PDA

View Full Version : Sion-American terrorists strike Iran



Tony
01-12-2010, 04:35 PM
Iran nuclear physicist killed: Iran sees US, Israel behind the attack

Iran state media reported Tuesday that a nuclear physicist and 'staunch supporter' of the Islamic Revolution was assassinated in Tehran near his home.


A nuclear physicist was assassinated in Tehran on Tuesday by a remotely controlled bomb, Iranian news outlets reported. The reports made thinly veiled suggestions the attack could have been carried out by the United Sates or Israel. The physicist's murder comes amid increasing speculation that Iran has been making nuclear weapons and ahead of a meeting this week by major powers on whether to impose further sanctions the Islamic Republic.

Iran's state-run Press TV described Massoud Ali-Mohammadi, a lecturer at Tehran University, as a "staunch supporter" of the 1979 Islamic revolution –and thus the current regime. It said a booby-trapped motorbike exploded near his home and that police were investigating the "terrorist case."

Press TV correspondent Amir Mehdi Kazemi, reporting from the scene of the assassination, quoted security officials as saying that the equipment and system of the bomb used in the attack had been related to a number of foreign intelligence agencies, particularly Israel's Mossad.

The reporting said the attack follows the June disappearance of another Iranian nuclear scientist and that authorities believe he was detained by the US. "It seems the kidnap and assassination of Iranian scientists is on the agenda of the United States," it added.

Terror attacks against officials in remote areas of Iran are not uncommon, but they are extremely rare inside the capital, says The Wall Street Journal. It was not clear whether Dr. Ali-Mohammadi had any involvement in Iran's nuclear program.


http://www.csmonitor.com/World/terrorism-security/2010/0112/Iran-nuclear-physicist-killed-Iran-sees-US-Israel-behind-the-attack

Cail
01-12-2010, 04:57 PM
Better this than nuclear weapon in the hands of islamist monkeys.

Tony
01-12-2010, 05:10 PM
Better this than nuclear weapon in the hands of islamist monkeys.

Are you talking of Pakistan by any chance?:wink
why the commies can have them , the French and the British , the Israelis , the Americans as well...
but not Iran?

Cail
01-12-2010, 05:14 PM
Are you talking of Pakistan by any chance?:wink
why the commies can have them , the French and the British , the Israelis , the Americans as well...
but not Iran?

Because commies (you mean Russia?), French and USA are not governed by radical muslims, or another destructive sect.

Tony
01-12-2010, 05:23 PM
Because commies (you mean Russia?)
I mean also China and pretty soon the North Koreans.


, French and USA are not governed by radical muslims, or another destructive sect.
So , since you call'em that shit I ask you why?
have they ever start any war against any neighbour state?
have they ever set up concentration camps for their jewish community?
have they ever treated their ethnic minoroties like the Azeri or the Kurds for instance , the way Israel treat Palestinians?

Loki
01-12-2010, 05:49 PM
I also don't see why nuclear weapons are acceptable for Israel, and not Iran. If anything it would make Israel less cocky in the region. Currently they are acting like big bullies who can invade their neighbours whenever they want, with the full backing of the US.

Fortis in Arduis
01-12-2010, 06:14 PM
So , since you call'em that shit I ask you why?
have they ever start any war against any neighbour state?
have they ever set up concentration camps for their jewish community?
have they ever treated their ethnic minoroties like the Azeri or the Kurds for instance , the way Israel treat Palestinians?

North Korea is nuclear already, I thought.

Iran is not a secular democracy, it is an Islamic theocracy, and certainly sexual misdemeanours are punished in a fashion that most people must find unacceptable.

Essentially there is nothing wrong with Iran, Cuba or North Korea being sovereign nations, but their human rights records are not brilliant, you know, and they are certainly a million miles away from the fascist ideals that you might admire.

As far as I know, Palestinians are not minorities in Israel, but a hostile grouping outside Israel who do not want Israel to exist. To that effect they fire rockets at Israeli civilians, including the Arab 'traitors' to their schemes who live in Israel.

They contrast somewhat with those Arabs of Palestine (now Israel) who live and work in Israel and are happy to participate in Israel's democracy.

The Palestinian identity is anti-Zionist. Palestine was there, but 'Palestinian' was an identity constructed in opposition to Zionism after the Yom Kippur War, along with that ugly flag.

Fortis in Arduis
01-12-2010, 06:16 PM
I also don't see why nuclear weapons are acceptable for Israel, and not Iran. If anything it would make Israel less cocky in the region. Currently they are acting like big bullies who can invade their neighbours whenever they want, with the full backing of the US.

I do not think that they do have the full backing of the US. They are being used by the US, and manipulated with foreign aid.

I think that relations are fairly unilateral with the US. If Israel did not have her weapons, I think that she would not exist at all just now.

Loki
01-12-2010, 06:40 PM
I do not think that they do have the full backing of the US. They are being used by the US, and manipulated with foreign aid.

I think that relations are fairly unilateral with the US. If Israel did not have her weapons, I think that she would not exist at all just now.

You really think big brother America would have allowed the destruction of Israel?

Tony
01-12-2010, 06:41 PM
North Korea is nuclear already, I thought.

Iran is not a secular democracy, it is an Islamic theocracy, and certainly sexual misdemeanours are punished in a fashion that most people must find unacceptable.
And then?
why don't USA bomb Saudi Arabia , another theocracy where the condition of women is way way worse than that of Iran , when actually most university students are female and the tfr (total fertility rate) is dropped to 2 , like France , and that's a signal of women independence.
Or for instance why doesn't US bomb China , an atheocray who persecute the Tibetans and religions?
not to mention the regime complicity with the ongoing gender-cide against female babies.

Human rights and theocracy are mostly mere excuses , like it was the "mass destruction weapons" accusation brought against Saddam Hussein.

Sol Invictus
01-12-2010, 06:44 PM
And then?
why don't USA bomb Saudi Arabia , another theocracy where the condition of women is way way worse than that of Iran

I agree with this completely. If it was true that the western world really cared about human rights and terrorist implications than Saudi Arabia would be better suited to be bombed. Don't get me wrong, I am against this mentality that we somehow have any right what-so-ever to tell other countries what they can and cannot do, but under the criteria over the so-called war on terror, Saudi Arabia has more implications under the 9/11 terror attacks than Iran or Iraq ever had - which are completely non-existant. It's all about Israel and it always has been.

Fortis in Arduis
01-12-2010, 08:53 PM
And then?
why don't USA bomb Saudi Arabia , another theocracy where the condition of women is way way worse than that of Iran , when actually most university students are female and the tfr (total fertility rate) is dropped to 2 , like France , and that's a signal of women independence.
Or for instance why doesn't US bomb China , an atheocray who persecute the Tibetans and religions?
not to mention the regime complicity with the ongoing gender-cide against female babies.

Human rights and theocracy are mostly mere excuses , like it was the "mass destruction weapons" accusation brought against Saddam Hussein.

I was merely responding to this:


So , since you call'em that shit [radical muslims] I ask you why?
have they ever start any war against any neighbour state?
have they ever set up concentration camps for their jewish community?
have they ever treated their ethnic minoroties like the Azeri or the Kurds for instance , the way Israel treat Palestinians?

Why the drama?

I had to point out that Iran is not all nicey-nicey, which is what you were suggesting, and yes, Iran has had wars with her neighbours.

I also do not think that the attack was designed to use terror as a weapon, and so I question the validity of the title of this thread.

We all know the deep underlying reason why Iran must be neutralised:

Iran, North Korea, Cuba and Libya are four countries in the world which are somewhat outside the international capitalist loop, but that does not make them friendly, but it does mean that they are the enemy of international capitalism, just as any fascist or communist country might be.

Your posts are poorly constructed and your punctuation is terrible.

You also forgot to capitalise 'Jewish', which is a childish WN habit that you probably picked up from Stormfront.


You really think big brother America would have allowed the destruction of Israel?

America is just using Israel. If Israel were not of use to America, she would be discarded like an unloved mistress.

Óttar
01-13-2010, 04:28 AM
Death to the Islamic Republic.

Shanhanshah zendebad!

http://www.rezapahlavi.org/media/gallery/246_Shir_o_Khorshid.jpg

Cyrus (Koroush) will rise again!

Tony
01-13-2010, 10:22 AM
I was merely responding to this:



Why the drama?

I had to point out that Iran is not all nicey-nicey, which is what you were suggesting, and yes, Iran has had wars with her neighbours.
Are you trying to twist my words or did you really not get it?
I didn't ask if Iran "has had wars with its neighbours" (its , not her , Iran isn't a woman) , I've instead asked if it had started any war...
and if you want to talk about geopolitics you should have known that the 80s bloody war between Iran and Iraq had been started by Iraq , with the fundamental US aid , in order to overthrow the anti-American Islamic regime of Teheran.


I also do not think that the attack was designed to use terror as a weapon, and so I question the validity of the title of this thread.

We all know the deep underlying reason why Iran must be neutralised:

Iran, North Korea, Cuba and Libya are four countries in the world which are somewhat outside the international capitalist loop, but that does not make them friendly, but it does mean that they are the enemy of international capitalism, just as any fascist or communist country might be.

Ok you've changed your mind , at first it was beacuse of this:


Iran is not a secular democracy, it is an Islamic theocracy, and certainly sexual misdemeanours are punished in a fashion that most people must find unacceptable.

Since I demonstrated that it's pretty false and a ridicule excuse for a war now you're trying to legitimize a war by accusing that country of being outside the capitalistic circle.
Aside the fact that that also wouldn't be a sufficient reason to bomb any country :rolleyes:
I inform you that Iran has been involving in regular trade with a lot of nations since long ago:
Main import partners (from Wiki):
China 13.5%, UAE 9.8%, Germany 9.1%, South Korea 6.1%, Russia 5.6%, Italy 5.1%, France 4.2% (2008)
Main export partners:
China 18.5%, Japan 15.4%, Turkey 6.9%, South Korea 6.8%, Italy 4.9% (2008)


Your posts are poorly constructed and your punctuation is terrible.

Maybe but this doesn't make your arguments more valid than mine.

Fortis in Arduis
01-13-2010, 10:53 AM
Are you trying to twist my words or did you really not get it?
I didn't ask if Iran "has had wars with its neighbours" (its , not her , Iran isn't a woman) , I've instead asked if it had started any war...
and if you want to talk about geopolitics you should have known that the 80s bloody war between Iran and Iraq had been started by Iraq , with the fundamental US aid , in order to overthrow the anti-American Islamic regime of Teheran.

Fair enough.


Ok you've changed your mind , at first it was beacuse of this:

[Iran is not a secular democracy, it is an Islamic theocracy, and certainly sexual misdemeanours are punished in a fashion that most people must find unacceptable.]

No, I was not saying, nor implying that it was because of that, I was merely discussing Iran. Iran's operation outside the liberal capitalist system, and Iran's status as an Islamic theocracy are not mutually exclusive conditions.


Since I demonstrated that it's pretty false and a ridicule excuse for a war now you're trying to legitimize a war by accusing that country of being outside the capitalistic circle.
Aside the fact that that also wouldn't be a sufficient reason to bomb any country :rolleyes:

No, I am not legitimising a war. I do not imagine that little me, behind my laptop screen would have the capability to do that. How grandiose.

I am just suggesting what the motivations behind such a war might be.


I inform you that Iran has been involving in regular trade with a lot of nations since long ago:
Main import partners (from Wiki):
China 13.5%, UAE 9.8%, Germany 9.1%, South Korea 6.1%, Russia 5.6%, Italy 5.1%, France 4.2% (2008)
Main export partners:
China 18.5%, Japan 15.4%, Turkey 6.9%, South Korea 6.8%, Italy 4.9% (2008)

Iran is still outside the liberal capitalist system, and is therefore an enemy of that system.


Maybe but this doesn't make your arguments more valid than mine.

You have improved.

Tony
01-13-2010, 08:00 PM
I've got an avatar that fits you very well Fortis...

http://www.rjchq.org/media/pics/Bush_AIPAC.jpg

Fortis in Arduis
01-14-2010, 03:07 AM
Last time I checked, George Bush was not a secular democratic nationalist, and I was not a capitalist neo-conservative.