America through this. "

Regan? Just another globalist.

How about a Patrick Henery? George Washington? Thomas Jefferson? Ben Franklin?

Nah, wouldn't want any of those -- damned isolationists and protectionists -- not forward thinking; bad for business after all.

Posted by: witness at March 12, 2006 10:28 PM

Sounds at about the level of the mad-coward/luddite-murderer's screed (which the NY Times published for 'forensic' purposes) scribbled by Ted "Unabomber" Kaczynski.

You can rarely stop really cunning maniacs beforehand. You just keep hunting them down ...through their tools and traces.

Meanwhile, let them rant.

It's easier to home-in on the s.o.b.'s.

And the only thing that 'will bring Americans to their knees' ...would be prayer ...at the victorious end of this un-'holy' terrorists' war.

So 'bloody but unbowed' will be the word whenever these lunatics strike.

They don't understand that we possess the ultimate advantage.

They fight by compulsion.
Slaves fighting to be more perfectly enslaved.

While we battle to remain free.
We know the value of liberty, and will fight that much harder to preserve it.

They secretly despise their fate of "submission", and, while they may be able to talk themselves into a manic state -in order to kill and die- they have only a negative world vision to offer as their goal.

Less joyous, less free, less creative, less honest, less musical, less equal, less conscious.

How can we lose against these losers?

Posted by: profitsbeard at March 12, 2006 10:35 PM

Profitsbeard,

Here, Here. Eloquent stated.

The Texican.
Freedom, the only choice at any cost.

Posted by: Texican at March 12, 2006 10:44 PM

How about a Patrick Henery? George Washington? Thomas Jefferson? Ben Franklin?
Nah, wouldn't want any of those -- damned isolationists and protectionists -- not forward thinking; bad for business after all.
Posted by: witness at March 12, 2006 10:28 PM
---------

Witness:

For President, who and why.

The Texican.
Freedom, the only choice at any cost.

Posted by: Texican at March 12, 2006 10:47 PM

I am starting to become seriously concerned.
Twin-Towers analysis:

http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html

Aside from the obvious, one thing bothers me about this paper, and that is the guy's call for an "international panel" to review the collapses.
-----------------

Yo, Texican, I'm afraid Witness is right. We've(or at least some of us) been living a lie since at least the creation of the Fed.
Trailer--- " America, from Freedom to Fascism"
http://www.freedomtofacism.com/

Posted by: kentim at March 12, 2006 10:50 PM

kentim I had a well meaning but stupid relative send me a simular site "proving" no jet hit the pentagon. The trouble was I knew people killed in the attack and some who helped treat the wounded. The net is a great tool for terrorists but it will never replace the truth. The towers fell because no building can stand 20,000 lps of jet fuel hitting it at that speed, end of story. The trouble with these stories is the never explain why we should forget the fact they commited the attack in the first place. Who cares why it fell, the issue is the hate behind the attack. I thought my muslim killing days were over, now I'm not so sure. I saw a movie once called "highlander" they kept saying "There can be only one". Islam or us, "there can be only one".

Posted by: Ronin at March 12, 2006 11:06 PM

Does anyone know of a website that lists all the various threats from Islamikazies over the last 4 years? and wether or not these "threats" ever came to fruition?

My sense is that none of the actual attacks had any linkable warning. I also suspect that there have been no specific attacks pre-warned, but, the "warnings" did preceed initiatives of some new battle front.

If anyone has a link that shows warnings/attacks please email me at MikeMontana@hotmail.com

As for how to respond to a major attack: Lets be realistic, the Al-Q types have always hyped thier attacks to the point of rediculousness "...the streets will flow with rivers of blood.." So, if this plan is real, and a major 2 phase attack begins, it will be hundreds to maybe thousands of deaths. Not 10k, 100k or 1m. What would be a critical attack? Oh the usual: blow-something-up, sabatoge a key infrastructure, suicide bombing in a city center. We're steeled to it, we expect it, we will survive it. Nukes? Hardly. Mass Bio Weapons? Nope.

Al-Q and its types are capable of guerilla warfare only. They havnt been able to rise above infrequent, limited scope attacks. Really - what can they do?

So, lets say this threat is real and they pull something astounding - say: kill 10k by bringing down a stadium during the March-madness Basketball seriers (as has been suggested in media posts). What should we do? Nuke mecca? No, we should do what is more painful for the avg joe arab - that is go cold-turkey on oil purchases.

We would suffer greatly. But, the Middle East will collapse and spiral into a failed-africa-like-model. Endless regional conflict, spiralling debt - revolutions within each nation... Shit, even a bombing campaign to ensure that NO-ONE gets middle-east oil might be in order. Still, a complete unilateral oil embargo of arab states will be more of a devestation than nuking Mecca.

Hell, some of the really hard core muslims claim that present day Mecca isnt even the Mecca that Mohammed meant.

Posted by: MikeMontana at March 12, 2006 11:15 PM

For President, who and why.

I'll vote for you!

Posted by: witness at March 12, 2006 11:17 PM

Mike no mecca no religion. Allah protects it, no mecca no Allah, or at least one who is not as powerful as the good old BLU82 we would use to burn it.

Posted by: Ronin at March 12, 2006 11:25 PM

For President, who and why.
I'll vote for you!
Posted by: witness at March 12, 2006 11:17 PM
--------------

Thanks witness, would like to, but not electable, not PC at all.

This war can be ended quickly, but the devistation will be enormous across the globe and it appers that is the way we are headed.

The Texican.
Freedom, the only choice at any cost.

Posted by: Texican at March 12, 2006 11:40 PM

Texican what is the downside? Islam will be gone and it will take generations before another enemy gets this powerful

Posted by: Ronin at March 12, 2006 11:56 PM

I fully agree with Texican...
These cavedwellers only know about killing the infidels. I'm going to take out the peaceful Islamowhacos before they get anywhere me.
Islamicfinder.org to find the enemy busineses ans mosques in a nieghborhood near you!

Posted by: Siciliano at March 13, 2006 12:52 AM

The spirit of the Lord says to the uncircumcised philistine named allah!

You have defied the ways of the Lord for to long! The time has come for you to be shaken as never before seen as MY warriors arise in me for such a time as this full of my liberating glory to set the captives free! Your falsehood shall abruptly come to end and as I even now begin to come down in all my glory to overtake all that is not of me in the land! I alone have control over what satan does in the realm of the spirit and in the earth! Allah is the name of the great fallen one whom has tried time after time again to overtake MY kingdom and throne to no avail! The seed of pride in allah shall be cut off with my cleansing fire! Whom is this uncircumcised philistine who taunts MY children in the land? Allah dares to arise against my own? For this he shall see his head cut off by the sword that proceeds out of MY mouth SAYS THE LORD! Even now the sword of my spirit is being released through my own as they release the words of MY spirit against all that is not of me! THE SPIRIT OF ALLAH SHALL BE BROUGHT VERY LOW THIS DAY SAYS THE LORD!! A great humbling will take place in the land of those who have chosen to draw from the resources of pride in allah! THE NECK OF ALLAH WILL BEND AS THE LION OF JUDAH COMES TO RELEASE HIS MIGHTY ROAR AGAINST HIM FOR SUCH A TIME AS THIS!!

1 Samuel 17

45 David said to the Philistine, "You come against me with sword and spear and javelin, but I come against you in the name of the LORD Almighty, the God of the armies of Israel, whom you have defied. 46 This day the LORD will hand you over to me, and I'll strike you down and cut off your head. Today I will give the carcasses of the Philistine army to the birds of the air and the beasts of the earth, and the whole world will know that there is a God in Israel. 47 All those gathered here will know that it is not by sword or spear that the LORD saves; for the battle is the LORD's, and he will give all of you into our hands."

Posted by: Humblewarrior at March 13, 2006 1:33 AM

I think they mistake our reluctance to go to war with weakness.

He's said we don't have the stomach for the sacrifice or a long war. He says we are too soft.

He's wrong.

If he were to strike us now, he has no idea how strong Americans can be.

The MSM has done us no favors by portraying us to the world as a bunch of indecisive frieghtened, shallow children.

Posted by: beth at March 13, 2006 1:37 AM

Is this the nuke Mecca thread? I sure hope we aren't cowards and do EXACTLY that if there is Muslim mega-terrorism on American soil. Mecca Medina Qom would need to be blotted out.

Only problem is, would we know for sure that the terrorists were Muslim? It could be impossible to attribute a nuking of an American city. Then what? What happens if some renegade Chinese or Russian faction nukes an American port city with an unattributable nuke in a cargo container. They do this to have us retaliate and nuke the Muslim "holy" cities so that the Muslims never again sell us oil