What Iran could do if attacked by the US [Archive]

PDA

View Full Version : What Iran could do if attacked by the US

cruise4

28-08-2007, 04:29 PM

brotherapostate

28-08-2007, 04:35 PM

Attack Israel? But then, I suppose that is what they want them to do.

cruise4

28-08-2007, 04:44 PM

I think Israel is in the frame with Syria just now. There's a tangled web being strung between all the middle eastern elements, including Hezbollah. Taking out the Saudis would strike at the real enemy I was thinking.

brotherapostate

28-08-2007, 04:49 PM

steevo

28-08-2007, 05:06 PM

Whatever happens, we are will find out via the mainstream media and it will be all lies.

1. errmmm ok, what should Iran do ?....let me think, this is a hard one....ok here it is.....Fight to the death in the same way the Iraqis are doing.

2. The water supply will be stopped and poisened by the US so they need to get ready for that and get stocked up ready before that happens.

3. Give the people guns and ammo now.

4. Develop a ray gun.

5. Blast Israel to kingdom Come cos Israel is really a strategically placed Army base disguised as a country.

The sad truth is we all know that there is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING Iran can do because the media is controlled by the Illuminati so the answer is this :-

Lets hope WE stop the Illuminati and their media in OUR countries and do it bloomin' quick.

cruise4

28-08-2007, 06:01 PM

I can't make my mind up about Israel's fate. There are things that suggest it's being fattened up for the kill, but then there's things suggesting its the country destined to be the base of operations. They have an awful lot of nukes though.

Apparently there's a small region in Iran holding 90% of the Oil and some say the US will just occupy that bit. Begins with K I think. Doesn't narrow it down really.

brotherapostate

28-08-2007, 06:07 PM

lol

the_pale_man

28-08-2007, 08:18 PM

Joe Rogan (being sarcastic): "Let's go over there and take all of their oil, ROME-STYLE! JESUS, GUIDE MY BULLETS!!!" :D

They should make watching the movie "300" mandatory in the US. lmao

wanderer

28-08-2007, 10:37 PM

Well, hypothetically speaking - if I was in charge of a country that had a nuclear arsenal, and was about to be invaded by the infidel, I might just consider burying a few nukes under my main cities, ports and oil reserves, and inform any future agressor of this fact - I suspect it would make any plans for future occupation somewhat less appealing. But then I'm just not a nice chap.

However, unlike Israel, Iran has no nuclear weaponry. And as far as I can see - no desire to act aggressively either.

I think it might have a trilateral agreement with Russia and China though.

Ho hum.

Peace,

wanderer

december

29-08-2007, 12:12 AM

Our brothers in Iran will respond with new long range guided weapon called Messenger.

Iran unveils 'smart bomb'. Video

http://en.rian.ru/video/20070827/74956454.html

Iran's defence minister says Tehran has developed a new 2,000 pound (900-kilogram) guided weapon.

http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/images/fullimage/ver1/i/iransmartbomb_ap.jpg

Iran Vows to Use 'Smart' Bomb Against Enemies

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,294645,00.html

Iran announces 2,000-pound 'smart' bomb

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) — Iran has developed a new 2,000-pound "smart" bomb, state-run television reported Thursday, the latest in a recent series of announcements heralding new weapons systems.
The guided bomb, named Qased or Messenger, can be deployed by Iran's aging U.S.-made F-4 and F-5 fighter jets and will be officially unveiled next week, said the broadcast, quoting a Defense Ministry statement. It did not elaborate.

Iran often announces new weapons for its arsenal, but the United States maintains that while the Islamic Republic has made some strides, many of these statements are exaggerations.

Emanuel Winston, a Middle East analyst at the U.S.-based Freeman Center for Strategic Studies, said Iran's smart bomb claim sounded "plausible" but cautioned that missile development would be more dangerous given the limited range of the country's aircraft.

Iran launched its own arms development program during its 1980-88 war with Iraq in response to a U.S.-led arms embargo. Since 1992, the country has produced its own tanks, armored personnel carriers, and missiles.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2007-08-23-iran-bomb_N.htm

Iran-Land of the Aryans
Iran-Land of the Aryans - YouTube

http://www.persiandna.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/thumb-iran.jpg

positive terror

29-08-2007, 01:31 AM

I was thinking about what Iran could do if attacked by the US and it occurred to me that I might consider:

Limited Harassment against US forces to disrupt targetting,
Bomb the Saudi Royal Family out of existence
Take the Iraqi Green Zone out

Anyone got any thoughts on this or additions?

I will tell you something I dont believe that that war never begins because Iran is an ally of US, Iran helped US in Afghanistan against Taliban and now they are helping US in Iraq against Al qaeda.
If they begin a war these two tyrans countries it will be the america and iran end.
We don't like wars but this war it would be something bad for the new world order and therefore it would be good for us.

december

29-08-2007, 02:54 AM

I will tell you something I dont believe that that war never begins because Iran is an ally of US, Iran helped US in Afghanistan against Taliban and now they are helping US in Iraq against Al qaeda.

Iranian nuclear dossier closed, U.S. attack unlikely, Bushehr to be completed - Ahmadinejad

28/ 08/ 2007

http://img.rian.ru/images/4807/42/48074268.jpg

TEHRAN, August 28 (RIA Novosti) - Iran's nuclear dossier is a closed matter, the U.S. is in no position to launch a pre-emptive strike to halt the country's nuclear progress, and the Bushehr nuclear power plant will be completed as promised, the country's president said Tuesday.

"I am officially declaring that the Iranian 'nuclear dossier' is, from our point of view, closed," Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said. He added that President Vladimir Putin assured him at a recent meeting of the Shanghai security organization that the Bushehr facility being built by Russia will be completed as contracted.

He said that despite repeated threats from Washington, U.S. forces are over-stretched and the country's political will flagging, making an attack unlikely.

http://en.rian.ru/world/20070828/75436763.html

http://www.worldpress.org/images/20060620-Ahmadinejad.jpg

Iranian president invites Putin to summit of Caspian nations

18/ 08/ 2007

TEHRAN, August 18 (RIA Novosti) - Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has invited President Vladimir Putin to a summit of Caspian nations, the Tehran Times newspaper reported Saturday.

The invitation was made during a session of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan August 16, where Iran has observer status. A date for the summit was not mentioned.

Iranian media reported that no meeting between the two leaders had been planned for Bishkek, but that they met informally and had a friendly exchange of views.

The first summit of Caspian nations, which includes Azerbaijan, Iran, Kazakhstan, Russia and Turkmenistan, took place in 2002. It was decided at the time to hold the second the following year, however it was repeatedly put off until now.

The 2002 summit in Ashkhabad, Turkmenistan discussed the legal rights of the Caspian nations to explore the huge oil reserves beneath the world's largest saline lake.

http://en.rian.ru/russia/20070818/72295593.html

Iran-Land of the Aryans

Iran-Land of the Aryans - YouTube

http://www.ictmiran.ir/ICTM_en/iran/iran2.jpg

synergy777

29-08-2007, 12:19 PM

the attack on iran will signal the end of the tribe of dan, uk/usa-anglo saxon elite, iran is the last straw, your last war, its not the 60's no more, we asians/aryans are no longer poor.

america/israel/england, are the most evil nations on the earth. the leaders have an endless pool of ignorant goyim slaves to use for their aims, master race, lol best sacrifices more like.

i say bring it, you won't stop until you are defeated, humbled.

Tales of the American War Machine
The Daily Reckoning
Paris, France
Tuesday, August 28, 2007

---------------------

*** Ignoring the twin goals of a modern democracy…terrorist threat takes a back seat to debt…

*** If you've got the best of something, why not use it?…bring back the beret…lobsters in Maine get a one day stay of execution…

*** Here's the shock of the year: consumers aren't confident…interesting investment plays in South America…and more!

---------------------

We are still on vacation. Plus, we have come up to Paris to see a dear friend in the hospital. So please don't expect much reckoning today.

Still, there is reckoning to do…

Today's top news story in the International Herald Tribune is that Nicholas Sarkozy, president of France, came back from his vacation in New Hampshire, and his visit with George W. Bush, and made a stunning announcement. The world faces only two choices, he said, both of them involving bombs. Either Iran gives up its plans to build a nuclear bomb, or it gets bombed.

'Peace and Prosperity' are the traditional twin goals of modern, democratic public policy. Both appear to be giving us the slip. Prosperity is disappearing for all the reasons described in these Daily Reckonings for the past eight years. We repeat them today, just so we don't forget: the 'boom' of the last 10 years was phony. In America (and Britain), it was based on debt, not on increases in productivity, output, or rising earnings. That is why the average person has seen no real income growth. Attempts by the manipulators to keep the phony boom going only make it worse…by increasing amounts of debt and bad investments.

As to peace, who wants it? Like so many other things, the desire for peace comes in cycles. After a war, people crave it more than anything else. Before a war, peace is often the last thing they want.

Paul Craig Roberts, former undersecretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration, is indignant about it:

"The Bush regime says it is going to designate part of Iran's military - the Revolutionary Guards - a terrorist organization, whose bases and facilities Bush intends to bomb along with Iran's nuclear energy sites. Three U.S. aircraft carrier strike forces are deployed off Iran. B-2 Stealth bombers are being fitted to carry 30,000 pound 'bunker-buster' bombs to use against hardened sites. Politicized U.S. generals assert that Iran is providing arms and aid to the Iraqi resistance to the U.S. occupation. The media are feeding the U.S. population the same propaganda about nonexistent Iranian weapons of mass destruction that they fed us about nonexistent Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. A former CIA Middle East field officer, Robert Baer, has written in Time magazine that the Bush regime has decided to attack the Revolutionary Guards within the next six months. Remember the 'cakewalk war'? Well, this time the neocons think that an attack on the Revolutionary Guards will free Iran from Islamic influence and cause Iranians to back the U.S. against their own government.

"Lies, unprovoked aggression, and delusional expectations - the same ingredients that produced the Iraq catastrophe - all over again. The entire Bush regime and both political parties are complicit, along with the media and U.S. allies."

War appeals to Americans, for reasons also described and explained to long-suffering Dear Readers in these columns. Like it or not, the USA is the world's leading empire. Fish gotta swim; birds gotta fly; and empires gotta live by the sword until they are finally put to death by it. War also appeals to Americans, more than to, say, Germans or Japanese, because war has been good to them. They came out of the two big wars of the last century ahead of the game; while other nations' economies were destroyed, the United States gained market share…and gained credits. No nation was owed more money by more foreigners than the United States of America, following both WWI and WWII.

But now it is more than half a century later. Now, no nation OWES more money to more foreigners than the USA. Relatively speaking, Americans get poorer while the rest of the world gets richer. But the U.S. military is still Numero Uno; is it really any wonder we love it so…and want to use it?

But there is always more to the story. A very alert French neighbor reminded us:

"Have you ever heard of the 'Report from Iron Mountain' or something like that? I only recall it vaguely. But I was a consultant and I remember the Rand Corporation was asked to prepare a report on what the United States should do…how it should motivate and control its citizens…after the Soviet Union fell apart. The Rand Corporation realized that without the threat of the Soviet Union, western governments were likely to drift, without any sense of purpose. And people in the West would probably resent paying taxes and so forth. Well, I don't remember exactly what the Rand analysts came up with, but I remember that they focused on three major ideas to distract and manipulate the masses - fighting terrorists, climate change, and health scares. And today, those are the three major public preoccupations, other than financial concerns.

"For example, we have major campaigns designed to vilify smoking," he continued, lighting a cigar, "and we're all supposed to be alarmed about global warming. And the War on Terror…I remember that I was startled at how fast they pinned the World Trade Center attack on Islamic terrorists (they even found the passport of one of them in the ashes of the building…somehow the fire that was hot enough to melt concrete and steel didn't have any effect on his paper passport). I was amazed too by how fast George W. Bush came out with his War Against Terror. It was as if the whole thing had been figured out before the attack …which, of course, I think it was."

And speaking of the public spectacle that is the war in Iraq, in the DR blog, Dave Gonigam points to a recent Newsweek cover story on the search for Osama bin Laden.

The Newsweek story asserts that instead of bombing caves like when the search for Osama began, the U.S. military wanted to "fight on a grander scale where it could show off its mobility and power." And how did they manage that? By invading Iraq, of course.

Newsweek continues: "Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich was on Rumsfeld's Defense Policy Board and, at the time, a close confidant of the SecDef. In November 2001, Gingrich told a NEWSWEEK reporter, 'There's a feeling we've got to do something that counts - and bombing caves is not something that counts.'"

"Not in the realm of public spectacle, it's not," says Dave. "You can't send in special ops to put a bullet between bin Laden's eyes and expect too much mileage out of it. You can't telegraph it for weeks or months in advance. Nor can you have TV cameras set up for the decisive moment. You can trot out bin Laden's corpse after the deed is done, but its utility is limited; it's not as if the video can be run in an endless loop to cover the talking heads on cable TV for more than a day or two.

"But a 'shock and awe' bombing campaign on a major urban center? That's got staying power. It's a storyline that'll last for weeks. There's ample opportunity for live coverage as it's happening, punctuated by ample down time during which the pundit class (and a host of Pentagon-approved retired generals) can pontificate about the significance of the moment. It is, in short, a public spectacle of spectacular magnitude."

We recently penned a book with co-author Lila Rajiva on how to "survive the public spectacle in politics and finance." Now might be a good time to pick up your copy.

Mobs, Messiahs and Markets

But now, the International Herald Tribune tells us that terrorism has been pushed out of the limelight.

"Bad credit cited as riskier than terrorism to U.S.," says the headline. The story tells us that the National Association for Business Economics polled its members and found that 50% more of them were worried about loan defaults and excessive debt than were about terrorism.

Terrorism poses a tiny statistical danger to Americans…but never any real danger to the USA. Instead, the Bush Administration correctly identified it not as a threat, but as an opportunity…to spend more money and boss people around. Trouble was, the money being spent hadn't been earned yet; we wonder if it ever will be.

Well, just one thought…

Do you remember our Country Hotline? It is a service we offer free of charge to sovereign nations. Heads of state can call us any time for advice. So far, the phone has been silent.

Still, a few months ago, we offered some helpful, unsolicited advice to Ireland, which we won't repeat here. And today we offer advice to France.

Tourism is big business in France. In fact, it may be the biggest industry in the country. More tourists arrive in France than in any other country. Unfortunately, many are disappointed. Not by rude waiters and high prices - they expect those things, and would feel cheated if they didn't get them. No, the disappointment sets in when they realize that the French are not so different from everyone else.

What makes this world interesting…and what drives tourism everywhere…are local particularities. But today, the French businessman looks just like a businessman in New York or Los Angeles. The uniform is the same. That is to be expected, you might reply. All businessmen are interchangeable parts of the great modern economic machine. But further down the ladder, the lower rungs are expected to preserve a bit of their local color. Alas, you look around France today and you see the same trashy, lower class culture that you'd find in Baltimore or Sarasota. Young women expose chubby midriffs. Young men tart themselves up with chains and track suits to look like rap singers. You walk down the street in Toulouse and, except for the old stones, you might feel as though you were in Toledo or Tulsa.

Rather than wait for Nicholas Sarkozy to call, we will go ahead and give the French government a simple piece of advice: Bring back the beret. We thought of it as we watched a man working on a construction site. He labored without a hat. He could have been working anywhere in the world. But put a beret on him…and he could only be French…and seeing him, you could only be in France. Put berets back on the heads of Frenchmen and you will give the nation's largest industry a big boost.

Bill Bonner
The Daily Reckoning

http://www.dailyreckoning.com/Issues/2007/DR082807.html

war is peace.

december

29-08-2007, 07:10 PM

Another provocation by the USA...

Iranians released after briefly detained by US forces

Baghdad, Aug 29, IRNA

Iraq-Arrest-Iran
Iran's ambassador to Baghdad declared on Wednesday morning that an Iranian delegation who had been detained by US forces are now released.

Hassan Kazemi Qomi said, "The arrested Iranians were handed over to the Iraqi prime minister office on Wednesday morning at 07:00 hours (local time) by the US military officers."
According to IRNA reporter in Baghdad, an Iranian delegation from Energy Ministry who were dispatched to Iraq upon an invitation extended by Iraq energy ministry for electricity-connected affairs were arrested on Tuesday evening by the US forces without any acceptable reason.

http://www2.irna.ir/en/news/view/line-22/0708294511181825.htm

Iran-Land of the Aryans

Iran-Land of the Aryans - YouTube

http://www.ictmiran.ir/ICTM_en/iran/iran2.jpg

december

29-08-2007, 10:52 PM

Ahmadinejad: French president's anti-Iran statement for domestic consumption

Tehran, Aug 28, IRNA

Iran-France-President
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Tuesday that French President Nicolas Sarkozy's anti-Iran statement has been for domestic consumption.

"He took office recently and wants to say something to attract attention of others. So, he does not know what he is saying," Ahmadinejad said.

President Ahmadinejad said that such statements lack political value, adding that the differences should be resolved through dialogue.

Asked whether Iran-US talks on Iraq would help resolve the Iraqi crisis and whether there is possibility of a debate with US President George W. Bush, he said that he had made such a proposal, but, Bush's advisors did not allow him to do so.

On Iraq, he said that the two ambassadors can help solve the Iraqi problem, but, if they (Americans) take it as a political game and want to use it for the US election campaign at the cost of lives of Iraqi people, it will remain unresolved.

He regretted that Washington's international role is being affected by the US election campaign.

"They are ready to let their soldiers and Iraqi people get killed. It is the mismanagement of the world order," he said.

Asked about completion of Bushehr power plant, the president answered that in his meeting with President Vladimir Putin in Bishkek, he said that the power plant will be completed according to the timetable.

"I think Mr. Putin and the Russian government are committed to the latest agreement and I'm not worried about that."
Responding to a question about counsel assistance to Iranian expatriates through Iranian consulates, the president said that the government has decided to defend the rights of Iranian communities abroad.

"During my visits abroad, I always meet Iranians living there to listen to their problems. Last year in my visit to the US, the minister of justice accompanied me to study was of providing counsel service for the Iranian community in the United States."

http://www2.irna.ir/en/news/view/line-22/0708286139193623.htm

Iran-Land of the Aryans

Iran-Land of the Aryans - YouTube

john white

30-08-2007, 12:09 AM

Ever heard of Barry Charmish? Great Israeli journalist, heard him a lot recently; he swears blind that Israel is being fattened up for the kill by the NWO. He has recently relocated to the US because of threats to his life.

Has he? Not checked in on Chamish recently, thanks for the info. He's a man I would believe can see the wind blowing

synergy777

30-08-2007, 11:24 AM

http://prisonplanet.com/articles/august2007/290807_b_urged.htm

Israel urged US to attack Iran - not Iraq

Gareth Porter
Asia Times
Wednesday, August 29, 2007

WASHINGTON - Israeli officials warned the George W Bush administration that an invasion of Iraq would be destabilizing to the region and urged the United States instead to target Iran as the primary enemy, according to former Bush administration official Lawrence Wilkerson.

Wilkerson, then a member of the US State Department's policy planning staff and later chief of staff for secretary of state Colin Powell, recalled in an interview that the Israelis reacted immediately to indications that the Bush administration was thinking of war against Iraq. After the Israeli government picked up the first signs of that intention, said Wilkerson, "The Israelis were telling us Iraq is not the enemy - Iran is the enemy."

Wilkerson describes the Israeli message to the Bush administration in early 2002 as being, "If you are going to destabilize the balance of power, do it against the main enemy."

The warning against an invasion of Iraq was "pervasive" in Israeli communications with the US administration, Wilkerson recalled. It was conveyed to the administration by a wide range of Israeli sources, including political figures, intelligence, and private citizens.

Wilkerson noted that the main point of their communications was not that the US should immediately attack Iran, but that "it should not be distracted by Iraq and Saddam Hussein" from a focus on the threat from Iran.

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 December 1, 2001, secretary of defense Donald Rumsfeld had ordered the Central Command chief, General Tommy Franks, to come up with the first formal briefing on a new war plan for Iraq on December 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 US intentions to invade Iraq. In the weeks preceding Sharon's meeting with Bush on February 7, 2002, a procession of Israeli officials conveyed the message to the US administration that Iran represented a greater threat, according to a Washington Post report on the eve of the meeting.

Israeli defense minister Fouad Ben-Eliezer, who was visiting Washington with Sharon, revealed the essence of the strategic differences between Jerusalem 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 Iraq."

Sharon, who was incapacitated by a stroke last year, never revealed publicly what he said to Bush in the February 7 meeting. But Yossi Alpher, a former adviser to prime minister Ehud Barak, wrote in an article in The Forward last January that Sharon advised Bush not to occupy Iraq, according to a knowledgeable source. Alpher wrote that Sharon also assured Bush that Israel would not "push one way or another" regarding his plan to take down Saddam.

Alpher noted that Washington did not want public support by Israel and in fact requested that Israel refrain from openly supporting the invasion in order to avoid an automatic negative reaction from Iraq's Arab neighbors.

After that meeting, the Sharon government generally remained silent on the issue of an invasion of Iraq. A notable exception, however, was a statement on August 16, 2002, by Ranaan Gissin, an aide to Sharon. Ranaan declared, "Any postponement of an attack on Iraq at this stage will serve no purpose. It will only give [Saddam] more of an opportunity to accelerate his program of weapons of mass destruction."

As late as October 2002, however, there were still signs of continuing Israeli grumbling about the Bush administration's obsession with taking over Iraq. Both the Israel Defense Forces' chief of staff and its chief of military intelligence made public statements that month implicitly dismissing the Bush administration's position that Saddam's alleged quest for nuclear weapons made him the main threat. Both officials suggested that Israel's military advantage over Iraq had continued to increase over the decade since the Gulf War as Iraq had grown weaker.

The Israeli chief of military intelligence, Major-General Aharon Farkash, said Iraq had not deployed any missiles that could strike Israel directly and challenged the Bush administration's argument that Iraq could obtain nuclear weapons within a relatively short time. He gave an interview to Israeli television in which he said army intelligence had concluded that Iraq could not have nuclear weapons in less than four years. He insisted that Iran was as much of a nuclear threat as Iraq.

Israeli strategists generally believed that taking down the Saddam Hussein regime could further upset an Iran-Iraq power balance that had already tilted in favor of Iran after the US defeat of Saddam's army in the 1991 Gulf War. By 1996, however, neo-conservatives with ties to the Likud Party in Israel were beginning to argue for a more aggressive joint US-Israeli strategy aimed at a "rollback" of all of Israel's enemies in the region, including Iran, but beginning by taking down Saddam and putting a pro-Israeli regime in power there.

That was the thrust of the 1996 report of a task force led by Richard Perle for the right-wing Israeli think-tank the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies, and aimed at the Likud prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

But most strategists in the Israeli government and the Likud Party - including Sharon himself - did not share that viewpoint. Despite agreement between neo-conservatives and Israeli officials on many issues, the dominant Israeli strategic judgment on the issue of invading Iraq diverged from that of US neo-conservatives because of differing political-military interests.

Israel was more concerned with the relative military threat posed by Iran and Iraq, whereas neo-conservatives in the Bush administration were focused on regime change in Iraq as a low-cost way of leveraging more ambitious changes in the region. From the neo-conservative perspective, the very military weakness of Saddam's Iraq made it the logical target for the use of US military power.

Gareth Porter is a historian and national-security policy analyst. His latest book, Perils of Dominance: Imbalance of Power and the Road to War in Vietnam, was published in June 2005.

positive terror

30-08-2007, 01:19 PM

http://prisonplanet.com/articles/august2007/290807_b_urged.htm

Israel urged US to attack Iran - not Iraq

The best way to put an end to the wars is to make disappear the origin of all the wars: Israel

synergy777

30-08-2007, 01:45 PM

israel is just palestine stolen. its like me stealing my neighbours garden and declaring it a new garden, my garden. if the meaning of israel is a spiritual nation, eg like the real torah jews know and the zionist/vaticanites (well, reading the texts and actually intepretating them is not necessary,lol) is merely a extension of the first templar crusade.the real jews, are with palestine, the thick zionists/christians are with the crusaders/nwo. the goyim cannon fodder, need to wake up.

Orthodox Jews Denounce 'Israel' and its Policies
http://www.nkusa.org/

Traditional Jews Are Not Zionists
http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/index.cfm

real jews are real, i rate/value them.

positive terror

30-08-2007, 02:12 PM

cruise4

30-08-2007, 02:27 PM

Good idea wanderer with burying nukes under likely areas of occupation. The only drawback would be unintended detonation. I suppose you could have them there bar detonator until the last minute.

Yes, Israel, Zionists, ADL, and the others are certainly in the frame. I wish I could take out the City of London tomorrow. Blanket blame is not whats called for. A mind-controlled slave is just that, deserving freedom and pity.