Cheers
________________________________________________________
This is for Mister X, as well as anyone interested in uncensored opinions.
Disclaimer first. Some of this comes from various sources on the internet.
Saving you all the trouble of clicking on links. And I got the idea of
calling President Ahmadinejad President Tom from CNN's Glenn Beck. Seemed
like a good idea.
You know, the internet is nothing but a global bucket that people dump their
info into. I just put up a spam blocker on it to stop the spam bots from
putting links to porno/spyware/viruses in the comments. And I didn't know it
restricts your comment to 300 words. I wouldn't say so much that it
restricts freedom of speech... just encourages brevity. You can say more.
Just break it up in blocks of 300 words. And if you want to have a bit of
fun, throw in the word 'bomb' every once in a while. Wake up the internet
spies.
As for Iran, the fact is, if it didn't have oil, nobody would care about it.
They are killers and thugs fighting and killing and terrorizing because they
can't sell their program honestly. Think the US government is working to
ensure a constant flow of oil from the gulf? You bet. Like it or not, (and I
personally hate it), our economy and our security is dependent on oil, and
it's my government's job to see that we get it. And no, we aren't looking
for an excuse to go to war with Iran. At least not until we're finished with
Iraq. :) Just kidding. The idea, as far as I know, was to install
democracies on either side of Iran, and to let them know that bad behavior
will result in punishment. Also, Iraq did, during the first Gulf War,
demonstrate that it had a chemical weapons program. Refrigerators labeled
"Anthrax" pretty much proved that. And the long line of trucks that ran like
hell from Iraq to Syria in the hours leading up to the invasion makes me
think that there may still have been some. Weapons of mass destructions
don't have to be nukes. And even if Saddam didn't have any WMD, doesn't mean
he wasn't working on them. He was. Everyone knows that. He'd already used
them on the Kurds... his own people. So he was a murderous thug who used
WMD. Better off dead. And now there's chaos over there. Sure. But the man
who really knows what's happening over there says that A) there are also
signs of progress over there... two elections and a constitution aren't bad,
considering there were decades of tyranny under Saddam Hussein, and B), what
they are trying to do over there is comparable to trying to fix an airplane
while it's in the air. And the leftist media here takes joy in reporting
everything that goes wrong. What is essentially an attempt to rewrite a
region (a good idea or not, justified or not) is not something that is going
to happen in a few years. People today don't understand that real change can
take decades. They want instant results and instant gratification. And if
the hard work that they all needed to get done takes longer than a few
weeks, suddenly people don't support it. Losers. And as for Afghanistan,
tell me this. If the government of, Singapore had openly supported a
terrorist group that flew a jetliner packed with people and jet fuel into
Parliament, would New Zealand be justified in invading Singapore? Of course.
Just because a country has a pipeline going through it doesn't mean we
aren't justified in whacking it if it sponsors terrorists who attack our
country. And despite all of the two-bit conspiracy theorists on the
internet, what everyone saw happen really is what happened. The people
responsible for it admitted to it. The government didn't know about it in
advance. That's just nuts. There are as many conspiracy theories out there
as there are IP addys. Show me one piece of hard solid evidence that will
stand up in court. You've quoted some interesting websites, featuring people
who don't, to my mind, have any credibility. It's easy to muckrake and throw
bombs (hello internet spies!)... when you don't allow your accusees (is that
a word?) to answer you. No, my worthy Mister X. I didn't see any effort in
any of those sites to allow anyone to defend themselves. If I'm wrong,
that's okay. Show me, and I'll retract. In the case of the Taliban and Al
Qaeda, they admitted it. They bragged about it. If you are saying that we
went to Afghanistan because of oil and not because of 9/11, it really makes
me think that you will think the worst of US motivation, no matter what
happens. I appreciate your opinions, as well as your communication. Keep it
up. The Dannevirke News may not want to print things that don't fit into the
politically correct goose-stepping Neo-fascism that is today's liberalism,
or that maybe encourage people in a small corner of the world to pull their
collective heads out of the sand (did you think I was going to say something
else? :)..), or maybe they're happy to ban talk that sheds light on one
intolerant, murderous religion while ridiculing and stifling the words of
another (Mister David W can back me up on that) peaceful religion. I don't
know. Small towns can be strange places, and to be blunt, there is that 'big
fish in a small pond' syndrome that can affect people in a bad way. I'm not
saying bigger is better. Just talking about small minds. They are bad. But
Mister X, you have actually taken the time and effort to engage me in
conversation. I respect that, and appreciate it.
So how about the poppy fields in Afghanistan? Resurgent Taliban are counting
on those same poppy fields to fund their spring offensive. I'd say their
convictions have taken a turn. It just gets harder and harder to support
them. And I don't know if Condi has an oil tanker named for her. I don't
obsess over oil, and I don't assume that anyone connected with it is evil.
Hey, you know, one the liberal movement's biggest champs, Michael Moore,
lied about owning Haliburton stock. Yeah. Sorry to break that to you. And
Mister X, if you don't know about M. Moore, you should get to know him. He
hates Bush, big oil (except for himself), and conservatives.
Do you really want to know what Iran has to gain from starting WW3? Nothing.
But Iran the country and the people aren't the ones trying to start it.
President Ahmadenijad... I'll just call him President Tom, to save time,
doesn't care about his country, or its people, or its culture. You have to
understand that his aims are not political. They're religious. He wants to
bring about a certain kind of apocalypse. One of the responsibilities of a
nuclear power is to play, well, responsibly. How can you do that? First,
appreciate the fact that nukes are horrible things that can wipe out entire
cultures. That may seem hypocritical, but in fact it isn't. We didn't drop
atomic bombs on Japan because we were renegade cowboys looking to create a
new world order by wiping out a nation - we dropped them because we wanted
to END the war; we dropped them because studies showed that fewer Americans
and Japanese would be killed if we did.
President Tom believe that killing hundreds of millions of people will help
create the chaos he needs to bring back the Mahdi - or his version of the
Messiah, and the fact that he's also starting a nuclear program is NOT a
coincidence.
Princeton's Bernard Lewis (the Cleveland E. Dodge professor emeritus of Near
Eastern Studies at Princeton University, specializes in Muslim history and
interaction between Muslims and the West) has written an opinion piece in
the Wall Street Journal advising that the rest of the world would be wise to
bear in mind that for those who believe the end of the world is imminent and
good, there is no deterrent even to nuclear warfare.
As WorldNetDaily has reported, Iranian President Tom has urged his people to
prepare for the coming of an Islamic "messiah," raising concerns a
nuclear-armed Islamic Republic could trigger the kind of global
conflagration he envisions will set the stage for the end of the world.
He's also said, in a WND report, that Islam and its followers must prepare
to rule the world, because it is a "universal ideology that leads the world
to justice."
"In this context, mutual assured destruction, the deterrent that worked so
well during the Cold War, would have no meaning," Lewis wrote. "At the end
of time, there will be general destruction anyway. What will matter will be
the final destination of the dead - hell for the infidels, and heaven for
the believers.
"For people with this mindset, MAD is not a constraint, it is an
inducement," he said.
His apocalypse just might coincide with an Islamic tradition when many
Muslims commemorate the night flight of the prophet Muhammad on the winged
horse Buraq, first to 'the farthest mosque,' usually identified with
Jerusalem, and then to heaven and back.
In Islam, as in other religious, certain beliefs describe the "cosmic
struggle" at the end of time. For Shiite Muslims, Lewis wrote, this will be
"the long awaited return of the Hidden Imam, ending in the final victory of
the forces of good over evil."
The significance, he said, is that there's a "radical" difference between
Iran and other governments with nuclear weapons.
"This difference is expressed in what can only be described as the
apocalyptic worldview of Iran's present rulers," he wrote. Iran's leaders
now "clearly believe that this time is now, and that the terminal struggle
has already begun and is indeed well advanced."
As for intent, a passage from the Ayatollah Khomeini, quoted in an
11th-grade Iranian schoolbook, reveals priorities: "I am decisively
announcing to the whole world that if the world-devourers (i.e., the infidel
powers) wish to stand against our religion, we will stand against their
whole world and will not cease until the annihilation of all them. Either we
all become free, or we will go to the greater freedom which is martyrdom."
Lewis wrote, "This might well be deemed an appropriate date for the
apocalyptic ending of Israel and if necessary the world."
History has proven that truly evil people all have one thing in common -
they don't hide their intentions; they don't try to be coy about their
plans. Hitler wasn't, and neither is President Tom; we just have to take
them at the word.
Also, "Atomic Iran" author Jerome Corsi notes (referring to the
Israel/Lebanon war) that it's less significant whether Hezbollah survives,
"but it's really the first chapter in the play for Iran and the Shiite Islam
nation to come to ascendancy in the Muslim world."
First is the battle against Israel and the United States, he said, then
against Sunni Islam. Where that group is more dominant, he said, is in Saudi
Arabia and Egypt, where group members are "not unhappy to see Iran
contained."
In the updated edition of "Atomic Iran: How the Terrorist Regime Bought the
Bomb and American Politicians," now available in paperback from WND Books,
Corsi discusses many of the disturbing developments related to Iran.
Meanwhile, Tanzanian customs officials have uncovered an Iranian smuggling
operation transporting large quantities of bomb-making uranium from the same
mines in the Congo that provided the nuclear material for the atomic bomb
dropped on Hiroshima 61 years ago, according to a recent report in the
London Sunday Times.
A United Nations report, outlining the interception last October, said there
is "no doubt" the smuggled uranium-238 came from mines in the Democratic
Republic of the Congo's mineral-rich Katanga province.
The smuggled uranium discovered by Tanzanian customs agents was hidden in
shipment of coltan, a rare mineral used to make chips in mobile telephones.
According to the manifest, the coltan was to be smelted in the former Soviet
republic of Kazakhstan after being shipped to Bandar Abbas, Iran's largest
port.
Uranium-238, when used in a nuclear reactor, can be used to create plutonium
for nuclear weapons.
No comments:
Post a Comment