In case I haven’t made it clear enough, LeeJudt, I gave you two warnings, and now it’s your fault I’m closing this thread. Good night, everyone.

Besides, the Iranian do want to dominate the Arab gulf states which is one reason why these countries also don’t won’t to see a nuclear Iran.

It’s not all about the US and Israel.

After all it’s no accident that women in that country live in fear of the Mulahcrocy.

Every thing you said thus far can be found on any Islamic or Nazi web site and without the hypocrisy that drips out of your mouth.

Go talk to David Duke he is your rela soul mate.

“LeeJudt: I wish you well. Shalom. Go with God. Salaam. as my Muslim friends would say, who miss the fredoms that have disappeared in their adoptive country in the sixteen years they’ve lived here and paid taxes, involuntarily, to a foreign aid program that murders their co-religionists. Peace, bro or sis…”

You are a joke.

“LeeJudt: BTW, I am awaiting delivery of a book by Lenni Brenner, “51 Documentsâ€?, where he exposes the history of Zionist COLLABORATION with the Nazis.”

Oh sure, the “Zionist” were the real perpetrators of the Holocaust.

You are really and insane self hater.

Brendan, your friend called me “paranoid” first.

btw: you are showing your colors by threatening me.

http://us.rediff.com/news/2005/dec/07iran.htm?q=tp&file=.htm

“India with us on Iran, says US

Aziz Haniffa in Washington, D.C. | December 07, 2005 | 02:45 IST

The Bush Administration seems to believe that India is now unambiguously in its corner and part of the coalition to isolate Iran on the issue of that country’s development of nuclear weapons capability and support for international terrorism.
Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, Nicholas Burns?– the Administration’s point man to push through the US-India civilian nuclear agreement through Congress in order to help India meet its acute energy needs and wean it from dependence on Iranian oil and gas?– said the US had been assured by India that for all the speculation and reports of major energy agreements with Tehran, no such deal had been consummated.

Talks on India-Iran pipeline next year: Aiyar?

During the question and answer session that followed his major speech on ‘US Policy Toward Iran,’ at his alma mater, the Johns Hopkins University’s School of Advanced International Studies, he said, ‘The Indians have assured us that there is no plan on the table that is ready for a decision by the Iranian and Indian governments ? that any plans, any discussions have been hypothetical and are years away.’

‘We would hope that these relationships would not be consummated,’ he added. ‘We would hope that as long as Iran is run by the type of government that runs it today, major governments in the world would not provide it long-term support through energy ties and we would hope that countries will look for energy resources elsewhere.’

Burns conceded that it’s a tough decision and “complicated because obviously Iran is a major exporter of both oil and gas, but we wouldn’t want to see new contracts made.” But he also told a questioner ‘You draw the right conclusion in terms of Iran’s foreign and strategic policy of its use of energy as a device to gain approval from other countries.”

He acknowledged that ‘these are sovereign decisions made by other governments,’ and that governments ‘have to make their own decisions they want to make. But we have a point of view and we have registered that point of view.’

‘In the case of India,’ Burns reiterated, ‘its hypothetical’ that India was on the verge of signing on to long-term energy agreements with Iran. ‘There is no deal on the table that would represent a decision today,’ he emphasized.

Iran knows how to make nuke warheads: EU?

Even as he slammed Tehran for its development of a nuclear weapons capability, support for international terrorism, and gross violations of human rights, Burns acknowledged that over the past several years, Iran had used access to its energy resources to build stronger ties with major US allies like India and even competitors like China.

Burns noted that ‘in the case of India, a lot of people have asked whether or not the United States will support or seek to dissuade India in engaging in a long-term energy relationship with Iran.’

Earlier, Burns spoke of the aggressive diplomatic efforts to convince Iran to return to the negotiating table at the International Atomic Energy Agency regarding its nuclear program and stop the enrichment of uranium, and noted, ‘What’s interesting about the diplomacy is that it’s not just the European Union making this request?– it’s now increasingly Russia, and you saw the statement by the government of India in September.’

‘India must realise danger of nuclear Iran’?

At that time, New Delhi had at the board of governors meeting at the IAEA voted with the US and the EU finding Iran in violation of its Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty obligations.

He said, ‘In coordination with our allies and our friends around the world, the US seeks to isolate Iran. It seeks to promote a diplomatic solution to Iran’s nuclear ambitions?to expose and oppose Iran’s support of terrorism. And to advance the cause of democracy and human rights within Iran.’

Burns said this vote by India had really ’surprised the Iranians, when India voted to find Iran in violation of its IAEA obligations. And you’ve seen a lot of other countries around the world?– an increasingly united group of countries calling for Iran to pull back in its nuclear ambitions.”

Revealed: What Iran did for India and why it hurts?

Burns said that ‘when we talk to countries diplomatically?– behind closed doors?– in my experiences over eight months, not a single country has contested the allegation that Iran is seeking a nuclear weapons capability or that it is promoting terrorism and harboring terrorists.’

He said if anyone thought that Washington’s allegation that Iran is providing a safe haven for international terrorists?– including those who belong to al Qaeda?– ‘is somehow a specious claim, you might imagine that a country that has been close to Iran in the past, a country that’s a member of the non-aligned movement might speak up on Iran’s behalf. We haven’t seen that.”

Burns recalled that the only country ‘that voted with Iran in September at the IAEA was Venezuela.’

He noted that no support was forthcoming from “China or Russia or India or Brazil on these charges — the deep concern over support for terrorism, over its nuclear weapons research program?– and that’s consequential.”

Burns said Russia, India, and China, had assured the US that ‘they don’t want to see Iran develop a nuclear weapons capability. That’s what all the governments with which we consistently deal with are saying.’

‘Awkward for India. We are friends of Iran & US’?

Thus, he said, Iran should take cognizance of the fact that ‘there is an international coalition with a very strong united message,’ including the likes of Russia, India and China, ‘on this nuclear issue.’

‘There was a time when the United States and a few other countries were a lonely voice. That’s no longer the case,’ Burns said.

Burns predicted that with regard to a decision at the IAEA to refer Iran to the United Nations Security Council if it does not acquiesce to return to the negotiating table and cease its enrichment of uranium, ‘the politics and diplomacy of that will unfold, I think, over the next 30 to 40 days.’”

Let me recommend that you not engage further with ‘lee_judt’

It will accomplish nothing.
Let him rant and rave.

>

You are just a paranoid Jew hater.

>

The only peace you will get from the Islamicists is the peace of the grave or the peace that comes with conversion to Islam.

get your facts straight.

Ask Chamberlain about what “Peace in our times,” means.

Are you so ignorant of history, or do you hate the US to the point of willing to let the Islamicists defeat us?

>

You are a “Jew” when you want to attack the Jewish State.

You are also ignorant.

There is no “US backed murder of Palestinians>”

There are murderous Pelestinian attacks on Jewish civilians backed by Iran and other Muslim organizations.

These attacks have been ongoing since the 1920’s and are part of the war the Muslim Arabs have been carrying on against Jews. The origin of this war antedates US backing of Israel by over half a century.

During the 30’s the Mufti of Jerusalem and other muslims in the region made common cause with Nazi Germany to help them in the genocide against the Jews.

Get your facts straight. You seem blissfully ignorant of history.

The US had nothing to do with any of this.

It may be. Deception is an observable tactic employed in nature. Predator-Prey scenarios and mating rituals are two of many areas where deception is employed to high success. Poker games as well.

I would say deception is definitely a plausible weapon used in an effective arsenal.

Nixon’s intellect, three sheets to the wind smashes the whole GW Bush administration into dust.

Nixon, as much as most of us disliked him, had somethings that GW Bush will never have.

One – Intellect

Two – Vision

Three – A Conscience

http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=2605

The OSU played a central role in the seizure of the United States embassy in Tehran in November 1979. Members of the OSU central council, who included Ahmadinejad as well as Ibrahim Asgharzadeh, Mohsen (Mahmoud) Mirdamadi, Mohsen Kadivar, Mohsen Aghajari, and Abbas Abdi, were regularly received by Khomeini himself.

According to other OSU officials, when the idea of storming the U.S. embassy in Tehran was raised in the OSU central committee by Mirdamadi and Abdi, Ahmadinejad suggested storming the Soviet embassy at the same time. A decade later, most OSU leaders re-grouped around Khatami but Ahmadinejad remained loyal to the ultra-conservatives.

During the crackdown on universities in 1980, which Khomeini called the “Islamic Cultural Revolution�, Ahmadinejad and the OSU played a critical role in purging dissident lecturers and students many of whom were arrested and later executed. Universities remained closed for three years and Ahmadinejad joined the Revolutionary Guards.

In the early 1980s, Ahmadinejad worked in the “Internal Security� department of the IRGC and earned notoriety as a ruthless interrogator and torturer. According to the state-run website Baztab, allies of outgoing President Mohammad Khatami have revealed that Ahmadinejad worked for some time as an executioner in the notorious Evin Prison, where thousands of political prisoners were executed in the bloody purges of the 1980s.

In 1986, Ahmadinejad became a senior officer in the Special Brigade of the Revolutionary Guards and was stationed in Ramazan Garrison near Kermanshah in western Iran. Ramazan Garrison was the headquarters of the Revolutionary Guards’ “extra-territorial operations�, a euphemism for terrorist attacks beyond Iran’s borders.

In Kermanshah, Ahmadinejad became involved in the clerical regime’s terrorist operations abroad and led many “extra-territorial operations of the IRGC�. With the formation of the elite Qods (Jerusalem) Force of the IRGC, Ahmadinejad became one of its senior commanders. He was the mastermind of a series of assassinations in the Middle East and Europe, including the assassination of Iranian Kurdish leader Abdorrahman Qassemlou, who was shot dead by senior officers of the Revolutionary Guards in a Vienna flat in July 1989. Ahmadinejad was a key planner of the attack, according to sources in the Revolutionary Guards.

Ahmadinejad served for four years as the governor of the towns of Maku and Khoy in northwestern Iran. In 1993, he was appointed by Minister of Islamic Culture and Guidance Ali Larijani, a fellow officer of the Revolutionary Guards, as his cultural adviser. Months later, he was appointed as the governor of the newly-created Ardebil Province.

In 1997, the newly-installed Khatami administration removed Ahmadinejad from his post and he returned to Elm-o Sanaat University to teach, but his principal activity was to organize Ansar-e Hezbollah, a radical gang of violent Islamic vigilantes.

Since becoming mayor of Tehran in April 2003, Ahmadinejad has been using his position to build up a strong network of radical Islamic fundamentalists organised as “Abadgaran-e Iran-e Islami� (literally, Developers of an Islamic Iran). Working in close conjunction with the Revolutionary Guard’s, Abadgaran was able to win the municipal elections in 2003 and the parliamentary election in 2004. They owed their victories as much to low turnouts and general disillusionment with the “moderate� faction of the regime as to their well-oiled political and military machinery.

Abadgaran bills itself as a group of young neo-Islamic fundamentalists who want to revive the ideals and policies of the founder of the Islamic Republic, Ayatollah Khomeini. It was one of several ultra-conservative groups that were setup on the orders of Ayatollah Khamenei in order to defeat outgoing President Mohammad Khatami’s faction after the parliamentary elections in February 2000.

Ahmadinejad’s record is typical of the men chosen by Khamenei’s entourage to put a new face on the clerical elite’s ultra-conservative identity. But beyond the shallow façade, few doubt that the Islamic Republic under its new President will move with greater speed and determination along the path of radical policies that include more human rights abuses, continuing sponsorship of terrorism, and the drive to obtain nuclear weapons.>>

This is like saying” the Nazis killed a lot of people, but this was a long time ago.

I’d bet most posters here are leftist which makes me glad the Republicans are in charge.

What a bunch of wishy washy appeasers chanting “peace in our time.”

My god save me from such peacenicks and do gooders. They are worse than the murderous President of Iran.

Regardless, I find this situation fraught with irony with respect to the public proclamations made by our current executive branch (i.e. Iran is one of three spokes in the Axis-of-Evil). Perhaps, the destabilization approach is the current course of action in play.

There is a monumental disconnect between the rhetoric and the outcome/results; it is a bit staggering to a reasonable mind on the outside looking in.