Print Page | Close Window

Only 10% US see Iran as Immediate Threat

Printed From:
Category: Politics
Forum Name: World Politics
Forum Discription: World Politics
Printed Date: 19 April 2018 at 8:41am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 8.04 -

Topic: Only 10% US see Iran as Immediate Threat
Posted By: Sawtul Khilafah
Subject: Only 10% US see Iran as Immediate Threat
Date Posted: 22 March 2007 at 3:49pm

Only 10% in U.S. See Iran as Immediate Threat - m/itemID/15093


As you can see most Americans are against invading Iran, and the same certainly goes for the great majority of Europeans.

But as I had already explained on another thread almost 2 months ago, this was what the US government really wanted.

In other words, the US Government and its allies delibrately turned their own people against invading Iran while pretending to support it themselves !!

This is what I wrote : - ;PN=1&TPN=1

Originally posted by Sawtul Khilafah

we see that the mainstream Media (which is controled by the same people who control the Governments) spoke against the war and so many controled oppositions and fake leftists were against this war...

The war on Afghanistan is silenced down by the media and the fake left who lead and set up the main protests pretty much ignore Afghanistan, concentrating almost entirely on Iraq instead.

We also saw how the Abu Ghurayb torture pictures came out and were spread in all the mainstream newspapers and the TV. These are the same newspapers and TV channels who censor 99% of the truth about world events and who cover up much of the crimes of the western Governments. But for some reason everyone suddenly seemed to turn against the Iraq war, including the fat cats and the members of secret societies and even the mainstream media.

We also saw how the US Government accused Iraq of having WMDs, but when they couldnt find any, they actually said so !

This is the same Government who covered up what really happened on 9/11. After the WTC attacks, the US Government immediately blamed the attacks on Al-Qaeda, and after Osama bin Laden denied responsiblity for the attacks the Government made numerous fake videos and audio tapes and all sorts of fake evidence to try and convince people that bin Laden was responsible for the attacks.

But again, when it came to Iraq, things were different. The US politicians just came out and admitted that they have found no WMDs, thus delibrately making the war unpopular.

Bush also accused Saddam of involvement in 9/11, but strange he later denied it. But why did he deny it ? If he had lied in the first place, why didnt he continue lying? If he had no evidence in the first place, why didnt he continue lying without any evidence ? Or could it be that he delibrately wants to be seen as a liar, thus making the Iraq war and the US right wing more unpopular.

The truth is that the US knew from day one that Iraq had no WMDs. Even Collin Powell admitted this when he first came to office. And the real question is, why was the US worried about Iraq's alleged Chemical and Biological bombs, when Iran was allegedly making NUCLEAR bombs ???

Surely Nuclear weapons should be a bigger concern... but strangely the US and the western media only turned their eyes towards Iran AFTER it was made clear to the whole world that Iraq did not have WMDs.

In other words, now that the US accuses Iran of making WMDs no one believes them because they had already lied about Iraq.

But the real question is Why didnt they invade Iran before Iraq ? This is while Iran is SUPPOSEDLY USA's biggest enemy in the middle east, and while Saddam was USA's former ally.

Iran was also a neighbour of Afghanistan, making it easier for the US to move it's forces from Iran to Afghanistan and from Afghanistan to Iran.

Now the media is trying to decieve us into thinking that the US wanted to invade Iran After Iraq... some going as far as claiming that the US wanted to "surround" Iran from the east and the west. This is rediculous though because it would have been much easier for the US to invade Iran in the first place, or at least right after Afghanistan.

No, the truth is something else. The US didnt invade Iran because they dont even want to invade Iran


Now the US Government is trying to make it seem like they want to invade Iran, but they just cant because so many people are against it... so as people protest against invading Iran, Bush and his administration just pretend like the good old "democracy" has tied their hands and the PEOPLE have prevailed.






Posted By: .:: SoHaIB ::.
Date Posted: 26 March 2007 at 7:01am
Thats a good theory man


Posted By: nu001
Date Posted: 26 March 2007 at 11:33am

Americans also did not think Iraq was a threat, before the attack. Even Bush declared in the state of the union address, days before the attack, that Iraq does not pose an immediate threat. But they went for attack.

Everyone knows, it was oil for which US went to Iraq. Iran has more reasons than just oil. US is not yet attacking Iran coz they are bogged down in Iraq. Don't forget Iraq was under UN sanctions for 10 years before the attack.

Sawat, I am amzed seeing your enthusiasm to convince muslims that Iran is a partner of USA. What's ur problem? Would Iran partner with US for getting economic sanctions?? Crazy.

If Iran is a partner of USA; then it's no news and there is no point of discussion. Because then they only join all the other islamic countries like SA, Egypt, Jordan, Pak etc. All of them are US partners.

Since you are trying hard to prove that Iran is a partner of US; that only indicates that, Iran is different than others and that means an enemy of USA. So a friend of true muslim people.

"Al-Quran-The only Straight path to success. Alhamdulillah"

Posted By: Sawtul Khilafah
Date Posted: 30 March 2007 at 4:49pm -

US Mainstream Media turning American people against war on Iran... including Fox News who are delibrately broadcasting it calling it "nonsense" but in fact what they are really doing is giving it even more publicity.

Posted By: Sawtul Khilafah
Date Posted: 25 August 2007 at 6:32am

Watch this recent video (late August 2007): - ney-VFWSpeech.wmv/

In it, Thomas Ricks says exactly what I said on this thread and also wrote nearly 7 months ago on this other thread: - ;PN=2&TPN=1

Where I wrote:

Originally posted by Sawtul Khilafah

why was the US worried about Iraq's alleged Chemical and Biological bombs, when Iran was allegedly making NUCLEAR bombs ???

Surely Nuclear weapons should be a bigger concern... but strangely the US and the western media only turned their eyes towards Iran AFTER it was made clear to the whole world that Iraq did not have WMDs.

In other words, now that the US accuses Iran of making WMDs no one believes them because they had already lied about Iraq.


Posted By: Israfil
Date Posted: 25 August 2007 at 11:23am
U.S cannot invade Iran because troops are spread too thin...simple as that. The rhetoric is mainly to convince Iran to "wise up" probably.

Posted By: Cassandra
Date Posted: 26 August 2007 at 8:54am

Israfil:   U.S cannot invade Iran because troops are spread too thin...simple as that. The rhetoric is mainly to convince Iran to "wise up" probably.

I wonder? Look at the Silk Road.  Do we have a potential "new Road": From (Pakistan), Afghanistan....(Iran)...Iraq...(Syria)...(Lebanon)...Israel?    Easy passage through the Med.

What would be the purpose of such an overland road?  No rounding the continent of Suez Canal.  And Gibraltar...well, almost in the U.S. pockets isn't it really?  I posted on this ages ago, but I still think that it is not Iran that is a threat to the U.S.  Looks more to me that the U.S. is a threat to Iran.  Look out Syria and Lebanon....?

Looks like a clear run to me.  C

(But what do I know??)

Posted By: Sawtul Khilafah
Date Posted: 28 August 2007 at 4:23pm
Israel has plans for nuclear strike on Iran: report

7 January 2007

LONDON - Israel has drawn up secret plans to destroy Iran’s uranium enrichment facilities with tactical nuclear weapons, Britain’s Sunday Times newspaper said.

Citing what it said were several Israeli military sources, the paper said two Israeli air force squadrons had been training to blow up an enrichment plant in Natanz using low-yield nuclear ”bunker busters”.

Two other sites, a heavy water plant at Arak and a uranium conversion plant at Isfahan, would be targeted with conventional bombs, the Sunday Times said.

The UN Security Council voted unanimously last month to slap sanctions on Iran to try to stop uranium enrichment that Western powers fear could lead to making bombs. Tehran insists its plans are peaceful and says it will continue enrichment.

Israel has refused to rule out pre-emptive military action against Iran along the lines of its 1981 air strike against an atomic reactor in Iraq, though many analysts believe Iran’s nuclear facilities are too much for Israel to take on alone.

The newspaper said the Israeli plan envisaged conventional laser-guided bombs opening “tunnels” into the targets. Nuclear warheads would then be used fired into the plant at Natanz, exploding deep underground to reduce radioactive fallout.

Israeli pilots have flown to Gibraltar in recent weeks to train for the 2,000 mile (3,200 km) round-trip to the Iranian targets, the Sunday Times said, and three possible routes to Iran have been mapped out including one over Turkey.

However it also quoted sources as saying a nuclear strike would only be used if a conventional attack was ruled out and if the United States declined to intervene. Disclosure of the plans could be intended to put pressure on Tehran to halt enrichment, the paper added.

Washington has said military force remains an option while insisting that its priority is to reach a diplomatic solution.

Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has called for Israel to be “wiped off the map”. Israel, widely believed to have the Middle East’s only nuclear arsenal, has said it will not allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons. 


OH NOOOO, they are going to attack!!!! We are all now supposed to be worried and have a big protest against invading Iran and support and sympathise with the Iranian Government and when it doesnt happen, we are supposed to think that it was through the "power of democracy" that we managed to stop this war from happening

I've been telling people for years that it's not going to happen, they are just trying to convince people that Iran and Israel+US are enemies as part of their long term plan which I've explained on other threads (despite the fact that Iran has helped the US invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq more than any other country in the world!!!)

For how long will people continue calling me a "conspiracy theorist" despite the fact that I've proven to be right about this and other connected issues over and over again....



Posted By: Duende
Date Posted: 29 August 2007 at 12:23am

The Next War Draws Nearer
No Comment
Scott Horton
August 23, 2007

Hardly a week passes in which I don’t get a message from someone
within the great bureaucratic wasteland on the Potomac about the Bush
Administration’s latest schemes relating to war against Iran. Now we’re
going through another one of those periods in which the pace is
quickening and the pitch is becoming more intense. I continue to put the
prospects for a major military operation targeting Iran down as “likely,”
and the time frame drawing nearer. When will Bush give the go ahead? I
think late this year or early next would be the most congenial time frame
from the perspective of the war party. Some of the developments that go
into my call:
**Labeling the Revolutionary Guards as ‘Terrorists.’ Last week the Bush
Administration floated the idea that it would schedule Iran’s
Revolutionary Guards (an official part of the Iranian government) as a
terrorist organization. This is related to the Administration’s propaganda
drive to portray the Revolutionary Guard as deeply engaged in training
terrorists in Iraq. (Iran is deeply engaged in outfitting and supporting
factions loyal to it in Iraq, as is Saudi Arabia and other states.) Of course,
the Revolutionary Guards answer directly to Supreme Leader Khamenei,
so in taking this position, the Bush Administration is essentially saying
that it has decided to ditch an initiative that focuses on skirting
Ahmadinejad by going directly to Khamenei—that is, it is limiting its
diplomatic options, yet again. No real surprise there, since it’s clear—
notwithstanding statements from Condoleezza Rice about the exhaustion
of diplomatic approaches—that the White House (read: Dick Cheney)
places no store whatsoever in a diplomatic effort for Iran.
**Preparation for a ‘Dirty War’? The branding of the Revolutionary Guard
as terrorists raises troubling prospects with respect to targeting and
military operations in Iran. Based on prior Bush Administration postures
(adopted with respect to the Taliban, and units of Saddam Hussein’s
military), it would mean that they are denied Geneva Convention
protections in the coming war and could be treated to “highly coercive
interrogation techniques” (i.e., torture) if captured. In sum, it looks like
the Bush Administration is busily preparing for another “dirty war.”
**Costing for Ground Operations in Iran. In the last two weeks the
Department of Defense has begun pushing regular contractors very
aggressively for “unit costs” to be used for logistical preparations for
reconstruction and ground operations in a certain country of West Asia. In
the last week, the requests have gotten increasingly harried. And what,
exactly, is the country in question? Iran.
**‘There Will Be an Attack on Iran.’ Former senior CIA analyst Bob Baer
has a piece in the current Time Magazine called “Prelude to an Attack on
Iran.” Baer also sees a quickening pace and an increasing likelihood of a
sustained military assault on Iran, driven by the Neocons. Baer develops
the scenario, showing how the Revolutionary Guards will be portrayed as
terrorists, they will be linked to armor-penetrating projectiles used in
Iraq, and this will be taken as a pretext to wage a war against Iran. He
quotes an Administration official who says these explosive devices “are a
casus belli for this Administration. There will be an attack on Iran.”
**Bolton Wants Bombs in Six Months. John Bolton appeared on Fox News
and was asked a question based on Bob Baer’s report. Bolton “absolutely
hopes” it is true that bombs will start falling on Iran within six months.
**The Predictable Role of Fox News. Fox News is intimately intertwined
with the Administration’s propaganda machine, as a study of its coverage
of the run-up to the Iraq War shows (and similarly, its decision to all but
pull the plug on more recent coverage of the dismal situation in Iraq).
Producer Robert Greenwald has done a terrific summary of how Fox News
continues a propaganda build-up to support military action against Iran
which closely parallels what it did for its masters in the run-up to the Iraq

Posted By: Sawtul Khilafah
Date Posted: 29 August 2007 at 6:53am

This is what I wrote on another Forum more than a year ago:

Originally posted by Sawtul Khilafah


When will USA attack Iran??? 2020 ?
Nearly thirty years ago there was an "islamic" revolution in Iran but the USA did nothing to stop it and even gave the new government Weapons (read about the Iran Contra afair, it's historical Fact).

Why did Iran help the USA in the war on Iraq and Afghanistan?? Why do Iranian backed militias (such as the Badr brigade) fight against USA's enemies? Why did the USA choose to form an alliance with the Nothern Alliance, Iran's puppets? Why did the USA hand over the Government to them?
Why is Iran allied to so many of USA's allies, including Russia, Britain, the puppet governments in the middle east, even Saudi Arabia!

Do you really think the USA would Ever invade Iran? Why have they not done so in the past 27 years?
If you think the USA "needed an excuse" then why didnt they blame 9/11 on Iran, or why didnt they invade Iran because they have WMDs (remember Saddam was only accused of having chemical and biological weapons while Iran is accused of having NUCLEAR weapons. Which is more dangerous???).

If you analyse the events carefully, rather than listening to the Words of the Politicians and Governments, you will see that Iran and USA are always benefiting eachother. Infact, Iran has benefited the most from the wars carried out by the Bush administration. Iran's only real enemies in the Middle East were the Taliban and Saddam...both were removed by Bush... these were certainly at least the only neighbours of Iran who were a menace to them.

Finally, I'd like to point out that Im an Iranian myself, and I know very well what Im talking about.

Inshallah the truth will be made clear_the Truth will abolish falsehood.

Wassalamu Alaykum wa Rahmatullah wa Barakatuh

Here's the link: - p;start=0

Everyone back then was worried that the USA and Israel were about to invade Iran while I made fun of the whole idea by saying "when are they going to attack? 2020?"

In fact, outside internet Forums, I've been telling people for 4 years that Iran is not going to be invaded by the United States!

If you look at the facts you will see that Iran and USA have everything in common, they are doing the exact same things with the exact same goals. The whole Nuclear issue was brought up to trick people into thinking that USA and Iran have something to "disagree" about. Then they started all the lies about Iran arming the resistance in Iraq and Even Afghanistan!!! (despite the fact that Iran actually HELPED the USA in Iraq and Afghanistan more than ANY other country in the world!).

The whole "USA is going to attack Iran" thing keeps going up an down in the news. One day it's the headline, the next day they say "US found no proof of its accusations against Iran so there wont be an attack". The next day "oooh, the nuclear issue", then "oooh Iran arming insurgents", then "no proof" and so on... (since when has PROOF been valuable to the Bush administration? Remeber Iraq WMDs...? anyone?)

I think the reason why this whole thing is being hightened now is to trick the resistance in Iraq...why? Because a lot of Sunni fighters in Iraq are fed up with Iran sending in their forces to help the United States, so much so that the leader of a major group in Iraq called "The Islamic State of Iraq" lead by Abu Omar al-Baghdad said that if Iran doesnt stop helping the US war on Iraq, he is actually going to make WAR ON IRAN!!!

In order to trick him and other fighters in Iraq, the US is spread whole "we're gonna invade Iran" lie. This they hope would have two effects on Sunni Iraqis and other mujahideen:

1: They would be tricked into thinking that USA and Iran are really enemies and their alliance in Iraq is only "temporary and insignifcant".

2: They would think that by attacking Iran they are doing what America wants.

In other words, they are trying to discourage them from attacking Iran by spreading the rumour that the US is planning to do the same thing....

Also by spreading the whole "Al-Qaeda are CIA agents" conspiracy theory, they hope that even if Al-Qaeda or their allies attack Iran, it could be portrayed as USA's attack on Iran (remember what Khamenehi said? He said that the Iraqi resistance are agents of America....! : - ;PN=1&TPN=1  )

Wassalamu 'alaykum wa rahmatullah wa barakatuh


Posted By: Sign*Reader
Date Posted: 29 August 2007 at 11:49pm
If Your hypothesis is on the money why US & Iran don't have diplomatic relations?

Kismet Domino: Faith/Courage/Liberty/Abundance/Selfishness/Immorality/Apathy/Bondage or extinction.

Posted By: Duende
Date Posted: 30 August 2007 at 12:55am
Hush, SignReader, don't ask sensible questions.

Like, for example, why Israel would play along with such a st**id

"The Israeli advice against using military force against Iraq was apparently
triggered by reports reaching Israeli officials in December 2001 that the
Bush administration was beginning serious planning for an attack on Iraq.
Journalist Bob Woodward revealed in "Plan of Attack" that on Dec. 1,
2001, Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld had ordered the Central
Command chief Gen. Tommy Franks to come up with the first formal
briefing on a new war plan for Iraq on Dec. 4. That started a period of
intense discussions of war planning between Rumsfeld and Franks.

Soon after Israeli officials got wind of that planning, Israeli Prime Minister
Ariel Sharon asked for a meeting with Bush primarily to discuss U.S.
intentions to invade Iraq. In the weeks preceding Sharon's meeting with
Bush on Feb. 7, 2002, a procession of Israeli officials conveyed the
message to the Bush administration that Iran represented a greater
threat, according to a Washington Post report on the eve of the meeting.

Israeli Defence Minister Fouad Ben-Eliezer, who was visiting Washington
with Sharon, revealed the essence of the strategic differences between Tel
Aviv and Washington over military force. He was quoted by the Post as
saying, "Today, everybody is busy with Iraq. Iraq is a problem...But you
should understand, if you ask me, today Iran is more dangerous than

Posted By: Sawtul Khilafah
Date Posted: 30 August 2007 at 2:41am

Originally posted by Sign*Reader

If Your hypothesis is on the money why US & Iran don't have diplomatic relations?

That's the whole point, they dont want people to know that they are allies so they try not to do much in the open.

What I find amazing is that the meeting between Iran and USA was seen as such a big deal in Iran, especially among the religious Iranians.

Then Khamenehi the Leader of Iran came out and said "we are only going to talk to them about Iraq, they are still our enemey, death to America...." (not an exact quote but that was pretty much it).

Now this was while Iran had actually sent armed men to Afghanistan to fight alongside the USA, but the Iranian Media and Leader and politicians simply didnt talk about it and so most Iranians dont even know it today. Only President Khatami finally mentioned it years after, and that was after it had been exposed as it was reported by numerous eyewitnesses and journalists in Afghanistan who had seen the Iranian forces - Amazingly, the group that Iran sent to help the US in Afghanistan was the QUDS FORCE.... this was the same group that Bush later accused of "arming the insurgency in Iraq"!! This is while the Quds force was always helping the United States in Afghanistan, and the Iraqis who were being armed by them were groups like the Badr Brigade who are not a resistance group, but on the contrary their job is to help the US occupation and actually Fight the resistance!!

So while helping eachother all the way, they are trying to fool people into thinking that they are enemies by simply using words against eachother.

For years Khamenehi told his followers that there would never even be a meeting with the US, then there was and he then tried to convince people that it's ok and wont turn into an alliance... this is while Iran had been allied with the US in Afghanistan Years before these "meetings", yet the meetings are seen as such a big deal because most people dont know about the actual alliance and the fact that the US was arming Iran even during the 1980s.

Back then, a relative of Ayatollah Montaziri (a famous Shiah cleric) revealed that Iran was being given American weapons through Israeli ships!!! The Iranian Government arrested and then Executed him!!! It was unbelievable, but after the claim was made it was investigated in the United States and was actually proven to be true.

Then the Reagan administration claimed that they were giving Iran weapons so that Iran would tell "Hezbollah" to free its hostages (hahahah, yeah right!).

Long story short, Iran has always been working for/with the West, including the USA, but they have both been trying their best to hide it.

Posted By: Duende
Date Posted: 30 August 2007 at 9:51am
Sawtul, I think you are permanently delusional: believing firmly in events
very few others can agree with. The extreme twists of logic required to
get you to your current delusional beliefs are exhausting to work through,
which is another sign that your mind does not quite work normally.
Delusions require vast explanations involving ever more extreme
scenarios. Like the accounts of UFO sightings and body abductions, in the
end, everyone starts to wonder whether there’s a grain of truth in it . But
it doesn’t mean you are any less delusional.

It is not just that you personally are deceitful, divisive or just plain
annoying. It is simply extremely difficult to accept your twisted rhetoric
and explanations of a unified Iran/USA strategy given the utter
childishness of it, in terms of global political policy.

Does anyone think, honestly now, that behind all the rhetoric coming
from Bush and Ahmadineyad, they secretly sit chuckling to themselves
about how well they’ve pulled the wool over everybody’s eyes? Can you
understand how is it possible that all commentary regarding Iranian-US
relations be utterly BACKWARDS, not just throughout the 7 year rule of
the Neocons in Washington, but all the way back to the days of the British
Imperial Tobacco company?

Can anybody really seriously consider that every single observer so far
has got it entirely WRONG about a possible US attack on Iran, and that
only Sawtul has the foresight and intelligence to turn things on their head
and say: no, it’s not really like that, they’re just kidding? Can Sawtul really
be the only person in the world to know the REAL TRUTH of the relations
between Israel, Iran and the United States?

Doesn’t it strike you as plain childish to deny that people such as Uri
Avenry, Robert Fisk, Seymour Hersh, (to name just a few of the globally
recognised Mid-East authorities,) are really st**id and have missed this
extraordinary cover-up where Teheran and Washington are secretly in
bed together ….?

The scale of the delusion you are trying to persuade us of, defies
imagination: military documents, CIA reports, independent observers, UN
staff, seasoned foreign and domestic investigative journalists, ALL
colluding and twitching like puppets according to your insane reading of
events involving Israel, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq
and the USA. That’s quite a broad brush stroke you’re painting. You lack
the intellect and maturity to observe events involving each of these
countries, weighing past history and current events, with anything like
the authority necessary to come up with a global plan, least of all such a
childish one. Of course, your acclaimed foresight means events inevitably
resolve the way YOU predict, simply because of your delusional state, and
because your scenario is so utterly childish.

Most forum members here are mature enough to know about the
misleading nature of MSM. We don’t swallow the news coming out of
Afghanistan, Iraq or Gaza as easily as you seem to think. It is not a
question of opening our eyes and ears to a distinctly contradictory
account of anything. Sawtul, you speak down to us, patiently explaining
your twisted logic and emphasising points only YOU find startling, this is
the attitude of someone deeply into delusion. The bottom line in all your
posts is: Shia is bad, Sunni is good, and Iranians are deceitful,
untrustworthy manipulators and hypocrites. That doesn’t mean you are
an authority on Iran-US relations. It just means you are obsessed with
your own ghosts and have created a wild and colourfull delusion for
yourself, which of course, needs constant approval from outside,
otherwise you would collapse under the weight of your own unresolved,
conflictive issues.

Posted By: Sign*Reader
Date Posted: 30 August 2007 at 10:34pm

If I look at the events and happenings in and around  Afghanistan and the role Iranians played it makes sense now!
Come to think of the eve of Twin Towers' blow down, on Sep. 10 why did the arab suicide bombers blowup Northern Alliance's honcho Ahmed Shah Masood?
He was the main man working with Indians, CIA, Russians, Tajiks and Iranians et al against the Talibs, Pakis, Chechens and other Arabs so if we were to step back and ponder the Iranian collusion; it is like enemy of my enemy is a friend (and I benefit from this in disguise)! I didn't like to believe this but you know SK, I see these alliances of the convenience and the resultant advantages Iran got by easily with the destruction of two of her main enemies (Taliban & Saddam),  in one fell swoop of the Empire coming down. The politics makes strange bed fellows!
This monkey business has been going on in Iraq in some of the strangest form, there is a collusion of all sorts with the Shiah groups by the US like I read in today's LA Times front page about Ammar Hakim (HL: He is close to the US and Iran) Ammar Hakim may be the White House's Best hope for an ally, but the young cleric has made it clear he's his own man........ right

 What a way to see the proof of the dissimulation?
 I think it is disgusting!!!

Kismet Domino: Faith/Courage/Liberty/Abundance/Selfishness/Immorality/Apathy/Bondage or extinction.

Posted By: Duende
Date Posted: 31 August 2007 at 12:13am
The duplicity of US alliances (and no doubt Iranian, every country does
what it feels to be politically expedient in any given moment, even if that
means scandals and death) is well known: the building up of Noriega only
to set him up as a drug/arms dealer, the financing and support for the
fledgling Mujahedeen including Osama Bin Laden, the hand shakes and
donations to Saddaam Hussein, the current support for Musharraf, Karzai
and Maliki. They will all end in tears.

But the one big spanner in the works as far as SKs delusional Iran-US
collusion goes, is Israel. Why has he not responded to my question?

Why would Israel go along with such a secret alliance? (Forget about Saudi

Posted By: Sawtul Khilafah
Date Posted: 31 August 2007 at 8:05am


Originally posted by Duende

The duplicity of US alliances (and no doubt Iranian, every country does
what it feels to be politically expedient in any given moment, even if that
means scandals and death) is well known: the building up of Noriega only
to set him up as a drug/arms dealer, the financing and support for the
fledgling Mujahedeen including Osama Bin Laden, the hand shakes and
donations to Saddaam Hussein, the current support for Musharraf, Karzai
and Maliki. They will all end in tears.

But the one big spanner in the works as far as SKs delusional Iran-US
collusion goes, is Israel. Why has he not responded to my question?

Why would Israel go along with such a secret alliance? (Forget about Saudi

As you may well know, the Western Governments have always been planning against Muslim countries, they created Israel and are now making war after war.

They knew very well that Muslims will want to fight back and they wont just sit there while all this was going on, so they came up with a very clever plan, which was to create forces around whom religious Muslims and those who want to do something about these wars would gather.

They knew that so long as they control the leaders of these groups/Governments, they would not Truely harm them in any way and would only carry out limited attacks and just use words and words and words the rest of the time to fool people into thinking that they are serious, while in reality these fakes would actually be helping the West and actually fighting against the real enemies of the Western occupation by simply accusing any real group that does not join them of being "agents of the west" or "agents of Israel".

However, this could only succeed through Shiism as it is they who believe in Taqlid (blinding obeying their scholars) so this plan could only work well on the Shiahs (also because Shiism is closely linked to western secret societies : - ;PN=3 )

Therefor, they first tried to portray Sunnis as pathetic, careless cowards and in order to do this they gave power to those in Sunni countries who were willing to openly obey the western Superpowers.

It was then that they created their fake Islamic Government in Iran and the so called "Hezbollah". Iran and "Hezbollah" have helped increase the popularity and conversion to Shiism and Iran has been publishing hundreds if not thousands of books propagating Shiism. In these books you will often see that they claim that Shiism is "heroic" while Sunnis are "Pathetic" and if anyone wants to be on the "heroes" side they would have to become Shiahs (the "victory" of "Hezbollah" in 1982 was meant to portray Shiism as just that - also Iran in 1979 became the only "Islamic fundementalist" country in the world, thus Shiism became the hope for those Muslims who cared about their Ummah.)

After 1982, the "Hezbollah" did very little (practically nothing) except propagate Shiism and promote themselves as the "heroic saviours of Islam", however after so many years it was required to once again remind people of the supposed "heorism" of the Shiah "Hezbollah" so then there was this recent war, the outcome of which I actually predicted during the early days of the war!!!

Here's the link: - ;PN=16&TPN=1

If you look at Sadr and "Hezbollah", one thing that they have in common is that they love "ceasefires" or "peace negotiations".

Now there is nothing wrong with making peace....but making peace in the middle of a war and while the occupation still continues simply does not make sense, but all FAKE groups do that. They first rise up and become popular, once enough people have joined and have become very famous they suddenly sit back and relax!!

On the other hand when you look at REAL resistance groups, such as the Chechen Mujahideen and the Sunni resistance groups in Iraq (examples: Ansar Sunnah, Tawhid wal-Jihad, Jayshal Islami fel Iraq) they continue to fight so long as there is war and occupation, killing thousands of enemy soldiers and themselves losing many of their men and leaders.

They continue to fight until they either win, or lose, something that imposters would not do because they dont want to win (they dont want to destroy their masters) and they dont want to lose (they are not willing to sacrifice their lives and obviously if they are destroyed the whole plan would be ruined).

Also read my post on this link (the long one with the picture, scroll down): ;PN=16&TPN=12



Posted By: Sawtul Khilafah
Date Posted: 31 August 2007 at 8:19am

Here's an interesting article: - us-2006-08-31.asp

Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook, Palestinian Media Watch, August 31, 2006.

"The Zionists are in horror, fear, confusion... [hiding] like mice and rabbits"
- Palestinian Authority TV


During the Israel -Hezbollah war in Lebanon, Palestinian society expressed three recurring reactions to the war:

A. Profound identification with Hezbollah
B. Celebration of both the perceived Hezbollah victory and the humiliation of Israel
C. Seeing Hezbollah tactics as a role model for the Palestinians

This in-depth report documents this phenomenon, and includes a representative sample of the statements of Palestinian officials and the Palestinian media that reflect the atmosphere in the Palestinian society regarding Israel’s war with Hezbollah.

A. Nasrallah Superman: Profound identification with Hezbollah

From the beginning of the war, the Palestinians expressed complete identification, not only with the Lebanese people but with Hezbollah in particular. Hassan Nasrallah, the Hezbollah leader, was seen as a hero who restored the honor to the Arab nation and the Islamic religion. A cartoon in the Palestinian Authority daily newspaper Al Ayyam showed Nasrallah taking off his religious cloak, in Clark Kent fashion, revealing his "Superman" costume underneath.

Another striking item indicated the degree of Palestinians' veneration of Hezbollah: 66.3% of the Palestinians wanted "Hezbollah alone to handle the negotiations over the [three Israeli] soldiers," even though one was kidnapped by Palestinians and is being held in Gaza. The Palestinians put more trust in Nasrallah to succeed in negotiations on their behalf than their own leaders.

B. Celebration of perceived Hezbollah victory and humiliation of Israel

From the Palestinian perspective, the war was a glorious victory for Hezbollah, and a humiliating defeat for Israel. "I am telling you that the Zionists are in horror, fear, confusion, and that their political and military leaders are in disagreement... They are living in shelters in fear. They are living like mice and rabbits [in shelters], unable to go out. Their people screamed and yelled, by the thousands, [they are] interested in leaving, interested in going to America, to Europe and Britain..." celebrated a religious leader on official Palestinian TV [August 4, 2006]. Palestinians see the war as a turning point in which the "resistance" to Israel – their term for terror organizations such as Hezbollah -- proved its ability to defeat Israel, from which the Palestinians will now learn.

C. Hezbollah tactics as a role model for the Palestinians

There has been much detailed discussion in the Palestinian media about tactics and strategies that the Palestinians must implement as a result of the Hezbollah successes, including analyses of Hezbollah's fighting methods.

In Depth Report:

A. Nasrallah Superman: Profound identification with Hezbollah
B. Celebration of perceived Hezbollah victory and humiliation of Israel
C. Hezbollah tactics as a role model for the Palestinians

A. Identification with Hezbollah

All segments of Palestinian society, from senior officials to children in street demonstrations, expressed empathy and unqualified admiration for Hezbollah during the war, viewing them as brothers-in-arms in their war against Israel. Though the Palestinians themselves are experiencing a severe economic crisis, they organized a "National campaign for support for the Lebanese People," under the patronage of President Mahmud Abbas, to raise money for Lebanon [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, July 31, 2006].

Opinion polls showed that 96% of the Palestinians had a "good appreciation" for Hezbollah, and 91% supported Hezbollah's demand for a prisoner exchange deal. A striking 66.3% of Palestinians preferred "that Hezbollah alone will handle the negotiation over the fate of the [three kidnapped Israeli] soldiers," which shows that the Palestinians trust Nasrallah to succeed more than their own leaders.
[Al-Najah poll, Al-Ayyam, July 27, 2006].

During the war, the official Palestinian media repeated and reinforced this support for Hezbollah. Palestinian TV aired hours of video clips that declared the unity between the fates of the Palestinians and the Lebanese. These included special broadcasts of support and fundraising appeals for the Lebanese, and a clip called "Your wound is our wound," which aired repeatedly – including three times during a period of less than two hours -- on August 2, 2006.

The PA media were actively raising awareness and support for Hezbollah through continuous declarations of solidarity and publicity of rallies for the Lebanese and Hezbollah. A cartoon in the PA daily Al Ayyam showed Nasrallah taking off his religious cloak, in Clark Kent fashion, revealing his "Superman" costume underneath. This reflects an accurate appraisal of the total admiration that PA society had for Nasrallah – to the point of seeing him as a super hero -- during and immediately after the war.

The following are representative examples from the media. Note that throughout these texts the PA uses the same term "resistance" to refer to the Hezbollah attacks on civilians and soldiers, as they use it to define Palestinian Authority terror against civilians and soldiers.

"Yesterday dozens of residents participated in a procession in the streets of Ramallah, in order to show solidarity with the Lebanese people… The participants praised the heroism of the Lebanese Hezbollah fighters, who took two Israeli soldiers captive, and expressed their joy over the continuing falling of resistance missiles on the Israeli cities and settlements."
[Al-Ayyam, July 17, 2006]

"Imad Abu-Hamad, commander of Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades: …'Regarding our ties with Hezbollah, we are proud and boastful of our good relationship with them… Whether the victory will be achieved here or there, it is a victory of both peoples against the common enemy… To Mr. Hassan Nasrallah, leader of the resistance we say…: And you, Oh master of the resistance! Oh Abu-Hadi [Nasrallah nickname], we tell you that we in the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades are all your brothers and your sons, we are all soldiers in the same battle you direct....'"
[Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, August 14, 2006]

"Poet and journalist Ahmad Dahbor said: 'Palestine shows solidarity with itself, while showing solidarity with Lebanon, since the Lebanese resistance stands tall to protect the Arab Nation…'".
[Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, August 11, 2006]

"During a Gaza convention organized by the Ministry of Culture under the name 'No to Israeli terror in Lebanon and in Palestine,' Abbas Zaki, member of the Fatah movement Central Committee and Palestinian Ambassador in Lebanon, said: '…It is an honor for the Palestinians that sister Lebanon will win, because she [Lebanon] always supports Palestine.…'"
[Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, August 11, 2006]

"The National and Islamic Forces organized a mass rally yesterday in the Jenin district to condemn Israeli aggression against the Gaza strip and Lebanon and in support of Palestinian and Lebanese resistance… the children carried many placards with slogans written on them, such as: 'Yes to resistance, no to submission'… Shiek Mahmmod Al-Saa'di, the political leader of the Islamic Jihad movement in the Jenin district, said… that the resistance is a legitimate right of the Palestinian and Lebanese peoples. He called all the military wings of the resistance factions to announce a general mobilization…"
[Al-Ayyam, July 17, 2006]

On July 10, 2006, Palestinian TV aired a new clip called 'From the land of Palestine to Lebanon,' portraying solidarity between the two regions that "suffer from the Israeli cruelty" and a message of the unity of blood. The clip included pictures from demonstrations in the Palestinian Authority in support of Lebanon.

During the same week a clip expressing solidarity with the Lebanese, called "One Wound," was aired many times. In its beginning, the clip tells a "story" about Israel bombing little children in Lebanon and Palestine. The clip also included a photo hinting that Israeli children wrote messages to children on shells destined to kill Palestinian and Lebanese children who wanted only to celebrate a birthday and be happy. The song has English subtitles.

Hamas demonstrations in Gaza and Nablus for solidarity with Hezbollah, received wide coverage. The Al-Manar TV broadcasts from August 13, 2006, aired demonstrations by Palestinian children. A boy, about eight years old, was seen talking about the children of Palestine identifying with the children of Lebanon. Afterwards pictures were included of many people in Gaza flying flags of Hamas and Hezbollah, and Palestinian children stomping on burning flags of Israel, the United States and Britain. Afterwards, the Al-Manar reporter in "Occupied Palestine" reported from a summer-camp in Ramallah. A girl who was interviewed advised the children of Lebanon to hold strong, as did the Palestinian children who endured the same actions. Another youth said [to the children of Lebanon]: "We are all with you, and if we have to give our blood, our kids, our families, and our homes for your sake – we are ready to do so".

B. Victory of Hezbollah in contrast to humiliation of Israel

For the Palestinian society, the war was a complete and admirable victory of Hezbollah, and a crushing and humiliating defeat for Israel. The following are a few examples from the media:

Nasser Al-Laham, chairman of the independent news agency "Ma'an": "Hezbollah has killed 120 Israelis, while during the Intifada the Palestinians killed over one-thousand Israelis, but what makes the difference is that against Hezbollah, Israel felt the defeat."
[Palestinian TV open-wave broadcasts 'Good Morning Palestine', August 17, 2006]

"Secretary General of the [Palestinian Liberation] Front… demanded from the masses of our people… to strengthen national unity…following the complete failure and the disgraceful defeat which the occupation army took at the hands of the resistance in Lebanon…"
[Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, August 22, 2006]

"The Ministry for Prisoner Affairs... said that the abduction [by Israel of Nasser Al-Din Al-Sha'er, Palestinian deputy Prime-Minister] is a failed attempt on behalf of the occupation government…. to improve its image in local public opinion, after the Lebanese resistance humiliated them… and caused them a very sound defeat…."
[Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, August 20, 2006]

"If Israel succeeded during the cursed Six-Day War to defeat three Arab armies… and to end the war within six days, well now starts the fourth week [of the war in Lebanon], and they are not capable of finishing the war…The Jews have experienced five wars. We have never seen such disgrace, shame, and fear among their ranks, as in this war."
[From a religious sermon by Shiek Dr. Ahmad Bahar, a Hamas member of the Palestinian Legislative Council – Palestinian TV, August 4, 2006]

"Head of the 'Palestinian Religious Teachers Society' in the Gaza strip said in a press release: 'Following a whole month of wild and barbaric aggression against our people in sister Lebanon, Israel walks out defeated in the face of relentless Jihad fighters, which shattered the myth of 'the unbeatable army' and taught the leaders of the occupation lessons in the arts of warfare and conflict.'"
[Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, August 20, 2006]

"Yesterday in the town of Salfit, the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine held its third party convention… The participants congratulated the heroes of resistance in Lebanon and Palestine, and sent messages of solidarity and support for the resistance and the Lebanese people for their great victory and the strong stance of Hezbollah fighters against the Israeli military demolition machine…"
[Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, August 20, 2006]

"Israel is capable of destroying everything, but she will not be able to get a victory and defeat the resistance… because the resistance… is a cultural, mental, and ideological stat among the peoples of the region…and here we witness, after more than a month, the defeat of the Israeli occupation army…"
[Dr. Hasan Abu-Hashish, aid to the deputy of the information minister, Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, August 20, 2006].

During the Palestinian TV news broadcast on August 10, 2006, a false Hezbollah report was quoted according to which "today the 'resistance' destroyed over eight tanks." Israeli soldiers were shown wounded and taking cover. Nasrallah was quoted regarding the shelling of Israeli "colonies" such as Nahariya.

"Oh dear brothers, we are under a vicious attack by the enemies of humanity and religion, by the Zionist criminals… We emphasize that the Zionist military structure has been defeated! They are not able to win the military battle, not in Palestine, nor in Lebanon. They are however interested in justifying their defeat by killing children, wrecking homes, cutting off electricity, wrecking hospitals and institutions, but this is indeed a defeat in itself… They are the defeated, they are the ones who lost, and we – in God's will – are winning because the flag of Islam will continue to fly in Palestine and in Lebanon despite their anger and wrath…"
[Friday sermon Palestinian TV, August 4, 2006, Shiek Dr. Ahmad Bahar, Hamas member of Palestinian Legislative Council]

C. Hezbollah tactics as a role model for the Palestinians

The Palestinian media are actively reviewing the lessons of the Hezbollah war in Lebanon, and the ways in which the Palestinians should learn from Hezbollah. This message is repeated often in the words of official and unofficial spokespeople, and columnists increasingly analyze the successes of Hezbollah. Additionally, there are some who view the victory as a precedent that proves that if only they persist, Israel will be defeated and eventually disappear.

"I call the Palestinians to make maximum use of the Lebanese model for handling a crisis and for the united and non-compromising stand … I warn against the policy of weakening the aims that any move towards normalization... is attempting to spread."
[Dr. Hasan Abu-Hashish, aid to the deputy of the information minister, AL-Hayat Al-Jadida, August 20, 2006].

"Imad Abu-Hamad, commander of the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades in Gaza: '…We increased the shelling of the colonies surrounding the Gaza Strip, and we also escalated the military activity in the [West] Bank, in coordination with Hezbollah's brave resistance, so that the enemy will be between two jaws of resistance in the south and the north. Yesterday the occupation retreated from southern Lebanon and afterwards from the Gaza Strip. And tomorrow, by Allah's will, they will retreat from the [West] bank and hence become prisoners of their own racist fence…'"
[Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, August 14, 2006]

"Dr. Attallah Abu-Al-Soboh, Minister of Culture, said: 'The Lebanese and Palestinian experience should be studied and benefited from. This proved that the Israeli army is defeated in the face of desire and good planning. Especially note the Israeli [civilian] evacuation and flight from the North [of Israel due to Hezbollah shelling of cities] proves that these are Palestinian cities and not Israeli ...' "
[Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, August 11, 2006]

"Marwan Abu-Al-Ras, head of the Palestinian Religious Teachers Society in the Gaza Strip… saw the heavy defeat of the occupation army [in Lebanon]… as the first step towards the disappearance of the thieving occupation from our occupied land... he emphasized that the path of resistance should be continued until the Israeli occupation will be driven out of the entire Palestinian territory…" [Note: "thieving occupation" is a term the PA uses to refer to all of Israel.]
[Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, August 20, 2006]

PA analyst Hani Al-Masri took pride on PA TV in Hezbollah's achievements, and specified:
"Brave battles of Hezbollah against the elite [Israeli] unit 51 of Golani… Breaking Israel's war conception of quick resolution, talking initiative …. A small organization [Hezbollah] succeeded in beating Israel… If Hezbollah was a state, their achievements regarding Israel would have been great… Because they [Hezbollah] are like a lightweight boxer competing against a heavyweight boxer, and managing to reach the 15th round..."
Palestinian TV on August 2, 2006]

TV program "Religion and Society" --

Sheik Hian Idrisi: "The Zionist project is currently in retreat due to the reality in which we live . They hoped for a completely Jewish state, but now, we are a thorn in their throats. They hoped, following their unilateral retreat from Gaza, that the [PA] missile [attacks] would cease and that the attacks against them would stop, and they would be satisfied with the West Bank. But the brothers in Gaza, who were under siege after this withdrawal, finding themselves in an enclave, did not stand arms folded, but continued [to fight].

Host Sheik Jamal Bawatna says that if this is about Jihad and resistance, one should note the origins. He mentions an episode from Muslim tradition, when Fatima was attacked and Mohammad was patient and didn't react with Jihad, until gathering a large army... 'This proves that the resistance against the enemies must be done with wisdom. Before we open a front, we must study the situation carefully...'

Sheik Idrisi: "The fighting creates many worries for the enemy. Many regions [in Israel] which are near Lebanon and Gaza have been paralyzed, and the people disappeared. We pray to Allah that they will not return ... Eventually Allah, may he be praised and glorified, will bring the Muslims the victory, and bring defeat to the infidels… The enemy stole our land, stole the historic land of Palestine."
Palestinian TV, July 23, 2006:

Sermon of Sheik Dr. Ahmad Bahar, Hamas member of Palestinian Legislative Council:

"The fighting brothers… we tell the monster entity state that by Allah's will, they will not be able to accomplish their goals... I tell you that the Zionist people are in horror, fear, confusion, their political and military leaders are in disagreement. I tell you that they are horrified. More than two million Zionists are not able to leave their shelters. They live in fear inside the shelters. They live like mice and rabbits, they can not leave. Their people screamed and yelled, by the thousands. They are interested in leaving [Israel]. One is interested in going over there, to America, to Europe and Britain. Negative migration has started… We have not witnessed the destruction of Jaffa, Haifa, and in Allah's will [soon], Tel-Aviv – except during this fifth war, this war, in which the noble, the believers, and the loyal fight in Palestine and in Lebanon."
Palestinian TV on August 4, 2006:

"Parliament member Bassam Al-Salhi, general secretary of Al-Shaa'b ['the people's] party... called to carry on the struggle and the resistance. He [also] called the people in power to [show] unity and learn from the Hezbollah experience in Lebanon in order to face the challenges…"
[Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, August 13, 2006]

"Parliament member Dr. Marwan Abu-Al-Ras, head of the Palestinian Religious Teachers Society in the Gaza strip, emphasized that the way of resistance should be continued until the expulsion of the Israeli occupation from the entire Palestinian territory. He also said: 'Despite the military arsenal that the forces of occupation hold, and despite the USA support and the international silence, they did not mange to achieve their goals and their aspirations, due to the strong-standing of our people in sister Lebanon, and due to the brave Islamic resistance'. He called to learn from the lessons of the confrontation between Hezbollah and Israel, in a way that will strengthen the Palestinian capability to inflict casualties among the forces of the occupation."
[Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, August 20, 2006]06]


This was EXACTLY what I predicted during the early days of the FAKE Israel vs "hezbollah" war on 20th of July 2006:

Originally posted by Sawtul Khilafah

Wait and see, this is a repeat of the 1982 events. Hezbulah will once again "gain victory" and start singing and dancing as the Heros and saviours. Anyone who opposes them after that would be accused of being a "Zionist agent" and they will continue as a wall between the Muslims and the Zionists... - ;PN=16&TPN=1

And the above article says:

Hassan Nasrallah, the Hezbollah leader, was seen as a hero who restored the honor to the Arab nation and the Islamic religion.



Posted By: Sawtul Khilafah
Date Posted: 02 September 2007 at 10:01am
Another interesting article:,+arming+and+training+the+Shia+footsoldiers+of+Muqtada+al+Sadr.+They+have+offered+no+proof+however,+and+given+the+pattern+of+American+statements+on+Iraq,+it+must+be+treated+with+extreme+skepticism.+American+and+British+officials+accused+Hizbullah+of+sending+members+to+Iraq+during+the+2003+American+war+that+overthrew+Saddam+Hussein.+They+later+accused+Hizbullah+of+doing+so+again+in+2004+and+most+recently+in+late+2006,+when+Hizbullah%27s+victory+in+the+July+war+in+Lebanon+put+it+under+the+American+crosshairs+once+more.&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&ie=UTF-8 - rican+government+has+accused+Hizbullah+of+supporting+the+Mah di+Army+militia+in+Iraq,+arming+and+training+the+Shia+footso ldiers+of+Muqtada+al+Sadr.+They+have+offered+no+proof+howeve r,+and+given+the+pattern+of+American+statements+on+Iraq,+it+ must+be+treated+with+extreme+skepticism.+American+and+Britis h+officials+accused+Hizbullah+of+sending+members+to+Iraq+dur ing+the+2003+American+war+that+overthrew+Saddam+Hussein.+The y+later+accused+Hizbullah+of+doing+so+again+in+2004+and+most +recently+in+late+2006,+when+Hizbullah%27s+victory+in+the+Ju ly+war+in+Lebanon+put+it+under+the+American+crosshairs+once+ more.&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&ie=UTF-8
According to the above links interview, Nasrollah says:

" We believe that the salvation of Iraq begins with the adoption of the armed resistance and struggle against the forces of the occupation. "

(Isn't it funny that Nasrollah supports resistance while Iran supports the puppet Government???)

The link also says:

When the American military besieged and attacked the holy Shia city of Najaf in May 2004, Seyid Hassan offered assistance to Muqtada's Shia resistance fighters. Muqtada al Sadr recently proclaimed his allegiance to Hizbullah during the Israeli war on Lebanon in July of 2006. Muqtada has been seeking to emulate Seyid Hassan's movement and leadership style since his rise to power in April 2003. His supporters sold posters showing Muqtada together with Seyid Hassan and modeled their militia on Hizbullah, though unsuccessfully, since unlike Hizbullah, the Mahdi Army is sectarian and engages in attacks against civilians.


This was what I said in the thread titled "Real reason why USA invaded Iraq"....

Also says:

 In January 2006 former al Qaeda in Iraq leader Abu Musab al Zarqawi declared his movement’s responsibility for missile attack on Israel launched from southern Lebanon. Zarqawi also condemned Hizbullah for “protecting the Zionist enemy against the strikes of the Mujahedin in Lebanon,” an usual accusation but true in the sense that Hizbullah jealously guards the South as its own and prevents other groups from operating there. Zarqawi’s last statement denounced Hizbullah and specifically addressed Sunni concerns in Lebanon.

Posted By: Duende
Date Posted: 07 September 2007 at 9:23am
Here's an interesting view:

When Wishful Thinking Replaces Resistance: Why Bush Can Get Away with
Attacking Iran

by Prof. Jean Bricmont

Global Research, September 6, 2007

Email this article to a friend
Print this article

Many people in the antiwar movement try to reassure themselves: Bush
cannot possibly attack Iran. He does not have the means to do so, or,
perhaps, even he is not foolish enough to engage in such an enterprise.
Various particular reasons are put forward, such as: If he attacks, the
Shiites in Iraq will cut the US supply lines. If he attacks, the Iranians will
block the Straits of Ormuz or will unleash dormant terrorist networks
worldwide. Russia won't allow such an attack. China won't allow it -- they
will dump the dollar. The Arab world will explode.

All this is doubtful. The Shiites in Iraq are not simply obedient to Iran. If
they don't rise against the United States when their own country is
occupied (or if don't rise very systematically), they are not likely to rise
against the US if a neighboring country is attacked. As for blocking the
Straits or unleashing terrorism, this will just be another justification for
more bombing of Iran. After all, a main casus belli against Iran is,
incredibly, that it supposedly helps the resistance against U.S. troops in
Iraq, as if those troops were at home there. If that can work as an
argument for bombing Iran, then any counter-measure that Iran might
take will simply "justify" more bombing, possibly nuclear. Iran is strong in
the sense that it cannot be invaded, but there is little it can do against
long range bombing, accompanied by nuclear threats.

Russia will escalate its military buildup (which now lags far behind the
U.S. one), but it can't do anything else, and Washington will be only too
glad to use the Russian reaction as an argument for boosting its own
military forces. China is solely concerned with its own development and
won't drop the dollar for non-economic reasons. Most Arab governments,
if not their populations, will look favorably on seeing the Iranian shiite
leadership humiliated. Those governments have sufficient police forces to
control any popular opposition-- after all, that is what they managed to
do after the attack on Iraq.

With the replacement of Chirac by Sarkozy, and the near-complete
elimination of what was left of the Gaullists (basically through lawsuits on
rather trivial matters), France has been changed from the most
independent European country to the most poodlish (this was in fact the
main issue in the recent presidential election, but it was never even
mentioned during the campaign). In France, moreover, the secular "left"
is, in the main, gung-ho against Iran for the usual reasons (women,
religion). There will be no large-scale demonstrations in France either
before or after the bombing. And, without French support, Germany--
where the war is probably very unpopular -- can always be silenced with
memories of the Holocaust, so that no significant opposition to the war
will come from Europe (except possibly from its Muslim population, which
will be one more argument to prove that they are "backward", "extremist",
and enemies of our "democratic civilization").

All the ideological signposts for attacking Iran are in place. The country
has been thoroughly demonized because it is not nice to women, to gays,
or to Jews. That in itself is enough to neutralize a large part of the
American "left". The issue of course is not whether Iran is nice or not
according to our views -- but whether there is any legal reason to attack
it, and there is none; but the dominant ideology of human rights has
legitimized, specially in the left, the right of intervention on humanitarian
grounds anywhere, at any time, and that ideology has succeeded in totally
sidetracking the minor issue of international law.

Israel and its fanatical American supporters want Iran attacked for its
political crimes--supporting the rights of the Palestinians, or questioning
the Holocaust. Both U.S. political parties are equally under the control of
the Israel lobby, and so are the media. The antiwar movement is far too
preoccupied with the security of Israel to seriously defend Iran and it
won't attack the real architects of this coming war--the Zionists-- for
fear of "provoking antisemitism". Blaming Big Oil for the Iraq war was
quite debatable, but, in the case of Iran, since the country is about to be
bombed but not invaded, there is no reason whatsoever to think that Big
Oil wants the war, as opposed to the Zionists. In fact, Big Oil is probably
very much opposed to the war, but it is as unable to stop it as the rest of

As far as Israel is concerned, the United States is a de facto totalitarian
society--no articulate opposition is acceptable. The U.S. Congress passes
one pro-Israel or anti-Iran resolution after another with "Stalinist"
majorities. The population does not seem to care. But if they did, but
what could they do? Vote? The electoral system is extremely biased
against the emergence of a third party and the two big parties are equally
under Zionist influence.

The only thing that might stop the war would be for Americans
themselves to threaten their own government with massive civil
disobedience. But that is not going to happen. A large part of the
academic left long ago gave up informing the general public about the
real world in order to debate whether Capital is a Signifier or a Signified,
or worry about their Bodies and their Selves, while preachers tell their
flocks to rejoice at each new sign that the end of the world is nigh.
Children in Iran won't sleep at night, but the liberal American
intelligentsia will lecture the ROW (rest of the world) about Human Rights.
In fact, the prevalence of the "reassuring arguments" cited above proves
that the antiwar movement is clinically dead. If it weren't, it would rely on
its own forces to stop war, not speculate on how others might do the job.

Meanwhile, an enormous amount of hatred will have been spewed upon
the world. But in the short term, it may look like a big Western "victory",
just like the creation of Israel in 1948; just like the overthrow of
Mossadegh by the CIA in 1953; just like the annexation of Alsace-
Lorraine seemed to be a big German victory after the French defeat at
Sedan in 1870. The Bush administration will long be gone when the
disastrous consequences of that war will be felt.

PS: This text is not meant to be a prophecy, but a call to (urgent) action.
I'll be more than happy if facts prove me wrong.

Jean Bricmont teaches physics in Belgium and is a member of the Brussels
Tribunal. His new book, Humanitarian Imperialism, is published by
Monthly Review Press. He can be reached at [email protected]

Posted By: sulooni
Date Posted: 10 October 2007 at 1:18pm
http://WWW.INSIGHT-INFO.COM/forum - iran is the only true islamic republic. it holds no ties to oppressive for example saudia arabia who supplied oil to the  israeli troops to help kill lebanese muslims.

it is a huge threat. unlike when it was run by the shah and america loved iran and sucked out much of it's oil and natural minerals.

america will find a good excuse to bomb iran just like it did afghanistan and iraq.

and that will be world war 3.



Posted By: Sawtul Khilafah
Date Posted: 02 November 2007 at 5:54pm
Originally posted by Sawtul Khilafah

I think the reason why this whole thing is being hightened now is to trick the resistance in Iraq...why? Because a lot of Sunni fighters in Iraq are fed up with Iran sending in their forces to help the United States, so much so that the leader of a major group in Iraq called "The Islamic State of Iraq" lead by Abu Omar al-Baghdad said that if Iran doesnt stop helping the US war on Iraq, he is actually going to make WAR ON IRAN!!!

In order to trick him and other fighters in Iraq, the US is spread whole "we're gonna invade Iran" lie. This they hope would have two effects on Sunni Iraqis and other mujahideen:

1: They would be tricked into thinking that USA and Iran are really enemies and their alliance in Iraq is only "temporary and insignifcant".

2: They would think that by attacking Iran they are doing what America wants.

In other words, they are trying to discourage them from attacking Iran by spreading the rumour that the US is planning to do the same thing....

Im sad to say that the Taliban have fallen for this trick, and since the Taliban are closely allied to al-Qaeda, I assume they too have been fooled into believing that the USA wants to invade Iran...

Taliban Commander Mulla Mansoor said in a very recent interview:

"This is a plan  of the Infidels to attack Iran, they say that they support us weapon and and and this is just a brazen lie and that the World will support the Americans and Bush in their plan to attack iran..."

He also said:

We and the Mujahideen of iraq All praise belongs to God we share good friendships and we support them in all ways we see them as our brothers and we trie to share our strategys plans with them and we trie to reach our friendships with all brothers who fight in the way of allah we will support them ...

This was of course one of the main reasons why the Western Media and the US Government made people think that they are planning to invade Iran (something that they have been "planning" for nearly 30 years but never actually doing anything).

So the Sunni resistance has been tricked and in fact, Abu Omar al-Baghdadi the leader of the biggest Jihadi force in Iraq (which includes Al-Qaeda), seems to have canceled his plan to fight Iran (he was going to fight Iran a few months ago, since he didn't I assume he canceled it).

Im not sure who was tricked first (Taliban or al-Qaeda in Iraq or al-Qaeda in Afghanistan - or all at the same time) but from what Mullah Mansoor said (that they share their strategy) and from what he said about Iran and Omar Baghdadi cancelling the attack on Iran, it's obvious that they have all been tricked.

So once again, sadly, my prediction came true...


Posted By: Sawtul Khilafah
Date Posted: 06 December 2007 at 6:44am
Originally posted by Sawtul Khilafah

The whole "USA is going to attack Iran" thing keeps going up an down in the news. One day it's the headline, the next day they say "US found no proof of its accusations against Iran so there wont be an attack". The next day "oooh, the nuclear issue", then "oooh Iran arming insurgents", then "no proof" and so on... (since when has PROOF been valuable to the Bush administration? Remeber Iraq WMDs...? anyone?) 

I was right again!!! -

The above article says (and you probably know if you been reading any newspapers or watching any news channels lately) that the US Government has found that Iran is not making nukes...

Another thing that I said that came true was:

On this thread: - ;KW=freemasonic&PN=0&TPN=2    I wrote:

Originally posted by Sawtul Khilafah

I guess the Freemasonic American Government is just "too good" to let Bush invade Iran... so we have the good old American Government on one side, and Bush on the other...

So once again my prediction came true, so when are people going to start listening to me? If I was on TV I would by now probably be one of the most famous people in the world!

But of course Forum members like "Duende" think it's all by chance that everything I say turns out to be true and what the so called "talented journalists" say turns out to be false.

Posted By: Duende
Date Posted: 06 December 2007 at 9:44am
what is your ambition Sawtul, to become a new prophet? or maybe
some sort of Televangelist? Do you seek world fame through
acknowledgment of your self proclaimed talents at divining world political

I have never said it is by chance that your predictions come true, you are
the only person claiming any of your predictions have come true.

At the end of the thread you mention above, you claimed to be 'way
ahead of me' in the knowledge of various organisations and societies
whose plans have largely been implemented over the past 100 years or
more. As I'm used to your posturing and self-delusion, I simply laughed it
off, since the truth is, had you been way ahead of me, you would have
brought in the significance of these parties already.

Whether or not the Bush administration or any subsequent admin actually
attacks Iran will not be because of anything you have said. The PTB
simply want to ensure the Moslem world remains underdeveloped and
economically strapped. When the Shah began the nuclear programme, it
pointed towards an eventual development in Iran, economic and social,
something which the Americans and British could not allow as this would
ensure Iranian dominance of the whole region. Thus, the Iranian
Revolution was encouraged and allowed to take place. The result: Iran was
thrown into a kind of Middle Ages; no economic nor social progress.

Curiously, this strategy of preventing Moslems from self-realisation has
been practiced since the days of the Christian crusades. It is quite
stunning to see the same tactics used in the 15th Century being repeated
in the modern world. It also doesn't require your convoluted, tiresome
headache inducing explanations for this or that.

Print Page | Close Window

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums version 8.04 -
Copyright ©2001-2006 Web Wiz Guide -