Meet a top Iranian official, Hassan Abbasi, who is a well-known Iranian political scientist, longtime top official of the Revolutionary Guards, and currently “theoretician” in the office of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and the head of the National Security and Strategic Research Center. Abbasi holds special responsibility for North American affairs. the introduction is needed to emphasize that he is not some powerless fundie - he is a top policy maker with all the resources of the mighty Iranian army at his disposal. now, read this article, where this guy gives his opinion and probably gives away some Iranian classified information(maybe on purpose) the article also quotes a report by a leading London-based Arab newspaper saying that so, an Iranian gov't official not only encourages the masses to practice suicide bombings against US targets, it actually creates its own unit for that! wow! and, all that other stuff where it wants to invade Britain and destroy America. as i said in the beginning of the post - this is not a rant by a powerless fundie - he is the equivalent of (in my opinion) Richard Perle in his status. maybe even higher. so what should be done about this? is this threat serious? is it even a threat? consider the last Iranian elections where the conservatives disqualified over a thousand reformist MP's from candidatcy, thus leaving only hardliners to choose from for the government. in my opinion, Iran is quickly rising to superpower status with very strong anti-American ambitions, which makes it the #1 threat to the US a few years from now, far more dangerous than North Korea considering all that, should there be some sort of sanctions? covert operations? any intervention? dhimmiism? ass sucking? and what about the IAEA comedy and the Iranian nuclear ambitions? we shouldn't any of this lightly.
found this link while searching for more info: http://www.mashregh.com/iranian/viewtopic.php?topic=801&forum=1
http://www.google.ca/search?q='Our ...Saxon Culture&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&start=0&sa=N As long as there isn’t a reputable news organization to substantiate this claim, it's nothing but Propaganda.
That's great, but doesn’t mean it is real. Let me tell you I have checked all my military, geo-political sites for any form of substantiation, nothing. Secondly did you ever think that maybe MEMRI is a propaganda site? I did, and I think it is. Just because it is Farsi doesn’t mean that it says what it says (can you read farsi), and if the recent allegation of the INC are anything to go by, this is most likely propagated by the pro-Shah forces, or some other organization. I can safely say you were manipulated by propaganda oth.
first you're saying that the source is fake or not credible (it is actually. the source is a mainstream Iranian news site. scroll down MEMRI's article's page and you'll see links). then you say that even if it's credible, MEMRI completely arbitrarily messed up the translation, or downright invented things (there are lots of Iranians in Toronto, just ask them to read it when you're in school). then you say that if it is true then it's most likely (how'd u figure that out?) propagated by pro-Shah forces. so make up your mind Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! is it 'zionist propaganda'? or 'Shah propaganda'? or maybe something else? (we just know it can't be the truth, don't we Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!) I can safely say you were manipulated by propaganda oth. and i can safely say you are immune to facts... there's a 1/4" extra thickness in your skull, just like Homer Simpson. you're desparately making up reasons to convince yourself the article is false. for your info, the article about the new suicide bombers squad created by the Iranian gov't, was exposed by a respected mainstream Arab newspaper in London, not covert pro-Shah propaganda spreading cells. and the rest of the stuff, by an Iranian mainstream news site.
first you're saying that the source is fake or not credible (it is actually. the source is a mainstream Iranian news site. scroll down MEMRI's article's page and you'll see links). Firstly how do you know it is reputable? Secondly how do you know it mainstream, do you read Farsi language newspapers? Thirdly where is that Farsi newspaper based, fouthly why is such a belligerent quote not being reported by ANYONE but that site? Not even the US gov’t? Give me a break. then you say that even if it's credible, MEMRI completely arbitrarily messed up the translation, or downright invented things (there are lots of Iranians in Toronto, just ask them to read it when you're in school). I didn’t any such thing, all I said is that MEMRI seems to be a propaganda organ, and it takes hyperbolic articles, translates them, and states it as fact. Not giving us anything to chew on, you have to be pretty simple to believe that load of crap. Would you mind translating the entire quote verbatim for me oth? then you say that if it is true then it's most likely (how'd u figure that out?) propagated by pro-Shah forces. Are you making up arguments and words again oth? Where have I said if it were true? is it 'zionist propaganda'? or 'Shah propaganda'? or maybe something else? (we just know it can't be the truth, don't we Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!) I am inclined to believe it is Zionist, considering that a Jewish group also reported this, look at the google link. Although I wouldn’t be surprised if it were a pro-Shah newspaper and overtly bias. They can’t even spell “Anglo-Saxon” right. Really… you're desparately making up reasons to convince yourself the article is false. I asked you for substantiation so I can believe this article, from a reputable news source. You have yet to show me any such substantiation, sorry but I am not easily pushed around like you with semantics.
reputable source... like... CNN? rotflmao! i don't know why some sources keep it quiet. but there are several logical reasons that come to mind. ok let's leave it at "you think it's propaganda but i don't" i'm wondering though, how dangerous do you think the Iranian regime is? what sort of strategic danger does it pose to US and Israel? keep in mind that while many western countries are very critical of the US, if it goes down so will they, at least economically. therefore being part of protecting the US in some way is in these countries' interest. one little terrorist attack in Saudi Arabia on some oil installations, and people around the world are worried about the economic consequences, oil prices peak. imagine what happened if US went down under a mushroom clowd? or some of those 29 installations were attacked. whether those 2 articles were spoofs, do you believe that the intentions of the Iranian regime are exactly those which were ilustrated in the articles?
reputable source... like... CNN? rotflmao! CNN,BBC,ITV,AP,REUTERS,BLOOMBURG,ECONOMIST,GLOBALSECURITY.ORG,VOA,CBC,NBC,CBS,ABC,DW,TV5,NYT,WALL STREET JOURNAL,FIANCIAL POST,WASHINGTON POST, EL PAIS, LE MONDE,GLOBE AND MAIL,etc. You choose. but there are several logical reasons that come to mind. So logical that it cannot be uttered? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! i'm wondering though, how dangerous do you think the Iranian regime is? I see Iran more of an ally then a enemy, Iran is positioned precisely were the US could use it to her own advantage. Iranians, Israel, and the US have always created ad hoc alliances in the past. They all have the same common enemy, Sunni Islam, and Arab nationalism. We make Iran dangerous as much as we want it to be. what sort of strategic danger does it pose to US and Israel? To the US very little, the US should rather have a much more open relationship with Iran. It would be smart, especially considering that China will most likely prop up the Iranians, and thus created the Chinese version of Saudi Arabia. American policy vis-à-vis Iran is dangerously short sighted and ignorant. Israel presents a dire threat to Iran, not only is Iran under direct nuclear threat from the Israeli’s, Israel has threatened to attack Iran. one little terrorist attack in Saudi Arabia on some oil installations, and people around the world are worried about the economic consequences, oil prices peak. imagine what happened if US went down under a mushroom clowd? or some of those 29 installations were attacked. Ok firstly those 29 installations is a joke, what are they? Secondly the US would not be attacked by Iran that is a psychical impossibility, do you actually believe that Iran can attack the US proper? You are so brainwashed oth really… do you believe that the intentions of the Iranian regime are exactly those which were ilustrated in the articles? No, and no.
Ok firstly those 29 installations is a joke, what are they? How about the Chicago Mercantile Exchange - a single suitcase nuke taking out that facility along with all the surrounding ancillary installations, would throw the nation's entire commodity distribution process into utter chaos, with catastophic repercussions affecting every city, town, business, and family in the country. Or how about The Library of Congress, also housing the United States Copyright Office, with its 110 million items, including 5 million irreplaceable historical documents, etc. - a catastrophy rivalling the burning of the Library of Alexandria, which some historians attribute to the Moslem Caliph Omar. In 640 AD the Moslems took the city of Alexandria. Upon learning of "a great library containing all the knowledge of the world" the conquering general supposedly asked Caliph Omar for instructions. The Caliph has been quoted as saying of the Library's holdings, "they will either contradict the Koran, in which case they are heresy, or they will agree with it, so they are superfluous." So, allegedly, all the texts were destroyed by using them as tinder for the bathhouses of the city. Even then it was said to have taken six months to burn all the documents. Secondly the US would not be attacked by Iran that is a psychical impossibility, do you actually believe that Iran can attack the US proper? Intercontinental missiles are not the ony means of delivery. Parts and fuel for the necessary nukes could be smuggled into the country in containerized freight, or across the loosely guarded Mexican or Canadian borders. Hell, fully operational devices could easily be carried in. They may already be here. Then, just as the 9/11 airliners were all hijacked more or less simultaneously, suicide operatives would position themselves at the targeted sites, triggering their devices to go off all at once ... Or not ... once in place there would be no way to identify or detect them, and so a more effective strategy might be to set them off one at a time, at intervals of a day or two, thus causing every city in the country to be subject to a panic evacuation, since it would be unknown as to where the next one would be detonated. The country would be entirely paralyzed, and would, in fact, collapse as planned. The only option left for survival would be for martial law to be declared, since the American civilian government would in all likelihood have been decapitated by one of the first nukes, and for the countries military leaders to use our full might to end the siege, by doing the only effective thing, namely to start nuking Iranian cities, with the threat that one by one the same thing would happen to them that they were doing to us, until and unless they called it off. It would be important in this situation not to immediately and totally annihilate all of Iran. The leadership in Teheran would need to be spared, since otherwise there would be no command structure surviving to communicate to their operatives in control of the still undetonated nukes, and those operatives would probably then go forward with their missions, resulting in additional unecessary destruction.
How about the Chicago Mercantile Exchange - a single suitcase nuke taking out that facility along with all the surrounding ancillary installations, would throw the nation's entire commodity distribution process into utter chaos, with catastophic repercussions affecting every city, town, business, and family in the country. Can you show me proof of Iran wanting to get these “installations?” In 640 AD the Moslems took the city of Alexandria. Upon learning of "a great library containing all the knowledge of the world" the conquering general supposedly asked Caliph Omar for instructions. The Caliph has been quoted as saying of the Library's holdings, "they will either contradict the Koran, in which case they are heresy, or they will agree with it, so they are superfluous." So, allegedly, all the texts were destroyed by using them as tinder for the bathhouses of the city. Even then it was said to have taken six months to burn all the documents. WE do not know who actually burned the library so nice try: http://www.ehistory.com/world/articles/ArticleView.cfm?AID=9 Intercontinental missiles are not the ony means of delivery. Parts and fuel for the necessary nukes could be smuggled into the country in containerized freight, or across the loosely guarded Mexican or Canadian borders. Hell, fully operational devices could easily be carried in. Then your fear should not be Iran, but rather Russia and her lose nukes. She has missing nukes, but why is the program to destroy Russian nukes so under funded? Iran does not even have nuke yet, let alone a warhead, or anything approaching that. Iran is honestly not that much of threat to the US, and Iran has a right to develop her nuclear weapons (although I don’t want to see it happen) because she is surrounded by 4 nuclear states, Israel, Russia, Pakistan, and India.
I think the possibility of Iran attacking the U.S. is extremely remote, considering that they have not done so since 1983. Iran, is a threat to Israel only, through its funding of Hezbollah and some suport of the Palestinians. Screaming "death to Americans" has been a catch phrase in Iran for about the last three decades, so I doubt that any threats headed that way are geniune. Even if these quotes were true, I doubt the would be anything else other than saber-rattling. Considering that the Iranian government is in a desperate fight to survive, and their younger population has become more westernized, I do not feel starting a terrorist program dedicated to attacking the United States is in their best interest. They have a fight at home to contend with, and little time for anything else. I feel Iran would simply prefer that the U.S. would simply leave it alone, which probably would be the best strategy America could use. Iran is sure to collapse in on herself, she has no genuine history of radicalism other than recent decades, and I think the time of that may be nearing an end on its own. Any threats would be regarded as a warning for America to stay out of Irans nuclear weapons program, but nothing of actual substance. "Iran is quickly rising to superpower status with very strong anti-American ambitions", otheapd Is this a joke?
In response to my suggestion that one of the 29 key sites chosen by Iran to nuke, as part of their strategy to destroy Anglo-Saxon Civilization, would be the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, our resident "undecided" Islamic terror apologist responds: Can you show me proof of Iran wanting to get these ?installations?? It's too bad your are not Iran's target selection consultant. I presume you would choose such nerve centers of Western Civilization as Tonopah, Nevada and Rugby, North Dakota.
Its nice to talk Bull Shit, but this isn't the Bush white house. I'll ask you again, where is the evidence to back up this 29 installation assertion. Firstly if Iran hasn't even admitted to a nuclear program how are we supposed to know that they are targeting 29 installations for nuclear attack. Putting the cart before the horse is a common tactic for the uninformed. Continue...
You mean like your Bullshit: did you ever think that maybe MEMRI is a propaganda site? I did, and I think it is ... I am inclined to believe it is Zionist, considering that a Jewish group also reported this "Thanks to the translators at the Middle East Media Research Institute, Americans can get a much better sense of the message coming from the Arabic-language press throughout the Middle East. Their work helps combat those who would murmur messages of peace and tolerance to Western ears, and then incite hatred and extremism to their countrymen in their native tongue." - National Review Online, May 20, 2003 "The role that MEMRI is playing in bringing the voices of the Arab and Muslim Reform ? from Arabic into English, to the world ? has been absolutely invaluable for everyone who cares about this process and wants to follow it." - Thomas Friedman, May 6, 2003 "? translations from Arabic on websites like www.memri.org let the rest of the world know what Saudis and other Arabs are saying to each other?" - January 13, 2003, Newsweek "? the evidence on MEMRI, the estimable Middle East Media Research Institute, www.memri.org ..." - January 7, 2003, United Press International "If there were justice in the universe, the MiddleEast Media Research Institute would already have been awarded some kind of special-achievement Pulitzer Prize. MEMRI has pioneered the careful translation, and dissemination to European and American audiences, of print and broadcast news sources in the Arab world. The group's work now pops up everywhere; here in the States, hardly a week goes by when some major daily or cable news show doesn't make use (generally without attribution) of a MEMRI translation." - June 12, 2002, The Weekly Standard, David Tell "www.memri.org - What they do is very simple, no commentary nothing else. What they do is they just translate what the Saudis say in the mosques, say in their newspapers, say in government pronouncements, say in their press." - October 1, 2002, BBC "MEMRI, an invaluable research service." -Thomas L. Friedman, New York Times Pulitzer Prize winner, October 16, 2001 "MEMRI is the most important research source for the Arab world of which I know and it has been immensely helpful to me and to just about every other serious person who writes about the Middle East." -Martin Peretz, Editor-in-Chief and Chairman, The New Republic, October 9, 2001
"undecided" makes the following illogical statement: As long as there isn?t a reputable news organization to substantiate this claim, it's nothing but Propaganda. To say that any claim which has not been "substantiated by a reputable news organization" can only be "propaganda", is logically false. It might be propaganda, but it might also be the truth. Anyway, thanks for giving us a little taste of the Horse Shit we might expect to find in a Kerry WhiteHouse!
Would you please stop pasting that macro in every single thread on this board? Hell it's in this one twice in a row! I punch the button because I see there's a new post in the thread, and instead I find out it's just the same old crap from Norman as I've read in every other thread. http://www.sciforums.com/search.php?searchid=193882
MEMRI is anything but a propaganda site. It's been around since the Clinton administration, and I've been reading it for several years to help my understanding of the Mideast situation, and I've relied on it mainly because it IS non-partisan. A statement from the site: "The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) explores the Middle East through the region's media. MEMRI bridges the language gap which exists between the West and the Middle East, providing timely translations of Arabic, Farsi, and Hebrew media, as well as original analysis of political, ideological, intellectual, social, cultural, and religious trends in the Middle East. Founded in February 1998 to inform the debate over U.S. policy in the Middle East, MEMRI is an independent, nonpartisan, nonprofit, 501 (c)3 organization. MEMRI's headquarters is located in Washington, DC with branch offices in Berlin, London, and Jerusalem, where MEMRI also maintains its Media Center. MEMRI research is translated to English, German, Hebrew, Italian, French, Spanish, Turkish, and Russian."
After blasting MEMRI as a Zionist propaganda site, "undecided" includes the BBC second only to CNN on his list of "reputable news organizations". The BBC (among many others) says of MEMRI : "What they do is very simple, no commentary nothing else. What they do is they just translate what the Saudis [and other Arab countries] say in the mosques, say in their newspapers, say in government pronouncements, say in their press." Doesn't sound like the BBC thinks it's a Jew propaganda site. Of course the praise for MEMRI coming from New York Times Foreign Affairs columnist Thomas L. Friedman, can be discounted, can't it, "undecided"? With a name like "Friedman" I'm sure you think he's just some Zionist kike.
