| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
So say Russian intelligence sources, although the Russian Defense Ministry denies it. From the Jerusalem Post:
The United States will be ready to launch a missile attack on Iran's nuclear facilities as soon as early this month, perhaps "from 4 a.m. until 4 p.m. on April 6," according to reports in the Russian media on Saturday.According to Russian intelligence sources, the reports said, the US has devised a plan to attack several targets in Iran, and an assault could be carried out by launching missiles from fighter jets and warships stationed in the Persian Gulf.
Russian news agency RIA Novosti quoted a security official as saying, "Russian intelligence has information that the US Armed Forces stationed in the Persian Gulf have nearly completed preparations for a missile strike against Iranian territory."
The Russian Defense Ministry rejected the claims of an imminent attack as "myths." There was no immediate response from Washington.
Posted by Robert at April 2, 2007 10:46 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
It will be a Good Friday if we hit Iran
Posted by: Elric66![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at April 2, 2007 10:51 AM
There will be no attack on Good Friday. Bush does not have the political clout to do it.
Posted by: sounder at April 2, 2007 10:54 AM
Too bad the US and British nations aren't 1/4 of the Great Shaitans we're made out to be.
Our troubles would have been over by now if we were.
at April 2, 2007 10:55 AM
Too bad the US and British nations aren't 1/4 of the Great Shaitans we're made out to be.
Our troubles would have been over by now if we were.
Posted by: A_Plague_on_Both_Houses at April 2, 2007 10:55 AM
Amen. Shaitan wouldnt put up with this shiite.
Posted by: Elric66 at April 2, 2007 10:56 AM
smoke in the wind...and Islam knows it...
Posted by: exsgtbrown at April 2, 2007 11:05 AM
Sounder:
"There will be no attack on Good Friday. Bush does not have the political clout to do it."
Perfect timing! If his clout is THAT bad then what does it matter...could it get any worse?
What does anyone want to bet that Bush's numbers rapidly climb if/when we attack?!?! I predict they jump to OVER 60%.
Posted by: Ponch at April 2, 2007 11:06 AM
I dunno. Could be disinformation by the Russians, who are CLEARLY on the side of the Iranians.
That said, the supercarrier USS Nimitz (CVN-68) and its support contingent Carrier Group 11 put to sea for the Persian Gulf this morning. That's a lot of "floating diplomacy".
Ollie North said last night that we ought to do a few things immediately, and I liked them all:
(1) Take out Iran's major oil port facility -- not the whole port, just the facility.
(2) Obtain an agreement from the Bahrainis that they would stop refining oil for Iran into gasoline, which they then ship back to Iran for consumer use.
(3) Obtain an agreement from the Germans to stop allowing Iranian undocumented travel through Frankfurt (they pass them through to England without papers).
(4) Expel the entire Iranian consular staff from London, every one of them, plus their families, and put 'em on the next plane out.
It ALL sounds good to me. Ollie North for Secy of Defense!
Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at April 2, 2007 11:07 AM
If I were Tony Blair and I knew that an American attack on Iran was imminent, I would do everything in my power -- including grovel and apologise -- to free my service personnel before the strike. They will almost certainly be executed otherwise.
Posted by: Charles Martel at April 2, 2007 11:08 AM
The necessity of an attack upon Iran should no longer be a question mark for anyone.
This is a global war with Islam. Look at Iraq bombings -- getting only worse over time with continued support from Syria and Iran. Look at the reconstitution of the Taliban in Afghanistan and now Pakistan.
Look at Dearborn, Michigan and Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Look at the 32 CAIR offices across the United States.
Look at Eurabia.
Look at Darfur.
Good, you've looked. Now you can no longer claim to be blind.
Fight the war or surrender.
Posted by: Foehammer at April 2, 2007 11:09 AM
Good, you've looked. Now you can no longer claim to be blind.
Posted by: Foehammer at April 2, 2007 11:09 AM
Some are just willingly blind. Also there are some that do see but are unwilling to admit wha is needed to win this war.
Posted by: Elric66 at April 2, 2007 11:11 AM
@Elric66: Indeed. But that doesn't mean I'm letting anyone off the hook.
Posted by: Foehammer at April 2, 2007 11:15 AM
"What does anyone want to bet that Bush's numbers rapidly climb if/when we attack?!?! I predict they jump to OVER 60%."
...probably true...but the dhimmicrats would be screaming IMPEACHMENT>....
at April 2, 2007 11:16 AM
@Elric66: Indeed. But that doesn't mean I'm letting anyone off the hook.
Posted by: Foehammer at April 2, 2007 11:15 AM
They have no excuse for being ignorant. I agree wholeheartly with that.
at April 2, 2007 11:18 AM
Good Friday eh?
2007 Phases of the Moon
Universal Time
NEW MOON Last QTR
d h m d h m
APR. 17 11 36 APR. 10 18 04
http://aa.usno.navy.mil/data/docs/MoonPhase.html#y2007
We started bombing Serbia over Easter; but I doubt that we will do it this time because:
Full Moon
d h m
APR. 2 17 15
at April 2, 2007 11:29 AM
It appears Olie missed the most important things...
Nukes???
I suppose he assumed all of us expected that. You attack all at once and not in stages. All this diplomacy stuff is meaningless. In fact I don't care if the Iranian diplomates stay or go in London or what the Germans do. All that matters is you bring force.
Nuclear sites and military sites must be targeted. Also the Iranian navy and air force should be put out of service. It should be a total air campaign. No need for ground forces. Our goal should be to weaken and if they gain their strength back you do it again every so many years. Also the Iranian government and certain leaders should also be targeted. Even if we don't get them it will keep them on the move.
Russians are just throwing up dust. Who knows what side they are really on. In truth I think they just want to prove they still have a intelligence service and they can get a story.
Sort of like the major news networks trying to be first with the news. It might be right or it could be wrong. From some reason I think our leaders don't have the guts. I could be proven wrong however. Georgie don't screw it up. Don't get cute with special forces or anything. More rubble...less trouble....
at April 2, 2007 11:39 AM
witness
I tend to agree. They would attack on a new moon when we have the greatest advantage. Unless we are doing this reverse psychology crap by doing the unexpected. Of course the full moon would not stop us from being successful (although it could be a tad more dangerous).
If we really wanted to funny we should attack on the night of the crescent moon! No chance of that because we don't want to offend.
Posted by: greatcometof1577 at April 2, 2007 11:45 AM
Not going to happen.
Posted by: KAOSKTRL at April 2, 2007 11:51 AM
"Video: Feinstein rebuke cools GOP senator's Iran 'regime change' rhetoric"
David Edwards and Mike Sheehan
Published: Monday April 2, 2007
quote
Sen. Kit Bond (R-MO) appears on CNN's 'Late Edition' advocating a change of leadership in Iran, suggesting that the use of military force may be the only way to bring about the fall of Iran's ruling class.
"Unfortunately, it doesn't look like there is any other option other than regime change," says Bond. "I would hope that other nations would be willing to join with the [United Nations] Security Council and start employing escalating sanctions on Iran to force them to change their way with nuclear weapons, or even to bring about a regime change in Iran."
Another guest, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), criticizes hints of military force during a time of sensitive diplomatic negations for the safe return of 15 British sailors that have been detained by Iran. "Cooler heads have to prevail," she says.
end quote
She meant to say:
Mullahs have to prevail?
US Army Mobilization WWI from 0.2 to Victory 19mo
at April 2, 2007 11:56 AM
For years I've said an attack on Iran was the only smart strategic outcome to entering Iraq. I steadfastly stick by those earlier statements.
So, if anyone thinks we won't attack Iran -- think on this -- I predicted we would be back in Iraq in 10 years and that was a tougher call.
Posted by: Foehammer at April 2, 2007 12:04 PM
For years I've said an attack on Iran was the only smart strategic outcome to entering Iraq. I steadfastly stick by those earlier statements.
So, if anyone thinks we won't attack Iran -- think on this -- I predicted we would be back in Iraq in 10 years and that was a tougher call.
Posted by: Foehammer at April 2, 2007 12:04 PM
Foe, this is a war that is inevitable. The longer we wait, the tougher it will be and more lives will me lost. The only thing appeasement does is cost more lives down the road.
at April 2, 2007 12:07 PM
Feinstein: "Cooler heads have to prevail,"
Old Atlantic: "She meant to say:
"Mullahs have to prevail?"
That's the reason the world is in this mess, cooler heads up against hot heads. With Feinstein like thinkers, we'll "cooler heads" ouselves into submission.
Posted by: sounder at April 2, 2007 12:08 PM
So, if anyone thinks we won't attack Iran -- think on this -- I predicted we would be back in Iraq in 10 years and that was a tougher call.
We WILL attack iran -- we have no choice; I was surprised it wasn't last year.
The ape says he is going to destroy Israel and the US. I believe him.
Exactly the timetable? I think the iranians know more about this that we do for various reasons.
Yes, they WILL try to drag Israel into the mess.
And Britian?
They'll be there too -- the promise they made will have been to a government that will "no longer exist;" therefore, the promise will be void.
Stay tuned.
Posted by: witness at April 2, 2007 12:19 PM
quote
That's the reason the world is in this mess, cooler heads up against hot heads. With Feinstein like thinkers, we'll "cooler heads" ouselves into submission.
Posted by: sounder [TypeKey Profile Page] at April 2, 2007 12:08 PM
end quote
Its surprising that is not a command in the Quran to Dhimmis. Maybe it is.
Posted by: Old Atlantic at April 2, 2007 12:33 PM
Charles Martel
If I were Tony Blair and I knew that an American attack on Iran was imminent, I would do everything in my power -- including grovel and apologise -- to free my service personnel before the strike. They will almost certainly be executed otherwise.
So what? While I dont want Iran to execute them, if I was myself (and not Tony Blair who has behaved pusillanimously), I would not dance to Iran's tune. Kissinger observed over the weekend that Iran respects strength not weakness. And he is right. I dont equate grovelling with strength.
Even if Blair abjectly humiliated himself, there is no guarantee that they will be returned.
At the end of the day, service personel know the risks of their job if they fall into the hands of the enemy and I would not advise allowing Britain to be blackmailed over their lives.
It is a bad policy, if terrorist countries know they can bring a country to its knees by blackmail.
All leaders must have steel and courage in their characters.
Manoeuvering some destroyers to shell Iran's only oil refinery, shelling it and freezing financial assets of theirs would seem sensible.
And I would not mention one word to Iran about the seaman. Iran would be puzzled if the British Government did not even complain.
at April 2, 2007 12:41 PM
Well, Blair (and his party) are Nancy boys without the cajones or understanding of a Thatcher or a Churchill.
So they have to depend on America ?
The projected strike ?
The sooner the better.
Posted by: dgene at April 2, 2007 12:47 PM
Oh yeah, like the Russians would know. Oh, maybe the Democrats went and told them since they do get so cozy with them - since FDR the Democrats have had a pretty cozy relationship with the communists.
We even see their coziness to this day - but I don't believe that the Russians know anything.
Keep in mind all the braying (by donkeys) that would go on if Bush bypassed Congress, the UN and all the left wing idiots in Europe.
Posted by: R_not at April 2, 2007 12:59 PM
UK Infidel Lover
My point is that Blair's prostrate behaviour at this time may be indicative of knowledge of an impending strike. If an attack is going to occur, Blair will have lost little in attempting to gain the sailors' freedom.
Iran will not be in a position to gloat.
Posted by: Charles Martel at April 2, 2007 12:59 PM
Morgaan Sinclair wrote:
"Ollie North for Secy of Defense!"
Oliver North? That brings back memories of 1980s news reports. The Iran-Contra affair!
And what did Ollie North do? He sold weapons to the Iranians!
And why did he sell weapons to the Iranians? In order to fund the 'Contra' terrorist group in Nicaragua. The Contras committed countless atrocities against civilians, and instilling terror into the civilan population was their principal military tactic.
It seems that some right-wing American conservatives are happy to do deals with Islamists and support terrorists.
Posted by: schmegel at April 2, 2007 1:23 PM
The contra terrorist group!
...
shmeg you are an idiot. Also, you are a kid. You don't remember these events. You weren't old enough then. So who taught you your stupid twisted version of history? You are something of a Nazi symp, aren't you?
nabi ZK
Posted by: zonie kafir at April 2, 2007 2:03 PM
Well, Schmegel ...
I think things look a little bit different to us now than they did then. We made a mistake with Saddam, too. And we lost a ton of materiel in Afghanistan that's now being used against us.
I don't think Ollie North is taking the wrong stand now. Do you? Do you think Ollie is doing "deals with Islamists and support terrorists" now???
Do you?
Do you think he's wrong about this? He's had the best ideas I've heard yet.
Or, if you don't like the ideas, what do you think we should do???
Schmegel for Secy of Defense!! (on a probationary basis).
Hit it, Schmegel!!
Cheers,
at April 2, 2007 2:03 PM
I am surprised the idiot Russians don't have the pilot's underwear sizes and what they will be eating for breakfast. Their "news" is so off the wall in 3rd world bs it is like watching CNN hyped on old Enquirer space alien stories.
As for schmegel's comment on Oliver North and schmegel's leftist charges the Contras terrorized civilians.......
I guess that is why the Nicaraguans VOTED IN THE CONTRAS and tossed out the communists.
Get your facts straight comrade and loose the grudge on Ollie as the people selling arms and WMD's to Iran are Germans and Europeans.....NOT AMERICANS.
Posted by: Lame Cherry at April 2, 2007 2:05 PM
Charles Martel ...
I think you might be right. But I think also that (who was it said this?) if we hit the harbor and shut down their economy, they will publicly behead all 15 of those sailors. So get 'em back first if possible.
But enough of these creepy, creepy people!!!!
Pitooey!
Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at April 2, 2007 2:06 PM
Perhaps appeasement is the answer. That's right...get the 15 sailors back by promising Iran that we will never hold it against them. Make as many promises as it takes until their (republican) guard is down.
Then let them have it.
It is good for the gander.
-XRDC
Posted by: XRDC at April 2, 2007 2:33 PM
Charles Martel ...
I think you might be right. But I think also that (who was it said this?) if we hit the harbor and shut down their economy, they will publicly behead all 15 of those sailors. So get 'em back first if possible.
But enough of these creepy, creepy people!!!!
Pitooey!
Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at April 2, 2007 02:06 PM
Nothing short of groveling may get them back. Groveling to the enemy is never good.
at April 2, 2007 2:36 PM
I was dazed by Morgaan's disarmingly polite response, but then up popped Lame Cherry...
"As for schmegel's comment on Oliver North and schmegel's leftist charges the Contras terrorized civilians.......
I guess that is why the Nicaraguans VOTED IN THE CONTRAS and tossed out the communists.
Get your facts straight comrade "
Facts?! Well, Comrade Cherry, here is a fact: the CURRENT elected president of Nicaragua is one Daniel Ortega, who, you might recall, was the leader of the Sandinista government in the 1980s.
at April 2, 2007 2:53 PM
"And why did he sell weapons to the Iranians? In order to fund the 'Contra' terrorist group in Nicaragua. The Contras committed countless atrocities against civilians, and instilling terror into the civilan population was their principal military tactic"
posted by Schmegel above
Sorry Schmegel, you are seriously misinformed or deliberately misleading in your statements about the Contras. I was there and am very familiar with who committed the atrocities. I saw the physical proof as well as talked personally to the civilian people who were tortured. You have the guilty parties reversed.
However, the arms deal did sicken me. I have never been sure as to what extent Ollie played. I like him, but that taint on his past could hinder his effectiveness. I believe his intentions were and are good, and he almost has a grasp on who the real enemy is in this war.
As to Good Friday, I sincerely hope it is a good friday. We need to get this over with. We have to determine battle lines and get started. A couple of "holy" sites in another nearby country would be a good "dessert" for Good Friday. I do not like the present strategy of dragging everything out for 30 or 40 years. Some people need to be shown the door back to the stone age from whence they came and wish to drag us into!
Posted by: TexasInfidel at April 2, 2007 3:05 PM
The Reagan administration maintained the balance of power between Iran and Iraq during their war. That was smart.
Posted by: pez at April 2, 2007 3:08 PM
Elric66 ...
Yeah, I know. Groveling is like blood to a shark.
I confess I just don't know what to do. We have GOT to get off OIL. We are paying these people to f*ck with us. Damn! Damn!
Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at April 2, 2007 3:14 PM
***** JUST IN: LARIJANI BLINKS *****
Dare I hope? I think this establishes that the Guard acted without the full influence of the Iranian Supreme Council.
Iranian Diplomat: No Need to Try Britons
Iranian Negotiator Says No Need to Try Captive Britons, Seeks Diplomatic Resolution
By NASSER KARIMI
The Associated Press
TEHRAN, Iran - Iran's chief international negotiator on Monday called for an end to "the language of force" in the dispute over 15 British sailors captured in contested waters of the Persian Gulf and said there was no need to put the crew on trial.
The comments from Ali Larijani, who last week had suggested that the crew "may face a legal path," came as both Iran and Britain appeared to be seeking a way to soften their approach to the dispute. Earlier Monday, Iranian state radio said there would be no more broadcasts of the detained crew, though it said all 15 captive Britons had admitted illegally entering Iranian waters.
And in London, an official said Britain had agreed to consider discussing with Iran how to avoid future disputes over contested waters in the Persian Gulf. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the dispute.
Larijani said his country's priority "is to solve the problem through proper diplomatic channels."
"We are not interested in letting this issue get further complicated," he told Britain's Channel 4 television news. "We definitely believe that this issue can be resolved and there is no need for any trial."
Britain contends the sailors were in Iraqi waters, however, and has refused Iranian demands for an apology. It has also criticized the airing of footage of four of the sailors confessing so far, saying the statements appeared coerced and the broadcasting of captured military personnel violated international norms.
Larijani, the top Iranian negotiator in all his country's foreign dealings, had suggested last week that the eight sailors and seven marines might be put on trial. Iranian television has aired footage of several of the crew members appearing to admit that they trespassed in Iraqi waters.
Larijani called for all involved to stop using "the language of force."
"There is a difference of view between the UK government and the Iranian government, and this issue should be resolved bilaterally," he said.
On Britain's part, "a guarantee must be given that such violation will not be repeated," he added,
Larijani also called for a delegation "to review the case, to clarify the case, first of all to clarify whether they have been in our territorial waters at all." He did not say who might be in such a delegation.
"Through sensationalism, you cannot solve the problem," he said.
In video Sunday, the captives appeared on the state-run Arabic-language TV channel Al-Alam in separate clips, pointing at the same map of the Persian Gulf.
The first sailor, who was identified as Royal Marine Capt. Chris Air, said the Iranians supplied the group with GPS coordinates which he said were "apparently" in Iranian waters.
Air pointed with a pen to a location on the map where he said two boats left a warship of the U.S.-led coalition in Iraq around 8:30 a.m. on March 23. He said the seven marines and eight navy sailors were captured around 10 a.m.
He said "we were seized apparently at this point here on their maps and on the GPS they've shown us, which is inside Iranian territorial waters."
The second sailor, identified as Lt. Felix Carman, pointed to an area on the map and said that location was where he and the 14 others were arrested.
"I'd like to say to the Iranian people, I can understand why you are so angry about our intrusion into your waters," he said.
Britain has released its own maps and GPS coordinates showing their location to be in Iraqi waters at the time of the capture.
In a letter sent in response to a note from Iranian officials, Britain agreed to consider discussions about how to avoid similar disputes in the future, said the British official. Britain's response most of which has been kept secret may have prompted the report Monday from Iran's state-run radio.
British Prime Minister Tony Blair's spokesman earlier in the day called the broadcast confessions "stage-managed," and said Britain had not changed its demand for the sailors' unconditional release.
The 15 Britons were detained by Iranian naval units on March 23 while patrolling for smugglers as part of a U.N.-mandated force monitoring the Persian Gulf. They were seized by Iranian naval units near the mouth of the Shatt al-Arab, a waterway that has long been a disputed dividing line between Iraq and Iran.
Al-Alam broadcast longer videos of the Britons earlier this week, including footage on Friday of captured marine Nathan Thomas Summers apologizing for entering Iranian waters "without permission" and admitting to trespassing in Iranian waters.
Al-Alam also aired video on Wednesday showing Faye Turney, the only woman in the group, wearing a headscarf and saying: "Obviously we trespassed." Iran has also made public three letters purportedly written by Turney. The last letter contained an apology.
Associated Press writer Paisley Dodds contributed to this report from London.
Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Copyright © 2007 ABC News Internet Ventures
at April 2, 2007 3:21 PM
Sky news:
Iran says it wants to solve the crisis over the 15 British military personnel by "diplomatic means" and sees no need to put the troops on trial.
Iran's chief international negotiator Ali Larijani told Channel 4 that Iran's priority "is to solve the problem through proper diplomatic channels."
"We are not interested in letting this issue get further complicated," he said.
He called for a delegation "to review the case, to clarify the case, first of all - to clarify whether they have been in our territorial waters at all".
Is this a chink of light or another game?
Posted by: Mert at April 2, 2007 3:21 PM
Morgaan beat me to it:)
Posted by: Mert at April 2, 2007 3:23 PM
Back in the day, when one power defeated another in a military conflict, it took territory. Perhaps Iranian off-shore oil deposits and Kharg Island. Let the left continue to complain. Kharg Island would be an excellent air base.
http://www.nioc-otc.com/Webpages/kharge.htm
Posted by: pez at April 2, 2007 3:36 PM
Mert, it's only because my brain is wired to the internet.
at April 2, 2007 3:41 PM
I was hoping that when the Nimitz put to sea this morning it would have this effect on the Iranian diplomat community.
Carrying a big stick ... and pound the damned floor like a giant as you go.
Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at April 2, 2007 3:45 PM
Morgaan can see the matrix!
at April 2, 2007 4:01 PM
Today is the 25th anniversary of the invasion of the Falklands and UK TV History aired a great documentary about American shuttle diplomacy between London and Buenos Aires in the days leading up to the war in the Falklands.
Secretary Haig mentioned implicitly warning the Argentinean Junta that Thatcher would fight, Britain would prevail and the Junta would fall as a result. He also mentioned the moment when the press in America leaked the fact that we were getting Sidewinder missiles from the US. But in Secretary Haig’s defence he had already warned Galtieri that America would back Britain in a shooting war. It was also mentioned that America would provide a carrier but Margaret declined the offer.
Now fast forward twenty five years and to the day we have a PM in a deadlock with a government not unlike Galtieri’s. Has Secretary Haig put it himself, there were too many people to veto a peace plan and nobody who could agree it.
Of course the difference is the Americans aren’t offering missiles and a carrier today, they already have lots of missiles and warships on the spot for their own use.
My point is that just like Argentina there is a chance that Iran will get war even if they all want to avoid it.
Posted by: Mert at April 2, 2007 4:23 PM
No, not exactly, Mert.
I ... am ... the Matrix ...
Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at April 2, 2007 4:50 PM
witness posted: They'll be there too -- the promise they made will have been to a government that will "no longer exist;" therefore, the promise will be void.
There are three other reasons I can think of
1. Governments or states are not obliged to keep a promise.
2. Britain can always claim that the promise was under duress.
3. Circumstances have changed. And here you can cook up almost anything.
at April 2, 2007 4:50 PM
American missing in Iran.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8O8LI5G0&show_article=1
at April 2, 2007 4:52 PM
I do not think we will see any military activity on Good Friday.
Posted by: mike trivisonno at April 2, 2007 5:04 PM
When I worked for 1st Id they didn't give us Good Friday off.
We got half a day on Presidents Day though, which was nice.
Posted by: Mert at April 2, 2007 5:10 PM
I hope you find your bloke everybody. One or fifteen makes no difference. I hope its nothing sinister.
Posted by: Mert at April 2, 2007 5:28 PM
schmeg
What an idiot you are. We don't need some college student to lecture us on the history we witnessed in our own lives or the fact that Mr. Ortega has now been elected and this time and didn't have to shoot his way into power. You can bet we will not overthrow him this time cause it's really the shooting your way into power part we actually object to. And additionally schmeg. Try to wrap your very simple mind around this concept. We go to war to protect our own national interests, not ot make the world safe for fluffy bunnies.
nabi ZK
at April 2, 2007 5:37 PM
Is that frees up to be evil Hugh?
Posted by: Mert at April 2, 2007 5:47 PM
No.
It's the title of a wonderful (I am told) book by Luigi Meneghello, of the Italian Department at the University of Reading, possibly by now retired.
And it's also a phrase in the Pater Noster.
Libera nos a Malo. Deliver us from evil.
Posted by: Hugh at April 2, 2007 5:54 PM
I prefer my interpretation, however incorrect.
Posted by: Mert at April 2, 2007 5:57 PM
Here it is:
Pater noster, qui es in caelis:
sanctificetur Nomen Tuum;
adveniat Regnum Tuum;
fiat voluntas Tua, sicut in caelo, et in terra.
Panem nostrum cotidianum da nobis hodie;
et dimitte nobis debita nostra,
Sicut et nos dimittimus debitoribus nostris;
et ne nos inducas in tentationem;
sed libera nos a Malo.
at April 2, 2007 6:05 PM
Our Father, who art in heaven,
Hallowed be thy Name.
Thy kingdom come.
Thy will be done,
On earth as it is in heaven.
Give us this day our daily bread.
And forgive us our trespasses,
As we forgive those who trespass against us.
And lead us not into temptation,
But deliver us from evil.
For thine is the kingdom,
and the power,
and the glory,
for ever and ever.
Amen.
at April 2, 2007 6:10 PM
There will be no attack on Good Friday. Bush does not have the political clout to do it.
Posted by: sounder
Bill Clinton attacked Serbia without congressional approval. Bush could go out with a BANG if he could just grow a set of BALLS.
at April 2, 2007 6:57 PM
That would be nice but one would be living in that oh too well lived in fantasy world to believe such a thing.
Although sending pelosi and her treasonists terrorist lovers to iran for some good old moderating and THEN blow the hell out of iran....now thats a dream.
Posted by: Dar al-harb at April 2, 2007 7:01 PM
Speaking of Good Friday. There's a nice Ukranian Congregation gathered in the street right now outside their church.. singing in Ukranian.
How much longer will they be able to do that? How many years do we have left?
Christains singing in HARMONY offends the moslems who definitely don;t care whom they molest with their 5x a day loud-speaker amplified wailing and screeching.
mahomet didn't use a loud speaker. So it should be haram. But what do I know? I am only a Kufar.
Oh, and the African Americans who love to support jihad.. the "reverends" Al-Jesse.. they will see their gospels choirs cancelled. If they even go to church. Too busy extorting big companies. Maybe getting donations from the devil.. I mean the SOWWdis? Nice suits, reverends!
Funny how the African-Amerrican Christians for the most part don't speak out on the jihad issue.
Time for some of them to grow a set as well and break rank with their bileful and whitey-hating "leaders". Trust me, if you think "whitey" is bad.. wait till you see alla in the house!
Time for more and more people of all backgrounds to stand and be counted! We can't do all the heavy lifting here on our own!
Now THAT would be a GREAT FRIDAY any day of the week!
at April 2, 2007 7:08 PM
flowerknife asked,
"Who runs Britain anyway. The Government or the BBC?"
UK has large Moslem constituency. In a one-person-one vote "democracy" that is in favor of Moslems. One male Moslem can have several female Moslem wives. Hence faster reproduction, more Moslem voters.
The remedy? More stringent citizenship (British subject?) requirements. If you cannot deport them, give "resident alien" status to non-citizens. If they participate in any anti-host-country activities, make them ex-resident aliens.
Here in the U.S., citizenship must be checked before people vote. Requirement for citizenship must include probe into loyalty of candidates. (This is not being done at present.)
Will this happen? Not right away. As the jihad progresses, yes. Before it can though, a leadership change is needed.
In the UK, need a leadership that smacks of past great British leaders. Cowing to the Moslems in the UK so that they either vote for your party or keep their tails quiet (not riot or blow things up) is not what makes a good leader.
In the US, we need a leadership that is not infected with Islam nor oil. And I do not mean Hillary or (gdforbid) Obama (crypto-Moslem?) nor the leadership of Pelosi/H. Reid.
New blood is needed everywhere in the free West (sort of free--I mean compared to the Mos. world).
Posted by: unicorns62000 at April 2, 2007 7:38 PM
Much of this gloating iran would not happen if the Eu would of told iran in no uncertain terms that all trade, ect. would be withheld from iran until till they released those Britts. but all we see is a weak Europe unable to handle themselves. they could not even take care of Bosnia without US intervention, which was a big mistake.
Posted by: ZenaWarriorPrincess at April 2, 2007 7:52 PM
pez,
I would be interested in what the agent's name is, and his business with Iran. I will save my concern until I know he is a real American.
at April 2, 2007 8:11 PM
Crucify Iran on Good Friday -- how fitting.
Posted by: champ at April 2, 2007 9:04 PM
Who runs Britain anyway. The Government or the BBC?
Posted by: flowerknife_us
Oh, everyone's favorite topic.. the Beeb...
Guess what? I heard a report on the BBC this morning about the Falklands War anniversary. They referred to the islands as the Malvinas or the Malvine Islands more often than they called them the Falklands.
They seemed to suggest the Falklands operation was ludicrous.
One positive aspect of the report were the interviews with a couple of Falklanders. They were definitely glad that Thatcher sent the task force down there.
One lady also said she went back to Britain to live in London but she went back home to the Falklands because there being too much crime and grime in London.
Happy Easter and Passover Holidays everyone!
Posted by: Allahfanculo at April 2, 2007 9:21 PM
How do we know the Russians aren't playing both sides? They made most of the money they were going to make building them he reactors. So now we come along and remove the threat which is also a threat against Russia. Pretty smart, those sneaky Russkies.
By publishing this "info" they are probably in cahoots with the USA somehow. They've gotten everything they need out of Iran and by the way.. when we bomb Iran that puts the damper on China's oil deal with the mullahs. I'm not so sure the Russians will shed a lot of tears about that one either.
And they don;t have to do anything but sit back and watch the Fireworks.
I say we attack 4th of July!!!!
Posted by: Allahfanculo at April 2, 2007 9:27 PM
War= Good for Regime, Bad for West
The Ayatollahs' Regime is provoking U.S. aggression to bolster Iranian nationalism, thus fortifying their power.
In this video we filmed on Friday, Iranian democracy-seeker in exile, Morad Moallem, lays out the argument (for Europe) to choke-off the Iranian economy and spur a public revolt, thus avoiding terrorist (wmd?) retaliation in the West.
www.democast.TV
www.democast.net
at April 2, 2007 9:39 PM
please can abdullah be there for round one!
Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at April 2, 2007 10:45 PM
Man, this is gonna piss off the Hidden Iman.
Posted by: Bingo at April 3, 2007 12:07 AM
Since the oil prices, as a result of such an attack on Iran, would rise sharply and cause a massive global mess (related serious hikes in goods, services, etc.) for the West and its suppliers, like China, until there is an alternative source of fuel, it is unlikely any real damage will be done to any part of The-Land-Formerly-Known-as-Persia (beyond surgical strikes on nuclear facilities).
Anything more disruptive to Iran's oil flow would cost too much to the comfortable, un-foresight-ful West, which has wasted almost 30 years- since the U.S. Tehran Embassy takeover in 1979- in NOT shifting to another fuel source.
We all now pay for the continuing lunacy of our leaders.
Thanks Jimmy Carter, and all since...
at April 3, 2007 1:26 AM
Just a thought -- will Nancy Pelosi still be in the ME on Good Friday? Hmm, only wondering. Seriously though, I don't think that there will be an attack on Good Friday...and it has not a lot to do with the President's lack of any anatomical parts. May have more to do with the fact that the military may be adverse to it at this time. What with our sleepwalking Congress not giving the military the funds they need without ladling out the pork...out of funds on or about April 17....Blithely going on vacation and dealing out legislation only to either infuriate or embarrass the President -- although it would be a great time to do it. Congress out of town, Pelosi out of country. Hmmm, we can but hope.
I do agree that Ollie North's plans make emminent sense as well. And why haven't the Brits expelled the Iranian diplomats? Shut down their embassy in Tehran? Called this the act of war it is? Why is the West so stupidly afraid to call things what they are? Political correctness, multiculturalism, call it what you like, but it is fast destroying the entire Western Civilization. What does one do when you get an infection? You innoculate yourself against it and kill it. Is it too late for the West? Lord I hope not.
Posted by: TeamNfdL at April 3, 2007 3:44 AM
It will be between April 15 - 18 and it is called Operation Tyrant.
Posted by: sheiknbake4pork at April 3, 2007 7:46 AM
Darlings, The fact of the matter remains: the poor Europeans have been decimated in terms of STRONG MALES; THERE AREN'T ANY LEFT!!!!! They sadly have been killed off during the last 200 years of war. Obviously, the so called "men" remaining are the offspring of the rejects of previous wars.
And, now, we wonder what happened to that super machismo European strength? The strength that explored and conquered the world? Simply, they died off...
Darlings, the British are NOT going to do anything about their so called warriors being held HOSTAGE. They DO NOT have any balls left.
When the time is right, America will do what needs to be done...We have at least, 1 3/4 balls left.
WE WILL KICK THEIR ASS!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Justn'thyme at April 4, 2007 5:07 AM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)