Case Closed: Iran Trying to Make Nuclear Missile

Ryan Mauro is a fellow with the Clarionproject.org, the founder of WorldThreats.com and a frequent national security analyst for Fox News Channel. He can be contacted at ryanmauro1986@gmail.com.


Pages: 1 2

In August 2006, FrontPage Magazine published an interview with a Danish official named Regnar Rasmussen who worked at the Central Police Department on immigration and criminal investigations. He told Jamie Glazov that in November 1992, he met with a high-level official from an unnamed former Soviet republic. The official told him that in the autumn of 1991, the Iranians made a deal with the president of Kazakhstan to obtain nuclear weapons, believing it would help them make their own. He expresses his certainty that exactly three warheads were purchased for $7.5 billion, though Rasmussen concedes that may be an exaggeration.

Rasmussen said that the warheads were transported by train to Makhachkala in Dagestan, and then driven to Turkey using trucks. The Iranians took control of the three trucks at the Turkish city of Dogubeyazit and brought them to Tehran through the Bazargan border post in northwestern Iran. Rasmussen says that an Iranian soldier saw the warheads in Lavizan and later defected to Israel. He notes that as early as April 1992, the British newspaper, The European, was reporting that a top-secret Russian intelligence report stated that at least two nuclear weapons from Kazakhstan had gone to Iran.

Reza Kahlili, a pseudonym for an Iranian Revolutionary Guards member who spied for the U.S., says he was asked by the CIA around this time to locate an Iranian scientist who could confirm the acquisition, as Iranian delegations had been visiting nuclear sites in the former Soviet Union. Kahlili says that Russia confirmed that three nuclear weapons in Kazakhstan had gone missing and that the Vice President of German Federal Intelligence Service confirmed that two bombs had gone to Iran. There were also reports that four 152-mm nuclear artillery shells were bought by Iran as well, he says.

In 1998, the Jerusalem Post reported that Iranian government documents from 1991 and 1992 stated that two nuclear warheads from a former Soviet republic were obtained by Iran and were being maintained by Russian scientists at Lavizan. However, GlobalSecurity.org comments, “it is probable that these claims are in fact incorrect. These reports are almost certainly the product of efforts by the Israeli government to pressure the United States into stronger trade sanctions on Russia.”

Bodansky takes the story one step further. He writes that in the fall of 1992, Iran purchased an additional four 50-kiloton nuclear warheads from Kazakhstan. In December 1992, a conversation was recorded between an Iranian diplomat in Geneva and a senior diplomat in central Asia about the deal. The former asked if “the guys who wanted to buy a few warheads…completed their task in the best manner possible.” The official in central Asia replied in the affirmative, but said technical difficulties delayed the transfer. Bodansky says the warheads were shipped to North Korea instead.

Kahlili says that the intelligence about this nuclear transfer is apparently still being taken seriously. He says that Mathew Nasuti, a former U.S. Air Force captain that served as an advisor in Iraq, was told in a briefing at the State Department that it was “common knowledge” that Iran got nuclear weapons from the former Soviet Union. Another intelligence officer and recipient of the Bronze Star, Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer, told Kahlili that his sources confirmed that Iran had two “workable nuclear warheads.”

If the story isn’t true, it’s still possible that Iran has developed nuclear weapons on its own using secret uranium enrichment sites. After all, Iran already has enough enriched uranium for at least three bombs and would only need six months to enrich its uranium to bomb-grade levels. During a meeting with a high-level Iranian defector in March 2005, Ken Timmerman was told about five secret enrichment sites, including one that supposedly contained Shahab-3 ballistic missiles and 15 nuclear warheads—“not material for fifteen warheads, but actual warheads,” he wrote in his book.

The defector learned about it from someone at the site in 2004. To verify his claim, he told Timmerman look at satellite images of the area before construction began in 2002. He described how the site was built in detail, pointing out that a housing development where 50 North Korean technicians live nearby. There’s a swimming pool to store the irradiated nuclear material and 200 Revolutionary Guards missile soldiers reside at the site, the defector claimed. Timmerman checked with his intelligence sources and they saw exactly what the defector described.

If Iran doesn’t already have atomic weapons, then we may be living in the final moments of a world without a nuclear-armed Iran.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

Pages: 1 2

  • crackerjack

    Wasn't it the policy of this site is to reject the UNO and call for the liquidation of it and all it's organisations? I also recall that in the case of Iraq WOMD, UNO findings were slammed as incompetent and negligible.

    Let's also bear in mind that Israel, who is now flying the IAEA flag upfront, rejects membership of this body, rejects the non-profilation treaty and refuses any form of cooporation, observation or supervision through the UN atomic agencys.

    • ObamaYoMoma

      Hopefully, you aren't mentally handicapped enough not to know that once a second holocaust of Jews has been perpetrated and Israel has been destroyed as you constantly hope, wish, and pray for, per your unhinged obsession, that next the Islamic world will be coming after you for the same exact reasons they are going after Israel today, that is because Jews like you are non-Muslin unbelievers and to make Islam supreme per the dictates of Islam. In fact, they already are, but obviously you are just too dumb to know it.

      • Herman Caintonette

        To be religious is to willingly embrace insanity.

        • ziontruth

          Religious = insane? Now, where did I hear this before… um… yeah, I remember now:

          ♫ Soyuz nerushimy respublik svobodnikh,
          Splotila nabeky velikaya Rus… ♫

          Gotta get those Good Cause juices flowing. Marxism rawks… over 100,000,000* sold.

          * Murders in its name. In its non-religious, non-nationalist name.

        • ObamaYoMoma

          To be religious is to willingly embrace insanity.

          I hate to rain on your unhinged anti-Semitic and self-hating/blame America first parade, but Islam is not a faith-based religion you moronic useful idiot, instead it is a supremacist theo-political totalitarian ideology that masquerades as being a religion to dupe the societies it intends to subjugate into a very draconian form of Islamic totalitarianism via the imposition of Sharia to make Islam supreme. Thus, the same holds for you, apparently you are too mentally deficient to understand that the Islamic world is also targeting you for the same exact reasons they are also targeting the Jewish unbelievers in Israel today, because Jews like you are non-Muslin unbelievers and also to make Islam supreme per the dictates of Islam.

          • Stephen_Brady

            Exactly, and what you have said illustrates why Muslim societies tend towards authoritarian ideologies, like fascism and communism. The purpose of Islam is not to "save" anyone, but to make Islam … and the theocrats who govern in its name … supreme.

          • Herman Caintonette

            If the Muzzies got all the abusive gits like you, I wouldn't shed a tear.

          • ObamaYoMoma

            If I understood what you were trying to say, I would respond.

      • crackerjack

        Israel is a IAEA non member. Israel has no international agenda in this affair, as it rejects the IAFA.

        • ObamaYoMoma

          You mean that Israel was a non-signatory of the NPT, as if Israel got rid of its nukes it would soon be attacked by a gang of Muslim countries as it repeatedly was attacked before it became known that Israel possessed nukes. Nevertheless, just like Muslims are waging jihad against the Jews in Israel because they are non-Muslim unbelievers, those same Muslims are also waging jihad against you, only you are too mentally deficient to know it.

  • SHmuelHaLevi

    Israel flies only its National flag. The information presented by the IAEA is old data.

    Who has ever seen TRINITITE? It is seen under a heavy lead glass enclosure on the left hand side of Ground Zero, Trinity Site, Alamogordo, White Sands Test facility.
    It has a greenish tint and is that byproduct of a nuclear blast.
    Apparently Iran is determined to have some of that material.
    That can certainly be arranged for. Iran can be coated from end to end in that fashion.

  • ObamaYoMoma

    Whether or not the rumors are true, Iran's ruling Mullah regime needs to be eradicated and all nuclear weapons programs and possible nuclear weapons arsenals must also be destroyed ASAP. Likewise with respect to Pakistan as well.

    As Muslims, per the sixth and most important pillar of Islam, are obligated to fight jihad in the cause of Allah against non-Muslim unbelievers to make Islam supreme and therefore must not be allowed to possess nuclear weapons under any circumstances.

    In fact, instead of spinning our wheels for the past 10 years in Iraq and Afghanistan pursuing stupid and silly idiotic nation-building missions that couldn't have been more fantasy based and counterproductive, the US should have already accomplished the above.

    • Herman Caintonette

      Why is it OUR job?

      This is all the evidence needed to conclude that Israel is a parasite, infecting its host and sapping its strength. We have no obligation to protect Israel. None.

      • ObamaYoMoma

        Why is it OUR job?

        All Muslims, per the sixth and most important pillar of Islam, are obligated to fight jihad in the cause of Allah against non-Muslim unbelievers to make Islam supreme and therefore must not be allowed to possess nuclear weapons under any circumstances. In addition, it would be nice to sit back and let Israel do the job for us, but the reality is all Israel can do is temporarily set them back, as only the USA has the firepower necessary to completely eliminate the program.

        Furthermore, the longer we put it off, the more the cost escalates. For instance, it would have been far cheaper for GWB to do it in 2003 instead of pursuing two silly fantasy based nation-building missions that couldn't have been more counterproductive, as today it is going to be exponentially far more expensive because Iran has procured and installed the S-300 air defense systems and other highly lethal weapon systems it purchased from Russia.

        Finally, if we fold and allow Muslims to acquire nukes because out of stupidity and PC multiculturalism we morally equate Muslims with westerners as Obama, obsessed Jew hating anti-Semitic bigots, delusional leftists, and self-hating/blame America first Ron Paul anarcho-kooks all do, then a thermonuclear WWIII that will make WWII seem like a pleasant stroll in the park will be inevitable. In fact, one of Ahmadinejad's most favorite and famous utterances he likes to make at rallies inside Iran is that a world without the USA and Israel is entirely possible in the not too distant future.

        This is all the evidence needed to conclude that Israel is a parasite, infecting its host and sapping its strength. We have no obligation to protect Israel. None.

        No, the Muslims are not only waging jihad against the Jewish unbelievers in Israel perpetually per the dictates of Islam, but they are also waging permanent and perpetual jihad against all other non-Muslim unbelievers in the world including mentally deficient ones like you. Thus, Israel is not a parasite, it is a very valuable ally. In fact, it is also a major asset as it is like having an American base in the Middle East and the cost of all the valuable intelligence the Israelis feed us would cost exponentially far more to acquire than the small amount of foreign aid we provide the Israelis.

        Indeed, if Israel was destroyed as you hope and pray for like a useful idiot anti-Semitic bigot, we would have to establish military bases in the region, which exponentially would be far more expensive to setup and maintain than the measly amount of foreign aid we provide to Israel on an annual basis. Not to mention the enormous amount of money it would take to replace all the intelligence we garner now for free from Israel.

        Therefore, I hate to rain on your self-hating mentally incompetent parade, but the 9/11 jihad attacks were not America's chickens coming home to roost as you have been inculcated to believe, as not only was Mossadegh secular and therefore an apostate that should be executed per the dictates of Islam, but the 9/11 perpetrators were also Sunnis, which are the mortal enemies of the Shiites of Iran. Hence, stick all your mentally incompetent moronic delusions about perceived injustices in Iran up where the sun doesn't shine.

        Thus, America must prevent Iran from getting nukes at all cost not to protect Israel, but because it is in our own national security interests to do so, and just because Israel's national security interest just so happens to coincide with ours, it doesn't make Israel a parasite.

        In any event, Israel nonetheless doesn't have the military capability to destroy Iran's nuclear weapons programs alone on its own, as again it only has the capability to temporarily delay it. Hence, the USA in cooperation with Israel – if we know what is good for us – must lead the attacks.

        • Herman Caintonette

          There are only five pillars of the Muslim faith, but lies flow off of your keyboard so often that it is barely worth mention.

          We don't have a reason to fight Iran. The parasite known as Israel wants us to fight her battles for her.

          • ObamaYoMoma

            There are only five pillars of the Muslim faith, but lies flow off of your keyboard so often that it is barely worth mention.

            You are wrong as always, there are actually six pillars of Islam. However, one is deliberately kept hidden. Indeed, Islam masquerades as being a religion in order to dupe the societies and gullible useful idiots like you that it intends to subjugate into a very draconian form of Islamic totalitarianism via the imposition of Sharia in order to make Islam supreme. Indeed, Muhammad famously said, “War is deceit.”

            Nevertheless, the sixth and most important pillar of Islam is Jihad or holy fighting in the cause of Allah against non-Muslims unbelievers to make Islam supreme and this is an obligation for EVERY MUSLIM on earth. No exceptions.

            As a matter of fact, The Noble Koran published in Saudi Arabia by the King Fahd Complex for the Printing of the Holy Qur’an, Madinah, K.S.A, says the following about the sixth and most important pillar of Islam:

            “Al-Jihad (holy fighting) in Allah’s Cause (with full force of numbers and weaponry) is given the utmost importance in Islam and is one of its pillars (on which it stands). Allah’s Word is made superior, (His Word being Lailaha illallah which means none has the right to be worshipped but Allah), and His Religion (Islam) is propagated. By abandoning Jihad (may Allah protect us from that) Islam is destroyed and the Muslims fall into an inferior position; their honour is lost, their lands are stolen, their rule and authority vanish. Jihad is an obligatory duty in Islam on every Muslim, and he who tries to escape from this duty, or does not in his innermost heart wish to fulfil this duty, dies with one of the qualities of a hypocrite.”

            Note that per the sixth and most important pillar of Islam, holy fighting in the cause of Allah against non-Muslim unbelievers to make Islam supreme is an obligatory duty for EVERY MUSLIM. Indeed, the sixth and most important pillar of Islam doesn't make it an obligatory duty only for so-called extremists to fight jihad in the cause of Allah and the sixth and most important pillar of Islam doesn't make it an obligatory duty only for so-called radicals to fight jihad in the cause of Allah, while at the same time giving an exemption and free pass to so-called moderate Muslims to fight jihad in the cause of Allah. Instead, the sixth and most important pillar of Islam makes it an obligatory duty for ALL MUSLIMS to fight jihad in the cause of Allah against non-Muslims unbelievers to make Islam supreme. No exceptions.

            Therefore, ALL MAINSTREAM ORTHODOX MUSLIMS are jihadists. A few of them are violent jihadists, while most of them are non-violent stealth and deceptive jihadists, and the few that are not jihadists are not Muslims at all but instead blasphemous apostates that per the dictates of Islam should be executed.

            In addition, I hate to rain on your incredibly ignorant parade again, but Islam is not a faith, as Islam requires total, complete, and unconditional submission to the will of Allah. Indeed, the word Islam in Arabic means submission and the word Muslim in Arabic means one who submits.

            As a matter of fact, adherents of faith-based religions are perfectly free to question and even challenge the texts and tenets of their respective religions and perfectly free to leave their respective religions or convert to another religion altogether. However, because the freedom of conscience in Islam is forbidden, those same actions, blasphemy in the first instance and apostasy in the second, are capital offenses in Islam. Indeed, what faith-based religions punish blasphemy and apostasy under the pain of death? Of course, the answer is none of them, proving at the same time that Islam is not a faith-based religion.

            In fact, Islam is far closer to totalitarian ideologies like Communism than it is to being a religion, as just like Communism, Islam seeks world domination, and the end result of Islam, exactly like Communism, is totalitarianism and lots and lots of misery. Thus, Islam is really a supremacist theo-political totalitarian ideology that masquerades as being a religion to dupe societies and gullible useful idiots like you in order to subjugate them into a very draconian form of Islamic totalitarianism via the imposition of Sharia to make Islam supreme.

          • Herman Caintonette

            Jihad properly translates to "struggle." This is no different from the Xian duty to strive in the contest of faith. I Tim. 6:12, Jude 1:3, Phil. 1:27.

          • ziontruth

            "Jihad properly translates to 'struggle.' This is no different from…"

            You're right. Other than the fact that it involves political subjugation and not mere proselytizing, it's no different.

            You know, I find it strange with you—with your type in general—that you can badmouth and scapegoat religion yet defend the one religion in our day and age that never underwent any kind of tolerance-instilling reform. Peculiar that.

          • Herman Caintonette

            It's easy to bad-mouth YOUR religion; I have intimate familiarity with it. And yes, it means more than proselytization.

          • ObamaYoMoma

            Damn Herman, how mentally incompetent can one single individual be? Indeed, maybe it's because your reading comprehension skills suck to high heaven.

            Again, read the following and try to pay attention to the parts in bold letters:

            “Al-Jihad (holy fighting) in Allah’s Cause (with full force of numbers and weaponry) is given the utmost importance in Islam and is one of its pillars (on which it stands). Allah’s Word is made superior, (His Word being Lailaha illallah which means none has the right to be worshipped but Allah), and His Religion (Islam) is propagated. By abandoning Jihad (may Allah protect us from that) Islam is destroyed and the Muslims fall into an inferior position; their honour is lost, their lands are stolen, their rule and authority vanish. Jihad is an obligatory duty in Islam on every Muslim, and he who tries to escape from this duty, or does not in his innermost heart wish to fulfil this duty, dies with one of the qualities of a hypocrite.”

          • Herman Caintonette

            I wasn't able to source this alleged quote. Knowing what kind of a liar you are, I'm not inclined to believe you. I have a Qur'an, courtesy of the Kingdom, lying somewhere around the house, and I certainly don't remember that quote having its origin therein.

          • ObamaYoMoma

            Herman, you have a Koran courtesy of the KSA about as much as you have Muslim friends. Thus, something else we have learned about the great Herman. He is not only severely mentally handicapped, but he is also a piss poor liar as well.

            By the way, there is a bunch of Korans on the Internet. Check out 2:190 where every Muslim on earth gets his marching orders to participate in holy fighting and is clearly commanded that no one but Allah is to be worshipped.

          • ObamaYoMoma

            We don't have a reason to fight Iran. The parasite known as Israel wants us to fight her battles for her.

            Only moonbats like you are mentally incompetent enough to morally equate Muslims with non-Muslims. Nevertheless, mutual assured destruction doesn't work to deter Muslims, as Muslims are inculcated cradle to grave to love death more than they love life, as Muslims believe that this life on earth is only a temporary life meant to be spent in the cause of Allah and that their real life doesn't begin until after they have spent this life first in the service of Allah. Indeed, we see Muslims all the time perpetrating suicide/homicide attacks, as they are also inculcated to believe that they will bypass purgatory and receive a one way ticket to Allah's version of carnal paradise where they will be rewarded with 72 wide eyed virgins and 72 young boys, in the case they prefer young boys to young virgins.

            Anyway, if Iran is not stopped then nuclear weapons will soon proliferate throughout the Islamic world in response to Iran acquiring nuclear weapons as Pakistan has already stockpiled nuclear weapons in anticipation of Iran rendering the NPT not worth the paper it is printed on. Thus, the Islamic world with its imperative to fight jihad in the cause of Allah against non-Muslim unbelievers to make Islam supreme will become armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons, which will inevitably precipitate a thermonuclear WWIII that will make WWII seem like a pleasant stroll in the park, and people that have been inculcated cradle to grave to love death more than they love life, will be at war with people that have been blinded and crippled by PC multiculturalism like you. Not to mention that when Ahmadinejad incessantly claims that a world without the USA and Israel will soon be a reality, he isn't joking.

            Indeed, you have to be one the most mentally incompetent people on the planet. No wonder you always eventually get kicked off of web sites.

          • Herman Caintonette

            "Only moonbats like you are mentally incompetent enough to morally equate Muslims with non-Muslims."

            The Muslims I know are not bat-guano crazy shvantzes like you. They are far ahead of you in the morality department.

          • Ghostwriter

            HC,you're out of your mind if you think for one second that Iran is going to do anything peaceful with nuclear power. A-jad has repeatedly said he wants to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. He also wants to destroy America as well. Why don't you get a clue and get real?

          • Herman Caintonette

            And how would a glowingly-irradiated Palestine be of any value to them? Iran has a legitimate need for nuclear weapons as tools of national defense, as evidenced by Iraq, Yugoslavia, et al., ad nauseum.

          • Ghostwriter

            You love standing up for tyrants,don't you,HC?

          • ObamaYoMoma

            The Muslims I know are not bat-guano crazy shvantzes like you. They are far ahead of you in the morality department.

            Herman, not only are you more than just a little mentally handicapped, but you are also a liar. You don't have any Muslim friends. You know why? Because Muslims are forbidden per the dictates of Islam from being friends with kafir infidels and especially lying and delusional ones like you. Try again!

          • Herman Caintonette

            You are bat-guano crazy, and have no standing to challenge anyone else's faculties.

  • kafir4life

    So…..the muslims were lying? Go figure! Who would have thought that a pedophilic warlord worshipping gutter cult called islam would lie? Islam is like rabies, muslims are the infected dogs. Can't reason with them. Can't give them a scritch behind their ears. Follow rabies protocol.

    allahu snackbar!

    • I must say

      Peep Up Kafir

  • David M

    As an Iranian citizen (unfortunately) I think the islamonazi regime of mad mullahs has given Israel every right to defend herself. A nuclear Iran is not only a danger to Iranians but also to the world. Europe is useless, coward, weak and cannot and will not help Israel. The only country that has means to eradicate mad mullahs threat to Israel and the world is the USA but with a Kenyan/Indonesian/Nation of Islam Barack Hussein, I'm afraid to say, that Israel is alone and has a task beyond her means. I STAND WITH ISRAEL.

    • Ghostwriter

      Thank you for the common sense. It's a trait that lacking in a few who comment on this section (Herman Caintonette comes to mind). I wish he or she would get a clue about what's going on in the real world.

  • Herman Caintonette

    An Iranian citizen who stands with Israel? Now, why don't I believe that? Okay, so you were with SAVAK as a kid. That, I would believe.

    As I see it, the actions of GWB and Clinton made it a practical necessity for every tin-horn Third World dictator to build a few nukes. Yugoslavia? Invaded. Iraq? Invaded. Libya? Bombed. Pakistan? Nope. North Korea? Ditto. It is an insurance policy against Pax Americana.

    And what legal right do we have to tell them they can't have nukes? We have them, and everyone knows that Israel has them (thanks to stolen technology).

    This is why the creation of "Israel" was such a colossal mistake. Religious nuts have been the same the whole world over, killing and oppressing infidels in the name of their particular flavor of psychotic ancient tribal sky-daddy. Jews and Christians are every bit as bad as Muslims on that score, and they always have grievances because what goes around eventually comes around.

    Religion is inherently toxic, and should only be taken in moderation.

    • ziontruth

      "This is why the creation of 'Israel' was such a colossal mistake."

      I can think of two people who made a colossal mistake.

      "Religious nuts have been the same the whole world over, killing and oppressing infidels in the name of their particular flavor of psychotic ancient tribal sky-daddy."

      While anti-religious Marxism has just around 100,000,000 deaths to its sane and rational name.

      "Religion is inherently toxic, and should only be taken in moderation."

      God gave mankind the 20th-century world as a playground to play in without Him (as per the 18th- and 19th-century Enlightenment gurus' heartfelt request), and in summation, they surpassed the darkest of ages in human carnage.

      To grow up is to stop scapegoating religion, or nationalism, or any other ideology, for the results of humankind's basic tendency toward evil. But growing up is hard, as you demonstrate.

      • Herman Caintonette

        Ever since man conceived of One True God, he has been killing in His name. Having one less reason to kill one another can only be a good thing.

        • ziontruth

          "Ever since man…"

          …came to be [+ rest of quote].

          Fixed it for you.

          Scapegoating is a bad habit.

          "Having one less reason to kill one another can only be a good thing."

          Religion can only be eradicated by a totalitarian fascism far murderous than anything religion has ever spawned. Q.v. Marxism and the hundred millions of dead in its wake.

    • kasandra

      What about the creation of, what, 22 Islamic states including such relatively recent additions as Iraq, Pakistan, Bengladesh, etc.? No problems there, eh? No. To people like you only the creation of the tiny, single, Jewish state in the world is a mistake. Hmm. I think there's a name for that.

      • Herman Caintonette

        If we hadn't mucked it up while doing Israel's bidding, moderate governments would have developed of their own accord (e.g., Iran).

        • ziontruth

          "If we hadn't mucked it up while doing Israel's bidding,…"

          Yeah, because America had been doing Israel's bidding way back in 1953 (the days of the Mossadegh Coup). /sarc

          What next from you? UFOlogical theories of Zionist panspermia initiatives with a von-Däniken-esque exposition that throws in a bit of neo-Velikovskianism for good measure? You're a real nut, that's what you are.

          "…moderate governments would have developed of their own accord (e.g., Iran)."

          Pay no attention to the Islam behind the curtain. Much less, to the fact that most of the populace in the Muslim world takes it seriously, together with its hardwired doctrines of infidel-hatred. Pay no attention; blame the Jews and their state instead. Subsequently, go back to sleep.

        • kasandra

          Sure they would have. Just like they've developed all over the Islamic world. Rave on.

    • Ghostwriter

      Oh sure! Blame America for the world's problems. That's an original thought! Why are you sticking up for North Korea? It's ruled by an insane lunatic who starves his own people and throws those who get out of line into prison camps! You're just unbelievable!

  • StephenD

    “And what legal right do we have to tell them they can't have nukes?”Sooner or later this tired old slogan would have to come out. Here is the problem with moral equivalency: We are not all equal ~ Morally.
    The leadership of Iran has said they intend to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. They have said and believe it is their “destiny” to usher in the 12th Iman which requires Armageddon size aggression. They intend to have the streets of Jerusalem flowing with blood.
    Would it be ok with anyone to allow folks that believe such things to have nukes? It’s been pointed out that Israel has nukes. I say, yeah so what? Have they threatened anyone with annihilation?  No. They are a rational people. It is too bad that the innocent Iranian people will suffer because of their diluted leaders. I wish America would help them overthrow these folks and we can stand down. I hope Israel can last until America is ready to stand with her again. I hope it is soon.

    • Herman Caintonette

      America (they call us "the Jews") didn't just have nukes … we used them. Depleted uranium weapons are WMD, irradiating the target country's water supply and causing birth defects. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/30/faull

      If a credible nuclear deterrent would prevent that from happening, there is no country which can be denied the right to develop them.

      • Ghostwriter

        Let me tell you again! A-jad threatened to wipe Israel off the map. He also has made it clear he wants a world without America. Do you really want someone like that with a nuclear bomb?

  • David M

    Herman Caintonette ,

    I've never been to Israel, or met an Israeli Jew and know nothing about Judaism. I,m like a German opposing Nazism or a Russian opposing Communism. I was deadly against the Pahlavi regime and SAVAK as I'm thousand times more against Islam and this barbaric mullahcracy.

    I remember how Iranian Communists allied themselves with mullahs and were responsible for the massacre of thousands of Iranians. Muslims, Communists and Nazis march together and you must be one of them. One must have a minimum of honesty and intelligence to differentiate between a democracy and a dictatorship and you have none.

    I accept that Islam is bad, dangerous and a cancer of out time.

  • kasandra

    And yet, while all the events chronicled in the UN report and in the "Case Closed" column are going on, our "news media" is devoting all of its attention to 14 year old allegations of sexual harassment by Herman Cain. Are we still a serious country?

    • Herman Caintonette

      We don't have a serious media any more, thanks to Roger Ailes and Rupert Murdoch (before he polluted the airwaves, the news department was a loss-leader). Sex sells, which is why we heard so much about JonBenet, Chandra, Natalee Holloway, et al., ad nauseum.

      • kasandra

        Oh please. It's Bush's fault. It's Fox's fault. Get a new record will ya. Check out that bastion of right wing media CNN's homepage. Earlier this morning under "Latest News" they had about 6 stories on Herman Cain and not a single one on the UN report. There wasn't even a Fox News in existence when this trend started.

  • Sidney

    It might be a good idea to get used to the idea of "Sky-Daddy". The way this World is going, a real loving sky daddy is exactly what we need to sort out the tantrums of his kids. Without this God, who has clearly revealed Himself through the Holy Scriptures and demonstrated His perfect love of humanity by redemption through the perfect sacrifice of His Son in Jesus, we are doomed to self destruction. The scriptures clearly reveal an end time scenario where it is He, "Sky-Daddy", if you will, that saves us from ourselves.

  • Herman Caintonette

    Townhall: "The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 51% of voters nationwide say it is at least somewhat likely the allegations against Cain are both serious and true."
    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2011/11/09

    • lscott

      That wasn't his point. His point was that we're paying so much attention to something as trivial as what Herman Cain did or didn't do, while potentially civilization-ending storm clouds are gathering in the Middle East.

      It's the 'Access Hollywood' mentality. Entertain me, don't try to educate me.

      • kasandra

        Thanks. You nailed it right on the head.

  • MULLAH HUNTER

    DEATH TO ISLAM, DEATH TO MULLAH,,,, LONG LIVE FREE IRAN , LONG LIVE ISRAEL AND AMERICA .. IRAN'S FREEDOM WILL COME SOON

    REGIME CHANGE FOR IRAN "ONLY"

  • mrbean

    Time for a preemptive strike and conquering. Muck the Fuzzlims. Nuke 'em til they glow, shoot 'em in the dark, and use their A$$E$ for runway lights when we land and occupy Iran to take over all the oil. "Ohhhh… I am such a war monger!"

  • guest

    we may be in luck. Obama is likely Sunni, not Shia. Or, 2012 may pass and we get an actual American president without 6 birth certificates, not an in sourced hack from Saudi Arabia lobby money.

    We should send Neapolitan and Holder over there to help them. That will be the end of it for Iran. Political corrects can destroy anything….

  • Herman Caintonette

    ObamaYo: "Why didn't you post the full unhinged diatribe instead of just the very end? And why did you bring my women and kids into the debate if you aren't addicted to emoting?

    You are incapable of rational, civilized debate. You attack everyone, including your allies. Please seek professional help.

  • Shivam

    Iran's nuclear facilities must be bombed out of existence as quickly as possible — it is dangerous to allow any Islamic country to have nuclear weapons. An Islamic country will always kill /subjugate non-Muslims, if it has the capability. This is what they have been brainwashed to do. Quran says:

    8.39. And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah altogether and everywhere …

    9.29. Fight those who believe neither in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

    58.20. Those who resist Allah and His Messenger will be among those most humiliated.

    • alphakilosingh

      In principle, all non-believers will agree with you, but there are practical difficulties in implementation of your plan. One of the difficulties is, that anyone trying to bomb Iran's nuclear installations will also have to deal with Pakistan's nuclear arsenal as well, and who knows who control Pakistan's Bombs.
      Anyone attacks Iran, Pakistan attacks India: just like Iraq attacked Israel when it was attacked by UN forces after its Kuwait misadventure. So you wouldn't possibly enjoy the war-coverage when Iran is attacked.

      • Shivam

        I wish India was as bold and intelligent as Israel. India should have bombed out Pakistan's N-plan right in the beginning.

        Anyway, Pakistan may not use nuclear weapons as per your logic for fear of being completely annihilated by Indian nuclear forces in retaliation.

  • Hercules

    "If Iran doesn’t already have atomic weapons, then we may be living in the final moments of a world without a nuclear-armed Iran." And, when Iran possesses nuclear weapons, we may be living in the final moments of the world! Iran is ruled certifiable fanatics who, like many Islamists, prefer death to life, for their ultimate reward is not in this life but the next. In their minds they believe that Allah commands them to annihilate the infidel even if it means their own extirpation. Not even the fanaticism of the Nazis was this extreme. The holocaust that we in the West wish to avoid they embrace with alacrity. While we refuse to think the unthinkable they embrace it with ebullience. They are without moderation and pretend to engage in diplomacy to gain time. Nuclear weapons and Islamism are a partnership which will eventually produce a conflagration that will consume us all, for there are no forces engaged in avoiding it.

  • alphakilosingh

    USA was not just aware, but was covertly supporting when Pakistan was making the Bomb. It has effectively financed Pakistan's Bomb.
    Since Pakistan made the Bomb, the technology has no longer remained a secret. USA and the rest of the West were always aware of Iran's ambitions about the Bomb, and there was a time when Iran could be stopped in its tracks, but now when it is so close, it is futile to talk about the threat the Bomb poses for the West.
    Israel and the West now have to reconcile to the fact that Iran and some other countries now have the Bomb. They should now focus on the next generation Bomb to neutralize the threat of first generation Islamic Bombs.

    • Shivam

      Iran can still be stopped by destroying their nascent research work on nuclear weapons. Accepting Iran as N-power would be committing the same mistake as India did.

  • ObamaYoMoma

    Actually, like Obama neither do you, which is why you hope that Israel does the job. It's also the reason why you have repeatedly chastised me for advocating that we do the job. In any event, Israel doesn't have the capability to destroy Iran's nuclear weapons program, only the capability to slow it down. Indeed, only the USA has the capability to destroy Iran's nuclear weapon program.

  • ObamaYoMoma

    Moonbat,

    There you go, more emoting as you at first deny and then subsequently admit exactly what I said, and it's not my fault that you are so mentally deficient that you remain ignorant to the full extent of the Islamic threat.

    As for as accepting apologies goes, apologies mixed in the middle of unhinge insults don't constitute apologies, they constitute sarcasm and more insults. Indeed, if you weren't still a liberal and thus addicted to emoting like a self-hating loon, you would never have resorted to hurling personal insults in the first place just because you lost another debate to a true conservative as opposed to fake one like you.

    you use words like "exterminate" and "eradicate" with stunning regularity.

    Yes I do. Do those terms conflict with your poor little emotions again as always? Apparently, they do. Too bad! Indeed, please explain why we shouldn't exterminate and eradicate all Islamic regimes that are responsible for murdering American troops in cold blood? Indeed, according to you, why exactly should we appease them instead?

  • StephenD

    Tell you the truth I like reading both of your posts. THIS exchange however is beneath you. Please, let it go. Both of you. There is much good that can be shared from you. Please don't waste your energies on what really is a non-issue. Your feelings being hurt merely means you're still among us humans. So be it. Now then, let's move on letting this die a natural death from being ignored hence.

  • ObamaYoMoma

    Moonbat,

    Declaring victory in debate and actually winning are two different things entirely. And that's the reason you despise me so, why you refused my apology AND my olive branch…because you don't possess the wherewithal to defeat me in debate and it enrages you Let me prove it once again…

    First of all, when you resort to emoting as you always do by hurling personal attacks instead of sticking to the debate, it becomes crystal clear that you lost the debate and also your cool. Second, when you issue a sarcastic apology laced in the middle of another unhinged emotional diatribe hurling more personal insults and attacks, it becomes crystal clear that your apology wasn't meant in sincerity but instead in sarcasm. Thus, quit claiming you tried to apologize, as sincere people don't apologize at the same they are also hurling personal attacks.

    "I'm not necessarily adverse to attacking Iran to stop its nuclear program. But…I CAN anticipate real world repercussions that are potentially detrimental to the security of the American people. I also recognize the repercussions of doing nothing." (Oct 7)

    No you don't recognize the repercussions. If you genuinely understood the repercussions of doing nothing, then you would only advocate that Iran be stopped at all cost, as the repercussions of doing nothing far exceed the repercussions of stopping them. Indeed, if we fail to stop them, then the NPT will not be worth the paper it is printed on as Pakistan, which has already stockpiled nuclear weapons in anticipation of Iran's acquisition of nukes rendering the NPT useless, is more than prepared to become the nuclear weapons supermarket for the Sunni Islamic world, which will rush to acquire nukes in response to Shiite Iran, and thus as a result an Islamic world with the imperative to fight jihad against non-Muslim unbelievers to make Islam supreme will become armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons.

    Now, I know that since you are a rabid demagogue whose powers of comprehension are too limited to grasp the nuance of such a statement, let me explain that it is NOT a rejection of military action. It is merely an acknowledgement that there may be very real repercussions.

    When has there ever been a war without repercussions moonbat? Of course, there are always repercussions to everything we do. Do you really believe that you alone are smart enough to figure that out. Indeed, why do you assume people aren't intelligent enough to weigh the repercussions?

    Meanwhile, I notice you couldn't answer my question…and that's you all-over Skippy. "Attack" "exterminate" "eradicate"…but no grasp of the necessary methodologies and mechanisms of how to proceed…(I think your childish excuse was "I'm not a general").

    More emoting. Indeed, once a liberal, always a liberal. It sucks to be you.

    You see Skippy, I WANT the mullah's overthrown, I WANT Pakistan's nuclear weapons destroyed, I WANT energy security for the West….but unlike you, I'm adult enough to comprehend that these things are complex, that success in achieving them is not assured, and that there are actual sacrifices and repercussions involved.

    Really…repercussions…who would have thought? Indeed, you are a complete asinine waste of time and an emotional basket case. The repercussions of not acting to stop nuclear weapons from proliferating the Islamic world and waiting until the Islamic world becomes armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons instead is like the repercussions of waiting until WWII had begun to stop Hitler, as the repercussions will not only cost exponentially far more, it could also result in the complete lost of freedom and the possible destruction of the world. Indeed, the repercussions of a thermonuclear WWIII against people that cradle to grave are inculcated to love death more than they love life against a West that has been blinded and crippled by PC multiculturalism is almost too horrible and frightening to contemplate.

    Indeed, what are the repercussions of seizing the Mideast oilfields and confiscating the immense unearned oil wealth of the Saudis and the Gulf State Emirs vs. the inevitable repercussions of not seizing the Mideast oilfields and confiscating the immense unearned oil wealth of the Saudis and the Gulf State Emirs?

    In addition, what are the inevitable repercussions of not containing the spread of Islam by not outlawing Islam and banning and reversing mass Muslim immigration with all of its excess baggage vs. acting to contain the spread of Islam, outlawing Islam and banning and reversing mass Muslim immigration with all of its excess baggage, and then isolating the Islamic world?

    –continued

  • ObamaYoMoma

    Now I ask again, how do we "eradicate" the mullah's regime in Iran without boots on the ground? You've postulated a premise, please back it up.

    Okay, since terms like "exterminate and eradicate" offend your leftwing political correct feelings, sensitivities, and sensibilities, then obviously it would be better that we just cross our fingers and hope for the best.

    Look moonbat, we must stop Iran from acquiring nukes at all cost, and if it takes booths on the ground then so be it. Indeed, if you can't figure that out, then I'm sorry but you are hopeless. Not to mention that the longer we wait to act, the more it is going to cost, which is what liberals like you are counting on as an excuse not to act.

  • ObamaYoMoma

    I don't know what you are smoking but email me some because it must be strong.

  • Stephen_Brady

    Personally, I don't understand what the argument between you and "Skippy" is all about. Except for some differences in methodology, you and OYM should be fast friends and allies. Maybe I've missed something along the way …

  • StephenD

    If I were an enemy of yours (both of you) my first objective would be to cause enmity between you.
    I think that Chez has made his apology and offered to put this behind him. OYM, I encourage you to accept this and move on.
    Often, what we see posted here influences folks that are directed to this site for OUR perspective. Having displayed this vitriolic and embittered affray is of no good to us. Please, stop it. Let it go and not another word about it.
    Imagine lives at stake (they truly may very well be).

  • ObamaYoMoma

    I think that Chez has made his apology and offered to put this behind him. OYM, I encourage you to accept this and move on.

    I'm sorry but Chez is a mentally incompetent liar. He never made a sincere attempt to apologize, he made a sarcastic apology clearly meant to mock at the end of a long diatribe filled with personal attacks and insults. Anyway, anyone that resorts to attacking another person's wife that he doesn't even know over a stupid and idiotic debate not only has a severely thin skin, but also is obviously suffering from severe mental problems as well.

  • Herman Caintonette

    Everyone. He can't debate without getting personal, raising questions as to his own mental stability.

  • ObamaYoMoma

    Moonbat,

    Well folks, there you have it…the man who has repeatedly stressed on these pages that invading and occupying Muslim countries was/is a mistake…is now advocating invading and occupying not just another Muslim country, but several. Apparently, he doesn't grasp the contradiction.

    Exactly where did I advocate occupying a Muslim country? Boots on the ground doesn't mean occupying Iran. It means boots on the ground until the ruling Mullah regime has been eradicated and Iran's nuclear weapons programs have been destroyed. Indeed, boots were on the ground in Pakistan until OBL was eradicated. Then as soon as that had been accomplished, the boots left ASAP without occupying Pakistan.

    With respect to who replaces the ruling Mullahs, I could care less. As I'm not stupid enough to believe that it will be a Western-style democracy, which is utterly impossible in the Islamic world in any event. Hence, as soon as the ruling Mullahs have been exterminated and the nuclear weapons programs destroyed, I advocate we leave ASAP deliberately leaving behind our death and destruction to fester and to serve as deterrence. Something we should have done in Afghanistan and Iraq a long time ago.

    As for the rest of his screed, he wants to attack Iran, to attack Pakistan, to invade the Gulf oil states and seize their oil….and anyone suggesting that his ambitions are possibly over-ambitious is a liberal.

    What is the likely repercussions of letting Pakistan keep its nuclear weapons with impunity? It will no doubt secretly proliferate nuclear weapons throughout the Islamic world, as it has already been caught red-handed doing? Again, the Islamic world will become armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons and thus the Islamic world with its imperative to fight jihad against non-Muslim unbelievers to make Islam supreme will be armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons. As an unhinged liberal this may not bother you, but please don't assume that everyone else is as mentally incompetent as you.

    What is the likely repercussions of allowing the Saudis and the Gulf State Emirs to keep the Mideast oilfields and their immense oil wealth? Obviously, if they are allowed to keep those resources, those resources will then be used to finance and wage jihad against the West perpetually forever per the dictates of Islam, which again as an unhinged liberal may not bother you, but again please don't assume that everyone else is as mentally incompetent as you. Not to mention that those oilfields and that immense unearned oil wealth will go a long way in paying for the cost of the wars.

    What is the likely repercussions of not acting to contain the spread of Islam by outlawing Islam and banning and reversing mass Muslim immigration with all of its excess baggage? Obviously the eventual imposition of Sharia and the rendering into harsh and degrading dhimmitude of all non-Muslim unbelievers, whereby all non-Muslin unbelievers will become violently oppressed and systematically persecuted exactly like all non-Muslim unbelievers living in the Islamic world today as second-class dhimmi citizens. Again, as an unhinged liberal that may not bother you, but please don't assume that everyone else is as mentally incompetent as you.

    You see, some people believe America is omnipotent…that we can attack and invade multiple countries simultaneously…that our domestic constraints wouldn't be the least bit problematic (e.g., war powers act, mass public opposition leading to repudiation of conservatives at the polls, etc), that foreign powers like Russia, China and even friends like Europe and India wouldn't be alarmed at such a broad-reaching power grab and unite against us.

    So acting rationally in self defense and to ensure the national security of the USA and our allies means that America is omnipotent? Not to mention that Russia, China, India, and Europe are also not immune to the global jihad as well. Indeed, for Islam to eventually be outlawed and mass Muslim immigration with all of its excess baggage to eventually be banned and reversed, a lot of education regarding the truth about Islam will be required. However, if we fail to act in that regard, in the long-run not only will Europe become Islamic, but America as well.

    Nevertheless, you try to claim that you are a true conservative. Moonbat, you are about as conservative as GWB was conservative. In other words, you don't have a conservative bone in your incredibly liberal body, and your complete and utter failure to recognize the threat Islam represents to the world indicates once again that you are incredibly liberal.

  • ObamaYoMoma

    What I'm trying to say is that attacking Iran's nuclear program makes geopolitical sense

    Yeah right it sounds like it, and never mind the fact that you have been arguing against it for weeks.

    Done right, we can serve a powerful message in maintaining the non-proliferation regime.

    Obviously, via an air campaign we can temporarily set back Iran's nuclear weapons program using conventional weapons, but to ensure that it has been totally destroyed will require boots on the ground, and if it's going to require boots on the ground, then it would be ludicrous not to target and exterminate the ruling Mullah regime, not only because they will never cease pursuing nuclear weapons if we don't eradicate them, but to also send a very loud and clear message to the rest of the Islamic world regarding what will happen to them if they too make the mistake of pursuing nuclear weapons. Not to mention that Iran has been killing American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan for many years now, thus the ruling Mullah regime must be made to pay for its crimes or else we will live to regret it.

    But advocating the invasion of Iran, of the Gulf oil states, AND attacking Pakistan…these are the rantings of an unbalanced mind who has no sense whatsoever of proportionality.

    I would suggest allowing nuclear weapons to proliferate the Islamic world, which will inevitably happen if Pakistan is allowed to keep its nuclear weapons as you are suggesting is the rantings of a very unbalanced mind. Not to mention that the notion that India will invade Pakistan if they don't have nukes is absurd as Western-style democracies never invade their neighbors unless it is in self-defense.

    Not to mention that allowing the Saudis and the Gulf State Emirs to keep their oilfields and immense unearned oil wealth so that they can continue to use those resources to finance and wage jihad perpetually against the West per the dictates of Islam on a global basis as you are advocating is also the rantings of a deeply unbalanced mind, and as for as proportionality goes, I'm sorry but the object of war is to obliterate your enemies before they obliterate you. Hence, stick that leftwing proportionality garbage up where the sun doesn't shine you leftwing moonbat. You may fool some of the people, but you don't fool me.

  • ObamaYoMoma

    I have to speak out in my own defense. Obamayomama about me "attacking" his wife, just as he lied about me attacking his kids.

    This is the exact quote: "Why do I suspect you don't have a woman?"

    It was inappropriate, but it was obviously not an attack on his wife….it was an attack on him.

    “I was also thinking about how your lust for "death and destruction" squares with your being a father and a husband. You know, a lot of wives and children are killed when creating a path of death and destruction. My guess is that you made the wife and kids up out of whole cloth, they same way you did Robert Spencer's advocacy of arming Saddam and encouraging his aggression.”

    "I wanted to apologize to you for bringing your woman (or lack of) into the equation a couple of weeks back. That was completely out of line and I'm sincerely sorry."

    Why didn't you post the full unhinged diatribe instead of just the very end? And why did you bring my women and kids into the debate if you aren't addicted to emoting?

  • ObamaYoMoma

    Yeah right I like the way you cease and desist, by hurling more personal attacks and insults. Meanwhile, you have the audacity to ask why I won't accept your insincere apology. Moonbat, you just can't stick to the issues without emoting and resorting to personal attacks. Indeed, once a liberal always a liberal. And, by the way, thanks, because you did far more to expose yourself as being a liberal than I ever could.

  • ObamaYoMoma

    Read everyone of that moonbats's post, as he does far more than me to reveal that he is a liberal. He also always emotes by resorting to personal attacks and insults instead of sticking to the topic, further demonstrating that once a liberal always a liberal.