| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Robert Spencer | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog |  |
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
Britain has already frozen relations with Iran, and is seeking condemnation of the sailors' and marines' abduction at the United Nations.
Iran's initial "humanitarian" gesture of offering the early release of Faye Turney served to raise international hopes, which Iran can now exploit in using Turney as its main bargaining chip, as well as a propaganda trophy in defiance of the Geneva Convention. "Britain seeks U.N. condemnation of Iran," from Associated Press:
TEHRAN, Iran - Iran may delay the release of the female British sailor if Britain takes the issue to the U.N. Security Council or freezes relations, the country's top negotiator Ali Larijani said Thursday. The Foreign Office in London, meanwhile, said Britain is seeking condemnation of Iran at the United Nations.
The seizure of 15 British sailors and marines, including Faye Turney, the only woman among them, took place during operations in Iraqi waters under a U.N. Security Council mandate, said the Foreign Office official, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak on the subject.
"There are some plans to say something on behalf of the United Nations (about the seized troops) but they have not been finalized," said the official.
Speaking on Iranian state radio, Larijani said: "British leaders have miscalculated this issue." If Britain follows through with its policies on the British sailors and marines detained by Iran last week, Larijani said "this case may face a legal path" — a clear reference to Iran's prosecuting the sailors in court.
Britain asked the Security Council to support a call for the immediate release of the detainees, saying in a statement Wednesday they were operating in Iraqi waters under a mandate from the Security Council and at the request of Iraq, according to council diplomats, speaking on condition of anonymity because the text was not released.
Earlier Thursday, Prime Minister Tony Blair's official spokesman said Britain wanted to resolve the crisis quickly and without having a "confrontation over this."
In a briefing to reporters, the spokesman said British officials had been angered by Tehran's decision to show captured the British sailors and marines on Iranian television.
"Nobody should be put in that position. It is an impossible position to be put in," he said. "It is wrong. It is wrong in terms of the usual conventions that cover this. It is wrong in terms of basic humanity."
"We are not seeking to put Iran in a corner," said the spokesman. "We are simply saying, 'Please release the personnel who should not have been seized in the first place.'"
On Wednesday, Britain announced it was freezing relations with Iran.
Posted by Marisol at March 29, 2007 1:14 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
Wow, freezing relations. How tough of the Brits.
Posted by: Elric66![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at March 29, 2007 1:21 PM
Maggie would of sent them several well aimed missiles for a message instead of bleating to the freakin UN! Good advice from someone on the radio, have informed to iranians they have 30 days to release Brits or face destruction of their one oil refinery, and if that dont work, naval blockage, no mo more fuel and iranians mullahs will be walkin the line of fire.
Posted by: ZenaWarriorPrincess at March 29, 2007 1:26 PM
"Wow, freezing relations. How tough of the Brits"
Oh, grow up. We live in the real world, not a world where you nuke 'em at the drop of a hat. It wouldn't be a world at all for very long, if we did. But of course, a dig at "the Brits" is always the first priority of many posters on this site.
Posted by: JFGR at March 29, 2007 1:27 PM
"Wow, freezing relations. How tough of the Brits"
Oh, grow up. We live in the real world, not a world where you nuke 'em at the drop of a hat. It wouldn't be a world at all for very long, if we did. But of course, a dig at "the Brits" is always the first priority of many posters on this site.
Posted by: JFGR at March 29, 2007 01:27 PM
Who said nuke the Iranians. Appeasement isnt going to get them back. Chamberlin must have been reincarnated. You would have thought the Brits would have learned. You have a better suggestion? Lets here it.
at March 29, 2007 1:30 PM
Can I now assume that the same crowd who has been snarling and gnashing their teeth over the treatment of the Koran and the variety of veggies that the prisoners receive at Camp Gitmo will turn their attention to the British hostages held by the Iranians?? No, I guess I won't hold my breath.....Has CAIR issued a statement yet??
Posted by: maryrose at March 29, 2007 1:32 PM
Speaking on Iranian state radio, Larijani said: "British leaders have miscalculated this issue."
I would say Iran's leaders have "miscalculated this issue."
The dirt-poor, smog-filled, nasty-smelling, unhappy, repression-filled, corrupt land of Iran just got more isolated.
Posted by: Ynkedoodl2 at March 29, 2007 1:32 PM
"We are simply saying, 'Please release the personnel who should not have been seized in the first place.'"
Are apologies next?
Posted by: Seymour Paine at March 29, 2007 1:34 PM
Can I now assume that the same crowd who has been snarling and gnashing their teeth over the treatment of the Koran and the variety of veggies that the prisoners receive at Camp Gitmo will turn their attention to the British hostages held by the Iranians?? No, I guess I won't hold my breath.....Has CAIR issued a statement yet??
Posted by: maryrose at March 29, 2007 01:32 PM
Better question would be "has the British version of CAIR issued a statement?"
at March 29, 2007 1:34 PM
Oh, grow up. We live in the real world, not a world where you nuke 'em at the drop of a hat.
JFGR you dont have to nuke them, just destroy their one and only oil refinery, and destroy military sites and nuke sites. that does not require nukes for their economy to downhill ovenight. their are bombs that do real good damage. just that the Brits need to do it now.
at March 29, 2007 1:37 PM
We're fooling ourselves if we think the US would be doing anything differently. Condi would be over there with a checkbook.
Posted by: pez at March 29, 2007 1:43 PM
JFGR you dont have to nuke them, just destroy their one and only oil refinery, and destroy military sites and nuke sites. that does not require nukes for their economy to downhill ovenight. their are bombs that do real good damage. just that the Brits need to do it now.
Posted by: ZenaWarriorPrincess at March 29, 2007 01:37 PM
Seems JFGR doesnt believe in standing up for oneself. No wonder Britian is being overrun by Muslims.
Posted by: Elric66 at March 29, 2007 1:44 PM
...and slots at the University.
Posted by: pez at March 29, 2007 1:46 PM
New word, to go with "androlepsy" (used at JW many times before): Gynolepsy.
Definition:
The seizing of female hostages, civilian or military, by the forces of one government, in order to engage in diplomatic blackmail of another government.
I hope the boys at Walton Crescent are reading this. If they look, they'll find a lot at JW, especially in the Archives, that will come in handy for their purposes.
This site, they will discover, has singlehandedly and singlemindedly brought back into modern circulation by using correctly a great many words once deemed archaic, or too rare to be usefully employed.
Among them is Shakespeare's beautiful "bezonian" ("Under which king, bezonian? Speak, or die."). For example, there have been many variants of the following phrase:
"Kalashnikov-clutching black-balakalava'ed bezonians, goosestepping smartly down the boulevards of Beirut or Baghdad."
Along with its slow but steady turning around of the S. S. Narrenschiff just before it turns into the S. S. Naufragium, this website offers, at no additional cost, possible immortality by way of its proffered uses, on a well-visited webstie, of certain unusual words, the archaic, the rare and -- as one can see from the initial paragraph above -- even the words that are products of sudden flights of lexicogeny.
Your every mental need, or almost every need, attended to right here. And what you can't get here, you can likely find at www.newenglishreview.org.
Accept no substitutes.
Posted by: Hugh at March 29, 2007 1:46 PM
'In a briefing to reporters, the spokesman said British officials had been angered by Tehran's decision to show captured the British sailors and marines on Iranian television.
"Nobody should be put in that position. It is an impossible position to be put in," he said. "It is wrong. It is wrong in terms of the usual conventions that cover this. It is wrong in terms of basic humanity."'
What does "basic humanity" have to do with Islam? There probably isn't even a word for that concept in Arabic.
We're getting hit on all sides folks. First the felonious flying Imams suing U.S. citizens for snitching on them. (Who do these guys think they are, the Mafia?) Now we have the Ahmadinejad Hostage Crisis Reunion Tour, (it was just so much fun the first time, we had to do it again,) featuring the lie of the hour, that British marines were in Iran's waters. I mean, any lie will do, they've gotten so brazen.
Enough is enough. Time to start fighting fire with fire. Perhaps a few well placed lawsuits based on reverse discrimination or maybe the guy who couldn't get his bacon swiped by the Muslim checker at Walmart could file a suit claiming pain and suffering because she delayed him having his much sought after BLT. I think Alarmed Pig Farmer might be able to stir something up because, after all, Muslims cast dispersions on his livelihood, and he probably has some anxiety that might need to be treated by a doctor so he could get some money for his medical bills.
Oh, and here is a rundown on how the female British sailor is doing. Not that good according to the pictures.
Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at March 29, 2007 2:07 PM
"Wow, freezing relations. How tough of the Brits"
Oh, grow up. We live in the real world, not a world where you nuke 'em at the drop of a hat. It wouldn't be a world at all for very long, if we did. But of course, a dig at "the Brits" is always the first priority of many posters on this site.
Posted by: JFGR
Lighten UP! It's not the Jihadwatchers who are taking a dig at Britain. it's the *iranians*.
Who said anything about nuking 'em? I am sure there are things that can be done short of that. And you know that as well. Maybe a tougher stance so that the Americans won't have a choice but to participate if anything goes down..
I'm not an expert but I know there is more that can be done than Tony bLiar is doing.
I only hope that England will righten the ship in the next election. I heard Scotland was moving in that direction for their upcoming elections as well.
We, the voters, can start by giving our lame leaders a few "shots across the bow".
Noone's taking digs at Britain. We all want the sailors released unharmed and promptly. Some of us are frustrated that none of the responses we have heard have been sufficiently threatening. We are simply fed up with all our guvmints pussyfooting around - no matter the provocation!
That includes France and Germany for sure! They were burning our flags and damaging them EU consulate in the West Bank - and now the Norwegians are sending them MONEY! The EU is trying very hard to send them money. I heard there was some kind of an under-the-table money pipeline going on already.
So we can take digs at all of Europe - and the USA too. We can also wonder who but Australian PM Mr. Howard has any clue down under.
And Spain is experiencing moslems trying to take over the Cathedral of Cordoba!
We can take digs at probably any country but Poland at this time. Their leaders are being ridiculed by the rest of Europe as "ignorant" and "right-wing" and "nationalistic". I say GOOD FOR THEM!
And good for Poland too.
Ultimately good for all of Europe.
Vive la RESISTANCE!!!
Posted by: Allahfanculo at March 29, 2007 2:10 PM
The more Iran screws around, the more resolve will grown in the West to prevent their nuclear ambitions.
Keep screwing, mullahs.
Rave on, Mahmoud.
(At what temperature does a Mahdi melt?)
Posted by: profitsbeard at March 29, 2007 2:20 PM
How about we "free" all those unhappy iranian moslems who are living in our lands and we give them a free ticket back to the iranerland?
Wouldn't that be a very friendly gesture?
Posted by: Allahfanculo at March 29, 2007 2:24 PM
You can tell the West has gotten soft. In times past an act of war like this would have been met with... war.
Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at March 29, 2007 2:37 PM
You can tell the West has gotten soft. In times past an act of war like this would have been met with... war.
Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at March 29, 2007 02:37 PM
We dont need to go to war. We have the UN to solve all the crisises in the world.
/Please note sarcasm
at March 29, 2007 2:39 PM
Only in this post 9/11 whacked out backasswards world we live in now could Iran pull this off. Only an islamic country could get away with something like this right now. Imagine the immediate world-wide OUTRAGE if tables were turned and it was, say, the US who illegally captured Iranian soldiers in Iraqi territory (and to the lib nuts pointing fingers at the US saying 'Well, we did the same thing to Iran! Captured their soldiers in an Iraq raid!' I say to them that we are occupiers of the country (Iraq) and legally have a right to be there, where you (Iran) DO NOT have the legal right to be there -- thus, this is not comparable.) I imagine the UN would have already issued a statement and the Arab League would have already met to discuss how to deal with the aggression of the Americans. But of course, since it's the craziest islamic country out there doing this, and they hold soldiers from a Western country, recently made impotent hang-wringers by the paralyzing colonial guilt forced down our throats via multiculturalism and such, we hear nothing but crickets.
How very sad.
Oh yeah, and only in this whacked out backassward world could a country get away scott-free with not only kidnapping soldiers from another country, holding them hostage, parading them around on tv, and denying human rights groups access to them, but Iran is also getting away with THREATENING the UK if the UK dares to go to the UN about this outrage or take punitive measures such as sanctions. How *DARE* the silly infidel take steps to DEFEND itself!!
And of course, from the rest of the world, we hear... nothing. Nothing, that is, except various pleas to do nothing, let it blow over, give Iran what it wants, etc etc (have any of y'all been over to the BBC's Have Your Say? *GAG* So many ppl, of course, just blindly taking Iran's word that the soldiers were captured in Iranian waters, completely ignoring the solid evidence the UK has to show otherwise... and believe it or not, there was even a few conspiratorists who suggested that the UK ALLOWED their soldiers to go into Iranian waters so that they WOULD BE captured -- of course, giving the US the green light to go to war with Iran. *snort*
Posted by: JenBee at March 29, 2007 2:59 PM
Sometimes you just need to buy time. Like the desires of Neutral Shipping.
The little motley crew of Rich Baby Gulf States seem to want nothing done to Iran.
Will they let us operate from their Soil, or will we be Shooting hundreds of them as they try and stop us?
If were going to have a Party in the sand, are we bringing all our toy's? Are There some toys we have to leave Home? There are some I would like to see Make it but they seem not to be on the list.
I bet Hezbollah gets to being frisky in the near future.
Trouble made like Dagwood Sandwich.
Posted by: flowerknife_us at March 29, 2007 3:06 PM
from Neal Boortz"
"Late news ... Britain now says that it going to seek United Nations condemnation of the Iranian actions. Ohhhhhhhh. I'll bet the pucker factors are at an all time high now in Tehran."
.....appeasement,negotiation,or threat of UN actions are all inappropriate....immediate action is required...
at March 29, 2007 4:00 PM
Here's the playbook Iran will use:
1) Formulate Evil Plan
2) Accuse Great Britain and the USA of having an evil plan
3) Take hostages
4) Accuse hostages of being complicit in Evil Plan
5) Force "confessions" from hostages
6) Offer to release a hostage
7) Retract the hostage release offer when hostage's government acts like it has "stones" for a change
8) Carry out the original Evil Plan
9) Extort USA and Great Britain into going along with Evil Plan by threatening to use harsh words and by acting offended
10) Invite puppet United Nations to send UNIFIL force to "monitor" situation and "protect" victims of Evil Plan
11) Invite United States to pay huge sums of money to offset the cost of Evil Plan
12) Scold United States for not paying more money until more money is paid
13) Repeat steps 1-12
Posted by: Doc Tater at March 29, 2007 5:15 PM
"Who said nuke the Iranians?"
Haven't you been reading the messages on this crisis on this site?
"Appeasement isnt going to get them back. Chamberlin must have been reincarnated. You would have thought the Brits would have learned. You have a better suggestion? Lets here it [sic]"
In international relations, you do not immediately play your trump card. You escalate your response. We're at the beginning of this crisis. You seem to think "appeasement" is anything short of outright war right away.
But why do I bother? Foaming at the mouth is so much more comforting to the ego than confronting real problems in a civilized way.
Posted by: JFGR at March 29, 2007 5:20 PM
The Brits have GPS recordings and satellite imagery showing that the sailors and marines were in IRAQI waters and that the Iranians made an incursion into Iraqi territorial watersto capture them.
Posted by: CGW at March 29, 2007 5:43 PM
Just a thought,
Why the woman? Out of all 15, why is the woman being played out in negotiation?
Because it plays to the media well?
Put her on the table, negotiate, then take her back off the table.
Are they trying to work public opinion?
Additionally, have you noticed the silence in the media about the 15 soldiers? Nothing.....
you could hear a pin drop. Is this because Iran has this much power even without a nuclear bomb? Or is this the calm before the storm?
Posted by: alaskan1000 at March 29, 2007 5:52 PM
"Who said nuke the Iranians?"
Haven't you been reading the messages on this crisis on this site?
JFGR is right. I have read enough nonsense about British politicians lacking backbone (which they may well be lacking backbone - could be true - but it is not backbone that is required here) and what Maggie would do.
You also remember that Carter tried a rescue mission for American hostages and it all went badly wrong.
Exactly what are Blairs options in this crisis?. It does not seem he has much.
It basically amounts to diplomacy of the positive (overtures to the Iranians) and negative kind (isolation), using friends (UN, EU, other countries), putting some kind of pressure (economic) on Iran and military solutions.
The ball is is Iran's court.
They can string this out for as long as they want to (which I have not doubt they will).
They want to haggle here:
- return of Iranians captured in Iraq
- nuclear concessions (no chance)
- a grovelling apology by Britain
My option is that we do nothing, carry on as if we have lost no one. Sounds mercenary, but it is not. In other words get on with sorting out Iraq and other problems. And whatever demands they make, do not give in. The Iranians will realise that they are not much value as bargaining chips - then there is the case - do they execute them, imprison them or let them go? We can keep pressure on them in that time, but the key point is not to give into blackmail.
It is rather similar to the 5 Bulgarian nurses 1 Palestianian doctor being tried in Libya for infecting 30 Libyan children HIV/AIDS (the evidence ). This has been going on for years.
There is no way Bulgaria will concede to Libya when the evidence looks like it was Libya's shoddy medical procedures that infected the children. Libya will either have to execute them, imprison them (which given length of trial it has amounted to) or let them go.
I favour the long option.
And this crisis has the power to isolate Iran and make other countries realise that they are rogue regime. It puts the Iran nuclear issue back to the top of the agenda.
at March 29, 2007 6:10 PM
Iran may delay the release of the female British sailor if Britain takes the issue to the U.N. Security Council or freezes relations.
This is the Sunnah in action.
* 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 *
It was called blackmail back then, and it's called blackmail now. But, whatever you call it, this is what God commands in Koran 33:21: emulate Mohammed, an accomplished blackmailer, one of the best ever, be like Mo.
It was the blackmailer Mohammed who, in the so-called Expedition to Nakhlah, did his first felony murder (by indirect command) in a caravan heist in 624 AD. When his eight Companions assaulted a caravan of four, one caravaner died, one fled, one was injured, he and another were taken captive... kidanpped for blackmail. Mohammed and his felonious Companion Moslems collected.
* 610 * 623 * 632 * 732 * 1066 * 1215 * 1453 * 1492 * 1683 * 1928 * 1948 * 1996 * 2001 *
By contrast, here is how the famed football school University of Southern California reports Islam today:
Today, technology is helping bring Islam into the homes of millions of people, Muslim and otherwise. There is a blessing in all this of course...
Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer at March 29, 2007 6:36 PM
Iran may delay the release of the female British sailor if Britain takes the issue to the U.N. Security Council or freezes relations.
This is the Sunnah in action.
* 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 *
It was called blackmail back then, and it's called blackmail now. But, whatever you call it, this is what God commands in Koran 33:21: emulate Mohammed, an accomplished blackmailer, one of the best ever, be like Mo.
It was the blackmailer Mohammed who, in the so-called Expedition to Nakhlah, did his first felony murder (by indirect command) in a caravan heist in 624 AD.
When his eight Companions assaulted a caravan of four, one caravaner died, one fled, one was injured, he and another were taken captive... kidanpped for blackmail. Mohammed and his felonious fellow Moslems collected.
* 610 * 623 * 632 * 732 * 1066 * 1215 * 1453 * 1492 * 1683 * 1928 * 1948 * 1996 * 2001 *
By contrast, here is how the famed football school University of Southern California reports Islam today:
Today, technology is helping bring Islam into the homes of millions of people, Muslim and otherwise. There is a blessing in all this of course...
Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer at March 29, 2007 6:37 PM
The only thing these people respect is the use of overwhelming force, or the credible threat of overwhelming force.
Unfortunately, the UK lost credibility by considering taking it to the UN.
I think their best bet would be to cancel all military leave to indicate to the Iranians that there may be more than just a dozen or so Brits on their soil.
The world has gone insane.
Posted by: Thunder Pig at March 29, 2007 7:03 PM
Stop all companies worldwide from any and all work for or with Iran. Seal up their ports, especially any oil; shipments. The only thing that can hurt these imbecilic bastards is cutting off the money spigot. If the Iranians get hungry enough, maybe they will do the right thing and remove the mullahs.
These crazy fanatics must be isolated.
Jimmy Carter needs his ass kicked for not bombing one city each day they held the US people back in '79..
These crazy fanatics must be isolated.
at March 29, 2007 8:16 PM
Total and complete embargo now, then let the process stagnate untill they release the soldiers or their population gets the message and takes the action that will lift the embargo. I agree that death from inside would be a much better fate for these muslims to go through.I WOULD LIKE TO BOMB THESE AS@#$%HO!@#$% BACK TO THE STONEAGE, but we have the science, technology and ,evil minded people that can do all of the attitude adjusting that needs to be done and not get our hands dirty with this scum!!!!
Posted by: OLD SARGE at March 29, 2007 9:00 PM
If Britain wants to avoid a conflict, maybe send in Jesse Jackson- America's best negotiator. If Iran will not negotiate, then strike!
Posted by: The Resistance at March 29, 2007 9:16 PM
In Islam, "humiliation" is one of the most important sins to be avoided by Moslems, but must be imposed on "infidels"--that is free people, who do not believe in the horse-manure that goes by the name of "Islam".
That is the tactics they are using with the British sailors and marines.
That is why Gitmo is a sin that Islamics (cum Western "useful idiots") are determined to wipe out.
The remedy?
"Humiliate" the Islamics every chance we get. They understand this. They must be made to realize that they are the lowest of the low in our estimation in this contest between the West and the troglodytes crawling out from under the rocks of their caves.
Islamics are the scum of the earth. In our eyes. and those are the only eyes out of which I am looking.
They don't like it? Let 'em squeal like the creatures that they are.
Posted by: unicorns62000 at March 29, 2007 11:20 PM
unicorns62000:
I think you are exactly right--shame needs to be employed. Iran needs to be treated with all of the "respect" that is due a high school dropout who joins a street gang and terrorizes old ladies. The lack of respect needs to clear and utterly dismissive. Dismissive humor needs to be employed, and broadcast to the ME.
There is no doubt that Islam is dangerous and that we need to help people wake up to the threat, but that doesn't mean we should pass up any opportunity to shame these Jihad-idiots for what they are.
Such tough soldiers for Allah, mistreating a woman making her sign a letter that isn't even written in proper English. Aren't those guys tough and macho in their "submission" to Allah!?!?! Couldn't get anyone in Iran capable of writing a error free letter? Probably the same idiot who at first confirmed the coordinates of the British vessel---coordinates that are in Iraqi waters.
What scientific developments are they responsible for? Cured any diseases? Provided aid to those suffering from poverty or the impact of natural disaster?
The Iranians have one oil refinery in their entire country!!!!! The country has to import gasoline. I wonder why that is . .. could it be the relative absence of Western companies and expertise.
We need to create and distribute propaganda that mocks the pride of these utterly pathetic societies. Comparing them regimes like the USSR and Nazi Germany does them an incredible injustice, as the USSR and Germany were willing to take on legitimate armies, not just isolated individuals.
An idea for a cartoon: a story about a Jihadist who disguises himself as woman and dresses in a burka in order to escape capture. When he argues with a non-Muslim about the Koran, he can make some idiotic statement about his horse . . .
A second idea for a cartoon: a comparison of great books in the history of mankind and what they are about, the Koran segment can focus on toilet paper and wiping one's behind
at March 30, 2007 12:57 AM
J. Sobieski,
Any Iranian "Republican Guards" taken in Iraq should, after stringent interrogation, be transported to Guantanamo Bay, dressed there in the white idiot prison garb, complete with pill-box cap, and taken muzzled and in chains to the interrogation chamber.
No need to report neither their capture nor transport to the monkey-boy in Teheran nor to his mean-looking, always-angry (constipated) be-turbaned mullah bosses.
Unfortunately, again we have caved to the weak sisters in our establishment: Red Cross facilities at Gitmo, white gloves for handling that toilet-paper substitute called the "koran," and allowing the Islamic animals there to spit and fling shit, and piss out of their cages towards their keepers.
Even so, although Gitmo is a country-club for these jihadist swine, incarceration there does humiliate them.
After the disappearance of Iranian "Republican Guards," with nary a word about their whereabouts, the--as I understand it--only gasoline refinery in Iran should be made inoperable (how this can be done I leave to some military genius's imagination).
Companies such as Germany's Siemens, which is instrumental in facilitating Iran's nuclear ambitions, should be barred from operating in the U.S. nor receive contracts from American corporations until such a time as they cease supporting Iran's nuclear ambitions (it will be an icy day in hell [poor mohammed, he'd be freezing his scaly bum off there]were this to take takes place.
Respect is what these degenerates (Moslems) demand; respect is what we should deny them at every turn.
No, we do not hate them; hate is reserved for something you fear. We despise them and their entire charade, starting with the unwholesome progenitor of this concoction that we dignify by treating it as if it were something to be taken seriously. Dismantling their "holy" books is akin to sorting through monkey turds to find undigested berries.
Like so much feces, they and their "teachings" deserve nothing but our disgust.
Posted by: unicorns62000 at March 30, 2007 1:52 AM
Freezing relations?
Whats next? wagging a finger or two
at March 30, 2007 2:56 AM
"Unfortunately, the UK lost credibility by considering taking it to the UN."
On the contrary, it showed up Russia for the perfidious state which it still is, and demonstrated yet again that we can still not trust them in the struggle against Islam.
Posted by: JFGR at March 31, 2007 6:07 PM
A couple well placed bombs should do the trick, no?
Once a few high ranking government officials have their homes toppled down on them, I'm sure Mr. Ahmadinejad will be singing a different tune.
Anyone remember when Colonel Gaddafi suddenly had the sense bombed into him? Ronald Reagan put a quick end to his antics. Perhaps Iran needs a little taste of the same medicine.
Posted by: NateTheOkay at April 2, 2007 11:13 PM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: Comments on articles are unmoderated, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Jihad Watch or Robert Spencer. Comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying may be summarily deleted. However, the fact that particular comments remain on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Robert Spencer of the views expressed therein.)